Comments on: How To: Miss Your Chance At Fame

By: Sid Morrison

Sid Morrison — Wed, 05 Sep 2007 09:05:12 +0000

Oh my goodness, the author of this post is really confused! I just about laughed my coffee through my nose when I read this. Just like today, not everyone with the same first name is the same person. The “Salome” being discussed in these books isn’t the same “Salome” who demanded the head of John the Baptist (Herodias’s daughter). It was a common name! The Salome mentioned here is generally accepted to be Salome the Disciple, who shows up elsewhere in the New Testment Canon (at Christ’s crucifixion at the least). There are a bunch of Marys, Jameses, and Johns in the New Testmament as well. Don’t confuse them either… Take a lookie here for the distinction on Salome:

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Salome_%28disciple%29

2. Also, just a clarification… the Infancy Gospel of James (a.k.a. the Protoevangelium of James) wasn’t Gnostic. I don’t believe Transitus Mariae was either.

3. There are actually 2 Gnostic “Gospels of the Egyptians”. The one being discussed here is the “Greek Gospel of the Egyptians”. There is also a completely different “Coptic Gospel of the Egyptians”.

4. While the Latin Church considers the Transitus Mariae to be an apocryphal book, the basic concept of Mary’s Assumption into Heaven is taken as dogma. I’d have to research the reasons for the book’s exclusion, but it may have been that they just didn’t have complete confidence in the veracity of some aspect of the story’s details. Like I said though, the basic idea of her Assumption is still accepted.

By: eve's dropper

eve's dropper — Tue, 04 Sep 2007 18:07:26 +0000

I must point out that books 1 and 3 (especially 3) are considered part of the tradition of the Eastern Orthodox Church.

By: Zach

Zach — Tue, 04 Sep 2007 15:47:17 +0000

Most of these apocryphal texts were left out because they contain Gnostic ideas. Gnosticism and many of the texts that espouse it have become popular as of late thanks to the Da Vinci code and the like, but I doubt that many of the folks who say they are Gnostics really have any idea what it actually means. Do they really believe that the material body is evil, and that the goal of religion should be to purify souls of their evil bodies? I honestly doubt it, since one bestselling “Gnostic” author claims she also believes Jesus had children, and the idea of Jesus having sex is anathema to real Gnosticism.