February 24, 2005
In 1958, a historian by the name of Morton Smith was visiting the Orthodox Monastery of Mar Saba near Jerusalem when he came across a fragment of a letter purported to be written by third-century historian Clement of Alexandria. In this letter, Clement describes a special, "more spiritual" version of the Gospel of Mark written for special Christian initiates, as well as a third, heretical version altered by Carpocrates to fit with his own theologically unique Christian sect. Smith took several photographs of the pages, translated them, and published his findings. Trouble is, now the letter has disappeared, and no one seems to know what happened to it, leading many to question the authenticity of Smith's findings. Some believe the letter to be a forgery, while others believe it to have been suppressed or destroyed by Christian conservatives, frightened that the Secret Gospel could undermine Christianity as we know it. For one thing, the text could imply that Jesus had a homoerotic experience. Dr. Charles Hedrick, founding member of the liberal Jesus Seminar, (DISCLOSURE: Former professor of mine, though we haven't spoken in years) is one of those currently looking for it. He has not succeeded yet, but he has discovered other photographs of the manuscript that he believes were not from Morton Smith's original shots.
-
Well, the Gospels do indicate that Jesus conferred knowledge to the apostles which he didn't to the masses... always pissed me off everytime I read them.
-
I think you'll find this story is apocryphal mct. Right, silly joke over thank you muchly. I find this kind of thing most interesting. I think this problem - "the comparative dearth of good studies on this piece in particular cannot be explained in any other way that a stubborn refusal to deal with information which might challenge deeply-held personal convictions" - is certainly not unique to biblical scholarship.
-
Short answer: "The oldest extant manuscripts do not contain these verses and the style differs from the rest of Mark, suggesting that they were a later addition." (Thus Bible Translations attempting to be accurate, either eliminate them or add them with a footnote explanation of that fact) depending upon their translation philosophy.) The wikipedia article quoted from (above) contains more and contains additional references and external links for those interested in reading further.
-
Mecurious, that entry only specifically addresses Mark 16:9-20, which depicts the resurrected Christ. It doesn't mention some of the bizarre events addressed by the text, such as the random and unexplained appearance in Gethsemane of the naked young man wrapped in linen in 14:51-52 or the weird transition in 10:46. Though its neutrality is under dispute, Wikipedia does have a page on the Secret Gospel (linked from mecurious's entry).
-
Just as a sidenote, that entire "Early Christian Writings" site is absolutely fascinating if you're interested in the historical realities behind Christianity rather than just what was set down (by committee) in the Bible. Especially since it highlights how much a legend gets added to by later re-tellers. Especially amusing are retellings where Jesus starts getting mixed up in events better suited to Hindu mythology. At the very least, give the Gospel of Thomas a read. Besides being almost universally accepted as being at least as accurate as any of the canonical gospels, it paints a far different picture of Jesus than the canonical ones - much more human and believable. (including one verse where Jesus even appears to be cracking a bad pun)
-
The "Peter = petra" one?
-
Alright! Jesus was a homo. This is gonna make some bible-belters heads spin.
-
How anyone gets 'homo' out of that passage is beyond me.
-
This kind of thing always makes me think, "So the fans of the one work of fiction disagree with the fans of the other work of fiction." Yet this stuff always fascinates me. Religion, and humankind's obsession with it, is quite something.
-
Do we tell Umberto Eco? I love the guy but I'm telling Dan Brown. He's more widely read you know. But then again, Brown doesn't have the credibility of Eco... What to do, what to do? I know, I'll tell Mel Gibson!!
-
I've recently been reading On Literature by Umberto Eco, translated by Martin McLaughlin. The only paradoxes that almost never seem to be transposable are those by Stanislaw J. Lec, observes Mr Eco. He then goes on to give short list from Lec's ...Uncombed Thoughts. Well, I have fiddled with this list to bring you the following salmagundi via Mr. Lec, via Mr Eco, via Mr McLaughlin, and via myself: Open Sesame! I want to get out I dreamed of Freud. What does that mean? Horrible is the gag smeared with honey. If only one could pay the death penalty by sleeping through it in installments. You can die on Saint Helena without being Napoleon. Cavorting with dwarves ruins your backbone. Burning pyres don't light up the darkness. Who knows what Columbus might have discovered had America not blocked his way! Even in his silence there were grammatical mistakes. He had a clean conscience: he had never used it. I dreamed of reality: what a relief to wake up!
-
Hehe excellent, thank you Sir Bees. I dreamed of Freud. What does that mean? ha!
-
And after six days Jesus gave him an order and, at evening, the young man came to him wearing nothing but a linen cloth. And he stayed with him for the night, because Jesus taught him the mystery of the Kingdom of God. Yeah, baybee, YEAH! >:)