Posted by OldtimerToo on July 19, 2004 at 10:02:29
In Reply to: Exegesis on John 1:1-5 posted by Mary Augustina de Franco on July 18, 2004 at 14:55:33:
Maria, and all:
Please read the information at the following URL:
http://www.equip.org/free/DG040-1.htm
What you posted as authoritative, is, with all due respect, quite unreasonable historically, philosophically, aand Scripturally.
Although Koine, or common Greek, did contain language descriptive of the term "logos", it did not arrise "from Helenic thought in the first century."
Are you stating this with yourself as your own private authority? If so, it would be extremely easy to refute what you said as having any historical validity.
Or, who are you quoting; if not? Nearly as easy would be the refutation that Gnosticism arose before New Testament Christianity, or even Old Testament prophecies about Jesus, from which Jesus and all the apostles taught; including Paul.
The Bible's writing spans over 1500 years, with over 40 authors contributing and over 300 prophecies about Jesus Christ in the Old Testament--it is an entire library.
In other words, based on historical accuracy, what you said is impossible--Gnosticism does not predate Christianity, and cannot therefore interpret it as if it did. Calling Gnosticism Helenic does not solve the historical mistake of the absolute statement you made on your post.
The belief system of gnosticism is, at best, very suspect as being supposedly based on extant historic documents, unlike, completely unlike, the Scriptures of the Old and New Tetament.
The central documents in question for the idea that you proposed as established fact are what is called the Nag Hammadi Library,and the claim of their historicity from the Gnostic point of view is far from established.
In other words, Maria, history does not back up your point of view which you expressed as dogmatic fact. As a Bible-believing Christian, it is acceptable for me to say that on this "Journeys" chat room board.
I am not mocking you personally; here, just questioning the nature of your dogmatic statement.
I can back it up personally with my own testmony (as an ex-Hindu Gnostic), with reason from the Scriptures of the Holy Bible, and with what existing manuscripts are historically known to say, regardless of one's current belief system.
I don't want to start an argumenet, per se, but will correspond with anyone who may be interested, by personal e-mail.
Thanks!