The Gospel of Thomas [Moved]

[Freedom63]

The Gospel of Thomas cannot be allowed to be seen as non heretical because it contains quotes that if taken to be accurate would seem to deny the co equal status of the Trinity. As in "Give unto Caesar that which is Caesar's, give unto God that which is God's and give unto me that which is mine."If it were allowed in the cannon it would cast doubt upon the whole idea of the Trinity as we know it. This is why it was rejected originally and why we cannot accept it now.

That quote you provided would rely largely on interpretation to determine it as gnostic would it not? There are parts of the gospels where Jesus words could be just as literally interpreted as differentiating Himself from the Father.

 

[miamited]

Hi LAT,

Did you know that much of what is found in the bible can be found in the Koran? Practically, everything up to Abraham is exactly the same, but the division comes from the two sons of Abraham. So, I'm just cautioning that most all false teachings and false religions have some or a lot that is in sync with the Scriptures and that is what 'tickles' our itching ears.

Many say, just as you have said, "Oh, this is just like the Scriptures." Look at those who discuss the flood. They find it confirmed in other ancient writings and proclaim, "See, this is just like the biblical account." But then they diverge to a different tangent than the one true and worthy savior of mankind to false idols and false teachings. So, when reading these other writings that are claimed to be by faithful disciples and prophets we must be careful that everything matches up with God's word. Not just some or most. The only reason I even consider the writings of Enoch as truth is Jude's mention of him as a prophet.

God bless you.
In Christ, Ted

 

[Jase]

Funny, I never got the memo. I guess your assertion here settles it for me. Thanks. I'll have to let Matthew Henry know too, and many other old biblical commentators going down to the time of Christ.

Christian Fundamentalism - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

A second stream came from Princeton Theology in the mid-19th century, which developed the doctrine of inerrancy in response to higher criticism of the Bible. The work of Charles Hodge influenced fundamentalists' insistence that the Bible was inerrant because it had been dictated by God and written by men who took that dictation. This meant that the Bible should be read differently from any other historical document, and also that modernism and liberalism were believed to lead people to hell just as much as non-Christian religions.[

 

[Armistead14]

Why the men that wrote scripture were inspired, the many different men and councils that put the many bibles together were not.

Many claim the KJV, originally it wasn't a protestant bible, it's anglican, in fact protestants outright rejected it, mostly because the KJ's council considered and used so latin words over the greek as defined by the Roman Catholics. Protestants brought their Geneva bibles to America.

Each bible, including the KJ's adds numerous words, even verses that can change the intent of what was being said.

Unless you have the original hebrew and greek and understand how to read it, you're being inspired by men as much as God. Culture and politics often defined biblical translations.

If you intend to understand scripture, you need every source available to do so and even at that because people interpret differently we still have hundreds of denominations and thousands of different doctrines.

 

[Galvanized]

Christian Fundamentalism - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

A second stream came from Princeton Theology in the mid-19th century, which developed the doctrine of inerrancy in response to higher criticism of the Bible. The work of Charles Hodge influenced fundamentalists' insistence that the Bible was inerrant because it had been dictated by God and written by men who took that dictation. This meant that the Bible should be read differently from any other historical document, and also that modernism and liberalism were believed to lead people to hell just as much as non-Christian religions.[

Matthew Henry ~
(1.) What is the excellency of the scripture. It is given by inspiration of God (v. 16), and therefore is his word. It is a divine revelation, which we may depend upon as infallibly true. The same Spirit that breathed reason into us breathes revelation among us: For the prophecy came not in old time by the will of man, but holy men spoke as they were moved or carried forth by the Holy Ghost, 2 Pet. i. 21. The prophets and apostles did not speak from themselves, but what they received of the Lord that they delivered unto us. That the scripture was given by inspiration of God appears from the majesty of its style,—from the truth, purity, and sublimity, of the doctrines contained in it,—from the harmony of its several parts,—from its power and efficacy on the minds of multitudes that converse with it,—from the accomplishment of many prophecies relating to things beyond all human foresight,—and from the uncontrollable miracles that were wrought in proof of its divine original: God also bearing them witness, both with signs and wonders, and with divers miracles and gifts of the Holy Ghost, according to his own will, Heb. ii. 4.

