tentex25 said:
I have been reading a book called "the everlasting hills," by thomas Cahill. In it cahill talks about how Paul wrote Romans, 1 and 2 Corinthians, Galations, 1 Thesselonians, and Philemon. But Ephesians, 2 Thessolonians may not have been written by Paul, but by a close follower. But even more interesting is that Titus, 1 timothy and hebrews were all written decades after Paul's death. How can the "word of god" be inspired, but god, but not written by who is credited with its authorship. Cahill then goes on to tell that Titus, 1 Timothy, and Hebrews perversely contradict Paul's theology. HOW CAN THIS BE THE WORD OF GOD IF IT IS ALL MISTAKES LIKE THIS? How can this be credited as "divine?" Anyone care to explain?
Authorship of particular letters and books are not what makes a writing inspired by God. For example, the actual Gospel "written" by Matthew is inspired by God - but that the author was indeed the apostle Matthew is NOT inspired - but considered a Church tradition. In much the same way, Hebrews may have been written by Paul, while other Church tradition credits it to Barnabas. Again, the Church recognizes the Word of God in the writing itself, not WHO the human author was.
The Church is merely verifying the writing, not the human author, when it considered the Canon of Scriptures...
Of course, this applies even MORE so in the Old Testament. What is important is that the Church identifies the Word of God, comparing what God has taught to the written word of an author, verifying its authenticity (or refuting it when someone claims to write in the name of God but does not write what the community understands to be the Word of God)
As to the Pastorals vs. Thessalonians, one should note that it certainly is possible that Paul wrote them all. We must recognize that man's understanding of God changes in time - and Paul, even in the letters that are universally attributed to him, develops his theology slowly. Also, the Church was evolving as well during the first few generations. An example of this can be clearly seen when studying "authority" in the NT. Note the change from Acts 1-5, to Acts 15, to the Pastorals. If we accept that Acts 1-5 is the nascent stage of Christianity, Acts 15 perhaps 20 years later, and the Pastorals another 20 years later, it all falls into place - the role of authority developed as the Church grew and the Spirit moved it.
Thus, it would not be unusual for a theologian such as Paul to grow in understanding between Thessalonians and Hebrews or the Pastorals.
Regards
:
