>In my opinion the biblical canonizers did today's world a complete >disservice by incorporating John's odd misaligned gospels instead of >Thomas'. John was of the fire and brimstone variety while Thomas was >of the seek-truth variety. By going with John the canonizers screwed >the planet for the last 1000 years.
Not sure I follow and certainly don't agree (from a Christian perspective). John's gospel isn't misaligned with the other gospels in its basic tenets (the main difference is in its more poetic language versus a more prose approach), and all four of the gospel are complete narratives, something that is not the case with the GoT. There are other issues with the GoT, from the paucity of sources in comparison with the canonical gospels and the significant gnostic redaction that it has undergone. There are contradictions in it as well when looking at the NT as a whole that simply do not fit. I do believe that underlying it is a kernel of truth and there's no doubt that much that is in it probably came from the same source as the synoptic gospels, but there is too much evidence of it having been modified to have much merit. I also don't find John's gospel at all what you describe of as "fire and brimstone". Of any of the canonical gospels, his by far is strongest in describing God's love for his creation. That's one reason John is very often the favorite gospel of most Christians. I'm also not sure how you can describe one over the other as "seeking truth". Neither is "seeking" anything, you would more clearly say they are stating the truth as they believe it. >Religious Christians would call my opinion heresy, but non-religious >Christians would agree or at least engage in a super-fun debate. I'm not sure what a "non-religious" Christian is. You can't be a Christian and be "non-religious" since Christianity *is* a religion. >But you needn't be religious nor spiritual to be guilty and/or know >the difference between right and wrong. Hhm, really? What or who determines what is right or wrong? Certainly the Nazis thought they were right when they exterminated the Jews and tried to take over the rest of the world. But clearly most of us would think that was wrong. Likewise today Iran thinks they are right to bomb Israel off the face of the earth, but most of us would think that is wrong. Humans have a morality that goes beyond what we typically see in nature (kill or be killed) and that seems to have little to do with our personal survival, it's an interesting question to consider why we have that and where it truly comes from, if *not* from religion or spirituality. >After all, we hold these truths to be self-evident that all men are >created equal. > >Sounds like Ben was on Thomas' side rather than John's. Again, huh? The gospel of John certainly teaches that we are all equal....we are all equally sinners and all equally saved. Equality is absolutely a tenant of Christianity, even if it is one that many find *very* hard to truly understand and follow. There's a tendency to swing from feeling guilty for sinning and failing to do what God wants, to doing lots of good, helping people out, etc. and feeling self-righteous and better than others. Both are equally false but very, very common failings. --- Mary Jo ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~| Want to reach the ColdFusion community with something they want? Let them know on the House of Fusion mailing lists Archive: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-community/message.cfm/messageid:306252 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-community/subscribe.cfm Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.5
