I didn't parse any words, it was the show's scholar that did, and I assume he has read it in Hebrew or Greek.

The show did not discuss the qualifications of each theologian or scholar, however.

I guess what I am asking is, since the divinity of Christ is an important part of the faith (am I assuming that it is?), the gospel of Thomas seems to say Jesus was not God or the son of God. So how does one reconcile this big deviation? Why are Jesus' sayings not important enough to be included in the Bible?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What about the unexplainable and astonishing shroud of Turin . As a science guy...I can tell it will never be explained and it is the most baffling artifact in human history. It should be the subject of every mystery program it's like we have a UFO, ghost or Bigfoot right before our eyes and in our posession.

You don't sound like a science guy to me.

Perhaps he's a Creation Museum type "science guy." Jesus rode on dinosaurs, you know.

Many scientists have become believers after in depth study of the shroud. It's truly astonishing. Scientists are equally vain and non open minded as creationist types. Both are threatened by contradictory facts that threaten their life beliefs and work.

This is true, according to many Christian websites. And science guy. Bill Nye, is that you?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What about the unexplainable and astonishing shroud of Turin . As a science guy...I can tell it will never be explained and it is the most baffling artifact in human history. It should be the subject of every mystery program it's like we have a UFO, ghost or Bigfoot right before our eyes and in our posession.

You don't sound like a science guy to me.

Perhaps he's a Creation Museum type "science guy." Jesus rode on dinosaurs, you know.

Many scientists have become believers after in depth study of the shroud. It's truly astonishing. Scientists are equally vain and non open minded as creationist types. Both are threatened by contradictory facts that threaten their life beliefs and work.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What about the unexplainable and astonishing shroud of Turin . As a science guy...I can tell it will never be explained and it is the most baffling artifact in human history. It should be the subject of every mystery program it's like we have a UFO, ghost or Bigfoot right before our eyes and in our posession.

You don't sound like a science guy to me.

Perhaps he's a Creation Museum type "science guy." Jesus rode on dinosaurs, you know.

Anonymous wrote:I'm not a Christian, but if you look at this more globally, every faith is a living faith, OP. Leviticus talks about all kinds of animal sacrifices, about how to treat your slaves, about stoning people for adultery. Judaism is now a 21st century faith and the Temple was destroyed long ago. We don't have reference to those laws and they don't have meaning or resonation. You could look at that as "doctoring" a faith, I suppose, or you could say that a faith evolves its doctrines and decides what is relevant and alive. I don't find it hypocritical of Christians to read from only certain Gospels. That's what a faith is about. Maybe there are political aspects to that too. Also, if you are going to parse language like "sons and daughters," you should read the original Greek and Hebrew.

I basically agree with you and look forward to religious groups shedding more and more of their outdated beliefs.

Anonymous wrote:It's been a while since I read Thomas, and I'm not going to re-read him today because work is going to be very busy.

But, I don't remember anything particularly faith-shaking about Thomas. In the end, it's still the same message about loving your neighbor, banishing ideas of vengeance and retribution, loving your enemy.

For me, it's this basic message of Jesus that continues to be compelling, whether it's in Thomas or in Matthew, Mark, Luke and John.

The ideas of Jesus that you mention are compelling to me too, and I am not religious and do not perceive Jesus as the son of god or my savior

Anonymous wrote:What about the unexplainable and astonishing shroud of Turin . As a science guy...I can tell it will never be explained and it is the most baffling artifact in human history. It should be the subject of every mystery program it's like we have a UFO, ghost or Bigfoot right before our eyes and in our posession.

You don't sound like a science guy to me.

What about the unexplainable and astonishing shroud of Turin . As a science guy...I can tell it will never be explained and it is the most baffling artifact in human history. It should be the subject of every mystery program it's like we have a UFO, ghost or Bigfoot right before our eyes and in our posession.

It's been a while since I read Thomas, and I'm not going to re-read him today because work is going to be very busy.

