Sometimes important religious discoveries are literally unearthed, giving us previously unavailable artifacts and texts -- such as the discovery of the so-called Gnostic Gospels in 1945 or the discovery of the Gospel of Judas more recently. At other times modern readers re-discover texts that have long been available, documents, for example, known all along to scholars, but not in wide circulation. The Apocryphal Gospels -- over forty texts in all -- include both kinds of discoveries. These early Christian writings comprise accounts of the life and teachings of Jesus that did not make it into the New Testament, that along with Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John provided ancient Christians with their information about Jesus -- some of it authentic but most of it, well, apocryphal. A good number of these non-canonical Gospels were once accepted by various early Christian groups as sacred Scripture; many of them contain stories that are bizarre indeed. For anyone interested in knowing what the earliest Christians thought about Christ, and God, and many other things, these books are indispensable. On top of that, they can be terrific reading. Consider the following tidbits drawn from a handful of these apocryphal texts.
- Mary's postpartum inspection, The famous Proto-Gospel of James, allegedly written by Jesus' half-brother (Joseph's son from a previous marriage) tells a tale of the midwife who attended Mary after she had given birth to the Son of God. She, the midwife, does not believe that Mary has given birth and remained a virgin, and so she gives her a vaginal inspection, only to find that her hymen is still intact. God punishes the midwife for her doubt -- making the offending hand burn -- but the infant Jesus heals her, the first of his many great miracles.
- Joseph and Mary: The Generation Gap, Joseph is always portrayed as an old man in the medieval paintings of Jesus' nativity (this supposedly explains why he never had sex with Mary). But just how old was he? According to a relatively unknown Gospel called The History of Joseph the Carpenter, Joseph was fully 89 years old when Jesus was born, whereas Mary was all of 15. The account goes on to describe the death of Joseph some twenty-one years later, told in the first-person by his most famous "son," the Son of God himself.
- Jesus the mischievous Wunderkind. Jesus may have been a miracle-working Son of God as an adult, but what was he like as a kid? That is the question answered by the amusing Infancy Gospel of Thomas, which regales readers with tales of Jesus' miraculous activities between the ages of five and twelve. As it turns out, Jesus was a mischievous young fellow and had a bit of a temper. Whenever someone irritates him -- a rough playmate or a strict teacher -- he uses his supernatural power to wither him on the spot. Eventually he gets his mood, and his power, under control, and becomes a remarkable young man to have around the carpenter shop and home.
- Jesus and sacred sex. In modern novels (The Da Vinci Code!) Jesus is said to have had a sexual relation with Mary Magdalene. Even stranger tales of Jesus, Mary, and sex were told in ancient Gospels; by all counts the strangest was The Greater Questions of Mary, now lost but quoted once by an early Church Father. According to this tale, Jesus took Mary alone up onto a mountain, and as she watched, he pulled a woman from his side and began to have sex with her. What happens next is even stranger, as it involves a case of divine coitus interruptus and the consumption of semen. Mary, not surprisingly, faints on the spot.
- The Giant Jesus and the Walking-Talking Cross. Remarkably, the Gospels of the New Testament do not tell the story of Jesus emerging from the tomb on Easter morning. But the Gospel of Peter does. In this text, discovered near the end of the nineteenth century, Jesus comes out of the tomb as tall as a mountain, supported by two angels, nearly as tall themselves. And behind them, from the tomb, there emerges the cross, which has a conversation with God in heaven, assuring him that the message of salvation has now gone to those in the underworld. How a Gospel like this was ever lost is anyone's guess.
- Pontius Pilate the Christian Convert. Pilate is usually portrayed as one of the real bad guys of the Gospel and, in fact, of all Christian history. But in a number of books, often called "Pilate Gospels," he is exonerated for having Jesus executed, and in some traditions he not only repents of what he did, but actually converts to become a believer in Jesus. In parts of the church, Pilate came to be canonized as a Christian saint. A saint? Yes, and the reason is clear. The more innocent Pilate is, the more guilty the other enemies are -- the Jews. These are Christian Gospels written in the context of rising anti-Jewish sentiment, a nefarious underside to many of these otherwise interesting and entertaining accounts.
For a complete picture of what the earliest Christians "knew" about Jesus, the books of the New Testament are not enough. One also needs to read the books that did not make it into Scripture, books written by and for Christians to convey what, in the authors' opinions, were the true views of the Christian faith. Some of these books contain ideas and perspectives that Christians today may regard as strange, or even heretical. Other readers will find them historically valuable and even scintillating. However they are judged today, at one time they were considered by some of Jesus' followers to be sacred Scripture.
