• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Old bible found in Israel confirms the Quranic view of Jesus(pbuh)

A Thousand Suns

Rationalist
Interestingly the old Bible denies the
1)divine nature of Jesus(pbuh) ,considers him as only a messenger of God

2)There is no resurrection ,which was assumed by Paul to be very important , in fact according to him there is no Christianity if there is no ressruction

1 Corinthians 15:14 And if Christ has not been raised, then all our preaching is useless, and your faith is useless.
 

A Thousand Suns

Rationalist
Yeah , but why aren't other Gospels added to Bible by early Church Father-----Like the Gospel of Thomas in which the words of Jesus(pbuh) was directly recorded-----Its surprising that the Church gives more importance to Paul's letter's rather than what the true disciples of Jesus(pbuh) wrote
 

Bowman

Active Member
This book leaves out Jesus’ virgin birth, His resurrection, and that He is God Almighty.

Thankfully, the Koran came along and confirmed that all of these things actually did occur.
 

Renji

Well-Known Member
Yeah , but why aren't other Gospels added to Bible by early Church Father-----Like the Gospel of Thomas in which the words of Jesus(pbuh) was directly recorded-----Its surprising that the Church gives more importance to Paul's letter's rather than what the true disciples of Jesus(pbuh) wrote

Because it contradicts the other books in the Bible. And FYI, the Gospels were written long after the time of the Apostles.
 

Pegg

Jehovah our God is One
Interestingly the old Bible denies the
1)divine nature of Jesus(pbuh) ,considers him as only a messenger of God

2)There is no resurrection ,which was assumed by Paul to be very important , in fact according to him there is no Christianity if there is no ressruction

1 Corinthians 15:14 And if Christ has not been raised, then all our preaching is useless, and your faith is useless.

they are not reading a 'bible'

it is an old document outlining the teachings of Jesus.
 

Pegg

Jehovah our God is One
Yeah , but why aren't other Gospels added to Bible by early Church Father-----Like the Gospel of Thomas in which the words of Jesus(pbuh) was directly recorded-----Its surprising that the Church gives more importance to Paul's letter's rather than what the true disciples of Jesus(pbuh) wrote

Gospel of Thomas is a Gnostic writing...read it and you'll see it contradicts the bible on many points. The writer was not an associate of Christ and did not record Jesus words at all...the writer wrote fanciful accounts of how Jesus as a child was a miracle worker.

You have to understand that not all who claimed to speak for God actually did speak for God. Paul, Jude, John all warn of false teachers and false teachings. The documentary you posted explains exactly that...that some teachers of christianity went far off from the original teachings of christ. They began to say Jesus was God, that Mary was the Virgin mother of God and the idea that she had other children is not taught in mainstream christianity even today.
 

A Thousand Suns

Rationalist
Because it contradicts the other books in the Bible. And FYI, the Gospels were written long after the time of the Apostles.
Doesn't makes sense to me because the Bible today contradict itself and the fact many other Gospels couldn't make it to the Bible ,which are supposed to contain more accurate teachings of Jesus
 

Oberon

Well-Known Member
Yeah , but why aren't other Gospels added to Bible by early Church Father

For a number of reasons, not the least of which many were writtn in the late 2nd or 3rd centuries.


----Like the Gospel of Thomas in which the words of Jesus(pbuh) was directly recorded-----

They weren't. There is some contention as to the dating of Thomas, but morst would argue it post-dates, and perhaps is even dependent on (see esp. Tuckett on this one), the synoptics. Certainly no scholars are arguing that thomas is a direct record of jesus' teaching.
Its surprising that the Church gives more importance to Paul's letter's rather than what the true disciples of Jesus(pbuh) wrote

There is no firm evidence that any of the true disciples of Jesus wrote anything.
 

MEMNOCK

Spiritual Tour Guide
You have to understand that not all who claimed to speak for God actually did speak for God. .

What a concept. Now if people like you could understand that the book you put so much blind faith into was put together by a pagan for political control you might get somewhere. Most christians have no idea what was in the original bible. They believe that bible that they bought at the christian book store is Gods literal words. Sorry to burst your little bubbles, but its not. Even true christian scholars who study ancient versions of the bible will tell you that there has been alot lost in translation. Not to mention a bunch of crap added along the way. You say that something was a gnostic text so it shouldn't be considered. Christians have no concept of what the gnostics were. The were what christianity came from, what it was supposed to have been before left in the hands of ignorant men who twisted its truths for the last 1700 years. Me ranting isn't accomplishing anything...in one ear and out the other. One day I hope that people wake from their mental as well as spiritual slumber and truely come to know God.:slap:
 

ellenjanuary

Well-Known Member
I don't know, man. Paul's letter to the Romans was written around 56. The Gospels, twenty years later. Sure sounds like agenda to me. ;)
 

Muffled

Jesus in me
Yeah , but why aren't other Gospels added to Bible by early Church Father-----Like the Gospel of Thomas in which the words of Jesus(pbuh) was directly recorded-----Its surprising that the Church gives more importance to Paul's letter's rather than what the true disciples of Jesus(pbuh) wrote

My understanding of the book of Thomas was that it was writtent by the heretical gnostics and contains contradictions to the OT as well as the new.

The Canon was developed using prayer to God who knows which books He wants.

Has God ever told you something different?
 

Muffled

Jesus in me
What a concept. Now if people like you could understand that the book you put so much blind faith into was put together by a pagan for political control you might get somewhere. Most christians have no idea what was in the original bible. They believe that bible that they bought at the christian book store is Gods literal words. Sorry to burst your little bubbles, but its not. Even true christian scholars who study ancient versions of the bible will tell you that there has been alot lost in translation. Not to mention a bunch of crap added along the way. You say that something was a gnostic text so it shouldn't be considered. Christians have no concept of what the gnostics were. The were what christianity came from, what it was supposed to have been before left in the hands of ignorant men who twisted its truths for the last 1700 years. Me ranting isn't accomplishing anything...in one ear and out the other. One day I hope that people wake from their mental as well as spiritual slumber and truely come to know God.:slap:

Good luck with that. The gnostics have about as much veacity as Alice going through a looking glass.
 
Top