Rating: 
Summary: Very informative!
Review: I borrowed this book from a friend and intend to buy my own copy :) Very informative, and with some very interesting points. A must for anyone looking for research on early Christianity and how it tried to take control of its members' sexuality.
Rating: 
Summary: Is Sex Sinfull?
Review: I dunno, but I hope so. At least that's more fun than the modern attitude of having it urged upon us as 'healthy.'
Save healthy for brushing your teeth. . .Ms. Pagels is a good writer but tries to cover quite a lot of ground here. As to her basic thesis that the story of Genesis has influenced Western culture and the average Joe is not supremely aware of this, well yeah, and what else is new? Where this book really shines is when she writes about anecdotal and speculative history : Were the gnostics really far out nutcases ? Why were Christians persecuted throughout the Roman Empire in the first place? Was St. Augustine a bit perturbed about bodily functions? This makes for some very interesting reding. While others believe persecution came about as a popular backlash within Roman society precisely because of gnostics or more "fringe" Christians making a spectacle of themselves (And how would you feel if you were at your synagogue or the temple of Diana and someone started 'speaking in tongues' out loud and wouldn't shut up?) Pagels makes a reasonable argument that the gnostics were the church. Sometimes the majority, depending upon locale. Furthermore, while Jews were "licensed atheists" to the Romans , getting away with praying for the Emperor's health rather than the obligatory pagan sacrifice to the Emperor's 'genius', the Christians did not enjoy such status and were seen as subversive to a point which we fail to appreciate due to our own prejudice: We assume the majority of pagans didn't really believe all that mumbo jumbo, especially not sophisticates, or Stoics like Marcus Aurelius. Pagels makes the case that they did believe that the gods embodied 'forces of nature' VERY seriously, and that refusing homage to 'annointed' head of state would be greeted as cheerfully as we would respond to someone spitting on the flag. As to the entire Augustine vs Pelagius argument, it's a fun ride if you're not familiar with it, what with bribing the Imperial Guards with horses and so on, so I don't want to give too much away. Suffice it to say it was one of the turning points in Church history. Indeed before 500 A.D. It's hard to prove that anyone believed in 'Original Sin.' Augustine's hero St. Paul, though a kindred soul in celibacy, would have likely found Augustine's conclusions regarding the ultimate depravity of human nature (not excluding baptized Christians) somewhat pessimistic in contrast with Pauls's own 'Good News.' What is fascinating is the Augustine came to 'Original Sin' as an answer in Theodicy (The nature of evil--or in the vernacular 'Why Bad things happen to Good People'-- ) Given the premises that there is a God and He is Just and children are born retarded, deaf, blind etc. Augustine's logical(?) conclusion is that these innocents are in a sense 'infected' by their parents. That Adam and Eve's sin of disobedience is transmitted through the semen. Good book about some of our predecessor's ideas and which ones won the fight for Western man. As Pagel notes, the belief that 'All men are created equal' which the founders took for granted, comes from theology not logic. Aristotle would have found it absurd.
Rating:
Summary: A Good Work About an Often Overlooked Subject
Review: I have been doing alot of thinking about the (supposedly!) inherent sinful nature of sex. This book, as no other I have found, deals with this subject. Does humankind live in a world that has fallen due to one man's (Adam's) sin? Or is the world good (sex included) as God designed it to be from the beginning? How did people come to believe that celibacy was superior to sex (i.e., the in-built natural sex drive)? Pagels answers these and other questions in this remarkable book. A must read for anyone concerned about the origins of the various positions of historic Christianity regarding human sexuality.
Rating: 
Summary: A useful book that leaves out pertinent information
Review: I liked how the book exposed the criticism of St. Augustine's beliefs on original sin. It is interesting that prominent Catholic theologians (Pelagius, Julian, and John Chrystostom) did not accept St. Augustine belief that Adam's original sin somehow morally corrupted Adam and his descendants. One reasonable objection is that if Adam had THIS much influence, Adam would be like a god. The weakness I see in this book is that she did not quote scriptures that give good reasonable alternatives to the doctrine of original sin. Romans 1 tells of the root cause of sin, and I Corinthians 15 tells of how people are made in Adam's original image. One could make the argument that Adam was created weak, and he sinned the way his descendants sin. We have inherited Adam's original weak nature. This can be seen by interpreting Romans 7 as St. Paul's explanation as to how he imitated Adam. Adam's forbidden fruit can be seen as representative of the law, for the law teaches people the knowledge of good and evil. She barely mentioned this possibility. Likewise, she emphasises the apparent contradictions in scripture on whether or not Christians should be married or single, and how they should view their limbido. These apparent contradictions can be resolved by simply believing that staying single has some good qualities, but getting married also has other good qualities. Likewise, sex is perfectly fine within marriage, but like other gifts, it can be problematic and lead to sin when not used lawfully. Abstiance from food and sex can be beneficial, but it is not for everyone at all times. This is a book on the views of early church theologians more than a book on Christianity. It tends to portray Christianity in bad light by discussing the differing, contradictory, and erronous interpretations of the Bible found among these theologians.