Bart. D. Ehrman and Zlatko Plese are co-authors of the new book, "The Apocryphal Gospels: Texts and Translations."
Oh by the way, the infallibility doctrine was not that clear then as to what it meant. The Church councils are the ones that decided what the teaching was not the pope in Rome at that time.
John says it best, "It is this disciple who testifies to these things and has written them,* and we know that his testimony is true. There are also many other things that Jesus did, but if these were to be described individually, I do not think the whole world would contain the books that would be written."
It's one of the reasons. The History of Joseph the Carpenter, one of the books mentioned by Ehrman above, was written in the 5th century.
In my opinion, the differences between the "versions" have been greatly exaggerated. In a couple of instance a few whole verses were inserted her or there, but usually it's a matter of one letter or one occasionally being mis-copied.
And excuse me, but some of the early NT manuscripts have lasted. Many existing copies were made as early as the third century. That's how we know about those few verse occasionally having been made up later.
Some. Not very many. There are also some scholars, not very many but they include John Dominic Crossan, who think that the Gospel of Thomas was written earlier than the canonical Gospels. But the vast majority date it later than the canonical books. The fact is that the current consensus dates ALL of the apocryphal books later than ALL of the canon. I'm not trying to defend religion, just accuracy in describing the current state of scholarship.
One of the books Ehrman mentions in his article, The History of Joseph the Carpenter, is even later than that. 5th century. Ehrman really could've mentioned that in the article. If, that is, his intent was not to mislead and sensationalize.
"It is also apparent that some texts don't have credibilitÂy because it often has innaccuratÂe historical and/or cultural informatioÂn, for example, giving the wrong name of a governing official that was supposedly in charge during that time, or giving cultural facts that were completely contrary to all history and knowledge of that time."
To be fair, that also applies to the canonical Gospels.
Wow... it *can* get even kookier!!
In a similar sense, for many people Protestantism has meant the freedom to question the authority and perfection of the Bible. For Luther and Calvin, and their Catholic contemporary Erasmus, it meant nearly the opposite: they all said that the traditional Church was not following the Bible closely enough. Erasmus edited the Greek NT and came up with a completely new Latin translation of the Bible to replace the Vulgate because the existing editions were not "pure" enough, not because he ever questioned whether it had been a good idea to make the Bible an authority in the first place.
So on one extreme you've got Protestantism leading to things like Deism and Unitarianism, and ultimately to atheism, and on the other extreme the same movement led to things like Puritanism and modern-day fundamentalism, with all sorts of things in between.
You like Dylan? You think when he wrote "I try my best to be just like I am" he was encouraging everybody to be just like him?
If we don't take advantage of the experience of others and what they learned from it, what good is it?
REALITY.
Religion isn't faith. And bigotry isn't Biblical.
You sound deeply confused to me.
I think many people have a concept of a "perfect" Bible which existed long ago before evil men came and crunked it up. The Bible itself starts off with a supposedly "perfect" Garden of Eden. Most ancient peoples thought that everything was always getting worse, that their ancestors had been better faster stronger etc. The predeluvian OT is full of people who live 600, 700, 800, 900 years. The ancient Greeks thought that their ancestors were Titans, giants.
You've helped the cause of enlightenment along in ways those of previous centuries could only dream of. The books I've read of yours have always been informative, well-researched and thought-provoking. Thanks for all your efforts.
A lot of us have actually put in a lot of time studying the topic ... and, atheism was the result of that study.
BTW - Most atheists, when they don't have an answer, aren't OK with just making something up.
Like, " how did ___ (fill in the blank) happen?" ... "I dunno, I'll just say "god" did it"
or -
"how many atheists are on HP?" ... "I dunno, I'll just say 1,300".
" those who "believe" force those beliefs down the throats of ..."
I'm Jewish, I 'Believe', whom do I force what down now? .....
If those of religious persuasion, and those of none, would acknowledge their differences, and "wished the other well", there would be more peace and kindness.
Evangelicals of ANY religion, are more problematic. As of course the name implies, they are called to evangelize. Each has to deal with that the best they can.
Divine, my behind.
Re: "The Apocryphal Gospels never received wide acceptanceÂ. Some informatioÂn there might be authentic but for the most part these texts were inconsisteÂnt with accepted gospel and even bizzare, and as such they were rejected from includsion in the Canon by early church fathers."
One might add SOME Church Fathers. Christianity has always been diverse, it is true today, and it has been true for 2,000 years. Some branches of Christianity were more accepting of these other writing than others.