Why were ''Gospels'' omitted from the Bible?

[Sunstone]

Um, really? I mean the bible/Tanakh is kinda fundamental to everything about Christianity and Judaism, I can't really understand why you think it's unnecessary.

I don't doubt that you cannot understand my views on the matter, but you still might console yourself that, like your views, they are only matters of opinion. To my thinking, the notion that we need highly organized religions at all is deeply problematic.

 

[Thana]

I don't doubt that you cannot understand my views on the matter, but you still might console yourself that, like your views, they are only matters of opinion. To my thinking, the notion that we need highly organized religions at all is deeply problematic.

Of course I don't understand your views on the matter, since you didn't express your views but merely asked questions. Seems pretty unreasonable for you to expect me to somehow ascertain your entire ideology from you asking three vague questions.

If you wanted to elaborate perhaps? Or are you trying to say that I'm incapable of ever understanding your views?

 

[Sunstone]

Of course I don't understand your views on the matter, since you didn't express your views but merely asked questions. Seems pretty unreasonable for you to expect me to somehow ascertain your entire ideology from you asking three vague questions.

If you wanted to elaborate perhaps? Or are you trying to say that I'm incapable of ever understanding your views?

I can certainly elaborate if that will at all entertain you. It seems to me that organized religions fail any reasonable cost/benefit analysis. That is, their myriad disadvantages outweigh their relatively few advantages to us. For example, one of their greatest disadvantages or costs it the price we so often pay for the control their clergies have over us. That price only begins at an endangerment or loss of benign liberties. Sometimes it includes even the loss of life.

I could on, Thana, for I think the costs are many and the benefits few, but perhaps you get my drift now. I am not going to debate this subject with you in this thread, however, because it would be off-topic and also because I hold no hope of it producing any results of value to me.

 

[Thana]

I can certainly elaborate if that will at all entertain you. It seems to me that organized religions fail any reasonable cost/benefit analysis. That is, their myriad disadvantages outweigh their relatively few advantages to us. For example, one of their greatest disadvantages or costs it the price we so often pay for the control their clergies have over us. That price only begins at an endangerment or loss of benign liberties. Sometimes it includes even the loss of life.

I could on, Thana, for I think the costs are many and the benefits few, but perhaps you get my drift now. I am not going to debate this subject with you in this thread, however, because it would be off-topic and also because I hold no hope of it producing any results of value to me.

Yeah.. I was more referring to why you think the bible is unnecessary not why you're an Anti-Theist.

I assumed you meant the bible is unnecessary for the religion itself but it seems that you meant the bible is unnecessary, full stop. Which is kind of unnecessary for you to say, We already know you're not a Christian and therefore don't believe the bible has any value so I don't see why you need to state the obvious.

 

[Sunstone]

Yeah.. I was more referring to why you think the bible is unnecessary not why you're an Anti-Theist.

I assumed you meant the bible is unnecessary for the religion itself but it seems that you meant the bible is unnecessary, full stop. Which is kind of unnecessary for you to say, We already know you're not a Christian and therefore don't believe the bible has any value so I don't see why you need to state the obvious.

Those strike me as perhaps willful distortions of my views. Which brings up another thing wrong with organized religions: Few of them teach their followers to value or cherish intellectual honesty.

 

[outhouse]

you're an Anti-Theist.

He is not an anti theist.

He just has an educated definition of theism.

 

[Bunyip]

In practice the process was pretty simple, texts that fit into the story and theology being created were included - those that did not were excluded.

 

[nazz]

I don't know of any reason the Gnostic Gospels couldn't have been included later, after they were written, had the Christian religion been one to accept their teachings. But the religion didn't accept their teachings, and I doubt that was entirely because someone had imposed an arbitrary cut off date for which books made it into the cannon.

It wasn't really arbitrary though. What they considered authoritative was what came from the original apostles who were all dead by the second century.

 

[Thana]

Those strike me as perhaps willful distortions of my views. Which brings up another thing wrong with organized religions: Few of them teach their followers to value or cherish intellectual honesty.

How so? I wasn't commenting on your views, All I said was that you were stating the obvious. And I admitted that I had made an assumption.

Also I'm non-denominational so I don't know why you'd mention organized religion in reference to me.

 

[Sunstone]

How so? I wasn't commenting on your views, All I said was that you were stating the obvious. And I admitted that I had made an assumption.

Also I'm non-denominational so I don't know why you'd mention organized religion in reference to me.

You distorted my views at least three times in one post and I believe you did so willfully. Nor is this the first time you've pulled such tricks. I've had that experience at your hands before. So, this is my last response to you in this thread.

 

[Thana]

You distorted my views at least three times in one post and I believe you did so willfully. Nor is this the first time you've pulled such tricks. I've had that experience at your hands before. So, this is my last response to you in this thread.

