Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Akoue

It's a bit tricky, though. Scholarly consensus has long held that the first of the NT texts is 1Thess., written about twenty years after Christ's death (probably a little less than twenty years after). The Gospels were written later, beginning with Mark. Now we don't have any independent verification of who the authors of the Gospels were: The names, the titles, were added later. In any case, we have Paul's epistles which begin in the early 50's (maybe 51, in the case of 1Thess.).

---

Warren H. Carroll in his series A History of Christendom suggests that the Gospels were written by Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John, as advertised, so to speak. He suggests that there is a (small ‘t’) tradition for this. I’ll look into it tomorrow, but he brings some other compelling evidence forward.

JoeT

This discution is going along great.
I find it very interesting.
Of course there are apostles at Mass. I've seen them there in the flesh and the spirit OF the original 12.
Thanks.
Keep up the good works.
Fred

Just a brief historic correction: Matthias would have been a thirteenth Apostle (though he was chosen to keep the number at twelve, which I'm guessing is what was meant be an earlier post). This would seem to show that the Apostles could choose successors and give them the very authority they themselves received directly from Christ.

Just a brief historic correction: Matthias would have been a thirteenth Apostle (though he was chosen to keep the number at twelve, which I'm guessing is what was meant be an earlier post). This would seem to show that the Apostles could choose successors and give them the very authority they themselves received directly from Christ. Also, Paul was an Apostle.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Akoue

Just a brief historic correction: Matthias would have been a thirteenth Apostle (though he was chosen to keep the number at twelve, which I'm guessing is what was meant be an earlier post). This would seem to show that the Apostles could choose successors and give them the very authority they themselves received directly from Christ.

---

Note that Matthias was chosen by men - not by God. Although he was no doubt a good man and a good Christian leader, there is no evidence that He was God's choice.

Indeed scripture specifically states that there are only 12 Apostles.

Akoue,
That's the way I and a great many others in several denominations understand it.
It also makes good sense.
Peace and kindness,
Fred

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Tj3

Simply - It was determined by God, not by man.

---

But men have disagreed, and so not all have gotten it right. If it was determined by God, how do we know which men are understanding God's determination correctly and which are misunderstanding it? I'll have to ask you to explain what you have in mind.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Akoue

But men have disagreed, and so not all have gotten it right.

---

Thus why we should not go by tradition. Men get it wrong.

This can be resolved simply - show me where we can read the tradition so that we can verify what you are saying.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Tj3

Note that Matthias was chosen by men - not by God. Although he was no doubt a good man and a good Christian leader, there is no evidence that He was God's choice.

Indeed scripture specifically states that there are only 12 Apostles.

---

Just so we're all clear: You mean to say that neither Matthias nor Paul should be regarded as an Apostle?

Akoue,
We need to keep in mind that the 12 apostles mentioned were at the time of Jesus selection. More were added after and over the years many more. They were and are the Bishops of The Church.
Peace and kindness,
Fred

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Akoue

Just so we're all clear: You mean to say that neither Matthias nor Paul should be regarded as an Apostle?

---

You asked for an amiable discussion - I agree - lets not mis-represent or put things in the mouths of others. Where did I mention Paul not being an Apostle?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by arcura

Akoue,
We need to keep in mind that the 12 apostles mentioned were at the time of Jesus selection. More were added after and over the years many more. They were and are the Bishops of The Church.
Peace and kindness,
Fred

---

Where does scripture alter what it said about there being ONLY 12?

The topic of this thread has been, all along, how do we sort out the disagreements that people clearly do have. If we have people disagreeing about the NT canon, how do we resolve this disagreement? How does anyone know who is right and who is mistaken?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Akoue

The topic of this thread has been, all along, how do we sort out the disagreements that people clearly do have. If we have people disagreeing about the NT canon, how do we resolve this disagreement? How does anyone know who is right and who is mistaken?

---

God is right.

You did not answer my question - show me where we can read the tradition so that we can verify what you are saying.

I don't mean to misrepresent anything (this is why I asked the follow-up question for clarification). At #144 I mentioned Matthias and Paul as Apostles. At #145 you affirmed your earlier claim that there were only 12 Apostles. Since Judas was one of the Twelve (replaced by Matthias, whom you don't regard as an Apostle) I took you to be saying that Paul is not an Apostle either. Please correct me if I was mistaken.

Akoue,
Paul was chosen after Jesus ascended into heaven.
So he was an additional apostle over the original 12.
Now back to your question, "If we have people disagreeing about the NT canon, how do we resolve this disagreement? How does anyone know who is right and who is mistaken?
I'm interested in the discussion on that.
Peace and kindness,
Fred

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Akoue

My apologies. I mean with this locution only to refer in a neutral way to any view that rejects Tradition in the sense clarified ealier in the thread and alluded to (alas, not as clearly as it should have been) in the OP.

Does this clear it up? Better: Tell me if it doesn't.

---

I don't think there is any orthodox (little 'o') Doctors or Fathers who reject Tradition. (at least I don't recall any). I don't know much about the Eastern Rites, but I understand they have a similar patristic Tradition of Faith that seems to cross the East-West Divide. St. Thomas takes Tradition (big and little) as a matter of fact. The first time we see Tradition being challenged is with Martin Luther (c. 1518) and the Protestant schism -- I wonder why?

JoeT

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Akoue

I don't mean to misrepresent anything (this is why I asked the follow-up question for clarification). At #144 I mentioned Matthias and Paul as Apostles. At #145 you affirmed your earlier claim that there were only 12 Apostles. Since Judas was one of the Twelve (replaced by Matthias, whom you don't regard as an Apostle) I took you to be saying that Paul is not an Apostle either. Please correct me if I was mistaken.

---

I never said anything about Paul not being an Apostle, so please ask first and don't assume. Paul was God's replacement for Judas.

The qualifications, BTW, which the Apostles stated for an Apostle can no longer be met in any case.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Tj3

God is right.

You did not answer my question - show me where we can read the tradition so that we can verify what you are saying.

---

Indeed, God is right. The question throughout the whole of the present thread, to which I'll ask you to speak as others have done, is: How do we know which human beings are right? How do we determine which is the right canon?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by arcura

Akoue,
Paul was chosen after Jesus ascended into heaven.
So he was an additional apostle over the original 12.
Peace and kindness,
Fred

---

There were only 11 after Judas was gone.