the new new testament???

It's Time for a New New Testament

quote:

---

More than 75 otherwise unknown documents from the early Christ movements of the first and second centuries have been discovered in the sands of Egypt, the markets of Cairo, or in unprocessed sections of European and Near Eastern libraries in the past 150 years. As these documents have been translated and studied by scholars, it has become clear that many of them belong to the very heart of Christian beginnings. ...

​

So with the support of my publisher, in 2011-2012, I convened 19 nationally recognized spiritual leaders to study a wide range of ancient literature from the early Christ movements and to decide which of them would be valuable spiritually for 21st century American readers. In late February of 2012 this council of Catholic, Methodist, Lutheran, United Church of Christ, Episcopalian, Presbyterian, Jewish and yogic leaders chose to add 10 books to the traditional New Testament. ...

---

So how does one know what to include and what to exclude? What makes one worth believing and another not?How is this different from the original Council of Nicaea?Don't you have to take ALL of them as gospel ... if you are a fundamentalist believer?(I miss Buzz on this one)Enjoy

How can anyone know which is which --- without human interpretation?Enjoy

Allow me to translate: ... without actually answering the question, but rather dismissing it.Enjoy

But that is not the issue, the issue is that now more documents have been found: Message 1:

quote:

---

More than 75 otherwise unknown documents from the early Christ movements of the first and second centuries have been discovered in the sands of Egypt, the markets of Cairo, or in unprocessed sections of European and Near Eastern libraries in the past 150 years. As these documents have been translated and studied by scholars, it has become clear that many of them belong to the very heart of Christian beginnings. ...

---

Enjoy

Hi Rahvin, Curiously this doesn't do anything but amuse me. Personally I can see no answer other than simply that human interpretation is necessarily involved. This then questions the old gospel as being human interpretations as well.Dawn went into a long harangue about how previous people would have interpreted these new gospels, and essentially said that as they had rejected them as hoaxes that we must as well. This then leads to the question of then rejecting old gospel that is otherwise confirmed by new gospel -- or is the rejection selective (cherry picking) or interpreted?EnjoyEdited by RAZD, : ...

Hi Dawn Bertot The part where humans in the past interpreted the documents? How do we know their interpretation was the most accurate? But this IS a test of time, now that we have other documents, the original assumptions\interpretations are tested by what these documents describe, yes? Sadly no, not demonstrated, just adamantly asserted with no reason to justify it other than assuming authority where none is demonstrated to exist (except by circular reasoning that because they made certain assumptions or interpretations that therefore they were authorities) and by making a appeal to authority logical fallacy.It seems to me that Rahvin (Message 14) and Jaderis (Message 17) both have valid arguments that make better sense ... and further that the Protestants must have made the very errors you are warning against here -- assuming that they knew better that those that compiled the original bible (catholics) when they made changes to it in creating their bible.Would not this argue that the Protestant bible should be discarded in favor of the Catholic bible if your argument is valid?Enjoy

It is my understanding that the new new testament findings were not available then, that (at least some) are new finds. In the days before the printing press, copies were may by scribes, and these would necessarily not be in an original author's hand -- how can you distinguish between original, copy of original, and fake?Additionally, some accounts could be transcriptions of public speeches rather than original author written documents -- how can you distinguish between original, transcript of original, and fake? You have only demonstrated the you are unwilling (not unable? ) to consider any other course of action.Enjoy.Edited by RAZD, : ...Edited by RAZD, : ...

Thank you for agreeing that it is all a matter of interpretation. By the same (logically false) argument, any religious claims regarding evolution are necessarily bogus ... because "jews or yoga teachers" (or christians) can't be authorities on the subject of evolution, certainly from a Scientific point of view ...Enjoy.Edited by RAZD, : ...