Lesson video

Hello there, my young theologians.

My name is Ms. Marx, and I'm going to be your religious education teacher today.

And today we're going to be looking at the Gospel of Mary, which you may never have heard of because it's not in the Bible that Christians use today.

But why is that? Should we go and find out? Let's go.

So by the end of today's lesson, you'll be able to explain how the books of the Bible were chosen and how the Gospel of Mary relates to this.

So let's start with our keywords: Apocryphal: Writings that are not officially accepted as part of the Bible, so are non-canonical.

Apostle: Early Christian leaders responsible for spreading the message of Jesus.

Canonical: Books or texts which were officially accepted as part of the Bible.

Gospel: Meaning good news referring to the teachings and revelation of Jesus Christ.

And Mary Magdalene: A follower of Jesus known for her role as a key figure in the early Christian community.

So our lesson today will have two sections: How was the biblical canon decided? And the Gospel of Mary.

So let's go with our first section, "How was the biblical canon decided?" Imagine there's a really popular series of books that everyone is reading and talking about.

Some fans find the characters of storylines so interesting that they write their own stories for the series using the characters and the plot.

So many people write this fan-fiction that these stories get put onto a website, and you search online about the book series and you read one of these stories.

What criteria could you use to decide if this was from the original stories author or not? And is there anything you could learn about the fans from this fiction? So how could you decide if it was actually the original writer that wrote it, what would show you that it was or wasn't? And secondly, maybe you could learn something from the fans by reading this.

If so, what could you learn? Pause the video and have a think, and you can talk to the person next to you or talk to me.

What we're talking about today is a little bit like this idea of fan fiction that we've spoken about, so keep that in mind as we go through this lesson.

As theologians today, when we use the discipline of theology in religious education, we can look at different types of text and interpretations of them, which can then lead to different meanings being derived from them.

We can look at how different texts were selected or rejected to become part of important collections of sources of authority, and they then go on to influence beliefs and practises in that religion.

That can help us understand better, the development of that religion over time.

Because in each of the religions you may have studied, there was a decision at some point what should be in or not that source of authority that you are looking at.

So today, we can really explore this as theologians.

So here I've got the Bible bookshelf.

So on here I've got all the books of the Bible that have been agreed upon and were here on this Bible bookshelf.

Now, different groups of Christians might have slightly different books on those shelves, but you get the concept that here is a collection of books that have been decided as part of the Bible.

The Bible is a collection of books and writings, and the books on this bookshelf were selected by different religious authorities at different points of history.

So the Old Testament books were decided with a certain process and the New Testament, and as I said, there's other denominations other than the one that's shown here that might have different books or different orders of books on their shelves.

However, at the time that these books were put together, there were some that were not accepted, so they're not in the Bible.

So there were other books that were around which may be similar, may have been said to have been written by the same people.

These were around at that time, and it had to be decided if they should be in or not.

And mainly we are focusing on the New Testament when we're talking about this.

So when that was decided, what was in, and what was out, and how was that decided? Well, most Christians believe that the Bible is the Word of God and it's an important source of authority for their beliefs and practises.

But the Bible did not however, appear for humans as a complete package, it wasn't sort of descended upon Earth for humans to read as one package.

Most Christians believe it was revealed over time through the writings of various authors at various times.

Different church leaders have decided at different points what books and text should be in or out of the collection as a whole.

The collection of approved books is known as the biblical canon.

Books and writings that have been accepted are canonical.

The list of books for the Old Testament are very similar to the Tanakh in Judaism, and the New Testament books were decided through debates between early church leaders in the 3rd and 4th century.

So it's a few hundred years after when Jesus was on Earth.

Those leaders were concerned that there were texts and writing circulating that may not have in fact been inspired by God, but were just written by people.

Some of these texts were leading to beliefs and practises that those church leaders felt were not what Jesus had taught.

And these books were being used by some Christian groups, and even some of the early church fathers.

So some of the church leaders were using some of these books.

But those were not selected to be in the Bible, and they are known as apocryphal.

So we can understand it a bit like this: Jesus' followers and very early Christians didn't have a New Testament, 'cause the books haven't been written or decided on yet.

Christians don't believe that Jesus had a book that he like gave to people before he ascended back to heaven.