But, I don't remember anything particularly faith-shaking about Thomas. In the end, it's still the same message about loving your neighbor, banishing ideas of vengeance and retribution, loving your enemy.

For me, it's this basic message of Jesus that continues to be compelling, whether it's in Thomas or in Matthew, Mark, Luke and John.

Anonymous wrote:PS. What you write probaby won't shock many posters. Many Christians believe that examining your faith is a crucial part of being religious. I know you don't want to believe it, but many of us refuse to simply believe what we're told.

These so-called lost gospels are by no means a recent discovery. They've been circulating for centuries, two millennia in fact, even if they haven't always circulating widely. As I said, I've read these so-called lost gospels, and I remember other Christians in this forum mentioning them. Yet, as you see, they aren't particulatly challenging to faith. I think they might be more challenging for bible literalists, however.

I would qualify that to say that many of us choose what we're going to believe among the many things that we're told.

For instance, many believers are told that reiigious faith shouldn't be shaken by facts. They are told that faith is preferable to facts that seem to contradict faith and they are told that faith leads you to an eternal life in heaven with God, while following facts that deny articles of faith will remove you from God's favor and lead to an eternal life of despair and pain. Thus, the incentive is high to believe what you're told, often as credulous children, about faith.

I'm not a Christian, but if you look at this more globally, every faith is a living faith, OP. Leviticus talks about all kinds of animal sacrifices, about how to treat your slaves, about stoning people for adultery. Judaism is now a 21st century faith and the Temple was destroyed long ago. We don't have reference to those laws and they don't have meaning or resonation. You could look at that as "doctoring" a faith, I suppose, or you could say that a faith evolves its doctrines and decides what is relevant and alive. I don't find it hypocritical of Christians to read from only certain Gospels. That's what a faith is about. Maybe there are political aspects to that too. Also, if you are going to parse language like "sons and daughters," you should read the original Greek and Hebrew.

PS. What you write probaby won't shock many posters. Many Christians believe that examining your faith is a crucial part of being religious. I know you don't want to believe it, but many of us refuse to simply believe what we're told.

These so-called lost gospels are by no means a recent discovery. They've been circulating for centuries, two millennia in fact, even if they haven't always circulating widely. As I said, I've read these so-called lost gospels, and I remember other Christians in this forum mentioning them. Yet, as you see, they aren't particulatly challenging to faith. I think they might be more challenging for bible literalists, however.

I've read many of the apocryphal gospels, including Thomas. Some bring new perspectives and others seem, honestly, a little silly. Besides Thomas, there are gospels of Judas, Mary, and other early narratives. One in particular gives the birth narrative in the details Christians are familiar with, but which don't appear in quite such detail in the canonical gospels.

Yes, of course there have been longstanding debates, going back to the first days of Christianity, about the nature of Christ's divinity, the role of women like Mary Magdalene, and Jesus' vision of heaven. However, you can see these debates in the canonical gospels. There are some theologians (Crossan and Borg, among others) who do credible research on these gospels, and others (Bart Ehrman comes to mind) who are clearly out to make a buck.

Yes, we're all "God's children." This is not news, it's always been a part of Christianity

No, reading the apocryphal gospels has not shaken my faith.

To add, the Gospel of Thomas was discovered in 1945 in Egypt and it stated that Jesus was not the only son of God. Anyone could be the son of God if they were close to God also. In other words, we are all able to become the sons and daughters of God.

The Gospel of Thomas seems older than any other gospel also. The dating techniques examining the papyrus showed it is an older material.

The Gospel only has the sayings of Jesus and nothing else. So it suggests it may be more ancient.

So the assumption is that this gospel is closer to the real truth as revealed by Jesus.

Anyone see this show tonight on "Lost Gospels"? It states that the Christian religion was doctored for the purpose of politics, to unify people. Certain gospels were banned. Later some of them were found but they were very different from the existing Bible. How do Christians feel about this? Do you believe this and, if so, does it disturb you? Would you be interested in knowing what the other gospels state and what Christianity was like before it was changed?