| • Science | • People | • Locations | • Timeline |
| Contents | ||
Both to its admirers, and to its critics, it appears innocent of any literary values. When the complete copy of it in Coptic was found in 1945, it was then realized that fragmentary Greek portions of it had already been discovered in Oxyrhynchus, Egypt in 1898. The manuscripts bearing the Greek fragments of the Gospel of Thomas have been dated to about 200, and the manuscript of the Coptic version to 340Events Constantine II attacks his brother Constans near Aquileia, aiming for sole control of the western half of the Roman Empire. Births Ambrose, church father (approximate date) Jerome, Bible translator (approximate date) Deaths Constantine II, joint em. Although the Coptic version is not quite identical to the Greek fragments, it is believed that the Coptic version was translated from a prior Greek version.
The Gospel of Thomas is distinct from the apocryphaIntro In every-day conversation, apocryphal means "of questionable (or lacking) authenticity", describing a story nevertheless frequently told and widely believed. In literature, apocrypha refers to works that purport to have been created by somebody othel or pseudepigraphicalPseudepigrapha is a text or a number of texts whose claimed authorship is false. Pseudepigraphy is the ascription of false names of authors to works. These at least are the basic and original meaning of the terms. There have probably been pseudepigrapha a Acts of ThomasThe early 3rd century text called Acts of Thomas is arguably the most Gnostic of the apocryphal writings, portraying Christ as the "Heavenly Redeemer", independent of and beyond creation, who can free souls from the darkness of the world. References to th and the work called the Infancy Gospel of ThomasSeveral surviving infancy gospels give an idea of the miracle literature that was created in the early Christian church to satisfy the hunger of early Christians for more detail about the early life of their Savior. In Greek an infancy gospel was termed a, which is one of a category of Infancy GospelsSeveral surviving infancy gospels give an idea of the miracle literature that was created in the early Christian church to satisfy the hunger of early Christians for more detail about the early life of their Savior. In Greek an infancy gospel was termed a, which expand on the canonical texts to describe the miraculous childhood of Jesus. The Infancy Gospel by contrast had an early, wide distribution; it was already known to Irenaeus in the middle of the 2nd century1st century 2nd century 3rd century other centuries) Events Roman Empire governed by the Five Good Emperors' ( 96 180) Nerva, Trajan, Hadrian, Antoninus Pius, Marcus Aurelius. Significant persons Cai Lun, Chinese inventor Galen, medical writer Saint Irena. When Hippolytus and Origen (ca 233) refer to a "Gospel of Thomas" among the heterodox apocryphal gospels, it is unclear whether they mean the Infancy Gospel of Thomas or this "sayings" Gospel of Thomas. In the 4th century, Cyril of Jerusalem mentioned a "Gospel of Thomas" in his Cathechesis V: "Let none read the gospel according to Thomas, for it is the work, not of one of the twelve apostles, but of one of Mani's three wicked disciples." (Cyril of Jerusalem, )
This "sayings" Gospel, the Gospel of Thomas, is agreed to be simpler, less legend-filled, altogether a less consciously literary document.
There is currently much debate about when the text was composed, with scholars generally falling into two main camps.
The Early Camp The early camp argues that since it consists of mostly original material and does not seem to be based on the canonical gospels, it must have been transcribed from an oral tradition. Since the practice of considering oral tradition authoritative ended during the 1st century, the Gospel of Thomas therefore must have been written before then, perhaps as early as around 50. Since this date antecedes the dates of the traditional Four gospels , there is some claim that the Thomas gospel is or has some connection to the Q gospel —the name for an unknown, theorised text (or oral verse) which may have spawned Gospels of Matthew and Luke known today.
The early camp argues that about half of the material in Thomas has no known parallels to the New Testament, and at least some of this material could plausibly be attributed to the historic Jesus, such as saying 42 "Be passers-by."
The early camp also notes that Q is almost universally regarded by secular biblical scholars as the most parsimonious explanation for the synoptic problem and is widely regarded to be the earliest written text of Jesus' teachings. It has been hypothesized that Q exists in 3 strata, termed Q1, Q2, and Q3, with the apocalyptic material belonging in Q2 and Q3. Secular biblical scholars have identified 37 sayings that overlap between Thomas and Q, all of which are conjectured to be in either Q1 or Q2 and none of which included the latter, apocalyptic material of Q3. Hence, Thomas shows little or no knowledge of Q3, did not incorporate or was not aware of Q3. The Q layers of Q1 and Q2 are thought to predate the four gospels. Hence the Thomas Gospel is thought early.
