FRDB Archives

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.


Go Back   FRDB Archives > Archives > Religion (Closed) > Biblical Criticism & History
Welcome, Peter Kirby.
You last visited: Today at 03:12 PM

 
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 04-11-2013, 09:45 PM   #11
Contributor
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Falls Creek, Oz.
Posts: 11,192
Default


Quote:
Originally Posted by Rt Rev Michael Nazir-Ali, the former bishop of Rochester

“I am concerned about the misuses of very obscure Gnostic gospels to impugne the integrity of the Bible.

The Rt Rev Michael Nazir-Ali, the former bishop of Rochester, does not seem to understand that the entire purpose and use of the Gnostic Gospels by the so-called gnostic heretics was to impugne the integrity of the Bible.

The Rt Rev Michael Nazir-Ali, the former bishop of Rochester, is a Eusebian parrot:

Quote:
Originally Posted by Eusebius

We have felt compelled to give this catalogue in order that we might be able to know both these works and those that are cited by the heretics under the name of the apostles, including, for instance, such books as the Gospels of Peter, of Thomas, of Matthias, or of any others besides them, and the Acts of Andrew and John and the other apostles, which no one belonging to the succession of ecclesiastical writers has deemed worthy of mention in his writings.

And further, the character of the style is at variance with apostolic usage, and both the thoughts and the purpose of the things that are related in them are so completely out of accord with true orthodoxy that they clearly show themselves to be the fictions of heretics. Wherefore they are not to be placed even among the rejected writings, but are all of them to be cast aside as absurd and impious."


Historia Ecclesiastica (Book 3, 25, 6-7)


THUS were the lurking-places of the heretics broken up by the emperor's command, and the savage beasts they harbored (I mean the chief authors of their impious doctrines) driven to flight. Of those whom they had deceived, some, intimidated by the emperor's threats, disguising their real sentiments, crept secretly into the Church. For since the law directed that search should be made for their books

Eusebius VC 65:
How on the Discovery of Prohibited Books among the Heretics,
Many of them return to the Catholic Church.




εὐδαιμονία | eudaimonia
mountainman is offline  
Old 04-12-2013, 04:19 AM   #12
Contributor
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Falls Creek, Oz.
Posts: 11,192
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by outhouse View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by JoeWallack View Post

JW:
Based on statistics I think it more likely Jesus was married than crucified.
And what statistics might that be?
The stats issued from the International Bureau of Common Era Sense on 28th October last year.





εὐδαιμονία | eudaimonia
mountainman is offline  
Old 04-13-2013, 01:52 AM   #13
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Birmingham UK
Posts: 4,876
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by aa5874 View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by andrewcriddle View Post
Although non-canonical accounts of Mary Magdalene are interesting for the study of early Christianity and its attitudes to women; it seems unlikely that they provide us with any information about the historical Mary Magdalene.

Andrew Criddle
What are the Canonical sources that provide us with information about the historical Mary Magdalene?

The authors of the Gospels are falsely attributed, their stories are most likely non-historical and it is not known of any actual evidence that the stories of Mary Magdalene did occur if she did live.
It is possible that the canonical sources provide us with little or no information about the historical Mary Magdalene.

It is almost certain that the non-canonical sources provide us with little or no (additional) information about the historical Mary Magdalene.

Andrew Criddle
andrewcriddle is offline  
Old 04-13-2013, 07:39 AM   #14
Contributor
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: the fringe of the caribbean
Posts: 18,988
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by andrewcriddle View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by aa5874 View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by andrewcriddle View Post
Although non-canonical accounts of Mary Magdalene are interesting for the study of early Christianity and its attitudes to women; it seems unlikely that they provide us with any information about the historical Mary Magdalene.

Andrew Criddle
What are the Canonical sources that provide us with information about the historical Mary Magdalene?

