Christian Forums

Here is an interesting take on things

Up To 50 Books Were Left Out Of The Bible, Here's Why

I am sure there  is some truth in it.  Just as sure as I am there is a spin on things.

Anyway, came across it and thought I'd share.





[edited to fix link]

Sorry, I could not get more than two minutes into it.  It treats the lost gospels as authentic when some have been proven to be false/fraudulent in nature.  When you start from a premise that far off, there is no way you can present any kind of credible arguments.

Quote from: BondServant on Sat Feb 21, 2015 - 09:33:32
Sorry, I could not get more than two minutes into it.  It treats the lost gospels as authentic when some have been proven to be false/fraudulent in nature.  When you start from a premise that far off, there is no way you can present any kind of credible arguments.

Which of the lost gospels have been proven to be fraudulent?
Do you know? I found an online library of sacred writings that includes them but there is no mention of those which have been declared false. 

Thank you. 

The Gospel of Thomas, The Gospel of Mary and The Gospel of Judas are all about Gnosticism.  The Gospel of Peter was not written by Peter, nor was it written by someone close to Peter.

Quote from: BondServant on Sat Feb 21, 2015 - 09:57:01
The Gospel of Thomas, The Gospel of Mary and The Gospel of Judas are all about Gnosticism.  The Gospel of Peter was not written by Peter, nor was it written by someone close to Peter.

Thank you. Do you have any link to those sources that determined these were false? I'd like to read the points they make in their criticism of the text.

I found so many sites that purport to relate why the pseudepigrapha are false.
I found this one that speaks of the lost gospel of Peter.
Is this in keeping with what you've discovered of it? I'm still looking for the other books you mention and what is said of them.

Don't go looking for lost texts or you may be preoccupied by what you find. 

National Geographic:No Forgery Evidence Seen in "Gospel of Jesus's Wife" PapyrusScientists find no evidence of fakery in an ancient papyrus scrap saying that Jesus had a wife.

Quote from: angel wings on Sat Feb 21, 2015 - 10:15:08
Don't go looking for lost texts or you may be preoccupied by what you find. 

National Geographic:No Forgery Evidence Seen in "Gospel of Jesus's Wife" PapyrusScientists find no evidence of fakery in an ancient papyrus scrap saying that Jesus had a wife.

Amongst other things too. Amongst our  biblical gospels, I understand that Luke and Mark were not a eyewitness of Christ but instead companions  of Peter and  Paul. . But was disturbing for me to read that it is speculated that gospel of Mark is of an unknown author :

From wiki :
The Gospel of Mark

Most modern scholars reject the tradition which ascribes it to Mark the Evangelist, the companion of Peter, and regard it as the work of an unknown author working with various sources including collections of miracle stories, controversy stories, parables, and a passion

Quote from: Jd34 on Sat Feb 21, 2015 - 10:41:35

Quote from: angel wings on Sat Feb 21, 2015 - 10:15:08
Don't go looking for lost texts or you may be preoccupied by what you find. 

National Geographic:No Forgery Evidence Seen in "Gospel of Jesus's Wife" PapyrusScientists find no evidence of fakery in an ancient papyrus scrap saying that Jesus had a wife.

Amongst other things too. Amongst our  biblical gospels, I understand that Luke and Mark were not a eyewitness of Christ but instead companions  of Peter and  Paul. . But was disturbing for me to read that it is speculated that gospel of Mark is of an unknown author :

From wiki :
The Gospel of Mark

Most modern scholars reject the tradition which ascribes it to Mark the Evangelist, the companion of Peter, and regard it as the work of an unknown author working with various sources including collections of miracle stories, controversy stories, parables, and a passion

That can be a scary thing. Especially if one chooses to watch more than two minutes of the video included in this thread and hears of the politic behind the Nicene Council.

I don't put much credit in Wiki. This may help you. (PDF Link)

Quote from: angel wings on Sat Feb 21, 2015 - 10:44:46

Quote from: Jd34 on Sat Feb 21, 2015 - 10:41:35

Quote from: angel wings on Sat Feb 21, 2015 - 10:15:08
Don't go looking for lost texts or you may be preoccupied by what you find. 

