In a recent post I wrote about a discovery I had made that has formed the genesis of a book on the subject of early Christianity and its mystic roots.  This discovery is not discernible through the canonical gospels, and requires a certain level of understanding in order to “get it.”  Rather than being a theory, it is more a certainty to my mind because of the language used and the level of understanding in those documents which I first accessed.  This is akin to a kind of “key” to understanding the language of what was, originally, the teachings that drove to the innermost realms of understanding union with the divine.  To this I direct you to the often spoken words by Jesus, “I am one with the father” or “I and the father are one.”  This, however, is just the tip of an iceberg of sorts that nearly all scholars have been unable to understand.


Passers by  incorrectly assume that I am somehow drawing from the canonical gospels.  I do draw from them, but I also understand that there are important impediments built into the gospels that keep much of the deeper knowledge either obscure, or entirely absent.  This is due to a number of factors, and these will be covered in my manuscript.  While it is highly simplistic, what I will show is that what seems to have happened with the gospels in canon is similar to a game called “Payphone.”  In this game, people sit in a circle and one person in the circle gives the person next to them a specific message.  This message is exact in its wording, is recorded for proof later, and once this is done, the message is then sent around the circle.  The more people in the circle, the more likely the message once it reaches the last person in the circle, will bear little resemblance to the original message.  Am I saying that the problem with the gospels is simply a matter of misconstruing the language somehow?  Yes, in some cases, it most certainly was this. But there is more to it than just this.  First, those who repeat the message do not understand the message to begin with, and begin using words that were never in the original message.  Simplistic, yes, but to a degree, accurate.


In the last post on this topic, I discussed what was perhaps the biggest impediment to getting the message conveyed to the canonical gospels, and this was a matter of language. Jesus taught using Aramaic and the gospels were written in Greek.  This might not seem a big thing on the surface of it, but if you understand just how different Greek is from Aramaic, you can begin to appreciate the challenges inherent in such an enterprise.


Another impediment to understanding the gospels has to do with the issue of some of the disciples having different teachings.  In the orthodox church the belief has been that Jesus did not hide any teachings from anyone, that he shared them freely to all who would listen.  But the problem is, the evidence does not support this. In fact, in gospels recently discovered, specifically the Gospel of Mary Magdalene, we can witness Peter speaking to Mary Magdalene and asking her to tell the rest of the disciples the teachings he imparted to her that he had not shared with the rest of the group. We also witness Thomas in his own gospel imparting sayings by Jesus that are different from other teachings in the other gospels.  Yes, there are teachings or sayings by Jesus in Thomas that are very similar or even identical to canonical gospels, but there is more there, also.


Early Church writers such as Origen, wrote about how to get the deeper teachings.  In Origen’s work, he directs the reader to pay attention to those instances when Jesus is teaching to large groups and then departs, with his followers asking after him clarification for what he was teaching.  Jesus gladly explains in greater detail, and instead of speaking in parables, tries to speak “directly.”  Jesus actually says that he speaks to the public in one way but speaks to his disciples in another way, which is befitting their level of understanding.


This way of teaching is mirrored in Valentinus’s way of teaching in the first century.  To understand the importance that this has, see how close Valentinus was to the secret teachings.  Valentinus was one teacher removed from what was described as the inner teachings of Paul. His teacher learned directly from Paul. Paul claimed revelation by way of a vision of Jesus who he said had imparted the secret knowledge to him.  Paul also knew some of the disciples even though he never met Jesus physically while Jesus was on the earth.  Valentinus went on to teach in a manner that was based on the way this secret knowledge had been conveyed; there was a multi-tiered approach in order to first educate, prepare, and then initiate the developing follower into the greater mysteries that was divine union.  To understand the secrecy, the final teachings were described as being like the Holy of Holies in the Jewish temple.  The Holy of Holies was a place that was visited in secret, and was kept from the eyes of the “great unwashed.”  The saying by Jesus, “pearls before swine” is operative here.  You could not hope to understand of grasp these deeper mysteries without being prepared.  As a result of this, it appears that Jesus did provide teachings to some disciples that he did not give to others.  Jesus knew what he was doing.