The authors of the Gospels are falsely attributed, their stories are most likely non-historical and it is not known of any actual evidence that the stories of Mary Magdalene did occur if she did live.
It is possible that the canonical sources provide us with little or no information about the historical Mary Magdalene.

It is almost certain that the non-canonical sources provide us with little or no (additional) information about the historical Mary Magdalene.

Andrew Criddle
Effectively, claims about the character called Mary Magdalene cannot be confirmed or corroborated and in any event it is quite reasonable to deduce that Mary Magdalene was active in events that were non-historical and is a product of fiction.

Mark 16:9 KJV
Quote:
Now when Jesus was risen early the first day of the week, he appeared first to Mary Magdalene, out of whom he had cast seven devils.
Mary Magdalene is not only featured in fictitious events but in writings that were falsely attributed to an invented author perhaps 100 years after the very same implausible event under Pilate.
aa5874 is offline  
Old 04-13-2013, 07:52 AM   #15
Banned
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Alberta
Posts: 11,885
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by andrewcriddle View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by aa5874 View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by andrewcriddle View Post
Although non-canonical accounts of Mary Magdalene are interesting for the study of early Christianity and its attitudes to women; it seems unlikely that they provide us with any information about the historical Mary Magdalene.

Andrew Criddle
What are the Canonical sources that provide us with information about the historical Mary Magdalene?

The authors of the Gospels are falsely attributed, their stories are most likely non-historical and it is not known of any actual evidence that the stories of Mary Magdalene did occur if she did live.
It is possible that the canonical sources provide us with little or no information about the historical Mary Magdalene.

It is almost certain that the non-canonical sources provide us with little or no (additional) information about the historical Mary Magdalene.

Andrew Criddle
That might be true but I like it better wherein Magdalene is the Eve in us wherein boys are boy-ish and girls are girl-ish, and are they not beautiful in each? Just gorgeous I think, and find it a shame that she is put to work these days beside her man, soon growing hair on her own chest so she can beat it too.

From this I would say that a vivid Eve is nice to have as the not the body but the sniff we have to smell things out our self.

My favorite on this is where Aufidius said: "But know thou first,/ I loved the maid I married," (Coriolanus IV.v.114-15) where she was called Valeria to show the valor that she represents, . . . wherefore Jesus was a Jew and it was the Jews who crucified him too (difficult jump-shift here where Peter must deny him first-hand to forever leave 'it' be).

And then go to "Julius Caesar" where she was the valiance of Casca there that Brutus always was loyal too as motivating force in him, as recognized in the tribute of the pivotal speech Mark Anthony made: "Yours, Cinna; and, my valiant Casca, yours. (III.i.190).
Chili is offline  
Old 04-13-2013, 07:55 AM   #16
Banned
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Alberta
Posts: 11,885
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by aa5874 View Post
Mark 16:9 KJV
Quote:
Now when Jesus was risen early the first day of the week, he appeared first to Mary Magdalene, out of whom he had cast seven devils.
Mary Magdalene is not only featured in fictitious events but in writings that were falsely attributed to an invented author perhaps 100 years after the very same implausible event under Pilate.
Also known as the Capital Sins, a Catholic would say as expert in that field.
Chili is offline  
Old 04-13-2013, 06:01 PM   #17
Contributor
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Falls Creek, Oz.
Posts: 11,192
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by andrewcriddle View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by aa5874 View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by andrewcriddle View Post
Although non-canonical accounts of Mary Magdalene are interesting for the study of early Christianity and its attitudes to women; it seems unlikely that they provide us with any information about the historical Mary Magdalene.

Andrew Criddle
What are the Canonical sources that provide us with information about the historical Mary Magdalene?

The authors of the Gospels are falsely attributed, their stories are most likely non-historical and it is not known of any actual evidence that the stories of Mary Magdalene did occur if she did live.
It is possible that the canonical sources provide us with little or no information about the historical Mary Magdalene.

