Non-Canonical Bible Studies: A Chance to Learn Together

Post Author: Rev. Danielle K. Bartz

It all started by questions provoked from the wisdom of Rachel Held Evans.  For our 2021 Lenten book study I chose “Inspired: Slaying Giants, Walking on Water, and Loving the Bible Again” by Rachel Held Evans (Thomas Nelson Publishing, 2018).  I had been noticing a burgeoning interest amongst several of the congregants for more intense study of scripture, and I was sure Held Evans’ intelligence, insight, and wit would only add to that interest.  

At some point in the study, we got sidetracked onto the topic of ancient theological writings that were not included in the final canon of the Bible.  Most were aware of the Old Testament Apocrypha, but several were unaware that there were gospels of Jesus that were rejected from the canon.  And this group of adult learners, appalled by the knowledge that there was material for study and conversation that they didn’t know about, suggested we add some of those books to our Bible study.

I serve a small (AWA 65, hybrid) United Church of Christ congregation in a mid-size college town.  For the most part, many in the congregation are highly educated, thoughtful, and eager to share their opinions.  Additionally, this congregation has an established level of trust that creates wonderful opportunities for vulnerable conversation and questioning (yes, I am bragging a bit).  Our adult faith formation activities are entirely conversational.  While I provide material in advance and an outline of the session, my primary focus is to ask questions and let them discuss.  I consider a Bible study to be successful if they carry the conversation entirely themselves, and I just facilitate making sure everyone gets a chance to share.  9 times out of 10, that happens.  Therefore, I was confident that we could engage in entirely new scriptural sources in a way that was both sophisticated and safe.

We started with the Gospel of Mary Magdalene.  I picked it for one reason – it was short.  We could tackle the entire remaining text (large portions have been lost) in four weeks.  The outline for each weekly session was exactly what I had been doing for all our previous studies. I began with a short prayer and then read the focus text aloud.  I after reading paused and asked if there were any initial reactions or questions about context or specific content.  Next, we examined a piece of artwork I had picked out that I thought would add to the conversation, which I almost always find in a series of art and scripture books called, “Imagining the Word: An Arts and Lectionary Resource” (United Church Press, 1995).  The group looks at, comments on, and wonders aloud about the art piece.  Sometimes I share why I chose it, often I just let them consider it on their own.  I then transitioned us to three questions to prompt our conversation.  And finally, I closed with a poem I had chosen that I thought reflects on a theme within the scripture.  

The Gospel of Mary Magdalene provoked reactions about the difference in Jesus’ tone – his words that are quoted don’t ‘feel’ like the words from the canonical gospels.  They enjoyed the spiritual and philosophical nature of the gospel, but found that they initially doubted their ability to understand it.  Nearly every week, someone would start the conversation by saying, “I have absolutely no idea what any of this is supposed to mean.”  However, as they talked together, asked me for my thoughts, looked at the artwork, and examined their own intuition, almost always a clear lesson was revealed.  Usually someone would comment on a revelation about Jesus, God, Christianity, or church history that was prompted by this new scriptural source.  

After a break to do a series on Revelation (oof – not a break!) and what I termed a ‘Palate Cleanser’ series on familiar stories, we delved into the Gospel of Thomas.  I did more prep work for this study and spent the first session ‘teaching’ a bit about the political and structural forces at play that led to the Gospel of Thomas being rejected from the canon (my primary resource was “Beyond Belief: The Secret Gospel of Thomas” by Elaine Pagels [Random House, 2003]).  

The response to the Gospel of Thomas was profound.  They loved hearing Jesus teach about the human capacity to carry the divine within and the accessibility of God in all of creation.  They tackled familiar lessons from the canon with a fresh perspective and developed new insights on what was considered old and familiar.  Some began to question long-held beliefs, and others found the Gospel of Thomas reinforced what they always understood about God and Jesus.  Their questions, conversation, and insights left my mind reeling after each session.

Throughout both studies I was unafraid to be an outloud learner.  The discussion questions I provided were my own questions.  I was never afraid to say, “I don’t know,” nor was I afraid to have my mind changed.  I would strive to make sure it was clear this was a mutual study:  I learned just as much from the group as I hope they learn from me.  I think this helped create a space for learning that is genuine, which is absolutely necessary when working with new material.

Based on my experience, I whole-heartedly recommend that other congregations give noncanonical Bible study a try.  An informal survey from my group indicates they recommend the same.  While it was bragging before, I will say that this particular group of people makes it easy for me, even as they challenge me to keep up.  I am fully aware that this type of Bible study would not work for every context.  But for those of you who think it might, I imagine you will be blown away by what revelations our extraordinary group of ordinary Christians can come up with when given a chance.