|
Register | Sign In |
|
QuickSearch
EvC Forum active members: 45 (9208 total) |
| |
anil dahar | |
Total: 919,519 Year: 6,776/9,624 Month: 116/238 Week: 33/83 Day: 3/6 Hour: 0/0 |
Thread ▼ Details |
Member (Idle past 1604 days) Posts: 9069 From: god's waiting room Joined: |
|
Thread Info
|
|
|
Author | Topic: apocryphal stories and mainstream theology | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||
arachnophilia Member (Idle past 1604 days) Posts: 9069 From: god's waiting room Joined: |
suggested in post 46 of the thread "How accurate is the bible?" in The Biblical Accuracy and Innerancy Forum
i caugh a special on the history channel the other night about non-canonical extra-biblical literature, including the apocrypha, pseudepigrapha, nag hammadi codices, gnostic texts, etc. this thread is for discussion of these apocryphal texts, and how they relate to mainstream beliefs when they were written, and today. the primary question is: how many stories are being told in churches even today that stem from sources other than the canon? several in particular come to mind. the first is the fall of satan/the devil, and the war for heaven from "the life of adam and eve." this story is heretical, or at least was in its time, because to support the notion that god could be challenged was blasphemous. this story seemed to get picked up again in the 1600's with paradise lost (how milton got it, i'll never know...), and the 1800's with smith's pearl of great price. and it remains mainstream theology, although it was originally heresy and nowhere in the bible. another important one is the origin of cain's wife: his sister. either "the life of adam and eve" or "jubilees" records that adam and eve had a bunch of other kids, and one of them married cain. this view is still touted by fundamentalist christians today (see this thread). however, this story is obviously heretical, because of strict laws against incest. "the book of enoch" records and expands on the life of enoch (breifly mentioned in genesis) and the events leading up to the flood. flooders, pay attention to this part, because at least part of this is still in the bible. the sons of god (angels- ben 'eloyhim) lust after the daughters of men, and come down and get them pregnant. they give birth to giants (nephilim) who run amok and cause general havok. azazel (see leviticus 16. the "scapegoat" is a mangled translation of azazel) comes down and teaches men to make weapons and wage war. god floods the planet to fix the giant problem, and casts about 200 angels into a pit until the end of the world (the beast, from revelation?). azazel appears to be the devil figure in this book, and indirectly causes all of the earth to be destroyed, twice. it's lack of inclusion appears to hinge on the fact that it was unacceptable in its time to say that angels were out of god's control. (yet azazel's name, which means "to cast away" remains in the canon) one new testament apocryphal text they talked about on the show had the story of christ descending into "hell" where the righteous dead slept awaiting salvation. it depicts christ rescuing moses, abraham, and various other jewish prophets. i think this was in "the gospel of nicodemus" they discussed many other texts too, like the nag hammadi library, the dead sea scrolls, gnostic texts (including the gospels of mary magdalene and thomas), etc. but what really interested me were stories that seemed to make it anyways, and yet can only be found hinted at in the bible. this thread is really only for people who are willing to discuss the literature of the bible, it's history (including editting, inclusions/exclusions, translation, copying, distribution, and origins), and it's place in theology. the folk who think the bible is the inerrant, inspired, and infallible word of god should kindly sit back and learn a few things. as posted in the other thread, here's a good source for various extra-biblical goodness: The Wesley Center Online: 404 Page Not Found
moved by the Queen This message has been edited by Arachnophilia, 07-12-2004 11:25 AM
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
jar Member (Idle past 100 days) Posts: 34140 From: Texas!! Joined: |
One of the things that is interesting regarding the Life of Adam and Eve is that it implies that mankind was actually something above even the angels. It shows the angels being told to bow down and worship mankind. It also seems to say that the reason that the devil was tossed from the heavenly kingdom was simply because certain angels would not worship mankind.
