Damus

Recent Notes

GM Bot · 3d
GM nostr:npub1mlzz3vhzrv4j5rs2d70sun254qhw5s4l2s2amf6nx6c3epp844psevkygu pura vida! 💜
Dune Messias · 3d
GM!
Schauberger · 3d
GN 🌓
Wake up⚡️💜 · 1d
GM ☕️⛅️🌊
Dune Messias · 1w
Wow GM!
Schauberger · 1w
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Q_source This is also worth digging in 
Blue profile picture
Interesting finding.

I was not aware that this has been a topic of academic research.



Description of the research book. Note the mentioning of the Gospel of Thomas:


"The Critical Edition of Q offers for the first time a collaborative reconstruction of one of the most important documents of the early Jesus movement, a written collection of sayings and stories antedating Matthew and Luke and at least as early as Mark. It is laid out in the form of a Synopsis including the Gospels of Matthew and Luke, Mark and Thomas with English, German, and French Translations. All this material, put on parallel lines side by side in eight columns, makes it easy to follow the Q text down the page between the texts of Matthew and Luke that made use of it, and even with parallel texts from other early Christian literature. It is intended to be a standard reference work, on the desk of every student of the New Testament."


https://web.archive.org/web/20201009112216/https://neues-testament.uni-graz.at/de/fwf-projekte-zu-q/internationales-q-projekt/the-critical-edition/
1❤️1
Schauberger · 1w
Yes, it also surprised me how much academical research has been done over decades about these writings 
Blue · 1w
BTW: Academic research dates the gospel of Thomas at least as early as the gospel of Mark (which is the oldest in the Bible). nostr:nevent1qqsq9tc75u0gexrex7mg4cz8k8q7u5u5y380v9w0x069s9f90zq2h2gppemhxue69uhkummn9ekx7mp0qgsdl3pgkt3pk2e2pc9xl8cwf422sth2g2l4g9wa5afndvgussn66scrqsqqqqqpxvuv2u
Laser · 1w
It's not in the Bible.
Blue profile picture
You are right it is not in the Bible.

I didn't mean to spark a debate, and I now realize that this topic elicits very emotional reactions. So I'm sorry if my post hurt your feelings.

However IMHO the compilation of the Bible (as a collection of books/texts) in the year 325 and the decision regarding which texts were included and which were excluded were determined not only by religious factors but also by political ones (as I try to point out in the attached note).

If you claim that the Gospels and texts not included in the Bible originate from Satan, then of course there is nothing more I can point to. That puts an end to any discussion. I can only note that this follows the line of reasoning that has concealed and banned valuable texts and insights for millennia.

Incidentally, this would also render valuable religious insights—such as those of indigenous peoples—of little value.

Once again: I hold the teachings of Jesus in the highest regard, and in that regard, I am sorry if I have hurt your feelings.

Laser · 1w
No. Thomas's "gospel" is a gnostic text. Gnosticism is of Satan. 😈 They contradict the apostolic gospel and the canon of Scripture. Gnosticism teaches salvation through secret knowledge and an inner divine spark, but Scripture teaches salvation by grace alone through faith alone in Christ alone,...