Rating: 
Summary: Brings up questions of what might have been...
Review: Elaine Pagels is a first-rate religious historian-- currently a professor at Princeton-- and "The Gnostic Gospels" is her best known work, examining the contents of "secret" gospels written after the death of Jesus which were rejected from canonization and therefore are largely unknown to Bible-reading Christians. What is most interesting to consider is just how different Christianity might be today if additional writings had been included in the Bible. One theory as to why they weren't was that early bishops wanted only gospels written by Jesus's apostles included in the Bible, although subsequent scholarship has proven that none of the Gospels' authorship is certain. Among the rejected, the Gospel of Thomas is probably the best known, and it is fascinating in its non-literal approach to Christ. Jesus is described as telling his followers that the Kingdom of God is not a realm (Pagels concludes that it is closer to an altered state of consciousness) and makes comments that place him closer in philosophy to the Buddha than to St. Paul. A lot is covered in just 180 pages -- Pagels gets credit for being among the least self-indulgent writers around. She lays down the facts and then lets the reader mull over them. No matter what your beliefs, you will benefit from reading this book.
Rating:
Summary: pretty good
Review: I disagree with the previous reviewer who stated this is only speculation. The author does a good job of documenting her sources. Whether it's true or not I cannot say but it is not pure speculation. She doesn't go into depth about Gnostic spirituality or mythology but explains the basic Gnostic orientation towards the teachings of Jesus. The orientation she describes is one that encourages individuals to attain knowledge for themselves rather than rely on the authority of the church. This book might be offensive to traditional Christians and is probably the reason for some of the more unfavorable reviews.
Rating: 
Summary: It was never that simple
Review: For a long time I, like many others I imagine, had the thought that if we could only know what the earliest Jesus followers believed and how they worshiped, we could peel away the layers upon layers of later interpretation and get to something like original beliefs and worship. In this book Elaine Pagels does a wonderful job of showing that it was never that simple. The discoveries of the Nag Hammadi texts and other early writing (which would make the Indiana Jones movies seem tame) show that there was never a consensus about any of what seems from our later perspective to be basic questions. Was Jeus human, divine or both? Is there only one God or are there two or more? Did Jesus rise form the dead physically or did his followers later experience a sense of him being present that was almost palpable? Early church fathers - and mothers too answered the questions in every way imaginable. True believers provided contradictory answers even within the primary organized church. Irenaeus and other developed orthodoxy, i.e. "straight thinking" to correct the heresy of others. When the early Jesus followers were not bein persecuted by the state, they were busy persecuting each other. Pagels suggests that there was a long conflict between self discovery and personal experience as a way to understand God versus investing canonical texts as the "true religion" and the definitive answer to all questions. (Of course there are contradictions between the four gospels and the letters of Paul, but that is another book.) The history of religious convictions and political wrangling that resulted in orthodoxy is fascinating. The author also gives us an outline of the richness of thought, belief and practice that existed in early churches. I suspect the conflicts described are still in play and to understand where we are it helps to review how we got here. This is a very readble and thought-provoking book for non-scholars.
