Go to Sannhetseeker
- Add a comment
- Go to If You Want to Know Jesus/Yeshua, You Need to Read the Other NT Books
Pappy -
I'm with you. I don't think the Bible is inerrant. I think it was written by mainly men who, for the most part, tried to get what they heard down the correct way. There were some who wrote stories and attributed sayings to fit into their political agendas. These political agendas also kept out legitamate books that should have been included in the NT. And of course, there were those who made mistakes in translating along the way.
My comments about the other books not listed in the NT is offered to hopefully get others who have never thought about questioning things to maybe start questioning things.
posted by
sannhet
on December 7, 2004 at 6:21 PM
| link to this | reply
So, cent
'These Christian preachers' shouldn't take the bible literally because some people in the past were deprived of some of the writings? Get real. The bible was written in Latin for fifteen centuries and only a few spoke Latin. If something other than humans had written the bible, would that make it more authoritative?
posted by
pappy
on December 7, 2004 at 12:42 PM
| link to this | reply
sannhet
It's the 'inerrant' thing that stops me. Even if the bible were perfect, there is no man that I know of who could read it perfectly. The inerrancy loses its meaning when used by men who do nothing but lie because they think they are telling the truth. That's not personal, you are probably better than me, but I KNOW how much I lie, so it isn't really a compliment.
posted by
pappy
on December 7, 2004 at 12:34 PM
| link to this | reply
Pappy -
I'm not disputing that editing went on with regard to the Bible. Nor am I stating that something has been kept from us. What I am saying is that before one decides that the Bible is the inerrant word of God, or make decisions about what Jesus/Yeshua really meant, one needs to read, at the very least, the Apocrypha (let alone the other couple of dozen books), to see what was left out of the Bible (and why they were left out and why others were left in) and what other reliable individuals reported about their (or others) experience with Yeshua/Jesus.
posted by
sannhet
on December 7, 2004 at 12:23 PM
| link to this | reply
Pappy,
Whoa there dude! 
Poor analogy. Not every short story is purported to be the word of God. Not every book is taken literally and used to sway so many as the bible is. And before te wonderful world of the internet these books WERE NOT widely available to all. Over the centuries many have not seen hide nor hair of many of these "lost" books of the bible. Maybe they are crappy writing, maybe they don't belong in the bible for one reason or another, but WHO decides this? Mere mortals? And they, these mere mortals, decide what stays in the bible? Hardly a text to base one's faith completely on being edited and put together and WRITTEn by humankind. After all we see how many times we screw up, so to take these thing in their literal sense is a bit of foolishness as far as I am concerned, and a bit whacked really. I have no time now,but would like to talk more about this later. Maybe in my own blog if I have some time later today. Later Pappy.
Cent
posted by
Cent
on December 5, 2004 at 5:12 AM
| link to this | reply
sannhet and cent
I guess the point is that they ARE all available to anyone who wants to read them. There is no plot to keep something from you. They are not in the 'Holy Bible' for the same reason that every short story is not published in every book of short stories. Some editing went on, deal with it.
posted by
pappy
on December 2, 2004 at 5:53 PM
| link to this | reply
sannhet
I was looking for the meaning of sannhet…that was what the search kicked back and I didn’t have time to look further…thanks.
posted by
justAcarpenter
on December 2, 2004 at 11:44 AM
| link to this | reply
Cent -
You bring up some very good points, which is the gist of my post. If one really wants to understand this thing we call Christianity, then shouldn't one review all of the evidence that is available? As I wrote in my post, it certainly has helped me to form a much richer picture of Yeshua/Jesus and his new testament.
posted by
sannhet
on December 2, 2004 at 11:29 AM
| link to this | reply
Westwend -
Thanks for the URL update, though I just tried the one I presented and it worked. Either way, it gives lots of good information. I and just looked at your history blog. I had never noticed it before. Some good URLs to look at. Thanks!
posted by
sannhet
on December 2, 2004 at 11:27 AM
| link to this | reply
sannhet and Westie,
Thanks for the url. I liked this post and have commented on this myself before. So Pappy, who chooses? Why are some books, supposed writings of the words of God and Jesus more relevent than others? Who decides? Humans? Why exclude any of them? Why not make them available to all? How can these christian preachers take the words of the bible literally if the damned thing isn't even complete and unabridged?
Just some questions. Thanks for that url guys.
Cent
posted by
Cent
on December 2, 2004 at 8:54 AM
| link to this | reply
here's the url
http://earlychristianwritings.com
no www. in it.
posted by
Xeno-x
on December 2, 2004 at 8:36 AM
| link to this | reply
YO
I clicked on the link and the browser couldn't find it.
I just did the same as you in my blog on the History of Christianity -- Arch spurred me on to add a new post so I did.
posted by
Xeno-x
on December 2, 2004 at 8:23 AM
| link to this | reply
JustA -
I know a little Norwegian, but not like my Father. I knew that "den" is "it" or "that" or "the". I wasn't sure about "enkel" so I needed a little help, but it means "simple" or "straightforward" and "sannhet" of course, means "trueness" or "truth", so "den enkel sannhet" would be "the simple truth".
posted by
sannhet
on December 2, 2004 at 6:40 AM
| link to this | reply
Excellent Post sannhet
And great comments too...
Just curious…what does “den enkel sannhet” mean?
posted by
justAcarpenter
on December 1, 2004 at 11:25 PM
| link to this | reply
Pappy -
It must be based on one's point of view. I'ev read most of them, and I see a much brighter picture of what Jesus/Yeshua was trying to say in his "new testament." I see many more people who recorded what he said and validated his testament of love and of letting go of old beliefs.
posted by
sannhet
on December 1, 2004 at 7:51 PM
| link to this | reply
sannhet
I think the real point is that if one had read all these writings would it change anything. I've read most of them, and some others besides and it's pretty clear why most of them are no longer included. They don't provide much new or relevant information, and many are not very well written. One of my favorites is stories about Jesus as a child when in fights with his playmates performed miracles on them. Perhaps it meant to show His divine nature, but seemed like a petulant spoiled brat.
posted by
pappy
on December 1, 2004 at 6:55 PM
| link to this | reply