FK: You appear to accept the writings of the Church Fathers without much or any question, but you have great trouble accepting the authenticity of the Biblical authors themselves.
The Church Father give their opinions. The Church Fathers do not claim God is speaking through them. They merely express their faith. But you claim (a) that 1 Peter was written by Apostle Peter (who was dead when that book was written!), and (b) that the words in 1 Peter are those of God Himself, no less.
I am simply asking you (again for the nth time) to prove to me that it is God speaking through the author and that the author is indeed St. Peter even thought we know he was dead when 1 Peter was written (between 80-110 AD).
Yet, your Church accepts the authenticity of these writers. Can't I just use your own Church to convince you?
No!
Or, does Orthodoxy deny that Peter wrote the epistles ascribed to his name, or that scripture is "God's word"?
The Orthodox Church, to the best of my knowledge, accepts the authenticity of 1 Peter as scripture as far back as the 2nd century AD, and (probably, although I never heard or read anything about the subject from Orthodox sources) that it would be St. Peter's work as well.
It was one of those books that made it into the canon early because, to a large extent, it represent a badly needed reconciliation between St. Paul and St. Peter in terms of theology. The end of the first century also marks the beginning of wide-spread persecution of Christians unknown at the time of Perter (the one of Nero was an isolated incident limited to Rome).
This is evident also from his strongly Pauline language, signaling who of the two will be the defining Apostle of the faith. It's the historical framework and geographical facts that betray it was not written by Peter.
1 Peter begins in a positively Pauline language:
"To God's elect, strangers in the world, scattered throughout Pontus, Galatia, Cappadocia, Asia and Bithynia, who have been chosen according to the foreknowledge of God the Father, through the sanctifying work of the Spirit, for obedience to Jesus Christ and sprinkling by his blood: Grace and peace be yours in abundance."
The "strangers" (exiles) in those areas were not there when Peter was alive in the mid 60's of the 1st century. They settled those areas when wide-spread Roman persecutions began, at the end of the first century! If he were to speak of exiles, he would have mentioned Rome, where Nero during Peter's lifetime castigated Christians. Yet 1 Peter doesn't even mention Rome.
Other sources of doubt include his impeccable and highly educated koine Greek (not the Galilean market Greek), as well as the fact that the author never recounts his personal experience with Christ but speaks only of the "suffering Christ." Surely, for someone who was singled out and had so many personal memories of Christ, he would have made it more personal than that!
Be it as it may, the Church accepted it and it's been canon ever since, and it would be very difficult for the Church to backtrack on anything for that matter. I do remind you that the Epistle of Barnabas and the Shepherd of Hermas were considered canon until the middle of the 4th century and are found in the Oldest Christian Bible.
For some unexplained reason between the middle and and the end of the 4th century they were "decommissioned" as being inspired. Once the canon was set, backtracking would mean the Church made a mistake and that's a big non, no.
I believe because God gave me irresistible grace
Well, if you say so. That Calvinist construct is simply not universally accepted among Christians.
I was born on Long Island because that's where God wanted me to be born, and my eyes are green because that is my wife's favorite color for eyes. That God wants it is not at all the same as "I don't know".
Well, this leads me back to Hitler...and you don't want to go there because you know well that if God controls everything we are and do, then it was He who created Hitler, who created him evil, and Who is ultimately behind the Holocaust because He preordained it.
You will have to show me that God wanted you to be born on Long island (that it would really matter where you were born) and that the color of your eyes is also something God willed. Then you can also tell me why is He making so many suffering children in this world!
My answer is that God doesn't create suffering children; we do. God did not create Hitler as evil. Hitler is responsible for his own evil. And as far as where we are born, it could be just pure chance or luck (bad luck or good luck, depends). But we really don't know, do we?
I did not say or imply it was from the Bible. We know it now from scientific observation, and mathematical calculations. Gravity is logical to me, as it seems to prove out today and it does not offend scriptures.
