Christian especially, What is your opinion on the Nag Hammadi book findings?

Question

The Nag Hammadi Library, a collection of thirteen ancient codices containing over fifty texts, was discovered in upper Egypt in 1945. This immensely important discovery includes a large number of primary Gnostic scriptures -- texts once thought to have been entirely destroyed during the early Christian struggle to define "orthodoxy" -- scriptures such as the Gospel of Thomas, the Gospel of Philip, and the Gospel of Truth.

There are those who would say, "Read the word, and you will be able to discern the truth", to not be shaken in your faith, when confronted with a mystery.

I personally do not feel books are necessary to obtain knowledge of a Supreme Being.

But I find it fascinating that there are writings attributed to Thomas, the doubter.

Do you think these "books" contain truth?

Gnosis; While the literal translation for this word is "knowledge", it's meaning is closer to "insight" or, to use a more modern concept, "enlightenment". Rather than purely an intellectual understanding then, it is a "knowledge of the heart" (which is not meant to imply mere emotionalism) or wisdom. It is the complete comprehension that comes from both rational and intuited means.

Answer 1

Many gnostic writings were rigorously reviewed for inclusion into biblical canon. All gnostic writings have failed the tests of canonicity. Briefly, these tests were:
1) The authority of the writer. In Old Testament writings, the writer had to have the authority of a lawgiver, or the prophet, or the leader in Israel. In New Testament writings, the writing had to be written or backed by an apostle, i.e. it had to have an apostolic signature or apostolic authorization.
2) The writings should give some internal evidences of their unique character as inspired and authoritative. The writings should be different from an ordinary book in communicating the revelation of God.
3) The verdict of the churches on the cononical nature of the writings was important. Amazing unanimity prevailed, whereas only a few were in contention.
The Old Testament canon was collected and recognized by Ezra in the 5th century B.C. References by Josephus in 95 A.D. and in 2 Esdras 14 in 100 A.D. indicate the 39 books we have today. Jesus Christ delimited the extent of the Old Testament canon when He accussed the scribes of being guilty of slaying all the prophets God had sent Israel from Abel to Zechariah, i.e. from Genesis to Malachi.
The 27 books of the New Testament canon was collected at the Council of Carthage (397 A.D.). Most of the books were accepted in the era just after the apostles.
Also, The 12 books of the Apocrypha were never accepted by the Jews or our Lord Jesus Christ to be on par with the books of the OLd Testament. They were revered, but not considered Scripture.
So, you see, the canon was developed over time, but almost always near the times of the actual events or original writing. Canon, especially New Testament were written independently by eyewitnesses to the events...these were the Apostles. None of the Apostles - at least who survived through the Lord's crucifixtion - were Gnostic. In the early church, Gnostics were a secret society that believed and proliferated the notion that salvation was only through some secret knowlege imparted by the Lord. Over the years this idea became so twisted that even today there are wild stories of a secret plan between Judas and Jesus that allowed Judas to achieve salvation, if he would do the Lord's will and turn the Lord over to the authorities. Although this might make for a hollywood thriller, it is neither biblical, historical, nor consistent with the nature of God.
So, to say that some newly discovered Gnostic library contains some "new" revelation of "truth" is in my mind overrated, in fact absurd. These texts, as all other Gnostic texts, will similarly fail the tests of canonicity.
Remember, salvation is through choosing to place your faith in Jesus Christ as the Lord of your life, and not through some "secret" knowledge.

Answer 2

Nag Hammadi is not a book. There was a collection of 13 ancient codices discovered in upper Egypt in 1945. They are Gnostic which the Christian Church has believed to be a heresy since the second century. I have read some of the books and see why they were rejected.

Answer 3

They illustrate how there always were and continue to be a variety of ways to experience spiritual growth in relationship to Jesus' example and teachings.

For some Christians now to claim "They're all lies, and contain no truth at all," is of course absurd, since, for one thing, works like the Gospel of Thomas include verbatim examples of sayings that also got recorded in the gospels included in the canon of the ultimately dominant currents of Christianity. And, as ♥Gnostic♥ nicely implies, the form of a number of Jesus' sayings as they appear in Thomas is closer to what New Testament scholars consider actually to be the original version of those sayings.

My favorite verses are from Thomas 133:

His disciples said to Him, "When will the Kingdom come?"
Jesus said, "It will not come by waiting for it. It will not be a matter of saying 'Here it is' or 'There it is.' Rather, the Kingdom of the Father is spread out upon the earth, and people do not see it."
.

Answer 4

Naturally I find them inspiring and beautiful.
New findings have Thomas pushed back far enough for some to speculate that it's the Q Gospel.

I don't think these testimonies are anymore necessary than any other testaments old or new.

Gnosis isn't "Secret" knowledge. That's the lie told by the Roman Catholics to justify mass murdering the Cathars who were Gnostic pacifist.

Gnosis is different than knowledge like reading about building cars is totally different than riding in a car. Riding would be Gnosis.
The Gnosis is unconditional Love. It is being born again. Without Gnosis you aren't a spiritual being. Once you're a spiritual being you are one with God. Naturally this oneness is subject to human weakness, for instance it's difficult to meditate while on fire. Still Gnosis opens the door and is enlightenment, then it gets better and better because no mater how far you go there's always more. The one thing that stays constant is the Unconditional Love.

