Beyond Belief: The Secret Gospel of Thomas by Elaine Pagels
|
List Price: Our Price: $6.49 You Save: $6.51 (50%) Availability: Usually ships in 1-2 business days Buy Used: from $0.15 (click here) Category: Book See more book details and other editions |
|---|
Book Reviews of Beyond Belief: The Secret Gospel of Thomas
Book Review: Personal, not Systematic Exegesis
Summary: 2 Stars
Pagels' book is an almost-too-good representation of syncretist gnostic thought. The fact is, though, to understand the Idea or Essence in any system of thought, we must go to the doctors or epitomes of that creed. The proper study of this dualism, and its relation (anti-relation) to Christianity is to be found in, e.g., Manichaeism, Buddhism, Catharism. Dried-up popular and superficial creeds don't have the life in them that these more excellent (and demanding faiths) do. The proof is plain; each of these aforementioned movements has its Saints. Where, I might (unfairly) ask, are the martyrs, the living perfections of the New Age movement? One actually has to stifle his laughter; it (Gnosticism) will fade again, and return again; no matter. Pagels is no saint.Book Review: Disappointed
Summary: 2 Stars
The Book title is misleading. I expected a book that provided insight into Thomas. Other than a listing of the Gospel of Thomas, there is very little about Thomas other than his disagreement with the "author of the Book of John". Ms. Pagels provides considerable discussion about "John" and about Irenaeus but nothing substantial about the Disciple Thomas.Book Review: Well Beyond Belief
Summary: 1 Stars
Elaine Pagels is a delightful writer, and one of the more reasonable of the skeptical Bible scholars I have read. Call the latter "damning with faint praise," however.
Here, Pagels compares the Gospel of John, emphasizing faith in Jesus, to the "Gospel" of Thomas, that stresses realizing truth within oneself. She argues John was written to refute Thomas. She reconstructs how and why the former became "orthodox"
Christianity, and the latter, banned and forsaken of all but Zen Buddhists. Emphasizing differences between John and the Synoptic Gospels, she traces the rise of "orthodoxy" through Polycarp to Iraneaus and Tertullian, who made Christianity the dogma friendly religion it remained.
I found much of Pagel's creation myth interesting, and her tone personable. (She is willing to admit good qualities in the dogmatism she opposes, for example.) But she does two things that make it hard for me to take the first part of her story seriously. First, she places John in a faith ghetto, apart not only from the other Gospels, but also the works of Paul, etc. I think that he agrees with the other writers of the New Testament on practically everything. Secondly, she makes the "Gospel" of Thomas the cornerstone of her thesis. This is a wobbly and insecure foundation, however.
The idea that John was written to disprove Thomas is untenable for at least three reasons. First, (as Pagels herself admits here), John shows many marks of familiarity with the time, events, and persons of First Century Palestine, while Thomas (as I think she admits of the Gnostics in general, in the Gnostic Gospels) shows none. It was therefore entirely reasonable for early Christians to accept the obviously historical John and reject the even more obviousy unhistorical Thomas: where is the mystery?
Secondly, many Biblical scholars believe, for what seem excellent reasons, that Thomas was written in the Second Century. Oxford scholar Tom Wright suggests that Thomas is not only unhistorical, it is even anti-historical: "Thomas did for the parables in the second century what Julicher, Dodd and Jeremias did in the twentieth, and perhaps for similar reasons, namely, the attempt to get away from their historical and very Jewish specificity." Pagels never mentions discouraging words like this from competing scholars, still less refutes any of the evidence on which they are based. We are supposed to accept her early dating for Thomas on blind faith, it seems. I wish she had been inspired by the Thomas who was full of doubts, rather than the Thomas who is simply doubtful.
Thirdly, John resembles the Synoptic Gospels much, while Thomas resembles them little. I recently went over what the Jesus Seminar calls the "Five Gospels" with a fine-toothed comb, and narrowed it down to four again. First, I listed 45 characteristics of the Synoptic Gospels, 43 of which John strongly shares. I then compared Thomas and other ancient literature, and found that of six documents I compared with the canonical Gospels, Thomas resembled them the LEAST. (And two of the other documents were from China!) I found Thomas flagrantly a-historical, formulaic, lacking in developed, convincing characters, unconnected to space or time, un-Jewish, and platitudinous on occasion. Pagels claims that John, unlike the Synoptics, has no moral teaching. Actually John contains rich moral teaching of the highest caliber: it is Thomas (surprisingly, for a sayings "Gospel") that has none!
