Do you believe the Gnostic Gospels?
102727
I certainly believe they exist, and have read several books on them, and did some extensive research on the Gospel of Thomas.  Do I believe they should be in the Bible?  No.  Many of the people who talk about them here have not read them, and there are several that we don't even have a complete copy of; the Gospel of Mary is an example of this.  There is some theology, especially concering creation, that are contrary to the rest of scripture.  Gnostics also have what is known as a docetic view of Jesus.  That is, that Jesus wasn't human, he only appeared to be human.  Gnostics believe that the physical world is evil, and so God would never have taken on human form.\n\nAlso, there are plenty of other writings that were not included in the Bible.  Letters from other church fathers such as Clement, and other books such as The Shepherd of Hermas and the Didache were considered for the canon, but not included.  So, it wasn't just the Gnostic gospels that were not included.\n\nThe Gnostic gospels are valuable however, because they show us some of how Christianity developed early in its history.\n\nFinally, it is important to know that for many of the Gnostic Gospels, we had no copies or only fragments of many of them before a discovery at Nag Hammadi in Egypt in the 1950's.  So, there hasn't been a long running conspiracy to keep these books from the public.
1124815
It's a great concept. I am leaning towards it. I'm not in religious organization nor do I go church but I do believe in God. I have been studying religious Humanism which I believe is the same as Christin humanism. I believe in the trinity but yet I see contradiction in the scriptures. In my heart, I believe that Jesus was God. I just started studying this in the past few months.
398012
yes\n\nthe gospel of Judas is false doctrine, written by gnostics in 300 AD... \n\ndont just accept what dan brown says people
693665
Its a lot like anything else. You either have faith in it or you don't.  They did prove its authenticity.  They know it was around at 180Ce.  And they do have a point (those that have answered) that they cannot prove that what the contents say is fact. (meaning this is actually what was said and all that) However if you want to take that route we can say the same for the other Gospels. Those in the bible and those not.  The Gospels in the bible are just as old.  We were not there.  We take what the scriptures say on faith. (for those who believe) So this book is no different.)  I personally feel that this Gospel has a lot to offer in our understanding of Jesus and his Disciples.  Just as the Nag Hammadi Library and the Dead Sea Scrolls.  They give us more insight. More understanding.  And, I feel, They give us something to weigh against the Gospels and other books in the New Testiment.
727901
The gospel of Thomas contains material that supports a gnostic view of Christianity, where each believer is to meditate and pray and come to know God by himself rather than trust into mama church and let the priest tell him what is correct.\n\nUnderstandably, organized religion has taken a dim view of this.
463231
Its another fake Gospel written by an early christian sect who obviously had no contact with Jesus, the disciples or the disciples followers. It was common for christian sects with no direct link to church founders to create bogus gospels to support there beliefs.\nIf the gospel is real it would have been mentioned somewhere in the ancient history or copies of it would have surfaced elsewhere. Not to mention a true gospel always matches with what the rest of the bible says.\nPeople have a bad habit of thinking if a text is old then it must be a part of Gods word.  This is not true!
544828
I don't think we'll ever be able to make a good judgement because we'll never see all the evidence about the Gospel of Judas. Those who want to use it to change Christianity are only going to show what they can use to help them. Also, so much of the Gospel is gone, it is like trying to read the bible skipping every 2 paragraphs or so.
422269
The word gnoso in Greek means "knowledge". The gnostics beleived they had "hidden knowledge" regarding Christ. You can tell present day gnostics by their use of extra-biblical text. Yes, the Bible is all well and good, but THIS book or THIS magazine will give you the REAL truth.\n\nThis is also seen in the DaVinci code (fiction supposedly based on fact), L. Ron Hubbard (science fiction taken as fact) and the gospel according to Judas (ancient text accepted as viable).
