|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
05-19-2008, 08:20 PM | #11 | |
Assistant to the Regional Manager
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: The Orgasmatron
Posts: 24,338
|
Quote:
If we have a pseudonymous writing, why should we accept it as inspired?
__________________
Ἓν οἶδα ὅτι οὐδὲν οἶδα |
|
05-19-2008, 08:22 PM | #12 |
Senior Member
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: NOVA
Posts: 3,005
|
to me if GAs include it in the standard works that's good enough. Whether Paul or one of his followers wrote it is irrelevant.
__________________
太初有道 |
05-19-2008, 08:29 PM | #13 | |
Assistant to the Regional Manager
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: The Orgasmatron
Posts: 24,338
|
Quote:
It seems rational they'd rather not distinguish us more than we are already are in order to avoid "rocking the proverbial boat." So rather than eliminate it all, they simply don't quote the offensive passages.
__________________
Ἓν οἶδα ὅτι οὐδὲν οἶδα |
|
05-19-2008, 08:29 PM | #14 |
Senior Member
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Orange County, California
Posts: 3,059
|
That's an interesting argument. Technically, it was pretty much grandfathered into the standard works, since it has been the basis of Christianity for all those years. Aren't the Book of Mormon and other standard works meant to supplement the Bible for the very reason that it isn't inherently reliable? (e.g., "translated correctly")
__________________
Get your stinking paws off me, you damned, dirty Yewt! "Now perhaps as I spanked myself screaming out "Kozlowski, say it like you mean it bitch!" might have been out of line, but such was the mood." - Goatnapper "If you want to fatten a pig up to make the pig MORE delicious, you can feed it almost anything. Seriously. The pig is like the car on Back to the Future. You put in garbage, and out comes something magical!" - Cali Coug |
05-19-2008, 08:31 PM | #15 | |
Assistant to the Regional Manager
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: The Orgasmatron
Posts: 24,338
|
Quote:
If you're arguing that the pseudonymous writings make nice arguments and are open for theological debate, then fine, but why continue to recognize it as canon?
__________________
Ἓν οἶδα ὅτι οὐδὲν οἶδα |
|
05-19-2008, 08:39 PM | #16 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: NOVA
Posts: 3,005
|
Quote:
__________________
太初有道 |
|
05-19-2008, 08:48 PM | #17 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Dallas, TX
Posts: 2,368
|
Quote:
|
|
05-19-2008, 08:53 PM | #18 |
Senior Member
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: NOVA
Posts: 3,005
|
when they're in the canon, I'm all ears.
__________________
太初有道 |
05-19-2008, 08:55 PM | #19 | |
Assistant to the Regional Manager
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: The Orgasmatron
Posts: 24,338
|
Quote:
How can we determine the authority for those scriptures? We're not using revelation, as our revelators don't concern themselves with such matters. So, if reasonable scholarship through internal and external factors can shed light upon them, then good. And if there is good amongst the disputed writings, so be it, but use with caution.
__________________
Ἓν οἶδα ὅτι οὐδὲν οἶδα |
|
05-19-2008, 09:03 PM | #20 |
Senior Member
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: NOVA
Posts: 3,005
|
use whatever "light" scholarship sheds with caution.
__________________
太初有道 |
Bookmarks |
|
|