[lit-ideas] Re: Reframing Christianity [was hijacking]
- From: JimKandJulieB@xxxxxxx
- To: lit-ideas@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Mon, 27 Feb 2006 15:13:14 EST
I slovenly referred to the gnostic gospels as apocrypha. I should have,
instead, asked readers to take a look at the Nag Hammadi Codices, for example.
Julie Krueger
======
Subj: [lit-ideas] Re: Reframing Christianity [was hijacking] Date:
2/27/06 10:17:13 A.M. Central Standard Time From:
_junger@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
(mailto:junger@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx) To: _lit-ideas@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
(mailto:lit-ideas@xxxxxxxxxxxxx) Sent on:
EY writes:
: The partisanship comes into view
: when the Synoptics are dismissed as 'corruptions' of that ur-text.
:
: Who said anything about "corruptions"? Merely reframing of earlier source
mat
: erial. There was probably a Q, a compilation of Jesus' sayings that were
used
: by the people who wrote the Gospels, whoever they were...
Maybe there is more than one Q[uelle].
Maybe I've missed something, but why has there, as far as I know, been
no mention of the Gnostic Gospels in this thread?
Maybe the present-day Christian Gospels are the corruption of some
G[nostic] text[s].
Which raises the question of whether Q = G.
--
Peter D. Junger--Case Western Reserve University Law School--Cleveland, OH
EMAIL: junger@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx URL: http://samsara.law.cwru.edu
------------------------------------------------------------------
To change your Lit-Ideas settings (subscribe/unsub, vacation on/off,
digest on/off), visit www.andreas.com/faq-lit-ideas.html
Other related posts:
