2 Thessalonians issue

by Mat 41 Replies latest watchtower bible

• 

  Mat

  Reading a great book, Jeus Interupted, that I reccomend, but I came accross an interesting issue about Second Thessalonians. Ehrman argues that he does not think 2 Thessalonians was written by the same person who wrote 1 Thessalonians, and gives his reasons:

  If Paul meant what he said in 1 Thessalonians, that Jesus’ return would be sudden and unexpected, it is hard to believe that he could have written what is said in 2 Thessalonians—that the end is not coming right away and that there will be clear-cut signs to indicate that the end is near, signs that had not yet appeared. The author of 2 Thessalonians writes, “I told you these things when I was still with you” (2:5). If that were true, why would the Thessalonians have been upset when some members of their community died (1 Thessalonians)? They would have known that the end was not coming right away, but was to be preceded by the appearance of the anti-Christ figure and other signs.

  My fellow ex-Jehovah's Witnesses, does this ring any bells? Just thought that was amusing.
• 

  ProdigalSon

  Yep, like the rest of the Bible, Paul's epistles are a patchwork of interpolations and opinions of later church fathers desperately trying to put together a cohesive book that would support their ever-changing doctrines and dogmas over the course of several centuries while Christianity as we have it today began to formulate......
• 

  PSacramento

  That is just ONE scholars opinion and, well, we all know Bart's view on these things, LOL !
  2 Thessalonians was probably written to clear up things from the frist letter and the subsequent letters that Paul got from that Church.

  Paul attempted to clear things up for them that they may have misunderstood from him/his letter OR from other sources.
• 

  Mad Sweeney
• 

  Mad Sweeney

  Forgot the "compatability" button. I had a great post, too, but I'm not rewriting it.

  Suffice it this way:

  Dr. Ehrman

  The Opportunist Paul
• 

  Mat

  Hi, PSacramento is on my wavelength! Clearly Proff. Ehrman has not had experience in a religion that changes it's doctrine to accomodate events! We know from experience that it is highly plausable for one person/religion to back-peddle on their belieafs and claim they didn't mean what they clearly said before! It so happens that this is the only reason scholars claim 2 Thess was written by someone else! Nothing in the style or apparent time setting.

  What this means is that even Paul would approve of the new light concept! Just goes to show that Christianity from the outset was just as manipulative and unethical as the JWs are today.
• 

  Mad Sweeney

  I'm with you, Mat. I don't think that's exactly PSac's point, though. I think he kind of likes Paul, unfortunately.

  Personally, I think Paul was the first great apostate and Jesus wasn't about most of the stuff he wrote AT ALL.
• 

  Mat

  I see what you mean Mad Sweeney. I did go through a stage of thinking that Paul was perhaps the first apostate after Jesus. Most of the JW's unethical teachings seem to come from him (subjection of women, bad associates, etc) but after reading The Jesus Mysteries I got to thinking that Christianity is in fact corrupt to the core. At the end of the day it's a religion founded of deliberate lies.
• 

  wobble

  I agree Mat, just as the WT/JW religion is founded on lies, and maintained by lies, the "Christianity" we see today is the same.

  I am not sure that Paul was a deliberate Apostate from the teachings of Jesus, it is unclear how much he knew of Jesus' own words, but it seems to me that the experience he had on the road to Damascus convinced him that Jesus was alive in Heaven, and was the Messiah expected by Jews based on their scriptures.

  He then gave great impetus to the spread of the Jesus Myth and boosted membership of the cult.

  Later came the writers of Gospels and similar, and later still (late 4th cent) the Christian Church, by then a powerful political body, chose which writings would be approved as canonical, rejecting many, and perhaps destroying many, for example letters supposedly written by Paul are referred to in the Epistles, and are missing today.

  Today's Christians have a faith based on nothing tangible.
• 

  PSacramento

  You guys are far too hard on Paul, sure he was a dickhead at times, but so where all the apostles, well...maybe not John since he was more of the easy going and loving type, His brother james was a trouble maker and lets not even talk about their mom, LOL !

  Anyways, Paul was very zealous and at times it got the better of him, BUT this is also Paul of Ephesians and Galatians, the Paul of Romans who exalted the women of the Roman congregation, the Paul that wrote quite possibly the greatest description of what Love is.

  The fact that Paul was accepted BUT criticized by the apotles just means that they knew he has been touched by Chtist but didn't always agree on HOW he expressed it, not the Gospel mind you, but how he expressed the Gospel.

  Because Bart used to be a pure bread litaralist of the bible and then did a 180, it makse sense he would have so much issues with Paul.

  The famed atheist Anthony Flew viewed Paul as a top notch philosopher and that is saying something.