Gnostic Jesus and God

where did Gnostics come up with their theory about there being a higher God ? they were a sect of Christianity correct / so they must have something from the Bible backing up their idea there was some sort of separate "spiritual Jesus" and etc..

They didn't use the Bible. They had their own gospels which were rejected from the accepted canon. Gnostics had different beliefs from region to region so its hard to say exactly where some of them got their ideas.

Originally posted by Nellinator
They didn't use the Bible. They had their own gospels which were rejected from the accepted canon. Gnostic's had different beliefs from region to region so its hard to say exactly where some of them got their ideas.

The bible (NT) did not exist at the time of the Gnostic's. The books of the NT were available to every Christian. There is a very good chance that the Gnostic where aware of the the books that eventually were added to the bible.

The Gnostic's did not support an all powerful Roman church. Therefore, it is not surprising that they were left out when this Roman church put together the NT.

Originally posted by Shakyamunison
The bible (NT) did not exist at the time of the Gnostic's. The books of the NT were available to every Christian. There is a very good chance that the Gnostic where aware of the the books that eventually were added to the bible.

The Gnostic's did not support an all powerful Roman church. Therefore, it is not surprising that they were left out when this Roman church put together the NT.

The biggest reason is the lack of apostolic support for any of them. Thomas was the only one that came close because it was possibly written by an apostle or his followers.

The Gnostic books were floating around but were considered heresy and not included in the Bible.

Originally posted by Nellinator
Did I say it did? No, not everyone, but yes they were widely accessible. The Gnostics did not use them though, hence why you Gnostic writers did not quote NT books, nor were NT scrolls found at any Gnostic sites.

The biggest reason is the lack of apostolic support for any of them. Thomas was the only one that came close because it was possibly written by an apostle or his followers.

Not a single book in the NT was written by any of the apostles. Look up the Q Gospel.

The gospel of Q, though unknown writer(s), were pretty true to the statements of Jesus, yes. Then it's up to us/you/others to interpret the meanings of what he was trying to say.

Originally posted by Shakyamunison
Not a single book in the NT was written by any of the apostles. Look up the Q Gospel.

Also, I am of the opinion that the Q document never existed. It is a fanciful theory and is a poor solution to a non-existent problem.

Let's fancy it all then, eh?

Originally posted by Nellinator
Umm, two were written by disciples at least, a third was written by a disciples scribe. Also, disciple =/= apostle.

Also, I am of the opinion that the Q document never existed. It is a fanciful theory and is a poor solution to a non-existent problem.

None of the four Gospels, Matthew, Mark, Luke and John are original documents written my the people who bear their names. The Q Gospel might have been written by one of those four, but sense we don't have the Q Gospel, we will never know.

* how about the epistles/letters? they are also parts of the New Testament... and we are very positive those were written by Paul, James, Peter, Jude and John...

Originally posted by peejayd
* how about the epistles/letters? they are also parts of the New Testament... and we are very positive those were written by Paul, James, Peter, Jude and John...

That is why I clarified my statement by listing Matthew, Mark, Luke and John.

Originally posted by Shakyamunison
None of the four Gospels, Matthew, Mark, Luke and John are original documents written my the people who bear their names. The Q Gospel might have been written by one of those four, but sense we don't have the Q Gospel, we will never know.

We will likely never have the Q document because such a thing likely never existed.

Originally posted by Nellinator
There is good reason to believe that they were written by the claimed authors. Not that it really matters.

We will likely never have the Q document because such a thing likely never existed.

What is your good reason?

I find the evidence that supports the Q Gospel to be compelling.

Originally posted by Shakyamunison
That is why I clarified my statement by listing Matthew, Mark, Luke and John.

* and those epistles/letters go in accordance with the life story of Jesus through the 4 Gospels... eventhough the author did not identify themselves, we are still positive that the 4 Gospels are true... 😉

Originally posted by peejayd
* and those epistles/letters go in accordance with the life story of Jesus through the 4 Gospels... eventhough the author did not identify themselves, we are still positive that the 4 Gospels are true... 😉

You will have to define what you mean by the word "true". You can believe anything you wish too.

Originally posted by Shakyamunison
What is your good reason?

I find the evidence that supports the Q Gospel to be compelling.

And yet, it can't be found anywhere and no one really talks about anything of the sort. It's wishful thinking and is full of fail imo.

Originally posted by Nellinator
The fact that it is not claimed that disciples wrote all the canonical gospels. Early dates of composition, when the alleged authors would still be alive, and early acceptance and defense of the four gospels as canon.

And yet, it can't be found anywhere and no one really talks about anything of the sort. It's wishful thinking and is full of fail imo.

Then were are the original writings?

Originally posted by Shakyamunison
Then were are the original writings?

Originally posted by Nellinator
I support the idea of the gospels being the original writings. Do you not think if the Q document existed it would have been copied and preserved?

There have been a lot of things lost over time. From what I understand, all we have of all the books of the NT are copies. Am I wrong about that?