19:11 Gospel of Thomas 25:43 Infancy Gospel of Thomas 31:55 Gospel of Mary 36:30 Gospel of Peter 41:25 Protoevangelion of James 48:00 Gospel of Judas 50:08 Acts of John 50:35 Acts of Paul
As a newer believer, Mike has been an answer to my prayers! There are so many people with so many views and opinions but Mike Winger clearly studies hard and thoroughly, there is no doubt in my mind and more importantly my HEART that he speaks truth! God bless you Michael!
1:28 1 Clement 4:05 The Didache 10:56 The Shepherd of Hermas 13:17 Polycarp's Epistle to the Philippians ☝ Pinned comment is useful, but here are timestamps for the wholesome, early Christian (non-heretical) reading.
It’s extremely painful when people you love don’t have discernment or fall victim easily to heresy, cults/cult thinking, and deception. :( it hurts to watch end it hurts even more to experience.😢
Man, I was talking to a Catholic about Mary’s perpetual virginity and he told me that exact explanation from the Protoevangelion. How I WISH I’d known the source back then! Thank you for this series a hundred times. It’s so so helpful.
Thank you Sooooo Much!! I spent last night praying to God about these books, I came to my computer & asked again for him to help me understand...AND BOOM!! There you were!! PRAISE YOU GOD FOR ANSWERING PRAYERS!!
This has absolutely nothing to do with the subject matter, but I had a thought.... if someone wanted to get you a gift, a plaid shirt seems like a safe bet! Good job being faithful in your ministry. God bless.
These books were not canonical for three reasons: One, with the heresies in some, and with the inconsistencies, unknown histories, and such within them. Two, with the inconsistencies and inaccuracies, and not going with the flow of the teachings of the Scriptures. Number three, because they were not inspired by God.. they were not God-breathed.. they were not written by the apostles of Christ. To be an apostle, you have had to have seen the Risen Christ, and personally be called by Him in to that special office. So, that is why none of these books are in the Bible.
@ ...I was raised Christian...but I will admit...I left Christianity because of the hypocrisy...and secrecy __ie : the "book of Enoch" + the "greed, racism & feminist narcissism" that they hide (not all)...but at some point...I simply had enough...no offense
5 років тому+3
@@XlllXlllXlllX ya that's why you don't look two men that preach this way you sit down and read the whole Bible front to back without any judgment on what it really supposed to mean and what it actually means to you
5 років тому+3
only when we start to let the world in becomes a problem I mean did you see Kanye West for example I really can't believe he's being for real or not look I mean when it comes to Christians only believing in the New Testament to me that makes no sense as think you should live by the whole book bible my belief is this I think you got to be a hundred and 10% in order to get past those Gates I don't think you could sin on Tuesday and then go to church on Sunday and think everything's okay and that's what they preach in the Christian church but they left the Book of Enoch out because it was too far out there when all reality it kind of explains half the things that the Book of Genesis did not explain it's like another example like Judas he's supposed to do when he really did
When I studied theology in the Netherlands Bart Ehrman's book was my textbook on the new testament. I Iearned a lot from it. Later in my third year I leaned about gnosis and gospels like the gospel of Thomas and the childhood gospels.I had to translate them. What I learned from Ehrman made very clear to me that those gospels were fake. Ehrman is a historian, the non christian kind.
thank you. thank you. THANK YOU. OH MY GOSH YOU HAVE ABSOLUTELY NO IDEA ... NONE. THANK YOU THANK YOU THANK YOU. finally, someone WHO KNOWS WHAT TIME IT IS. THANK YOU, JESUS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
@TheGoodOlRebel Yes. Its all about how Pilate became a believer after the crucifixion, what he witnessed after the death and resurrection, and the letters he sent afterwards telling the world of christ.
Hey Mike! Love your content brother, I just had a question. Are these recordings from your Sunday service or do these talks happen on another day like some sort of Bible study night?
As you went through the Gnostic rejected books and how ridiculous they are I couldn't stop thinking.... I would love to see someone do a mockumentary cartoon (laugh your butt off) depiction of these stories... a spoof that presents how hideous and far out there that these are and... hope that it would go viral. For all those who have not actually read the text but are more than willing to proclaim "lost gospels" and "banned books" as if Christianity/the church has deprived of secret wisdom... it would be great to see the foolishness of the believers of these revealed and that it would be lunacy to find any value in these writings.
Thank you, finally somebody on God's side addresses this! I have watched the documentaries on the banned books and all the "scholars" who defend them and it's cringe inducing.
When you add myth to the Gospel you get comedy. Listening to the resurrection story from The Gospel of Peter, I'm sitting here laughing. I'm relieved the talking cross never made the cut.
Yes, the Gospel of Thomas is without a doubt a pseudepigraphic work, but so are some of the writings in the Bible, such as the pseudo-pauline epistles. To use the word "forgery" to describe this kind of ancient literature is a loaded term because ancient scriptural authors did not see it the same way. Using the name of a famous legendary figure was simply a way to get attention to the writing and did not have the kind of unethical baggage that the term "forgery" has to modern ears. The Book of Enoch is also clearly pseudepigraphic... and yet JUDE, in his epistle, quotes from it directly in the context of it being authoritative. Jude says that "Enoch prophesied" those words in the Book of Enoch, and yet the Book of Enoch was written centuries after Enoch. So...the Bible itself sets a precedent for embracing pseudepigraphic "forgeries."
@Pro Semite It is the NT epistle of Jude that quotes directly from the pseudepigraphic Book of Enoch, in the context of it being inspired. Jude clearly believed that the Book of Enoch was the inspired word of God & authoritative.
Mike I just want you to know I have been using your material since last September. I am now on this lesson. I took off the summer. It is a blessing what you prepare that keeps blessing. I take 2 to 3 Bible class periods to cover one of yours. So eventually I will finish this series. I am in no hurry. I have the remainder of my life to share the Word with you. I pray for you often to stay strong in the face of adversity. California can be tough
Thank you Mike!!! I have been getting lost in a web of lies with all these promoted videos on UA-cam about Gnostic texts and secret teachings of Jesus. I got sucked in for a bit thinking I was making headway and learning something on a deeper level. I’m new believer and there is a lot of false info and bad teachers out there. I pray to god that I can discern and thank you for being a blessing and shedding light on the truth
When you mentioned the gospel of Thomas video I had to STOP ✋ and immediately go find it, and I’m so glad I did 😂 my favorite thing about it is the filmmakers choice to represent Jesus like a cheesy 80s double exposure portrait 🤣🤣🤣
@@cardcounter21 The talking snake was either just Satan in a different form or Satan possessing a snake, and not an actual snake, the donkey could not talk on it's own and was only able to talk through the power of God, and Jonah was likely made to be able to live inside the giant fish/whale through the power of God.
@@thebirdaplierphd.memeology3411 _The talking snake was either just Satan in a different form or Satan possessing a snake, and not an actual snake_ So why did God punish all snakes for what Satan did?
This one was definitely fun! All these "gospels" so clearly just take themselves down. Internally inconsistent, inconsistent with the four gospels, outright nonsensical in places. As you said, about what you would expect of fiction.
Wow! The Gospel of Thomas contains words & phrases that don't even sound like Yeshua's teachings. That's pretty dangerous. Also, I remember a youtube video a man made who converted from Muslim to Catholicism & he mentioned a clay bird & how Yeshua breathed life into it. That is not in the bible & that never happened. God bless you for taking the time to speak about these untruths about our Messiah. Amen!
This had me laughing more than an intentional comedy! Any one with a mediocre knowledge of the gospel will recognize these books as agendized forgeries. If not, well, I'd have to question that person's intelligence. Thank you Mik Winger. I love your channel. God bless.
Adria: Satans job it to deceive, confuse and divide. After reading most of these “rejected” books and closely comparing them to the KJV Bible. It’s pretty clear that SOME of these are heresy and others (that were part of the original texts before the 1611 version King James changes) were widely accepted as inspired. So if the devil can convince people that they ALL are heresy, he’s done his job confusing and dividing. When you read these books you have to pray first and ask God to open your eyes with deep discernment and then you’ll KNOW if they are from God or not!
To my knowledge they are both Jewish literature that Jesus likely read they aren’t inspired so thus not apart of scripture but, they are still interesting History/historical books.
