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.
Rating: 
Summary: Pagels Does it Again
Review: Elaine Pagels' latest book, Beyond Belief, is a huge step forward for her scholarship. Her breakthrough 1979 work, the Gnostic Gospels, seemed content to suggest that the early Christians often held what would later be seen as heretical views. She illuminated some of these views, but she didn't seem to have a sense of who did the forming and why, and spent more of the book talking about how these views were driven underground when the church decided to canonize certain texts. In her current book, however, she seems to have put the pieces together that much better. She's able now to talk about various schools of early Christians (the Thomas Christians, the "Johannine" Christians, the Mary Magdalene Christians) and demonstrate directly how these groups used their namesake gospels to debate each other. The Gospel of John, which has always been the loose cannon of the four New Testament gospels, can no longer be read uncritically. Even its wonderful opening poem ("In the beginning was the Word") is convincingly shown by Pagels to be polemic, even political, in its intent. The view that John advances, that Jesus must be revered as God and that our own salvation depends on accepting this, is contrasted with the more open Gospel of Thomas. Thomas's take on Jesus was that Jesus's holiness is something that is accessible to anyone. Jesus, according to the Gospel of Thomas, is not the only way to God, but merely someone who has found the way to God, a way available to anyone. In other words, according to Thomas, we are all potentially Jesus. That last sentence should set off alarm bells among evangelical Christians. In fact, your reaction to this book probably will say more about your personal relationship to church orthodoxy than it does about Pagels' scholarship, which is excellent. Pagels' decision to include part of her own autobiography in the book also gives ammunition to those who claim that she's on some sort of vendetta. While "vendetta" is a strong term for what she's doing, she makes no bones about her personal world view and the agenda that leads her research. I for one find her honesty on this point refreshing. She's a revolutionary, sure, but as she amply demonstrates the author of the Gospel of John was too. He advanced ideas about Jesus which many Christians in the early church clearly did not share. And yet his views were eventually adopted by the church for some pretty stark political reasons, having to do with a desire for unity, harmony, control and money -- the last item thanks to the patronage and largesse of a guy named Constantine. On this board, earlier criticisms of this book seem to be as follows: first, the Gospel of John may have actually been written before the Gospel of Thomas (if so, the latter couldn't have been written in reaction to it), and second, the Gospel of Thomas seems to have it in for women and hence Pagels' (here standing in for the bugaboo of feminism) has misquoted him in service of her agenda. Neither critique stands up under scrutiny. (I'm ignoring for now the English fellow who got so worked up over the rule of logical non-contradiction. If non-contradiction is an issue for you, please put your Bible down now and step away from it.) As for which gospel was published first, it almost certainly doesn't matter. The primacy of the published word is a modern invention. The early church operated under a much more oral tradition, therefore it's entirely possible that the Gospel of John was written to critique a school of thinking whose primary document was not yet composed. As for the other criticism, that Pagels intentionally ignores the anti-feminist sayings in the Gospel of Thomas, it doesn't stand up to scrutiny. In this book, Pagels is not particularly interested in the early church's relationship with women. It's a question that simply doesn't come up. That said, the argument also falls apart as soon as you actually read the Gospel of Thomas quote in context. Here's the full quote: "Simon Peter said to them, 'Let Mary leave us, for women are not worthy of life.' Jesus said, 'I myself shall lead her in order to make her male, so that she too may become a living spirit resembling you males. For every woman who will make herself male will enter the kingdom of heaven.'" Here's evidence for an early church debate on the role of women, with Jesus weighing in on the side of women. (Not a ringing endorsement, perhaps, but an endorsement all the same.) In context, Jesus' comment about women making themselves male to reach heaven can be read as an ironic retort to Peter. In any case, the sense of the passage is clear: in the Gospel of Thomas, Jesus sees women as just as worthy of his teachings as the men. I guess my only disappointment with this book is that I'd always imagined the early Christians as a harmonious, loving, somewhat hippy-dippy group of believers. Now, thanks to Pagels, I find out that that Christians were pretty much the same as they are today: at least as back-biting and slanderous as they were loving and caring. Live and learn.
