Including listen these lost scriptures how they're just described here in this neutral Forged Gospels

these books were collected into the pages of the New Testament and The church left out all of these forged

So again, the Gospel of Philips, the similarity in some wording only indicates that the canonical Gospels, Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John, which are in our New Testament, that these were widely circulated and had gotten around enough that they had influenced some of the language of people who wrote Gospels after the canonical Gospels were written.

So again, the gospel of Philips, the similarity in some wording only indicates that the canonical gospels, Matthew, Mark, Luke and John, which are in our New Testament, that these were widely circulated and had gotten around enough that they had influenced some of the language of people who wrote gospels after the canonical gospels were written.

Did you know this? They were found in Egypt in the Nag Hammadi library like the Gospel of Judas the Gospel of Peter the Gospel of Mary. These are other Gospels. And do you know why they were not permitted into the Bible?

And surely if God is going to enter into his own creation redemptively, he is going to be more than capable of producing divinely inspired and accurate documents. Every sort of denial of the accuracy and divine nature of the gospels has been put forth over the centuries, and it is a little odd upon reflection that I would be going first in defending the historical accuracy and authenticity of the gospels.

You see, this type of fraud and deception about penning books with your own hand and claiming that they are from the disciples of Jesus, you know as well as I do, this was a common practice back then.

It's almost a complete copy of the Gospel of John. It's P66. This is hugely important. Structurally, the text consists of 75 papyrus leaves, double -sided pages. The first 26 have been remarkably preserved and can be read.

The more witnesses you have, the confidence you have that you possess, the more witnesses you have, the greater the confidence you have that you possess the original text. So, if I have a manuscript of John from Caesarea, from Africa, from Italy, from France, from, well, Gaul back then, from all over the Mediterranean region, if I recognize that what has happened is that the New Testament exploded across the known world, it was freely copied, and hence, you have a wide variety of sources and a wide number of manuscripts, and they all say the same thing, not down to every single spelling of a word or the textual variants that we have, but they're very clearly all copies of the exact same thing, then I can have tremendous confidence, because if what I had, instead of what we have in P45, or P66, or P75, which are all gospel manuscripts from around the same time period, if what we have is we have P45, which has the story of the good shepherd, and then in P66, we have something called the Gospel of John, but there's nothing about a good shepherd, but there is, in the place, something about a good king, and then P75 has a story, actually, about an eagle.

The Gospels are suited to different audiences. Okay, that's the one you probably know. That's the one that would probably be my reflex if somebody said, why are there four different Gospels? Well, he's writing for different purposes, I would say, and there are different audiences.

There are a lot of myths about these supposed lost Gospels of the New Testament. Frequently people will read a book or they'll see something on TV that talks about a lost Gospel that was discovered, such as the Gospel of Judas, or maybe the Gospel of Mary Magdalene, or the Gospel of Thomas, or the Gospel of Philip.

There were other people who were spreading other so -called gospels, and Paul needs to contend for the truth of the message that he preached. And he goes so far as to say that if anyone, even an angel from heaven, preaches any other gospel, brings any other message apart from the one that he and by extension his fellow apostles brought, then they are no true messengers, but are actually under the curse of God.

These are gospel manuscripts too, but they tend to be very consistent from one family. P45 is not that way. You see in Matthew p45 follows one perspective one family seems like in Mark it's a little bit different John it's different.

This is what the gospel is is what you present here is. What Matthew Mark? What Matthew Mark and Luke knew? But did not consider it to be appropriate to put into their Gospels given the context in which they intended their Gospels to be used Etc etc.

It was being controlled in this apostolic circle, who knew what Jesus was doing and saying. And that group was also trying to keep an eye on what made it into the churches. So I tell people when Mark sent his gospel by FedEx to a church and said, hey, I'm introducing this gospel.

Now that's the second false gospel. And there's a lot of things that can be in between all of that. But if anything attacks us and causes our faith to look to here and now as blessings, or that we look to our own good works, those are false gospels.

But what is the different gospel that they have turned to? Yes sir? The Judaizers were trying to add works, the law, the Mosaic law.

Because you actually can't read the whole thing. It doesn't make any sense. So, be aware of the fact that there are many out there. They'll go after the Gospel of John especially, because obviously the Gospel of John contains some of the key texts on the deity of Christ, who Jesus Christ is.

P75, P66, early gospel manuscripts. I'm doing my third doctorate on P45 and CBGM. That's Matthew, Mark, Luke, John, and Acts, a very unusual manuscript. But that began happening later on as they began to become collected together.

These are simplistic arguments that are inconsistent. I mean if if every gospel just read the exact same way the immediate response to be asked either is copying each other. There's no independent witnesses here.