This is a placeholder text
Group text
by GSDguy08 on 20 September 2012 - 17:09
Just thought I would post information on the "lost gospels" for some on here who are Christians or who may be interested in reading about these; And to why they are not and should not be in the bible. When I say the lost gospels, I mention ones like the "gospel of Judas, Philip, Mary Magdalene, Thomas, Egyptians, etc etc. I'll just post one for now and add the others later on. Let's keep this thread nice and without anything harsh. I know these threads can turn into harsh arguments, If you don't have anything nice to say about this, Christianity, etc, please keep it out of this thread.
There is a good amount written on this. And better written than I could have, but here is what is mentioned about the "Gospel of Judas".
The Gospel of Judas was developed by a Gnostic sect in the second century A.D and was was originally written in Greek around 130-170. This fact alone tells us that it was not authored by Judas himself. The oldest extant copy is a Coptic manuscript written in Sahidic (last phase of ancient Egyptian) in the fourth or fifth century.
The gospel of Judas is included in a 62-page papyrus1 manuscript that was uncovered in Egypt during the 1950's or 1960's.2 The translator of the Gospel of Judas is Rodolphe Kasser of the University of Geneva, a leading Coptic Scholar and the contents are due to be released in April, 2006. At the date of writing this article (April 7th, 2006), the complete translated text of this pseudepigraphal writing is unavailable. However, at CNN.com we have the following excerpts:
"The newly translated document's text begins: 'The secret account of the revelation that Jesus spoke in conversation with Judas Iscariot.'
"In a key passage Jesus tells Judas, 'You will exceed all of them. For you will sacrifice the man that clothes me.'
"This indicates that Judas would help liberate the spiritual self by helping Jesus get rid of his physical flesh, the scholars said.
"'Step away from the others and I shall tell you the mysteries of the kingdom,'" Jesus says to Judas, singling him out for special status. 'Look, you have been told everything. Lift up your eyes and look at the cloud and the light within it and the stars surrounding it. The star that leads the way is your star.'"
"The text ends with Judas turning Jesus over to the high priests and does not include any mention of the crucifixion or resurrection."3
According to National Geographic website on the Gospel of Judas page, it says that the newly discovered gospel is, "One of the most significant biblical finds of the last century'a lost gospel that could challenge what is believed about the story of Judas and his betrayal of Jesus."4 In fact, National Geographic has invested a lot of money in its presentation.
"Retired Claremont Graduate University professor James Robinson said that "early in November he learned that Kasser and several European, Canadian and U.S. scholars had signed agreements with the National Geographic Society to assist with a documentary film and a National Geographic article for an Easter 2006 release and a succession of three books."5
Is the Gospel of Judas authentic?
The Gospel of Judas apparently depicts Judas in favorable terms and commends him as doing God's work when he betrayed Christ to the Jewish religious leaders. This, of course, contradicts what was written by the apostles in their gospels of Matthew and John as well as those gospels written by Mark and Luke who are under the direction of Peter and Paul.
The Gospel of Judas falls into the category of pseudepigraphal writings. This means that the gospel is not authentic but is a false writing. In fact, the gospel was not written by Judas, but by a later Gnostic sect in support of Judas. Gnositicsm was an ancient heresy that taught salvation through esoteric knowledge. Gnosticism was known at the time of the writing of the later epistles in the New Testament and was rejected by the apostle John.6
The ancient writer Irenaeus (130 - 202 AD) in his work called Refutation of All Heresies said that the gospel of Judas was a fictitious history:
"Others again declare that Cain derived his being from the Power above, and acknowledge that Esau, Korah, the Sodomites, and all such persons, are related to themselves. On this account, they add, they have been assailed by the Creator, yet no one of them has suffered injury. For Sophia was in the habit of carrying off that which belonged to her from them to herself. They declare that Judas the traitor was thoroughly acquainted with these things, and that he alone, knowing the truth as no others did, accomplished the mystery of the betrayal; by him all things, both earthly and heavenly, were thus thrown into confusion. They produce a fictitious history of this kind, which they style the Gospel of Judas."7
We can conclude that the Gospel of Judas is not authentic, is not inspired, and was properly rejected by the early church as an unreliable and inaccurate depiction of what really happened concerning Judas.
