Christ's Authority

Another area of interest is the power or authority Christ had which enabled Him to perform the mighty miracles which He did, ranging from blessings, prophecies, blessings, healings, casting out devils, and miracles. 

Many have taught that Christ was able to do these works because of who He was. They teach that because He was the Son of God that He had access to divine powers that mortal men do not possess. Later His apostles learned how to do many of these same works because He granted them His power. These same teacher then by reason propose that the reasons why men today cannot do such things is that the power was lost. 

So let's examine this with what the scriptures teach. 

“And when He was come into the temple, the chief priests and the elders of the people came unto Him as He was teaching, and said, "By what authority doest thou these things? and who gave thee this authority?"

And Jesus answered and said unto them, "I also will ask you one thing, which if ye tell me, I in like wise will tell you by what authority I do these things.  The baptism of John, whence was it? from Heaven, or of men?"

 And they reasoned with themselves, saying, "If we shall say, 'From Heaven'; he will say unto us, 'Why did ye not then believe him?'  But if we shall say, 'Of men'; we fear the people; for all hold John as a prophet."

And they answered Jesus, and said, "We cannot tell." And he said unto them, "Neither tell I you by what authority I do these things."”

Matthew 21:23-27

From this passage it makes it clear that authority was a serious issue among the men of the day just as it is with many today. Now Christ's response not only confounded the Jewish priests, but it gives us a very real insight and a serious question for us to ponder and think upon. Where did John The Baptist get his authority?  The priests may not have followed John and his teachings, but the feared and respected him. Many of them acknowledged the power of his teachings and many acknowledged him as a prophet of God. For that matter, going back further in history, where did Noah obtain his authority? Abraham? Isaac? Jacob? Joseph? Moses? Aaron? Joshua? Samuel? Elisha? Elijah? Isaiah?  

Were any of these men the Son of God as Jesus was?  And yet did they not have power to heal the sick?  Prophecy? Bless? Command the elements? Raise the dead? The definitive answer if the scriptures are to be believed is yes!  If these men were not Jesus and yet were able to do many of the same works, then the reason Christ could do what He did must not have been a result of who He was. One must by reason alone conclude that there is another important key here. Something that all these mighty prophets had in common. 

Was Mary A Prostitute?

Many have claimed to have heard that Mary of Magdalene was a prostitute who became one of Christ's disciples. In this article, lets us explore this idea so we can come to a better understanding of the truth. 

To begin with I will state that this idea does NOT come from the scriptures. There are no passages found in the gospel that state that Mary of Magdalene was a prostitute. 

“Now when Jesus was risen early the first day of the week, he appeared first to Mary Magdalene, out of whom he had cast seven devils.”

Mark 16:9

“And it came to pass afterward, that he went throughout every city and village, preaching and shewing the glad tidings of the kingdom of God: and the twelve were with him, And certain women, which had been healed of evil spirits and infirmities, Mary called Magdalene, out of whom went seven devils,”

Luke 8:1-2

We are not given a definition of what these devils were. But based upon other example that can be found in scripture these can range to be anything from seizures, chronic illness, depression, bipolar disorder, etc. It would not be typical to say that a prostitute was a prostitute because she had a devil. So I think it's safe to say that this passage means that Christ healed her of a serious mental disorder or some kind of illness and I feel it very safe to say that this passage does not suggest that she was unvirtuous. 

“And one of the Pharisees desired him that he would eat with him. And he went into the Pharisee’s house, and sat down to meat.  And, behold, a woman in the city, which was a sinner, when she knew that Jesus sat at meat in the Pharisee’s house, brought an alabaster box of ointment, And stood at his feet behind him weeping, and began to wash his feet with tears, and did wipe them with the hairs of her head, and kissed his feet, and anointed them with the ointment.

Now when the Pharisee which had bidden him saw it, he spake within himself, saying, This man, if he were a prophet, would have known who and what manner of woman this is that toucheth him: for she is a sinner.  And Jesus answering said unto him, Simon, I have somewhat to say unto thee. And he saith, Master, say on.”