Rating:
Summary: fascinating and very readable
Review: I was fascinated by what changed (and what stayed the same) in early Christianity's interpretation of the story of Adam and Eve. I frequently stopped reading to think about what I believed about God and the world. This book sparked a 6 year (so far) interest in religious history and interpretation.
Rating:
Summary: interesting, thought provoking, but is it right?
Review: If you just have a chance to glance at the book, (1)read pg 150, this is the last page before the epilogue(and is a very concise summary of the book's topics), then read the (2)epilogue, then chapter 1 (3)"the kingdom of God is at hand".(these will give you the best idea of the type of writing and whether it means with your interests) The meat of the book is chapter 6 "the nature of nature" which is an extended argument against Augustine's view of original sin as 1)carried by semen 2)at odds with the radical moralfreedom that the early church taught 3)at odds with natural science. 4)is primarily a cynical justification of the power of religious and political organizations I really don't know who to recommend the book to. It is written not for scholars, although rebuttal of her points would require at least as good a scholar as she is, but rather at an undergrad level. Educated laymen, interested scholars from associated disciplines, people following an interest in Augustine, early church history particular the gnostics(her speciality) would be the natural audience. I read it as part of a deliberate study on Gen 1-3 and interpretations and found it most interesting and provocative with regards to this interest. She is a good and competent writer, holding your attention and making effort to explain difficult and esoteric historical points not only clear but relevant. A noble and achievable goal in this book. As to the content, there are only a few points that i am particularly competent to analyze as they cross my interests or knowledge base. In several of these she had misread orthodox thinking and comes close to strawman arguments, however i am not sure if this stems from her committments in the field or from my lack of historical depth. But it doesn't demolish the arguments only make them not-persuasive to me. The book is an extended historical and theological introduction to the exegesis of Genesis 1-3, in particular, the relationship of Adam-Eve-the serpent to the questions of freewill or moral competence-to-choose. She is most detailed and fact-based when she talks about Augustine in chapter 6, but most interesting as she outlines the 4 or 5 centuries of intellectual history in chapter 1. As a secondary, but certainly interesting theme, there is the interpenetration of religious with political thinking. Why doctrines are not hand delivered from God above but rather are often the result of backroom manipulations and intrigue. It is this tension between ideas as independent creatures, like Plato's forms, and as nothing more than justifications of power structures and hierarchical institutions that supplies a movement, a dynamic that makes the book readable and engaging. I am, of course, aware of Prof. Pagels by reputation, however this is the first book of hers i have had the pleasure of reading and as a result will be interesting in finding more, particularing in her field of Gnostic studies and the Nag Hammadi manuscripts.
Rating:
Summary: The Village Reader Review
Review: Jesus interprets Genesis 1 to 3 in a radical new way, and the subsequent four centuries of orthodox and Gnostic Christians resulting thought process leads to modern ideas on relationships. In first century Jerusalem there was conflict between the pagan Rome and Jewish culture and religion. There were also a struggles between Jews that had an accommodative posture toward Rome (led mostly by the upper classes and Priests that had the most to lose) and those, mostly more conservative and rural, that resisted Roman influence. In modern terms, Jesus was a resistance leader. Pagels argues the conflict was partly due to Jesus' interpretation of Genesis. In Genesis 1:28, the basis for marriage was procreation - and by Jewish law, marriage without children was grounds for divorce. Christ turned the law upside down. When asked what the grounds for divorce were, his answer, in Matthew 19:4-6, is that there are none. "This answer shocked his Jewish listeners and, as Matthew tells it, pleased no one". After the crucifixion, but long before the Reformation, two groups competed for the heart and soul of Christianity - the orthodox and Gnostics. The same Scriptural texts supported radically different viewpoints. Orthodox Christians read Genesis as "history with a moral" - and their viewpoint was "a proclamation of moral freedom". Pagels implies this led to the development of the rights of man, democracy and equality under the law. Gnostics believed that Genesis was a "myth with a meaning". They argued that Genesis could not be read literally because it didn't make sense. There were two different creation texts which didn't agree (Genesis 1:26, 27 and 2:7); they questioned if Adam and Eve could hear God's footsteps (Genesis 3:8) and wonder why God an omniscient God would ask "where are you?" (Genesis 3:9). They looked for a deeper meaning to scripture. For four centuries orthodox and Gnostic waged a philosophical battle for the heart of Christianity. Orthodoxy won, and only now, nearly sixteen hundred years later, are some of the early arguments and texts being reexamined, after the discovery of the Nag Hammadi texts in 1945 and the Dead Sea Scrolls in 1947. This well written, probing, thought provoking book is a part of a reexamination of the development of religious thought.
