I am posting here a quote from Delafruita, please tell me if this sounds to you like a passage that fits within scripture.
here's a link to the original thread if you need: https://www.nairaland.com/989852/women-restricted-work-pastor

"the gospel according to mary magdalene(it wasnt included in the bible because it conflicted with paul)
chapter 5
1)go to the Gentiles and preach the gospel of the Kingdom of the Son of Man? If they did not spare Him, how will they spare us?
2) Then Mary stood up, greeted them all, and said to her brethren, Do not weep and do not grieve nor be irresolute, for His grace will be entirely with you and will protect you.
3) But rather, let us praise His greatness, for He has prepared us and made us into Men.
4) When Mary said this, she turned their hearts to the Good, and they began to discuss the words of the Savior.
5) Peter said to Mary, Sister we know that the Savior loved you more than the rest of woman.
6) Tell us the words of the Savior which you remember which you know, but we do not, nor have we heard them.
7) Mary answered and said, What is hidden from you I will proclaim to you.
cool And she began to speak to them these words: I, she said, I saw the Lord in a vision and I said to Him, Lord I saw you today in a vision. He answered and said to me,
9) Blessed are you that you did not waver at the sight of Me. For where the mind is there is the treasure.
10) I said to Him, Lord, how does he who sees the vision see it, through the soul or through the spirit?
11) The Savior answered and said, He does not see through the soulnor through the spirit, but the mind that is between the two that is what sees the vision and it is [...]
(pages 11 - 14 are missing from the manuscript)
Chapter 8:
. . . it.
10) And desire said, I did not see you descending, but now I see you ascending. Why do you lie since you belong to me?
11) The soul answered and said, I saw you. You did not see me nor recognize me. I served you as a garment and you did not know me.
12) When it said this, it (the soul) went away rejoicing greatly.
13) Again it came to the third power, which is called ignorance.
14) The power questioned the soul, saying, Where are you going? In wickedness are you bound. But you are bound; do not judge!
15) And the soul said, Why do you judge me, although I have not judged?
16) I was bound, though I have not bound.
17) I was not recognized. But I have recognized that the All is beingdissolved, both the earthly things and the heavenly.
18) When the soul had overcome the third power, it went upwards and saw the fourth power, which took seven forms.
19) The first form is darkness, the second desire, the third ignorance, the fourth is the excitement of death, the fifth is the kingdom of the flesh, the sixth is the foolish wisdom of flesh, the seventh is the wrathful wisdom. These are the seven powers of wrath.
20) They asked the soul, Whence do you come slayer of men, or where are you going, conqueror of space?
21) The soul answered and said, What binds me has been slain, andwhat turns me about has been overcome,
22) and my desire has been ended, and ignorance has died.
23) In a aeon I was released from a world, and in a Type from a type, and from the fetter of oblivion which is transient.
24) From this time on will I attain to the rest of the time, of the season, of the aeon, in silence.
Chapter 9
1) When Mary had said this, she fell silent, since it was to this point that the Savior had spoken with her.
2) But Andrew answered and said to the brethren, Say what you wish to say about what she has said. I at least do not believe that the Savior said this. For certainly these teachings are strange ideas.
3) Peter answered and spoke concerning these same things.
4) He questioned them about the Savior: Did He really speak privately with a woman and not openly to us? Are we to turn about and all listen to her? Did He prefer her to us?
5) Then Mary wept and said to Peter, My brother Peter, what do youthink? Do you think that I have thought this up myself in my heart, or that I am lying about the Savior?
6) Levi answered and said to Peter, Peter you have always been hot tempered.
7) Now I see you contending against the woman like the adversaries.
cool But if the Savior made her worthy, who are you indeed to reject her? Surely the Savior knows her very well.
9) That is why He loved her more than us. Rather let us be ashamedand put on the perfect Man, and separate as He commanded us andpreach the gospel, not laying down any other rule or other law beyond what the Savior said.
10) And when they heard this they began to go forth to proclaim and to preach."

hmm

Even though i'm no longer a christian, my past experience as a christian teaches me that giving attention to extra-canonical and apocryphal books like these is error-prone and damaging to wholesome christian worldview. Those books are not scriptural and are not worth any serious christian's attention. You will do well to ignore them as a christian.

