| Author |
Message |
Bobj
Registered user
Username: Bobj
Post Number: 107
Registered: 1-2006
| | Posted on Tuesday, February 06, 2007 - 9:15 am: |     |
Olga,
The book "Lost Christianities" by Bart D Ehrman comments that the book of 3 Cor "is preserved in a number of ancient manuscripts of the New Testament and was eventually accepted as part of the canon by Armenian and some early Syrian Christians."
Since I've already quoted from this book in previous posts (above) I'm reluctant to continue out of respect for copyright laws. The book was published by Oxford University Press. I bought mine in a small bookstore, but I assume it would be available at your local Christian store or amazon.com I'm not a Bible scholar, just an interested reader like so many of us here.
Ehrman gives a very concise summary of about 42 of these lost gospels in the front of his book, along with the probable date and a brief summary of the content. The book of 3 Cor he lists as late 2nd century, supposedly (but not) written by Paul to the Corinthians to counter the claims of Gnostic teachers etc.
Well hey, we knew Paul really meant to write 3 Cor, (right?), but he's gone now, so we must do our duty and fix this problem with gnosticism before it gets any worse. While we're at it, let's do a little repair work on the doctrines of God, creation, and the flesh. I'm sure Paul would approve, given our situation and all.
So that's what's in 3 Cor.
Interestingly, he mentions Seventh-day Adventists and David Koresh on the first page of his introduction.
Bob |
River
Registered user
Username: River
Post Number: 493
Registered: 9-2006
| | Posted on Tuesday, February 06, 2007 - 9:39 am: | |
Colleen wrote:
We are different from men, and the Bible is also clear that there is a difference of role between men and women.
Thank God for that difference, Thank God for the girls.
One time I was riding a stud mule down the road and I passed a ranch with a stud horse on the other side of the fence, that old stallion started racing up and down the fence line, snorting, bucking and whinnying and showing out and I thought to myself ìThis is a stud mule you foolî.
Thank God for the girls. 
Tomorrow is my birthday and I am getting long in the tooth but I can still get to wanting to run up and down the fence line. Another
River
P.S. Tomorrow morning itís off to the beach with that girl who keeps me on the right side of the fence, Ifen I get to running the fence she ropes and hogties me pronto!!
|
Dane
Registered user
Username: Dane
Post Number: 134
Registered: 4-2004
| | Posted on Tuesday, February 06, 2007 - 4:52 pm: | |
A word of warning regarding Bart Ehrman. Although he is a New Testament Scholar (UNC-Chapel Hill) he is known for very liberal theological views. Apparently he now classifies himself as an agnostic. Also, he questions the historical resurrection of Jesus. IMO he is in the same category as those "scholars" of the Jesus Seminar and bases his ideas on Enlightenment rationalism that seeks to destroy the Bible. It is very dangerous to start picking and choosing what "we" think should or should not be in the Word. |
Bobj
Registered user
Username: Bobj
Post Number: 114
Registered: 1-2006
| | Posted on Tuesday, February 06, 2007 - 5:41 pm: | |
Dane
Thanks for the perspective on Ehrman. I wish I knew more about canon history. I would appreciate any good references on this topic.
I remember how depressing this topic seemed to me when I first began to hear lectures on it in Greek class and in other theology classes. It wasn't what I wanted to believe, but the alternative was even less appealing.
I recall how hungry I was for the gospel for most of my life. I don't say this to be negative, but I honestly wanted to know the truth, even if the process was a bit uncomfortable.
I wish this was easier.
Thanks for your kind advice.
Bob
|
River
Registered user
Username: River
Post Number: 494
Registered: 9-2006
| | Posted on Tuesday, February 06, 2007 - 6:30 pm: | |
The enlightenment came and we didnít need God, then WW1 came and we did, the we danced and partied until WW2 came and we needed him again, then we looked to ourselves until Korea, then Vietnam then 9/11 and everybody looks around and says ìWhereís God?î and the churches gain a few but then in a month or two they drift away.
