[ref001]
#apologetics: DEBATE LOGS - 4/30/96
#apologetics: DEBATE LOGS - 4/30/96
[21:11] Alcuin (an153611@remote4-line39.cis.yale.edu)
joined #apologetics.
[21:11] Stevvve (shannon@ppp03.GC.PeachNet.EDU) joined
#apologetics.
[21:11] pascoe (pasc8891@xslip06.csrv.uidaho.edu) joined
#apologetics.
[21:13] Mode change '+o W ' by washington-r.dc.us.undernet.org
[21:15] Action: Achi pints out to those involed that
the op meeting is supposed to start now...
[21:16] Stevvve: At the beginning of his gospel,
Luke indicates to Theophilus that he will be providing
information in an orderly fashion, based upon his research.
That doesn't indicate anything against the NT canon.
[21:17] let me read it to you again
[21:17] you are leaving out parts
[21:19] "so that Your Excellency may realize
the reliability of the teachings in which you ahve
been instructed."
[21:19] vs. 4
[21:20] reliable?
[21:20] Stevvve: I would recommend that you
consult Philip Schaff's _Creeds of Christendom_ and
Pelikan's _History of Christian Document_ as a *starting
point* to investigate the particulars of "disagreement"
among the ante-Nicene fathers.
[21:20] what does that imply?
[21:21] ummm
[21:21] Stevvve: what do you imagine that it
implies?
[21:21] well there was a lot of disagreement
with post-Nicene fathers as well
[21:22] yes. Again: so?
[21:23] it indicates there were other gospels
about, that Luke judged....probably Mark
[21:24] The *mere* fact of dissent and disagreement
tells nothing about whether a correct assessment of
a situation obtains.
[21:24] no, but it does tell us that men were
judging what would be in the canon
[21:25] and not just men...Church leaders
[21:26] Stevvve: It is a commonplace of NT criticism
that Luke used sources (as would any good researcher)
to help creation of his text. So?
[21:27] And altered them, as you know NT textual
critics maintain
[21:27] Stevvve: You seem terribly troubled
by the idea that men are involved in the process of
defining the canon. Why?
[21:27] I am not troubled by it at all
[21:28] you dont realize i am in debate with
3 persons here
[21:28] hahaha
[21:35] (However, the title "most excellent" would
ordinarily prefix a proper name...so it would be most
unusual if the intended were not *named* Theophilus...)
[21:37] Stevvve: Are you familiar with the issues
that typically arise in connection with canonicity?
What do you suppose are the standards by means of
which a work is evaluated, when one considers whether
it is or is not canonical?
[21:40] what???? Since what time has serious
consideration of inclusion or exclusion of a book into
or out of the canon been considered? None i am aware
of since the Reformation
[21:42] I'm asking categorically. When is not
relevant.
[21:43] When IS relevant. If it hasnt been
considered seriously since that time, then there are
probably little written or thought out about it in
lieu of recent discoveries
[21:46] hmmm
[21:47] Has anyone here read Gospel of Thomas?
[21:52] Action: Achi wonders why everyone focuses on
books that are not referenced in book IN the Bible
and yet never bring up on the few that is...
[21:52] Pesh (0912@ppp7.accessnet.intercom.es) joined
#apologetics.
[21:52] one of the that is
[21:53] You don't follow these matters, do you?
[21:53] Pesh (0912@ppp7.accessnet.intercom.es) left
#apologetics.
[21:54]
[21:54] I have been asking since I entered
this channel why Thomas is being considered.
[21:55] instead we get off on tangents
[21:55] A quick search turns up 30 titles in
only the last decade on issues of New Testament canonicity....
[21:56] I mean i alsot NEVER mention the Book
of Enoch yet is is one of the few book directly referenced
by a conical book
[21:57] canonical even
[21:59] a lot of that debate focused on THomas
[21:59] correct?
[22:00] Likewise, a quick search turns up almost
70 works in the last decade on the Gospel of Thomas.
[22:01] Action: Stevvve nods
[22:01] Achi: yes, Enoch is referenced. Paul
also uses non-canonical references in Acts 17. :)
[22:03] Topic changed by ApoloBot!bibleman@serss0.fiu.edu:
The Home of Rational Theism
[22:07] W (cservice@undernet.org) got netsplit.
[22:07] pascoe (pasc8891@xslip06.csrv.uidaho.edu) got
netsplit.
[22:07] Stevvve (shannon@ppp03.GC.PeachNet.EDU) got
netsplit.
[22:07] Alcuin (an153611@remote4-line39.cis.yale.edu)
got netsplit.
[22:07] Achi (caan@ix-dfw14-06.ix.netcom.com) got netsplit.
[22:13] W (cservice@undernet.org) got lost in the net-split.
[22:13] Achi (caan@ix-dfw14-06.ix.netcom.com) got lost
in the net-split.
[22:13] Alcuin (an153611@remote4-line39.cis.yale.edu)
got lost in the net-split.
[22:13] Stevvve (shannon@ppp03.GC.PeachNet.EDU) got
lost in the net-split.
[22:13] pascoe (pasc8891@xslip06.csrv.uidaho.edu) got
lost in the net-split.
[ref002]Return to #apologetics Home Page
[ref003]Return to LOGS Page
[ref004]Go to the MCU Virtual Library
[ref001] http://mcu.edu/library/logs/log_4_30_96.html
[ref002] http://www.fiu.edu/~wgreen01/apologetics.html
[ref003] http://www.fiu.edu/~wgreen01/logs.html
[ref004] ../
