 |
|
|
|
|
April 7th, 2014
12:41 PM ET
Megachurch pastor resigns, citing 'moral failing'Fort Lauderdale, Florida (WPLG Miami) The senior pastor of Calvary Chapel Fort Lauderdale has resigned after confessing to cheating on his wife, according to WPLG Miami. Pastor Bob Coy, 58, reportedly confessed a "moral failing which disqualifies him from continuing his leadership role at the church" to Calvary leaders on Wednesday. A board meeting was called the next day, when he resigned. Coy, who has led the church since its founding in 1985, said he will now focus his full attention on his personal relationship with God and his family. The radio, television and digital media that distributes Coy's teachings have also been suspended. "The governing board of the church is providing counselors and ministers who will help guide him through the process of full repentance, cleansing and restoration," Calvary Chapel said in a statement. Calvary is one of the largest churches in Florida, with some 20,000 members who worship in 10 locations across the state. "Trusting in God's providence, protection, provision and direction, the staff of Calvary Chapel Fort Lauderdale will continue our mission to 'make disciples' through regular services at all campuses and through myriad other ministries the church has established over the years," the statement said. At an open service at the church Sunday, a letter was read to the congregation from Coy and the board. Assistant pastors who are on staff will continue their usual rotating schedule as teaching pastors for all services, the statement said.
Next entry »Is the Internet killing religion?
« Previous entryArchbishop to vacate $2.2 million mansion
|
  About this blog
The CNN Belief Blog covers the faith angles of the day's biggest stories, from breaking news to politics to entertainment, fostering a global conversation about the role of religion and belief in readers' lives. It's edited by CNN's Daniel Burke with contributions from Eric Marrapodi and CNN's worldwide news gathering team.  |
|
|
|
I don't understand why Christians require some leader telling them what their god said and what this god meant when he said it. How odd that the creator of the universe would have flawed humans (his creation) write down his instructions 2000 years ago into a book and allow it to be further re-written and edited throughout history with numerous versions of his word to later have scammers further manipulate people with it.
1 Corinthians 1:21 – For since in the wisdom of God the world through its wisdom did not come to know God, God was well-pleased through the foolishness of the message preached to save those who believe.
Amen Theo! The Word is what saves. Preaching the Word saves souls. Of course He would want us to write down what Jesus said. Would it be more reliable if it were passed down strictly through word of mouth?
" Preaching the Word saves souls. "
Then why are you all so BAD at it ? Why, given the way Christians behave on these boards, would anyone want what you are selling ? Why would anyone want to be like you ?
We have interpretation based on the original language if you have an issue with the current interpretations, then do your own research.
Oh, I think it's all bullshit. I was just wondering why you need some other human to lead you as if they have some higher qualification.
It's no different than having a teacher of any other subject. The teacher reads the scripture, and gives the meaning to those who do not understand.
1 Timothy 4:13 – Until I come, give attention to the public reading of Scripture, to exhortation and teaching.
and you have thousands of "teachers" all with different interpretations
The leader in the Church is supposed to be the greatest servant, although most organized religion does not follow this model. Jesus was the "Good Shepherd" and he commanded the leaders to feed the sheep. Sheep need a shepherd or they get lost and fall prey to wolves. Many of the leaders you see are the wolves that have inflitrated the church because the shepherds weren't leading the sheep failthfully. Those are the tares Jesus spoke of amongst the wheat (believers). Satan has had 2000 years to plant his weeds in the churches, making it difficult for people like you to see much good in becoming a believer. But Jesus is still alive and He wants you to study His Word with or without a leader. That is YOUR responsibility.
You are delusional.
squeegeny – "But Jesus is still alive and He wants you to study His Word with or without a leader."
That's a very first-world view of things. Tell that to the poor Ethiopian woman who has never learned to read and spends all her available time trying to keep her family from starving, with no leisure time or literacy for all this study you think Jesus wants.
The third world woman is why we have missionaries. That's why I contribute to missionary organizations that feed and educate children. The Great Commission is to go into all the world, preaching the Gospel and makilng disciples. Equipping believers to read the Word for themselves because just as Jesus said, "Man does not live by bread alone, but by every word that proceeds out of the mouth of God"
Since god should know that humans are flawed I see no reason to believe that he would rely on them to spread his word.
sqeegeny –
Did you miss the part where she's illiterate? And so are her children. She doesn't have time to learn to read just to follow up on a superst.itious story someone tells her. So you're saying she has to take someone else's word for it. And why should she? She's probably heard a lot of superst.itious tales, and to her the story of Jesus is just one more. But by the reasoning of many Christians, if she heard the story but didn't believe it she's now doomed to eternal punishment. So tell me, is such a woman better off or worse off for having heard about Jesus?