Rating:
Summary: Always Fascinating Author
Review: As a lover of the Gnostic Gospels by Elaine Pagels, I always am overjoyed when a new book of hers is released. I was not disappointed by her latest effort, Beyond Belief (The Secret Gospel of Thomas). It is a little more personal at times than her previous writings which actually enhances the experience considerably. One does not have to be a believer to enjoy the author's take on the early battles in Christianity as orthodoxy was determined and the gospel of Thomas, and its believers, were defined as heretical, much to the future church's harm. The gospel of John was the winner and the author provides a rich, learned examination of Irenaeus and his pivotal role in the early battles. It is a brief book that is highly focused. A longer book with a wider context may have been helpful to the general reader but this is still a recommended read for anyone with an interest in religious history.
Rating:
Summary: Another Winner!
Review: I thoroughly enjoy reading Elaine's Pagel's books and this one is no exception. I think that if you are frustrated with the religious "standard" and all it's contradictions this is a good way to sort out the controversy. Instead of "believing" for the sake of believing I think it's important for someone's spiritual growth to understand where it all began and why things are arranged the way they are in the bible and for what reason. I've never accepted all the views of any one religion and turned to Gnosis to find some answers within. Having a Universal Church with it's rules and regulations, while neglecting certain works as heresey because they don't fit into the scheme of control is unfortunate as we all have minds of our own. We've all heard the expression "doubting Thomas" but Pagel's views on this apparent contest between apostles and their followers makes a lot of sense. If you are looking for truth in the bible or confirmation of your faith, this is not the book for you. Her books are written for people who want to know the reasons behind the Christian movement and the Universal Church.
Rating: 
Summary: Pagels Drops the Ball
Review: Elaine Pagels is known within the Gnostic Christian community as an author whose scholarship is impecable. Her first book "The Gnostic Gospels" is used to introduce interested persons to the Nag Hammadi library of texts, and for one reason, because it does the job with an emphasis upon an analysis of the texts. Beyond Belief: The Secret Gospel of Thomas would appear to be an exegesis of the Gospel of Thomas(hereafter called "Thomas"), however it appears to be more of an autobiography combined with personal insights. Thomas is rarely mentioned in any substantial fashion throughout the course of her writing. There are more thorough exegesis of this phenomonal gospel available in print. If you're looking for an auto-biography and personal experience, buy this book. If not, I would highly advise keeping away from it.
Rating: 
Summary: Good grief! It¿s beyond belief!
Review: Don't get me wrong. I'm a fan of Elaine Pagels' earlier book, THE GNOSTIC GOSPELS, which helped many of us appreciate the importance of the stunning find made at Nag Hammadi, Egypt, in 1945: an entire Gnostic library stuffed inside a clay jar. However, some of us have come a long way since then. Unfortunately, professor Pagels has not kept up. Do we expect too much of her? Perhaps. BEYOND BELIEF is an uneven book. The subtitle does not fit. The book is less about the Gospel of Thomas than about the part played by the second century AD Bishop Irenaeus in shaping orthodox Christianity -- the Christianity we know today. Irenaeus was one of two important "heretic hunters" in the early Church. The other was Bishop Hippolytus. (More about him, in a moment). Pagels does a good job presenting the views of Irenaeus, who championed the Gospel of John. And she is correct that Irenaeus helped narrow Christian writings down to the canon we know today. Unfortunately, Pagels can't seem to make up her mind if this was a good thing, or an insult to the Spirit. She points out that the purpose of the winnowing was to unify Christianity. Yet, she admits (correctly) that the scaled down canon failed to accomplish the objective. The Church ended up more wracked by schism than ever! Only at the tail end of the book does Pagels rather lamely weigh in for openness. Shame on her. One of the most