2007-12-22 17:14:09 · 11 answers · asked by "G" 5 in Society & Culture ➔ Religion & Spirituality
I think all the writings should be together
Gospel of Thomas,Gospel of Phillip,Gospel of Mary.
Let us decide what to believe after all has been read.
2007-12-22 17:24:53 · answer #1 · answered by mw 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Even though I'm not Catholic I would say that they are valid historical sources - at least from what I've studied of them - and should probably be included in Scripture. I say this because they fill in a couple hundred year gap between the Old and New Testaments and therefore, provide valuable information that helps us better understand the historical context leading up to first century Israel.
For example, the Hebrew Bible ends with the Jews rebuilding Jerusalem having regained autonomy after the Neo-Babylonian exile. By the time the new Testament roles around however, they are under yet another foreign occupation (the Romans). Also, Pharisees didn't exist in OT times, but they certainly pop out of no where in the NT. Understanding how both of these came to pass (among a host of other events) is pivotal to a complete understanding of the life of Christ.
2007-12-22 17:32:18 · answer #2 · answered by Harbinger 3 · 1⤊ 0⤋
One of the chief external evidences against the canonicity of the Apocrypha is the fact that none of the Christian Bible writers quoted from these books. While this of itself is not conclusive, inasmuch as their writings are also lacking in quotations from a few books recognized as canonical, such as Esther, Ecclesiastes, and The Song of Solomon, yet the fact that not one of the writings of the Apocrypha is quoted even once is certainly significant.
2007-12-22 17:19:38 · answer #3 · answered by conundrum 7 · 2⤊ 1⤋
Apoocryphal books are not Scripture and therefore have no special authority. However, the 73 inspired books of the Holy Bible - all of them - are the Word of God, including the 7 books deleted from the Bible by the founder of Protestantism a few hundred years ago. (He intended to trash 10 books of God's Holy Word, but his followers wouldn't allow him to throw out the 3 New Testament books he intended to discard.)
2007-12-22 17:26:11 · answer #4 · answered by PaulCyp 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋
I've only fully read the Book of Tobit. I think it was removed from the KJV because the protestants didn't feel the Apocrypha had anything to do with spirituality, it just told stories of people who did things with God.
I believe they are scriptures, talking about people who believed in God. My church doesn't recognize them(probably for the same reason I said above) but they're still interestign to read.
2007-12-22 17:19:43 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 1⤋
It's always a case of "My church, right or wrong".
Regarding the validity of the apocrypha, the mugs in the pews will accept whatever the priest tells them.
2007-12-22 19:24:21 · answer #6 · answered by youngmoigle 5 · 1⤊ 1⤋
Sure. I think they're just more examples of people documenting their religious convictions and beliefs, like the bible and many other works of the time period. But then again, I'm not a Christian.
2007-12-22 17:22:44 · answer #7 · answered by phaedra 5 · 2⤊ 1⤋
Valid in what way? They are not scriptural according to protestants, they are according to Catholics. I've read them, and they were interesting, but they contained nothing that would alter any of my basic beliefs.
2007-12-22 17:17:50 · answer #8 · answered by Thrice Blessed 6 · 2⤊ 1⤋
Yes they are. And for 1,600 years they were part of the bible. Martin Luther removed them because they did not fit his agenda
2007-12-22 17:18:28 · answer #9 · answered by tebone0315 7 · 3⤊ 2⤋
they aren't valid. that's why they were removed. look it up.
2007-12-22 17:35:22 · answer #10 · answered by dagger 3 · 1⤊ 1⤋