Jude quotes from Enoch directly in the context of it being authoritative. Peter alludes to it also. It is an indisputable fact that early Christians (even biblical authors) considered the Book of Enoch to be inspired. The Ethiopian Orthodox Church still includes The Book of Enoch in it's canon today.
@@eugenesanders3094 yes, I agree. I believe that because the book of Enoch is somewhat reliable, Mark didn't include it in this study but I'd like to know why wasn't it included.
from what i have researched in the past it wasn't added because they couldn't 100% guarantee it all written by enoch and they thought people may have added on to it
Just watched this in Feb 2019 and was grateful for the info. It was hilarious...when we learn this stuff yes you have to laugh when you here the lies. Keep up the good work Mike.
Awesome Brother ❤ and I laughed so hard! We all need a great laugh, even in these last days. In curious about all the other lost books, if any be creditable?
All the channels you mentioned is the problem and reason people fall away from the faith. They talk about all of this stuff and then people start to question. If it’s not in the Bible, then leave IT ALONE !!!! Jesus is Lord ✝️✝️
Thank you for this. I had heard some of these beliefs and discounted them as nonsense, little did I know just how extraordinarily ridiculous these were... I'm deeply comforted that Paul didn't baptize the lion without a profession of faith....whew!
Mike, Can you do a video on the book of Enoch please? This came up in a recent conversation that I was having with a fellow believer. It’s an area I haven’t read up on, at all really. Appears to be a bit of a minefield. Every blessing!
One of the things that made me start doubting my faith was knowing the existence of non canonical books in the bible but listening to what they were now it is ridiculous also slight correction Judas in the book of Judas was seen like the devil even in there but it just shows that Judas was well aware of his role which makes no sense if he killed himself and confessed that he killed an innocent man
I watched this whole series shortly after it came out as i started truly growing in my walk with Christ. Now 7 years later and knowing a lot more, it really hits harder. Especially these heretical text.
Hi, where can I find the song that plays at the end of this video? Thank you for your tireless work and dedication to providing solid biblical content!
So glad to find this video....as these false doctrines are appearing yet again in documentary form in 2021.....IE the marriage of Jesus and Mary of Magdalene.....GOD bless and keep the Christian family and please protect the Word from these false doctrines. Grace and peace Gilly wife of Mark
then the question is : Is it in the Jewish bible? If not then we can say it probably is "fanFIction" if you will, ie not real scripture, Also remember the curse that GOD gave on removing or adding to the scriptures.
@@Riddimsofcreation The Ark of the Covenant is in heaven and the book of Enoch was not made in Ethiopia, the only surviving text of it in whole was in Ethiopia, who have 80 something books in their canon
Who is Lilith? Is there any warrant for calling Lilith Adam’s first wife, or is this just the baseless chatter of woodland creatures? Are there appearances of Lilith in the Bible? Dan Ben-Amos, Professor of Folklore and Asian and Middle Eastern Studies at the University of Pennsylvania, explores the figure of Lilith in the Bible and mythology in his article “From Eden to Ednah-Lilith in the Garden” in the May/June 2016 issue of Biblical Archeology Review. - - His analysis shows that Lilith is an intriguing figure who has taken on many shapes over the millennia. Lilith is first mentioned in ancient Babylonian texts as a class of winged female demons that attacks pregnant women and infants. From Babylonia, the legend of “the lilith” spread to ancient Anatolia, Syria, Israel, Egypt and Greece. In this guise-as a wilderness demoness-she appears in Isaiah 34:14 among a list of nocturnal creatures who will haunt the destroyed Kingdom of Edom. This is her only mention in the Bible, but her legend continued to grow in ancient Judaism. During the Middle Ages, Jewish sources began to claim her as Adam’s first-and terrifying-wife. How did Lilith evolve from being a wilderness demon to Adam’s first wife? Interestingly enough, this story begins at the beginning, in Genesis 1. The creation of humans is described in Genesis 1 and in Genesis 2. The first account is fairly straightforward: “So God created humankind in his image, in the image of God he created them; male and female he created them” (Genesis 1:27). The second account describes how God formed man out of the dust of the ground and then creates woman from the man: “Then the Lord God formed man from the dust of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and the man became a living being. … So the Lord God caused a deep sleep to fall upon the man, and he slept; then he took one of his ribs and closed up its place with flesh. And the rib that the Lord God had taken from the man he made into a woman and brought her to the man” (Genesis 2:7, 21-22). In the post-Biblical period, some ancient Jewish scholars took the stance that Genesis 1:27 and Genesis 2:21-22 must describe two separate events, since it appears that woman is created differently in these accounts. In her Bible Review article “Lilith” in the October 2001 issue, Professor Janet Howe Gaines explains this reasoning: “Considering every word of the Bible to be accurate and sacred, commentators needed a story to explain what seemed to them to be a difference in the creation narratives of Genesis 1 and 2. God supposedly creates woman twice-once with man, once from man’s rib-so there must have been two women. The Bible names the second woman Eve; Lilith was identified as the first in order to complete the story.” Accordingly, Genesis 1:27 describes the creation of Adam and an unnamed woman (Lilith); Genesis 2:7 gives more details of Adam’s creation; and Genesis 2:21-22 describes the creation of Eve from Adam. Lilith’s creation is recounted in The Tales of Ben Sira, an apocryphal work from the tenth century C.E. Dan Ben-Amos explains that although this is the first extant text that records the legend of Lilith, her story probably existed earlier: [Lilith’s] story seems to hover at the edges of literacy with sporadic references. … [I]n the post-Biblical period, the sages identify the lilith several times, not by name, but as “the First Eve,” indicating that her full story was well known in oral tradition, yet barred from the canonized Biblical text. Finally, in the tenth century C.E. in Babylon, an anonymous writer, who was not bound by normative traditional principles and who included in his book some other sexually explicit tales, spelled out the Lilith's adventures in paradise. The Tales of Ben Sira relates that God created Lilith from the earth, just as he had created Adam. They immediately began fighting because neither would submit to the other. Recognizing that Adam would not listen to her, Lilith “pronounced the Ineffable Name and flew away into the air” (The Tales of Ben Sira). The angels Snvi, Snsvi and Smnglof were sent to pursue Lilith, but when they reached her, she refused to return with them to the Garden of Eden. “‘Leave me!’ she said. ‘I was created only to cause sickness to infants. If the infant is male, I have dominion over him for eight days after his birth, and if female, for twenty days’” (The Tales of Ben Sira). As a compromise, she promised that whenever she saw the angels’ names or forms on amulets, she would leave the child alone. She also agreed that 100 of her children-demons would die every day. The Lilith legend continued to grow and change over the following centuries, which is reflected in various artistic depictions of her. While some portrayed Lilith as a beautiful woman, others showed her in a more sinister light.
It's not a banned book. That's from the Jewish Talmud, the oral traditions of the Jews that were passed down and written much later. This was the stuff Jesus talked about when he condemned the traditions of their fathers. Not even worth worrying about.
Read The 2nd book of Adam and Eve chapter 3:9: "But I rejoiced over the birth of thy son Seth; yet after a little while I sorrowed greatly over Eve, because she is my sister. For when God sent a deep sleep over thee, and drew her out of thy side, He brought me out also with her. But He raised her by placing her with thee, while He lowered me.” This is Satan deceiving Adam to believe that a SECOND woman was taken from him as Eve was. Could these stories come from such a source since it is all deception it would make sense as it was a made up story of the devil meant to confuse!!
Hi there Mike, I noticed while studying the Didache in Chapter 9 it references the Last Super or Comunion and says to only share this with the saints that have been baptized in the name of Jesus, the literal word here is the Greek name for Jesus. I have read some historical commentaries, whom lean toward the opinion that this "Trinitarian Formula" was actually an addition to further inspire the doctorine of the Catholic church, hence the head sprinkling, which I notice you paraphrased as "whatever they had available".
Jude quotes from Enoch directly in the context of it being authoritative. Peter alludes to it also. It is an indisputable fact that early Christians (even biblical authors) considered the Book of Enoch to be inspired. The Ethiopian Orthodox Church still includes The Book of Enoch in it's canon today.
@@fbnflaviusbroadcastingnetw6786 Yet Jude Quotes Enoch. Peter alludes to enoch especially in the areas where he talks about the Angels who rebelled being bound in chains of darkness.
