Announcement

Collapse

Apologetics 301 Guidelines

If you think this is the area where you tell everyone you are sorry for eating their lunch out of the fridge, it probably isn't the place for you


This forum is open discussion between atheists and all theists to defend and debate their views on religion or non-religion. Please respect that this is a Christian-owned forum and refrain from gratuitous blasphemy. VERY wide leeway is given in range of expression and allowable behavior as compared to other areas of the forum, and moderation is not overly involved unless necessary. Please keep this in mind. Atheists who wish to interact with theists in a way that does not seek to undermine theistic faith may participate in the World Religions Department. Non-debate question and answers and mild and less confrontational discussions can take place in General Theistics.


Forum Rules: Here
See more
See less

Papyrus found Jesus married

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #91
    Originally posted by One Bad Pig View Post
    Norm doesn't care. They weren't written recently, so they don't apply to this time anyway.

    You're right. I could care less. But, I don't base my entire worldview on the words from this book.

    NORM
    When the missionaries came to Africa they had the Bible and we had the land. They said 'Let us pray.' We closed our eyes. When we opened them we had the Bible and they had the land. - Bishop Desmond Tutu

    Comment


    • #92
      Originally posted by NormATive View Post
      These were just some of the more interesting ones:

      Rule of the War of the Children of Light Against the Children of Darkness (1QM 1QWar Scroll), Son of God' Text, and The Manual of Discipline (1QS, 1Q28), Book of Jubilees (1Q17), Book of Noah (1Q19-1QNoah), Aramaic Testament of Levi from the Cairo Genizah (1QTLevi ar), and this one is probably the most interesting: Book of Giants (1Q24-1QEnGiants arb) - there is a large section of it found in the Book of Enoch (rejected from the Jewish canon).
      None of these are gospels.

      It wasn't me who called them gospels - one of the instructors kept referring to the smaller letters as gospels. I truly don't recall the names of them, other than The Gospel of Mary and the Gospel of Judas (those are the more well known). There were dozens and dozens of them.
      Your instructor didn't know what he was talking about, or, more likely, you're misremembering what he said. No gospels have been found at Qumran. The Gospel of Mary and the Gospel of Judas were not found at Qumran either. They both post-date the finds at Qumran by centuries.

      I really don't care about "canons." It's not my role to decide what books are holy or not. If you think War and Peace is holy, then; so be it.
      Your remark in post #26 certainly made it sound like you cared.

      This phrase added to I John that added the doctrine of the trinity, for one:
      Yes that's a good one, though, as far as I understand it, its a very late interpolation, and most modern Bible translations do not include it. Check out this link of comparison texts.. http://biblehub.com/1_john/5-7.htm

      By the way, its not the whole phrase that was added, just the part that reads: "in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost: and these three are one. And there are three that bear witness in earth,"

      So it reads in most modern New Testament translations (NIV, NASB, ESV, etc.) something like this "For there are three that testify: the Spirit and the water and the blood; and the three are in agreement."

      The famously quoted phrase from Jesus in John 8:

      In fact, the entire story is missing from the earliest manuscripts:
      Yes, I mentioned that already in post #69. Don't you remember?

      Shall I go on? There are numerous other such examples.
      Please do.

      Comment


      • #93
        Originally posted by OingoBoingo View Post
        or, more likely, you're misremembering what he said. No gospels have been found at Qumran. The Gospel of Mary and the Gospel of Judas were not found at Qumran either. They both post-date the finds at Qumran by centuries.
        It's quite possible - the entire lecture was in Hebrew, and I was just new to it. Nevertheless, there were gospels among the documents. I never said we only had Qumron artifacts in the classroom, BTW.