Luke 7:36-40

Now in this passage, we are not told who this woman was, nor what her sins were. For some reason, we seem to associate the word sin with sexual immortality. But in the context the scriptures use the word, sin does not necessarily mean what we think it means. In fact this passages does give some clues. Christ was visiting a Pharisee. The Pharisees were historically know among Christians and even many Jews to be self righteous. So sin may have only been sin from the Pharisees perspective. In fact, Christ says "Simon, I have somewhat to say unto thee."  This tells us that this mans point of view was in error. The Saviour then tells a story about forgiveness. See Luke 7:41-50. 

Now some might associate that because this woman washed the Lord's feet with her tears and that Mary anointed the Lord's feet with oil that this woman is Mary. But the scriptures do not say so, nor imply so. So to assume that this woman is Mary is a stretch, and is pure speculatation, and to assume this woman was a prostitute is also speculation. 

“Jesus went unto the mount of Olives.  And early in the morning he came again into the temple, and all the people came unto him; and he sat down, and taught them.  And the scribes and Pharisees brought unto him a woman taken in adultery; and when they had set her in the midst,

They say unto him, "Master, this woman was taken in adultery, in the very act.  Now Moses in the law commanded us, that such should be stoned: but what sayest thou?"

This they said, tempting him, that they might have to accuse him. But Jesus stooped down, and with his finger wrote on the ground, as though he heard them not.  So when they continued asking him, he lifted up himself, and said unto them, "He that is without sin among you, let him first cast a stone at her."

And again he stooped down, and wrote on the ground.  And they which heard it, being convicted by their own conscience, went out one by one, beginning at the eldest, even unto the last: and Jesus was left alone, and the woman standing in the midst.  When Jesus had lifted up himself, and saw none but the woman, he said unto her, "Woman, where are those thine accusers? hath no man condemned thee?"  She said, "No man, Lord." And Jesus said unto her, "Neither do I condemn thee: go, and sin no more."”

John 8:1-11

Again in this passage, no name is given as to who this woman is. In fact, when Christ addresses her, He calls her woman. This seems to indicate that He does not know her personally. Again to suggest this woman is Mary of Magdalene is a stretch at best, and there is enough evidence contained within the text itself to tell us this woman is NOT Mary. 

Next let's look at Mary's name as given in Scripture. She us referred to as Mary of Magdalene, or Mary Magdalene, or Miriam of Magdala. So what is the Magdalene part, why is it important?  In the time these things were written, Magdalene was a known term. It is used because it indicated what family she was descended from. Magdala refers to a town along the Sea of Galilee, of which Mary's family were prominent members, perhaps even leaders. In Hebrew Magdala also has a meaning of "tower", so poetically Magdala means exalted. Mary was descended through a powerful family, descended from the bloodline of David (House of Bethul) and at the time of Christ it was a well known and well respected family line. The scriptures do in fact support this view.  For example:

“And many of the Jews came to Martha and Mary, to comfort them concerning their brother.”...“The Jews then which were with her in the house, and comforted her, when they saw Mary, that she rose up hastily and went out, followed her, saying, She goeth unto the grave to weep there.”...“When Jesus therefore saw her weeping, and the Jews also weeping which came with her, he groaned in the spirit, and was troubled,”...“Then said the Jews, Behold how he loved him!  And some of them said, Could not this man, which opened the eyes of the blind, have caused that even this man should not have died?”...“Then many of the Jews which came to Mary, and had seen the things which Jesus did, believed on him.  But some of them went their ways to the Pharisees, and told them what things Jesus had done.”

John 11:19, 31, 33, 36-37, 45-46

From these versus one can readily see that Mary's family was quite respected among Jewish society. When Mary's brother died the entire community came to weep with them. These people were not there to see Jesus, they did not believe in Jesus. They came to mourn for the family of Lazarus and to comfort them in their time of loss. 

So now that we have established that Mary's family was of some importance, we can reason out another principle. If Mary was a prostitute, as the Catholics claimed, she would have been disowned from such a notable Jewish family. It would not have been typical for a promiscuous daughter to tarnish the good name of such a respected family. So based in the fact that she was still allowed to carry on the name Mary of Magdalene, this tells us today that she was an honorable and well respected individual in the Jewish community, not a harlot. 

Christ's Example In Marriage Pt 2

Now that I have shown using some examples of canonical scripture that Christ was married, let us look at some less known works. 

“There were three who always walked with the Lord: Mary, his mother; the sister of his mother; and Miriam of Magdala, known as his companion [koinonos]; for him, Miriam is a sister, a mother, and a wife [koinonos].”

Gospel of Philip 32

In this sampling, this outright states that Mariam (Mary) of Magdala (Magdalene) was His wife. In Greek the word koinonos means companion, partner, spouse. 

“The Wisdom [Sophia] thought to be sterile [steira] is the mother of angels.  The companion [koinonos] of the Son is Miriam of Magdala.  The Teacher loved her more than all the disciples; He often kissed her on the mouth.

When the disciples saw how He loved Miriam, they asked Him: 'Why do you love her more than us?'

The Teacher answered: 'How can it be that I do not love you as much as I love her?'”

Gospel of Philip 55

This passage even more clearly illustrates to the reader the nature of the relationship between Mary and Jesus. 

“This is how it is with those united in marriage. The mystery which unites two beings is great; without it, the world would not exist.  What gives substance to the world is Anthropos.  What gives substance to Anthropos is an intimate and enduring relation [gamos]. Seek the experience of the pure embrace [koinonia]; it has great power; contemplate the Presence in this impermanent body.”

Gospel of Philip 60

In this passage it refers to Anthropos, which translated from Greek in this context means Son of Man, the same word used in the canonized New Testament to describe Jesus.  This passage makes it clear not only that Christ was married, but that it was an essential part of His holy mission.  

“Peter said to Mary, Sister we know that the Savior loved you more than the rest of woman.

Tell us the words of the Savior which you remember which you know, but we do not, nor have we heard them.

Mary answered and said, 'What is hidden from you I will proclaim to you.'”

Gospel of Mary 23-25

In this statement it shows us that Christ would have told His wife things which He may not have told others.  This is a very natural idea, and should not come as a stretch that the Apostles and other disciples would consider Mary to be a reliable source of information regarding Christ and His teachings since she was His wife and would know Him very intimately. 

“Now I see you contending against the woman like the adversaries.  But if the Savior made her worthy, who are you indeed to reject her? Surely the Savior knows her very well.  That is why He loved her more than us. Rather let us be ashamed and put on the perfect Man, and separate as He commanded us and preach the gospel, not laying down any other rule or other law beyond what the Savior said.”

Gospel of Mary 51-53

Again this passage shows that Christ was not a respecter of a person by gender, social status, wealth, or any of the things we consider important. He judged people by their true worth. A good sign of that is shown by how faithful we are and by our willingness to set aside our pride and be humble. Do we reject things that are true because it goes contrary to our own ideas and understanding?  Or are we willing to listen to and trust the Lord. 

Christ's Example In Marriage Pt 1

Now another belief held by many Christians is that Christ lived a celibate lifestyle. That he was perfectly clean and pure in his life, and that He could not have a wife as a distraction from His holy work. 

This belief is interesting to look at. It reveals several things that have permeated Christian beliefs about marriage. But these beliefs are not backed by scripture. One of these beliefs is that celibacy is superior to matrimony. So when did this practice of celibacy first start becoming a require among the priests?  It turns out that until around 1000AD that priests could be married and have children.  Then the policy began to be changed because of abuses in the church. By about 1100 one could not be ordained to any position in the church unless one had publicly made a vow to abstain from marriage for life. 

So what did Christ say and teach about marriage. 

"And he answered and said unto them, Have ye not read, that he which made them at the beginning made them male and female, And said, For this cause shall a man leave father and mother, and shall cleave to his wife: and they twain shall be one flesh?  Wherefore they are no more twain, but one flesh. What therefore God hath joined together, let not man put asunder." 