Oops, 1708–1710 "infallibly true". Perhaps he was a time-traveling fundamentalist.

 

[Jpark]

The distortions are so horrifying. The writing is like watching a horror movie.

Here's why I disbelieve it:

Jesus said, "I am the light that is over all things. I am all: from me all came forth, and to me all attained. Split a piece of wood; I am there.
Lift up the stone, and you will find me there."

Whereas the Bible indicates that you don't have to move things to find Jesus. Because He's a Spirit and is in a piece of wood and in a stone.

Far be it from Peter and Matthew to identify Jesus improperly:

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."

And far be it from His disciples to speak like the Pharisees:

His disciples said to him, "Who are you to say these things to us?"
"You don't understand who I am from what I say to you.
Rather, you have become like the Judeans, for they love the tree but hate its fruit, or they love the fruit but hate the tree."



Matthew would have said that Jesus is the Messiah.
Peter would have said that Jesus is the way to the Father.
Peter also said “Lord, to whom shall we go? You have words of eternal life. We have believed and have come to know that You are the Holy One of God.”

 

[ElijahW]

What is so heretical about the gospel of Thomas, found in the Nag Hamadi scripture. Much of what is found in the text can be found in the bible. The gospel of Thomas should be viewed as a source of Truth.

1. And he said, "Whoever discovers the interpretation of these sayings will not taste death."

​

Like the other conversation about the Gospel of Truth, in the other thread we were talking in; it is the execution of the ideas and thinking that the beliefs/gnosis is where the salvation is at. The writer of Thomas took the sayings of Jesus but left out the sacrifice because that doesn't make sense to them, because they see salvation as only coming from connecting/learning about the spiritual side of the universe.

 

[Jpark]

Like the other conversation about the Gospel of Truth, in the other thread we were talking in; it is the execution of the ideas and thinking that the beliefs/gnosis is where the salvation is at. The writer of Thomas took the sayings of Jesus but left out the sacrifice because that doesn't make sense to them, because they see salvation as only coming from connecting/learning about the spiritual side of the universe.

Precisely.

Phil. 3:8, 10

The disciples didn't just believe in Jesus. They came to know Jesus.

2 Tim. 2:25 with gentleness correcting those who are in opposition, if perhaps God may grant them repentance leading to the knowledge of the truth,

1 Tim. 2:4 who desires all men to be saved and to come to the knowledge of the truth.

Acts 11:18 When they heard this, they quieted down and glorified God, saying, “Well then, God has granted to the Gentiles also the repentance that leads to life.”

2 Tim. 3:7 always learning and never able to come to the knowledge of the truth.

John 5:39-40 You search the Scriptures because you think that in them you have eternal life; it is these that testify about Me; and you are unwilling to come to Me so that you may have life.

Gnosticism is just opposition to Christ (2 Tim. 3:8 ...so these men also oppose the truth, men of depraved mind, rejected in regard to the faith.).



2 Cor. 7:10 For the sorrow that is according to the will of God produces a repentance without regret, leading to salvation, but the sorrow of the world produces death.

Ecclesiastes

Gnosticism takes the path of Judas. Bible takes the path of Peter.

 

[OzSpen]

What is so heretical about the gospel of Thomas, found in the Nag Hamadi scripture. Much of what is found in the text can be found in the bible. The gospel of Thomas should be viewed as a source of Truth.

Afterall, if much of it is the words of Jesus then why can't the rest of it be the words of Jesus? It places a new perspective on the word of Christ if what can be found within it can be believed to be true.

There are those of the Jesus Seminar kind of theology who use the Gospel of Thomas as authoritative as the 4 canonical Gospels. John Dominic Crossan affirms Patterson's view that GThom contains "rudimentary Gnosticism" and the extent of this gnosticism "is not yet fully charted" as it "is not a full blown gnostic gospel. Crossan's view is that it is "a borderline text that could have been pulled either toward or away from gnosticism" (Crossan 1998. The Birth of Christianity. HarperSanFrancisco, p. 271).

