Customer Reviews

The Missing Gospels: Unearthing the Truth Behind Alternative Christianities

5 star:		(14)
4 star:		(6)
3 star:		(0)
2 star:		(3)
1 star:		(0)

 

 

Darrell Bock has written an excellent followup book to his "Breaking The Da Vinci Code" (2004). Bock notes in the preface that "for more than ten years I have wanted to write this book for a popular audience... I would do this not primarily for those who study this material as a vocation, but for those who were hearing about it." Thus, the targeted audience makes this book as readable as it could be, yet coming from a top-notch scholar like Darrell Bock, it is also full of great information regarding such topics as Gnosticism, early Christian diversity, and orthodoxy in the early church (specifically the first two centuries).

While dealing indirectly with some of the claims from The Da Vinci Code, this book deals more directly with the claims of Walter Bauer and the New School as well as the claims of Bart Ehrman's "Lost Christianities" (2003) and "Lost Scriptures" (2003) and others.

The table of contents are as follows:

1) Making a scorecard: The Periods and Players of Early Christianity

2) Discussion fo a Key Alternative View: About Gnosticism and Its Definition

3) Dating the Origin of Gnosticism

4) Early Christianity's Diversity and Historical Judgments

5) The Claims of Walter Bauer and the Roots of the New School

6) The Nature of God and Creation, Part 1

7) The Nature of God and Creation, Part 2

8) Jesus: Divine and/or Human? Part 1

9) Jesus: Divine and/or Human? Part 2

10) The Nature of Humanity's Redemption: Spiritual or Also Physical? Part 1

11) The Nature of Humanity's Redemption: Spiritual or Also Physical? Part 2

12) Jesus' Death: Knowledge, Sin, and Salvation, Part 1

13) Jesus' Death: Knowledge, Sin, and Salvation, Part 2

14) Conclusion: The New School, the Missing Gospels, Alternative Christianities, and Orthodoxy

Appendix 1: List of Extant Texts Beyond the Four Gospels

Appendix 2: List of Key Texts in the Apostolic Fathers

Each chapter ends with a Summary and 3-4 Study Questions to help the reader make sure they understood the key points in the chapter.

Overall, Bock has done the Church and other readers a great service through writing "The Missing Gospels". Readers will be both challenged and encouraged through what they learn from this well researched and written text. Highly recommended.

In 1945 a set of ancient texts were found in a cave in Nag Hammadi, Egypt. These books described a different Jesus and a different God not to mention a completely different Christianity. Some believe and some scholars have written texts claiming that these findings call for a complete rethinking of the Christian religion. Dan Brown based his novel "The Da Vinci Code" partially on these findings. Darrell Bock writes this book to analyze these new findings. He analyzes their estimated dates as well as their content. It's not a complete study of the complete series of texts, but it's sufficient for the average reader.

"The Da Vinci Code" was an exciting mystery novel with twists around every corner based partly on history but mostly on fantasy. This book is a serious, scholarly analysis of historical texts and theology written by a PhD professor. Some may find a detailed, technical analysis like this to be boring.

The same author wrote "Breaking the Da Vinci Code" which covers the same material but not as indepth as this book.

Darrell Bock is one of our finest contemporary New Testament scholars. As a conservative evangelical, he is well placed to take on the latest trends and fads of liberal and radical theology. He did this quite well recently in his critique, Breaking the Da Vinci Code (Nelson, 2004)

Here he takes on the hype and hoopla associated with the discovery of various gospels and religious writings, especially those found at Nag Hammadi in Egypt in 1945. These discoveries have led to claims that many gospels and religious texts have been suppressed or discounted by the church.

In addition, there are now many who have been convinced that there has been some massive cover-up job by the church to suppress these so-called hidden gospels. Both the New Age movement, and Dan Brown, among others, have been making these sorts of claims.

Thus it is often claimed that the Christianity that exists today is not the real thing, and that we need to give credence to these various gospels, and the alternative understandings of Christianity. What are we to make of these claims? Is the traditional understanding of Christianity now obsolete? Does the Bible we now possess need radical altering to take into account, or include, these new discoveries?

