The Nag Hammadi

[ke7ejx]

Hello, everyone. I'm writing a 15 page paper on the Gnostic Gospels-particularly the Gospel of Thomas and the Gospel of Judas and comparing them to the Synoptic Gospels to explore why the Nag Hammadi isn't accepted as canon in Orthodox Christianity (meaning those who accept the Nicene Creed and whatnot). What in the Nag Hammadi caused the documents to be rejected by Orthodoxy?

Oh, and I'll also be giving a 20-minute oral presentation to the school on this at the end of the semester so that will be fun. I would like to make it clear that I'm not an Arianist or a heretic, this is purely academic research for my History of the Bible in English Class. Thanks!

[TheWall]

Well I am an amateur but I think that the trinity is a big deal with them. The gospel of Judah also makes jesus out to be a collar all failure.

[QuantaFille]

A lot of it has to do with dating. The Gnostic gospels are dated much later than the canonical ones, and so could not have been written by or corroborated by eyewitnesses.

[One Bad Pig]

Be careful of your terminology, since IIRC the Gospel of Judas was not part of the Nag Hammadi collection. The gnostic gospels (which don't really have anything to do with Arianism, btw) were rejected because of their late date and their heretical contents. For example, Eusebius attests here that the Gospel of Peter was rejected because it had not been handed down by the church and it contained heretical concepts, even though it was acknowledged to contain much that was accurate.

[ke7ejx]

My copy of the Nag Hammadi includes Judas.

[One Bad Pig]

My copy of the Nag Hammadi includes Judas.

Here is an index of the codices found at Nag Hammadi.

[ke7ejx]

I didn't say that it couldn't have been added later, only that my edition has it.

[One Bad Pig]

I didn't say that it couldn't have been added later, only that my edition has it.

Um, it couldn't have been added later, since it wasn't part of the collection as found. It is a similar genre to part of the NH library (which IIRC appears to be a collection not made by a gnostic group given the diversity within it), so I can see why it would be printed in a collection of gnostic works. I assume (hope) that your edition accurately points out which of its contents are additions to what was originally found.

[ke7ejx]

Um, it couldn't have been added later, since it wasn't part of the collection as found. It is a similar genre to part of the NH library (which IIRC appears to be a collection not made by a gnostic group given the diversity within it), so I can see why it would be printed in a collection of gnostic works. I assume (hope) that your edition accurately points out which of its contents are additions to what was originally found.

Sorry, Pig. I have a medium concussion so I don't think I quite made myself clear. What I meant was printing edition of the Nag Hammadi. Mine is a later printing. I am aware that while Judas is similar to the Gnostic Gospels, a lot of historians and Gnostic scholars debate whether it is Gnostic in origin.

[ke7ejx]

I'm glad we had this conversation because it made me dig through my pile of books a bit. Marvin Meyer, a scholar of Gnosticism from Chapman University mentioned this about the Gospel of Judas in his book The Gnostic Discoveries:

In a private correspondence, Charles W. Hedrick has indicated that he has seen photographs of the Nag Hammadi Codex, and he describes the character of the codex and the Gospel of Judas within the codex:

There are at least two subscript titles in the codex: The Letter of Peter to Phillip, and The Gospel of Judas. Judas is not the disciple of Jesus, Judas Thomas, but rather Judas the betrayer, as is made clear in the last line of the text. Judas is described as a "disciple of Jesus" as "taking money", and the last line of tet concludes, "and he delivered him over".

[Rushing Jaws]

I'm glad we had this conversation because it made me dig through my pile of books a bit. Marvin Meyer, a scholar of Gnosticism from Chapman University mentioned this about the Gospel of Judas in his book The Gnostic Discoveries:

There is also this, which contains 31 documents in translation: https://www.amazon.co.uk/Nag-Hammadi.../dp/0061626007

[One Bad Pig]

I'm glad we had this conversation because it made me dig through my pile of books a bit. Marvin Meyer, a scholar of Gnosticism from Chapman University mentioned this about the Gospel of Judas in his book The Gnostic Discoveries:

Interesting. I'm wondering which of the titles referenced in my link contains the subscript 'The Gospel of Judas'. And I'm not sure why Dr. Hedrick feels the need to mention the distinction, because I don't recall the Gospels giving Thomas the name Judas, and I don't recall anyone being confused over that point.

[ke7ejx]

Interesting. I'm wondering which of the titles referenced in my link contains the subscript 'The Gospel of Judas'. And I'm not sure why Dr. Hedrick feels the need to mention the distinction, because I don't recall the Gospels giving Thomas the name Judas, and I don't recall anyone being confused over that point.

According to the scholars I checked, Meyer said "yes", Elaine Pagels said "maybe" and Rudolph Kasser said "not even close". I spoke to one of my professors and he says it is considered a mystery that isn't likely to be solved.

[ke7ejx]

Well, I'm afraid I derailed my own thread. The question from the OP is this: Why are the writings in the Nag Hammadi and the Gospel of Judas considered heretical instead of part of the canon for Christianity?

[One Bad Pig]

Well, I'm afraid I derailed my own thread. The question from the OP is this: Why are the writings in the Nag Hammadi and the Gospel of Judas considered heretical instead of part of the canon for Christianity?

See my link to Eusebius in post #4 above.