        NORM
        When the missionaries came to Africa they had the Bible and we had the land. They said 'Let us pray.' We closed our eyes. When we opened them we had the Bible and they had the land. - Bishop Desmond Tutu

        Comment


        • #94
          Originally posted by NormATive View Post
          Gospel is a generic term, not limited to Christian works. There were many gospels in Hebrew and Aramaic.
          I'd like to see an example of a scholar calling a non-Christian work a "gospel."
          Unfortunately, the Christian "fathers" did a fairly good job of destroying all the existent texts of the time. I remember reading a book written by Irenaeus listing and describing some of the works he had destroyed.
          Where does Irenaeus say he destroyed any works?
          Interestingly, not one of Paul's letters mention anything about miracles, virgin births, immaculate conceptions, etc., etc...
          Not sure why these would come up in letters written to deal with various issues the addressees were having problems with. Paul does talk about the resurrection of Christ, which is kind of the biggest miracle of them all. And the dogma of the immaculate conception is almost new enough (19th century) that you might accept it as modern.

          <snip speculative history>
          We have only fragments of what your church fathers destroyed.

          NORM
          I suspect Diocletian is responsible for far more destruction than anyone else. And many of the Gnostic sects were quite secretive about the contents of their writings, not even sharing them with everyone in their in-group. Further, the ravages of time has destroyed nearly everything written back then anyway.

          Originally posted by NormATive View Post
          It wasn't me who called them gospels - one of the instructors kept referring to the smaller letters as gospels. I truly don't recall the names of them, other than The Gospel of Mary and the Gospel of Judas (those are the more well known). There were dozens and dozens of them.
          Neither of those is dated even close to the 2nd century. The Gospel of Judas was "discovered" less than a decade ago, so I doubt your instructor was referring to that one. And we certainly do not have the remains (or even references to) "dozens and dozens" of gospels.
          Enter the Church and wash away your sins. For here there is a hospital and not a court of law. Do not be ashamed to enter the Church; be ashamed when you sin, but not when you repent. – St. John Chrysostom

          Veritas vos Liberabit<>< Learn Greek <>< Look here for an Orthodox Church in America<><Ancient Faith Radio
          sigpic
          I recommend you do not try too hard and ...research as little as possible. Such weighty things give me a headache. - Shunyadragon, Baha'i apologist

          Comment


          • #95
            Originally posted by One Bad Pig View Post
            I'd like to see an example of a scholar calling a non-Christian work a "gospel."
            The Nag Hammadi discovery contains nearly fifty volumes. Since Gnostic works were not considered "Christian" by those who define such things, they are therefore, non-Christian works called gospels.

            Originally posted by One Bad Pig View Post
            Where does Irenaeus say he destroyed any works?
            My bad. I mistook hyperbole for actual destruction:

            I shall also endeavour, according to my moderate ability, to furnish the means of overthrowing them - Irenaeus: Against Heresies
            However, it is rather strange that until the Nag Hammadi discoveries, very few Gnostic works existed.

            Originally posted by One Bad Pig View Post
            I suspect Diocletian is responsible for far more destruction than anyone else. And many of the Gnostic sects were quite secretive about the contents of their writings, not even sharing them with everyone in their in-group. Further, the ravages of time has destroyed nearly everything written back then anyway.
            Agreed. The Gnostics were even stranger than the emerging Christians.

            Originally posted by One Bad Pig View Post
            Neither of those is dated even close to the 2nd century. The Gospel of Judas was "discovered" less than a decade ago, so I doubt your instructor was referring to that one. And we certainly do not have the remains (or even references to) "dozens and dozens" of gospels.
            The Gospel of Judas was found in the 1970s by Frieda Nussberger-Tchacos, an antiquities dealer in Egypt. The translation was recently completed (in the early 2000s). It is quite possible this document was in the collection. There were lots of fragments of documents being translated and studied. I am sure they are continuing the work even as we debate. There will be more "gospels," I am sure of it.

