Bible? about other gospels not included?
346698
Most of the "Gospels" that were not included in the Bible have been dated to about the second century. The books of the New Testament were all written either by eyewitnesses to the events or people who spoke with those eyewitnesses. Many of the books refer to other books of the New Testament as scripture. It certainly wasn't one person who "got to pick what would go into the Bible."\n\nAdded:\nThe language and content of the Gospel of Thomas is consistend with the second century, not the first. It was written after all the eyewitnesses were dead. It's pretty easy to write a book about events that happened two hundred years ago, since no eyewitnesses are around to refute it. Also, some of the things in the Gospel of Thomas don't line up with the rest of the Bible. The gospels (and other New Testament books) that are included in the Bible were written at a time when eyewitnesses to the events were still around to refute it. Luke, for instance, was most likely written within 30 years of Jesus' death. Paul, in 1 Corinthians 15, actually lists names of eyewitnesses and tells the church in Corinth that most of the eyewitnesses were still alive when he was writing.
292246
Yes it is,  Many protestant bibles have left it out since it does not contain alot of writings to the level of some of the other books ( but I would guess if many protestants had thier choice today they would leeave out some of the OT stories now adays.\n\nBut it is in my bible
567374
These claims are just that, claims.  There is no foundation of truth to these claims.  The word canon is closely related "reed."  Our word "cane" comes from the same word.  The idea is a measuring stick.  The idea is that canonical scriptures are those scriptures by which we measure our lives.  Who decides what is canonical?  Whoever is reading it, honestly.  We see that principal in Acts 17:11, when the Bereans were considered most noble because they examined the scriptures (Old Testament here) to see if what Paul said was true.  I do not agree with the Catholic's church of making the books officialy recognized (making acceptance of other books or rejection of any of the 27 a heracy) in the 16th century as a reaction to Martin Luther questioning the authority of the book of James.  \n\nHowever, history tells us that NO OTHER BOOKS have ever been widely accepted as scripture.  It also tells us that EVERY book in the New Testament WAS widely accepted as scripture.  The early church fathers, who wrote between the last part of the first century, and the first part of the second century, collectively quoted almost every single verse in the New Testament in their writtings.  No other books were quoted as scripture by them at all.  \n\nThe Muratorian Fragment is one of the earliests know lists of New Testament books.  Although it is incomplete, it refers to Luke as the "third" Gospel.  This would have been around the same time or before Irenaeus (I don't know the exact date of that fragment, only that it was the second half of the second century).  \n\nAs to your claim that we only have the 4 gospels to have the "slavation shallows...that we merely have to accept Jesus on faith and we are saved..." this is a ridiculous claim.  First of all, the Gospels say very little (although they are not completely silent) about how to be saved.  Mostly we find that in Acts and Paul's letters (Paul's letters are also written before most of the Gospels).  The simplicity of the Good News is found in Paul's writings.  \n\nAlthough I don't know the date of the three gospels you have mentioned, I know that most of the gnostic gospels are usually dated around 200 A.D.  This is reason enough to reject them.  Also, despite recent claims made by The DaVinci Code, the other gospels made Jesus out to be some mystic demi-god that didn't come in the flesh at all.  In fact, the gnostic gospels (the recent gospel of Judas among them), don't have a Jewish veiw of God at all, don't quote the Old Testament, and reject many of the events that fulfilled Old Testament prophesy about Jesus.  Their beliefs come from some Greek and Roman beliefs, and as such should be rejected.\n\nThe decision of what should be canon and what should not still goes on today.  Most of that decision goes on today in the form of Textual Criticism.  However, I believe Christians should still look at the 27 books we have and ask themselves, "Do these belong here?"  I believe we should still read some of the other early Christian writings and ask "Should these be considered scripture?"  I have done much study, and I am convinced that the 27 books in the New Testament are the ones by which I need to live my life.  Questioning what has been passed down, however, is never a bad idea.  Just make sure you don't obsess over it that you WANT to believe something else so badly that you don't remain objective (or that you want TO believe it, for that matter).  \n\nGod bless.\n\nP.S.  The importance of the indwelling of the Holy Spirit is found througout the scripture, especially the letters of Paul and the writings of John.
69470
Get this book:\nThe Gospels of Mary : The Secret Tradition of Mary Magdalene, the Companion of Jesus (Hardcover)\nby Marvin Meyer, Esther A. De Boer \nIsbn 0060727918
429770
http://www.christgospelokc.org/GospelSongBook.html
619397
I believe these are the Four Horsemen of the Apocalypse, How ever they are not refer-ed to anywhere in any of the Gospels. Read your Bible a little closer. They are refer-ed to in Rev. 6:1-8
235485
I've attached a link as a source to help you begin your search but I think it's going to be like looking for needle in a haystack.  I can tell you (as can anyone else) that Jesus Christ began Christianity but as far as who began all the differences (Catholic vs. Protestant vs. Baptist, etc), I have no clue.  It's just different interpretations of the Bible.
