Reeper
04-06-2006, 03:59 PM
Here we go...

K. so apparently a new twist on the old Judas betraying Jesus story has been "discovered" in a 3rd century text. The manuscript says that Judas was actually acting on secret orders given him by Jesus. The validity that the manuscript came from the third century is not being called into question, but the source is. It was written by the gnostics!!!!!! If you don't know who the gnostics are ask and I'll try and explain, but anyway thoughts.

Peace

terrasin
04-06-2006, 09:02 PM
There were several writings by the Gnostics. A group who believed they were privy to secret knowledge. They were actually founded in a few other religions pre-christian. Things they wrote about aren't to be taken as factual.

CJ

sky_flashings
04-08-2006, 07:33 AM
If Judas was action on "secret orders" from Jesus, then he wouldn't have really been betraying him, would he?

drumchick101
04-09-2006, 01:24 PM
I actually saw that a show about that was going to be on the discovery channel but I didn't watch it because I figured that it was written by the gnostics. I've heard about other "gospels" according to Peter, Mary Magdeline, Thomas, and many others wirtten by the gnostics. Someone was telling me that the church "left out" those books because they were worried that people would not fear the church anymore. Their reference was more towards the midevil Catholic church. This is obviously wrong, but where do you think that they got that (besides the fact that they probobly made it up)?

><sarah><

zeroneff
04-09-2006, 01:30 PM
Well all i fallow is whats in the bible for i know whats in it is true

terrasin
04-09-2006, 02:31 PM
I actually saw that a show about that was going to be on the discovery channel but I didn't watch it because I figured that it was written by the gnostics. I've heard about other "gospels" according to Peter, Mary Magdeline, Thomas, and many others wirtten by the gnostics. Someone was telling me that the church "left out" those books because they were worried that people would not fear the church anymore. Their reference was more towards the midevil Catholic church. This is obviously wrong, but where do you think that they got that (besides the fact that they probobly made it up)?

><sarah><
There were several other gosples written by different people. We have a thread about this if you're interested in reading about it. The fact was that The Council of Nicea were the ones who voted which books were going to be in the Bible. All the others that didn't make it in the Bible can still be found, but I'm looking for a source to find them.

CJ

drumchick101
04-09-2006, 03:36 PM
I researched the Council of Nicea a bit and this leads me to a couple of questions. This was only 323 A.D. and the Catholic church was already formed. Now, I can understand that the church did not have much organization in the early church because of constant persecution and such. But when did the catholic church really form and was there any other forms of christianity back then? It just seems that Catholisism is so much different from many other christian denominations and it seems to be too much of a burocracy, which is not the type of church Jesus wanted us to have. So, when/where did we go wrong as a whole?

I find myself trusting individual denominations less and less seeing as though that is not the way it was meant to be in the first place. I stick with my personal convicetions and those who God will put in my life. But I'm still curious as to why things are the way that they are.

><sarah><

somasoul
04-09-2006, 05:02 PM
But I'm still curious as to why things are the way that they are.

Here's how simple it is. The early church decided that the books they finally compiled were the ones that most churches around the world read and considered 'legit'. Then those books were compiled into what we now have.

Either the others books were considered 'fakes' or were not popular enough to make enough impact.

Undomiel
04-09-2006, 05:05 PM
Follow the Bible.
It's True.

drumchick101
04-10-2006, 06:50 AM
Here's how simple it is. The early church decided that the books they finally compiled were the ones that most churches around the world read and considered 'legit'. Then those books were compiled into what we now have.

Either the others books were considered 'fakes' or were not popular enough to make enough impact.

I understand that, but I was talking more about how the church has turned into more of an institution and a burocracy rather than a family of believers fighting for Christ and His purpose and fulfilling the great commission. When did it become about buisness instead of love?

><sarah><

terrasin
04-10-2006, 10:22 AM
I researched the Council of Nicea a bit and this leads me to a couple of questions. This was only 323 A.D. and the Catholic church was already formed. Now, I can understand that the church did not have much organization in the early church because of constant persecution and such. But when did the catholic church really form and was there any other forms of christianity back then? It just seems that Catholisism is so much different from many other christian denominations and it seems to be too much of a burocracy, which is not the type of church Jesus wanted us to have. So, when/where did we go wrong as a whole?

I find myself trusting individual denominations less and less seeing as though that is not the way it was meant to be in the first place. I stick with my personal convicetions and those who God will put in my life. But I'm still curious as to why things are the way that they are.