Matthew 19:4-6

Let us analyze these teachings. Firstly God created make and female. Two parts that go together to form a whole. Ok, let this idea sink in. God created both man and woman.  

"And Adam said, This is now bone of my bones, and flesh of my flesh: she shall be called Woman, because she was taken out of Man. Therefore shall a man leave his father and his mother, and shall cleave unto his wife: and they shall be one flesh." 

Genesis 2:23-24

God created a companion for Adam because man needs woman and in turn woman needs man. Now I could point out further scriptures in this matter (Ephesians 5:22-33, 1st Corinthians 7:1-16) but my focus is on the teachings of Christ Himself both His words and example.  

Now we know that Jesus, being recognized by the Jews as a great teacher was often called Rabbi. 

"Then Jesus turned, and saw them following, and saith unto them, What seek ye? They said unto him, Rabbi, (which is to say, being interpreted, Master,) where dwellest thou?" 

John 1:38

"There was a man of the Pharisees, named Nicodemus, a ruler of the Jews: The same came to Jesus by night, and said unto him, Rabbi, we know that thou art a teacher come from God: for no man can do these miracles that thou doest, except God be with him." 

John 3:1-2

"When the people therefore saw that Jesus was not there, neither his disciples, they also took shipping, and came to Capernaum, seeking for Jesus.  And when they had found him on the other side of the sea, they said unto him, Rabbi, when camest thou hither?" 

John 6:24-25

So that he was called Rabbi is very clear. What many people do not know is that in order to be called Rabbi, one was typically married. Now I have found no clear indication that marriage was required, but Rabbis were considered to be great teachers, and in order to be great teacher they had to have both learning and experience. They were frequently consulted in regards to marriage and children.  If a man did not have the experience, he was not regarded as a Rabbi.  The Jews had no laws encouraging celibacy (outside certain Essene sects, even among them it was rare), and on the contrary, men were encouraged by law to have children to carry on the family line. Those who had no offspring often felt shame among Jewish society.

"And God remembered Rachel, and God hearkened to her, and opened her womb.  And she conceived, and bare a son; and said, God hath taken away my reproach:"

Genesis 30:22-23

Now reevaluating Matthew 9:4-6 we see that Christ is clearly giving advice related to marriage and divorce. He clearly states that the union between man and woman is ordained of God. Now Christ came to fulfill the law, and the law states that man and woman are made for each other. Therefore, one can readily conclude that if Christ was not married yet gave advice on marriage, He would be considered a hypocrite. 

Now more information can be found in examining further scripture. Let us look at the following story of Christ. 

"Now it came to pass, as they went, that he entered into a certain village: and a certain woman named Martha received him into her house. And she had a sister called Mary, which also sat at Jesus’ feet, and heard his word.  But Martha was cumbered about much serving, and came to him, and said, Lord, dost thou not care that my sister hath left me to serve alone? bid her therefore that she help me.  And Jesus answered and said unto her, Martha, Martha, thou art careful and troubled about many things:  But one thing is needful: and Mary hath chosen that good part, which shall not be taken away from her."

Luke 10:38-42

Now look at this connection that exists between these two women and Jesus. Let us examine this story with an open mind by putting ourselves in Christ's place for a moment. If you were a great teacher, and you went to visit someone's home, and teach them, and one of the people at the home is busy with serving you and the other guests. Now suppose one of the people at this home was expected to help serve, but us instead listening to you as you teach. Would it not be proper for a complaint to be filed with the head of the household?  When have you ever heard of a matter like this passage being brought before a guest?  

The story sounds quite odd to say the least that Christ as a guest would be asked to resolve the matter. But if Christ was the head of household, in other words the husband, then the story makes far more sense. In this story you see several important points. Mary sat at Jesus feet. This would indicate a closeness between them. She is sitting exactly where Christ is. If she was a random person, such a placement would be inappropriate.  But as Christ's wife that position would be natural. She would desire to be near her husband. 

This next bit may anger some, but I cannot stop at revealing that Jesus was married to Mary, but that Martha was also His wife. Polygamy was not considered sinful in scriptural times. It is commonplace in the Old Testament, and was still widely practiced in the New Testament period among the Jews. We tend to think of it as sinful only because of centuries of Christian tradition wherein celibacy is presented as superior to marriage, and monogamy in like manner would be better that polygamy for the same reasons.  

In these passages, Martha clearly deals with Jesus as head of household yet it states that it was Martha's home.   This connection is further affirmed by the fact that Christ states Martha's name twice "Martha, Martha". To speak to someone in that matter is a term of endearment. Further He stated that she is "careful and troubled about many things". This statement affirms that Christ knows Martha very well. 

I will not quote it here but I recommend my readers see John 11. This chapter actually shows that Christ was particularly close to this family. Why?  Because Martha and Mary were His wives, and Lazarus was His brother in law. 

"There they made him a supper; and Martha served: but Lazarus was one of them that sat at the table with him.

Then took Mary a pound of ointment of spikenard, very costly, and anointed the feet of Jesus, and wiped his feet with her hair: and the house was filled with the odour of the ointment.

Then saith one of his disciples, Judas Iscariot, Simon’s son, which should betray him, 'Why was not this ointment sold for three hundred pence, and given to the poor?'  This he said, not that he cared for the poor; but because he was a thief, and had the bag, and bare what was put therein.

Then said Jesus, 'Let her alone: against the day of my burying hath she kept this.'"

John 12:2-7

Again Martha is serving because she is Christ's wife, He is hosting this Passover supper. Then Mary anoints the feet of her husband. Random strangers do not behave this way. Then when Judas criticized her for using expensive oil in this way, Jesus defends her, as a husband defends his wife. And when He explains her reasons for doing this anointing, we learn that she had purchased it and kept it for this day, so that she could perform this ordinance unto her husband. 

"And there was Mary Magdalene, and the other Mary (Christ's mother), sitting over against the sepulcher.  Now the next day, that followed the day of the preparation,..."

Matthew 27:61-62

"The first day of the week cometh Mary Magdalene early, when it was yet dark, unto the sepulchre, and seeth the stone taken away from the sepulchre.  Then she runneth, and cometh to Simon Peter, and to the other disciples, whom Jesus loved, and saith unto them, They have taken away the Lord out of the sepulchre, and we know not where they have laid him."

John 20:1-2

"But Mary stood without at the sepulchre weeping: and as she wept, she stooped down, and looked into the sepulchre, And seeth two angels in white sitting, the one at the head, and the other at the feet, where the body of Jesus had lain.  And they say unto her, Woman, why weepest thou? She saith unto them, Because they have taken away my Lord, and I know not where they have laid him.

And when she had thus said, she turned herself back, and saw Jesus standing, and knew not that it was Jesus.

Jesus saith unto her, 'Woman, why weepest thou? whom seekest thou?' She, supposing him to be the gardener, saith unto him, 'Sir, if thou have borne him hence, tell me where thou hast laid him, and I will take him away.'

Jesus saith unto her, 'Mary'. She turned herself, and saith unto him, Rabboni; which is to say, Master.  Jesus saith unto her, 'Touch me not; for I am not yet ascended to my Father: but go to my brethren, and say unto them, I ascend unto my Father, and your Father; and to my God, and your God'.

Mary Magdalene came and told the disciples that she had seen the Lord, and that He had spoken these things unto her."

John 30:11-18

Now a question to my readers. Why was Mary present before He was prepared to be buried at a ceremony that only the closest members of the family were permitted to attend?  Why is Mary at the tomb of Jesus? Why did Mary return to the sepulcher after they discovered that Christ's body had been taken?  Why did she have so much concern about where the body had been taken?  The answer is obvious. He was her husband, and not only had she just had to go through the devastating loss of her dearly beloved, but upon arriving at the tomb, to dress the body (recall that He had been buried promptly to avoid breaking the Sabbath), they discover He is gone, so she is struggling with the added grief that now His body is missing. 

My hope is to show using the scriptures that are commonly accepted by Christians to show that Christ was married, that marriage was an important part of who he was and what he taught, that marriage did not detract from his holy calling, and that Christ in His mortal state was fully human. Ladies and gentlemen, marriage is not sinful. In fact, according to scripture, it was one of the first commandments God gave to men. 

Divinity of Christ

One of the main teachings is that Christ was  God. So let us begin with this doctrine and see what the scriptures say. 

"Now the birth of Jesus Christ was on this wise: When as his mother Mary was espoused to Joseph, before they came together, she was found with child of the Holy Ghost.  Then Joseph her husband, being a just man, and not willing to make her a publick example, was minded to put her away privily.

But while he thought on these things, behold, the angel of the Lord appeared unto him in a dream, saying, Joseph, thou son of David, fear not to take unto thee Mary thy wife: for that which is conceived in her is of the Holy Ghost.  And she shall bring forth a son, and thou shalt call his name Jesus: for he shall save his people from their sins." 

Matthew 1:18-21

"And in the sixth month the angel Gabriel was sent from God unto a city of Galilee, named Nazareth, to a virgin espoused to a man whose name was Joseph, of the house of David; and the virgin’s name was Mary.

And the angel came in unto her, and said, Hail, thou that art highly favoured, the Lord is with thee: blessed art thou among women.  And when she saw him, she was troubled at his saying, and cast in her mind what manner of salutation this should be.

And the angel said unto her, Fear not, Mary: for thou hast found favour with God.  And, behold, thou shalt conceive in thy womb, and bring forth a son, and shalt call his name Jesus.  He shall be great, and shall be called the Son of the Highest: and the Lord God shall give unto him the throne of his father David: And he shall reign over the house of Jacob for ever; and of his kingdom there shall be no end.

Then said Mary unto the angel, How shall this be, seeing I know not a man?  And the angel answered and said unto her, The Holy Ghost shall come upon thee, and the power of the Highest shall overshadow thee: therefore also that holy thing which shall be born of thee shall be called the Son of God." 

Luke 1:26-35

It is clear from these passages that Jesus Christ did come into the world through a great miracle wherein He was literally the Son of God. However, this does not make Him unlike mortal man, or make Him half immortal. Part of Christ's mission was to save us from our sins. In order to do this He had to be fully mortal in order to show to man that it is possible for mortal man to overcome sin. 

"He that ascended up on high, as also He descended below all things, in that He comprehended all things, that He might be in all and through all things, the light of truth;" 

Doctrine & Covenants 88:6

"Now that He ascended, what is it but that He also descended first into the lower parts of the earth?  He that descended is the same also that ascended up far above all heavens, that he might fill all things." 

Ephesians 4:9-10

In order for Christ to be able to set the example for us to follow He must have had to go through the same trials and temptations that all men face. Here are few example that show that as a mortal He was subject to the weaknesses of the flesh. 

"And when He was entered into a ship, his disciples followed him.  And, behold, there arose a great tempest in the sea, insomuch that the ship was covered with the waves: but he was asleep.  And his disciples came to him, and awoke him, saying, Lord, save us: we perish." 

Matthew 8:23-25

"Now Jacob’s well was there. Jesus therefore, being wearied with his journey, sat thus on the well: and it was about the sixth hour." 

John 4:6

This shows clearly that He was subject to exhaustion and needed sleep just as we do. 

"And it came to pass, as Jesus sat at meat in the house, behold, many publicans and sinners came and sat down with him and his disciples. And when the Pharisees saw it, they said unto his disciples, Why eateth your Master with publicans and sinners?

But when Jesus heard that, he said unto them, They that be whole need not a physician, but they that are sick."

Matthew 9:10-12

"From that time forth began Jesus to shew unto his disciples, how that he must go unto Jerusalem, and suffer many things of the elders and chief priests and scribes, and be killed, and be raised again the third day."

Matthew 16:21

"Then when Mary was come where Jesus was, and saw him, she fell down at his feet, saying unto him, Lord, if thou hadst been here, my brother had not died.

When Jesus therefore saw her weeping, and the Jews also weeping which came with her, He groaned in the spirit, and was troubled, And said, Where have ye laid him? They said unto him, Lord, come and see.

Jesus wept.  Then said the Jews, Behold how He loved him!"

John 11:32-36

"Seeing then that we have a great high priest, that is passed into the heavens, Jesus the Son of God, let us hold fast our profession. For we have not an high priest which cannot be touched with the feeling of our infirmities; but was in all points tempted like as we are, yet without sin." 

Hebrews 4:14-15

There used to be even more references to Christ's humanity, however they disagreed with the Nicean theology, so they were omitted from the scriptures. In the gnostic gospels you see a Christ that experienced all human feelings and emotions. The point is that Christ became master of His body and passions,  and He was trying to teach mankind to do likewise. 

So why did Nicean theology have to portray Christ as part God?  Because it gives men an excuse. If Christ was special, then it means that they can teach that men aren't expected to overcome sin. The idea that God and man are so different is a purely pagan idea. Remember, the Niceans were pagans who were trying to modify Christianity to bring it into compliance with their pagan beliefs about diety. 

"Not at all similar are the race of the immortal gods and the race of men who walk upon the earth." 

Homer, Illiad, Book 5

Niceans Vs. Gnostics, Who Was Right

The question of which group was right can easily be answered by reading the scriptures as well as with reason. Now just to make one thing clear, neither group was 100% right, nor was either group completely wrong. And to say that all members of either group felt and believed the same is also false. 

Let's start by examining the evidence found in the scriptures that we are familiar with. If I feel it is necessary I can present gnostic gospels or other non-canonical works as well as traditional beliefs that are relevant, but for the sake of presenting the facts, let us examine some key doctrines and what the the gospels teach us about them. 

Who were the Gnostics?

With the discovery of texts such as the Gospel of Peter, the Gospel of Thomas, the Apocalypse of Peter, and many others, a group of early Christian believers known as the Gnostics are being reexamined. Who were these Gnostics, what did they believe that was different from other Christian faiths, and what can they teach us today. 

The questions can best be answered by examining the gospels they left behind and comparing their teachings and doctrines with what the Nicean churches teach. In a previous article recording the Nicean Creed, certain doctrines and beliefs about Christ were established among the churches which claimed to hold lines of authority. These beliefs included ideas such as Christ being a divine diety, that He lived a celibate lifestyle, that He was not subject to temptation or mortal weakness, and that He is unlike mortal man. 

The gnostics on the other hand had a very different view of Christ. They believed that he was the son of God, but that he was completely 100% mortal. They believe that he was in fact married, they believe that he was subject to every temptation and weakness which mortal man is subject to. In other words the major churches believed that Christ was immortal and the gnostics believed that Christ was human. 

Now this leads to another area where the two differed. The churches taught that through a long line of authority that had been passed down that could be traced to Christ and His disciples, that they had the power to administer in the saving ordinances, that the church in other words was like the gatekeeper. The churches claimed that they represented Christ here on the earth and that men in their wicked sinful state could obtain salvation by being baptized into their church, confessing their sins to the proper appointed legal administrators, through the paying of tithes as a penalty for sin, through partaking of the Eucharist (sacrament, mass), etc. 

The Gnostics on the other hand claimed that the lines of authority were not so important because you could receive the same authority straight from Jesus Christ. They claimed to have authority to baptize, administer Eucharist, and perform other blessings. They claimed that you needed to confess your sins to Christ, that paying tithes (not to be confused with charity or communal living) was unnecessary, etc. 

In other words, one of the defining key differences between the churches and the Gnostics was that the churches acted as a mediator for Christ because Christ was so perfect and devine that He is beyond the reach of the wicked sinful man. The Gnostics claimed you needed no mediator because you could gain direct access to Christ through prayer and humility, that He was a man like us and that through faith and repentance we could develop a personal relationship with Him. They also teach that because Christ was a man, that in turn we can be like Him and that we too can be sons and daughters of God. 

So with those differences in mind, it demonstrates the differences in the scriptures they valued. Many gnostic gospels emphasis this personal relationship with Christ, and emphasis the nature of our connection with God. 

The Nicean Creed

Now it is time to discuss the New Testament and how it came to be. Most of us who are familiar with the New Testament are familiar with the Gospels of Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John. They will also be familiar with the writings of Paul, the Acts of the Apostles, and the Book of Revelation. What many people do not know is the process of how these works came to be in the New Testament, what books may have been excluded, and why. 

Again a history lesson is in order here. At the time of Christ, very little was written about Him. Then some time after He died, people realized that it would be important to write down the things He said and taught, and events that took place. These written records became the Gospels. However, it stands to reason that those four Gospels were not the only ones written about His life. And as history is proving, they weren't. Different authors remembered different things of what He said and taught and recorded them. Likewise of the Apostles. These records were all individual isolated writings and had not yet been collected to a singular volume. 

By the third century AD, Christianity was very fragmented. There were many different groups divided on different doctrines. Add to this that a Roman Emporor name Constantine claimed to have received visions and that he was a Christian. A political push ensued to define Christianity. So a council was held, which came to be know as the Counsil of Nicea, in which many church leaders, scholars, historians, and writers discussed what the official doctrine was going to be. 

While they were far from united,  several ideas were adopted. They decided that Christ was God himself in a mortal form, that he was not a mortal man, that He lived a celibate lifestyle, and that He passed his authority on to His Apostles who passed it on to the church. Many of the ideas have become a firm tradition in the Christian faiths even though there is little to no scriptural backing. And once they established these ideas, then only scriptures that aligned with these views were accepted. And over time scriptures that had not been accepted as canon were deemed to be heretical and were outlawed and such books were usually destroyed. 

One of the main areas where differing opinions occurred, and one of the main reasons this Counsil took place was the role of the church. On one side was the church, which claimed to have received authority which had been passed down to administer the saving ordinances to the people, and that the leadership of the church had authority to represent God here on the earth. On the other hand you had groups such as the Gnostics (derived from Greek it means knowing or ones who know) who claimed that people could establish personal relationships with Christ and receive instruction and teaching from Him without having to go through the hierarchy of the church. Each group had their religious texts which supported their view. Since the churches outnumbered the Gnostics and had political allies, ultimately the Gnostics disappeared as did their gospels. 

Today however fragments of many of these texts which were lost have been found and their contents call the actions and traditions and beliefs of the churches into serious question.  

Why Do We Use the Hebrew Bible Version?

In a previous article I asked why we use the Hebrew Bible for the Old Testament in our Protestant Bibles, instead of the Septuagint, even though we know the Hebrew was designed in part to disprove Christianity. 

The answer, again is a story about politics and beliefs. If we look at the work of the great reformers, men such as Martin Luther, John Calvin, etc. were separating from the Roman Catholic Church. Among the matters that came up was an accusation that the Catholic Bible had been corrupted and had false books inserted. This accusation was based on the assumption that the Hebrew Bible was the original, and that the Catholic Bible, which contained the Septuagint, was created at a later time. 

Unfortunately, their assumptions were incorrect. The Septuagint does contain valuable teachings, and as it was the same Bible that Christ used, it contains additional teachings, prophecies, and doctrines which relate to what is in the New Testament. By omitting this information, it creates a disconnect between the Old and New Testaments. 

The reformers had good intentions, however, they were ignorant of the history of the Hebrew Bible and they choose to act based on their own wisdom rather than praying to God to know what they should do. The result is that today many Christians are ignorant about much of the teachings of Christ because they are unfamiliar with the teachings and history of the Jews at the time. 

An interesting point to consider us that while many today consider the additional books in the Septuagint to be apocryphal, at the time the Septuagint was compiled those books were considered canon. When it was compiled was much closer to the time they were written so the translation from the original text to Greek occurred in a time when its meaning was understood. 

Understand that I am laying out as much history in the matter as I can gather. But much of this is also my opinion. My opinion is that the Sepuagint should not be so readily dismissed and I think Christianity and Judaism could benefit from considering the texts of the Septuagint.