The Nag Hammadi Scriptures: The Revised and Updated Translation of Sacred Gnostic Texts Complete in One Volume

This isn't a book! It's actually a magic portal through which the reader tumbles from one dimension to another. Sometimes the results are unsettling, but one is always left believing that, however much new got found in the next dimension, a lot is still there waiting to be discovered. The blah cover of Nag Hammadi Scriptures makes it look like just another dry, boring now-let's-study-the-Bible type book. Instead it's a ticket for fascinating time travel out of the present and back to a murky, confusing past; from one civilization to another; from one rigid belief system to another; from one religion to another. You get bounced from reality to myth, and then all the way back again -- provided you still want to return. This ancient anthology is an impressive job of scholarship and clear translation, and it oozes with bunches of helpful footnotes, introductions and leads for further study. If it has a flaw, I think it is that, found here and there throughout the volume, are faint hints of traditional Christian ideas. Sometimes one senses the editors may be trying a little too hard to reconcile some orthodox Christian belief or other with what they assume the ancient authors were saying or thinking. And the book certainly wants to make you believe that everyone with a point of view needs to have earned a degree from some obscure school of theology or religion. But ignore all that. If you buy the book, you've got the right to make up your own mind about what it says. And if there ever was a topic about which everyone's entitled to their own slant, this must be it. As all readers will, I have a bias. I am a very devout Buddhist, steeped primarily in the religious traditions of Sri Lanka. The revelations I derived from the Nag Hammadi Scriptures were that passage, after passage, after passage is at least compatible with (and sometimes nearly identical to) Theravadan Buddhist teaching, and that both Gnostic ideas and Buddhism seem closer to one another than either one does to today's Christian practices. All of which suggests to me that, though the world doggedly perpetuates and exalts countless images of, names for and ideas about "gods", you don't have to be a great scholar or professional theologian to recognize that, in the end, there is after all only one. To me this book argues most eloquently that, whoever or whatever that god may be, a wise search for him/her starts by a dive deep within the human psyche.

Love my copy of the Nag Hamadi scriptures. Although I've only read other versions online, this seems to be thorough in commentary from the translators as well. The size of text is equal to that of any standard book. Easy to read. Would definitely recommend to anyone interested in the Sacred Gnostic texts.

This is an excellent book to read if you have already read the gnostic writings of the Dead Sea Scrolls. It has additional books, some of which were removed from the Bible around 300AD by Emperor Constantine. They are well worth reading.

Being firmly planted in the holy bible, I decided to read other texts written around the birth of Christianity. I would like to think this book was well worth what I paid for it. I would have preferred a simple version with just a quick forward on the history of the text, and then the texts itself, as I found the authors ramblings to be a bit too educated. The books I found to be the most "Christian" or inspired (if you will) were: The Treatise on Resurrection Exegesis on the soul The Book of Thomas The acts of Peter and the Twelve Apostles Excepts from Plato's Republic Excepts from the Perfect Discourse (Don't let the opening sentences fool you LOL), and The teachings of Silvanus (Only up to page 507. Which is great, by the way. Once it gets into the sections on 507 called Know Yourself, I feel that another author took over, adding to an existing text. It clearly dives right into heavy Gnostic thought. Seemingly penned by the same author as many of the other wholly Gnostic texts.) The rest of the texts were/are what I would assume to be wholly Gnostic. I know the entire work is assumed to be Gnostic texts, but many of these clearly come from the same mind, if not the same hand. While I won't claim to know which is and which is not of holy inspirations, I will say many seemed to me to be complete works of fiction using AD Christian characters, such as the Apostles. Those that do this use heavy use of dialog between individuals, and use language we today would expect a common liar, or story teller to use. "Now it's like this..." "I'll tell you why they are completely wrong..." "I... I... I..." and make many attempts to retell key events, often making note as to why people like Moses were wrong, and why they are right. Other books seem like an attempt to Greek-ify Christianity by giving names to a multitude of angels and spirits, and breaking the heavens up into real estate. Basically an attempt to introduce or manipulate Christianity into what the Greek religion was around that time... a multitude of gods. That's not to say such structure does not exist in the heavens, but sometimes the safest and quickest way to the truth is to admit you don't know. I know as humans we always want to believe we are missing something. That there is some sort of secret we have yet to find. Or at least those who actually search in the first place. As such much of this book seems to be an attempt by people of those eras trying to put into words what they think or clam to know (or understand), using the layman's philosophy of the time, which by today's standard we would say those individuals were "Talking in Circles", as they said much, but in the end, really said nothing at all. But... because of the way they said it, some readers might assume the point alluded them. If you are a heavy bible reader (believer), then you know there is a flow, or common mind (Holy Spirit?) from cover to cover, and as such most of the texts found in this book simply do not follow that flow, and others down right seek to dam it up or reroute it altogether. But I believe there are treasures to be found here, some heavily Gnostic, but on point, like The Treatise on Resurrection, and others seemingly inspired, such as the first section of The teachings of Silvanus. So my advise is to grab a copy and read it, but don't expect that magic pill that is going to illuminate the true path to salvation, because that path you may already have within the mystery Christ was the answer to. What you will find, are a few gems that will keep you on track in the same ways Paul and his fellow apostles do with their letters. It is certainly worth a read.

