|
Post by Dave on Aug 31, 2012 21:14:36 GMT -5
Church tradition ascribes the epistles First and Second Peter to Apostle Peter, as does the text of Second Peter itself.
First Peter implies the author is in "Babylon," which has been held to be a coded reference to Rome (1 Peter 5:13). Although, Babylon was an important fortress city in Egypt, just north of today's Cairo and this fact is combined with the "greetings from Marc" (1 Peter 5:13), who is regarded as founder of the Church of Alexandria (Egypt); thus other scholars put the First Peter epistle to be written in Egypt
There are also a number of other apocryphal writings, not recognized by the Church, that have been either attributed to or written about St. Peter.
These include: Gospel of Peter, a partially Docetic narrative that has survived in part Acts of Peter Acts of Peter and Andrew Acts of Peter and Paul Acts of Peter and the Twelve Gnostic Apocalypse of Peter A Letter of Peter to Philip, which was preserved in the Nag Hammadi library Apocalypse of Peter, which was considered as genuine by many Christians as late as the 4th century Preaching of Peter, Judgment of Peter The Epistula Petri, the introductory letter ascribed to Apostle Peter that appears at the beginning of at least one version of the Clementine literature
All are rejected by the Catholic Church as apocryphal
WHY? Is Peter the chosen of Jesus or not? Why wouldn’t organized christendom want to include all of Peters writings?
|
|
|
Post by Dave on Aug 31, 2012 22:52:42 GMT -5
There have been many Coptic versions of the Bible, including some of the earliest translations into any language. Several different versions were made in the ancient world, with different editions of the Old and New Testament in all four of the major dialects of Coptic. Biblical books were translated from the Alexandrian Greek version.
Partial copies of a number of Coptic Bibles survive. A considerable number of apocryphal texts also survive in Coptic, most notably the Gnostic Nag Hammadi library. Coptic remains the liturgical language of the Coptic Church and Coptic editions of the Bible are central to that faith.
Apocryphal? - The term apocrypha is used with various meanings, including "hidden", "esoteric", "spurious", "of questionable authenticity," (according to Rome) and "Christian texts that are not canonical".
The word is originally Greek (ἀπόκρυφα) and means "those hidden away," specifically, "to hide something away."
The general term is usually applied to the books in the Roman Catholic Bible, and the Eastern Orthodox Bible, but not the Protestant Bible on their claim that it is not God's word. So, it is misleading in this sense to refer to the Gospel according to the Hebrews or Gnostic writings as apocryphal, because they would not be classified in the same category by orthodox believers (Rome)
The gnostic writings are generally not accorded any status, not even a negative one: they are ignored, as they are incompatible with the accepted canon prima facie. Non-canonical books are texts of uncertain authenticity, or writings where the work is seriously questioned. Given that different denominations have different beliefs about what constitutes canonical scripture, there are several versions of the apocrypha.
Esoteric writings - The word "apocryphal" (ἀπόκρυφος) was first applied, in a positive sense, to writings which were kept secret because they were the vehicles of esoteric knowledge considered too profound or too sacred to be disclosed to anyone other than the initiated. For example, it is used in this sense to describe A Holy and Secret Book of Moses, called Eighth, holy books citing esoteric is a text taken from a Leiden papyrus of the third or fourth century AD. The text may be as old as the first century, but other proof of age has not been found. In a similar vein, the disciples of the Gnostic Prodicus boasted that they possessed the secret (ἀπόκρυφα) books of Zoroaster. The term in general enjoyed high consideration among the Gnostics (see Acts of Thomas, pp. 10, 27, 44).
Ethiopian Orthodox Church - Since the Christianization of Ethiopia in the 4th century, the Church of Ethiopia has come under the dominion of the Church of Alexandria.
Ethiopian Biblical canon contains 81 books. This canon contains the books accepted by other Orthodox Christians.
The Narrower Canon also contains Enoch, Jubilees, and I II III Meqabyan. (These are unrelated to the Greek I, II, III Maccabees with which they are often confused.) The canonical Enoch differs from the editions of the Ge'ez manuscripts in the British, for example in treatment of the Nephilim of Genesis 6.
Some sources speak of the Broader Canon, which has in fact never been published as a single compilation, but is said to include all of the Narrower Canon, as well as additional New Testament books said to have been used by the early church: two Books of the Covenant, four Books of Sinodos, an Epistle of Peter to Clement. These may not all bear close resemblance to works with similar titles known in the west. An eight-part, Ethiopic version of the history of the Jewish people written by Joseph be Gorion, known as the Pseudo-Josephus is also considered part of the broader canon, though it would be considered an Old Testament work.
|
|
|
Post by Dave on Sept 2, 2012 22:27:14 GMT -5
How different the two attitudes between Coptic and Catholic
The Coptic says - here read it all
The Catholic - says you don't need to know that. The priest will interpret the Bible for you. Oh and by the way we are building a new cathedral and we are having a sale and for only $50 you can get your mom and grandma out of hell. All ancient writings that don't pass Vatican approval are hereby considered myth and fable - don't believe it.
|
|
|
Post by Chris2014 on Aug 8, 2014 12:44:55 GMT -5
Not being a RC I find it difficult to defend their position on the authority of the Apochral texts. my reading of their position on the apochrah is that you cannot prove doctrine from those texts,not that you have to have priests interpretation. Secret texts make no real sense. God set up the rules why make anything he does a secret.
