Post by iris89 on Oct 16, 2007 18:54:06 GMT -5
Research Subject Selection:
INTRODUCTION:
Research subjects of the data mining variety are almost endless; therefore, the researcher must define what he/she wants to research and why.
First, The researcher must ask himself or herself is the subject worth researching, i.e., does it have a strong possibility of being important and whether it has or has not been adequately covered by other researchers/writers.
Second, Is there an issue involved with multiple possibilities or is there no diversity of opinion on the outcome of the subject. If there are no multiple possibilities and/or diversity of opinion on the outcome of the subject, there is no reason to research it, i.e., if all major players agree on the outcome, no investigation should be undertaken.
Third, Is there a strong possibility the results of the research will be educational or add new knowledge? If it is judged that there is NOT a strong possibility that the results will be useful – then no research is warranted.
If the answer to any of these preliminary items before doing research is NO none should undertaken; to wit,Items lacking importance should NOT be researched.
EXAMPLE OF APPLICATION OF THE THREE GUIDING PRINCIPLES TO UNDERTAKING RESEARCH:
Some years ago, I was looking into doing research on the accuracy of Bible canon as it effected an important subject; to wit, which Bible books are inspired and why.
I first took an overview of both the New Testament and the Old Testament, but I quickly narrowed my research down to the Old Testament only. Why? Simple, there was a large and important discrepancy with regard to which books various groups included in their translations of the Old Testament.
Whereas, all groups seemed in complete agreement with which were the inspired books of the New Testament with any disagreement having been resolved for over a millennium. Bibles by Protestant groups, Roman Catholic Church (RCC), the Eastern or Orthodox Church, the Anabaptist, the Mormons, the Unitarians, independent of denomination translations such as those by James Morfit, Dr. J. J. Griesbach, in his word-for-word translation from Koine Greek found in the Vatican Manuscript #1209, "La Bible du Centenaire" by L'Evangile selon Jean, by Maurice Goguel," The Bible-An American Translation by J. M. P. Smith and E. J. Goodspeed, “Das Neue Testament,” by Ludwig Thimme, The New Testament by James L. Tomanek, "Das Evangelium nach Johannes" Siegfried Schulz, "Das Evangelium nach Johannes" by Johannes Schneider, “Das Evangelium nach Johannes" by Jurgen Becker Harwood, Translator's NT, Barclay NT, Scholar's Version, Young’s Literal Translation, Becker’s Translation, Translation by Lyder Brun (Norw. professor of NT theology), Bibel in heutigem Deutsch, The New Testament in An Improved Version, Upon the Basis of Achbishop Newcome's New Translation: With a Corrected Text, The Emphatic Diaglott, by Benjamin Wilson, 1884 (Darby 1884 Version; Darby) Version, Today's English Version, etc. all had the exact same canon. NO ISSUE HERE WORTHY OF RESEARCH AS NO VARIANCE OF OPINION.
However, the Old Testament was a very different case. There were plenty of different canons and NO agreement on them. The RCC had one canon, the Copts had another, the Protestants had another, the Anabaptist had another, etc. So as can be seen the proper place for research was on the Old Testament with respect canon due to lack of agreement on same. It meant all three criteria as listed in the INTRODUCTION.
As I started my research, the subject started to get away from me as it proved to have many more facets than my preliminary cursory research had revealed; to wit, the subject proved much bigger and more diverse than appeared on the surface. When all was said and done, I ended up writing three separate research reports on Old Testament Bible canon instead of one due to the many facets of the subject. The names of my research products are:
Old Testament Bible Canon - Beginning:, which can be read at,
religioustruths.proboards59.com/index.cgi?action=display&board=canon&thread=1163276361
A Second Look Including The Thinking of Jerome:, which can be read at,
religioustruths.proboards59.com/index.cgi?action=display&board=canon&thread=1163276574&page=1
Bible Canon - A Challenging Addition On The Subject of The Apocrypha:, which can be read at,
religioustruths.proboards59.com/index.cgi?action=display&board=canon&thread=1163276825&page=1
THE SUBJECT OF THE APOCRYPHA:
In doing my research on the Old Testament Bible canon a most salient feature with respect differences came to the forefront, some translations had Apocrypha books included in them and there was no consistency with respect which ones were included. The most unusual finding, as best I can remember, was with respect the Apocrypha books – four – of Maccabees, which were excellent history books for filling in an era between of the Old Testament about 400 BC and the start of the CE even though they were of course no more inspired than were the works of Flavius Josephus, the great historian of the first century.
