kutz@cis.ohio-state.edu (Kenneth J. Kutz) (06/27/91)
There are two articles in the July 1, 1991 issue of US News and World Report which when combined on the same page (page 57) present an interesting and ironic combination. The first article is about some assertions made from a panel of about 50 "liberal-to-moderate scholars from universities and divinity schools around the world". These assertions state that most of what is recorded as the words of Jesus in the New Testament are not really his words but words of others attributed to him. (One implication of this is that much of the gospels then are founded on lies which means then that the foundation of the Christian faith is not trustworthy, but of the devil, the father of lies). What I find ironic is the second article which is about a computer scientist at Stanford that has done some work looking at all of the Bible verses that are "3:16". What is most interesting to me is that if one were to read 2 Tim 3:16 and 2 Peter 3:16, one would read the Bible's rebuttal to the first article. -- Kenneth J. Kutz Internet kutz@andy.bgsu.edu Systems Programmer BITNET KUTZ@ANDY University Computer Services UUCP ...!osu-cis!bgsuvax!kutz Bowling Green State Univ. US Mail 238 Math Science, BG OH 43403
jclark@sdcc6.ucsd.edu (John Clark) (07/01/91)
In article <Jun.27.02.45.37.1991.18893@athos.rutgers.edu> bgsuvax!kutz@cis.ohio-state.edu (Kenneth J. Kutz) writes: +There are two articles in the July 1, 1991 issue of US News and World Report + +The first article is about some assertions made from a panel of about +50 "liberal-to-moderate scholars from universities and divinity schools +around the world". These assertions state that most of what is +recorded as the words of Jesus in the New Testament are not really his +words but words of others attributed to him. (One implication of this +is that much of the gospels then are founded on lies which means then There is no such 'implication'. On the one hand Christians criticize the 'spiritualist' for their 'automatic' writings and then criticize 'scholars' for say that a number of Biblical texts are not 'automatic' writing. There is no record in the Bible of the 4 Gospel writers actually recording the events as they happend as we understand such today. (There was no 'reporter' assigned to follow the group from the "Jerusalem Times", on the other hand there were no supermarket tabloids either). It would seem that most of the events recorded are at best the reflection of a person some years after (this is of course presuming that one individual is responsible for a particular book). >that the foundation of the Christian faith is not trustworthy, but of >the devil, the father of lies). > >What I find ironic is the second article which is about a computer >scientist at Stanford that has done some work looking at all of the >Bible verses that are "3:16". What is most interesting to me is that >if one were to read 2 Tim 3:16 and 2 Peter 3:16, one would read the Bible's >rebuttal to the first article. > > >-- > Kenneth J. Kutz Internet kutz@andy.bgsu.edu > Systems Programmer BITNET KUTZ@ANDY > University Computer Services UUCP ...!osu-cis!bgsuvax!kutz > Bowling Green State Univ. US Mail 238 Math Science, BG OH 43403 -- John Clark jclark@ucsd.edu