(More Bible Studies Available @ www.marktabata.com)
To Receive These (And Other) Free Bible Studies And Updates Via Email, Contact Mark Tabata @ 606-216-1757 (Text Message) Or hazardhomecoc@gmail.com (Email)
Hebrews 13:9-Do not be carried about with various and strange doctrines. For it is good that the heart be established by grace, not with foods which have not profited those who have been occupied with them.
In the second century A.D., the religious group known as the Gnostics began to manufacture their own scriptures. Even though these books had no relationship to the Apostles of Christ, the Gnostics attached their names to them in order to try and give their teachings some semblance of credibility. Fortunately, the early church was able to easily identify these fake works (due primarily to their recognition of the New Testament Scriptures, the late date of the Gnostic books, and the differences between the New Testament and the Gnostic works).
There is a common (but quite mistaken) belief that the early church did not know which Books were written by the Apostles of Christ, and that it was not until some clandestine “church council” in the year 325 that those Books were “officially” placed into the canon of Scripture. Several facts show that this is not true, one of which is the numerous references from the Christians between the first and third centuries from the New Testament. One researcher points out:
“Here’s another astonishing fact: the early Church fathers—Origen, Clement, Tertullian, Irenaeus, Ignatius, Polycarp, etc.—prolifically cited the New Testament in their writings. Just a few of the early fathers alone account for 36,000 New Testament citations, but the number of such citations from all the Church fathers exceeds one million. “So extensive are these citations,” say Komoszewski, Sawyer, and Wallace, “that if all other sources for our knowledge of the text of the New Testament were destroyed, they would be sufficient alone for the reconstruction of practically the entire New Testament.” 71 And as Sir Fredric Kenyon observes, “The number of manuscripts of the New Testament, of early translations from it, and of quotations from it in the oldest writers of the Church, is so large that it is practically certain that the true reading of every doubtful passage is preserved in some one or other of these ancient authorities. This can be said of no other book in the ancient world.” 72”. (David Limbaugh, Jesus on Trial: A Lawyer Affirms the Truth of the Gospel, 217 (Kindle Edition): Washington, DC: Regnery Publishing)
Two of the Gnostic books, the alleged “gospels” of Mary and Philip, contain passages which are related to our current study. Technically, these books are not “Gospels,” since the word “Gospel” usually has reference to the life, ministry, miracles, death, burial, and resurrection of Jesus Christ. These books are more of a discussion regarding Gnostic teachings. In this study, we will take a look at the gospel of Philip.
This book was written in the late second or third century A.D.
“The Gospel of Philip is the third tractate in Codex II of the Nag Hammadi library, where it follows immediately after the Gospel of Thomas. Most likely it was originally written in Greek. Whether the text was composed in Syria during the second century, or a bit later, as has been proposed, remains somewhat uncertain, though the references to Syriac terms suggest an acquaintance with Syriac language and literature.” (Marvin Meyer, The Gnostic Gospels of Jesus: The Definitive Collection of Mystical Gospels and Secret Books about Jesus of Nazareth, 48 (Kindle Edition): New York, NY: HarperCollins Publishers Inc.)
The Gnostics taught that there are five “sacraments,” or ways in which God manifests grace to people today. These are (according to the Gnostics) baptism, chrism (anointing with oil), redemption, bridal chamber, and the Eucharist (another name for the Lord’s Supper).
(Note for a later study: the Gnostic teaching of baptism denied its’ essentiality in the plan of salvation).
The fourth of these sacraments is identified as “the bridal chamber.” Johnson gives us an overview of this “sacrament.”
“The fourth sacrament is that of the bridal chamber. It was important that a male and female Gnostic undergo the rite of the bridal chamber because it connected the two in such a spiritual way that could not be achieved by one person alone. All we know about it is that the church fathers taught it was connected with fornication and astrology. This sounds like the tantric sex magic of the Hindus. This is what church father Irenaeus taught: “Gnostics believe they have spirits that are emanations from Sophia. This makes them predestined to be saved. It does not matter if their behavior is good or evil. The most “perfect” of them addict themselves to evil deeds and are in a habit of defiling the women they convert. Irenaeus, Against Heresies 1.6 The Gospel of Philip seems to indicate that the sacrament of the bridal chamber is the most important for attaining godhood. The sacrament of the bridal chamber is also mentioned in the Gospel of Thomas, saying 75. It must be entered into by a free man and virgin. Defiled women, slaves, and animals could not partake of the rite. The gospel also teaches that there are “sons of men who create.” Those are the ones whose children are ensnared by the world and its evil; they are normal human beings. There are also “sons of men who beget.” These beget in private (the bridal chamber) and their offspring are the “sons of light.” It also states those who have received the light of the bridal chamber are free since they cannot be seen by evil. It has been suggested, based on this gospel and what the ancient church fathers indicated, that a sexual union between a man and woman in a controlled manner with the necessary magical incantations would allow spiritual development of the individuals. Going a step further, it would allow a child born from that union to have a spirit that is an emanation from Sophia and therefore immortal. The church fathers saw this as an excuse for the Gnostics to defile any woman they chose. “A horse sires a horse, a man begets man, a god brings forth a god.” Gospel of Philip We see this same idea in occult circles today.” (Ken Johnson, Demonic Gospels, 55-57 (Kindle Edition): CreateSpace Independent Publishing Platform)
Reading all of this, I cannot help but think of Peter’s warning of false prophets that would arise within the Christian age.