National Geographic:No Forgery Evidence Seen in "Gospel of Jesus's Wife" PapyrusScientists find no evidence of fakery in an ancient papyrus scrap saying that Jesus had a wife.

Amongst other things too. Amongst our  biblical gospels, I understand that Luke and Mark were not a eyewitness of Christ but instead companions  of Peter and  Paul. . But was disturbing for me to read that it is speculated that gospel of Mark is of an unknown author :

From wiki :
The Gospel of Mark

Most modern scholars reject the tradition which ascribes it to Mark the Evangelist, the companion of Peter, and regard it as the work of an unknown author working with various sources including collections of miracle stories, controversy stories, parables, and a passion

That can be a scary thing. Especially if one chooses to watch more than two minutes of the video included in this thread and hears of the politic behind the Nicene Council.

I don't put much credit in Wiki. This may help you. (PDF Link)

Awesome! Thanks for that link!

You're welcome. 

I don't give credit to anything on the internet, particularly youtube.  That youtube video has absolutely zero credibility.

You are both free to exercise doubts about the validity of the Bible and about Jesus Christ.  I don't.  I know falsehood when I see it and I will call it out for what it is.  There is a big movement today to destroy the credibility of the Bible.  Undercut the Bible and you undercut Christianity.  That youtube video is part of that attempt.  It is wrong about the "lost gospels" and it is wrong about the Council of Nicea.

Pay a visit to your local library to learn about both.

 

Quote from: BondServant on Sat Feb 21, 2015 - 21:27:11
I don't give credit to anything on the internet, particularly youtube.  That youtube video has absolutely zero credibility.

You are both free to exercise doubts about the validity of the Bible and about Jesus Christ.  I don't.  I know falsehood when I see it and I will call it out for what it is.  There is a big movement today to destroy the credibility of the Bible.  Undercut the Bible and you undercut Christianity.  That youtube video is part of that attempt.  It is wrong about the "lost gospels" and it is wrong about the Council of Nicea.

Pay a visit to your local library to learn about both.

I agree Bond, ( a grain of salt) but how did we arrive at what we believe! Because my great great grand dad told my great grand dad and  told my grandfather that told my dad that told me? Our written word has went thru so much history... Constatine, Theidous ect... And then thru all the translations...

I am sorry but I don't think our 1 and 1/2" Bible tells us the complete story of everything. Does it tell enough?? No doubt it does! I can say that nothing from the Lost Gospel of Thomas contradicts any canonized scripture.

Which prompts my original question. Who decides what is credible and what is not and how do they decide that?

Quote from: Jd34 on Sun Feb 22, 2015 - 00:06:17
I am sorry but I don't think our 1 and 1/2" Bible tells us the complete story of everything. Does it tell enough?? No doubt it does! I can say that nothing from the Lost Gospel of Thomas contradicts any canonized scripture.

You can say nothing in ToG contradicts Scripture, but you would be wrong.  ToG is not a narrative, but an alleged collection of sayings, for example:

"Have I not told you that you are Gods" - Jesus

Quote from: Jd34 on Sun Feb 22, 2015 - 00:06:17
Which prompts my original question. Who decides what is credible and what is not and how do they decide that?

Contrary to the myths put out by some, there was not one big event that cannonized all of scripture.  It happened over time, starting with the Apostle Peter (2 Peter 3:15-16).  Many of the early Church leaders quoted from what we know as the New Testament in their writings, including Clement, Ignatius, Papias.  The first consolidated book was from Marcon.  While he later delved into the heresy of gnositism, he did consolidate Paul's letters and the four true Gospels.

That being said, when the New Testament was "officially" canonized by the Council of Carthage, there were three main criteria:  1) Writing or supervised by someone who had direct dealings with Jesus. 2) Accepted by the early Church leaders as authentic and authoritative. 3) Writings were in line with previously accepted scripture (Deut. 18:20-22).

Basically, the Council of Carthage confirmed what was already accepted as Scripture by the Church. It was no specific person or group that decided what was and was not canon, but an entire lineage of Church leaders, starting with the Apostles and ending with the third Council of Carthage.