@@adalynroseprescott8927 I've read the entire book of Enoch, and honestly, I don't see why a number of people fear it so much. For a book that wasn't penned by Christians, it has the clearest portrayal/prophecy of Christ that any discerning Christian would notice. It has one of the clearest arguments against abortions and even prophesies about abortion in the end times etc.
We may laugh at the nonsense that is found in those evil materials, but it’s really another sad reflection of our rebellious condition that can’t be cured by natural remedies, but only by God’s Grace. These days the most stupid books become bestsellers before publication. We like to entertain ourselves to the grave watching, reading or listening to complete nonsense that at best is a waste if precious time. The Bible reveals our sinful condition in contrast to our Creator’s perfect purity. That’s why the apostle Paul considered himself the first of sinners, a wretched man. The closer we get to the true Light of the world, the bigger our imperfections appear. Some of the comments in this thread show how easily we can be unaware of our own ignorance. I was in that condition for a substantial part of the years that I’ve been around. So much nonsense is found in some comments. Only deep ignorance can explain it. However, it’s better not to discuss with them, lest one throw pearls to the pigs.
As old as i am (30) i been searching for months why Book of Enoch and the others were completely rooted out. Knowing that i am a very Big Revelation of John fan and seeing this controversy surround one quote left me down and confused. Digging and delving deep in the modern history of man..one Quote kept me thinking. "any thing that is added or taken out is, those people will not inherit the Kingdom of God." Now giving the idea i didn't go Verbatim but i could not wrap around my head because 21st Century Christians seem to lose any logic beyond what they see.I Just have to give credit to the world we live in for such ignorance and people like you is what i like to see who aren't afraid to challenge the status quo of this world. Truly i thank you for this it answers alot and gives me more Curious Questions.
Only on the gospel of Thomas, but it’s interesting that he chose “sayings” rather than actually telling a cohesive narrative. You have to plan a cohesive narrative, you have to understand history, the notable people, and get the acts all in order. But with “sayings”, you can pretty much come up with whatever you like if you think you can convince people it’s godly. Notice that Muhammed also did this. The quran is a book of sayings.
Im finding the need to comment, because as much as I'm loving this series, particularly the Daniel parts as it really reignited my faith, I wish when you speak about the gnostic books that it wasnt dismissed so quickly simply because its comical to you, unbelievable or doesn't correspond with what is said in the accepted Canon books. Some of us coming at this from a place of real doubt, and for whatever reason, were not able to dismiss it so easily. The dating of when they were written is a great help, but the thing with doubt is that thos niggling questions of: "well how do they know the right date?", "and "what if all of these gnostic books are right, and all of the Canon books are wrong" start to ring in your ears. As I said, I'm loving the series, but the rationale for why books are cannon and why some are not, cannot be "because they themselves (the author) says it's a word from God, and it was accepted without question in their time." We have examples of religions, sects and cults who have done the same thing throughout time. And likewise, saying its "gnostic and not ever considered cannon" because they are so different to what is accepted cannon, is a hard rationale to swallow. Im listening, and I'm learning plus watching your videos where you answer questions and its definitely helping. But I just needed to pause and comment this thinking. Thanks
Ok so I have a theory as to the origin of the infancy Thomas book. After hearing all of this, all I could think of is some guys got together and wrote some form of comic book style entertainment along the lines of what Brightburn is to Superman. So, like a “what if” type situation. It was probably even read as such (entertainment) in that day, and then throughout the years it slowly lost it’s original ridiculousness as a crazy what if story and morphed into an actual gospel.
I just want unfettered access to the Vad's Libraries, basements and hidden storage vaults. Can you imagine the knowledge that's been locked away by supposed "Holy Men" that have decided for themselves that it is not for our "untrained" eyes/minds for literal centuries/millennia? Yes, my Bibles are enough for me but one can dream can't they and wish to know our Lord even more. I mean how amazing would it be to find works from the Library of Alexandria that only exist in those secure from the "wrong eyes" libraries/vaults/basements... God Bless...
TIGP P: The gospel of Thomas is HERESY! Read This: Verse 14) Jesus said to them, "If you fast, you will give rise to sin for yourselves; and if you pray, you will be condemned; and if you give alms, you will do harm to your spirits.” Yea spirits of demons! Just this one verse reveals this teaching is the exact OPPOSITE of what Jesus taught.
I have Lightfoot's Apostolic Fathers, and it think (based on Phillip Schaff I think), that the Didache has evidence of having been written before the gospels were published, based on evidence of having been updated after the council of Jerusalem. But the general gospel presentation modeled in Matthew, Mark and Luke would have been given for 20 years before it was written. Matthew and Mark seem to have been published between 63-68 CE, and Luke, while written around 60 CE, was not published until his death in 70 CE. But Luke accounts multiple written gospels circulating in his day, and his gospel was the first gospel to have been fully written, followed by Matthew within 1-3 years, and Mark within another 1-3 years. Its clear that they were drawing from common source material, but not an orginial apostolic gospel publication.
Funny that the Gospel of Thomas dehumanizes women. But all those documentaries say that Mary was second in command and the books were hidden to hide this fact. Kind of a contradiction there.
Hey Mike what can U tell me about the 'sealed book' I know people who say it's God's new words koz Jesus has come back as a man (again) and given these words. Is this true?
+Dianna Yates thank you! I think the OT canon was already established by the time of Jesus and it didn't include Enoch. I have more on that in my video on "how we got the Old Testament".
@@schindel6307 Primarily, because while the other books of the Old and New Testaments were writings by prophets guided by God, the Song of Songs is poetry written by an unknown author and despite the beautiful parts, it also contains some interestingly bawdy lyrics. Nobody disputes that it does not directly speak about Christ or the Church and that its value is derived entirely from allegorical interpretations of which there are several. The Jews decided to include it on the reasoning that it worked to inspire men to be better people (It 'imparts uncleanness'), but there is no evidence this reasoning was anything but opinion by certain influential leaders. Mishnah (Yadayim 3:5) William Whiston (1667-1752), known for his translation of Josephus’ works, wrote in 1723 that “the Book of Canticles is not a Sacred Book of the Old Testament; nor was it originally esteem’d as such, either by the Jewish or the Christian Church [sic].” [1] A century later, Harvard University professor George R. Noyes, who considered the allegorical view of the Song as “mere fancy,” declared in 1846, “I do not regard . . . the Song of Solomon, to have an express moral or religious design.” [2] Noyes went on to cite scholars in Europe, and specifically in England, who in the preceding century had rejected the allegorical or “spiritual” view of the Song, including Eichorn, Jahn, and Ewald, as well as “the distinguished Methodist, Adam Clarke” and “the Calvinist dissenter, John Pye Smith.” [3] Adam Clarke skeptically asked in his commentary, originally published in eight volumes between 1810 and 1826 (the 1830 edition is used herein), “In a word, does Solomon here represent Jesus Christ? . . . And where . . . is the proof?” After then reviewing the various allegorical proposals known to him, Clarke defiantly claimed, “Nothing but a direct revelation from God can show us which of these opinions is the correct one, or whether any of them are correct. The antiquity of an opinion, if that be not founded on a revelation from God, is no evidence of its truth.” [1] William Whiston, A Supplement to Mr. Whiston’s Late Essay, towards Restoring the True Text of the Old Testament, Proving That the Canticles Is Not a Sacred Book of the Old Testament; Nor Was Originally Esteemed As Such Either by the Jewish Or the Christian Church (London, 1723), 5. A century later, John Brown complained, “in vain Whiston, and others, upon scarcely the shadow of a ground, have denied its [the Song’s] authenticity.” “Song, or Hymn,” in A Dictionary of the Holy Bible (London, 1824), 639. [2] Noyes, A New Translation of Proverbs, Ecclesiastes, and the Canticles (Boston: James Munroe, 1846), 123, 119. [3] Noyes, A New Translation, 121. See also the names provided by Thomas Brown, “Canticles,” in Smith’s A Dictionary of the Bible, 271-72.
