tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-52912413020249030.post1870470717748809756..comments2024-03-12T11:58:24.510+13:00Comments on Otagosh: Canon article updatedGavin Rhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17965552923012880262noreply@blogger.comBlogger5125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-52912413020249030.post-52655102391211205592012-02-21T13:56:07.213+13:002012-02-21T13:56:07.213+13:00Brant: thanks for the comments. Yes, I avoided usi...Brant: thanks for the comments. Yes, I avoided using the word 'council' in the same breath as Jamnia for the reasons you explained. My understanding is that Jamnia was indeed the beginning of a process.Gavin Rhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17965552923012880262noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-52912413020249030.post-12425176442763081932012-02-21T13:17:43.457+13:002012-02-21T13:17:43.457+13:00Too bad that for 200,000 years or more that mankin...Too bad that for 200,000 years or more that mankind didn't have a Bible to read. Oh, wait, they probably couldn't read...<br /><br />But, when writing was finally invented and since there were already existing priesthoods, it just stands to reason that these priests would write down a bunch of stuff.<br /><br />Later, this "stuff" gets picked through and edited and corrected and otherwise changed to fit the "orthodoxy" of the time. <br /><br />Neo says it takes a "teacher to make sense of it". Well, of course it does, and there are thousands, if not millions, of those "teachers" around too.Corkyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15894537940881776504noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-52912413020249030.post-18750922982998192542012-02-21T12:26:57.250+13:002012-02-21T12:26:57.250+13:00Neo,
I have to agree with you that the Bible is n...Neo,<br /><br />I have to agree with you that the Bible is not infallible. However, all christian faiths rely upon it. If parts are literally true and other parts are not, the question becomes "where do you draw the line". You say we need a teacher, but where does the teacher get his information? <br /><br />I believe it is very easy to show that the Bible is not infallible. However, once you accept that, the christian religion becomes a "slippery slope". How much do you keep and how much is fiction? How does anyone know?The Skeptichttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02327459017793489626noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-52912413020249030.post-71872573584435692292012-02-21T09:54:36.519+13:002012-02-21T09:54:36.519+13:00Gavin:
I agree, as I so often do, with John Petty...Gavin:<br /><br />I agree, as I so often do, with John Petty's assessment. Tis is, indeed a fine piece. I do have a quibble with it, however. It is my understanding that the Council of Jamnia was a supposition that has now been abandined by most biblical scholars as it probably never happened. Rather, the canon of the Jewish Bible, like that of the New Testament, was formed by a more fluid process. I do think that Judaism abandoned the use of the Septuagint (with its additional writings) in favor of the Hebrew canon at least partly as a reaction to Christian use of the LXX.<br /><br />BrantBrant Clementshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16593149504013469895noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-52912413020249030.post-43789209702020368032012-02-21T06:07:52.559+13:002012-02-21T06:07:52.559+13:00"The canon of the Bible, then, did not drop o..."The canon of the Bible, then, did not drop out of the heavens one day, fully formed and divided tidily into proof texts."<br /><br />Excellent point. Literalists Christians and almost all atheists are persuaded that the Bible should have been perfect from day one or it has no validity. They also believe that it should be an engineering specification something like the handbook that goes along with your DVD player. It should contain repeatable scientific principle. The literalist Christians are surprised at the checkered history of the Bible and the atheists use this checkered history to put another strut under their body of assertions. <br /><br />I differ sharply with most Christians in that I believe the the Bible was never intended to be a carefully engineered document with an incontrovertible pedigree. There is the eternal word of God and then there is the Bible. The Bible is a human artifact subject to manipulation by humans as you have carefully demonstrated. The fact that the truth of the Word of God was thrust into the corrupt human realm, so to speak an incarnational document, captured by human instruments,bearing a human imprint, an evolving document, is a part of the penalty visited on man because of man's insistence that God be disengaged from human life. <br /><br />The Bible as man would define it has become elusive due to human intervention. The Bible as God would define it would be bounded and definitive. But even in the latter case, it consists of a collection of readings that cover a diversity of topics. This is not a chemistry or physics test. It requires a Teacher to make sense of it. Absent the Teacher, the classroom goes wild and we all sit around flipping boogers at eachother. <br /><br />-- NeoAnonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08487906691943831671noreply@blogger.com