[MarkBsnr]

So, Paul, James, Jude, and John (look at 2nd and 3rd John, and Revelation) are guilty of hubris? And, by the way, Peter identifies himself in the text of both 1st and 2nd Peter as the author of each, which would of course render the very text of both epistles false. So, which is it? The authors of the books of the canonical NT Scriptures are guilty of “hubris” or your statement is, shall we say, somewhat less than true, or at least cited without much thought from some unstated source?

Well, let's look at it. Who wrote Hebrews? It does not say it in the text. 2 Peter is considered a late writing approximately 150 AD, about 100 years after Peter was martyred. And it was figured that up to (but not categorically stating) half of Paul's works were not written by Paul. I am not a scholar in this area, but the works are well documented and available on the internet.

I understand where you are coming from. How about this: I believe that the Church has selected the Scripture for us. It doesn't matter who wrote it; the Church has selected it as Scripture.

As it says in the Nicene Creed: I believe...

[Belteshazzar]

MarkBsnr wrote:
“Well, let’s look at it. Who wrote Hebrews? It does not say it in the text.”

This is avoidance of the point, whether you realize it or not. There is a very great difference in admitting that one does not know the author of a particular book of the NT, and Hebrews is unique in this (and maybe it was intended to be such ... Origen’s statement on this is still the best) and either assigning a supposed name or, worse, denying the plain statement of the text of the said work. Don’t you see that? Don’t you see that denying the truth of the author’s own self-identification calls into question everything that follows?

I will leave unanswered the rest of what you say, since I have already spoken to the points you are simply repeating. It would seem that your trust in scholars outweighs your trust in God’s word.

Lastly, I too say and confess with the Nicene Creed - and with heartfelt sincerity: “Credo”, “I believe.” But I do not believe in that which is detached from real history. The Scriptures of the NT, like those of the OT, are anchored in time and space. They speak truth itself, given by God to us through the authors of the various books. If what they say is not true, the Christian faith is a sham, no matter how vociferously urged on us by Rome or anyone. The Nicene Creed stands upon and draws is veracity and authority from the Holy Scriptures, which themselves are grounded in history. Otherwise my “I believe” is of no more certainty than that of a Muslim, Hindu, Buddhist, Mormon, or any naturalistic religion of the world.