mountainman

Serendipitous archaeological discoveries related to
the new testament apocrypha (NTA) have increased over
the last century, as has the publication of their english
translations. The Nag Hammadi codices perhaps almost
doubled the count of primary sources of the NTA
which are now available for study.

Prior to these recent events, the history of the NTA
has been allowed (by default) to be presented by the
orthodox christian "historians" particularly the first
of such, called Eusebius, and his continuators, namely
the Ecclesiatical Orthodox of the 4th and 5th centuries.

Below, Marvin Meyer calls this class of authoritative
assertors "the Christian heresiologists".

The primary documents now in our possession do not
permit us to conjecture on the fate of the NTA which
is not in our possession. However, the story that
they do tell is that the NTA was preserved by burial.

These texts were consigned to the earth in an epoch
at which time it was deemed they would have a better
chance of survival buried than than they would if "found"
by those of the orthodox authorities who were searching
them out for destruction.

The Gnostic Discoveries
Marvin Meyer

INTRODUCTION

p.1

GNOSTIC WISDOM - Ancient and Modern

Since the discovery of the ancient texts that comprise
the Nag Hammadi library, the world of the historical Jesus,
the schools of Judaism and Graeco-Roman religion, and the
varieties of Christianity has begun to look remarkably
different than it did once upon a time."


"Prior to the discovery of the NHL, "gnosticism" typically
was considered to be an early and pernicious Christian heresey,
and much of our knowledge of gnostic religion was gleaned
from the writings of the Christian heresiologists, those
authors who attempted to establish orthodoxy and expose
heresey in the early church. The Christian heresiologists
disagreed vehemently with Christian gnostics on matters
of faith and life, and as a result they portrayed gnostic
believers as vile heretics."


p.2

"From these and other heresiological writers, who were
bristling with righteous wrath against the gnostic opponents
[vile heretics], we can hardly expect to read a fair and
balanced account of gnostic religion, and before the
discovery of the NHL this heresiological bias permeated
much of the discussion of gnosis"



p.31

After introducing the known provinence of the NHL
including an examination of the physical cartonage :


"It is quite plausible, then, to conclude that one likely
scenario for the time and occasion for the burial of the
NHL may be related to Athanasius' festal letter of 367.
When Pachomian monks heard the stern words of admonition
of the holy archbishop ... they simply could not destroy
them, so they gathered them and hid them safely away, to
be uncovered on another day."

Earlier ...

"Athanasius condemns the heretics and warns the faithful
to beware of the heretics and their dispicable writings.
Apocryphal texts, he maintains,

'are fabrications of the heretics,
who writie them down when it pleases them
and generously assign to them
an early date of composition
in order that they may be able to draw upon them
as supposedly ancient writings
and have in them occasion to deceive the guileless.'
[19]

I think what might be able to be argued about the NTA
is that the NTA texts which survived have done so
because they were buried "out of harm's way".


1921 - Pistis Sophia was the most important Gnostic document
until the discovery and publication of The Nag Hammadi Library.
It was the first Gnostic religious document to exist in English
at the time it was first published in 1921. It is erroneously
named "Pistis Sophia".

The name "Pistis Sophia" was not derived from the document
which in more than one place states that the document is better
self-entitled as "A Portion of the Books of the Saviour".p

This title is more in keeping with the titles of the NHL.



Texts like gPeter survive because they were buried.

In the winter of 1886-7 a large fragment of the Greek text of the Gospel of Peter was discovered in a tomb of a monk at Akhmîm in Upper Egypt. It is a manuscript from the 8th century.


The primary documents are in our possession
because they were "Hidden in the Earth itself".



in (H.E,iii,25,6) Eusebius implicitly categorises the Gospel of Peter among the forged heretical gospels-

Eusebius on the Heretic Authors of the NTA

" those that are adduced by the heretics under the name of the apostles, ... of which no one of those writers in the ecclesiastical succession has condescended to make any mention in his works; and, indeed, the character of the style itself is very different from that of the apostles; and the sentiments, and the purport of those things that are advanced in them, deviating as far as possible from sound orthodoxy, evidently proves they are the fictions of heretical men; whence they are not only to be ranked among the spurious writings, but are to be rejected as altogether absurd and impious

The new testament canon was preserved by the continuators
of Eusebius and Constantine in the imperial basilicas of
authoritative power supported by the army.