important points made in BEYOND BELIEF is never acknowledged by the author. I wonder if Pagels realizes, even now, the deep irony in her book. She may have achieved it unconsciously. Anyone familiar with Irenaeus' massive opus against heresy knows that a large portion of his leaden prose (Watch out! Irenaeus will put you to sleep!) was devoted to refuting the Gnostic demi-urge (Ialdabaoth). Pagels never openly mentions the demi-urge in her new book, however, she touches on the issue briefly and obliquely in her final chapter about the Secret Book of John (from the Nag). In early Christianity the controversy surrounding the demi-urge was deep and bitter. The demi-urge pro and con was one of the main battle lines between so called heretics and the orthodox Church. The Church considered the concept heresy. Which is why Irenaeus devoted so much space in his opus to refuting the demi-urge. Here's the irony: though Irenaeus railed against the demi-urge, denying its existence, incredibly, his favored evangelist John quotes Jesus affirming the reality of the demi-urge! (see John 8:44) Avid readers of Scripture will not be wrong if they recognize "the prince of this world" as the same entity. Who is this? Why, none other than the detritus of the old Canaanite storm god masquerading as Yaweh! Want an example? Read the book of Job, the high water mark of the Old Testament. Pagels mentions the line from John (8:44) at the start of chapter two without making the connection! She is completely unaware. And, of course, the significance of Job is never discussed. OK. Here's the significance: the fact is that Job is totally subversive to orthodox Christianity. No wonder Job is so seldom mentioned by Christian scholars. What they don't understand they simply ignore. I know of no adequate discussion of the demi-urge in print, which is why I devote a lengthy chapter in my forthcoming book SECRETS OF THE NAASSENE SERMON to this crucial issue of early (and modern) Christianity. Still more serious is Pagels treatment of Peter's Confession. (Mark 8:27-33) This is one of the most important scenes in the New Testament. Pagels, like almost every Christian scholar in my experience, demonstrates that she does NOT understand what is being presented. Pagels regurgitates the standard interpretation. Jesus asks Peter: "Who do you say I am?" Peter answers: "The Messiah..." Pagels states that this is the secret identity of Jesus. Wrong! In fact, in the episode Jesus tells the apostles NOT to use the term. ("Tell no one...") When Peter (stubborn and obtuse as usual) protests, Jesus rebukes him: "Get behind me, Satan, because your way is the way of the flesh, not of the spirit.." Here is the meaning: The name that Jesus favored was NOT the Messiah, but rather: "Son of Man." That other mysterious name. And the reasons were two: Messiah had no spiritual connotation in first century Judaism. The expected Messiah was to be a priest-king. It was a political designation. Messiah was also a recent idea, and local, born just a few centuries before the time of Jesus. Yet Jesus was a reformer. His purpose was to effect a spiritual revolution. And part of this revolution involved a radical reshaping of the Jewish God-concept. Son of Man fit the bill. The name was hoary with antiquity. It had deep spiritual meaning. Again, like nearly all Christian scholars, Pagels does not understand this. She attributes the name Son of Man to the book of Daniel or to Ezekiel. But the term did NOT originate in the Old Testament. It was much much older. Remember, the prophet Ezekiel wrote in exile. And the author of Daniel wrote ABOUT exile. Much new material entered into Judaism through these two apocalyptic writers: material from the East, i.e., Babylonia, Chaldea, Iran etc And Son of man was one of these ideas. The scholar Richard Reitzenstein pointed all of this out a century ago. But Pagels has not sounded the deep history. No wonder she is out of her depth in BEYOND BELIEF. For example, she mentions the "Primal Father" only briefly (in a later chapter, no less -- p. 115) apparently without realizing the link between the Primal Father and the Son of Man. The link becomes obvious once it is understood that "Primal Father" was only one of many names. Others synonyms were Anthropos, Secret Adam, Higher Adam, Adam Kadmon (from the Kabbalah) and Primal Man. And, no doubt, there were many others. Obviously, Son