Biblical Criticism & History Forum - earlywritings.com

Secret Alias wrote:. You have no idea .

A little learning is a dangerous thing;
drink deep, or taste not the Pierian spring:
there shallow draughts intoxicate the brain,
and drinking largely sobers us again.

Secret Alias wrote:So this is outhouse's 'proof' .

I don't need to prove anything here. You do. Your the one attacking academia.


Your so desperate you have to resort to childish attacks?

As I said, you're too dumb to waste time on. You have no reasonable explanation for Acts sudden success. As a typical American you imagine that history was decided by 'elections.'

Secret Alias wrote: ... you imagine that history was decided by 'elections.'

Did the Council of Nicea decide subsequent Christian theology by 'election'?

Yes, rigged elections for doctrinal issues. But think of all the Eastern representatives who attended the conference still using a Diatessaron. And there is no evidence for a synod in the late second century to decide the books of the canon. This was God's choice - made according to the Holy Spirit that was in the soul of Irenaeus.

Kind of the antithesis of soul music -

Soul music was born thanks to the innovations of a generation of post-war musicians who, essentially, turned gospel music into a secular form of art.
http://www.scaruffi.com/history/soul.html

The soul of Irenaeus was turned into synoptic gospel/s. and we can mention the relevant war/s

Secret Alias wrote:As I said, you're too dumb to waste time on. '

If I need someone's two cents worth here, I cannot ask you as your books are on sale for 1 cent. Your opinions are a penny short on value.

you have no reasonable explanation for Acts sudden success

Nor do you.

. As a typical American you imagine that history was decided by 'elections.

Rhetoric.

Your childish retort, is simply desperation.

Consensus is popularity.


http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline ... gence.html

Allen D. Callahan:
Associate Professor of New Testament, Harvard Divinity School
CANON EMERGES FROM CONSENSUS

Sometimes when the New Testament scholarship discusses the matter of canon formation, the story implied is that there are some smoke filled rooms somewhere in the 2nd century and a bunch of these cigar smoking Christian big shots got together and they decided who was going in and who was going out and then... it was a wrap, they closed up and then everything else was on the cutting room floor.... If we return to Irenaeus' argument for the canon, I think precisely the contrary is closer to a more responsible historical reconstruction, and that is that there's some kind of consensus among people in the Jesus movement as to what constitutes reliable tradition, reliable literature - literature that they want to read or they want to hear over and over again, and other kinds of literature that they don't want to hear. And, of course, there are groups that have differences of opinion about this. There's some discussion about certain books that can be read but can't be read in church, for example. You can read them on your own, but there's a kind of parental advisory on them or something, and you don't read them in church and you're careful when you read them by yourself, this kind of thing. Or there's some pieces of literature that a lot of people are reading but that the Grand Poobahs in the church don't want them to read. But these really constitute special cases that imply a kind of consensus that are formed very early about the kind of literature Christians used that spoke to their self-identification and by which, they in turn, identified themselves.... That's kind of touchy-feely; it's hard to get a get a historical fix on it, but it's got to have been there. That was a development... from the bottom up, as opposed to from the top down. In Irenaeus' voice, I think we're hearing some top down arguments ex-post facto.

Use, is popularity

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline ... gence.html

L. Michael White:
Professor of Classics and Director of the Religious Studies Program University of Texas at Austin


The process of the development of the canon; that is, the bible itself as the normative document in the way that we now have it, is really a product of the second and third century use of the gospels tradition.