436048
There were a bunch of books left out of the Bible. Mostly this was done to maintain consistancy. You can read some of them at my link. I have read most of the ones on this page and there is little "new" information.
420193
Very good!  If more Christians displayed such a sense of humor, we wouldn't have so much trouble with hostilities in this section of Yahoo! Answers, let alone in the rest of the world.  Isn't there plenty of stuff about joy and lightheartedness and so forth in the gospels?  Howcum so many Christians forget that part?
494889
unsure of website, but a great book is "knowing your bible 101" Good summaries of each book and background of it. Good luck! Also available - Christianity 101
737087
There are many many more sections of the Bible out there.  The Vatican removed them many years ago to cover up many things so that people will not learn the truth about many things listed in the Bible.\n\nDo a Google search for "missing bible".  Look at the missing bible verses, people, places, things, religions, etc.\n\nAlso look for some special books.  Take a look at the list of what the Torah consists of and compare that to the list of the Old Testament.  Find all those that are in the Torah and not in the Old Testament.\n\nLook for a 2,000+ page multi-volume set written by a nun from France many centuries ago.  She claimed to be the reincarnation of Mary's mother and wrote about her past life in very great detail.\n\nLook for the African accounts of Mary and Jesus - it gives a blow by blow detailed account of how Mary first encountered the Angels from God when she was born, how she was taught all about childbearing while she was a mere babe, and how when she was 5 years old she went to the temple to demand that the Priests approve her for marriage because she was going to carry the child of God.  It also explains how the priests sought out a suitable husband for the 5 year old, eventually blackmailing the just widowed Joseph into marrying Mary, how he had to flee his village with Mary when she became pregnant, and how they only place they could find was a manger because the inn keepers did not want a pregnant child on the premises.\n\nThere is so much more to be learned.  The reasons for not having any male figures is discussed in detail - you learn that God is female and not male - the change of the sex was done by rulers in power to stop female rulership.\n\nOops, I am rambling now.  I could go on forever with the things removed, cut out and altered in the Bible to try to halt technological progress, prevent science from gaining a foothold, prevent people from learning about the solar system is laid out and so much more.
508860
Allow me to rephrase.. Yes it changes the meaning. But ((why)) are such things in the bible when we know they were added later? But there are more verses which were added (the NIV indicates them in footnotes). So, if such things were added, then who knows what else was added or removed?\n\nBTW, do you know about the "Secret Gospel of Mark"? This is a gem indeed. It answers the difficulty of Mark 10:46 (ie. what happened at Jericho?) and demonstrates nicely how they removed things they didn't like ;)
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!
730078
i found a bible search c link below\nhope u find what u need.\n:)\nit's 1 of my favourites.
951817
Some of them were considered spurious or heretical.  One of them, the Infancy Gospel of  Thomas, talks about Jesus using his powers to kill children and blinding people (no joke).  There are quite a few, along with several other acts, epistles, and apocalypses.\n\nIn the beginning of the church, there was no organization of the various churches, and few, if any, had a whole New Testament.  Many had a single gospel and possibly and epistle or two.  As Christianity grew, more and more copies of the various books were around, and the current New Testament, or actually something close to it, was compiled.  Many of these books (for example, the Infancy Gospel of Thomas) were rejected.  There was some debate on six of the books, two of which (Hebrews and Revelations) were included; four of them, including the Didache (or the "Teachings of the Twelve Apostles"), the Epistle of Barnabas, the Epistle of Clement (now called First Clement because a purely apocryphal Second Clement also exist), and an apocalyptic book titled the Shepherd of Hermas, were rejected.  This final decision on these six books were decided at a church council.  \n\nAll of these "extra" books are called the New Testament Apocrypha by scholars.
771847
Paul SAYS Jesus said this, but it isn't anywhere to be found in the Gospels.  Possibly Jesus never said it, or maybe Paul made it up; Or, possibly, one of the hundreds of "editors" of the bible thought it was a nice sentiment and added it.
347038
nope. there are quite a few false "gospels" that different sects like the gnostics wrote that are not in accordance with the rest of the Bible. its interesting historically and teaches us more about these sects, but it doesnt mean that it was ever part of maintstream Christianity or that its true. the gospel of judas sounds like pretty typical gnostic stuff- the flesh is bad, the spirit is good, judas was helping Jesus get rid of the bad flesh, only certain special people get special knowledge... nothing particularly new, just dealing with judas.