How did they dare? (page 4)

Narkissos

Perhaps codification (the canon) was the beginning of the end for Christian creativity.

Or it would divert creativity to other literary genres, such as scholarly commentary (the more scholarly the less creative perhaps) or popular hagiography.

TopHat,

You will find a lot in the links I provided on the top of this page (especially the Pseudepigrapha section at www.earlyjewishwritings.com). About early Christian literature you can check all the non-NT texts on the other site and, for Gnostic Christian writings, http://www.gnosis.org/naghamm/nhl.html. On the canon you can start with http://www.infidels.org/library/modern/richard_carrier/NTcanon.html

Leolaia

Narkissos....Well, how about a more modern exemplar...the Book of Mormon, which fits into the ancient genre of pseudepigrapha quite well and we know far more about the circumstances of its writing far better than any other pseudepigraphal writing. I've read American Apocrypha cover to cover, and it has given me a fascinating insight into how the Book of Mormon was written and the mind of Joseph Smith, but still.... I still have no idea how to evaluate Joseph Smith morally... was he a liar? a fraud? an honest-hearted reformer who merely used a literary device? a prophet who truly believed what we wrote came from angelic sources (it was an angel who revealed the Urim and Thummim and delivered the plates when he moved)? or something else?

I would like to think of the OT prophets like Jeremiah as social reformers who adopted the office of prophet and the voice of Yahweh as the authority behind their teachings...and I can imagine some fantasy-prone ppl today who can externalize their own thoughts as something they believe they "heard", or take dreams or visions as divine oracles, psychologically influenced of course by their pre-existing religious outlook....but who knows?

Narkissos

Good example. And of course this could apply to all representatives of "creative belief" -- prophets and gurus alike. I remember how Ray Franz described his uncle in Crisis of Conscience -- sometimes capable of self-criticism, sometimes actually believing in his own "inspiration".

I think there is something like a prophetic posture which actually suspends moral judgement and is not completely foreign to the so-called primitive "trance states" of oracles, mediums, voodoo priests, etc. One has to put on a mask of sorts to speak in the name of God/gods without placing oneself under some previous authority -- that is, whenever religious speech exceeds pure exegesis of sacred texts.

This reminds me of the fascinating MT of Habakkuk 2:1:

I will stand at my watchpost,
and station myself on the rampart;
I will keep watch to see what he will say to me,
and what I will answer concerning my complaint.

The prophet, curious of what he will say as the word of God...

googlemagoogle

I am sorry but that is a part of history I am unfamilar with. I am not a history scholar by any means...so can you please point me to a link with some info.

the links narkissos posted are a very good place to start. there are several websites and books out there of how, why and when the different canons were compiled. by no means was it a clear decision wheter a book was included or not.

some words to search for: "apocrypha", "pseudepigraphia", "nag hammadi", "apostolic fathers"

i'd gladly discuss this topic in a new thread.

Golf

Are facts based on assumption? I have patents on three inventions. My patent lawyer's job is to write my invention in a language that no will infringe on it.

When you hire a beginning patent lawyer compared to an old pro, he can make holes in his description of your invention and can make his look-a-like invention legal without infringing on your invention. These guys are good.

Since your topic is based on assumption we can only create scenarios.

Golf

Narkissos

Are facts based on assumption?

Our approach of "facts" always is.

Since your topic is based on assumption we can only create scenarios.

I didn't ask for anything else...

Golf

Nark, does faith enter the picture, if so, what type of faith and based on what?

I pose this question because as a competive golfer if your not sure of what club to select in executing a given shot, it will cost you strokes.

Golf

Narkissos

Golf,

In my assumption some sort of "faith" did enter into the picture, but obviously not the sort that would hinder creativity -- not subjection to some older authority which would have fixed everything once and for all. They felt free to rewrite history, create new tales, with their g/God as protagonist. In one word they did invent.

And it is not a completely gratuitous assumption as the Bible abounds in consecutive rewritings of the same stories -- Chronicles involve a rewriting of Samuel-Kings, Matthew and Luke a rewriting of Mark, to quote the most famous examples.

Perhaps the gradual sacralisation, and eventual canonisation of their writings could be described as the patent on their inventions?

Leolaia

Whose faith, btw, counts? A devout Mormon will believe fully in the inspiration of the Book of Mormon. A member of the Ethiopic church will believe fully in the inspiration of 1 Enoch and Jubilees. A member of the Nestorian church would disregard the general epistles (i.e. 1 Peter, 2 Peter, Jude, 1-3 John) and Revelation as uninspired, while the Samaritans had faith only in the Torah. Catholics since Trent have generally regarded the apocrypha as scripture...

JamesThomas

how did they dare make their "God" speak and act?

Since it is the mind of man which has created a separate and finite anthropomorphic deity as "Creator", it seems consistent that man would speak for him too. I mean: how could he dare not to?

j

How did they dare?

Share this