Lost Scriptures: Books That Did Not Make It Into the New Testament by Bart D. Ehrman

Lost Scriptures: Books That Did Not Make It Into the New Testament Reviews

• 
  Rickey

  This book isn’t what I would call exciting reading, but if you’re interested in the early religious writings it is informative. There is a short introduction about each of these “lost books” and then the actual translation. Of course, these books weren’t actually “lost” because we have copies of them today, but they were “missing” for centuries until they were discovered in modern times. They are early gospels, acts, epistles, and apocalypses that seemed to disappear for a time. Some are complete translations, some are just fragments, and some are what we have learned from quotes in other writings. Some actually seem like they could have been included in the Bible. They go from interesting and informative to boring and absurd or ridiculous. In one there’s a talking dog. Of course, wasn’t there a talking donkey in the Bible? We also have a smoked tuna that was resurrected and that Mary was checked to make sure she was really a virgin. I wonder who did that? For me, the interesting ones were the Gospel of Mary, the Acts of John and Thecla (Paul’s companion), The Shepherd of Hermas, The Infancy Gospel of Thomas , which I believe are the only writings of Jesus’ early life, and The Coptic Gospel of Thomas, which reveals 114 secret teachings of Jesus. Many say that these writings of Thomas may be closer to what Jesus actually taught than what we find in the New Testament. Of course, I'm also sure that many would adamantly disagree with this statement.
  
  Several of these writings were quite controversial. In a few Jesus has a twin brother, Didymus Judas Thomas. One of the most interesting is the fragmentary Gospel of Mary. There are several references to the intimate relationship she had with Jesus. In one, it states, “there were three Marys who walked with the Lord: A Mary is his sister and his mother and his lover.” In another it references Mary as the “consort of Christ is Mary Magdalene.” In this gospel, she is also given a high status among the apostles, “Jesus loved her more than us.”
  
  I never really knew what it took for an early writing to be accepted as canonical. This book tells me: they had to be ancient (near the time of Jesus), apostolic, catholic, and orthodox. Yet what is considered heresy would definitely depend on your point of view. Most of these early writings were rejected by the church because they preached a Gnostic point of view, leaned toward a too ascetic lifestyle, or were, at the time, thought to be falsely written in the name of an apostle. Yet some modern Bible scholars believe that some of the apostolic writings included in the New Testament were not actually written by who they claim.
  
  I believe this book is actually written as a resource for one of Ehrman’s other books, Lost Christianities. As I mentioned earlier, some of the “lost books” were interesting and some weren’t, and I found myself scanning and skipping through some of them. This book probably would been better if I had read Lost Christianities first. If you’re looking for shocking revelations, this isn’t the book for you. Read this book if you are able to have an open mind about the New Testament and have an interest in early religious writings. It gives insight into these early times, the thoughts of these early writers, and the culture of this time period. Know beforehand that some of these early writings are not that interesting, but it makes for a good reference book.
  
• 
  Demetrius Rogers

  Good to gain a familiarity with these early books. Most were pretty fanciful and even absurd; some you can call orthodox and were well respected. However, even in these 'orthodox' works you gotta ask - where's the gospel?? Even they had a very works/merit-based flavor to them (with the exception of maybe 1 Clement). Reading this collection gave me an even stronger confidence that what we have passed down to us in the form of the New Testament is of a much superior stripe. Often times when reading these alternate gospels, acts, epistles, and apocalypses I had to ask - is this the best out there? There's just no comparison to the real thing.
• 
  Jon

  Like I said in another review, Ehrman doesn't pretend to be Christian. He's not a Christian. But that shouldn't stop Christians from seeing how ludicrous (and even humorous) some of the alleged "lost scriptures" were. I really enjoyed this book even though I don't trust Ehrman's "professional" opinions at all.
  
  Ehrman implicitly shows how desperate unbelievers (like him) are to present convincing evidence against the Canon of Scripture. There are obvious, self-evident reasons for judging these "lost scriptures" as uninspired, non-canonical, and non-authoritative. The most memorable references come from the alleged "lost" Apocalypse of Paul, which claims that, in Hell, people who "break their fast before the appointed hour" are tortured and hung for all eternity "over a channel of water, and their tongues were very dry, and many fruits were placed in their sight, and they were not permitted to take of them." (p. 295). Also, allegedly, some pastors who do not perform their ministry well are tortured in hell "by Tartaruchian angels, having in their hands an iron instrument with three hooks" with which they pierce the pastor's bowels (p. 294). Other pastors get off easier, and are simply pushed into a pit of fire up to their knees and stoned in the face by angels.
  