But it's the early followers of Jesus who remembered what he said and did, and wrote about this and wrote to each other that we now have as the New Testament.

So those very early Christians didn't really have it 'cause it wasn't written, and then it hadn't been decided 'cause it was happening there and then.

And there were many different accounts of Jesus' life and writings about His religion circulating in those first few centuries.

So we know that Paul's letters were written as possibly some of the earliest writings in the New Testament that were actually written down, even though chronologically the events of Jesus' birth came first.

But we know that those gospels were written at a time when there were other ones as well, and it had to be chosen which ones were going to be included.

Different ideas about Christianity were influenced by these writings.

So different gospels have Him saying slightly different things or different writings say slightly different events happened.

So the church leaders felt that there needed to be one list that everyone could agree on as the official books of the Bible.

And this was put together and really kind of agreed upon by about 400 CE, although over time, this has changed slightly and different denominations now may have slightly different sets of books that they include within their Bible.

Well, how were they selected then? Well, it was over quite a long period of time, a bit of back and forth between the different early church leaders.

But generally what they agreed upon was that the books should be written by, or really connected to an apostle, one of the original disciples, or Paul, and it should be widely accepted and in line with the teachings of their Christianity.

So it should be, not just one group that have this one text, it should be that wide numbers of people are accepting it, as well as it being in their eyes what Christianity was.

So we've used this word "apocrypha" quite a bit in this lesson.

Let's break it down to understand what it means, it comes from Greek, and it has these stems, "apo" and "crypha".

So "apo" means sending away or sending off.

So we have the apostles being sent away, going off to tell others about Jesus.

So we know this means to being away.

And "crypha" comes from "kryptein" meaning to hide.

And so a crypt is an underground, hidden bit of a building, may be under a church.

So a literal translation of the term is "hidden away." So this might refer to the early church leaders wanting these books to be put away and not part of the Bible, which they'd want everyone to read.

And the apocrypha means those books and texts which were written about Jesus and His teachings, and they were accepted by some early followers, but not accepted into the biblical canon.

So they may have similar content and be about similar events, but for some reason, they were not accepted and put into the Bible.

So let's do a quick check.

Is this true or false? "Texts which are widely read and accepted by some early Christians, and included in the biblical canon, are known as the apocrypha." Is that true or false? Pause the video and have a think, and we'll see what you come up with in a moment.

That is false, but why? It's a bit of a tricky one, isn't it? The texts which are included in the biblical canon are called canonical.

The apocryphal texts are those which were read by some early Christians but not accepted as part of the biblical canon.

So some Christians would've been reading them, but they weren't accepted into the Bible that we would have today.

So let's unpack this criteria a bit more than how were the books decided? So criteria one: Written by or about one of the apostles, or someone very close to the apostles.

And by the apostles, it was generally felt it should be one of the 12 original apostles of Jesus, or Paul.

Where does this authority come from then? Well, in the Bible, Jesus instructed His disciples to spread his word and commands across the world as it says in Matthew, "Therefore, go and make disciples of all nations, baptising in the name of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit, and teaching them to obey everything I have commanded you." So here it's seen as Jesus giving the authority to the disciples to go and spread that message, and spread His teachings.

So some of that is going to be in the writing.

Why was it important to the early church leaders that the authors were apostles or close to them? Read the text again and have a think.

Pause the video, and you can talk to the person next to you or talk to me.

Or not only does Jesus command them to teach others and gives them this authority to go and spread what He's been teaching, also, they were the ones who spent a lot of time with Jesus and were with Him through lots of these different events that are apart of the Christian story.

So here we have Lucas talking to Charlie, who's a Baptist Christian, about the Bible.

Lucas asked Charlie, "Is it important to you that apostles either wrote or were very involved with the books of the New Testament?" And Charlie says, "Yes, it's really important to me.

These are the people who spent time with Jesus.

They were by His side, listening His teachings, and taking part in the story of Jesus' death and resurrection.

I trust they were instructed to write what they did about Jesus by God.

The Bible is God's Word." So for Charlie, it's really important that these letters and books were written about, or to do with or from these apostles.

So now onto criteria two, let's unpack that: Being widely accepted and in line with the teachings of Jesus as the early church leaders knew it.

So we have, here are four gospels that are in the Bible today, Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John, they're the canonical gospels.