><sarah><
I am not sure about the date the Catholic church was established per say, but the old Catholic church was nothing like the Catholic church is today. All our traditions and beliefs spawn from the origional catholic church as said in the Nicene Creed that is still spoken in traditional churches:

We believe in one God,
the Father, the Almighty,
maker of heaven and earth,
of all that is, seen and unseen.

We believe in one Lord, Jesus Christ,
the only Son of God,
eternally begotten of the Father,
God from God, light from light,
true God from true God,
begotten, not made,
of one Being with the Father;
through him all things were made.
For us and for our salvation
he came down from heaven,
was incarnate of the Holy Spirit and the Virgin Mary
and became truly human.
For our sake he was crucified under Pontius Pilate;
he suffered death and was buried.
On the third day he rose again
in accordance with the Scriptures;
he ascended into heaven
and is seated at the right hand of the Father.
He will come again in glory to judge the living and the dead,
and his kingdom will have no end.

We believe in the Holy Spirit, the Lord, the giver of life,
who proceeds from the Father [and the Son],
who with the Father and the Son is worshiped and glorified,
who has spoken through the prophets.
We believe in one holy catholic and apostolic Church.
We acknowledge one baptism for the forgiveness of sins.
We look for the resurrection of the dead,
and the life of the world to come. Amen.
I'm unsure of when the Catholic church started moving away from traditional belifs and to where it is today.

CJ

terrasin
04-10-2006, 10:26 AM
Here's how simple it is. The early church decided that the books they finally compiled were the ones that most churches around the world read and considered 'legit'. Then those books were compiled into what we now have.

Either the others books were considered 'fakes' or were not popular enough to make enough impact.
This isn't exacely correct. The reason they picked some books and left out others was because of the message they wanted to stress to people. Not so much that the other books wern't legit per say, but that they really didn't promote the message that the Council wanted to get to people. And so they were left out.

I'm sure there were some books they didn't find completely kosher, but a lot of them were just left out because of the above stated.

I believe there are some 96 books that were left out. I really need to look some more of those up... no library in town. :(

CJ

Reeper
04-10-2006, 01:15 PM
The thing to really remember when we are talking about what books were chosen and which books weren't is that God promised to preserve His word. So, no matter who chose the books he was at work to make sure the correct ones were chosen and preserved as part of the Bible. There is a reason why the Judas gospel was left out. No matter how much special revelation the gnostics thought they had, it was not from God or else their books would have been maintained. Remember God works through man to accomplish his purpose.

Peace

DrummerGurl4God
04-12-2006, 12:21 PM
listen that whole Gospel of judas thing it aint true the only thing i belive in the Bible and that was never or is going to be in the Bible or be true

frymeskillet
04-28-2006, 05:36 AM
listen that whole Gospel of judas thing it aint true the only thing i belive in the Bible and that was never or is going to be in the Bible or be true

Amen, Sister.

skilletfreak101
04-28-2006, 08:36 AM
Well all i fallow is whats in the bible for i know whats in it is true
who do you follow? the Bible or God? now i'm not saying i don't believe in the Bible...but you should be able to question everything...you should allow God to show you ANYTHING. the whole Bible was written by man, not God. God influenced the people to write it of course but it's still man's account. One example is that lots of people in the old testament prophesied the coming of a Messiah, but their prophecies weren't exactly correct. They were predicting a huge king or whatever to come out and rule everybody...and who came? Jesus of Nazareth. And about the Judas Gospel...i don't exactly believe what it's saying, but it's actually very interesting. After reading it, you should ask the question, "Was it God's will for Judas to betray Jesus?" Because i mean, if Judas hadn't betrayed Jesus in the first place, how else would Jesus have died for us? And also, Judas's betrayal and the 30 pieces of silver thing had all been prophecied beforehand.

drumchick101
04-28-2006, 02:55 PM
The question presented by the Judas Gospel is an old one and one I've never been able to answer. However, that was how it was prophesied so that's how it was going to happen. If it was going to happen another way, it would have been prophesied another way. It's not that the betrayal had to happen, that's just how it did happen. Does that make any sense? Because it's slightly confusing.

About what you said about questining the Bible...Paul says it's the inspired word of God, it is true. But here's something to think about: Paul was referring to the Old Testement. In the early church, they used the Hebrew scriptures as their Bible, they had no new testement. I believe that the New Testement is just as accurate as the new but it's just something to think about.

