Beyond Belief : The Secret Gospel of Thomas

Rating:
Summary: Read and decide for yourself
Review: All this book really does is lay out the orthodox John text and Gnostic Thomas text side by side, discuss their differences, similarities and provide an historical context.

Consider: If it's -30 below zero, blizzardy, dark, cold and windy which car are you going to drive 150 miles alone in the dark?

1--The car that has had a reputation all along for breaking down, but despite all the empirical evidence to the contrary, someone has told you that you *should* believe will work?

2--Or will you choose the car that, by virtue of your own personal experience, has always started and has *never* failed you and thus you naturally grow to have *FAITH* in it?

Clearly faith and belief are not the same thing.

While the Book of John would say car number one, Gnosticism's Thomas would declare just as strongly car number two. Why?

Mere "belief" from the Gnostic point of view is a function of "second-hand faith" aka mindless belief and thus of little comfort and even less help when stranded along the side of the road at night in the middle of nowhere. Indeed the ancient Gnostics called such belief a "faith of fools."

Genuine faith on the other hand, as the Gnostics define it, is a function of first-hand experience. To Gnostics since we're created in the image of God we therefore have the innate ability to seek God by virtue of sharing that image with God. It's the opposite of the spiritual learned helplessness that was all started by the John Gospel generations after the Crucifixion by author or authors unknown.

Despite my clear bias here, it's clear to anyone who actually read/listened to the book that this author isn't endorsing one version of Christiantiy over another. You have to show both sides else its a mere op ed., report ALL the facts, all relevant theories and keep personal bias out. Sure she cites a few individuals who chose a Gnostic system over orthodox and why. That's their choice. LIVE WITH IT. Sure,I'll admit that she does dwell on the Gnostic side more, but if you bother to actually look at the title, well, (gosh, goly, gee, holy heretics Batman!) it's a book about Thomas Gnosticism! Most aren't too familiar with it, and it requires a lot of explaining.

And as far as the "synoptic" gospels being "superior" to Thomas, well, Bishop Irenaeus of Lyon unilaterally decided that there could only be four gospels because it conformed to the "science" and theories of that era: The four elements, four cardinal directions and the four mythical animals.

Hence, naturally, the number of gospels would inevitably be four, just like the peculiar maps of the new world Catholicism extrapolated from scripture before science proved that the other continents looked nothing at all like such kooky theories.

To such "learned" primitives of the time as Irenaeus, such "reasoning" made perfect sense. And when he unilaterally condemned Gnosticism simply because he didn't like it, well, that was good enough for him and his ilk. What boggles the mind is how many supposedly better "educated" scientific MODERN people nowadays, with science having proven over triple the number of elements Irenaeus acknowledged back in the age of the primitives, still mindlessly assume Irenaeus made his decision on far more REASONED and REALISTIC grounds rather than such obsessed intolerant ones. But that does explain much as to why Catholics and Protestants even to this day have such hostile/negative knee-jerk reactions to the very word "Gnosticism." Yet when they are queried few if any have the slightest idea what it is or its history.

And *THAT* my friends, is the very definition and incarnation of "mindless belief and "intolerance" in action.

Also take a peek at "The Book Your Church Doesn't Want You to Read," and anyone who examines it fairly will discover that even the four gospels are often in disagreement about things as basic as the details of the crucifixion, resurrection, when the last supper was in relation to the Passover, and even the geographics. Hence using the Bible as bench mark to assess Gnosticism is on shaky ground at best since the very people who condemned Gnosticism also edited the Bible. It's called conflict of interest. And while you're at it take a peek at H. Spencer Lewis' "Mystical Life of Jesus."

If this has aroused your curiosity then check out my reader's guide for more startling info. on alternative Christianity.