Did you miss the part where I said that's why we send missionaries and i support missions that educate those in poor countries and preach the Gospel to them? I don't know if her, as an individual, is better off if she never heard it, then heard it and rejected it. She probably is. The point is we are to try and there are many more that do accept it as a result of our efforts. Do some research. The Church is growing fastest in poor countries. Not only are the people being given the Gospel, but being educated and fed by Christians worldwide. What is your problem with this?
If Jesus was the only way to heaven the god himself would see too it that everyone alive knows who Jesus is. Since this is not the case belief in Jesus can't be that important.
squeegeny – " I don't know if her, as an individual, is better off if she never heard it, then heard it and rejected it. She probably is. The point is we are to try and there are many more that do accept it as a result of our efforts."
Most Christians I know say that if you've rejected the story of Jesus you're doomed, but if you have never heard it you have also never rejected it and therefore aren't doomed. In other words, nobody who hasn't heard it needs to be saved, so all missionary work seems to accomplish is dooming lots of people who wouldn't otherwise have been doomed. Nice work.
squeegeny,
Eskimo: 'If I did not know about God and sin, would I go to hell?'
Priest: 'No, not if you did not know.'
Eskimo: 'Then why did you tell me?'
It is all about expectations and the making of the church in the image of American corporations. http://choosetotrust.com/2013/05/when-numbers-are-not-enough/
" moral failing which disqualifies him from leadership"
Hats off to the leadership at Calvary Chapel. This relatively recent, but common, phenomenon with church leaders of" he's confessed, he's repentant, we all sin and therefore shouldn't judge, let him continue in the ministry, all systems go" is just bizarre.
I agree. You have to have to have a thief fleecing the flock that people can believe in.
He can continue in ministry but has disqualified himself from leadership. Church discipline needs to occur here. Don't interfere.
Just take the Jimmy Swaggart defense:
"God has forgiven me – why can't you?"
And then gullible fools will send their child's college fund.
I don't beleive this man even has a large television ministry, if any at all, mr Judgmental.
The Calvary group owns and operates 16 radio stations across the country.
First of all that's radio and secondly, he didn't have airtime with them.
common failing both outside & inside the church, but they'd have to skip 1 timothy 3 if he was to stay.
it's an unexpected transition, but i bet with a church this size they will maintain continuity of teaching & so forth.
I have to admit now that there is some evidence for a benevolent deity: Kentucky did not win last night.
It was just this morning I figured out the other team was not "Yukon". That had me baffled.
Do you think that the straight camp that cured Ted Haggard of the gays has a program for adulterers too?
Yes they have that. They are called "orgies".
When I first saw the headline I was hoping it was Osteen.
That was my prayer as well.
Unfortunately, Osteen has gone the way of Balaam (Numbers 31:16, 2 Peter 2:15, Revelation 2:14), having prosti.tuted the gospel, saying whatever he can solely to make a profit from the gospel, even by preaching what is false (2 Corinthians 2:17, 2 Peter 2:1-3).
The Prosperity Preacher:
A persistent side-effect of the McCarthy era's conflation of capitalism and Christianity.
"It is hard to see how a man who has been given a mandate from on High to spread tidings of joy to all mankind can be seriously interested in taking up a collection to pay his salary; it causes one to suspect that the shaman is on the moral level of any other con man."
– Robert Heinlein
Well, it is necessary to take up a collection for the ministers. But just as there are those in secular society who take advantage and gain wealth with wrong motives and through ill means, the minister must not strive for money. For "the love of money is the root of all kinds of evil..."
1 Corinthians 16:1-2 – money collections are to be taken on the first day of the week (Sunday) for the preservation of the ministers of the gospel – men are to give “as he may prosper,” there is no mention of a percentage or a certain amount to be given; it is a free will gift to God, not to be confused with the OT system of ti.thes.
1 Corinthians 9:14 – So also the Lord directed those who proclaim the gospel to get their living from the gospel.
1 Timothy 5:18 – For the Scripture says, “YOU SHALL NOT MUZZLE THE OX WHILE HE IS THRESHING,” and “The laborer is worthy of his wages.”
Timothy – well we don't really know who wrote Timothy. And then most Biblical scholars agree that Peter didn't author Peter 2 – oops, there goes the stamp of approval for Paul's Corinthians as being divinely-inspired scripture....
Doris,
You can continue to attempt to revise history all you want, as there will always be those who strive to be factious about such matters. But 2,000 years of ardent study has shown the gospels to be reliable, and its authorship sure. If you wish to take the word of other historical revisionist such as Bart Ehrman and the Jesus Seminar, then go right ahead, but no studied theologian takes them seriously.
Doc,
Luke 10:7
And in the same house remain, eating and drinking such things as they give: for the labourer is worthy of his hire. Go not from house to house.
Believe it or not, there are many pastors who work a day job during the week, preach on Sundays and in the evenings, and visit the sick and shut-ins on their time off. The verse above supports the idea of providing the needs of those who do God’s work, but there does seem to be something wrong where the pastor lives a life of luxury and excess.
"but no studied theologian takes them seriously."
LOL – studied theologian? No I would expect a Spooky Physics Lite™ "specialist" to take seriously leading NT scholars like Ehrman.
sorry – should have been "I would not expect"
However, Theo, you may want to review my response to truthfollower01 just below.
No, Ehrman cannot be taken seriously. In all honesty he has not done enough research to make the claims that he has made. Start your reading with the Westminster Di.vines, and when you read all of them, I can give you another reading list.
@Robert
I've no doubt at all that there are a good percentage of preachers and pastors who are honestly and truly charitable and compassionate.
Perhaps it's cynical of me, but I tend to consider shamans con-men until they prove otherwise.
If a congregation has mandatory ti/thing (hello Mormons!), that is a huge red flag that they're probably not on the level.
If, first and foremost, a preacher is asking for money and not for true charity in the form of congregants' time, effort and expertise, I don't entertain the sales pitch.
The Westminster Divines can be found below...
http://www.reformed.org/books/hetherington/west_assembly/
Theo, Ehrman is not the only reference I used in response to truthfollower01 regarding authorship to Peter 2, for instance. There is even a source writing for the Evangelical Theological Society.
"Theo, Ehrman is not the only reference I used in response to truthfollower01 regarding authorship to Peter 2, for instance. There is even a source writing for the Evangelical Theological Society."
--------------–
So?
Theo
The more you look into Coy's past the more he looks like Jimmy Swaggart. Couldn't find out if he lived as extrava.gantly as Joel Osteen but would not be surprised if he did. BTW you seem to be contradicting yourself yet again. In your comment about J. Osteen, saying whatever he can solely to make a profit and then just 15 minutes later, those that do there job faithfully and well, are they not worthy of the pay? To me they are in the same boat out to make a profit. So you consider J. Osteen to a be a conman in your judgement but do not in regards to Bob Coy or a Billy Graham because you agree with their message. Everybody has to meet your standards, I know you take your standards from the bible, you could do better than an old book of fiction.
It's pretty funny to watch Robert Brown and Theo try to make their cases by arguing using their particular interpretations of their selected sections of their 2000+ year-old mythbook. I think it is helpful to take a bigger picture look at the very poor case for the existence of the god of those tall tales in the bible. Arguments over the interpretation of that old, multi-version, multiply-translated Christian book of folklore AKA the bible can go on all day. Let's cut to the chase:
Ask yourself why we should have to rely on very stale, thousands-of-years-old, many-versioned old text, that is only reasonably subject to debates over its meaning. Why is it that your pathetic sky fairy can't even get with the past decade and create his own web presence (no, religious shill sites don't count), or push some tweets out? Even the pope, that creepy hider of criminal priests, could do that much, as can most children. After thousands of years of radio silence, reasonable doubt in the existence of your sky creature is easily justified, to say the least. Your absurd "god" is also apparently less capable at communication than any modern 10 year old.
Ask the questions. Break the chains. Join the movement.
Be free of Christianity and other superstitions.
http://whywontgodhealamputees.com/
And you want me to take seriously Church of England/Scotland clergy? So? lol
(My last response was to Theo.)
"The more you look into Coy's past the more he looks like Jimmy Swaggart."