><sarah><

unshakeable15
04-30-2006, 09:15 PM
Rob Bell talks about that in his book Velvet Elvis, about how we need to constantly re-examine our faith. The Bible, while inbued (www.webster.com) with God, had human writers with their own reasons for writing the books. (Luke (http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Luke%201:1-4;&version=31;), 1 Timothy (http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=1%20Timothy%201:1-2;&version=31;)...) Most of Paul's books were written, first and foremost as letters not intended in any way to be made into a bible of any kind, to edify the church in a specific area and reprimand it for things it wasn't getting right.

The only reason we hold these letters to such high esteem (probably a little more than we should sometimes) is because through the ages, what they have said has rung as true, not only in our spirits, but in action as well. But even then, we don't take everything written in the Bible as a gospel for life (what women here cover their heads (http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?book_id=53&chapter=11&verse=5&end_verse=7&version=31&context=context)? Or, how about cursing people who don't love the Lord (http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=1%20Corinthians%2016:22;&version=31;)? Or, selling all you have to give to the poor (http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=matthew%2019:21;&version=31;)?)

If C.S. Lewis or A.W. Tozer had lived 2000 years prior, or St. Augustine 600 years earlier, they might have been included within what we call the Bible. They just don't have the weight of the ages upon to act as credence to their writings.

NightCrawler
05-01-2006, 06:05 AM
The question presented by the Judas Gospel is an old one and one I've never been able to answer. However, that was how it was prophesied so that's how it was going to happen. If it was going to happen another way, it would have been prophesied another way. It's not that the betrayal had to happen, that's just how it did happen. Does that make any sense? Because it's slightly confusing.Sounds circular. You know it was foretold correctly because it happened as it was said. Sounds kinda self-explanitory, but then you get into false prophets that claim God said something but it doesn't show up. How do you know that they are false? Because they didn't prophesy what happened.

About what you said about questining the Bible...Paul says it's the inspired word of God, it is true. But here's something to think about: Paul was referring to the Old Testement. In the early church, they used the Hebrew scriptures as their Bible, they had no new testement. I believe that the New Testement is just as accurate as the new but it's just something to think about.

><sarah><
Yup, big difference. Old testiment is what he was talking about, but ya know what?... God not only inspired the writers (mind you, they had gifts that I have never even seen, the supernatural was their main facet of their lives) ... but God also preserved the writings and prevented their distruction. And further, hundreds of disciples and theologians prayed over the inclusion of the writings for instruction and application. If they were honestly after what God wanted, then I don't think the NT is fallible in what it is talking about, just as the OT.

skilletfreak101
05-01-2006, 12:06 PM
Rob Bell talks about that in his book Velvet Elvis, about how we need to constantly re-examine our faith. The Bible, while inbued (www.webster.com) with God, had human writers with their own reasons for writing the books. (Luke (http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Luke%201:1-4;&version=31;), 1 Timothy (http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=1%20Timothy%201:1-2;&version=31;)...) Most of Paul's books were written, first and foremost as letters not intended in any way to be made into a bible of any kind, to edify the church in a specific area and reprimand it for things it wasn't getting right.

The only reason we hold these letters to such high esteem (probably a little more than we should sometimes) is because through the ages, what they have said has rung as true, not only in our spirits, but in action as well. But even then, we don't take everything written in the Bible as a gospel for life (what women here cover their heads (http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?book_id=53&chapter=11&verse=5&end_verse=7&version=31&context=context)? Or, how about cursing people who don't love the Lord (http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=1%20Corinthians%2016:22;&version=31;)? Or, selling all you have to give to the poor (http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=matthew%2019:21;&version=31;)?)

If C.S. Lewis or A.W. Tozer had lived 2000 years prior, or St. Augustine 600 years earlier, they might have been included within what we call the Bible. They just don't have the weight of the ages upon to act as credence to their writings.
dude i agree with you in everything there. thanks for posting that!

unshakeable15
05-01-2006, 10:39 PM
You're welcome. :) But you should really thank Rob Bell since i'm just sharing what he wrote in the book.

asparagus
05-02-2006, 10:38 AM
A good, related article that I thought I would plug: How Can the Bible Be Authoratative? By N. T. Wright (http://alexandsierra.com/authoratative.pdf)

It's also cited in Velvet Elvis.

unshakeable15
05-04-2006, 08:49 PM
Cool Alex. :D Thanks. i was slightly interested to check that out but didn't know where i would find it. Now i just need to find the time to read through it.