It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Book I. The careers of Adam and Eve, from the day they left Eden; their dwelling in the Cave of Treasures; their trials and temptations; Satan's manifold apparitions to them. The birth of Cain, of Abel, and of their twin sisters; Cain's love for his own twin sister, Luluwa, whom Adam and Eve wished to join to Abel; the details of Cain's murder of his brother; and Adam's sorrow and death.
Book IL The history of the patriarchs who lived before the Flood; the dwelling of the children of Seth on the Holy Mountain--Mount Hermon--until they were lured by Henun and by the daughters of Cain, to come' down from the mountain. Cain's death, when slain by Lamech the blind; and the lives of other patriarchs until the birth of Noah.
One critic has said of this writing:
"This is we believe, the greatest literary discovery that the world has known. Its effect upon contemporary thought in molding the judgment of the future generations is of incalculable value.
"The treasures of Tut-ank-Amen's Tomb were no more precious to the Egyptologist than are these literary treasures to the world of scholarship."
But we prefer to let the reader make his own exploration and form his own opinion. The writing is arresting enough to inspire very original thoughts concerning it,
In general, this account begins where the Genesis story of Adam and Eve leaves off. Thus the two can not well be compared; here we have a new chapter--a sort of sequel to the other. Here is the story of the twin sisters of Cain and Abel, and it is notable that here the blame for the first murder is placed squarely at the door of a difference over Woman.
Originally posted by Resinveins
reply to post by NOTurTypical
I believe the op refers to the Council of Nicaea in 325 A.D. It was a gathering of christian leaders brought together by Emperor Constantine to determine an official bible.. and which texts would be included in it and which would not.
Pretty sure it's thought many of those decisions were made for dubious reasons, rather than what they thought was credible or not. So they pretty much shaped the Bible the way it is today, and in no sense added all the prevalent christian texts of the period.. but only those they felt.. "appropriate".
The First Council of Nicea was convened by Constantine I upon the recommendations of a synod led by Hosius of Córdoba in the Eastertide of 325. This synod had been charged with investigation of the trouble brought about by the Arian controversy in the Greek-speaking east. To most bishops, the teachings of Arius were heretical and dangerous to the salvation of souls. In the summer of 325, the bishops of all provinces were summoned to Nicea (now known as İznik, in modern-day Turkey), a place easily accessible to the majority of delegates, particularly those of Asia Minor, Syria, Palestine, Egypt, Greece, and Thrace....
The agenda of the synod included:
1. The Arian question regarding the relationship between God the Father and Jesus; i.e. are the Father and Son one in divine purpose only or also one in being
2. The date of celebration of the Paschal/Easter observation
3. The Meletian schism
4. The validity of baptism by heretics
5. The status of the lapsed in the persecution under Licinius
A number of erroneous views have been stated regarding the council's role in establishing the Biblical Canon. In fact, there is no record of any discussion of the Biblical Canon at the council at all. The development of the Biblical Canon took centuries, and was nearly complete (with exceptions known as the Antilegomena) by the time the Muratorian fragment was written, perhaps as early as 150 years before the council, but more likely in the 4th century, specifically at the Council of Carthage in 397. In 331 Constantine commissioned fifty Bibles for the Church of Constantinople, but little else is known, though it has been speculated that this may have provided motivation for canon lists. In Jerome's Prologue to Judith he claims that the Book of Judith was "found by the Nicene Council to have been counted among the number of the Sacred Scriptures".
The earliest indications of the Old Testament canon come from the time of Ezra and Nehemiah and suggest that the process had begun during the Babylonian captivity (605-535 BC) with the Torah (the 1st 5 Books of the Bible). But the process was probably not complete until sometime in the 2nd Century BC. Deciding which books were to be included was done by senior priests based on general agreement that each book was authentic (written by the person identified as its author) and divinely inspired.
The New Testament had pretty much come together by 150AD but there continued to be discussion about a few books until about 400 AD. It was not officially canonized until the Council of Trent in the 1500′s. There were three basic criteria for inclusion.
1. Were the authors either eyewitnesses to the events they wrote about or at least directly taught about them by the Apostles?
2. Was each book’s teachings consistent with church practice and tradition?
3. Was each book already in general use by the church, and accepted as the Divine Word of God? In both Old and New testaments, the books included had to be generally viewed as the work of divinely inspired writers who faithfully converted God’s Word into written form.
There are ton of books missing from the Bible thanks to the council of men who decided to leave them out because they are too hefty and not for the riffe-raffe to know.
What I do know is that the Council of Nicea had absolutely nothing to do with the canon of scripture, nor was Jesus "deified" at the council.
The absurdly rampant propagation of these silly myths make me want to gouge my eyes out with pencils.
HOWEVER, if you're a closed minded, religious-book thumping fanatic, then DEFINITELY don't take the chance. It would only cause unneeded distress in your mind and your intestinal tract.