Also Solomon got his wisdom from a false deity who masked himself as a god ... God is just a title...many hearts will fail when tgey find out they have been worshiping a satan/adversary of the TRUTH OF THE UNSPOKEN.. WORDS AND ORAL TRADITIONS HOVE DELUTITED THE TRUE WORD WHICH DWELLS DEE IN EACH OF US.. HE IN YOU WILL REVEAL ALL YOU NEED TO KNOW
Jude quotes from Enoch directly in the context of it being authoritative. Peter alludes to it also. It is an indisputable fact that early Christians (even biblical authors) considered the Book of Enoch to be inspired. The Ethiopian Orthodox Church still includes The Book of Enoch in it's canon today.
@@eugenesanders3094 we need to remember that he Jews did not consider a number of apocryphal works to be inspired by Yahweh,it might be fun to speculate but let's show respect for the Hebrew canon,our OT.jesus never uttered a quote from an apocryphal work,however,to embellish a point ,a couple of the apostles quote from a non canonical book,as paul draws on Greek poets and philosophers when appropriate.
@@stephenmatthews161 The problem with your position is that Jude was not simply quoting popular fiction like someone would quote from Star Wars today. He quoted directly from the Book of Enoch in the context of it being authoritative scripture. Jude says, "Enoch prophesied..." and then he quotes from the pseudepigraphic Book of Enoch. The simple reality that modern fundamentalist Protestants are in denial about is that early Christians (even biblical authors) considered those intertestamental apocryphal books to be inspired. That in itself should reveal the Protestant fallacy of "sola scriptura" and the false doctrine of biblical infallibility.
@@eugenesanders3094 an author lifting a quote from another source as it fits as an illustration or fleshes out a point doesn't mean they consider that work to be some in some way very significant or authoritative.,you make assumptions regarding jude.
@@stephenmatthews161 To not acknowledge Jude's authoritative direct quote from the what he considered to be the inspired Book of Enoch is to be blind to the entire context. And also to be blind to all the evidence from antiquity that the early Christians viewed the Book of Enoch as inspired scripture. Jude not only quotes the pseudo-Enochian author, but he says that Enoch "prophesied" those words. You are engaging in the typical kind of apologetic acrobatics engaged in by those who try to push their agenda on to scripture.
The book of Enoch is legit. To say that its not just because its not in the "Holy Bible" thats the Catholic church all put together, is very close minded.
@@meganwestberry5963 Enoch doesn't mean the criterion of the Canon of Scripture. To find out what "Canon " means is easy. I suggest you look up this important subject.
I downloaded an app that has a bunch of lost books. I found the Psalms of Solomon and the First Book of Adam & Eve really interesting. I think of it as Bible fan fiction. I hope it hasn't clouded my understanding of the scriptures though! Eeek lol
The Epistle of Barnabas also condemns abortion in no uncertain terms... far more clear than anything that made the NT canon. It makes me wonder why the Lord didn't inspire believers to include this kind of ultra-clear condemnation of abortion in the Protestant Canon.
Be careful not to look through a social justice lens when reading the NT,jesus never mentions slavery which was a societal norm in the Roman empire,and the apostles just advise how to behave as a christian slave or a christian owner of a slave,we might wonder why a christian who had slaves in his household did not just free them with a generous gift so they could make a new start,the apostles never commanded this in the fledgling churches and we suppose there were reasons why not.
@@stephenmatthews161 The simple reason that slavery was condoned in the NT is because it was so culturally normative that the human biblical authors did not question the immorality of it. The OT even condones the taking of women to be marital sex slaves as the booty of war after giving them a month to grieve for their family members, who their new slave owners just slaughtered. And lets not forget that YHVH supposedly sanctioned murderous genocide as well. Those are the kind of absurdities one must believe if they are a biblical inerrantist.
19:11 Gospel of Thomas
25:43 Infancy Gospel of Thomas
31:55 Gospel of Mary
36:30 Gospel of Peter
41:25 Protoevangelion of James
48:00 Gospel of Judas
50:08 Acts of John
50:35 Acts of Paul
Jasher, the book of Susanna, Enoch, etc etc all book missi from the Bible bc of the Vatican doesn't want you to know the truth
@@cb90222 Maccabees as well
Acts of Paul sounds like a great Narnia book!
@@timrodriguez16 Or DUNE
@@cb90222 they are all easily available online.
As a newer believer, Mike has been an answer to my prayers! There are so many people with so many views and opinions but Mike Winger clearly studies hard and thoroughly, there is no doubt in my mind and more importantly my HEART that he speaks truth! God bless you Michael!
Agree 💯
Mind = heart
May you please share your testimony?
me too
I too am a new believer and I love Mike Winger. He clearly does thorough research on ever topic he presents, and presents the information simply.
1:28 1 Clement
4:05 The Didache
10:56 The Shepherd of Hermas
13:17 Polycarp's Epistle to the Philippians
☝ Pinned comment is useful, but here are timestamps for the wholesome, early Christian (non-heretical) reading.
I really want to read the Didache now, even though I'm not a new Christian... But I have finally forsaken the hyper charismatic movement 😊
_The Didache_ is a great read indeed.@@malenejensen2995
thanks so much, I couldn't get the names just by hearing
It’s extremely painful when people you love don’t have discernment or fall victim easily to heresy, cults/cult thinking, and deception. :( it hurts to watch end it hurts even more to experience.😢
💯
Man, I was talking to a Catholic about Mary’s perpetual virginity and he told me that exact explanation from the Protoevangelion. How I WISH I’d known the source back then! Thank you for this series a hundred times. It’s so so helpful.
That is so helpful to know ! I frequently witness to catholics and they throw alot at you these sources and knowledge is so helpful
Thank you Sooooo Much!! I spent last night praying to God about these books, I came to my computer & asked again for him to help me understand...AND BOOM!! There you were!! PRAISE YOU GOD FOR ANSWERING PRAYERS!!
Praise YHWH 🙌🏾
Same thing happened to me !
Wow, you found the search bar!
@@AveCaesar2112 do you not feel at all embarrassed over how whiny you sound?
@@AveCaesar2112 Don't think he searched, but that it showed up in his recommendations
"When you get a little more information, it really helps you out" - Mike Winger. Amen, Mike! Thank you!
This has absolutely nothing to do with the subject matter, but I had a thought.... if someone wanted to get you a gift, a plaid shirt seems like a safe bet! Good job being faithful in your ministry. God bless.
Haha
Candice Knuth-Winterfeldt I wear shirts like that. It’s pretty nice! I’d wear that!!
Looks like a Western shirt. He wears it well.
How many plaid shirts do you suppose he's gotten in the mail since you posted this? ha ha ha
Having come out of the independent baptist movement...Mike Winger has been an amazing breath of fresh air. Thanks Mike!
I LOVE CHRISTIANS AND PASTORS LIKE YOU!
These books were not canonical for three reasons: One, with the heresies in some, and with the inconsistencies, unknown histories, and such within them. Two, with the inconsistencies and inaccuracies, and not going with the flow of the teachings of the Scriptures. Number three, because they were not inspired by God.. they were not God-breathed.. they were not written by the apostles of Christ. To be an apostle, you have had to have seen the Risen Christ, and personally be called by Him in to that special office. So, that is why none of these books are in the Bible.
So in other words they don't make you feel as nice and fuzzy inside?
@@reviewtechUSSR1 In other words their useless for people like you and you don't like it.
@@reviewtechUSSR1 No 🤦♂️
@@ifeanyichukwu3644 Yes. Sorry I'm right and you're wrong.
@@reviewtechUSSR1 Nope. You are wrong, extremely wrong
The Infancy Gospel of Thomas sounds like an early draft of The Omen
Jesus: Don't make me angry Mr. McGee. You wouldn't like me when I'm angry.
🤣🤣🤣🤣👍
I guess now we know why Joseph is missing from the Gospels. 🤣
Yup. The religion for breakfast yt stream has an entire show about it.
What is the omen
Please make a Second part with the Book of Enoch and the Deutorocanonical Old Testament books!!!
Can you please cover the book of Enoch specifically?
Please do.
