Post Reply
Page 1 of 5  •  1 2 3 4 5 Next
2 years ago  ::  Apr 22, 2012 - 11:04AM #1
Marcion
Posts: 2,883
Does anyone know of authenticated references to the criteria used to determine the canonocal vs heretical gospels other than the winners make the rules.
 
Quick Reply
Cancel
2 years ago  ::  Apr 22, 2012 - 11:18AM #2
costrel
Posts: 6,226

Apr 22, 2012 -- 11:04AM, Marcion wrote:

Does anyone know of authenticated references to the criteria used to determine the canonocal vs heretical gospels other than the winners make the rules.


Click HERE for an online resource that lists quotations from the Church Fathers from Ignatius of Antioch (circa 110) to Didymus the Blind (350-398) concerning not only the canonical New Testament writings but also a variety of other early texts, including many of the important noncanonical Gospels. And for those who have a difficult time opening links on their computers, here is the url: www.ntcanon.org/table.shtml 

Quick Reply
Cancel
2 years ago  ::  Apr 22, 2012 - 11:38AM #3
Eliascomes
Posts: 889

Apr 22, 2012 -- 11:04AM, Marcion wrote:

Does anyone know of authenticated references to the criteria used to determine the canonocal vs heretical gospels other than the winners make the rules.
 



Here's a site also.


www.gnosis.org/naghamm/nhlalpha.html

Quick Reply
Cancel
2 years ago  ::  Apr 22, 2012 - 12:11PM #4
Marcion
Posts: 2,883

Apr 22, 2012 -- 11:38AM, Eliascomes wrote:


Apr 22, 2012 -- 11:04AM, Marcion wrote:

Does anyone know of authenticated references to the criteria used to determine the canonocal vs heretical gospels other than the winners make the rules.
 



Here's a site also.


www.gnosis.org/naghamm/nhlalpha.html




Thanks for the link. I have been researching Goosticism recently. The Gnostics did not refer to themselves as Gnostic; they called themselves Christian. 


Rather than take a scholarly approach, Iraneus went ballistic when he came across the Gospel of Judas. What makes him right and all others wrong.


Constantine favored the group calling themselves Catholic because they had a hierarchy modeled after the Roman Legions; so does the Mafia.

Quick Reply
Cancel
2 years ago  ::  Apr 22, 2012 - 8:20PM #5
costrel
Posts: 6,226

Apr 22, 2012 -- 12:11PM, Marcion wrote:

Thanks for the link. I have been researching Goosticism recently. The Gnostics did not refer to themselves as Gnostic; they called themselves Christian. 


Rather than take a scholarly approach, Iraneus went ballistic when he came across the Gospel of Judas. What makes him right and all others wrong.


It all depends on what one believes. Even the Gnostic Christians referred to other Gnostic Christians as heretics. One of the major problems with Gospel texts such as the Gospel of Judas is that they explain that the God of the Hebrew Scriptures, He who created the universe, kicked mankind out of the Garden, and gave mankind the iron laws known as the Ten Commandments, is a stupid, blind, mortal creature who is not the immortal, spiritual, loving, and good Great Invisible Spirit, also known as the Father. In other words, the God of the so-called "Old Testament" is not the same as the Great Invisible Spirit, the Father, of the New Testament. (As the Nag Hammadi Gospel of Philip explains: "The world came about through a mistake. For he who created it wanted to create it imperishable and immortal. He fell short of attaining his desire. For the world never was imperishable, nor, for that matter, was he who made the world.") In fact, the God of the Hebrew Scriptures will one day cease to exist when he commits suicide (as the Nag Hammadi Tractate On the Origin of the World states, "he will turn against himself and destroy himself until he ceases to exist"). Another issue those Christians who became the orthodox had with Christian Gnosticism was the large amount of heavenly beings, the Aeons, the Archons, the Gods, etc., that made up the Gnostic heavenly pantheon. There were a number of other issues that the emerging orthodox had with Christian Gnosticism as well, but these seem to be two of the major issues.

Quick Reply
Cancel
2 years ago  ::  Apr 22, 2012 - 8:33PM #6
Ed.W
Posts: 9,434

What would you like to be there that is not there?



Have you got anything I can sink my teeth into?
Quick Reply
Cancel
2 years ago  ::  Apr 22, 2012 - 9:48PM #7
Blü
Posts: 24,857

And if there were divine guidance, how did all those pseudepigraphs get through the net?

Quick Reply
Cancel
2 years ago  ::  Apr 22, 2012 - 10:34PM #8
Ed.W
Posts: 9,434

Apr 22, 2012 -- 9:48PM, Blü wrote:


And if there were divine guidance, how did all those pseudepigraphs get through the net?




Who's to say that what's there is not what God wants there, regardless of actual authorship?  Maybe God would be more interested in the words in the book than proper credit? 


Also, very few (if any) pseudepigraphs are certain to be pseudepigraphs.  It's just a majority opinion of more often than not unenlightened scholars often with biases against the scripture. 


And there is quite a bias against Paul in particular because he's perceived as anti homosexual, and before that anti-woman.  So I think the scholars are factoring in a little bit of posthumous "payback" on Paul.




Have you got anything I can sink my teeth into?
Quick Reply
Cancel
2 years ago  ::  Apr 22, 2012 - 10:39PM #9
Blü
Posts: 24,857

Ed


Who's to say that what's there is not what God wants there


Common sense, for a start, tells you that the NT looks exactly like it'd look if a thoroughly human, faillible and political committee put it together.


On what basis would you go beyond that?  Wishful thinking?  Belief in magic?

Quick Reply
Cancel
2 years ago  ::  Apr 22, 2012 - 10:46PM #10
Ed.W
Posts: 9,434

Apr 22, 2012 -- 10:39PM, Blü wrote:


Ed


Who's to say that what's there is not what God wants there


Common sense, for a start, tells you that the NT looks exactly like it'd look if a thoroughly human, faillible and political committee put it together.


On what basis would you go beyond that?  Wishful thinking?  Belief in magic?




Neither.  Everything that happens is preordained.  There are no accidents.  If Hebrews was thought to be written by Paul and it turns out to be Bob, then apparently the Lord wanted Bob's book of Hebrews in the Bible.


Only someone bent on attacking the messenger rather than the message would have an issue?


And in most cases, the message was probably the thing that sold the book to the canon committee.  The authorship is just two words.  Or one.  Well Paul had a last name.  (Tarsus)


You probably shouldn't hijack Marcion's thread tho.

Have you got anything I can sink my teeth into?
Quick Reply
Cancel
Page 1 of 5  •  1 2 3 4 5 Next
 
    Viewing this thread :: 0 registered and 1 guest
    No registered users viewing
    Advertisement

    Beliefnet On Facebook