If people aren't allowed to change the Bible, why were the Gospels of Thomas and Mary, among other, kept out of the "final version?" An interpretation of Revelations would suggest that all of the Gospels should've been included. Hypocrisy?
2007-08-08 20:42:46 · 17 answers · asked by Anonymous in Society & Culture ➔ Religion & Spirituality
well the book of revelations was written in the first century c.e. and the bible wasn't canonized until the fourth century c.e., i think the ones who canonized it are the ones who added the whole no editing clause to the book of revelations. what i find funny is that the catholic version of the bible has two more books in the old testament the the protestant version does.
2007-08-08 20:53:06 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
Warnings like the one at the end of Revelations is specifically for the book it's written in. Revelations was placed last on purpose to maximize the effect of that warning.
The worst confusion is that all the books are good. Obviously some were liked and some weren't, for example the Gospel of Thomas predates the four gospels that were included in the Bible. In all there were as many as 50 Gospels at one point.
Remember the scriptures were written to be a testimonial not "THE WORD OF GOD!!!"
The Word of God comes from your spirit and your experience with Christ in your life is your testimonial that is as valid as any scripture ever written.
If you aren't sure a thing comes from God then consider does it promote love. If it promotes selfless love it's from God, if it's divisive or judgmental it is certifiably NOT from God.
Didn't you read-"God is Love?"
♥Blessed Be♥
♥=∞
2007-08-08 20:52:43 · answer #2 · answered by gnosticv 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Revelation 22:18 says to not add nor take away from this book....I'm sorry does that even mention the bible? NO!
The "book" is The Book of Revelations....John didn't want anyone to add or take away from his prophecy so we would all know how the world will end.
It doesn't say "don't add or take away from the bible" because when John the Revelator lived, there was no bible...just gospels like the Gospel of Matthew(Mark, Luke, John, Judas, etc.) and other books...but no bible.
You need to know the history of the church before you can understand what you're talking about with this....
2007-08-08 20:48:07 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 0⤋
Not at all. The only Gospels included were those the Church could prove had been written by one of the 12 Apostles (or directly under their tutelage), who were after all, eye-witnesses of the events.
Any books which contradicted the things written by the Apostles themselves, were of course self-excluding.......
Uh, by the way all; I have searched all my many Bibles thoroughly--some 50 English translations, as well as the Latin, Hebrew, and Greek, and even my Telagu translation, and I do not find a Book of Revelations in ANY of them. Just where is this Book of Revelations? Do you mean "Revelation"?
OK, sorry, it's just an old crotchet of mine, and at my age I'm entitled to several crotchets if I want! And I do!!!
2007-08-08 23:07:05 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Its says not to add to or take away from "this book", and there was no collected "book" of the gospels yet. He was talking about Revelation itself. It is not talking about every book in the Bible. But granting your argument, I could just as easily argue that it would be hypocritical to "add" the gospels of Judas and Thomas when they are not conforming to the Holy Spirit. So your argument does not hold solid.
2007-08-08 20:55:40 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
Parts of the Bible were elft about because they had to much flaw. Some of the so called "Gospels" left out of the Bible were written hundreds of years after the orginal Gospels were already in the Bible. Also because some fo the Gospels were pure frawd put out by surtin people to corrupt the growth of the Church. But on a faith based response it was because the books in the Bible were inspired by God.
2007-08-08 20:49:14 · answer #6 · answered by Seth B 2 · 0⤊ 1⤋
The Gospels of Thomas and Mary have been pretty much proven to be "pseudopigrapha" (false writings), books generated in the Middle Ages and therefore were excluded from the Canon of Scripture.
2007-08-08 20:50:32 · answer #7 · answered by Foxfire 4 · 1⤊ 1⤋
Constantine first ordered Eusebius of Caesarea to prepare 50 Books to be disbursed to the church homes that's the 1st time they have been prepare interior the 4th Century, those books could have been copied from Origens Hexapla. interior the 5th Century Jerome made a translation of the Bible into Latin, he in spite of the shown fact that broke faraway from Church custom and used the Hebrew previous testomony rather of the Apostolic Bible called the Septuagint. He additionally rejected the Ecclesiastical books maximum of which the Apostolic church homes used besides yet translated them below stress. In 1550, King James needed a Bible for His human beings, it used the Hebrew previous testomony and a often Byzantine although some previous due in date New testomony, via Erasmus, this replaced into achieved in 1611 it lined the Ecclesiastical Books yet some rejected its inclusion so as that they took it out. in case you have anymore questions or in simple terms prefer a pal to speak to click on my image and e mail me i'm going to be commemorated to be your pal.
2016-10-01 23:13:48 · answer #8 · answered by solarz 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
'An interpretation of Revelations would suggest that all of the Gospels should've been included'
An interpretation. Another interpretation.
The big book is open for everyone to make their own interpretation. i believe the real question would be:
"Who had the true interpretation?"
That, itself is also open for arguement...
2007-08-08 20:48:18 · answer #9 · answered by TelecomsTowerGod 4 · 1⤊ 0⤋
What is the Gospels of Thomas and Mary?
Can you prove that these Gospels was real ?
2007-08-08 20:52:28 · answer #10 · answered by Si semut 4 · 2⤊ 0⤋