Elaine Pagels

As I mentioned before, I discovered Elaine Pagels through a book review in the May edition of The Atlantic. I already discussed the first book of hers that I read, The Gnostic Gospels. Here is a link to that post.

https://wurdsfromtheburbs.blogspot.com/2025/07/gnostic-gospels.html

I just finished reading another book, the one which was specifically reviewed in that Atlantic article, called "Miracles and Wonder" with a subtitle of "The Historical Mystery of Jesus", published just this year.

Where to begin.

The best thing I can do is to recommend that if you are a Christian who is interested in understanding the beginnings of the movement that has grown from a smattering of apostles and acolytes to one which continues to spread throughout the globe, continues to inspire people to seek God, truth, morality, and which counts over 2 billion adherents worldwide, in various permutations, read this book.

Short of that, a few things stand out for me. In no particular order

Pagels refers to brothers of Jesus, not in the way that bros refer to their friends, but actual brothers who were born from the marriage of Mary and Joseph. Perhaps this is more commonly accepted than I knew before reading the book, but I was never asked to memorize Jesus's brothers during my Catholic school upbringing, never remember any teacher, nun or lay person, discussing in any way that Mary had other children, yet Pagels mentions it numerous times in her book as fact, without any attempt to justify such a claim. 

As to why my Catholic training never mentions these siblings, I can only postulate that the desire to present Mary as a virgin, extended to the rest of her life, for no real obvious reason. 

Pagels discusses the necessity of the virgin birth story, in light of the fact that Judea, at the time, was rife with activity against Roman Rule, and that, as is true today, Roman soldiers were often deployed into regions of unrest whereupon they killed without requiring guilt or proof and raped with impunity. 

Does Pagels believe that Mary was a victim of such an event, thereby inspiring the story that Jesus was the result of a virgin birth? No, but she does cite accusations at the time against Jesus and his questionable birth story. Remember, the gospels of Matthew, Mark, Luke and John were written decades after the crucifixion of Christ, at a time when acknowledging an association, let alone worship of Jesus placed one's life in danger. To deflect an obvious criticism, that Mary was not married making Jesus illegitimate, a story intimating divine intervention can be effective when cementing the believers faith. 

At one point, Pagels refers to this nascent movement as someone who lived in that time, whether Jewish or Roman or Pagan, might perceive it. As a cult. This really struck me in light of how we still look askance at the "cults" of today, how we worry when young people turn to non-traditional religions or religious beliefs, or even kidnap them from these groups so as to reprogram them to a more acceptable religious affiliation. 

One might say that it is true that every major religion of today, was at one time considered a cult, its leaders and followers heretics, blasphemous, etc. by the mainstream religions of the time. As I mention in the post about The Gnostic Gospels, even within the Christian communities in the first 300 years after Christ's death, there was debate among the followers, and rifts and disagreements about the meaning of the life of Christ. Cults within the cult, so to speak. 

At the end of the book, Pagels delves into how three particular films have presented different perspectives on Jesus and his life. One of them, a 2018 film called Mary Magdalene, features a disturbing scene in which Mary's family has decided that she is possessed by some sort of devil. Not because she is following Jesus, at that point she only has a cursory familiarity with his teachings, but because she refuses to marry the man that her father has chosen for her. In the scene, she is dunked repeatedly into the river, to drive out the demon, until she is practically drowned. 

Eventually, the family asks Jesus to "cure" her. He questions her, speaks with her, listens to her, and then tells her that there is no demon here. She decides to follow him, but when she tells her family of her decision, they double down on their belief that she is not well, their reactions ranging from anger at Jesus and his disciples, "what have you promised her?" "what have you done to her?" to outright shunning, her mother telling her that she won't be welcome back if she leaves with Jesus and his crew.

Again, remember, Jesus often told his followers that they must leave their families if they are to follow him, if they are to find the truth, find God, not unlike so many anguished families today who lament the lack of contact with their children who have joined a cult.

Such a fascinating perspective, at least for me, perhaps partially because I spent a few years seeking knowledge and attending talks and visiting ashrams which associated with Maharaji, now referred to as Prem Rawat. While I have often credited my mother as a moral example in my life, the time I spent listening to Maharaji also influenced my life, then and now.

Another major point of Pagels book is the perception that many of the apostles who accompanied Jesus during his time of teaching and healing, believed that when he referred to the new kingdom that was near, they believed that he meant soon, literally, in his lifetime and theirs. Again, in the Mary Magdalene film (I watched it after finishing the book), Judas is presented as a true believer in this concept. In fact, the movie suggests that he betrayed Jesus, not for money, but to force Jesus to show his true power. 