of Man and Primal Man were inextricably linked. The obstacle for modern Christians is that Primal Man is not mentioned in the New Testament. Yet, it is implied by the Son of Man. The one implies the other. Hence, the crucial importance of that other third century AD heretic hunter Hippolytus -- I have already mentioned him -- who in his REFUTATION OF ALL HERESIES quotes verbatim an authentic Gnostic-Christian manuscript, today known as the Naassene Sermon, which documents in amazing detail the universal usage of the Primal Man concept in the ancient world, the same world, incidentally, that gave birth to Christianity. Today, of course, this ancient usage is no longer understood, or appreciated. It's long gone down the memory hole. Here is my point: By favoring the name Son of Man Jesus was consciously placing himself in a context of history that is nothing short of mind boggling in scope. Because there is no doubt that the names Primal Man and Son of Man trace to the dawn of recorded history, yes, all the way back to Sumer, and probably before. This is only one of many reasons why Hippolytus (i.e., the Naassene Sermon) is so very very important. Yet, it has been almost wholly ignored by Christian scholarship, including Pagels. The rule has been: what you don't understand -- ignore. Hence, my reaction: Good grief! And the need for my forthcoming SECRETS OF THE NAASSENE SERMON, which will correct this and other deficiencies current in Christian scholarship. Stay tuned!
Rating:
Summary: Organized religion--and disorganized
Review: This continuation of Pagels' The Gnostic Gospels is a first-rate portrait of the early development of Christianity from its mysterious sources to its Constantinian phase of 'deep freeze'. The Gnostic roots, or else, echoes, in Christianity should have been an obvious truth of history, but history buried it, to the diminishing of the final result. Pagel's account is liberating and a quiet expose. The history of early Christianity is probably impossible to really tell, as is the 'real' history of 'gnosticism', whose Zoroastrian, Indian, or other influences lurk forever veiled behind the figure of Jesus himself. Although it is true that the later orthodoxy destroyed the diversity of the early church, our age has seen a flood of 'gnostics live' in the many New Age movements, and the mystique of the subject is now subject to the lifeguard's warning that the sharks are in a new feeding frenzy, the gurus are all available to supply the new demand. Watch out. Islam with it sufism, and India with its gurus has had plenty of gnostic touches, but it would seem ironic that the West was more able to express, at last, a culture of human autonomy than the rest. So the picture of the dilemma of the Church is not a simple question.
But Pagels' account is a book for the times, and a wake up call for the creative renewal of creative religious culture.
Rating:
Summary: misleading title
Review: I enjoyed this book and found it to be informative, as all of Ms. Pagels' books are, but I am completely mystified by the subtitle "... the Secret Gospel of Thomas." In fact, the book contains almost nothing about that particular Gospel. Most of the analysis was about the cannonical Gospel of John, how and why it was written, how it played against the early Gnostic sects of Christianity (though she has chosen not to use that term in this book). The book should have been titled more forthrightly; I was very disappointed that it was, in fact, NOT about the Gospel of Thomas, other than a very few brief mentions. The book was really more an exposition of how the early orthodox church became established, why it did what it did to supplant the 'heretics.' Which was interesting, but not "the Secret Gospel of Thomas." Why the deception?
Rating:
Summary: What's the big deal?
Review: So, Thomas said what you are seeking, Christ, is in you, all of you. John said to look not into yourself. So what? Lots of Christian thought says that you need to look for Christ within you. Read Meister Eckhart. Is that now OK when it was previously Gnostic? John may not be Gnostic, but it is filled with gnosticisms, dualities, light, veils, etc. Sufism is filled with gnosticisms; Kaballah is filled with gnosticisms, esp. that of 16th C Sefat and Isaac Luria. Being gnostic in thought does not make one a Gnostic. The Gospel of John is just as gnostic as is the Gospel of Thomas.
|
