Epistle Of James Puns

For my own spiritual discipline/practice, I am going to take at least one verse of the Epistle of James and work my way through the entire document.

My goal is to strengthen my new understanding of the Bible as Neville has taught me, one verse or cluster of verses a day.

I will be using the New English Translation (NET) Bible, though I may lean on other versions and the Greek, at times.

Personal experiences and discussion are heartily welcomed and encouraged.

Are there any literary connections between the authors of the canonical gospels and epistles vs those found at Nag Hammadi?

Scholars seems to present a kind of anti sola fide reading of James. I’m wondering where I could read about more Protestant views of James.

How do we know it didn't change over the 20 years before Paul wrote it down?

>In the early part of the 20th Century scholars unanimously affirmed that verses 6-7 were part of the pre-Pauline creed.  However, now few hold that position.30  Often scholars who support this position “content themselves with magisterial assertions” rather than providing evidence.31  However, there are a few arguments.  First, verse 6 does fit with the formula stylistically.  The epeita references do not indicate that the creed ends.  Rather, it simply indicates a flow between verses 5 and 7.  Second, there is at least one non-Pauline word in verse 6, which is epano.  Also, there are some words that occur infrequently in Paul’s epistles, such as menein which only once has the exact parallel with the meaning in 1 Corinthians 15.32  Third, even scholars who argue that the creed ends in verse 5 admit that verse 7 contains traditional material.  For example, Murphy-O’Connor argues that Paul preserved the reference to hoi apostoloi and Iakobo in order to underline his apostolic authority.33  It has a traditional basis since it exhibits an abnormal linguistic pattern.  Murphy-O’Connor argues, “Were v. 7 a Pauline composition, one would expect him to begin with eita after the epeita in v. 6, as he in fact does in vv. 23b-24.  If he did not do so, it must be because eita already existed as the link between ‘James’ and ‘the apstles.’  Thus, it seems more probable that Iakobo eita tois apostolois came to Paul as a fixed formula.”34  Fourth, if Paul added the hoti and epeita references it would not seem to create a problem for a verse 7 ending.  Fifth, it is obvious that Paul wrote the latter part of verse 6.  However, this does not prove that the mention of the 500 is an addition to the text.  All it points out is that Paul is inserting comments on the tradition.

https://carm.org/analysis-pre-pauline-creed-1-corinthians-151-11

The 1 Cor 15 creedal formula is a [**pre-Pauline saying

It's my understanding that the Pastoral Epistles are generally attributed to a Pauline school of authorship, following a general consensus that the ecclesial structure presupposed in these letters arose after Paul's lifetime. I'm wondering if someone can point me to the strongest arguments for both this position and a Pauline authorship position. For example, what external evidence corroborates the claim that ecclesial hierarchy (in the form of bishops, etc.) did not exist before around AD 60 (assuming Paul's death occurred around that time)?

If only a terminus ante quem can be established for this level of church structure, has any other external evidence for authorship and dating been adduced? I'm familiar with arguments from internal evidence (e.g. writing styles, etc.), but I would greatly appreciate any discussion or recommendations of articles on the subject of external evidence on this point. Thank you for your time!

I do understand that the subject matter and usage of the Greek language differs in the Pastoral Epistles from Paul's 'undisputed' Epistles (i.e. 1 Thes, 1 Cor, 2 Cor, Gal, Rom, Phil, Phlm).

What I do not understand is:

(A) Why a reasonable scholar would feel comfortable presuming that a shift in subject matter, even if dramatic, would necessitate differing authorship. Generally speaking, Paul's letters seem highly specialized to his audience and their present troubles and concerns. Paul also demonstrates skill at jumping from topic to topic, yet still producing a coherent overall message. What is so anomalous within the Pastoral content that gives critical scholars unabashed certainty in non-Pauline authorship? (And is there a risk of overconfidence here among such scholars?)

(B) Also, isn't it pretty widely accepted that Paul sometimes employed scribes to compose the bodies of his letters? Why couldn't the use of unfamiliar Greek be the consequence of a new scribe or series of scribes? Additionally, couldn't an evolution in Paul's personal theological focuses, over time, lead to his using new vocabulary for clearer expression/emphasis?

I apologize if I'm not asking the right questions here. If I'm asking the wrong questions, then please feel free to ignore them and address the more relevant issues instead! Lastly, I'm not at all trying to be hostile or combative -- only trying to make sense of the apparent boldness of modern critical scholarship on this subject, which eludes me.

I sincerely appreciate everyone's time and thought! God bless you.

So Gordon blows up the combine home planet essentially destroying them and is teleport-ed away by vortigaunts. Where does he go that no one recognizes him? Why does alyx decide to leave gordon and go with the G-man to god knows where? I was hoping they'd end up together happily after beating the combine :(

Many scholars have called the disputed six letters of Paul the “deutero-Pauline” epistles. It is believed by some that these letters may have been written by someone who was influenced by Paul’s doctrine and wrote what they thought Paul would have said on certain issues. Whether or not all of the epistles traditionally attributed to Paul were in fact written by him is a matter of ongoing discussion among biblical scholars. There are traditionally thirteen epistles attributed to Paul.

https://crossexamined.org/paul-write-thirteen-letters-attributed/

The New Oxford Annotated Bible with Apocrypha (NOAB), Fifth Edition*,* states:

>Of the twenty-one letters in the New Testament, thirteen are from Paul or his missionary associates: Romans, 1 and 2 Corinthians, Ephesians, Philippians, Colossians, Galatians, 1 and 2 Thessalonians, 1 and 2 Timothy, Titus, and Philemon. These letters are arranged not chronologically but in rough order of length, with Romans being the longest and Philemon the shortest.(Introduction to the Letters/Epistles in the New Testament, in the *New Oxford Annotated Bible with Apocrypha (Fifth Edition),*Kindle Edition, Loc. 116716.)

