Why all the letters from Paul

[Shekinahs]

Paul's letters are mainly to churches in Greece/Rome area and Turkey. A brief overview for those who may not know. Romans was written to the church in Rome. Corinthians was written to the church in Corinth which was in Greece. Galatians was written to the church in Galatia which was in Turkey. Ephesians was written to the church of Ephesus which is also in Turkey. Philippians was written to the church in Philippi which is in Greece. Colossians was written to the church in Colosse which was in Turkey. Thessalonians was written to the church of Thessalonica which was in Greece.

Now what interest me is that Paul spent a great deal of time in the Roman/Greece area which later becomes the location for the Roman church which via the Councel of Nicea helps to shape the Bible. And it does not escape me that the letters the Bible contains are mostly from Paul. And I'm wondering where in the world are the letters from the other teachers who may have never once stepped foot in Rome if their churches were elsewhere. I'm of the impression that the Roman church was biased in favor of Paul since he started their church and allowed his letters to make up the bulk of the NT non gospel writings. And he was converted AFTER the death of Christ.

As a matter of fact I wonder period about the idea of putting letters written to churches into a book that is to be seen as a holy book. But I'm wondering about the contents of the letters written by the disciples for example over their years of preaching and teaching. At least they were with Jesus. I mean Peter was WITH Jesus and we only have two letters from him in the NT. Does that not seem unbalanced Like there was an agenda on the table when the NT was put together.

 

[stauron]

Paul's letters are mainly to churches in Greece/Rome area and Turkey. A brief overview for those who may not know. Romans was written to the church in Rome. Corinthians was written to the church in Corinth which was in Greece. Galatians was written to the church in Galatia which was in Turkey. Ephesians was written to the church of Ephesus which is also in Turkey. Philippians was written to the church in Philippi which is in Greece. Colossians was written to the church in Colosse which was in Turkey. Thessalonians was written to the church of Thessalonica which was in Greece.

Now what interest me is that Paul spent a great deal of time in the Roman/Greece area which later becomes the location for the Roman church which via the Councel of Nicea helps to shape the Bible. And it does not escape me that the letters the Bible contains are mostly from Paul. And I'm wondering where in the world are the letters from the other teachers who may have never once stepped foot in Rome if their churches were elsewhere. I'm of the impression that the Roman church was biased in favor of Paul since he started their church and allowed his letters to make up the bulk of the NT non gospel writings. And he was converted AFTER the death of Christ.

As a matter of fact I wonder period about the idea of putting letters written to churches into a book that is to be seen as a holy book. But I'm wondering about the contents of the letters written by the disciples for example over their years of preaching and teaching. At least they were with Jesus. I mean Peter was WITH Jesus and we only have two letters from him in the NT. Does that not seem unbalanced Like there was an agenda on the table when the NT was put together.

Too much to address all at once, but since the Roman Army marched through all those areas just a few years after the letters were written, it demonstrated the faithfulness of God to warn and prepare His children for the coming conflagration. And especially prepare them for the apostacy when a significant portion of the people in the churches went out. (1 John 2:18,19) Since there was so much confusion at the time about who were the "real" people of God, Paul's letters (and the others) gave important instructions to genuine Christians and gave them hope in the midst of persecution.

 

[Shekinahs]

Too much to address all at once, but since the Roman Army marched through all those areas just a few years after the letters were written, it demonstrated the faithfulness of God to warn and prepare His children for the coming conflagration. And especially prepare them for the apostacy when a significant portion of the people in the churches went out. (1 John 2:18,19) Since there was so much confusion at the time about who were the "real" people of God, Paul's letters (and the others) gave important instructions to genuine Christians and gave them hope in the midst of persecution.

I understand the need for the letters. I'm just questioning why the coucel decided Paul's letters would make up the bulk of the epistles. By making his letters by far the most authoritative (by volume) that has slanted all of Christianity into a NT doctine based on the writings of Paul and mostly Paul alone. There are not enough letters from other writers to give a more balanced view.

 

[skylark1]

I understand the need for the letters. I'm just questioning why the coucel decided Paul's letters would make up the bulk of the epistles. By making his letters by far the most authoritative (by volume) that has slanted all of Christianity into a NT doctine based on the writings of Paul and mostly Paul alone. There are not enough letters from other writers to give a more balanced view.

I believe that the Holy Spirit guided the council in the decision of which letters should be included as part of the Bible. I think that God chose Paul for this purpose. Saul/Paul's encounter with Jesus on the road to Damascus makes it clear that God chose him for a purpose. Paul was very intelligent. He had studied under Gamaliel. He was both a Jew and a Roman citizen. He abandoned his old life, and lived for Christ.

Acts 22
1"Brothers and fathers, listen now to my defense." 2When they heard him speak to them in Aramaic, they became very quiet.
3Then Paul said: "I am a Jew, born in Tarsus of Cilicia, but brought up in this city. Under Gamaliel I was thoroughly trained in the law of our fathers and was just as zealous for God as any of you are today. 4I persecuted the followers of this Way to their death, arresting both men and women and throwing them into prison, 5as also the high priest and all the Council can testify. I even obtained letters from them to their brothers in Damascus, and went there to bring these people as prisoners to Jerusalem to be punished.
6"About noon as I came near Damascus, suddenly a bright light from heaven flashed around me. 7I fell to the ground and heard a voice say to me, 'Saul! Saul! Why do you persecute me?'
8" 'Who are you, Lord?' I asked.
9" 'I am Jesus of Nazareth, whom you are persecuting,' he replied. My companions saw the light, but they did not understand the voice of him who was speaking to me.
10" 'What shall I do, Lord?' I asked.
11" 'Get up,' the Lord said, 'and go into Damascus. There you will be told all that you have been assigned to do.' My companions led me by the hand into Damascus, because the brilliance of the light had blinded me.
12"A man named Ananias came to see me. He was a devout observer of the law and highly respected by all the Jews living there. 13He stood beside me and said, 'Brother Saul, receive your sight!' And at that very moment I was able to see him.
14"Then he said: 'The God of our fathers has chosen you to know his will and to see the Righteous One and to hear words from his mouth. 15You will be his witness to all men of what you have seen and heard.
​

 

[Shekinahs]

I believe that the Holy Spirit guided the council in the decision of which letters should be included as part of the Bible. I think that God chose Paul for this purpose. Saul/Paul's encounter with Jesus on the road to Damascus makes it clear that God chose him for a purpose. Paul was very intelligent. He had studied under Gamaliel. He was both a Jew and a Roman citizen. He abandoned his old life, and lived for Christ.

I agree Paul was chosen for a purpose but so was Peter and any other person called by God to teach the churches. I do not agree with the notion though that the Holy Spirit guided the councel to use Paul's writings as the major non-gospel writings of the NT. Plus personally, I have little faith in the Nicene councel being truly led by the spirit of God. Too much politics at stake at that meeting. Actually, I am wondering if anybody knows of any other letters that were considered but not accepted and a link to them.

 

[Radio-Free Gnosis]

Because the Council chose documents that supported their view of Christianity.

Then, when they couldn't find enough of them, they wrote some, and attributed them to Paul. I guess they wanted their own pseudopigrapha.

 

[Shekinahs]

Because the Council chose documents that supported their view of Christianity.

Then, when they couldn't find enough of them, they wrote some, and attributed them to Paul. I guess they wanted their own pseudopigrapha.

Now that's news to me. Which letters were these?