The Land God promised Abraham

[Clare73]

Acts 7:2 And he said, Men, brethren, and fathers, hearken; The God of glory appeared unto our father Abraham, when he was in Mesopotamia, before he dwelt in Charran,
Genesis 28:1 And Isaac having called for Jacob, blessed him, and charged him, saying, Thou shalt not take a wife of the daughters of the Chananites.[2] Rise and depart quickly into Mesopotamia, to the house of Bathuel the father of thy mother, and take to thyself thence a wife of the daughters of Laban thy mother’s brother.LXX
huh

Question?

Who wrote the letter to the Hebrews? ... and, can you prove your answer?

Relevance?

 

[atpollard]

Who wrote the letter to the Hebrews? ... and, can you prove your answer?

Relevance?

Awww … come on. That is a fun question (nothing like these endless arguments about end time prophecies).


Paul wrote Hebrews. [my opinion]
NOBODY can prove who wrote it. [a sad fact]

I base my opinion upon the 2nd century practice of circulating the Pauline Letters collected together as a single scroll ending with ‘Hebrews’ as evidence making it “more likely than not” in my opinion. I am not dogmatic in following the ECFs (they got too much theology wrong to be infallible), but they were so much closer to the First Century Authors that they had a better chance of knowing (by living memory) who wrote what.

 

[Ligurian]

Question?

Relevance?

Awww … come on. That is a fun question (nothing like these endless arguments about end time prophecies).


Paul wrote Hebrews. [my opinion]
NOBODY can prove who wrote it. [a sad fact]

I base my opinion upon the 2nd century practice of circulating the Pauline Letters collected together as a single scroll ending with ‘Hebrews’ as evidence making it “more likely than not” in my opinion.

Wasn't that collection itself Marcion's doing?

 

[Ligurian]

The Land God promised Abraham

When did they first decide where the Promised Land was supposed to be?
Did this decision happen before or after the return from Babylon?


------Edit------

Here's the earliest I could find:

"The Father of Biblical Geography" "Archeology and the Old Testament"
Edward Robinson (scholar) - Wikipedia
Biblical researches in Palestine, Mount Sinai and Arabia Petraea : Robinson, Edward, 1794-1863

But there must have been more proof before that, right?

 

[atpollard]

Wasn't that collection itself Marcion's doing?

Maybe, hard to remember since I was pretty young back then (and not a Christian until 1979).

 

[Ligurian]

Maybe, hard to remember since I was pretty young back then (and not a Christian until 1979).

Marcion's collection is what some older kids are calling it. There are modern books about "The First New Testament", saying Marcion created the canon. Hard to believe, since Marcion is later called a heretic... by the same people who pretty much went along with his canon.

 

[atpollard]

Wasn't that collection itself Marcion's doing?

Jack Finegan, in the Harvard Theological Review, wrote an article titled “The Original Form of the Pauline Collection” where he states “It is also almost certain that the original collection was made before AD 95.” This would place the two scroll collection of Pauline Epistles circulated among the early churches far predating Marcion and his AD 144 controversy.

 

[Clare73]

Awww … come on. That is a fun question (nothing like these endless arguments about end time prophecies).

Paul wrote Hebrews. [my opinion]
NOBODY can prove who wrote it. [a sad fact]

I base my opinion upon the 2nd century practice of circulating the Pauline Letters collected together as a single scroll ending with ‘Hebrews’ as evidence making it “more likely than not” in my opinion. I am not dogmatic in following the ECFs (they got too much theology wrong to be infallible), but they were so much closer to the First Century Authors that they had a better chance of knowing (by living memory) who wrote what.

Okay. . .is Hebrews 2:3: "This salvation, which was first announced by the Lord, was confirmed to us by those who heard him," a problem for you in that it indicates it was not Paul?

 

[atpollard]

Okay. . .is Hebrews 2:3: "This salvation, which was first announced by the Lord, was confirmed to us by those who heard him," a problem for you in that it indicates it was not Paul?

Why is that a problem?
Was Paul unsaved?
Did Paul not meet the Apostles in Jerusalem?
Was Paul not a Hebrew and qualified to say “us”?

