So you're saying that you're guided by what the majority of scholars think about the ending of Mark? So if the majority would think that the 2nd Peter was not written by Peter would you also support that point of view? There has been much debate over the authorship of 2 Peter. Most conservative evangelicals hold to the traditional view that Peter was the author, but historical and literary critics have almost unanimously concluded that to be impossible.
Well, my view is not simply based on majority opinion. My view is that textual criticism shows overwhelmingly that Mark's long ending didnt show up in history until long, long after Mark was dead and gone. However, early church leaders did attribute 2 Peter to Peter...although there was debate about the authorship. In my view, while there is interesting and some compelling information to conclude that 2 Peter was not written by Peter, the arguments are not overwhelming (as is the case with the long ending of Mark). I believe that if it is ever proven beyond a resonable doubt that 2 Peter could not have been written by Peter, then I would then conclude it is not inspired and therefore not Scripture. If its claims of authorship and that the author walked with Jesus and heard the voice on the mountain were fabricated, then nothing in the book can be considered historically accurate and therefore true.
Identifying who wrote them doesn't mean they're not inspired. of course once you start down this road then you really have no reason to doubt any reasonable scenario.
It does if they are lying and saying they are Peter and they walked with Jesus, when, in fact, they did not. If i write a letter to you and say, "I am the Apostle Paul" and you know I am not, then why would you trust anything I have to say? Inerrancy says that the book is without error. If Peter didnt write it, then the book has errors and I simply reject the notion that God's Word contains errors.
As I said originally what is written and Mark is just as significant and true as what is written by others in the New Testament regardless of who actually wrote them.
I disagree. What made these books "significant" is that they were written by eyewitnesses and people who either walked with the Lord or spoke with those who did. If it is determined that portions of Mark were written by someone 400 years removed from the actual events, then it pretty much robs them of their authority the claims of inspiration upon which the canon was based. In fact, this is precisely the reason why the Gnostic Gospels were rejected as authoritative. They were written under assumed names by people who claimed to walk with Jesus or the Apostles but did not. They were written 200 years after the fact and thus were written with an agenda and not from the perspective of an eyewitness who was relating their experiences. If what you are saying is true,then why not accept something someone wrote today as part of the Holy Bible? I mean, if connection to Jesus or the Apostles has nothing to do with inspiration, then why dont we add to the Bible yearly?
Saying that a different writer would not have been inspired is simply conjecture.
Well, I guess you have to make the case of why someone 400 years removed from Mark adding information to the Gospel could be considered inspired. The only reason we think that is because translations like the KJV include the long ending because they thought Mark actually wrote it. Believe me, if those translators knew that it was added to Mark 400 years later, they would have never included it in "Mark's" Gospel. In sum, if Mark didnt write it, its not part of Mark's Gospel!
This is all conjecture on your part WW, and you haven't provided a single word of scripture that substantiates your personal opinion.
What? I quoted two passages from Ezekiel (which clearly states false prophets are those who prophesy from their own imaginations), one from 2 Peter and referenced numerous other passages such as the calling of Samuel, Moses, the revelation of John, the vision of Paul, the angelic visits to Daniel, the personal experiences of the Apostles, etc. Look at pretty much every OT prophet and their book begins with their calling...which usually involves a heavenly vision, an angelic visitation, a dream, or an audible voice. Allow me to add a few more...
“
And I heard the voice of the Lord saying, “Whom shall I send, and who will go for us?” Then I said, “Here I am! Send me.” And he said, “Go, and say to this people: “ ‘Keep on hearing, but do not understand; keep on seeing, but do not perceive.’” (Isaiah 6:8–9, ESV)
“Now the word of the Lord came to me, saying, “Before I formed you in the womb I knew you, and before you were born I consecrated you; I appointed you a prophet to the nations.”” (Jeremiah 1:4–5, ESV)
“In the thirtieth year, in the fourth month, on the fifth day of the month, as I was among the exiles by the Chebar canal, the heavens were opened, and I saw visions of God.” (Ezekiel 1:1, ESV)
“When the Lord first spoke through Hosea, the Lord said to Hosea, “Go, take to yourself a wife of whoredom and have children of whoredom, for the land commits great whoredom by forsaking the Lord.”” (Hosea 1:2, ESV)
“The vision of Obadiah. Thus says the Lord God concerning Edom: We have heard a report from the Lord, and a messenger has been sent among the nations: “Rise up! Let us rise against her for battle!”” (Obadiah 1, ESV)
“Now the word of the Lord came to Jonah the son of Amittai, saying, “Arise, go to Nineveh, that great city, and call out against it, for their evil has come up before me.”” (Jonah 1:1–2, ESV)
“In the second year of Darius the king, in the sixth month, on the first day of the month, the word of the Lord came by the hand of Haggai the prophet to Zerubbabel the son of Shealtiel, governor of Judah, and to Joshua the son of Jehozadak, the high priest: “Thus says the Lord of hosts: These people say the time has not yet come to rebuild the house of the Lord.”” (Haggai 1:1–2, ESV)
“Do not listen to the words of the prophets who are saying to you, ‘You shall not serve the king of Babylon,’ for it is a lie that they are prophesying to you. I have not sent them, declares the Lord, but they are prophesying falsely in my name, with the result that I will drive you out and you will perish, you and the prophets who are prophesying to you.”” (Jeremiah 27:14–15, ESV)
If anyone is basing their opinoin on "conjecture" it is you. Show me ONE passage where a person is called to speak for God by simply saying whatever they think and taking it by faith that whatever they just said is God's Word! There is no place in the Bible that says such a thing. However, true prophets are shown to have real interactions with God and God "sends" them with a very specific message. In fact, pretty much every prophetic book speaks of the "word of the Lord" coming to the prophet and usually gives an exact date when the "word" came and often that word was accompanied by visions, angelic visitors and some very specific instructions for the prophet to carry out. These were not just inner musings, but specific declarations from God that were exact and precise statements that were to be declared word for word.
You seem to be confusing physical reality with spiritual reality? When the Bible says 'for him who has ears to hear let him hear', is that an actual audible voice, or a call to be spiritually attentive to what the Holy Spirit is trying to tell us?
Well, those words were said by Jesus, and yes, he spoke with an audible voice. He was the Word made flesh and his words were direct words from the Father...given audibly and not by inner musings and interpretations.
Your words here indicate a person who obviously has never experienced nor exercised the gifts of the Holy Spirit. If you don't take my word for it then there's nothing really more we can discuss.
It always comes down to this. If you just had my experience, then you would agree with my interpretation. Sorry. I dont read the Bible that way. The Bible never teaches that we should presume to speak for God and ONLY shows those that spoke for God heard directly from Him. So, until you can provide Scriptural evidence that what you are saying is true, then no, I cannot base my relationship with God and speaking on His behalf for others based on your personal feelings on the subject. I think the Bible is sufficient and no where does God tell me in his Word to start making up words or noises and presume they are God's declarations. He has given me declarations and they are written in Scripture and in that Scripture we are told that false prophesy is that which is born out of man's imagination.