Oh crap. Sorry, my memory misserved me. It wasn't Irenaeus but Hippolytus and others.

"The earliest surviving written references to the Gospel of Thomas are found in the writings of Hippolytus of Rome (c. 222–235) and Origen of Alexandria (c. 233).[24] Hippolytus wrote in his Refutation of All Heresies 5.7.20:

"[The Naassenes] speak...of a nature which is both hidden and revealed at the same time and which they call the thought-for kingdom of heaven which is in a human being. They transmit a tradition concerning this in the Gospel entitled "According to Thomas," which states expressly, "The one who seeks me will find me in children of seven years and older, for there, hidden in the fourteenth aeon, I am revealed."

This appears to be a reference to saying 4 of Thomas, although the wording differs significantly.

Origen listed the "Gospel according to Thomas" as being among the heterodox apocryphal gospels known to him (Hom. in Luc. 1).

In the 4th and 5th centuries, various Church Fathers wrote that the Gospel of Thomas was highly valued by Mani. In the 4th century, Cyril of Jerusalem mentioned a "Gospel of Thomas" twice in his Catechesis: "The Manichæans also wrote a Gospel according to Thomas, which being tinctured with the fragrance of the evangelic title corrupts the souls of the simple sort."[25] and "Let none read the Gospel according to Thomas: for it is the work not of one of the twelve Apostles, but of one of the three wicked disciples of Manes."[26] The 5th century Decretum Gelasianum includes "A Gospel attributed to Thomas which the Manichaean use" in its list of heretical books.[27]"

Is that proof enough of the gospel of thomas existing?

...oh my , why do you persist ? You are doing more to disprove the gospel of Thomas than anyone else .

I don't doubt that the guy who was against it and didn't even read it got it wrong. I don't see why thats a big deal. They did that for many of the texts that were found at Nag Hammadi. The Church Fathers were interested in refuting the Gnostic Gospels, not showing a historically verifiable account of them.

Are you trolling me, Widow?

sometimes when people run out of excuses, they resort to things like trolling

...you found one person to buy into your nonsense and now you want to coddle him , how cute . Unfortunately for you and your cause he will never become a mohammadan .

[QUOTE=Dune1,Aug 9 2012 12:04pm]lol this copy/paste is quite humorous. I wanted to stop when I read "died for original sin", but then I actually stopped when I read that "because Mary referred to the dead body of Jesus as "him" rather than "it".. it must be false". lol. Thanks for all the evidence![/QUOTE]

Then you are far too blind to see the truth when it is staring you right in your face.

[QUOTE=Voyaging,Aug 9 2012 12:06pm]lol ok I'm converting to Islam[/QUOTE]

suuuuuuuuuuuure

[QUOTE=xXAn0nym0usXx,Aug 9 2012 02:56pm]This thread has so much undisputable evidence...[/QUOTE]

which you cannot ever hope to refute - lol

[QUOTE=AiNedeSpelCzech,Aug 9 2012 10:45pm] Yeah, probably. [/QUOTE]

Correction: NO WAY ACCORDING TO THE INTERNAL EVIDENCE!

[QUOTE=Voyaging,Aug 9 2012 10:50pm] Number 3: contradictions is easily disputed. It is quite obviously a difference in specificity in each of the Gospels, in both cases presented, not a legitimate contradiction. [/QUOTE]

As it is 100% obvious, the "According to Gospels" contradict each other on basic information, thus we cannot rely on them to deliver the true happenings of the times of Jesus (pbuh)

[QUOTE=AEtheric,Aug 9 2012 11:05pm]How are they not legitimate contradictions? You're bending over backwards to defend Christianity.[/QUOTE]

Exactly my point...

[QUOTE=AEtheric,Aug 9 2012 11:22pm] These are legitimate contradictions. [/QUOTE]



[QUOTE=russian,Aug 9 2012 11:55pm]So somebody mentions two hobos loafing around, but forgets to mention the angel rolling away the stone and the two angels sitting inside? And THESE are the people you are relying on for historical information?[/QUOTE]

Excellent point!

[QUOTE=Voyaging,Aug 10 2012 12:04am] I amclaiming that the Bible is infallible. At least five women visited the tomb: Mary Magdalene, Joanna, Salome, Mary the mother of James, and at least one other person. None of the Gospels contradicts this fact. [/QUOTE]

The Gospel According to John ALONE refutes you there by CLEARLY saying that Mary Magdalene ALONE went to the Tomb on Sunday Morning...

[QUOTE=Lifebane99,Aug 10 2012 02:21am]I cant believe people take this so seriously.[/QUOTE]

Because eternal damnation OR salvation is at stake here, in case you didn't know...

I suggest you go learn something about your Creator...

[QUOTE=Ylem122,Aug 10 2012 05:12am]the river tells no lies though the dishonest man on the shore still hears them. it is up to you to understand the bible. Only one with an open heart and good intentions will find the true meanings.[/QUOTE]

To find WHAT? A Book full of errors and self-contradictory reports? And then you try and say that GOD dictated this book? ffs give me a break...

[QUOTE=WidowMaKer_MK,Aug 10 2012 12:43pm]...why do you rely on your own mistaken interpretation and not the teachings of the Biblical scholars ? Your personal interpretation is not in agreement with Christian teaching .[/QUOTE]

LOL and you expect researchers to BLINDLY base their beliefs on what your HEAVILY BIASED "scholars" believe???

By the way, back in the 80's, out of the 39 Anglican Bishops, 30 (!) declared that they do NOT believe that Jesus is the literal son of God

And your "scholars", sir, tell us that the Bible has been altered thousands and thousands of times. Go read the Preface of the RSV (Revised Standard Version). I guarantee that you will be SHOCKED!!!

[QUOTE=WidowMaKer_MK,Aug 10 2012 12:58pm]...the highest level of teaching is recognized in Christianity as a gift from God through the Holy Spirit . They are appointed to teach .[/QUOTE]

There is no such thing as a Trinity. You are following the FALSE teaching of the enemy of Jesus: Paul the LIAR, who also destroyed the Scriptures by adding false doctrine, and making a new Mixture of the Pagan Roman Religion, with the addition of Mythraism (pagan ancient Egyptian Religion).


[QUOTE=Thor123422,Aug 11 2012 01:06am]Dude, you flat out lost, Jesus is god and the bibles don't do what you say they are. Learn to actually read in non-squiggles[/QUOTE]

LOLOLOL here comes the ATHEIST again to defend the bible/christianity LOLOLOL

This post was edited by poulgaragr on Aug 11 2012 10:43am

ITT - tries to attack Christianity but embarrasses islam instead , almost to the point of no return on this forum .

On the contrary, I answer to all your conjectures with EVIDENCE and VALID POINTS, unlike you, who run/lie/dodge

Get a life; your religion is a failure, and the evidence is staring you RIGHT IN THE FACE

This post was edited by poulgaragr on Aug 11 2012 11:32am

...your jihad has failed , no virgins for you !