Hey Lurker:
No need to get into profanity stuff here. Most Church Historians and Scholars of early Church manuscripts do in fact date the Gnostic Gospel of Philip the the late 3rd century, so my date of 300 AD is the upper limit of the dating of that text. However, some put it as early as 180 AD. So, my previous post would have been more precise had I said “Scholars date the Gnostic Gospel of Philip from 180 AD to 300 AD”. St. Ireneaus of Lyon, in about 170-175 AD, was the first orthodox Church Father, that we have written evidence of, to clearly state there are Four canonical Gospels, which of course are MT, MK, LK, and John,.
The first canonical listing of NT books was compiled by the Church of Rome in about 190-200 AD in what today is referred to as the “Muratorian Fragment”, and it lists MT, MK, LK, and John as the only four orthodox Gospels.
If you personally think Philip of inspired, this is the United States and we have a 1st amendment. And, you have the ability to go to a church that recognizes this Gnostic Gospel as canonical, or hey, “start your own church” and make the Gospel of Philip part of your canon.
However, I as an orthodox Catholic in communion with the Bishop of Rome, currently Pope Benedict XVI, will not be joining your church.
Regards and God Bless
I never said 'inspired', I said 'authentic'.
The Catholic Church simply picked those Gospels that supported their world-view at the time and declared all others to be 'heresies' not to be spoken of upon pain of death.
They did no scientific research, and in fact tried to destroy every single copy of them they could lay their hands on.
In short they were a bunch of barbarians.
You may not like it, but those are the facts.
The Gospels of Philip and Timothy are every bit as historically valid as those of MT, MK, LK, and John. They simply don't fit in with whatever the Catholic Church is calling 'orthodox doctrine' this century.
L