--------------–
Well, I didn't know, I didn't look into his past. If he is as bad as you say, then it is all the more reason why he has disqualified himself as an elder/overseer, and must be compelled to repentance.
"you seem to be contradicting yourself yet again. In your comment about J. Osteen, saying whatever he can solely to make a profit and then just 15 minutes later, those that do there job faithfully and well, are they not worthy of the pay? To me they are in the same boat out to make a profit. So you consider J. Osteen to a be a conman in your judgement but do not in regards to Bob Coy or a Billy Graham because you agree with their message."
------------------
I have done nothing more than to bring scripture to bear on the situation. It is right that the one who preaches the gospel also make his living from the gospel. And it is also fine if they earn a great living, in fact, they should. But when wealth becomes the sole reason that they preach the gospel, then they have wrong motives, and according to Paul's words to Timothy, have disqualified themselves as an elder/overseer because they are not free from the love of money.
Doc,
Agreed
They have all "gone the way of Balaam", Theo. They are ALL capitalizing on your faithfulness. This is the basis for organizations to function. You live humbly while they live like kings.
Are you put off by pastors of large churches who preach the gospel faithfully, and live what they preach, but are wealthy? Those who do their job faithfully and well, are they not worthy of pay? This is so in secular society, why not in the pulpit?
Nope, I do not begrudge anyone's wealth and I am not advocating that you give up your wealth so that I live high on the hog as your preachers do.
MK
The best scams are the ones that those that are being scammed know it and are to deluded to break away from the scammer, an addiction by any other name.
Hmm – does Numbers say that a couple of eggs a day are bad for you or good for you?
I won't ask about the others considering one is by a substance abuser on an island and then since most likely Peter didn't author Peter 2 – oops, there goes the stamp of approval for Paul's works being divinely-inspired scripture....
Me too. I keep waiting for that grinning goon to finally be exposed. He's such a slippery eel, stays noncommittal and always middle of the road that I wouldn't doubt his sheep would allow him to completely survive any scandal. His sheep so desperately need that smoke blown up their ass.
I think a good stoning is in order,
That is the punishment prescribed in the bible. But then, maybe they don't practice what they preach.
The crimes and prescribed punishments are only for those who don't belong to the club, I expect. Frankly, I'm surprised there isn't a whole lot of hollering about the violation of the sacred covenant between one man and one woman.
The mistakes (sins?) we commit, and that this preacher made, is simply a part of the fabric of being human and having weaknesses and frailties. As a minister, he is indeed held to a higher standard that most. Especially given that he is expected to be an example to his congregation. He failed. Only he and his family can determine whether he should be forgiven, and as far as I am concerned, it's really none of my business what happens to him.
I am fond of this poem from The mistakes (sin) we commit, and that this preacher made, is simply a part of the fabric of being human and having weaknesses and frailties. As minister, he is indeed held to a higher standard that most. Especially given that he is expected to be an example to his congregation. He failed. Only he and his family can determine whether he should be forgiven.
I am fond of this poem from the poet and mystic, Jelaluddin Rumi, that expresses the troublesome emotions that we humans are subject to. We are happy one day, sad and depressed another. Vengeful and mean on another day and perhaps kind on another – it's simply part of the frustration of all humanity:
THE QUEST HOUSE
" This being human is a guest house.
Every morning a new arrival.
A joy, a depression, a meanness,
some momentary awareness comes
as an unexpected visitor.
Welcome and entertain them all!
Even if they are a crowd of sorrows,
who violently sweep your house
empty of its furniture,
still, treat each guest honorably.
He may be clearing you out
for some new delight.
The dark thought, the shame, the malice.
meet them at the door laughing and invite them in.
Be grateful for whatever comes.
because each has been sent
as a guide from beyond." – by Jelaluddin Rumi
Apparently I tend to stutter when I type....sorry.
And of course, this makes it all okay. No refunds, no returns.
Does it make it okay? I have no idea. It's just the plight of being human.
Passion is stronger than a wedding vow...as long as there is marriage/relationships there will be affairs.
At least he admitted it. I just hope he doesn't call it a mistake as so many do. This is noting new. Monogamy is questionable.
CT
There have been some reports that Coy had relations with two women in the past year and that he had an addiction to p0rn. Hardly an oops, I am sorry, I gave into to temptation but a pattern of behaviour for which he needs treatment.
This man only repents because he got caught. Otherwise, why destroy his career at his non-profit company.
