Where do things like the Gospel of Thomas fit into Christianity?

The Bible is made up of sixty-six books, beginning with Genesis and ending with Revelation. Recent years have seen an increased interest in ancient books like the Gospel of Thomas. The Gospel of Thomas is one of fifty-two books known as the gnostic gospels. The Gnostic gospels were all written sometime between 100-300 A.D. and generally claim to have been written by apostles or other individuals who had close relationships with Jesus. Other well known gnostic writings include The Gospe of Judas, The Gospel of Mary and the Gospel of Phillip. The collection of gnostic gospels cannot be summarized easier because have many different themes and purposes. Some claim to reveal information about Jesus’ life not discussed in the New Testament. Some claim to present a different perspective on Jesus’ ministry that the New Testament writers wanted to keep hidden. Some claim to offer a new angle on the events recorded in the New Testament gospels, interpreting the episodes in Jesus’ life according to Gnostic beliefs.

Since many of the gnostic gospels claim to give factual information about Jesus and His disciples that was not included in the New Testament, how does the Christian view these books? They have no legitimate claim to be the Word of God. They make fraudulent claims about their authorship. They make factual statements that contradict the New Testament. They teach doctrines contrary to the doctrines of the Bible. No gnostic gospel was ever recognized as God’s Word by any ancient Christian church.

The gnostic gospels are not Scripture, but do they offer some historical insight like some Apocryphal books? The length of time between the life of Jesus and the writing of the gnostic gospel (at least one hundred years) means the information included is less trustworthy than that found in the New Testament. The unique historical claims of the gnostic gospels have no confirming evidence in other historical records. A number of the gnostic gospels present historical details that are clearly fallacious (like those found in the Infancy Gospel of Thomas). Some of them, like the Gospel of Judas, rewrite history to present an account that supports gnostic theology.

The gnostic gospels are books written by men promoting a body of beliefs contradictory to the New Testament. The books make claims based on the imaginations and theological errors of the gnostic heresy. These books are intentional fabrications. They offer much insight into gnostic theology but they provide no useful information about the early life, the personal life or the secret life of Jesus. A quick comparison between any of the most popular gnostic gospels and any of the New Testament gospels will reveal an obvious difference. The gnostic gospels read like poor imitations of the New Testament or feeble attempts to create epic mythology. The gnostic gospels are unreliable as anything but historical curiosities. They are not Scripture and offer nothing to aid the understanding of the life of Jesus or to promote true, Biblical theology.

Do conservative Christians want America to follow the Old Testament laws?

In some of the many debates about morality, a few have accused conservatives and Christians of wanting to put America under Old Testament law. The implication is of a fundamentalist movement that wants to enact a Christian version of Sharia law. The angry retort accuses Christians of thinking America should burn witches and stone homosexuals. Is there any truth to this? Do Christians think American law should be like the law of Moses? What should Christians think about the laws of Israel and their application to America today?

Most conservative Christians do not secretly yearn for a day when America is under the law of Moses. The law of Moses was a unique system of laws unfit for use in any other country of the world. The law of Moses was not just a religious law. It described the right ways of worship andd sacrifice. It defined right and wrong, commanding some behaviors and forbidding others. The law of Moses was more than religious law. The law of Moses was also civil law. The laws given to Moses by God described how the nation of Israel would be governed. It assigned punishment for crimes, maintained civil order and directed those who arbitrated God’s law. At that time Israel was a theocracy, a government by God mediated through His prophet Moses. Israel had no elected leadership, no constitution, no king, no ruling body. God was Israel’s supreme ruler and He ruled directly over the affairs of the nation.

Most Christians are not seeking to turn America into a theocracy. Such an effort would be futile and contrary to God’s commands for Christians today. God has never commanded the church or individual Christians to establish a Christian nation ruled directly by God. Christians have been commanded to exert a positive influence on the morals of others. Christians recognize that the moral laws found in the Old and New Testament are God’s unchanging standard of right and wrong. Christians would love to see the nation move to a place of obeying those moral laws, but Christians do not desire to overthrow the existing system of government to enact a pseudo-spiritual political agenda.

The focus of all Christians should be on a goal higher than the passing of new laws or the defense of existing laws. The Christian recognizes that human behavior is the symptom of the evil that exists in every human heart. As a result, the Christian’s goal is the transformation of the heart. The Christian must not be content to be a lobbyist or legislature. The Christian must be anxious to tell the gospel to everyone he meets so the heart of individuals will be changed by the power of God. Only when the heart of a man is changed, turned from sin, cleansed by God and made new, will he be able and wanting to obey God’s laws. The laws of a nation can only order the actions of a people, they can never change hearts.  Christians are not interested in making America a theocracy like Israel, but are anxious to preach the gospel to every creature.

How was it decided what books were included in the New Testament?

