Why Apochyphal/Gnostic writings are not part of Canon

[gnostic]

True. I don't like them either, or brains, or hearts.

So what about the canon? We could use a cannon for the zombies though.

What do you mean cannon?

Do you mean circus act, like the amazing zombie-cannonball?

 

[gnostic]

I had brought up the same subject about the saints' tombs in another topic (can't remember which), and having reading several of the translations, they all seemed to indicate the dead rose to life, and enter the city.

52 And the graves were opened; and many bodies of the saints which slept arose, 53 And came out of the graves after his resurrection, and went into the holy city, and appeared unto many.

52 and the tombs broke open. The bodies of many holy people who had died were raised to life. 53 They came out of the tombs after Jesus’ resurrection and went into the holy city and appeared to many people.

52 The tombs also were opened, and many bodies of the saints who had fallen asleep were raised. 53 After his resurrection they came out of the tombs and entered the holy city and appeared to many.

52 The tombs were opened, and many bodies of the saints who had fallen asleep were raised; 53 and coming out of the tombs after His resurrection they entered the holy city and appeared to many.

They came out of their tombs and went into the city.

 

[Ouroboros]

What do you mean cannon?

Do you mean circus act, like the amazing zombie-cannonball?

Exactly. And they have to wear some of those little red helmets with a white star on it. Muahaha! Poor zombies.

 

[Pegg]

I still want to know how Paul's epistles (the authentic as well as the Deutero) don't completely contradict rule 4.

And how wishing castration on your enemies doesn't violate the others.

can you post the scriptures you have in mind? what exactly about Pauls letters do you think is out of harmony with the hebrew scriptures? (im guessing it has to do with not adhering to the festivals, sacrifices and food restrictions of the mosaic law, yes?)

 

[CG Didymus]

FWIW, a little background on the assembly of the Bible.

"According to Professor John Crossan of Biblical Studies at DePaul University the Roman Emperor Constantine the Great (274-337 CE), who was the first Roman Emperor to convert to Christianity, needed a single canon to be agreed upon by the Christian leaders to help him unify the remains of the Roman Empire. Until this time the various Christian leaders could not decide which books would be considered "holy" and thus "the word of God" and which ones would be excluded and not considered the word of God.

Emperor Constantine, . . used what motivates many to action - MONEY! He offered the various Church leaders money to agree upon a single canon that would be used by all Christians as the word of God. The Church leaders gathered together at the Council of Nicaea and voted the "word of God" into existence. . . . the final version of the Christian Bible was not voted on at the Council of Nicaea, per se. The Church leaders didn't finish editing the "holy" scriptures until the Council of Trent when the Catholic Church pronounced the Canon closed. However, it seems the real approving editor of the Bible was not God but Constantine!"
source
​

Hey Pegg, I didn't see a response to this post. To add to it, I went to a site called Early Church History. Here is a quote from their article called The Reality of the Biblical Canon

At the turn of the 5th century, St Jerome translated the Bible into vernacular Latin. As he went along he decided that the Septuagint and other Greek and Latin translations of Judaic scripture weren’t sufficient, that he had to translate from the Hebrew. This changed things, since the Septuagint had included books and passages of existing books which were not in Hebrew. Jerome did not accept the authority of all the books before him, especially some Christian works as Revelation, the epistle to the Hebrews, and the epistles of Peter. The Pope, however, pressed him to translate these, anyway. He appears simply to have added then-available translations of these books to his own translations of those he did consider sacred.
If there was any single point in time where the Biblical canon was “decided,” this was it; for Jerome’s translation, the Vulgate, eventually became the current Roman Catholic canon. In reality, however, the matter was still under discussion after Jerome’s time. The Synod of Trullo (692), for example, discussed the canon, and other writers such as Nicephorus of Jerusalem offered their own canon lists. The fact is that the Biblical canon was still controversial, even centuries after Jerome.

