|
Post by rdywenur on Apr 6, 2006 17:39:18 GMT -7
|
|
|
Post by bescheid on Apr 7, 2006 11:54:46 GMT -7
I had seen some thing about this on television news just yesterday. Who knows for sure. Most likely, there are books as yet to be discovered, or were covered up by the ancients for what ever particular reason for that time. www.middle-east-online.com/english/culture/?id=13097I believe that what books were gathered into a central reading for the Bible that we know today, is true. We are on comcast here, and they do not put out a television guide. The ones I have bought in the store, do not correspond with the actual programming. Off the internet, we do have the AMC weekly programming that is on the money accurate. Our basic cable bill is $43 dollars monthly. Digital is only available on three channels, the TV I purchased at Circuit city will not handle digital, it would have increased the cost, and I just did not believe it was worth the extra cost at the time. Charles
|
|
george
Cosmopolitan
Posts: 568
|
Post by george on Apr 7, 2006 14:21:05 GMT -7
This Gospel of Judas is true. Its been proven to be authentic already. Written at about 300 AD. The Gospels were used to hearing in church were written 60 AD to 100 AD. Wheather you believe it or not i suppose can be said about the new testament Gospels also. If this Gospel of Judas shows us one thing is that even during that time there were differing opinions of Christs life. I am however confident that we will continue to find various readings from the early centuries that will shake up Christianity a little. Were finding more and more what life was like back then and the mystery is slowly being uncovered. I once new a very wise nun who told me that the Gospels should not be used as a historical document but rather like a painting that gives you an idea of what the message was. These stories were handed down over a long period of time. They were not written by witnessness to the events.
|
|
|
Post by kaima on Apr 7, 2006 18:15:10 GMT -7
It is worth remembering that writing the gospels back then, 30 to 60 years after the fact, would be like us writing the history of WW II and Vietnam today, 30 to 60 years after the fact and with virtually no written records to refresh our memories.
To write a "gospel" 300 years after the fact would be comparable to us today writing a history of the American Revolution or the Partitions of Poland, again with little written record to base our own writing upon.
Now some people insist the bible and gospels are inspired word, but I would argue that a lot of imagination goes along with the inspiration!
Kai
|
|
|
Post by Jaga on Apr 7, 2006 21:14:21 GMT -7
The gospel of Judas is a true material but who knows how true the content is. I read through it today and it is interesting. It is definitively more convincing that some of the other gnostic stories. www.tertullian.org/rpearse/manuscripts/gospel_of_judas/I wish I lived in that time among the first Christians, we might know about the life of Jesus much more then than now but they did not have the internet we have today
|
|
|
Post by bescheid on Apr 8, 2006 11:50:06 GMT -7
Well, as an exposed opinion. I would suggest nothing be taken in blind faith. It would be as purchasing tickets to an idiots convention.
A person should remember though, the original writing of the Bible was in Hebrew(old testament) then into Aramaic, then into Greek translations, I believe this was under the requirement of Alexander the Great.
Within all of this complexity, it is a wonder that we now have what we have of the Bible. Then we have the twickings of various scholars trying to standardize from so many translations, there lays another wonder of what we have.
And then there is: King James (thank you Leslie of the UK) and sourced out from the Catholic, Luther (German) and then once again, the translations of the Greeks and of that of the Hebrews once again.
As a Bible scholar, diffidently not my self, this for sure...
It is just in the past, I used the Bible for references and maps with my past University studies of the Middle East. Every where from the four hundred years of silence with the Hyksos, King Sargon 2nd, Assyria and Darius 3rd (King of Persia). The Bible was the best and most accurate resource for forming a basis for some of my papers.
For within the contents, were exact formulas of living, hygienic, and food resources for desert survival. The lay of the land (which has not much changed) successful combat strategies. The water resources of each city state, has not change in location. Locate the city site, then the water resources are close by. Usually accessed by a tunnel system for times of war.
Our present legal system, is almost exactly based upon the system invented by King Hammurabi (The law of Hammurabi, legal documents must be witnessed, signed and sealed).
From this area (fertile crescent)(Iraq) arose the man, Abraham, father of the patriarchs.
But, it is all a matter of prospective. What you choose to believe is a personal matter.
