Authority of Paul (hell, doctrine, women, believers)

[I LOVE NORTH CAROLINA]

Originally Posted by Oakback

And what scripture was Paul referring to ?

Just what he said ALL of it.

[bigthirsty]

Originally Posted by Oakback

Do you believe all books in the canon that were not written by the person to whom it was attributed to, are not authoritative?

It certainly does raise my eyebrows.. sorry .. it just does. So if Peter didn't write 2 Peter.. then did he really acknowledge Paul?

[bigthirsty]

Originally Posted by ShanaBrown

Bigthirsty, I was just wondering how you decide whether or not any of the books of the NT are inspired or divine? What do you consider to be your standard? Just asking.

Here are a few sources that I found on the canonicity of the NT.

[/font]

Development of the New Testament canon - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


The New Testament Canon, by Glenn W. Barker

Development of the Biblical Canon

You know.. great question.

Short quick answer is I simply put more weight into what Jesus said... his spoken word.

Long answer.. I'm still trying to figure it out.

[Oakback]

Originally Posted by bigthirsty

It certainly does raise my eyebrows.. sorry .. it just does. So if Peter didn't write 2 Peter.. then did he really acknowledge Paul?

Probably should have another thread that discusses authorship of the canon.

Scholars disagree about who actually wrote many of the books.
Utimatley, it boils down to an acceptance of the canon we now have.

[bigthirsty]

So after 30 or so responses it looks like these are the answers:

1. Because its in the bible (Paul's works were inspired)
2. Petere cross referenced him in 2 Peter

Am I missing anything?

Thanks to all for the responses. I need to do some more research.

[Oakback]

Originally Posted by bigthirsty

So after 30 or so responses it looks like these are the answers:

1. Because its in the bible (Paul's works were inspired)
2. Petere cross referenced him in 2 Peter

Am I missing anything?

Thanks to all for the responses. I need to do some more research.

You'll have to forgive my laziness. But thought this might give you something to chew on.
CATHOLIC ENCYCLOPEDIA: St. Paul

BTW; do you believe in the authenticity of Luke? Many references to Paul.

[World Citizen]

Originally Posted by bigthirsty

So after 30 or so responses it looks like these are the answers:

1. Because its in the bible (Paul's works were inspired)
2. Petere cross referenced him in 2 Peter

Am I missing anything?

Thanks to all for the responses. I need to do some more research.

Bigthirsty,

You simply can't pick and choose what you want to believe out of the Bible. Jesus came to earth as a revelation of who God is... Paul planted churches.

God sent Paul to the Gentiles. Because of him, we're having this discussion.

God always used the most unlikely people, like Paul, and Moses, and Joseph, and David... people that didn't want the job. Paul was deadset against christians.. in the end, he died for his belief in Christ.

You can feel free to research as much as you'd like. You won't be the first. But, in the end, you're going to have to accept that the Bible is the Word of God, handed down by men...

Faith comes by hearing, and hearing by the Word of God....

But without faith it is impossible to please Him: for he that cometh to God must believe that He is, and that He is a rewarder of them that diligently seek Him...

I don't believe you want to be led astray by any of the cults who have re-written the Bible. I believe you are seeking truth...

There are many who chose to research the Bible. Are you familiar with Josh McDowell? He's got a two volume work, I believe, called Evidence that Demands a Verdict.

I think it's harder for academics to accept Truth blindly. But, that is what it takes. I think Josh McDowell (and Paul, too) may be right down your alley, ...

May the Spirit of God lead you into all Truth. May you not be led into error...

May you choose the right path.

In Jesus Name. Amen.

God Bless!

[Oakback]

Originally Posted by I LOVE NORTH CAROLINA

Just what he said ALL of it.

Remember though, that did not include the "New Testament".
It didn't exist yet.

[Megande]

I strongly agree with what World Citizen said "You simply can't pick and choose what you want to believe out of the Bible." In my opinion, if you are going to disregard any of it, you might as well disregard all of it. If we as created beings get to decide which parts apply to us, we are saying that we know better than God what is true or best for us.

Basically, if you are going to pick which parts to obey, you aren't obeying at all. If I were to say to my child, "I expect you to obey me, unless you find what I say irrelevant, outdated, or not to your liking" he would never obey me at all. He may do what I say occasionally, but it would be because my will coincidentally went along with his.

Like many others have said, there is outside evidence that validates the Bible. But even without that, I don't think it makes sense to take some of the Bible and reject the rest. If God is Who He says He is, we can accept all of the Bible. If He is not, why would we want to listen to any of it?

[Miss Blue]

Megande...The bible introduces me to Jesus and His teachings.The reason for His death, burial and resurrection. I follow His teachings and I believe my personal relationship with God through His son and Holy Spirit, are my guides, my teachers, my comforters and most of all my peace, and my assurance that one day I will stand before Him, and will be deemed "worthy"..Who and where I decide to worship with, are my decisions, for Jesus taught that wherever two or three are gathered together in His name He would be there..Yes, I guess I do pick and choose what I want to believe and base my life on from the bible, and I choose to follow Jesus and His teachings..