@@wanrazul they were never canonized. They were respected writings but they were not included in the canon of scripture or seen as authoritative or inspired. Even Catholics believed that and didn’t want those canonized until of course the Protestant reformation then all of a sudden the Catholics wanted to add the books as scripture because they felt they supported their theology more.
Thank you sir. Also, I find it strange to think two men filled with the Holy Spirit would find it necessary to to copy one or the other. The bible has one author.
Saying that 1st Peter was written by Peter because it says so in the beginning is like saying that an anonymous email claiming to wire you millions of dollars if you give your bank routing number is from the Prince of Nigeria because it says it's from the Prince of Nigeria.
@@LukeABarnes I did. And there are no real answers beyond the first 20 seconds. "There is evidence that galileans received pretty good education in Greek" he doesn't even give the evidence, and if that were so, it doesn't mean that Peter received that education. "Theres also the possibility that Peter and other New Testament writers had scribes had people who could help them in writing their works" ...yes, that is a possibility. But again, that doesn't prove anything. Especially when you consider that there's a possibility of the opposite of this statement.
@@joelpocalipsbut if you read acts and believe the Peter in acts is the real Peter then why is it so unbelievable that a Peter filled with the Holy Spirit would write the letter of Peter. He preached many times making reference to OT scriptures often and spoke with boldness to the Jews. Making Peter an incompetent fishermen after reading acts doesn’t make sense
@@therealgdmstr as I learn more about bible translations, you can't tell me what is or isnt true in the bible. Throughout the centuries, people with agendas ad pre exiting bias Are the ones the removed books and changed verses to fit their world view. The only true scriptures where written in extremely perishable material that likely didn't survive time. With that said, ca you provide the evidence on what I was questioning?
Firstly we believe The Bible to be true from cover to cover. Secondly Peter says in The Bible het wrote this book. Thirdly so I believe it to be true because The Bible says so. End of discussion.
@@christopherskipp1525 The scholars in New Testament times (pharisees and sadducees) we could gladly miss. A lot of todays scholars are no difference. Most aopstles were no scholar mind you.
To belive it is ALL true would mean you DONT believe The Father because if you study Jeremiah 8:8 , The Most HIGH says the scribes wrote LIES in BOOKS. Go translate it yourself. Those BOOKS are now in the bible, and Jesus even said the enemy would Sow Tares AMONG HIS WORD in the field, which is also in THE BIBLE
@@mellavelli A FALSE gospel. Jesus taught us HOW to have ETERNAL LIFE KEEP THE LAW OF YHVH Luke 10:25-26 Mat 5:17-20 Mat 19:17 Paul taught the doctrine of the Nicolaitans, which GOD HATES = rev 2:15 Look it up and see for yourself Paul was WARNED about OVER and OVER again But just b/c the Test came in the Bible, ppl missed it Exactly how YHVH said it would play out Mat 24:24-30
He would have had to have a scribe do this for him. A fisherman would not have been educated in writing Aramaic, Hebrew, or Greek. His scribe would have been a slave. 1 Peter also encourages slave obedience.
Peter wrote it, end of story, I could care less about the far fetched conspiracy theories of Atheist scholars who hold the highest of high scrutiny on Christianity
This sounds like quite a stretch. You are straining credulity to make this argument. Only apologists believe this letter is authentic not scholars. Education standards in Galilee where very low, less than 5% knew how to write at all and to write with the sophistication that the letters are written Peter would have had to be in the top 1% of literate persons to even dictate such a heavily theologically ladened document. Believe what you want but you are taking the stand akin to determining the earth is flat by looking at the horizon and saying you didn’t see any curve.
One clarifications. Peter doesn’t state he was with Jesus, he simply says he was an apostle OF Jesus. Apostle is not the same as a disciple.Paul was an Apostle but not a disciple. It is possible that Peter could have been both but I want to clarify that nowhere in 1Peter does he say he knew Jesus personally. Paul also never knew Jesus personally. Thanks 🙏
He does say that he was an *eye-witness* of the Sufferings of Christ. Most likely did. Other people say he knew Jesus personally. All the Gospels do. Also remember Jesus' disciples were called Apostles. Because Luke 6:13 says that Jesus chose twelve and called them Apostles.
a FEW similarities lol.. More like THE ENTIRE writing was from Paul. You would have to be SLEEP to not see this letter was written by Paul or someone trying to verify Paul the FRAUD.
They don't want you to know the truth about Peter. He didn't write this book. His writings are in the Homilies and Recognitions. Also, saul/paul was a false 13 self proclaimed 'apostle' who wrote 13 deceiving books of the NT...this is the truth.
Thank you. Either way God knew 1 Peter was to be in the Bible for our generation. God Bless!
How?
What about the books in the Catholic bible? Who took that out?
@@wanrazul they were never canonized. They were respected writings but they were not included in the canon of scripture or seen as authoritative or inspired. Even Catholics believed that and didn’t want those canonized until of course the Protestant reformation then all of a sudden the Catholics wanted to add the books as scripture because they felt they supported their theology more.
Thank you sir. Also, I find it strange to think two men filled with the Holy Spirit would find it necessary to to copy one or the other. The bible has one author.