            NORM
            When the missionaries came to Africa they had the Bible and we had the land. They said 'Let us pray.' We closed our eyes. When we opened them we had the Bible and they had the land. - Bishop Desmond Tutu

            Comment


            • #96
              Originally posted by NormATive View Post
              The Nag Hammadi discovery contains nearly fifty volumes. Since Gnostic works were not considered "Christian" by those who define such things, they are therefore, non-Christian works called gospels.
              You're showing an unfamiliarity with the subject matter. Scholars believe that Gnostic "gospels" were composed by a Christian sect. Other Christian sects included Docetists, Marcionites (both, in a way, pre-cursors to Christian Gnostics), Ebionites, Montanists, Arians, and so on. What may be confusing you is that gnosticism had a tendency to attach itself to a number of different faiths, and philosophies, including Judaism. When scholars refer to "Gnostic Gospels", though, they're always referring to the Christian variant.

              My bad. I mistook hyperbole for actual destruction:
              This is the context of that passage:

              Source: Against Heresies (Book I, Preface)

              I intend, then, to the best of my ability, with brevity and clearness to set forth the opinions of those who are now promulgating heresy. I refer especially to the disciples of Ptolemæus, whose school may be described as a bud from that of Valentinus. I shall also endeavour, according to my moderate ability, to furnish the means of overthrowing them, by showing how absurd and inconsistent with the truth are their statements. Not that I am practised either in composition or eloquence; but my feeling of affection prompts me to make known to you and all your companions those doctrines which have been kept in concealment until now, but which are at last, through the goodness of God, brought to light. For there is nothing hidden which shall not be revealed, nor secret that shall not be made known.

              © Copyright Original Source



              Even accounting for hyperbole (which I don't see in that citation), how in the world did you get the destruction of texts out of that? Irenaeus is very clearly saying that his way of overthrowing heretics is by expounding upon their beliefs. Irenaeus believed that by spilling the beans on the secret knowledge of Gnostic Christianity, people would see how bizarre their beliefs were, and it would spell out their undoing.

              However, it is rather strange that until the Nag Hammadi discoveries, very few Gnostic works existed.
              Its not at all strange. This is true with most ancient texts that weren't religiously copied down throughout the centuries. Until the discovery of the Dead Sea Scrolls, very few ancient Hebrew texts existed.

              Comment


              • #97
                Originally posted by NormATive View Post
                The Nag Hammadi discovery contains nearly fifty volumes. Since Gnostic works were not considered "Christian" by those who define such things, they are therefore, non-Christian works called gospels.
                A whopping four of those are called "gospels" - and they are all at least Christian-inspired.
                My bad. I mistook hyperbole for actual destruction:

                However, it is rather strange that until the Nag Hammadi discoveries, very few Gnostic works existed.
                Not especially, since gnostic groups had pretty much disappeared over a millennium ago - and they were most active in areas mostly controlled by Muslims since then.

                The Gospel of Judas was found in the 1970s by Frieda Nussberger-Tchacos, an antiquities dealer in Egypt. The translation was recently completed (in the early 2000s). It is quite possible this document was in the collection. There were lots of fragments of documents being translated and studied. I am sure they are continuing the work even as we debate. There will be more "gospels," I am sure of it.

                NORM
                It's possible that more will be found. It's amazing how much material has been found at Oxyrhynchus and the Cairo genizah, for example; it will take quite a while yet to even know what all we've found there. Yes, the Gospel of Judas was found in the 1970's, but was apparently not even studied until early this century (when the scholarly world became aware of it).
                Enter the Church and wash away your sins. For here there is a hospital and not a court of law. Do not be ashamed to enter the Church; be ashamed when you sin, but not when you repent. – St. John Chrysostom

                Veritas vos Liberabit<>< Learn Greek <>< Look here for an Orthodox Church in America<><Ancient Faith Radio
                sigpic
                I recommend you do not try too hard and ...research as little as possible. Such weighty things give me a headache. - Shunyadragon, Baha'i apologist

                Comment


                • #98
                  Originally posted by One Bad Pig View Post
                  A whopping four of those are called "gospels" - and they are all at least Christian-inspired.
                  Those who decide such things do not consider Gnostic works Christian. Four is more than none.

