>>259310
>Taken from the ICSB:
'That being said, the distinctiveness of the Pastoral Epistles is a factor that must be weighed carefully, for the evidence that can be interpreted in different ways. For instance, even critics who deny Pauline authorship generally recognize traces of Paul's thinking throughout these letters, and this leaves open the possibility of a closer relationship to the apostle than that envisioned by pseudepigraphical advocates. Stylistic differences between the Pastorals and Paul's undisputed writings, while undeniable, probably have more to do with differences in purpose and subject matter than anything else. After all, the Pastoral Epistles are written to pastors (Timothy and Titus) who are already well seasoned and educated leaders in the Church, while Paul's other letters are written to instruct young congregations in the basics of Christian faith. Allegations that the ecclesiastical hierarchy outlined in the Pastorals was unknown to the Church of Paul's day are likewise overdrawn, since several passages in the undisputed letters of Paul point to a structured system of leadership already in place during the earliest days of the Church (1 Cor 12:28; Phil 1:1; 1 Thess 5:12; cf. Acts 14:23; 20:17). As for Paul's travel itinerary, one must admit that these letters claim to give us information about Paul's career that is otherwise uncorroborated in the NT. Nevertheless, this can be taken as an earmark of Pauline authorship, since it is more likely that a literary forgery would stay within the outline of Paul's life set forth in the Book of Acts and his genuine letters rather than depart from it. Otherwise, the attempt to pass off these letters as authentic Pauline writings would surely fail to convince the original recipients that they were reading the words of an apostle. In the end, the case against Pauline authorship is neither airtight nor immune to criticism, and the tradition that Paul himself composed the Pastoral Epistles can still be critically and convincingly defended.'
>>259319
>You can choose a interpretation and interpret all other bible verses in that light, but I find it hard to believe that all writers thought the same. Early christians believed in very different things for example.
Well yeah, the Council of Nicaea and Scholasticism that established the teachings of christianity formally happened hundreds of years after them. I said that only on the matter of faith they wouldn't.
You know what, find me some bible verses by different authors that are contradictory in teaching the christian faith and morals.
>The point is, there are verses which weren't in the earliest manuscripts.
This article explains why we accept those verses.
https://vivacatholic.wordpress.com/2007/10/31/misquoting-jesus-vs-misquoting-truth/