And they were seen as authoritative by different groups of Christians at this time.

They were viewed to be genuine, authoritative accounts of Jesus' life.

And they have, to some extent, an agreed message about Jesus.

They share some stories of different ways that things happened across these four gospels.

So it's seen as them sort of backing each other up and more likely to be true.

And different Christian communities had accepted them, and different early church leaders saw these as authoritative.

And we can see this in the writings of an early Christian thinker, Irenaeus, Irenaeus was an early church leader and he wrote about 180 CE.

So it's still within about 300 years after Jesus, and still 200 years before the final list is decided, remember.

The authors of apocryphal books had, "Created an unspeakable number of apocryphal and spurious writings, which they themselves have forged to bewilder the minds of foolish men, and of such are ignorant of the Scriptures of truth." So he's calling the scriptures of truth, the four canonical gospels, Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John here, and saying that these other ones that have been written aren't full of truth, but they were actually fake, forgeries, spurious writings.

Time for another check: Which two of these statements about how the books of the New Testament were decided are correct? A: The books of the New Testament were only selected if there were books written by Jesus.

B: The books of the New Testament were selected if they were written by one of the apostles or someone very connected to them.

And C: The books of the New Testament were selected if they were already accepted and in line with Christian teachings.

Which two of those are correct? Pause the video and have a go, and we'll see what you've done in a moment.

That's right, it's B and C.

A is not correct because Jesus didn't write any books before he ascended up to heaven.

So time for a task to see what we've learned.

"Lucas, Sam, and Izzy have each said something incorrect about how the biblical canon was decided.

Correct each of their mistakes." Lucas has said, "The canonical books of the Bible were decided by Jesus Christ before he ascended to heaven." Sam has said, "The books that are in the New Testament were all written directly by one of the 12 apostles." And Izzy has said, "There have never been any Christian groups that have accepted the apocryphal books as authorities." Each of them has made a mistake, and you're going to correct that.

Pause the video and have a go, and we'll see what you've done in a moment.

Well done, that was some really good thinking there.

So I asked you to correct the mistake that Lucas, Izzy, and Sam each made about how the biblical canon was decided.

So Lucas actually said, "The canonical books of the Bible were decided by early Christian leaders and finalised by around 400 CE." It wasn't Jesus who decided it.

Sam says, "The books of the New Testament were all written by or closely connected to an apostle." It wasn't that they were all written directly by one of those apostles, some of them, it was people that were very close to them.

And Izzy says, "In those first few centuries CE, there were some Christian groups that accepted the apocryphal books as authorities." It wasn't that none of them were ever accepted, that's why we're still interested them as apocryphal books, well done.

So on to our second section of the lesson then, "The Gospel of Mary." So there are many apocryphal gospels that filled in some of the details of the story and the teachings of Jesus that the canonical gospels didn't cover.

So there were things that we don't know from those canonical gospels about times in Jesus' life or different things that happened in different events, we dunno much about what happened when he was a small child, for example, in those years between when He was lost in the temple and then when He appears to start His ministry.

Other examples are: The Gospel of Thomas.

So this apocryphal gospel has sayings from Jesus on lots of philosophical matters.

So lots of questions that is asked to Jesus and replies that He gives.

So it's almost as if the writer of the Gospel of Thomas wished they could have asked Jesus these things.

And if Jesus was there, that's what he would've asked him.

So the Infancy Gospel of Jesus has stories about Jesus' life as a child in that kind of gap that we have in the canonical gospels, it fill that in with stories of Him, for example, returning home to Mary's village, and her having to present this child that was born, even though she obviously says that she was a virgin, and it retells that story.

And then we have the Gospel of Judas, which is an explanation of why Judas did what he did in betraying Jesus, and actually how this was all part of God's plan.

So maybe that was someone trying to figure out why he was one of the disciples, and why did he do what he did? So how might these gospels be similar to our example of fan fiction that we had at the start of the lesson.

So if you remember at the start of the lesson, I asked you, "What if there was a book series that everybody loved, with characters that everyone loved, and before the next book was published, other people started writing fan fiction using the characters and plots?" Can this be connected to that? Have a think about that.

You can pause the video and have a think, talk to the person next to you, or talk to me.

