Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.1 6/24/83; site mcnc.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!unc!mcnc!bch
From: bch@mcnc.UUCP (Byron Howes)
Newsgroups: net.religion
Subject: Re: Jesus, N'tzarim, and Yirmiyahu Ben David (pt 2)
Message-ID: <2269@mcnc.UUCP>
Date: Thu, 4-Oct-84 00:52:18 EDT
Article-I.D.: mcnc.2269
Posted: Thu Oct  4 00:52:18 1984
Date-Received: Fri, 5-Oct-84 04:43:19 EDT
References: <2264@mcnc.UUCP> 
Reply-To: bch@mcnc.UUCP (Byron Howes)
Organization: North Carolina Educational Computing Service
Lines: 35
Summary: 

In article  rjb@akgua.UUCP (R.J. Brown [Bob]) writes:
>>
>> the question is do they reflect the reality of the time ?
>>
>
> Mercy Sakes Byron we ain't never gonna get the answer to that
> one unless we get a super find like the dead sea scrolls.
>
I think you missed the point on this.  Many Christian apologists imply
that the accuracy of New Testament texts (in the sense of their truth
value with respect to early Christian thought) is in some sense proven
by the existance of large numbers of copied text fragments.  As Steve
Bellovin has pointed out, there is a significant body of text which
dates from the same period that is not included in NT canon and is
often at odds with the Apostolic Christian thought represented by that
group of writings compiled by the early Christian Bishops as the New
Testament.  There has also been considerable research indicating that
the Synoptic Gospels were culled from earlier works, some in the
Gnostic tradition, in such a way as to reflect the Apostolic authority.

Why is it that most fundamentalist Christians claim the NT as authority
by the direct word of G*d?  The history of the Bible is one of political
foment and competing theologies.  As someone has said, "history is
written by the winners."  This is no less true of historical theology.

Without challenging the legitimacy of modern Christian thought, as it
is a philosophy which extends well beyond its seminal documents, I
do find the often-stated assumption of Biblical inerrancy to be
extremely suspect.


-- 

						Byron C. Howes
				          {decvax|akgua}!mcnc!ecsvax!bch