The 4 gosple writers of The Bible were close to Jesus (2 apostles, 2 friends). They were written no longer than 40 years after Jesus. Yet, the Gnostic gospels were written about 200 years later!! They contradict the 4 gospels. They are heresy! The gnostic writers didn't even know Jesus so how could they write about him?
2006-06-16 13:31:14 · 16 answers · asked by Anonymous in Society & Culture ➔ Religion & Spirituality
I know and to be a gospel it had to be written by one of the disciples or their assistant. The gos[pel of Thomas, Judas etc, were NOT written by them. The stuff that people will believe!
2006-06-16 13:39:55 · answer #1 · answered by Jen 3 · 0⤊ 1⤋
First off idiot try reading the Gnostic Gospels then you might have some basis for your opinion. The bible was written 300 years after Jesus died...and the Gospels were changed around alot!! There is only speculation as to who wrote all the gospels! Maybe if you searched for your answers a little better then just relying on Christians sources you might have more of an open mind. Plus the gnostic gospels contradicted the Church...they said that the kingdom of heaven is within us not in a building. That makes alot more sence to me...So really try learning both sides of a story before spouting ignorant biased words.
2006-06-16 13:39:42 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 0⤋
They're not lies. The Gnostic gospels reflect that there were a lot of beliefs and ideas about who Jesus was. One person's heresy is another person's doctrine, and the winning side gets to declare the other a heretic.
There were plenty of writings and accounts about Jesus' life, but church leaders only chose a few. If writing after the time of Jesus is the main concern we shouldn't give credence to the Gospel of John, written latest, and most likely not by an eyewitness to Jesus' life.
2006-06-16 13:44:37 · answer #3 · answered by keri gee 6 · 2⤊ 0⤋
Actually, many Biblical scholars say that very few, if any of the New Testament writers actually knew Jesus in the flesh. Because the Gnostic writers held a different view from that held by Biblical editors, their opinions were mostly hidden from public view.
It's been said that "heresy" is any belief that conflicts with one's own.
The Biblical record is far from perfect. Modern archeologists and historians are beginning to re-construct what actually happened.
The role of women in the early church has been ignored or suppressed. We must be prepared to open many of our closed belief systems to include new insights and discoveries.
This is an exciting time to be alive.
2006-06-16 13:46:24 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 0⤋
uh, sorry charlie, but actually there are NO gospels writtten within 40 years by anybody who actually knew Jesus. The Gnostic Gospels have every claim to legitamacy that the standard ones do. The only difference is how well the different gospels supported the tweaks the roman cathars wanted to put into the mix.
2006-06-16 13:36:42 · answer #5 · answered by kucitizenx 4 · 2⤊ 0⤋
What does "know Jesus" mean? If your criteria is that, since the Gnostic gospels were written 200 years later, they could not write about him, THAT IS FINE WITH ME.
I guess that means that about 90% of those who respond in the Religion section of Yahoo Answers DON'T KNOW JESUS either (THAT IS FINE WITH ME) because they are writing OVER 2000 YEARS LATER !!!!!
2006-06-16 13:42:51 · answer #6 · answered by billhill1066 6 · 1⤊ 0⤋
don't forget to look at what 'heresy' is. It refers to the Greek word heterodoxy (other thought) as apposed to orthodoxy (right thought).
however orthodoxy shares the Zoroastrian view that the universe is a constant battle between good and evil but unfortunately they lack a proper understanding of how both terms are used. ultimately when the orthodoxy labels something as 'evil' or heresy, it's only true as far as there belief goes and no more. this is because in all cases where the word evil is applied it is a matter of opinion. heresy is merely the orthodox slandering other beliefs. It was Jesus' "unorthodox" teachings that would eventually lead to his cruxifiction.
2006-06-17 11:05:41 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 0⤋
via very actuality they did no longer meet the time line and distinct criteria for the Bible gospels. a million. there is not any longer any good evidence that the gospel of Mary Magdalene replaced into fairly written through her 2. properly, he would have 'favorited' indirectly her for her being a lady and following Him inspite of the reality that it replaced into no longer basic for females human beings to have the potential to objective this, yet God loves all both. 3. Jealousy did no longer make the Gnostic gospels to any quantity extra good 4. Jesus replaced into sinless, Jesus did no longer have any followers and He not in any respect had sex, not in any respect. 5. No, Judas had his loose will. Jesus only knew how he replaced into going to practice it. Jesus replaced into precise. 6. particular, Christianity is a private relationship with God, no longer a faith. inspite of the easy undeniable actuality that, God made us for the community and thanks to this church has an recommendations-blowing function in our very own relationship with God. we are the body of Christ. Church is the body of Christ. all persons would opt to operate actual for that body to finish precise, meaning also exhibiting up for the worship. The 4 gospels are shelter through God. they help the Scripture. Jesus shown the previous testomony and promised the NT.
2016-11-14 21:20:14 · answer #8 · answered by weagraff 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
There may have been copies of the original scripts.
Trust the scholars, they know what they're doing.
God Bless, and read the Gnostics, they just might open your eyes.
2006-06-16 13:44:53 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
I don't think that the Gospel of Thomas is as late as you say.
2006-06-16 13:36:39 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