Red Letter Living

Many of us have “Red Letter Edition” Bibles.  These editions have all the words of Jesus printed in red.  The idea is that, even though all of scripture is important, we need to pay particular attention to what Jesus had to say.

I think that it is more important than ever for us to reemphasize the words of Jesus in our Christian lives.  He gave us pretty clear teaching on how we should live our lives — more about who we should be and what we should do than what we must believe.  Most of the heavy doctrinal burdens and issues that we bear today did not originate with the Savior.  They were added later by various church leaders.

I found two interesting blogs that focus on this perspective:

http://www.redletterchristians.org/

http://redletterliving.net/

I plan to read through the gospels again, using my red letter edition Bible this time.  I will also look at some of the accounts of Jesus’ sayings that were not accepted into our Bibles (the New Testament apocrypha) to see what they have to add.  And finally, I plan to augment my reading with the Aramaic New Testament (see https://churchofourfathers.wordpress.com/2012/04/30/the-peshitta-aramaic-new-testament/).  Since it is almost certain that Jesus spoke to his Jewish followers in Aramaic (not the Greek from which our English translations have been derived), this should provide an improved rendering of the words that Jesus actually said.

I have been reminded that we call ourselves Christians, not “Paulians” or “Peterians” or “Augustinians”.  The teachings of Christ himself must certainly receive our primary attention.

—————————

I also touch on some of these topics in my other blog at http://pathsofchristianity.com/.

Advertisements

More Books

I love bookstores.  I discovered a nice little bookstore in Cottonwood, Arizona yesterday.  Their inventory was pretty unusual, and I found a couple of books (at half price!) to add to my collection.  That is one reason why I entitled this post “More Books”.

The other reason that I chose that title is that are many more books and writings that were written in the early years after Christ than those which are included in our Bibles today.  They are sometimes called the New Testament Apocrypha.  Many are similar in form and content to the gospels and epistles that are in our Bibles, but they were not judged suitable to be included with the canonical books of scripture.  The names of these books could lead one to believe that they were written by apostles or other prominent figures of Jesus’ day.  However, actual authorship is often questionable.

The two books that I just purchased are text and commentary on The Gospel of Philip and The Gospel of Judas.  I already had a book on the New Testament Apocrypha which includes a large number of early writings, including The Gospel of Thomas, The Gospel of Bartholomew and The Gospel According to Mary.   I have a lot of studying to do!  Even if we accept that the early church leaders were correct — or even divinely inspired — in their selection of the canonical books, these writings of the first centuries after Christ can inform us on what the earliest Christians thought was important.  They are part of the history of Christianity.

Another subject for my future studies and future blog posts will be the history of how we got our Bibles.  The selection of the books to be included is one major aspect, but there are also issues surrounding the identification of the earliest/original texts, the accuracy of the copies made by scribes, and the accuracies of the various translations.  For example, I came across some information a while back that theorizes that the original gospel writings weren’t in Greek at all.  That theory is based on some textual analysis plus the idea that the Jewish apostles would almost certainly have written in their native Aramaic language and not the Greek trade language.  In that case, what we consider “original Greek” texts today would actually be early translations from Aramaic.  The more I dig into the earliest Christian history, the more I learn that those formative first centuries were much more complicated than I thought!