The Gospel's that didnt make it

[hemi]

I find religion fascinating. To have blind faith in something without the whole story confuses me. I'm not sure if this has been talked about already here but there are hundreds of Gospels out there and we have only just started to discover them. Two of my favorite that didn't make the cut because some one in history did not see the value of diversity or the importance the role of women are shown below. My how history would have been different if we had the whole story instead of what someone thought was impotent. Its a shame.

<object style="height: 344px; width: 425px;">


<embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/ywJdMezcqio" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowfullscreen="true" allowscriptaccess="always" width="425" height="344"></object>

I have always wounder why Judas was hated. To me Jesus picked him and if he didn't do what he was assigned to do then Christianity would have never happened right?

<object style="height: 344px; width: 425px;">


<embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/pb17NbNaUU8" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowfullscreen="true" allowscriptaccess="always" width="425" height="344"></object>

Mary Magdalen has gotten such a bad rap. She in my view is one of the most impotent people in history and after doing much research on her I also think she is the person that actuality started what would become Christianity.

Please remember these are just my views and im not stating anything as fact here. I by no means am a Biblical Historian. I just feel there is so much that has been lost to history we can not possibly know everything there is to know or should know about this subject.

<object style="height: 344px; width: 425px;">


<embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/-L7cQ3BrD5U" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowfullscreen="true" allowscriptaccess="always" width="425" height="344"></object>

 

[dyingsun]

This is quite interesting indeed, I always understood the bible and especially the ten commandments more as a general rule of how to 'live with other people ', in that sense it really made a good points.

 

[Red]

It certainly makes a case that religion is a lot more fluid and changing that many people think. I could be wrong, but some scholars now think that the book of Judas is really an allegory because he is described as a spirit or demon.

 

[CapnG]

This is why I laugh whenever I hear someone talk about the bible as the "true and perfect word of God Almighty", as if Jesus himself sat at the head of the council of Nicea with a big, red "approved" stamp...

 

[exo_doc]

As for the Abarhamic religions, I think I'll go with what Gene Roddenberry said about them;

"A perfect God,....creates an imperfect creation,...then blames that creation for it's imperfections. No thank you."

 

[rhcball]

I love how Christianity has been revised and adjusted over and over again--by human beings--for two thousand years, and yet its proponents can still say with a straight face that it's direct from the mouth of God.

There's a book on Gnosticism by John Lash that does a good job of arguing for the hideously destructive effects that messianic religion has on us. I've seen a lot of it in myself c/o the standard Catholic cathechism cycle.

 

[jpw.in.wi]

As for the Abarhamic religions, I think I'll go with what Gene Roddenberry said about them;

"A perfect God,....creates an imperfect creation,...then blames that creation for it's imperfections. No thank you."

And if that summation of the "Abrahamic religions" were the truth, I'd have nothing to do with Christianity either. But what you quoted is Christianity according to George Carlin: a thoroughly ignorant, bigoted, hate-filled jumble of popular and convenient half-truths, lies, and crass attempts at humor. "No thanks!"

I love how Christianity has been revised and adjusted over and over again--by human beings--for two thousand years, and yet its proponents can still say with a straight face that it's direct from the mouth of God.

It's a scandal the way people calling themselves Christians have taken it upon themselves to chop the Church up into so many splinter groups they're not worth counting. And each split is the direct result of individual pride, conceit, hatred, and greed. And you know what? So goes every single institution that has ever been populated by human beings. That's not Jesus' fault, that's ours. He's the doctor, here to try and heal all of us sick bums. And what's our response to that offer of help? We kill him!

There's a book on Gnosticism by John Lash that does a good job of arguing for the hideously destructive effects that messianic religion has on us. I've seen a lot of it in myself c/o the standard Catholic cathechism cycle.

And what destructive effects did you witness at the hands of the "standard Catholic catechism cycle" (????)? In my own life, I've seen community food pantries being supported, aid being collected and sent to sick and homeless Haitian earthquake victims, funds being raised for the construction of an orphanage in India, when I was a kid the members of my parish bought and shipped a John Deere tractor to a mission church in Bolivia ... I could go on, and that's just a few things that have happened right here at home.

Oh, but I forgot ... the Inquisition ... the Crusades ... Galileo ... all topics which we've all really taken the time to honestly study and understand. And the Gnostic Gospels????? If you think the Canon is messed up, you shouldn't want to touch those books with a 10-foot pole! But who reads them anyway?