Is there no resemblance at all to the Old Testament days of Israel?
|
Bobj
Registered user
Username: Bobj
Post Number: 115
Registered: 1-2006
| | Posted on Wednesday, February 07, 2007 - 6:30 am: | |
River
Good point. I recall reading that just before 1000 ad people were coming to the Lord in anticipation of His return that year, perhaps similar to what happened prior to Y2K, and similar to the experience of the Millerites in 1844. Hard to know for sure.
I read that people made significant life changes as a result of 9-11, and also have heard that soldiers in foxholes tend to leave athiesm behind.
I praise God anytime a person comes to Jesus, regardless of the means God used to draw him.
Your comment about Israel in the OT is right on. Thank God that He is patient with us.
Bob |
Mwh
Registered user
Username: Mwh
Post Number: 513
Registered: 4-2006
| | Posted on Wednesday, February 07, 2007 - 3:35 pm: | |
1 Cor 14
It seems that Paul is quoting a question from the Corinthians.
"Your women in the assemblies let them be silent, for it hath not been permitted to them to speak, but to be subject, as also the law saith; and if they wish to learn anything, at home their own husbands let them question, for it is a shame to women to speak in an assembly." 34, 35
And rebuking them:
"From you did the word of God come forth? or to you alone did it come? 36
There is no such law in the Word of God, v 34 prohibiting women from speaking in the assemblies. But there is a law like that in the Talmud, I believe it is some false teachers that would like to introduce that false teaching into the church.
Check out Women in Ministry - Silenced or Set Free, it has a great exegesis on the hard passages on the women issue. Its really hard core and I recommend it to anyone seriously studying the women issue.
In Jesus,
Martin |
Bobj
Registered user
Username: Bobj
Post Number: 117
Registered: 1-2006
| | Posted on Wednesday, February 07, 2007 - 4:32 pm: | |
Colleen and Aliza,
I apologize for this, but in re-reading my post #106, above, I must say that Gary Inrig shared 1 Cor 11:19--I clearly remember him doing it, but I may not be accurate in stating that it was in the context of the canon of scripture. I think it was, but am not absolutely sure, and am away from home so can't check to be sure.
I recall purchasing a couple of his sermon CDs, one entitled "Did the Canon Misfire." It was excellent--very encouraging for those who base their faith in Jesus on the words of scripture.
I hope I am not mis-quoting him or getting his message out of context, and if so, I sincerely apologize. He is a fine teacher and pastor.
Bob |
Colleentinker
Registered user
Username: Colleentinker
Post Number: 5389
Registered: 12-2003
| | Posted on Wednesday, February 07, 2007 - 5:19 pm: | |
BobóI tried to find the archives of that sermon series online, but they have been taken off the website along with a large number of other sermons that are "older". I've emailed and asked if they can still be made available.
I remember Gary talking about people having differing ideas and criticizing each other for them...but the context was not in connection with the canon. Gary said the canon was selected because the books included were verifiable. He specifically talked about the two or three in the NT that were not signed and less "provable", and he explained in detail how and why they were included.
Gary also said that there are more existing manuscripts of the canon than of any other ancient books. No one, he pointed out, questions Plato or Socrates, but there are more existing manuscripts by a LARGE number of the canon than of any of the other ancient writers.
The books not included were clearly unlike and taught different things than those included. The manuscripts approved by the apostles and used by the first century church are verifiable.
Some non-canonical books were also in use, but Gary explained how the consensus was achieved that validated the canon. I cannot remember the details, so I can't be completely clear. I'll let you know if I'm able to find links to those sermons.
Colleen |
Bobj
Registered user
Username: Bobj
Post Number: 119
Registered: 1-2006
| | Posted on Wednesday, February 07, 2007 - 7:36 pm: | |
Thank you, Colleen. I'll look to see if I still have the sermon CD when I get back. I think you are right in what you've said above. Good memory!
Bob
|
|
