I have begun to read this book though probably won't read it straight thru. This is probably advisable given the length and time one should spend to carefully read scripture.
Anyway, I read the introductory and background material, including how the "new" material was chosen and some thoughts on its value. The latter was done in somewhat repetitive and rambling fashion, but some introductory remarks by John Dominic Crossan (a leading scholar sympathetic to the approach here, which some might deem "revisionist") made a good point. The new material provides a contrast to the material in there already -- the more paternalistic Pastoral Epistles, e.g., can be balanced by the more feminist Acts of Paul and Thecla. Two different apocalypses is another example. The New Testament was always mroe diverse than some think (as a look at the gospels suggest), but this expands that. The additional works also provide more of a feminine voice. Plus, there is an emphasis on additional prayers or perhaps a sort of Psalms for the New Testament.
Finally, the material is seen as an opening for a fresh approach that the editor (and various contributors to formulating the collection or helping to translate parts of it) particularly thinks is helpful to address spiritual conflict. There is a concern expressed that many today are spiritually troubled, not thinking old ways of religion appropriately deals with their needs. I think the term "spiritual" is interesting myself, since it has such an open-ended meaning. The book uses it without giving a particular sense of what it means. I think that Wikipedia entry does a good job providing an understanding of what we are talking about here.
Don't know how many will be like those mentioned that teared up and gasped when they heard the Gospel of Thomas (doesn't seem that striking to me) and wonder if this is somewhat a matter of too much emphasis given to some "authority." ("It is great! Now, I have something in the name of Mary [Magdalene] that expresses my beliefs of the truth!") There is some special connection we have with the past, including when we read and honor scripture. So, use of writings from some past age as compared to something written later or even today that expresses the same thing is particularly special (sacred, spiritual) to people.
The collection limits itself to roughly to period of the original New Testament (175 C.E., which to me is rather late). That's a plan, but not necessary. The original New Testament was selected because it was felt that the material came from the age of the apostles. Some of the works are dubious on this front at best -- some of the epistles, e.g., were found doubtful even in the fourth century. Still, we are talking stuff that mostly came within a hundred years or less of Jesus. Other than maybe the Gospel of Thomas -- a somewhat esoteric collection of sayings that it is not surprising really that wasn't included -- the usual material people think could have been included came later. But, this doesn't mean they couldn't be added. The Old Testament spans a long time.
Some of the material not added also helps provide insight on that which was. Didache or Teaching of the Twelve Apostles is one example that provides early insight on Christian practices. It appears to have be written sometime in the late first or early second centuries. As I noted in the past, it was not agreed upon in this volume (if by a close vote) because of a prohibition of "abortion," which is ill-advised, especially because it isn't particularly clear just what that means. Note, e.g., the reference against "pederasty" in that work. This provides insight on what Paul was concerned about -- not "homosexuality" overall, which was not really understood the same way as today. The Greek terms he used in his list of forbidden sexual acts are still debated, but this reference to me is informative.
One account I read (I can find it, but it's just one, so it isn't determinative anyway) noted that the Didache was not included because it did not seem to be of literal merit. Another suggested that it was seen as not really authoritative (not really "the twelve apostles"). But, it is a quick and interesting read, including in respect to its prayer for the Eucharistic meal -- thanks for Jesus Christ, but not an emphasis on his death and resurrection. Not to put myself on the same plane as the scholars and religious personnel here, but like the person who led the effort, I would have included this work. Pagels and others also like it.
One theme of the descriptive remarks is the approach set forth by Karen King and others to de-emphasize the term "gnostic," which is deemed by this group misleading. It is deemed to cover too much ground as if a diverse group of material could be put under one umbrella and sometimes have an implication of "other" or "not quite orthodox." The latter is not quite in the spirit of this enterprise. The material is worthy of study, and as I have noted in the past, in the air even as Jesus taught. Some of these writings (try this as a taste -- The Apocalypse of Adam) is hard going because of talk of "aeons" and other things, but reflected philosophical themes written by Philo (d. c. 50 C.E.) and others. And, the basic idea is not too hard to understand. Check out the Gospel of Judas, for instance.