Am sorry. I do not dip myself into what is not part of the scriptures. I read and study wide but only within the materials that surrounds the canon of the scriptures. Why will I waste my time studying about the gospel according to Mary Magdalene and which soul do I want to win with such since it is not included in the canon of the scriptures. It will be a waste of time because it will seems like "speaking in tongues" when no one understand and it profits none rather than "speak with understanding" so many can benefit and be edified. This is my take sir.

I am not asking anyone to study it. All I am asking is that you give it a glance and tell me if it reads like scripture at all. I am not after an analysis as such, I am more after your gut feeling as one conversant with scripture.

^
It doesn't look or read like scriptures to me though. I rest my case.

Goshen360: ^
It doesn't look or read like scriptures to me though. I rest my case.

Thanks that was exactly my first impression.

Goshen360: Am sorry. I do not dip myself into what is not part of the scriptures. I read and study wide but only within the materials that surrounds the canon of the scriptures. Why will I waste my time studying about the gospel according to Mary Magdalene and which soul do I want to win with such since it is not included in the canon of the scriptures. It will be a waste of time because it will seems like "speaking in tongues" when no one understand and it profits none rather than "speak with understanding" so many can benefit and be edified. This is my take sir.

Bro Goshen Are you trying to say that the book can't be called gospel? I hope you know that ONE man is responsible for books in the bible because he deemed others no fit enough.. I will love to discuss bible history with you.

For the sake of diligence in argument, I did read through all that (ugh!). It hurt...badly!
Not only did it not read at all like the rest of the Bible, it sounded positively like an attack on the rest of the Scriptures. It's the same trouble I have with Sirach, Tobit, Wisdom etc (yes, I have the "complete" Catholic Bible).

Mkmyers45, what exactly is the problem with the compilation of the Scriptures? I do not care to debate Bible history with you, however! I just wanna say that I think that anyone who set out on a research expedition will, after they have obtained all the material touching their subject of interest, separate such as are coherent from those that are absurd in their organisation of thought with respect to the subject they are researching. If you have read the Bible, I'm sure you'll find that the books and letters accepted to constitute it have a common thread of thought running through them all, while those in dispute have this really very nasty and, yes, obnoxious effect of twisting that thread of thought into a hopeless kink one can't make sense of. Ugh!

^^
so are you admitting that it is man who determines what should be included and excluded as the "Word of God"

Ihedinobi: For the sake of diligence in argument, I did read through all that (ugh!). It hurt...badly!
Not only did it not read at all like the rest of the Bible, it sounded positively like an attack on the rest of the Scriptures. It's the same trouble I have with Sirach, Tobit, Wisdom etc (yes, I have the "complete" Catholic Bible).

Mkmyers45, what exactly is the problem with the compilation of the Scriptures? I do not care to debate Bible history with you, however! I just wanna say that I think that anyone who set out on a research expedition will, after they have obtained all the material touching their subject of interest, separate such as are coherent from those that are absurd in their organisation of thought with respect to the subject they are researching. If you have read the Bible, I'm sure you'll find that the books and letters accepted to constitute it have a common thread of thought running through them all, while those in dispute have this really very nasty and, yes, obnoxious effect of twisting that thread of thought into a hopeless kink one can't make sense of. Ugh!

thousands of people would have witnessed the life of jesus.its indisputable that they would have different ideas.mary magdalene was a close associate of jesus and it has been claimed that the "gospel according to mary" were her words and not a forgery.
knowing fully well that constantine via eusebius and the catholic bishops selected what should be in the bible and decided to exclude all books that didnt align with their aim.
moreover mary magdalene lived at the same time with jesus,she ate with jesus,was the first one at his tomb,was the first one he appeared to after ressurection,is it her words we should believe or the words of luke and mark who never met jesus and lived many years after he supposedly died.or is it the words of paul who never met jesus and who is the only witness to his own "miraculous" conversion.

Ihedinobi: For the sake of diligence in argument, I did read through all that (ugh!). It hurt...badly!
Not only did it not read at all like the rest of the Bible, it sounded positively like an attack on the rest of the Scriptures. It's the same trouble I have with Sirach, Tobit, Wisdom etc (yes, I have the "complete" Catholic Bible).

Mkmyers45, what exactly is the problem with the compilation of the Scriptures? I do not care to debate Bible history with you, however! I just wanna say that I think that anyone who set out on a research expedition will, after they have obtained all the material touching their subject of interest, separate such as are coherent from those that are absurd in their organisation of thought with respect to the subject they are researching. If you have read the Bible, I'm sure you'll find that the books and letters accepted to constitute it have a common thread of thought running through them all, while those in dispute have this really very nasty and, yes, obnoxious effect of twisting that thread of thought into a hopeless kink one can't make sense of. Ugh!

