• Welcome to Christian Forums
  1. Welcome to Christian Forums, a forum to discuss Christianity in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to be able to join in fellowship with Christians all over the world.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!

  2. The forums in the Christian Congregations category are now open only to Christian members. Please review our current Faith Groups list for information on which faith groups are considered to be Christian faiths. Christian members please remember to read the Statement of Purpose threads for each forum within Christian Congregations before posting in the forum.

The Gospel of Thomas [Moved]

Discussion in 'Controversial Christian Theology' started by Lily_Among_Thorns, Sep 9, 2011.

  1. Lily_Among_Thorns

    Lily_Among_Thorns Newbie

    273
    +5
    Catholic
    Single
    What is so heretical about the gospel of Thomas, found in the Nag Hamadi scripture. Much of what is found in the text can be found in the bible. The gospel of Thomas should be viewed as a source of Truth.

    Afterall, if much of it is the words of Jesus then why can't the rest of it be the words of Jesus? It places a new perspective on the word of Christ if what can be found within it can be believed to be true.
     
    We teamed up with Faith Counseling. Can they help you today?
  2. Biker Angel

    Biker Angel Never coming back to this mad house

    +188
    Christian
    Married
    US-Others
    We don't need to add another gospel book to the bible, we need to live by the ones that have already made it into the bible and that we often ignore for the ones that haven't.

    Rev. 22:18
     
  3. Freedom63

    Freedom63 Universal Reconciliationist (Eventually)

    +26
    Christian
    Married
    US-Libertarian
    Your revelation quote is not likely meant to include our present canon but rather the Revelation itself. We know for a fact some has been added and some taken away since that was told to John...so if we apply it to the whole bible as you imply there is simply no way to accept our bibles at all because they violate this warning.
     
  4. Brenda Morgan

    Brenda Morgan Newbie

    266
    +1
    Pentecostal
    Single
    Yes,,,,,,,,As we know, the KJV of the Bible originally included extra books not found in the Bible today.
     
  5. Biker Angel

    Biker Angel Never coming back to this mad house

    +188
    Christian
    Married
    US-Others
    Millions of Christians all over the world accept the bible just fine believing that verse applies to the whole bible, so don't imply that I'm the first or the only one who believes that.

    The gospel of Thomas is Apocrypha and does not belong in the bible. Or God would have put it there.
     
  6. Biker Angel

    Biker Angel Never coming back to this mad house

    +188
    Christian
    Married
    US-Others
    Well there's your problem right there.
     
  7. Biker Angel

    Biker Angel Never coming back to this mad house

    +188
    Christian
    Married
    US-Others
    Catholic bible has Apocryphal books not found in Protestant Bibles of today. IMO That's where the extra books ended up.....not all of them tho.
     
  8. Freedom63

    Freedom63 Universal Reconciliationist (Eventually)

    +26
    Christian
    Married
    US-Libertarian
    I was not "implying" anything...simply stating a belief that is held by millions of Christians. Try not to get your panties in such a snit...;)
     
  9. Biker Angel

    Biker Angel Never coming back to this mad house

    +188
    Christian
    Married
    US-Others
    Don't you go worrying your little head off over my leather biker pants now. I might start thinking your a weirdo or something.;)
     
  10. CryptoLutheran

    CryptoLutheran Friendly Neighborhood Spiderman

    +351
    Christian
    Single
    The Gospel of Thomas isn't in the Canon because it was never part of the books which could have made it. It was never part of what the Church received and read in the churches, which was the single most important criterion for canonicity.

    Think of the Canon in part as a legal document, like a constitution (this analogy is far from perfect), sometimes amendments are brought before the government's legislative body which may pass and be included, others don't pass and are rejected; while others were never brought before any legislative body whatsoever.

    The books that are in, passed the Church's "legislature" by standing the test of time through centuries of consent among Christians and churches all over the Christian world; other books did not make it, they were filtered slowly because they didn't receive that mutual consent among Christian Faithful. Then there were books that simply were never part of the process at all, they were never read in any of the churches, they were never part of the Church's liturgical reading, never part of the Church's hymn and prayer life, never part of the universal life of the Christian Church. The Gospel of Thomas is part of this last group.

    While Thomas isn't overtly Gnostic, at least not like other Nag Hammadi texts, it is still quite Gnostic in content, or perhaps "Gnostic-lite". It was written too late to be of any serious value to the churches, it never had a wide enough readership within the churches to "stick". These are just a few reasons, but in the long run it simply wasn't ever in the running and thus was never part of the Christian canon of Holy Scripture.