It is almost certain that the non-canonical sources provide us with little or no (additional) information about the historical Mary Magdalene.
These two claims feature the sub claim that Mary Magdalene was historical, but may be reformulated
to feature the sub claim that Mary Magdalene was not historical as follows"
It is possible that the canonical sources provide us with little or no information about the fictional Mary Magdalene.

It is almost certain that the non-canonical sources provide us with little or no (additional) information about the fictional Mary Magdalene
Logically, Mary may have been historical or fictional.

If Mary was historical then the former claims are logical.

However if Mary was fictional, then the second claim is clearly erroneous because it is absolutely certain that the non-canonical
sources do provide us with a great deal of (additional) information about the fictional Mary Magdalene.


Do we have an index or a list of non canonical material featuring Mary Magdalene?

Here's a start:


* The Gospel of Mary [Magdalene]
* The Gospel of Philip
* A Portion of the Books of the Saviour aka "Pistis Sophia"
* The Greater Questions of Mary
* The "Gospel of Jesus' Wife"





εὐδαιμονία | eudaimonia
mountainman is offline  
Old 04-13-2013, 07:10 PM   #18
Contributor
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: the fringe of the caribbean
Posts: 18,988
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by mountainman View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by andrewcriddle View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by aa5874 View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by andrewcriddle View Post
Although non-canonical accounts of Mary Magdalene are interesting for the study of early Christianity and its attitudes to women; it seems unlikely that they provide us with any information about the historical Mary Magdalene.

Andrew Criddle
What are the Canonical sources that provide us with information about the historical Mary Magdalene?

The authors of the Gospels are falsely attributed, their stories are most likely non-historical and it is not known of any actual evidence that the stories of Mary Magdalene did occur if she did live.
It is possible that the canonical sources provide us with little or no information about the historical Mary Magdalene.

It is almost certain that the non-canonical sources provide us with little or no (additional) information about the historical Mary Magdalene.
These two claims feature the sub claim that Mary Magdalene was historical, but may be reformulated
to feature the sub claim that Mary Magdalene was not historical as follows"
It is possible that the canonical sources provide us with little or no information about the fictional Mary Magdalene.

It is almost certain that the non-canonical sources provide us with little or no (additional) information about the fictional Mary Magdalene
Logically, Mary may have been historical or fictional.

If Mary was historical then the former claims are logical...
Whether or not it is possible that Mary Magdalene did live no argument can be maintained for an historical Mary Magdalene at this present time based on the fact that there is no corroborative evidence from antiquity and much of what is claimed about Mary is found in a source of fiction and implausibilities.

It is claimed Mary Magdalene saw the resurrected Jesus born of a Ghost and a Virgin.
aa5874 is offline  
Old 04-13-2013, 07:16 PM   #19
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Auburn ca
Posts: 4,269
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by andrewcriddle View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by aa5874 View Post

What are the Canonical sources that provide us with information about the historical Mary Magdalene?

The authors of the Gospels are falsely attributed, their stories are most likely non-historical and it is not known of any actual evidence that the stories of Mary Magdalene did occur if she did live.
It is possible that the canonical sources provide us with little or no information about the historical Mary Magdalene.

It is almost certain that the non-canonical sources provide us with little or no (additional) information about the historical Mary Magdalene.

Andrew Criddle
I think both of those are factual.

There is a absense of evidence on Mary Magdalene, historical and mythological.
outhouse is offline  
Old 04-13-2013, 08:08 PM   #20
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Hawaii
Posts: 9,233
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by andrewcriddle View Post
Although non-canonical accounts of Mary Magdalene are interesting for the study of early Christianity and its attitudes to women; it seems unlikely that they provide us with any information about the historical Mary Magdalene.

Andrew Criddle

For that matter, canoniical accounts are unlikely to "provide us with any information about the historical Mary Magdalene."
Jaybees is offline  
 

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -8. The time now is 05:01 PM.

Top

This custom BB emulates vBulletin® Version 3.8.2
Copyright ©2000 - 2015, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.