@@TruthfromBibleMinistry he's not going to ... because it goes against his secret "christian conversion agenda"
@ ...I was raised Christian...but I will admit...I left Christianity because of the hypocrisy...and secrecy __ie : the "book of Enoch" + the "greed, racism & feminist narcissism" that they hide (not all)...but at some point...I simply had enough...no offense
@@XlllXlllXlllX ya that's why you don't look two men that preach this way you sit down and read the whole Bible front to back without any judgment on what it really supposed to mean and what it actually means to you
only when we start to let the world in becomes a problem I mean did you see Kanye West for example I really can't believe he's being for real or not look I mean when it comes to Christians only believing in the New Testament to me that makes no sense as think you should live by the whole book bible my belief is this I think you got to be a hundred and 10% in order to get past those Gates I don't think you could sin on Tuesday and then go to church on Sunday and think everything's okay and that's what they preach in the Christian church but they left the Book of Enoch out because it was too far out there when all reality it kind of explains half the things that the Book of Genesis did not explain it's like another example like Judas he's supposed to do when he really did
When I studied theology in the Netherlands Bart Ehrman's book was my textbook on the new testament. I Iearned a lot from it.
Later in my third year I leaned about gnosis and gospels like the gospel of Thomas and the childhood gospels.I had to translate them.
What I learned from Ehrman made very clear to me that those gospels were fake. Ehrman is a historian, the non christian kind.
A lot of people say many things. Ermans claim of being an historian isn't true.
He says he is to give himself cred.
thank you. thank you. THANK YOU. OH MY GOSH YOU HAVE ABSOLUTELY NO IDEA ... NONE. THANK YOU THANK YOU THANK YOU. finally, someone WHO KNOWS WHAT TIME IT IS. THANK YOU, JESUS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
What if one day, they dig up an ancient text called “The Gospel of Pilate” 😂
There is one. Not joking about that haha
@TheGoodOlRebel Yes. Its all about how Pilate became a believer after the crucifixion, what he witnessed after the death and resurrection, and the letters he sent afterwards telling the world of christ.
@TheGoodOlRebel sorry haha. I thought you were the OP
Pilate is a Saint in the Coptic church!
Hey Mike! Love your content brother, I just had a question. Are these recordings from your Sunday service or do these talks happen on another day like some sort of Bible study night?
As you went through the Gnostic rejected books and how ridiculous they are I couldn't stop thinking.... I would love to see someone do a mockumentary cartoon (laugh your butt off) depiction of these stories... a spoof that presents how hideous and far out there that these are and... hope that it would go viral. For all those who have not actually read the text but are more than willing to proclaim "lost gospels" and "banned books" as if Christianity/the church has deprived of secret wisdom... it would be great to see the foolishness of the believers of these revealed and that it would be lunacy to find any value in these writings.
Did anyone else think of The Twilight Zone's "It's a Good Life" when he read from The Infancy Gospel of Thomas?
Yep
The gospel might have been the inspiration for that part
Thought of that episode as well
@@Strongtower Yay! 😊
Thank you, finally somebody on God's side addresses this! I have watched the documentaries on the banned books and all the "scholars" who defend them and it's cringe inducing.
When you add myth to the Gospel you get comedy. Listening to the resurrection story from The Gospel of Peter, I'm sitting here laughing. I'm relieved the talking cross never made the cut.
The infancy gospel OF Thomas finished me with laughter. These gospels are pure comedy.
Yes, the Gospel of Thomas is without a doubt a pseudepigraphic work, but so are some of the writings in the Bible, such as the pseudo-pauline epistles. To use the word "forgery" to describe this kind of ancient literature is a loaded term because ancient scriptural authors did not see it the same way. Using the name of a famous legendary figure was simply a way to get attention to the writing and did not have the kind of unethical baggage that the term "forgery" has to modern ears. The Book of Enoch is also clearly pseudepigraphic... and yet JUDE, in his epistle, quotes from it directly in the context of it being authoritative. Jude says that "Enoch prophesied" those words in the Book of Enoch, and yet the Book of Enoch was written centuries after Enoch. So...the Bible itself sets a precedent for embracing pseudepigraphic "forgeries."
@@eugenesanders3094 false. flat out wrong.
@@canabiss8297 No, everything I said was truthful. Sorry if you're upset by facts.
@Pro Semite It is the NT epistle of Jude that quotes directly from the pseudepigraphic Book of Enoch, in the context of it being inspired. Jude clearly believed that the Book of Enoch was the inspired word of God & authoritative.
Mike I just want you to know I have been using your material since last September. I am now on this lesson. I took off the summer. It is a blessing what you prepare that keeps blessing. I take 2 to 3 Bible class periods to cover one of yours. So eventually I will finish this series. I am in no hurry. I have the remainder of my life to share the Word with you. I pray for you often to stay strong in the face of adversity. California can be tough
Such a great video. I’ve been enjoying your channel! It’s like a course in Christian apology. Very thorough! I feel so smart after watching 😃
Thank you Mike!!! I have been getting lost in a web of lies with all these promoted videos on UA-cam about Gnostic texts and secret teachings of Jesus. I got sucked in for a bit thinking I was making headway and learning something on a deeper level. I’m new believer and there is a lot of false info and bad teachers out there. I pray to god that I can discern and thank you for being a blessing and shedding light on the truth
When you mentioned the gospel of Thomas video I had to STOP ✋ and immediately go find it, and I’m so glad I did 😂 my favorite thing about it is the filmmakers choice to represent Jesus like a cheesy 80s double exposure portrait 🤣🤣🤣
Do you have a link to it? I can’t seem to find it lol
I died with the "Infancy Gospel of Thomas" 😂
Your brain died with the "talking snake and donkey and someone living inside a fishes belly" Gospel!
Your brain died when it killed God
@@cardcounter21 well that’s not a gospel…
@@cardcounter21 The talking snake was either just Satan in a different form or Satan possessing a snake, and not an actual snake, the donkey could not talk on it's own and was only able to talk through the power of God, and Jonah was likely made to be able to live inside the giant fish/whale through the power of God.
@@thebirdaplierphd.memeology3411 _The talking snake was either just Satan in a different form or Satan possessing a snake, and not an actual snake_
So why did God punish all snakes for what Satan did?
Thank you so much for researching this content and sharing your findings in such an accessible way! I love listening to your videos!
They'll say "SEE THIS IS IN THE SCRIPTURES AND ITS STUPID" like yeah its garbage. That's why it wasn't added to the Bible.
This one was definitely fun! All these "gospels" so clearly just take themselves down. Internally inconsistent, inconsistent with the four gospels, outright nonsensical in places. As you said, about what you would expect of fiction.
Thanks, I've been studying the gnostics and how to refute them, and this helped a lot.
Much love and blessing to you brother Winger.
The infancy gospel of Thomas makes me wonder if Anne Rice used it when she wrote Young Messiah.
Maybe, but then only by principle, being, about him as a child. The rest she clearly gave the finger to. Lol.
I was thinking that too.
Wow! The Gospel of Thomas contains words & phrases that don't even sound like Yeshua's teachings. That's pretty dangerous. Also, I remember a youtube video a man made who converted from Muslim to Catholicism & he mentioned a clay bird & how Yeshua breathed life into it. That is not in the bible & that never happened. God bless you for taking the time to speak about these untruths about our Messiah. Amen!
I’m glad that “evil baby Jesus” at 38 mins got a laugh, that was hilarious
I love this video so much, it's so funny i always come back to it every other 8 months lol
The most important belief is accepting Jesus and the most important knowledge is knowing what is of God and what is of the Devil.
This had me laughing more than an intentional comedy! Any one with a mediocre knowledge of the gospel will recognize these books as agendized forgeries. If not, well, I'd have to question that person's intelligence.
Thank you Mik Winger. I love your channel. God bless.
Adria on the vine did that ego come from Jesus? Humble yourself and pray, seek truth.
Adria: Satans job it to deceive, confuse and divide. After reading most of these “rejected” books and closely comparing them to the KJV Bible. It’s pretty clear that SOME of these are heresy and others (that were part of the original texts before the 1611 version King James changes) were widely accepted as inspired. So if the devil can convince people that they ALL are heresy, he’s done his job confusing and dividing. When you read these books you have to pray first and ask God to open your eyes with deep discernment and then you’ll KNOW if they are from God or not!
Can you please continue this video and cover a few more books such as...
"The Book Of Jasher"
and
"The Book Of Enoch" ?
What about....The book of. Nicodemus?
Yeah those are popular now days
To my knowledge they are both Jewish literature that Jesus likely read they aren’t inspired so thus not apart of scripture but, they are still interesting History/historical books.
