Evidence for God from Science

http://www.tertullian.org/fathers2/ANF- ... 54_1014821

Quote: "For some from among the Gentiles have rejected my legal preaching, attaching themselves to certain lawless and trifling preaching of the man who is my enemy."

The enemy seems to be Apostle Paul.

Is this authentic?

Maybe I don't understand what I am reading.

I would appreciate some help.

Thanks.

The Apostles seemed to accept Paul as genuine, though they admitted some of his stuff was hard to understand. 2 Peter 3:16

That epistle is not part of the NT.
If I recall correctly, it is dated to much later than the NT writings.
It is not written in the same literary style as the NT letters of Peter.
He quotes Matthew:
"The heavens and the earth shall pass away, but one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law.

But Peter died before Matthew's gospel was written.

So...

Honestly, you need to be very mindful of the writings outside the NT because it is very easy to get mislead into thinking they are valid, when they are not.
And they are not valid because they are outside the canon, no that is not the reason.
They are valid because they teach false teachings, like Gnosticism and that is why they were not included in the canon.

PaulSacramento wrote:Honestly, you need to be very mindful of the writings outside the NT because it is very easy to get mislead into thinking they are valid, when they are not.
And they are not valid because they are outside the canon, no that is not the reason.
They are valid because they teach false teachings, like Gnosticism and that is why they were not included in the canon.

I see a lot of anti-Paul stuff on the Internet, posted by people who hate him.

PaulSacramento wrote:That epistle is not part of the NT.
If I recall correctly, it is dated to much later than the NT writings.
It is not written in the same literary style as the NT letters of Peter.
He quotes Matthew:
"The heavens and the earth shall pass away, but one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law.

But Peter died before Matthew's gospel was written.

So...

Thank you.

I use Robinson's dates for the New Testament:

James, 47-48AD
1 Thessalonians, early 50’s AD
II Thessalonians, 50-1 AD
1 Corinthians, Spring 55AD
1 Timothy, autumn 55AD
II Corinthians early 56AD
Galatians, later 56AD
Romans, early 57AD
Titus, late spring 57AD
Philippians, spring 58AD
Philemon, summer 58AD
Colossians, summer 58AD
Ephesians, later summer 58AD
II Timothy, autumn 58AD
Mark, 45-60AD,
Matthew, 40-60AD
Luke, 57-60AD,
Jude, 61-2AD
Acts, 57-62AD
John, 40-65+AD


Additional reading:

http://www.ristosantala.com/rsla/Nt/NT07.html

Christian2 wrote:

PaulSacramento wrote:Honestly, you need to be very mindful of the writings outside the NT because it is very easy to get mislead into thinking they are valid, when they are not.
And they are not valid because they are outside the canon, no that is not the reason.
They are valid because they teach false teachings, like Gnosticism and that is why they were not included in the canon.

I see a lot of anti-Paul stuff on the Internet, posted by people who hate him.

Typically because they mis-interpreted what Paul says OR are going by SOMEONE else interpretation of what Paul says.
There are some passages of Paul's, when taken out of context, that look bad ( women not speaking in church for example, which needs to be taken in cultural context to the gentile church- that had recently converted pagans in it-that it was addressed to), then there are those that are, quite simply, passages that have redefined western civilization, such as:
There are no masters or salves, no men or women, all are the same under Christ.
Paul's passage on love in 1 Corinthians is, quite possibly, the most beautiful description of love ever written.

In short, Paul is an easy target for haters when taken out of cultural, literal and audience context.

PaulSacramento wrote:

Christian2 wrote:

PaulSacramento wrote:Honestly, you need to be very mindful of the writings outside the NT because it is very easy to get mislead into thinking they are valid, when they are not.
And they are not valid because they are outside the canon, no that is not the reason.
They are valid because they teach false teachings, like Gnosticism and that is why they were not included in the canon.

I see a lot of anti-Paul stuff on the Internet, posted by people who hate him.

Typically because they mis-interpreted what Paul says OR are going by SOMEONE else interpretation of what Paul says.
There are some passages of Paul's, when taken out of context, that look bad ( women not speaking in church for example, which needs to be taken in cultural context to the gentile church- that had recently converted pagans in it-that it was addressed to), then there are those that are, quite simply, passages that have redefined western civilization, such as:
There are no masters or salves, no men or women, all are the same under Christ.
Paul's passage on love in 1 Corinthians is, quite possibly, the most beautiful description of love ever written.

In short, Paul is an easy target for haters when taken out of cultural, literal and audience context.

Thank you.