In a nutshell, Bock says no. The four canonical gospels, part of the 27 books in the New Testament, are there, and these new gospels are not, for good reason. The early church was aware of these alternative books, and gave them short shrift. And so should we. While they may provide some helpful background understanding to Christianity, and demonstrate the richness and diversity of religious life in the early centuries, these new gospels and alternative Christianities are not to be equated with their orthodox counterparts.

Bock examines in detail the findings of Nag Hammadi. The 52 ancient texts found there date primarily from the second and third centuries, well after the period in which the New Testament was penned. These writings are mainly characterised as Gnostic in nature.

While Gnosticism is a much-debated topic, we know that it entailed beliefs quite at variance with New Testament thought. Its emphasis on hidden or secret knowledge, and its esoteric understandings of salvation are quite at odds with the very public knowledge of man's dilemma and God's solution as offered in the biblical texts.

These various writings, such as the Gospel of Thomas, are carefully contrasted to the canonical gospels by Bock. They are found to differ markedly in genre, in content, and theology. They were rightly rejected by the early Christian church as incompatible with genuine Christian orthodoxy.

And the claim that there were various versions of Christianity circulating in the first few centuries, rivalling the traditional understanding, is also challenged by Bock. Thus he critically examines the thesis of Walter Bauer and its later proponents, such as Elaine Pagels and Bart Ehrman. While there certainly was diversity amongst the early Christians, these alternative positions were never majority views.

Bock demonstrates how the traditional understanding was the predominant view by looking at key biblical doctrines: God, creation, the nature and work of Christ, sin and salvation. In all of these he demonstrates that not only were the alternative religious teachings and writings widely at variance with these key doctrines, but they were always considered to be heterodox and fringe in nature.

He contrasts the biblical writings and church fathers with the alternative teachings and teachers. While there are some similarities, they are also major differences, and the traditional and alternative views were set apart from each other very early on.

Thus Bock rejects the claims made by the new school that we need to redefine and remake Christianity, in light of these Gnostic texts and teachings.

Given how much hype is being made in various quarters about these so-called missing gospels, a book-length rebuttal has been needed for some time now. This volume fits the bill nicely: it is scholarly enough, yet written for the non-specialist. As such it is a timely and welcome antidote to the new school musings.

Bock has written a careful analysis of modern claims about diversity in New Testament Christianity. He reasons slowly and deliberately to show the reasonableness of his conclusions. That careful analysis is both a positive and negative in the book. It is a positive in that it is convincing, but it is a negative in that the book sometimes moves so slowly that the reader can lose Bock's overall line of argument.

I wonder if this book will hold the attention of most lay readers. The chapters where Bock describes the teaching of the Gnostics and the New Testament can become overly long. Those chapters are necessary, however, to sustain Bock's argument. Without them there would be no reasoned argument but only assertion. That's exactly what the "new school" does, and Bock properly wants to avoid that.

For a quick summary of Bock's historical argument, read chapters 1, 4, 5, & 14. In the chapters where Bock lays out the teaching of the Gnostics and the NT, just read the summaries at the end of the chapters.

Darrell Bock's book "The Missing Gospels" is a good overview and comparison of the early church beliefs that developed into orthodox Christian doctrines and an early, often disjointed `alternative' movement labeled as Gnosticism. In the book's preface Bock states that he intended this book for a popular audience because books on Gnosticism continue to "pour forth for the religion sections at bookstores like Barnes and Noble and Borders;" additionally, "The DaVinci Code" (both novel and movie) and all of the hype surrounding "The Gospel of Judas" this past year have brought Gnosticism to the forefront in the popular media.