I’m so glad you said Shepard of Hermas was “weird”. I said the same and was worried I was just missing something lol
Great study, thank you. I was hoping you would talk about the book of Enoch, it's been mentioned a lot lately.
Jude quotes from Enoch directly in the context of it being authoritative. Peter alludes to it also. It is an indisputable fact that early Christians (even biblical authors) considered the Book of Enoch to be inspired. The Ethiopian Orthodox Church still includes The Book of Enoch in it's canon today.
@@eugenesanders3094 yes, I agree. I believe that because the book of Enoch is somewhat reliable, Mark didn't include it in this study but I'd like to know why wasn't it included.
from what i have researched in the past it wasn't added because they couldn't 100% guarantee it all written by enoch and they thought people may have added on to it
Just watched this in Feb 2019 and was grateful for the info. It was hilarious...when we learn this stuff yes you have to laugh when you here the lies. Keep up the good work Mike.
Awesome Brother ❤ and I laughed so hard! We all need a great laugh, even in these last days. In curious about all the other lost books, if any be creditable?
All the channels you mentioned is the problem and reason people fall away from the faith. They talk about all of this stuff and then people start to question. If it’s not in the Bible, then leave IT ALONE !!!! Jesus is Lord ✝️✝️
May God bless you abundantly Mike. Thanks for your videos
So helpful, as always Pastor Mike
Thank you for this. I had heard some of these beliefs and discounted them as nonsense, little did I know just how extraordinarily ridiculous these were...
I'm deeply comforted that Paul didn't baptize the lion without a profession of faith....whew!
"Whoever drinks from My mouth-"
*Pardon.*
Mike,
Can you do a video on the book of Enoch please?
This came up in a recent conversation that I was having with a fellow believer. It’s an area I haven’t read up on, at all really.
Appears to be a bit of a minefield.
Every blessing!
Q...ever heard of Neville Goddard? I would love to hear your opinion on his teachings...thanks!
One of the things that made me start doubting my faith was knowing the existence of non canonical books in the bible but listening to what they were now it is ridiculous also slight correction Judas in the book of Judas was seen like the devil even in there but it just shows that Judas was well aware of his role which makes no sense if he killed himself and confessed that he killed an innocent man
I watched this whole series shortly after it came out as i started truly growing in my walk with Christ. Now 7 years later and knowing a lot more, it really hits harder. Especially these heretical text.
Hi, where can I find the song that plays at the end of this video? Thank you for your tireless work and dedication to providing solid biblical content!
So glad to find this video....as these false doctrines are appearing yet again in documentary form in 2021.....IE the marriage of Jesus and Mary of Magdalene.....GOD bless and keep the Christian family and please protect the Word from these false doctrines.
Grace and peace
Gilly wife of Mark
What about the book of Enoch?
Rachel Wilkinson pagan
Tice Rippy im pretty sure is a jewish text
then the question is : Is it in the Jewish bible? If not then we can say it probably is "fanFIction" if you will, ie not real scripture, Also remember the curse that GOD gave on removing or adding to the scriptures.
The original text is in Ethiopia just as the ark of the covenant
@@Riddimsofcreation The Ark of the Covenant is in heaven and the book of Enoch was not made in Ethiopia, the only surviving text of it in whole was in Ethiopia, who have 80 something books in their canon
+Mike Wenger
What about the banned book people like to bring up that involves Lilith? Did anyone of your research bring up anything about that?
Who is Lilith? Is there any warrant for calling Lilith Adam’s first wife, or is this just the baseless chatter of woodland creatures? Are there appearances of Lilith in the Bible?
Dan Ben-Amos, Professor of Folklore and Asian and Middle Eastern Studies at the University of Pennsylvania, explores the figure of Lilith in the Bible and mythology in his article “From Eden to Ednah-Lilith in the Garden”
in the May/June 2016 issue of Biblical Archeology Review.
- - His analysis shows that Lilith is an intriguing figure who has taken on many shapes over the millennia.
Lilith is first mentioned in ancient Babylonian texts as a class of winged female demons that attacks pregnant women and infants. From Babylonia, the legend of “the lilith” spread to ancient Anatolia, Syria, Israel, Egypt and
Greece. In this guise-as a wilderness demoness-she appears in Isaiah 34:14 among a list of nocturnal creatures who will haunt the destroyed Kingdom of Edom. This is her only mention in the Bible, but her legend continued to grow in ancient Judaism.
During the Middle Ages, Jewish sources began to claim her as Adam’s first-and terrifying-wife. How did Lilith evolve from being a wilderness demon to Adam’s first wife?
Interestingly enough, this story begins at the beginning, in Genesis 1.
The creation of humans is described in Genesis 1 and in Genesis 2.
The first account is fairly straightforward: “So God created humankind in his image, in the image of God he created them; male and female he created them” (Genesis 1:27). The second account describes how God formed man out of the dust of the ground and then creates woman from the man: “Then the Lord God formed man from the dust of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and the man became a living being. … So the Lord God caused a deep sleep to fall upon the man, and he slept; then he took one of his ribs and closed up its place with flesh. And the rib that the Lord God had taken from the man he made into a woman and brought her to the man” (Genesis 2:7, 21-22).
In the post-Biblical period, some ancient Jewish scholars took the stance that Genesis 1:27 and Genesis 2:21-22 must describe two separate events, since it appears that woman is created differently in these accounts.
In her Bible Review article “Lilith” in the October 2001 issue, Professor Janet Howe Gaines explains this reasoning: “Considering every word of the Bible to be accurate and sacred, commentators needed a story to explain what seemed to them to be a difference in the creation narratives of Genesis 1 and 2. God supposedly creates woman twice-once with man, once from man’s rib-so there must have been two women. The Bible names the second woman Eve; Lilith was identified as the first in order to complete the story.” Accordingly, Genesis 1:27 describes the creation of Adam and an unnamed woman (Lilith); Genesis 2:7 gives more details of Adam’s creation; and Genesis 2:21-22 describes the creation of Eve from Adam.
Lilith’s creation is recounted in The Tales of Ben Sira, an apocryphal work from the tenth century C.E. Dan Ben-Amos explains that although this is the first extant text that records the legend of Lilith, her story probably existed earlier:
[Lilith’s] story seems to hover at the edges of literacy with sporadic references.
… [I]n the post-Biblical period, the sages identify the lilith several times, not by name, but as “the First Eve,” indicating that her full story was well known in oral tradition, yet barred from the canonized Biblical text. Finally, in the tenth century C.E. in Babylon, an anonymous writer, who was not bound by normative traditional principles and who included in his book some other sexually explicit tales, spelled out the Lilith's adventures in paradise.
The Tales of Ben Sira relates that God created Lilith from the earth, just as he had created Adam. They immediately began fighting because neither would submit to the other. Recognizing that Adam would not listen to her, Lilith “pronounced the Ineffable Name and flew away into the air” (The Tales of Ben Sira). The angels Snvi, Snsvi and Smnglof were sent to pursue Lilith, but when
they reached her, she refused to return with them to the Garden of Eden. “‘Leave me!’ she said. ‘I was created only to cause sickness to infants. If the infant is male, I have dominion over him for eight days after his birth, and if female, for twenty days’” (The Tales of Ben Sira).
As a compromise, she promised that whenever she saw the angels’ names or forms on amulets, she would leave the child alone. She also agreed that 100 of her children-demons would die every day.
The Lilith legend continued to grow and change over the following centuries, which is reflected in various artistic depictions of her. While some portrayed Lilith as a beautiful woman, others showed her in a more sinister light.
It's not a banned book. That's from the Jewish Talmud, the oral traditions of the Jews that were passed down and written much later. This was the stuff Jesus talked about when he condemned the traditions of their fathers. Not even worth worrying about.
@@stacy2point0 Nice one.
@Daric , Yes you are correct... but I was just answering a question that was asked about Lilith.
Read The 2nd book of Adam and Eve chapter 3:9: "But I rejoiced over the birth of thy son Seth; yet after a little while I sorrowed greatly over Eve, because she is my sister. For when God sent a deep sleep over thee, and drew her out of thy side, He brought me out also with her. But He raised her by placing her with thee, while He lowered me.” This is Satan deceiving Adam to believe that a SECOND woman was taken from him as Eve was. Could these stories come from such a source since it is all deception it would make sense as it was a made up story of the devil meant to confuse!!
