SermonIndex Audio Sermons
Promoting Authentic Biblical Christianity.
Looking for free sermon messages?
Sermon Podcast | Audio | Video

Discussion Forum : General Topics : Revelations of Hell from two different people

Print Thread (PDF)

Goto page ( Previous Page 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 )
PosterThread









 Re:

how was the cannon put together? Were there disagreements at any time between apostles? in the early church? how about in the church fathers? did all have the holy spirit? do we synthesize the 4 gospels into one original story? (for there WAS one original story) If we synthesize the 4 gospels into one original story, whatever apparent differences, is it at least POSSIBLE in any way to synthesize the Apocalypse of Peter into the original story?

 2014/4/28 19:32
Oracio
Member



Joined: 2007/6/26
Posts: 1992
Whittier CA USA

 Re:

by NoahJD

Quote:
how was the cannon put together? Were there disagreements at any time between apostles? in the early church? how about in the church fathers? did all have the holy spirit? do we synthesize the 4 gospels into one original story? (for there WAS one original story) If we synthesize the 4 gospels into one original story, whatever apparent differences, is it at least POSSIBLE in any way to synthesize the Apocalypse of Peter into the original story?


I believe this is a helpful website in that regard:


http://www.gotquestions.org/canon-Bible.html

http://www.gotquestions.org/apocalypse-of-Peter.html


_________________
Oracio

 2014/4/28 20:47Profile









 Re:

Quote:
how was the cannon put together? Were there disagreements at any time between apostles? in the early church? how about in the church fathers? did all have the holy spirit? do we synthesize the 4 gospels into one original story? (for there WAS one original story) If we synthesise the 4 gospels into one original story, whatever apparent differences, is it at least POSSIBLE in any way to synthesise the Apocalypse of Peter into the original story?



The earliest canonical list is generally referred to as the The Muratorian Fragment. In this fragment we find the following words:

"We receive only the apocalypses of John and Peter, though some of us are not willing that the latter be read in church."

scripta apocalypse etiam iohanis et petri tantrum recipimus quam quidam ex nos

Hans Lietzmann, Das Muratorische Fragment und die Monarchianischen Prologue zu den Evangelien (Kleine Texte, i; Bonn, 1902; 2nd ed., Berlin, 1933)

It is generally accepted that this fragment was originally written in Greek and then translated into Latin at a much later date. Therefore the earliest known reference to a Canonical List expressly states that the Apocalypse of Peter whilst received, is not sufficiently trusted to be read in the churches.

Personally there in one very singular reason why I would not receive it as anything other than a historical document. This is because it cannot possibly have been written by Peter. The fact that it is Pseudo graphical means that it cannot be accepted alongside Canon. The issue is not simply a matter of synchronistic equivalence. It is much more fundamental than that.

In drawing attention to Matthew 17:1–9 I was not simply pointing to obvious contradictions in the Revelation of Peter text, as a comparison with Matthew, but was more specifically drawing attention to the very point you yourself make. By asking if it is possible to synthesise the four gospels what you are really alluding to is the differences between the gospels. It is important to recognise that if everything that Jesus did were gathered into books, it would fill many more books that the four gospels could contain. It would amount to a library of books. The gospels are therefore written according to the intention of each gospel and not as a way of seeking precise agreement. The agreement would fill the world four times over.

“And there are also many other things which Jesus did, which if they were written in detail, I suppose that even the world itself would not contain the books that would be written.” (John 21:25, NASB95)

The synthesis which you speak of, is surpassed by the whole event of the Lord's life. There is no agreement with the whole, because the whole has not been written. Each is a Spirit led part. That is why we cannot accept that which is written outside of the Holy Spirit's clear leading. In short the original story has not been recorded fully. For that reason attempting to synthesise the Revelation of Peter into the Canon of scripture would amount to an unjustified confidence and speculation.

 2014/4/28 23:19









 Re:

did you read the whole Muratorian Fragment?

http://www.bible-researcher.com/muratorian.html

sure is interesting.

Quote:
Therefore the earliest known reference to a Canonical List expressly states that the Apocalypse of Peter whilst received, is not sufficiently trusted to be read in the churches.



it might not be a matter of trust. it only says some are unwilling to have it read in church

"(71) We receive only the apocalypses of John and Peter, (72) though some of us are not willing that the latter be read in church."

I've never read that before. My info comes from a class on Eastern Orthodox Christianity, but it covered church history as well.

edit:order,clarity

 2014/4/29 0:21









 Re:

Quote:
it might not be a matter of trust. it only says some are unwilling to have it read in church

"(71) We receive only the apocalypses of John and Peter, (72) though some of us are not willing that the latter be read in church."

I've never read that before. My info comes from a class on Eastern Orthodox Christianity, but it covered church history as well.



In recent weeks I have been giving a great deal of thought to how believers walk, and how it is that on the one hand, we must walk by faith if we are to please the Lord, and on the other hand, how we must be led of the Holy Spirit in all things. At any point in this walk we can become off balance as we learn how to be led of the Holy Spirit, and at the same time still walk by faith when we do not know His clear leading.

I believe that this would be no less true for the apostles as well. With regard to the issue of scripture it may be possible to see that when the apostles were writing down the letters and books which eventually became Canon, they would have had to exercise their faith always, realising that their efforts were going to be very important. Peter acknowledged this point regarding Paul's letters "of some things which are difficult". In that process they would have to be completely dependant on the Holy Spirit, yet at times they would have been writing from memory as well as from inspiration. How do we strike that same balance?

At the same time as the apostolic fathers were reading out these letters and books in the churches some of them were also writing their own letters and books to the churches. They did it in their own hand, by faith, in their own calling of God. In this, lays their accountability and their reward. When others then have to decide which of these letters and books to include in the canon of scripture later on, they too had to walk by faith, be led of the Holy Spirit and at the same time take account to those traditions which they had knowledge of concerning the apostles themselves and the apostolic fathers.

In all things these men of the second and third century, were led of the Holy Spirit and at the same time they had to exercise their own reasonable minds. They were subject to the same need to be led, and yet had a calling to lead as well. How they did that is to their account in the day of the Lord. It seems to me therefore that given that we know that the foundation which the apostles and the prophets laid is Christ Himself crucified for sin, and that their names are written on the twelve gates of the New City, Jerusalem, we can and ought to take confidence fully in that which was by their hand. Absolutely none of the books and letters outside of canon can be directly attributed to these apostles directly. This includes the Revelation of Peter as well.

For these two reasons, the foundation which is laid, as well as the obedience of the apostles means that their labours are a matter of the faith once delivered to faithful men. The preaching of the gospel is a matter of faith. The scriptures are a matter of faith, the pseudo and apocryphal writing are a matter of intellect and not a matter of faith. The difference is a difference of receiving them privately and reading them publicly. Yet what ever we do it must be by faith and whatever is not of faith, is sin. To that we will have to give an account even as the apostolic fathers will also have to give an account.

 2014/4/29 9:04





©2002-2019 SermonIndex.net
Promoting Genuine Biblical Revival.
Privacy Policy