The Gnostic Gospels 
asked by potato on November 22, 2006 5:38 PM
Gnosticism's Christian form grew to prominence in the 2nd century A.D. Ultimately denounced as heretical by the early church, Gnosticism proposed a revealed knowledge of God ("gnosis" meaning "knowledge" in Greek), held as a secret tradition of the apostles. In The Gnostic Gospels, author Elaine Pagels suggests that Christianity could have developed quite differently if Gnostic texts had become part of the Christian canon. Without a doubt: Gnosticism celebrates God as both Mother and Father, shows a very human Jesus's relationship to Mary Magdalene, suggests the Resurrection is better understood symbolically, and speaks to self-knowledge as the route to union with God. Pagels argues that Christian orthodoxy grew out of the political considerations of the day, serving to legitimize and consolidate early church leadership. Her contrast of that developing orthodoxy with Gnostic teachings presents an intriguing trajectory on a world faith as it "might have become." The Gnostic Gospels provides engaging reading for those seeking a broader perspective on the early development of Christianity. --F. Hall
Reviews
This is a well written book explaining the Gospel of Thomas as well as some of the other literature found at Nag Hammadi. It includes comparisons of the canonized books of the New Testament to those found in Nag Hammadi.
reviewed by maxmill on November 28, 2006 12:55 AM
I enjoyed the book but I think it was titled incorrectly. The book provides insights into the history of the early Christian church as well as the philosophical differences between the "orthodox" and "gnostic" Christians. I was hoping the book contained a translation and interpretation of the Gnostic Gospels. The book discusses the text of the Gnostic Gospels only briefly.
reviewed by carrots on November 29, 2006 1:56 PM
I found this book very educational and well written and layed out. I would recommend it to anyone wanting to learn more about the gnostic gospels in and easy to follow form.
reviewed by smiling on November 29, 2006 6:33 PM
I enjoyed this book, though I really had to concentrate while reading it. It was not exactly what I was expecting. It spoke less about the content of these gospels than it did about the history of the development of christianity, and the early "battle" between the more orthodox church (institution) and the gnostics, who believed in a more individual, less directed experience. I liked it and learned alot about christianity's early days. Only negative is that it could be repetitive at times.
reviewed by harrypotter on November 29, 2006 7:03 PM
