I am a Christian but it has always bothered me that the bible was censered by men. They very well may have been men inspired by the word, but they did leave a lot out. I have even herd of a text that qwotes Jesus as saying "I am not your Lord". Has there ever been an effort to translate some of the old texts that did not make the cut?
2007-10-17 22:54:17 · 9 answers · asked by Anonymous in Society & Culture ➔ Religion & Spirituality
Of course they're available in English!
I just bought a book entitled "Lost Books of the Bible," and it contains several of the books that are considered Apocryphal.
I've also read a lot of the Apocryphal books: The "Child" Gospel of Thomas, the "sayings" Gospel of Thomas, the Gospel of Barnabas (both versions of it; there are actually two, written at different times), the "Gospel" of Peter (it's ridiculous. It features a walking and talking cross!)...
Just do a search for them, and you can find them. I highly encourage people to read them. They're interesting...and it's also obvious why they were left out.
2007-10-17 23:05:12 · answer #1 · answered by The_Cricket: Thinking Pink! 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
the reason of apart from particular text textile from the bible is numerous yet based on sparkling defined standards. For the recent testomony. a million. Is the author ordinary? a. if the author is unknown who do the a million century church leaders say who the author is or would have been? The e book of Matthew falls into this classification. the author is unknown yet a million Century church leaders characteristic it to Matthew. b. Did the a million century church leaders evaluate the text textile valid and inspired? c. if the author is thoroughly unknown and the a million century church leaders do no longer state who wrote it; does it consider different actual scripture to contain the previous testomony: in uncomplicated terms one e book interior the recent testomony suits this standards and that's the e book of Hebrews. d. Does the text textile substitute something interior the previous testomony. D is there because of the fact God is persevering with, he would substitute how he deals with guy yet his character does no longer substitute. Gnosticism become on the upward thrust interior the 1st century of the church, this is while lots of the Gnostic gospels popped up so the church leaders have been very careful on figuring out what become authentic and what become no longer. As to the previous testomony issues are slightly extra complicated. i'm which contain a link that would element this extra suitable than i'm waiting to in this answer. Edit And definite the excluded books are available for examining, as a rule on line yet there could be some revealed variations. i'm Baptist and anybody who says the Catholic church is deliberetly hiding books is totaly incorrect. in this present day age there is not any way they'd do this and injury out with it.
2016-12-29 16:18:44 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Do you even know why those texts were omitted? Early Christians would use these texts and letters in the teaching of Christianity. Somehow, "other stuff" was making its way in so they eventually had to get together to weed out any false teaching and anything that wasn't authentic. The books of the NT were written by either the disciples themselves or someone who was "trained" by an apostle.
Some of these omitted books that you are (probably) talking about were written 100 yrs or more AFTER the times of Jesus. Now, if you have a book called The Gospel of John whose earliest manuscript is estimated to be dated withing 20-30 yrs of the life, death, and resurrection of Jesus and you have a book called The Gospel of Thomas that was written well over 100yrs after the times of Jesus, which one do you think has the potential for authenticity?
2007-10-17 23:00:40 · answer #3 · answered by ScottyJae 5 · 2⤊ 1⤋
Dude you can read the Cut out texts. Do a search on the Gnostic Gospels. They had to establish a set of "authorized scriptures" because so many people had different opinions. The stories started out as word of mouth tales and then they were written down.
2007-10-17 22:59:33 · answer #4 · answered by Pathofreason.com 5 · 5⤊ 1⤋
I have studied them all.
Many are extremely valid, some not so good.
Just remember the "Word of God" is NOT a BOOK.
Keep that in mind and find inspiration where you must and seek the kingdom and all will be revealed with or without scriptures. Then you will be the "living word of God" yourself.
John 14:20 At that day ye shall know that I [am] in my Father, and ye in me, and I in you.
Unity NOT Trinity.
2007-10-17 23:04:15 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 1⤋
I recently had a gander at the Gospel of Thomas. The end of it, it says " women are not worthy of salvation"
114. Simon Peter said to them, "Make Mary leave us, for females don't deserve life."
Jesus said, "Look, I will guide her to make her male, so that she too may become a living spirit resembling you males. For every female who makes herself male will enter the kingdom of Heaven."
That doesn't fit. It was obviously written by someone who did not understand Jesus's message of an opportunity and method for universal salvation. That's why false gospels like this, and the "Gospel of Barnabas" were excluded from canon.
2007-10-17 23:00:45 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 3⤊ 1⤋
Yes. The one that says to love your enemies.
2007-10-17 23:06:48 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 1⤋
The stuff 'left out' is what is called 'pseudepigrapha'. No one in their right mind ever believed in it anyhow.
2007-10-17 22:59:16 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 3⤊ 3⤋
Well here they are
http://www.bibleufo.com/anomlostbooks.htm
2007-10-17 23:02:42 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 3⤊ 0⤋