Sometimes I think I'd be better off not watching the History Channel at all. I enjoy most of their programs, but they sure do love biblical revisionism.

The show that's on now, called "There's Something About Mary Magdalene," presents another of those popular "new" theories that Mary Magdalene was the wife of Christ and/or the closest apostle of Christ and/or the co-founder of Christianity. These conclusions are presented as the conclusions of "recently discovered information," and they sure do seem to be amazing and confounding claims.

Except, not.

Look, if the History Channel wants to do PR for the various Gnostic non-Christian faiths, that's fine with me. I just wish they'd be a little less biased and provide all the information so that viewers who might be swayed by this stuff would be better informed.

Some of facts that the History Channel doesn't seem concerned enough to include in their program include:

• "Recently discovered information?" No, not really. The so-called "Gnostic gospels," including the "gospel of Mary Magdalene," were re-introduced to the world when bound volumes of them were discovered in Nag Hammadi, Egypt, in 1945.



• The "Gnostic gospels," contrary to modern claims, are not as old as the canonical gospels. Most scholars, religious and secular, agree that the "Gnostic gospels" are at least a few centuries newer than the canonical gospels.



• The Christian church has been well aware of these so-called "gospels" for hundreds of years and has rejected their authenticity and validity. In Christian terms, they are heresy.



• The "Gnostic gospels" do not complement or "flesh out" the canonical gospels. They contradict the canonical gospels. Each of the "Gnostic gospels" hinges on the idea that Christ taught certain things secretly to selected apostles. This is a contradiction to Christ's assertion while on trial for blasphemy that he'd taught nothing in secret. The claims of "secret lessons" from Christ is easy to explain… the writers of the "Gnostic gospels" wanted to present their new versions of "christiantiy" with an air of authority.



• Mary Magdalene" was an important and very privileged friend of Jesus. That's obvious to anyone who actually reads the canonical gospels, especially Luke. Of course, modern "Gnostics" aren't going to encourage you to do that. After all, the Canonical gospels, when read, have this odd effect of convincing many people that Jesus was Lord. (And, by the way, I'm personally convinced that Mary Magdalene is done as much a disservice by the "Gnostics" as she was by those who used to incorrectly consider her a prostitute.)



• The canonical gospels are different from the religious and mythical texts of their day. As C.S. Lewis pointed out, Mark, Matthew and Luke are clearly written as journalistic reports, not as attempts to proselyze or to make converts. They were written to preserve, as matter-of-factly as possible, the memories of those who actually lived and traveled with Christ. If they resonate emotionally with readers, that's because they connect on a level that's far deeper than the literary.

Shesh!

Look, if you want to worship everything, or nothing, or Mary Magdalene, or Tina Turner or roosters, be my guest. Just don't claim that there's historical support for your beliefs if there clearly isn't.

Labels: Faith, News