B.H. Carroll’s Pastoral Theology
Southwestern Journal of Theology
Volume 58, No. 2 – Spring 2016
Managing Editor: W. Madison Grace II
Edited and Translated by Bart D. Ehrman and Zlatco Pleše. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2014. 352 pages. Paperback, $26.95.
The Other Gospels is a valuable sourcebook of material most Christians never see—and for good reason. The material was either rejected long ago by the church as being noncanonical or it was written after the New Testament canon was closed. However, these writings are of interest to some lay people and students who are unable to read ancient languages, so Ehrman and Pleše do a real service in providing this unusual and often hard-to-find material.
Both men are professors at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill. Pleše is an authority on Gnostic literature. Ehrman is an expert on New Testament textual criticism, apocryphal writings, and the early church. He has written extensively on these subjects and is typically highly skeptical of the truth of Christianity.1 However, in this book he and Pleše simply present good descriptions and English translations of over forty ancient gospels and textual fragments. The book’s arrangement is by subject: (1) infancy gospels, (2) ministry gospels, (3) sayings gospels and agrapha, and (4) passion, resurrection, and post-resurrection gospels (vii–ix). These writings are extant in at least one of three possible forms: (1) as a full or fragmentary physical text, (2) as a quotation in a Patristic writing, and/or (3) as a reference in a Patristic writing with no surviving quotation or text (322).
The definitions are quite helpful, such as the agrapha (literally “unwritten”) being alleged sayings of Jesus that were written elsewhere but do not appear in the four canonical Gospels (xv, 180). The background descriptions are short but accurate, such as observing when it is difficult to ascertain a writing’s original text (e.g., 3–4, 99, 127, 140, 254–55) and noting that many titles given to these writings are modern titles given after their rediscovery (4, 19, 37, 58). Also, citing the textual version upon which the English translation is based is beneficial, and the translation is often very similar to one already given by a prominent scholar associated with the text (7, 22, 40, 102). Whenever a writing has similar details to a canonical Gospel, there is a helpful footnote to that Gospel (e.g., 220–24). Also, the editors give a helpful bibliography for each of the writings.
Two interesting elements in these apocryphal writings are: (1) the unusual, alleged miracles, and (2) the revelation of the origins of some Roman Catholic and/ or Eastern Orthodox beliefs. Biblical miracles normally have a clear faith lesson or salvific purpose associated with them. However, a number of miracles in the apocryphal writings lack this element and clearly seem fake, such as the infant Jesus doing self-serving miracles (11–12, 55, 91), metal standards of Roman soldiers twice bowing down to Jesus when he appeared before Pilate (237), and Jesus standing taller than the sky next to a talking cross at his resurrection (199). Some stories not in the New Testament but in Catholic tradition are in these apocryphal writings: Mary’s parents being named Joachim and Anna (24–25), Gabriel appearing to Mary at a well (29, 48), Joseph being an older man with children from a previous marriage (28, 81), 4) the perpetual virginity of Mary (40, 46, 50, 90), 5) personal guardian angels (84), and 6) people making the sign of the cross on their forehead (260, 264).
Of what value is a study of these noncanonical writings? Ehrman and Pleše claim these collected writings help one to see what early Christians thought (4–5, 18–22, 234). However, since orthodox Christians rejected the canonicity of these writings, they represent only what some Christians and some heretics thought. It is unlikely that any of these writings give access to the actual sayings of Jesus—contrary to what the editors claim (159)—since most date hundreds of years after Jesus’ day. Yet, there is some value. First, it is interesting to read writings with false teachings that ancient heretical sects used. Second, it helps to understand what events some Christians (as well as heretics) wished were in the canon, such as stories of Jesus’ childhood. Third, it is helpful to know the origins of some false teachings in the Catholic and Orthodox churches. Fourth, reading these false gospels can affirm why the church rejected them and accepted the four Gospels that are canonical.
However, there is a danger in a new or nominal Christian reading these writings. Such a reader might think the outlandish claims in the writings are true. Certainly some of the stories are heretical, such as salvation being unavailable to women (173), Judas Iscariot being the hero disciple (206–13), Gnosticism (salvation comes only through secret knowledge, 162, 201–03), and Docetism (Christ was not human, but the Christ spirit inhabited a human, 191–95). Other apocryphal details are fairly innocuous but nonetheless unattested in the canonical Gospels, such as Joseph living to age 111 (80, 85) and giving names to unnamed people in the Gospels, such as the woman healed from the issue of blood (241) and the repentant thief crucified with Jesus (244).
The book could be improved by adding a term index as well as a Scripture index as appendices. Also, a few photographs of actual source fragments would be enlightening. Nonetheless, Ehrman and Pleše have provided an interesting sourcebook of apocryphal gospels. It may have limited appeal to Christian lay people, but pastors and Bible teachers could use it for examples of writings that easily show why the church rejected them long ago.
- See Bart Ehrman, Lost Christianities: The Battles for Scripture and the Faiths We Never Knew (Oxford: University Press, 2003). ↩︎
