Home & Garden2 mins ago
The Truth Of The Bible.
574 Answers
Only the bible describes the state of the world as we head into the End Times.
Only the bible has verifiable prophecies that can be tested for truth.
Is it not time to take the bible seriously?
Only the bible has verifiable prophecies that can be tested for truth.
Is it not time to take the bible seriously?
Answers
the letter in the Times today said: Bible Studies Dear Sir, Keith Elliott writes about the debate over the exclusive authority of the New Testament (credo letters). Christians believe that canonical scripture was established under the guidance of the Holy Spirit. That some books entered the canon 'by the skin of their teeth' is immaterial....
18:23 Tue 20th Jul 2021
Theland, once again you demonstrate your inability or unwillingness to answer a question, you reply but do not give an answer. You just reaffirm your belief that the bible is correct and all the answers are there. You have been asked to explain how can the bible be right in every detail when there is so much contradiction in it. Your reply is the fault lies with us and we don't interpret it correctly. If two statements contradict, one of them must be false, yet according to you both are correct and yet never give an explanation how you arrive at that thought.
You say you like to debate but your idea of debating is to tell us what you believe and then ignore, become dismissive, sarcastic or rude to anybody who disagrees or asks for clarification. I could go on but what would be the point, you're only here to preach and you consider that everyone else, from atheists to the world religions, are wrong. As you believe implicitly in the bible, I refer you to Proverbs 12:15.
You say you like to debate but your idea of debating is to tell us what you believe and then ignore, become dismissive, sarcastic or rude to anybody who disagrees or asks for clarification. I could go on but what would be the point, you're only here to preach and you consider that everyone else, from atheists to the world religions, are wrong. As you believe implicitly in the bible, I refer you to Proverbs 12:15.
Naomi try to stop making these gormless one liners
we have read them all before many many times to do us any good
I woke up this morning with a foo-foo in ma hand - I didnt. I awoke with the NT in my hand and thought "do I wish to read another 500 -x "foo what dat dens?" on AB or .....I mean do YOU read AB and think o god the usual crap from the usual suspect? I do. or - "enough already!"
So I transcribed Elliotts Piece called Credo on the simple basis of a better use of my time which was int he Times a week or so ago and is currently Crouching behind a paywall. I have also done earlier Revd Angry's waspish response - alert ABers will notice reversed order. Most won't.
we have read them all before many many times to do us any good
I woke up this morning with a foo-foo in ma hand - I didnt. I awoke with the NT in my hand and thought "do I wish to read another 500 -x "foo what dat dens?" on AB or .....I mean do YOU read AB and think o god the usual crap from the usual suspect? I do. or - "enough already!"
So I transcribed Elliotts Piece called Credo on the simple basis of a better use of my time which was int he Times a week or so ago and is currently Crouching behind a paywall. I have also done earlier Revd Angry's waspish response - alert ABers will notice reversed order. Most won't.
Headline Credo New Testament writers did not set out to write authoritative texts
1. The debate about the exclusive authority of the NT never seems to flag.as the new religion developed in the first of the Christian centuries certain book were accepted by the various councils as canonical - which means that they were approved reading matter, whereas other writings were deemed to be unsuitable
2 Sometimes it was only by the skin of their reeth that Hebrews James and Reelation were included when other sich as 'epistle of Barnabas' and 'The Shepherd' by Hermas were branded as non-canonical and therefore excluded from the canon. Also some apostolic writings were lost completely. We know that Paul wrote more letters than those that chance to survive and thse epistles were unable to be included as genuine parts of the NT
3. Change as well as choice characterised the early Christian writings. A analyis of those books inlcuded in the NT shows that all writer used and adapted only some of the inofrnation that they had access to. The evangelists Luke and Matthew used Mark but did not regard his work as sacrosanct. The rder of the stories were changed. Throughout their own works these evangelists ded omitted rearranged and substantially altered all their predecessors had written. The later evangelists certianly did not St M as if it were inviolable and unchangeable scripture.
4. The Letter to Ephesus - not actually a letter written by St Paul himself ) similarly rewrote what Paul had previously written in his letter to the Colossians. The unknown author of the so called pastoral letters (the letters written to Timothy and Titus) follows in Pauls footsteps but the writer too has made significant changes to them
(Keith Elliott and then he goes on....)
