Rating: 
Summary: Another Excellent Book!
Review: As usual, Elaine Pagels proves her balanced scholarship in this new book. Pagels has been a mainstay in the world of scholarship about Christianity for decades. This book is sorely needed in sorting out the jumble that is early Christianity. Pagels demonstrates clearly that Christianity did not smoothly spring from the mind of a single founder, i.e., Jesus Christ, but was strung together over a period of centuries by force and forgery. Apologists will not like the conclusion that the Gospel of Thomas existed before that of John, because Thomas can be dated no earlier than the first quarter of the second century. As scholars have known for centuries now, the four canonical gospels were NOT written by their pretended authors. As Pagels also shows--and as many before have also shown--there were MANY gospels before Irenaeus determined which ones were to make it into the so-called New Testament. He did this at the END of the second century. What all this demonstrates is that the Bible is a manmade work, not divinely inspired "God's word." Much of what Pagels shows in this book can be used to validate the various "Jesus myth" books that have appeared in the past several years. These works inclued "The Jesus Puzzle," "The Christ Conspiracy," "The Jesus Mysteries" and "Deconstructing Jesus." GA Wells is another scholar who has spent much time showing Jesus to be a mythical character. Perhaps the best book on the subject of the gospel dating ever written Cassells' "Supernatural Religion." It clearly shows--by minute inspection of the documents from the first and second centuries--that the four gospels did not exist until well into the second century. This book can be found online, even though it is well over 1,000 pages. After reading Cassells's book, it is clear that Pagels's conclusion is well founded. Although Pagels never goes far enough for this reviewer's taste in showing Christianity to be based on older religions, she is to be commended for bringing this more elevated thinking regarding Christianity to the lay masses.
Rating:
Summary: Raises big questions and answers small ones
Review: Quick disclosure (with a book like this, you have to know where the reviewer is coming from): I am an orthodox Christian, who believes that the Fathers were correct in most of their criticisms of Gnostic doctrine, but tragically short-sighted in rejecting the springs of gnostic creativity. "Test the spirits, whether they be of God," advised the apostle Paul. Unfortunately, he didn't spell out how to conduct the test. And so the church has always had some factions wanting to play it safe, and admit no "spirits", no further revelation or prophecy of any kind, for fear of admitting godless elements; and other factions ready to lend credence to every huckster and pythoness who claimed to have "a word from the Lord." This book argues that the first such division arose between the Gallic church father Irenaeus, and the gnostic house churches that were proliferating in western Europe under the persecutions of the second century. Those who have read any of Pagels' previous works, from "The Gnostic Gospels" on, will not be surprised to learn that Pagels sides with the house churches who embraced continuing (if often suspect) revelation. But I was pleasantly surprised by the degree of sympathy she extends to Irenaeus, who turns out to be the book's central character. When the martyrdom of the old bishop thrust the oversight of the region's spiritual welfare upon him, the faith seemed to be in double jeopardy: from the external threat of pagan violence, and from centrifugal forces that seemed likely to dissolve the church from the inside. The prime engines of those centrifugal forces were the proliferating pseudepigraphal gospels and acts and testaments emanating from the mystics, philosophers and visionaries we think of today as the gnostics. So Irenaeus attempted to establish a center by declaring just four books to be authentic gospels: the synoptics (Matthew, Mark, Luke) already accepted by all the Christian zoo, and his own favorite, John. A gospel which, by Pagels' account, was composed specifically to counter the growing influence of the mystic, philosophical, visionary "Thomas church", the community that gave birth to the Gospel of Thomas. And in those first gambits in the shaping of the canon, Irenaeus ended up inventing orthodoxy itself.
