Re: Gospel of Judas
- From: dan <dnadan56@xxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Sun, 16 Apr 2006 20:15:16 -0700
pyotr filipivich wrote:
Okay, so I'm late and catching up, but "Jeff McCann" <NoSpam@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
wrote on Fri, 14 Apr 2006 12:40:34 -0500 in misc.survivalism :
And as relevant to the real Jesus as the Reverend Weems' story of
George Washington and the Cherry tree. Accurate but faked.
Yes. It's great when you can pick and choose which are Gospels and which
are just dirty old scrolls that you can say are full of lies.
It helps if you understand the difference between the Old and New
Testaments, and their relative importance for Christians.
And why the books in the Canon were kept and why the ones which
weren't, weren't. Being a good, pious and uplifting book was not enough.
There had to be a "paper trail", so to speak, authenticating the work as
being of the apostles, or those contemporary. Much as there are many
wonderful quotes floating around the net, attributed to all number of
person, yet there is no record of anything remotely similar being said in
contemporary accounts. E.g. if Stalin said "It doesn't matter who votes,
only who counts the votes." it is interesting that the attribution first
appears in 1996, in an essay in English. But if Stalin said it, in
Georgian or Russian, it wasn't recorded when he was alive, or by any of
those who knew him.
But it gets attributed to him imprint, so it must be true.
Same goes for the Julius Ceaser quote which was floating around after
the 2004 election.
the "evangelium of Judas" is similar. It isn't contemporary, and not
considered consistent with what was understood to be contemporary.
Or did you fall for the George "I cannot tell a lie" Washington Cherry
Tree fable?
Well, your opinions are noted, but do not correlate well with the history of Christianity, of the era, nor of how the Canon was selected.
What IS known is that:
*NONE of the books are history (see the differences between them).
*None of the books are contemporary, either with the life of Christ or with each other.
*None of them had any kind of paper trail pedigree.
*None of them were authenticated, either then or now, except insofar as they were decreed to be the select by the fledgling political body that became The Church (JC would be spinning in his grave, if...)
*It IS consistent with what was around in the era, in that part of the world, and shares that distinction with a number of codices that are either know from historians in the era or copies of which have been found and translated.
*It talks of things that are in the other gospels and verifies what many have known from reading them (e.g., that Jesus set up his own capture with Judas' help).
And those nuns thought I wasn't paying attention!
Dan
.
- References:
- Gospel of Judas
- From: Stuart Grey
- Re: Gospel of Judas
- From: Stuart Grey
- Re: Gospel of Judas
- From: pyotr filipivich
- Re: Gospel of Judas
- From: Stuart Grey
- Re: Gospel of Judas
- From: Jeff McCann
- Re: Gospel of Judas
- From: pyotr filipivich
- Gospel of Judas
- Prev by Date: Re: Gospel of Judas
- Next by Date: Re: Gospel of Judas
- Previous by thread: Re: Gospel of Judas
- Next by thread: Re: Gospel of Judas
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|