It reminds me of the whole mosque near Ground Zero debate. For too many, it's easier to be a bigot and hold to one image of Muslims so they can quickly take their position on this "issue" and then change the channel. On the other side, I've heard people argue in favor of the mosque really just because they know that's the opposite of what Rush Limbaugh or Glenn Beck or whoever thinks. They really don't have a good reason for their position--they just want to make it clear they disagree with "those" people over there, so therefore they are smart and good people. Don't use this as an occasion to try to get at the truth of who Muslims are and what they're really about. That takes a lot of work, getting to know other human beings.

But most of us see what you want to see. IMO ... We should rather try to look beyond appearances to the Truth that allows itself to be ignored by shallow-looking eyes. Maybe you think differently.

 

[CapnG]

And the Gnostic Gospels????? If you think the Canon is messed up, you shouldn't want to touch those books with a 10-foot pole! But who reads them anyway?

OOh! OOh! I know! Biblical scholars and "alternate historians" looking for apocraphal roots to their personal versions of ancient humanity.

What do I win?

 

[Angel of Ioren]

And what destructive effects did you witness at the hands of the "standard Catholic catechism cycle" (????)? In my own life, I've seen community food pantries being supported, aid being collected and sent to sick and homeless Haitian earthquake victims, funds being raised for the construction of an orphanage in India, when I was a kid the members of my parish bought and shipped a John Deere tractor to a mission church in Bolivia ... I could go on, and that's just a few things that have happened right here at home.

That has nothing to do with religion, as non-believers will gladly donate as well:
Non-Believers Giving Aid - Support for the Haiti Tragedy and Beyond

 

[Xylo]

It is my opinion that the bible is a wonderful collection of history, mysticism, legend, myth and astronomical allegory with a bit of life rules and old wives' tales thrown in for good measure.

I skimmed the pdf version of "The Gospel of Judas" when it was first released, I may still have a copy of it on one of my PCs. I thought it was somewhat interesting.

 

[Red]

As for the Abarhamic religions, I think I'll go with what Gene Roddenberry said about them;

"A perfect God,....creates an imperfect creation,...then blames that creation for it's imperfections. No thank you."

And if that summation of the "Abrahamic religions" were the truth, I'd have nothing to do with Christianity either. But what you quoted is Christianity according to George Carlin: a thoroughly ignorant, bigoted, hate-filled jumble of popular and convenient half-truths, lies, and crass attempts at humor. "No thanks!"

It's a scandal the way people calling themselves Christians have taken it upon themselves to chop the Church up into so many splinter groups they're not worth counting. And each split is the direct result of individual pride, conceit, hatred, and greed. And you know what? So goes every single institution that has ever been populated by human beings. That's not Jesus' fault, that's ours. He's the doctor, here to try and heal all of us sick bums. And what's our response to that offer of help? We kill him!

And what destructive effects did you witness at the hands of the "standard Catholic catechism cycle" (????)? In my own life, I've seen community food pantries being supported, aid being collected and sent to sick and homeless Haitian earthquake victims, funds being raised for the construction of an orphanage in India, when I was a kid the members of my parish bought and shipped a John Deere tractor to a mission church in Bolivia ... I could go on, and that's just a few things that have happened right here at home.

Oh, but I forgot ... the Inquisition ... the Crusades ... Galileo ... all topics which we've all really taken the time to honestly study and understand. And the Gnostic Gospels????? If you think the Canon is messed up, you shouldn't want to touch those books with a 10-foot pole! But who reads them anyway?

It reminds me of the whole mosque near Ground Zero debate. For too many, it's easier to be a bigot and hold to one image of Muslims so they can quickly take their position on this "issue" and then change the channel. On the other side, I've heard people argue in favor of the mosque really just because they know that's the opposite of what Rush Limbaugh or Glenn Beck or whoever thinks. They really don't have a good reason for their position--they just want to make it clear they disagree with "those" people over there, so therefore they are smart and good people. Don't use this as an occasion to try to get at the truth of who Muslims are and what they're really about. That takes a lot of work, getting to know other human beings.

But most of us see what you want to see. IMO ... We should rather try to look beyond appearances to the Truth that allows itself to be ignored by shallow-looking eyes. Maybe you think differently.