Nicholas Perrin is a researcher in the nature of the Gospel of Thomas, which was discovered at Nag Hammadi in the 1940s. It is a document that is dated from mid-to-late second century, coming out of a Syriac environment. His assessment is that

the Gospel of Thomas invites us to imagine a Jesus who says, 'I am not your saviour, but the one who can put you in touch with your true self. Free yourself from your gender, your body, and any concerns you might have for the outside world. Work for it and self-realization, salvation will be yours - in this life'. Imagine such a Jesus? One need hardly work very hard. This is precisely the Jesus we know too well, the existential Jesus that so many western evangelical and liberal churches already preach (Perrin, p. 139).

Let's check out some statements from a translation of the Gospel of Thomas that should raise issues of conflict with NT Gospels:
GThom 1-7:

These are the secret sayings that the living Jesus spoke and Didymos Judas Thomas recorded.
1 And he said, "Whoever discovers the interpretation of these sayings will not taste death."
2 Jesus said, "Those who seek should not stop seeking until they find. When they find, they will be disturbed. When they are disturbed, they will marvel, and will reign over all. [And after they have reigned they will rest.]"
3 Jesus said, "If your leaders say to you, 'Look, the (Father's) kingdom is in the sky,' then the birds of the sky will precede you. If they say to you, 'It is in the sea,' then the fish will precede you. Rather, the kingdom is within you and it is outside you.
When you know yourselves, then you will be known, and you will understand that you are children of the living Father. But if you do not know yourselves, then you live in poverty, and you are the poverty."
4 Jesus said, "The person old in days won't hesitate to ask a little child seven days old about the place of life, and that person will live.
For many of the first will be last, and will become a single one."
5 Jesus said, "Know what is in front of your face, and what is hidden from you will be disclosed to you.
For there is nothing hidden that will not be revealed. [And there is nothing buried that will not be raised."]
6 His disciples asked him and said to him, "Do you want us to fast? How should we pray? Should we give to charity? What diet should we observe?"
Jesus said, "Don't lie, and don't do what you hate, because all things are disclosed before heaven. After all, there is nothing hidden that will not be revealed, and there is nothing covered up that will remain undisclosed."
7 Jesus said, "Lucky is the lion that the human will eat, so that the lion becomes human. And foul is the human that the lion will eat, and the lion still will become human" (emphasis added).

GThom 13:

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 devour you" (emphasis added)

GThom 22:

Jesus saw some babies nursing. He said to his disciples, "These nursing babies are like those who enter the kingdom."
They said to him, "Then shall we enter the kingdom as babies?"
Jesus said to them, "When you make the two into one, and when you make the inner like the outer and the outer like the inner, and the upper like the lower, and when you make male and female into a single one, so that the male will not be male nor the female be female, when you make eyes in place of an eye, a hand in place of a hand, a foot in place of a foot, an image in place of an image, then you will enter [the kingdom]" (emphasis added)

GThom 114:

Simon Peter said to them, "Make Mary leave us, for females don't deserve life." Jesus said, "Look, I will guide her to make her male, so that she too may become a living spirit resembling you males. For every female who makes herself male will enter the kingdom of Heaven" (emphasis added).

The Jesus of the Gospel of Thomas is radically different from the Jesus revealed in the NT Gospels. GThom has a private, esoteric emphasis throughout and presupposes the teaching of Jesus in the NT but claims to record secret, hidden words that are radically different from the NT Gospels.

Recall what Jesus said about believers (his followers) having faith, but GThom 1 says that Jesus' disciples should find "the interpretation of these sayings" and for these people, they will not taste death.

This is not biblical Christianity.

I'd recommend a read of Nicholas Perrin 2007. Thomas, the Other Gospel. London: SPCK. There also is an excellent assessment of GThom in Craig A. Evans 2007. Fabricating Jesus: How Modern Scholars Distort the Gospels. Nottingham, England: Inter-Varsity Press. I have the British editions of these books.

Sincerely, Oz

 

[Biker Angel]

Millions of Christians around the world, especially in the United States, know absolutely nothing about the Bible or the history of where it came from.

They just repeat whatever their pastor told them, regardless of how in error it is. God did not create the Bible. Humans did.

Yes but millions more do know about the bible and where it came from. And that it was inspired by God and that the meaning of the bible is protected by the Holy Spirit. Since there are approx. 350,000,000 people in America, your not the only one who thinks they have all the answers and are sure they are correct. But you are entitled to your opinion.

