Comments on: More Responses to “Heresy Hunting” http://www.TonyBurke.ca/apocryphicity/2008/10/22/more-responses-to-heresy-hunting/ A weblog devoted to the study of the Christian Apocrypha Thu, 02 Feb 2012 11:44:35 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1 By: Rev Max http://www.TonyBurke.ca/apocryphicity/2008/10/22/more-responses-to-heresy-hunting/comment-page-1/#comment-16867 Rev Max Wed, 29 Oct 2008 16:45:04 +0000 http://www.TonyBurke.ca/apocryphicity/2008/10/22/more-responses-to-heresy-hunting/#comment-16867 Similarly, some of the “bizarre elements” in Gos. Thom. and Gos. Pet. can also be tamed or explained if one takes the time to do so. It is unfair, I think, to label Gos. Thom. 114 “misogynistic.” For one thing, such an assessment is anachronistic; for another, it is far too simplistic a way to interpret the saying. I won’t attempt to do so here as there are far too many other experts on the text who could do so, and have done so. Unfortunately, the apologists (like Witherington) do not consult these works; they simply draw attention to these sections of the texts that will alarm their readers. ------------- What's interesting to me is that there are so many genuinely intriguing passages in the NH scriptures which speak to very modern ideas - intelligent design, the anthropic principle etc - and yet these modern-day Irenaeuses (Irenaeii?) ignore these in favor of taking cheap shots at brief sayings which have been removed from context. WHat I would like to see is a form of full-blown gnostic apologetics which explains the NH gospels in modern, popular terms. Because so far this has been largely a one-way dialogue. Similarly, some of the “bizarre elements” in Gos. Thom. and Gos. Pet. can also be tamed or explained if one takes the time to do so. It is unfair, I think, to label Gos. Thom. 114 “misogynistic.” For one thing, such an assessment is anachronistic; for another, it is far too simplistic a way to interpret the saying. I won’t attempt to do so here as there are far too many other experts on the text who could do so, and have done so. Unfortunately, the apologists (like Witherington) do not consult these works; they simply draw attention to these sections of the texts that will alarm their readers.

————-

What’s interesting to me is that there are so many genuinely intriguing passages in the NH scriptures which speak to very modern ideas – intelligent design, the anthropic principle etc – and yet these modern-day Irenaeuses (Irenaeii?) ignore these in favor of taking cheap shots at brief sayings which have been removed from context.

WHat I would like to see is a form of full-blown gnostic apologetics which explains the NH gospels in modern, popular terms. Because so far this has been largely a one-way dialogue.

]]> By: Judy Redman http://www.TonyBurke.ca/apocryphicity/2008/10/22/more-responses-to-heresy-hunting/comment-page-1/#comment-16612 Judy Redman Thu, 23 Oct 2008 04:42:12 +0000 http://www.TonyBurke.ca/apocryphicity/2008/10/22/more-responses-to-heresy-hunting/#comment-16612 While I have been known to categorize some aspects of the CA as bizarre myself (although not when I am attempting a scholarly comment), I think that Christians forget just how bizarre some parts of the canon actually are. I work with people who practise religions other than Christianity and they ask me what Christians believe about things. I am not infrequently struck as I try to explain what we believe and why just <i><b>how</b></i> bizarre what I am saying must sound to people who have not grown up with the canonical texts. I also work with people who come from cultures that are non-Anglo and some of their cultural practices strike me as weird and some of ours strike them as equally weird. The bizarre elements in the canonical texts are not so bizarre simply because we're used to them!!! While I have been known to categorize some aspects of the CA as bizarre myself (although not when I am attempting a scholarly comment), I think that Christians forget just how bizarre some parts of the canon actually are. I work with people who practise religions other than Christianity and they ask me what Christians believe about things. I am not infrequently struck as I try to explain what we believe and why just how bizarre what I am saying must sound to people who have not grown up with the canonical texts. I also work with people who come from cultures that are non-Anglo and some of their cultural practices strike me as weird and some of ours strike them as equally weird. The bizarre elements in the canonical texts are not so bizarre simply because we’re used to them!!!

]]>