Tuesday, May 13, 2008

The formation of the Biblical canon



http://thekingpin68.blogspot.com/2008/05/polytheism-henotheism-environmentalism.html

I like to present information from other sites at times on this blog. I am aware that I can look in my textbooks, for example, and find opinions differing from the material in this article, as can many others, but the information below is helpful overall.

From J. P. Holding:

http://www.tektonics.org/lp/ntcanon.html

However, if we believe in the inspiration of the Bible, then it is also reasonable to assume God's hand in the matter of the compiliation of the canon. Although skeptical of many traditional positions on the canon, McDonald rightly perceives that "(t)hose who would argue for the inerrancy of scripture logically should also claim the same infallibility for the churches of the fourth and fifth centuries, whose decisions and historical circumstances have left us with our present Bible." [MacD.FormCB, 255] One cannot sensibly argue that God inspired certain books of the Bible and then allowed us to mix in books with it that were not inspired. It was either all inspired at its origination, or none of it at all, other than at a basic human level of inspiration - and though, thanks to transcription errors and the like, we have some chaff mixed in with the wheat at present, the ambiguity that is reality at the textual variant level does NOT affect our position on the canon level.

I reason that within the apostolic era the original Scriptural letters were inspired and infallible in regard to the message the Lord conveyed through the writers. I do not think we can take the idea of inspiration and infallibility into the fourth and fifth centuries, although I do grant that God did guide the correct texts to be included within the New Testament text. I reason that without holding to an infallible canon formation, we can accept the idea that God used reason and evidence to formulate the entire Biblical canon. This means it is possible, although very unlikely, that a lost manuscript could be found at a later date that may be considered part of Scripture. The written content, to be accepted, would not contradict the teachings of the other Biblical books. My view is that the original Scripture was inspired and infallible and that we have essentially accurate copies by which a proper canon was formed.

Per Metzger, NT works cited or alluded to - in actuality and in probability - by Apostolic Fathers are:

All Four Gospels;
Acts
All Pauline epistles except three (see below)
Hebrews
1 John
1 Peter
James
Revelation.

Not cited or alluded to are Titus, Philemon, and 2 Corinthians; 2 Peter, Jude, 2 and 3 John.

However, no conclusions may be drawn from this for two reasons:

First, except for 2 Corinthians, all of these books are so short that it is possible that there was never any need to refer to them - especially in light of the fact that:

Second, as Metzger indicates, the total extant works of the Apostolic Fathers fits "a volume about the same size as the New Testament"! (ibid., 72) It would therefore have been very fortunate if we had indeed had witness to all 27 NT books.

Conclusion

Human beings will never agree unanimously on anything, even the canon of Scripture. Even today, many groups (such as the Mormons) seek to add to what has been written. This, of course, is their right; but the fact remains that the canon has been fixed, not by some 4th-century Church Council, but by the witness of history itself. As Metzger writes: "the canon cannot be remade - for the simple reason that history cannot be remade." (ibid., 275) The books that made it into the canon did so by means of "survival of the fittest" - it was not a random drawing with all participants beginning on equal footing. The church did not create the canon, "but came to recognize, accept, affirm, and confirm the self-authenticating quality of certain documents that imposed themselves as such upon the Church. If this fact is obscured, one comes into serious conflict not with dogma but with history."(ibid., 286) We may freely learn from the non-canonical literature [MacD.FormCB, 257], and it may be that some of that literature contains authentic strands of teaching by Jesus. Nevertheless, we have our canon. We are each free to take it or leave it; and if it offend thee - take up scissors and paste, and make what thou considerest a better effort than others!

Here is yet another scammer email. The email came to undisclosed-recipients, and is written with the usual magnificent command of the English language:

Queen Elizabeth's Foundation And The Nigeria FoundationWoodlands RoadLeatherhead Court LeatherheadSurrey KT22 0BN.