This is an amazing book! It truly reveals a completely fresh and unexpected perspective on Jesus, uncovering sides of him that are rarely explored in traditional teachings. It challenged my preconceptions and deepened my appreciation for his life and message in ways I never anticipated. This version keeps the original enthusiasm while making it more polished, eloquent, and engaging—perfect for sharing on Goodreads, Amazon, or with friends! If you have the book’s title or more details about what specifically surprised you, I can refine it even further. 😊

It is useful to have all these texts in a single volume. The commentary is helpful. The Gospel of Mary may be the most important Christian text.

This book is written as an honest and faithful translation (not transcription) of the Nag Hammadi Scriptures. It gives the history of the multitude of texts that were used in this translation. Mangled by time and human stupidity, these codices required not only physical restoration. To be as accurate as possible, scientists and historians throughout the world had to work together at an unprecedented level in order to put together the meanings lost in one codex but revealed in another. I applaud the dedication to truth and the love of history that inspired these men and women to complete their life-work. Throughout history, it has been common to dismiss all but the canonical gospels as "heresy", as defined by Irenaeus of Lyon as early as 180 CE in his book: Adversus Haereses. In the ensuing centuries, differing thoughts and philosophies were ruthlessly crushed by the full weight of the all-powerful Catholic Church. During the darkest of these ages, the fear of loss of power pushed its unlearned and uneducated leaders to throw medicinal, astronomical, and mathmatical knowledge deep into the pit of ignorance that came to define the Church itself. In the ultimate irony, the Son of Humanity who was sent to bring Light and Knowledge to our world inspired the cruelest, most ignorant, and blood-thirsty religion (by sheer volume) known to man. The Catholic Church has burned literally countless scrolls, codices, and books; slaughtered millions of people throughout the world; destroyed dozens of civilizations; and continue to this day in the relentless rape and torture of young children. To believe the Catholic Church's word that these ancient scriptures are heretical, one would have to believe that the Catholic Church is the living representation of Jesus on earth. Due to overwhelming evidence to the contrary, I personally reject that assertation. As a believer, and one with ears to hear, I have been searching for other Words from the Redeemer since I was a child. I was fascinated by the discoveries of these codices, and eagerly awaited the various translations; hanging on each new Word. After years of drips and drops of knowledge, this is like coming upon Jacob's well. Finally, humanity has been gifted with this ancient and new understanding and hope. Personally, I am discovering a new love for the ancient philosophers and followers of Jesus the Christ and Redeemer. I hope that anyone who has an interest in more knowledge and a love of history will consider purchasing this book. It is a wonderous and insightful window into the past, unsullied by the fingerprints of greed and ignorance.

