johnydon22:
McSterlin very correct, there are in fact up 50 of these gospels written. . . The ones that made it in the bible are called Synoptic gospels while the ones left out are called Gnostic gospels of which Gnostic christians and churches still make use of some of these texts too. . Many catholic Oral tradition developed from the Gnostic gospels like Mary being born without sin, The parent of Mary being Joachin and Anna and so on

Scholar8200:


If I consider the definition of Gnosticism from http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/gnosticism as:


: the thought and practice especially of[b] various cults of late pre-Christian[/b] and early Christian centuries distinguished by the conviction that matter is evil and that emancipation comes through gnosis;

then I wont be wrong to say that the gnostic movement existed before the Church and ,like other false groups have done and are doing, tried to squeeze in the true Gospel, into their teachings! This therefore means we can dispense with their writings (aka 'gospels') as a deceptive, syncretic piece of literary work. Unlike the synoptics and John, the gnostics appear to make claims of which there is no OT declaration or prophesy.

Scholar8200:
Luke's scope of study as stated in the introduction suggests his focus was to be more on what Theophilus had already believed- the life and teachings of Jesus - hence quickly brushing through such prefatory aspects might be pardonable.

Luke 1:3,4

3 With this in mind, since I myself have carefully investigated everything from the beginning, I too decided to write an orderly account for you, most excellent Theophilus, 4 so that you may know the certainty of the things you have been taught.

I am persuaded that the highlighted may not concern as much issues as Mary's father or how old she was or how they had to go to Egypt etc

Jesus appeared more than once to the disciples.

johnydon22:
And you know the names the gospels bear are all later additions to it. . . . All the 50 gospels vary in timeline as well as content, individual perception and ideas

johnydon22:
I think i would go with scholarly consensus that Gnostic movement emerged as a reaction to Christian movement incorporating many ancient eastern religious teachings to Christianity. That is why they are called Gnostic christians.

Scholar8200:
Since this is so, then it further reinforces the fact that the Gnostic 'gospels' was syncretic and deceptive! {I perceive this action of 'stealing from Christianity' is what gave rise to horus and other personalities who, being Jacob (in the sense of being usurpers) , try to cover themselves with the wool of the Lamb (Jesus Christ)! Meaning they already existed before but later incorporated features of the Truth in order to retain adherents! In fact, Paul's epistle to the Colossians was a rebuttal to the lies of gnosticism being offered, by its exponents, to the believers in Colosse. }

johnydon22:
If by horus you are in anyway referring to the egyptian God then you are dead wrong. . .Horus is an ancient egyptian concept and in no way a product of christianity rather one can discern the christian conept borrowed from it because it predates the christian concept with a huge margin.

Most The gospels regarded gnostics are in no way all materials of gnostic writings, most of them have background from second generation christians just like the other gospels you have in the bible e.g The gospel of Thomas.

The exclusion of these gospels in the canonical christian book collection is what relegates them to being referred to as Gnostic write ups .

There are mostly regarded as the new testament deutrocanonical books. . . Gnostic movements became imminent in 2century AD.
Orthodox and Gnostic Christianity still remains paralell lines and all partakes wholesomely from the same fable [/i][/b]

Scholar8200:
Exactly! Just like the extant gnostic teachings, this (horus/osiris/isis/semiramis) also existed but the semblances to Christ were later incorporations (the pre-christian gnostics did it afterall). The questions engendered by their action ( see this thread: Horus is not Jesus Christ And can Never Be)still solicits for answers.

But you said they incorporated some Christian teachings to Ancient eastern beliefs which I guess was attributable to those that Merriam-webster pointed out were of the pre-christian era.

Parallel lines with no interception in substance no matter how many inscriptions of the form they incorporate!