The Apocryphal Gospels: A Very Short Introduction

Very Short Introductions #201

by Paul Foster, Jennifer Van Dyck (Narrator)

"This Very Short Introduction offers a clear, accessible, and concise account of the apocryphal gospels - exploring their origins, their discovery, and discussing how the various texts have been interpreted both by the Church and beyond." "Looking at texts from the Gospels from Nag Hammadi to the Dialogues with the Risen Saviour , Paul Foster shows how the apocryphal gospels reflect the diversity that existed within early Christianity, and examines the extent to which they can be used to reconstruct an accurate portrait of the historical Jesus. Including discussions of controversies and case-studies such as the alleged hoax surrounding the discovery of Secret Mark , Foster concludes that the non-canonical texts, considered in the correct context, offer us an important window on the vibrant and multi-faceted face of early Christianity." Readership: Non-specialist readers interested in early Christianity, the Bible, and the teachings and life of Jesus; also students of theology or biblical studies.

Genres: Religion, History, Nonfiction, Christianity, Theology, Audiobook, Philosophy

Audiobook

First published February 26, 2009

Reviews

[Bojan Tunguz · Rating 5 out of 5]

Over the last ten years or so there has been a flurry of interest into the apocryphal gospels and all forms of early non-orthodox Christian thought and practice. Much of this is due to the fact that many of these early non-orthodox sources were for the first time in almost two thousand years available in their original form, thanks to the remarkable set of archeological discoveries that commenced in the late nineteenth century and continue to present day. It became exciting to see these ancient texts in their original form, unmediated to us through the prism of their opponents or detractors. For the better or for worse, some of the interest in these texts stemmed from the desire for sensational and mysterious, and many of those texts became the source of ever more exaggerated claims. To the opponents of Christianity, or at least its more orthodox form, these texts gave a hope of discovering more "authentic" Christianity that was not corrupted by the "power-hungry churches" over the course of history. This interest has been additionally fueled by all sorts of books of varying level of credibility that purported to reveal the conspiracies at the heart of Christianity. However, the more sober and scholarly assessment of these non-canonical text paints a much more subdued picture. For a start, the term "gospel" has been used widely for many of these texts that vary widely from the canonical gospels and amongst themselves. Most of these apocryphal gospels are available to us only as fragments, and there is very scant evidence that even in their original form they had been anything but very short texts. Furthermore, far from being earlier than the canonical gospels these extra-canonical texts are by and large later in origin and depend heavily on the canonical gospels for the kernel of their narrative. In the instances where they deviate from those narratives, they tend to be very fanciful, mysterious or downright bizarre. Most of these apocryphal gospels were a Gnostic reaction to orthodox Christianity, and were written in order to bolster the Gnostics' theological claims. Overall, the scholarly consensus is that they shed very little light on the "real" historical Jesus. Their primary value is in giving us more informed view of the diversity and growth of early Christianity.

This very short introduction introduces the reader to the most important and famous of the apocryphal gospels. It gives ample quotations and references to those works, and makes a critical assessment of their value. It is written with a general reader in mind, and for the most part stays clear of any theological or doctrinal biases. This is a very useful introduction to the apocryphal gospels.

[Richard · Rating 4 out of 5]

Read this for an essay; quite good and easily digestable, although a little slim (well, it's not meant to be a scholarly tome) on the detail and the aspect of how this conflicts with orthodox views of Jesus.

[John · Rating 3 out of 5]

Nothing too gripping here, feel free to move along. Basically the author says that all the non-canonicals have at best two quotes that the big four don't and the only thing the former are good for are good is relating that second and third century Christians weren't as much on the same page as maybe the "winners" would have you believe.

I went after this because it was short, in audio form, and I didn't want to be completely in the dark on the subject. Well mission accomplished, but it wasn't much fun. I confirmed that The Gospel of Thomas is the first loser, and now I can start straining to work "well it's not like you found the Nag Hammadi codices" into conversation.

[Amanda · Rating 3 out of 5]

I listened to the audio version. It was easy to zone out to the narrator’s voice and I could tell when a tough word was stumbled upon. The text itself read less like an introduction and more like a scholarly essay, with parts that I had trouble keeping up with. The organization of the contents seemed scattered and I wished it were more comprehensive for the casual reader who is interested in the topic but unfamiliar with the background.

