were witnesses of jesus christ life.. according to this there are only 4 gospels only one it's a witness that's John.. but matthew, luke and mark were selected only because they are similar? what's happened with other writtens of the others apostles..I know there are letters of peter and jude, ect.. but they dont speak nothing about the life of christ... they speak about theology some of them were written by anonymous authors... the gospel of Saint James where is it? why the catholic church selected only those gospels?
2007-08-17 05:50:05 · 14 answers · asked by Anonymous in Society & Culture ➔ Religion & Spirituality
Keys,
Some of what you talk about is around so that you can take a look at them. Why not do that? You are allowed! lol
Here is a site that I go to in order to read some things that are not in the Bible. Some of them are actually quite interesting, and others are actually convincing as to why they are not in the Bible. But no one expects you to take their word for it, or at least shouldn't.
Why not see for yourself?
Weigh what you see on the Holy Spirit. Because without His guidance, we can be led into things that are not the truth.
http://www.pseudepigrapha.com/
Have fun!
2007-08-17 06:38:51 · answer #1 · answered by Christian Sinner 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
In actual fact in the early Church there were a number of gospels, about thirty six in all. A gospel attributed to Peter was lost, others were not considered inspired, either by the first Christians or by later councils. The four gospels in the present bible were the only ones considered inspired by the first Christians and by later councils. The gospel of Thomas, the gospel of Judas and others like them are known as "Gnostic Gospels" and were not written by the people they were named after, but by individuals associated with the Gnostic sect. This sect actually predates Christianity and simply hyjacked Christian teaching. It was condemned as heretical by early Christians and for good reason. The canon of the new testament was put together after very careful consideration and it is generally accepted by all Christians today.
2007-08-17 17:29:05 · answer #2 · answered by latics7 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Ever read Mark? That's Peter's story. He couldn't read or write. So Mark a young boy (seen escaping the roman soldiers in Gethsemane) That declared himself an apostle after Jesus died and spent years with Peter.
Thomas and Andrew wrote are had written for them long after they died gospels that were argumentative or did not fit the other gospels and were left out.
In the recent past a cop-tic writing was found and it claims to be the gospel of Judas but nothing about it encourages belief and was probably written by a sect that believed him innocent.
2007-08-17 13:12:33 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
There were various councils in the early church, the council of Nicea being a significant one, where the bishops got together and debated over which of the multitude of texts were 'divinely inspired' and which were just the deranged writings of men.*
So they picked the most consistent gospels that gave the message that they wanted to give and declared those, and only those, to be god's word.
They then went on to eliminate (often with extreme prejudice) and group that disagreed with their decision and destroying any copies of these 'false' gospels that they could lay their hands on.
Using Nicea as an example, it was called by Emperor Constantine, who was a pagan at the time, mainly to stop the internal bickering and strife within the Roman Empire which was weakening it's defenses against external threats. Constantine did not care a jot what was or was not included, he just wanted internal consistency.
*The reality is that they all fall into the second category.
2007-08-17 13:06:23 · answer #4 · answered by Simon T 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Good question. The books of Saint Peter, Thomas and Jude were all not written by those people. They are reffered to as Psuedopigrapha, meaning they were written psueudonymously in their names (which is an academic way of calling them forgeries).
Andrew's harder to prove, and the Gospel of Mary and Judas may have been either actually written by them, or by close confidants (much like the words of Peter aren't in the bible, as he was illiterate, they are actually dictations to his secretary.) For the most part these do not fit with what the early orthodox Roman Church wanted to teach, so they were left out.
2007-08-17 12:55:17 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 2⤋
...who's been teaching...? "Pee Wee Herman"...? Peter wrote several books in the New Testament... The Book of Jude is right there for you to read... Thomas, tho he didn't write a "book" make perhaps the most declarative statement in the entire Bible... (see John chapter 20... start reading at vs.24) ...be very caution of what the Roman Church trys to tell you... "they" have "skewed" Scripture over the centuries to keep their followers in "religious bondage"... it's NOT about "religion"... it's about a "relationship" with God....
2007-08-17 12:59:35 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 1⤋
Uhmm. Do you own a bible? James, the brother of Jesus, does have a letter in the New Testament. As does Jude. Peter has TWO.
2007-08-17 12:54:46 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 3⤊ 1⤋
God is a very influential person. Because he is all powerfull he has chosen to speak through people with out even being there in person. He even has more to say than talking about his son (Jesus). He uses ordinary people to do extraordinary things.
2007-08-17 13:02:47 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
When the church was selecting books to be included in the Bible, they discarded books that were in conflict with current church doctrine.
In other words...
"If it indicates that we might be wrong --
IT DOESN'T COUNT!"
.
2007-08-17 12:57:47 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 1⤋
None of the saints have books in the bible. The books were named after them to help promote the bible.
2007-08-17 12:53:30 · answer #10 · answered by S K 7 · 0⤊ 2⤋