How do we interpret the rejection of the Gnostic Gospels?

[Little_Star_1]

I want to add that I suspect their motives in choosing those that they did put in was the fact that their aim was to establish a unified religion. They based their selection on which documents were in the most harmony with one another and delivered a unified message. I guess you could argue that the fact the NT gospels were in harmony with one another, that is proof that they were divinely inspired. But, the thing that should be made clear is that the first Christians were not unified in their thinking. Peter and Paul had major disagreements at one point. None of it makes a difference. There is but one source from which Truth comes and we can take our questions directly to that source.

 

[PJM]

=14olearyn;9653025]Hello!
I recently attended a lecture at my church on the Gnostic Gospels.

In the first lecture, the lecturer seemed to imply that the Gospels of Mary Magdalene and Thomas were rejected by the Church fathers because the fathers sought to control the development of the Church for their own benefit.

In the second lecture, he explained that much of what is written in the Gospel of Thomas is inconsistent or even contrary to what is written in the Gospel of John. The Gospel of John, he said, was written specifically to counter what is written in the Gospel of Thomas. Again, the lecturer was implying that the Gospel of John had been written for political reasons, and consequently, he seemed to be subtly suggesting that we cannot affirm anything in the Gospels.

The whole ordeal shook my faith a bit. I kept reasoning silently, “If we cannot trust what is written in the Gospels, we have no grounds to trust the Church, and if we cannot trust the Church, we cannot trust the Gospels.” If the authority of the Church is based on scripture (i.e. Matthew 16:18), but scripture was created by the Church, what basis does the scripture have, and what basis does the Church have for its authority?
(I’m sorry for being so confusing!)

Thank you!

Its quite simle actually.

It boils down to WHOSE in charge? Our God or ourselves?

Allowing God to be leads to truth; usurping the Power and Rights of God lead to misunderstandings; an leaves us open to Errors because it is pride based. “I know more and or; I know better” than God Himself and His Church.

The Bible IS 'The INSPIRED WORDS of God" and containa ALL that our Perfect God desires it to contain. AMEN

 

[billcu1]

I want to add that I suspect their motives in choosing those that they did put in was the fact that their aim was to establish a unified religion. They based their selection on which documents were in the most harmony with one another and delivered a unified message. I guess you could argue that the fact the NT gospels were in harmony with one another, that is proof that they were divinely inspired. But, the thing that should be made clear is that the first Christians were not unified in their thinking. Peter and Paul had major disagreements at one point. None of it makes a difference. There is but one source from which Truth comes and we can take our questions directly to that source.

I somewhat concurr. We are saved by Jesus as in taken to heaven but heaven and earth will pass away. There’s more to come. There is a “secret knowledge” that is revealed when we’re ready. If you’ve ever heard of the “7 mystery schools” they established the nations. Jesus was of one of the order’s of Melchizedek. It is also written that “all that has been called evil has only been called evil to conceal (for a time) its holiness.” Jesus had sheep in other folds.