The other Gospels

[Lui]

I was watching a documentary last night that was about the so-called vanished Gospels by Peter, Mary, Thomas and Judas. I thought it was kind of interesting and the explanation why they didn’t “make it” into the Bible was interesting.

Has this topic ever been discussed? I assume so but when I searched I couldn’t find anything specific.

 

[ZDHayden]

I was watching a documentary last night that was about the so-called vanished Gospels by Peter, Mary, Thomas and Judas. I thought it was kind of interesting and the explanation why they didn’t “make it” into the Bible was interesting.

Has this topic ever been discussed? I assume so but when I searched I couldn’t find anything specific.

Not that I know of.

These “Gospels” were Gnostic works - most probably written long after their namesakes left this life. I seem to recall St. Irenaeus of Lyons wrote a scathing review of the Gospel of Judas in his day. A fragment of this review might be available on the New Advent site.

I think the Gnostic gospels are interesting, in part because Gnosticism keeps popping up - it’s one of the heresies that just never seems to die. It dies for a few generations, then is picked back up. I would advise, if you read the Gnostic gospels, to be sure that you know the true Gospels well first - and know the Church’s teaching well. The Gnostics have a way with being convincing.

 

[Lui]

These “Gospels” were Gnostic works - most probably written long after their namesakes left this life. I seem to recall St. Irenaeus of Lyons wrote a scathing review of the Gospel of Judas in his day. A fragment of this review might be available on the New Advent site.

I think the Gnostic gospels are interesting, in part because Gnosticism keeps popping up - it’s one of the heresies that just never seems to die. It dies for a few generations, then is picked back up. I would advise, if you read the Gnostic gospels, to be sure that you know the true Gospels well first - and know the Church’s teaching well. The Gnostics have a way with being convincing.

They examined how old the findings were. It was said that the Bible as we know it today was put together by Romans in the 3rd Century. They voted which Gospels would go into and which would be left out of the Bible which is why many were excluded.
They concluded that the Gospels weren’t written directly by the disciples themselves but neither were the Gospels of John, Matthew, Mark and Luke.

They mentioned that the reason certain Gospels were left out were because they were Gnostic which would mean that priests and bishops weren’t a necessity. I’m not sure I’m explaining the documentary perfectly right because it is hard to understand if you don’t know all the details.

I don’t know what is true about this but I was surprised that other Gospels even existed.

 

[ZDHayden]

They examined how old the findings were. It was said that the Bible as we know it today was put together by Romans in the 3rd Century. They voted which Gospels would go into and which would be left out of the Bible which is why many were excluded.
They concluded that the Gospels weren’t written directly by the disciples themselves but neither were the Gospels of John, Matthew, Mark and Luke.

They mentioned that the reason certain Gospels were left out were because they were Gnostic which would mean that priests and bishops weren’t a necessity.

I don’t know what is true about this but I was surprised that they even existed.

The bolded statement I have to disagree with greatly. The Church Fathers maintain repeatedly that the names attached to the true Gospels were indeed written by the Evangelists. The idea that the Evangelists did not write their Gospels has gained popularity today, unfortunately even among Catholic scholars.

The implications of the statement just below the bolded also makes the almost stereotypical statement at this point that the Bishops were selfish and looking after their own skin.

The documentary may be interesting for the sake of learning a certain perspective, but I doubt it is good for accuracy - all documentaries, while interesting, have this exact flaw.

 

[Lui]

The bolded statement I have to disagree with greatly. The Church Fathers maintain repeatedly that the names attached to the true Gospels were indeed written by the Evangelists. The idea that the Evangelists did not write their Gospels has gained popularity today, unfortunately even among Catholic scholars.

They explained that in the documentary but I can’t recall the exact details.They didn’t exactly say Matthew etc didn’t write the Gospels but rather that the writings that the Bible was based on were copies of the original writings which is why it was written a long time after Matthew etc had died. I couldn’t find the documentary which I watched which was on TV but I found this on Youtube about “The Other Gospels”:
youtube.com/watch?v=-L7cQ3BrD5U&feature=related

 

[Dorothy]

There are many spurious sources that like to expound on the gnostic gospels.

A friend had loaned me a DVD about their origin. I do not remember the name of it but there were many reliable scholars teaching on that DVD, including Father Mitch Pacwa.

We have to be very careful of the sources and agendas of those who sound learned and would have you accept their half-truths and misunderstandings.

I am so grateful that our Church has a Magisterium that we can depend on with regard to teachings of faith and morals!