The gospel of John was then tragically distorted, I now believe, by the Nicene and post-Nicene fathers, who used it to formulate their creeds. As Greek thinkers, these early Christian leaders had little appreciation for things Jewish and as far as we can tell no understanding whatsoever of Jewish mysticism.
John Shelby Spong (Episcopal Bishop of Newark, ret.) The Fourth Gospel: Tales of a Jewish Mystic
Very little of what is now orthodox Christianity is obvious from a reading of the Gospels. The “standard view” is based on centuries of splicing together a narrative that seemed to fit as close as possible to a bunch of independent works that contradicted one another. This view was created through a political process known as the seven ecumenical councils.
When hundreds of people with multiple agendas get together to try to solve a problem, you get the U.S. House of Representatives, not the Apollo Moon Mission. Much of the decision making was political, with factions, enemies and ultimately some very bad decisions.
The most important outcome from the Protestant Reformation was the turn toward each person going directly to original sources in order to draw his or her own conclusions – we were not to grovel to an authority where God was concerned. Unfortunately, the reformation just ended up creating more “authorities” and more factions.
The most egregious error made by the church councils was made at the first one, where they tried to define the exact nature of Jesus. Without the ability to understand the essentially mystical nature of Jesus – that a human could unite with God – the councils instead decided that Jesus himself must be a God. But, given the obvious monotheistic basis of Judaism, they had to twist their logic into the pretzel that became the doctrine of the Trinity.
Even though the First Council of Nicaea (and the later Council of Constantinople) supposedly concluded the trinitarian doctrine once and for all, “protest-ant” versions of Christianity continued to survive throughout the middle ages. One even almost beat out the orthodox version (see my essay “The Original Lord of Light”).
Whenever possible, refer to the original sources, and always try to read them with fresh eyes.
ATTRIBUTION: Fresco in Capella Sistina, Vatican / Public domain https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Nicea.jpg
Could you please send me a link to your essay “Original Lord of Light”? I could not find it on your website. Thanks.
Here’s the text of that essay (I hope it displays okay in a comment)…
THE ORIGINAL “LORD OF LIGHT”
Some Game of Thrones fans might be surprised to find out that the original “Lord of Light” was one of two Gods in a religion which almost beat out Christianity for dominance in the Roman Empire – and beyond. Manicheanism was a religion started by a man named Mani in Persia in the 3rd century C.E. (A.D. for those of you who went to school before 1980). It was heavily influenced by Zoroastrianism, Gnosticism and Buddhism, and he assimilated early Christian beliefs into his system. It lasted into the late Middle Ages and still has some adherents today (this is not an endorsement).
Mani solved the problem of evil by postulating that there is not one deity, but two: God (The Lord of Light) and the Devil (The King of Darkness), who are equally powerful. The problem of evil is, briefly, this: If God is good and omnipotent, then why is there evil in the world? Since God and the Devil are equally powerful, there is no more “problem of evil” – evil exists because it is as powerful as God. According to Mani, the history of the world is the history of the struggle between the forces of good and evil.
It’s interesting to note that (Saint) Augustine was an accomplished Manichean before being converted to Christianity (which I discuss in another essay). And, since Augustine was a seminal figure in Western Christianity, you could say that Christianity was itself heavily influenced by The Lord of Light.