The Gospel of Judas

**Speranza** · 15/04/2006, 1:57 PM

Jebus, sorry if my post came across as arrogantly suggesting that Christians believe everything the church/scriptures say. I was more trying to say that people just aren't aware of the fascinating editing that occured. The process is called "biblical criticism" and shows the links between the 4 main gospels and their influences.

**Anto McC** · 15/04/2006, 8:04 PM

Originally Posted by jebus

Thats the type of thing that bothers me about books like the Da Vinci Code, the Gospel of Judas and generally peoples perceptions of Christians today. Although before I go into this I'd like to say thgat this isn't intended to be a pop at Speranza, this is just venting my own frustrations at certain peoples attitudes to Christians in the modern day.

Seriously though, the amount of times I've been called ignorant, brain washed, naive, stupid etc. when it comes out I'm a Christian is beyond laughable at this stage. Never do I push, or impose, my beliefs on ANYONE, and yet a decent perchantage of people I meet feel its perfectly aceptable to push their non-beliefs on me. I mean if it was a constructed argument I wouldn't mind so much, it would still get annoying, but at least it would be a discussion. But no, I'm subjected to insults and Dan Brown 'facts' at every turn. I even had one girl say to me, "its so stupid to believe everything they tell you in that book (the Bible), I've just read the Da Vinci Code and what really happened was......" I mean how do you argue you with that?? And would the same people put up with me if I started attacking them over what they read/believe and started ranting about what John 3:16 has to say? I doubt it somewhat.

Thank you,you managed to sum up exactly how i feel much better than i could have!

**John83** · 18/04/2006, 11:15 AM

Originally Posted by jebus

...Seriously though, the amount of times I've been called ignorant, brain washed, naive, stupid etc. when it comes out I'm a Christian is beyond laughable at this stage.

...But no, I'm subjected to insults and Dan Brown 'facts' at every turn. I even had one girl say to me, "its so stupid to believe everything they tell you in that book (the Bible), I've just read the Da Vinci Code and what really happened was......" I mean how do you argue you with that??

You call her ignorant, naive and stupid for treating a work of fiction as a factual source.

**Roverstillidie** · 18/04/2006, 6:47 PM

Originally Posted by John83

You call her ignorant, naive and stupid for treating a work of fiction as a factual source.

come on john, some of the bible happened im sure

**John83** · 19/04/2006, 11:36 AM

Originally Posted by Roverstillidie

come on john, some of the bible happened im sure

Sure, but it's supposed to be true. The Da Vinci code doesn't even claim that.

**Dassa** · 19/04/2006, 3:22 PM

Have to ask yourself,who took it upon themselves to include or exclude books from the bible.

**Lionel Ritchie** · 19/04/2006, 3:52 PM

Originally Posted by Dassa

Have to ask yourself,who took it upon themselves to include or exclude books from the bible.

...and why? ...and for who's benefit?

**Dassa** · 19/04/2006, 5:19 PM

OK then I have to ask myself for my own benefit.

**John83** · 21/04/2006, 7:57 PM

Originally Posted by Dassa

Have to ask yourself,who took it upon themselves to include or exclude books from the bible.

Originally Posted by Lionel Ritchie

...and why? ...and for who's benefit?

The Roman emperor Constantine is supposed to have had a hand in it. He chose to go down a different path to his predecessors, who had pilloried the Christians, and converted to Christianity himself. He gave some story of having seen three crosses (I think) over Rome as he rode home from war, but it's generally thought that it was mostly oppertunism on his behalf that caused him to convert.

Anyway, he wanted a unified church - much easier to deal with. The details are a little hazy - it's a while since I read about this stuff, but I think taxation came into it. The church at that time was pretty divided - plenty of squabbling. There wasn't a canon as such. Constantine pushed for a single canonical scripture, a unified church (look up the council of Nicea if you want to see more of what he did) and he got it (tax breaks are kind of interesting to most people).

The books chosen were picked to get a reasonably consistant gospel. The rejected gospels were considered spurious, uncanonical or even heritical in some cases.

For more info, I'd suggest starting with a Google search like this one. Be careful though, most of the stuff you'll find has a slant on it.