Christians, would you buy this NT?

[Aractus]

On what basis do you think that Jude is a forgery?

[watchamadoodle]

On what basis do you think that Jude is a forgery?

Probably Jude was a forgery, but I've noticed a common theme in the arguments for forgeries of epistles - the scholars claim that the earliest Christians (Peter, John, Jude, James) were not educated and did not know Greek. There is evidence that Galilee was Hellenized and some argue that Jesus was a Cynic. Maybe the followers of Jesus were a very educated and Hellenized group who could have written some of these epistles?

Kummel presents the reasons that most scholars suspect Jude to be a pseudepigraph (Introduction to the New Testament, pp. 428):

...and the cultivated Greek language as well as the citations from a Greek translation of the Enoch Apocalypse do not well suit a Galilean.
...

[Aractus]

Again, on what basis? All it says is it's written by Jude brother of James. It's debatable whether it's the brother of James the Just or another brother, and it's unanimously agreed not to be Judas Iscariot, so all the author has to be is someone named Judas with a brother named James... so why would the epistle be a forgery?

[watchamadoodle]

Again, on what basis? All it says is it's written by Jude brother of James. It's debatable whether it's the brother of James the Just or another brother, and it's unanimously agreed not to be Judas Iscariot, so all the author has to be is someone named Judas with a brother named James... so why would the epistle be a forgery?

That's true, but then why should we reverence this letter from Jude if he isn't the brother of James the Just?

EDIT: O.k., I think I see where you're going. Why should we care about Revelation if John of Patmos wasn't John the disciple? So, you are right, Revelation should be dropped.

[Aractus]

I just think it's strange to label Jude a forgery. It's one of the letters from a different author that gives you more information - Luke + Paul + James + Jude, the author of "John", the author of "Mark, the author of "Matthew", and the author of "1, 2, 3 John" are the authors you should be concerned with. No need to label those as forgeries - in that all were almost certainly written in the first century and were near identical to the copies that exist of them today. The books that are less authoritative in terms of author creditability and first century authorship would be 1-2 Peter, "Hebrews", and the pastoral epistles and other pseudonymous Pauline epistles (which interestingly enough include two works that are not in most Christian Bibles).

Revelation is a different matter, it may have been written late first century, but it doesn't contain any history in it, it's a book of futuristic visions, so it can't really tell you anything about the first century church, and for that reason it's safe to ignore it.

[watchamadoodle]

Here is the list of NT books. Anybody have ideas on which books should be removed, modified, etc? Also any ideas on the standards for inclusion?
Matthew
Mark
Luke
John
Acts
Romans
1 Corinthians
2 Corinthians
Galatians
Ephesians
Philippians
Colossians
1 Thessalonians
2 Thessalonians
1 Timothy
2 Timothy
Titus
Philemon
Hebrews
James
1 Peter
2 Peter
1 John
2 John
3 John
Jude
Revelation

[Godscreated]

Here is the list of NT books. Anybody have ideas on which books should be removed, modified, etc? Also any ideas on the standards for inclusion?
Matthew
Mark
Luke
John
Acts
Romans
1 Corinthians
2 Corinthians
Galatians
Ephesians
Philippians
Colossians
1 Thessalonians
2 Thessalonians
1 Timothy
2 Timothy
Titus
Philemon
Hebrews
James
1 Peter
2 Peter
1 John
2 John
3 John
Jude
Revelation

When you study them for their spiritual value, which is why they were given, one can only conclude they are all indispensable.

GC

[watchamadoodle]

When you study them for their spiritual value, which is why they were given, one can only conclude they are all indispensable.

Would you agree that:
- all writings of the Bible should be inspired by the Holy Spirit
- deception would not be compatible with inspiration of the Holy Spirit
- editing a letter written by somebody famous or suggesting that your own letter was written by somebody famous is deception

If you agree on those points, then I think we need to improve the NT.

[robvalue]

Maybe God fucked up and needed to slide updates in via forgeries.

[Aractus]

When you study them for their spiritual value, which is why they were given, one can only conclude they are all indispensable.

GC

Considering that almost all of Mark is contained within Matthew and Luke, why is it 'indispensable'?