[Kyle · Rating 4 out of 5]

epic tales of jesus the child asshole and esoteric mumblings

[Judy · Rating 2 out of 5]

I’m not sure how to rate this, but I learned a lot of interesting things about Christianity and conspiracy theories! It wasn’t too boring :)

[Kay · Rating 4 out of 5]

3.5/5, rounded up to 4/5

[Hannah · Rating 3 out of 5]

A great guide to the Apocryphal Gospels. They reveal little about the historical Jesus, but a lot of interesting tipbits about the way that early Christians were battling over the form of Christianity and Jesus.

NOTES TO SELF

In the gospels, Jesus was a highly mystical figure, used to endorse the religious practices of the various factions in existence at this time. The apocryphal gospels covered are those found in the Oxrhynchus (found by Grenfell and Hunt- only 4% of which have actually been published), the Nag Hamadi (found in Egypt, obstructed by blood fueds). It's kind of incredible the battering these manuscripts have had, and the careful work done to reconstruct them.

Great section explaining the variety of different forms of gnostic Christianity - e.g. Valentinian gnoticism. Valentinian gnosticism was based on the beliefs of Valentinius. These early Christians believed in aeons or emmanations from God, fifteen complimentary pairs of male and female aeons. People were seen as comprising of the female, spiritual aeon, trapped within a male, materialist aeon. The reunion of the fractured being could only be achieved through Valentinian rituals. The gospels associated with this gnosticism is The Gospel of Truth. This movement was broadly related to Marcion, who attempted to jettison all links Christianity had to Judaism, and Justin the Martyr, who sought to defend Christianity in rigorous philosophical terms against the charge of being folklorish and flimsy. The Gospel of Philip reflects the Valentinian practie of the Bridal Chamber ceremony. Baptism was seen as only the first step towards spiritual enlightenment, the 'marriage' was seen as the reunification of one's male, material body with one's angelic, 'female' soul. After this ceremony, 'bridegrooms' would abstain from sexual acts, in order not to refracture the relationship between their body and soul. The Valentians similarly believed in the pre-existnece of all our souls before they enter our bodies, thus instead of 'blessed is he who believes', Jesus says in the Gospel of Philip 'Blessed is he who is before he came into being. For he who is, has been and shall be." Gnostic believers 'pre-existed' and will return to the unified state.

In contrast, Sethian gnosticism was more associated with Judiasm, intermingling platonic and Jewish ideas. The Gospel of Judas reflects this Sethian gnosticism. The origin of Seth was seen as a result of a divine incarnation, therefore making decendents of Seth superior to the descendents of Cain. Descendents of Seth were believed to strive for the upward movement of the soul to return to the realm from which Seth was descended. Orphite gnosticism, founded by Origen, seems to have had similar belief as the soul moved various concentric spiritual circles or levels. The Gospel of the Egyptians is a form of Sethian gnosticism. in addition to the Trinity, the Gospel of the Egyptians posits the existence of a divine mother figure called Barbelo. She concurs with God, she is self originating, she is virginal and presides over heaven. She is described with a series of made up words and self referential magical language.

The Gospel of Thomas in fun (all off the wall proverbs, like how a lion would be blessed to be eaten by a human because it would bring it closer to humanity, or the rather sweet proverb 'be passerby'. Here, as Foster writes, "it appears to promote an inner recognition of a lack of place as one seeks to return to the true state and origin of existence" e.g. the importance of renouncing the world in a spiritual journey.

Equally diverting is the Infancy Gospel of Jesus, where Jesus maims and murders school children, embarrases and attacks his teachers, and refuses to be ruled by Joseph who is 'not his real Dad'. The Protoavaneglum tells the story of the immaculate conception of Mary. Some other stories get slight twists here- the 'Jesus in the manger' part is repackaged as the result of Mary trying to hide the infant Jesus from Hereod. In this story, the infant Jesus is miraculously brought forth from Mary and lay at her breast without any Labour- and it goes to town with the fact that her hymen is still in tact. No one believes her, including Salome, who is set on fire for her disbelief, until the infant Jesus holds her hand. The Gospel of Mary is about Mary Magdalene, and her considerable authority ; she actually holds fourth on visions from Jesus - her and Peter have a row. I should go back and read that one.