I should have posted tax-exempt company.
Guilt can eat at one though. He risked a lot by admitting it but that is the very reason so many who no longer believe still preach-the mighty dollar is a huge lure....it's hypocrisy at its best.
Here is what the word of God says regarding SIN (disobedience to and betrayal of God). "Everyone remaining in union with Him does not practice sin; no one that practices sin has either seen Him or come to know Him......Everyone who has been born from God does not carry on sin, because His (reproductive) seed remains in such one, and he cannot practice sin, because he has been born from God." 1st John 3:4-9.
you confuse the word of god with edited, translated iron age hearsay
and, "sin" is a man made religious concept that does not apply to anyone outside of that religion
That would mean that the only sinless one is God, who will be alone in the end after all of us sinners are gone, right?
Here is what the word of God says regarding SIN
---–
The bible represents the word of it's human authors, not God. God is powerful. If he wanted to create some word, he's certainly up to the task of doing it himself, without the aid of humans.
If he is capable of doing things without humans, then why does he always coerce some poor sap into doing his work?
" word of God says regarding SIN (disobedience to and betrayal of God)"
To call the bible the word of god is dishonest...there is no way to know that those words are anything more than the words of the men who wrote them and even those names are not known.
So if sin is the disobedience and betrayal of of god, that leaves 5 billion on this planet out-those who either don't know about your god, are Atheist, believe in another god...so sin doesn't apply to them-right? Much of what the bible deems as sin is either common sense, thought crime or simply none of the churches business (ie, what people do in the privacy of their own home). Not all of us need a book to tell us not to cause harm, not all are that weak.
"disobedience to and betrayal of God..."
Why does your needy god need you to be so sorry to him? He's not the one that was cheated upon. When you commit a sin, it's against a person. Why wouldn't you be repentant to that person? Why does your, or any, god need so much validation and attention?
The key word is PRACTICE. If you are a true born again Christian, belonging to Christ, then you will not be able to Practice sin. We are all fallible and have sinned. Only Jesus is sinless. God's grace and mercy saves us. This preacher has sinned. He should repent, and seek the forgiveness of God, his family, and his congregation. He should use his experience as an opportunity to teach others. I don't think you can really STOP leading, and teaching the word of God, if that is what you were called to do.
From Monday's gospel, John 8:6-11
Jesus bent down and began to write on the ground with his finger.
But when they continued asking him,
he straightened up and said to them,
“Let the one among you who is without sin
be the first to throw a stone at her.”
Again he bent down and wrote on the ground.
And in response, they went away one by one,
beginning with the elders.
So he was left alone with the woman before him.
Then Jesus straightened up and said to her,
“Woman, where are they?
Has no one condemned you?”
She replied, “No one, sir.”
Then Jesus said, “Neither do I condemn you.
Go, and from now on do not sin any more.”
For those who are so quick to condemn here:
"Do you suppose, O man–you who judge those who practice such things and yet do them yourself–that you will escape the judgment of God?
Or do you presume on the riches of his kindness and forbearance and patience, not knowing that God's kindness is meant to lead you to repentance? But because of your hard and impenitent heart you are storing up wrath for yourself on the day of wrath when God's righteous judgment will be revealed.
He will render to each one according to his works:" Romans. 2
How exciting to know that you will be posting this every time your brother or sister in Christ persecutes an individual who is LGBT or when a story about them is posted.
Thanks in advance.
Do you even know anything about this man? Who's persecuting who?
We are not condemning. We are uplifted by the schadenfreude this hypocrite bestows upon us like honey. Perhaps Pastor Coy will be less willing to cast the first stone in the future. We all know that you will take him back in a while all cleansed and repentant. In fact, it is probably a good career move on his part. Now he can play the "repentant sinner" just like he played the "wise elder". If belonging to this church wasn't sufficient to deter its pastor from sin, why would 20,000 people think that it will do anything for them?
What stones did he cast your way?
I'm betting Pastor Bob delivered many a condemning sermon to his parishioners about sinning. Just like all those pastors who condemn the gay then are later outed.
I'm "betting" you never heard the guy speak in public. Talk about judgmental and condemning. Calvary Chapel Churches preach the Gospel and Jesus. Is that what you have an issue with? I'm "betting" it is.
Well of course that's what they preach. Now, as to following his own preaching, not so much.