BATCH NO: (N-222-6747,E-900-56)

Attn: Beneficiary

Congratulations The Queen Elizabeth's Foundation And The Nigeria Foundation has chosen you by theboard of trustees as one of the final recipients of a Cash Grant/Donation for your own personal,educational, and business development. To celebrate the 30th anniversary 2008 program, We aregiving out a yearly donation of 250,000.00 Pounds each to 40 lucky recipients, ascharitydonations/aid from the Queen Elizabeth's Foundation, ECOWAS, EU and the Africa UNO inaccordance with the enabling act of Parliament.which is part of our promotion To file for your claim You are required to contact the ExecutiveSecretary below their email

Executive Sec: Edwin Johnson

E-Mail:
queen-elizabeth-foundation@hotmail.com

Regards.Mrs Tracy Peterson

And yet another:

INVESTMENT PROPOSAL.

Dearest One,
My name is Miss Vianney Aliababa, the only Daugther of late Mr.and Mrs Aziz Alibaba (A GOLD MARCHANT). I have a preposition important which permits me to request for your assistance in a financial transaction. And I wish to invest in Manufacturing management in your country.

I inherited Eight million Five houndred thousand Dollars.(8.500,000) to invest in your country with your very help, and I will require your assistance in helping me stand as my late father's foreign business partner who will receive the whole money in your coperate account for my self keeping and the investment project as we will agree together.

The Fund was deposited in Prime Bank in fixed suspense account.I will be glad to give you 25% of the total sum for your assistance.

While we will discuss on your percentage, on the Capital investment that you will introduce me to.

Please know that I have not gotton a good financial Education to control the whole money in your country.That is why I real need your help to secure a better financial education that will enbale me not to make poor money decissions later in life that might take years to over come.

please it is very important you contact me immediately on my private email address.(via_baba@hotmail.fr) for further explanation.

Awaiting your immediate response Thanks and God bless.
Best Regards,

VIANNEY ALIBABA.


A future satire and theology blog troll?


My Mom sent me links featuring interesting paintings. I am not making a political/social statement.

Global Warming from Robert Bateman

A thought:

O.J. Simpson, Michael Jackson, Mike Tyson, Robert Blake and Phil Spector should form the Society of Celebrity Super-Villains.

26 comments:

  1. Too bad the Queen Elizabeth's Foundation can't even afford their own website, and have to use Hotmail!

    The Society of Celebrity Super-Villains...LOL! I think Ian McKellen should join that list, since he tears out pages from Gideon Bibles at hotels he stays in...particularly Leviticus 18:22. His super-villain name could be "Ian the Ripper."

    I reason that within the apostolic era the original Scriptural letters were inspired and infallible in regard to the message the Lord conveyed through the writers. I do not think we can take the idea of inspiration and infallibility into the fourth and fifth centuries, although I do grant that God did guide the correct texts to be included within the New Testament text. I reason that without holding to an infallible canon formation, we can accept the idea that God used reason and evidence to formulate the entire Biblical canon.

    Good point. There were many individuals and groups who pointed out flaws, misuses and wrong teachings in the Roman Catholic Church, even before Luther. Still, the Lord used the Roman Catholic Church to help preserve His Word, despite the Church's flaws.

    ReplyDelete
  2. An interesting point on Ian McKellen. He should consider God's historically revealed word as is, and ponder on human corruption and the resulting problem of evil. If anyone is going to save us, it is God, and he will judge those outside of Christ (Revelation, Chapter 20). I think Mr. McKellen is a very good actor, by the way.

    I agree Jeff, concerning the Roman Catholic Church. Many groups have corrupted Scripture, but thankfully we have many copies (or portions) of original manuscripts and some gifted scholars to interpret this Scripture. We of course also equally need Christian theologians and philosophers.

    Cheers, Jeff.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Russ,

    Yes, many groups have corrupted Scripture: the Jehovah's Witness "New World Translation" for example. The Gnostic 'gospels' and books, though they may contain some helpful information, cannot be relied upon for doctrine. The Book of Mormon is complete fantasy, and not a shred of it has ever been proven archaeologically, even though I've read that the LDS Church has had the largest archaeological society in the world (not to mention their fanaticism with genealogical records). Other Bible versions have been written by very liberal sources, as well, I understand.