FK, gravity is a property of matter. We don't know why bodies attract. You can's say that something is "logical" if you don't know the cause of the effect. Today, we know that hygiene and communicable disease are connected because we know how diseases spread. So we can say that personal hygiene is a "logical aspect" of disease prevention. We can't say that gravity is a logical property of matter because we don't know what causes it.
Of course, we can always default to the Dark Ages and just say "God made it that way" and be done with it. In which case we would still be treating bubonic plague as a "curse" (as quite "logical") without taking any preventative steps to avoid its spread.
Exactly ,dear Brother! Man's sin even disrupts human nature and all of nature itself
It should not be a surprise to anyone that the Tsunami in Indonesia took place in the part of the world where child pornography and child slavery runs rampant.
I've heard the language argument before and discounted it because Peter probably drew from Paul's superior educational background and learned. What historical and geographical facts indicate it was not written by Peter?
The "strangers" (exiles) in those areas were not there when Peter was alive in the mid 60's of the 1st century.
Those are areas that Paul has already evangelized. It does not necessarily indicate "exiles". It can very well be understood to mean strangers to the world at large because they have become Christians.
Sure they do claim that. (Or, the Orthodox Church claims it for them.) Isn't that what defines "consensus patrum"? If any other group gets together and comes up with "dogma" or "doctrine", then it has less weight, but when the Church Fathers did it (with others of the hierarchy), you claim it was from God.
But you claim (a) that 1 Peter was written by Apostle Peter (who was dead when that book was written!), and (b) that the words in 1 Peter are those of God Himself, no less.
God's word says that God's word is God breathed. In addition, 1 Peter begins with: " Peter, an apostle of Jesus Christ, ...". God's word is good enough for me. To disbelieve this one must place a higher authority on some other source than God's word. What is that authority for you?
I am simply asking you (again for the nth time) to prove to me that it is God speaking through the author and that the author is indeed St. Peter even thought we know he was dead when 1 Peter was written (between 80-110 AD).
We have already established that attempting to "prove" anything concerning God's word to you is pointless. In addition, whatever your higher-than-the-Bible authority is that tells you that 1 Peter was written after Peter died is unknown to me. My particular Bible estimates that 1 Peter was written around 63-64 A.D. The note says:
"That the apostle Peter was the writer (as stated in 1:1) is confirmed by the many similarities between this letter and Peter's sermons recorded in Acts (1:20 and Acts 2:23; 4:5 and Acts 10:42). The same Silas who accompanied Paul on the second missionary journey was his amanuensis, or secretary (5:12; Acts 15:40)."
Obviously, denying the very authorship of the sacred scriptures is an easy predicate to denying the truth of anything inconvenient found in them. :)
1 Peter begins in a positively Pauline language:
Perhaps they were both right. :)
You will have to show me that God wanted you to be born on Long island (that it would really matter where you were born) and that the color of your eyes is also something God willed. Then you can also tell me why is He making so many suffering children in this world!
All this God willed because it happened. From the Westminster Confession:
Chapter 3. Of God's Eternal Decree. 1. God from all eternity did, by the most wise and holy counsel of his own will, freely and unchangeably ordain whatsoever comes to pass; (a) yet so as thereby neither is God the author of sin, (b) nor is violence offered to the will of the creatures, nor is the liberty or contingency of second causes taken away, but rather established. (c)
a. Rom 9:15, 18; 11:33; Eph 1:11; Heb 6:17. • b. James 1:13, 17; 1 John 1:5. • c. Prov 16:33; Mat 17:12; John 19:11; Acts 2:23; 4:27-28.
2. Although God knows whatsoever may or can come to pass upon all supposed conditions, (a) yet hath he not decreed anything because he foresaw it as future, or as that which would come to pass upon such conditions. (b)
a. 1 Sam 23:11-12; Mat 11:21, 23; Acts 15:18. • b. Rom 9:11, 13, 16, 18.
3. By the decree of God, for the manifestation of his glory, some men and angels (a) are predestinated unto everlasting life, and others fore-ordained to everlasting death. (b)
a. Mat 25:41; 1 Tim 5:21. • b. Prov 16:4; Rom 9:22-23; Eph 1:5-6.