481875
Jesuit scholar says Gospel of Judas does not merit name 'Gospel'\n\nBy Cindy Wooden\nCatholic News Service\n\nROME (CNS) -- The Gospel of Judas was unimportant to most Christians when it was written hundreds of years ago and it is unimportant today, said a Jesuit professor who has convoked a series of ecumenical studies of the historical Jesus. \n\nJesuit Father Gerald O'Collins, a longtime professor of Christology at Rome's Pontifical Gregorian University, said the text, like the gospels of Mary Magdalene and Philip, "does not merit the name 'Gospel.'" \n\nThe National Geographic Society unveiled the document April 6, posting a copy of it on the society's Web site, www.nationalgeographic.com, and releasing English translations of portions of the text.\n\n"A 'Gospel' is a literary genre -- established by Matthew, Mark, Luke and John -- focusing on the life, death and resurrection of Jesus," Father O'Collins said. \n\nWhile including events supposedly related to the life of Jesus, the Gospel of Judas and the others really are texts "attempting to bolster the importance" of the personalities they are named after, not of Jesus, the priest said. \n\n"They are not summaries of the good news," he said.\n\nThe texts come from the gnostic tradition, a religious-philosophical current popular in the second, third and fourth centuries. The gnostics claimed to have secret knowledge unavailable to the vast majority of people and focused so strongly on the spiritual and intellectual that they despised material creation, including the human body. \n\nIn the year 180, St. Irenaeus condemned the gnostics, mentioning particularly a Gospel of Judas.\n\nFather O'Collins said the most important thing about the text released in early April is that "it shows just how right Irenaeus was in saying the gnostics were against mainstream Christianity and Judaism, they were against our God." \n\n"To give Judas greater credit," the Jesuit said, the gnostics "portray Jesus giving him secret knowledge. It was a nice try," but there is no evidence to support the claim.\n\n"It was junk then and it is junk now," he said .\n\nFather O'Collins, who between 1996 and 2003 convoked a series of ecumenical, interdisciplinary summits for scholars on the historical Jesus, said it was "ridiculous" for anyone to claim publication of the Gospel of Judas will challenge mainstream Christianity. \n\nEND
992839
This is what Dan Brown would have you believe, but there is no historical evidence to back him up.   In particular,\n\n1) The Council of Nicea (AD 325) did not even discuss the question of "canon" (that is, what belongs in the Bible)!!   In any case, well before this time there was widespread agreement on which books were accepted  (evidence going back to the early 2nd century).   There is NO evidence of authorities "inserting" or "removing" stuff.\n\n2) Not only did Constantine not foist his own view of the deity of Christ on others,  ALL those at this Council (representing the viewpoing of churches throughout the Roman world) agreed that Jesus was divine!   The only question was precisely how that idea was to be UNDERSTOOD.   \n\nAlso, contrary to various insinuations, the vote was not even close!   The Council of Nicea was almost unanimous in its final statement (two out of over three hundred disagreed... though again, they did NOT disagree that Jesus was divine!)
307607
There are four "accepted" Gospells, that you will find in the King James Version of the New Testement.  If you want to get into the Gnosstic Gospells ~ there are as many as 30 KNOWN Gospells, to include the Gospell of Mary, The Gospell of Thomas, and now the much publisied Gospel of Judas. \n\nHowever, if you really want to tie things up, I would recommend a book entitled "The Arm of Hiram" \n\n*WARNING*  Should you read the "Arm of Hiram" ~ you're NOT going to like what you're going to read.  In it, it ties the Shroud of Turin, the Knights Templar, The Freemasons, the Gnosstic Gospels, the story of Christ up in one neat little package.  \n\nThe Roman Cahtolic Bible, the Orthodox Bibles, and the King James version of the Bible was meant for the un-educatd, illiterate masses.  The Gnosstic Gospels were meant for the more initated, educated, and informed ~ that is to say the more enlightened people ~ thus the Illuminati.  Be careful of where you thread with this ~ The more your dig ~ the deeper you get.  And, it is deep.  Pity that the Libary of Alexander was destroyed by the Romans ~ which if you study Roman strategty ~ goes against everything that they did when the conquered a city.  The first thing they did ~ was NOT to burn a city's library ~ but to seize it and make it safe ~ so why did they burn the library of Alexander?  \n\nEverything in the Bible is indeed true ~ however its like reading the Cliff Notes version or at best the Reader's Digest condensed version.  Its as I said intended for the un-educated, the illietrate, the common man, the masses.  \n\nWhen you see the most base of televanglist on television ~ this is the most base of people appealing to the simplest of people ~ which is why Jessie Ventura ~ the former Governor and Navy Seal was quoated as saying "Christian's are simple-minded people"\n\nTo give you but a taste ~ we're not earthly beings having a spiritual expiernce ~ we're spiritual beings having an earthly experience.  Who we are ~  what we are ~ is not of this Earth.  We are all children of God, and therefore gods ~ which is why Christ spoke of having but the faith of a mustard seed ~  and you can move mountains.  (The Book of Seth)  We come to this world~ to learn, to grow, to experience ~ but the experiment has gone awire ~ and we have forgotten who and of what we are.  What we truly are. \n\nIt can be proven mathematically ~ that an person who is of an eighth dimesion can walk through solid walls, solid objects.  This isn't speculation, nor falacy. Its pure math. Which is the absolute language of the universe.  An eigth dimesional person (Discory Magazine ~ I forget the year and edition) can walk through solid object in a three dimesional world.  \n\nThere is also the "Physics of Immortainlity"  another book I've read. Probally out of print.  A physicist, with a PhD in Nuclear Physics, who was trying to complete Einstien's "Unified Field" theory and who started out as an atheist ~ became a Christian based upon pure mathematics and physics.  \n\nYOU THREAD WHERE ANGELS FEAR TO GO!