Explain how that disqualifies Pauline authorship.
(I find it suspicious that Paul identifies himself as the author in all of his other letters but not in Hebrews, but that does not prove that Paul did not write it.)

 

[atpollard]

For the record, you are entitled to believe that Paul was NOT the author of Hebrews … with my blessings. I just thought it was a good question to ask and discuss.

 

[Clare73]

Why is that a problem?
Was Paul unsaved?
Did Paul not meet the Apostles in Jerusalem?
Was Paul not a Hebrew and qualified to say “us”?
Explain how that disqualifies Pauline authorship.
(I find it suspicious that Paul identifies himself as the author in all of his other letters but not in Hebrews, but that does not prove that Paul did not write it.)

Does "confirmed to us by those who heard him" sound like the author got it second hand?

Apart from that, I agree with you.

 

[Ligurian]

Jack Finegan, in the Harvard Theological Review, wrote an article titled “The Original Form of the Pauline Collection” where he states “It is also almost certain that the original collection was made before AD 95.” This would place the two scroll collection of Pauline Epistles circulated among the early churches far predating Marcion and his AD 144 controversy.

Wow... one guy is almost certain... that settles that, right? Not quite. The dating of everything is always the tricky part, and the outcome always seems to be a matter of politics. If you want to get published, you don't rock the boat...

"The real past is a book sealed with seven seals."
--Dean W. R. Inge, D.D.

Okay. . .is Hebrews 2:3: "This salvation, which was first announced by the Lord, was confirmed to us by those who heard him," a problem for you in that it indicates it was not Paul?

"Confirmed to us by those who heard him"... whom is the "us" in that statement?

"Those who heard him" could have been (1) chief priests, (2) Pharisees, (3) Sadducees, (4) the blind multitudes, (5) failed disciples who turned back, (6) high priest Theophilus, etc.

Did Paul not meet the Apostles in Jerusalem?

No, I don't think he did. Luke is hearsay... who else says the 12 hung around in Jerusalem? or even went back to Jerusalem after meeting the Son in Galilee, in Matthew 28:16-20 and John 21:1?
Doesn't it take more than one witness to establish a thing? And if you had more than one witness on each side of a debate, would you choose first-hand or second-hand testimony?
Paul says he met with James the Lord's brother in Galatians 1:19... and calls that James an apostle. The word apostle seems to have been loosely applied. And there was more than one James even among the 12... so it was a very common name. So was Simon and John.
Luke's Apostle list is also entirely confusing... who is Jude James's brother? Personally, I wouldn't count on Luke to be entirely accurate... and I'm not the only person who has ever thought so. We don't know who Luke's informants were, or even who Luke was... and the identity of Theophilus also seems to be up for grabs.
The most uncomfortable thing of all may be the relations of Luke with Josephus, and Josephus with Paul. It almost seems like Josephus and Paul suffered the same shipwreck... And that's not even touching the testimony which comes from the Dead Sea Scrolls.

 

[atpollard]

Wow... one guy is almost certain... that settles that, right? Not quite. The dating of everything is always the tricky part, and the outcome always seems to be a matter of politics. If you want to get published, you don't rock the boat...

You offer your personal opinion that Marcion was responsible for the Pauline scroll collection (offering no other support but yourself and your opinion).

I challenge that opinion with a quote from a peer reviewed article in a Theological Journal.

You then mockingly refute my challenge by citing … once again … your unsupported personal opinion.

This is a bit one-sided of a conversation.
I’ll leave you to your high opinion of your opinions.

 

[atpollard]

No, I don't think he did. Luke is hearsay...

Tear the gospel of Luke out of your Bible if it pleases you to do so. I will keep it among my 66 inspired books.

 

[Ligurian]

Marcion's collection is what some older kids are calling it. There are modern books about "The First New Testament", saying Marcion created the canon. Hard to believe, since Marcion is later called a heretic... by the same people who pretty much went along with his canon.

Jack Finegan, in the Harvard Theological Review, wrote an article titled “The Original Form of the Pauline Collection” where he states “It is also almost certain that the original collection was made before AD 95.” This would place the two scroll collection of Pauline Epistles circulated among the early churches far predating Marcion and his AD 144 controversy.

