Nathan_Jr
-
Posts
3,205 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
82
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Calendar
Gallery
Everything posted by Nathan_Jr
-
You pickin up what I'm putting down, cuz.
-
What about this topic bothered you? I wonder if it's what also bothered victor. Was it all the arguing about which books would be included? Was it the sectarian conflicts leading to winners and losers in a politically-charged arena of churchianity? Was it the burned, banned and buried scriptures that didn't make the cut because one group won out over another? What verses do you think answer the canonical problem? How did Mark, Luke, John and Paul (not Matthew?) assemble the canon? Was Paul really concerned with a canon of scripture? After all, he thought he knew God's timeline - he thought the eschaton was coming in his own lifetime. And, again, what exactly is the problem?
-
Cat on a tin roof, dogs in a pile. Nothing left to do but....
-
The Masorah is the transmission of religious tradition or the religious tradition itself? From this the Masoretic Text is derived, right? The MT dates from the 7th to 11th century. AND the variants among the MT, the Septuagint and the Dead Sea Scrolls are not insignificant. Would you please elaborate on this advanced technology?
-
Thanks for the clarification. I look forward to you sharing some notes from your limited collaboration with him. Or just your own notes. Walter doesn't matter to me. This can be the last time we ever have to mention his name, if it's all the same to you.
-
Ok. But I noticed you didn't include Matthew as one taking part in the early assembly of the canon. I think you only mentioned Mark, Luke, John and Paul. Is there a reason for omitting Matthew? Or was that just an oversight?
-
I don't know. I haven't searched for it. It probably could use an update like all old posts on four crucified. Victor is on record deflecting and avoiding questions about the canon. See transcripts of Corps teachings, Advanced classes, and SNT/SNS. Either he didn't understand the canon and was afraid of addressing it, or he DID understand it and was afraid of addressing it. Whatever his insecurity, he didn't know how (H-O-W) to handle it, so he ignored it hoping it would go away. Since we have nothing on record from vic, Mike's perspective is probably close to whatever Vic's was. And Mike and Walter collaborated. So, for the record, this seems important. And fun. I'm hoping to learn from everyone.
-
Real simple. We can handle it here and get it cleared. Do you believe Matthew was written first and was the source for Mark and Luke? That's Matthaean priority.
-
The irony of the pronunciation: Griesbach sounds like Greasespot.
- 702 replies
-
- 1
-
-
- novelty
- hermeneutics
- (and 8 more)
-
Those two statements do, indeed, appear conflicted. Mike, care to address? I knew what you meant concerning the Marcan priority, Waysider. It seems Mike subscribes to a Matthaean priority. And thanks for bringing up the other lost source. Most scholars agree it's a collection of Jesus' sayings - the Germans called it Q. The sayings shared by Matthew, Luke and Thomas point to Q.
-
Hi, Bolshevik. Good to see you. I've missed you on these here threads.
-
The context is the first several centuries. The assembly of the NT cannon didn't happen in the first century, nor did the assembly of OT cannon. The topic by definition is not limited to the first century. Mike's evidence for the assemblage of the NT are scriptures written after the first century - II Timothy and II Peter.
-
Fair questions, OS. I'm open to including the Old Testament as part of this discussion. And, yes, a discussion on the canon that excludes the apocrypha is no discussion at all. I'd really like to get this started with addressing Mike's (and Walter's?) hypothesis that Mark, Luke, John and Paul assembled the cannon, or the proto-canon, and that evidence can be found in the pseudepigrapha of II Timothy and II Peter. FYI, some Wikipedia articles can be very, very good - encyclopedic, even.
-
So, you believe in a Matthaean priority?
-
Please, Mike. I started a new topic on this so we can continue this fascinating discussion without derailing the Absent Christ thread. Would you please copy and paste this post onto that thread?
-
Thanks, T-Bone.
-
These are great points, Waysider. He seems to be assuming Paul wrote the 2nd century epistle II Timothy. And it sounds like he is relying on II Peter, another 2nd century document. Who knows? I hope to find out, though. I started a thread to discuss this topic. Please let your brain explode there.
-
-
-
I was in the woods with the geese, ducks, bass, deer, pigs, raccoons, skunks, armadillos, bobcats, trees, flowers, plants, and water. Its amazing how easily you can see and hear God when you remove your nose from a book and your ears from a sermon.
-
-
In the Absent Christ thread, Mike said he believed the New Testament cannon was assembled by Mark, Luke, John and Paul. He and Walter C. collaborated on this idea in the mid-70s. It sounds like Mike is relying on some passages in II Timothy to support his hypothesis. This thread is established (once) to explore this proposition and to mitigate potential derailment of the Absent Christ thread. Thanks, Mike, for indulging my curiosity. Please continue our discussion here.
-
I'll start a new topic, Mike. Didn't mean to distract you or anyone else, but I must admit, this cannon idea of yours and Walter's is distracting me. Wow. Just wow.
-
It's very easy to scan documents with a phone or tablet/iPad. I presume that's what you mean by digitizing.
-
What a novel proposition! Could you elaborate, please? Or could you point me to any New Testament scholarship that makes a case for this? I'm curious. If you don't have the time, could you point me in the direction of further study?