However, one group the RCC included the first two books of Maccabees in their canon, but not the other two – strange indeed. Also, one other group included some of the works of Maccabees in their canon, but not the same ones as the RCC. I have never figured out why if you include one Apocrypha book of a series written by the same group in your canon why you would not include all. One small middle eastern group even included in their canon an Apocrypha book that said God had a girl friend, I believe this Apocrypha book was Susanna, but I am no longer sure.
WHAT IS THE APOCRYPHA OR DEUTERCANONICAL BOOKS?
First, let's consider what they are as defined by the Columbia Encyclopedia, sixth edition, by Columbia University Press. This encyclopedia defines the Apocrypha as, "(pk´rf) (KEY) [Gr.,=hidden things], term signifying a collection of early Jewish writings excluded from the canon of the Hebrew scriptures. It is not clear why the term was chosen." In reality they were nothing but uninspired writings, many purporting to be written by other than who was actually their author, or basically illegitimate and lacking credence. In fact, the real author of only one of the Apocrypha is actually known. Some religions, unfortunately, have included some of the Apocrypha in their Bibles, but even these were few in number. A list of most of the Apocrypha follows:
1 Clement, 1st Apocalypse of James, 2 Clement, 2nd Apocalypse of James, 1 Esdras, 2 Esdras, Acts of Andrew, Acts of Apollonius, Acts of Carpus, Acts of John,Acts of Paul, Acts of Perpetua and Felicitas, Acts of Peter, Acts of Peter and the Twelve, Acts of Pilate, Acts of the Apostles, Acts of Thomas, Additions to the Book of Esther, Anonymous Anti-Montanist. Anti-Marcionite Prologues, Apelles, Apocalypse of John, Apocalypse of Peter, Apocryphon of John, Apollonius, Apology of Aristides, Aristo of Pella, Ascension of Isaiah, Athenagoras of Athens, Authoritative Teaching, Bardesanes, Baruch, Basilides, Eel and the Dragon, Book of Elchasai, Book of Thomas the Contender, Books of Jeu, Caius, Celsus, Christian Sibyllines, Claudius Apollinaris, Clement of Alexandria, Colossians, Coptic Apocalypse of Paul, Coptic Apocalypse of Peter, Dialogue of the Savior, Diatessaron, Didache, Didascalia, Dionysius of Corinth, Discourse on the Eighth and Ninth, Dura-Europos Gospel Harmony, Ecclesiasticus, or the Wisdom of Jesus the Son of Sirach, Egerton Gospel, Epiphanes On Righteousness, Epistle of Barnabas, Epistle of Mathetes to Diognetus, Epistula Apostolorum, Excerpts of Theodotus, Fayyum Fragment, Fifth and Sixth Books of Esra, Fronto, Galen, Gospel of Judas, Gospel of Mary, Gospel of Peter, Gospel of Philip, Gospel of the Ebionite, Gospel of the Egyptians, Gospel of the Hebrews, Gospel of the Nazoreans, Gospel of the Savior, Gospel of Thomas
Gospel of Truth, Hegesippus, Heracleon, Hippolytus of Rome, Ignatius of Antioch, Infancy Gospel of James, Infancy Gospel of Thomas, Inscription of Abercius, Irenaeus of Lyons, Isidore, Judith, Julius Cassianus, Justin Martyr, Kerygmata Petrou, Letter from Vienna and Lyons, Letter of Jeremiah, Letter of Peter to Philip, Lost Sayings Gospel Q, Lucian of Samosata, Mara Bar Serapion, Marcion, Marcus Aurelius, Martyrdom of Polycarp, Maximus of Jerusalem, Melchizedek, Melito of Sardis, Muratorian Canon, Naassene Fragment, Octavius of Minucius Felix, Odes of Solomon, Ophite Diagrams, Origen, Oxyrhynchus 1224 Gospel, Oxyrhynchus 840 Gospel, Pantaenus, Papias, Passion Narrative, Passion of the Scillitan Martyrs , Philostratus, Pistis Sophia, Pliny the Younger, Polycarp to the Philippians, Polycrates of Ephesus, Prayer of Azariah and the Song of the Three Jews, Prayer of Manasseh, Preaching of Peter, Ptolemy, Quadratus of Athens, Rhodon, Secret Book of James, Secret Mark, Serapion of Antioch, Shepherd of Hermas, Signs Gospel, Sophia of Jesus Christ, Suetonius, Susanna, Tacitus, Tatian's Address to the Greeks, The Additions to the Book of Daniel, Tertullian, Testaments of the Twelve Patriarchs, Theophilus of Antioch, Theophilus of Caesarea, Tobit, Traditions of Matthias, Treatise on the Resurrection, Trimorphic Protennoia, Valentinus, Victor I, Wisdom of Solomon, etc.
