Posted on 09/12/2018 2:29:33 PM PDT by pcottraux
Welcome to Wednesday night Bible study!
I was off last week due to a vacation. This week, however, we're resuming the vlog series on why the New Testament was written, focusing on Romans.
A little shorter than last time, but the history behind Romans isn't all that complicated. Video runs at 11:16.
Why Paul Wrote I and II Corinthians
Why Paul Wrote the Thessalonian Letters
Why James Was Written
Why Galatians Was Written
You can also subscribe by entering your email in the subscription box on the home page, read all my past blogs on the Archives page, or follow me on:
Twitter: @DepthsPentecost
YouTube: Depths of Pentecost
This is the official ping list for Depths of Pentecost: I’m a Christian blogger who writes weekly Bible lessons. Topics range from Bible studies, apologetics, theology, history, and occasionally current events. Every now and then I upload sermons or classes onto YouTube.
Let me know if you’d like to added to the Depths of Pentecost ping list. New posts are up every Saturday.
Bookmark
Thanks.
for later
.
Did Paul use his phone cam, or is this a better quality
video?
.
They were writing letters to the congregations they had nurtured, and to their own disciples, about the important challenges they faced.
To them Tanakh were the only scripture there were.
.
.
Like getting free Bible college classes. Keep ‘em coming.
BTW, I had heard that part of the Jew / Gentile friction in Rome after Jews were permitted to return was partly due to Gentile Christians not being forced to leave. I never explored deeper into sources, but have you heard this before?
Not sure what you mean, but I personally don't use a phone cam. Although I could probably benefit from investing in better sound equipment.
The apostles didn't consider themselves to be writing scripture.
For the epistles, you may be right. For the gospels and Luke/Acts, I disagree. The realization that Christ wasn't returning any time soon inspired the need to record his life, ministry, and the history of the birth of the church. I'm sure they knew the importance of what they were writing...the sense of urgency comes across in the text.
BTW, I had heard that part of the Jew / Gentile friction in Rome after Jews were permitted to return was partly due to Gentile Christians not being forced to leave. I never explored deeper into sources, but have you heard this before?
I have not, though if that's true it would make sense. To my knowledge, Christianity was still considered synonymous with Judaism to the Romans, so I would assume they were expelled from the city as well. However, many of the Gentile converts might have joined Christianity after the ban was lifted, which would certainly be a source of friction.
Matthew was the only literate disciple, and he waited over 20 years before writing, although that gospel had apparently traveled the literate world by the end of the century.
The Acts was clearly a treatise on how to live Torah.
.
P.S. my opening line was a wisecrack.
Yet the Apostle Peter specifically referred to the letters of the Apostle Paul as scripture.
.
Actually, the early copies of Peter’s epistle do not indicate “other scriptures,” but simply “scriptures,” so the “other” was obviously added centuries after peter wrote his letter.
No, the apostles were not arrogant enough to assume their letters were “scripture,” Tanakh was “Holy” (set apart) to them.
.
Nonsense; P72, the oldest manuscript of the work we have clearly contains the reference. In context, also, Peter is clearly referring to Paul’s letters as scripture. Paul writes claiming Apostolic authority and obviously believes his letter are divine authority for the lives of those he addressed them to. There were intended to be read with the OT scriptures in the earliest church and the Apostles knew this was being done. None objected to the churches treating their epistles as scripture. I have no doubt the Apostles considered their letters to be scripture as much as the recipients did.
bttt
.
It does now, but shows modification in a different hand than the original. Probably Eusebius’ work.
There are several that do not have it.
.
.
>> “I have no doubt the Apostles considered their letters to be scripture as much as the recipients did.” <<
Mega-foolish comment!
Even the ancient prophets didn’t consder their utterances worthy of being written. They were only spoken.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.