Saturday, October 15, 2011

Gnostic Gospel of Truth: Geography and Places

Here the point of this series will become plainer. After looking at the four canonical gospels, we will next take a look at the Gospel of Truth, one of the alternative gospels that is mentioned now and then. Here is the list of all the earthly, physical, geographical places listed in the Gospel of Truth:
  • (None)
That's right: None. There are no earthly, physical, geographical places mentioned in the Gospel of Truth. There is no baptism in the Jordan or anywhere else, no journey to Jerusalem or anywhere else, no Sermon on the Mount or anywhere else, no trial before Pilate or anywhere else. It doesn't record earthly events, and takes little interest in this world. If you'd like to see a copy of the Gospel of Truth, you can take a look at it and see for yourself.

The Gospel of Truth has its value -- as a record of what early Gnostic Christians made of Jesus. You can read the Gospel of Truth and see what the early Gnostic Christians considered to be important. You can see how, in their own way, some schools of Greek philosophers longed for beauty, truth, perfection, and fullness -- even joy -- and found these in Christ. It's a testimony to how Christ fulfilled more hopes than those of the ancient Jews who wrote the New Testament.

What you will not find in the Gospel of Truth is anything like historical information on Jesus. No places are named, and no events are recorded -- though it does assume the reader is familiar with some of Jesus' life and teachings from other sources. The text is mainly a commentary on theology and philosophy, and how true knowledge of God through Christ changes our views of that. If you are looking for historical information on Jesus, you will not find it there.


Metacrock said...

week end I can't find an email address for you so I have to ask here.

tell me more about your feelings in your comments on my blog. Are you saying I don't profess the faith enough?


Weekend Fisher said...

Hey Meta

Wow, I sure wouldn't want to go into accusation mode.

Back on your blog -- about how you said you thought it should be obvious. I just think the people reading you might not think it's obvious. Just consider how often you can beat a point to death and they still won't get it. You can spell things out with plain words and an outline and you'll still get a large percent saying, "Huh?" If that's how much they understand the stuff you spell out day after day, post after post, what are the odds they'll get a point that you don't mention? Y'know.

Reading between the lines of that guy's question, I almost wondered if he was asking (translate mode): "Ok, you believe in God, but 'salvation' -- what about Jesus?" Which comes back to: What about hope? What about the reality of God in this world?"

Take care & God bless
Anne / WF

Metacrock said...

I see where you are coming from and you have a good point. I didn't think you were accusing.

Martin LaBar said...

Two different genera, or genres, apparently. Interesting.