Christ's 40 Day Ministry

[Figs&Grapes]

An up and coming Gospel Doctrine lesson is Acts 1-5.

Acts 1:3 states:

To whom also he shewed himself alive after his passion by many infallible proofs, being seen of them forty days, and speaking of the things pertaining to the kingdom of God:

Leaving conjecture behind as to the details of this 40 day ministry, it presents a problem for most Christian denominations--that Christ would teach his apostles about things pertaining to the Kingdom of God that are not written or recorded in the Bible--a closed book.

One might almost think that there is more to Christ's Gospel than is canonized in the Bible.

[jwhitlock]

There appears to have been quite a bit of interest about the 40 days among early Christians. The Gnostics had some success purporting to have the secret teachings of those 40 days. It appears that what the Savior said during those 40 days was not distributed in public writings.

It is highly doubtful that Christ simply reiterated what he had taught before his death during the 40 days. That 40 days was a period when the apostles and other disciples were trained and edified and given power to do the upcoming work of spreading the gospel. The apostles are very different people after those 40 days than they were before the crucifixion, when they were subject to doubts and other weaknesses.

It is most likely that there were significant teachings given during that time. The silence of those 40 days is indeed proof that the Bible is only a very incomplete record of what the Savior taught.

[skenderbeg]

Correct me if I'm wrong, but didn't Clement state on several occasions Peter would be talking to him, and would start to share some of the deeper 'mysteries' - things not found in the 'public' teachings of Christs Church - with Clement, but then would stop himself, and say something to the effect of, "The spirit constrains me to say no more", due to the fact that Peter was about to share something from the 40 days?

Yes, I have no reference off of the top of my head, and I can't even point my finger at which of Clement's writings this would have come from, but I really think that Peter 'wanted' to share things with Clement that he wasn't allowed to - perhaps issues dealing with issues more sacred than that which was shared abroad in the epistles of the Apostles? Perhaps similar to that which Cyril of Jerusalem wrote down?

[Bill “Papa” Lee]

An up and coming Gospel Doctrine lesson is Acts 1-5.

Acts 1:3 states:

To whom also he shewed himself alive after his passion by many infallible proofs, being seen of them forty days, and speaking of the things pertaining to the kingdom of God:

Leaving conjecture behind as to the details of this 40 day ministry, it presents a problem for most Christian denominations--that Christ would teach his apostles about things pertaining to the Kingdom of God that are not written or recorded in the Bible--a closed book.

One might almost think that there is more to Christ's Gospel than is canonized in the Bible.

Great point...Thanks

Pa Pa

[Doctor Steuss]

The esoteric was very much a part of early Christianity. I guess we just have to hope we've got the "right" esoteric stuff...

[jwhitlock]

The esoteric was very much a part of early Christianity. I guess we just have to hope we've got the "right" esoteric stuff...

Well, the tradition continues. J. Golden was fond of stating that high priests just sit around gassing about obscure points of doctrine.

[consiglieri]

The esoteric was very much a part of early Christianity. I guess we just have to hope we've got the "right" esoteric stuff...

As opposed to the majority of "traditional" Christians who claim that there is no esoteric stuff?

All the Best!

--Captain P.P.

[Doctor Steuss]

As opposed to the majority of "traditional" Christians who claim that there is no esoteric stuff?

All the Best!

--Captain P.P.

If only Clement of Alexandria, Tertullian, and Basil of Caesarea (all the way in the 4th century) had gotten that memo...

The Best Back Atcha!

--Mohel

[Doctor Steuss]

Well, the tradition continues. J. Golden was fond of stating that high priests just sit around gassing about obscure points of doctrine.

When you reach that age, it's hard not to gass...

[jwhitlock]

When you reach that age, it's hard not to gass...

Please... I'm embarrassed enough as it is with the rest of the weaknesses I have.

[Eteponge]

See The 40 Day Teachings of Christ in The Books of Jeu/Ieou and The Pistis Sophia, among other Early Christian and Early Gnostic Christian Writings. You'll find many Elements of LDS Theology & Ritual in there.

Take the Early Gnostic Writing, "The Untitled Gnostic Text" for example...

"And he placed watchers upon their veils. And he gave many honours to those who had worshipped him. And he exalted them over those who had opposed him and withstood him. And he spread out the land on the right side into many lands. And he made them each into ranks, and each into aeons, and each into worlds, and each into heavens ', and each into firmaments, and each into heavens, and each into places', and each into places, and each into spaces. And he appointed laws for them. He gave to them commandments: "Abide in my word and I will give to you eternal life '. And I will send you powers. And I will strengthen you with spirits of power, and I will give you authority as you will.

And no one will prevent you in what you wish. And you will beget for yourselves aeons and worlds and heavens, (so that) the intelligible spirits come and dwell in them. And you will become gods, and you will know that you are from God, and you will see him, that he is God within you, And he will dwell in your aeon." And the Lord of the All said these words to them. And he withdrew from them and concealed himself from them '." (The Untitled Gnostic Text)

[Doctor Steuss]

[...]

(The Untitled Gnostic Text)

Do you happen to know the dating of this text?

[Sargon]

Nibley has some to say on this subject.

http://farms.byu.edu/display.php?table=tra...ipts&id=114

[LifeOnaPlate]

I think maybe Jesus came back for 40 days just to hang out. Everything we need is in the Bible, or in the post-Biblical creeds made centuries after Jesus was gone.