Quote from: BondServant on Sun Feb 22, 2015 - 06:13:23

Quote from: Jd34 on Sun Feb 22, 2015 - 00:06:17
I am sorry but I don't think our 1 and 1/2" Bible tells us the complete story of everything. Does it tell enough?? No doubt it does! I can say that nothing from the Lost Gospel of Thomas contradicts any canonized scripture.

You can say nothing in ToG contradicts Scripture, but you would be wrong.  ToG is not a narrative, but an alleged collection of sayings, for example:

"Have I not told you that you are Gods" - Jesus

Quote from: Jd34 on Sun Feb 22, 2015 - 00:06:17
Which prompts my original question. Who decides what is credible and what is not and how do they decide that?

Contrary to the myths put out by some, there was not one big event that cannonized all of scripture.  It happened over time, starting with the Apostle Peter (2 Peter 3:15-16).  Many of the early Church leaders quoted from what we know as the New Testament in their writings, including Clement, Ignatius, Papias.  The first consolidated book was from Marcon.  While he later delved into the heresy of gnositism, he did consolidate Paul's letters and the four true Gospels.

That being said, when the New Testament was "officially" canonized by the Council of Carthage, there were three main criteria:  1) Writing or supervised by someone who had direct dealings with Jesus. 2) Accepted by the early Church leaders as authentic and authoritative. 3) Writings were in line with previously accepted scripture (Deut. 18:20-22).

Basically, the Council of Carthage confirmed what was already accepted as Scripture by the Church. It was no specific person or group that decided what was and was not canon, but an entire lineage of Church leaders, starting with the Apostles and ending with the third Council of Carthage. And as far as church

Thanks Bond! But I still don't understand how the Council of Carthage ( 200 plus years after Christ lived and walked the earth as a man) can confirm or deny anything. I mean its no big deal , but once I stop and think about it a little a question of mans motives arise. 

Quote from: Jd34 on Sun Feb 22, 2015 - 07:48:38
Thanks Bond! But I still don't understand how the Council of Carthage ( 200 plus years after Christ lived and walked the earth as a man) can confirm or deny anything. I mean its no big deal , but once I stop and think about it a little a question of mans motives arise.

As I stated above, you are free to doubt the validity of God's Word.  However, I have demonstrated your claimed about the Third Council of Carthage are false.  One would have no choice but to see that you are not just doubting the validity of God's Word, but deliberately trying to undercut it.  Repeating the same false claims over and over again make them no less false.

I don't think it is fair to say I question the validity of the scriptures of our Lord for that matter.

We're discussing lost gospels. That doesn't mean we don't embrace the present ones or Jesus.

Quote from: BondServant on Sat Feb 21, 2015 - 21:27:11
I don't give credit to anything on the internet, particularly youtube.  That youtube video has absolutely zero credibility.

You are both free to exercise doubts about the validity of the Bible and about Jesus Christ.  I don't.  I know falsehood when I see it and I will call it out for what it is.  There is a big movement today to destroy the credibility of the Bible.  Undercut the Bible and you undercut Christianity.  That youtube video is part of that attempt.  It is wrong about the "lost gospels" and it is wrong about the Council of Nicea.

Pay a visit to your local library to learn about both.

Quote from: BondServant on Sun Feb 22, 2015 - 08:00:55

Quote from: Jd34 on Sun Feb 22, 2015 - 07:48:38
Thanks Bond! But I still don't understand how the Council of Carthage ( 200 plus years after Christ lived and walked the earth as a man) can confirm or deny anything. I mean its no big deal , but once I stop and think about it a little a question of mans motives arise.

As I stated above, you are free to doubt the validity of God's Word.  However, I have demonstrated your claimed about the Third Council of Carthage are false.  One would have no choice but to see that you are not just doubting the validity of God's Word, but deliberately trying to undercut it.  Repeating the same false claims over and over again make them no less false.

I am not doubting the validity of any of Gods words. I am not making any false claims about the Third Council of Carthage.  Im only questioning the authority of those who decide what is valid and what is not valid and how they make that decision . I am talking about the compilation of Our bible. Our bible is one book made of many books.. The many books that were decided was chosen by men.. Men like the Pope I suppose.. Lol..the same men who decide what not to go in the Bible also.

