What was the point of all the fake Gospels floating around in the first 3 centuries of Christianity? None of them say anything that extreme, revolutionary, or misleading. "It's okay to commit adultery" "Worship demons" or shit like that. Why were they even composed in the first place? Were people that bored "I'm gonna write a long document with generic messages and pretend Jesus said it"?
You know who's misdirection
>>16801810They justify Cathodox doctrines unironically.For example, the Protoevangellium of James is the only source claiming Mary's perpetual virginity.
>>16801819>The "Jews" had secret councils were they wrote and distributed their counterfeit gospels (that contain harmless innocuous material) to defame an insignificant underground religion that the Romans were already persecuting while they themselves were also being persecuted because....reasons.
>>16801821So why didn't "the evil Catholics" include it in the NT? Who or what was stopping them?
>>16801810Council of Nicaea cherry picked texts as a reaction to political pressure, leaving out some which were more explicit on certain controversial truths they felt were well enough conveyed in deniable ways through the ones they choose to include.
>>16801810>What was the point of all the fake Gospels floating around in the first 3 centuries of Christianity?Same point as the other gospels. Every gospel is fake, including the canonical ones. It was just a popular genre of fiction with a particular demographic.
Everything starts to make sense once you remember that this world belongs to Satan.He just gave us a fighting chance
>>16801825Yes
>>16801891That wasn't what Nicaea was about. >>16801810Christianity had dozens of sects then, it was an underground religion.
>>16801810The Bible itself says nothing revolutionary.God is angry, be good fellow.
