Post Reply
Page 11 of 11  •  Prev 1 ... 6 7 8 9 10 11
2 years ago  ::  Mar 07, 2012 - 4:42PM #101
Kwinters
Posts: 21,003

Mar 3, 2012 -- 1:38PM, Lookbeyond wrote:


Kwinters says Ephesians is a forgery! 




No. Not me. People who have made a life's work out of studying these texts know it is a forged document. Personally I don't consider people who lie and deceive sources of moral advice.  Do you?


earlychristianwritings.com/ephesians.htm...


Kummel provides three arguments that have persuaded most scholars to consider Ephesians to be deutero-Pauline (Introduction to the New Testament, pp. 358-361): language and style, dependence upon Colossians, and theological differences.


  1. Many terms in Ephesians aren't found in genuine Paulines but are found in the later NT writings and early patristic writings. Also, the author of Ephesians uses different words for important Pauline concepts. "Although these and related linguistic and stylistic differences alone could not prove the Pauline authorship of Eph to be impossible, they make extremely difficult the supposition that Paul could have written Eph in the form in which it has been handed down."
     
  2. Almost all of Ephesians evinces verbal contacts with Colossians, indicating that the author of Ephesians wrote in imitation of Colossians, and the author also shows contact with the rest of the Pauline corpus (excepting II Thess). "Decisive against assuming that the same author wrote Col and Eph very quickly one after the other are those instances where Eph manifests clearly (a) literary dependence or (b) at the same time a really substantive difference from Col." 
     
  3. Kummel shows five different ways in which Ephesians clearly has a further developed theology than Colossians. Moreover: "If these developments beyond Paul are in any case completely inconceivable in a letter of Paul written at almost exactly the same time as Col, other ideas and formulations in Eph stand in any case in irreconcilable opposition to Paul. In characteristic fashion, Eph 2:10 in reworking Col 1:10 employs the plural εργα αγατηα which Paul always avoids (see 21.4.1). Equally characteristic is the fact that Eph in contrast with Col uses several εν-formulae that Paul does not have: εν τω χριστο ιησον (3:11), εν τω ιησον (4:21), εν τω κυριο ιησον (1:15). And in 1:15 πιστισ is linked with κυριοσ, while in Paul it is linked only with χριστοσ. Also it cannot be an accident that only in Eph 1:17; 3:14 (in contrast to all the Pauline letters) do we hear God addressed as Father in petition. Still more essential than these divergences, however, are three other factors which cannot be reconciled with Pauline authorship. First, in contrast to all the Pauline letters including Col 3:4, there is lacking in Eph any mention of the expectation of the parousia. With its formulation εισ πασασ τασ γενεασ τον αιωνοσ των αιωνων, Eph 3:21 is scarcely counting on a near eschaton. The valuing of marriage as the image of the heavenly union of Christ and his church (5:25 ff) is scarcely open to the same Paul who wrote I Cor 7. Finally, the statement that Paul's commissioned office was to proclaim the unity of Jews and Gentiles in the promise of Christ (3:2 ff) is contradicted by his own statements including Col 1:25 ff, and the self-designation of Paul as εγαχιστοτεροσ παντων αγιων (3:8) is scarcely a conceivable overstatement of εγαχιστοσ τον αποστολων (I Cor 15:9)."

Jesus had two dads, and he turned out alright.~ Andy Gussert

“Feminism has fought no wars. It has killed no opponents. It has set up no concentration camps, starved no enemies, practiced no cruelties. Its battles have been for education, for the vote, for better working conditions…for safety on the streets…for child care, for social welfare…for rape crisis centers, women’s refuges, reforms in the law.

If someone says, “Oh, I’m not a feminist,” I ask, “Why, what’s your problem?”

Dale Spender
Quick Reply
Cancel
2 years ago  ::  Mar 07, 2012 - 4:45PM #102
Kwinters
Posts: 21,003

Mar 5, 2012 -- 11:26AM, lope wrote:


Mar 4, 2012 -- 3:19PM, 57 wrote:


Mar 4, 2012 -- 3:15PM, Heretic_for_Christ wrote:


Mar 4, 2012 -- 3:11PM, 57 wrote:


Who said he was presenting an achievable goal? 




Jesus' own words suggest it. You are imposing your own interpretation because your theology demands it, irrespective of what he is reported to have said here. 




OK, for the sake of the argument..let say He was.....you already failed.  Along with every other human that has lived or will ever live.




The Bible says Job was a righteous man.




And Joseph.

Jesus had two dads, and he turned out alright.~ Andy Gussert

“Feminism has fought no wars. It has killed no opponents. It has set up no concentration camps, starved no enemies, practiced no cruelties. Its battles have been for education, for the vote, for better working conditions…for safety on the streets…for child care, for social welfare…for rape crisis centers, women’s refuges, reforms in the law.

If someone says, “Oh, I’m not a feminist,” I ask, “Why, what’s your problem?”

Dale Spender
Quick Reply
Cancel
2 years ago  ::  Mar 07, 2012 - 7:28PM #103
dio
Posts: 4,669

I know Ephesians isn't written by Paul but I wouldn't call it a forgery. It was written by someone who was a disciple of Paul. To forward what he sincerely thought was Paul's theology. This is what makes biblical studies interesting. And it's a very good letter in my opinion. I've always liked the idea of putting on the whole armor of God.


What I find interesting is you can intuit what was going on, what issues they were dealing with in the community in these pseudo letters.

Quick Reply
Cancel
2 years ago  ::  Mar 08, 2012 - 10:17AM #104
lope
Posts: 10,715

Mar 7, 2012 -- 4:45PM, Kwinters wrote:


Mar 5, 2012 -- 11:26AM, lope wrote:


Mar 4, 2012 -- 3:19PM, 57 wrote:


Mar 4, 2012 -- 3:15PM, Heretic_for_Christ wrote:


Mar 4, 2012 -- 3:11PM, 57 wrote:


Who said he was presenting an achievable goal? 




Jesus' own words suggest it. You are imposing your own interpretation because your theology demands it, irrespective of what he is reported to have said here. 




OK, for the sake of the argument..let say He was.....you already failed.  Along with every other human that has lived or will ever live.




The Bible says Job was a righteous man.




And Joseph.





an Enoch

Quick Reply
Cancel
Page 11 of 11  •  Prev 1 ... 6 7 8 9 10 11
 
    Viewing this thread :: 0 registered and 1 guest
    No registered users viewing
    Advertisement

    Beliefnet On Facebook