People that speak for God judging people and hating usually worship Jesus, which isn't what we're supposed to do at all. We're to worship the Father who is Love. As Jesus taught we know them by their fruit.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Uh-1JVctSOY
♥Agape♥
♥Blessed Be♥
♥=∞

Answer 5

christian opinion nag hammadi book findings

Answer 6

I think they're interesting, and I'm sure they do contain truth. Even though they didn't make it into the canon, they give insight into the rich diversity of early Christianity.

Answer 7

They give us good insights into what the Gnostics believe but not into the reality of the Bible. The books in the Bible were selected because of their reliability and the fact several were written by witnesses to Jesus's life and resurrection.

As for Thomas he had seen Jesus crucified and buried and found it hard to believe that Jesus was alive again. His reaction when he saw Jesus tells you where his heart was...
John 20 : 28 Thomas said to him, "My Lord and my God!"

Oh and they hold some truth probably but are not reliable texts while the ones in the Bible are!

Answer 8

We knew about these books for a long time; they're referenced in Patristic works, and so when they were rediscovered, we knew what we'd find in them.

But they do have some truth in them, like every book.

Answer 9

Pseudopigrapha, meaning "false author" is the technical term for these.

They easily fall into that category since the majority were written many years after their claimed author's death.

The documents are all available on-line for anyone who wishes to read them. http://earlychristianwritings.com/ is a good source that links to the Nag Hammadi website (http://www.gnosis.org/naghamm/nhl.html ) plus contains most of the early "church fathers."

Answer 10

I'm not Christian but I can provide insight.

First off there is really no such thing as a actual "Gnostic" scripture. People such as Valentinus who was deemed the greatest of all Gnostics by reason of his influence and at one point almost became Pope of Rome, were labeled Gnostic by later Church Fathers whom by that time were completely out of touch with how the Theology was during those days. Valentinus was a mystic Christian, or spiritual Christian and those whom were "gnostic" were spiritual/mystical Christians, but again that is purely from a historical sense, because as Gnostic is derived from the word gnosis, which Gnostic having its meaning as those who seek knowledge as salvation. The word Gnostic fits and from this perspective the scriptures are "Gnostic" because they are characterized with a somewhat similar design or cosmology, in many places - a common language, if you will.

Gnosticism in Christianity played as the higher discourse, the aspect of the Theology which is called meat. The common body of believers were feed off of milk, where they were completely carnal in their understanding, interpreting the scriptures fully literally. So for them Jesus Christ and him crucified was taught, because they were babies in understanding and immersed within their lower nature. By the literal application they would go on to live better lives where they were at, and this was important as the common believer being in praise and bound under a figurative image it was not opportune for them to understand what it signified within themselves, but having gone through striving to live towards it they would in like manner work on their lower aspects making it greater to perceive things from their own inner source. After having overcome the the milk or entry discourses they would come to the point of applying the key of knowledge, which is the gate way to gnosis and this means turning the scriptures and pretty much all of life within yourself,as all of what you read in scripture is your inner story of the mind of a seeker as they progress through the way to manifest the inner kingdom within themselves. The "Gnostics" were the higher aspect of this, the condemners of Gnostics in later centuries said they were elitist because they held to a secret knowledge, when in fact this knowledge is only secret to those who do not prepare themselves to receive it. It is only Secrete by ones own inability to apply the key of knowledge/gnosis, which means observe and turn everything within thy self to gain true education from your source of being and expand the mind. Their inability to receive this "gnosis" was due to the fact that their minds they did not develop as they operated within a mundane consciousness which could receive anything beyond what is at its level alone, the mind has to be expanded beyond the natural organic limitations.

And Gnosis is the living manna/knowledge that flows from ones inner source of being. It is the Knowledge departed from the divine soul spark, which is the authentic self and it is the acquaintance and perspective of this very nature whereby gnosis is even gain. So it is true education of ones self and the patterns/laws of life. It is fully fulfilled in coming to KNOW the first cause, but one can't know "God" until they know thy self.

As for the books, they are good. The scripture I ever read in my life was Thomas Gospel, I read the bible after I read Thomas Gospel. And as some said there is truth in all things, it depends what you are willing to take from them, but the key to knowledge of all scripture, no matter if it is Christian, jewish, muslim, it must be turned within yourself or the process of gnosis, which is in the growing of your ability to draw upon that inner resource, for true education, as Yeshua said there is only one Teacher and it is within.

Btw Gnostics referred to James/Yavok the Just, Thomas, and I believe Matthew as authoritative. What is interesting is that James isn't hardly mention with regard to the New Testament, yet he was Yeshua's brother and was head of the Church in Jerusalem. Within the Hebrew version of Matthew James is through out the whole gospel, at least this is what was recorded by the Fathers of the church at that time, now this scripture has been destroyed, but I wouldn't doubt if it is buried in the sands somewhere. Bottomline what the those scriptures you name show about primitive Christianity is that it has been corrupted, especially noted through the Thomas Gospel. The Emperor and some bishops of the west hand picked what they wanted and edited what they willed to support where they were taking, creating the creed then. Later to have many Gnostics killed and their writings completely destroyed.