A notable thing here is that the movement is not merely Christian -- Philo was a Hellenistic Jewish philosopher. It brings to mind a parable of Jesus involving sowing the fields -- the time was ripe for the message. There are some universal themes here. The accounts, experiences and thoughts of a select group is found in most scriptures, including the Qu'ran. We should keep that in mind when trying to use them as universal guidelines. It is hard enough using the U.S. Constitution to govern us today and that was written by people in our own country not that long ago.
I think this effort to try to find a more complete New Testament is fine. But, the dreams of a Native American minister to formulate a sort of Native American Bible that brings together material from that tradition also shows its limitations. Part of the path to fully addressing the needs of 21st Century spiritual needs is to realize that they do not rest only on 1st Century (even if that means late 2nd) documents. We need not create new myths ala the Church of Latter Day Saints here. Various religions have grew over the years with their own new writings. The Hebrew Scriptures spans over a thousand years even beyond its mythical opening. The Christian Scriptures can extend for over a century.
There are various collections out there (down to Atheist Bibles), but I think that would be a good effort. A "testament" that provides writings that reflect the story of Christianity thru the ages, including such things as medieval writings of Thomas Aquinas and tales of martyrs in England and France. An excerpt from the Crusades and modern appeals to strict to fundamentals plus a reply to such a move. This covers a lot of ground, but I can imagine it being done in a reasonable sized volume or two.
Anyway, one more thing. A New New Testament might lack useful explanatory footnotes,* but I again note that it has an attractive font. It is very readable and inviting on that front.
---
* As noted before, most bibles have footnotes noting translation issues, parallel or related biblical verses and at times specific discussions of the matters addressed.
Some of the people involved in this work did help put forth a "Jesus Seminar" effort that tries to determine the relative historical nature of the four gospels, tossing in the "Q" sayings, a few Jesus related quotes in other NT books & the Gospel of Peter. (Looking at it some more, a few other references, including from the Gospel of Thomas is tossed in too.) I obtained a cheap copy of this guessing job and it does provide some such material for the material covered -- it is overall a commentary of the material.
Anyway, I read the introductory and background material, including how the "new" material was chosen and some thoughts on its value. The latter was done in somewhat repetitive and rambling fashion, but some introductory remarks by John Dominic Crossan (a leading scholar sympathetic to the approach here, which some might deem "revisionist") made a good point. The new material provides a contrast to the material in there already -- the more paternalistic Pastoral Epistles, e.g., can be balanced by the more feminist Acts of Paul and Thecla. Two different apocalypses is another example. The New Testament was always mroe diverse than some think (as a look at the gospels suggest), but this expands that. The additional works also provide more of a feminine voice. Plus, there is an emphasis on additional prayers or perhaps a sort of Psalms for the New Testament.
Finally, the material is seen as an opening for a fresh approach that the editor (and various contributors to formulating the collection or helping to translate parts of it) particularly thinks is helpful to address spiritual conflict. There is a concern expressed that many today are spiritually troubled, not thinking old ways of religion appropriately deals with their needs. I think the term "spiritual" is interesting myself, since it has such an open-ended meaning. The book uses it without giving a particular sense of what it means. I think that Wikipedia entry does a good job providing an understanding of what we are talking about here.
Don't know how many will be like those mentioned that teared up and gasped when they heard the Gospel of Thomas (doesn't seem that striking to me) and wonder if this is somewhat a matter of too much emphasis given to some "authority." ("It is great! Now, I have something in the name of Mary [Magdalene] that expresses my beliefs of the truth!") There is some special connection we have with the past, including when we read and honor scripture. So, use of writings from some past age as compared to something written later or even today that expresses the same thing is particularly special (sacred, spiritual) to people.
The collection limits itself to roughly to period of the original New Testament (175 C.E., which to me is rather late). That's a plan, but not necessary. The original New Testament was selected because it was felt that the material came from the age of the apostles. Some of the works are dubious on this front at best -- some of the epistles, e.g., were found doubtful even in the fourth century. Still, we are talking stuff that mostly came within a hundred years or less of Jesus. Other than maybe the Gospel of Thomas -- a somewhat esoteric collection of sayings that it is not surprising really that wasn't included -- the usual material people think could have been included came later. But, this doesn't mean they couldn't be added. The Old Testament spans a long time.