2 Peter 2:14 (ERV)-Every time they look at a woman, they want her. They are always sinning this way. And they lead weaker people into the trap of sin. They have taught themselves well to be greedy. They are under a curse.
It is within this context of the gospel of Philip that we read:
Gospel Of Philip-“The companion of the [savior] is Mary of Magdala. The [savior loved] her63 more than [all] the disciples, [and he] kissed her often on her [mouth]. The other [disciples] [64]…said to him, “Why do you love her more than all of us?” The savior answered and said to them, “Why do I not love you like her? If a blind person and one who can see are both in darkness, they are the same. When the light comes, one who can see will see the light, and the blind person will stay in darkness.”64”
The arguments that Jesus and Mary are married made from this text are threefold. First, it is argued that Mary is the “companion” of the Savior (which it is then argued meant “spouse”). Second, is is claimed that Jesus kissed Mary often on the mouth, and that this was a passionate sexual kiss. Third, it is believed that Jesus loved Mary “more” than He loved His other disciples.
The first argument is easily answered. This book was written in Coptic, but was written earlier in Greek. Notice what Garlow tells us:
“One of Dan Brown’s characters says, “As any Aramaic scholar will tell you, the word companion, in those days, literally meant ‘spouse’” (DVC, 246). However, the sole ancient manuscript of Gospel of Philip is written in Coptic, not Aramaic (found in 1945 at Nag Hammadi), and no evidence has been found to suggest that an Aramaic version ever existed. The word translated “companion” derives from the Greek koinonos, a term that never required sexual or marital relationship; in fact, it appears ten times in the Greek New Testament with no hint of a sexual relationship (Matt. 23: 30; Luke 5: 10; 1 Cor. 10: 18, 20; 2 Cor. 1: 7; 8: 23; Philem. 1: 17; Heb. 10: 33; 1 Peter 5: 1; 2 Peter 1: 4). In addition, Gospel of Philip’s language suggests the opposite of Brown’s theory, thus providing no support to the notion that Jesus and Mary were married.” (James L. Garlow, The Da Vinci Codebreaker: An Easy-to-Use Fact Checker for Truth Seekers, 879-887 (Kindle Edition): Bloomington, Minnesota: Bethany House Publishers)
Notice especially Garlow’s point about the “Gospel of Philip’s language suggests the opposite of Brown’s theory.” What did he mean? Very simply, many groups of the Gnostics forbad marriage, some going so far as to claim that it was evil. This context should be kept in mind when reading the alleged gospel of Philip.
The second claim is that Jesus often kissed Mary on the “mouth.” Please observe how the word “mouth” is in parenthesis here. The reason is because that part of the text is missing! By reading throughout the rest of the gospel of Philip, we see that this is likely a reference to the “holy kiss” mentioned throughout the New Testament, especially because the gospel of Philip has Jesus kissing all of His disciples.
“There is the flimsiest of evidence for that. There is one passage in the Gospel of Philip (c. 250 A.D.) that claims Jesus often kissed Mary Magdalene on her ________. 45 Where he kissed her is obscure in the manuscript, which is Coptic translated from the original Greek. Brown mistakenly identifies it as having been written in Aramaic first. The word could have been mouth, cheek, forehead, or whatever. Even liberal scholar Karen King of Harvard, observes that this is referring to a holy kiss, that is, asexual. 46 Just like it says in the Bible, greet one another with “a holy kiss” (Romans 16: 16). So even Dan Brown’s sources from antiquity don’t make his case for him.” (D. James Kennedy & Jerry Newcombe, The Da Vinci Myth versus the Gospel Truth, 51 (Kindle Edition): Wheaton, IL: Crossway Books)
The third argument that Jesus loved Mary “more” than the other disciples is also easily answered. The text identifies the love of Jesus for Mary as being the same kind of love that He had for all of His disciples. Clearly, this is not talking about a sexualized love, despite the claims of those who would have us to believe that Jesus and Mary Magdalene married.
Now, here is the final thing to consider. Let’s say that we are mistaken about this, and the gospel of Philip is trying to argue that Jesus and Mary Magdalene were married.
So what?!
Books written by people with a philosophical axe to grind two hundred years after Jesus died need to be considered in that light, and then contrasted with Books written by those who personally knew, followed, and loved Him, and wrote within a few years of His death.
Which writings are logically more credible historically?
To ask is to answer.
In our next study, we will investigate the claims made regarding the alleged gospel of Mary Magdalene.
The grace of the Lord Jesus Christ, and the love of God, and the communion of the Holy Spirit, be with you all. Amen.