Of course, the complaint is often raised that this opinion, like that of the early church, simply rejected anything that opposed a preconceived idea. But, this complaint falls by the wayside when we understand that the early church knew which documents were authored by the apostles and which were not. God did not make a mistake when he led the Christian Church to recognize what is and is not inspired. The Gospel of Judas was never recognized by the church as being inspired.
Addendum
On April 9 National Geographic aired the special on the Gospel of Judas. Unfortunately, the special was below standard in its scholarly representation of both sides of the argument on the validity of the New Testament Gospels as well as the Gospel of Judas. It did not give competent counter evidences against its liberal and inaccurate suggestions regarding the formation of the New Testament cannon. The special failed miserably to adequately deal with the formation of the New Testament Cannon, how the gospels were arrived at, how we know who wrote them, and when they were written, etc. I was extremely disappointed. Here is a quick example of one of the many problems.
The National Geographic show had a "scholar" who stated that most experts agree that the earliest gospels weren't written until around 60 A.D. But, the problem here is that no substantiation was offered for this opinion. Second, internal evidence in the Gospels and the book of Acts contradicts the statement. The book of Acts was written by Luke well after he wrote the Gospel of Luke. Acts is a history of the early Christian church and it does not include the accounts of "Nero's persecution of the Christians in A.D. 64 or the deaths of James (A.D. 62), Paul (A.D. 64), and Peter (A.D. 65)."8 The book of Acts is a compilation of the early church's history. One would think that it would naturally include the death of such important figures as James, Paul, and Peter if it were written any time after their deaths. Since this book does not include such information it appears that it was written before at least the death of James (A.D. 62). Let's offer a conservative number of three years prior to the death of James which would mean Acts could have been written around A.D. 59 This would mean that the Gospel of Luke was written years before that, let's pick a low number of five years before Acts which puts Luke at around A.D. 54. Additionally, it is generally agreed upon that Mark was the first Gospel written. Therefore, Mark was before Luke. Let's pick another low number of five years by which Mark preceded Luke. This would reasonably put the Gospel of Mark at 49 AD. This is a conservative estimate and it could be that Mark was written much earlier. Therefore, very quickly we see that the statement made in the program that the gospels weren't really written until after 60 A.D. can be easily countered. The question is why is it that National Geographic did not produce competent counter arguments?
Another issue is regarding Gnosticism which was not properly represented. Gnosticism basically states that God cannot become incarnate. The show suggested that gnostics were Christians, but this cannot be since they contradict one of the essential doctrines of the Christian faith -- which was also taught in the Old Testament (Zech. 12:10 ). John the apostle who wrote 1 John addressed the early formation of Gnostic thought in Chapter 4 when he denounced those as antichrists who denied that Jesus had "come in the flesh." National Geographic failed miserably to represent Christian theology and instead misrepresented Gnosticism, trying to make it appear that the present Christian theological system was merely the result of political happenstance.
CARM concludes that it the National Geographic program was very biased and insufficiently researched.
There is a good amount written on this. And better written than I could have, but here is what is mentioned about the "Gospel of Judas".
The Gospel of Judas was developed by a Gnostic sect in the second century A.D and was was originally written in Greek around 130-170. This fact alone tells us that it was not authored by Judas himself. The oldest extant copy is a Coptic manuscript written in Sahidic (last phase of ancient Egyptian) in the fourth or fifth century.
The gospel of Judas is included in a 62-page papyrus1 manuscript that was uncovered in Egypt during the 1950's or 1960's.2 The translator of the Gospel of Judas is Rodolphe Kasser of the University of Geneva, a leading Coptic Scholar and the contents are due to be released in April, 2006. At the date of writing this article (April 7th, 2006), the complete translated text of this pseudepigraphal writing is unavailable. However, at CNN.com we have the following excerpts:
"The newly translated document's text begins: 'The secret account of the revelation that Jesus spoke in conversation with Judas Iscariot.'
"In a key passage Jesus tells Judas, 'You will exceed all of them. For you will sacrifice the man that clothes me.'
"This indicates that Judas would help liberate the spiritual self by helping Jesus get rid of his physical flesh, the scholars said.
"'Step away from the others and I shall tell you the mysteries of the kingdom,'" Jesus says to Judas, singling him out for special status. 'Look, you have been told everything. Lift up your eyes and look at the cloud and the light within it and the stars surrounding it. The star that leads the way is your star.'"