Brother are you agreeing that it was up to someone to decide what was to be in God's word and what was not..

cyrexx: ^^
so are you admitting that it is man who determines what should be included and excluded as the "Word of God"

I assume it was me that your comment was directed at, pls correct me if I'm wrong. I do not think anything in my last comment implies that I think that it was man or men who decided what was and what was not the Word of God.

mkmyers45: Brother are you agreeing that it was up to someone to decide what was to be in God's word and what was not..

No! I AM MOST CERTAINLY NOT!

Ihedinobi:
No! I AM MOST CERTAINLY NOT!

then certainly what way do we determine what should be holy-writ? Should we countinually accept the decision of a man/men?

@Delafruita et al,
There is no true Christian who will read that passage and not spot it's inappropriateness. I posted that passage here just to show you that fact. It doesn't matter when that piece was written or if indeed it was written by Mary Magdalene. One thing I know for sure is that that passage was not inspired by the Holy Spirit.

Quite alright, It is difficult to explain. It is like the way someone who is conversant with Picasso's work can intuitively spot a fake Picasso painting even if it has been signed in Picasso's name.

You see as a Christian, I know Jesus Christ personally and that guy in that passage sounds nothing like Him.

Delafruita:
thousands of people would have witnessed the life of jesus.its indisputable that they would have different ideas.

Right.

Delafruita: mary magdalene was a close associate of jesus and it has been claimed that the "gospel according to mary" were her words and not a forgery.

A claim is not the same as a certainty.

Delafruita: knowing fully well that constantine via eusebius and the catholic bishops selected what should be in the bible and decided to exclude all books that didnt align with their aim.

One. I do not know the bolded statement to be true. If you do, the onus of proof lies on you, not that I care for it. Feel free to prove it.
Two. The fact that some men came together to decide what would be in the Bible and what wouldn't does not mean that their aim alone was served. One of the accepted traits of "the Christian God" is that He rules in the affairs of men. So, men may intend one thing by an act and only end up accomplishing the desires of "the Christian God" by that act or His edition of that act. However, even were we to accept for the sake of argument that God was helpless to secure His Own Book from men's mishandling, either because He doesn't exist or that He was just too weak or whatever, we know from observation that human beings have an innate ability to sort and categorise things, so it is reasonable to think that if men were assembling a document and had to do so from a wide array of material, they would choose according to kind.

Delafruita: moreover mary magdalene lived at the same time with jesus,she ate with jesus,was the first one at his tomb,was the first one he appeared to after ressurection,is it her words we should believe or the words of luke and mark who never met jesus and lived many years after he supposedly died.or is it the words of paul who never met jesus and who is the only witness to his own "miraculous" conversion.

First bolded statement. So did Jesus's apostles from whom it is reasonable to believe that Luke and Mark got their accounts. Also, the statement needs verification from you. I know of no place in the Bible that qualifies Mary Magdalene as you have represented in the second part of the bolded statement. But I know of many that qualify the apostles beyond what you have said of Mary.
Second bolded statement. This needs proof. On what do you base the declaration that "the gospel according to Mary Magdalene" were indeed her own words?
Third bolded statement. Where is it said that Paul was the only witness to his conversion?

Mr_Anony: @Delafruita et al,
There is no true Christian who will read that passage and not spot it's inappropriateness. I posted that passage here just to show you that fact. It doesn't matter when that piece was written or if indeed it was written by Mary Magdalene. One thing I know for sure is that that passage was not inspired by the Holy Spirit.

Quite alright, It is difficult to explain. It is like the way someone who is conversant with Picasso's work can intuitively spot a fake Picasso painting even if it has been signed in Picasso's name.

You see as a Christian, I know Jesus Christ personally and that guy in that passage sounds nothing like Him.

Other parts of the 'Holy-writ' where inspired by him?

Mr_Anony: @Delafruita et al.
You see as a Christian, I know Jesus Christ personally and that guy in that passage sounds nothing like Him.

.

mkmyers45: then certainly what way do we determine what should be holy-writ? Should we countinually accept the decision of a man/men?