 

[Lily_Among_Thorns]

We don't need to add another gospel book to the bible, we need to live by the ones that have already made it into the bible and that we often ignore for the ones that haven't.


Rev. 22:18

I'm not saying adding it to the bible but, rather, recognizing it as another possible source of Jesus' words. If some of the words within are the words of Jesus then isn't it possible that the rest of the words within are in fact Jesus' own words?

 

[Lily_Among_Thorns]

Your revelation quote is not likely meant to include our present canon but rather the Revelation itself. We know for a fact some has been added and some taken away since that was told to John...so if we apply it to the whole bible as you imply there is simply no way to accept our bibles at all because they violate this warning.

That's true. I agree that the revelation quote is likely meant to apply to Revelation itself. If you think about it words throughout the bible have been changed with each revision, effectively altering the meaning of the text within. That quote just applies to the book of revelation.

 

[Lily_Among_Thorns]

Yes,,,,,,,,As we know, the KJV of the Bible originally included extra books not found in the Bible today.

The Roman Catholic Bible of today includes those same books. I have a copy/facimile of the original KJV. Those books are called the Apocrypha.

 

[Lily_Among_Thorns]

Millions of Christians all over the world accept the bible just fine believing that verse applies to the whole bible, so don't imply that I'm the first or the only one who believes that.

The gospel of Thomas is Apocrypha and does not belong in the bible. Or God would have put it there.

What about the Apocrypha. Protestant bibles have taken out the Apocrypha. Are those people in danger of the plagues found within revelation? The Roman Catholic bible includes the Apocrypha and they have been around long before the protestants.

The gospel of Thomas is not Apocrypha. It is from the Nag Hamadi. God however, put the Apocrypha in the bible. What do you think the Catholics use?

 

[Lily_Among_Thorns]

The Gospel of Thomas isn't in the Canon because it was never part of the books which could have made it. It was never part of what the Church received and read in the churches, which was the single most important criterion for canonicity.

Think of the Canon in part as a legal document, like a constitution (this analogy is far from perfect), sometimes amendments are brought before the government's legislative body which may pass and be included, others don't pass and are rejected; while others were never brought before any legislative body whatsoever.

The books that are in, passed the Church's "legislature" by standing the test of time through centuries of consent among Christians and churches all over the Christian world; other books did not make it, they were filtered slowly because they didn't receive that mutual consent among Christian Faithful. Then there were books that simply were never part of the process at all, they were never read in any of the churches, they were never part of the Church's liturgical reading, never part of the Church's hymn and prayer life, never part of the universal life of the Christian Church. The Gospel of Thomas is part of this last group.

While Thomas isn't overtly Gnostic, at least not like other Nag Hammadi texts, it is still quite Gnostic in content, or perhaps "Gnostic-lite". It was written too late to be of any serious value to the churches, it never had a wide enough readership within the churches to "stick". These are just a few reasons, but in the long run it simply wasn't ever in the running and thus was never part of the Christian canon of Holy Scripture.

If you find personal value in Thomas, then good on you, though I would caution that one be able to understand that the text, if not heretical, comes quite close in a number of cases and should be read appropriately.

I find a number of statements in Thomas to be quite fascinating and worthy of note; but I also recognize that many are clearly Gnostic in character and therefore have no part of Christian orthodoxy.

-CryptoLutheran

May I ask an example of a statement that you find to be clearly Gnostic in character?

Clearly the Holy Trinity is established within the gospel of Thomas.

I wasn't suggesting that the gospel of Thomas should be added to the canon. I was merely suggesting that it should not be viewed as such heresy when it clearly has value. When it clearly contains the spoken words of Jesus, it may be that the whole thing is in fact the gospel of his disciple, the one they called Thomas. It's not so far out there and the words spoken within the text are very Christ-like.

 

[Lily_Among_Thorns]

Hey LAT,

This reminded me of this verse from Ecclesiastes: "Be warned, my son, of anything in addition to them. Of making many books there is no end, and much study wearies the body" (12:12). Hope you can derive something from it.

Yea. Thanks. But we're just talking about one book, not many. Besides what is the recognized words of Jesus in the gospel of Thomas do you think it is possible that the gospel of Thomas is indeed the gospel of the disciple they called Thomas?

