Why was the apocropha excluded? (Jesus, reject, gospel, mystic)

[Mystic-als]

I read a post that Arrow started that asked why the NKJV and another version of the bible had some different books.

So I ask the question. Why was the apocrapha excluded from the final church approved cannon?

Someone told me that it was because there were contradictions in the apocrapha and not in the other books.
Someone else tod me that it was because the apocrapha didn't acknowledge Jesus as part of the trinity.
Now I don't know what the real reason is.
So please help me and others with the same questions?

[angellous_evangellous]

The apocrypha was excluded mainly (if not exclusively) to save printing costs because the Protestants did not use the apocryphal books in worship, like many Catholics before them.

The apocrypha is from the intertestamental period before the NT - so there would be no mention of Jesus or the Trinity at all.

[MysticSang'ha]

I've heard that the reasons behind the establishment of what belongs in the canon and what doesn't had nothing to do with the Council of Nicea, and that there was already a large agreement between the varying Christian sects of which Gospels were canonical and which weren't - long before Constantine gave the "OK" sign, right?




Is this close to how you understand it, A_E?



Peace,
Mystic

[angellous_evangellous]

Originally Posted by MysticSang'ha

I've heard that the reasons behind the establishment of what belongs in the canon and what doesn't had nothing to do with the Council of Nicea, and that there was already a large agreement between the varying Christian sects of which Gospels were canonical and which weren't - long before Constantine gave the "OK" sign, right?

Is this close to how you understand it, A_E?

Something like that. My views are changing as I learn more. It depends on how you define "Christian sect" - that phrase really opens the floodgates.

Here's my view:

1) Codex Sinaiticus predates Constantine or is exactly contemporary to him (fourth century). I think that the very existence of this text at this time is evidence that Christians had an idea of canon before Constantine. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Codex_Sinaiticus

2) Marcion (second century) rejected and accepted altered books of the NT and was criticized for it by the church fathers who clearly had an idea of which writings were acceptable and which ones were not. The churches that accepted the now canonical books of the NT would later become "orthodox." The churches that rejected/altered the now canonical books became heretical sects - unorthodox Christian churches like the Marcionites and Gnostics. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marcion

[Elvendon]

Why was the Gospel of Thomas booted out? I've read it and it doesn't seem that gnostic. In fact, it adds an extra dimension onto the Christian faith that I didn't think of before...

[angellous_evangellous]

Originally Posted by Elvendon

Why was the Gospel of Thomas booted out? I've read it and it doesn't seem that gnostic. In fact, it adds an extra dimension onto the Christian faith that I didn't think of before...

Because it is Gnostic, LOL.

Besides, for whatever reason, the Gospel of Thomas was not being used in the churches - otherwise it would have been considered for the canon.

[michel]

This site http://watch.pair.com/apocrypha.html is an interesting read on when, and why.

[MysticSang'ha]

Originally Posted by angellous_evangellous

Something like that. My views are changing as I learn more. It depends on how you define "Christian sect" - that phrase really opens the floodgates.

Oh, I was willing to define "Christian sect" as those who identified themselves that way.

Originally Posted by angellous_evangellous

Here's my view:

1) Codex Sinaiticus predates Constantine or is exactly contemporary to him (fourth century). I think that the very existence of this text at this time is evidence that Christians had an idea of canon before Constantine. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Codex_Sinaiticus

2) Marcion (second century) rejected and accepted altered books of the NT and was criticized for it by the church fathers who clearly had an idea of which writings were acceptable and which ones were not. The churches that accepted the now canonical books of the NT would later become "orthodox." The churches that rejected/altered the now canonical books became heretical sects - unorthodox Christian churches like the Marcionites and Gnostics. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marcion

Thanks for the links, A_E. (Wikipedia rocks) I had a feeling that there was already dissent and disagreement before Constantine, but that the numbers of dissenters were rather small compared to the sects that would eventually agree on the now canonical Gospels? However, it seems that Marcion was a wealthy man who used his money after his excommunication from the Chuch of Rome to establish his own church with himself as Bishop, and he was considered a very real threat because of his money and influence. Is that safe to say?




I am concluding that church fathers such as Irenaeus, Tertullian, Clement, and Origen would be those that are considered "Orthodox" and espousers of the certain interpretations of canonical Gospels that we see today, and Marcion and his followers would be considered heretical because of his interpretations and teachings of these same Gospels? Correct me if I'm wrong.



Peace,
Mystic

[Elvendon]

Originally Posted by angellous_evangellous

Because it is Gnostic, LOL.

Besides, for whatever reason, the Gospel of Thomas was not being used in the churches - otherwise it would have been considered for the canon.

It didn't strike me as very Gnostic when I first read it... no mention of demiurges or anything like that.

[angellous_evangellous]

Originally Posted by MysticSang'ha

Thanks for the links, A_E. (Wikipedia rocks) I had a feeling that there was already dissent and disagreement before Constantine, but that the numbers of dissenters were rather small compared to the sects that would eventually agree on the now canonical Gospels?

That has been the traditional view. To be honest, the evid