This is good solid Pagels. Her fans (and I count myself one) know what to expect, and her fans won't be disappointed. In this outing, she doesn't speak exclusively in her academic voice. I found the brief excursions into her personal spiritual experience worthwhile: it teaches us to hear the right tone of voice in which to read her previous work. Let me be clear about what this book is not. Those who are looking for a close reading - or any sort of explicit reading - of the Gospel of Thomas, should look elsewhere. Similarly, those looking for a primer on the doctrine, practices, and worldview of the gnostics will find it here only in very sketchy form. What I found valuable was the detailed look at Irenaeus and his milieu; the arguments (potent but too few to be conclusive) for the notion that the author of John was trying to counter the "Thomas church" precept that God is immediately accessible to each person in the same way that He was accessible to Jesus; and the insight that "discernment of the spirits" was the critical practical issue dividing gnosticism from orthodoxy. What I found disappointing was that though Pagels raises the essential question, "How are the spirits to be discerned?", she gets no further than to reject the orthodox answer "Pay no attention to Paul's advice, reject all spirits", and to half heartedly endorse the gnostic answer "Pay no attention to Paul's advice, welcome all spirits." I think the Apostle would have been grieved at the false dichotomy. Still, it's thoughtful, personally engaging, informed, and I for one found plenty to chew on and some good detailed review of church history, made a lot more interesting than it ever seemed in Eusebius. Recommended.
Rating: 
Summary: Neither flesh nor fowl
Review: Although it is clear that Elaine Pagels is an admirable person whose views are interesting (when focused), this book is really a collection of fuzzy discussions loosely surrounding the development of the Christian canon. The subtitle would seem to indicate that it is about the "Secret Gospel of Thomas," but the author quickly abandons that gospel, fastening on her subjects only long enough to satisfy the most uninformed interest. Pagels' personal religious perspective seems interesting, but even that is not well developed. Parts of the first section, where she is dealing specifically with her own struggles over belief in the face of losing a child are very promising. I began to look forward to a continuing discussion of her spiritual development set against scholarship about the Gnostic gospels and how they might affect Christian belief in the modern world.
But this vein, like others in this very short book, fades out.
Rating: 
Summary: GThomas, Spirituality Today, Orthodoxy--what's it about?
Review: I bought this book thinking that it would be about the Gospel of Thomas. That turned out to be wrong. Only a few pages discuss GThomas and its relation to the Gospel of John. If you are looking for a study of the Gospel of Thomas, there are good commentaries available from Patterson, Valantasis, and Davies. When I read the first few pages, I thought this book would be about the potential for spirituality today. As a humanist fascinated by religion, I would have found such an exposition an interesting prospect. However, Pagels never really gets around to explaining what is good about Christianity when all the dogmas are peeled away. Only a few pages in the first and last chapters discuss the personal experiences of Pagels, and I was again tantalized but unsatisfied. What this book turns out to be is "The Gnostic Gospels Reloaded." The book spends much more time on Irenaeus of Lyons than the Gospel of Thomas. More space is given to the struggle between orthodoxy and heresy than to modern day religious practice. Yet, after having read both The Gnostic Gospels and now Beyond Belief, I must give higher marks to The Gnostic Gospels for its organization, cogency, and insight. If you are going to read Pagels for the first time, I suggest reading The Gnostic Gospels instead. In sum, then, the title misleads many to think that the book is about GThomas, and the first few pages make it seem as though the book discusses the potential for faith today, when in fact neither subject is given a proper treatment. Rather, the ermegence of orthodoxy is its subject. For that purpose, the book would get four stars. I took one off, making it three, because of misleading indications on the book's true thesis.
Rating: 
Summary: A fine study of censorship in canonization
Review: The key to this work is in the comparison of the Gospel of
Thomas with John. In looking at the comparison, I found the text extremely helpful in outlining how the early Church Fathers were trying to shape and control the beliefs of the followers of that faith. It is insightful, I believe, that "imagination" and personal interpretation was what those early Fathers held in suspicion. You see, if we can come to a faith with courage, using our own resources, then who needs the church. As a matter of fact, I think Pagel's work liberates us from the years of dependency and calls us to ourselves to find a faith. I loved this book! Thank you Dr. Pagels!
