Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!wuarchive!bcm!dimacs.rutgers.edu!aramis.rutgers.edu!athos.rutgers.edu!christian From: tensmekl@infonode.ingr.com (Kermit Tensmeyer) Newsgroups: soc.religion.christian Subject: Re: Why a New Testament? Message-ID: Date: 24 Jan 91 08:23:27 GMT Sender: hedrick@athos.rutgers.edu Organization: Intergraph Corp. Huntsville, AL Lines: 35 Approved: christian@aramis.rutgers.edu In article sacg1198@uxa.cso.uiuc.edu (Scott Cattanach) writes: > >Speaking only for myself ... > >The books of the OT were not delivered to the Jews at one time, they were >written over a span of many years. IMHO, the books we separate into the NT >are simply a continuation of the unfolding relevation of God that had been >going on since Abraham or Moses. God's message was incomplete after >the 5 books of Moses, it was incomplete after the Psalms were compiled, >and it was incomplete after the last book (chronologically) of the OT was >written. I believe Revelation was the close of this relevation; anything >past that will have to be addresses by a Muslim. > Is it your understanding that because "The Revelation of John" is listed as the "last book" in the NT that it is the "last book (chronologically)"? It is my understanding that several of the episiles were written after revelation. I remember a lecture in which the speaker maintained that the Gospel of St. John was different from the other gosples because John had a vision and then understood that Jesus (his friend and companion) was in fact God. John then wrote his gosple to teach from that point of view. At the time, it seemed to me, to be reaching to grab that point of view. Would it be of any real value to know why each book in this Testament of Christ was placed in the canon or why other books are denied? I don't think so. -- Kermit Tensmeyer | Intergraph Corporation UUCP: ...uunet!ingr!tensmekl | One Madison Industrial Park INTERNET: tensmekl@ingr.com | Mail Stop LR23A2 AT&T: (205)730-8127 | Huntsville, AL 35807-4201