The wackiest and weirdest Gospel that I don't think I can ever get my head round is the Gospel of Judas. Judas says that Jesus is from 'the immortal realm of Barbelo', but still puts Jesus to death? Confused.

Vocab
- Soteriological- to do with salvation.
- Docetic- the belief that Jesus' humanity was not real, but only a cloak or shell to those who did not perceive what he really was. Believers thought that Jesus' true form, the logos, only became apparent during the time of the passion.
- Repristinated - restored to original condition.

[John Smart · Rating 4 out of 5]

Interesting and illuminating insights into early Christianity

[Jack R.]

The Oxford "A Very Short Introduction" series is never really "hit-or-miss." Their brevity, and consensus-based encyclopedic-style content, makes for brisk, informative reads that lead towards a basic understanding of the topic of discussion. Scholars rarely go off in provocative directions and that is fine and dandy, really. I want to learn the general gist of, say, geology, not venture down some niche controversy about magma. If you read these little texts with the hopes of becoming an expert in geology, or even with the ability to delve right into the the deep foundational works of X subject, you will be disappointed.

Foster provides a clear recapitulation of the major non-canonical gospel texts (some are "gnostic," a phrase he uses with nuanced, supportive qualification instead of fashionable rejection, while others are pious fictions and almost Midrashic elaborations on Jesus themes). He denies their connection to the historical Jesus, a popular tendency among certain liberal New Testament scholars in the 1980s-2000s, but instead contends their value is in clarifying a broad definition for the term "gospel" (he writes: "perhaps the most that can be concluded is that texts which appear to have some link with Jesus and also relate an understanding of ‘good news’ or salvation, seem to have had the potential to be classified as gospels," (133)) and in elucidating the diversity and divisions in the early Church, he claims too whitewashed by patristic sources. He writes, "for the historian of ancient Christianity this is itself an extremely important window onto the piety, practices, and beliefs of diverse groups of Christians in the 2nd and 3rd centuries–and beyond" (136).

Foster follows the VSI guideline of straightforward, consensus scholarship. While he rebukes poor scholarship (particularly concerning the National Geographic Gospel of Judas translation) and conspiracy theorizing, he does not spend an inordinate amount of pages relitigating the arguments pop-scholars like Ehrman, Pagels or Karen L. King (although this book came out prior to the latter's public embarrassment concerning forged gospel fragments). He clearly summarizes the non-canonical gospel texts and attempts to provide context to their outré theology. This is not a "one-stop" shop for knowledge about these works, but it is surely a better starting point than some mid-2000s woo-woo digression published by Rupert Murdoch's Harper Collins.

[Rob McMonigal · Rating 4 out of 5]

I'm fascinated by what didn't make it into the official Bible, so this intro to some of those texts was a good, quick read. It's not comprehensive at all, but that's not its point.

What it did show me is that most of those gospels came well after Christ, and the reason they aren't part of the main Bible is that they tend to be written so late as to be rather dubious in terms of authenticity to Christ's teachings. (No, there's no way we'll ever know how authentic the Big 4 are, but they are from around the 1st Century and therefore more likely to be what was taught originally.) They do show that Christianity has been splintered almost from the get-go, making the Protestant Reformation, non-denominational churches, and other things we think of as being unique to their time periods less special. Folks have *always* wanted to make Jesus say and defend their positions!

My favorite parts are when Foster clearly thinks a document is bogus (not in terms of being old, but in terms of its veracity) and he decimates it with sarcasm that's still scholarly.

What I learned from this is that there's a good case for the Gospel of Thomas to be useful, and possibly the Gospel of Peter (though it's clearly designed to make the Romans look good), along with a few of the lost texts that are considered Jewish-Christian (i.e. they hew closer to retaining aspects of Jewish religious practices). But overall, most of these run from the fanciful and weird (the Infancy Gospel of Thomas, where Jesus-as-petulant-child runs amok) to those that barely resemble Christianity at all (looking at you, "Gospel" of Judas.)

