A question about the Bible
- Thread starter gLing
- Start date
Users who are viewing this thread
-
30Replies
-
829Views
-
0Participant count
-
Participants list
the gospels which we now call the new testament ,and the letters from paul were all written within 30 years of the death of jesus,the gnostic gospels ie thomas were written much later some as late as the 4th century.although interesting and poetic the gnostic gospels gave very little substance and rely on presenting a secret knowledge of Jesus,whereas the man himself presented teaching for all and are of great substance.
the book called acts and letters to various groups show detailed history and advice given to the early christian world and the greek used in them make dating very easy.these documents restore the original teachings to the early christian church.
the writers and scholars at nag hammadi where many of the gnostic gospels came from were set apart from the christian world and the writers were more of a cult.
in reading and comparing gnostic and canonical scriptures those considered of no value and substance were removed.
the book called acts and letters to various groups show detailed history and advice given to the early christian world and the greek used in them make dating very easy.these documents restore the original teachings to the early christian church.
the writers and scholars at nag hammadi where many of the gnostic gospels came from were set apart from the christian world and the writers were more of a cult.
in reading and comparing gnostic and canonical scriptures those considered of no value and substance were removed.
Interesting. There was a show about this on Discovery Channel last night and according to them there is at least one bible out there that does include an extra book. It's the Ethiopian Bible and it has The Book of Jubilees in it I think.
All Else Failed
Well-Known Member
Many were excluded because the early church "fathers" and the council of Nicene saw them as too "outlandish".
IntruderLS1
Active Member
Nevermind.
I had a bit written, but no point in giving you anything new to think about for awhile.
lol, some of them are just stupid though. There's seriously one about baby Jesus, and how Mary put his foreskin in a vase, and people would touch it and be healed... and another one about teenage Jesus getting angry at the other Teens and blasting them with his magic powers... a little fanciful, perhaps?
Nevermind.
I had a bit written, but no point in giving you anything new to think about for awhile.
:24::24::clap
All Else Failed
Well-Known Member
Um, have you even read the bible?lol, some of them are just stupid though. There's seriously one about baby Jesus, and how Mary put his foreskin in a vase, and people would touch it and be healed... and another one about teenage Jesus getting angry at the other Teens and blasting them with his magic powers... a little fanciful, perhaps?
Raising of unread, mystical plagues, parting of massive water bodies, resurrection, mythical animals such as unicorns.....don't even get me started on Revelation.
No no, go ahead, I'm all ears.Nevermind.
I had a bit written, but no point in giving you anything new to think about for awhile.
Peter Parka
Well-Known Member
I dont like the Bible anyway because I don't like homophobic literature.
HisHoliness
Banned
Noticed your typo so I fixed it for ya. I got your back, man.
:24::24::24::24::24::24:
IntruderLS1
Active Member
Are you asking for another knowledge stick beating? :jk
How about one thing at a time. We're a couple of weeks old on the other discussion. We'll que this one for now. I warn you though... I like history stuff, and this one isn't quite like what some people like to sell it as. :nod:
COOL_BREEZE2
Well-Known Member
So that it wouldn't be overwhelmingly fat and so much harder to read?
So that it wouldn't be too difficult to take around?
:dunno
COOL_BREEZE2
Well-Known Member
I smell bait. :ninja
COOL_BREEZE2
Well-Known Member
Ahhhh.....I see the ole Intruder standing by.....
........and the very AEF waiting on the wings incognito.
opcorn2:
........and the very AEF waiting on the wings incognito.
opcorn2:yep, quite a bit of it. Dare I say, probably a lot more than you have.
skyblue, it's interesting that you mention the book of enoch... even though it's officially considered 'apocrypha', it is actually quoted in the book of Jude... makes you think, doesn't it! :cool
This is the trouble with religious arguments though. For example, consider this question: have the books of the Bible remained exactly the way they were originally written, and are all the 'right' books included? Rationally, the chances of this are miniscule... and, yet if you believe in God, then you could argue that he miraculously intended it to be that way... see what I mean? You just can't win either way.
COOL_BREEZE2
Well-Known Member
So you probably have read the bible more than AEF huh? Interesting.
...and opcorn2:.When you ask "have the books of the Bible remained exactly the way they were originally written" do you mean in the same language as they were written? I would guess that the original writings are in the same language however would have had to be translated to different languages to cater for those who speak a different language, which may lead to some measure of interpretation as in the normal scenario.
Well, my understanding is that the OT was mostly written in Hebrew and the NT was written in Greek (to cater for the 'gentiles' who a great deal of it was written for...). I think both are supposed to have gone through a Latin translation before making it to King James time in English.
I'm talking more about verse changes, and that sort of thing. A lot of people, for example, believe that the original gospels said nothing about Jesus' divinity, but that it was added much later by the church, wanting to push their particular doctrines on the issue. But, yeah, I reckon the copying (Remember, they didn't even invent the printing press until the 1500s or whenever) and translation would have had some effect at least on the accuracy of the texts.
I'm talking more about verse changes, and that sort of thing. A lot of people, for example, believe that the original gospels said nothing about Jesus' divinity, but that it was added much later by the church, wanting to push their particular doctrines on the issue. But, yeah, I reckon the copying (Remember, they didn't even invent the printing press until the 1500s or whenever) and translation would have had some effect at least on the accuracy of the texts.
78,875Threads
2,185,391Messages
4,959Members