Gospel of St Thomas

[Follower3]

That is a very weird verse and is quite different from the rest of it, and I heard was added later, the rest of the verses sound like the other gospels but worded slightly differently. That is also the FINAL verse of the gospel, which is also strange when you think about it.

I'm not ruling it out as a legit gospel, something weird is just going on with it.

 

[RaymondG]

That is a very weird verse and is quite different from the rest of it, and I heard was added later, the rest of the verses sound like the other gospels but worded slightly differently. That is also the FINAL verse of the gospel, which is also strange when you think about it.

I'm not ruling it out as a legit gospel, something weird is just going on with it.

That verse is not unlike the verse that states a man shall leave mother and father and cleave to the wife and they shall become one flesh......is it?

 

[Follower3]

Thats a tiny bit of a stretch? You know when they find those scrolls, and they are all ripped up, and stuff? And I think if you look up the gospel of thomas scroll it is pretty tattered. I wonder if this is a failed attempt at fill in the blank?

 

[JackRT]

An excerpt taken from it:

(30) Jesus said, "Where there are three gods, they are gods. Where there are two or one, I am with him."

Surely the apostle did not write this, nor did Jesus ever say such absurd things.

This version is from a Coptic manuscript and is likely a mistranslation from an earlier Greek manuscript. It seems to be the Thomean version of Matt 18:20. The Jesus Seminar voted this as not authentic to Jesus.

The Gospel of Thomas sayings match the canonical Gospels about 60% of the time. It is no more Gnostic than the Gospel of John.

 

[JackRT]

Isn't that the one that states women aren't worthy of life and Jesus states females must become males before they can enter the Kingdom of God?

Yup, not real.

This saying represents Christian patriarchy carried to an extreme.

 

[JackRT]

Thats a tiny bit of a stretch? You know when they find those scrolls, and they are all ripped up, and stuff? And I think if you look up the gospel of thomas scroll it is pretty tattered. I wonder if this is a failed attempt at fill in the blank?

The only complete text of the Gospel of Thomas was found with the rest of the Nag Hammadi Library. It is not a scroll but rather a folio and was actually in good condition. The Gospel of Mary (Magdalene) was in the same find. The shepherd boy who found them took them home and his mother tore pages out as kindling before someone recognized their value. What a pity.

 

[Follower3]

If pages were burned then it is a huge case of fill in the blank

What is interesting is at the end of the gospel of Mary peter also says something against her, and then the gospel ends. Very strange.

 

[JackRT]

If pages were burned then it is a huge case of fill in the blank

What is interesting is at the end of the gospel of Mary peter also says something against her, and then the gospel ends. Very strange.

In the Gospel of Mary, we are told that Jesus often preferred to walk and talk with her to the exclusion of the other disciples and that he frequently kissed her on her …?… Here there is a word missing in the manuscript. We could guess and fill in words like cheek or lips. Missing words are not all that unusual in ancient manuscripts. They naturally tend to deteriorate along the edges with an effect quite similar to tearing a strip from the edge of the page of a book.


The gospel goes on to record that the disciples ask Jesus "Why do you love her more than all of us?" His reply is rather enigmatic "Why do I not love you like her?" Perhaps in answering their question with another question, Jesus is pointing out to them that although he loves them as disciples, he loves her in a different way. Once again much is implied but little is specified.

 

[ViaCrucis]

In the Gospel of Mary, we are told that Jesus often preferred to walk and talk with her to the exclusion of the other disciples and that he frequently kissed her on her …?… Here there is a word missing in the manuscript. We could guess and fill in words like cheek or lips. Missing words are not all that unusual in ancient manuscripts. They naturally tend to deteriorate along the edges with an effect quite similar to tearing a strip from the edge of the page of a book.


The gospel goes on to record that the disciples ask Jesus "Why do you love her more than all of us?" His reply is rather enigmatic "Why do I not love you like her?" Perhaps in answering their question with another question, Jesus is pointing out to them that although he loves them as disciples, he loves her in a different way. Once again much is implied but little is specified.

You're thinking of the Gospel of Philip. And there's a lot missing from the manuscript.

So it ends up looking a lot like this:
"the companion of the [...][...]ia the Ma[....]. The [...] M[...] more than [...] disciples, [...] kissed her on her [...]"

-CryptoLutheran

 

[JackRT]

You are correct. My mistake. I should have double checked. Thanks for the correction.

