Originally Posted by George Knighton
In asking about those works, you also define why they are not gospels.
Recently discovered = recently written, relatively.
that's like saying that finding the tomb of tutankamen was only possible because he died only weeks before. i's a fairly naieve standpoint.
Even the vaunted Dead Sea Scrolls are suspect. People enjoy very much pointing out the little differences between the scrolls and other early works; however, in many cases the majority of ancient works contradict the scrolls.
Have you ever stopped to wonder why the Dead Sea Scrolls were found where they were? Those caves were the hideouts of criminals and weird religious cults. There was a reason why they were not a part of the normal societies of the region, whether Hellenic, Roman or Jewish.
neither of the scriptures i pointed out were part of the dead sea scrolls. dunno where you're going with that one.. however such works went into hiding with the emergence of the roman catholic church out of fear of them being labeled heresy and being destroyed.
the works i mentioned are part of the nag hammadi library that was uncovered in egypt in 1945.
Who knows what weird ideas developed, and what mistakes were made in transcribing documents, in those dark days in the caves, secluded and away from the students of Christ's apostles?
the gospel of thomas.. thomas
was one of christ's apostles.
As for your attack on Christ's dual nature and divinity, it is patently illogical and contradicted in many works...assuming you accept the possibility that a Christ can exist at all.
it wasn't an attack at all.. the councils of the early church met at Nicaea, Constantinople, Ephesus, and Chalcedon between AD 325 and AD 451 to discuss the validity of just that topic, and others. i'm just saying that an emerging church with the backing of the roman empire can make things happen.. especially making a man that lived 3-400 years prior into the son of god through omition of a few texts and burning the evidence. call me crazy.