JPW,
Please don't think I am picking on you or religion in particular. I strongly believe that religion brings out the best or the worst in people and there never seems to be a middle group. I don't dispute that the Catholic Church has done great good, but it has done some great harm. The child abuse scandals, the Pope refusing to support health care due to abortion issues and its stance against the use of condoms in Africa are all very troubling issues to me.

We are imperfect beings, but it is not God's intent to punish us for it. He made us imperfect so that we would have to grow and evolve to become better human beings. As a result all of our institutions will be imperfect as well (insert church, government, banking institution here). Anybody who assumes their religion is the perfect manifestation of God is just heading for a fall.

Part of the problem is that we confuse rational truth and mythical truth. In trying to make the Bible into scientific fact we lose the spiritual thread and our link to God. If we treated it as a mythical truth, then we would be drawn to the excerpts that would bring many of the moments of our lives meaning and give them focus. Some of the stories may not apply, but that would be okay to. But here we are; where people accept every word of the Bible as scientific fact, and where Christianity has lost its ability to evolve and have meaning in a modern world.

Another issue I have is the zealots who believe that shaping the world to their beliefs is more important than trying to create a better world for all. Remember the comparisons of the Iraq war to the Christian Crusades? It scared the heck out of me. I know I am picking on the Christians, but the Muslim extremists are just as bad. Poisoning little girls because you believe that women should not be educated is just wrong.

I think too many people talk about being Christian, but they don't act Christian. If you don't believe in abortion, you don't protest; you help a pregnant mother, whether that means taking her in your home or supporting her education or making sure she can get daycare. I think homosexuality is a non-issue, especially when children are starving and families are homeless in this country; and yet, I see rallies on TV almost daily opposing homosexual marriage. I have to wonder what good could have been done if that energy had been spent elsewhere. Especially since I think letting children starve is a much, much bigger sin.

How you act in the world is much more important than what you profess to believe (or what you rail against). I think too many people have forgotten this (both believers and non-believers).

 

[rhcball]

And what destructive effects did you witness at the hands of the "standard Catholic catechism cycle" (????)? In my own life, I've seen community food pantries being supported, aid being collected and sent to sick and homeless Haitian earthquake victims, funds being raised for the construction of an orphanage in India, when I was a kid the members of my parish bought and shipped a John Deere tractor to a mission church in Bolivia ... I could go on, and that's just a few things that have happened right here at home.

I was referring to psychological effects. I've observed them in myself, and I think a lot of it can be at least partially attributed to the worldview I was handed. Especially when we're talking about impressionable young minds, those aspects of religion matter a lot more than charity drives.

Again, I would refer you to Lash's analysis of the effects that messianic religion has on the typical mindset. You'd have to wade through a lot of pagan romanticism, though, so maybe look for someone else's take if you're interested.

[And on a sort of unrelated note, it's sort of intriguing that my only re-acquaintence with the Jesus paradigm came when I was in the throes of what has been diagnosed as a full-blown psychotic episode. At that moment, it really appealed to me.]

 

[jpw.in.wi]

That has nothing to do with religion, as non-believers will gladly donate as well:
Non-Believers Giving Aid - Support for the Haiti Tragedy and Beyond

Attempting to speak from a Catholic point of view here, I would argue that what members of a group like "Non-Believers Giving Aid" miss is that the fact we all have this desire to go outside of ourselves to help others who are suffering precisely because humans were created ontologically good--we were created for love (which Catholics define as "willing the good of the other, as other"). Our thirst for justice, compassion, and mercy isn't there just by accident. When we are acting "humanely", we are responding to that goodness that is in our human nature. It's our freedom to be prideful, selfish, and rebellious against the Truth that has caused the world's problems.

And turning their backs on the one who conceived of them before time even began isn't going to undo what He made them to be. It's maybe something like the Mona Lisa saying to The Last Supper, "Look at me! I'm just as much of a masterpiece as you are, but I deny the existence of a painter who put me on this canvas. I just happened accidentally. So there!" Well, of course she's a masterpiece, because that's what she was made to be. Her feelings about Da Vinci can't change that.

And getting back to that name, "Non-Believers Giving Aid" seems to betray a real ugly in-your-face sort of selfishness in its members. It gives the impression that the people who are suffering really come second: They are just a means for NBGA's real priority, which is taking the "believers" down a few notches.

