Gospel of Mary Magdalene
#21
(08-23-2011, 12:43 AM)Someone1776 Wrote:
(08-23-2011, 12:15 AM)Mithrandylan Wrote: Why are these gospels called the "Gospel of X person" when X person didn't write it?

Why is the Autobiography of Malcolm X called the Autobiography of Malcolm X when he didn't write it? 

That's what I'm asking.  What is the reason when these writings do not claim a lie in their authorship?  It's not like people claim Judas or Magdalene wrote these gospels... yet these gospels are given to their name.
More Catholic Discussion: http://thetradforum.com/

Go thy ways, old Jack;
die when thou wilt, if manhood, good manhood, be
not forgot upon the face of the earth, then am I a
shotten herring. There live not three good men
unhanged in England; and one of them is fat and
grows old: God help the while! a bad world, I say.
I would I were a weaver; I could sing psalms or any
thing. A plague of all cowards, I say still.
Reply
#22
(08-23-2011, 12:45 AM)Mithrandylan Wrote:
(08-23-2011, 12:43 AM)Someone1776 Wrote:
(08-23-2011, 12:15 AM)Mithrandylan Wrote: Why are these gospels called the "Gospel of X person" when X person didn't write it?

Why is the Autobiography of Malcolm X called the Autobiography of Malcolm X when he didn't write it? 

That's what I'm asking.  What is the reason when these writings do not claim a lie in their authorship?  It's not like people claim Judas or Magdalene wrote these gospels... yet these gospels are given to their name.

I haven't read too much gnostic literature, but usually these gospels claimed to have the "secret" revelations of Christ revealed to X Apostle.  That's how the Gospel of Judas begins.  Remember Gnosticism stressed Christ had secretly given extra information to the Apostles that was not public. These gospels claimed to have these secret instructions. 

But, during the early Church there were many people who also wrote documents falsely in the name of the Apostles to strengthen their credibility.  Some of these fake works are actually quite good and the early church fathers recognized them as theologically sound but condemned them for the being dishonest.  Thus, you can find lots of bonus letters of Saint Paul. 

Some scholars even suggest that some of the scriptural letters of Saint Paul weren't written by him, but someone else long after Paul died. I disagree with this view as its largely based on how different the Greek is in some letters, but ignores the fact that Paul quite clearly indicates he is dictating his letters to a secretary.  A different secretary could easily account for differences in the Greek.   
Reply
#23
Something I will add is that while many secular historians question whether the stated authors of the New Testament were really the true authors (a view I disagree with), practically everyone agrees that scripture consists of the oldest Christian writings in existence.  All of the apocryphal gospels and letters were written much later. 

The only Christian documents from the 1st century not included in scripture are the First Letter of Saint Clement and The Didache.  Both are worth reading, especially the letter of Saint Clement. 
Reply
#24
Unfortunately, you may be screwed.  Of course I am speculating, but from what you describe, my guess of the outcome is - if you agree with his (or some) cockamamie interpretation that this "gospel" is a lost truth that the evil, meanie, Catholic Church has suppressed, you will get an A; and if you actually deal with it factually and historically as heretical, you'll probably end up near the bottom.

Professors generally want you to agree with their genius, and in my academic experience, in "soft" classes where grades are subjective, students who toe the intellectual line will get better grades.
Reply




Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)