    Although the Roman Catholic Church was, by far, the ruling/main (and basically uncontested, because of the power of the Popes) religious organization during the Middle Ages, there were many groups and individuals at times who were nevertheless at variance with the Roman Catholic Church...some at the expense of their lives. For example, the Anabaptists, the Waldenses, the Cathari or Albigensians, the 'Brethren of the Common Life,' etc. I was also thinking of individual critics of the papacy other than Luther, such as Erasmus, John Hus, Peter Waldo, John Wycliffe, Girolamo Savonarola, and others.

    Regarding Mr. McKellen, it seems that, whereas some people pick and choose what portions of Scripture to believe, Ian McKellen takes it much more seriously. Since he doesn't like the Bible speaking against homosexuality, he merely (literally) rips those pages out of whatever Bibles he can get his hands on. He has bragged that he has ripped out hundreds of pages from Bibles. Unless he repents and turns to Jesus for salvation, his name will be ripped out of the Lamb's Book of Life (figuratively speaking, since the names of the Elect were written in the Lamb's Book of Life before time began), and he will find himself facing God's wrath for all eternity, in Hell.

    ReplyDelete
  4. The Book of Mormon is complete fantasy...

    Instead of Fantasy Island... Fantasy Continent.

    Boss, da plates, da plates.

    After taking Army's advise and installing the StatCounter widget, I am finding that the traffic stats for StatCounter and BlogRush are very close in numbers, and Site Meter is far behind. I reason that Site Meter is not doing a proper job and I have deleted the widget.

    The larger traffic numbers are encouraging.

    Thanks, Jeff.

    ReplyDelete
  5. Instead of Fantasy Island... Fantasy Continent.

    Boss, da plates, da plates.


    LOL!! Hilarious!

    Your intellect and wit make for quite the combination.

    LDS missionaries to Hong Kong, etc., have had to stop calling themselves "Mormons," because "Mormon" in Chinese means "Gates of Hell." I confirmed this with a Chinese guy years ago, and he drew the Chinese character for me (which I still have). The full character means "Mormon Chow" (like Purina Cat Chow? LOL! Mormon Chow--the food of Mormons!), and the first 2 top characters of the 3-character word means "Mormon." "Mormon Chow" means "Hell," and "Mormon" means "Gates of Hell." The character for "Mor" means "magical tricks," and if you break that character up into parts, one part of it means "ghost." Mormon missionaries to China changed the written form to a character that means "praying hands," since the Chinese would not accept them, because, not only does "Mormon" mean "Hell," but its also a place in China where they practice voodoo, black magic, etc.

    ReplyDelete
  6. Your intellect and wit make for quite the combination.

    Thanks, Jeff. By the Lord's help I have both, which I need to write philosophical and satirical theology blogs. Otherwise I would be 'hooped'.;) As long as I stay mentally healthy I am improving.

    LDS missionaries to Hong Kong, etc., have had to stop calling themselves "Mormons," because "Mormon" in Chinese means "Gates of Hell." I confirmed this with a Chinese guy years ago, and he drew the Chinese character for me (which I still have).

    Fascinating.

    From my limited research I reason that they prefer to be called Latter-Day Saints more often than not. That is the term I use more often. They are usually quite nice people, but they need to seriously consider why traditional, orthodox Christianity and Judaism reject their theology.

    ReplyDelete
  7. Thank you for your comments on cultists and their false interpretations and changes that they have made to the Bible. Continue to defend the faith. Your work is very much appreciated.
    -Student of the Scriptures-

    ReplyDelete
  8. Thanks, Anon.

    Please keep up the comments, and I wish to respectfully deal with the cults, although this is a satirical site, of course.

