Gnostic Gospels

With Easter approaching, I thought I would share some recent thoughts on Jesus and the New Testament. Now keep in mind what I am speaking of occurred during the First century and–admittedly–I was not present (at least not in this form) and, I’m guessing, neither were you. Also, consider that the earliest gospels were written at least 10 years after Jesus died. Prior to that, they were part of an oral tradition (back then, only a few people could read and write). Therefore all of this is speculation, but speculation based upon the available historical records.

Ask anyone who is more than a Christian in name only and they will dutifully tell you the names of the four New Testament gospels of the apostles–Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John. But many of even the most devote Christians don’t know, or haven’t ever heard that these are not the only gospels. Apostolic gospels not contained in the New Testament include the gospels of Thomas, Peter, Philip, Judas, and Mary Magdalene.

So if these gospels were based upon the experience of those who actually knew Jesus, why are they not included in the New Testament? To understand this, we need to look at the history of Christianity from the time of Jesus’ crucifixion to 325 AD.

For almost 300 years after Jesus’ death, there was no established Christian church or religious canon. “Christians” were a largely secret sect of Judaism. Early Christian’s had to hide their religion as there was no First Amendment protecting religious minorities. At the time, there were many different gospels in circulation–none officially sanctioned by “the Church” because there was no church as such to sanction them.

It wasn’t until the Roman emperor Constantine converted to Christianity that the Christian religion as we know it today was established. Constantine formed the First Council of Nicaea in 325 AD to establish an “official” Christian church and liturgical canon. At the Council the early Church fathers decided what and–perhaps more importantly–what not would be included in the Church’s official canon. Those that made the cut were included in the New Testament. Those that didn’t were considered heretical and–as has remained the custom–burned.

Most of us would have never known about the non-canonical gospels if it were not for a farmer from the Egyptian town of Nag Hammadi. In 1945 while tilling the soil, the farmer found a sealed urn which contained documents dating back to the 3^rd and 4^th centuries. Speculation is that an early Christian sect–the Gnostics–hid these documents to protect them from the post-Nicaean purge. This find was called the Nag Hammadi library and contained some of the earliest historical documents of early Christianity.

So why were these excluded from the New Testament by the Church fathers? Well of course the “official” Church line is that they were heresy. Must be some pretty bad stuff, right?

Well let’s take a look at what’s so “bad” in these gospels that the early Church deemed them unfit for human consumption–especially since much of their content did not differ significantly from the canonical gospels. Let’s start with the Gospel of Thomas.

The Gospel of Thomas dates to between 60 and 140 AD. Many scholars believe the Gospel of John was written after the Gospel of Thomas and that much of John’s gospel was written to refute that of Thomas. The Gospel of Thomas was likely considered dangerous to the establishment of the early Church in that it really emphasized Jesus’ teaching that the Kingdom of Heaven is within you. It basically quoted Jesus as saying that God was not outside us, but inside us. That he (Jesus) was not special–that anyone could have what he had attained by recognizing their inner divinity (Namaste Jesus!).

Well this implies that to be a “Christian” one needs to follow a mystic path of direct connection with the God within–rather than to use priests and the church as a go-between to ask favors of a god-in-the-sky. Not a good thing if you are trying to establish a corporate church with ordained clerics as its salesmen. If people are taught that the Church and its clergy are unnecessary middlemen, it does not bode well for the collection plate.

In the Nag Hammadi manuscripts, the Gospel of Philip was bound together with the Gospel of Thomas. It contained much of the same mystic language, but what was probably even more problematic was that it contained evidence that Jesus and Mary Magdalene were married! The whole idea of things such as virgin birth and religious figures who do not succumb to the temptations of the flesh furthers the idea that these people are “special.” If you want to emulate them, you must remain chaste/celibate. You can’t be truly “holy” and “human” at the same time.

But there’s an even more “dangerous” part of Philip’s gospel. Consider this passage:

And the companion of the Savior was Mary Magdalene. Christ loved Mary more than all the disciples, and used to kiss her often on her mouth. The rest of the disciples were offended by it and expressed disapproval. They said to him "Why do you love her more than all of us?" The Savior answered and said to them, "Why do I not love you like her? When a blind man and one who sees are both together in darkness, they are no different from one another. When the light comes, then he who sees will see the light, and he who is blind will remain in darkness.

Holy sh*t! Not only is Jesus “kissing her often on her mouth,” but he is implying that she is the only one of the apostles who “will see the light.” Mary Magdalene–a woman–the only one of the apostles who will see the light! No wonder the male-dominated Church wanted this put to the torch. But it wasn’t enough to try burning all evidence of this. The Church also began a whisper campaign about Mary being a prostitute to further erode any legitimacy she might have.

At this point, there can be little wonder why the Church tried to erase the Gospel of Mary Magdalene from history. Not only would this put her on equal footing with the male apostles, but it would further establish that Jesus considered her the most spiritually worthy of his followers.

The Gospel of Mary Magdalene dates to between 80 and 120 AD. Since the discovery of the Nag Hammadi library, two other fragments of the Gospel of Mary have been found. Unlike Philip’s gospel, Mary’s does not speak about her personal relationship with Jesus (although a good portion of it is missing). The core of it relates to Mary’s encounter with Jesus after the Resurrection. It was in this encounter that Jesus gave Mary his final teaching.

Let’s divert for a moment and look at just how important Mary Magdalene is in the life of Jesus. She was the only one who stood by Jesus during the crucifixion. All the men were busy hiding and trying to save their own skin. She was the one to whom Jesus revealed himself after the Resurrection. And she was the one to whom Jesus gave his final teaching. These three things are not disputed in any gospel. Add to that the possibility that she may have been his wife and, if not, was most certainly his “girlfriend” and the case can easily be made that she was the most important person in Jesus’ adult life.

So what about this “final teaching?” What did Jesus allegedly say upon revealing himself to Mary? Here’s what she had to say:

I saw the Lord in a vision and I said to him, “Lord, I saw you today in a vision.” He answered and said to me: “Blessed are you, that you did not waver at the sight of me. For where the mind is, there is the treasure.” I said to him, “So now, Lord, does a person who sees a vision see it through the soul or through the spirit?”

Jesus responds that the inner self is composed of soul, spirit, and mind, and visions are seen and understood in the mind. If you think this sounds a lot like Buddhism–you're right. Remember, no one has a copyright on the truth.

When Mary tries to relay this message to the other apostles, many don’t believe her. Andrew responds: “Say what you think concerning what she said. For I do not believe that the Savior said this. For certainly these teachings are of other ideas.”

Peter, Mary’s long-time rival, also chimes in: “Did he then speak secretly with a woman, in preference to us, and not openly? Are we to turn back and all listen to her? Did he prefer her to us?”

I believe this last statement by Peter encapsulates the attitude of the Church regarding the role of women and why the Gospel of Mary Magdalene was such heresy.

If you consider that the Council of Nicaea established a tradition of the Church doing everything it can to eliminate anything that would usurp its male-dominated power–you can easily see the roots of the inquisition, resistance to the Protestant reformation, and the Salem witch trials. Today the Catholic (Roman) Church continues to demand an unmarried priesthood and steadfastly refuses to allow women any positions of power within the Church.

What all of these so-called “Gnostic Gospels” document is that Jesus taught that God is not only without, but within. And that the path of the true seeker is to turn inward. Just some thoughts as we prepare to celebrate rebirth.