But there are also many inconsistencies between the various translations. In addition, it adds so many other things that are not mentioned in Genesis that it would have been difficult, if not impossible, to blend it in with the Gensis stories. There were already conflicts and problems with Genesis and adding in the Life of Adam and Eve would have complicated matters even more. As is, no one has ever been able to resolve the differences even in the two Creation stories found in Genesis 1 and Genesis 2. Aslan is not a Tame Lion
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
arachnophilia Member (Idle past 1604 days) Posts: 9069 From: god's waiting room Joined: |
It shows the angels being told to bow down and worship mankind. this is probably another reason it's considered heretical. doesn't sound like kosher hebrew lit to me. jealous is often the emotion attributed to satan thatcauses the fall. i've heard it as jealousy of god, and of man. either way, there's no evidence of this in the bible at all, satan is always depicted as serving god and greater good. it's been suggested that satan makes appearances in the pentateuch as both the serpent in eden and azazel in leviticus, but i seriously doubt the veracity of this. gen 6 does talk about fallen angels and their offspring, and hints at the enoch story, but doesn't say anything about any wars in heaven or any angels being punished for their actions. genesis instead opts for the view that god was punishing men for their actions and wickedness, not fixing the angels-and-giants problem. this rectifies the view of an omnipotent god with the story of the flood. (god is traditionally viewed as limited in omnipotence, as he did after all give man free will)
As is, no one has ever been able to resolve the differences even in the two Creation stories found in Genesis 1 and Genesis 2. do they especially need reconciling? maybe if we're claiming the story is true and the bible without error. but in most biblical scholars' views, they're just two slightly different accounts of creation from two different sources. genesis 3 is where the real interesting part comes in.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
arachnophilia Member (Idle past 1604 days) Posts: 9069 From: god's waiting room Joined: |
alright, i'm interested to hear some fundamental christian takes on this. i know we have a few here.
what are your opinions on these books? which apocryphal stories to do you believe? which books, if any, do you think divinely inspired?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
almeyda Inactive Member |
The Apocrypha books were not added to scripture because of several reasons
1. They contain historical and geographical inaccuracies and anachronisms 2. They teach doctrines which are false and foster practices which are at variance with inspired scripture 3. They resort to literary types and display an artificiality of subject matter and styling out of keeping with inspired scripture 4. They lack the distinctive elements which give prophetic power, poetic and religious feeling Of course this does not mean the books are useless. Many of them have noble sentiments and writings but they were simply not from God. 5. No canon or council of the Christian church for the first 4 centuries recognized the Apocrypha as inspired 6. Many of the great Fathers of the early church spoke out against the Apocrypha 7. The Jewish scholars of Jamnia did not recognize the Apocrypha 8. Luther and the Reformers rejected the canonicity of the Apocrypha 9. Since this time, there has been no serious questioning of the 27 accepted books of the New Testament
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
arachnophilia Member (Idle past 1604 days) Posts: 9069 From: god's waiting room Joined: |
1. They contain historical and geographical inaccuracies and anachronisms so do genesis and exodus
2. They teach doctrines which are false and foster practices which are at variance with inspired scripture so does galations
3. They resort to literary types and display an artificiality of subject matter and styling out of keeping with inspired scripture so does revelation
4. They lack the distinctive elements which give prophetic power, poetic and religious feeling so does chronicles
5. No canon or council of the Christian church for the first 4 centuries recognized the Apocrypha as inspired 6. Many of the great Fathers of the early church spoke out against the Apocrypha 7. The Jewish scholars of Jamnia did not recognize the Apocrypha 8. Luther and the Reformers rejected the canonicity of the Apocrypha that's a tautology. the apocrypha was defined by which scriptures they didn't feel were inspired.
9. Since this time, there has been no serious questioning of the 27 accepted books of the New Testament actually, that's just plain wrong. the four gospels are inconsistent in some ways, and too consistent in others. it's generally accepted as literary fact that three of them were plaigarized from another source. the dead sea scrolls and nag hammadi library brought a number of questions as well. and anyways. the ORIGINAL question was which stories from apocrypha have been made so traditional that even though most people have not read the text, the story remains alive. for instance, the story of the serpent biting seth. or the war in the heavens, with the fall of the angels. the latter in particular is accepted today as mainstream theology, yet appears nowhere in the bible. it is however in the pseudopigraphica.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
jar Member (Idle past 100 days) Posts: 34140 From: Texas!! Joined: |
Actually almeyda, the Apocrypha did not even exist until near the end of the 4th Century. The books now called the apocrypha were simply part of the accepted canon of many of the churches. In fact, some books of the apocypha are still part of the canon, for example, look at the canon of the Ethiopian Cristian Church.
