Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

To: swmobuffalo

There isn’t one, really.

There’s nothing wrong with the catholicos gospels; it’s just good to have more. Athanasius wasn’t divine; Jesus was.


6 posted on 03/29/2008 8:49:27 PM PDT by hanfei
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies ]


To: hanfei
There’s nothing wrong with the catholicos gospels;

Are you implying that this is considered a canonical gospel by the Catholic Church?

If so, you a terribly mistaken. The Church rejected this, and the other works shown on the site you pulled this from, many, many moons ago.

19 posted on 03/30/2008 12:26:17 AM PDT by TotusTuus (Christos Voskrese!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies ]

To: hanfei
Well, at least you acknowledge Jesus to be divine. But, seriously, are you a "History Channel Christian"? By that I mean, do you take all of the nonsense that cable channel puts out to be a serious presentation of Christianity, where any number of Gnostic writings are supposed to be "lost" or "deliberately removed" from the canon of Scripture? Then know that all of the Gnostic writings were written after the Apostolic Era, and all of the Gnostic sects died out over time and remained extinct until ersatz copiers resurrected their notions in our own day. To the extent that the writings aren't old enough to have been considered "inspired," and the fact that their proponents died out as a movement, that should say something about their genuineness as part of the Scriptural canon.

So it is not "good to have more" writings. This stuff is not Christianity; to insist otherwise is to hopelessly garble the message. Dig deeper. Don't settle for being a mere controvertialist. If you think Jesus was divine, then investigate the criteria for authentic Scripture that the early Church demanded. When you do, you will run away from the idea that the "Gospel of Mary Magdalene" is anything other than a book written by people who sought to parallel Christianity, but who were definitely confused enough to be outside the fold entirely.

22 posted on 03/30/2008 6:42:15 AM PDT by magisterium
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies ]

To: hanfei

“There’s nothing wrong with the catholicos gospels; it’s just good to have more.”

Even the Catholics deny the Gnostic gospels. You have no point but division.


38 posted on 03/30/2008 6:48:55 PM PDT by swmobuffalo ("We didn't seek the approval of Code Pink and MoveOn.org before deciding what to do")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies ]

To: hanfei

You’re kidding, right? You really believe this gospel was authored by apostolic authority of those who knew Jesus? Do you have any idea what the name “gnostic” refers to?


57 posted on 03/31/2008 7:04:10 PM PDT by dangus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson