(Ron) Confidence in 2 Peter (was Day as 1000 years)]]

• Messages sorted by: [ date ][ thread ][ subject ][ author ]

> >> EDWARDS

> >> Of course their understanding is limited and open to disproof, but

> how are

> >> current critical methods essentially different from ancient ones?  As

> to

> >> mere speculation, I'd say it's much more than that.  Short of

> something

> >> remarkable, the statement that someone other than *the* Peter wrote 2

> Peter

> >> will always be a hypothesis.  However, it is a hypothesis backed by

> >> evidence, and thus not mere speculation.  I suggest that the way to

> approach

> >> this question is first to simply gather and present the evidence in

> favor of

> >> each hypothesis.

>

> RON

>   I agree. The evidence in favor of it is the direct statement of the

> text and the tradition of the Church. What is the evidence against his

> authorship?

> >

> >

> >

> >

>

> ______________________________________________________

> Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com

• Previous message: (Ron) The Evolution of Emphasis (was Isaiah 42:8)]]
• Next message: (Ron) Confidence in 2 Peter (was Day as 1000 years)]]
• Messages sorted by: [ date ][ thread ][ subject ][ author ]