It says that Jerome didn't accept the authority of all the books? Especially some Christian works as Revelation, the epistle to the Hebrews, and the epistles of Peter? The Catholic Church might have had an agenda when they were "inspired" to include only certain books. The NWT is accused of having an agenda when they made the official JW translation. Gospel writers might have had an agenda when they wrote their "inspired", "eyewitness" accounts of the story of Jesus. Paul might have had an agenda when he wrote his epistles.

A lot of God's "Chosen people" don't accept the NT as authoritative. They, no doubt, have several criteria that they use to reject it. And speaking of contradictions, why didn't God tell the Jews to come knock on my door to try and "save" me. Why is it that now his "new" chosen people have to knock on my door? And to make things more confusing, right after those "chosen people" leave, some nice young men in white shirts come knocking on my door and sing "I believe!" They have a wonderful new translation of the Bible and a new Book given to them by God directly from an angel. Where does it end? Was their founder a truly a prophet? Was the founder of JW's a prophet? How do I determine if any Book is the true Word of God? Like we're all doing right here and right now, we're questioning the hell out of it. I don't trust those guys that decided upon the books and I know you don't trust how they interpreted them.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

this is the point, the bodies thrown out of the tombs are not said to have been resurrected. It only says they were thrown up. It doesnt say they came to life, it doesnt say they were resurrected. That is added by those who interpret the account in that way.

The Greek Interlinear states it exactly like this:
'And the tombs were opened and many bodies of the saints having fallen asleep were raised'
Matthew doesnt say they were resurrected. But in the same passage, he does use the word resurrection when speaking of Jesus being raised.

So why does he not use the same word regarding the bodies of the saints who were raised? this is why its not reasonable to conclude that Matthews account is about a resurrection of the dead... .he doesnt say it is so there is no basis to interpret it that way.

The NWT puts it this way:
And the memorial tombs were opened and many bodies of the holy ones that had fallen asleep were raised up, 53 (and persons, coming out from among the memorial tombs after his being raised up, entered into the holy city,) and they became visible to many people.
Our interpretation of the event is that the bodies were thrown out of the grave, and people who were at the tomb site and witnessed this then went into the city to tell others what had happened.

Sure... insert text into a passage and you can make it say whatever you want.

one account says that he hung himself, the other says his body split apart on the rocks below... so both things happened. He hung himself from a tree, the branch eventually gave way and his body fell and split apart on the rocks below.

That still makes no sense.

- first, both passages do purport to describe the manner of Judas' death. If not for this desire to shoehorn the Acts account into something that won't contradict Matthew, the plain, straightforward interpretation of the passage would be that he tripped. It makes absolutely no sense to presume that the author of Acts would have left out the detail of Judas committing suicide if he was trying to faithfully recount what had happend.

- second, it contradicts basic physics. The passage in Acts says that Judas fell headlong. Did he hang himself upside-down?

Have you read the Hebrew scriptures? have you not read the accounts of what happens to the wicked?
Here is a recap:
Ps 92:7 When the wicked ones sprout as the vegetation And all the practicers of what is hurtful blossom forth, It is that they may be annihilated forever.

Psalm 37:38 But the transgressors themselves will certainly be annihilated together; The future of wicked people will indeed be cut off

If a person is sustained and tortured forever, exactly how are they "annihilated"?

Psalm 9:17 Wicked people will turn back to She′ol, Even all the nations forgetting God

Do you have any evidence that the ancient Jews considered "Sheol" to be a Christian-style realm of eternal torment?

Prov 2:22 As regards the wicked, they will be cut off from the very earth; and as for the treacherous, they will be torn away from it

Not sure how this passage is relevant.

Do you think Jesus teachings regarding the fate of the wicked are any less then what we read in the Hebrew scriptures? They are not.
EG.
Matt 25:46 And these will depart into everlasting cutting-off, but the righteous ones into everlasting life.

The ESV renders it "eternal punishment", not "everlasting cutting-off", but regardless, I never said that Revelation disagrees with all of the rest of the Bible, only that there is material in the rest of the Bible that contradicts Revelation.

