in 1st Corinthians, Paul is all across the board on whether it’s okay for a Christian to eat food offered to Pagan god

[AgnosticBoy]

Peter recognized Paul’s writing as scripture: 2 Pet.3: 15-16 And account that the longsuffering of our Lord is salvation; even as our beloved brother Paul also according to the wisdom given unto him hath written unto you; As also in all his epistles, speaking in them of these things; in which are some things hard to be understood, which they that are unlearned and unstable wrest, as they do also the other scriptures, unto their own destruction.

Good find. The NIV version of that passage is easier to understand...

2 Peter 3:15,16
15 Bear in mind that our Lord’s patience means salvation, just as our dear brother Paul also wrote you with the wisdom that God gave him. 16 He writes the same way in all his letters, speaking in them of these matters. His letters contain some things that are hard to understand, which ignorant and unstable people distort, as they do the other Scriptures, to their own destruction.

The only issue is that not all of Paul's writings were from God. Paul acknowledges this several times when he says this or that is from "I, not the Lord". Lemur also brought up some passages earlier showing just that, as well.

 

[Multicolored Lemur]

Peter recognized Paul’s writing as scripture: 2 Pet.3: 15-16

While it would be easy enough to say, that’s just a slightly bigger circle of reasoning,

I’m going to say, it’s one line of evidence which shows Paul’s writings as mainstream within the early Christian movement.

 

[AgnosticBoy]

Peter recognized Paul’s writing as scripture: 2 Pet.3: 15-16

While it would be easy enough to say, that’s just a slightly bigger circle of reasoning,

I’m going to say, it’s one line of evidence which shows Paul’s writings as mainstream within the early Christian movement.

Was going to say that I wouldn't have doubted that the early Church would've looked to Paul's writings as if they were Scripture. He's a well respected leader, and usually religions like to venerate people and things, which is like the tendency to want idols. Catholic Church is also big on that with all of the different Saints and relics.

 

[Multicolored Lemur]

He's a well respected leader, and usually religions like to venerate people and things,

Usually after they die,

but some exceptions to this.

 

[Multicolored Lemur]

Synod of Hippo - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

in the year 393 —

“ . . the first time a council of bishops listed and approved a Christian Biblical canon that corresponds to the modern Catholic canon . . . . . Previous councils had approved similar, but slightly different, canons. . ”

————-

And for the Protestant Bible, a handful of books were removed around 1500, I think due to the influence of Martin Luther.

 

[AgnosticBoy]

Lemur...

I guess that made it formal. There were some drawbacks to this as well since what was considered Scripture back then might have included writings that were falsely attributed to Paul and the other Apostles. These writings are generally called the 'apocrypha'. The Gospel of Thomas comes to mind. I think there's also a Gospel of Peter too.

So although it's nice knowing that Paul's writings were part of Scripture, but you still have to question what else was being passed off as Scripture... Thomas? Peter?

 

[Multicolored Lemur]

These writings are generally called the 'apocrypha'.

I think this is the word Protestants use. Catholics are just fine with keeping Maccabees in the Old Testament, for example.

And I’m pretty sure that both Catholics and Protestants, as well as Eastern Orthodox believers, have the same 27 books in the New Testament.

 

[Multicolored Lemur]

Bible Gateway passage: Romans 6 - New King James Version

Dead to Sin, Alive to God - What shall we say then? Shall we continue in sin that grace may abound? Certainly not! How shall we who died to sin live any longer in it? Or do you not know that as many of us as were baptized into Christ Jesus were baptized into His death? Therefore we were buried...

www.biblegateway.com

Romans, chapter 6 —

1 What shall we say then? Shall we continue in sin that grace may abound? 2 Certainly not! How shall we who died to sin live any longer in it?

—————

I like how it starts the 2nd verse with “Certainly not!” And by the way, this is the NKJV, which means the New King James Version.

This is another example of Paul arguing with himself.

But it’s a simpler, briefer idea, and Paul immediately refutes it. So, the whole thing works much better.

 

[AgnosticBoy]

I think this is the word Protestants use. Catholics are just fine with keeping Maccabees in the Old Testament, for example.

And I’m pretty sure that both Catholics and Protestants, as well as Eastern Orthodox believers, have the same 27 books in the New Testament.

I meant for the early Christians.,.. I would say from the 1st 3 centuries. The early Church Fathers quoted from books that weren't part of today's NT, like the Acts of Paul and Thelca.

Btw, have you seen the Ethiopian Bible? I counted 81 books, including the Book of Enoch, book of Jubilees, and like 4 or 5 extra NT books. Either they didn't get the memo from Rome or they didn't care and just collected everything, lol

The Ethiopian Orthodox Tewahedo Church

 

[Multicolored Lemur]

The early Church Fathers quoted from books that weren't part of today's NT, like the Acts of Paul and Thelca.

Thecla, I think

And she was supposedly a young woman from a rich family who traveled with Paul in a relationship of respect, platonic love, and romantic abstinence. It would have been an equally powerful story if she had been a young woman from a poor family.

I think “chivalry” would be the right word.

Then we have the somewhat mysterious 1st Corinthians ch 9, verse 5 —
“Do we have no right to take along [c]a believing wife, as do also the other apostles, the brothers of the Lord, and Cephas?”

c = “a sister, a wife”

Cephas is Peter. And why then do Catholics make a big deal about a priest not getting married?

And I think the answer is tradition, no more, no less. I wish abstinence was viewed as one valid choice, but not the only valid choice.

In fact, Catholic priests can be married if they convert from the Episcopal Church, or Eastern traditions, but I think they can’t move upward in the hierarchy as Bishops.