The central argument of Elaine Pagels Beyond Belief (2003) is that there seems to be conflict between the Gospel of John and the Gospel of Thomas. According to Pagels, certain specific passages in the Gospel of John can only be understood in light of Thomas-like sayings, ideas, traditions, philosophical beliefs, and community, whether or not the present Gospel of Thomas itself. The most famous example in the Gospel of John is of " Doubting Thomas," which Pagels interprets as rebuttal for the Thomas community. Pagels' interpretation of John logically requires that Thomas-like ideas or a Thomas-like community, if not the present Gospel of Thomas, already existed when John's gospel was written. A critical evaluation of Pagel's book can be found here.
Another argument for the early camp is that there is overlap between Paul's epistles and Thomas. The authentic corpus of Paul's epistles, which include 1 Corinthians, Galatians, and Philippians are universally regarded by secular biblical scholars as predating the canonical Gospels of Mark, Matthew, Luke, and John. There are overlaps between teachings found in Paul and in Thomas that are not found in the canonical Gospels, (or independently attested by them), and that he therefore may have drawn on a common sayings pool that overlapped with both the canonical gospels and Thomas. According to this theory, Paul was drawing on sayings that were widely recognized to come from Jesus, and some which are uniquely preserved in Gospel of Thomas. The early camp argues that if Thomas knew of the New Testament, including the Pauline epistles, and if it is thought that Thomas showed gnostic tendencies, then it is surprising that he did not take the opportunity to include many verses that would have supported such "gnostic" theology, which that are present in the canonical New Testament, such as John 8:58 "Before Abraham was born, I AM." The Gospel of Thomas did in fact include a great deal of material unparalleled in the New Testament. It, however, lacks distinctive terms from second century Gnosticism such as archons, pleoroma , aeons, demiurge that would be expected from a product of historical Gnosticism: this is seen by some as another justification for an earlier date of authorship.
The Late Camp The late camp, on the other hand, contends that the seeming parallels with the canonic gospels are derived from the Synoptic Gospels, the "Q" source, or even the Diatessaron and that the GoT was probably written in the second century. They take the view that the Thomas gospel is at least partially derived from earlier copies of the known Gospels. To the quotations displayed above, critics often counter that, if the Gospel of Thomas is not a primary source but derives much of its material from the New Testament, these similar verses merely indicate that the Gospel of Thomas was written after Paul's letters were written (possibly even a century or more later).
Proponents of this view, which is in the majority among critical scholars, include the eminent Christopher Tuckett from Oxford University, Graham Stanton from Cambridge, Craig Evans from Trinity Western, and many others. Tuckett, a world expert on "Q," the saying of Jesus, and the gospels, finds evidence of a few sayings of Jesus in Thomas which seems independent from the canonical texts, but argues for a late view. Evans brings up the point that Thomas directly quotes or alludes to more than half of the NT books: Matthew, Mark, Luke, John, Acts, Romans, 1-2 Corinthians, Galatians, Ephesians, Colossians, 1 Thessalonians, 1 Timothy, Hebrews, 1 John, and Revelation. In his words, "Thomas appears to comprise hardly more than a collage of NT and apocyphal materials..." (Word Biblical Commentary, Vol 34b, p. xl). Even more problematic is the fact that Thomas borrows from material that is distinctive to Matthew ("M"), Luke ("L"), and John (see [Synoptic Problem]). It is much more likely that Thomas drew from these sources (for which we have relatively firm, early dating), which by all accounts were independent of each other, than they having drawn from Thomas. This is especially likely since no extra-biblical authors mention the gospel of Thomas until late in the 2nd century, while all the canonical books are attested much earlier.
Those who argue for a later date for Thomas also call into question the apparent assumption of those within the "early camp" that "sayings" material is necessarily earlier than full-fledged gospels that include narrative. To the contrary, one characteristic of early Christianity that appears to be uniform is a focus on the story of Jesus' passion and death - not his words. The letters of Paul are all dated earlier than any canonical gospel, and themselves focus not on Jesus' words but on his death and resurrection.
The version of Thomas that we currently have is doubtless not the original, either. Only two manuscripts for it exist, and there are significant differences between them. In its current form, Thomas is a very Gnostic document, and "removal of the Gnostic veneer will never be easy" (Graham Stanton, The Gospels and Jesus 2002, p. 129). That is, current arguments about the date of Thomas are based on a text that was fluid, changing, and probably not representative of its earliest versions. Proponents of the early theory are inevitably forced to piece apart Thomas and recreate the "real," earlier, and supposedly non-Gnostic version. This is a methologically subjective exercise that essentially creates a document that never existed, and can never be proven to have existed without substantial evidence (the "Q" document is a good example of a non-existent document that has been recreated from substantial evidence - but there is still much debate about its form, whether or not it was one or many documents, and other issues. See [Synoptic Problem]) Dating it in light of such scant data is extremely difficult.
In connection with this, it is observed that the Jesus of Thomas is not very Jewish at all. This flies directly in the face of nearly all the substantial research into the Historical Jesus of the last 30 years. Jesus is now understood as having been fundamentally Jewish, rooted in its scriptures and theological traditions. A Gnostic Jesus who rejects the physical world, women (see Thomas 114), and believes the Yahweh of the Old Testament to be evil is simply inconsistent with the Jewish Jesus who appears to have been concerned with the poor, women, marginalized, and destitute, as well as the God of the OT.
Some sayings of Thomas are present in all four gospels and all of their proposed predacessor sources Q, M, and L (see the [Synoptic Problem]). It is highly unlikely that the author of Thomas had independent (that is, apart from the canonical gospels) access to all of the oral sources that these traditions drew from, especially since the canonical gospels and Q, M, and L (and thus their sources) probably existed in distinct geographical areas. A much more likely explanation is that Thomas drew from a 2nd-century "harmony" (compilation) of the four gospels (harmonies came into existence in teh 2nd century). This would account for why Thomas has access to material in all four gospels.
The Late Camp argues that GoT is late second century Gnostic work based on the presuppositions that the GoT in its current form reflects the work of second-century Gnostic thought. Other documents in the cache of manuscripts found at Nag Hammadi are clearly Gnostic in their approach, but not all. Among the works is a paraphrase of Plato's Republic. Readers are invited to make a comparison of this Gospel of Thomas with an actual Gnostic work available on the Web— the Pistis Sophia for example— and judge for themselves. It should be noted, however, that Gnosticism in general was a very fluid belief system that was never sytematized in the way that Christian beliefs were. Documents that are not "explicitly Gnostic," then, but contain much Gnostic-like material can still be considered substantively part of the Gnostic community (or communities).
The fact that the Gospel of Thomas does not seem to have been considered for the New Testament is considered by some as an indication of its being of a later date—had it actually been written by the apostle Thomas, they argue, it would have been at least seriously considered by those in the century immediately following Jesus' death. This opinion is more popular among Christians who accept a divinely-inspired New Testament canon as an article of their faith—especially those considering themselves fundamentalist or evangelical Christians.
However, in the first three centuries of the Christian Church, there was no firmly established New Testament canon that was universally recognized. The New Testament canon as it is now was first listed by St. Athanasius, Bishop of Alexandria, in 367, in a letter written to his churches in Egypt. That canon gained wider and wider recognition until it was accepted by all at the Third Council of Carthage in 397, nearly four centuries after the events they purport to relate. This was done under the command of emperor Constantine, when he convened the Council of Nicea. Even this council did not settle the matter, however. Certain books continued to be questioned, especially James and Revelation. Even as late as the 16th century, theologian and reformer Martin Luther rejected the Epistle of James.
It should be noted that however the canonizers choose which books to include into the canon of the New Testament, since many books that were chosen by men to be included into the canon of the New Testament, such as the epistles of Paul, the letters of John, James, Peter and the book of Revelation (or apocapylse) of John contain little or no information about the historical Jesus, and little or no teachings from the historical Jesus, information about the historical Jesus itself was not a singular criterion for inclusion into the New Testament Canon.
The Gospel of Thomas may have failed to be included in the canon of the New Testament because:
The Gospel of Thomas is mystical—it emphasizes a direct and unmediated experience of the Divine. Jesus is presented as a mystagogue, a teacher of Divine mysteries, much as he is presented in the Gospel of John. While the emphasis in John is a balance between his miracles and his words, the emphasis here is exclusively the words of Jesus. A discovery of the interpretation of those words is what allegedly brings about enlightenment. The Gospel of Thomas records this as one of Jesus' sayings: "He who discovers the interpretations of these secret teachings shall never taste death." The theme is paralleled in John; however in John, salvation is understood as salvation from Eternal Damnation.
Unlike John, which distinguishes belief in Jesus from unbelief, the Gospel of Thomas premises salvation on an enlightened understanding of one's true identity—an image of oneself as divine.
In John's Gospel, Jesus is the "only begotten son" of the Father (John 1:3). In the Gospel of Thomas Jesus is quoted as saying that "the kingdom of the Father is spread out upon the earth, and men do not see it." This too can be interpreted as Jesus attempt to bring enlightenment through his teachings that mans existence is not as much material as it is spiritual—hence his claims to his own divinity came with an implied stipulation that this "divinity" was not limited to himself, rather belongs to anyone who is born-again spiritually.
