Which apocryphal texts would you include to the canon

  • Thread starter Thread starter minichibi
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
M

minichibi

Guest
Another topic I find interesting šŸ™‚ Which books or texts do you think were unjustly not included in our current Canon?
I would include Enoch,because there is evidence the NT writers knew of it and even used and quoted it.
The Didache and Hermas Shephard have essential early christian teachings as well.
 
minichibi said:
Another topic I find interesting šŸ™‚ Which books or texts do you think were unjustly not included in our current Canon?
I would include Enoch,because there is evidence the NT writers knew of it and even used and quoted it.
The Didache and Hermas Shephard have essential early christian teachings as well.
Click to expand...
Just because something was quoted does not mean that it was automatically held to be authoritative. Under this thinking Epimenides should be in the New Testament as well.

My answer to your question? Nothing.
 
This is one of those fun topics! I dont think anything has been ā€˜unjustlyā€™ not added because the Holy Spirit was in charge of our canon, but one that I would have enjoed to see added was the Acts of Barnabas, because I think it is authentically written by the Gospel writer Mark who wrote his version of Paul and Barnabas going their different ways and what Mark and Barnabas did, whereas Luke wrote Paulā€™s version about it and what Paul did.
 
COPLAND_3 said:
This is one of those fun topics! I dont think anything has been ā€˜unjustlyā€™ not added because the Holy Spirit was in charge of our canon, but one that I would have enjoed to see added was the Acts of Barnabas, because I think it is authentically written by the Gospel writer Mark who wrote his version of Paul and Barnabas going their different ways and what Mark and Barnabas did, whereas Luke wrote Paulā€™s version about it and what Paul did.
Click to expand...
Sorry to ask, but what is the Acts of Barnabas?
 
Had I the authority to make these decisions at all (and of course I donā€™t) I would only consider texts which have been regarded as canonical by some part of the Catholic Church throughout history. I donā€™t know whether any such texts exist other than those which have already been defined as canonical. Possibly some Old Testament apocrypha, such as the Prayer of Manasseh, have been and still are regarded as canonical by some Eastern Catholics?
 
patrick457 said:
Sorry to ask, but what is the Acts of Barnabas?
Click to expand...
Its easy to find, you can probably google it and and would show up. I am on my phone at the moment or i would copy and paste the link. I will be back later on my PC and will post a link. Its great stuff, it clears up that odd misunderstanding Paul and Barnabas had over John Mark, Barnabasā€™ nephew.
 
Instead of Apocryphal texts, I would include important writings by the Fathers like ā€œOn the Incarnationā€ by St. Athanasius.
 
1 Clement would be cool.

I also like the apocryphal writings concerning the Assumption of Mary, but those kinda came a lot more laterā€¦3rd or 4th century.
 
The Gospel of Thomas.
The Gospel of Philip.

I would suggest these, because they are so inspirational.
 
yeah, the Didache would be my choice. As well as the Apocalypse of Peter. And maybe even Paulā€™s letter to the Laodicians (if it exists at all).
 
friendster324 said:
yeah, the Didache would be my choice. As well as the Apocalypse of Peter. And maybe even Paulā€™s letter to the Laodicians (if it exists at all).
Click to expand...
Sure it exists. Check the standard current edition of the Vulgate.
 
friendster324 said:
yeah, the Didache would be my choice. As well as the Apocalypse of Peter. And maybe even Paulā€™s letter to the Laodicians (if it exists at all).
Click to expand...
I would agree with the Didache; I would not agree with the Apocalypse of Peter. If I remember correctly, the ending of the Apocalypse states (or at least implies) universalism: the damned, even Satan, will eventually return to God and His presence in Heaven. This clearly is a problem to the other books of the Bible and even Christā€™s words themselves.
 
Qoeleth said:
Sure it exists. Check the standard current edition of the Vulgate.
Click to expand...
That Epistle to the Laodiceans is not the real one (if an original even existed): someone just cobbled together different bits of Paul and presented it as the authentic letter. The fact that the letter does not exist in Greek but only in Latin should tell you something.
 
Qoeleth said:
The Gospel of Thomas.
The Gospel of Philip.

I would suggest these, because they are so inspirational.
Click to expand...
The Gospel of Thomas was considered false and heretical (see Origen and Eusebius).
The Gospel of Philip is a Gnostic scripture and consequently heretical.

These ā€œgospelsā€ were never considered to be inspired or even worth reading.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top