Why are Paul's letters considered sacred scripture?

[Elijah John]

1) If Jesus is the "Word of God" shouldn't he be the last Word?

2) Why would Jesus need the interpreter Paul?

3) Shouldn't Paul's letters be considered just that and not sacred scripture? Nothing more than very influential pastoral advice, admonition, and encouragement? And theological treatises?

4) Do modern Christians quote Paul more than Jesus, heed Paul more than Jesus, and for all practical purposes, put Paul's letters above Jesus words as recorded in the Gospels?

5) Is Paul the "another helper" Jesus spoke of in the Gospel of John? Or would that be the Holy Spirit. (side note point of interest not debate, Muslims interpret that prediction as referring to the prophet Muhammed)

Please address any combination of these questions.

[Eloi]

[Replying to brianbbs67]

If you believe what is written in the Hebrew Scriptures, you should consider what means this text:

Jer. 31:31 “Look! The days are coming,� declares Jehovah, “when I will make with the house of Israel and with the house of Judah a new covenant. 32 It will not be like the covenant that I made with their forefathers on the day I took hold of their hand to lead them out of the land of Egypt, ‘my covenant that they broke, although I was their true master,’ declares Jehovah.�

This is not the topic here though ... I guess we can analize this in a new thread.

[JehovahsWitness]

1) If Jesus is the "Word of God" shouldn't he be the last Word?

Jesus, as the Messianic King and appointed Word of God was and remains the ultimate revealer of divine truths. No one would have tne authority to surplant, override or contradict anything he said. That said, his position as such would not negate the emergence of subsequent revelation or scripture.

CHRISTIAN "PROPHETS"

• Although Jesus was "The Prophet" predicted to come by Moses, the bible indicates that prophecying, in its most basic sense of relaying and explaining divine messages would continue after Jesus. Peter applied Joels words that people would ‘prophesy and see visions.’ to Pentecost when anointed Christians declared “the magnificent things of Godâ€� (Ac 2:11-40). And Paul himself explained that God would provide the Christian congregation with human "gifts" to help them in their deviotion...
  

  EPHESIANS 4: 11, 12
  
  And he gave some as apostles, some as prophets, some as evangelizers, some as shepherds and teachers, with a view to the readjustment of the holy ones, for ministerial work, to build up the body of the Christ

INSPIRED SCRIPTURE

• Jesus did not himselg leave written documents of his message but he did not prohibit the production of any. In time eyewitness accounts were complied of his teachings and actions in four gospels. From their incepton these accounts were held as authoritative by the Christian community, thus the fact that Jesus was Gods last Prophet (in absolute terms of being the ultimate authority on revealed truth) does not indicate there would be no further revelations or inspired writings as evidenced by the community acceptance of the gospels and the letters of Peter, Pail and others.
  
  NOTE: The gospels were not all written by Apostles, authorative scripture was scripture that claimed divine origin, was accepted by the community and authenticated by the Apostles and those taking the lead during the Apostolic age.

CONCLUSION Jesus was The (promiised) Prophet and the ultimate proclaimer of Divine messages, but there is nothing to indicate that his earthly ministry would mark the endmof divine revelation (notably in explaining and expanding on what he (Jesus) had taught), nor that there would be no written scripture divinely inspired for the edification of the Christian community.

Go to other posts related to JESUS , MESSIANIC PROPHECY and ...CHRISTIANITY

[polonius]

3) Shouldn't Paul's letters be considered just that and not sacred scripture? Nothing more than very influential pastoral advice, admonition, and encouragement? And theological treatises?

Doesn't Paul claim to have been chosen by God to speak for God? Or chosen by Christ to speak for Christ? I'm pretty sure he does make this claim.

I don't think he ever claimed to be a mere believer who was just voicing personal opinions.

RESPONSE: I have several acquaintances who think that are special agents of God and can speak in his name. A few are members of the clergy!

If they say they are, should we believe everything they say?

[Checkpoint]

3) Shouldn't Paul's letters be considered just that and not sacred scripture? Nothing more than very influential pastoral advice, admonition, and encouragement? And theological treatises?

Doesn't Paul claim to have been chosen by God to speak for God? Or chosen by Christ to speak for Christ? I'm pretty sure he does make this claim.

I don't think he ever claimed to be a mere believer who was just voicing personal opinions.

RESPONSE: I have several acquaintances who think that are special agents of God and can speak in his name. A few are members of the clergy!

If they say they are, should we believe everything they say?

By their fruit you shall know them.

[onewithhim]

[Replying to post 10 by brianbbs67]

I don't understand what you are trying to say. Can you be clearer?

[marco]

By their fruit you shall know them.

Jesus was wrong when he said bad trees bear no good fruit. They often do. And from good trees we get the occasional bad apple.

The identification of what is good is easier with fruit than people and institutions. If there is one bad person in a group is the group therefore bad? The apostles had Judas. If an institution attracts billions, is it therefore successful? That would mean the RC Church has the best claim.... but then billions have followed Muhammad.

So "knowing" the good tree by the fruit is a big problem. Easy to say, difficult to do.

Do we judge Paul's writing as being sacred because of its fine rhetoric? Surely the devil can sing as well.

[marco]

... It is impossible that God inspired (by His spirit) as truth two opposite ideas about the same aspect; so that is the rule we can know who is a false teacher.

Jesus is a shepherd. Jesus is a lamb.

These are two contradictory messages. Do we deduce Jesus was a false teacher?

OR


Honour thy father and thy mother:
(Matthew 19:19)

I am come to set a man at variance
against his father, and the daughter against her mother (Matthew 10:35)

It would be nice if things were as simple as you suppose. Similarly when Paul in
1 Corinthians tells women to shut up in Church we can't assume he is speaking with God's authority. Surely God encourages all to participate - even women!

[bjs]

[Replying to post 1 by Elijah John]

For better or worse, orthodox Christianity has always claimed to be built on the teachings of the Apostles. We don’t have any words directly from Jesus. We only have what his Apostles, including Paul, wrote about him. Orthodox Christians claim that some of those writings, including Paul’s writings, were inspired by God the Spirit, and that the Spirit is one with the eternal Word.

[PeterPan]

No part of the bible was written directly by Jesus. In fact, the Gospels were probably only written around 68-110AD.

7 of Paul's 14 letters are likely to have been written by Paul himself. Whereas the authors of the Gospels are unknown. The original Greek manuscripts on which most of the New Testament was based have not survived, so determining authorship is very difficult.

The earliest known canon which contains some of Paul's letters was compiled by Marcion of Sinope in the 2nd Century. Marcion's canon did not include any books of the Old Testament, and he taught that the Hebrew God was a lesser God and the God of the New Testament was the proper object of worship.

Papyrus 86, written in 175-225AD, is another ancient document which contains most of Paul's letters.

TLDR: I don't know. History is complicated.

[polonius]

Elijah John: Shouldn't Paul's letters be considered just that and not sacred scripture? Nothing more than very influential pastoral advice, admonition, and encouragement? And theological treatises?

William: Why consider anything to be 'sacred scripture'? Why should any book be regarded as "The Word of God"?[/quote]

RESPONSE: Because then it will sell more copies.