Rating:
Summary: A provocative, insightful look at the early Christian church
Review: Noted historian of the early church Elaine Pagels has produced a clear, cogent, and very effective introduction to the subject of Gnosticism, a different form of Christianity that was declared heretical and virtually stamped out by the orthodox church by the start of the second century after Christ. Most of what we knew of the Gnostic belief system came from the religious authors who worked so hard to destroy the movement, but that changed drastically with the still relatively recent discovery of a number of lost Gnostic writings near Nag Hammadi in Upper Egypt. Unlike the Dead Sea Scrolls, this momentous discovery of ancient papyri has received little attention, and I must admit I went into this book knowing virtually nothing about Gnosticism. As an historian by training and a Christian, the information in these "heretical" texts intrigue me, and I believe that Christians should challenge their faith by examining material that does not fall in line with accepted beliefs. I should note that Pagels does not attempt to summarize or examine in detail the Gnostic Gospels in and of themselves; her particular focus here is the way in which Gnosticism affected the rise of the orthodox church that declared the Gnostics heretics. Still, she presents a great deal of information on many of the newly discovered texts and inarguably shows that the Christian church was founded in a society espousing a number of contradictory viewpoints. Pagels does a good job of presenting the context in which the early Christians lived and eventually argued against one another. The debate was seemingly one over spiritual authority, and social and political issues played a part alongside purely religious disagreements between different factions. I think she tends to overemphasize the sociopolitical implications of Gnosticism, yet her arguments are certainly sensible and enlightening. One of the problems with Gnosticism as a movement was the disagreement among many so-called Gnostics on a number of issues. In terms of Gnosticism as a whole, however, one can point to a number of thoughts and ideas that ably represent the whole. Gnostics basically saw their faith as an internal thing, a practice based on the secret knowledge Jesus supposedly shared with a select number of individuals, one of whom was Mary Magdalene. Gnostics attracted women in particular because most Gnostics viewed everyone as equal and allowed for the participation of women in any sacred act. The orthodox, arguing that the disciples were men and thus the church held no leadership positions for women, opposed the teachings on these grounds. Gnostics basically believed that one found Christ in oneself; inner visions were the trademarks of true Gnostics. To the orthodox church founded on the basis of Peter's succession as the head of the church, Gnostics thus placed themselves not only on the same footing as the apostles but above even the Twelve. They tried to answer their own questions as to how Christ could be both human and divine, and many of them came to view Christ as a spiritual being who only appeared to suffer and die. Many also interpreted the virgin birth in spiritual rather than human terms. To the orthodox Christians, this was blasphemy, for the church as we know it is basically built on the faith and belief that God's son took on a human form and died in the literal sense on the Cross in order to conquer Death and save all of his followers. Some Gnostics came to believe that the Creator was not God but a demiurge who falsely declared there was no other God but him. Thus, orthodox Christians were seen as following a false god out of ignorance, a charge that did not set well with orthodox Christians. The orthodox beliefs on the subject of resurrection legitimized a hierarchy of persons through whose authority all others must approach God. Gnostic teachings were thus seen as subversive of this social order by offering direct access to God outside of the priests and bishops of the orthodox church. A true discussion of Gnostic beliefs would take many pages to even begin, and Pagels has jam packed a relatively short book with much information along those lines. Her contrast between the two competing forms of early Christianity clearly explains how and why the orthodox church worked so vehemently to stamp out the heretical Gnostic acolytes. I am of the opinion that Gnosticism would have died out of its own accord had it not been declared heretical; its followers basically practiced a deeply personal and largely unorganized form of worship that excluded the masses. The early church needed organization in order to survive, especially during the times of awful persecution we find in the centuries after Christ's death. This is a deeply provocative book indeed, addressing a subject I will continue to investigate. As a Christian of fundamentalist Southern Baptist persuasion, I will add that nothing I read here posed any threat to my current beliefs or faith. Those Christians who fear the influence of a different type of Christianity should not avoid this book or others like it out of fear; instead, such individuals should test their faith by reading this provocative material because one's faith can actually be strengthened rather than weakened by such endeavors.
Rating:
Summary: COMPELLING!!!!
