Did We Get the New Testament Wrong? - How the Canonical Books Were Recognized

[@ogloc6308]

one of the best explanations of biblical canon i’ve ever heard. glory to God

[@JadDragon]

God bless. Jesus lives! ♥️ and is Yahweh God 🙏🏻 Christ ✝️ and King 👑

[@traceystrange7114]

:)

[@seanpierce9386]

But the eleven didn’t write the gospels. They were a compilation of oral accounts written in Greek and may or may not have had Aramaic precursors. Since they were originally anonymous, we have no idea who actually wrote the gospels. Their names were assigned to lend to their authority. The traditions you mention are only found in the works of later church fathers and historians. Your discussion on the tentative canonical books is revealing. “Thick with apostolic teaching” is not a supernaturally endowed criterion. It’s evident that the canon was constructed from sufficiently believable sources to affirm doctrine that the church already taught. P.S. I find it disingenuous that you introduce non-historical secular straw man early on without engaging with legitimate secular scholarship. I would be interested if you had a conversation with someone rather than just saying what you personally think. That would demonstrate that your position is defensible, right?

[@ogloc6308]

Were the gospels and epistles not circulating at the time of the late 1st and early second century?

[@seanpierce9386]

@@ogloc6308 Yes, of course they were. I don’t see how that’s relevant to my critique though.

[@HearGodsWord]

​@seanpierce9386 the irony in you accusing someone of being disingenuous, whilst being disingenuous!

[@seanpierce9386]

@@HearGodsWord How so? Please explain. Did I misrepresent anything?

[@HearGodsWord]

@@seanpierce9386 I didn't mention misrepresenting. I was highlighting your hypocrisy.