"The text ends with Judas turning Jesus over to the high priests and does not include any mention of the crucifixion or resurrection."3
According to National Geographic website on the Gospel of Judas page, it says that the newly discovered gospel is, "One of the most significant biblical finds of the last century'a lost gospel that could challenge what is believed about the story of Judas and his betrayal of Jesus."4 In fact, National Geographic has invested a lot of money in its presentation.
"Retired Claremont Graduate University professor James Robinson said that "early in November he learned that Kasser and several European, Canadian and U.S. scholars had signed agreements with the National Geographic Society to assist with a documentary film and a National Geographic article for an Easter 2006 release and a succession of three books."5
Is the Gospel of Judas authentic?
The Gospel of Judas apparently depicts Judas in favorable terms and commends him as doing God's work when he betrayed Christ to the Jewish religious leaders. This, of course, contradicts what was written by the apostles in their gospels of Matthew and John as well as those gospels written by Mark and Luke who are under the direction of Peter and Paul.
The Gospel of Judas falls into the category of pseudepigraphal writings. This means that the gospel is not authentic but is a false writing. In fact, the gospel was not written by Judas, but by a later Gnostic sect in support of Judas. Gnositicsm was an ancient heresy that taught salvation through esoteric knowledge. Gnosticism was known at the time of the writing of the later epistles in the New Testament and was rejected by the apostle John.6
The ancient writer Irenaeus (130 - 202 AD) in his work called Refutation of All Heresies said that the gospel of Judas was a fictitious history:
"Others again declare that Cain derived his being from the Power above, and acknowledge that Esau, Korah, the Sodomites, and all such persons, are related to themselves. On this account, they add, they have been assailed by the Creator, yet no one of them has suffered injury. For Sophia was in the habit of carrying off that which belonged to her from them to herself. They declare that Judas the traitor was thoroughly acquainted with these things, and that he alone, knowing the truth as no others did, accomplished the mystery of the betrayal; by him all things, both earthly and heavenly, were thus thrown into confusion. They produce a fictitious history of this kind, which they style the Gospel of Judas."7
We can conclude that the Gospel of Judas is not authentic, is not inspired, and was properly rejected by the early church as an unreliable and inaccurate depiction of what really happened concerning Judas.
Of course, the complaint is often raised that this opinion, like that of the early church, simply rejected anything that opposed a preconceived idea. But, this complaint falls by the wayside when we understand that the early church knew which documents were authored by the apostles and which were not. God did not make a mistake when he led the Christian Church to recognize what is and is not inspired. The Gospel of Judas was never recognized by the church as being inspired.
Addendum
On April 9 National Geographic aired the special on the Gospel of Judas. Unfortunately, the special was below standard in its scholarly representation of both sides of the argument on the validity of the New Testament Gospels as well as the Gospel of Judas. It did not give competent counter evidences against its liberal and inaccurate suggestions regarding the formation of the New Testament cannon. The special failed miserably to adequately deal with the formation of the New Testament Cannon, how the gospels were arrived at, how we know who wrote them, and when they were written, etc. I was extremely disappointed. Here is a quick example of one of the many problems.
The National Geographic show had a "scholar" who stated that most experts agree that the earliest gospels weren't written until around 60 A.D. But, the problem here is that no substantiation was offered for this opinion. Second, internal evidence in the Gospels and the book of Acts contradicts the statement. The book of Acts was written by Luke well after he wrote the Gospel of Luke. Acts is a history of the early Christian church and it does not include the accounts of "Nero's persecution of the Christians in A.D. 64 or the deaths of James (A.D. 62), Paul (A.D. 64), and Peter (A.D. 65)."8 The book of Acts is a compilation of the early church's history. One would think that it would naturally include the death of such important figures as James, Paul, and Peter if it were written any time after their deaths. Since this book does not include such information it appears that it was written before at least the death of James (A.D. 62). Let's offer a conservative number of three years prior to the death of James which would mean Acts could have been written around A.D. 59 This would mean that the Gospel of Luke was written years before that, let's pick a low number of five years before Acts which puts Luke at around A.D. 54. Additionally, it is generally agreed upon that Mark was the first Gospel written. Therefore, Mark was before Luke. Let's pick another low number of five years by which Mark preceded Luke. This would reasonably put the Gospel of Mark at 49 AD. This is a conservative estimate and it could be that Mark was written much earlier. Therefore, very quickly we see that the statement made in the program that the gospels weren't really written until after 60 A.D. can be easily countered. The question is why is it that National Geographic did not produce competent counter arguments?