Elaine Pagels argued in Beyond Belief that, while this strand of Christianity died out, many great Christian mystics independently derived ideas similar to Thomas, from Meister Eckhart to Teresa of Avila to Saint John of the Cross . Mainstream Christian scholars, on the contrary, find fairly clear distinctions between the basic ideas of these Christian mystics and the author of the Gospel of Thomas.
The Gospel of Thomas is, in any case, one of the earliest accounts of the teaching of Jesus outside of the canonical gospels and so is considered a valuable text. Some say that this gospel makes no mention of Jesus' resurrection, an important point of faith among Christians. A minority opinion, however, interprets the opening words of the book, "These are the secret sayings which the living Jesus spoke and which Didymos Judas Thomas wrote down" ( Nag Hammadi Library translation, 2d. edition, BooksEnthsiast.com) to mean that the sayings are being presented as the teaching of Jesus Christ after the resurrection.
Some scholars consider this gospel to be a gnostic text, since it was found in a library among other, more clearly gnostic texts. Others reject this interpretation, because Thomas lacks the full-blown mythology of Gnosticism as described by Irenaeus of Lyons, ca 185 or recognized by modern scholarship. No major Christian group accepts it as canonical or authoritative.
The gospel is ostensibly written from the point of view of Didymus Judas Thomas, one of the twelve disciples of Jesus (who appears in the Gospel of John as "doubting Thomas"). It claims that special revelations and parables (recorded in the text) were made only to Thomas. However, the gospel is a collection of sayings and parables, which contains no narrative account of Jesus' life, something that all four canonical gospels include.
This Gospel is important for scholars working on the Q Gospel, which, like Thomas, is thought to be a collection of sayings or teachings. Although no copy of Q has ever been discovered, the fact that Thomas is a sayings Gospel is taken by some as indication that the early Christians did write collections of the sayings of Jesus, and thus they feel it renders the Q theory more credible.
Modern scholars use three criteria to determine what the historical Jesus may have taught: multiple attestations, dissimalarity, and contextual credibility. Many modern scholars believe that the Gospel of Thomas was written independently of the New Testament, and therefore, is a useful guide to historical Jesus research.
By finding those sayings in the Gospel of Thomas that overlaps with Q, Mark, Matthew, Luke, John, and Paul, scholars feel such sayings represent "multiple attestations" and therefore, are more likely to come from a historical Jesus, than sayings that are only singly attested, such as the vast majority of the material in John.
GoT has also been used by Christ mythicist theorists such as Earl Doherty, author of 'The Jesus Puzzle', and Timothy Freke, author of 'The Jesus Mysteries', that Christianity did not originate with a historical Jesus, but as a Jewish adaptation of the Greek mystery religions. The collection of teachings attributed to Jesus represent part of the initiatiation to the mysteries of their religion. See Historicity of Jesus Christ. See Mystery religion
The Gospel of Thomas is regarded by some individuals as the single most important find in understanding early Christianity outside the New Testament. It may attest to extraordinary diversity in early Christianity, and very different understandings of Jesus. It also may offer a window into the worldview of this ancient culture and a window of the debates and struggles within early Christianity, and its relationship and split with Judaism.
In translating ancient texts, often the meaning of words is revealed only in abstraction, and must be transliterated, after being translated, in order for the meaning to be addressed. This is the case with all translations, as each reveals the limits and changes of languages, in the divergent tasks of; being sufficiently descriptive, and being easy to use in common speech. In the Thomas Gospels, the 66th is one famous example of how translation often differs subtly in its proper transliteration.
The use of the word "corner-stone", in the Brill edition, is inaccurate for the meaning, and the correct word is "keystone", as in the Patterson-Meyer translation. To understand the difference, we must think through the parable for its intended meaning. As in all Christian parables, the deeper meaning reflects a moral story; In this case, by the analogy of constructing of an arch:
The Gospel of Thomas does not refer to Jesus as "Christ" or "Lord" as the New Testament does, but simply as "Jesus." The Gospel of Thomas also lacks any mention of such classic Christian doctrines as Hell, eternal damnation, Satan, Demons, The Second Coming, the Holy Trinity, sin, miracles or signs, or salvation. Eschatology is largely avoided, though the disciples ask more than once: "Jesus said, 'Have you found the beginning, then, that you are looking for the end? You see, the end will be where the beginning is.'"
