Duvduv

Personally I get bored of all the disputes of the greatness of this or another academic who either preserve or discount the content and context of the NT texts while leaving to sacred ground (except for some slight criticism) the writings of the ancient heresiologists and church spokesmen.

It's so funny or sad. Discard this gospel or that gospel; this epistle or that epistle is authentic or fake; this or that is the true meaning of the teachings; this or that NT text came before or after another one.

But to dig into the writings of the hallowed church propagandists as defined by the Church tradition itself??? Instead we see, "Eusebius says this.....Tertullian said that.......we find in Justin Martyr or Origen........even Epiphanius agreed........but Athanasius showed that..........

Give me a break.........

Juststeve

Personally I find your post about what you find boring a little boring. Others however may be fascinated.

Steve

Duvduv

Steve, since I didn't post a very detailed or long posting, maybe you could zero in on exactly what you found boring about it, and we can discuss it further.

GakuseiDon

Duvduv, how can you not be but fascinated by early writings? These were people looking out at a universe where their world was the centre of that universe, and many felt that they could look up and see their gods. We see the first attempts to systematically try to explain that universe. How can this be boring?

You sound like a kid being shown photos of his great-grandparents and declaring it is all boring and how can anyone be interested in such old photos? Fair enough from the kid's perspective; but it doesn't mean it is boring for everyone else.

Have a read of my website page "In their own words", and tell me you don't find early writings fascinating: http://members.optusnet.com.au/gakus...own_words.html (it's been a few years since I worked on it, and the font-size got screwed up at some stage unfortunately)

outhouse

They dont dig at them because they are to far removed from the real person in question.


They are only talking about the movement in their time based soley on the epistles and gospels with different degrees of understanding

Duvduv

Outhouse, I don't see how this explains why academics refuse to subject ancient heresiologists to the same and more scrutiny to which they subject the NT texts.