The Truth About The Book New Testament Apocrypha   Gevan Oliveira
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in...5
×
 

The Truth About The Book New Testament Apocrypha Gevan Oliveira

on

  • 1,182 views

 

Statistics

Views

Total Views
1,182
Views on SlideShare
1,182
Embed Views
0

Actions

Likes
1
Downloads
2
Comments
1

0 Embeds 0

No embeds

Accessibility

Categories

Upload Details

Uploaded via as Microsoft Word

Usage Rights

© All Rights Reserved

Report content

Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

Cancel
  • Full Name Full Name Comment goes here.
    Are you sure you want to
    Your message goes here
    Processing…
Post Comment
Edit your comment

The Truth About The Book New Testament Apocrypha   Gevan Oliveira The Truth About The Book New Testament Apocrypha Gevan Oliveira Document Transcript

  • The truth about the Book New Testament Apocrypha     " Jesus, a mysterious and heavenly ET disguised as a human." The highlighted phrase was published by Epoca in issue No. 202 of 01/04/2002. One of the most respected publications in the national press, the season for a failed attempt and filled with hollow arguments, conjecture and Christianity would be if the books were replaced by the canonical apocryphal. Unfortunately, the lack of theological knowledge of fellow journalist or his need to produce something marketable, it does tread a path already traveled by other adventurers of " art" seeking fame and money creating fabrication from speculative statements of the apocryphal books. A case of filmmaker Martin Scorsese's The Last Temptation of Christ, based on the book written in Greek Nikos Kazantzakis presents Jesus as a brothel-goer, demented and schizophrenic sexual. A Christ who lives dreaming adventures sex with numerous women, including the sisters of Lazarus and Mary Magdalene own. Or Jesus the leader of a sect of homosexuals, according to the book Corpus Christi Terrence McNally. Or even as the international best seller of 1992, Holy Bloonde Holy Grail (The Holy Blood Holy Grail), which speculates that Jesus married Mary Magdalene and together they had six children. Wonder why the hallucinogenic trips on the figure of Jesus always permeate his sexuality! I think that Freud, for it has the answer ... In fact, this is the only way left to try to catch him in any fraud. Who dares judge or interpret Jesus has another vision about aborting bizarre works, like the Semitic John Allegro. In the book The Sacred Mushroom and the Cross (The Sacred Mushroom and the Cross) the infamous says that Jesus is not a historical person, but a kind of code name alluding to the use of a hallucinogenic drug made from the red-headed mushroom, Amanita muscaria . Since the New Testament writers were allegedly members of an ancient fertility cult that put their secrets in an elaborate cryptogram, the New Testament itself. In view of Alegro, we have to admit, the Apocrypha are not as competent. The writer of the New Testament, the English scholar, RT France in his book The Evidence for Jesus in 1986, said of the news about the Historical Jesus: " All these reconstructions of Jesus necessarily have in common an extreme skepticism regarding the main evidence on him, the canonical gospels, which are considered as a deliberate distortion of the truth in order to offer a Christian worship Jesus appropriate. Instead, they seek hints of " suppressed evidence" and provide a central place for the historical details and incidental late apocryphal traditions, known to biblical scholars and traditions, and which has been generally regarded as peripheral at best and in many cases and unreliable. Credulity with which it is accepted that " suppressed evidence" , which receives a place of honor in the reconstruction of the real Jesus, is even more remarkable when contrasted as excessive skepticism shown toward the " gospels" Bring to light what the books say about the apocryphal story of Jesus's intention to reconsider or to deny the canonical books, is a profound waste of time. Not that these are the only ones considered inspired by God, but the simple fact that the Apocrypha are not supported by their stories and could not be compared with the writings of eyewitnesses and faithful followers of Jesus and Christianity. The accusation that the Apocrypha were written by humble people and therefore were not accepted, is proof of lack of information (or bad faith) of the writer. I remind the fellow that the apostles Peter and John, authors of seven of the 27 New Testament books, were rude fishermen. Another crucial detail: the assertion that the books rejected by the church were written by people who had lived with him also unfounded, since their records dating from the 1st century. But what really are the Apocrypha Honestly, what is skeptics question the veracity of the New Testament canon. Because only they contain the truth of Jesus? This is the key question. The question only comes up out of sheer historical ignorance and theological. The term " Apocrypha" comes from the Greek for hidden things. When it comes to apocryphal usually refers to the fourteen or fifteen books of the Old Testament (VT), but in the case of the matter, the author refers to the writings of the New Testament (NT). As in the case of the Old Testament, the apocryphal NT are not supported due to its authority and authenticity doubtful. But how, then, the books came to check that we know today? Who gave the verdict? The answer: the Canon. This word is a transliteration of a Greek term with the main thrust rod or rule. In the early Christian church, had the sense of rule of faith, later, would the list of New Testament books. The canon of the NT did not arise arbitrarily from day to night. The history books record that in 393 A.D. the Church Council at the time, this called for the Synod of Hippo, listed the 27 books of the NT, and four years later, the decision was reaffirmed at the Third Synod of Carthage. However, and here lies the crux of the matter, what the church did was just give an authority that the books have ever owned. Many years before the meeting of the councils, the elders of local churches of the 1st century collected, assessed and decided which of the writings of his day had the authority of the apostles. As stated by one of the most important apologists of this century, author of leading books on the historicity of Jesus, English, Josh MacDowell, the records that deserve more attention were exactly those that contained stories and facts about Jesus. " O Christ, to them, had the same meaning ascribed to divine the importance of the Old Testament, like the prophets. This is because he was considered and accepted as the Messiah of God, hence the choice." Another factor of great relevance as regards the date on which the documents were written. Those who are now part of the canon were produced before the end of the first century, as some researchers, among them the renowned biblical archaeologist William Albright in his book Recent Discoveries in Bible Lands " We can say emphatically that there's no basis solid for dating any book of the New Testament after 80 AD " The only question hanging over the book of Revelation, that other historians believe was written around the year 95 AD This fact, according to scholars of biblical history, allowed those who selected the texts access to eyewitnesses. Thus, they could orally, check the truth of what had been written. As the apostles were dying, the need to preserve their stories meant that his letters were valued even more. The older was the writing, less confidence and more caution was to assess its authenticity. Interestingly, almost all the apocryphal writings are recognized as being historically the first, second and up to the 3rd century, others still after almost a thousand: The Gospel of Thomas (140 AD), Gospel to the Hebrews (c. 170 AD) , The Treaty of the Resurrection (the middle or end of the 2nd century), Gospel of Peter (200 AD), The Gospel of Philip (3rd century AD) Pseudo-Matthew Gospel (ages 8 or 9 AD). Thus, having been written very late offer little or no reliable historical evidence of Jesus. Also, note at odds with the Christian precepts are easily found in these books. As is the case of the Gospel of Peter. Apparently based on the canonical Gospels, his narrative is found to provide details, which were arranged to meet the purpose of the author. Besides being docet (heretical concept that the body of Jesus was not real flesh and blood), it also argues strongly in favor of innocence and guilt of Pilate only Jews for the crucifixion. The Gospel of Thomas, was convicted by scholars because it contains clear evidence of Gnosticism (an attempt to explain all the things on the ground), which is an affront to genuine Christian faith. Many contradictions and other shots in the dark about Jesus are triggered by the apocryphal that seem to have reached some predestined to doubt Jesus histórico.Mas not want to end the case for the story, after all, " Canonicalization is determined or fixed authoritatively by God is simply discovered by man " (Norman and William Nix Geiler - A General Introduction to the Bible, 1986).