Lost gospels


#1

I don’t know if anyone on this forum has heard of them but, anyways I was just wondering why were certain gospels left out of the Bible? For example the the gospel of Thomas that was discovered 1945 in naghamadi Egypt was left out. There are probably many more the church deems heretical. One thing that the documentary does state is that some of these ancient authors, probably wrote them in a way that just seems, ungraspable.

Its interesting because the documentary talks about the infancy gospel and how he was born, which differs from what the bible says. For example this infancy gospel states he was born in a cave. But the Bible says he was born in a stable.

You can also find more information about these sort of lost gospels from (the secret lives of Jesus), which can be found on Youtube.

I have not watched the whole thing yet buts its actually a pretty interesting documentary.


#2

Because they aren’t gospels.

The so-called Gospel of Thomas is not a Christian document. It comes from the Gnostic heresy.

these are synonymous in first century Israel.

Or you can find out about the actual life of Jesus from the Bible.

Don’t fill your mind with trash, fill it with Truth.


#3

After doing more thinking research ect. The gospels in the bible are probably the most accurate. Because heresies such as the gospel of Thomas were written by people who did not witness Jesus while he was alive and so there for they would have had to base their writing off of information that might be shaky. Plus stories that are often passed down by word of mouth can change over time unless they are written down.

The four gospels of mathew mark luke and john, the writers had lived seen heard and conversed with Jesus. This would make them the most accurate.


#4

Both are correct.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Church_of_the_Nativity


#5

Red/Bold is not correct.

Luke himself says that he was not an eyewitness.

Mark may have been present early in Jesus’ ministry but may have been one of the ones to walk away when Jesus taught that his flesh was true food, later brought back to the faith by Peter. Whether this is true or not, it is not entirely certain whether he was an actual eyewitness to all of Jesus’ ministry. He probably wasn’t.

We know that only John and Matthew were eyewitnesses with any certainty.

-Tim-


#6

Infancy Gospel appeared much later than the canonical ones.


#7

The Gnostic gospels just have a whole different feel to them, you can see for yourself if you read them. Which is why early Church councils did not include them in the cannon.


#8

Gnostic texts are earliest, late 2nd century. The only one that some historians say is earlier is Thomas, this is because it is the only one written in Greek. The rest are Coptic.
You can find them online, and it is true that they dont have the same “feel” as the four Gospels.
There are many Christian documents that didn’t make it in to the cannon- the Didache, Clement’s letter to corinth, the Sheppard of hermas and many others. Although they were as old as the Gospels, they were not commonly used in the mass so they were not kept in the cannon.


#9

There are thousands of Christian denominations today, and they all believe various “versions” of the truth; times were no different back when these Gospels were written. Some “Lost” Gospels may qualify as private revelation from God; others may be utter nonsense. They are only evidence that some group believed something, and have little to do with mainstream Christianity.

Its interesting because the documentary talks about the infancy gospel and how he was born, which differs from what the bible says. For example this infancy gospel states he was born in a cave. But the Bible says he was born in a stable.

The Church of Nativity in Bethlehem is actually built over the *cave *that early church fathers believed was used as stable at the time of Christ’s birth.

You can also find more information about these sort of lost gospels from (the secret lives of Jesus), which can be found on Youtube.

I have not watched the whole thing yet buts its actually a pretty interesting documentary.


#10

You just need to read a few passages to know why the Church rejected the Gospel of Thomas ( and correctly so ) for just one example The Gospel of Thomas says that it is possible for a woman to get into heaven, she just needs to become a man first …

I think k you can see a problem …or I hope so :eek:


#11

Hahahah I didn’t know that. Thanks


#12

Rest assured they are not lost. I am sure the Vatican has them in their archives.


#13

There is no such thing as a “lost gospel”. There were books which were clearly fraudulent and that the church knew about and were never seriously considered for inclusion in the Bible. This notion that there were books that were left out of the Bible for some political or some Constantinian reason is just plainly false. It is the invention of so-called higher critics who have used their position to invent fiction and fallacy and call it truth. But these books were well known from the time of their writing and were known to be fakes and so they were never seriously considered as Canon by anyone except the heretics who were perpetrating the fraud.

Much the same as what is happening today.


#14

There’s a book entitled The Other Bible, it’s a collection of non-canonical books including a few “Gospels.” I had to use it for a college class a few years ago, and I read a few of the so called Gospels it had. Gospels are supposed to be about the life and ministry of Jesus, but many of the ones that exist outside of the Bible focus on the individual who met Jesus or lived with him and their experience with Jesus. The few Gospels that do focus on Jesus, like the Infancy Gospel, miss the reason why Jesus came in the first place. They focus on Jesus preforming miracles almost like magic, and leave out his teachings and sacrifice.


#15

The so-called “lost gospels” is likely material for sensationalist publications, that supposedly inform about the hidden truth.


#16

Actually, the gospel of Luke doesn’t say that either. It just says that the newborn Jesus was laid in a manger - a feeding trough for animals. It doesn’t say anything about whether it was a barn or a cave or a house they were in.

Early Christians imagined that Jesus was born in a cave because they thought it fulfilled a passage from Isaiah (as translated in Greek): “he shall dwell in the lofty cave of the strong rock.”

We get the stable from much later, medieval Europe. In medieval Europe, mangers were located on freestanding barns (unlike in 1st century Palestine, where people kept their animals inside their houses), and, because the Latin Vulgate’s text of Isaiah is not translated from the Greek but from the Hebrew - which says something slightly different - there’s no longer any prophecy to fulfill.


#17

Another thing you have to remember.

Many of these gnostic gospels were not even originally meant to be simply picked up and browsed at random in the first place. These are secret texts, revealed and read only to the initiates of the specific group that composed them. It’s kind of like Scientology, where you only have access to those classified teachings once you get past a certain level. In this regard, they are unlike the canonical gospels, which are meant to be read in public.


#18

I suggest the following:

amazon.com/Why-Catholic-Bibles-are-Bigger/dp/1581880103

Ed


#19

Some scholars call the Lost Gospels apocryphal gospels. The Lost Gospels have unknown origins.
gospel-mysteries.net/lost-gospels.html


#20

For me, Mathew, Mark, Luke, John all have the “feel” of Scripture. But that may be because I was raised to regard them as sacred, just as you probably were. Looking backward, you can say, oh it’s obvious this gospel was inspired, and that one not, but it was not obvious in ancient times. It is no help to say* that* gospel is connected to that heretic group, and is therefor suspect, unless you have some ground, other than gospels, to separate orthodox Christianity from heresy. You also need some visible human authority to designate these books are New Testament (which they also had to create) and those other books are not New Testament.

In other words, if there is no visible, reliable Magisterium, there is no reliable canon of gospels.


DISCLAIMER: The views and opinions expressed in these forums do not necessarily reflect those of Catholic Answers. For official apologetics resources please visit www.catholic.com.