Hi there Mike, I noticed while studying the Didache in Chapter 9 it references the Last Super or Comunion and says to only share this with the saints that have been baptized in the name of Jesus, the literal word here is the Greek name for Jesus. I have read some historical commentaries, whom lean toward the opinion that this "Trinitarian Formula" was actually an addition to further inspire the doctorine of the Catholic church, hence the head sprinkling, which I notice you paraphrased as "whatever they had available".
you just read that into it completely
Finally know where the age of Mary and the age of Joseph come from. Now I can rest easy and dismiss it completely.
Great job Mr. Winger. This earns Brother Andrew's seal of approval.
The sayings in Gospel of Thomas sounds like that one stoner that gets high and starts thinking about philosophy and it doesn't make a lick of sense
this was so much fun i didn't want it to end!
Hey mike you never addressed some of the most famous OT apocrypha like the book of Enoch. Could you address that at some point?
Jude quotes from Enoch directly in the context of it being authoritative. Peter alludes to it also. It is an indisputable fact that early Christians (even biblical authors) considered the Book of Enoch to be inspired. The Ethiopian Orthodox Church still includes The Book of Enoch in it's canon today.
I was hoping he would have touched on the book of Jasher and the book of Enoch
James The Lesser doesn’t matter, for they both still are apocryphal.
@@fbnflaviusbroadcastingnetw6786 I would like to know why
@@fbnflaviusbroadcastingnetw6786 Yet Jude Quotes Enoch. Peter alludes to enoch especially in the areas where he talks about the Angels who rebelled being bound in chains of darkness.
I have heard a lot of well respected gospel loving Christians use the book of Enoch a lot so maybe that’s why. Who knows?
@@adalynroseprescott8927 I've read the entire book of Enoch, and honestly, I don't see why a number of people fear it so much. For a book that wasn't penned by Christians, it has the clearest portrayal/prophecy of Christ that any discerning Christian would notice. It has one of the clearest arguments against abortions and even prophesies about abortion in the end times etc.
We may laugh at the nonsense that is found in those evil materials, but it’s really another sad reflection of our rebellious condition that can’t be cured by natural remedies, but only by God’s Grace. These days the most stupid books become bestsellers before publication. We like to entertain ourselves to the grave watching, reading or listening to complete nonsense that at best is a waste if precious time.
The Bible reveals our sinful condition in contrast to our Creator’s perfect purity. That’s why the apostle Paul considered himself the first of sinners, a wretched man. The closer we get to the true Light of the world, the bigger our imperfections appear.
Some of the comments in this thread show how easily we can be unaware of our own ignorance. I was in that condition for a substantial part of the years that I’ve been around. So much nonsense is found in some comments. Only deep ignorance can explain it.
However, it’s better not to discuss with them, lest one throw pearls to the pigs.
Surprised that the most requested book on here wasn’t touched
Michael Arango So? That too is apocryphal.
FBN Flavius Broadcasting Network Which book didn’t he cover?
Maccabees?
@@MunchJinkies macabees are a historical book but are not inspired
Great Video i been searching the reason of why these books were left out for some time and this helped alot thank you and God Bless
+WhipdaDash thank you!
As old as i am (30) i been searching for months why Book of Enoch and the others were completely rooted out. Knowing that i am a very Big Revelation of John fan and seeing this controversy surround one quote left me down and confused. Digging and delving deep in the modern history of man..one Quote kept me thinking. "any thing that is added or taken out is, those people will not inherit the Kingdom of God." Now giving the idea i didn't go Verbatim but i could not wrap around my head because 21st Century Christians seem to lose any logic beyond what they see.I Just have to give credit to the world we live in for such ignorance and people like you is what i like to see who aren't afraid to challenge the status quo of this world. Truly i thank you for this it answers alot and gives me more Curious Questions.
+WhipdaDash I'm glad I could help in some way.
Only on the gospel of Thomas, but it’s interesting that he chose “sayings” rather than actually telling a cohesive narrative.
You have to plan a cohesive narrative, you have to understand history, the notable people, and get the acts all in order. But with “sayings”, you can pretty much come up with whatever you like if you think you can convince people it’s godly.
Notice that Muhammed also did this. The quran is a book of sayings.
This was interesting. Now, can you explain the Apocrypha?
I'm excited to begin listening and studying this. Thank you.
Thanks for your hard work doing thorough research.
Im finding the need to comment, because as much as I'm loving this series, particularly the Daniel parts as it really reignited my faith, I wish when you speak about the gnostic books that it wasnt dismissed so quickly simply because its comical to you, unbelievable or doesn't correspond with what is said in the accepted Canon books. Some of us coming at this from a place of real doubt, and for whatever reason, were not able to dismiss it so easily. The dating of when they were written is a great help, but the thing with doubt is that thos niggling questions of: "well how do they know the right date?", "and "what if all of these gnostic books are right, and all of the Canon books are wrong" start to ring in your ears.
As I said, I'm loving the series, but the rationale for why books are cannon and why some are not, cannot be "because they themselves (the author) says it's a word from God, and it was accepted without question in their time." We have examples of religions, sects and cults who have done the same thing throughout time. And likewise, saying its "gnostic and not ever considered cannon" because they are so different to what is accepted cannon, is a hard rationale to swallow.
Im listening, and I'm learning plus watching your videos where you answer questions and its definitely helping. But I just needed to pause and comment this thinking. Thanks
Check out Wesley Huff. He's a Bible scholar and I think he'd help you.
Ok so I have a theory as to the origin of the infancy Thomas book. After hearing all of this, all I could think of is some guys got together and wrote some form of comic book style entertainment along the lines of what Brightburn is to Superman. So, like a “what if” type situation. It was probably even read as such (entertainment) in that day, and then throughout the years it slowly lost it’s original ridiculousness as a crazy what if story and morphed into an actual gospel.
I just thought the same thing lol
Today we would call those things fanfictions.
I just want unfettered access to the Vad's Libraries, basements and hidden storage vaults.
Can you imagine the knowledge that's been locked away by supposed "Holy Men" that have decided for themselves that it is not for our "untrained" eyes/minds for literal centuries/millennia?
Yes, my Bibles are enough for me but one can dream can't they and wish to know our Lord even more.
I mean how amazing would it be to find works from the Library of Alexandria that only exist in those secure from the "wrong eyes" libraries/vaults/basements...
God Bless...
As far as I can tell in the gospel of Thomas Jesus refers to good as “male” and bad as “female”
TIGP P: The gospel of Thomas is HERESY! Read This: Verse 14) Jesus said to them, "If you fast, you will give rise to sin for yourselves; and if you pray, you will be condemned; and if you give alms, you will do harm to your spirits.” Yea spirits of demons! Just this one verse reveals this teaching is the exact OPPOSITE of what Jesus taught.
U did a great job man. Plus super funny!! Love it man keep doin ur thing!
Im curious on your thoughts about the book of Enoch
Have you done anything on the Book of Enoch?
What’s your thoughts about the book of Enoch??
19:40 Oh my goodness I found it. The video is called “Gospel of Thomas Movie, Gentle” and can confirm, he is both wide-eyed and spooky looking.
I have Lightfoot's Apostolic Fathers, and it think (based on Phillip Schaff I think), that the Didache has evidence of having been written before the gospels were published, based on evidence of having been updated after the council of Jerusalem. But the general gospel presentation modeled in Matthew, Mark and Luke would have been given for 20 years before it was written.
Matthew and Mark seem to have been published between 63-68 CE, and Luke, while written around 60 CE, was not published until his death in 70 CE. But Luke accounts multiple written gospels circulating in his day, and his gospel was the first gospel to have been fully written, followed by Matthew within 1-3 years, and Mark within another 1-3 years. Its clear that they were drawing from common source material, but not an orginial apostolic gospel publication.
Excuse me if this comment is ignorant to the subject. What about the book of Enoch. Would like to hear your thoughts on it. Thank you
Where are all the other parts to this series of videos?
Funny that the Gospel of Thomas dehumanizes women. But all those documentaries say that Mary was second in command and the books were hidden to hide this fact. Kind of a contradiction there.
Have you made a video on the Deuterocononical books?