  Similar examples are found in the alleged Apocalypse of Peter, which claims that in hell there is a very deep pit reserved for those who cause premature births, and that pit is filled with "all manner of torment, foulness, and excrement." Opposite to that pit is a place where children sit and shoot lightning bolts from their eyes at fornicators within the pit (see p. 284). Hell also, allegedly, contains places where liars have their lips cut off, people who lust with their eyes get their eyes burned out with red-hot irons, idolaters are chased by demons up and down "high places" for all eternity, and people hang from their eyebrows (!) for all eternity in order to "unceasingly pay the proper penalties" (p. 296).
  
  Almost every one of these "lost scriptures" is just as ludicrous as the examples above. I am grateful that a popular unbelieving critic of Christianity took the time to publish this pathetic attempt to combat the inspired Scriptures of God.
• 
  Anne

  Fascinating introduction to non-canonical Christian texts!
• 
  Mike Davis

  I don't know how to rate this book since there is minimal, but appropriate, comment by the author. It is essentially a representative collection of documents written around the time of the Christ event (50-300 C.E.) many of which were discovered after the current canon was "established." All of these writings were excluded from current canon usage either because they were not available during the selection process, they were hidden, they were censored, or they were part of the canon of branches of Christianity that died out and were lost.
  
  This book is a companion and sequel to Ehrman's book The Lost Christianities which gives the historical background of the fits and starts, successes and failures of the early believers. I would strongly recommend reading that book first, and there are frequent references to it in the footnotes. The current book is a collection of the writings from that time and includes much from the recently discovered Nag Hammadi library and other recently found sources as well as other writings passed over for one reason or another.
  
  Ehrman is a biblical archaeologist and as such deals with facts, translations and examples. It is not a book of faith and belief, and Ehrman gives only a brief contextual introduction to each translation. The translations contain letters, gospels and apocalyptic writings not found in the current canon, and those who hold the current biblical canon as "inerrant" may well be shocked when they venture outside of their familiar comfort zone to realize what's out there and what got left behind. Highly recommended to open minded readers who want to see the bible in its historical context.
• 
  Erik Graff

  I'd read most, if not all, of these texts before in the old two-volume Oxford set of the Apocrypha and the Pseudepigrapha and the smaller supplemental third volume of non-canonical texts related to the Christian Scriptures. I read this hoping for illuminating commentary and interested in seeing new translations by Ehrman, a scholar I have come to appreciate.
  
  I was disappointed. Part of the disappointment is my own fault. This collection is intended as a resource for Ehrman's Lost Christianities. In there I likely would have found more of what I sought in terms of commentary. The introductions in this volume are very brief and the notes almost non-existant (this being almost criminal especially as regards some of the very obscure "gnostic" texts wherein I question some of his translations of the Greek and would like to see his justifications). Part of the disappointment is in the texts themselves. Many are not by Ehrman at all, not even particularly up-to-date and superior to older translations by Charlesworth etc. They remain as obscure and bizarre as they were in the 19th and early 20th century translations. What I want is insight to the mentalities of the first writers and their readers and hearers. This book and its translations do not offer much on that score--though, again, the volume this supplements likely does to some extent.
• 
  Josh Liller

  Not as exciting as it might seem. There is a page on each of the "lost" books, followed by a translation of some part of the text. In some cases only fragments are known from quotations in other writings. Some of the works are presented in their entirety while others only have excerpts given due to their length.
  
  Some of the potentially most interesting - like the Gospel of Mary Magdalen - have not been found in their entirety.
  
  Most of the non-canonical books presented were apparently rejected either because they are heavily slanted toward Gnostics and/or the Ascetic lifestyle or because they were determined to have been falsely written in the name of an apostle.
  
  If you're looking for shocking & scandalous revelations about what the Church cut out of the official Bible, this is not the book for you.
• 
  Stu

  A fascinating compendium of texts that did not make it into the Christian canon. Although Ehrman's stated point is to demonstrate the diversity of early Christianity, he is intellectually honest enough to demonstrate the obvious reasons why most of this shunned scripture was cast aside by the early church.
• 
  Cheryl

  This is the kind of book I really should own, because it is impossible to absorb all the material in a single reading. I am left with some highlights that stick in my head (the gnostics were really bizarre) and not a lot of details. Good reading, hard work to get through it all.
• 
  Emily

  Lots of excerpts, especially of those that he often spends the most time introducing.
• 
  Nathan Albright

  The books (or excerpts or fragments of books) discussed in this book are not really lost scriptures, in the sense that they were ever considered canonical by mainstream believers, much less the early Church of God, but they were all books that didn't make it into the New Testament.  This book definitively proves that all you need to have a good Bart Ehrman book is to have him (mostly) shut up and (mostly) let the texts speak for themselves.  If none of these books hold a candle to the Bible, these books are at least historically significant and show at least a few worthwhile books that deserve to be read as part of the context of the early centuries of Christianity.  If they are not quite as world-changing as advertised, these are worthwhile books and it is always worth it to read ancient texts [1].  This book offers a way forward for Bart Ehrman to make reasonably decent books, and that is for him to write misleading introductions to texts that manage to contain excellent cross-referencing that are able to stand on their own for the most part.  There are worse career paths for overrated "experts" on the Bible.
  