Rating:
Summary: Disappointing and Disturbing
Review: Pagel's study of suppression and the politics of religious belief is both disappointing and disturbing. It is disappointing for a number of reasons, and not only because the title is misleading. In addition, the book lacks any close scrutiny of Thomas' gospel; at most we have one or two short passages served up with a heavy dose of Pagels' read of what they mean. Likewise, there are no close studies of the differences between analogous stories in Thomas and John. If Pagels is correct that John's gospel had more than one interpretation, thus requiring the development of the "official story" in the Nicene Creed, then why should we believe that Pagel's interpretation of Thomas, based on two passages cut-and-paste-to-fit, is correct? And why, other that Pagels' say-so, should we accept that Thomas' gospel has affinity to Jewish mysticism and Kabbalah? For at least these reasons, this is not serious interpretative work, and that is a fault that cannot be forgiven if the goal is to prove that there were different versions of Christianity competing with each other for predominance. Of course, Pagels might be correct that John's gospel was developed to refute Thomas', and (contrary to some of her critics) precisely when it was that the versions we have were put down on paper really doesn't matter, considering that there might have been earlier written or oral versions. Nor does it matter much that traditional Christians believe that Thomas is heresy and was rejected by the church founders. If Christians demand that their story be literally true, they should be willing to read what other accounts have to say, just as scholars of Socrates feel compelled to at least consider the accounts of Xenophon and Aristophanes, if only to ultimately reject their testimony. When they do reject them, it is because in their search for factual truth, they find those accounts lacking in some way related to their factual truth. They do not simultaneously demand factual truth while rejecting those competing accounts merely because an organization with a formal creed adopted some 400 years after the fact, based on writings that probably did not come from eyewitnesses, have decreed that the competing accounts are not to be believed. In the Boston Globe for July 22, 2003, an op-ed piece discusses how the new movie by Mel Gibson about the last days of Jesus really misses the point: Christianity succeeds because the truths it offers transcend mere questions of fact, and speak to how we perceive ourselves and our world and make our way through it. But Christianity has traditionally cast its lot with factual claims: that Jesus in fact performed miracles and rose from the dead; that he was in fact a product of virgin birth; that he in fact fulfilled biblical prophecy. As a result, Christians must face the historical record, and not only the historical and archeological studies that indicated that only some 15-20% of what the gospels report happened, but also the testimony of alternative gospels. If you decide to stand or fall by factual truth, you cannot legislate what evidence counts. And to this extent Pagels' book is worthy, even if flawed and too thin on the interpretative side. But the book also remains disturbing. Pagels' presentation of the defense of John against competing views is almost too good. Many christians will not see Linaeus' polemic as overheated and irrational, as the distinction between belief that comes from God and belief that originates with the individual ultimately is. They will react unsympathetically towards Thomas and supportive of John, and will see Linaeus as having hit the nail on the head. The traditional bias of Christianity against Jews is stated unblinking and unquestioningly and without pointing out either that Judaism had its martyrs or that, on Thomas' interpretation, it was nonetheless possible for Jews to have a relationship with God --as the American bishops now concede and as a study of the similarities between Jesus' teachings and the "thou shalt be holy because I, the Lord your God am holy" portion of Leviticus and the teachings of Rabbi Hillel would suggest. Perhaps Pagels' presentation of the prejudices against Jews was intended to make the point that orthodox Christianity is a source of bigotry and repression; but she does not say so, and leaving things as she does is simply dangerous. Pagels could be cited out of context in much the same way that Nazis abused Nietzsche. Perhaps what is most disturbing, however, is that at bottom Pagels portrays Christianity as something that, in whatever form, should have survived, and for reasons that reduce it to a mere cult. The result is that Pagels appears somewhat forgiving of Linaeus' demand for doctrinal homogeneity as a vehicle for the survival of the faith. Christians, she shows us, support each other, show love for each other, welcome each other to their fold, help each other grieve in sorrow, etc. All fine and good, but so, it could be said, did Branch Davidians, and we want to know who is at the helm when it comes time to decide what the identity of the group consists of? The fight between Thomas and John, to put it in Pagels' terms, was between a group that expressed love for each other because, as they saw it, of the inner divinity that Jesus shared with us all, making us all worthy and all capable of openly debating and disagreeing, and another group that decided that only Jesus and his deputies had a connection with God and to be a member you must believe as the hierarchy says. Pagels starts off by telling us that she rejects the second. By the time you are finished reading the book, however, you might be tempted to say, "well, that's too bad, but it is necessary, so let's live with it." If Pagels did not mean that, she should have been far more explicit, far less persuasive in her presentation of the dogmatization of Christianity, and far more openly critical of the tactics and techniques used by the Church to enforce hegemony.