Hey Mike what can U tell me about the 'sealed book' I know people who say it's God's new words koz Jesus has come back as a man (again) and given these words. Is this true?
Great video, very informative. Thank you so much for sharing. I'm curious to know how you feel about the Book of Enoch.
+Dianna Yates thank you! I think the OT canon was already established by the time of Jesus and it didn't include Enoch. I have more on that in my video on "how we got the Old Testament".
Oh cool, going to watch it now. Thank you :)
Dianna Yates the Canon did include enoch it was removed by council in Europe.
Oh boy now I'm confused. I have to look into this, does anyone have any articles or books that cite about the European council?
Besides that is there any scripture that says this is my canon exclude all other books and only accept well I figure there would be a list.
For some fun, explain how Song of Solomon made the cut for inclusion in the Bible.
Why do you think it shouldn't have?
@@schindel6307 Primarily, because while the other books of the Old and New Testaments were writings by prophets guided by God, the Song of Songs is poetry written by an unknown author and despite the beautiful parts, it also contains some interestingly bawdy lyrics. Nobody disputes that it does not directly speak about Christ or the Church and that its value is derived entirely from allegorical interpretations of which there are several. The Jews decided to include it on the reasoning that it worked to inspire men to be better people (It 'imparts uncleanness'), but there is no evidence this reasoning was anything but opinion by certain influential leaders. Mishnah (Yadayim 3:5)
William Whiston (1667-1752), known for his translation of Josephus’ works, wrote in 1723 that “the Book of Canticles is not a Sacred Book of the Old Testament; nor was it originally esteem’d as such, either by the Jewish or the Christian Church [sic].” [1] A century later, Harvard University professor George R. Noyes, who considered the allegorical view of the Song as “mere fancy,” declared in 1846, “I do not regard . . . the Song of Solomon, to have an express moral or religious design.” [2] Noyes went on to cite scholars in Europe, and specifically in England, who in the preceding century had rejected the allegorical or “spiritual” view of the Song, including Eichorn, Jahn, and Ewald, as well as “the distinguished Methodist, Adam Clarke” and “the Calvinist dissenter, John Pye Smith.” [3] Adam Clarke skeptically asked in his commentary, originally published in eight volumes between 1810 and 1826 (the 1830 edition is used herein), “In a word, does Solomon here represent Jesus Christ? . . . And where . . . is the proof?” After then reviewing the various allegorical proposals known to him, Clarke defiantly claimed, “Nothing but a direct revelation from God can show us which of these opinions is the correct one, or whether any of them are correct. The antiquity of an opinion, if that be not founded on a revelation from God, is no evidence of its truth.”
[1] William Whiston, A Supplement to Mr. Whiston’s Late Essay, towards Restoring the True Text of the Old Testament, Proving That the Canticles Is Not a Sacred Book of the Old Testament; Nor Was Originally Esteemed As Such Either by the Jewish Or the Christian Church (London, 1723), 5. A century later, John Brown complained, “in vain Whiston, and others, upon scarcely the shadow of a ground, have denied its [the Song’s] authenticity.” “Song, or Hymn,” in A Dictionary of the Holy Bible (London, 1824), 639.
[2] Noyes, A New Translation of Proverbs, Ecclesiastes, and the Canticles (Boston: James Munroe, 1846), 123, 119.
[3] Noyes, A New Translation, 121. See also the names provided by Thomas Brown, “Canticles,” in Smith’s A Dictionary of the Bible, 271-72.
Also Solomon got his wisdom from a false deity who masked himself as a god ...
God is just a title...many hearts will fail when tgey find out they have been worshiping a satan/adversary of the TRUTH OF THE UNSPOKEN..
WORDS AND ORAL TRADITIONS HOVE DELUTITED THE TRUE WORD WHICH DWELLS DEE IN EACH OF US..
HE IN YOU WILL REVEAL ALL YOU NEED TO KNOW
@@blessedwithtruth105 WHAT. Where do you get this from? Source? Thanks!
@@blessedwithtruth105 who blessed you with truth? How do you know they are truth?
Excellent. Thank you Mike from 6 years ago.
Hey which song is that you played in the end
Why do people think that I'm skeptical enough to question the gospels, but dumb enough not to question their information.
Remember- we know nothing.
We want to think that we know the truth, but we don't know it and we will not be ready
How do you spell the third book you mentioned @ 13:18?
The letter of "Polycarp the Philippy", better known as the letter of "Polycarp to the Philippians".
should I wonder about Joel. it quotes from Enoch.
What do you think the book of Enoch? Seems to be pretty popular .
Jude quotes from Enoch directly in the context of it being authoritative. Peter alludes to it also. It is an indisputable fact that early Christians (even biblical authors) considered the Book of Enoch to be inspired. The Ethiopian Orthodox Church still includes The Book of Enoch in it's canon today.
@@eugenesanders3094 we need to remember that he Jews did not consider a number of apocryphal works to be inspired by Yahweh,it might be fun to speculate but let's show respect for the Hebrew canon,our OT.jesus never uttered a quote from an apocryphal work,however,to embellish a point ,a couple of the apostles quote from a non canonical book,as paul draws on Greek poets and philosophers when appropriate.
@@stephenmatthews161 The problem with your position is that Jude was not simply quoting popular fiction like someone would quote from Star Wars today. He quoted directly from the Book of Enoch in the context of it being authoritative scripture. Jude says, "Enoch prophesied..." and then he quotes from the pseudepigraphic Book of Enoch. The simple reality that modern fundamentalist Protestants are in denial about is that early Christians (even biblical authors) considered those intertestamental apocryphal books to be inspired. That in itself should reveal the Protestant fallacy of "sola scriptura" and the false doctrine of biblical infallibility.
@@eugenesanders3094 an author lifting a quote from another source as it fits as an illustration or fleshes out a point doesn't mean they consider that work to be some in some way very significant or authoritative.,you make assumptions regarding jude.
@@stephenmatthews161 To not acknowledge Jude's authoritative direct quote from the what he considered to be the inspired Book of Enoch is to be blind to the entire context. And also to be blind to all the evidence from antiquity that the early Christians viewed the Book of Enoch as inspired scripture. Jude not only quotes the pseudo-Enochian author, but he says that Enoch "prophesied" those words. You are engaging in the typical kind of apologetic acrobatics engaged in by those who try to push their agenda on to scripture.
And the book of Enoch some of it was quoted in the NT.
The book of Enoch is legit. To say that its not just because its not in the "Holy Bible" thats the Catholic church all put together, is very close minded.
@@meganwestberry5963
Enoch doesn't mean the criterion of the Canon of Scripture.
To find out what "Canon " means is easy. I suggest you look up this important subject.
Awesome video brother, loved the tbn joke and relating the secret to narcissism!
I downloaded an app that has a bunch of lost books. I found the Psalms of Solomon and the First Book of Adam & Eve really interesting. I think of it as Bible fan fiction. I hope it hasn't clouded my understanding of the scriptures though! Eeek lol
Don’t forget that canon Biblical scripture is always quoting each other and exalting the deity of Christ and our Heavenly Father’s love and creation.
Where can I find the video teaching before this one?
There's a playlist. Evidence for the bible
The Epistle of Barnabas also condemns abortion in no uncertain terms... far more clear than anything that made the NT canon. It makes me wonder why the Lord didn't inspire believers to include this kind of ultra-clear condemnation of abortion in the Protestant Canon.
Be careful not to look through a social justice lens when reading the NT,jesus never mentions slavery which was a societal norm in the Roman empire,and the apostles just advise how to behave as a christian slave or a christian owner of a slave,we might wonder why a christian who had slaves in his household did not just free them with a generous gift so they could make a new start,the apostles never commanded this in the fledgling churches and we suppose there were reasons why not.
@@stephenmatthews161 The simple reason that slavery was condoned in the NT is because it was so culturally normative that the human biblical authors did not question the immorality of it. The OT even condones the taking of women to be marital sex slaves as the booty of war after giving them a month to grieve for their family members, who their new slave owners just slaughtered. And lets not forget that YHVH supposedly sanctioned murderous genocide as well. Those are the kind of absurdities one must believe if they are a biblical inerrantist.
@@eugenesanders3094 you don’t understand the Bible Eugene
These works were obviously translated, do we know if the originals, or at least copies in original language are still kept?