Re: Forgiven's fallacy
Submitted by JohnQ on September 3 2001 13:20:57
In reply to Forgiven's fallacy submitted by RDLL on September 3 2001 08:51:06
|
Now you're working under a fallacy. The canonical books were npt chosen to support any particular "sexist" or "racist" agenda, but rather were based on whether the books and letters were authentic, that is written by those who's name appears on the by-line and whether such people had actually met and talked with Jesus. Those books such as the gospel of Mary, of Thomas, the Childhood narratives of Christ were not considered canonical because of either doubtful authenticity, or in some cases, there was proof (at least for the 4th Century) that they were written later. The Old Testament was based on which books were considred canonical by the Jews. But, since there was both the extant Hebrew Scriptures and the Septuagint, there arose two lists of books for the Old Testament. The Orthodox and Roman Catholic used one list, the Protestants another. This is just the start of considerations why some books are canonical and why some are in and others aren't. |
Follow ups: