• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

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

The lost books and Gnostic scriptures vs bible

Riders

Well-Known Member
Why shouldn't I believe the Gnostic and lost books of the bible that wernt canonized into scriptures were the real testament of Jesus and Christianity instead of the others?

The men who canonized the bible chose to leave them out to stear us away from that Gospel but the Gnostics claimed they were the true Gospel as well.
 

allfoak

Alchemist
The only answer to the question would be to test what they say.
Do what they say to do and see if the results are what is expected.

I have already done this and can testify to the truth of what they say.
 

George-ananda

Advaita Vedanta, Theosophy, Spiritualism
Premium Member
Why shouldn't I believe the Gnostic and lost books of the bible that wernt canonized into scriptures were the real testament of Jesus and Christianity instead of the others?

The men who canonized the bible chose to leave them out to stear us away from that Gospel but the Gnostics claimed they were the true Gospel as well.
I think we need to consider all things and why some books were chosen and others not. Unfortunately, it is hard to get a clear picture of it all as even experts have differing opinions.
 
Most of them appear to have been written a lot (edit) later than the canonical Gospels which is one reason.

Whatever the reasons though, it was simply because they just didn't have enough support, it was a bit of a popularity contest. I wouldn't put it down to some cynical attempt by nefarious bishops to suppress the 'truth' for their own ends though. This overstates their power re: the rank and file and underestimates their piety.

The author of the Quran sometimes seems to agree with a few of them as regards Jesus' infancy, Mary's pregnancy, etc. though so many Muslims might agree that they contain aspects of the 'Gospel of Jesus'.
 
Last edited:

allfoak

Alchemist
Excerpt from:
The Gnostic Gospels
by Elaine Pagels
Vintage Books, New York: 1979
pp. xiii-xxiii

But the discoveries at Nag Hammadi have upset this picture. If we admit that some of these fifty-two texts represents early forms of Christian teaching, we may have to recognize that early Christianity is far more diverse than nearly anyone expected before the Nag Hammadi discoveries.

The rest of the Article
 
Last edited:

Brian Schuh

Well-Known Member
I'm not disagreeing with anyone. Just a couple notes. 1.) Modern Gnostics claim the Gospel of John as theirs. and 2.) Several apocryphal books of the New Testament were and still are in some circles, considered supplementary to the New Testament and not heretical at all.
 
Why shouldn't I believe the Gnostic and lost books of the bible that wernt canonized into scriptures were the real testament of Jesus and Christianity instead of the others?

The men who canonized the bible chose to leave them out to stear us away from that Gospel but the Gnostics claimed they were the true Gospel as well.

I agree and additionally they killed every gnostic christian they could find. I believe the apostate church the bible talks about is the one thats been dominant the last 1900 years or so.
 

Milton Platt

Well-Known Member
Why shouldn't I believe the Gnostic and lost books of the bible that wernt canonized into scriptures were the real testament of Jesus and Christianity instead of the others?

The men who canonized the bible chose to leave them out to stear us away from that Gospel but the Gnostics claimed they were the true Gospel as well.

They all are the same. the "Bible" is just a collection drawn from them all put together to suit a group of Englishmen way back when. There is no real basis for separating them out from all the other writings, except that maybe they represented the opinions of the particular people collecting them and they were substantially more cohesive than the others.
 
Why shouldn't I believe the Gnostic and lost books of the bible that wernt canonized into scriptures were the real testament of Jesus and Christianity instead of the others?

The men who canonized the bible chose to leave them out to stear us away from that Gospel but the Gnostics claimed they were the true Gospel as well.

See, if through them, you can become a child of the Light.
 

CG Didymus

Veteran Member
I agree and additionally they killed every gnostic christian they could find. I believe the apostate church the bible talks about is the one thats been dominant the last 1900 years or so.
Prior to the NT, how much variance in belief was tolerated? The way Paul's letters go, it seems a lot of "believers" were going off on tangents. In the beginning, how did the dominant group deal with them? After the dominant group got big enough and in control, killing all "heretics" does seem like the way they handled things. But later, were the early Protestants any different?
 

roger1440

I do stuff
Why shouldn't I believe the Gnostic and lost books of the bible that wernt canonized into scriptures were the real testament of Jesus and Christianity instead of the others?

The men who canonized the bible chose to leave them out to stear us away from that Gospel but the Gnostics claimed they were the true Gospel as well.
Can you be more specific? Many books were written. To include all known gospels would have made the New Testament meaningless.
 

buddhist

Well-Known Member
Why shouldn't I believe the Gnostic and lost books of the bible that wernt canonized into scriptures were the real testament of Jesus and Christianity instead of the others?

The men who canonized the bible chose to leave them out to stear us away from that Gospel but the Gnostics claimed they were the true Gospel as well.
OP, ultimately it all comes down to what you personally know and believe.

If you believe the Gnostic Christianity is authoritative, then follow their scriptures. If you believe orthodox Christianity is authoritative, then follow their scriptures.

There really isn't a reason why you shouldn't believe the Gnostics, except that the orthodox Christians judges the former as inauthentic (and likewise, the former judges the latter to be inauthentic).

It seems you're looking for an objective, third-party verification of your choice. There are none.
 

Riders

Well-Known Member
I put it up because at another debate forum alot of Christians debated which scriptures wer authentic, if you dont want to debate it dont. It doesnt mean its not a legitimate debate topic, Ive already seen it debated for a very long time somewhere else so i went by that .
 

Riders

Well-Known Member
Its a debate not looking for verification Im putting up a debate debate or not its up to yall. The question is which scriptures were more authentic?
 

Valjean

Veteran Member
Premium Member
Can you be more specific? Many books were written. To include all known gospels would have made the New Testament meaningless.
And contradictory...
The NT is an anthology, the books included cherry picked by the dominant sect at the time in the early ecumenical councils.
 

roger1440

I do stuff
They all are the same. the "Bible" is just a collection drawn from them all put together to suit a group of Englishmen way back when. There is no real basis for separating them out from all the other writings, except that maybe they represented the opinions of the particular people collecting them and they were substantially more cohesive than the others.
Refresh my memory. What group of "Englishmen"? There is so many of them.

Clockwork-Orange.jpg
 

life.period

Member
Why shouldn't I believe the Gnostic and lost books of the bible that wernt canonized into scriptures were the real testament of Jesus and Christianity instead of the others?

The men who canonized the bible chose to leave them out to stear us away from that Gospel but the Gnostics claimed they were the true Gospel as well.

Thank you for asking

Gnostic belief like muslims

Gnostic believe jesus is prophet

Bible say Jesus is prophet

Jesus said : " I shall press today and tomorrow prophet shall not die " 13 Luke


Gnostic believe jesus was not crucified

Bible says god promised jesus to be saved from death

" he/ Jesus offered cries and prayer to the most high to be saved from death and he heared" Hebrew 5

God say in old testonemy he doesn't break his convient neither he change what come out of his mouth

So there is zero percent that god will not save jesus from death / crucify

Timothy first 6:16 " God is immortal "

God doesn't die .. immortal

God is not human

Numbers 23 " God is not human that he lies "
 

Rise

Well-Known Member
Why shouldn't I believe the Gnostic and lost books of the bible that wernt canonized into scriptures were the real testament of Jesus and Christianity instead of the others?
You'd first have to define what gnostic means.
Not every non-canonical writing falls under the category of gnostic.

The gnostic gospels, the ones which put forth gnostic ideas and theology, are not compatible with what is found in the New Testament. They can't both be true at the same time. Either the NT is true or the gnostic gospels are true.

With that in mind, you must consider that:
1. There's no evidence that the gnostic gospels were around prior to the mid and late 2nd century. In contrast, we know the authentic gospels were written in the 1st century based on early church references to them at the turn of the century as well as early physical manuscript fragments from around that time.
2. Every ancient canon list, compilation of scripture, or reference in early church writings we have all witness to the canon we have. Even when they are separated by geography and time. And this is all from the centuries prior to the Council of Nicea.
So this tells us that the early church had already known what was authentic centuries before Christianity had the power of the state behind it to enforce orthodoxy.

The men who canonized the bible chose to leave them out to stear us away from that Gospel but the Gnostics claimed they were the true Gospel as well.

Now I have to ask you if you have one shred of historical or scriptural evidence that would support your assertion that such a thing ever happened.

You won't be able to do it because all the documentation we have shows that the canon was established before the persecution of the church had stopped. The Christians of those era had no power to force certain views on anyone. That's why Gnosticism was able to rear it's head in the first place without being shut down. The only weapon the Christians had was apologetics, which is why we have writings preserved from those first couple centuries where they defend the faith against lies.
 
Top