Author Topic: The letters of the apostles:  (Read 169 times)

0 Members and 2 Guests are viewing this topic.

Offline Wahrani

  • Full Member
  • ***
    • View Profile
The letters of the apostles:
« on: July 02, 2020, 02:22:11 PM »
I was tempted to do some research on the Letters of the Apostles, on which it is said that their dates are more assured. The documentation consulted makes me say the following:

Most of the letters are addressed to churches rather than individuals, which clearly indicates that these are not real letters at all, but in fact that they are theology disguised as correspondence, and the length of several d 'between them - "Romans", for example, is longer than many ancient books. All the epistles are troubled by disorder and inaccuracy.

With the book of Acts, the epistles have a crucial objective: they constitute a bridge between the scene in Palestine described in the Gospels and the emerging churches of the end of the second century. The very existence of so-called letters confirms the myth of a unified church. The epistles proved the legitimacy of their churches and approved the episcopal right to govern as servants of Christ.

As it stands, there is no copy of a New Testament letter prior to the 2nd century, that is, nothing that predates the ruthless sectarian conflicts and bitter doctrinal battles of the 2nd century - a At that time false apostolic writings were primary weapons in the war of the sects of early Christianity.

I will take as an example the thirteen letters which bear the name of Paul, nine of them are addressed to churches and four to individuals. Do they prove something?


Curiously, the four Gospels do not mention or even suggest an adventurous apostle called Paul. For evangelical writers, Paul does not exist. It is just as curious that Paul's letters do the same, that is, the ignorance of the evangelists. Indeed, the evangelist Matthew, the tax collector so gifted at finding prophecies about Jesus in the Jewish Scriptures, is not so much named in any Pauline epistle.

If I should say a word about Paul, I should ask:
Why did Jesus return to earth to convert Paul through a vision?
Why did he not simply allow his own disciples to faithfully proclaim his message with one vision.
Did the disciples of Jesus, disciples of the Jewish God, followers of the Jewish Scriptures, baffled by the teaching of Jesus, mistakenly believing that he was the Jewish Messiah, even after his death and resurrection, continued to interpret the words, deeds and death of Jesus in light of their understanding of Judaism. This is why Paul had to face the disciple of Jesus, Peter, and James the brother of Jesus as seen in the letter to the Galatians.

I remain of course categorical to see that the letters do not offer any continuous narrative and nobody has a real idea of the unfolding of their composition from where the sustained uncertainty in the origin of the letters and their obvious incompatibility with the history ancient of Christianity. Precisely when it comes to understanding:

When they were written!
By whom they were written!
Where they were written!

It is very useful to wonder why all these letters from the Apostles (Personal Correspondence) or even the story of the Mantle of Paul, are they inspired by the Holy Spirit, this remains an endless speculation test?

[http://kadertahri.canalblog.com/]

 

What's new | A-Z | Discuss & Blog | Youtube