Posted on 10/07/2005 8:38:02 AM PDT by Caleb1411
It appears that you are right. Christians who KNOW the Truth in the person of Christ Jesus hear the voice of their Shepherd. I was hoping that he was perhaps seeking the truth, but it appears that he is really trolling his deceptions. I ain't biting.
I'll stick with a Douay myself. Or a Navarre Series for that matter.
My ggg grandfather the Baptist deacon would have a fit if he knew his ggg granddaughter was a Papist. . . but I think he'd calm down if we soothed him a bit.
The SECULAR government taxes you, not Christians. Blame it on Woodrow Wilson.
Your posts were giving me a flash-back to 1977.
Whatever Campolo might be, stupid is not on that list. i have serious doubts about the accuracy of the article, and for good reason: These "endoursements" are something i have seen before.
In other circles, diverse people of influence are often sent articles, papers, and books for their input. The reasoning is that even bad publicity is still publicity. More readers can be obtained by virtue of the controversy if nothing else. It is often true that The 'reviewer' has not even read what it is he/she is supposedly reviewing, and the 'review' doesn't even bear the name on close inspection.
You will notice in mny cases the 'reviewer' does not endourse the conclusions of the book/paper/article, and does not speak of the position at all. It doesn't mean that Williams, Campolo, et. al. agree with the book, the scholarship, the conclusions, or even the need for such a book/paper. In many cases, the 'reviewer' isn't even qualified to discuss the subject matter. Some of you may recall Dave Hunt's citation of Dr. Richard Feinman, a NASA Physicist, concerning the subject of psychology in one of his books. Hunt took a lot of heat for that (and rightfully so). One must carefull read the comments, and not draw conclusions not warrented by the comment.
It is a common trick of cultists, and aborrant theologians, and creates a veneer of legitimacy for an otherwise shoddy work.
As I said, go get educated, and then come back and talk.
(Denny Crane: "Sometimes you can only look for answers from God and failing that... and Fox News".)
Oh, what's all the fuss about, mates?
In Australia they just came out with a 'Strine version that has the angel telling the Virgin Mary she's "one special Sheila".
Surely THAT'S not offensive...
I've heard of the arguments regarding the pastorals & of revelation, but to excise them from the text and to add in the Gospel of Thomas is orthodox suicide.
"Immanuel Swedenborg, call your office".
Radioman,
Sir Francis Bacon didn't "leave out" the Gospel of Thomas from the Authorized Version (the "King James Version").
It wasn't in the Vulgate, which was the primary template for the KJV, in the first place. It isn't in the Catholic Canon (and never was). It isn't in the Orthodox Canon (and never was). It isn't in Martin Luther's Canon (and never was).
It wasn't even considered for the Authorized Version.
The original King James Bible was a translation into English of the Latin Vulgate, and it included the deuterocanonical works of the OLD Testament, later downgraded to the status of "apocrypha" and banished from the Protestant canon. Nobody in the English Church seriously suggested bringing in the Gospel of Thomas.
It wasn't in the Bible that then existed everywhere in England (the Catholic, Latin one). It wasn't in Tyndale's translation of the Catholic, Latin one. It wasn't in Luther's German bible. And it wasn't on the table to be included "by Sir Francis Bacon" (who was not an English Bishop, and did not, therefore, have the ecclesial authority to determine the content of the English Bible.
In short, Bacon's a red herring when it comes to the KJV and so's the Gospel of Thomas.
When you say, "America was founded as a Christian nation", what exactly do you mean? Surely you do not think that America was founded as a Christian nation in the same way as Saudi Arabia is an Islamic nation?
No.
None of the Gospels were written while Jesus was alive and preaching.
There is one fragmentary letter which is said by some to have been written by Jesus to some followers. The Catholic Church never accepted it as canonical, and even if they had it would have been of no spiritual use, because about all it says is "Greetings, Jonias..." or something about as banal. Jesus was a carpenter by trade, so presumably there were a bunch of tables and stools wandering about Nazareth that he made. Maybe he framed some houses too. None of those things were preserved as holy relics either.
But let's assume, for a moment, that Thomas' Gospel was written during Jesus' lifetime (it wasn't). So what?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.