I've recently watched a few videos of Richard Dawkins speaking at various events. Richard Dawkins is a well published Atheist who is currently touring (proselytising, even) his new book, The God Delusion, which I have not read.
In visiting RichardDawkins.net, I found in the forum this discussion about the Q document, and subsequently a translation of the Q document by a fellow, Burton Mack. The primary sentiment of the thread is that Christianity as it stands today is largely exagerated, fabricated, etc. That is to say the original Q document doesn't mention anything of the deity of Christ Jesus, only his teachings. The translation I've read and to which I've linked supports this- that the Q document makes no mention of the divinity of Christ.
What we know of the 'Q' (using only the link as a source) is that it is a record of the sayings of Christ Jesus. It is reasonable to assume that only those who follow the teachings of Christ Jesus would have interest in recording his words- therefore, the 'Q' was likely written within a Christ-minded community, and intended for a Christ-minded community. Now, for some slightly more broad steps of logic.
Why record only Jesus' teachings? Why not record specifically any exchanges which might allude to Jesus' divinity? The audience intended by the author(s) of the 'Q' is a person/community who already follows Christ. 'Q' was not meant as a proselytising instrument. Therefore, it was assumed by the author that a person/community reading 'Q' would possess prerequisite knowledge of Jesus. It would be unimportant, and worthlessly redundant, to include "proof" of Jesus' divinity.
further study:
Theopedia- a theological wiki
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment