Inner and outer christianity from Pentagram 4 - 2010

Inner and outer christianity  from Pentagram 4 - 2010 

During the fourth century, a tragedy occurred with great consequences for original Christianity. Since Constantine (280-337 AD), a great political game was played to separate the true inner experiencing of Christianity, which every human being can experience, from the official Roman religion, which was mainly used as an instrument of power. An important chapter in this tragedy was the selection of the so-called true scriptures of the church, which were initially called ‘the new Roman testimonies’, but which soon became ‘The New Testament’. However, now the Gospel of Thomas has been found.

The Gospel of Thomas begins as follows: ‘Whoever discovers the interpretation of these sayings will not taste death.’ Instead of seriously seeking the meaning of these words, they were ultimately dealt with as heretical, that is, far from the truth. How could this happen? And has an explanation ever been found for these words? During the early years of Christianity, differences in interpretation between the various groups was not a problem, that is, until, during the second century, church father Irenaeus became restless. He stated that there could be one church only. In his view, only the members of that church were orthodox Christians who stuck to the true faith. Those whom he considered not to think ‘straight’, were the Gnostics, particularly Valentinus, Basilides, Montanus and Marcion. Irenaeus’ ideas were gradually adopted widely, so that the church had become an institution by the end of the fourth century. Thus it had become possible to pursue a strict policy. Three radical measures were enforced: 

• It was decided which books were holy and which were not. The church came with a canon, a collection of writings that deter mined once and for all which writings be longed to the Bible. 

• A bishop was the head of the church. 

• The teachings of the church determined

what people should believe. During successive councils or church assemblies, these were expanded and further specified. The consequences are clear: even the discovery of about 35 gospels at Nag Hammadi in 1945 did not change an almost two-thousand-yearold canon overnight. In addition, it was discovered that the teachings of the church significantly deviated from the image of Jesus of Nazareth, which we find in these newly-found gospels. These documents describe teachings, according to which the original Christians of those days lived and worked, and which had already been known long before Irenaeus. By the way, the image of Jesus of Nazareth that the church had at the time was certainly not unequivocal; it had not yet crystallised by a long shot. It was not until 451 AD, during the Council of Chalcedon, that the discussion was closed. For four and a half centuries, people had been discussing the question: How are the divine and the human nature combined in Jesus? Athanasius succinctly formulated it in his Confession: ‘And although He is God and man, yet he is not two, but one Christ.’ If we com - pare this with the part about Jesus from the ‘apostolicum’, which formulated the content of the faith, the image is almost complete: Jesus Christ is the only-begotten son. This confirmed the classical image: God has only one son, who was born as Godman on earth.

THE GODMAN In the gnostic and the mystery religions from before our era, the concept of ‘the divine human being’ was a familiar phenomenon; it referred to the divine birth that occurs in a human being. This idea was recognised by original Christianity. When Jesus was baptised, the Gospel of Luke mentions that a voice from heaven resounded: ‘You are my beloved Son; with You I am well pleased.’ Some church fathers added the words from Psalm 2: ‘Today I have begotten you.’ This means that they, anyway, situated the divine birth during Jesus’ life and not as having occurred at his birth. This song of praise also speaks of the divine birth which a person may experience during his life. It would be a narrow interpretation to let this word refer to Jesus only. Something similar has happened to the words from the Gospel of John: the concept ‘only-begotten’ has been explained in the sense of a father-god, who has only one son, while the literal text means ‘born from one’, that is, born from the one, invisible, unknowable energy, as Light, as manifestation. ‘Born of God.’ This verse was probably added later, because in two other verses, John describes the divine birth in the human being: ‘But to all who received him, he gave power to become children of God; who were born, not of blood nor of the will of the flesh nor of the will of man, but of God.’ 

LUKE AND MATTHEW At first sight, the Gospels of Luke and Matthew emphasise the physical birth of Jesus. Particularly in the birth story of Luke, it has been so strongly externalised that it is usually only interpreted outwardly. Matthew opens with a genealogy of Jesus that immediately emphasises his human aspect: ‘… Jesus Christ, the son of David.’ While Luke begins with: ‘… the son (as was supposed) of Joseph’ and ends with ‘… the son of Adam, the son of God.’ It may strike us that not only the divine aspect of Jesus is mentioned, but above all the divine descent of man. Church history has had little eye for this aspect. 

THE GOSPEL OF THOMAS Scientists still discuss dating of the Gospel of Thomas, but there are strong arguments in favour of an early dating of some parts at around the year 50 AD, while other parts stem from around 130 AD. Mark is the first official gospel (around 60 AD). Unlike the four gospels from the Bible, the Gospel of Thomas does not have a continuous story. It is a collection of sayings, in which the story of Jesus’ life does not appear. It does not speak of the passion and the resurrection either. Consequently, the Gospel of Thomas is less restricted and less influenced by all kinds of interpretations. 

JESUS IN THE GOSPEL OF THOMAS In the Gospel of Thomas, Jesus does not call himself a son of God. On the other hand, he guides his pupils, pointing out their divine descent: ‘If they say to you: Where have you come from? say to them: We have come from the light, from the place where the light came into being by itself, established [itself], and appeared in their image. If they say to you: Is it you? say: We are its children, and we are the chosen of the living Father.’ Here, the pupils are made conscious of the fact that they, too, are children of the living father. And in logion 108, Jesus even says: ‘Whoever drinks from my mouth will become like me…’ When Jesus speaks about himself, he does so as follows in logion 77: ‘I am the Light that is over all things. I am all. From me all came forth, and to me all attained. Split a piece of wood; I am there. Lift up the stone, and you will find me there.’ These words particularly express the universal nature of the Gospel of Thomas, which is hardly present in the other gospels. Here we see a parallel with Daoism. When Chuang Zi told a pupil that Dao is omnipresent, the latter asked him: Can you be a bit clearer? Chuang Zi pointed to an ant, but the pupil did not understand. Next, he pointed at the weeds, and when he still did not understand, he pointed at a grain of sand. The Egyptian Gnosis knows the same idea, when Hermes says to Aesclepius: ‘He who knows himself, knows the all.’ 

DISCOVERING THE BEGINNING What matters here is that the Gospel of Thomas offers an opportunity to see through all historical interpretations, so that a person will be able to recognise his divine descent again and will be able to live on the basis of what is eternal in him: ‘Tell us, how will our end come? Jesus said: Have you found the beginning, then, that you are looking for the end? You see, the end will be where the beginning is. Congratulations to the one who stands at the beginning; that one will know the end and will not taste death.’