1. The debate about the exclusive authority of the NT never seems to flag.as the new religion developed in the first of the Christian centuries certain book were accepted by the various councils as canonical - which means that they were approved reading matter, whereas other writings were deemed to be unsuitable
2 Sometimes it was only by the skin of their reeth that Hebrews James and Reelation were included when other sich as 'epistle of Barnabas' and 'The Shepherd' by Hermas were branded as non-canonical and therefore excluded from the canon. Also some apostolic writings were lost completely. We know that Paul wrote more letters than those that chance to survive and thse epistles were unable to be included as genuine parts of the NT
3. Change as well as choice characterised the early Christian writings. A analyis of those books inlcuded in the NT shows that all writer used and adapted only some of the inofrnation that they had access to. The evangelists Luke and Matthew used Mark but did not regard his work as sacrosanct. The rder of the stories were changed. Throughout their own works these evangelists ded omitted rearranged and substantially altered all their predecessors had written. The later evangelists certianly did not St M as if it were inviolable and unchangeable scripture.
4. The Letter to Ephesus - not actually a letter written by St Paul himself ) similarly rewrote what Paul had previously written in his letter to the Colossians. The unknown author of the so called pastoral letters (the letters written to Timothy and Titus) follows in Pauls footsteps but the writer too has made significant changes to them
(Keith Elliott and then he goes on....)
and it continues
5 Scholars of today now note that the three letters attributed to John in the NT are really adaptations of the theology in the Fourth Gospel ( also attributed to the self same "John"). Theologicans espically in Germany tend to describe the NT as a "canon within a canon" - all of it being a collection of sermons. The definition of 'sermons' refers here to influential addresses delivered to defined people. These sermons set out to examine the role of this new faith's founder.
6 Such a definition clearly has an appeal, it having been obvious for many decades how difficult it is to write one, single theology of the NT in its entirety. Each writer in that corpus is speaking within a tradition but is also freely interpreting it in his own context to meet the needs of his own community. That in itself explain why the NT contains contraction and equivocations.
7. Seen as a collection of sermons the NT can never have a sinlge theology nor can the individual part of it be accepted lock stock and barrel as consistently relevant or authoritative in its revealing truth. It means when we quote verses out of books of the bible out of context to provide definitive asnwers to problems of the christian faith or to prove what is or what is not Christian we sue ancient writings in ways never intended by their authors. The original writers were interpreters, commnetators or preachers who mmever wished to write canonical scriptures comparable to the 'Law' and prophets of the "Old" Testament. They were transmitting the early tradition of early Christians which had grown up over the generations.
8. What makes the NT of prime importance is not that it was an infallible depository of teachings but only that it represents the teachings of those closest to Jesus of Nazareth . This interpretaiton did not end iwth the writing of the last book of incorporated in the NT nor is it restricted to the 27 books that made it into that collection. The outsiders appear nowasays as the Apostolic fathers or are labelled aprocryphal writings. These florilegia like the anthology which is now called the Christian NT are very significant . The NT itself and those later texts are merely the first steps in a contintual intepretation of the faith . Treated in that way, a canon of Christian scripture becomes an issue of theology rather than history Keith Elliott - Prof emeritus of NT text criticism uni Leeds
5 Scholars of today now note that the three letters attributed to John in the NT are really adaptations of the theology in the Fourth Gospel ( also attributed to the self same "John"). Theologicans espically in Germany tend to describe the NT as a "canon within a canon" - all of it being a collection of sermons. The definition of 'sermons' refers here to influential addresses delivered to defined people. These sermons set out to examine the role of this new faith's founder.
6 Such a definition clearly has an appeal, it having been obvious for many decades how difficult it is to write one, single theology of the NT in its entirety. Each writer in that corpus is speaking within a tradition but is also freely interpreting it in his own context to meet the needs of his own community. That in itself explain why the NT contains contraction and equivocations.
7. Seen as a collection of sermons the NT can never have a sinlge theology nor can the individual part of it be accepted lock stock and barrel as consistently relevant or authoritative in its revealing truth. It means when we quote verses out of books of the bible out of context to provide definitive asnwers to problems of the christian faith or to prove what is or what is not Christian we sue ancient writings in ways never intended by their authors. The original writers were interpreters, commnetators or preachers who mmever wished to write canonical scriptures comparable to the 'Law' and prophets of the "Old" Testament. They were transmitting the early tradition of early Christians which had grown up over the generations.
8. What makes the NT of prime importance is not that it was an infallible depository of teachings but only that it represents the teachings of those closest to Jesus of Nazareth . This interpretaiton did not end iwth the writing of the last book of incorporated in the NT nor is it restricted to the 27 books that made it into that collection. The outsiders appear nowasays as the Apostolic fathers or are labelled aprocryphal writings. These florilegia like the anthology which is now called the Christian NT are very significant . The NT itself and those later texts are merely the first steps in a contintual intepretation of the faith . Treated in that way, a canon of Christian scripture becomes an issue of theology rather than history Keith Elliott - Prof emeritus of NT text criticism uni Leeds
Latest Posts
ChatterBank4 mins ago
Quizzes & Puzzles5 mins ago
Employers To Move Jobs Abroad...who'd...
News5 mins ago
Crosswords6 mins ago
ChatterBank13 mins ago
