So does the Gnostic Gospel of Thomas. - Aspen
-- You mean the "Gospel" that teaches that Jesus, as a boy, murdered two children? That "Gospel" of Thomas?
The one that says Jesus, as a young boy, struck adults with blindness?
The one that portrays the young Jesus as an immature, petulant, disrespectful boy?
The one that attributes multiple quotes to Jesus found in no other Gospel?
As far as the rest of the works you listed, no one has said they couldn't or shouldn't be read. But if they disagree with the Bible or add things that go beyond what the Bible says, (Like our Savior murdering two children when he Himself was a child, which tends to contradict the idea that He lived a sinless life) one must ask why someone would bother with them.
They have the chance of doing more harm than good.
Either you believe the BIble is divinely inspired and assembled, or you don't.
But none of the materials you've mentioned have anything at all to do with the topic at hand.
Except perhaps for the "Gospel" of Thomas. Written in the 2nd century, likely long AFTER Thomas was gone.
And they have absolutely nothing to do with the one specific question you asked and I answered.
I have provided excellent justifications as to why the rest of the BIble is helpful well beyond the three books you mentioned.
You wanting to expound that with non-Biblical materials is your choice.
But that doesn't automatically make that choice a correct one.
(Especially if you look to the Gnostic Gospel of Thomas as a reasonable choice.)
-- You mean the "Gospel" that teaches that Jesus, as a boy, murdered two children? That "Gospel" of Thomas?
The one that says Jesus, as a young boy, struck adults with blindness?
The one that portrays the young Jesus as an immature, petulant, disrespectful boy?
The one that attributes multiple quotes to Jesus found in no other Gospel?
As far as the rest of the works you listed, no one has said they couldn't or shouldn't be read. But if they disagree with the Bible or add things that go beyond what the Bible says, (Like our Savior murdering two children when he Himself was a child, which tends to contradict the idea that He lived a sinless life) one must ask why someone would bother with them.
They have the chance of doing more harm than good.
Either you believe the BIble is divinely inspired and assembled, or you don't.
But none of the materials you've mentioned have anything at all to do with the topic at hand.
Except perhaps for the "Gospel" of Thomas. Written in the 2nd century, likely long AFTER Thomas was gone.
And they have absolutely nothing to do with the one specific question you asked and I answered.
I have provided excellent justifications as to why the rest of the BIble is helpful well beyond the three books you mentioned.
You wanting to expound that with non-Biblical materials is your choice.
But that doesn't automatically make that choice a correct one.
(Especially if you look to the Gnostic Gospel of Thomas as a reasonable choice.)