For Judas, the fact that Jesus could do all sorts of miracles, not the least of which was bringing a dead man back to life, meant that he could wave his hand and smite the Roman oppressors, that he could call on his angels to bring justice to their world, that he could truly make the last first, and the first last. In the movie, Judas hangs himself, as I was taught, but his death seems driven more by disappointment, perhaps even anger that he believed that the kingdom was at hand, so could not accept the death of his messiah.

Which brings us to the Resurrection. 

Again, Pagels discusses this as objectively as possible in an attempt to explain why such a miraculous event, rising from the dead, was important to the New Testament Gospel writers, as a way to attract new believers, as well as differentiate Jesus from the other teachers and prophets that existed at the time.  

Her analysis is not an attempt to cast doubt that Jesus rose from the dead but to explain why such a story would be helpful when expanding a new religion. During this chapter, she makes a number of references to how some of the disciples doubted the Resurrection, at first, and not just the well taught Doubting Thomas anecdote. Along with the movie, Mary Magdalene, both present accounts that cast Mary's encounter with the raised Jesus as being openly rejected by most of the apostles, specifically Peter. It is not until they have their own experience that they accept the Resurrection.

This reluctance to trust the word of a woman, is also reflected in a scene, in the movie (I can not confirm if it appears in any of the accepted Gospels, but does appear in the Gospel of Mary, one of those documents recovered from Nag Hammadi which I refer to in my previous post called The Gnostic Gospels). 

In that scene, Peter does not doubt Mary's word, but does demonstrate a lack of understanding about the message of Jesus. In the scene, Peter and Mary are traveling together, just the two of them, when they come upon a village with multiple people, men, women and children, who are dying, presumably due to the violence inflicted upon those not Roman during these times.

Mary stops to help them, to Peter's consternation, more concerned is he with his safety. Afterwards, after their intervention which saves a child, Peter admits to Mary that her actions more surely reflect the sermons of Jesus. Peter seems to start to realize the power, and danger, that living the life examples of his teacher can be, and tells Mary that her actions in helping the people they came across truly demonstrate her belief in Jesus, and his deficit in understanding His message.

The next to last chapter of the book, touches on the topic, when did Jesus become God. Here, Pagels points out that Matthew, Mark and Luke emphasized the good news of Jesus's message, whereas it was John who took the next step into proclaiming Jesus as God. It is not something I ever noticed when learning the catechism, but she points out numerous passages in all four Gospels which demonstrates how the four men interpreted similar events in a different light.

It is a point, as I mentioned in my other post, that is one of the reasons that I call myself a lapsed Catholic. I always thought that the message, the sermons, the example of his life, should be enough for us to know right from wrong. That, like many other advanced spiritual beings that have existed throughout history, we should adhere to the message without glorifying the messenger.

Similarly, although on the other side of the spectrum, we just witnessed the firing of a public servant whose job it is to report labor statistics, jobs created, unemployment, etc. When the report was published last week, the messenger was fired by a president who does not tolerate bad news when that news reflects poorly on himself. 

Sadly, once Trump places a Yes person in charge of that particular department, any future jobs report that features good news, will generate doubt on its veracity. And again, trust in the government will be compromised.

If we were to extrapolate this concept to include the possibility that other advanced spiritual humans have been born since Jesus of Nazareth, perhaps even in 1957, but since we have maintained the blinders that necessitate the belief that Jesus was the Son of God, who died for our sins so we can spend eternity with God, then we become oblivious to the possibility that someone with a similar message could be walking on Earth today, or be born tomorrow. 

Add to that possibility that such a person could have been six years ago in Gaza, or tomorrow in Sudan, and there is no chance that a new belief system, or even a revision, or extension of a current belief system, can be spread, and accepted in America, let alone across the globe.

Perhaps that should be my next story, God sends another Son to Earth to remind us of His love for us, His desire for us to share eternity with him, but that person ends up in an early grave, born to the wrong parents in the wrong country, or in a hospital for people considered insane.

Or maybe the better story line is that God so loves us, that She sends such a person on a yearly basis, born in various countries, sometimes male, sometimes female, perhaps even a gay person here and there, all to remind us of the message that is of the utmost importance. And, knowing that we are a rather stupid species, or perhaps, to give us a break, too concerned with institutions that give us comfort, allow us to abdicate our rational brain, and spiritual growth, to what we are told by those who claim a connection to the very God that prefers an individual relationship, not a watered down one filtered through the teachings of man made dogmas, messengers are sent, over and over again. 

Which of course, makes Jesus the one in ten thousand iterations of such interventions by the Creator whose teachings, and life, stuck, all the rest being tossed away without recognition. 

Now that is a Creator I can get behind. I just hope the patience and persistence behind such a plan will overcome humanity's infantile understanding of spirituality, and the actual point of our lives.