[Bill “Papa” Lee]

An up and coming Gospel Doctrine lesson is Acts 1-5.

Acts 1:3 states:

To whom also he shewed himself alive after his passion by many infallible proofs, being seen of them forty days, and speaking of the things pertaining to the kingdom of God:

Leaving conjecture behind as to the details of this 40 day ministry, it presents a problem for most Christian denominations--that Christ would teach his apostles about things pertaining to the Kingdom of God that are not written or recorded in the Bible--a closed book.

One might almost think that there is more to Christ's Gospel than is canonized in the Bible.

Well he either taught them many things that cannot be written (Sound Familar) or

He taught them nothing new...therefore there was nothing more to write.

I think it is the first...

Pa Pa

[jwhitlock]

Nibley has some to say on this subject.

http://farms.byu.edu/display.php?table=tra...ipts&id=114

Good article. It was included as part of Nibley's "When the Lights Went Out: Three Studies on the Ancient Apostasy", which can be read at the Maxwell Institute here.

[Eteponge]

Do you happen to know the dating of this text?

It was found among The Bruce Codex, first translated into English in 1892...

"When Mr. Bruce was at Med

[Figs&Grapes]

I think maybe Jesus came back for 40 days just to hang out. Everything we need is in the Bible, or in the post-Biblical creeds made centuries after Jesus was gone.

Riiiiiiiight.

Hang out, maybe go to the mall, or see a movie or something to bring back fond memories.

Totally!

[e=mc2]

I understand the excitment and enthusiasm over the Gnostic materials of the Books of Jeu and Pistis Sophia, but I wouldn't go so far as to say you can find Mormonism in them. One of our problems is that we tend to "Mormonize" the ancient scriptures, which is why we still haven't gotten the early Christian history of the successors to Jesus right yet. We totally ignore and misunderstand the significance and importance of not only James, Jesus' brother as his next successor, but the actual family line going through at least 15 other people. The Gentile faction of Christianity won the war, so we don't get to the Jewish Christianity as much as the early Christians did. (I know, I know, I am really oversimplifying things). Anyway.......... be careful about trying to read too much modern Mormon thinking back into the ancient scriptures, they simply were nothing like Mormons. That is one of the powerhouse responses of the LDS scholar Louis Midgley to Joseph Fielding McConkie and Robert Millet's commentary on the Book of Mormon. They try to "Mormonize" the Nephites, who were Jews, so their commentary is essentially just bunk. We do this far too often with the New Testament and Old Testament as well. Lets not over Gnosticize ourselves also......

[Eteponge]

I understand the excitment and enthusiasm over the Gnostic materials of the Books of Jeu and Pistis Sophia, but I wouldn't go so far as to say you can find Mormonism in them. One of our problems is that we tend to "Mormonize" the ancient scriptures, which is why we still haven't gotten the early Christian history of the successors to Jesus right yet. We totally ignore and misunderstand the significance and importance of not only James, Jesus' brother as his next successor, but the actual family line going through at least 15 other people. The Gentile faction of Christianity won the war, so we don't get to the Jewish Christianity as much as the early Christians did. (I know, I know, I am really oversimplifying things). Anyway.......... be careful about trying to read too much modern Mormon thinking back into the ancient scriptures, they simply were nothing like Mormons. That is one of the powerhouse responses of the LDS scholar Louis Midgley to Joseph Fielding McConkie and Robert Millet's commentary on the Book of Mormon. They try to "Mormonize" the Nephites, who were Jews, so their commentary is essentially just bunk. We do this far too often with the New Testament and Old Testament as well. Lets not over Gnosticize ourselves also......

That's why I said ELEMENTS of LDS Theology & Ritual Mr. Shirts.

Signs, Tokens, Passwords, Theosis, Exaltation, Three Degrees of Glory, Pre-Existence, these ELEMENTS are very much present in these Ancient Jewish and Early Christian Writings. Many of them HIGHLY RESEMBLE LDS Rituals, although they sometimes take a different meaning in Gnostic Circles. That's the point I make. That they have SOME FORM of Ancient Origin within the Ancient Jewish & Early Christian Traditions, pre-dating Joseph Smith.

[e=mc2]

All riiiiiiiighty then..... just makin sure I understood yer contextualizations............thanks.

[Platypus Man]

Has anyone read The Secret Tradition by Margaret BArker.

I read it a long time ago, and it seems to have many quotes from early christians concerning secret teachings handed down by Christ to the apostles, and so forth by word of mouth.

This seems awfully similiar to the claim the gnostics made of having the secret teachings of Christ during His forty day ministry.

I personaly think it is safe to conclude from these two sources that Jesus Christ did in fact give secret teachings which were handed down by word of mouth to the apostles. I believe that th secret teachings of the early orthodox christians and the early gnostic christians, came (or were claimed to have come) from the same source... the forty day ministry of Jesus Christ.

Is this a reasonable assessment?

[Platypus Man]

here's a link to the complete article

[freakin a man]

I think its reasonable to to conclude that the 40 days material was not the stuff found in the New Testament. One can read the entire New Testament in a day or two or less so if Jesus was mention that stuff, one still has at least account for 38+ days of non New Testament teaching.

[e=mc2]

I just listened to (again this week) Nibley's two talk tapes on the 40 day ministry. THEY ARE available on line as podcasts, along with other very fun selections of Nibley. And yes Barker's ideas are very interesting, to say the least.