You offer your personal opinion that Marcion was responsible for the Pauline scroll collection (offering no other support but yourself and your opinion).

I challenge that opinion with a quote from a peer reviewed article in a Theological Journal.

You then mockingly refute my challenge by citing … once again … your unsupported personal opinion.

This is a bit one-sided of a conversation.
I’ll leave you to your high opinion of your opinions.

Are you saying that you've never found any references to the Marcion Apostolikon? So that the first time you ever read Marcion and Paul linked together was in that journal? Seriously?

Well then... here's another peer-reviewed article... which you don't have to sign-up for:

"He published the first known canon of Christian sacred scriptures,[2][8][9] which contained ten Pauline epistles (the Pastoral epistles were not included) and the Gospel of Marcion which is a shorter version of the Gospel of Luke.[2][10] This made him a catalyst in the process of the development of the New Testament canon by forcing the proto-orthodox Church to respond to his canon.[2][11]"
Marcion of Sinope - Wikipedia

And here's the link for your source:
The Original Form of the Pauline Collection | Harvard Theological Review | Cambridge Core

I gave you the title of this book already:

The First New Testament: Marcion's Scriptural Canon, BeDuhn.

Marcion
Work info: Five Books Against Marcion - Christian Classics Ethereal Library

Anything else I can help you find?

 

[Ligurian]

Luke is hearsay... who else says the 12 hung around in Jerusalem? or even went back to Jerusalem after meeting the Son in Galilee, in Matthew 28:16-20 and John 21:1? Paul says he met with James the Lord's brother in Galatians 1:19... and calls that James an apostle. The word apostle seems to have been loosely applied. And there was more than one James even among the 12... so it was a very common name. So was Simon and John. Luke's Apostle list is also entirely confusing... who is Jude James's brother? Personally, I wouldn't count on Luke to be entirely accurate... and I'm not the only person who has ever thought so. We don't know who Luke's informants were, or even who Luke was... and the identity of Theophilus also seems to be up for grabs. The most uncomfortable thing of all may be the relations of Luke with Josephus, and Josephus with Paul. It almost seems like Josephus and Paul suffered the same shipwreck... And that's not even touching the testimony which comes from the Dead Sea Scrolls.

Tear the gospel of Luke out of your Bible if it pleases you to do so. I will keep it among my 66 inspired books.

If the Bible canon was always inspired, then why did it change?

The Canon of the New Testament, Metzger

The Canon of the New Testament

And (I guess) you have no answers to all of my questions about Luke?

 

[atpollard]

Are you saying that you've never found any references to the Marcion Apostolikon? So that the first time you ever read Marcion and Paul linked together was in that journal?

Nope.

• I am saying: You are heavy on opinions and "snark" and light on backing opinions up when you make them.
• I am saying: This is a tiresome conversation style that I want no part of.

Any more questions?

 

[Ligurian]

Are you saying that you've never found any references to the Marcion Apostolikon?
[...] Marcion of Sinope - Wikipedia [...] The First New Testament: Marcion's Scriptural Canon, BeDuhn. [...] Marcion [...] Work info: Five Books Against Marcion

Nope.

• I am saying: You are heavy on opinions and "snark" and light on backing opinions up when you make them.
• I am saying: This is a tiresome conversation style that I want no part of.

Any more questions?

You call my four references in Post #35 a light back-up of opinion. Interesting.

Yes, I do have more questions... you'll answer Post #36 this time?

Tear the gospel of Luke out of your Bible if it pleases you to do so. I will keep it among my 66 inspired books.

Post #36:
If the Bible canon was always inspired, then why did it change?

The Canon of the New Testament, Metzger
The Canon of the New Testament

 

[atpollard]

Yes, I do have more questions... you'll answer Post #36 this time?

Nope.
Life is short.
Later.

 

[Ligurian]

Tear the gospel of Luke out of your Bible if it pleases you to do so. I will keep it among my 66 inspired books.

Post #36:
If the Bible canon was always inspired, then why did it change?

The Canon of the New Testament, Metzger
The Canon of the New Testament

Yes, I do have more questions... you'll answer Post #36 this time?

Nope.
Life is short.
Later.

Your inability to answer has been noted.