Freethought & Rationalism Archive

MrMacSon · 08-23-2012, 05:19 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Duvduv

However, there is evidence of any 2nd century individual :constern01: that he could edit an entire body of texts, ascribe sacred status to it alongside the Old Testament, and that clergy and followers all over started obeying him.

If one argues that Irenaeus and Tertullian were in the 2nd century, they certainly do not acknowledge some mysterious authority in that period in the slightest way who was followed as a matter of course (inasmuch as the texts suggest that "Irenaeus" and "Tertullian" took for granted the existence, acceptance and primacy of the four gospels).

The only overriding authorities would be at the service of the emperor, i.e. in the 4th century.

You mean "However, there is not evidence of any 2nd century in a Christian environment carrying so much weight ...??

Duvduv · 08-23-2012, 05:54 PM

Yes, you are correct. It should read "......there is NO evidence......"

MrMacSon · 08-23-2012, 06:47 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Duvduv

Yes, you are correct. It should read "......there is NO evidence......"

You can probably edit it ...

Duvduv · 08-23-2012, 07:00 PM

I think you're only able ro edit your most recent postings

Quote:

Originally Posted by MrMacSon

Quote:

Originally Posted by Duvduv

Yes, you are correct. It should read "......there is NO evidence......"

You can probably edit it ...

aa5874 · 08-24-2012, 01:27 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by outhouse

Quote:

Originally Posted by Horatio Parker

Quote:

Originally Posted by Duvduv

However, there is evidence of any 2nd century individual in a Christian environment carrying so much weight that he could edit an entire body of texts, ascribe sacred status to it alongside the Old Testament, and that clergy and followers all over started obeying him.

Perhaps that is the perception desired and generated by later authorities ie that a high degree of central control existed when it did not.

Maybe the early canon was less authoritative than it now appears. But the difference would be that the competing versions are no longer available.

ding ding ding

we have a winner.

and thats how it should be viewed

"Perhaps" and "Maybe" does NOT make one a WINNER.

"Maybe" signifies LACK of knowledge, Lack of Evidence or Guesswork.

What is 2+2??

Perhaps..... Maybe its 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7.......

MrMacSon · 08-24-2012, 02:58 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Duvduv

I think you're only able ro edit your most recent postings

So I see - I can't edit that post from 8 hrs ago.

Duvduv · 08-24-2012, 09:29 AM

In any event, I still feel the same way, that there is NO evidence of any individual empowered in the 2nd century by himself or others to compose a set of sacred texts with a biblical style. Even the so-called memoirs of the apostles seem to have that importance according to "Justin," and there is no evidence as to WHO would have authorized readings of such "memoirs" alongside the books of the prophets.

Indeed, the very use of the term "prophets" in Justin is rather strange. Because presumably since the Tanakh includes the Torah in addition to the prophets the writer would just refer to Scriptures which would include the entire Scriptures unless he wasn't actually familiar with them (despite copious references to to verses in the whole Tanakh in the writings of "Justin).

outhouse · 08-24-2012, 09:50 AM

Quote:

that there is NO evidence of any individual empowered in the 2nd century by himself or others to compose a set of sacred texts with a biblical style.

the word empowered is misused completely, it doesnt belong.

private scribes without any prophet what so ever wrote the gospels.

there were no early churches, the worshipped judaism in houses, but they were not jews.

a single house with a small attendance probably wrote what they felt was important.

NO governemnt, NO authority, NO power. just some shmucks recording oral tradaition in the first century.

people did write in the second century, but their works didnt make the cut

Duvduv · 08-24-2012, 10:11 AM

This is very, verey hard to believe. If everything was freelance or open season, then there would be much more evidence of something like a full story called the Gospel according to Charles or the Gospel According to William. The fact is that the rendering sacred of the 4 gospels to resemble the Tanakh could only occur when scribes were instructed to create documents to be accepted as bible-like, sacred writ. This could have only happened through regime-sponsored directives that only started to exist in the 4th century.....

Toto · 08-24-2012, 10:20 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Duvduv

This is very, verey hard to believe. If everything was freelance or open season, then there would be much more evidence of something like a full story called the Gospel according to Charles or the Gospel According to William. ....

Are you familiar with the variety of gospels available in the second and third centuries, not mention the variety of Acts?

New_Testament_apocrypha

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

08-23-2012, 05:54 PM	#42
Duvduv Veteran Member Join Date: Nov 2011 Location: USA Posts: 4,095	Yes, you are correct. It should read "......there is NO evidence......"

08-24-2012, 09:29 AM	#47
Duvduv Veteran Member Join Date: Nov 2011 Location: USA Posts: 4,095	In any event, I still feel the same way, that there is NO evidence of any individual empowered in the 2nd century by himself or others to compose a set of sacred texts with a biblical style. Even the so-called memoirs of the apostles seem to have that importance according to "Justin," and there is no evidence as to WHO would have authorized readings of such "memoirs" alongside the books of the prophets. Indeed, the very use of the term "prophets" in Justin is rather strange. Because presumably since the Tanakh includes the Torah in addition to the prophets the writer would just refer to Scriptures which would include the entire Scriptures unless he wasn't actually familiar with them (despite copious references to to verses in the whole Tanakh in the writings of "Justin).

08-24-2012, 10:11 AM	#49
Duvduv Veteran Member Join Date: Nov 2011 Location: USA Posts: 4,095	This is very, verey hard to believe. If everything was freelance or open season, then there would be much more evidence of something like a full story called the Gospel according to Charles or the Gospel According to William. The fact is that the rendering sacred of the 4 gospels to resemble the Tanakh could only occur when scribes were instructed to create documents to be accepted as bible-like, sacred writ. This could have only happened through regime-sponsored directives that only started to exist in the 4th century.....

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.