 

[Follower3]

Oh, is Philip another banned manuscript? I am more and more interested in reading these, especially seeing how close to the other gospels they are. I think something fishy was going on here in the early church, and they didn't want certain things to be known ( for example, Mary was the favorite apostle?) etc etc.

Edit: Wasn't Peter part of the early church? If he said some things he is embarrassed about maybe he took those out of the bible (not trying to point fingers at anyone XD But doesn't it seem like a reasonable possibility?)

 

[JackRT]

Oh, is Philip another banned manuscript? I am more and more interested in reading these, especially seeing how close to the other gospels they are. I think something fishy was going on here in the early church, and they didn't want certain things to be known ( for example, Mary was the favorite apostle?) etc etc.

Edit: Wasn't Peter part of the early church? If he said some things he is embarrassed about maybe he took those out of the bible (not trying to point fingers at anyone XD But doesn't it seem like a reasonable possibility?)

Mary Magdalene is a most interesting player in early Christianity. We know that there were a number of female disciples of Jesus - Mary Magdalene, Mary the mother of James, the sisters Mary and Martha, Joanna, Susanna and Salome are all named. Whenever the female disciples are mentioned in the Bible, Mary Magdalene is always the first named. In the literary tradition of the time the first named is always the most important. Mary Magdalene is even named ahead of Mary his mother. Even the name Mary Magdalene may be informative. Mary "of Magdala" seems not to be correct since there is no solid historical or archaeological evidence that there ever was such a town. Another possible interpretation of the word "Magdalene" is that it is derived from an Aramaic word meaning roughly "the most important". Early Christian writers have sometimes referred to her as "Mary the Great" and also as the “Apostle to the Apostles”. Why should such importance be attached to this woman?

Christian, particularly Catholic tradition, has been very unkind to Mary Magdalene. She has been variously identified as the woman taken in adultery or the woman who washed Jesus' feet with her tears and dried them with her hair or possibly both. She is portrayed as a great sinner who became a great saint. The Gospel of John says that Jesus cast seven demons from her. Some might jump to the conclusion that demonic possession is indicated here. However, we must examine this in the context of the times. Disease was thought to have been caused by invisible demons. We know today that this is wrong - disease is actually caused by invisible germs or viruses. It seems that we have renamed the demons! John is simply saying that Jesus cured her of some unspecified disease. As for the charge that she was a prostitute, that first appeared in a sixth century sermon by Pope Gregory.

There is also a strong tradition in the south of France that Mary Magdalene was the first Christian missionary to that region. This is attested to in a stained glass window in the Cathedral of Marseilles that depicts Mary consecrating a bishop!

 

[Follower3]

WOW, very informative little mini-bible study about Mary Magdalene! I didn't know all those things. This makes me think even more so that those banned gospels are legit.

Edit: This is almost sounding a bit Davinci-Code, I don't know if you ever saw that movie. I joke of course )

 

[ViaCrucis]

Oh, is Philip another banned manuscript? I am more and more interested in reading these, especially seeing how close to the other gospels they are. I think something fishy was going on here in the early church, and they didn't want certain things to be known ( for example, Mary was the favorite apostle?) etc etc.

Edit: Wasn't Peter part of the early church? If he said some things he is embarrassed about maybe he took those out of the bible (not trying to point fingers at anyone XD But doesn't it seem like a reasonable possibility?)

Wasn't banned, just heretical and so had no purpose in the Church.

Different Gnostic sects tended to have their favorite disciple. In the Gospel of Philip it is Mary, in the Gospel of Thomas it is Thomas, in the Acts of John it is John. In the Gospel of Judas it is Judas Iscariot.

There's a reason for this, as Gnosticism presented a narrative of the elite few who properly understood true gnosis, represented by the select disciple; the rest of the the disciples are presented as ignorant. The select disciple is the Gnostic, and the ignorant disciples are the mainstream Christian Church.

Only the select few are worthy to be initiated into the inner secrets of gnosis, everyone else is ignorant. That is the consistent narrative of the Gnostic texts.

That Thomas lacks a clear narrative doesn't change the fact that it is still immersed in Gnostic themes, this is clear from the opening statement,

"These are the secret sayings that the living Jesus spoke and Didymos Judas Thomas recorded. And he said, 'Whoever finds the interpretation of these sayings will not experience death.'"

The logia or "sayings" are couched in the language of secret knowledge which only a select few will understand, because to understand the esoteric meaning one must be properly initiated.

