early christian apocalyses
i thought it would be a good idea to put together into a single thread all the early 1st.
cent.
Leolaia, thanks for this fascinating synopsis. Extending your analytical pattern to non-Christian Apocalypses seems quite promising (but this is a lot of work!).
Just a detail on the Apocalypse of Peter: isn't the "Deceiver coming into the world" even closer to 1 John 4 and 2 John 7 than to the Didachè?
i was preparing comments on another thread and some strange memories started to surface.
one that had haunted me years ago was the disfellowshipping of jan. she was a 30 something woman who had found herself single when her husband ran off with her good friend.
jane was no angel herself though: a slim, suntanned, blonde headed, party girl who's life style had made her quite familiar with the judicial process, which is how jane and i became more acquainted.
One thing I'm really glad about is that I never had to sit this side of a JC.
Thinking of such an experience, I'm all the more respectful of people like Steve and Jim who have, but later had the guts (or heart) to admit how silly that was, despite of all the guilt involved. So many people in that situation just harden their hearts down to the end.
I love this particular "Gospel" which stands complete in three words: do not judge (and you won't be judged). No "belief" nor "work", no "ransom sacrifice" required. Just do not judge. The biggest challenge to a religious mind perhaps.
last night, on the discovery channel, they interviewed a researcher who analyzed a scrap of papyrus that recorded revelation.. he contended that the critical passage of the "number of the beast" actually read 616 in greek, not 666. he tried to apply.
this to caligula thru numerology.. i had never heard of this variant reading before.. .
metatron
Leolaia: my post to Zen Nudist was only on the question of spelling (i.e., full spelling or numeral letters) in the manuscripts and other witnesses.
the pastoral epistles is the name given to 1 and 2 timothy and titus.
each of these letters explicitly claims to be the work of the apostle paul, but the higher critical school has concluded that these letters were written by a disciple of paul's, sometime in the early second century, and that his name was affixed to them to lend them authority.
this is so ingrained in liberal scholarship that it is taken for granted the letters are not from paul.
Leolaia: it seems you hold a very early date for Polycarp's epistle to the Philippians...
Cf. http://www.earlychristianwritings.com/polycarp.html
Interestingly, a recent trend in Catholic scholarship (as appears in the French 1998 edition of the Jerusalem Bible) has 2 Timothy as (partly? mostly?) Pauline (because of the apparent autobiographical material) but 1 Timothy and Titus as pseudepigraphical.
Onacruse: Hebrews, as a very original piece of Alexandrine theology, is definitely out of the Pauline (and postpauline) picture, notwithstanding the conclusion which tries to make it look pauline (especially with the mention of Timothy in 13:23).
in the context of a current european court trial, i?m trying to collect some international jurisprudential information.
apparently the wt instructions about df?d or da?d people (involving shunning by relatives and personal friends) can be legally questioned on the basis of the existing laws against religious discrimination.
on the other side, the wt might plead that, since its discipline rules are based on an interpretation of bible texts, they are protected by the principle of liberty of conscience.
A further though related question: a few weeks ago I've seen a thread on this site about the WT adapting its policy concerning data on DF'd or DA'd persons to a recent (1998?) UK law protecting privacy. Is somebody able to locate it? I've tried the search function and didn't find it...
in the context of a current european court trial, i?m trying to collect some international jurisprudential information.
apparently the wt instructions about df?d or da?d people (involving shunning by relatives and personal friends) can be legally questioned on the basis of the existing laws against religious discrimination.
on the other side, the wt might plead that, since its discipline rules are based on an interpretation of bible texts, they are protected by the principle of liberty of conscience.
Heathen, you're right -- until the WT is called before a court...
moral principles, doctrine , prophecy , ourselves ?
ZN:
When I wrote "sitting by", I meant besides, or alongside the real. Such is, IMO, our contiguous situation to the real as speaking beings.
Perception involves two things: (1) the actual connection to the real through sensations, and (2) our minds' imaginary function which orders perceptions into our mental "map" of distinct and related things we call "reality". So "reality" as an ordered system is definitely on the side of "imagination" in this sense, not "real".
