Here is what I wrote to my sister way back when I read this book.
Right now I’m reading The Gnostic Gospels by Elaine Pagels (she’s at Barnard I think). It’s really interesting. 1600 years ago, around 370 when Christianity started to get the backing of the Imperial administration and military, a monk in Egypt put thirteen books in this huge jar and hid them deep in some caves. They became the time capsule. They have the gospels and epistles that didn’t make it into the New Testament, the ones the Church wanted to burn or get rid of and stunt milleniums of Christian imagination.
What these “gnostic” gospels show is an alternative vision of Christianity that didn’t make it, one where God is male and female, where there is no dogma or hierarchy, where God is not an aloof master, but within in each person,where in the Garden of Eden the snake was right and “God” was wrong and an imposter besides (reread Genesis 2: who lies and tells the truth?), where its illusion vs enlightenment not sin vs repentance, where Jesus wasn’t resurrected on the third day, where the gospels tell what happened after the crucifixion, where Mary Magdelene, not Peter, is Christ’s favorite, etc. It was Buddhistic in certain ways (indeed trade routes to India were opening up then).
The reason Pagels gives why orthodox Christianity survived and gnostic Christianity didn’t isn’t because one had the Truth and the other didn’t. Gnostics are heretics only because they didn’t win. The reason they didn’t win, says Pagels, is because their beliefs didn’t reinforce political and institutional survival. Their Christianity wasn’t wrong or wicked, it’s just that it wasn’t dogmatic, hierarchical, and matyristic enough to survive. They thought Jesus’s divinity transcended the pain and suffering of the crucifixion, that he laughed during the crucifixion and danced the night before, so that gnostics didn’t take martyrdom seriously. They didn’t think Jesus was physically resurrected and wouldn’t be on tap again till the End, but instead thought that each believer had direct spiritual access (some Protestant sects believe this)and didn’t have to go through any church or cadre of priests to achieve salvation. Thus they weren’t as well organized and institutionalized as orthodox Christianity. Nor as dogmatic since each believer could find out the Truth himself and didn’t have to rely on the say-so of priests. They thought the violent, jealous God the Master of the Old Testament was an imposter, so their religion didn’t support hierarchy and dogmatism.
In the second century (Jesus was crucified in 30) the gnostics and the orthodox were about equal, but 200 years later the orthodox had gained the upper hand by their greater organization and cohesiveness and so stamped out the only significant rival vision of Christianity that there’s ever been.
What is most interesting is how Pagels shows there was a Darwinian natural selection of various interpretations of Christianity, how the mere fact of institutional survival warped Christianity: Jesus had to be human for any one to be willing to be a martyr, that he had to be physically resurrected so that the Church can be seen as preserving the only surviving link back to Jesus, that there can only be one God so you can have a monolithic hierarchy, etc. Subtract any of these and Christianity wouldn’t’ve had enough cohesiveness to survive.