There are three letters among these termed Pastoral Epistles:

>The term “Pastoral Epistles” has been applied, since the eighteenth century, to the three letters from Paul to his two co-workers and envoys, Timothy and Titus. The name reflects the central concern in these three epistles for the internal life, governance, and behavior of Christian communities and their members. Scholars have long debated whether these letters were written by the apostle Paul himself, or by a later disciple who sought to provide guidance for Pauline churches in new times and places. While most scholars today regard them as pseudepigraphical (that is, ascribed to the authority of a major figure but not actually written by him, a custom well attested in ancient literature), there is not complete unanimity on the question. The conclusion that these three epistles were not written by Paul is based upon literary, historical, and theological criteria.(Ibid, from Introduction to the Pastoral Epistles.)

According to the commentary in the aforementioned NABRE,

>The three letters, First and Second Timothy and Titus, form a distinct group within the Pauline corpus. In the collection of letters by the Apostle to the Gentiles, they differ from the othe

https://www.christiantruththroughapologetics.com/talk-apologetics-blog/authorship-of-1-2-peter

///Objection #1: Peter used Jude as a source, but Peter would have died before Jude would have been written.

Reply: It’s easier plausible that Jude could have used 2 Peter as a source if this document is earlier. This objection becomes circular if they do not bring in evidence that 2 Peter used Jude as a main source.///

That is a point that is rarely admitted. Texts relying on other texts sometimes becomes a game of assumptions. Hard to prove positively or negatively, but presuppositions still abound :/

My other thought is one of confusion.

///Objection #5: Church fathers do not quote 2 Peter and its canonicity was under attack in the fourth century.///

And yet in an earlier part of the article it states: ///This is where the controversy comes on with 2 Peter since it’s clear he had help from Silvanus in 1 Peter. Skeptics will point this out to be evidence against Peter as the author of second Peter. To the contrary, *Irenaeus, Tertullian, and Clement of Alexandria* accept Peter as the author.///

So...did the church fathers accept 2nd Peter as being authored by peter or not? How can church fathers not quote 2nd peter (objection #5) and yet it is claimed that 3 of the church fathers accept peter as the author of 2nd peter as stated in the earlier authorship section??

Something I like about Epistle 3 is how after years of wondering, we finally know how Freeman talks. (Or writes) and he sounds like an actual well-spoken scientist documenting his last adventure. It's just something that makes the whole story better and sadder to me.

Do you guys believe that was the nail in the coffin and was truly the summary to HL3 to give us closure to a game thats never coming out? or is it possibly being rumored that its really not actually the plot for the next game and we can still remain slightly hopeful?

He writes: "thus far he, whose name I shall conceal, (though the exellence of the matter, and present style, will easily discover him) ..

Is there a concessus who actually came up with the content of the epistle?

From what I can tell, most scholars hold to common authorship of 2 John and 3 John and are divided on whether the author of the first epistle is the same author or someone else. What are the arguments for and against these respective positions?

Also, if you have any light to shed on the dating of the epistles, whether before or after the Gospel of John, that would be great too.

Greetings to all the officers of the INC and your feeling neglected 😩 families. Please do not go to that special worship service of EVM . These kind of events is more in line with the Pharisees way of imposing “burdensome yokes” that our Lord Jesus Christ is very much opposed too. What you will receive on that day is just the same indoctrination from the INC and NOT the gospel or preaching of our Lord Jesus Christ. It is just another event to stroke EVM’s ego some more. Stay away and do something productive with your own lives and your families . Assuredly I say to you, our Lord Jesus Christ got your back. 🙏(Read the New Testament of the Bible in its entirety . The true gospel of our Lord Jesus Christ is in there)

Hey, Zen,

I know I’m supposed to make you happier, but I don’t know how. We’re in each other’s heads, but someone like you is still a mystery to someone like me. Something so pure and delicate, and... I don’t know. I’m not one with words.

I can’t picture you happy, but I’d like to. I’ve never heard you sing but I want it stuck in my head.

It’s hard to let you know about this, but the night my sister died, I killed four people.

So please, if you can’t smile yet, yell at me. Get mad. Hurt something.

But then, that’s not you. It’s... impure. So do whatever good people do, I guess.

You know what else I’d love to see? Wraith’s face when you tell him about that special person. You laughing as you remembering a story from long ago.

How much was taken from you? For how long?

I wish you could read this letter. No, that ain’t it: wish I could write something like this. I wish I was brave enough to tell you what I was.

But I’m not that kind of person. I’d like to think if I was, you’d appreciate the letter.

Because in the end, it was never the fault of people like you. It’s on us.

Forever yours,

Lilac.

Note: biggest/most discussed game reveal ever on r/gaming. specifically.

Just thought it would be interesting to share. This is VERY important for VR because Medal of Honor didn't even have more than 8 comments.

A gameplay reveal is sure to make another big splash.

How does the Church treat the epistles of St. Ignatius that are of spurious origin? Are they rejected outright, or are parts of them accepted? How does one parse through which is which?

Robert Price argues.. " all that can be taken from the epistles, Price argues, is that a Jesus Christ, son of God, lived in a heavenly realm, there died as a sacrifice for human sin, was raised by God, and enthroned in heaven.[22] "

I went through all refs to Jesus in the epistles, and I can't find anything that Paul writes that seems that connected to the Gospels story of Jesus, other than one mention of him being crucified and raised, but that doesn't mention it happening in the "real world".

According to scholars, which Pauline epistles are authentic (that is, written by Paul the Apostle) and which are written by someone else? Also, by what evidence is this conclusion reached: is it a matter of the kind of writing, or is it the source of the original documents (or scrolls)?