665054
It is a WORK OF FICTION. While the theories he talks about, Mary being the wife of Christ and bearing children, have been around for hundreds, if not thousands of years, there is little historical evidence on either side.\n\nIn 1945 at Nag Hammadi in Egypt, a number of early Christian Gnostic texts were unearthed, some of which are believed to be as old or older than the canonical Gospels. The early church sought to destroy these Gnostic Gospels as heritical. \n\nOne of these texts is The Gospel of Mary. According to this Gospel, it was not Peter who was Jesus' second-in-command, but Mary Magdalene. It was Mary who rallied the despondent deciples after the Crucifixion. \n\nAccording to the Gnostic Gospel of Philip:\n'But Christ loved her more than all the disciples and used to kiss her often on the mouth'. Later in the same Gospel it says 'There are three who always walked with the Lord;Mary his mother, his sister, and Magdalene, who is called his companion. His sister, his mother, and his companion were all called Mary. And the companion of the Saviour is Mary Magdalene'. Where companion implies colleague or friend, the original Greek word actually meant 'consort' or 'sexual partner'.\n\nWere Jesus and Mary married? Did they have children?  That is a question the world may never know the true answer to. But truth is irrellivant where religion is involved. It's all about faith and belief.\n\nSome other books I recommend on this topic are "Holy Blood, Holy Grail" and "The Woman with the Alabaster Jar", both of which Dan Brown draws heavily on.
1155567
Look for Books by Elaine Pagels.  Particularly the following two:\n\nThe Gnostic Gospels: A Startling Account of the Meaning of Jesus and the Origin of Christianity Based on Gnostic Gospels and Other Secret Texts\n\nBeyond Belief : The Secret Gospel of Thomas\n\nThey are very well written, easy to understand, and very good starting points for the study of Gnosticism in my opinion.  She will also reference other books in her book that are good reads as well.
444972
Many scholars believe that they were not written by the attributed authors. If disciples had intentions of writing accounts they would have written them immediately rather than waiting several decades. It would be like someone today finally getting around to write about WWII. Would that make sense? I think the gospels are a mixture of truth and mythology.
674285
The Koran is an excellent guide, as are some Hindu texts, American Indian legends, and many others, and upon those things which all agree is most likely the most firm truth.\n\nI personally only credit the gospel of Thomas as being at least on par with the other four gospels, the rest of the gnostic texts seems to be inconplete, or contrary to wisdom.\n\nOnce again I agree with "lit the light up" (first answerer), whom I respect in my heart, except I believe Christ has already come again, and much of the truth has been firmly laid out. God's truth can never been entirely related in books, hence I say much of the truth, not all.\n\nSee sources for more.
461267
Gnosticism:\na heretical movement prominent in the Christian Church in the 2nd century, in part at least of pre-Christian origin and with ideas drawn from Greek philosophy and other pagan sources. Gnostics emphasised the power of gnosis, the supposed revealed knowledge of God, to redeem the spiritual element in humankind; they contrasted the supreme remote divine being with the demiurge or creator god, who controlled the world and was antagonistic to all that was purely spiritual. Christ came as an emissary from the supreme god, bringing gnosis.\n\nIn the United States there are several Gnostic churches with diverse lineages, one of which is the Ecclesia Gnostica, based primarily in Los Angeles, which is affiliated with the Gnostic Society, an organization dedicated to the study of Gnosticism.\n\nDan Brown's bestselling novel The Da Vinci Code draws on Gnostic scriptures and modern re-interpretations of those works.\n\nSuch films as Dark City, Pleasantville, The Matrix, Thirteenth Floor, The Truman Show, Twelve Monkeys, Groundhog Day and Vanilla Sky can be compared to Gnostic cosmological myth in the presentation of a world that is illusory, that is created with the intention to deceive or restrict its inhabitants, and that is not configured to humanity's benefit save through the illuminating realization of its falsehood.\n\nThe MTV animated science fiction television series, Æon Flux, contains many Gnostic ideas.
717425
There are no hidden 'facts'.  A few years ago we had the movie Stigmata revealing a hidden Gospel.  It turns out to be the Gospel of Thomas, readily available at any Barnes and Noble.  The Church certainly did a good job of suppressing that one.  Dan Brown 'unearths' the Gospel of Mary Magdalene, a Gnostic Gospel similarly in print for many centuries.  I have a copy myself.  It is in a Collection titled "Hidden Gospels".  It has not been suppressed.  It is simply not believed by mainstream Christians.  Most recently we have the Gospel of Judas.  This is another Gnostic Gospel condemned by early Church leaders at least as early as 180 A.D.  These are all historical documents that have been known to scholars for many years.  They have been on the dustheap for all those years simply because they haven't been seen as credible by any reasonable historian or theologian.