"Calvary Chapel Churches preach the Gospel and Jesus. "
The gospel and teachings of Jesus are all about making sure you are well aware that you are a sinner. That is fact, not judgement, and I don't have to bet on that.
The Gospels are all about you making sure you know that Jesus died for your sins. If you don't recognize you are in need of a Savior, then it doesn't apply to you. Nothing to see here, move on. Stop condemning this man for his moral failings. It's none of your business. The Church and he handled it appropriately. What do you have to add to the issue?
I'm not the one up on a pulpit abusing his power while claiming a holier than thou position and brain-washing people to hand over their hard earned money or else. Stop condemning a hypocrite?
Your own god judges you in a much worse way.
So did they say how old the little boy he had an affair with was?
Read it again, no they did not. Musta been too young for them to release the details.
just another con man tripping over his dic...
Is it the sign of the times when pastors act like wild politicians?
Obama even commented on the pastor resigning: http://igg.me/at/SmartMio/x/5944165
We see this over and over and over. Hypocrisy after hypocrisy after hypocrisy. Cheating on wives. Sinning with children. Building huge personal residences. Hating on others and proposing to tell everyone how to live. When will we learn the obvious lesson?
Also take note of conservative Christian Rep Vance McAllister. Same deal, gets caught, issues "heartfelt" apology, will be welcomed back with open arms.
Just to reiterate,
Three facts pertaining to Jesus's fate and what occurred afterward that nearly 100% of all scholars (including Bart Ehrman) today studying this subject accept. This includes Christians, Jews, agnostics and atheists.
1. Jesus' death by crucifixion.
"One of the most certain facts of history is that Jesus was crucified on orders of the Roman prefect of Judea, Pontius Pilate." – Bart Ehrman quote shown in his debate with Michael Liconia ("Ehrman vs. Licona (2009)") on YouTube.
2. Appearances to the Disciples
This is short for saying that shortly after Jesus's death, a number of Jesus's followers had experiences both individually and in group settings that they perceived were of the risen Jesus who appeared to them.
"Why, then, did some of the disciples claim to see Jesus alive after his resurrection? I don't doubt at all that some disciples claimed this. We don't have any of their written testimony, but Paul, writing about twenty-five years later, indicates that this is what they claimed, and I don't think he is making it up. And he knew at least a couple of them, whom he met just three years after the event Galatians 1:18-19)." – from Bart Ehrman's book, Jesus Interrupted
3. Appearance to Paul
Short for saying that Paul had an experience that he perceived was of the risen Jesus appearing to him.
""there is no doubt that [Paul] believed that he saw Jesus' real but glorified body raised from the dead."
– Bart Ehrman quote shown in his debate with Michael Liconia ("Ehrman vs. Licona (2009)") on YouTube.
As an atheist I can say that the trouble with this is that my friend the jesus is ransacking the world of it's riches for lying losers like this guy. Bark Bark tribble go around the
It's important to note that:
1. Bart Ehrman, an agnostic NT scholar, is stating that he believes claims were made, not that claims were true.
2. truthfollower starts off mentioning three facts and then claims the first as certain fact and then doesn't mention #2 or #3 as facts. Perhaps it's really one thing that most NT scholars agree on and two things with perhaps not as much agreement especially among the groups claimed to be represented in agreement.
3. I have asked several times for truthfollower to give stats or sources that would back up the claim for "nearly 100% of all scholars" – with stats on the non-Christian groups mentioned. truthfollower avoids answering this question.
4. An enormous amount of the little information Christians rely on as verification for their beliefs flow through Paul and his disciple Luke. Beyond them are hearsay "historians" and unknown authors:
–Paul allegedly learns of claims by witnesses of a resurrected Jesus; he allegedly has a vision and converts
–Paul writes a bunch of letters
–Gospels of Mark, Matthew & John are written – authorship unknown
–Peter 2 is written allegedly approving Paul's ministry as divinely inspired scripture- – most Biblical scholars agree that Peter did not author Peter 2.
It's just as reasonable to think that Paul was the Joseph Smith of his time with regard to evidence for his claims.
And for one who presents himself as being so knowledgeable, it is shocking (shocking I tell you) that he can't differentiate between:
"claims made" and "caliming its true"
...but, oh well...wisdom is not a prerequisite of knowing.