In short, I find NO reason to take the "Gospel of Thomas" seriously as a source for the life of Jesus, or to call it a Gospel. John, on the other hand, is intimately related to the Synoptic Gospels in dozens of vital ways, and shows many signs of being a trustworthy account of something that happened. The early Christians chose these Gospels because they knew their work -- better than some modern scholars, it seems to me, who are making absolute fools of themselves by pushing such wares, when they ought to know better.
I rather like Pagels, and I think she is trying to be honest. Some of the points she makes about the psychology of martyrdom and orthodoxy make sense to me. I find more sense in that argument than in Crossan's invention of the "Cross Gospel," Mack's fanciful sociological studies of imagined Q communities, still more the "Jesus Conspiracy" theories of Doherty, Freke or Gandy. But really, isn't it time skeptical historians defined what they mean by "Gospel," instead of using it as a prop to make unlikes sound the same? Isn't it time they argue for their beliefs historically, rather than making casual jumps to skeptical assumptions by saying, "Many of us can no longer believe all that," and thereafter simply ignore evidence that points to "all that?" Until skeptical historians bring their arguments out of the hothouse and face critism squarely, it is hard for me to see why those arguments should be taken seriously.
Book Review: TRUTH REVEALED
Summary: 1 Stars
In offering this information regarding why there is so much ignorance, pain and suffering during this time, it is important to perform self-enquiry on a community, state and national level regarding fundamentalist concepts that continue to try to block the Light from TRUTH seekers.
This began during the Fourth Century AD---
When Constantine "the Great" had gained the throne of the mighty Caesers, like other despots, he craved more power.
He was motivated by the vain attempt to have the exclusive religious power of the world. He would go to the seat of the religion which ruled most of the subjets of his vast realm, import that religion to Rome, revise and alter it to serve his purpose, invent a popular name for his new religion, and then conceal his fradulent work by sending out his army to demolish their ancient temples and to collect and destroy all the ancient scrolls that could be found.
To make hos work morfe secure, effective, and complete, he would murder the Masters of the ancient religions, and the discredit them and disgrace their country by stigmatizing it, "Land of Darkness." kIts temples were dem,olished. its scrolls were destrroyed. and two shiploads of its preciouys instruments and equi[ment were dumped into the sea.
It was the most astounding crime ever committed against humaity in all the known history of the world; and its consequences and reactions were so broad and vast, that it plunged the Roman Empire into a state of intellectual darkness that is still in evidence in Europe and America.
For this "good work", Constantine, the murder, was the first person to be elevated to the plane of "Saint" by the blighting institution which that "good work" created.
Out if that darkness and desolation hgas come all the history of ancient days that the Christian world has had until the last two centuries.
When it became less dangerous to do so, archeologists began to salvage from the ruins of the "Land of Darkness" some religious fragments of the Lost Wisdom of the Ancient Masters.
From Egypt, the Light shone once more. Truth revealled it could not remain hidden.
The Fifth Gospel, The Gospel of Thomas was unearthed shining with the truth of the Apocalypse of Peter. Peter had a vision and went to the Master Jesus to enquire of its meaning. Peter reported of having seen two manifestations of Jesus and he ask which one was the real Jesus, the one below on the ground, or the one he saw laughing in the air above at the time of the crucifixion?
Jesus said, "I am the one you see above laughing", and continued by describing the flesh body as the substitute body.
Today this gives the enquiring mind the necessary elevation in consciousness to realise that besides the processes of performing the greatest miracles of healing, etc., ever witnessed that this man-god could not be killed, or murdered. He truely was "not of this world" as He stated and is still grossly underestimated to the point of profanity by those who claim to seek His grace.
this is also why I am very sceptical of any system that is trying to abolish all of the wisdom of the past great ages
I work with recovery and those who are ready to look at western civilization real hard, I tell them this: I send out e-mails like this asking my AA friends if they believe the 12 step program will help relieve those who are drunk on blood.
