Show simple item record

dc.contributor.authorBirner, Benjamin J.
dc.date.accessioned2019-03-18T18:30:32Z
dc.date.available2019-03-18T18:30:32Z
dc.date.issued2019
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/123456789/4477
dc.descriptionSenior Thesisen_US
dc.description.abstractOrthodox Lutherans have varied in how they treat the antilegomena. Martin Chemnitz believed the antilegomena should not be used to establish doctrine. This was the practice in the Wisconsin Synod until not too long ago. Later theologians removed this distinction and this seems to be the practice of the Wisconsin Synod today. How do we deal with this apparent discrepancy in something as important to Christians as the Bible itself? This paper will review the authority of Scripture, the formation of the canon, and what Lutheran theologians have said about the distinction to show that there is no real theological issue underlying the ancient distinction between the homologoumena and antilegomena. Nevertheless, Lutherans would be wise to maintain it for reasons of historical accuracy and apologetics.en_US
dc.language.isoen_USen_US
dc.subjectAntilegomenaen_US
dc.subjectHomologoumenaen_US
dc.titleThe Proper Distinction Between Antilegomena and Homologoumena: Its History and Applicationen_US
dc.typeThesisen_US


Files in this item

Thumbnail

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record