Another issue is regarding Gnosticism which was not properly represented. Gnosticism basically states that God cannot become incarnate. The show suggested that gnostics were Christians, but this cannot be since they contradict one of the essential doctrines of the Christian faith -- which was also taught in the Old Testament (Zech. 12:10 ). John the apostle who wrote 1 John addressed the early formation of Gnostic thought in Chapter 4 when he denounced those as antichrists who denied that Jesus had "come in the flesh." National Geographic failed miserably to represent Christian theology and instead misrepresented Gnosticism, trying to make it appear that the present Christian theological system was merely the result of political happenstance.
CARM concludes that it the National Geographic program was very biased and insufficiently researched.
by vonissk on 21 September 2012 - 01:09
Again thank you for such an interesting post. I saw that show when it was on twice as a matter of fact. But because I knew so little about the subject, I had no clue they were telling it all wrong.
I am intrigued about knowledge and factual information. I know the one time when we were all arguing and yes that's what it was, and I know I said some pretty far out things. This is my deal; if you talk to me, I am openminded enough to listen and consider your point of view. But what I dislike about most of the "religious" things that get going on here are the quoting of scriptures and the feeling of being threatened--oh if you are doing this or that or XYZ you are going to hell. I am the type that when I feel threatened I do not back down and I tend to get more turned off and finally say "Make it so". And then it tends to get nasty. I like intelligent people that can hold a decent discussion and stand up and believe in themselves. I grew up in a Southern Baptist church, a member of Girl's Auxillary, etc. So what I am basically saying is I know the Bible fairly well and if I want to read it, there are a jillion places on the net to do so and I think I have 3 Bibles here in the house. I would rather hear why people decided to believe the way they do, the history of Bibical times according to books by known writers or tv docs......................
And PS I like the discussions too that are REAL discussions even with opposing points of view.................
by Shtal on 21 September 2012 - 04:09
vonissk wrote: I am basically saying is I know the Bible fairly well.
Hi, I am not here to cause trouble on this thread, but if you know Bible fairly well then why creating this thread?
http://www.pedigreedatabase.com/german_shepherd_dog/bulletins.read?mnr=640612
Like I said I am not causing trouble,
sincerely,
Shtal.
Hi, I am not here to cause trouble on this thread, but if you know Bible fairly well then why creating this thread?
http://www.pedigreedatabase.com/german_shepherd_dog/bulletins.read?mnr=640612
Like I said I am not causing trouble,
sincerely,
Shtal.
by vonissk on 21 September 2012 - 09:09
Yep well GSDGuy I tried.....................The reason I started that thread is cause I can. You're not going to bait me into starting an argument with you. Like Travels said about how you treat people-- this is a prime example. I wasn't talking to you or about you.I know any moment you are going to break out the scripture and the going to hell threats. So I will just shutup now and let you take over.
by GSDguy08 on 22 September 2012 - 15:09
Hey vonissk. I don't know what was said in regards to going to hell threats, or what all Travels was referring to either. I "do" understand though why some post scripture, as I do as well at times. Basically when I or most others whom I know that are Christians refer to what we believe as truth; We refer someone to what God's Word says. I feel it's good to do so when speaking to others who believe in God, considering it is HIS Word. (Capital on his when I refer to God). Now to the non believers, the ones who don't believe in God, or who believe in "other" gods. Referring to scripture might not be the ideal approach of course. If one doesn't believe in God, of course the scriptures mean nothing, nothing more than a story book to them. If one seeks to convert them there are many other approaches, that won't always start from the bible as one would have to see what their reasoning is behind their beliefs first. But back to the scripture/one's who believe in God. I might ask (not necessarily to you, I don't know exactly what you believe) if you had said Jesus doesn't condemn homosexuality (I can't remember the wording from the link at the moment).....I would ask why you don't believe that; But also what does God's Word say about it? And if you hold no value in the bible, then I would go to ask why? And then further the discussion from there. Anyway I need to get off of here for now. Taking Auggie and Buck to town to let them socialize and interact with people more today. If you respond back to this later I'll try to respond sometime this afternoon or evening before the Vandy/Georgia game starts. Football can't be interrupted lol.
Contact information Disclaimer Privacy Statement Copyright Information Terms of Service Cookie policy ↑ Back to top