Bock's aim is admirable, but I'm not sure that his goal of educating the average reader ends up being fully realized. He gives equal space to both the Gnostic texts and what he labels "traditional" texts (the New Testament documents and the writings of the Apostolic Fathers) and cites a good deal of material from both. Therein lies the problem, however: the majority of Bock's target lay-readership probably doesn't have the theological background knowledge, or (unfortunately) the interest, to follow the many quotes from texts and ensuing discussions thereof. On the other hand, readers who have given previous consideration to some of his topics may wish that Bock would go even more in-depth than he does.

Overall, Bock does well at showing the reader which beliefs both types of texts have in common and upon which points they diverge. However, in some instances, Bock actually gives insufficient attention to the "traditional" texts and how the Gnostics appropriated certain language from them. As he discusses his four main points - the view of God, the view of Jesus, the nature of salvation, and Jesus' work - Bock alternates between chapters filled with quotes from Gnostic texts and chapters filled with quotes from the "traditional" texts. When a reader sees that a New Testament writer, such as John or Paul, has used terms or concepts that appeared in many of the Gnostic texts in the previous chapter, he may become confused and lend some credence to what proponents of Gnosticism claim: namely, that it was just as credible and prevalent as "traditional" Christianity.

Fortunately, in spite of the abovementioned (occasional) shortcomings, I believe that Bock still gives sufficient examples and explanations to prove his thesis that the documents of the New Testament and Apostolic Fathers are earlier and reflect true ("traditional") Christian beliefs - beliefs which are based on Jesus' own teachings and the teachings of His apostles - and that the Gnostic documents are a slightly later attempt to combine Greco-Roman teachings with the "traditional" Christian teachings.

Bock also does a good job of exposing why so many people, including scholars of the "new school" (proponents of Gnosticism), are so eager to embrace these "missing gospels." At its most basic, it is a reflection of the fact that - in 21st century American society - so many people are unwilling to take any personal responsibility for their actions or to be held accountable for them (especially to God). Bock expresses this best when he shows, through Romans 7:14, that Paul had "a sense of personal responsibility for this [his slavery to sin and spiritual] failure" and continues by stating "Neither a defective creation nor outside spiritual forces are to blame [although this is the case in many Gnostic documents]. Paul looks at the mirror and sees the enemy as himself." Our culture values 'self' over God; thus it is no wonder that many people might be excited by a document like the "Gospel of Thomas" in which, as Bock states, "the key to God's kingdom is self-knowledge and self-understanding."

Those who try to defend Gnosticism as either the true Christianity that was suppressed or, at least, a viable alternative to "traditional" Christianity, tend to cite the writings of people like Elaine Pagels and Bart Ehrman. The argument is that these writers are objective scholars who are simply presenting newly (re-)discovered truths. Unfortunately, this is also untrue, especially in the case of Ehrman who has turned his back on his faith and become a vocal critic of "traditional" Christian texts. A quote from Dr. Daniel Wallace (Professor of New Testament Studies at Dallas Theological Seminary) in his review of Ehrman's book "Misquoting Jesus: The Story Behind Who Changed the Bible and Why" can also serve as an accurate assessment of the vast majority of so-called scholarship on Gnosticism (although this particular book by Ehrman is about his perceived corruption of the NT rather than Gnostic texts, the point can be applied to all texts which distort the facts): "In sum, Ehrman's latest book does not disappoint on the provocative scale. But it comes up short on genuine substance about his primary contention. Scholars bear a sacred duty not to alarm lay readers on issues that they have little understanding of. Unfortunately, the average layperson will leave this [Ehrman's] book with far greater doubts about the wording and teachings of the NT than any textual critic would ever entertain. A good teacher doesn't hold back on telling his students what's what, but he also knows how to package the material so they don't let emotion get in the way of reason. A good teacher does not create Chicken Littles."

If anyone out there wants to get rid of their Gnostic Chicken Littles, then start with this book by Bock. Then, if you want more information, consult some of the sources he lists in the seven-page bibliography at the end of his book.

Met any "Da Vinci Code" believers? Yes, who hasn't? It seems the bookstores are chock full of sensational bestsellers that prove that there were alternative Christianities, better Christianities, lost "gospels" hushed up by corrupt clerics, and sensational finds that would prove Jesus was really a mushroom (I am not making this up; there really was a bestseller that claimed that Jesus was a mushroom cult).

