mountainman

The Gnostic Discoveries: The Impact of the Nag Hammadi Library (or via: amazon.co.uk)
by Marvin Meyer (Author)

"SINCE THE DISCOVERY of the ancient texts that comprise the Nag Hammadi library,
the world of the historical Jesus, the schools of Judaism and Greco-Roman Religion,
and the varieties of Christianity has begun to look remarkably different
than it did once upon a time."

Editorial Review From Publishers Weekly:

"the world of the HJ .....
has begun to look remarkably different
than it did once upon a time".

spamandham

While I agree that Nag Hammadi library (and Dead sea scrolls as well) *should* fundamentally change the outlook of early Christianity, I don't think it adds to your general Eusebian forgery thesis.

mountainman

Thanks for the note spamandham.

For a number of reasons I have relegated my earlier thesis
concerning an explanation using profane ancient historical
evidence for the invention of the NT canon to thesis (3).

My main index page to notes has been modified as follows:

Background notes in respect of three separate but related theses are presented below.
It is important to note that thesis (1) is to be approached first, thesis (2) second, etc.
Thesis (3) should be approached and understood after examination of theses (1) and (2).


Thesis 1

The New Testament Apocryphal tractates
were authored after the Council of Nicaea
as a Hellenistic reaction to the Canon
and represent a Homerization of the Canon.


Thesis 2

The author of Apocrypha - "The Hidden Books of the New Testament"
and the historical person behind the fourth century pseudonym "Leucius Charinus"
is man at the focus of the "Arian Controversy", Arius of Alexandria.

I intend to pursue the argument of thesis (1)
before re-approaching theses (2) and (3).

The problem that I have encountered however
in this approach is that very few people want to
discuss the new testament apocryphal books as
they appear to be regarded as "poor cousins" when
compared to the examination of the "canon itself".

My intention is to try and firstly establish that my
thesis (1) is in a better agreement with all the available
evidence than is the current mainstream theory.

[nb: the mainstream theory of the NT Apocrypha,
which of course since 1950-1970 includes the NHC,
presumes that a number (about 25) of NT apocrypha
were authored before Nicaea. The basis of the
evidence for this mainstream belief are a very small
number of references in Eusebius' "history", the key
reference being Tertullian on the existence of the
"Acts of Paul".]

I am working on this thesis as we speak.
The C14 citations relate to the NT Apocrypha.
They tell me that I have an argument.
Eusebius is a hostile witness to the Apocrypha.
He tells us in no uncertain terms that they were
written by terrible and unworthy heretics.

Would Eusebius have interpolated Josephus about "Jesus"?
Would Eusebius have interpolated Tertullian about "Heretics"?
These are two different issues.

The former concerns false representations of orthodoxy
which do not concern my thesis 1. The latter concerns false
representations of the unorthodox heretics which I will
deal with in theses 1 and 2.

I found that there was/is so much emotional baggage
associated with the argument that we are looking at
the 4th century invention of the canon, that I have
decided to start again in a new direction examining the
non canonical side of the coin of "Early Christianity".

I have atheists telling me I cannot be right because
of what the atheists learnt from their "preachers".
This was getting nobody nowhere.
So we now go the long way around.

Thanks again for your open-minded questions.

mountainman

As an afterthought a note about the "Gnostics".

The Gnostics I will argue did not believe in the HJ.
The Acts and Gospels of the NT Apocrypha are
described by Renan as "peurile amplifications
of the canon".

The Gnostics were not Jewish but Hellenistic.
They had just been deprived of their temple network 324 CE.
Constantine flattened it and prohibited its use.

Constantine and the Problem of Anti-Pagan Legislation in the Fourth Century
Scott Bradbury, Classical Philology, Vol. 89, No. 2 (Apr., 1994), pp. 120-139
Constantine's Prohibition of Pagan Sacrifice
T. D. Barnes, The American Journal of Philology, Vol. 105, No. 1 (Spring, 1984), pp. 69-72

Constantine wanted everyone to adopt the NT canon.

The gnostic NT Apocrypha were then authored as an act of sedition.
They mocked and mimiced the Canonical Jesus and Canonical Apostles.
They incorporated wild Hellenistic romance narratives of unbelievable
events as if someone had decided to meld Homer and the Canon.
They incorporate at least one of Aesop's fables.
They were very popular seditious tractates against the state religion.

