The newly-publicized gospels of Thomas and Judas once again show a differing mindset between Atheists and theists. An Atheist sees this as new evidence — stuff to be considered, like a new piece of scientific data – about how the bible was formed and assembled two millenia ago. Christians are quick to launch press releases stating that nothing, including hard evidence, would ever change their mind about their mythos.I haven’t read the Gospel of Judas (or the available parts) yet, but I really liked the Gospel of Thomas – probably because it completely lacks religion.
There was a letter to the editer in my local paper this week (don’t remember if it was the Denver Post or the Rocky Mountain News) that I had to respect, regarding this topic as well as The Davinci Code. She basically stated that by stating that the bibble was inerrant and perfect, it basically made the book (and by extension, the religion) a “dead” one. These people are so afraid that they might be wrong that they will do anything and everything to try to keep any dissent out.
gospel shospel, who cares?
I have a gospel?
Who Knew!
I think we’ve been reading the gospel according to tomwright for quite a while on this blog.
Sorry, I couldn’t resist the setup.
Even if the gospel of Judas said to forgive others, turn the other cheek, and treat others as you would have them treat you,… it wouldn’t keep Christians from judging, hating, going out of their way to impose their will on you.
…because they don’t read the bible, they only quote the bible.
R4D, RA,
Thanks for the feedback and references.
Sounds like as good a method as any. “God decided which ones stayed on the table. It’s a miracle!”
r4d:
Well, here’s a link to the codices:
http://www.gnosis.org/naghamm/nhlalpha.html
& yes, there was a lot of pseudipigrapha back then. Thousands? Don’t know about that. A lot of stuff got torched.
I forget who said this, but I read once, that the way the Nicene council voted on which books to keep, they piled all the books on a table, & whatever didn’t fall off, they kept.
There was a review of the Gospel of Judas in last week’s New Yorker. It sounds really freaky.
It begins during the last supper – Jesus busts out laughing as soon as the disciples start to pray. Everybody gets mad at chuckling Jesus, everyone except Judas, who says to JC “I know who you are and where you have come from. You are from the immortal realm of Barbelo.” So Jesus is impressed with Judas and decides to confide all the secrets of the universe, like Jesus isn’t really the son of Yahweh (a false god), but an avatar of Adam’s third son, Seth. Oh, and Barbelo is the name that the gnostics gave to the Celestial Mother who resides in the Land of Barbelo (a beautiful realm ‘beyond the stars’) with her children and another god called “The Self Generated One.”
The interesting thing about the GOJ is that it lets Judas off of the hook. Jesus wants Judas to turn him in (kinda like in ‘The Last Temptation of Christ’), for being sacrificed is, apparently, the only way Jesus can get back to Barbelo.
Bored yet?
The thing to keep in mind when it comes to these gnostic gospels is that there were thousands of them. They were the ancient equivalent of a pulp fiction novel, and should be read with about as much seriousness (this includes the canonical gospels as well.)
Speaking of pulp fiction. . .
Great movie.
Off topic but I saw this story about the love of our lord for the small children:
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/12467604/?GT1=7938
Alex.
R4D
I’ve heard this number quoted a few times, but do not know of its reliability. Do you have a source for it? The only non-canonical gospels I could find (admittedly a short search) are:
* Gospel of Thomas
* Gospel of Truth
* Gospel of Philip
* Gospel of Peter
* Gospel of Mary Magdalene
* Gospel of the Egyptians
* Gospel of the Hebrews
* Gospel of James
* Gospel of Judas
Surprise! The Judas book doesn’t agree with the other “gospels”. The accepted gospels don’t agree with each other either. Doesn’t this totally discredit the entire mythology? Or do the christians think the invisible space monkey is a liar? You would have to think one or the other. Considering any of it to be true would be pretty silly considering their own texts.
I hope that more of these early texts are found. It will tell us nothing about god or jesus, but will tell us allot about history and the influences that turned a mythology into a world religion.
The Trinity
Jesus said, Whom do men say that I am?
And his disciples answered and said, Some say you are John the Baptist returned from the dead; others say Elias, or other of the old prophets.
And Jesus answered and said, But whom do you say that I am?
