Let's say you are living in the 2nd century CE, and it is the first time you've ever encountered any of the Gospels. They are not yet a part of a recognized canon. You want to know, are these really true and from God?
Do you think you would have been able to discern if they were true or not? Would you have reached the same conclusion as you have today?
What would you do to decide? Would you compare them and see if they agreed? What would you do if they disagreed? Would you have assumed that one must be wrong?
2007-03-13 08:31:09 · 11 answers · asked by Heron By The Sea 7 in Society & Culture ➔ Religion & Spirituality
Probably not. There were a lot of false, plagarized works floating around. Done so well that they even fooled the scholars. The only way to find what was true was either by the author saying they didn't write the alleged book, or by comparing writing styles.
So, since most people couldn't even tell what was by who with any great certainity, I doubt they would have been able to tell which books were written by God. There may have been some so far out in left field that it was obvious they didn't jive. But others, such as Didache of the Apostles were believed to be true, yet didn't make it into the bible.
I personally wouldn't base my beliefs on just the works of man.
2007-03-13 08:44:16 · answer #1 · answered by noncrazed 4 · 2⤊ 0⤋
Interesting question. One would have to be able to read, which most people couldn't do. Then one would actually have to be afforded the time to sit down and read them. There weren't a lot of copies of things back then, as there were no printing presses and writing materials were highly expensive. Only a very few people would have read them.
In the 2d century CE these writings were not regarded as they are today. They were used byreligious leaders of the day, and those people told the people they encountered the wisdom that some of these books contained. Even the religious leaders themselves would not have read them all, or even known all of them to exist.
2007-03-13 08:43:23 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
If I was a 2nd cen Christian (CE inherently implied ;-) I would have been engaged in the verbal and written slagfest that was raging through the first centuries of Christianity as various leaders struggled and slandered for power.
If I was just living in the 2nd cen CE, I probably would have been wondering what all the fuss was about. Some failed revolutionary from 100 years back? What's up with that?
;-)
2007-03-13 09:46:02 · answer #3 · answered by The angels have the phone box. 7 · 0⤊ 1⤋
I can't imagine as a 2nd century person I would have put that much thought into it. I would be more preoccupied with things like providing food and shelter for my family and not being tortured for being Jewish, a witch, crazy, or breaking some obscure law about foot washing.
If I had the luxury of listening to some wandering preacher preach the Gospel to me, I imagine I would have accepted it at face value until the next wandering preacher came along.
2007-03-13 08:38:47 · answer #4 · answered by Rachel M 4 · 2⤊ 0⤋
There were many many more gospels at that time. It was those who gained political power who eventually chose which would be included. The rest were tossed.
In the 2nd Century, there were many different belief systems regarding who and what Christ was. Deciding that one idea was right and the rest were wrong is a peculiarly human innovation. Somehow, we need to hold on to an idea that only one person can be right, and that there is no such thing as relative truth.
2007-03-13 08:36:05 · answer #5 · answered by Deirdre H 7 · 2⤊ 0⤋
"What would you do to decide?" - What I do today. Find an authority that knows and ask them.
I would find Father K of that time and ask him, or the Heron by the Sea and ask her, I guess. Also wouldn't people with power still be alive, I mean the Saints we honor today should be alive, I would talk to them. (Well try.) I possibly could see them preform miracles.
Lastly I hope I would maintain my faith, as I have today - being able to see all the first drafts, and talk to actual Saints should only strengthen my faith. How much proof does a person need to still believe in Jesus, and GOD?
2007-03-16 14:32:55 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
as the gospels were not written by god but by man, you would have had the same problem then as now, except then, you would have believed without questioning...hmmm, sounds like lots of people i know alive today.
2007-03-13 08:36:11 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
I am assuming I would come to the same conclusion I did after reading them in this time period. That Christianity makes little sense.
2007-03-13 08:34:46 · answer #8 · answered by Quantrill 7 · 2⤊ 1⤋
Who readily uses the CE stuff.
2007-03-13 08:35:37 · answer #9 · answered by <><><> 6 · 0⤊ 1⤋
No. Matthew , Mark, Luke, and John are written anonymously.
2007-03-13 08:34:36 · answer #10 · answered by ? 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