Charles
|
|
|
Post by Jaga on Apr 8, 2006 16:12:35 GMT -7
As a Bible scholar, diffidently not my self, this for sure... It is just in the past, I used the Bible for references and maps with my past University studies of the Middle East. Every where from the four hundred years of silence with the Hyksos, King Sargon 2nd, Assyria and Darius 3rd (King of Persia). The Bible was the best and most accurate resource for forming a basis for some of my papers. For within the contents, were exact formulas of living, hygienic, and food resources for desert survival. The lay of the land (which has not much changed) successful combat strategies. The water resources of each city state, has not change in location. Locate the city site, then the water resources are close by. Usually accessed by a tunnel system for times of war. Our present legal system, is almost exactly based upon the system invented by King Hammurabi (The law of Hammurabi, legal documents must be witnessed, signed and sealed). From this area (fertile crescent)(Iraq) arose the man, Abraham, father of the patriarchs. But, it is all a matter of prospective. What you choose to believe is a personal matter. Charles Charles, the information about Babylon, Persia etc were probably from the old Testament. Do we call the old testament also a bible? Or only new testament is a bible? By the way, from what I understand the Egyptian period of Jews, plaques and their retreat from Egypt until now have not been proved by any evidence
|
|
|
Post by bescheid on Apr 8, 2006 17:26:52 GMT -7
{By the way, from what I understand the Egyptian period of Jews, plaques and their retreat from Egypt until now have not been proved by any evidence }
Jaga
Both the old and new, are the bible. Only that some would for reasons of a particular notion, use wither only the old or for that matter, the new for their brand of teaching. But, non the less, fact remains, both old and new are the bible. A person of understanding, must read both, then they will be knowledgeable and understand.
One of my instructors (she hated my insides) Named: Miss (And she meant absolutly, Miss)O berhouser (And I shall never forget her name) was a graduate from the University of Cairo. She was an expert on Egypt. from past to present. She was retired from the State Department (USA) and was involved in the formation of the new government of the immediate post war Germany. She was not a person to take lightly.
Under her teaching as to the leaving of the Israelites from the then,"Raamses 2. There were recorded by the Egyptian scribes (under Raamses 2) the passage of Israelite tribes people past the out post of the Egyptian border, these are the,"Miktol", (translation of ) meaning tower. There is recorded also of the Egyptian chariots in pursuit through the Reed See, not Red Sea (Ried-Meer)(Rotes-Meer) The Reed sea if this is true, is further north in to a vastly marsh area. I think, the Hebrew name for this would be," Yam Suph," (translation of).
Most of the evidence of historical interest, would be destroyed by the construction of the Suez-Canal.
Again, it is to the believer as to what to believe, my studies were the land with the people. But, personally, I will believe what is recorded in the bible. Mans interpretation is fairly much tainted by education/beliefs of religious means or non-religious means. It is the land that changes but little. It will still be there when man is not.
Charles
|
|
|
Post by Jaga on Apr 10, 2006 9:41:15 GMT -7
Charles,
thanks for trying to dig up through the history. Did you have a chance to watch the movie in National Geographic Channel? I really wanted to see it and.... we upgrated pur satelite dish yesterday so that we could watch it. It was an interesting film, it was talking about how the manuscript was found, how it was robbed, found again and then given to scholars to see its value and then... hidden away for many years because nobody was giving 3 mln dollars for it.
The so called gospel of Judah is not really like the four major gospel. It is a bit different so I understand why it was not seen as one of the core gospels. Still, worth to see. Give a bit different perspective.
|
|
|
Post by bescheid on Apr 10, 2006 12:32:53 GMT -7
Jaga
You have asked if I had watched the movie on National geographic. Well no. I am sorry. Very seldom do I watch the television except for the morning news. Anne has her programmes to watch, I do my morning briefing (just a creature of habit) (actually, I do miss those previoulsy hated morning briefings) and as such, do not watch so much of televison.
My only input was that of my early training such as what I have remembered and some notes hidden in books that have survived time and place.
When my training was currant, the Middle East and camel riders, was very low on the list of,"must know". A diffenant waste of time, resources, and butt time in University class room instruction. I was assigned to be there, my tuition was prepayed (at tax payer expense), my temperment was very negative, and my presence in those studies was forced by threat. I hated every thing that moved, my self, and most of all, my stupidety of signing on with the (well, I have to stop at that). In other words, I was not a happy camper.
The only grace with all of the above is: The insight of the Bible and understanding of the reasoning that prevailed in those times. Was this Gods way of dealing with a very stubburn, irritating, little barbaric man? How ever, for what ever, it worked. I did learn, and only attempting to pass on to others what little I know, how ever so little.
Charles
|
|
|
Post by oldpolish on Jul 20, 2007 18:25:41 GMT -7
In Poland we are not surprised of non canonical books. I think about people who don't study popular magazines as a main source of knowledge. Wincenty Myszor, a catholic priest in cooperation with Albertyna Dembska from University of Warsaw translates gnostic gospel and other apocrypha from Coptic and publishes it. Gospel of Judas was publicated in Polish transaltion by him in 2006. I also had occasion to read Gospel of Pseudo- Thomas in his publication with parallel Coptic and Polish text.
New Gospels, new Letters, new Acts and so one shouldn't be reason of loosing faith. Mainly the Church-connected scholars are interested in it. Popular editions (today I saw Coptic Gospel of Mary translated into Polish from...another, French translation) made for make-more-sensation are part of popular culture together with Mickey Mouse and Gremlins.
|
|