God does not change from the Hebrew scriptures to the Greek scriptures. The God Moses preached gave mankind a choice:
“I have put life and death before you, the blessing and the malediction; and you must choose life in order that you may keep alive.”—DEUTERONOMY 30:19.
This choice is still the choice before us and revelation shows the outcome for those who choose the blessing:

It is?

Go back a bit in that passage and Moses describes what the choice he describe entails:

Deut 30:16:

If you obey the commandments of the Lord your God[a] that I command you today, by loving the Lord your God, by walking in his ways, and by keeping his commandments and his statutes and his rules, then you shall live and multiply, and the Lord your God will bless you in the land that you are entering to take possession of it.

IOW, he's saying that if his followers obey the rules of God (i.e. the rules that he just laid out; the rules that make up the bulk of the book of Deuteronomy), then they will receive earthly reward in their new land.

So...

- do you think the laws of Deuteronomy are still binding? All the stuff about stoning disobedient children and taking war captives as forced brides?

- do you think this passage in Deuteronomy has anything to do with the afterlife?

 

[Pegg]

Hey Pegg, I didn't see a response to this post. To add to it, I went to a site called Early Church History. Here is a quote from their article called The Reality of the Biblical Canon It says that Jerome didn't accept the authority of all the books? Especially some Christian works as Revelation, the epistle to the Hebrews, and the epistles of Peter?

Hi CG,
You've obviously noticed that not everyone agrees on everything, and that does include what books are 'inspired' and which are not. Many critics today have said the entire bible is a load of rubbish. As with everything, if you want to find the truth to a matter, you have to start at the beginning of the story. We need to go back further then jerome to find out about the canon because the beginning of those books date back earlier then Jerome....so his opinion on the matter cannot tell us anything about the foundation of the books in question.

Jerome is considered a church authority, but his late date does not make him an authority on the goings on which were before his time if you understand what i'm saying.
The most ancient historian who testifies that Revelation was written by the Apostle John is Papias of the first part of the second century C.E. The next is Justin Martyr, of the second century, in his “Dialogue With Trypho, a Jew” (LXXXI): “There was a certain man with us, whose name was John, one of the apostles of Christ, who prophesied, by a revelation that was made to him.”

So there are church authorities who are much closer to the time of John who testify to the books authenticity. If Papias was an old man in the first half of the 2nd century, he would have been a young man when John was still alive....or at the very least, he would have associated with older men who were associates of John himself. Justin Martyr is similar, he likely associated with older men who knew of John personally. This is the real foundation for belief that Revelation is inspired... people who were there at the time as opposed to someone who lived a few centuries later with no direct links.

The Catholic Church might have had an agenda when they were "inspired" to include only certain books. The NWT is accused of having an agenda when they made the official JW translation. Gospel writers might have had an agenda when they wrote their "inspired", "eyewitness" accounts of the story of Jesus. Paul might have had an agenda when he wrote his epistles.

of course everyone has an agenda, but not everyone's agenda is to establish truth and fact.

A lot of God's "Chosen people" don't accept the NT as authoritative. They, no doubt, have several criteria that they use to reject it. And speaking of contradictions, why didn't God tell the Jews to come knock on my door to try and "save" me. Why is it that now his "new" chosen people have to knock on my door? And to make things more confusing, right after those "chosen people" leave, some nice young men in white shirts come knocking on my door and sing "I believe!" They have a wonderful new translation of the Bible and a new Book given to them by God directly from an angel. Where does it end? Was their founder a truly a prophet? Was the founder of JW's a prophet? How do I determine if any Book is the true Word of God? Like we're all doing right here and right now, we're questioning the hell out of it. I don't trust those guys that decided upon the books and I know you don't trust how they interpreted them.

there are answers to these questions... you just have to look into it yourself and make an informed decision on what you believe and dont believe.

 

[Pegg]

Sure... insert text into a passage and you can make it say whatever you want.

every bible translation inserts text.... thats what has to happen when translating from one language to another. It even has to be reworded to be cohesive in another language.

- second, it contradicts basic physics. The passage in Acts says that Judas fell headlong. Did he hang himself upside-down?

I dont think it defies physics... how high was the cliff from which he fell? When people fall from high places, do they always land feet first? Is there not way he could have hit the rock face on the way down so that he ended up facefirst?

It dont think its a contradiction that Matthew speaks only of the mode of the attempted suicide while Peter describes the results of it.

If a person is sustained and tortured forever, exactly how are they "annihilated"?
Do you have any evidence that the ancient Jews considered "Sheol" to be a Christian-style realm of eternal torment?

what you are talking about now is philosophical theologies.... the scriptures do not make it possible for people to be tormented after death because they are very clear that at death, a person ceases to be conscious of anything.

Ecclesiates 9:5 For the living are conscious that they will die; but as for the dead, they are conscious of nothing at all
If the dead are not conscious, how can they be tormented??? They can't.

So we dont read Jesus words to mean that the dead are tormented in some kind of hell... they can't mean that if the dead are not conscious. We interpret Jesus words in harmony with the teachings of the Hebrew scriptures. Some churches of Christendom have chosen to create a new religion out of Jesus teachings, but that is surely not how Jesus ever intended his teachings to be used (or misused)
Jesus was a Jew and he believed and taught in harmony with the Hebrew scriptures. So must we. The Hebrew scritpures are the authority on Jesus teachings much more then any churches of christendom. Unfortunately, they allowed Romes influence over them to influence their teachings as well.

There is plenty of evidence that the hebrew Sheol means the grave of mankind:

Collier’s Encyclopedia (1986, Vol. 12, p. 28) says: “Since Sheol in Old Testament times referred simply to the abode of the dead and suggested no moral distinctions, the word ‘hell,’ as understood today, is not a happy translation.”

Encyclopaedia Britannica (1971, Vol. 11, p. 276) noted: “Sheol was located somewhere ‘under’ the earth. . . . The state of the dead was one of neither pain nor pleasure. Neither reward for the righteous nor punishment for the wicked was associated with Sheol. The good and the bad alike, tyrants and saints, kings and orphans, Israelites and gentiles—all slept together without awareness of one another.”

Go back a bit in that passage and Moses describes what the choice he describe entails:

Deut 30:16:

IOW, he's saying that if his followers obey the rules of God (i.e. the rules that he just laid out; the rules that make up the bulk of the book of Deuteronomy), then they will receive earthly reward in their new land
So...
- do you think the laws of Deuteronomy are still binding? All the stuff about stoning disobedient children and taking war captives as forced brides?

- do you think this passage in Deuteronomy has anything to do with the afterlife?

Any law that God imposes should be obeyed, and any law which he puts aside should be put aside. What God required of Isreal, he did not require of any other nation... The Isrealites were not permitted to judge the nations according to the mosaic law because those laws were not for the nations. When the jewish christian congregation began to take in gentiles to chrsitianity, it was clear to them that the same rule applied.... gentiles were not expected to become jewish proselytes in order to worship God according to Jesus teachings. They needed only to abide by Jesus teachings and the apostles knew that Jesus was not teaching mosaic law... he was teaching the principles behind the mosaic law. The principles of love/faith/ righteousness... so in line with that, as long as the new gentile converts were living in harmony with love faith and righteousness, they were acceptable to God.

You dont need the mosaic law to do that... Abraham did not have the mosaic law and yet he lived by Love Righteousness and Faithfulness.

So in conclusion, a person must do whatever God says we must do at this particular time... now is the time to live according to Christs teachings of love, faith and righteousness. if we do that we are fulfilling what is currently required.

 

[idea]

3. There must be no appeal to ...creature worship .

Then I suppose "the Song of Solomon" should not have been included in the cannon