I began reading the Nag Hammadi scriptures in the early 80's when the James Robinson The Nag Hammadi Library: A Translation of the Gnostic Scriptures was first published. It was a hard read, mostly because there was so much missing (lacunae). This version makes it much more understandable but not without a price (see the excellent review by John Aaron regarding a little too much translation). Oh well, nobody is/was perfect except one. When I began reading this version, I imagined a round table of scholars who picked apart the essense of these ms's with the metaphorical microscope as a team and debated each and every translation problem. For how could only a few decide what the texts were saying with so many missing fragments and even whole pages/chapters? They used correlations with all available manuscripts to extract the essence of each manuscript and "fill in the blanks" to make it readable to the average person like me. Yes, it must have been like that. In some cases like The Gospel of Mary (of Magdala), we may not know all of what the High Priest said after he returned from death with just this manuscript because the first three chapters are missing. Maybe they wound up as fire-starter material for some poor people in Egypt? I don't blame them; we all need light/heat/food to dispel the darkness. A perfect solution. There are other works that are said to be the teaching of The Christ after he returned like Pistis Sophia: The Gnostic Tradition of Mary Magdalene, Jesus, and His Disciples . Yet, even the remnants of the Gospel of Mary are so profoundly beautiful; it is the single most beautiful thing I've read in my life. I need to find an older version to see where they deviate but, again, the essence must be there and only made clearer in this version. For anyone unfamiliar with the Gospel of Mary, imagine the scene given in Luke 24:10-11... "10 It was Mary Magdalene, Joanna, Mary the mother of James, and the others with them who told this to the apostles. 11 But they did not believe the women, because their words seemed to them like nonsense." Why did their words seem like nonsense? Perhaps because they were so profound as to be not believable? Or perhaps for a more "practical" reason; the editors of the Bible did not want these more in depth details to be known. Teachings like this... "Peter Asks Mary to Teach: Peter said to Mary, “Sister, we know that the Savior loved you more than all other women. Tell us the words of the Savior that you remember, the things you know that we don’t because we haven’t heard them.” Mary responded, “I will teach you about what is hidden from you.” And she began to speak these words to them. ... "Mary Discusses Vision and Mind: She said, “I saw the Lord in a vision and I said to him, ‘Lord, I saw you today in a vision.’ “He answered me, ‘Blessed are you for not wavering at seeing me. For where the mind is, there is the treasure.’ ~ The Nag Hammadi Scriptures (p. 743) I'd like to say more about the Gospel of Mary but it's hard without giving examples and Amazon would probably say it's copyright infringement and not put up my review. For another good example of how the NH not only clarifies but expands and elucidates, see Mark 8:27-30 - Jesus asked them, "who do people say I am?" In the Bible, Peter (and others) respond "You are the Messiah" "one of the prophets" etc. But is that all of it? There were some other replies like that of Thomas... "Jesus said to his disciples, “Compare me to something and tell me what I am like.” Simon Peter said to him, “You are like a just messenger.” Matthew said to him, “You are like a wise philosopher.” Thomas said to him, “Teacher, my mouth is utterly unable to say what you are like.” Jesus said, “I am not your teacher. Because you have drunk, you have become intoxicated from the bubbling spring that I have tended.” And he took him, and withdrew, and spoke three sayings to him. When Thomas came back to his friends, they asked him, “What did Jesus say to you?” Thomas said to them, “If I tell you one of the sayings he spoke to me, you will pick up rocks and stone me, and fire will come from the rocks and consume you." ~ The Gospel of Thomas, 13 So did Jesus say "who do the people say I am?" He already knew what people said before they said or thought it. Isn't it more plausible that Jesus asked his desciples, who were closest to him, who they thought he was? There is so much more in the NHS especially regarding the Old Testament. That the word "Elohim" is both singular and plural is a clue. El is really the singular of Elohim. The names of God in the OT have been reduced to meaningless interchangable words. Yahweh, Jehovah, Elohim; do these names all mean the same thing? Are they interchangable like a car, a vehicle, an automobile? I think not. The belief of early Christian Gnostics was that the "God" of the OT was not the one true God. The one that Jesus called "Father." This is the key to understanding the OT. The "demigurge" or archon(s) are themselves temporary and subordinate to God the Father and Christ. If only Christians would put aside what they were TOLD by their Mystery Babylon occult rulers and read/research for themselves. "For what goes into your mouth will not defile you; rather, it is what comes out of your mouth that will defile you.” ~ The Gospel of Thomas 14, Matthew 15:11 "Jesus did many other things as well. If every one of them were written down, I suppose that even the whole world would not have room for the books that would be written." ~ John 21:25 I suppose He said many other things as well.