Books were immediately banned and prohibited by Constantine following Nicaea.
They had to be buried and hidden.
One was to deliver such books to the fire,
or face the possibility of "immediate beheading".
What were these books and songs of Arius?
We think we dont know.
We think Arius' works were lost.

Books were hidden.
They became "The Hidden Books of the NT".
The "Apocrypha of the NT"

They were initially preserved "out of town" away from the
direct control of Constantine and his minions: Syrian deserts
and hundred of miles up the Nile from Alexandria at Nag Hammadi.

By the late fourth century, they had become part of the explosive
beginnings of the great church which was then ruled by the concept
of "The Three Hundred and Eighteen Fathers of Nicaea.

The Arian controversy I will argue is interwoven into the controversy
about the existence and preservation of "The Hidden Books".
Regular mentions at 4th century orthodox church meetings
expressly state that (eg: from Laodicea ).

Canon 59:
Let no private psalms nor any uncanonical books be read in church,
but only the canonical ones of the New and Old Testament.

The name "Leucius Charinus" commences its appearance
in the later fourth century.

We might ask why no author writing before the end of the
fourth century is able to name the author of the earliest
and hardest-hitting "uncanonical tracts".

Eusebius cites these "heretical works".
Why does he not give us an author's name?
Do these early christian historians read?
Photius in the 8th century is able to pick
up a compendium of the NT Apocrypha
(perhaps in Babylon) and immediate state
that the authors name, as the book clearly
shows, is "Leucius Charinus".


There is a palpable tension between the NT canon and the NT
apocrypha in the fourth century which by the time of the end
of the fifth century is expressed as follows (Decretum Gelasianum ).
In any other words we have the forerunner to what was to be
called the Index Librorum Prohibitorum.

The Fore-Runner to the Index Librorum Prohibitorum

Chapter 5 - Decretum Gelasianum
LIKEWISE A LIST OF APOCRYPHAL BOOKS

firstly we confess that the Synod of Sirmium called together by Constantius Caesar the son of Constantine through the Prefect Taurus is damned then and now and for ever.
the Itinerary in the name of Peter the apostle, which is called the nine books of the holy Clement apocryphal
the Acts in the name of the apostle Andrew apocryphal
the Acts in the name of the apostle Thomas apocryphal
the Acts in the name of the apostle Peter apocryphal
the Acts in the name of the apostle Philip apocryphal
the Gospel in the name of Mathias apocryphal
the Gospel in the name of Barnabas apocryphum
the Gospel in the name of James the younger apocryphum
the Gospel in the name of the apostle Peter apocryphum
the Gospel in the name of Thomas which the Manichaeans use apocryphum
the Gospels in the name of Bartholomew apocrypha
the Gospels in the name of Andrew apocrypha
the Gospels which Lucianus forged apocrypha
the Gospels which Hesychius forged apocrypha
the book on the infancy of the saviour apocryphus
the book of the nativity of the saviour and of Mary or the midwife apocryphus
the book which is called by the name of the Shepherd apocryphus

all the books which Leucius the disciple of the devil made apocryphi

NOTE:
These are the "Leucian Acts" we have today in our possession.

