Skip to Content.
Sympa Menu

corpus-paul - Re: Pauline authorship and Canon

corpus-paul AT lists.ibiblio.org

Subject: Corpus-Paul

List archive

Chronological Thread  
  • From: George Goolde <goolde AT mtnempire.net>
  • To: corpus-paul AT franklin.oit.unc.edu (corpus-paul AT franklin.oit.unc.edu)
  • Subject: Re: Pauline authorship and Canon
  • Date: Wed, 05 May 1999 16:01:48 -0700


At 11:41 AM 5/5/1999 -0700, you wrote:
>David and all . . .
>
David wrote:

I find the division of doctrinal from historical to be dubious, even if a
>disciplinary commonplace, but I certainly understand your concern that we
>seem to be reaching a moment where key fundamental values come into
>conflict, and the common ground upon which our discussion has flourished
>now
>finds itself opening up, turning into a chasm.
>
>My own response to Prof. Goolde's statement of presuppositions
>("canon"-ical
>"theses"?), however, is to engage in a bit of dialogue, to see if I
>personally couldn't continue my participation in this conversation:
>
>1. What does "discoverers" mean?

Good dialogue, to which I reply:

As common protestant tradition would have it, I think discovery means that
there is a canon which God established and that every individual believer
has the right and responsibility to recognize for him or her self what it
is. I derive this from 2 Tim 2:15, c.f. 2 Tim 2:2 where Timothy and each
one (by the extention in verse 2) is to cut a straight line through the
word of truth. This makes both canonicity and interpretation an individual
responsibility, rather than a group/church/tradition responsibility.

And isn't this why we are all together wrestling with these issues, since
we see a need to "recognize" the canon. Admitedly we do it differently.
It is a choice privilege to agree to disagree agreeably. . . .

George

George A. Goolde
Professor of Bible & Theology
Southern California Bible College & Seminary






Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.

Top of Page