Rating:
Summary: It's OK to Question
Review: I thoroughly enjoyed Beyond Belief. Ms. Pagels is a first rate scholar and a very good writer. Her history of the early church is impeccable. Unlike some reviewers on here who believe truth comes pre-packaged between leather covers, some of us wish to discover things for ourselves... without arguments ad hominem. Anytime life throws one a curve ball, we start to think. Life threw Ms. Pagels two tradgedies pretty close together. That her writing contains autobiographical references is not a draw back. And probably makes her work more alive than dry accademic tomes. Anyway, buy this book, and her other books if you want an eye opening experience about what really went on in the early church.
Rating:
Summary: Concept of Jesus the son
Review: I was expecting more about the Thomas's Gospel but it is more about the confirmation and struggles about how Thomas's gospel that was forgotten and Church's emphasis on John's gospel for the concept of Jesus the son of God.
Rating: 
Summary: Bad scholarship
Review: Though this book was popular in certain circles in the early church, the author ignores the fact the Church Fathers (mentored by the original disciples)were unanimous in rejecting it. While it does have some authentic quotations from Jesus (found in the other authentic gospels), it is also mixed in with massive doses of bizarre teachings. An example: "When you make the two one, and when you make the inside like the outside and the outside like the inside, and the above like the below, and when you make the male and the female one and the same, so that the male not be male nor the female female; and when you fashion eyes in place of an eye, and a hand in the place of a hand and a foot in place of a foot and a likeness in place of a likeness; then you will enter [the kingdom]." Yeah, Elaine, you strapped yourself to a real winner. You found a gospel that reflects your bias.
Rating:
Summary: Christianity Revisited
Review: Let me begin by saying that this is not a dry history of Church thought through the ages. Pagels has written a deeply personal book, stimulated in part by her son's terminal illness. She weaves her life experiences throughout the pages and, in so doing, she shows us how powerfully an ancient debate can resonante in a modern life.
That said, Elaine Pagels' contribution to the history of Christianity and the variety of Christian experiences that might have been available to believers is twofold. First, she has taken from the dusty files and shelves of divinity schools, manuscripts and information that would otherwise have had little importance outside the narrow world of practicing theologians, and made these sources relevant to the broader laity. Second, she has demonsrated, more forcefully in Beyond Belief than in her earlier The Gnostic Gospels, that what became Christianity for the great majority of believers over time was neither the inevitable consequence of the revealed word of Jesus Christ, nor His example, but also and very much a result of what early Church fathers chose to preserve, and what they sought to conceal. Her explication of the Gospel of St. Thomas and her argument that John's gospel can best be seen as a challenge to Thomas form an important part of her argument that what became Christianity, as exemplied in the standard Apostle's Creed, was only one possible evolutionary path for Christianity. The suppressed alternative, contained in the gospels unearthed at Nag Hammadi in the 1940s, basically allowed for the continued growth of God's word by sanctioning an individualistic communion with the divine presence, that is, by allowing for the possibility that individual believers could through their own actions approximate a relationship of sorts with God. That view presented problems for advocates of one, holy apostolic church. What status as a truth can the Word of God revealed by the presence on earth of God's only Son -- what standing does that Word have as truth -- if any believer has the capacity to be a recipient of God's word? Figuring prominently in her history is the herculean, and remarkably successful effort of Irenaeus to destroy views at odds with what became the standard Gospels, and especially the Gospel of John. Yet, she is not unsympathetic to Irenaeus. Indeed, her explanation of his motives forms one of the most fascinating segments of this very provacative book. This book demands attention. It demands to be read and pondered. Christians everywhere, whether they ultimately agree or disagree with her, ought to take the time to understand the broad and critical history she surveys in this slender, but pithy volume.
|