The NTA were preserved by their being "Hidden".
They are called "Apocrypha" because the word means "hidden".
The NTA are "The Hidden Books" of the Christian Bible.
They were hidden because they were prohibited.



Is war natural?

What about the ravages of war?

We forget that Constantine was at war!
The catch cry was "Onward Chrestian Soldiers!



The NTA texts were preserved by burial in the earth.
Those who ordered them buried obviously decided that
they would stand a better chance of preservation
underground.



What evidence do we have concerning the intentional or otherwise
burning of people, books, libraries, churches, temples, public buildings,
state buildings, schools, universities and other architecture
during epochs of wholesale war?

Because we have been taught to understand that at heart we are all
good little "christian soldiers" we overlook the fact that at the
time Constantine implemented our beloved monotheistic state religion
he was very much at war.

When the commander of the forces of the western Roman empire defeated
the forces of the commander of the eastern Roman empire, Lucinius c.324 CE,
the war did not stop. It had only just begun!

Constantine's War against the "Gentiles"

"In 324 Constantine established Christianity as the official religion
of the Roman Empire, and that he carried through a systematic and
coherent reformation, at least in the eastern provinces which he
conquered in 324 as a professed Christian in a Christian crusade
against the last of the persecutor.

Constantine's Prohibition of Pagan Sacrifice, T. D. Barnes,
The American Journal of Philology, Vol. 105, No. 1 (Spring, 1984), pp. 69-72

Knowledge Burning by the 4th Century Christians

Have a good long look through the above list of citations.
Lets talk about them one by one if necessary.
But the problem is that nobody is acknowledging the fact that this was not an epoch of peace.
It was an epoch of war. Massive architectural destruction implies loss of books.
Start with the major temple to Asclepius at Aegae.

Constantine's destruction of ancient architecture started well before the "Council" of Nicaea.

At the "Council" of Nicaea, Constantine himself burns the written petitions of
attendees in their presence of the summoned authors. It was epoch of supreme authority in the hands of very few.

What does Eusebius disclose?
He states that

"The law directed that search
should be made for their books".

Does everyone understand what this implies?
"The law directed that search should be made for their books"

Search them out and not burn them?
Search them out just for fun and games perhaps?

Here we simply have Eusebius praising the Boss of the Christian Soldiers.

Eusebius, inspired by the Boss, and writing between 337 and 339 CE
that everything is harmonous and the heretics have headed out of town,
gets it all wrong.

The Arian controversy is associated with two things:

(1) the words of Arius of Alexandria recorded as at Nicaea 325 CE
(2) the preservation of various books of the NTA.


Despite Eusebius' description of harmony and contentment the Arian
controversy explodes across the empire and rages for two hundred years.
What was it all about? Shall we ask the othodox or the heretics?

We have only ever had the opportunity to read the accounts of the
Eusebian continuators - the victors who preserved a twisted story.

That is, until some of the primary documents started turning up
in archaeological finds. Now the picture is changing. We are now
for the very first time armed with additional information about
the heretics who were put out of business by the orthodox.

The heretics present as gnostics.
We have their primary documents in front of us.
What are they saying to us?

We have Eusebius and his continuators addressing the authors as
vile heretical gnostics.


Of course it was common practice.
What did the Romans do to Carthage?
What did Ardashir do the the Parthian literature?
Massive social changes occurred to the non christians.

One minute everyone was living, moving and having their being
in Asclepius, Apollo and Zeus, and the next Constantine sponsors
the Canon Cult.

The NTA were not to the liking of the orthodox canon cult.
The Extra gospels and extra Acts of Apostolic legend were unauthorised.


It has subsequently been thought that the NTA existed
before Nicaea, on the basis of the say so of the orthodox.
That COnstantine selected the canon from a larger group.

But I challenge this conjecture.
It is reasonable to also consider the possibility that the
NTA did not exist at Nicaea, but were authored and circulated
in the eastern greek academic empire as seditionist literature
directed against the NT canon.

This explanation provides a political reason why:

1) they were deemed heretical by the orthodox canon cult.
2) targeted for search and destroy missions by the OCC, and
3) preserved by burial like time-capsules by the resistance.


The gnostics resisted christianity.

Roger Pearse

Can someone split off Mountain Man's attempted derail? Thanks.

Toto

This is Pete's latest hobby horse. A few sentences were on topic, but otherwise had nothing in common with the thread.

mountainman

"A few sentences were on topic"

Well, a few is better than none I suppose.