Is there anything wrong or unreasonable in seeking out the person reputed to author a document for proof that they did indeed author the document? If God is said to author the Bible, then if anyone were in question as to the truth of that, it's perfectly reasonable that they ask Him directly if He did or didn't.

mkmyers45: Other parts of the 'Holy-writ' where inspired by him?

Have you heard any Christian claim otherwise?

Ihedinobi:

Is there anything wrong or unreasonable in seeking out the person reputed to author a document for proof that they did indeed author the document? If God is said to author the Bible, then if anyone were in question as to the truth of that, it's perfectly reasonable that they ask Him directly if He did or didn't.

ROFL Martin Luther or the Council of Nicea where not there when all the bible books were written so how did they verify? What about the book of 'Edras'? Who verified Ezra?

Ihedinobi:

Have you heard any Christian claim otherwise?

Yes, i have

Ihedinobi:

Right.



A claim is not the same as a certainty.



One. I do not know the bolded statement to be true. If you do, the onus of proof lies on you, not that I care for it. Feel free to prove it.
Two. The fact that some men came together to decide what would be in the Bible and what wouldn't does not mean that their aim alone was served. One of the accepted traits of "the Christian God" is that He rules in the affairs of men. So, men may intend one thing by an act and only end up accomplishing the desires of "the Christian God" by that act or His edition of that act. However, even were we to accept for the sake of argument that God was helpless to secure His Own Book from men's mishandling, either because He doesn't exist or that He was just too weak or whatever, we know from observation that human beings have an innate ability to sort and categorise things, so it is reasonable to think that if men were assembling a document and had to do so from a wide array of material, they would choose according to kind.



First bolded statement. So did Jesus's apostles from whom it is reasonable to believe that Luke and Mark got their accounts. Also, the statement needs verification from you. I know of no place in the Bible that qualifies Mary Magdalene as you have represented in the second part of the bolded statement. But I know of many that qualify the apostles beyond what you have said of Mary.
Second bolded statement. This needs proof. On what do you base the declaration that "the gospel according to Mary Magdalene" were indeed her own words?
Third bolded statement. Where is it said that Paul was the only witness to his conversion?

just as a claim the the bible is the word of god is not a certainty.
i dont need to prove to you that constantine had the bible compiled.thats like asking me to prove to you that julius ceasar reigned or asking me to prove to you that lord lugard amalgamated north and south.
this your argument of "god rules in the affairs of men" is one i have been expecting to hear and frankly,thats a good argument.however,if god indeed bamboozled them to do his will,did he also have it in mind to execute those with differing opinions?

if mark and luke got their accounts from the disciples(a false claim),does it mean their accounts should supercede those of people who walked with jesus like barnabas,thomas,phillip,mary etc?all these people also have their own gospel which werent included in the bible.
tell me one other eyewitness to the conversion of paul on the road to damascus.

Mr_Anony: @Delafruita et al,
There is no true Christian who will read that passage and not spot it's inappropriateness. I posted that passage here just to show you that fact. It doesn't matter when that piece was written or if indeed it was written by Mary Magdalene. One thing I know for sure is that that passage was not inspired by the Holy Spirit.

Quite alright, It is difficult to explain. It is like the way someone who is conversant with Picasso's work can intuitively spot a fake Picasso painting even if it has been signed in Picasso's name.

You see as a Christian, I know Jesus Christ personally and that guy in that passage sounds nothing like Him.

This is an adequate response to everything you all raise as objections to the Bible and God. I have said elsewhere that if God is a reality, then He is One that can be tested out as to the integrity of His reality. My effort in argument (which I feel rather sorry that I moderated) is to show the futility of it when the subject of argument is God.
In argument, everyone is showing off their intellectual prowess by trying to overwhelm the other. I do not subscribe to that. I maintain that God is a reality and that the Bible is His Own Writing. If anyone doubts me, I say "ask Him yourself". If you say to show Him to you, I tell you that the only way you can see Him for yourself is in asking Him to show Himself to you, and I hope my life and ways is sufficient encouragement for you to do so.
If your determination however is to show me that I'm incredibly stupid to believe in God, it's really a waste of your energy. You see, I know what and Whom I have seen and that is enough for me. If you do not believe, it's very much your problem or lack of it, not mine.
If you were insistent on knowing the truth, you will find it and know it. But if you think you do, it doesn't matter what arguments I marshal, I might as well be shouting at the moon for all you care.
Delafruita, all the foregoing means I am refusing to answer your objections. If this means that I have lost the argument and you are thereby proved right, so be it.
Mkmyers45, I'm glad I amused you. I am very much tempted to answer your comment but I choose not to. My argument is simple, God is a testable reality. You can test Him out for yourself or refuse to. I wish you would, but my life does not revolve around whether or not you do.