When Peter asks Mary to convey to the rest of the group assembled the teachings that Jesus gave her, Peter denounces her once she is finished.  Here we see Jesus’s reasoning for imparting these teachings to Mary and not to Peter; one was ready for a certain teaching  while others were not, which Peter and his brother Andrew clearly illustrate by their ignorance cloaked in incredulity.  While Peter may have been a chauvinist and perhaps even jealous of Mary’s knowledge, the teachings may well have gone completely over his head too.  I contend that this is why the teachings in these books have gone over the modern scholar’s heads, too.  To understand them, you need to have someone who has been initiated, or prepared for the revelations.  While this may sound elitist, in truth, it has nothing at all to do with elitism.  These teachings are there before anyone willing to read and take them into their hearts, minds, and even bodies.  You have to have initiated a clear channel to the divine and this channel can be known by those who know how to test and look for evidence of it.


There are other direct hints that Jesus imparted some teachings to some and not others.  In Thomas, for example, Jesus speaks privately with Thomas for a time, after which some of the disciples walk up to him asking him what he had been told.  What Thomas says is telling.  He says that if he were to tell them what Jesus had said, they would surely stone him!  We don’t know what Jesus said to Thomas, but assuming that Thomas understood the message, it may well have been construed as being blasphemous, even by his own fellow disciples!   While we don’t have a lot of these examples we have enough, I think, to show that the secret teachings were meant for those who were ready.  As a result, you would not expect to find a wealth of examples of Jesus teaching in secret because he probably would not have been seen teaching this way by others.


It is also possible that Jesus taught in a way that was more in line with the Valentinian model, which was that he taught to the masses and then waited for those who were mystified and wanted to know more, to follow after him.  This is what Origen certainly has suggested.  If the Valentinian model was reflective of what actually went down, then it makes sense that people were indeed given a curriculum that prepared them for the rarefied experience of divine union.  Again, you didn’t just throw pearls to swine, lest they be trampled underfoot. Jesus may well have been revealing enough to the public that those who felt moved to learn more were able to, and may have been driven to.  This would be one way to vet your followers in a sense, not to exclude them, but to simply wet ones interest and see who follows after, hoping, perhaps hungering, to know more.


In my own work, I bring in my own experience as one who has been initiated, branded by spirit, who opened the doors within to glimpse the divine.  I do not proclaim this proudly, only clearly, and explain how it is that we can all know the revelation, the apocalypitc message that is inherent in the experience. This is a process that is open to anyone, but in every single tradition in the world, the process of divine union comes about through preparation.  While I did not have a teacher, I awakened myself through a series of very blessed events that all took place in what I can only think was somehow coordinated. This “divine conspiracy” to awaken me led me into the innermost core of the very heart of what divine union entails.  As a result, what I found was that the way that I managed to awaken was actually described, word for word, by Jesus.  Indeed.  But these words were not contained in the canonical gospels.  Hidden away for over 1600 years, these came to light and are moving many to rethink ancient Christianity. As a result, my telling you about it would be like Mary speaking to Peter about her expeirence.  You would not believe it.  And this is perhaps as it should be; you cannot “get” this by way of reading books or hearing teachings only.  You have to do something more than just that.  You have to be able to take a cognitive leap, a  leap of faith that lands you in a state of being that begins to remake you, renovates, renews, heals, and resurrects a latent or hidden part of the self which no one knows until it happens to them.


This way to the divine, however, is not exclusive the Christianity.  It is, and has been, available to all regardless of their faith.  This is one of the biggest hurdles for those within the church who may have been brought up to believe that when Jesus said “only by me” that he meant that they had to accept him as savior.  The problem is that when Jesus said this, he meant it because there was not another person who had attained what he had attained at that time.  He was the only bona fide conveyor for the depths of that which could lead men and women to salvation.  Instead of this being an outward event, a kingdom that one reaches for, it was found entirely within.  Phillip in his gospel explains that what Jesus was doing was making his followers into Christs.  But you would not know this unless this consciousness had streamed through you and begun its work.  While this may sound strange to some in the church, consider that Jesus also said in the canonical gospels that his followers would do even greater things than he.  This is fitting for a man who wanted to impart a certain level of consciousness to his followers.


The result of this impedement, as well as others, which I will be covering in my work, it resulted in the greatest story never told.  It is time to tell it.