[quote]pushharder wrote:
[quote]Severiano wrote:
[quote]Sloth wrote:
[quote]thehebrewhero wrote:
Its human nature to be a free thinker.[/quote]
Or, maybe human nature is to have the illusion that one is a free thinker. That our feeling of having made a choice is only an illusion put together after the fact, to match up with subconscious processes.
Don’t let your subconscious processes make you upset with mine.
[/quote]
Sloth, what you say could be true for all of us. I’m not upset with your subconscious, I encourage you to know more about your own religion. I started by purchasing myself and my sister and mother gnostic gospels.
I just thought it was important by the very fact that the Church rejected them, the supposed word of the rest of the apostles. A true Christian would want to have those accounts. It led me to figuring out what happened to the Catharists, and that there were many different ways of being Christian before it became Peters way or the deathway. Because at one point it did.
[/quote]
Sev, do you realize what you just did there? Let me analogize.
[i]I encourage you to know more about your own country’s history. I started by purchasing myself and my sister and mother history books about the War of 1812 written by “scholars” from Mexico.
I just thought it was important by the very fact that British and American historians rejected them, the supposed word of the rest of the historians. A true history buff would want to have those accounts. It led me to figuring out what happened to the Caribbean pirates, and that the war was really between the USA and Bolivia before it became the USA vs Great Britain. Because at one point it did.[/i]
The reasons the Gnostics were considered heretics is…they…were…teaching…a…get this…[b]FALSE[/b] doctrine.
False. As in not true. As in bogus.
Why read a book about the War of 1812 being between the US and Bolivia?
Why read the gnostic gospels (looking for spiritual truth, that is) when they teach a false way of being a Christian?
[/quote]
If you ask me I don’t know that there is a correct way to be a Christian.
You can make comparisons to the war of 1812, it doesn’t change the facts of the history of the Church, or that the oldest accounts of Christ were written at earliest nearly 80-100 years after he died, and by people who didn’t know him personally.
I’d be very cautious of who is determining what is right and wrong, accurate and inaccurate when it comes do books and such that are thousands of years old. And a Church who’s history is told, re-written and re-interpreted by self appointed folks who have had a very long history of self interest and self preservation. This may be a reach and I’m more asking this as a question, but whose interest is it to control the gospels? Who has the most to gain, and who has the most to lose by what composes the bible? Doesn’t it make sense to include accounts of all the apostles so we can have the greatest breadth and depth of information about Christ and the way he lived?
Gospel of Thomas is quite interesting btw.
Gospel of Thomas - Wikipedia If you ask me, I think it may not be controversial amongst Christians as there isn’t anything in it referring to Jesus as the Messiah.
The Gospel of Judas is an interesting account as well, I doubt many Christians feel good reading it, but in short it explains that Christ wanted himself to be martyrd, and made it Judas’ duty. But again who knows what is accurate and inaccurate when it comes to these books written by people who were all at least 100 years removed from the Christ?