Here is a great article by Mark Robertsand series to not only a response to the Gospel of Judas question, but also to the DaVinci Code problems and the reasons we can trust the New Testament documents. It gives not only what I would consider strong arguments, but also links to the sourse documents (like the Gospel of Judas) so you can read for yourself why we don't need to trust the "new" gospels as authentic or missing from the Bible.
After reading the series above, I think it is up to the critic to demonstrate why we should have included these books. There were standards that those involved in the decision of what went into the formation of the canon of Scripture and it was determined that certain books did not make the standard.
Read this article also giving reasons why there are no lost books of the Bible.
These links describe what I am talking about, but more clearly and more in depth.
I am not sure that just because something claims to be a lost Gospel, that it should have been put into the Bible. There is a skit we once did in youth group. About five people are walking around in a circle. One says, We're in an airport, we must be airplanes" and eveyone goes zooming around the room. Someone yells, "stop, just because we are in an airport does not mean we are an airplane." and the group goes back to walking in a circle.
Several other times someone says other things ending with "we're at a church, we must be Christians" and they go around acting crazy knocking people over and singing and praying. Someone yells, "Stop, just because we are at church doesn't mean we are Christians. The point being, of course, that it takes more than a claim to really be a Christian.
I would extend this to the claim of a new gospel. Just because you claim to be a Gospel doesn't mean you are. It definately does not warrant tossing it in to the canon of the Bible. The burden of proof, it seems, needs to be placed on those making the claim that a lost book should be in the Bible. I am not convinced that any of the "new" gospels are, in fact, missing from the Bible. The truth is, they were rejected many years ago for a reason. I could be wrong, but I don't think these new books deserve to be in there.
At least that is the way I see it for now,
Derrick
Update: Here was a good quote from Melinda Penner over at STR:
"The discussion surrounding Dan Brown's story and the recent release of the Gospel of Judas has raised a question in my mind. Why do people want to claim the title Christian even though what they believe bears no resemblance to the 2000 year old tradition? Gee, believe in pagan goddess worship if you want to, but why claim it's the original intent of Christianity? Anyone is free to be a gnostic, but it's not Christianity.
This is the worldview divide in religious conversations: Christianity and the Bible deal with evidence, facts, history, and truth. It makes objective truth claims, true for all time and for all people. You can't play "what if" or fill in the blank with your personal preference with Jesus. He told us who He is."
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
4 comments:
Derrick,
Thank You for posting a discussion on the Gospel of Judas. There are many fascinating and interesting reads on the subject.
I think it dangerous to trust these new fragments of incomplete data that have been found in caves. Technology has evolved to such a science that it may be possible to duplicate the type and quality of decomposition necessary to create such a fragment.
The Bible is complete. It has been complete.
The new and creative ideas about Jesus and his walks on earth are what I call historical fiction. The Bible is real and accurate. These new stories are based upon truths yet are fictional.
The danger lies in those who are so close to becoming believers have satan pounding on their back door with these false claims that are written as truth.It confuses non-believers. In as much, it is possible that brand new Christians may come to The Lord by actually believing these fictional stories. What of them? Thoughts?
There may be many different ones, but the thing about Christianity is that it is not about what feels good, or works for me, but rather it has an historical basis and evidence supporting it.
I do not necessarily think it is dangerous to trust these fragments, not just becaus eit is possible someone, somewhere, somehow feigned oldness. While it is possible, there is no reason, or evidence, to suggest this is the case.
After reading the articles I linked, it could be argued that they are not trustworthy for entirely different reasons.
BTW, these "new" gospels are not new in any sense that I can tell.
1)They are from the 2-4 century. Not too new and
2)They have been around for quite a few years now with scientists and theologians knowing about their existance.
Those promoting or jumping on the wagon of DaVinci would like you to think that these documents pose a threat that has not already been dealt with in Church history.
I think the danger is that many people are deceived because they don't know much about how the Bible came to be and this is just one more excuse someone may use to not believe in the Bible.
As to your, it is possible that people may come to the Lord by reading fiction..Shore, it is possible, but it could also be possible that pink elephants and Ho-Hos lead them there, too. Though it is not likely.
I think it is more reasonable to consider the work some Christians are doing to educate those who read the DaVinci Code, the gnostic gospels, including Judas to the truth of Christianity and it hasn't been a big cover-up, etc...
If a person is truly seeking after God, and most of us humans are actually running from God looking for excuses or bad examples to justify are hesitation to commit to Christ and Christianity, then God can make a way for that person to learn the truth and accept it and His salvation from the wrath of God.
At least that is the way I see it,
Derrick
Ho-Hos.... A tall glass of super cold milk and a couple of Ho-Hos. It doesn't lead you to the Lord but it sure is a little bit of heaven... Yum.
Here is a Friday thought. I had a discussion with a non-believer last night. His argument against being a believer is that the books of The Bible were written by men. He also claims that book written to complete The Bible were written many years after the crucifiction. men are evil and decieve. This is quite an interesting guy. He is quite intelligent and to me wants badly to come to The Lord. Yet, satan is on his back big time. This guy reminds me of the late Dr. Gene Scott. Dr. Scott went to get his PHD in disproving The Bible and ended up a believer. First, the mathematical geometric progression of Biblical events confounded him. Them The Lord touched his heart. In this way, there is a chance that many will come to The Lord by virtue of having their curiosity stirred by recent publications. A witness can come from the most interesting of sources. We all came to The Lord by way of different witness types. But, we all share the same victory when we give our life to The Lord.
Post a Comment