Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Should God be replaced? -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Greg or e who wrote (10249)	2/6/2002 5:14:46 PM
From: Mitch Blevins	Respond to of 28931

>>Even if one assumes the material was authentic, which was not fully addressed, I thought Smith's conclusions were laughable.<< I haven't read Smith's book, so I don't have a strong opinion on it either way. But I do agree that the conclusions are a stretch. I could go either way as to authenticity. We already know that Mark's original Gospel did not survive intact (as witnessed by the multiple endings). Also, it seems that whoever wrote the Secret Gospel had access to the fourth Gospel (or the other way around), which makes me think it is either very early (pre-John) "authentic" or a late forgery (but not necessarily forged by Smith). But until the actual manuscript shows up, I will lean towards the skeptical side.