Men like Dawkins are interesting in this regard: Mother Teresa, to choose a well-known example, picked up the twisted bodies of the dying from the gutters of Calcutta BECAUSE in them she saw the twisted, suffering, and degraded body of her creator as He writhed and finally died on the cross, when all He wanted to do was love us. She returned His love by loving Him in the poor. And she inspired an army of other religious sisters and brothers to join her in this work of serving God by caring for Him in His most afflicted children.

But rather than applaud her for this "giving of aid", men like Dawkins attack her! Who's it all about in cases like this: the poor, or the Dawkinites? Who's gotten it more right?

Anyway, great discussion! You never know what direction these sorts of threads will end up taking.

 

[CapnG]

Uh jpw... you do know that towards the end of her life Mother Teresa said she doubted as to whether or not God really existed, right?

What she did may have been done under the umbrella of religiosity but in her heart she did it purely out of humanitarian compassion.

 

[NTS]

I'm not a Jew, but I lean toward the Judaic view that good actions should be recognized irrespective of what may have motivated them. If one person does a good thing because she thinks it's God's will, another because he thinks it right in an ethical sense, and another because he just feels sorry for someone, they all deserve praise.

 

[Angel of Ioren]

Attempting to speak from a Catholic point of view here, I would argue that what members of a group like "Non-Believers Giving Aid" miss is that the fact we all have this desire to go outside of ourselves to help others who are suffering precisely because humans were created ontologically good--we were created for love (which Catholics define as "willing the good of the other, as other"). Our thirst for justice, compassion, and mercy isn't there just by accident. When we are acting "humanely", we are responding to that goodness that is in our human nature. It's our freedom to be prideful, selfish, and rebellious against the Truth that has caused the world's problems.

And turning their backs on the one who conceived of them before time even began isn't going to undo what He made them to be. It's maybe something like the Mona Lisa saying to The Last Supper, "Look at me! I'm just as much of a masterpiece as you are, but I deny the existence of a painter who put me on this canvas. I just happened accidentally. So there!" Well, of course she's a masterpiece, because that's what she was made to be. Her feelings about Da Vinci can't change that.

And getting back to that name, "Non-Believers Giving Aid" seems to betray a real ugly in-your-face sort of selfishness in its members. It gives the impression that the people who are suffering really come second: They are just a means for NBGA's real priority, which is taking the "believers" down a few notches.

Men like Dawkins are interesting in this regard: Mother Teresa, to choose a well-known example, picked up the twisted bodies of the dying from the gutters of Calcutta BECAUSE in them she saw the twisted, suffering, and degraded body of her creator as He writhed and finally died on the cross, when all He wanted to do was love us. She returned His love by loving Him in the poor. And she inspired an army of other religious sisters and brothers to join her in this work of serving God by caring for Him in His most afflicted children.

But rather than applaud her for this "giving of aid", men like Dawkins attack her! Who's it all about in cases like this: the poor, or the Dawkinites? Who's gotten it more right?

Anyway, great discussion! You never know what direction these sorts of threads will end up taking.

FYI: I was raised Catholic, I got married in a Catholic church, I had my daughter baptized, and I am the godfather to someone's child. It's all lovely and well as a tradition, but I could care less about some all powerful imaginary friend in the sky.
You can choose to believe in a god, but keep in mind that religion always changes. Just look at what they believed 4000 years ago. You'll have people telling you it's all because of ancient astronauts or some such nonsense - humans created god(s), not the other way around. That's how are brains are wired to think. It's a coping mechanism.
When someone rings my doorbell to give me a copy of the watchtower, I politely accept it and say thank you. No harm done.
The problem arises when people who are considered "different" have their rights taken away. We are all made of the same stuff, and on one hand you have people helping others (although once you look into what Mother Teresa did, some of it is appalling) and on the other you have assholes trying to take away the rights of a person marrying whomever they want.

Great pictures of Dawkins and Hitchens by the way. Oh and that reminds me, the people praying for Hitchens to die are revolting.

 

[TClaeys]

And getting back to that name, "Non-Believers Giving Aid" seems to betray a real ugly in-your-face sort of selfishness in its members. It gives the impression that the people who are suffering really come second: They are just a means for NBGA's real priority, which is taking the "believers" down a few notches.
.

This is some of the trouble I see in religion. Believers seems to want to believe that morality is God given, that it is somehow inherent in believing in God. But let me just comment that religion doesn't hold a monopoly on virtue, morality, or "all that is good". But if you listen to them you would think otherwise.

