Lost Christianities: The Battles for Scripture and the Faiths We Never Knew

published	September 15th 2005 by Oxford University Press, USA
binding	Paperback
isbn	0195182499 (isbn13: 9780195182491)
ebook
pages	320
description	The early Christian Church was a chaos of contending beliefs. Some groups of Christians claimed that there was not one God but two or twelve or thirty...more [close] The early Christian Church was a chaos of contending beliefs. Some groups of Christians claimed that there was not one God but two or twelve or thirty. Some believed that the world had not been created by God but by a lesser, ignorant deity. Certain sects maintained that Jesus was human but not divine, while others said he was divine but not human. In Lost Christianities, Bart D. Ehrman offers a fascinating look at these early forms of Christianity and shows how they came to be suppressed, reformed, or forgotten. All of these groups insisted that they upheld the teachings of Jesus and his apostles, and they all possessed writings that bore out their claims, books reputedly produced by Jesus's own followers. Modern archaeological work has recovered a number of key texts, and as Ehrman shows, these spectacular discoveries reveal religious diversity that says much about the ways in which history gets written by the winners. Ehrman's discussion ranges from considerations of various "lost scriptures"--including forged gospels supposedly written by Simon Peter, Jesus's closest disciple, and Judas Thomas, Jesus's alleged twin brother--to the disparate beliefs of such groups as the Jewish-Christian Ebionites, the anti-Jewish Marcionites, and various "Gnostic" sects. Ehrman examines in depth the battles that raged between "proto-orthodox Christians"--those who eventually compiled the canonical books of the New Testament and standardized Christian belief--and the groups they denounced as heretics and ultimately overcame. Scrupulously researched and lucidly written, Lost Christianities is an eye-opening account of politics, power, and the clash of ideas among Christians in the decades before one group came to see its views prevail. [close]
date added	02-15-07 edit book

find at: Amazon | Half.com | Barnes & Noble | Abebooks | more...

Sign in to Goodreads to see your friends' reviews of Lost Christianities: The Battles for Scripture and the Faiths We Never Knew.

discuss this book

There are no discussion topics on this book yet. Be the first to start one »

friend reviews (0)

To see what your friends thought of this book, please sign up.

lists with this book

Where's the love? Add this book to your favorite list.

other reviews (showing 1-20 of 208)

Skylar rated it:

02/10/08

bookshelves: christianity, nonfiction, religion

Read in February, 2008

recommends it for: conspiracy theorists

Here is a sentence from "Lost Christianities" that provides a clue to why the book is not really very sensational, as well as a clue to Ehrman's perspective: "It comes as a bit of a shock to most people to realize that the Church has not always had the New Testament." Perhaps it once came as a shock to Ehrman, but it does not come as a shock to any Christian with an inkling of Christian history. I am reminded of Alexander Pope's phrase, "A little learning is a dangerous ...more Here is a sentence from "Lost Christianities" that provides a clue to why the book is not really very sensational, as well as a clue to Ehrman's perspective: "It comes as a bit of a shock to most people to realize that the Church has not always had the New Testament." Perhaps it once came as a shock to Ehrman, but it does not come as a shock to any Christian with an inkling of Christian history. I am reminded of Alexander Pope's phrase, "A little learning is a dangerous thing." Ehrman seems to have once taken a small drink from the well of Christian history, drawn a startling conclusion from it, and then attempted to shove all future research into the mold of that pre-drawn conclusion.

This book often plays a "what if" game. What if orthodox Christianity didn't win out? What if the Gnostics or the dualists or the Marcionites or the Ebionites won out? Well, it's an amusing hypothetical, I suppose, but it's rather like saying, "What if the Constitution didn't become the standard for the U.S. but instead the Communist Manifesto did?" Ehrman's fun speculations still beg the question as to which form of Christianity most accurately represents Christ, which form of Christianity is most true. This question, perhaps the most essential question, is one Ehrman seems to regard as unimportant.

He explores why the so-called proto-orthodox "won" out, offering reasons that range from geography to forgery and slander, but he does not spend much time asking whether their theology is more accurate, more true, than the theology on offer by the other "varieties" of Christianity. Is it likely that a sect teaching that the God of the Old Testament is evil has grasped a true representation of the 1st century Jew Jesus? Is it likely that a sect teaching there are twelve gods has grasped a true representation of the 1st century monotheist Jesus? Is the theology of a gospel written over 100 years after Christ's death to be trusted more than the theology of a gospel written within less than thirty years of his death? To Ehrman, these are irrelevant questions. What is relevant is that these "varieties" existed and that their adherents claimed to be followers of Christ, and therefore, presumably, the orthodox have no reason to claim they are orthodox. Ehrman leaves the reader with the impression that the "proto-orthodox" are but one group of Christians among many, no more likely to have grasped a true understanding of Christ and his teachings than any other group of self-labeled Christians.

Perhaps the reason Ehrman does not much explore the question of which group most accurately portrays Christ is that the most likely answer is not sensational. While all of these diverse writings are interesting to read about, it seems highly likely that the earliest manuscripts written by near-contemporaries of Christ and chosen for inclusion in the canon after an application of a strict set of standards more accurately represent the views of Christ than do works written 100+ years after his death. It seems likely that the proto-orthodox interpreted Christ's teachings more accurately than did the Manicheans or the Gnostics. The existence of a wide variety of sects, gospels, and epistles is all very interesting, but it is not SENSATIONAL, and Ehrman seems to be trying to make it sensational.

