Reply #41: The canonical New Testament is a collection of texts chosen by .. [View All]

.. committees some years after the crucifixion.

Prior to these official statements of approval, the actual Christian communities which existed had access to a number of writings, some of which remain informative, others of which now seem merely bizarre.

The Nag Hammadi texts provide a useful, if somewhat limited window, on such a community in Egypt.

Your assertion, that "Christianity is not based on the Gospel of Thomas or any other Nag Hammadi texts," is true in the sense that most modern churchgoers will not cite Nag Hammadi, and most of these texts appear, in fact, to have been excluded from the canon for good reason.

Still, in the effort to read the Bible, which provides ancient writings from foreign lands, perhaps such old noncanonical texts provide real insight: much of the interest in Nag Hammadi and similar discoveries came from Biblical scholars.

I find the Bible intriguing enough to attend a midweek Bible study at my church regularly, though I think a number of other Christians find my interpretative style unpalatable.

Personally, I find Thomas refreshing, if somewhat offbeat. I certainly had no intention of offending you. We apparently have somewhat different views about the Bible and Christianity.