Apparently, God also knew that four was the right number of Gospels before Jesus even walked the earth—if you take the Church Fathers seriously, that is. Because, you know, there are four elements, four winds, four Ghostbusters. The old bullshit is always more acceptable than new bullshit.
Take Patterson: evangelical, but it’s not just the usual biases at work here. I'd argue it's more reasonable to see the canon’s formation as shaped by things like bigotry, slavery, and sexism than by any supposed “divine symmetry.” Four Gospels don’t prove anything about Christianity's origin—they only testify to the lateness of the tradition. Later than Marcion, later than the Jewish-Christian traditions, even later than the Johannine faction. It’s like Ted McGinley joining your show right when it’s about to jump the shark—late, too little, and a desperate attempt to maintain relevance.
The notion that the four-Gospel canon reflects “original Christianity” is absurd, a stale joke that dates back to the days when religious authorities claimed jurisdiction over what could be said about early Christianity. You've got referees from the second and third centuries shaping what got through; you've got Nicene-era scribes scrubbing out the contradictions; you've got the Reformation studies doing their part to reinforce the canon. And still, centuries later, all this myopia has yet to produce a compelling case. That’s a pretty deficient argument, isn’t it?
Take Patterson: evangelical, but it’s not just the usual biases at work here. I'd argue it's more reasonable to see the canon’s formation as shaped by things like bigotry, slavery, and sexism than by any supposed “divine symmetry.” Four Gospels don’t prove anything about Christianity's origin—they only testify to the lateness of the tradition. Later than Marcion, later than the Jewish-Christian traditions, even later than the Johannine faction. It’s like Ted McGinley joining your show right when it’s about to jump the shark—late, too little, and a desperate attempt to maintain relevance.
The notion that the four-Gospel canon reflects “original Christianity” is absurd, a stale joke that dates back to the days when religious authorities claimed jurisdiction over what could be said about early Christianity. You've got referees from the second and third centuries shaping what got through; you've got Nicene-era scribes scrubbing out the contradictions; you've got the Reformation studies doing their part to reinforce the canon. And still, centuries later, all this myopia has yet to produce a compelling case. That’s a pretty deficient argument, isn’t it?
Statistics: Posted by Secret Alias — Mon Nov 04, 2024 1:50 pm