Ihedinobi:

This is an adequate response to everything you all raise as objections to the Bible and God. I have said elsewhere that if God is a reality, then He is One that can be tested out as to the integrity of His reality. My effort in argument (which I feel rather sorry that I moderated) is to show the futility of it when the subject of argument is God.
In argument, everyone is showing off their intellectual prowess by trying to overwhelm the other. I do not subscribe to that. I maintain that God is a reality and that the Bible is His Own Writing. If anyone doubts me, I say "ask Him yourself". If you say to show Him to you, I tell you that the only way you can see Him for yourself is in asking Him to show Himself to you, and I hope my life and ways is sufficient encouragement for you to do so.
If your determination however is to show me that I'm incredibly stupid to believe in God, it's really a waste of your energy. You see, I know what and Whom I have seen and that is enough for me. If you do not believe, it's very much your problem or lack of it, not mine.
If you were insistent on knowing the truth, you will find it and know it. But if you think you do, it doesn't matter what arguments I marshal, I might as well be shouting at the moon for all you care.
Delafruita, all the foregoing means I am refusing to answer your objections. If this means that I have lost the argument and you are thereby proved right, so be it.
Mkmyers45, I'm glad I amused you. I am very much tempted to answer your comment but I choose not to. My argument is simple, God is a testable reality. You can test Him out for yourself or refuse to. I wish you would, but my life does not revolve around whether or not you do.

Way to go sir, P.s: Your comment had hints of selfishness and i can understand that but Mr i think your 'i follow because i believe' is good on you but next time please don't discuss when you know you will leave others hanging....

Cheers

Mkmyers45, I'm really sorry about my exit. I'm concerned about running my battery down again. I've been doing that consistently for the past few days. I actually hope to start a thread to address some of the objections atheists and skeptics have about the God of the Bible. Look out for it.
Delafruita, when I do start that thread, I hope you don't come and commend my writing skills again lol. Shoot holes in it if you can or accept its arguments as irrefutable.
Cheers y'all.

Ihedinobi: Mkmyers45, I'm really sorry about my exit. I'm concerned about running my battery down again. I've been doing that consistently for the past few days. I actually hope to start a thread to address some of the objections atheists and skeptics have about the God of the Bible. Look out for it.
Delafruita, when I do start that thread, I hope you don't come and commend my writing skills again lol. Shoot holes in it if you can or accept its arguments as irrefutable.
Cheers y'all.

Looking forward to it.....

Ihedinobi: Mkmyers45, I'm really sorry about my exit. I'm concerned about running my battery down again. I've been doing that consistently for the past few days. I actually hope to start a thread to address some of the objections atheists and skeptics have about the God of the Bible. Look out for it.
Delafruita, when I do start that thread, I hope you don't come and commend my writing skills again lol. Shoot holes in it if you can or accept its arguments as irrefutable.
Cheers y'all.

i will commend your writing skills if they are commendable.i must admit you have a strong believe in your faith even though you have your doubts.however,you dont let your doubts take your eyes from the prize(golden crown in heaven).thats commendable

cyrexx: Even though i'm no longer a christian, my past experience as a christian teaches me that giving attention to extra-canonical and apocryphal books like these is error-prone and damaging to wholesome christian worldview. Those books are not scriptural and are not worth any serious christian's attention. You will do well to ignore them as a christian.

A beautiful advise.

Delafruita:
i will commend your writing skills if they are commendable.i must admit you have a strong believe in your faith even though you have your doubts.however,you dont let your doubts take your eyes from the prize(golden crown in heaven).thats commendable

While I appreciate your commendation of my faith, I wonder that you think I have any doubts. I actually have none whatsoever. I would if I only had intellectual appreciation of Jesus Christ, but I've got more than that.
@all, I'm really sorry I haven't started that thread. I very recently got swamped with work. But I'll let y'all know once I do probably on any trending thread I find y'all on.

Here's the new thread, guys: www.nairaland.com/992952/idehn-logicboy-macdaddy-mkmyers45-delafruita#11468914