Review: This work compellingly investigates the relationship between Christian Gnosticism and the nescient orthodoxy in the early centuries of the Christian movement. Pagels explores the political and social implications of the coalescing orthodoxy's religious tenets, providing us something of the secular context for the elements of the Nicene creed. Such an approach could provide (and often has) a facile platform for preachy social discourse or disparagement, but Pagels is too much the scholar for this and I personally found her detachment respectable. After providing us a fascinating history of the Nag Hammadi texts (the "Gnostic Gospels" of the title), Pagels deftly contrasts their tenets against the orthodox positions, revealing the diversity of early Christian thought. The very concepts of "orthodoxy" and "heterodoxy" inevitably have serious secular implications, but these are rarely explored with the adroitness demonstrated by this fascinating work. The Gnostic gospels from the Nag Hammadi differ radically from organized Christian dogma. In the first 300 years of Christianity, Gnostic dogma and scripture were destroyed by zealots and suppressed by the church. The Nag Hammadi is the only surviving scriptures of early Christians that haven't been heavily edited by biased early Christian theologians. They are all free to be read on the internet at www.gnosis(dot)org Consider: The tip of the iceberg: Numerous authorities who had noted the errors in the K.J.V. such as William Kilburne (1650's) 20,000 errors, John Wesley (in 1755) 12,000 changes in the New Testament alone, the Revised Version of 1881 consisted of 36,000 errors and on and on. The NIV, RSV and The Living Bible are also replete with thousands of errors. Do some research! The KJV Bible is the True Word of God! Or is it? Inspired? Or not? I believe all of the one star ratings and rantings are from uneducated Protestants. For example: In 'Acts 5:30; 10:39.' the KJV, in speaking of Jesus' death, reads, "Whom ye slew 'and' hanged on a tree." The word "and" is 'not' in the Greek text, and by adding it to the text at this point in the verse it leads to some confusion on the part of the readers. The conjunction "and" indicates grammatically that one action followed another (i.e.: two separate actions independent of one another). Some unbelievers have tried to use this verse to demonstrate that Christ was killed first, 'and then' His dead body was hung on a 'tree'. By inserting the word "and," numerous complications have arisen which could have been prevented by a correct translation of the original text. The KJV translators also did not know what the "Asherah" was (a wooden idol representing a Canaanite goddess), so they translated the word repeatedly as meaning a "grove" of trees. In 'I Kings 16:33' they state, "And Ahab made 'a grove," which provoked the Lord God to anger. In point of fact, Ahab made an 'idol' here (the Asherah); his sin was 'idolatry', not planting a grove of trees!! In Deuteronomy 33:17 the KJV speaks of "the horns of unicorns." There are two mistakes in this passage: (1) The animal mentioned here in the original text is the "wild ox" and not the mythical "unicorn," and (2) in the original text the passage speaks of one animal (singular) with horns (plural). In Luke 18:12 the KJV reads, "I give tithes of all that I possess." The Law did NOT require one to tithe a tenth of all that he "possessed" (all his capital holdings), but rather a tenth of his increase (that which he acquired in addition to his possessions). This is clearly stated in the Greek word used in this passage. So if the few examples I've given you of some 10 thousand I'm aware in various scriptures, how do you know the Passion or KJV is accurate? Flawed men produce flawed works. No man with emotions and feelings was ever unbiased in his writings and translations. Research the genre of historical books written by scholars who are not blinded by the dogma of their Christian or Jewish writings. The more I study, the more Agnostic I become. No man, religion, or dogma is between me and my God. Decide for yourself; "He who believes blindly sees not the truth." If you are open minded and looking for those books begging for its pages to be turned...look no further. I just read a copy of Edgar Fouche's 'Alien Rapture,' which also blew me away. Fouche was a Top Secret Black Program 'insider', whose credibility has been verified over and over. I also really liked Dan Brown's 'Angels and Demons.' Want to be shocked, check out Dr. Paul Hill's 'Unconventional Flying Objects' which NASA tried to ban. Read the reviews of these books.
Rating:
Summary: An excellent overview of Gnostic thought.
Review: For the majority of folks, the Christian religion in the early centuries after the death of Jesus is that of the Catholic/Orthodox Church pure and simple. There are many reasons for that, not the least of which is that most of the early variants of the Christian religion did not survive past around 400AD. Until the 20th century, very little of their writings survived and those that did were often ones that were quoted by writers such as Iraneus in his "Against The Heresies". Fortunately, this changed with the discovery of a collection of Gnostic works at Nag Hamadi in 1945. Elaine Pagels does an excellent job of constructing an overview of the various belief systems of these early Gnostic Christians through both the knowledge gained from the Nag Hamadi library, the early proto-orthodox apocrypha, and the writings of the early proto-orthodox writers such as Iraneus. It is not an in depth study of any of these sources, and is aimed at the person who wishes to gain some knowledge of the "other" Christian churches of the time. As such, it makes an interesting introductory read that may be followed by greater study by those inclined. Elaine's style in this book makes for an easy read on a topic that could have been quite the quagmire.
