Why don’t Christians know their own history or even the Bible very well?

Question

If I thought I had a direct infallible revelation from a god I’d learn it backwards and forwards. I’d also study parallel texts. But I just asked a question about the Apostle Peter bringing a smoked fish back to life and no one had even heard of it.

By the way, the account in is the Acts of Peter. But you all have probably never heard of it.

I never said it was in the Bible. It is, however a part of your religious history.

Answer 1

Some do and some don't. By the way, the Acts of Peter isn't in any bible I own, and I own a lot of different Bibles. Your original question was asking "Why don’t Christians know their own history or even the Bible very well? "

I guess you can say that Apocryphal and Pseudepigraphal reading isn't required. It's enough for some people to read the Bible after all.

Are you trying to exalt yourself? Because it isn't working. You did all that and still do not have the understanding enough to be Christian? What do you make of 2 Timothy 3:7?

Answer 2

The Acts of Peter is not in the Bible. I have a parallel Bible. I just read both Peter I and Peter II. There is nothing about a smoked fish. Not sure what you are reading? I have 4 versions here. However, since you are concerned with it, it sounds like God is working on you! Let him into your heart, ask forgiveness and continue to study the real Bible.
Since you edited that it wasn't the Bible, why did you question the Bible? That is The Book we live by, not anything written by yahoos. Of course we never heard of it. It didn't happen if it's not in the Bible.

Answer 3

Your question is flawed because:

1. You cannot generalize all Christians. Absolutes are more often than not, wrong. Because all it takes is finding that 1 person to contradict you and he or she is probably out there.

2. The issue of memorizing details is not an issue that affects Christians alone. Your question is flawed because you make this assumption. People in general are not computers. With the exceptions of a few, most people cannot retain every detail for the rest of their life. Simple proof. Read 10 pages of poems. Preferably each page contains at least one different poem. Wait a week and ask a friend to randomly highlight and read a part of a poem and you have to guess which poem he is reading from. My guess is, more often than not you will find you cannot correctly identify the poem. This is especially unfair, because your friend did not even have to read the entire 10 pages of poems, all he had to do is randomly choose from what's in front of him.

3. Acts of Peter is not part of the new testament. Most Christians only accept the old and new testament. This means, most Christians may not even consider Acts of Peter, and other texts like it, to be parallel texts.

4. You can't expect people to discuss with you their thoughts on a text they have not read. Your best course of action is to point them to the text and let the discussion start from there.

5. Finally, your assumption that faith must come from proof is flawed. You feel like Christians should read all the texts and know everything about the bible before committing to faith. This is not true because becoming a Christian, in no way, signifies the believer to be a Christian encyclopedia. Quite the opposite, most Christians spend their lives constantly learning more about the bible. Christianity, is actually one of the few faiths that offers constant learning and analysis of the text. Part of the reason for the constant learning is because the text is still very elusive, even to Christians. We are, afterall, dealing with a text that is thousands of years old and poorly translated into English. So there's still so much to figure out.

Answer 4

I don't know of any book of the bible called the Acts of Peter.

I'm pretty well-versed in Scripture (although i don't claim to be a scholar) and I'm not aware of any account of Peter bringing a smoked fish back to life.

I do believe that while I have not had a "direct infallible revlation from God," that the Bible is the inerrant Word of God. I strive to learn what it says, but I *do* see your point. A lot of Christians who spout off on Yahoo! Answers would do well to spend more time in the Word and less time spouting it.

Thanks for making a valid point, even if the delivery was less than optimal.

Answer 5

There is enough revelation in the canonical scriptures to last lifetimes, so we are not likely to waste time on gnostic works (usually written centuries after Christ). Actually christians have the anointing of the Holy Spirit, and would be able to pick up on the fact that such works are not from God.

Jesus didn't do pointless miracles like bringing smoked fish back to life. All his miracles either showed compassion or affirmed Jesus' Messiah status, or had symbolic meaning to help people understand an idea.

Answer 6

first, i've said it before - unfortunately a lot of people view Christianity as a club. they feel that they can just claim to be one without any lifestyle change. these people are ones who think that just by saying a little prayer and accepting Jesus into your life, getting a little water sprinkled on them and being a "good person" will reap all the bennefits of being one who follows Christ. but it doesn't work that way - God cleary states that we, as Christians, should study to show ourselves a workman who need not be ashamed...
a true Christian will love to read the Bible, will pray daily and will cherish the words of the Lord - both logos and rhema
(logos- written Word of God; rehema - that Word from God in due season)

- now as far as the acts of peter - i dont remember reading any such thing in my Bible; please provide chapter and verse if you can - but i have a feeling its in an alternate version of the Bible, like the made up versions by the catholic or mormons

Answer 7

a million.Judas dying: while somebody commits suicide, there are continuously rumors concerning to the hows and whys. The "how" does not relatively count type, does it? in ingredient of certainty, the guy felt to blame and killed himself. possibly via putting, possibly via leaping -- despite. It purely does not count. 2. Slaves: Slaves have been regular on the time the previous testomony and New testomony have been written. Acknowledging that there have been slaves isn't condoning slavery. Giving slave-vendors and slaves tips for coping with the area in a Christian way isn't condoning slavery. Christianity from the 1st replaced into continuously "radical" approximately not have social training yet treating anybody as equivalent, and you will possibly be able to tell that via the theory that slaves must be lively areas of the Christian community, too.

Answer 8

I'm a Christian and you're absolutely right. The thing is we're told what the Bible says when we're young, and we just accept it. I was a Religion major in college, and I was absolutely flabbergasted (yea, flabbergasted) when my teacher said "yea, that's really in there." It's hard to sit and read and understand the Bible. Even Biblical Scholars haven't read the whole Bible. There is so much in there. I think that Christians should look at the Bible very critically, and from all angles in order to be able to defend the faith (apologetics).

Answer 9

There is no account anywhere in the books of Bible about Peter bringing a smoked fish back to life.

There are, however hundreds of thousands of fictional books written about God, Peter, Jesus, etc. Most are totally pointless, and Christian do not waste their time on them. I am sure that you could find dozens of obscure books to quote from that most Christians would not have wasted their time learned about.

We are instead using the time to learn the truth about God in the Bible.

Answer 10

Most Christians will not waste their time reading that garbage. Just a quick Internet scan on your question is enough info for me to not even waste a minute more on it. It's not in the Bible for a reason.

A miracle contest? Please. I do not read material stating what claims to be true when in fact it's hogwash. A miracle contest in and of itself only promotes the man and not God. Any miracle with focus going to a man is irrelevant.