Well Doris,
Nothing says fact quite like "opinions" and "beliefs" of certain scholars. I'm also curious as to what the percentage is among just how many scholars who were surveyed or just gave their two cents in or whatever that say 2 Peter for sure wasn't written by Peter as opposed to among that same percentage whose viewpoint was that they were not fully certain but were leaning towards a different or as opposed to those who were just saying that they were merely open to consider that it was possible that 2 Peter was written by someone else. You didn't really provide any such details, and even if you did provide such details, how does that make it established fact?
It's such a shocker that one who accepts the apostleship of Paul accepts it based on faith and belief after all relying on faith and belief was never considered essential in Christianity...oh wait.
Couldn't find stats regarding Peter, but maybe this will help:
Raymond E Brown and Bart Ehrman (that truthfollower01 uses as a source above), among others, state that most biblical scholars have concluded Peter is not the author, and consider the epistle pseudepigraphical.[3] [4] Reasons for this include its linguistic differences from 1 Peter, its apparent use of Jude, possible allusions to 2nd-century gnosticism, encouragement in the wake of a delayed parousia, and weak external support.[5]
3. Brown, Raymond E., Introduction to the New Testament, Anchor Bible, 1997, ISBN 0-385-24767-2. p. 767 "the pseudonymity of II Pet is more certain than that of any other NT work."
4. Erhman, Bart (2005). Misquoting Jesus: The Story Behind Who Changed the Bible and Why. Harper Collins. p. 31 "Evidence comes in the final book of the New Testament to be written, 2 Peter, a book that most critical scholars believe was not actually written by Peter but by one of his followers, pseudonymously.". ISBN 978-0-06-182514-9.
5. Grant, Robert M. A Historical Introduction To The New Testament, chap. 14.
=====
from Bible.org:
"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.
The rejection of Peter as the writer of 2 Peter is by far the most common opinion today. In fact, the view of the pseudonymity of the epistle is almost universal.
The history of the acceptance of 2 Peter into the New Testament canon has all the grace of a college hazing event. This epistle was examined, prayed over, considered, and debated more than any other New Testament book—including Revelation."
=====
Michael J. Kruger, “The Authenticity of 2 Peter, Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society, 42.4 (1999):
"J. N. D. Kelly in his commentary on 2 Peter confesses that 'scarcely anyone nowadays doubts that 2 Peter is pseudonymous.' [1] Indeed, from the very start this epistle has had a difficult journey. It was received into the New Testament canon with hesitation, considered second-class Scripture by Luther, reluctantly accepted by Calvin, rejected by Erasmus, and now is repudiated as pseudonymous by modern scholarship. Joseph B. Mayor agrees with the current consensus when he declares that 2 Peter “was not written by the author of 1 Peter, whom we have every reason to believe to have been the Apostle St. Peter himself .... We conclude, therefore, that the second Epistle is not authentic.” [2]
The argument against the authenticity of 2 Peter turns on three main problems: (1) problem of external attestation in the early church; (2) stylistic and literary problems with 1 Peter and Jude; and (3) historical and doctrinal problems that seem to indicate internal inconsistency and a late date. Undoubtedly, 2 Peter has a plethora of problems. Most scholars believe its path towards canonical status was littered with pitfalls and detours for good reason.
1. J. N. D. Kelly,
A Commentary on the Epistles of Peter and of Jude
(London: Adam & Charles Black, 1969) 235.
2. Joseph B. Mayor,
The Epistles of Jude and II Peter
(Grand Rapids: Baker, 1979) cxxiv.
The problem Doris is that those additional opinions you listed are just that opinions and although there is discussions in Bible.org among scholars about the authenticity of 2 Peter there are also contradictory POV's from notable scholars over that issue from Bible.org as well, and frankly just a majority vote doesn't make the issue resolved and placed as fact.
This is especially the case when it comes to fields of archeology, history, and other fields of study associated with the Bible, and even among those who do doubt the authenticity of 2 Peter are not absolutely sure of it and are open to any new evidence that may come along to challenge their paradigms, which does have a tendency to happen in those fields of study.
So, in the end what the scholars conclude is really no different than anyone else. They make conclusions based on what evidence they do have analyze it and form conclusions based on belief.
sems to me that "truthfolower" (an ironic screen name) is a reincarnation of that duplicitous coward topher/gopher. does it appear that way to you, too?
sam stone
"truthfollower" isn't that wrong of a name. There is truth and then he comes along following behind, not with truth.