Well, many people do make this comparison between the apocrypha and found fiction, because it was people who were writing because they loved the story of Jesus and they loved all these different characters wondering what if maybe this had happened, maybe that had happened.

So they're wanting to kind of fill in those gaps with their ideas.

So where does the Gospel of Mary fit into all this then? Well, the Gospel of Mary is not thought to be written by Mary, but she's an important figure in the story.

And the gospel was not known about in modern Christian times until fragments were found at the end of the 19th century.

And these were found in Egypt in a site called Nagaa Hammadi.

We don't have the entire gospel, but the fragments we do have tell us it was written about the 2nd or 3rd century CE.

It was written in Greek originally, the language of earlier text.

So for example, Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John were written in Greek originally too.

That was the language around in the Roman Empire at that time.

And then it is translated into Coptic, because we found fragments in both.

And that was the language of the church later in Egypt.

So we know it stayed important 'cause it gets translated into a new language, and we know that it is also now important in Egypt rather than Jerusalem where maybe it was first written.

So the Coptic script, that's the later copy, is written in messy handwriting, which means the archaeologists and theologians and historians think maybe it was a personal copy belonging to one person that maybe they'd copied from something else.

There's no other direct reference to the Gospel of Mary in text from the time, but there are some other apocrypha texts which have similar themes and even a similar conversation to the one we have in the Gospel of Mary.

The gospel is centred around Mary, who many scholars think is Mary Magdalene, not Mary, the mother of Jesus, although it could be Mary, the mother of Jesus.

Mary Magdalene is an important figure in the canonical books of the New Testament.

She's healed of a great problem by Jesus and travels with him to spread His message.

The canonical gospels all say that Mary was the first person to discover the empty tomb of Jesus.

And John's gospel has an exchange between Mary and Jesus where He tells her He's about to ascend, and that she must go and tell the others that He has risen.

And this has earned her the title, for some Christians, as the "Apostle to the Apostles." In the Gospel of Mary, she is with the disciples when they see the risen Jesus and as He leaves them, they get upset.

Mary comforts them, and they ask her to teach them what Jesus told her as He loved her more than any other woman.

So even though we don't have the entire Gospel of Mary, what we do have has the following story: Between the resurrection and Jesus ascending to heaven, He meets with the disciples and Mary Magdalene.

Whilst He was explaining the nature of matter and existence, the disciple, Peter, asked Him to explain what sin is.

Once He's finished this, He leaves.

Now, the disciples then start to grieve and weep bitterly as they're worried that they'll also be killed if they start to spread the message of Jesus to others.

Mary then stepped in, and reminded them that they would be protected when they do this.

Peter asked her to tell them more about what Jesus had told her.

Mary described a vision she had of Jesus, but we don't have all of this fragment.

It's about as soul ascending through different powers, which could refer to the ascension of Jesus.

Peter then challenged Mary about why Jesus told her things and not them.

Mary is then defended by Levi, who argued that if she was good enough for Jesus, she should be good enough for them.

And so we have some parts here from this gospel.

"How can we go out to preach the gospel? If they didn't spare Him, why would they spare us?" "Sister, we know the Saviour loved you more than all the other women.

Tell us the words of the Saviour that you remember." "Mary then describes a vision of Jesus and a mystical description of a soul ascending." And then Peter challenges her.

"He didn't speak with a woman without our knowledge and not publicly with us did He? Did he prefer her to us?" And then Levi, who defends her, "If the Saviour made her worthy, who are you then to reject her? Surely, the Saviour knows her very well." So here you have this kind of argument between two of the disciples about whether Mary has the right to tell them or whether Jesus really did tell her these things.

Let's do a quick check.

Which two statements about the Gospel of Mary are correct? A: Fragments of the Gospel of Mary were found in Egypt.

B: The Gospel of Mary was written by Mary Magdalene.

C: The Coptic fragment is written in messy handwriting.

And D: The Gospel of Mary is a canonical gospel.

Two of those are right and two are wrong.

So have a think, pause the video, and we'll see what you've got in a moment.

The two that were correct were: A: fragments of the Gospel of Mary were found in Egypt, and C: the Coptic fragment is written in messy handwriting.

Well done.

So the canonical Gospel of John, so remember that means it's in the Bible, shows Jesus speaking to Mary after the resurrection.

So this part is accepted by Christians as part of the Bible.