  The real stars of this book are the texts themselves.  The editor divides these texts into several categories of writings that take up about 340 pages or so of material.  The first section of the book contains non-canonical gospels from a variety of approaches, including Judaizing Gospels like those of the Nazareans and Ebionites, as well as Gnostic gospels like the Gospel of Thomas, and other books like the Proto-Gospel of James that provide a substratum of information that became part of the mythos of Mary, the mother of Jesus.  The second part of the book looks at non-canonical acts of the apostles, including selections from the Acts of Paul (and Thecla) that disprove the editor's claims that the early Church of God had a laissez faire attitude towards biblical books being written under false names, even in the Hellenistic church.  After that come some interesting and revealing non-canonical epistles and related writings, including the letters of 1 and 2 Clement and an interesting fake series of letters between Paul and Seneca, as well as the historically significant Didache and anti-Jewish Letter of Barnabas.  After this comes a selection of non-canonical apocalypses and revelatory treatises like the Shepherd of Hermas--an interesting and significant work, if obviously non-apostolic--and apocalypses of Peter and Paul that were significant in providing images of hell for Hellenistic Christians, and some really odd gnostic myths that have been influential among contemporary gnostics.  Closing the book come some canon lists that are interesting to read as well.
  
  It should be pointed out that this is not a perfect book.  Not all of the texts are worth reading, although most of them are worthwhile at least in terms of context, to better understand the Bible through reading fakes and frauds and seeing the sort of writings that were railed against by Paul and John among the biblical writers, for example.  Most of these books can be appreciated either as transparent attempts to pass off pastiche and fakery under false names or early stabs at devotional fiction that simply lacked the genres and legitimacy that would have allowed them to fill in the biblical gaps with their imagination in a way that was open and honest.  Many of the works here are pious frauds or openly honest writings from people who admitted they were not apostles and simply wanted to explore areas where the Bible was silent, or wanted to write creatively about their own perspectives and opinions on matters of faith and practice, and simply did not have the way to do so that would not infringe upon the scriptural canon.  This book is better than it has any right to be, largely because it demonstrates the superiority of the Bible that we have to its imitators and competitors and does so from the perspective of someone who is among their most outspoken champions.  The fact that this book serves as eloquent testimony to the clear superiority of the Bible to the books in this text makes this text worthwhile because one can best read it as a collection of interesting ancient texts that have no merit to be considered as lost scriptures at all.
  
  [1] See, for example:
  
  
  https://edgeinducedcohesion.blog/2018...
  
  
  https://edgeinducedcohesion.blog/2014...
  
  
  https://edgeinducedcohesion.blog/2017...
  
  
  https://edgeinducedcohesion.blog/2017...
  
  
  https://edgeinducedcohesion.blog/2016...
• 
  Fred Dameron

  This is a fantastic collection of writings. Ever wonder why after ten pages of The Acts of the Apostles we only have one more work by Peter? Well thats because the Church declared none of the other books written by Peter or by his Apostles as canon. But, there are the Acts of Peter, The Gospel of Peter, The Coptic Apocalypse of Peter, The Preaching of Peter, and another Apocalypse of Peter. All at one time and by large numbers of early Christians were considered Canonical. These works also preached celibacy for both men and women who joined the Church, but then some works of Peter let celibacy go. The same applied for converting to Judaism before being a Christian. Peter falls on both side of this question. The biggest issue with Peter is in his preaching where Peter continually is tested by Simon, AKA Paul (?), many theologians believe this, and claims that Paul is actually given his power by Satan. If so is the modern church actually built to support a Satanistic program? Judging by many of the "Church's" actions the past 1500 years maybe. Also In the Acts of Paul and the Acts of Thecla one see's a large commitment to celibacy for ALL church members. Not exactly what a founding father of the Church would want to be preached to new converts. Yet Thecla was preached until the Renaissance. During the Middle Ages many Gothic and Byzantine churches had Thecla in carved in relief in there door frames, buttress, and archways, despite the work being non-canonical. So maybe the Church of 2021 should read many of these works on Sundays. Maybe they will help many Extreme Churches find the way again and this work along with "Lost Christianities" put paid to the idea of "God said it, I believe it, the settles it." that evangelicals cling to. God didn't say it because man picked and chose what God said and to whom so nothing can be settled except in very narrow minds. Enjoy being enlightened.
• 
  Einar Jensen

  I have several reasons for reading Bart Ehrman’s Lost Scriptures: Books That Did Not Make It Into the New Testament. I’m a fan of Ehrman, a historian who hungers for knowledge about his chosen faith, and his engaging writing style. I’m also a fan of learning and research. Although I have given up on Christianity, I appreciate its stories and impact on the world and, therefore, I enjoy learning more about those stories and historical figures. Many of these texts explain paintings I’ve studied and admired. I also appreciate the rogue nature of this book and its contents: it shares early Christian stories that editors omitted from the Christian canon.
  