    If you find personal value in Thomas, then good on you, though I would caution that one be able to understand that the text, if not heretical, comes quite close in a number of cases and should be read appropriately.

    I find a number of statements in Thomas to be quite fascinating and worthy of note; but I also recognize that many are clearly Gnostic in character and therefore have no part of Christian orthodoxy.

    -CryptoLutheran
     
  11. Jase

    Jase Well-Known Member

    +342
    Messianic
    US-Democrat
    Millions of Christians around the world, especially in the United States, know absolutely nothing about the Bible or the history of where it came from.

    They just repeat whatever their pastor told them, regardless of how in error it is. God did not create the Bible. Humans did.

    And the Apocrypha exists in the Catholic and I think Eastern Orthodox Bible. Protestants are not the only Christians on this planet you know.
     
  12. Jase

    Jase Well-Known Member

    +342
    Messianic
    US-Democrat
    An inerrant Bible has long since been disproved. It's a modern concept, not a historical one. The Fundamentalist movement of the 19th/20th Century is what really pushed the 100% infallibility doctrine.
     
  13. Jase

    Jase Well-Known Member

    +342
    Messianic
    US-Democrat
    Ironically, based on the arguing over its authenticity and heretical nature, Revelation technically shouldn't exist in the Bible. The Church fought for 400 years against putting that in.
     
  14. CryptoLutheran

    CryptoLutheran Friendly Neighborhood Spiderman

    +351
    Christian
    Single
    Moreso in the East than in the West. Early Western Fathers such as Sts. Irenaeus and Justin Martyr regarded it as authentically canonical and accepted as Scripture. The Muratorian Fragment points out that it wasn't universally accepted and other churches used the Apocalypse of Peter--and I don't think it was fully accepted by the East until the time of St. John of Damascus who argued for its full and final inclusion. Interestingly enough I believe it's the only book in the New Testament that isn't read in the regular lectionary by the Orthodox--but it is read I think once a year in its entirety.

    For clarification--and just added information for the thread--the Council of Trent while retaining most of the Deuterocanonicals did trim a few; thus the Orthodox Old Testament contains more books than the Catholic/Tridentine Canon. And some Protestant Bibles still preserve the Deuterocanonicals in their own appendix, though most Protestant English Bibles dropped them completely in the 18th or 19th century.

    The Luther Bible still retains them, and I believe certain official translations in use by the Church of England retain them.

    -CryptoLutheran
     
  15. mrmccormo

    mrmccormo Newbie

    557
    +57
    Christian
    Married
    Also, it exists in the Jewish Bible, since the inclusion of "apocryphal" books was always a part of the Septuagint since before Jesus's birth. In fact, I'm pretty certain that the whole concept of the Apocrypha didn't even show up until 1,500 years after Jesus's ministry during Marin Luther's day. Luther felt that certain books weren't Scriptural enough, so he put them at the back of the Bible (and these books are the Apocrypha). Take note that Luther also wanted to remove James, Revelation, and Hebrews from the Bible because he thought those books were not inspired Scripture.
     
  16. meinabox

    meinabox Guest

    +0
    Hey LAT,

    This reminded me of this verse from Ecclesiastes: "Be warned, my son, of anything in addition to them. Of making many books there is no end, and much study wearies the body" (12:12). Hope you can derive something from it.
     
  17. grasping the after wind

    grasping the after wind That's grasping after the wind

    +2,954
    Lutheran
    Married
    US-Others
    The Gospel of Thomas cannot be allowed to be seen as non heretical because it contains quotes that if taken to be accurate would seem to deny the co equal status of the Trinity. As in "Give unto Caesar that which is Caesar's, give unto God that which is God's and give unto me that which is mine."If it were allowed in the cannon it would cast doubt upon the whole idea of the Trinity as we know it. This is why it was rejected originally and why we cannot accept it now.
     
  18. Galvanized

    Galvanized Guest

    +0
    Funny, I never got the memo. I guess your assertion here settles it for me. Thanks. I'll have to let Matthew Henry know too, and many other old biblical commentators going down to the time of Christ.
     
  19. Freedom63

    Freedom63 Universal Reconciliationist (Eventually)

    +26
    Christian
    Married
    US-Libertarian
    In spite of the dripping sarcasm...your view is in the minority.

    The bible is inspired...but it is difficult to maintain the view of perfect inerrancy and maintain genuine integrity in the analysis of it. Biblical perfection is born out of man's intense desire to make it so rather than an act of God in my opinion.
     
Loading...