View Single Post
Old 09-23-2010, 09:58 AM   #218
WT Sharpe
Bah, humbug!
WT Sharpe ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.WT Sharpe ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.WT Sharpe ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.WT Sharpe ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.WT Sharpe ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.WT Sharpe ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.WT Sharpe ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.WT Sharpe ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.WT Sharpe ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.WT Sharpe ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.WT Sharpe ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.
 
WT Sharpe's Avatar
 
Posts: 39,072
Karma: 157049943
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Chesapeake, VA, USA
Device: Kindle Oasis, iPad Pro, & a Samsung Galaxy S9.
Quote:
Originally Posted by EatingPie View Post
You had me up till that last sentence there. If they were "virtually unanimous" then the scholars who chose the Canon would not have included it. No?

But the main thing is that your statement is a logical fallacy. It can't be proven true or false. How do you show something is "virtually unanimous."
There would be no logical fallacy if it were true that all but a very few doubted if it's authenticity, but I must nevertheless ask your forgiveness and admit to a bit of hyperbolic language in my earlier post. In truth, the authorship of Ephesians is still in dispute. What I should have said is that most critical scholars reject Pauline authorship. To quote Ehrman from the syllabus to his NT course, "With Ephesians, there is less debate. Most critical scholars are fairly persuaded that Paul did not write it." And again, "Was Ephesians written by Paul, then? There is still debate, but most critical scholars think not. If it was not written by Paul, then it was likely written by a follower after Paul’s death."

Metzger disagreed on linguistic and historical grounds, but even he admitted that Philemon, James, 2 Peter, and 2 and 3 John do not appear in the works of Clement.

Last edited by WT Sharpe; 09-23-2010 at 10:02 AM.
WT Sharpe is offline   Reply With Quote