Freethought & Rationalism Archive

rickP · 07-20-2004, 03:23 PM

A christian friend of mine recently stated that the gnostic gospels are generally not considered reliable because they contain information that is known historically to be incorrect about the time they were written and that they were written in the 2nd century by a fringe group.

What evidence is there that some or all of the gnostic texts are essentially reliable?

SkepticBoyLee · 07-20-2004, 03:26 PM

Sounds like a description of the "synoptic" Gosphels as well.

How strange that christians apply proper skepticism to every other belief, text,whatever except their own.

MysteryProf · 07-20-2004, 03:40 PM

Well, the Gnostic gospels are unabashedly more spiritual and less historical. Where they are concerned, "reliability" isn't the point, so it's misleading for someone to use that argument. What they do represent is a political struggle within early Christianity and they survive as an example, among many others, that the early Christians were by no means a unified body with a definite set of beliefs.

SkepticBoyLee · 07-20-2004, 04:04 PM

What about the synoptic gosphels can be said to be purely historical in nature?? I realize that is a total different discussion. I assume you mean that the Gnostic gospehls are different in that they are about "spiritual" matters more so than a story about what happened to christ.

Chris Weimer · 07-20-2004, 04:32 PM

WELL... Gospel of Thomas only contains quotes, so how is there historical accuracy in that, you got me. A textual comparison of gThomas with the other synoptics show that Thomas has a few differences from the synops in a number of quotes, differences that sort of correlate with other synoptic texts, and not just quotes. For example, I can only recall one quote offhand about Jesus telling Pharisees (in the synops) that the stage before creation a.k.a. androgynous humans is the perfect stage. This fits perfectly with Gnostic tradition, numerous gThomas quotes, and just about nothing else in the synoptic texts. Actually, much of the other stuff appears contradictory to the text, so by including a gnostic quote with christian texts sort of shows the 1. the gnostics are AT LEAST semi-reliable and 2. the synops were quasi-deliberated.

SkepticBoyLee · 07-20-2004, 04:43 PM

Sure I know that the Gosphel of Thomas only contains supposed sayings of the christ. I am less familar witht he other Gnostic Gosphels. I was just taking issue with the synoptic gosphels being reffered to as "historical" though he may have simply meant "a somewhat chronological narrative" as compared with the Gnsotic gosphels being more sayings and spiritual hodge podge type suff.

Like I said I know the Gosphel of Thomas is just sayings. I am unfamilar with the other Gnostics. Do they add to the biographical narrative of Christ?? I suppose I could hit the II archives for this instead of splintering the original topic.

07-20-2004, 03:23 PM	#1
rickP Veteran Member Join Date: Jan 2004 Location: Bloomington, IL Posts: 1,079	How reliable are the gnostic gospels? A christian friend of mine recently stated that the gnostic gospels are generally not considered reliable because they contain information that is known historically to be incorrect about the time they were written and that they were written in the 2nd century by a fringe group. What evidence is there that some or all of the gnostic texts are essentially reliable?

07-20-2004, 03:26 PM	#2
SkepticBoyLee Senior Member Join Date: Jun 2003 Location: Nashville, TN Posts: 759	hehe Sounds like a description of the "synoptic" Gosphels as well. How strange that christians apply proper skepticism to every other belief, text,whatever except their own.

07-20-2004, 04:04 PM	#4
SkepticBoyLee Senior Member Join Date: Jun 2003 Location: Nashville, TN Posts: 759	hmmm What about the synoptic gosphels can be said to be purely historical in nature?? I realize that is a total different discussion. I assume you mean that the Gnostic gospehls are different in that they are about "spiritual" matters more so than a story about what happened to christ.

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

07-20-2004, 03:40 PM	#3
MysteryProf Regular Member Join Date: Dec 2003 Location: Chicago Posts: 301	Well, the Gnostic gospels are unabashedly more spiritual and less historical. Where they are concerned, "reliability" isn't the point, so it's misleading for someone to use that argument. What they do represent is a political struggle within early Christianity and they survive as an example, among many others, that the early Christians were by no means a unified body with a definite set of beliefs.

07-20-2004, 04:32 PM	#5
Chris Weimer Veteran Member Join Date: Jun 2004 Location: none Posts: 9,879	WELL... Gospel of Thomas only contains quotes, so how is there historical accuracy in that, you got me. A textual comparison of gThomas with the other synoptics show that Thomas has a few differences from the synops in a number of quotes, differences that sort of correlate with other synoptic texts, and not just quotes. For example, I can only recall one quote offhand about Jesus telling Pharisees (in the synops) that the stage before creation a.k.a. androgynous humans is the perfect stage. This fits perfectly with Gnostic tradition, numerous gThomas quotes, and just about nothing else in the synoptic texts. Actually, much of the other stuff appears contradictory to the text, so by including a gnostic quote with christian texts sort of shows the 1. the gnostics are AT LEAST semi-reliable and 2. the synops were quasi-deliberated.

07-20-2004, 04:43 PM	#6
SkepticBoyLee Senior Member Join Date: Jun 2003 Location: Nashville, TN Posts: 759	Sure I know that the Gosphel of Thomas only contains supposed sayings of the christ. I am less familar witht he other Gnostic Gosphels. I was just taking issue with the synoptic gosphels being reffered to as "historical" though he may have simply meant "a somewhat chronological narrative" as compared with the Gnsotic gosphels being more sayings and spiritual hodge podge type suff. Like I said I know the Gosphel of Thomas is just sayings. I am unfamilar with the other Gnostics. Do they add to the biographical narrative of Christ?? I suppose I could hit the II archives for this instead of splintering the original topic.

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.