                  Originally posted by One Bad Pig View Post
                  ...gnostic groups had pretty much disappeared over a millennium ago - and they were most active in areas mostly controlled by Muslims since then.
                  This is what I thought too, but my Uncle, who lives in Egypt, is in communication with groups who claim to be linear descendents of some of those Gnostic groups. I find their claims dubious, but they could be telling the truth.


                  Originally posted by One Bad Pig View Post
                  It's possible that more will be found.
                  Precisely what the professor said.

                  Originally posted by One Bad Pig View Post
                  Yes, the Gospel of Judas was found in the 1970's, but was apparently not even studied until early this century (when the scholarly world became aware of it).
                  How is that apparent? The Hebrew University of Jerusalem is working around the clock translating ancient documents, as are many other such institutions in Israel. Just because you are unfamiliar with it doesn't mean it is not so.

                  NORM
                  When the missionaries came to Africa they had the Bible and we had the land. They said 'Let us pray.' We closed our eyes. When we opened them we had the Bible and they had the land. - Bishop Desmond Tutu

                  Comment


                  • #99
                    Originally posted by NormATive View Post
                    Those who decide such things do not consider Gnostic works Christian.
                    Not sure who you're referring to. When a text claims to have been written by an apostle, then it's claiming to be Christian.
                    Four is more than none.
                    Yet far, far short of "dozens and dozens."
                    This is what I thought too, but my Uncle, who lives in Egypt, is in communication with groups who claim to be linear descendents of some of those Gnostic groups. I find their claims dubious, but they could be telling the truth.
                    Perhaps they can show us copies of the scriptures they've kept all this time. Or maybe they're as linear as the baptists are descendents of the early church.
                    How is that apparent? The Hebrew University of Jerusalem is working around the clock translating ancient documents, as are many other such institutions in Israel. Just because you are unfamiliar with it doesn't mean it is not so.

                    NORM
                    I've read something of the history of the document in question. It was (not well-)kept in a private collection for some 30 years. It wasn't even available to study until this century.
                    Enter the Church and wash away your sins. For here there is a hospital and not a court of law. Do not be ashamed to enter the Church; be ashamed when you sin, but not when you repent. – St. John Chrysostom

                    Veritas vos Liberabit<>< Learn Greek <>< Look here for an Orthodox Church in America<><Ancient Faith Radio
                    sigpic
                    I recommend you do not try too hard and ...research as little as possible. Such weighty things give me a headache. - Shunyadragon, Baha'i apologist

                    Comment


                    • Originally posted by One Bad Pig View Post

                      Perhaps they can show us copies of the scriptures they've kept all this time. Or maybe they're as linear as the baptists are descendents of the early church.
                      Chuckle! I was raised in the Baptist church. I recall hearing that "we are direct descendants of the Annabaptists" line all the time.

                      NORM
                      When the missionaries came to Africa they had the Bible and we had the land. They said 'Let us pray.' We closed our eyes. When we opened them we had the Bible and they had the land. - Bishop Desmond Tutu

                      Comment


                      • Originally posted by OingoBoingo View Post
                        Even accounting for hyperbole (which I don't see in that citation), how in the world did you get the destruction of texts out of that? Irenaeus is very clearly saying that his way of overthrowing heretics is by expounding upon their beliefs. Irenaeus believed that by spilling the beans on the secret knowledge of Gnostic Christianity, people would see how bizarre their beliefs were, and it would spell out their undoing.
                        See also: Scientology, Jehovah's Witnesses. Some things never change! The JWs just ignore their foundational documents, whereas the Scientologists use the courts to try to keep theirs from the public.