In Ehrman's sensational version of events, the proto-orthodox, through their "machinations," destroyed these other forms of Christianity, which are themselves occasionally portrayed as more virtuous or liberating than orthodox Christianity. But, how, exactly, do the proto-orthodox, who at the time had no state power and were occasionally subject to persecution, carry out their "machinations" except by intellectual persuasion and accepted authority (which itself implies that orthodoxy was established earlier than Ehrman suggests). Ehrman proceeds almost as if these "lost" writings were lost because the "proto-orthodox" collected every existing copy and set them ablaze in a giant bonfire, and not at all because they were the product of unconvincing religions that ultimately died out after failing to adequately portray Christ to the world. Most of these "varieties" are not so much lost Christianities as dead Christianities.

Despite all this criticism, I give the book two stars (an "okay" rating) because it contains so much information, all in one place, on early Christian and Gnostic literature, early sects, and the history of Christianity. I cannot give it more because the information comes obviously processed and arranged to persuade the reader that orthodox Christianity has no more reason to consider itself orthodox than any other form. Religious labels need some definition to be useful at all. If we say the orthodox Christians (those who canonized the Bible, those who established the creeds, those who spread the church throughout the world) have no more right to define Christianity than anyone else, then the Muslims and Unitarians are Christians too; they're just Christians who view Christ differently than orthodox Christians, and so the religious term becomes meaningless. It's almost as if someone started speaking of the "varieties of Judaism" and began behaving as though the Samaritans and the Christians had as much authority to define Judaism as the Jews.

"Lost Christianities" could have benefited from better organization and less backtracking, and, when it comes to textual claims (i.e. about whether or not a verse is original, for instance) it would be helpful if he discussed the dissenting opinions in some detail rather than simply presenting his own perspective as near fact. I suggest that anyone who reads this also read the second half of Timothy Paul Jones's "Misquoting Truth" for two different perspectives. Also of interest are the actual noncanonical texts, many of which can be found collected in "Lost Books of the Bible." Finally, I recommend the slim volume "How We Got the Bible" for a clearer, concise, factual historical overview of why and how the canon was selected....less

Like this review? yes (2 people liked it)

9 comments

John rated it:

11/02/07

Read in May, 2006

This book is an account of the details of these Christian faiths that were ultimately suppressed, as well as an account of how these faiths became "heretical" while one of these sects of Christianity came to be considered orthodox and ultimately shape the beliefs of Christians down to our own day. I found this to be a fascinating trip through the ancient world. Believers should understand the roots of their religion and of the texts on which it is founded; likewise, non-believers will...more This book is an account of the details of these Christian faiths that were ultimately suppressed, as well as an account of how these faiths became "heretical" while one of these sects of Christianity came to be considered orthodox and ultimately shape the beliefs of Christians down to our own day. I found this to be a fascinating trip through the ancient world. Believers should understand the roots of their religion and of the texts on which it is founded; likewise, non-believers will probably also be interested in seeing those roots bared. Christianity has been so influential on our culture for the past 1600 years or so that it seems worth understanding.

Allow me to quote extensively from his introduction. He says "It may be difficult to imagine a religious phenomenon more diverse than modern-day Christianity," and goes on to enumerate the stunning varieties that Christianity takes today in America. He continues, however, to ask

"What could be more diverse than this variegated phenomenon, Christianity in the modern world? In fact, there may be an answer: Christianity in the ancient world. As historians have come to realize, during the first three Christian centuries, the practices and beliefs found among people who called themselves Christian were so varied that the differences between Roman Catholics, Primitive Baptists, and Seventh-Day Adventists pale by comparison."

He gives us some sense of this later in the introduction.

"The wide diversity of early Christianity may be seen above all in the theological beliefs embraced by people who understood themselves to be followers of Jesus. In the third century there were, of course, Christians who believed in one God. But there were others who insisted that there were two. Some said there were thirty. Others claimed there were 365.
"In the second and third centuries there were Christians who believed that God created the world. But others believed that the world had been created by a subordinate, ignorant divinity. (Why else would the world be filled with such misery and hardship?) Yet other Christians thought it was worse than that, that this wrld was a cosmic mistake created by a malevolent divinity as a place of imprisonment, to trap humans and subject them to pain and suffering.
"In the second and third centuries there were Christians who believed that the Jewish Scripture (the Christian "Old Testament") was inspired by the one true God. Others believed it was inspired by the God of the Jews, who was not the one true God. Others believed it was inspired by an evil deity. Others believed it was not inspired.
"In the second and third centuries there were Christians who believed that Jesus was both divine and human, God and man. There were other Christians who argued that he was completely divine and not human at all. (For them, divinity and humanity were incommensurate entities: God can no more be a man than a man can be a rock.) There were others who insisted that Jesus was a full flesh-and-blood human, adopted by God to be his son but not himself divine. There were yet other Christians who claimed that Jesus Christ was two things: a full flesh-and-blood human, Jesus, and a fully divine being, Christ, who had temporarily inhabited Jesus' body during his ministry and left him prior to his death, inspiring his teachingsand miracles but avoiding the suffering and its aftermath.
"In the second and third centuries there were Christians who believed that Jesus' death brought about the salvation of the world. There were other Christians who thought that Jesus' death had nothing to do with the salvation of the world. There were yet other Christians who said that Jesus never died."

Some of these beliefs may seem absurd today, but they were all held passionately by people who believed that they knew what God wanted from them and what Jesus had taught. They had scriptures to back them up and arguments supporting their positions....less

Like this review? yes

title link
avg rating
small image
med image
large image

Lost Christianities: The Battles for Scripture and the Faiths We Never Knew

discuss this book

friend reviews (0)

lists with this book

other reviews (showing 1-20 of 208)

book data (includes all editions)

blog this book

popular shelves

other editions