4. These angels and men, thus predestinated and fore-ordained, are particularly and unchangeably designed; and their number is so certain and definite that it can not be either increased or diminished. (a)
a. John 13:18; 2 Tim 2:19.
5. Those of mankind that [Kosta, here would be a good use of "sic" since the correct word is "who". :)]are predestinated unto life, God, before the foundation of the world was laid, according to his eternal and immutable purpose, and the secret counsel and good pleasure of his will, hath chosen in Christ, unto everlasting glory, (a) out of his mere free grace and love, without any foresight of faith or good works, or perseverance in either of them, or any other thing in the creature, as conditions, or causes moving him thereunto; (b) and all to the praise of his glorious grace. (c)
a. Rom 8:30; Eph 1:4, 9, 11; 1 Thes 5:9; 2 Tim 1:9. • b. Rom 9:11, 13, 16; Eph 1:4, 9. • c. Eph 1:6, 12.
6. As God hath appointed the elect unto glory, so hath he, by the eternal and most free purpose of his will, fore-ordained all the means thereunto. (a) Wherefore they who are elected, being fallen in Adam, are redeemed by Christ, (b) are effectually called unto faith in Christ by his Spirit working in due season; are justified, adopted, sanctified, (c) and kept by his power through faith unto salvation. (d) Neither are any other redeemed by Christ, effectually called, justified, adopted, sanctified, and saved, but the elect only. (e)
a. Eph 1:4-5; Eph 2:10; 2 Thes 2:13; 1 Pet 1:2. • b. 1 Thes 5:9-10; Titus 2:14. • c. Rom 8:30; Eph 1:5; 2 Thes 2:13. • d. 1 Pet 1:5. • e. John 6:64-65; 8:47; 10:26; 17:9; Rom 8:28-39; 1 John 2:19.
7. The rest of mankind God was pleased, according to the unsearchable counsel of his own will, whereby he extendeth or withholdeth mercy as he pleaseth, for the glory of his sovereign power over his creatures, to pass by, and to ordain them to dishonor and wrath for their sin, to the praise of his glorious justice. (a)
a. Mat 11:25-26; Rom 9:17-18, 21-22; 2 Tim 2:19-20; 1 Pet 2:8; Jude 1:4.
8. The doctrine of this high mystery of predestination is to be handled with special prudence and care, (a) that men attending the will of God revealed in his Word, and yielding obedience thereunto, may, from the certainty of their effectual vocation, be assured of their eternal election. (b) So shall this doctrine afford matter of praise, reverence, and admiration of God; (c) and of humility, diligence, and abundant consolation to all that sincerely obey the gospel. (d)
a. Deut 29:29; Rom 9:20. • b. 2 Pet 1:10. • c. Rom 11:33; Eph 1:6. • d. Luke 10:20; Rom 8:33; 11:5-6, 20; 2 Pet 1:10.
At least there is some good scripture there on the sovereignty of God. Now, on the matter of why children suffer we can only know that God is in charge and in control of everything. We weren't built to have all the answers to God's ways, as you have pointed out from scripture. However, THAT we don't understand something IS NOT prima facie evidence that it is not of God, as you seem to imply.
And as far as where we are born, it could be just pure chance or luck (bad luck or good luck, depends). But we really don't know, do we?
Well, I know, and so do many others here on FR. :) There is no chance or luck.
FK, gravity is a property of matter. We don't know why bodies attract.
You just need the presupposition that there is an intelligent CREATOR. If we can get there, then we can accept that all matter has (reasonably consistent) properties. Gravity doesn't surprise me at all since it is a perfect part of the reality that we know. Without it, our reality would be completely different.
You can's say that something is "logical" if you don't know the cause of the effect.
The cause is God. :) You appear frustrated if things cannot be explained without God. I'm afraid I don't have good news for the future. :) Schaeffer wrote extensively about Renaissance philosophers and practitioners of what he called the "new theology" who were and are in the same boat.