My eyes are just seeing a small part of the desk I'm sitting at. But I know it is a desk because I have a word for it (symbolic), and because I have a mental image of what a desk is (imagination). I know it is distinct from the computer and books that are on it, although sight by itself couldn't tell me that. If I bang against the corner of my desk and hurt myself, I'll have a real experience of this desk which cannot be reduced to the word "desk" or to any "desk concept" (although I'll quickly relate this to that).
What I meant by "asymptotic" is that we are definitely connected with the real (in fact, we are real as biological individuals), but as soon as we try to describe or understand this connection we are already in a different dimension (symbolical and imaginary orders). Poetical, metaphorical, parabolical speech points to the connections of symbolic and imaginary with the real. On a clinical perspective, symptoms do the same thing.
Btw, what was my second false assumption?
in the context of a current european court trial, i?m trying to collect some international jurisprudential information.
apparently the wt instructions about df?d or da?d people (involving shunning by relatives and personal friends) can be legally questioned on the basis of the existing laws against religious discrimination.
on the other side, the wt might plead that, since its discipline rules are based on an interpretation of bible texts, they are protected by the principle of liberty of conscience.
Amazing,
Thanks for the tip. In fact, the US policy seems to be consistently more protective of "religious freedom" (i.e., freedom of the cults vs. freedom of the individual) than, say, French or German policy. The annual State Department report on religious freedom regularly criticizes European decisions in such matters.
Hope we can discuss that in a Parisian "bistrot" (bar) someday.
And bttt in case somebody has got further information.
in the context of a current european court trial, i?m trying to collect some international jurisprudential information.
apparently the wt instructions about df?d or da?d people (involving shunning by relatives and personal friends) can be legally questioned on the basis of the existing laws against religious discrimination.
on the other side, the wt might plead that, since its discipline rules are based on an interpretation of bible texts, they are protected by the principle of liberty of conscience.
Thank you very much for your answers.
Amazing, your information is exactly what we needed. (Btw, do you really live in France?)
If someone has heard of similar or different court case material, in the US or elsewhere, I'd still be glad to know.
in the context of a current european court trial, i?m trying to collect some international jurisprudential information.
apparently the wt instructions about df?d or da?d people (involving shunning by relatives and personal friends) can be legally questioned on the basis of the existing laws against religious discrimination.
on the other side, the wt might plead that, since its discipline rules are based on an interpretation of bible texts, they are protected by the principle of liberty of conscience.
In the context of a current European court trial, I?m trying to collect some international jurisprudential information.
Apparently the WT instructions about DF?d or DA?d people (involving shunning by relatives and personal friends) can be legally questioned on the basis of the existing laws against religious discrimination.
On the other side, the WT might plead that, since its discipline rules are based on an interpretation of Bible texts, they are protected by the principle of liberty of conscience.
My question is: do you know of decisions by US or other courts on religious discrimination involving UN instructions, such as:
(1) 1948 Universal Declaration of Human Rights, article 18 :
Everyone shall have the right to freedom of thought, conscience and religion. This right shall include freedom to have a religion or whatever belief of his [her] choice.
(2) 1966 International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, article 18 :
1. Everyone shall have the right to freedom of thought, conscience and religion. This right shall include freedom to have or to adopt a religion or belief of his [her] choice, and freedom either individually or in community with others and in public or private, to manifest his [her] religion or belief in worship, observance, practice and teaching.
2. No one shall be subject to coercion which would impair his [her] freedom to have or to adopt a religion or belief of his [her] choice.
3. Freedom to manifest one?s religion or belief may be subject only to such limitations as are prescribed by law and are necessary to protect public safety, order, health, morals or the fundamental rights and freedoms of others.
4. The States Parties to the present Covenant undertake to have respect for the liberty of parents and, when applicable, legal guardians, to ensure the religious and moral education of their children in conformity with their own convictions.
(3) 1981 Declaration on the Elimination of All Forms of Intolerance and of Discrimination Based on Religion or Belief, article 4, declaring
that all States [including all sectors of civil society] shall take effective measures to prevent and eliminate discrimination based on religion or belief through:
· Actions in all fields of civil, economic, political, social, cultural life;
· Enacting or rescinding legislation where necessary to prohibit such discrimination;
· Taking all appropriate measures to combat intolerance based on religion or belief.
Cf. http://www1.umn.edu/humanrts/edumat/studyguides/religion.html
References welcome.
Thanks,
Narkissos