Early Christianity had a lot of loose ends that needed tied together and it was the first Council of Nicaea that Constantine called to order to nail some issues down concerning Christianity.

As far as the lost gospels go, clearly there is a gnostic slant to them but they still propegate our Lord Jesus Christ.. I can't judge them- some of Jesus sayings in the gospel of Thomas is the same as in our bible , so I know there is truth in it.

I don't doubt any word of Gods but it seems that many do.

Quote from: Jd34 on Sun Feb 22, 2015 - 11:46:10
I am not doubting the validity of any of Gods words. I am not making any false claims about the Third Council of Carthage.  Im only questioning the authority of those who decide what is valid and what is not valid and how they make that decision . I am talking about the compilation of Our bible. Our bible is one book made of many books.. The many books that were decided was chosen by men.. Men like the Pope I suppose.. Lol..the same men who decide what not to go in the Bible also.

J34, you have not read a single thing I posted.  You clearly have an agenda.  You think if you repeat the same false claims over and over again, they will be true?  The "lost" Gospels are FALSE gospels.  I am not sure how much clearer that can be.  The canonization of Scripture began with the Apostle Peter, who was given the authority by Jesus Christ Himself.  I'm not sure how much clearer that can be.  No Pope decided what goes in and what goes out.

Quote from: Jd34 on Sun Feb 22, 2015 - 11:46:10
Early Christianity had a lot of loose ends that needed tied together and it was the first Council of Nicaea that Constantine called to order to nail some issues down concerning Christianity.

The first council was in Jerusalem.  The Council of Nicea used the Council of Jerusalem as a precedent.  However, that is not where the Bible as we know it today was officially canonized...not sure why you keep bringing this up, except that you believe it somehow undercuts the validity of God's Word.

Quote from: Jd34 on Sun Feb 22, 2015 - 11:46:10
As far as the lost gospels go, clearly there is a gnostic slant to them but they still propegate our Lord Jesus Christ.. I can't judge them- some of Jesus sayings in the gospel of Thomas is the same as in our bible , so I know there is truth in it.

There is more than "a Gnostic slant."  They are Gnostic writings, which is an absolute heresy.  They do not propagate our Lord Jesus Christ, they undercut His entire message!  How can you not see that?  Copying a few lines from the true Gospels does not make the false Gospels true.  It was a tactic the writers used to further their Gnostic teachings.

Quote from: Jd34 on Sun Feb 22, 2015 - 11:46:10
I don't doubt any word of Gods but it seems that many do.

You clearly do and you are clearly trying to undercut the true Gospel.  You can deny it if you wish, you can even curse my name for pointing it out, but your insistence that the false gospels are true and that Bible is man-made speak far louder than any denials you can make.

Bond, you are making a lot of assumptions about me that are not true. I have read what you have posted. I do not have an agenda only a curiosity. I do not insist that the lost Gospels are absolute truth- I have said there is some truth in them--I can say that because alot is the same of what we find in our bible.

I am not denying anything or am I undercutting anything. I posted that youtube vid because I came across it and found it to be interesting. I watched it with an opened mind.. I said it was an interesting take on things and had a spin to it and that I was sure there was "some" truth in it- that's all.

I am secure in my faith and nothing threatens it.  But you will think of me as you will and that's fine- does not bother me in anyway.

Good day

Quote from: angel wings on Sat Feb 21, 2015 - 09:37:02

Quote from: BondServant on Sat Feb 21, 2015 - 09:33:32
Sorry, I could not get more than two minutes into it.  It treats the lost gospels as authentic when some have been proven to be false/fraudulent in nature.  When you start from a premise that far off, there is no way you can present any kind of credible arguments.

Which of the lost gospels have been proven to be fraudulent?
Do you know? I found an online library of sacred writings that includes them but there is no mention of those which have been declared false. 

Thank you. 

Depends what you mean by fraudulent.

They are authentically ancient... from 100 years or less after the time of Christ.

They are simply not Christian documents.  It is provable that they originate in Egypt and were written by people who weren't Christians.

Jarrod