Words of Christ, lacking sources

 

Would you say that the Apochryphal sect is similar to the Islamic sect of Sufi's, in the sence that they concentrate on the mystical, divine and love?

The question which particular text to include in the official canon of the New Testament was not that of authenticity, but more if the text confirmed to the dogmata of the proto-orthodox Church hierachy in the early centuries of Christianity.

Gospels whose content did not agree with the beliefs of the more powerful and numerous Christian tendencies were simply excluded.

Thus the Gospel of Philip is as authentic, or not, as the four included in the New Testament.

 

Firstly, it's very true that not all Apochryph gospels were Gnostic. I apologize for the confusion.

 

However, it is not due to the hierarchy of the ancient church that we have the Bible we have today. The texts concerning Christ were read throughout the Eastern Mediterranean and people in the congregations decided much by themselves, according to Norwegian professor Oskar Skarsaune, which gospels they considered to be authentic. After a few centuries, this progress ended in what we now know as the New Testament. The exclusion of some texts were simply logical: The four gospels were considered to be the most authentic (no modern scholar today will disagree) and therefore their form and content was made the guideline for what texts the congregations throughout the early Christendom considered to be authentic. Gnostic texts or texts that differed from how the four gospels and the letters were written, were excluded from the Bible, but that does not mean they were banned. Church fathers approved of them, because they taught good morale. They were of course aware of the fact that they were not reliable due to their young age. Of course, the Gnostic texts were banned from most congregations, since they presented a view that was hard to combine with traditional Christianity.

 

Komnenos, you mentions texts written in the same era as the four gospels. Are these Gnostic?

 

 

 

As far as i know none of the gospels are acurate in the current addition of the Bible. None of the Gospels in the standerd Bible was writtain by anyone that even met Jesus. That is why in the New Testiment one can read in the begining of a gospel, "The Gospel ACCORDING to St. ...". Gospels which can be described as a primary source such as the Gospel of St. Barnabus along with all the other original Gospels in the Hebrew language must be destroyed due to the order by the Nicene council in the year 325AD. This clearly is evidence that this major man-made edition to the word of the Lord was clearly politacally motivated and thus cannot be used as a reliable source let alone as evidence of what Jesus actually said.

 

So Jesus's message which lasted for just over two years was to be remembered acurately by those old people, who in turn passed the messeage on to others to write their version of Jesus. This does not sound accurate to me.

You have yet to address my point about the Gospel of Baranabus. A man who unlike the other men such as Paul, actually met Jesus but for some reason has not got his gospel in the Bible (or whatever is left of it).

 

The Gospel of Barnabas was accepted as a Canonical Gospel in the Churches of Alexandria till 325 C.E.  In 325 C.E., the Nicene Council was held, where it was ordered that all original Gospels in Hebrew script should be destroyed.   Source: http://www.barnabas.net/

 

What?!? Certainly decrees where decided, but destroy all the original Gospels?!

Here is what actually was determined at the First Nicene Council:

 

1. prohibition of self-castration; (see Origen) 2. establishment of a minimum term for catechumen; 3. prohibition of the presence in the house of a cleric of a younger woman who might bring him under suspicion; 4. ordination of a bishop in the presence of at least three provincial bishops and confirmation by the metropolitan; 5. provision for two provincial synods to be held annually; 6. exceptional authority acknowledged for the bishops of Alexandria and Rome, for their respective regions; 7. recognition of the honorary rights of the see of Jerusalem; 8. provision for agreement with the Novatianists; 9�14. provision for mild procedure against the lapsed during the persecution under Licinius; 15�16. prohibition of the removal of priests; 17. prohibition of usury among the clergy; 18. precedence of bishops and presbyters before deacons in receiving Holy Communion, the Eucharist; 19. declaration of the invalidity of baptism by Paulian heretics; 20. prohibition of kneeling during the liturgy, on Sundays and in the fifty days of Eastertide ("the pentecost"). Standing was the normative posture for prayer at this time, as it still is among the Eastern Orthodox. (In time, Western Christianity adopted the term Pentecost to refer to the last Sunday of Eastertide, the fiftieth day.) [25] Source: Wiki