So in this bit of the Bible it says, "Go to my brothers and tell them, 'I'm ascending to my Father and your Father, to my God and your God.

' Mary Magdalene went to the disciples with the news, 'I have seen the Lord!' And she told them that he had said these things to her." Who does Jesus send Mary to speak to? And what does Jesus instruct Mary to do when she gets to them? Pause the video and read the text again and see if you can find the answer to that.

You can talk to each other or talk to me.

Well done, Jesus instructs Mary to go to his brothers, the disciples.

Jesus instructs Mary to go to his brothers, the disciples, and to go and tell them that He is ascending to the Father.

Can you see how this links to the content of the Gospel of Mary here? She's talking to the disciples, and also she gives them a message about a soul ascending.

So is the gospel of Mary telling us what really happened as Christians would say the Gospel of John is, or was this bit of the gospel of John inspiration for somebody to write their own version of what they think happened when Mary went to speak to the disciples? So does this Gospel of Mary pass the early church's criteria.

If you remember, we had two criteria from earlier in the lesson.

Criteria one: It was written by or about one of the apostles or someone very close to the apostles.

And criteria two: It was being widely accepted and in line with the teachings of Jesus as the early church leaders knew it.

So does the Gospel of Mary pass this criteria? Mary Magdalene is a close follower of Jesus, and the canonical gospels do say this about her healing and her spending time with Jesus, and being there when Jesus raises from the dead.

But this Gospel of Mary wasn't necessarily written by her though, even though it's about her, whereas Matthew, mark, Luke, and John are said to have been written by those people.

Criteria two: Being widely accepted and in line with the teachings of Jesus as the early church leaders knew it.

Well, the Gospel of Mary may have been accepted by some Christian groups in Egypt because it's found in Egypt, it's written in the Coptic script, it's been translated outta the Greek.

So we know it mattered to some people there in Egypt, but there's no other mentions of it in Egypt, or elsewhere, or in any other writings.

There just doesn't seem to be, like it's vanished.

So maybe it wasn't that widely accepted if there's no other appearances of it anywhere, when there is with other writings.

So time for another check.

Is this true or false? "In the Gospel of John, Jesus tells Mary to go and give a message about His ascension to the disciples." Is that true or false? Pause the video and have a think, and we'll see what you've got in a moment.

That is true, in the Gospel of John, the canonical Gospel of John that's in the Bible, Jesus does tell Mary to go and give a message about His ascension to the disciples.

The Gospel of Mary then, may be an apocryphal book.

We may have said it doesn't pass the criteria and we can understand why it wasn't included in the biblical canon, but then it can still tell us about the early followers of Jesus, can't it? Just like the fan fiction that people might write today about their favourite characters can tell me something about them as people who wrote it.

What do you think the Gospel of Mary could tell us about those early followers then if one of them wrote it.

Pause the video and have a think.

You could talk to the person next to you or talk to me.

Well, the Gospel of Mary could tell us that early Christians were debating about the role of women in the church because she had the disciples there arguing over whether she had a right to teach them these things from Jesus or not.

It tells us that Mary's a very important figure, and most people do think it was Mary Magdalene.

So it tells us that she has got some importance that she's put in this position to be teaching them these things as the woman that Jesus loved the most.

It also shows us there might have been some tensions over leadership at that time.

If there was tensions in the early church as they were deciding what should and shouldn't be in the cannon, and what should and shouldn't be followed and believed in the faith, maybe they sort of back put that into their being tensions between the disciples and them arguing over what Mary was telling them.

It also shows us there was a diversity of beliefs.

So again, those two disciples, but also the different views that are shown in the Gospel of Mary about ascending to heaven, and when Jesus described what sin is, shows us there was many different beliefs that were circulating at that time.

Another thing it tells us is that people were keeping personal private copies of texts.

So that Coptic script, if you remember, that was written in messy handwriting, shows us that this might have been a hurried copy that somebody did or something they kept for themselves, their own devotion, their own prayers perhaps, rather than it always being something that was an official copy that had been done by somebody employed to do that.

Also, the Gospel of Mary tells us that there were philosophical questions being asked by these early Christians.

So Peter asks Jesus, "Well, what is sin?", because they're trying to figure out what does sin mean, and why have I got sin, or have I not got sin, or where is it gone? So these are quite big philosophical questions that they're asking too.