Some ask me what I mean and I say-
We should make these three teachings illegal:
1. Anthropomorphism (that God can only exist and be worshiped in physical form)
2. Belief in a personal devil
3. Deicide (ritualistic canabalism, or communion)
When masses of fundamentalists continue to throw these horrible energies out into the astral Light and manifest thought forms of death, killing and blood as vividly as teaching those same lies (that divine beings must die and be eaten to dissolve all karmic debt while some "devil" runs riot unmolested) to the children and PROMOTING SUCH EGOISM it is no doubt that this is the darkness in need of Light of TRUTH.
Jesus said in John 10:34, 'Ye are gods'
This means that every child that is born is god and that we must nourish this TRUTH Jesus gave because it is so much more tham just a profound positive affirmation. This TRUTH leads us to the ability to do greater things than He did, as He stated later in the Gospel of John.
This book title "Beyond Belief" brings to mind the idea that it is beyond belief that anything like this was allowed to be published in the 21st Century.
Jesus left his body before any "crucifixion" took place.
No one can kill (or murder) God.
The story of the Laughing Jesus is the true Gospel of Thomas.
Book Review: Worst book I have read in quite some time
Summary: 1 Stars
There has been quite a vogue for Irenaeus-bashing in the last several years. He was the second-century bishop who spearheaded the movement to limit the canon of gospels to the four we now include in the New Testament, and one of the pricipal targets of Pagels's ire. She states that Irenaeus's efforts to establish a unified church were anti-creativity and anti-originality, which rather misses the point. Were the Gospels intended as exercises in artistic fulfillment, or as ways to show seekers the path to God through story? The idea was to provide a means for communicating what the writers presumably saw as critical truths, not to allow them a forum for exercising their originality.
Pagels makes any number of totally unsupported statements and conclusions throughout this somewhat rambling book, and then goes on to treat them as fact. For example, she asserts that the depiction of Thomas as "doubting" was a clever plot on the part of Irenaeus's orthodox party to discredit Thomas. Huh? If that is the case, why is the Catholic Church (which has a pretty heavy stake in orthodoxy) in the habit of referring to him as Saint Thomas, and naming churches after him? It is poor scholarship to make such an assertion with absolutely no facts to back it up.
I am also rather taken aback by her very close-minded ideas of what other contemporary Christians believe. She states flatly that "most" New Testament scholars now believe that the whole Nativity story was made up as a kind of retrofitted history, attempting to make the story of Jesus fit with prophecy. Maybe that is what scholars with offices next to hers believe, but there are a lot of scholars outside her narrow world who don't agree.
Another example: she repeatedly implies that the difference between the order of events in the gospel of John and the order in the synoptic gospels is proof that John is fabricated. Actually, if Pagels were to read two current news accounts of the same event put out by two different news agancies, ahe might realize that differences in the order of events as recounted are not exactly proof of anything.
The worst aspect of the book, though, is the way Pagels twists the writings of the Gnostics to suit her agenda. The Gnostics were devoted to the idea that the truth is only revealed to a select few, that matter (including flesh and the childbirth that engenders flesh) is a burden that keeps the select from full realization, and that there exists a rather bizarre heavenly hierarchy of emanations and spirits, in which (among other things) the God of the Old Testament is a twisted and evil mistake. These core ideas of Gnosticism are conveniently left out or only hinted at.
I suspect that the idea of gaining access to "secret" writings and doctrines was--and is--very appealing to certain mentalities, and there does seem to be a fashion every so often for that kind of thing (for example, the late nineteenth century proliferation of organizations with secret initiations, including most of the fraternities currently on American campuses). A number of New Age ideas, such as the so-called "ascended masters," also seem to be examples of this phenomenon. Ultimately such secret groups, promising a special level of enlightenment or prestige to the chosen few, are elitist and utterly antithetical to the very heart of Christianity. As I continued reading this book, I found myself growing more and more appreciative of Irenaeus. I can't help but wonder--if the New Testament had allowed all the peculiar documents floating around in the first centuries after Christ to become part of the canon, as Pagels seems to wish had happened, would Christianity even still exist? Given the content of many of those early Gnostic writings, it seems highly likely that it would have gone the way of the cult of Cybele.
I was hoping for a scholarly approach by Ms. Pagels in 'Beyond Belief'. Unfortnately my expectations were likely a bit too high.