At any rate, what's the truth? Bock sets out in this short book--it's a mere 230 pages--to offer to the general reader an overview of the orthodox response to these claims.

He succeeds, for the most part. This is only a general overview so a bit of the information is sketchy. But for the average reader who only wants to know the basic facts, "Missing Gospels" will be of great help.

So why were some gospels not added to the bible? And do we now have information about forms of Christianity that we never had before?

The "missing" gospels were Gnostic texts. "There was never a 'Gnostic church' only a conglomeration of disconnected schools that disagreed with each other as well as with the traditional Christians. These Gnostic groups...operated...like Greek philosophical schools" (p 23-4).

These texts were not lost in the sense that no one knew they ever existed. The church fathers wrote about them frequently, albeit with great disdain. So we already had huge numbers of quotations from these texts. One thing that finding some of these texts has done is prove the early church fathers quoted them correctly. a change that was made in the mid 1800's.

The crux of the issue is the time period the Gnostic texts were written in. If, as Bock and other orthodox scholars contend, they were written one hundred years or more after all the rest of the gospels, then there is no real case for a multiplicity of Christianities. Instead, there was just plain old orthodox Christianity, and the various schools of Gnosticism were the pagan response, and a pretty sad response at that, to a vibrant religion which was soon to swamp them.

Why is the time period so important? Because by 110 AD Christianity was already a flourishing faith with an solid theology. 1 Clement and Ignatius' letters prove that. They show Christian communities formed in a wide swath across the empire, bishops and leaders in place, and a theology which was orthodox.

And Christianity was making a real impact already. There had been "vast numbers" of them in Rome that Nero tortured and killed. And there were so many of them that Pliny complained that the pagan temples were deserted.

What Paul's letters, and 1 Clement and Ignatius show is that the communities were close, frequently visited, wrote constantly, and believed the same thing.

"The importance of instruction by traditional missionary link between communities are two dynamics that Gnosticism seems to have lacked" (p 33). Paul, our first evidence, insists again and again on the importance of tradition. "Tradition oriented Christians from the earliest days appealed to what had been passed on orally to them as teachings (p 33).

And then there all the gospels, all written in the first century. I am not going to go into the long and exhausting arguments about dating the gospels. But anyone interested should pick up books by Martin Hengel.

But what about the Gnostic texts? There is not a single quote that can be placed in the first century. Not one.

Crossan and others used to argue that parts of the "Gospel of Thomas" was very early, but even that has been disproved. Nicholas Perrin has recently landed a mortal blow to "Thomas", proving it was derived from the Diatessaron, circa 170 AD.

The reason the Gnostic gospels are missing from the New Testament is that they were not Christian and not early. They were never in the running to begin with. And no one had any trouble distinguishing between a Gnostic and a Christian. The Gnostics, as the early church fathers acidly pointed out, were the ones who were never fed to the lions.

To get a glimpse of deep scholarship, try N T Wright's "Judas and the Gospel of Jesus". N T Wright is one of the most famous biblical scholars, and this book is his response to the recent discovery of the "Gospel of Judas". What's so great about this book is way that he skewers liberal scholars Bart Ehrman, Pagels, etc. These scholars have for decades played fast and loose with the truth, and it's about time someone called them on it.

The best book on the subject of Gnosticism is "A Separate God" by Simone Petrement. She argues forcefully, and, I believe, convincingly, that Gnosticism was a pagan reaction to Christianity.

First of all I should mention that Dr. Bock is a theologically conservative scholar. This is fine with me as I would normally fall under the Conservative branch regarding the NT. However I feel it is good to known from what perspective the author is approaching the subject.