                        Comment


                        • Originally posted by NormATive View Post
                          Chuckle! I was raised in the Baptist church. I recall hearing that "we are direct descendants of the Annabaptists" line all the time.
                          Not "Annabaptist," which I assume is a Baptist who is named Anna, or likes Anna, or something. It's "Anabaptist", from the Greek ana- (meaning "again") prefixed onto "Baptist." The Anabaptists were indeed the forerunners of modern day Baptist churches. They were derisively called "the re-baptizers" (Anabaptists) because they had all been baptized as babies in Reformed, or Anglican, or Lutheran, or Roman Catholic churches, but their theology led them to believe that those baptisms didn't count, because they had not made profession of faith in Jesus at the time of their infant baptisms. So upon making such profession, they would be baptized again, as adults.

                          No one disputes that modern Baptist churches have their roots in the Anabaptist movement, although the ana- prefix was dropped since then second generation were never baptized as infants in the first place, but only as adults. However, the controversy to which One Bad Pig was referring is that some Baptists claim a sort of Apostolic succession going back to the Apostles themselves, having been persecuted over the years, in a so-called "trail of blood", by the rest of the Church.
                          Last edited by RBerman; 04-26-2014, 01:51 PM.

                          Comment


                          • There's usually a reason why secret knowledge is kept secret :)

                            Comment


                            • Originally posted by RBerman View Post
                              Not "Annabaptist," which I assume is a Baptist who is named Anna, or likes Anna, or something. It's "Anabaptist", from the Greek ana- (meaning "again") prefixed onto "Baptist." The Anabaptists were indeed the forerunners of modern day Baptist churches. They were derisively called "the re-baptizers" (Anabaptists) because they had all been baptized as babies in Reformed, or Anglican, or Lutheran, or Roman Catholic churches, but their theology led them to believe that those baptisms didn't count, because they had not made profession of faith in Jesus at the time of their infant baptisms. So upon making such profession, they would be baptized again, as adults.

                              No one disputes that modern Baptist churches have their roots in the Anabaptist movement, although the ana- prefix was dropped since then second generation were never baptized as infants in the first place, but only as adults. However, the controversy to which One Bad Pig was referring is that some Baptists claim a sort of Apostolic succession going back to the Apostles themselves, having been persecuted over the years, in a so-called "trail of blood", by the rest of the Church.
                              Didn't (some of the?) early (ana)Baptists claim to go back not only to the Apostles but even to John the Baptist?
                              βλέπομεν γὰρ ἄρτι δι᾿ ἐσόπτρου ἐν αἰνίγματι, τότε δὲ πρόσωπον πρὸς πρόσωπον·
                              ἄρτι γινώσκω ἐκ μέρους, τότε δὲ ἐπιγνώσομαι καθὼς καὶ ἐπεγνώσθην.

                              אָכֵ֕ן אַתָּ֖ה אֵ֣ל מִסְתַּתֵּ֑ר אֱלֹהֵ֥י יִשְׂרָאֵ֖ל מוֹשִֽׁיעַ׃

                              Comment


                              • Originally posted by robrecht View Post
                                Didn't (some of the?) early (ana)Baptists claim to go back not only to the Apostles but even to John the Baptist?
                                Yes, that was the point.

                                NORM
                                When the missionaries came to Africa they had the Bible and we had the land. They said 'Let us pray.' We closed our eyes. When we opened them we had the Bible and they had the land. - Bishop Desmond Tutu

                                Comment

                                Related Threads

                                Collapse

                                Topics Statistics Last Post
                                Started by shunyadragon, 02-15-2024, 12:52 PM
                                74 responses
                                313 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post whag
                                by whag
                                 
                                Started by whag, 02-06-2024, 01:46 PM
                                60 responses
                                328 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post whag
                                by whag
                                 
                                Started by Hypatia_Alexandria, 02-04-2024, 06:06 AM
                                144 responses
                                725 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post tabibito  
                                Started by Hypatia_Alexandria, 02-03-2024, 09:07 AM
                                62 responses
                                326 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post eider
                                by eider
                                 
                                Started by whag, 01-26-2024, 01:08 PM
                                53 responses
                                323 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post Hypatia_Alexandria  
                                Working...
                                X