Login

**robvalue** · August 3, 2018 at 11:10 am

Was it the council that decided by vote that Jesus was God, as well as the son of God? I seem to remember hearing that a lot. That doesn't seem like the sort of thing that is subject to human opinion.

Amarok · (This post was last modified: August 3, 2018 at 11:21 am by Amarok.)

Quote:It has always been my understanding that the process of official recognition (canonization) was affirming already held beliefs--not actually changing anything. Of course there were a few books on the bubble.

Nope

Carrier gets it right you got it wrong

**Minimalist** · August 3, 2018 at 12:18 pm

Which "canon?" There are so many.

Even the earliest "complete" bible we have is the Codex Vaticanus and it bears some significant differences from the catholick bible as we know it today. Since it was produced shortly after Nicaea it appears that they were still tinkering with it because apparently fucking jesus just couldn't make himself clear!

**Neo-Scholastic** · (This post was last modified: August 3, 2018 at 3:18 pm by Neo-Scholastic.)

The Coptic churches have retained Enoch. Revelation almost didn't make it. Only Catholics recognize Maccabees. As for the so-called "gnostic" gosepls, there isn't a lot of there there. They are short, heavily infused with Hellenistic ideas, and contain very few references to historical people or places. In the time of Ezra, the Song of Songs was almost left out. And even in Swedenborgian theology, the Pauline letters are considered instructive but not inspired. The main take-away for me is to not treat Holy Scripture like an idol, as far too many do; but rather, to reflect on it prayerfully so as to connect with what is inside and behind the text.

**The Grand Nudger** · (This post was last modified: August 3, 2018 at 2:02 pm by The Grand Nudger.)

(August 3, 2018 at 12:43 pm)Neo-Scholastic Wrote: Only Catholics recognize Maccabees.

Which is a shame..I like that one.

Quote:The main take-away for me is to not treat Holy Scripture like an idol, as far too many do; but rather, to reflect on it prayerfully so as to connect with what is inside and behind the text.

That's a great takeaway, IMO, though I don't have faith in the notion that reflecting prayerfully is an efficient tool for determining truth or facts.........or know what sort of truth or facts we might expect to find inside of stories that we don't -quite- believe in....beyond the completely mundane articles of literary artifact.

I think that far too many christians feel compelled to deny basic facts about the narrative, as though there were any need. Accepting them for what they are and trying to draw whatever wisdom (of any kind) is contained is an honest way to approach a magic book. It's open to christians, you manage it...wtf is wrong with the rest of yall? Wink

Angrboda · August 3, 2018 at 3:03 pm

(August 3, 2018 at 11:03 am)SteveII Wrote: It has always been my understanding that the process of official recognition (canonization) was affirming already held beliefs--not actually changing anything. Of course there were a few books on the bubble.

I'd be interested to know what information this understanding is based on.

SteveII · August 3, 2018 at 3:58 pm

(August 3, 2018 at 3:03 pm)Jörmungandr Wrote:
(August 3, 2018 at 11:03 am)SteveII Wrote: It has always been my understanding that the process of official recognition (canonization) was affirming already held beliefs--not actually changing anything. Of course there were a few books on the bubble.

I'd be interested to know what information this understanding is based on.

Many years of school/church/reading. I found the quote from the wiki article that support that.

Writings attributed to the Apostles circulated among the earliest Christian communities. The Pauline epistles were circulating, perhaps in collected forms, by the end of the 1st century AD.[a] Justin Martyr, in the mid 2nd century, mentions "memoirs of the apostles" as being read on "the day called that of the sun" (Sunday) alongside the "writings of the prophets."[5] A defined set of four gospels (the Tetramorph) was asserted by Irenaeus, c. 180, who refers to it directly.[6][7] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Developmen...ollections

Although, I thought about this recently. No one has to live by what those councils decided. We still have all the contested documents. We can do incredible things with word usage and sentence structures than ever before. It is easy to reapply some of the same doctrinal-consistency tests the councils would have done back then. The charge that "the winners" decided what was in the Bible is meaningless. You can re-check their work--with more precision. There is not one book that "should" have been included after reexamination. There are some epistles that might not be from Paul--so? Did any doctrine change? Any new teaching get introduced? No.

**robvalue** · August 3, 2018 at 4:02 pm

(August 3, 2018 at 11:10 am)robvalue Wrote: Was it the council that decided by vote that Jesus was God, as well as the son of God? I seem to remember hearing that a lot. That doesn't seem like the sort of thing that is subject to human opinion.

"Whoops, well... we've already said he's the son of God, how can he also be God? That makes him his own son, and his own father! No one's going to buy this crap!"

"On the contrary. They'll love it. The more convoluted and apparently impossible the religion sounds, the better."

**The Grand Nudger** · August 3, 2018 at 4:11 pm

It's even more true because it's even more amazing!

LastPoet · August 3, 2018 at 4:30 pm

So, its a canon that shoots christians as amno? I will buy one, plenty of amno around.

Login
Username:
Password:	Lost Password?
	Remember me