Perhaps those early Christians were asking it, which is why they put it into the mouth of Peter and Jesus in the apocryphal book.

While the apocryphal books have been really fascinating to historians and theologians ever since they've been discovered, and Dr.

Sarah Parkhouse is a historian and theologian who has studied the Gospel of Mary and other apocryphal books.

And she says that it shows us there were many different flavours of Christianity around at that time.

And I know some theologians talk about Christianities at that time rather than one formed religion.

It also matches with ideas in the canonical gospels and the importance of Mary Magdalene.

So it kind of underlines the importance that she has in the history of Christianity.

It also shows us that early Christians were trying to work out how to be Christians.

Like we said earlier, the Bible wasn't like there for them on day one, it was formed over time and then decided by about the year 400.

And so Christians were trying to work out what it meant to be Christian at that time.

And she also says it is a little bit like that fan fiction we spoke about at the beginning of the lesson, along with other apocryphal writings.

It's as if they're trying to fill in the gaps of or imagining their favourite characters were saying were doing this.

So Lucas and Sam are discussing now how the Gospel of Mary could be seen as both a victim and a victor.

Lucas says, "The Gospel of Mary has been a victim of how the books of the Bible were put together.

It has a woman teaching the disciples so it didn't fit with other Christian ideas." So Lucas thinks it was a victim of that process, and maybe Lucas thinks it should have been put into the biblical canon.

Sam says, "The Gospel of Mary can't have been that accepted by early Christians, otherwise it would've been mentioned, but it is a victor and now that it's been discovered and people can learn about it." So Sam's point is that while other books didn't mention it, it doesn't seem to be widely accepted by lots of people, but we can now learn about it now that we've found it.

So ultimately, it was a victor when it was found in Egypt.

Do you agree with Lucas or Sam, or do you have a different view, and why? Pause the video and have a think.

You can talk to the person next to you or talk to me.

Time for another check.

Is this true or false? "The Gospel of Mary cannot help us better understand the early Christian communities." Is that true or false? Pause the video and have a think, and then we'll see what you've done in a moment.

That is false, but why? Well, even though it's apocryphal, so it's not accepted in the biblical canon, the Gospel of Mary can still help us better understand the early Christian communities as it shows some of the debates and the discussions they were having, including over women leading in churches.

Time for a task to see what we've learned then.

Here's some statements about the Gospel of Mary, as well as some explanations for how it can help us better understand the early Christian communities.

Match the statements to the correct explanations.

And your statements are: The Coptic fragment of the Gospel of Mary was written in messy handwriting.

The disciples have an argument in the Gospel of Mary.

Mary speaks to the disciples about the ascension in the Gospel of Mary.

And there are Greek fragments of the Gospel of Mary.

So which of these explanations can match to those statements? A: This means that whoever wrote this probably knew John's gospel story of Mary at the tomb of Jesus.

B: This means it's probably dated to before the year 300 CE.

C: This means it was probably used in a personal, private way.

Or D: This means that there were debates and disputes in the early church with different flavours of Christianity.

So match the statement with the explanation.

Pause the video and have a go, and we'll see what you've done in a moment.

Well done, some really good thinking there.

So I asked you to match up the statement with the explanation that goes with it best, and your answers should look something like this: The Coptic fragment of the Gospel of Mary was written in messy handwriting, and this means it was probably used in a personal and private way.

The disciples have an argument in the Gospel of Mary.

This means that there were debates and disputes in the early church with different flavours of Christianity.

Mary speaks to the disciples about the ascension in the Gospel of Mary.

This means that whoever wrote this probably knew John's gospel story of Mary at the tomb of Jesus.

And there are Greek fragments of the Gospel of Mary.

This means it's probably dated to before the year 300 CE.

So let's summarise everything we've learned today about the Gospel of Mary.

The biblical canon are the books which are part of the Bible.

The Gospel of Mary is not one of these.

The biblical canon was decided by the year 400 CE by early Christian leaders.

Books and texts that were accepted into the canon are canonical.

Books and texts which were not accepted into the canon are apocryphal.

The Gospel of Mary is an apocryphal book which can help us better understand early Christian communities.

Well done, that was some fantastic work today, my young theologians.

I hope to see you next time, bye-bye.