The book itself is a generally well-written and informative work dealing primarily with the divergence of thought between Christian Orthodoxy (primarily pre-Iraneaus) and alternative christian beliefs. Concepts such as beliefs about God, the essence of who Jesus (Yeshua) was, creation (positive vs. negative), and a number of others are discussed. The contrasts are shown nicely by deviding the topics and then subdeviding them into opposing worldviews which are further broken down into individual works ranging from the Gospels to early Christian writers to Gnostic (and other non-orthodox) works. Useful summations are provided as well. There is also some discussion regarding Bauer and the more recent "New School" though the actual discussions of texts and ideals are really the core of the book. I personally thought Bock did a good job arguing for Orthodox beliefs being earlier though in fairness I myself already held that position. I unhesitantly recommend this book for anyone wanting a well structured and readable comparison of early Christian views and alternative non-orthodox works.

Bock arranges this book by subjects(e.g. was Jesus human, divine or both)which entails extracting the relevant material here and there from the apocryphal gospels. Thus don't expect detailed descriptions of these gospels. Just comparisons of their theology to orthodox theology.

Bock tries to be fair and comes to the same conclusion that the great majority of scholars and christians have-- the apocryphal gospels are later than the canonical New Testament and represent various deviant forms of Christianity that died out. These deviations make interesting reading because nearly every christian doctrine is changed in one or the other. It's as if there had been a competition from ~150 - ~250 to offer as many variations as possible. And each apocryphal gospel must have attracted a following for them to have been written and noticed by orthodox theologians such as Irenaeus. David Koreshes have probably always existed.

Finally, reading this book requires concentrated thought. I skipped through some sections when the theological arguments got too complex.

Darrell Bock's "The Missing Gospels" is, in a word, informative. Very informative. Especially for such a relatively small book. Dr. Bock does a truly scholarly job sifting through the so-called "alternative Christianities" and evaluating arguments both pro and con in a fairly even-handed manner.

He examines various players (e.g. Bart Ehrman, Helmut Koester, Elaine Pagels, Walter Baeur) and their contributions--most of whom would generally have supported the "makeover" theory.

One very important note: the book is very layman friendly. I was surprised at how smoothly and easily it reads, how non-technical the prose is. Of course, the names of some manuscript fragments may sound technical, but there's no avoiding that.

Dr. Bock explains the roots and origin of Gnosticism, its relationship to classic Christianity, the claims of the school that favors Gnosticism to traditional Christianity, then contrasts the Gnostic theology and worldview with the New Testament theology and worldview.

The chapter titles run as follows:

1) Making a Scorecard: The Period and Players of Early Christianity

2) Discussion of a Key Alternative View: About Gnosticism and its Definition

3) Dating the Origin of Gnosticism

4) Early Christianity's Diversity and Historical Judgments

5) The Claims of Walter Bauer and the New School

6) The Nature of God and Creation, Part 1 (i.e. in Gnosticism)

7) The Nature of God and Creation, Part 2 (i.e. in traditional Christianity)

8) Jesus: Divine and/or Human, Part 1 (Gnosticism)

9) Jesus: Divine and/or Human, Part 2 (traditional Christianity)

10) The Nature of Humanity's Redemption, Part 1 (Gnosticism)

11) The Nature of Humanity's Redemption, Part 2 (traditional Christianity)

12) Jesus' Death: Knowledge, Sin, and Salvation, Part 1 (Gnosticism)

13) Jesus' Death: Knowledge, Sin, and Salvation, Part 2 (traditional Christianity)

14) Conclusion: The New School, the Missing Gospels, Alternative Christianities, and Orthodoxy

Three to four study questions close out each chapter. Following these we have two appendices, containing plentiful information on texts and dates, and a bibliography for further study.

Very well written, very well explained. Four & 1/2 stars.

Darrell Bock successfully refutes, in particular, the popular assertions of Bart Ehrman, Karen King, and Elaine Pagels in The Missing Gospels (Thomas Nelson). It is a careful study of the first two centuries of texts; helping to explain what the extra-biblical gospels are and why they were not included in the NT canon, and citing some 21 of these as well as the Church Fathers and Apologists up to Irenaeus