In their introduction to 2Peter in the New American Bible, they state:
The bishops list numerous reasons why 2Peter could not have been written by the Apostle Peter.Among modern scholars there is wide agreement that 2 Peter is a pseudonymous work, i.e., one written by a later author who attributed it to Peter…
In the first chapter, the author of 2Peter claims to speak with authority because he, the author, was there with Jesus at the “transfiguration” described in Matthew 17.
The epistle-writer says:
Clearly, the statements in boldface are outright lies.16 We did not follow cleverly devised myths when we made known to you the power and coming of our Lord Jesus Christ, but we had been eyewitnesses of his majesty.
17 For he received honor and glory from God the Father when that unique declaration came to him from the majestic glory, "This is my Son, my beloved, with whom I am well pleased."
18 We ourselves heard this voice come from heaven while we were with him on the holy mountain.
That the Catholic Church at some historical point included 2Peter in the official Bible (which is the Word of God) could be seen as some sort of honest mistake.
The Church’s continued inclusion of this bogus, lying document as the word of God hurts the Church’s claim of authenticity, let alone honesty.
2Peter addresses the” scoffers.”
The early Church’s belief that the second coming would happen in their lifetimes was a gigantic misunderstanding. The people, apostles and such, who were actually there, living and traveling and talking with Jesus, completely misunderstood his promise to return soon.
How much else of Jesus’ preaching was misunderstood?
Per the statue pictured above (click on image for source) St Peter had a great physique with a nice net. But he did not write 2Peter.
2 comments:
A very detailed photograph of a statue sculpted in the 1980s for an Anglican Church in England... (Hasn't been Catholic since the early 1500's - when the statue wasn't there.) Not sure what you were getting at with it.
Also note, the American bishops unfortunately point out an opinion. More than they probably should have done, but that still does not constitute an edorsement or official teaching...
And I don't put much value the opinion of the committee who authored "Finally, the principal problem exercising the author is the false teaching of "scoffers" who have concluded from the delay of the parousia that the Lord is not going to return. This could scarcely have been an issue during the lifetime of Simon Peter."
The committee has trouble thinking that "scoffers" had arisen in the Christian community who were upset that Christ had not returned to lead a revolution on their time frame? Please... How many people get restless when the waiter does not come to their table within 60 seconds of being sat?
All in all, bad, sad scholarship. If looking to cast doubt or aspersion on the Catholic Church as a whole, the blatherings of some committee functionary is a cheap (thought I grant expedient) place to start.
Just a few messy details... Back to your stance now.
Again I get a little shocked by the ignorant position of the writer of this blog, where is said here, that the official Bible has any authorship in the Roman Catholic Church. I am also familiar with a typical Roman Catholic Theology, that claims that all Gospels are written in around 450 AC by the Pope, not by Apostles.
Tindale was burned by Thomas Moore. All bibles where burned by the Roman Catholic Church if possible, until the 2nd Vatican Council only half a century ago. Before the V2, only priests could have legal possession of a bible in the Latin sabotaged version.
The Gospel came here in Holland, and other parts of Europe, thanks to the Waldenses in the 15th Century. There is was stolen again by the Roman Catholic Church, the Holy Inquisition, that went on their deliberate corrupted Latin version and research to destroy the Bible by infiltrating most translations today.
A reliable Bible today, according to many, me including: the King James Bible from 1611. Because King James would hang all Jesuits, said otherwise, intellectuals in England had a chance in that time. The Geneva Bible is also called reliable. Hanging Jesuits is an intellectual achievement, because these men have no families, many of them are pedophiles because also needed for mindcontrol slavery, while they also intend to rob the wives of their victims, and making more jesuits from the children that lost their father in the assassination. These fatherless children are more easy to rape, and with more Jesuits, more fatherless children have to grow up.
Proof here for my position in a previous comment, that all Atheists are run by Romanism. Atheists have the opinion, that the Roman Catholic Church has any thing to do with the publishing of the Bible. How fools reason. They lie where it suits them, until they get caught.
The Jews are the source of the Torah, the biggest part of the Bible. Jews have nothing to do whatsoever with the Roman Catholic Church.
Other parts of the Bible where guarded by Waldenses and many other guardiands of original texts that where called Witches in these days. Witches had a Bible, a Torah, that one can know thanks to the fact that Witches keep the Sabbath. Keeping the Sabbath is one of the 10 commandments [Exodus 20], that has been on purpose wrong translated by most translations today, in order to make the people accept a Roman Catholic Sunday Worship. Sunday Worship is serious heresy, according to the Bible. It is Sun worship. The Sun is a Creation, not a God!
Catholics and Atheists, dirty hypocrite Romanists is all of them! But maybe worse are the Christians, that are too often fanatic Anti-Christian papists here in the Netherlands, for keeping the Sunday of the Pope in a fanatic fashion. These hypocrites close down their website on Sunday, while persecuting witches, sabbath keepers and protestants. Than they go steal the names of their victims, so official Calvinists are Papists in Sunday supersticion for Hypocrasy and voluntarily cursing every child, not only their own!
Post a Comment