Iscariot finally gets his side out

[mojopanther]

So the Gospel of Judas has been found. So I make the count of gospels that are not in the bible now at 3. St. Thomas was left out too. Perhaps the members of the lesser christian faiths need to call forth a convention and investigate whether these books are in line or could be in line with the gospels and sorta have a council like they did in

Comments

Well

[anonymous]

Since none of those gospels tells us anything historical about Jesus, why would we want them in our Bibles? The four Gospels that are already in the Bible are much earlier and the only ones that provide useful historical information about Jesus.

http://christiancadre.blogspot.com/2006/04/laymans-guide-gospel-of-judas.html

Re: Well

[mojopanther]

NOt to argue, as I said merely curious, you say that the four gospels are earlier. What is the case for this. If these are in fact Judas' words,(while not truly concerned on Judas' gospel, but rather Thomas, and Peter's which are not in the bible), how are Mattew, Marcus, Luke, and John's words any older? The argument, that we have studied and known about the other gospels longer, does not seem valid to me. I understand, as christians, we don't want to allow perversions into our holy book, but there were 13 men who were disciples of Jesus, we only listen to the words of four. I have been told many reasons for this, but to me none seem all that valid. I truly don't care about the history of Jesus. I care about the divinity of Jesus, and the teachings of Jesus.

Re: Well

[doesanyoneknow]

What is the case for this

Carbon dating. Or so I assume.

The Gospel of Judas was tested and came back like it was written in 300 or 400 A.D. ish, if I remember correctly. I have no idea when (or even if) the Gospels of Mathew, Mark, Luke, and John were ever truly found or if it was more of a word of mouth until someone finally wrote them down, but I'd assume the former.

The reason why the Gospel of Judas will not be incorporated is for a number of reasons. A)It doesn't delve much into the teachings/acts of Jesus at all. In fact, instead it mainly focuses on Judas's private dealings with Jesus and how Judas was asked by Jesus to sell him to the Romans. It's only 7 pages long and badly damaged, so there very well could have been more to it, but as of this moment, there isn't.

And no, I'm not anonymous up there. No idea who the snarky bastard is.

Re: Well

[mojopanther]

radio carbon testing is horrendously inaccurate, but as I recall all of the oldest copies of the gospels are from around the 300-400's. I think the dead sea scrolls are older but no sure on how much new testament stuff was in them, if I recall not much if any. As I mentioned I really am more curious about the gospels of Thomas and Peter, but que cera, cera.

[mojopanther]

Dear anonymous,
Do I know you? I ask not to belittle your statement, merely to find out if you are one of my friends whom is not on LJ, or a new aquintance to meet and talk to. If you feel offended by the question I do apologize, the question is merely for me to know and understand. I enjoy talking to new people and so if you are indeed new, then I would love to discuss thing swith you.

[reebear]

Marcus you are totally being stalked. Dude, that's kinda like... dating. :)

[reebear]

Honey, want to re-write the bible? Just for you and me? We'd put all sorts of fun things in there. Like um... you know, there will be a day for celebrating clean white socks, or making every Thursday hereby be deemed "Let's try to fix the rice-cooker on the fritz" day. And let's not forget the biggest holiday of the season - "Thou shalt not post recipes for molasses cookies under the guise of gingerbread cookies" day. :D

[mojopanther]

So if the bible already has so many contrdictions then why does a few more matter???