As can be seen many of these illegitimate books try to give themselves credence by closely mimicking the names of actual legitimate canonical books of the Bible. These books are often called the pseudepigrapha? The term is a transliteration of the Greek plural noun that literally means "with false superscription". According to Webster's Third New International Dictionary (p. 1830), the term can be defined as, "spurious works purporting to emanate from biblical characters". The Random House Unabridged Dictionary of the English Language defines the term as, "Certain writings (other than the canonical books and the Apocrypha) professing to be Biblical in character, but not considered canonical or inspired. These are NOT lost books, just NOT legitimate books of Bible cannon.
Interesting there really is a lost book of the Bible, 4 John, mentioned elsewhere in the New Testament, but no copy of it has ever been found so my conclusion is that nothing contained in it could be of great importance for us or Almighty God (YHWH) would have made sure it was preserved. I discovered this in a very careful reading of the New Testament, but have found no reference to by any other so my research product on it may well be the only one. For those who care to read it, it is at Discourse on a Lost Book of the Bible:, which can be read at,
religioustruths.proboards59.com/index.cgi?board=biblical&action=display&thread=1163273589
If you do read it, send me your comments as a PM.
Your Friend in Christ Iris89
INTRODUCTION:
Research subjects of the data mining variety are almost endless; therefore, the researcher must define what he/she wants to research and why.
First, The researcher must ask himself or herself is the subject worth researching, i.e., does it have a strong possibility of being important and whether it has or has not been adequately covered by other researchers/writers.
Second, Is there an issue involved with multiple possibilities or is there no diversity of opinion on the outcome of the subject. If there are no multiple possibilities and/or diversity of opinion on the outcome of the subject, there is no reason to research it, i.e., if all major players agree on the outcome, no investigation should be undertaken.
Third, Is there a strong possibility the results of the research will be educational or add new knowledge? If it is judged that there is NOT a strong possibility that the results will be useful – then no research is warranted.
If the answer to any of these preliminary items before doing research is NO none should undertaken; to wit,Items lacking importance should NOT be researched.
EXAMPLE OF APPLICATION OF THE THREE GUIDING PRINCIPLES TO UNDERTAKING RESEARCH:
Some years ago, I was looking into doing research on the accuracy of Bible canon as it effected an important subject; to wit, which Bible books are inspired and why.
I first took an overview of both the New Testament and the Old Testament, but I quickly narrowed my research down to the Old Testament only. Why? Simple, there was a large and important discrepancy with regard to which books various groups included in their translations of the Old Testament.