Some of the material not added also helps provide insight on that which was. Didache or Teaching of the Twelve Apostles is one example that provides early insight on Christian practices. It appears to have be written sometime in the late first or early second centuries. As I noted in the past, it was not agreed upon in this volume (if by a close vote) because of a prohibition of "abortion," which is ill-advised, especially because it isn't particularly clear just what that means. Note, e.g., the reference against "pederasty" in that work. This provides insight on what Paul was concerned about -- not "homosexuality" overall, which was not really understood the same way as today. The Greek terms he used in his list of forbidden sexual acts are still debated, but this reference to me is informative.
One account I read (I can find it, but it's just one, so it isn't determinative anyway) noted that the Didache was not included because it did not seem to be of literal merit. Another suggested that it was seen as not really authoritative (not really "the twelve apostles"). But, it is a quick and interesting read, including in respect to its prayer for the Eucharistic meal -- thanks for Jesus Christ, but not an emphasis on his death and resurrection. Not to put myself on the same plane as the scholars and religious personnel here, but like the person who led the effort, I would have included this work. Pagels and others also like it.
One theme of the descriptive remarks is the approach set forth by Karen King and others to de-emphasize the term "gnostic," which is deemed by this group misleading. It is deemed to cover too much ground as if a diverse group of material could be put under one umbrella and sometimes have an implication of "other" or "not quite orthodox." The latter is not quite in the spirit of this enterprise. The material is worthy of study, and as I have noted in the past, in the air even as Jesus taught. Some of these writings (try this as a taste -- The Apocalypse of Adam) is hard going because of talk of "aeons" and other things, but reflected philosophical themes written by Philo (d. c. 50 C.E.) and others. And, the basic idea is not too hard to understand. Check out the Gospel of Judas, for instance.
A notable thing here is that the movement is not merely Christian -- Philo was a Hellenistic Jewish philosopher. It brings to mind a parable of Jesus involving sowing the fields -- the time was ripe for the message. There are some universal themes here. The accounts, experiences and thoughts of a select group is found in most scriptures, including the Qu'ran. We should keep that in mind when trying to use them as universal guidelines. It is hard enough using the U.S. Constitution to govern us today and that was written by people in our own country not that long ago.
I think this effort to try to find a more complete New Testament is fine. But, the dreams of a Native American minister to formulate a sort of Native American Bible that brings together material from that tradition also shows its limitations. Part of the path to fully addressing the needs of 21st Century spiritual needs is to realize that they do not rest only on 1st Century (even if that means late 2nd) documents. We need not create new myths ala the Church of Latter Day Saints here. Various religions have grew over the years with their own new writings. The Hebrew Scriptures spans over a thousand years even beyond its mythical opening. The Christian Scriptures can extend for over a century.
There are various collections out there (down to Atheist Bibles), but I think that would be a good effort. A "testament" that provides writings that reflect the story of Christianity thru the ages, including such things as medieval writings of Thomas Aquinas and tales of martyrs in England and France. An excerpt from the Crusades and modern appeals to strict to fundamentals plus a reply to such a move. This covers a lot of ground, but I can imagine it being done in a reasonable sized volume or two.
Anyway, one more thing. A New New Testament might lack useful explanatory footnotes,* but I again note that it has an attractive font. It is very readable and inviting on that front.
---
* As noted before, most bibles have footnotes noting translation issues, parallel or related biblical verses and at times specific discussions of the matters addressed.
Some of the people involved in this work did help put forth a "Jesus Seminar" effort that tries to determine the relative historical nature of the four gospels, tossing in the "Q" sayings, a few Jesus related quotes in other NT books & the Gospel of Peter. (Looking at it some more, a few other references, including from the Gospel of Thomas is tossed in too.) I obtained a cheap copy of this guessing job and it does provide some such material for the material covered -- it is overall a commentary of the material.
No comments:
Post a Comment
Thanks for your .02!