The Gospel of Thomas does not list the canonical twelve apostles, though it does mention James the Just, who is singled out ("No matter where you are you are to go to James the Just, for whose sake heaven and earth came into being"); Simon Peter; Matthew; Thomas, who is taken aside and receives three points of revelation; Mary; and Salome. Though here Mary Magdalene and Salome are mentioned among the disciples, the canonical Gospels and Acts only mention men, but make a distinction between "disciples" and the inner group of twelve "apostles"—a Greek term that does not appear in GofT—with varying lists of names making up the canonical twelve.
Compare Thomas 8 SV
"And Jesus said, The person is like a wise fisherman who cast his net into the sea and drew it up from the sea full of little fish. Among them the wise fisherman discovered a fine large fish. He threw all the little fish back into the sea, and easily chose the large fish. Anyone here with two good ears had better listen!"
with Matthew 13:47-50 NIV:
47"Once again, the kingdom of heaven is like a net that was let down into the lake and caught all kinds of fish. 48When it was full, the fishermen pulled it up on the shore. Then they sat down and collected the good fish in baskets, but threw the bad away. 49This is how it will be at the end of the age. The angels will come and separate the wicked from the righteous 50and throw them into the fiery furnace, where there will be weeping and gnashing of teeth.
Note that Thomas makes a distinction between large and small fishes, whereas Matthew makes a distinction between good and bad fishes. Furthermore, Thomas version has only 1 fish remaining, whereas Matthew's version implies many good fish remaining. The manner in which each Gospel concludes the parable is instructive. Thomas version lacks verses 49-50, the commentary of the apocalyptic end of the age.
Another example is the parable of the lost sheep, which is parallel by Matthew, Luke, John, and Thomas.
This is the parable of the lost sheep in Matthew 18: 12-14 NIV
12"What do you think? If a man owns a hundred sheep, and one of them wanders away, will he not leave the ninety-nine on the hills and go to look for the one that wandered off? 13And if he finds it, I tell you the truth, he is happier about that one sheep than about the ninety-nine that did not wander off. 14In the same way your Father in heaven is not willing that any of these little ones should be lost.
This is the parable of the lost sheep in Luke 15: 3-7 NIV
3Then Jesus told them this parable: 4"Suppose one of you has a hundred sheep and loses one of them. Does he not leave the ninety-nine in the open country and go after the lost sheep until he finds it? 5And when he finds it, he joyfully puts it on his shoulders 6and goes home. Then he calls his friends and neighbors together and says, 'Rejoice with me; I have found my lost sheep.' 7I tell you that in the same way there will be more rejoicing in heaven over one sinner who repents than over ninety-nine righteous persons who do not need to repent.
This is the parable of the lost sheep in Thomas 107 SV
107Jesus said, The kingdom is like a shepherd who had a hundred sheep. One of them, the largest, went astray. He left the ninety-nine and looked for the one until he found it. After he had toiled, he said to the sheep, 'I love you more than the ninety-nine.'
This is the parable of the lost sheep in John 10: 1-18 NIV
1"I tell you the truth, the man who does not enter the sheep pen by the gate, but climbs in by some other way, is a thief and a robber. 2The man who enters by the gate is the shepherd of his sheep. 3The watchman opens the gate for him, and the sheep listen to his voice. He calls his own sheep by name and leads them out. 4When he has brought out all his own, he goes on ahead of them, and his sheep follow him because they know his voice. 5But they will never follow a stranger; in fact, they will run away from him because they do not recognize a stranger's voice." 6Jesus used this figure of speech, but they did not understand what he was telling them. 7Therefore Jesus said again, "I tell you the truth, I am the gate for the sheep. 8All who ever came before me were thieves and robbers, but the sheep did not listen to them. 9I am the gate; whoever enters through me will be saved.[1] He will come in and go out, and find pasture. 10The thief comes only to steal and kill and destroy; I have come that they may have life, and have it to the full. 11"I am the good shepherd. The good shepherd lays down his life for the sheep. 12The hired hand is not the shepherd who owns the sheep. So when he sees the wolf coming, he abandons the sheep and runs away. Then the wolf attacks the flock and scatters it. 13The man runs away because he is a hired hand and cares nothing for the sheep. 14"I am the good shepherd; I know my sheep and my sheep know me-- 15just as the Father knows me and I know the Father--and I lay down my life for the sheep. 16I have other sheep that are not of this sheep pen. I must bring them also. They too will listen to my voice, and there shall be one flock and one shepherd. 17The reason my Father loves me is that I lay down my life--only to take it up again. 18No one takes it from me, but I lay it down of my own accord. I have authority to lay it down and authority to take it up again. This command I received from my Father."
This is a list of scholars or intellectuals who either have committed significant scholarly work in Gospel of Thomas studies, or have commented on the Gospel.
|