    ReplyDelete
  9. How about a TV show that educates everyone about the history behind the LDS? All we have now is "Big Love", which I don't think explains much about the Nephites, the Lamanites, the plates, etc. (although South Park makes a valiant effort).

    ReplyDelete
  10. PBS did a fairly reasonable job with their presentation on The Mormons, although I would like to have seen more theological discussion.

    Thanks again for the clip on Jehovah's Witnesses.

    ReplyDelete
  11. Chucky,

    That's an excellent video! Very educational! Thanks for posting that link! I will send that out to others. What a great find! I may even post that video on my blog site. Thanks again---good job!

    ReplyDelete
  12. This Chucky is no evil doll.

    LOL!!

    Russ,

    I have just begun to keep a file (in NotePad) of some quotes by you. Although I have thought about doing that before, the thing you said that finally moved me to actually begin such a file was when you said, regarding Einstein, "A brilliant scientist that one can learn from does not necessarily make a brilliant philosopher or theologian to learn from."

    In one of your blog posts, or possibly one of your comments, you posted the verses where the Bible talks about the various levels or degrees of punishment in Hell. Can you tell me what those verse were again, or where that post or comment is?

    ReplyDelete
  13. Thanks, Jeff, I am a humbled student.

    Matthew 11:21-24

    I stated here:

    hell

    If one is annihilated after judgment facing God, one must wonder how God can make one sinner's punishment worse than another person's? Everlasting death would seemingly be equal punishment for all.

    ReplyDelete
  14. Thanks, Russ!
    I can't believe you found that so fast.

    ReplyDelete
  15. Yes, and I found and corrected an error I had made.

    Cheers.

    Russ:)

    ReplyDelete
  16. It's important to note that many of the contributors specifically of the New Testament were eye-witnesses or scribed for an eye-witness and that was in large part a reason for canonicity.

    ReplyDelete
  17. satire and theology said...

    Thanks, Anon.

    Please keep up the comments, and I wish to respectfully deal with the cults, although this is a satirical site, of course.
    ----------------------------

    That's right, so enjoy this:

    An old Italian lived alone in New Jersey He wanted to plant his annual tomato garden, but it was very difficult work, as the ground was hard.

    His only son, Vincent, who used to help him, was in prison. The old man wrote a letter to his son and described his predicament:

    Dear Vincent,
    I am feeling pretty sad, because it looks like I won't be able to plant my tomato garden this year. I'm just getting too old to be digging up a garden plot. I know if you were here my troubles would be over. I know you would be happy to dig the plot for me, like in the old days.
    Love, Papa

    A few days later he received a letter from his son.

    Dear Pop,
    Don't dig up that garden. That's where the bodies are buried.
    Love, Vinnie

    At 4 a.m. the next morning, FBI agents and local police arrived and dug up the entire area without finding any bodies. They apologized to the old man and left.

    That same day the old man received another letter from his son.

    Dear Pop,
    Go ahead and plant the tomatoes now. That' s the best I could do under the circumstances.
    Love you, Vinnie

    ReplyDelete
  18. More satire:

    Why did the chicken cross the road?

    BARACK OBAMA:
    The chicken crossed the road because it was time for a CHANGE! The chicken wanted CHANGE!

    JOHN MC CAIN:
    My friends, that chicken crossed the road because he recognized the need to engage in cooperation and dialogue with all the chickens on the other side of the road.

    HILLARY CLINTON:
    When I was First Lady, I personally helped that little chicken to cross the road. This experience makes me uniquely qualified to ensure -- right from Day One! -- that every chicken in this country gets the chance it deserves to cross the road. But then, this really isn't about me.......

    DR. PHIL:
    The problem we have here is that this chicken won't realize that he must first deal with the problem on 'THIS' side of the road before it goes after the problem on the 'OTHER SIDE' of the road. What we need to do is help him realize how stupid he's acting by not taking on his 'CURRENT' problems before adding 'NEW' problems.

