Why doesn’t the Bible include the “gospels” of Mary Magdalene, Thomas, and Judas?

Ask Pastor Lutzer: The New Testament has 27 books, but some people wonder why there aren't more.

Why doesn’t the Bible include the “gospels” of Mary Magdalene, Thomas, and Judas? - Peggy

#apocrypha #gnosticgospels #bible #canon #askpastorlutzer #moodychurchmedia #erwinlutzer

[amynojutsu]

You better believe that fake news exist back in Jesus's day too & onward

[thmountainvet]

Great conversation. Discussion like this needs to be an emphasis in today’s Church. Christians have lost conviction and history has been replaced with “feelings”.

[Ms.Royalty]

Galatians 1:8"Let God’s curse fall on anyone, including us or even an angel from heaven, who preaches a different kind of Good News than the one we preached to you". we ought to be aware of doctrines of demons this sounds just like that to me.

[deanjohnson]

WHY NOT? The Gospel of Thomas is not in the canonical Bible. However, it may be an extremely early Gospel. It claims to be authored by Jesus himself (Perhaps, just after the resurrection. See Acts 1:3 and the Thomas Prologue). Thomas also purports to have been scribed by Jesus' brother Jude Thomas, who probably also wrote Jude, the second last book in the New Testament. This would mean that Thomas is unique being not only written by Jesus the author and finisher of our faith but is also an early apostolic writing having been scribed by Thomas. This Gospel also appears to be the foundational scripture underpinning the other apostolic writings found within what is often called the New Testament. For those interested in a more in-depth examination regarding how this "Testimony of Jesus", which is the spirit of prophecy, inspired the apostolic writers to pen their own letters and Gospels of the New Testament... for these diligent ones and even for myself, it may be helpful to type a search for - "the original gospel authored by Jesus Christ" takethescroll. Blessings on your search for truth.

[fce]

I happily listen to Professor Lutzer on a program a local radio station broadcasts on Sunday. However, he’s quite uniformed on this. What he quickly glosses over doesn’t begin to define Gnosticism, much less do so correctly. Nor does he explain what qualifies the Gospel of Thomas as a gnostic text or why we’d reject it for being so.

The Gospel of Thomas holds no less gravitas than the 4 canonical Rome chose to accept. In fact, it parallels the wisdom verses of Matthew and Luke, particularly in its critical prose of the Pharisees. And because of this, evidence lines it up as preceding the Gospel of John. The Roman council that decided the books to include occurred in the 4th century, far from the writings of the New Testament. The statement of there being four winds, there likewise should be 4 Gospels speaks to a lack of rigor on the debate and ultimate decision instead of meaningful rationale. On another point, as it’s not Paul, we don’t know who wrote the Letter to the Hebrews, and yet it stands as one of the greatest works on the explanation, glory, and ultimate freedom provided by the New Covenant. So to say we don’t know who authored Thomas as disqualifying it doesn’t hold water.

I encourage believers to read the Gospel of Thomas for themselves

[swarlly]

Don’t physically read these books. Read it spiritually so that you can identify which spirit is at work.

Jesus called these “hidden knowledge” deeper truths of Satan in revelations. God works in light and Satan works in secret and darkness

[gigichica]

Did they not allow these books because of patriarchal thinking and if they did allow these books, it would throw out male dominance? Then men would have to accept that women are in the same level if not higher on authority than men? Your explanation is great if it were true. But the fact tha, , "men" didn't allow these books says more than your explanation.

[karkir-joharkarntkristkark]

Well, there are many common denominators also. The Books of Jeu deals with how to get the Earth (consciousness) up to and down from Heaven (a higher realm, the Crown chakra), by the use of what's called Merkabah among the Jews (Jesus was a Jew). The same topic is illuminated in the apocalyptic writings of John, where the 24 balanced (The Spring Equinox) tribes/hours from the crucifixion have ascended and are positioned around the Crown chakra (the middle cross represents the mid energy channel which the energies of the Sun and moon rushes into when balanced. The two energy channels mentioned in the Gospel of Thomas). And there's a part in the Gospel of Philip where Jesus actually brands a certain type of people Beasts, people who uses their sexuality in a non-spiritual way, which suggest that the Beast 666 is a personification of the unactivated Kundalini or the unrefined Kundalini, the mode of the Kundalini when it's three times coiled around itself, in which it rest in most people. I'd rather say that the Gospel of Thomas deals with Jewish knowledge than gnostic, although the Three of life often is said to be of neo-platonic origin. The 24 tribes of Isis-Ra-El are positioned along the Euphrates river (the spine/the central nervous system, the main energy channel in the human body). I suspect that these 24 tribes actually where spheres of the pre neo-platonic tree which contains only 10 spheres. I think it's peculiar that people are more intested in The person Jesus and his death than in the esoteric knowledge he teached. Wine was for instance in the Gospel of John hinted as being a spiritual ecstasy. The water is then probably a metaphor of an attribute of a higher, purer realm/consciouness or the sexual energy/sperm which constitutes it (the fishes thoughts, knowledge). It is interesting how the intoxicating effect of the wine/trance is used to revert back to a pre-fall condition previous to the dualistic consciousness of polarities (good and evil, the branches of the tree). Most Christians preaches soberness (I'm just joking) 😂

[manningcustom]

what about the contradictions in the accepted gospels?

[paultaylor]

I don't think most of the Gospels were not written by anyone of the authors because they were word of mouth or passed along and rewritten. Then you get to the European church going to war to secure anything Jesus related, yet it was Rome that wanted it snuffed out. You think GOD has to make himself a man and live as man, knowing he is immortal to begin with and can't really die. When he came and walked with Adam and took Enoch with him. You don't think a sect of the European church used the chance to get a religion that truly made men fear a GOD through the image of a man, when so many other GODS failed to control men. And you don't think a man couldn't love a woman and want to be with her over faith, and the chance at being hunted down and killed. So, Jesus and Judas and the rest could've planned out this elaborate scheme to get to safety with the help of the Roman Church, hide Jesus and Mary far away from the Romans after paying guards to fake a kill and resurrection. And these now referred to by modern churches Gnostics books, just information passed down from people whose family may have helped or known what happened.

[defaultgreen]

How do you guys know was not real?
Is everyone writing style the same? How do you know they speculated?
There are always two sides to a story… you choose not believe the side you want

[jenniferzabala]

You might not believe but we do believe those that do have that sacred hidden knowledge built into our DNA that has been awakened we understand these books and they speak directly to our knowing from our DNA.