A Scathing Review of an Orthodox Author’s Characterizations of Apocryphal Gospels and the Christians Who Once Valued Them, by James Bean
I’m sure this book: https://www.academia.edu/s/ed07a7a698 will be well received in the community it is intended for. In terms of historical accuracy however it does not represent a sincere curiosity for truth in any scholarly sense. Predictably it’s confined to an orthodox dogma, restricted canon of scripture, and makes some factual errors when characterizing the religions and scriptures of others, those whose ‘crime’ or “heresy” was being part of some other Christian faith-community in antiquity outside of “orthodoxy” as they came to define themselves.
For instance, there is a kind of “dating game” used by orthodoxy regarding ancient texts. There is an eagerness to date the composition of New Testament books as early as they can, and always date texts outside of the New Testament as late as possible to delegitimize those extra-canonical texts believing that an early date equals legitimacy and authoritativeness, and late composition means of lesser importance. They may be rather generous and unquestioning of the canonical gospels but have an entirely different, far more rigorous and aggressive stance toward books they characterize as “apocryphal.” Writings outside the orthodox authorized canon are always portrayed as of late composition deep into the Second or Third Centuries, late as possible, the later the better, dubious, heretical, “gnostic”, and of no historical value.
A glaring factual error would be this sentence from the book: “The person of Christ did not occupy a central place in any of the Gnostic systems”. Wow, that’s just flat-out false. Ever read some of the Nag Hammadi Library or Pistis Sophia? Apparently not.
Another propaganda sentence from the book: “The Gnostic systems of Valentinus, Basilides, and Marcion differed significantly from each other, but they all had in common the combination of separate elements of Christianity with elements from Eastern religions, occultism, magic, and astrology.” Well no. Basilides was quite informed by Platonism. Why isn’t Platonism included on the list of influences I wonder? Marcion was quite devoted to the Apostle Paul, not some black robe wearing occultism. The Gospel of Truth by Valentinus is one of the most loving, God-devoted and eloquent texts of early Christianity. No dark occult magic being advocated by any of those sources. They represented other expressions of early Christianity, as did the Ebionites (the Jesus Movement or Hebrew Christians that should also be remembered). Were those reading gospels such as the Gospel of Thomas, Gospel of Mary or the Gospel of the Nasoreans merely Buddhist or Hindu infiltrators from the east pretending to be Christians in an attempt to make converts in the western world? I think not. Sure, these spiritual movements of the early centuries AD had somewhat differing Christian theologies and christologies, and they attended different churches, but what disinformation is leveled against them! What propaganda continues to be parroted, echoed, and perpetuated with each new generation of orthodox publications about Christian origins!
Another passage from the book suggesting a violent past without any sense of universally recognized principles of free will, human rights, choice, or regard for religious freedom being extended to other types of Christians affiliated with other denominations and sects by orthodoxy in the Roman Empire long ago. “Alongside the canonical texts, in the early church there are many compositions that have become known as apocryphal in scholarly literature. They include a number of gospels, for example the Gospel of Thomas, the Gospel of Philip, the gospel of Peter and the gospel of Nicodemus. Some of the apocryphal gospels were condemned by the church and their texts were removed from use and destroyed.” “DESTROYED.” Jesus may have been critical of the Pharisees yet he never gathered a battalion of Roman Legions to go on over to their meeting places and destroy their writings, forbid them from copying more, or assembling for worship to practice their religion. No doubt some readers of this are acquainted with that history of not only forbidding people from reading certain books but far more disturbing accounts of oppression in the name of religion. And the word “apocryphal” is not a pejorative term.
A couple of honest books about early Christianity and ancient scriptures used by various Christian sects of antiquity I highly recommend: “Disciples”, by Keith Akers; “A New New Testament: A Bible for the Twenty-first Century Combining Traditional and Newly Discovered Texts”, by Hal Taussig; and, “The Pre-Nicene New Testament: Fifty-four Formative Texts”, by Robert Price.