|
|
|
Post by Dave on Aug 8, 2014 22:50:53 GMT -5
Welcome. Seminary student - love it, love it, love it! We are all called to share what we know. Anyone serious about the conversation to be a seminary student is more than welcome. Although the Pondering Confusion Fellowship began as a Bible Study Group, we now try hard to be separate from the traditional "Christian" Group. To open the discussion to a much wider audience than just traditional "Christians." People that have become disenfranchised with the local corner hypocritical 5013 business organization. The problem is that many have thrown away the Bible with the church. This is a trend we hope to correct, by bringing the discussion back to scripture from a more esoteric beginning. Having said that - there are many differences between Eastern tradition Christianity and the Western Tradition Religion based upon Rome. Much of any serious discussion will always revolve around mutually understood vocabulary. Authority is only valid if is of the Holy Spirit. Without the books, without the church organization, alone in the wilderness like David, or John the B, it is the HS that is the ultimate guide and teacher. Part of the question is are we all taught the same? Any student of scripture must yield that Ambiguity is by design. Secret texts make no real sense. God set up the rules why make anything he does a secret. Why secret - great questionGod did not revel His plan to destroy every human being on planet earth save Noah and family - until when - surprise The children of Abraham could not inhabit Canaan for 400 years - why, because the sin of the Rephaim was not yet complete -surprising Israel is told over and over that they are God's people - then Jesus is born - surprise Israel, expert in the Tanack, missed the birth of Christ - but three "pagan" magi didn't - - surprise Jesus comes as the king of the Jews, but has to die - surprise Jesus was a Jew - says that not one word of the law shall fade, yet Western Tradition Roman Religion does not teach the OT at all like any Jew I know. Isaiah 14 and 45:7-8, as well as, 2 Tim 3:16 are problematic for Roman Christians. (I have many more) You should read my paper - the Psychology of Understanding - ponderingconfusion.com/papers.php?id=psychologyWe should be on guard of "Anthropomorphising" the Creator - people amuse me when they declare that God is omnipotent - but he can't do that. It is obvious that God plays both sides. God hardened Pharaohs heart, no free will there. God empowered Moses. God settled it by sending the Angel of Death. The Christian will look at nature and see he beautiful balance and harmony - all is nice, "feel good," - isn't God wonderful The non-believer will say - nature is a kill to survive environment with much pain and suffering, and the perfect God allows birth defects and is powerless to stop the evil loose upon the earth. - I say why should my human version of paradise look anything like God's? I say neither grasp the scope of God's plan. Whatever God's plan is for earth, it is only one small drop in the sea of the universe, especially in the revelation that the universe is a mutlti-verse of 10D. Which now makes my God so much bigger than ever considered before.
|
|
|
Post by Dave on Aug 9, 2014 7:38:03 GMT -5
Why Secret
For 99.99% of the human population - the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob was a complete secret until the Gospel.
You may say that God is open about His plan because 0.01% of the population was told.
Hmmm? 0.01% informed versus 99.99% un-informed -- isn't that the definition of a secret?
Revelation has not been a secret - but until this last 1/2 century did anyone understand Islam's role in it?
God used Pharaoh and the Egyptians to demonstrate His glory on earth God used the Babylonians, Assyrians, and Hittites to punish and test Israel God used Rome to punish Israel
Now here we are today - with the fastest growing religion on the planet preaching death to the Kafer While the Christian message is to love your enemy and turn the other cheek The combination of these two has only one logical conclusion - persecution of the christian, testing of the Christian Which seemingly looks a lot like the path to Revelation and Matthew 10
|
|
|
Post by Dave on Aug 9, 2014 7:49:56 GMT -5
If you are going to a Christian Seminary within Western Tradition Christendom - to me -you are a Roman Christian Protestantism is just the liberal application of Roman doctrine. In your seminary as you do research, tell me just how much non-Roman literature are you permitted to study? If you leave the confines of the Roman Canon you are a heretic. If you want to look father back in church history than Calvin you will turn to the writings of Rome. 2 Tim 3:16 has nothing to do with Roman canon. Roman canon wasn't completed for another 1500 years after Paul wrote that verse. 2 Tim 3:16 - and this is from Arthur Clark's commentary - is only referencing the OT as Jesus did - yet Rome doesn't teach the OT the same way Jews of the day or Christ would have. I would be curious if you are taught doctrine from the Greek Orthodox Canon or perhaps the Coptic Canon - or are these groups not real Christians?
|
|
|
Post by Richard on Aug 10, 2014 8:40:39 GMT -5
A few years ago, someone wanted to study a passage from the Gospel of Thomas. Reading your post reminds me of the churches response. We were told no. The official wording went something like - the risk is turning people from the Canon. It wasn't that the Gospel of Thomas was wrong,or uninspired, or that it contained false teachings, the written statement didn't say any of that. It simply said there is a risk from turning people from the official canon. This happens maybe 10 years ago and I had complete forgot all about it, until now. At the time I didn't think anything of it, but today ??
|
|
|
Post by Dillon on Aug 10, 2014 9:00:35 GMT -5
If nothing of God's plan is secret, why do people pray for revelation?
|
|