Whereas, all groups seemed in complete agreement with which were the inspired books of the New Testament with any disagreement having been resolved for over a millennium. Bibles by Protestant groups, Roman Catholic Church (RCC), the Eastern or Orthodox Church, the Anabaptist, the Mormons, the Unitarians, independent of denomination translations such as those by James Morfit, Dr. J. J. Griesbach, in his word-for-word translation from Koine Greek found in the Vatican Manuscript #1209, "La Bible du Centenaire" by L'Evangile selon Jean, by Maurice Goguel," The Bible-An American Translation by J. M. P. Smith and E. J. Goodspeed, “Das Neue Testament,” by Ludwig Thimme, The New Testament by James L. Tomanek, "Das Evangelium nach Johannes" Siegfried Schulz, "Das Evangelium nach Johannes" by Johannes Schneider, “Das Evangelium nach Johannes" by Jurgen Becker Harwood, Translator's NT, Barclay NT, Scholar's Version, Young’s Literal Translation, Becker’s Translation, Translation by Lyder Brun (Norw. professor of NT theology), Bibel in heutigem Deutsch, The New Testament in An Improved Version, Upon the Basis of Achbishop Newcome's New Translation: With a Corrected Text, The Emphatic Diaglott, by Benjamin Wilson, 1884 (Darby 1884 Version; Darby) Version, Today's English Version, etc. all had the exact same canon. NO ISSUE HERE WORTHY OF RESEARCH AS NO VARIANCE OF OPINION.
However, the Old Testament was a very different case. There were plenty of different canons and NO agreement on them. The RCC had one canon, the Copts had another, the Protestants had another, the Anabaptist had another, etc. So as can be seen the proper place for research was on the Old Testament with respect canon due to lack of agreement on same. It meant all three criteria as listed in the INTRODUCTION.
As I started my research, the subject started to get away from me as it proved to have many more facets than my preliminary cursory research had revealed; to wit, the subject proved much bigger and more diverse than appeared on the surface. When all was said and done, I ended up writing three separate research reports on Old Testament Bible canon instead of one due to the many facets of the subject. The names of my research products are:
Old Testament Bible Canon - Beginning:, which can be read at,
religioustruths.proboards59.com/index.cgi?action=display&board=canon&thread=1163276361
A Second Look Including The Thinking of Jerome:, which can be read at,
religioustruths.proboards59.com/index.cgi?action=display&board=canon&thread=1163276574&page=1
Bible Canon - A Challenging Addition On The Subject of The Apocrypha:, which can be read at,
religioustruths.proboards59.com/index.cgi?action=display&board=canon&thread=1163276825&page=1
THE SUBJECT OF THE APOCRYPHA:
In doing my research on the Old Testament Bible canon a most salient feature with respect differences came to the forefront, some translations had Apocrypha books included in them and there was no consistency with respect which ones were included. The most unusual finding, as best I can remember, was with respect the Apocrypha books – four – of Maccabees, which were excellent history books for filling in an era between of the Old Testament about 400 BC and the start of the CE even though they were of course no more inspired than were the works of Flavius Josephus, the great historian of the first century.
However, one group the RCC included the first two books of Maccabees in their canon, but not the other two – strange indeed. Also, one other group included some of the works of Maccabees in their canon, but not the same ones as the RCC. I have never figured out why if you include one Apocrypha book of a series written by the same group in your canon why you would not include all. One small middle eastern group even included in their canon an Apocrypha book that said God had a girl friend, I believe this Apocrypha book was Susanna, but I am no longer sure.
WHAT IS THE APOCRYPHA OR DEUTERCANONICAL BOOKS?
First, let's consider what they are as defined by the Columbia Encyclopedia, sixth edition, by Columbia University Press. This encyclopedia defines the Apocrypha as, "(pk´rf) (KEY) [Gr.,=hidden things], term signifying a collection of early Jewish writings excluded from the canon of the Hebrew scriptures. It is not clear why the term was chosen." In reality they were nothing but uninspired writings, many purporting to be written by other than who was actually their author, or basically illegitimate and lacking credence. In fact, the real author of only one of the Apocrypha is actually known. Some religions, unfortunately, have included some of the Apocrypha in their Bibles, but even these were few in number. A list of most of the Apocrypha follows:
1 Clement, 1st Apocalypse of James, 2 Clement, 2nd Apocalypse of James, 1 Esdras, 2 Esdras, Acts of Andrew, Acts of Apollonius, Acts of Carpus, Acts of John,Acts of Paul, Acts of Perpetua and Felicitas, Acts of Peter, Acts of Peter and the Twelve, Acts of Pilate, Acts of the Apostles, Acts of Thomas, Additions to the Book of Esther, Anonymous Anti-Montanist. Anti-Marcionite Prologues, Apelles, Apocalypse of John, Apocalypse of Peter, Apocryphon of John, Apollonius, Apology of Aristides, Aristo of Pella, Ascension of Isaiah, Athenagoras of Athens, Authoritative Teaching, Bardesanes, Baruch, Basilides, Eel and the Dragon, Book of Elchasai, Book of Thomas the Contender, Books of Jeu, Caius, Celsus, Christian Sibyllines, Claudius Apollinaris, Clement of Alexandria, Colossians, Coptic Apocalypse of Paul, Coptic Apocalypse of Peter, Dialogue of the Savior, Diatessaron, Didache, Didascalia, Dionysius of Corinth, Discourse on the Eighth and Ninth, Dura-Europos Gospel Harmony, Ecclesiasticus, or the Wisdom of Jesus the Son of Sirach, Egerton Gospel, Epiphanes On Righteousness, Epistle of Barnabas, Epistle of Mathetes to Diognetus, Epistula Apostolorum, Excerpts of Theodotus, Fayyum Fragment, Fifth and Sixth Books of Esra, Fronto, Galen, Gospel of Judas, Gospel of Mary, Gospel of Peter, Gospel of Philip, Gospel of the Ebionite, Gospel of the Egyptians, Gospel of the Hebrews, Gospel of the Nazoreans, Gospel of the Savior, Gospel of Thomas
Gospel of Truth, Hegesippus, Heracleon, Hippolytus of Rome, Ignatius of Antioch, Infancy Gospel of James, Infancy Gospel of Thomas, Inscription of Abercius, Irenaeus of Lyons, Isidore, Judith, Julius Cassianus, Justin Martyr, Kerygmata Petrou, Letter from Vienna and Lyons, Letter of Jeremiah, Letter of Peter to Philip, Lost Sayings Gospel Q, Lucian of Samosata, Mara Bar Serapion, Marcion, Marcus Aurelius, Martyrdom of Polycarp, Maximus of Jerusalem, Melchizedek, Melito of Sardis, Muratorian Canon, Naassene Fragment, Octavius of Minucius Felix, Odes of Solomon, Ophite Diagrams, Origen, Oxyrhynchus 1224 Gospel, Oxyrhynchus 840 Gospel, Pantaenus, Papias, Passion Narrative, Passion of the Scillitan Martyrs , Philostratus, Pistis Sophia, Pliny the Younger, Polycarp to the Philippians, Polycrates of Ephesus, Prayer of Azariah and the Song of the Three Jews, Prayer of Manasseh, Preaching of Peter, Ptolemy, Quadratus of Athens, Rhodon, Secret Book of James, Secret Mark, Serapion of Antioch, Shepherd of Hermas, Signs Gospel, Sophia of Jesus Christ, Suetonius, Susanna, Tacitus, Tatian's Address to the Greeks, The Additions to the Book of Daniel, Tertullian, Testaments of the Twelve Patriarchs, Theophilus of Antioch, Theophilus of Caesarea, Tobit, Traditions of Matthias, Treatise on the Resurrection, Trimorphic Protennoia, Valentinus, Victor I, Wisdom of Solomon, etc.
As can be seen many of these illegitimate books try to give themselves credence by closely mimicking the names of actual legitimate canonical books of the Bible. These books are often called the pseudepigrapha? The term is a transliteration of the Greek plural noun that literally means "with false superscription". According to Webster's Third New International Dictionary (p. 1830), the term can be defined as, "spurious works purporting to emanate from biblical characters". The Random House Unabridged Dictionary of the English Language defines the term as, "Certain writings (other than the canonical books and the Apocrypha) professing to be Biblical in character, but not considered canonical or inspired. These are NOT lost books, just NOT legitimate books of Bible cannon.
Interesting there really is a lost book of the Bible, 4 John, mentioned elsewhere in the New Testament, but no copy of it has ever been found so my conclusion is that nothing contained in it could be of great importance for us or Almighty God (YHWH) would have made sure it was preserved. I discovered this in a very careful reading of the New Testament, but have found no reference to by any other so my research product on it may well be the only one. For those who care to read it, it is at Discourse on a Lost Book of the Bible:, which can be read at,
religioustruths.proboards59.com/index.cgi?board=biblical&action=display&thread=1163273589
If you do read it, send me your comments as a PM.
Your Friend in Christ Iris89