Prots: Why not accept 'Gnostic' writings?

[Presence]

As I was reading through one of the other threads it got me wondering: As Catholics we have the authority of the Church to tell us what is inspired, so the issue is handled relatively simply regarding Gnostic writings and whether or not to believe them. The fact that some of them were handled by the ECF’s surely helps as well.

But what about Non-Catholic Christians? How can they definitively deny Gnostic writings without a recognizable authority to tell them?

No doubt, there are certainly ways by scriptural and historical means to show the unreliability of these writings. But there are Non-Catholic Christians who are influenced by them. Is that not some sort of evidence to other NCC’s in the dangers of Scripture alone?

 

[Jolly_Joe]

Do you actually deny them? Read the infancy gospel of James. I bet the next Christmas pagent you have the wise men come to the cradel to give their gifts like in that writing rather than to his home like in the Bible.

 

[fbl9]

Do you actually deny them? Read the infancy gospel of James. I bet the next Christmas pagent you have the wise men come to the cradel to give their gifts like in that writing rather than to his home like in the Bible.

T’wasnt His home…"…entered the house" not entered their home. Joseph was from Nazareth Luke 2:4…details details

 

[puzzleannie]

this is not Northern Ireland, and “Prots” is not a respectful way to refer to our separated brethren who share with us the dignity of baptism. any English translation of the bible published under non-Catholic auspices will contain a history of the translation and how the reformed churches chose the canonical writings those editions contain.

 

[COPLAND_3]

As I was reading through one of the other threads it got me wondering: As Catholics we have the authority of the Church to tell us what is inspired, so the issue is handled relatively simply regarding Gnostic writings and whether or not to believe them. The fact that some of them were handled by the ECF’s surely helps as well.

But what about Non-Catholic Christians? How can they definitively deny Gnostic writings without a recognizable authority to tell them?

No doubt, there are certainly ways by scriptural and historical means to show the unreliability of these writings. But there are Non-Catholic Christians who are influenced by them. Is that not some sort of evidence to other NCC’s in the dangers of Scripture alone?

Great point! But as for those who believe in Scripture alone, they would not since Scripture is their only authority to their faith. They even dismiss the Church Fathers. Before I discovered the truth of the Catholic Church, I studied the Gnositc writings and even the non-Biblical writings of the Dead Sea Scrolls, I guess I knew deep down inside that there had to be authority outside of the Bible, so I started searching. I guess there are a couple of ways people will approach the Gnostic writings, those who are searching for truth and investigate the Gnostic writings, or those who are not interested in truth but want to corrupt it.

By the way I better mention that I eventually found that the Gnostic writings are not worth the paper they were written on.

 

[NHInsider]

By the way I better mention that I eventually found that the Gnostic writings are not worth the paper they were written on.

But they were in fact very influential in their day and that’s why the Councils went to such lengths to sort out which books were orthodox and which were not. And thanks be to God that they did, it would be dreary if each of us individually had to figure out what’s authentic Scripture, what’s orthodox but not inspired, and what’s imitation/heretical. . . .