Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Revelation Good case for Aramaic Primacy?? Come on now
#35
Shlama Akhi Stephen,

I would like to answer this for myself quickly:

1) I believe the COE considers the W5 as "pious works" which is above even the writings of their most beloved saints like Ephraim but below what would be read liturgically. It seems very like how the Writings in my liturgy are not read in the haftorah cycle. I believe the COE also is fine if people want to study the W5 at home and agrees that there are no errors doctrinally in them.

2) I believe that Paul and know that I have way higher regard for the W5 than a book like 1 Clement, or Enoch or any other such work. To me the W5 are Scripture too, but through a different process. Ben Sira, Tobit and friends are not nearly as important.

3) 2 Peter 1:4 is the only place that DIRECTLY says "divine nature' but the divine nature is talked about in the 22 in other ways. I would reference qnoma and living water teachings in John 4 and 5, Hebrews 1:1-5 and also most precisely Galatians 4:8 on idols "who by their NATURE are not gods". 2 Peter does not contradict the 22 here but neither does the 22 need 2 Peter 1:4 when it makes the exact same point.

Hope this helps and I will defer to Akhan Paul to confirm what I am saying from his view.

Shlama w'burkate
Andrew Gabriel Roth
Reply


Messages In This Thread
Re: Revelation Good case for Aramaic Primacy?? Come on now - by Andrew Gabriel Roth - 09-04-2008, 04:55 PM

Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)