Being a good person doesn't have to be about being accountable to some higher unknown God who will punish them if they don't behave. If that's so then fine, that's what you believe, religion works because it changes your behavior. Exactly what it was intended to do.

I don't feel accountable to any unseen God. Yet I'm certainly as moral as a lot of my religious friends, probably much more. And I haven't seen the evidence that Catholics are all seeking justice, compassion, and mercy, ... actually at times quite the opposite, .. even from the high seated ones telling everyone how to act.

But somehow, for some reason, the amoral atheists are plotting to bring down religion in the guise of generosity??

 

[Xylo]

This is some of the trouble I see in religion. Believers seems to want to believe that morality is God given, that it is somehow inherent in believing in God. But let me just comment that religion doesn't hold a monopoly on virtue, morality, or "all that is good". But if you listen to them you would think otherwise.

Being a good person doesn't have to be about being accountable to some higher unknown God who will punish them if they don't behave. If that's so then fine, that's what you believe, religion works because it changes your behavior. Exactly what it was intended to do.

I don't feel accountable to any unseen God. Yet I'm certainly as moral as a lot of my religious friends, probably much more. And I haven't seen the evidence that Catholics are all seeking justice, compassion, and mercy, ... actually at times quite the opposite, .. even from the high seated ones telling everyone how to act.

But somehow, for some reason, the amoral atheists are plotting to bring down religion in the guise of generosity??

Indeed. Altruism is seen frequently within social animal species.

Altruism in Animals: Understanding Compassion Behavior in Animals

http://www.bihartimes.com/Maneka/altruisminanimals.html

Altruistic Chimpanzees Adopt Orphans | LiveScience

Perhaps, just perhaps when one being views itself as part of the whole, altruism and sympathetic actions are the rule rather than the exception?

 

[exo_doc]

And if that summation of the "Abrahamic religions" were the truth, I'd have nothing to do with Christianity either. But what you quoted is Christianity according to George Carlin: a thoroughly ignorant, bigoted, hate-filled jumble of popular and convenient half-truths, lies, and crass attempts at humor. "No thanks!"




George Carlin may have said something along those lines or even plaguerized Gene, but this is quoted straight from his biographical book:
http://www.amazon.com/dp/0451454189/?tag=rockoids-20

All that aside about who said it, it still does not invalidate, falsify, or even mildly dent that statement, to wit;
God is perfect.
God makes man who is imperfect.
God blames man and punishes him being imperfect.

I see nothing crass, bigoted, humorous, or false about that. That is a perfectly valid summation.

Beleive what you wish, I think it's still a somewhat free country in some places (void where prohibited). I may disagree with you, but I'll defend your right to follow your own conscience.

 

[jpw.in.wi]

Believers seems to want to believe that morality is God given, that it is somehow inherent in believing in God.

I don't feel accountable to any unseen God. Yet I'm certainly as moral as a lot of my religious friends, probably much more.

Indeed. Altruism is seen frequently within social animal species.

I'm sorry, but it seems like you just didn't really read my posts and recognize the argument I was making.

God is perfect.
God makes man who is imperfect.
God blames man and punishes him being imperfect.

I see nothing ... false about that. That is a perfectly valid summation.

In what way is it not false? How is it valid? I'm sure it's a true summation of the false and bigoted views of some people like Carlin. I'm sure it's a true summation of some sects that call themselves Christian but are clinging to a "theology"--if you could even call it that--that is in significant error, to say the least. Or what some people think who sit through church on Sunday, not really paying attention, and not caring to take time during the week to learn a little basic philosophy and theology, and educate themselves more deeply on what it is that their church really teaches. People who have no desire for a prayer life and could care less about pursuing some time-tested spiritual exercises that could really transform their lives.

But to take those three lines, hold them up against 2,000-plus years of deep scholarly and spiritual labor and tradition, and say, "Yup, that's all it is ... that, and an old man with a white beard sitting on a cloud!" that is really more than intellectual dishonesty. That's just downright hate.

Isn't this whole thing we've looked at an example of attacking people we don't like rather than testing the substance of authentic arguments? I don't recall any post in this thread citing a passage in a Gnostic Gospel and proving that it teaches a truth that the Catholic Church is covering up with a lie.

For what it's worth ...