New Film on Jesus’ “Missing Years”

July 18, 2007 by Tony

The Halo Effect promises to tell the story of Jesus’ life between the ages of 12 and 30, a stage in his life about which even the Christian Apocrypha are mostly silent. You can read about the film HERE but I excerpt the article below:

North Shore Pictures Entertainment, a production company based in Hollywood has optioned Peter Kahalani's screenplay, "The Halo Effect." The script covers the missing years of 12-30, before Christ begins his ministry.

The film has intrigue, murder, plot twists, deception, a new world order, the discovery of hidden manuscripts and an unlikely hero that shows the world that Satan has been in control for many thousands of years masquerading under one of the worlds top formable religions.

"The film never points a finger at any given religion but points to a way to a higher consciousness and a discovery not seen by many of the worlds population," says Kahalani. It is slated for production to begin in May of 2008 in Asia and released worldwide Christmas 2008.

Vatican Library To Be Closed for Renovations

July 18, 2007 by Tony

I just learned that the Vatican Library will be closed until 2010 for much-needed renovations. This article from BBC News describes how scholars are scrambling to finish their research before the Vatican Reading Room closes. The article states also that scholars can still obtain microfilm copies of manuscripts during the renovations. Good news as I have a standing order for five microfilms (the Vatican have never been very quick filling orders, mind you, so I still may have to wait until 2010 for my material).

But there is another option. According to an article in the International Herald Tribune, St. Louis University has copies of “nearly half of the medieval and Renaissance manuscripts” from the Vatican archives. The University has been stockpiling the material (on microfilm) since the 1950s; the collection even includes a copy of the Codex Vaticanus. I wonder: perhaps a microfilm order from SLU would arrive far quicker than from the Vatican.

“Top Ten Faulty Arguments” Revisited

July 16, 2007 by Tony

Several readers have added comments to my previous post on five “Faulty Arguments” about the Christian Apocrypha advanced by Christian apologists. Before I continue the discussion by adding the next five arguments, I’d like to offer a response to the comments thus far.

First, Timothy Paul Jones points out a typographical error. I wrote: “First, even if we grant that full-blown Gnostic Christianity is a late second century phenomenon (well, mid-first century really if we include Valentinus and Marcion)” but should have written “well, mid-second century…”). Oops.

Bryan L. asked for my opinion on why the non-canonical gospels fell out of use. Was there a concerted effort to suppress the texts? It would seem so from reading the canon lists and Athaniasius’ 39th Festal Letter. But such limitations on the canon can only be enforced in areas where the Western church had power and influence. As that power and influence grew, the Western canon became enforced. That said I agree that certain texts seem to have been more popular in certain areas and this popularity would have a natural effect on shaping the canon (though were they popular because the people liked them or because their preachers/bishops, etc. liked them and chose to read no other texts?). Gnostic texts, of course, had a limited audience (average readers/listeners would find them hard to understand and the texts’ views on asceticism unattractive).

Peter Head wrote: “For me most of these are only problematic when absolutised and generalised. Try using ’some’ for 1 …

Top Ten Faulty Arguments in anti-Apocrypha Apologetics (Part 1)

July 16, 2007 by Tony

There has been talk lately on various blogs about certain conservative scholars (specifically, N. T. Wright) and the biases that influence their positions on events in the life of Jesus (specifically, the resurrection). I, too, have come again into contact with Wright’s work—his Judas and the Gospel of Jesus is an expression of conservative polemic against the Christian Apocrypha—and found myself frustrated by his approach. But Wright is not the only scholar who allows his presuppositions about the CA affect his positions on these texts; indeed, I have read many works by such scholars lately and, frankly, their arguments are becoming tiresome (and repetitive). I offer, then, this list of “pet peeves” of anti-CA apologetic and my responses to them.

1. All non-canonical texts are Gnostic. Since when was the Gospel of Peter a Gnostic text? What about the Infancy Gospel of Thomas? Such identifications belong in scholarship of the nineteenth-century (when we knew less about Gnosticism) not the twenty-first century. Either the modern apologists know nothing of recent scholarship on the texts (which is likely) or they intentionally call all non-canonical texts Gnostic in order to heap scorn upon them (which is also likely)—i.e., Gnosticism is bad, all non-canonical texts are Gnostic; therefore, all non-canonical texts are bad.

2. Canonical texts are early compositions and non-canonical texts are late. The late dating of non-canonical texts is due to two factors: because Gnosticism is a late second-century phenomenon, and because the physical evidence for Gnostic texts is no earlier …

Do Non-canonical Gospels Make You “Uneasy”?

July 3, 2007 by Tony

April DeConick has begun a discussion on her Forbidden Gospels blog asking “Why do noncanonical texts make us uneasy?” (begin HERE). Of course this “us” would not include April and myself and at least some of our readers. We are not “uneasy” about this literature at all. Perhaps I can add to this discussion, however, by stating instead why I am attracted to it.

My introduction to the Christian Apocrypha, as for many people, came in undergraduate Bible classes. I was raised as a Catholic (albeit with a small “c”) and was surprised to learn of the existence of this literature; I felt I had been misled or intentionally misinformed by the church. This was also a time in my life when I was intensely interested in journalism and its attendant passion for intellectual freedoms. The church’s obfuscation of the CA seemed to me yet another example of censorship. As my interest in journalism waned and my interest in biblical studies waxed, I turned my attention to learning more about the CA and, eventually, to bring awareness to it.

Now a seasoned (well, lightly-seasoned) professor, I have left my initial bitterness about the church (and my faith in toto) behind. I remain interested in the literature, but only as a window into the variety of Christian thought and literary expression in antiquity. I believe the CA are essential for understanding the development and growth of Christianity, including how Christian thought has penetrated into the arts (e.g., the influence of …