Really? I can't remember the last time I debated you nor do I see now how I've distorted your views. Instead of insulting me you could just tell me what my alleged mistake was.

I'll never understand this cut and run tactic in debates, It's so silly. If you think someone has done something wrong just tell them instead of walking off with your nose in the air.

 

[Woodrow LI]

In practice the process was pretty simple, texts that fit into the story and theology being created were included - those that did not were excluded.

Too simple for most people to want to believe.
Once the Ebionites, Gnostic and Essene fell out of favor everything that supported them had to go

 

[LegionOnomaMoi]

In practice the process was pretty simple, texts that fit into the story and theology being created were included - those that did not were excluded.

Only that didn't happen, the NT as we have it doesn't reflect a single story or theology or christology, and plenty of excluded texts fit perfectly. Basically, nothing in the above is true.

 

[Bunyip]

Only that didn't happen, the NT as we have it doesn't reflect a single story or theology or christology

I did not say otherwise, please read more carefully before trolling. I know that the NT does not reflect a single story, or theology or christology. As usual you post saying that I am wrong, and then prove nothing of the kind.

and plenty of excluded texts fit perfectly.

Example please of an apocrypha that fits perfectly into the NT but was excluded?

.Basically, nothing in the above is true.

I really don't see the point of trolling me Legion, but if you insist on doing so - at least think things through hard enough so that when you tell me I am wrong, you have some kind of rationale.

 

[Bunyip]

Too simple for most people to want to believe.
Once the Ebionites, Gnostic and Essene fell out of favor everything that supported them had to go

Yeah, the truth is often as simple. And as difficult to accept.
Cheers.

 

[Augustus]

But in all, Paul and the gospels won out due to popularity, not one mans decision or a group, the group that survived used the text that lasted.

It won the test of time.

I think many of us underestimate the extent to which politics enters into which books made it into the cannon. For instance, the Gnostic gospels, had they been accepted, would have undermined the power and authority of the clergy.

I think many people also overestimate the extent to which politics enters into it. While any decision to reach consensus is in some way political, I think it is a bit far fetched to think of some scheming bishops manipulating things at will for their own worldly benefits. Even if they had the motivation to do this (which is very far from a given - why assume collective dishonesty rather than genuine belief?), I think it overstates their ability to implement any change that did not enjoy some sense of popular legitimacy.

And which despot would let the Book of Revelations in when it seems to go against the interest of the powers that be? (and that certainly proved to be the case).

Religion is (ironically) a bottom-up system rather than a top-down one. Popularity far more important than narrow political interests.

 

[Jayhawker Soule]

Why would it be 'incredible' to think that faith in Jesus wasn't necessary for salvation, or that freeing one's self from the secular world is a way to obtain a fulfilling and grace-filled life? Those were some of the tenets that were omitted.

You're absolutely right. It was all a vicious plot by the antichrist, cleverly manipulated by Constantine, to suppress arianism, docetism, assorted gnosticism and the rest of the true followers of truth which, miraculously, you have rediscovered in diluted form through a spirit-inspired, albeit it occasional and superficial, web search. It couldn't be more clear.

 

[wizanda]

How can anyone be certain then of the Bible's validity, if not all of ''God's word'' was included?

This is the same problem Muhammad faced, there were numerous sects of Christianity to begin with, with many unorthodox views.... If you compare the many accounts within the additional texts, overall they create a completely different Yeshua.
So as in my debates running on here, it is better to first establish who is Yeshua, with gospels that confirm each other. So in Matthew, Mark and Luke we see an overall matching character, with a clear representation of prophetic understanding in parables.
What is more concerning is not what they kept out, as a lot of the gnostic gospels are very whimsical; yet that they kept in the letters of Paul, the gospel of John and the writings of Simon.... The reason they did this, is they want direct apostolic succession, so they can claim the church is ordained; even if it provides numerous contradictions in theology, which they've then made forcibly fit (hypocrisy).

 

[Deidre]

You're absolutely right. It was all a vicious plot by the antichrist, cleverly manipulated by Constantine, to suppress arianism, docetism, assorted gnosticism and the rest of the true followers of truth which, miraculously, you have rediscovered in diluted form through a spirit-inspired, albeit it occasional and superficial, web search. It couldn't be more clear.

I'm glad you agree.

 

[Deidre]

Those strike me as perhaps willful distortions of my views. Which brings up another thing wrong with organized religions: Few of them teach their followers to value or cherish intellectual honesty.

This.

The way I tend to see it now, is why do I need to take others’ word for it, as to who god is, what ‘’he’’ wants from me, and how to live my life? And if I disagree, or don’t follow said hearsay advice, I’m doomed to a fiery pit known as hell. Fear is a powerful motivator for many who remain ‘faithful’ to such doctrine.