    OPRAH:
    Well, I understand that the chicken is having problems, which is why he
    wants to cross this road so bad. So instead of having the chicken learn
    from his mistakes and take falls, which is a part of life, I'm going to give this chicken a car so that he can just drive across the road and not live his life like the rest of the chickens.

    GEORGE W. BUSH:
    We don't really care why the chicken crossed the road. We just want to know if the chicken is on our side of the road, or not. The chicken is either against us, or for us. There is no middle ground here.

    COLIN POWELL:
    Now to the left of the screen, you can clearly see the satellite image of the chicken crossing the road...

    ANDERSON COOPER - CNN:
    We have reason to believe there is a chicken, but we have not yet been
    allowed to have access to the other side of the road.

    JOHN KERRY:
    Although I voted to let the chicken cross the road, I am now against it! It was the wrong road to cross, and I was misled about the chicken's intentions. I am not for it now, and will remain against it.

    NANCY GRACE:
    That chicken crossed the road because he's GUILTY! You can see it in his eyes and the way he walks.

    PAT BUCHANAN:
    To steal the job of a decent, hardworking American.

    MARTHA STEWART:
    No one called me to warn me which way that chicken was going. I had a
    standing order at the Farmer's Market to sell my eggs when the price dropped to a certain level. No little bird gave me any insider information.

    DR SEUSS:
    Did the chicken cross the road? Did he cross it with a toad? Yes, the
    chicken crossed the road, but why it crossed I've not been told.

    ERNEST HEMINGWAY:
    To die in the rain. Alone.

    GRANDPA:
    In my day we didn't ask why the chicken crossed the road. Somebody told us the chicken crossed the road, and that was good enough.

    BARBARA WALTERS:
    Isn't that interesting? In a few moments, we will be listening to the chicken tell, for the first time, the heart warming story of how it experienced a serious case of molting, and went on to accomplish its life-long dream of crossing the road.

    ARISTOTLE:
    It is the nature of chickens to cross the road.

    JOHN LENNON:
    Imagine all the chickens in the world crossing roads together, in peace.

    BILL GATES:
    I have just released eChicken2007, which will not only cross roads, but will lay eggs, file your important documents, and balance your check book.
    Internet Explorer is an integral part of the Chicken. This new platform is much more stable and will never cra...#@&&^(C% ......... reboot.

    ALBERT EINSTEIN:
    Did the chicken really cross the road, or did the road move beneath the chicken?

    BILL CLINTON:
    I did not cross the road with THAT chicken. What is your definition of
    chicken?

    AL GORE:
    I invented the chicken!

    COLONEL SANDERS:
    Did I miss one?

    DICK CHENEY:
    Where's my gun?

    AL SHARPTON:
    Why are all the chickens white? We need some black chickens.

    ReplyDelete
  19. Jeff, the Italian joke is very clever and the second comment is original. You are a comment king.

    ALBERT EINSTEIN:
    Did the chicken really cross the road, or did the road move beneath the chicken?


    What about Norman Einstein?

    ReplyDelete
  20. What about Norman Einstein?

    LOL!

    OK, here you go:

    JOE THEISMANN:
    "That chicken was foolish to endanger his own life by crossing such a busy street. Obviously, he was no Norman Einstein."

    OK, so I just made that one up, since I couldn't find any "Why did the chicken..." jokes that mentioned Norman Einstein or Joe Theismann. But here's another one I found on the Internet:

    Q: Why did the chicken cross the road?

    A: To prove to the possum it could actually be done!

    From:
    http://www.whydidthechickencrosstheroad.com/

    ReplyDelete
  21. You are no Norman Einstein.

    LOL! I don't know whether that's a cut-down or not, since I don't know whether it would be good to be Norman Einstein or not! :)

    Personally, I think that Norman was Albert's cousin, who nobody in the family ever talked about, because he was an embarrassment to the family. Their excuse for him was that he was "slow."

    ReplyDelete
  22. Do not worry, Jeff. You are a blog star, and no Norman Einstein, and no Norman Frankenstein.

    ReplyDelete