Peter answered and said, “Thou art the Logos, existing in the Father as His rationality and then, by an act of His will, being generated, in consideration of the various functions by which God is related to his creation, but only on the fact that Scripture speaks of a Father, and a Son, and a Holy Spirit, each member of the Trinity being coequal with every other member, and each acting inseparably with and interpenetrating every other member, with only an economic subordination within God, but causing no division which would make the substance no longer simple.”
And Jesus answering, said, “What?”
HeatheNZ,
Maybe I just heard it quoted a number of times too, now that I think about it. I remember watching that Frontline documentary “From Jesus to Christ” and them saying that there are all these other gospels that we know about second-hand from other ancient writings and even ancient graffiti. There seems to have been a gospel craze in the first and second centuries.
The gnostic texts you mention were all discovered at one time by a guy named Muhammad Ali (no, not that one.)
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/religion/story/pagels.html
Bernarda-
Exactly!
One question you can ask your christian neighbors is “what do you think of the Council of Nicaea in 325 AD?”
Besides no knowing the bible, they will almost certainly not know of this. Ask any TV or other preachers that you know.
But the Council of Nicaea was the first bureacratic committee that decided on the christian canon. They just voted on what they thought should be considered christian and what should not.
Simple. Though the christians have never explained how these guys knew what god meant or wanted.
Those who lost the committee vote were declared heretics. Simple.
Why did this committee choose four gospels and reject the others? Politics. Simple.
Anybody who believes in the New Testament simply believes in the decisions of a focus group.
I think an important interpretation of the gnostic gospels is that they try to convey a higher level spiritual message. As such, they are not (supposedly) literal accounts of Jesus’ doings, and are therefore, not included in the canon we call the bible (because it is only a collection of smaller books). Hence the term gnostic, or knowledge.
But seriously, a new gospel? So what. I am about as impressed as finding out there is a new spiderman.
Most serious christians I have met are perfectly aware of the Council of Nicaea, and this awareness poses no threat to the faith of a true believer. The apologetic rationalization is simple: God was in control.
r4d:
You mean the big kahuna fixed the vote?
Now we know where Shrub got the idea in 2000.
jesus christ you people are smart!!!seriously
Yep. I’ve heard that one too – God fixed the election. From my own father, no less.
My father-in-law says stuff like that too… Maybe god wanted Kerry to be president and we defied god’s will. I find it hard to be that fatalistic about this was god’s will and that was god’s will. My response to people saying that god made sure that everything that’s in the bible is in there is how do we know that god doesn’t want me to question it? This, of course, is not really useful to the atheist, but I find it an engaging way to discuss belief and how we believe.
That’s one of reasons I really enjoy stuff like this. I love reading about all the new things being discovered about my own religion. I think there is something divine in wrestling with one’s own ideas and wrestling with accepted notions or fiats that exist within a community. What is god’s will? My best answer so far is to take care of each other. Hmmmm… I guess we didn’t need the council of Nicea to tell us that. I know I’ve said this before, but check out “When Jesus Became God”… it’s a fascinating look at the Nicean Creed and from what I remember it’s not written from a christian perspective… I think it’s an attempt of a straight up historic account and the political environment at the time. For other interesting reading check out Elaine Pagels.
Maybe God wants us to be atheists! I would if I were God, for if I were God I of course would have to be an atheist because it would be unreasonable for me to believe in anything higher than myself. So, if my goal were to create rational beings in my own image, they would have to be atheists as well.
It’s a good thing I didn’t grow up to be a theologian.
I knew it! I’ve been going against god’s will all along
You’re a better man that I Rainbows.
that I = than I
d’oh!
r4d:
But you’d have to believe in yourself, right?
Hmmm…we might have a valid argument for self-worship right there.
I don’t need much more of an excuse beyond my dashing good looks.
I know it’s a little of topic, but did you see Sam Harris on the Colbert Report? It reminded me of many of the conversations we have here. You can see the video here:
http://www.comedycentral.com/shows/the_colbert_report/index.jhtml
of topic = off topic
man, I’m having an off day. Stupid fingers.
If you believe that God wanted Bush to be elected, you have to believe he ALSO wanted Clinton elected!
Zac said:
Wait a minute!! There’s a new Spiderman???