Banned from the Bible

[aaron]

I watched bits and pieces of a show on the History Channel (I think) about books that were banned from being in the final Bible. It included one written by a woman (who preached celibacy), the Gospel of Judas, another book by Peter, and the Gospel of "Secret Mark". There had to be several more because this was the second part in the series. Anyone have any information on these?

[zorro]

Gnostic literature.

See review of Stolen Identity in the book review section.

I highly recommend getting the book and reading it in order to understand the differences between Gnosticism and true Christianity.

[Hermione]

The true Gospels were written very shortly after the events they describe. The gnostic gospels were written much later, to support a heretical version of Christianity.
Let's not forget that the early writings, gospels and the letters of Paul and others, were circulated among the early churches. They knew which ones were authentic and which ones weren't. The so-called "Gospel of Judas" for instance, was known in its own time. It was mentioned by early church fathers. Its discovery recently is somewhat like people a thousand years from now finding a manuscript of Gone With the Wind and claiming they have uncovered an authentic history of the American South. The manuscript is authentically an old manuscript, but the book itself was fiction.

[Conveyor Belt]

I find it interesting that people praise modern day authors in their interpretation of Jesus, but easily dismiss those written more closely to his time.

[Hermione]

Nice comment, CB. We think we're the smartest people who ever lived and the ancients were dumb, when really they were just like us but without electricity!
A church history professor told me once that there is more documentary support for the events of the New Testament than there is for Caesar's Gallic Wars, but no one questions them!

[jmb]

The true Gospels were written very shortly after the events they describe. The gnostic gospels were written much later, to support a heretical version of Christianity.
Let's not forget that the early writings, gospels and the letters of Paul and others, were circulated among the early churches. They knew which ones were authentic and which ones weren't. The so-called "Gospel of Judas" for instance, was known in its own time. It was mentioned by early church fathers. Its discovery recently is somewhat like people a thousand years from now finding a manuscript of Gone With the Wind and claiming they have uncovered an authentic history of the American South. The manuscript is authentically an old manuscript, but the book itself was fiction.

Is this the reason that the Catholic Bible contains books that others don't recognize?

[Hermione]

Did we have a discussion of the Apocrypha not long ago? I know that the Catholic Bible contains all the books in the Protestant Bible plus some others. I'm not really qualified to teach the history of why. I do know that the Anglican church (Episcopal) has recognized and used the Apocrypha. In my New English Bible, they are between the Old and New Testaments. I tried to look at the Good News Bible (a Catholic version I was given at Cursillo) but can't put my hands on it. There's sort of a . . .umm, a book situation. . . at my house.

[Conveyor Belt]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Books_of_the_Bible

Here's a pretty good list...

Now, are the books that are in the old testament in some faiths considered Gnostic, too?

[Hermione]

No. The Gnostic gospels were rejected very early on. The present "canon" was set in the fourth century. Not "some faiths" -- it's all the Christian faith. It's a Protestant list vs. a Catholic list, but it's the same faith.

[Hermione]

CB, this bit from Wikipedia seems to be a good, concise explanation.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apocrypha#Biblical_books_called_apocrypha

[Conveyor Belt]

I think some would disagree with you about the 'faith' part. Now, when the canon was set... is that where the present church leaders got together and decided what they would and wouldn't teach as gospel?

[58ford]

A good list CB, but I noticed the second book of Ruth was left out.
I think that one should gather all the data from writings of that time as you can. For a study of Christianity the KJ is a good STARTING point. It covers all the important stuff, but if you are a curious, or unconventional Christian as I consider myself to be, gathering all Christian thought both eastern & western, conventional & gnostic adds to growth, saying "no don't read that." because some monk in the 13th century didn't think it was relevant is just stupid. You have your own faith, if something you read doesn't seem kosher then maybe it isn't, but you'll know. gather all the info you can, you'll know what fits you & what doesn't. You will never be poorer for reading a book (biblical or otherwise), but you may remain poorer for not reading it.

[wilebill]

I saw that program on THC last night too, aaron. From what they were saying, though, the "secret Mark" was some passages that were taken out of the current Mark. The thought was that the Gnostics were trying to take those passages out of context and put additional meaning to them, so whoever it was decided to take those passages out so that they couldn't be misconstrued.

The passages dealt with Jesus' trip to Jericho, and how he brought some young guy back to life. The Gnostics were trying to attach some homosexual thing to it, so the church decided to just delete that.

[aaron]

I saw that program on THC last night too, aaron. From what they were saying, though, the "secret Mark" was some passages that were taken out of the current Mark. The thought was that the Gnostics were trying to take those passages out of context and put additional meaning to them, so whoever it was decided to take those passages out so that they couldn't be misconstrued.