One book that was included, the Gospel of John, was also considered heritical by many of the churches. Aslan is not a Tame Lion
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Cold Foreign Object  Suspended Member (Idle past 3308 days) Posts: 3417 Joined: |
the folk who think the bible is the inerrant, inspired, and infallible word of god should kindly sit back and learn a few things Judging by your illiterate punctuation skills contained in the OP maybe you should graduate from high school before asserting expertise in Bible. Do you even know what the canon is ? You are the typical evo who thinks whatever knowledge they possess in science instantly qualifies them as Bible proficient.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Cold Foreign Object  Suspended Member (Idle past 3308 days) Posts: 3417 Joined: |
The Apocrypha books were not added to scripture because of several reasons Only two reasons: 1) the Puritans. 2) British and American Bible Societies. These entities are responsible for removing canonized scripture arbitrarily. The KJV contained the Aprocrypha. Puritans removed it. Why should the "scholarly" Puritans be allowed to edit the canon ?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
jar Member (Idle past 100 days) Posts: 34140 From: Texas!! Joined: |
Nonsense WILLOWTREE.
First, many of the Apocryphal books are still apart of the canon of some churches. Second, by the fourth century, not long after the first gospels (which we don't have) showed up, many of the books included in the apocrypha were being challenged. It had nothing to do with Puritans or British and American Bible Societies. Where do you get some of these ideas? Aslan is not a Tame Lion
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Cold Foreign Object  Suspended Member (Idle past 3308 days) Posts: 3417 Joined: |
Did the KJV contain the Apocrypha or not ?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
jar Member (Idle past 100 days) Posts: 34140 From: Texas!! Joined: |
It still does. But not all of the Apocrypha.
You can buy one here Where do you get some of your info? Even Gene Scott can't be that out of touch. Aslan is not a Tame Lion
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
almeyda Inactive Member |
quote: Ur has been located. And had one of the most advanced cultures in all the ancient world. (Genesis 11:28) Haran has been located. Excavations have also been done here showing early culture of the Summerian city and its later Assyrian influence. (Genesis 11:31) Egypt. (Genesis 12:10) Sodom. Excavations revealed an enormous cemetery with over 20,000 tombs. Historical references to Sodom have been cited among clay tablets from Ebla found at Tell Mardikh in Syria. (Genesis 13:10) Salem. Ancient evidence for the name of this city can be found in the Ebla tablets, Egyptian Execration texts and the Amarna Letters. (Genesis 14:18) Bethel. Excavations revealed a Canaanite settlement dating from 2000B.C.(Genesis 28:19)
quote: I dont understand?
quote: Its quite obvious by the name that this book had nothing to do with how to live life according to Gods teachings or anything like that. It does however trace the history of Israel from the beginning of the humanrace until the fall of Jerusalem and the subsequent return of the Jews during the reign of the Persian king (Cyrus).
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
arachnophilia Member (Idle past 1604 days) Posts: 9069 From: god's waiting room Joined: |
Sodom. Excavations revealed an enormous cemetery with over 20,000 tombs. Historical references to Sodom have been cited among clay tablets from Ebla found at Tell Mardikh in Syria. (Genesis 13:10) keep reading. "sodom" and "gamorah" were destroyed in a war. really want me to look up the other ones, or shall we just settle the debate with "you can't even show the hebrews had dealings with the egyptians let alone lived there?" i seem recal some other interesting anachronisms about exodus.
quote: I dont understand? paul says in galations that following the letter of the law, and keeping the covenent of the lord (circumcision) is not neccessary. this is clearly contrary to established doctrine.
Its quite obvious by the name that this book had nothing to do with how to live life according to Gods teachings or anything like that. i'm glad you can recognize that specific books have specific purposes. i'd hardly say that it contains any "distinctive elements which give prophetic power, poetic and religious feeling." and a good number of apocryphal books do contain such elements. the book enoch is quite a powerful text, for instance. so are the books of maccabbees.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
arachnophilia Member (Idle past 1604 days) Posts: 9069 From: god's waiting room Joined: |
Actually almeyda, the Apocrypha did not even exist until near the end of the 4th Century. The books now called the apocrypha were simply part of the accepted canon of many of the churches. In fact, some books of the apocypha are still part of the canon, for example, look at the canon of the Ethiopian Cristian Church. point of semmantics really. the canon didn't exist until then either. it was an attempt to unify the churches, and decide what was accepted belief and what was not. everything in the apocrypha, pseudepigraphica, gnostic libraries, etc, were ALL accepted by some church, somewhere, as inspired. the ethiopian church reads which book? jubilees? i recall it explaining the ethiopian lineage, and why they currently have the ark of the covenant.
One book that was included, the Gospel of John, was also considered heritical by many of the churches. i haven't been to one, but i believe it. i personally think the gospel of john is heretical.
|
|
|
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024