It's always possible that the Gospel of Thomas began simply as a collection of sayings, similar to what Papias tells us about how Matthew wrote a list of Jesus' sayings in Aramaic before composing the gospel text. Or similar to the hypothetical Q text. But whatever kernal of legitimacy the text may have had originally, the form in which we find it has clearly been given the thick lacquer of Gnostic esotericism. Resulting in a list of esoteric sayings which the common man isn't supposed to comprehend, but only the properly initiated is given the secret to understand.

-CryptoLutheran

 

[Follower3]

Wasn't banned, just heretical and so had no purpose in the Church.

Different Gnostic sects tended to have their favorite disciple. In the Gospel of Philip it is Mary, in the Gospel of Thomas it is Thomas, in the Acts of John it is John. In the Gospel of Judas it is Judas Iscariot.

-CryptoLutheran

Sounds like philip is the only one willing to admit it's not him XD Of course in thomas it's thomas, and in john it's john XD LOLLLLL.

This "inner circle" could also be understanding via the holy spirit which gives us discernment, and understanding when reading the word.

 

[ViaCrucis]

Sounds like philip is the only one willing to admit it's not him XD Of course in thomas it's thomas, and in john it's john XD LOLLLLL.

This "inner circle" could also be understanding via the holy spirit which gives us discernment, and understanding when reading the word.

Well Philip didn't write the Gospel of Philip, just as Thomas didn't write Thomas, and the Acts of John weren't written by John. These works are the products of sects centuries after the apostles were already dead.

We know that actual apostolic teaching was retained by those whom the apostles publicly and openly taught. Which is why the writings of the fathers are reliable witnesses to apostolic teaching and Christian practice.

Christianity isn't a secret. It's a very public confession and proclamation of the Gospel. The Spirit does not lead us away from the Gospel toward private, personal, and innovative ideas. Hence we are called to retain the teaching and preaching which has been received from the beginning.

"So then, brothers, stand firm and hold to the traditions that you were taught by us, either by our spoken word or by our letter." - 2 Thessalonians 2:15

"But even if we or an angel from heaven should preach to you a gospel contrary to the one we preached to you, let him be accursed." - Galatians 1:8

"For if someone comes and proclaims another Jesus than the one we proclaimed, or if you receive a different spirit from the one you received, or if you accept a different gospel from the one you accepted, you put up with it readily enough." - 2 Corinthians 11:4

"Beloved, although I was very eager to write to you about our common salvation, I found it necessary to write appealing to you to contend for the faith that was once for all delivered to the saints." - Jude 1:3

"Let not those who seem worthy of credit, but teach strange doctrines, fill you with apprehension. Stand firm, as does an anvil which is beaten. It is the part of a noble athlete to be wounded, and yet to conquer. And especially, we ought to bear all things for the sake of God, that He also may bear with us. Be ever becoming more zealous than what you are. Weigh carefully the times. Look for Him who is above all time, eternal and invisible, yet who became visible for our sakes; impalpable and impassible, yet who became passible on our account; and who in every kind of way suffered for our sakes." - St. Ignatius, Epistle to Polycarp, ch. 3

"It is within the power of all, therefore, in every Church, who may wish to see the truth, to contemplate clearly the tradition of the apostles manifested throughout the whole world; and we are in a position to reckon up those who were by the apostles instituted bishops in the Churches, and [to demonstrate] the succession of these men to our own times; those who neither taught nor knew of anything like what these [heretics] rave about. For if the apostles had known hidden mysteries, which they were in the habit of imparting to "the perfect" apart and privily from the rest, they would have delivered them especially to those to whom they were also committing the Churches themselves. For they were desirous that these men should be very perfect and blameless in all things, whom also they were leaving behind as their successors, delivering up their own place of government to these men; which men, if they discharged their functions honestly, would be a great boon [to the Church], but if they should fall away, the direst calamity." - St. Ireaneus, Against Heresies, Book III, ch. 3:1

-CryptoLutheran

 

[JackRT]

Different Gnostic sects tended to have their favorite disciple. In the Gospel of Philip it is Mary, in the Gospel of Thomas it is Thomas, in the Acts of John it is John. In the Gospel of Judas it is Judas Iscariot.

I do not think that the apostle Thomas is even mentioned in the Gospel of Thomas. In actual fact, we don't really know the names of the authors of most of the gospels, both canonical and non-canonical. The names Matthew, Mark, Luke and John were assigned about a century after writing based almost entirely on legend.