Gospel of Thomas
#1
Pax et Bonum!  Could someone please explain what the Gospel of Thomas is and why we cannot use it?  Is it wrong for us to read it?  I understand it contains the Sayings of Jesus.  Tks and God bless!  angeltime :readrules:
Reply
#2
(02-07-2018, 07:40 PM)angeltime Wrote: Pax et Bonum!  Could someone please explain what the Gospel of Thomas is and why we cannot use it?  Is it wrong for us to read it?  I understand it contains the Sayings of Jesus.  Tks and God bless!  angeltime :readrules:

Basically because it's the same as if some random person wrote a gospel today.  It's dating is later than the other gospels and contains novel sayings and lessons that not only obviously didn't come from Jesus, but also stand in contrast to his teachings.  The Gospel of Thomas is an invention of the gnostics.

This was discerned by the early Church when they were putting together the books of the Bible, and academic studies have further confirmed that it is not really related to the literary traditions of the books that are considered canon.
Reply
#3
(02-07-2018, 07:40 PM)angeltime Wrote: Pax et Bonum!  Could someone please explain what the Gospel of Thomas is and why we cannot use it?  Is it wrong for us to read it?  I understand it contains the Sayings of Jesus.  Tks and God bless!  angeltime :readrules:

I have read it and I think it should be called the "Gnostic Gospel of Thomas". There are many problems with this book and the writings do not square well with the accepted writings of our Bible.

St. Thomas went to evangelize in Southern India, which is still quite Christian in an overtly non-christian society. My parish priest was from there, a Carmelite Order Priest and they are very proud of this history with Thomas, but not this book.
One should have an open mind; open enough that things get in, but not so open that everything falls out
Art Bell
 
The individual is handicapped by coming face to face with a conspiracy so monstrous that he cannot believe it exists.
J Edgar Hoover

 
I don't need a good memory, because I always tell the truth.
Jessie Ventura

 
Its no wonder truth is stranger than fiction.
Fiction has to make sense
Mark Twain

If history doesn't repeat itself, it sure does rhyme.
Mark Twain
Reply
#4
(02-07-2018, 08:02 PM)Zedta Wrote:
(02-07-2018, 07:40 PM)angeltime Wrote: Pax et Bonum!  Could someone please explain what the Gospel of Thomas is and why we cannot use it?  Is it wrong for us to read it?  I understand it contains the Sayings of Jesus.  Tks and God bless!  angeltime :readrules:

I have read it and I think it should be called the "Gnostic Gospel of Thomas". There are many problems with this book and the writings do not square well with the accepted writings of our Bible.

St. Thomas went to evangelize in Southern India, which is still quite Christian in an overtly non-christian society. My parish priest was from there, a Carmelite Order Priest and they are very proud of this history with Thomas, but not this book.
Peace.....I didn't realize it was written much later and by who knows?  Best to stay away from it.....we have enough confusion going on!  Tks a lot everyone.....angeltime
Reply
#5
There are two apocryphal gospels called "Thomas" - the "Sayings" gospel and the "Infancy" gospel. It seems you are more interested in the former, though the latter is also interesting. The Quran seems to derive certain details about Jesus from a shared tradition represented in the Infancy Gospel of Thomas.

The Gospel of Thomas (the sayings gospel) is a collection of over a hundred sayings attributed to Jesus. It survives in Greek fragments and completely in Coptic. The above posters are very much at odds with much of modern scholarship, which dates this apocryphon quite early (most apocrypha are indeed quite late). I studied this gospel in grad school in my Coptic studies. Some of the sayings are basically quotes from the canonical Gospels, some are things not in the canonical gospels but sound like things the Lord could have said, and some are completely enigmatic/bizarre statements. Overall it is not as overtly "gnostic" as other apocrypha, mostly because it lacks a narrative completely – it is literally just a list of sayings. It is probably considered "gnostic" mostly because it was found at Nag Hammadi alongside overtly "gnostic" texts. (BTW, I think the "gnostic" label is generally a problematic one.)

I think there is value in reading such things as historical data, as evidence of what early heterodox Christians believed. Whether that is something that is valuable to your spiritual life is debatable. I think whether it is "OK" to read depends on why you would want to read it. Historical data/context – OK; spiritual reading – not so. The authorship is unknown, who did the collecting is unknown, the ancient patristic references to it are universally negative – all of which make it doctrinally worthless from the Church's standpoint.
O unashamed intercessor of Christians, ever loyal advocate before the Creator, do not disregard the prayerful voice of sinners but in your goodness hasten to assist us who trustfully cry out to you: Intercede always, O Mother of God, in behalf of those who honor you!
[-] The following 2 users Like aquinas138's post:
  • jovan66102, Zedta
Reply
#6
(02-08-2018, 01:24 AM)aquinas138 Wrote: I think there is value in reading such things as historical data, as evidence of what early heterodox Christians believed. Whether that is something that is valuable to your spiritual life is debatable. I think whether it is "OK" to read depends on why you would want to read it. Historical data/context – OK; spiritual reading – not so. The authorship is unknown, who did the collecting is unknown, the ancient patristic references to it are universally negative – all of which make it doctrinally worthless from the Church's standpoint.

This.

It is a difficult read, indeed and often confusing, which may partly be due to translation and language that is aged to begin with. In the end, it really has very little to offer in the realm of enhancing one's faith.
One should have an open mind; open enough that things get in, but not so open that everything falls out
Art Bell
 
The individual is handicapped by coming face to face with a conspiracy so monstrous that he cannot believe it exists.
J Edgar Hoover

 
I don't need a good memory, because I always tell the truth.
Jessie Ventura

 
Its no wonder truth is stranger than fiction.
Fiction has to make sense
Mark Twain

If history doesn't repeat itself, it sure does rhyme.
Mark Twain
Reply
#7
(02-08-2018, 01:24 AM)aquinas138 Wrote: There are two apocryphal gospels called "Thomas" - the "Sayings" gospel and the "Infancy" gospel. It seems you are more interested in the former, though the latter is also interesting. The Quran seems to derive certain details about Jesus from a shared tradition represented in the Infancy Gospel of Thomas.

The Gospel of Thomas (the sayings gospel) is a collection of over a hundred sayings attributed to Jesus. It survives in Greek fragments and completely in Coptic. The above posters are very much at odds with much of modern scholarship, which dates this apocryphon quite early (most apocrypha are indeed quite late). I studied this gospel in grad school in my Coptic studies. Some of the sayings are basically quotes from the canonical Gospels, some are things not in the canonical gospels but sound like things the Lord could have said, and some are completely enigmatic/bizarre statements. Overall it is not as overtly "gnostic" as other apocrypha, mostly because it lacks a narrative completely – it is literally just a list of sayings. It is probably considered "gnostic" mostly because it was found at Nag Hammadi alongside overtly "gnostic" texts. (BTW, I think the "gnostic" label is generally a problematic one.)

I think there is value in reading such things as historical data, as evidence of what early heterodox Christians believed. Whether that is something that is valuable to your spiritual life is debatable. I think whether it is "OK" to read depends on why you would want to read it. Historical data/context – OK; spiritual reading – not so. The authorship is unknown, who did the collecting is unknown, the ancient patristic references to it are universally negative – all of which make it doctrinally worthless from the Church's standpoint.
Peace.....thankyou for so much clarity!  I prefer the Sayings of Jesus are genuinely from Jesus, so this sounds as though I should pass it up even though it is somewhat historical and educational to know.  I think I read that some of these writings came from a Theologian Origen from Alexandria???  angeltime
Reply




Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)