 

[Lily_Among_Thorns]

The Gospel of Thomas cannot be allowed to be seen as non heretical because it contains quotes that if taken to be accurate would seem to deny the co equal status of the Trinity. As in "Give unto Caesar that which is Caesar's, give unto God that which is God's and give unto me that which is mine."If it were allowed in the cannon it would cast doubt upon the whole idea of the Trinity as we know it. This is why it was rejected originally and why we cannot accept it now.

It doesn't deny the trinity. The trinity is established within the text. Where there are three Gods they are divine. Where there is one ore two I exist with him.
Whoever raises a word against the Father shall be forgiven. Whoever raises a word against the son shall be forgiven. But whoever raises a word against the Holy Ghost shall not be forgiven in heaven or on earth.

The trinity is clearly established within the text. It is the meaning of words that throws you off. It also says within the text, He who was within your presence you did not know nor do you know how to read him.

It's not heresy. It's a matter a perception.

 

[OzSpen]

I'm not saying adding it to the bible but, rather, recognizing it as another possible source of Jesus' words. If some of the words within are the words of Jesus then isn't it possible that the rest of the words within are in fact Jesus' own words?

Have you read all of the Gospel of Thomas? I have. There are enough statements in GThom to indicate clearly that the source of these words is not Jesus. Like the quote I gave you from GThom 114, part of which stated,

Jesus said, "Look, I will guide her to make her male, so that she too may become a living spirit resembling you males. For every female who makes herself male will enter the kingdom of Heaven" (emphasis added).

This is so contradictory to what Jesus stated in the 4 canonical gospels. Do you think that Jesus would say that a female must make herself a male to enter God's kingdom?

This is heretical Gnostic teaching or Gnostic-like teaching. So, why are you wanting to accept GThom as a source of Jesus' teaching? GThom has many places of foreign, heretical teaching when compared with the NT Gospels?

Oz

 

[OzSpen]

May I ask an example of a statement that you find to be clearly Gnostic in character?

The Gnostic Society Library states:

The Gospel of Thomas, one of the Gnostic texts found preserved in the Nag Hammadi Library, gives these words of the living Jesus:

Jesus said, `I am not your master. Because you have drunk, you have become drunk from the bubbling stream which I have measured out.... 12
He who will drink from my mouth will become as I am: I myself shall become he, and the things that are hidden will be revealed to him.' 13
​

Of GThom 13, the Gnostic Society Library makes this comment,

“He who will drink from my mouth will become as I am: What a remarkably heretical image!”

That’s about as good a summary as we will get of the heretical teaching in GThom.

Why don’t you check the Gnostic Bible to see the quotes from the Gospel of Thomas? These are some examples:

• The Gospel of Thomas (12) says that heaven and earth came into being for the sake of James (Yaakov). The Gnostic Bible, p.47;
• The Gospel of Thomas (31) says that a doctor does not heal those who know the doctor. Apparently those who know the Gnostic Jesus are not healed by him! The Gnostic Bible, p.53;
• In The Gospel of Thomas (57) Jesus mentions they have to bear the cross like he did. The Gnostic Bible, p.57;
• In the Gospel of Thomas (100) Jesus said to give unto Caesar what is Caesar’s, give to God what is God’s, and “give me mine.” The Gnostic Bible, p.67.

What about these sayings from GThom?

In GThom 108, Jesus says, "Whoever drinks from my mouth will become as I am; I myself shall become that person, and the hidden things will be revealed to him."

In GThom 70, Jesus says, "If you bring forth what is within you, what you have will save you. If you do not bring it forth, what you do not have within you will kill you."

So the Gnostic Society and the Gnostic Bible both consider that the Gospel of Thomas has Gnostic content. This GThom radical content is far, far from biblical Christianity as revealed in the NT Gospels.It is regarded as containing heresy by the Gnostic Society Library.

But you don't want to recognise it as heretical!

Oz

 

[tyronem]

An inerrant Bible has long since been disproved. It's a modern concept, not a historical one. The Fundamentalist movement of the 19th/20th Century is what really pushed the 100% infallibility doctrine.

Nothing about the errancy of the Bible has ever been disproved, in fact it has been proved accurate in every case where scoffers sought to discredit it.