From the very beginning of the church, the groups and people who received letters from the apostles recognized those writings as inspired by God. This was true of both the Old and New Testament. Prior to Jesus, the writings of the prophets were received as the Word of God. After Jesus the writings of the apostles were received as the Word of God. The individual churches who received a particular writing knew it was from God. Those writings were then passed around among the churches. In fact, several books of the Bible were not written to individual churches but to entire people groups or several churches in a particular region (for example, Matthew, Mark, John, Colossians, Hebrews, James, John, Peter, Jude, Revelation). Some letters were written to individuals, which were then shared with a single church and then passed on to other churches. (such as, Luke, Acts, Timothy, Titus, Philemon, 2 & 3 John).

The churches recognized these letters as inspired by God from the very beginning. This is made plain in 2 Peter 3:16. Peter says that Paul’s writings are sometimes hard to understand, and those who are unstable twist Paul’s Words, just like they do the other Scriptures. Peter considers Paul’s writings the Word of God, even though they are at times difficult to understand. In Paul’s letter to Timothy he quotes the gospel of Luke and declares it is Scripture. In 1 Thessalonians Paul claims his writings are the Word of God. The apostles knew they were writing God’s Word and they knew that other writings of the apostles were inspired Scripture.

Because of the way in which the New Testament was written and distributed, there were times when false letters claiming to be apostolic were passed around the church. Because the writings of the apostles were sent to churches spread across widespread regions of the Roman empire some churches did not receive copies of certain books until decades after the books had been written. At that later point, and often without apostolic oversight, churches and groups of churches had to be able to decide between the true Biblical books and those which were false. To help make this determination, the church identified several criteria to identify genuine Biblical books.

First, the book had to have apostolic authority. For a book to be Scriptures it was to have been written by an apostle or under the direct supervision of an apostle. Second, the book could not contradict books already recognized as Biblical. Third, everything contained in the writing had to be true. Nothing inspired by God would contain errors or fraudulent claims. Any book found to be erroneous was rejected as not genuine Scripture. Last, the book had to have already been accepted by the church. A writing that was not recognized in any church as Biblical could not suddenly be elevated to be upheld as Biblical. The writing had to be accepted as Biblical by those who received it before it could be accepted as Biblical by the church at large.

At no point in history did anyone have an official meeting with all the possible books in front of them and decide if those books were going to be considered as Biblical. History tells us a few specific books of the Bible were not recognized by all the church until later and after much consideration. Many false books were rejected by the church, on the local and regional levels. In the end the formation of the New Testament was not the result of men deciding which books belonged, but of God moving holy men to write His Word. The churches that received His Word recognized the marks of authentic, Divine truth and acknowledged such writings to be the Bible.

Were the Crusades Christian?

Last week when making a point about the distortion of religions, our President claimed the crusades were undertaken in the name of Christ. The claim repeated by Mr. Obama is one that has been repeated many times by many people and will be repeated many times over again. Were the crusades Christian?

The crusades were an ostensibly Christian undertaking, claiming to be in the name of Christ. The crusades did not take place in a religious vacuum. The crusades took place in a socio-political environment in which the Roman Catholic church was tightly interwoven with numerous national governments. Church and state were not separated and were, in fact, nearly inseparable. Despite the claims, to say the crusades were Christian has as much merit as saying the Seattle Seahawks NFC victory was Christian. Christian claims and Christian participation do not a Christian event make.

Yes, the Crusades claimed Christianity for their support. No, the Crusades were not at all a Christian undertaking. Historically, nations have long claimed Biblical and Divine support of their cause in war. During the Civil War the Union and Confederacy both claimed God was supporting their cause. In the World Wars Americans claimed Divine support. In First Gulf War and the war on terror, America claimed Divine support. These claims do not prove any of those wars were Christian undertakings. Nothing in the Bible teaches an army of church men are to march into Palestine and drive out its conquerors, just as nothing in the Bible teaches America was to drive Al-Qaeda out of Afghanistan.

At this point someone will protest that God told Moses, Joshua, Saul and David to conquer the land of Canaan and to wipe out entire populations. This claim is true, but Israel is not the church. The scope of this article does not allow time to go into the specifics of the Old Testament, God’s commands to Israel and God’s working in the world during that time. One recognition is vitally important to understanding how God’s command to Israel have no bearing on the crusades. The church and Israel are not the same in function, purpose, relationship to the world or governance. Israel in the Old Testament was a nation, acting as an autonomous government among the many nations of the world. The church is not and never has been a nation. The church is not a federal agency with its own army, justices and legislatures that imposes its will by force and fiat on those who resist. The church is something very different and distinct from a nation. The church has no authority to declare war. No true church will claim Jesus’ support of violence, murder and barbarism and no genuine Christian can claim Christ’s example for brutality, assault and bloodshed.