Rating:
Summary: Unsure What To Believe
Review: Ms. Pagel's book was a fascinating interweaving of historical facts. But I was unsure as to how to take the whole thing. The conclusions that a person come to can be from two perspectives: Someone looking at their own religion from a position of acceptance, and one looking at a religion from the outside, trying to understand it without being committed to the truths of it. I found that Ms. Pagel made many suppositions that can only come from a person that does not understand what it means to be a Christian or a Jew. She states that Christians USED the creation story to justify their sexual beliefs, and that it is Christianity's position that sex is inherently sinful and was responsible for the fall of man and original sin. That could not be further from the truth. Speaking as a Christian, sex is considered to be created by God not only for procreation but for pleasure as well, God simply wants that wonderful relationship to be within the protection of a marriage relationship. According to everything I have been taught (and I have belonged to many churches) the fall of man was because of disobedience, not because of sex. So I believe Ms. Pagel has a bit of a bias. However, I still recommend the book.
Rating:
Summary: One passage, hundreds of interpretations.
Review: Pagels sets out the focus of her book on page 9: "This book will explore the attitudes that Jesus and his followers took toward marriage, family, procreation, and celibacy, and thus toward "human nature" in general, and the controversies these attitudes sparked as they were variously interpreted among Christians for generations -- or for millenia, depending on how one counts." Pagels' book assumes some primary knowledge of early Church history, as Pagels' primary focus is on the different uses of the early chapters of Genesis in reference to the political and theological challenges of the first five centuries of Christianity. Although the six chapters loosely follow the chronology, the focus of the content in each chapter is topical, rather than historical. It's a little difficult at first to read the chapters together into a whole, but the themes that emerge in the early chapters do build upon one another, up to the sixth chapter in which the interpretation of the creation and fall is discussed the most. Some of these themes are the following: 1.Is it better to be celibate or to have a family? Even as far back as the New Testament, the question isn't 100% clear. According to Luke (as Pagels reads it), Jesus' admonition against divorce is absolute, and the "marrying and giving in marriage" is a sign of commitment to the affairs of this world instead of the coming Kingdom of God. In both instances, passages from Genesis (chapters 1 and 6) are applied to make the point. However, Matthew's use of Luke's material here adds some qualifiers to the prohibition of divorce. On a similar note, the differences can't be ignored between Paul's celibacy and lukewarm approval for marriage in I Corinthians and "Paul's" outright advocacy of marriage and family in I Timothy. 2.What exactly is "liberty"? The Christians, when they were treated as second-class citizens under Roman rule, argued for the right not to worship the imperial gods, which many thought were real demons who were the impure product of the "sons of God" and "daughters of men" in the pre-flood times (Genesis chapter 6). The Roman idea of liberty was living under a good emperor, and that the criticism of their practices amounted to a form of treason. In support of this, the idea that all men were created by God "in his image" proved appealing to those in the underclass who suffered in the empire. But when Christianity became the religion of the empire, questions of religious liberty were asked in a completely different context. 3.Is the path to God, or a more intimate relationship with him, achievable through human effort? The gnostics thought so -- they took interpretations of Genesis to extraordinary lengths, some holding that mankind was governed by preexisting forces that were beyond their free will, and that it was the reintegration of the good forces within us through knowledge that made Christians complete. The ascetics also thought human effort brought them closer to God, by rejecting both sexualty and the comforts of the world. Oddly enough, the way that each of these movements were criticized went in two different directions. In repudiating the gnostics, the church fathers argued that Christianity was not about finding a cosmic ebb and flow and the acceptance of suffering, but about a moral freedom to choose a moral life. Two centuries later, the muscular efforts of the ascetic life were made dim by the emergence of Augustine's pessimism about human nature, i.e., that no effort was sufficient to escape our defective natures. At the end of the formation process, with all of these elements in the mix, we end up with a view of humanity that to the outsider would appear to be the worst of all options: the original sin is perpetuated by the childbirth process, nature itself is defective (with disease and stillbirth cited as evidence), no one can remove the stain of the original sin -- not even converted believers. Pagels explains that this view of mankind, and of the fall, was not only well-suited to a centralized church authority, it also provided the individual with an explanation of why bad things happen in the world. Whether intentional or not, a good deal of the book is framed in reference to how Christian orthodoxy has been formed in reaction to a crisis -- the Jewish society, the Roman empire, the gnostic subversiveness, and the Pelagian opposition to centralized church rule. While it may seem that the Catholic Church has been the same for at least 1600 years, Pagels' book provides a partial glimpse of how much in flux the first 400 years were in shaping orthodoxy.
Rating:
Summary: fascinating historical discussion where many fear to tread
Review: Reading Elaine Pagels is much like reading Marvin Harris or B.F. Skinner. You thought you understood something, and then you find yourself following her arguments and realizing that you didn't understand quite as well as you thought you did. This is not for those who are afraid to have their basic assumptions questioned. As a unitarian, I find Dr. Pagels work in the finest tradition of religious and literary criticism. I've never read a bad book of hers, and this is no exception.
| 