Saying that 1st Peter was written by Peter because it says so in the beginning is like saying that an anonymous email claiming to wire you millions of dollars if you give your bank routing number is from the Prince of Nigeria because it says it's from the Prince of Nigeria.
Did you watch more than 20 seconds into the video?
@@LukeABarnes I did. And there are no real answers beyond the first 20 seconds.
"There is evidence that galileans received pretty good education in Greek" he doesn't even give the evidence, and if that were so, it doesn't mean that Peter received that education.
"Theres also the possibility that Peter and other New Testament writers had scribes had people who could help them in writing their works" ...yes, that is a possibility. But again, that doesn't prove anything. Especially when you consider that there's a possibility of the opposite of this statement.
@@joelpocalipsbut if you read acts and believe the Peter in acts is the real Peter then why is it so unbelievable that a Peter filled with the Holy Spirit would write the letter of Peter. He preached many times making reference to OT scriptures often and spoke with boldness to the Jews. Making Peter an incompetent fishermen after reading acts doesn’t make sense
@@therealgdmstr as I learn more about bible translations, you can't tell me what is or isnt true in the bible. Throughout the centuries, people with agendas ad pre exiting bias Are the ones the removed books and changed verses to fit their world view. The only true scriptures where written in extremely perishable material that likely didn't survive time. With that said, ca you provide the evidence on what I was questioning?
God Bless!
Thank you
So what is the upshot of the speaker? Oh, ok, he just said the author is who he purports to be. Fine. What about 2 Peter?
Thanks
Firstly we believe The Bible to be true from cover to cover. Secondly Peter says in The Bible het wrote this book. Thirdly so I believe it to be true because The Bible says so. End of discussion.
Wow, I guess we don't need Biblical scholars anymore.
@@christopherskipp1525 The scholars in New Testament times (pharisees and sadducees) we could gladly miss. A lot of todays scholars are no difference. Most aopstles were no scholar mind you.
To belive it is ALL true would mean you DONT believe The Father because if you study Jeremiah 8:8 , The Most HIGH says the scribes wrote LIES in BOOKS. Go translate it yourself. Those BOOKS are now in the bible, and Jesus even said the enemy would Sow Tares AMONG HIS WORD in the field, which is also in THE BIBLE
@@911EVERLASTINGGOSPEL What is peter teaching what is against the gospel? or counterfit the words of Yahshua? can you point that out?
@@mellavelli A FALSE gospel.
Jesus taught us HOW to have ETERNAL LIFE
KEEP THE LAW OF YHVH
Luke 10:25-26
Mat 5:17-20
Mat 19:17
Paul taught the doctrine of the Nicolaitans, which GOD HATES = rev 2:15
Look it up and see for yourself
Paul was WARNED about OVER and OVER again
But just b/c the Test came in the Bible, ppl missed it
Exactly how YHVH said it would play out
Mat 24:24-30
He would have had to have a scribe do this for him. A fisherman would not have been educated in writing Aramaic, Hebrew, or Greek. His scribe would have been a slave. 1 Peter also encourages slave obedience.
No sir, there is no such evidence in fact acts 4 :13 does clearly state that both Peter and John were illiterate.
Peter wrote it, end of story, I could care less about the far fetched conspiracy theories of Atheist scholars who hold the highest of high scrutiny on Christianity
People forget about the Holy Ghost…how did he preach that great Pentecost sermon.
This sounds like quite a stretch. You are straining credulity to make this argument. Only apologists believe this letter is authentic not scholars. Education standards in Galilee where very low, less than 5% knew how to write at all and to write with the sophistication that the letters are written Peter would have had to be in the top 1% of literate persons to even dictate such a heavily theologically ladened document.
Believe what you want but you are taking the stand akin to determining the earth is flat by looking at the horizon and saying you didn’t see any curve.
One clarifications. Peter doesn’t state he was with Jesus, he simply says he was an apostle OF Jesus. Apostle is not the same as a disciple.Paul was an Apostle but not a disciple. It is possible that Peter could have been both but I want to clarify that nowhere in 1Peter does he say he knew Jesus personally. Paul also never knew Jesus personally. Thanks 🙏
He does say that he was an *eye-witness* of the Sufferings of Christ. Most likely did. Other people say he knew Jesus personally. All the Gospels do. Also remember Jesus' disciples were called Apostles.
Because Luke 6:13 says that Jesus chose twelve and called them Apostles.
a FEW similarities lol.. More like THE ENTIRE writing was from Paul. You would have to be SLEEP to not see this letter was written by Paul or someone trying to verify Paul the FRAUD.
@@lightoftheworld5455 thank you, i did not know that
:(
Was is a zionist Jew ✡ 🤣
They don't want you to know the truth about Peter. He didn't write this book. His writings are in the Homilies and Recognitions. Also, saul/paul was a false 13 self proclaimed 'apostle' who wrote 13 deceiving books of the NT...this is the truth.
Lol the other apostles accepted Paul as an apostle, next.
@@dsmp7 Says saul...
@@JD-uy5js don’t you think the other apostles would’ve said something/written something/done something if Paul was preaching a false gospel?
@@dsmp7 They did Peter spoke against him in the Homilies and Recognitions...banned from the Cannon.
@@JD-uy5js lmao tell me where to find these illegitimate writings