The passages dealt with Jesus' trip to Jericho, and how he brought some young guy back to life. The Gnostics were trying to attach some homosexual thing to it, so the church decided to just delete that.

Yep, Mark is apparently the only book that mentions the man. Here are the verses and this took place when Jesus was arrested:

Mark 14
51 A young man was following Him, wearing nothing but a linen sheet over his naked body; and they seized him.
52 But he pulled free of the linen sheet and escaped naked.

[zorro]

Is this the reason that the Catholic Bible contains books that others don't recognize?
Others have already weighed in on this, but here is a good brief explanation from an evangelical leader that I personally think is pretty solid: http://www.alliancenet.org/CC/article/0,,PTID307086%7CCHID559376%7CCIID1936500,00.html

[58ford]

Others have already weighed in on this, but here is a good brief explanation from an evangelical leader that I personally think is pretty solid: http://www.alliancenet.org/CC/article/0,,PTID307086%7CCHID559376%7CCIID1936500,00.html

Cool.

[KingMaker]

Gnostic literature.

See review of Stolen Identity in the book review section.

I highly recommend getting the book and reading it in order to understand the differences between Gnosticism and true Christianity.

Zorro I agree. And to elaborate a little, without taking away from Stolen Identity.

In about 60 AD, the Church at Colossus was becoming infiltrated by Gnostic teachings. Many Bible scholars feel that this was the reason for Paul's letter to the Colossians. Paul at this point had probably not been to Colossus, because it was evangelized during the time he was at Ephesus. I urge each of you to read the Letter with this background and text. You will also find that in addition to Gnosticism, Paul also warns of Legalism in the Church. Read Ch. 2:8 through 3:4

[Hermione]

KM, I only quibble a little at your date for an outbreak of gnosticism in 60AD. My understanding and reading is that it was a threat in the second century (well, it's a threat today today too.)

Z, that was an interesting site. I hadn't heard of the Alliance Council, but I recognize some of the names on its board. Alister Begg is popular with many orthodox Anglicans, as are Mohler and Sproul. Good explanation, particularly the point that the Jews themselves made the distinction as to which Old Testament scriptures are Apocryphal and which are canon. The Church early on accepted the Jewish scriptures as they stood.

[RHB]

I watched bits and pieces of a show on the History Channel (I think) about books that were banned from being in the final Bible. It included one written by a woman (who preached celibacy), the Gospel of Judas, another book by Peter, and the Gospel of "Secret Mark". There had to be several more because this was the second part in the series. Anyone have any information on these?

I actually thought this program was shown on The National Geographic Channel last week with a series of programs like the Secret Life of Jesus and another on the Society of the Knights Templar. All were very interesting.

[aaron]

Yeah, the Knights Templar program was also very interesting.

[KingMaker]

KM, I only quibble a little at your date for an outbreak of gnosticism in 60AD. My understanding and reading is that it was a threat in the second century (well, it's a threat today today too.)




The debate on when Gnositc teaching first became a problem in the Church will be kicked around from now until Christ tells us himself in heaven. The reason that I threw out 60 AD was because of this passage from Colossians

Col 2:8 KJV

Beware lest any man spoil you through philosophy and vain deceit, after the tradition of men, after the rudiments of the world, and not after Christ.

This to me reads as though Paul was directly warning the Church at Colossus of the dangers of mingling Christianity and philosophy. Which is the basis of Gnosticism.


The dates really aren't much of an issue, because the threat is probably as real today as at in time in the Church's history.

[Hermione]

Are you saying that philosophy is the basis of gnosticism or that the mingling of philosophy and Christianity is the basis of gnosticism? "Philosophy" is a pretty broad term -- and as the Church moves out of Jerusalem and begins to attract Gentiles, you get converts like Justin Martyr who were classically trained in Greek philosophy and were able to see "glimpses of truth" in philosophy.

(And lest anybody get the mistaken idea that I know much about this, I have my old copy of The Story of Christianity by Justo L. Gonzalez at my elbow, plus we are having a series of classes on the development of the early church right now at my church.)

[KingMaker]

I am not a Bible scholar nor an expert on world and new age religion. But, I lean to the belief that Gnosticism in it's earliest form was a fusion of Christianity and Philosophy. It was at that time (and even today) beginning to modify the message and morph it into something else.

[Hermione]

KM, you might enjoy the book I mentioned if it's still available. It was used in a class I took some years ago. It's good because it's clearly written and understandable to any of us. It's in two volumes, but I only have volume one. Too bad our class is about over, you'd have been welcome to join us.