If you want a place to start, I think this is a good one. It also has helped me see the early Church better than I did before, and that was really cool to me.

[Hank Hoeft · Rating 4 out of 5]

When I was a kid, I’d see ads in comic books, in the backs of magazines like Popular Science and Popular Mechanics, and in the Johnson Smith Co. catalog of novelty items, for the “lost” or “hidden” or “secret” books of the Bible. Those ads always intrigued me, and conjured up visions of arcane and esoteric knowledge of Christianity and history, like stories of Prestor John or the history of the Knights Templar or the Illuminati. But I never sent off for any of those volumes and their promises of mystic wisdom.

Well, The Apocryphal Gospels: A Very Short Introduction was the perfect way for me to finally scratch that ecclesiastical itch. In its short length (118 pages of text), it only presents a sampling from all the non-canonical Christian texts that we have, or have heard of, but author Paul Foster does an excellent job of summing up their general contents, and their significance to Christians and to the world at large. Unfortunately for my childhood visions and dreams of superior knowledge, the apocrypha were, as far as scholars could tell, mostly written later, not earlier, than the four accepted synoptic gospels of Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John, and are interesting and useful not for the increased knowledge of the life and teachings of Jesus Christ, but for the insights they give us into the varied patchwork of beliefs and directions of the early days of Christianity. It’s a bit like discovering there is no philosopher’s stone that can transmutate base elements into gold or grant eternal life, but hey, that in itself is increased and superior knowledge.

[Stephen Harrison · Rating 3 out of 5]

This wasn't quite what I expected. The author is an expert on the New Testament and on gospels of Jesus that didn't make it into the New Testament. I thought he would explain what each gospel was and why it wasn't selected for incorporation. Instead, he does pretty much what he says he would do, which is tell the reader what makes a gospel, how they were discovered and what we can learn from them. Foster does a serious textual analysis, where he finds that most of these "gospels" were written after the four gospels of the New Testament. Rather than using them as a window onto new aspects of Jesus, he uses them as a window on the early church, seeing in each a possible doctrinal purpose. These purposes could be laying the blame for Jesus's death on the Jews, as was common in the 3rd century CE, or possibly to raise women's status in the church.

Foster shows how difficult it is to evaluate gospels, although he doesn't deal with the canonical gospels in the same way. This was disappointing for me, but was not the purpose of the book, so I can't hold it against him. I would like to see him write as critical a book about the canonical gospels and explain why they were chosen.

Obviously, this book has a narrow focus and that is what makes it accessible. But it would be nice to see a broader work along the same lines.

[Luke · Rating 3 out of 5]

A decent run-down on the alternative texts of early Christianity. What becomes overwhelmingly clear is that the Church fathers got it exactly right in choosing what became the Bible. All the apocryphal gospels are much later, much weaker, and sometimes fully insane.

One revealing part was exposing the sensationalist and blatantly wrong translation that became the international story of the 'gospel' of Judas.

Something weird about the undue reverence many scholars have for the apocryphal gospels is the belief that they may 'preserve' some traditions that pre-date the canonical gospels - such as the wording of some sayings in the 'gospel' of Thomas. They seem to forget that the canonical gospels also emerged out of earlier traditions, and with a century head start, shouldn't the traditions they 'preserve' still be the far earlier account? Also annoying is the assumption that the canonical gospels have to be post-destruction of the Temple (70 AD) because Jesus predicted it. That's arguing in a circle: Jesus isn't divine so he can't make predictions, therefore his predictions must be fabricated, therefore the gospels must be late, therefore Jesus isn't divine.

Not to mention, by the way, the 'Criterion of Embarrassment' which argues that: the only stories or sayings we can be sure are true are those that the writers would be embarrassed to put in (i.e. that conflict with the divinity of Jesus), and surprise, surprise, all that remains is a human Jesus, therefore Jesus can't be divine. The whole approach assumes 'nothing is miraculous' then concludes 'nothing is miraculous'. I really don't know why they bother.