  Ehrman’s writing and perspective are limited in this book to introductions of the 42 excluded treatises, epistles, Gospels, and other stories. He was among the translators of the texts. Whether the translators corrupted the ancients texts is beyond my knowledge. I do know that each writing style is different; some are engaging, some are painfully dry, and most are average reads.
  
  My favorites include The Infancy Gospel of Thomas that has stories of Jesus as an unruly child with a mean-streak, The Proto-Gospel of James that reveals Mary’s immaculate conception (Jesus was 2nd-generation divine birth) and her marriage to a much older carpenter named Joseph, and The Gospel of Mary, which gives Mary Magdalene far more credit for her significance in Jesus’s life. Bringing an open, hungry mind to this book is a must. A reader who rejects these texts discovered in various libraries, tombs, and other venues over the last 1,800 years won’t find this book intriguing or useful. However, it is both useful and intriguing for readers willing to feed their inner Lara Croft or Indiana Jones, or for readers who are simply hungry to learn, challenge their assumptions, and lean into the resulting discomfort. Ehrman did not disappoint. I enjoyed it.
• 
  Joe Henry

  I read this when my discussion group chose it. Our practice is to rotate discussion leadership weekly, and it was common for members to say that they couldn't make sense out of it or that it put them to sleep. That was our fault.
  
  This book is actually was written as a companion volume to his book, Lost Christianities: TheBattles for Scriptures (2003). As he says in his 'General Introduction" (p. 3), the Lost Scriptures volume is intended "to provide easy and ready access to the texts discussed in Lost Christianities . Trying to read this volume without having previously read or simultaneously reading Lost Christianities , as we did, must be like trying to read page after page of a dictionary.
  
  I gave the book a 4-star because I think it does a good job of achieving its objective, providing a reference for the subject matter of Lost Christianities .
• 
  Shane

  "Lost Scriptures", which is not really one book but many, was overall a good way to learn about and read some of the other early books that some--sometimes just a few, sometimes a lot--early Christians thought should be scripture. It's a great way to expand our understanding of what could have been scripture.
  This book did take me a while to get through because it is so dense. Ehrman's introductions for each section and each book were concise but informative.
  As with most compilation books, the quality varied. Some of the selections were fascinating and insightful, others were entertaining but very mythological or weird, while some unreadable.
  A few from each category:
  Fascinating/Insightful: 1 Clement; Didache; Acts of Thecla
  Entertaining but Weird: Gospel of Thomas; Infancy Gospel of Thomas; Acts of Peter
  Unreadable: 2nd Treatise of the Great Seth; Secret Book of John
• 
  Juniper Danielsen

  Genuinely mystified that this isn't widely read by the Christian community as a staple piece of literature for mere historical and contextual reference at the very least. Also, the lack of internal education on the process in which the agreed upon books of the Bible were selected and a few subsequently destroyed (spoiler, it was a vote by religious leaders).... I think it's a tiny bit important to know all the contenders for the books that make up God's Guide, but what do I know... I'm a mere Christian who finds organized religion abominable.
• 
  Jamie

  Fascinating, and pretty comprehensive on the gnostics. I’d recommend a working history with Christianity to appreciate the best parts. (Raises hand.) I can’t pick a favorite: flying apostles, talking lions, baby Jesus killing kids, grownup Jesus crashing a wedding night to talk the couple out of sex. Some bonus homoeroticism. Great stuff.
• 
  Aaron

  This book would be better with longer introductions and more annotations. I know it is intended to be a companion book to Lost Christianities, but it would be a more helpful resource if it had more explanatory and background content.
• 
  Fraser Sherman

  Very much YMMV. Ehrman collects an assortment of apocrypha from the early church: gospels, stories of the apostles, letters, and apocalypses. If that stuff doesn't interest you, neither will the book.
• 
  Eshe Mūrutani

  Interesting read and discoveries... I can understand why some of the books were not included in the current Bible.
• 
  Martin Willoughby

  An interesting journey through discarded scripture. Is our new testament the one God wanted us to read, or were politics involved?
• 
  Maximus Virtus

  I just started reading this book and it is an eye opener. I would recommend this book to any Christian who has an interest in the history of our church and faith.
• 
  Bledar

  Then introductions make it more readable, but it is not the reading I would do. Too much fantasy attempted to cast a competing light to true Christianity.
• 
  Genna

  Eh, does what it's supposed to, but not really my thing.
• 
  Stacyand Brody

  I read some of it but not all.
  There wasn't anything I read that I felt added or took away from the text of the Bible. But that is what I felt amd read.