Rating: 
Summary: Topic misrepresented by the title!
Review: Seveal months ago I embarked upon an intellectual and spiritual journey after reading "The Da Vinci Code". The topic of the sacred feminine and the true identity and message of Jesus was always nagging away in the inner recesses of my mind and soul. I made an effort to find several books that might tend to enlighten me more and this work by author Pagels wound up in my library. Unfortunately this work seems to be somewhat obfuscatory and misleading. Yes , the author describes the discovery of the Nag Hamadi documents , and gives an adequate background of the history of Gnosticism , but I was not looking for a book review of the Gnostic Gospels , but for the original works translated. Pagels admits to having an "orthodox Christian" background , and tends to minimise the importance of the historic find. Overall the book is valuable , but needed to include some rather lengthy translated excerpts from the original works to be taken more seriously.
Rating:
Summary: Utterly awesome
Review: Chapter 5 and 6 make this book priceless to me. I love all of Professor Pagels works and own them all. This book grabbed my attention because it lays out so well how religion is man made. How humans design a God and over years, decades and centuries fine tune this God to suit their needs. Having read and re-read this gem of a book, I come away each time knowing that my gut reaction to what I believe Christ really taught is right. That he isn't a God and didn't say he was a God but as Professor Pagel notes in this work, simply wanted people to think for themselves and look deep within for the truth. That each of us is unique and good if we seek to be good. That the 'church' was and is more a political body than a spiritual body. That spiritual is unique and fits the person and their walk in life. In Chapter 5 I better understood how by the second century orthodox Christian began ti establish man made rules for church membership. Church meaning the people and people being the Christian church. Creeds were required and not simply a personal proclamation that one according to their own knowledge was a 'christian'. Chapter 6 is my favorite. Gnosis: Self=Knowledge as knowledge of God. On page 120 the author notes: 'The Gospel of Thomas relates that when the disciples asked Jesus where they should go, he said only, 'There is light within a man of light, and it lights up the whole world. If he does not shine, he is darkness.' Far from legitimizing any institution, both says direct one instead to oneself--to one's inner capacity to find one's own direction, to the 'light within.' The author notes that during the fourth century the organized church began to insist that monks who were solitary look within mode, adhere to more structured less personal 'beliefs' or Godly leadings. Page 122 she notes: 'But some Gnostic Christians went so far as to claim that humanity created God--and so, from its own inner potential, discovered for itself the revelation of truth. This conviction may underline the ironic comment in the Gospel of Philip: '...God created humanity [but now human beings] create God. That is the way it is in the world--human beings make gods, and worship their creation. It would be appropriate for the gods to worship human beings!' Reading page 124 I remember an audible WOW when I read 'Many gnostics, on the contrary, instead that ignorance and not sin, is what involves a person in suffering. The gnostic movement shared certain affinities with contemporary methods of exploring the self through psychotherapeutic techniques. Both gnosticism and psychotherapy value, above all, knowledge--the self knowledge which is insight. They agree that, lacking this, a person experiences the sense of being driven by impulses he does not understand....'
Rating:
Summary: An Interesting Study
Review: Pagels' book is an interesting study, a fairly easy read, just enough for some, and just wets the appetite for others. I don't agree with everything in The Gnostics Gospels, but these ideas should be considered by all thinking Christians. I found it to have integrity and purpose which is a rare find these days. Much like another book I just read called The Book of Thomas By Daniel Aber and Gabreael. The entire gamut of metaphysics are covered in their book.
Rating:
Summary: Is that guy serious?
Review: Is that guy from Houston serious? That has to be a joke, right? Right? I can't believe anybody that uneducated and ignorant has the mental capacity to even turn on a computer, let alone espouse a diatribe such as that one. Joke, right?
| 