The crusades were not Christian in any way. They may or may not have been just (that’s a separate discussion), but they were not Christian. Christian is that which follows the teachings of Jesus Christ as recorded in the New Testament. Anything contrary to the New Testament is not Christian. Anything not built on the clear teaching of the New Testament cannot claim to be Christian. Only that which is defined in the New Testament as Christian behavior can legitimately be called a Christian endeavor.

When did the church decide Jesus is God?

From the same sources that brought us such startling news that Mary Magdalene is Jesus’ wife, the early church conspired to oppress women and the New Testament wasn’t written down until over one hundred years after Jesus’ death, we are demystified again by the declaration that at a strategic church council it was decided by the bishop’s present that Jesus actually was God. As the story goes in popular parlance, the disciples began to tell of how great a person Jesus was and the story grew and grew and grew until a few hundred years later people began to believe Jesus was God. Once people began believing this, certain church leaders met together, decided to make Jesus’ Deity the official doctrine of the church and declared a heretic anyone who doesn’t believe Jesus is God.

This story is spun because of one or two controversies in the early church around 300 AD, though in reality teachers opposed the deity of Jesus from the very earliest days of the church. The most noted controversy surrounded the teachings of a man named Arius. Arius was alive in the late 200’s and early 300’s. He taught that Jesus was not the eternal God, but was created by God at some point before the rest of creation. Arius’ errors led to the calling of the first historic church council, which met in Nicea. In that council the pastor’s cl arified the position of the church and condemned Arius as a false teacher and heretic. The Nicene creed declares that Jesus is, “not made, being of one substance with the Father.”

The Council of Nicea did not devise the doctrine of Jesus’ deity. They affirmed that which the church had believed all along. All of the New Testament is filled with the claim that Jesus is the Eternal God. From the claims of the disciples during Jesus’ life (“My Lord and my God.” -John 20:28), to the claims of Jesus during His ministry (“He said also that God was His Father, making Himself equal with God.” -John 5:18), to the teachings of the apostles Paul (“Christ, who is over all, God blessed for ever.” -Romans 9:5) the testimony of the New Testament is unequivocal. Jesus is God. The church fathers did not create the doctrine of Jesus’ Deity, they upheld it as the truth of God.

Are Christians forbidden to eat pork?

image1The above graphic was emailed to me with a request for my thoughts. At first, I am a little amused by the image. For the sake of full disclosure, I am an avid carnivore. I delight in consuming a myriad of mammalian and avian life. I have no qualms about hunting, killing, gutting, butchering, cooking and then eating a critter. I have no desire to give up my meat eating ways, nor restrict them in any fashion. That being said, if the Bible commands me as a Christian to stop eating a particular animal, I will obey the Word.

The question implicitly answered in the above image is that modern day American Christians do not have license to eat porcine food products (and I assume that also includes other foods prohibited in the Old Testament). The statements made by the graphic designers are factually accurate. Peter’s vision in Acts 10:9-16 was not given to lead him down the path of bacon and pork chops. Peter’s vision prepared him for ministry to the Gentiles. God was giving Peter a poignant object lesson to break down the barriers of prejudice that were still in the hearts of many Jews- the disciples included.
However, to us the above truth as evidence we should not be eating pork would be to overlook or ignore a number of other very clear passages. We have to draw a clear line between the Jews of the Bible and the Gentiles of today. The question at stake is if believing Gentiles are under the dietary restrictions of the law of Moses. That question was answered clearly and definitively in three distinct places in the New Testament. Acts 15 is the first time the church addressed this specific issue.
As the gospel spread throughout Gentile regions a group of men began teaching that Gentiles must also keep the laws of Moses to be saved. In Acts 15, church leaders from Jerusalem and Antioch met together to address the matter. Peter was one of the leading voices at that council. After mentioning how God used him to first take the gospel to the Gentiles he said, “Why tempt ye God, to put a yoke on the neck of the disciples, which neither our fathers nor we were able to bear?” Paul and Barnabas spoke after Peter and declared much the same thing. James, the pastor of the church in Jerusalem, stood and concluded the meeting by affirming that Gentile believers are under no obligation to keep the ceremonial and civil restrictions of the law of Moses. This conclusion was later affirmed by the entire church, and was a major part of Paul’s correction of the Galatian and Colossian errors. In fact, in his first letter to Timothy Paul declared that any one who forbade eating meats was teaching a demonic doctrine. The New Testameny explicitly teaches the Gentile Christian has no obligation to obey the laws given to the Israelites, including dietary restrictions.
American Christian’s today can enjoy or abstain from all varieties of meat. We are under no specific command to imbibe or forsake any kind of meat. Instead, we give thanks God who has made us clean through Jesus. We rejoice that because of Jesus, diet plays no part in our standing with God.