the book which is called the Foundation apocryphus
the book which is called the Treasure apocryphus
the book of the daughters of Adam Leptogeneseos apocryphus
the cento on Christ put together in Virgilian verses apocryphum
the book which is called the Acts of Thecla and Paul apocryphus
the book which is called Nepos's apocryphus
the books of Proverbs written by heretics and prefixed with the name of holy Sixtus apocryphus
the Revelation which is called Paul's apocrypha
the Revelation which is called Thomas's apocrypha
the Revelation which is called Stephen's apocrypha
the book which is called the Assumption of holy Mary apocryphus
the book which is called the Repentance of Adam apocryphus
the book about Og the giant of whom the heretics assert that after the deluge he fought with the dragon apocryphus
the book which is called the Testament of Job apocryphus
the book which is called the Repentance of Origen apocryphus
the book which is called the Repentance of holy Cyprian apocryphus
the book which is called the Repentance of Jamne and Mambre apocryphus
the book which is called the Lots of the apostles apocryphus
the book which is called the grave-plate (?) of the apostles apocryphus
the book which is called the canons of the apostles apocryphus
the book Physiologus written by heretics and prefixed with the name of blessed Ambrose apocryphus
the History of Eusebius Pamphilii apocrypha
the works of Tertullian apocrypha
the works of Lactantius also known as Firmianus apocrypha
the works of Africanus apocrypha
the works of Postumianus and Gallus apocrypha
the works of Montanus, Priscilla and Maximilla apocrypha
the works of Faustus the Manichaean apocrypha
the works of Commodian apocrypha
the works of the other Clement, of Alexandria apocrypha
the works of Thascius Cyprianus apocrypha
the works of Arnobius apocrypha
the works of Tichonius apocrypha
the works of Cassian the Gallic priest apocrypha
the works of Victorinus of Pettau apocrypha
the works of Faustus of Riez in Gaul apocrypha
the works of Frumentius Caecus apocrypha
the cento on Christ stitched together from verses of Virgil apocryphum
the Letter from Jesus to Abgar apocrypha
the Letter of Abgar to Jesus apocrypha
the Passion of Cyricus and Julitta apocrypha
the Passion of Georgius apocrypha
the writing which is called the Interdiction of Solomon apocrypha
all amulets which are compiled not in the name of the angels as they pretend but are written in the names of great demons apocrypha
These and those similar ones, which


Simon Magus,
Nicolaus,
Cerinthus,
Marcion,
Basilides,
Ebion,
Paul of Samosata,
Photinus and Bonosus, who suffered from similar error, also
Montanus with his obscene followers,
Apollinaris,
Valentinus the Manichaean,
Faustus the African,
Sabellius,
Arius,
Macedonius,
Eunomius,
Novatus,
Sabbatius,
Calistus,
Donatus,
Eustasius,
Jovianus,
Pelagius,
Julian of Eclanum,
Caelestius,
Maximian,
Priscillian from Spain,
Nestorius of Constantinople,
Maximus the Cynic,
Lampetius,
Dioscorus,
Eutyches,
Peter and the other Peter, of whom one disgraced Alexandria and the other Antioch,
Acacius of Constantinople with his associates, and what also
all disciples of heresy and of the heretics and schismatics,

whose names we have scarcely preserved, have taught or compiled, we acknowledge is to be not merely rejected but eliminated from the whole Roman Catholic and Apostolic Church and with their authors and the followers of its authors to be damned in the inextricable shackles of anathema forever.

mountainman

Some notes from the book:

The Gnostic Discoveries
Marvin Meyer

INTRODUCTION

p.1

GNOSTIC WISDOM - Ancient and Modern

"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".

We may consider Eusebius to be our trustworthy guide
on the trail to the Historical Jesus, and we may coyly
shy away from impugning his integrity as an historian.

But when we move into the territory of the Gnostics
the trustworthiness of Eusebius is dramatically and
politically diminished, since he is a very very big and
conspicuous hostile righteously wrathful orthodox
heresiologist. He should not be implicitly trusted as a guide
to the new testament apocrypha, for the reasons
outlined by the author Marvin Meyer above.

He admits the apocrypha (aPilate) were being written
while he was alive in the fourth century. He spits at
the vile works of unmentionable heretics. The Nag Hammadi
Codices are buried for the sake of their preservation,
Meyer thinks sometime around the mid fourth century.

He presents a possible scenario p.31:

"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]

Here Athanasius unwittingly reveals the modus operandi
of retrojecting texts. He says the heretics did this. One
may not assume the orthodox did not do the same thing.

The most orthodox heresiologist Athanasius casts vile
dispersions on the non-canonical tractates of the new
testament. But there are earlier precedents, that the
author Meyers does not appear to cite (at this stage,
I am still reading the book), such as:

Council of Laodicea.[363-364]

Canon 59

59. Let no private psalms nor any uncanonical books be read in church,
but only the canonical ones of the New and Old Testament.

Astatue readers will also see that the censorship of the NT apocrypha
at this stage in the proceedings of the fourth century was obliged to
also assume the censorship of Emperor Julian's treatise "Against the
Christians" (ie: c.362 CE) (nb: Meyer does not mention Julian).