Quote:
Originally Posted by Praxeas
Here are the problems with that'
1) we don't know the dates for sure most of the time
2) often documents were forged by someone else
3) often the contain interpolations, meaning someone changed something, deleted something or added something
4) Even if genuine the don't tell us how the entire church believed. For example, early on many Christians were gnostic and there are many documents considered gnostic. That the were gnostic does not mean the entire church was nor that such a view should be up for consideration
My earlier point was, if it's not in scriptures and people practiced it, it's a tradition of man not the word of God
|
one can read the writings themselves and make the call weather they think its inspired or not.
I dont find any problems with the didache contridicting the bible personally. I also just skimmed over the epistle of barnabas and really still dont see any contridiction. even expanded on some other views i have had.
though i agree with things getting flaky after the church state mix under constantine. but usually before that what tidbits we have most have went under major microscopes to disproove and aprove
and most dates are a guess to when specifically written, however they keep the date with in the life time of the person written
For instance justin marytrs work
however i dont believe we have to keep adding to the bible everytime we discover something.
Hybrid Mode