[Rasmus Tillander · Rating 4 out of 5]

Kiinnostavia välähdyksiä alkukristillisyyden moninaisuudesta.

Raamatun ulkopuolelle jäävät evankeliumit ovat todella kiinnostava aihe ja tämä lyhyt johdatus esittelee niitä sangen kunniakkaasti. Osansa saavat gnostilaiset tekstit, lapsuusevankeliumit sekä myös enemmän kanonisten evankeliumen kaltaiset tekstit. Tämän parissa mietin useasti, että miten on voinutkin kuluttaa niin kauan teologisen tiedekunnan käytäviä näistä juuri kuulematta (tai kuuntelematta).

Foster esittää tässä johdannossa mielestäni selkeästi tarpeeksi tekstejä ja niihin liittyvää taustatietoa (mm. arkeologiasta), jotta lukija saa kokonaiskuvan aiheesta. Rakenteellisesti kirja on kuitenkin vähän erikoinen: johdantolukujen jälkeen esitellään Nag Hammadista löytyneet neljä tekstiä, sitten lapsuusevankeliumeita, sitten Jeesuksen julkista toimintaa kuvaavia tekstejä ja lopuksi heittoluokka johon kuuluvat Juudaksen ja Marian evankeliumit. Itse olisin ehkä kaivannut selkeämpää temaattista jaoittelua, mutta se on pieni puute. Aluksi pidin myös erikoisena Fosterin painotusta evankeliumi-termin merkitykselle, mutta tämäkin palveli lopulta tarkoitustaan.

Siis jos lyhyt yleiskatsaus näihin kiinnostaviin Raamatun ulkopuolisiin teksteihin kiinnostaa niin tässä on kyllä oikein hyvä johdanto.

[Stephen Theaker · Rating 4 out of 5]

Continuing my efforts to become Britain's cleverest chap by half-listening to all 200+ of the Very Short Introductions that are on Audible Plus… This one was pretty interesting, about the bits that were left out of the official bible, and how they were recovered centuries later. Best bit was the non-canonical gospel concerning Jesus as a murderous little boy. He had definite Prince Joffrey vibes. Those gospels trying to explain away inconvenient elements like Jesus's brothers and the overwhelming likelihood that Jesus's father would have been his mother's husband were also interesting. Had to groan about the guy who came into possession of a centuries-old document and decided to freeze it, destroying the binding. The author's assertion that the fanciful elements of the non-canonical gospels make them unlikely to be true was interesting, since that would only be the case if you assume that none of the supernatural stuff about Jesus was true to begin with. If he really was the son of God, then nothing would be off the table.

[Rena Sherwood · Rating 1 out of 5]

This very short introduction is in dire need of a very short introduction.

As a reading experience, this sucks. Granted, the Apocryphal Gospels is a very difficult subject to begin with, but this reads like it was badly translated into English. The prose is stiff, dense and lethargic. I read a text-only version, but I don't think the few photos included would've helped any.

The author also thinks that Jesus was a real person. I don't know if he really thinks that, or if he was just fearful of Christian backlash. There is absolutely no proof that Jesus ever existed. That a supposed historian would talk about a "historical Jesus" is like a geography teacher being a Flat Earther. Foster then goes on to claim that some Apocryphal Gospels were "more historical" than others.

Oy.

You're much better off reading books by Bart D. Ehrman, who is not only a much better writer, but a better historian. His books are much longer than this one. Sadly, there just seems to be no "very short" guide to the Apocryphal Gospels.

[Louis Lapides · Rating 4 out of 5]

An interesting survey of apocryphal literature focusing on several so-called gospels. If one is unfamiliar with the variety and content of these gospels, Foster’s little 137 pg book will be helpful.

I appreciated the fact the author respected the canonical gospels enough to hold them up as a reliable source for information about Jesus. While the apocryphal gospels certainly reflect the variety of Christian thinking in the second-third centuries after Christ, they do not always reflect the truths found in traditional Christianity. For those who want the mystical, secret accounts of Jesus’ birth and childhood, these gospels will be alluring. However, the various accounts of Jesus as an obdurate, violent child are so far out in left field that it is difficult to take these writings seriously.

[Bohdana · Rating 4 out of 5]

The book looked over definitions and the uses of apocryphal books. It looks in-depth at various of the gospels.

It looked at various gospels: Gospel of Thomas, Gospel of Peter, Gospel of Mary, Protevangelium of James, Gospel of Judas, and other smaller fragments such as Papyrus Oxyrhynchus 840 and Papyrus Egerton 2.

The book looked at certain debates regarding the non-canonical/apocryphal gospels and provides an academic view that tampers popular misinterpretations.

The main thesis of the book seemed to be that the apocryphal books in themselves are useful for their show of the diversity of early Christianity and the way it reflects on debates in the communities in later centuries such as 2nd, 3rd and 4th century concerns. One example is the disputes over hierarchical church leadership and the contextualizing personal vison within religious experience.

[Taylor Swift Scholar · Rating 4 out of 5]

This book was exactly what I want out of a Very Short Introduction. I learned a lot about a topic I knew little about and have a list of additional reading. Main takeaways: I had no idea that there were ancient texts floating around that portray Jesus the preteen as a murderous, vengeful know-it-all. Or that some early Christians were anxious to portray both Mary AND Joseph as virgins. The author takes a clear stance on what the Apocryphal Gospels are (a valuable tool for understanding the diversity of perspectives in early Christianity) and what they are not (lost knowledge about the "original" Jesus Christ.)

[Timothy Klob · Rating 3 out of 5]

Some good information here, and a good general overview, but difficult to follow in a few parts with lists of sections and page numbers from some of the apocryphal gospels without sufficient accompanying commentary. Might have been better had it focused on a few of the most prominent or widely known apocryphal gospels instead of attempting to cover the entire waterfront including many of the lesser known or fragmentary documents.

[Michael · Rating 5 out of 5]

As the name of the book states, this is a very short introduction into the topic. Nevertheless it offers an easy to understand overview of what is known about the early years of Christianity. This book is a good starting point for everyone interested in the origins and the moulding of Christian beliefs.

[Nicholas · Rating 5 out of 5]

Overall good read

I'm not a historian or linguist, so I can't comment on the accuracy of the contents. That said, I really liked the material, how it was divided and presented, and the summary nature of the book. Super interesting for someone with an amateur interest in religious doctrine.

[John · Rating 3 out of 5]

Pedantic, at least as an audiobook (many of the descriptions even include full collations, snore), but rich in insights about what these texts tell us about the spiritual and intellectual directions early Christianity took.

[Tara · Rating 3 out of 5]

Read this for a class

[Paññādhammika Bhikkhu · Rating 4 out of 5]

Short enough.

[Gab Nug · Rating 3 out of 5]

Don't feel like I can fairly review this, as I never finished it. I got bored with it, but I'd like to examine it again in the future.

[Becky Ye · Rating 4 out of 5]

Credibility- 8
Accessibility - 10
Writing - 8
Pay-off - 8
Individuality - 5
Logic - 9
Enjoyment - 7

55 -> 7.86 (4 stars)

[Barry · Rating 5 out of 5]

I learned a tonne with this one

[A. Macbeth’s bks · Rating 2 out of 5]

Gosh I wrote an entire little book report for this very short intro to non-canonical pseudo-gospel writings, read in preparation for an upcoming group Advent study, and forgot to save it so will have to reconstitute it later .

What an Advent Study Book selection ! But I’m nobody , so I just have to go along with the flow.
The group study guide handout has been made available ahead of time. It’s like a syllabus for a 4-credit 6-week course at one of the better liberal arts colleges.

In the meantime, I did read this book for the upcoming Advent book study’s deep dive into a religious book and will have to reread it in bits and bobs for the zoom sessions. I’ve never been that impressed by biblical archeology as a profession nor ever that interested in bible translation as a field of study or practice. In fact, interestingly, I studied Latin for four years in high school and I do have a full B.A. in french studies with specialization in translation from French to English, and I never encountered biblical translation mentioned during all those years of study.

U should see the pictures of some of the Nag Hammadi gnostic gospels library documents ; it looks like a pile of rocks and stones and some parts of it are like smashed to bits and powder -those smashed parts would be lacunae .