The Gospel Of Thomas

[Guest open eyes]

Ever since I saw the movie "Stigmata," I have had a huge interest in the Gospel of Thomas. It is supposed to be the actual words of Jesus....(if he existed for real) It's main premise is "The Kingdom of Heaven is inside you and all around you." It basically tells us to find our inner self and we will be closer to god. I don't know if there is a god, but I know that the one major thing that feels real to me is the pantheism expressed in this text.

 

I often describe myself as an atheist because I loathe organized religion, but I consider myself an agnostic atheist pantheist. I don't believe in deities other than what unites us all. The universe that we are all a part of; the most amazingly beautiful thing I have ever seen....the stars above, in the depths of the sea, the view from a mountain top, etc. I do think if Jesus did exist that he was a teacher and he taught us to be true to ourselves as in this particular text. It really speaks to me, and I find it fascinating. Here is a link to a website that explains and analyzes it. I couldn't figure out how to set up a link because I can be a computer idiot at times and am new to the post but here is the web address. http://www.earlychristianwritings.com/thomas/

 

I got it off wikipedia after entering gospel of thomas.

[Guest open eyes]

Ever since I saw the movie "Stigmata," I have had a huge interest in the Gospel of Thomas. It is supposed to be the actual words of Jesus....(if he existed for real) It's main premise is "The Kingdom of Heaven is inside you and all around you." It basically tells us to find our inner self and we will be closer to god. I don't know if there is a god, but I know that the one major thing that feels real to me is the pantheism expressed in this text.

 

I often describe myself as an atheist because I loathe organized religion, but I consider myself an agnostic atheist pantheist. I don't believe in deities other than what unites us all. The universe that we are all a part of; the most amazingly beautiful thing I have ever seen....the stars above, in the depths of the sea, the view from a mountain top, etc. I do think if Jesus did exist that he was a teacher and he taught us to be true to ourselves as in this particular text. It really speaks to me, and I find it fascinating. Here is a link to a website that explains and analyzes it. http://www.earlychristianwritings.com/thomas/

 

I got it off wikipedia after entering gospel of thomas.

[Neon Genesis]

Why can't more Christians preach something like this instead of hellfire and eternal damnation?

[mwc]

Why can't more Christians preach something like this instead of hellfire and eternal damnation?

They're afraid of hellfire and damnation.

 

mwc

[Guest open eyes]

Gnostic Christians study these texts which I found very interesting and inspiring. All the early Christian writings if you study the actual writings rather than the bible minus the text that Constantine outlawed (the gospel of thomas being one.) are very pantheistic and very accepting of all people. The also seem to have great reverence for the universe. It is beautiful. I have googled about gnostic christians, and most gnostic christians don't call themselves christians because they don't like what the evangelical movement has done to Christianity-they HATE it! As a pantheist, I think that they have bastardized the true message of Christ's teachings and it is true blasphemy. I don't know if Jesus existed, but I do know that the emperor Constantine put all the crappy messages into Christianity. I have actually seen a few documentaries about it recently..........

 

Also, I just saw the "lord's prayer" with a direct translation from aramaic. It is also interesting..Here's link to that: http://nmazca.com/verba/lord.htm

[Neon Genesis]

Do you know of any good reliable sites about Gnostic Christianity, Open Eyes? I've only ever read about Gnostic Christianity from Wikipedia and some of the gnostic gospels at earlychristianwritings.com but I keep meaning to read more about it.

[LilaMae]

Wow, that real Lord's Prayer is so different. Really new-age

 

I wonder how screwed up all of Jesus' other "sayings" are. I don't know if Jesus the man actually existed, but if he did, I imagine he'd be pretty pissed off at what the fundies are doing to his message!

[Neon Genesis]

Unfornatulely, as nice and interesting as The Gospel Of Thomas is, Jesus is still just as sexist as he is in the canon gospels.

Simon Peter said to them: Let Mariham go out from among us, for women are not worthy of the life. Jesus said: Look, I will lead her that I may make her male, in order that she too may become a living spirit resembling you males. For every woman who makes herself male will enter into the kingdom of heaven.

[Jeff H]

Also, I just saw the "lord's prayer" with a direct translation from aramaic. It is also interesting..Here's link to that: http://nmazca.com/verba/lord.htm

Hey open eyes, I was just wondering if you know who exactly translated this. It's certainly very interesting, but of course, with all translations, it is easy to put in some of your own ideas unintentionally. Languages never line up exactly. I think I'd be more interested in this translation if I knew that it came from a reliable source, i.e. a reputable scholar and an expert on Aramaic. But at any rate, either way, it's interesting

 

Edit: Yes, doing a quick Google search, there appears to be a good deal of controversy surrounding it (not just from Christians, either), and I've found many, many differing translations. I'd give this a quick read, anyway: http://aramaicdesigns.blogspot.com/2007/06...-of-cosmos.html

[Guest open eyes]

Do you know of any good reliable sites about Gnostic Christianity, Open Eyes? I've only ever read about Gnostic Christianity from Wikipedia and some of the gnostic gospels at earlychristianwritings.com but I keep meaning to read more about it.

 

There are a lot of interesting questions and answers at http://www.gnosticchristianity.com/

 

A note is that most gnostics do NOT consider themselves christians. Not even the "priests", in fact if you google gnostic christian churches you will pull up a blog of a "priest" who also participates in Wicca; which I found quite interesting. Keep in mind these are supposed to be the real private teachings from the historical Jesus, if he did exist. If he existed, he sounds like a great teacher and very enlightened but I don't believe he was any more the son of god than you or I. I personally think we are one and one is all, which is what these texts seem to point to...which I find exciting.

[Guest open eyes]

Unfornatulely, as nice and interesting as The Gospel Of Thomas is, Jesus is still just as sexist as he is in the canon gospels.

Simon Peter said to them: Let Mariham go out from among us, for women are not worthy of the life. Jesus said: Look, I will lead her that I may make her male, in order that she too may become a living spirit resembling you males. For every woman who makes herself male will enter into the kingdom of heaven.

 

As a feminist, a writer and a female that part always didn't make sense to me. I like to think that it was metaphorical, to say that the qualities of women of the time, being subservant, soft spoken and shy, is what women would have give up to do to "become male." For example, be empowered, and think for themselves rather than listen to men telling them what to do.

 

Or unfortunately, yes, Jesus if he existed was a sexist. You would be correct if it was meant literally. As a poet though, most writers do NOT write literally. It is an interesting text none the less, and that quotation has always perplexed me.

 

It could also refer to us being neither male or female and to simply embrace the "maleness" (traditional men's qualities) Either way these hidden texts are quite interesting. Even if Jesus did exist, I don't think he is too be worshipped or that he was perfect. He was just a teacher, and perhaps he was a sexist teacher and not enlightened enough to see that woman are equal. The historical Jesus would have been just a man nothing more than a teacher spouting his ideas.

 

Definitely a great point though and something I have thought a lot about too.

[Neon Genesis]

Keep in mind these are supposed to be the real private teachings from the historical Jesus, if he did exist. If he existed, he sounds like a great teacher and very enlightened but I don't believe he was any more the son of god than you or I.

But according to Wikipedia, it's debatable as to when exactly the Gospel Of Thomas was written. Some people think it dates back to either the first century or sometime before the Gospel Of Mark, which was the earliest of the canon gospels written, while others speculate that it could have been written sometime in 60 CE. If it was a later date, wouldn't it seem unlikely to be the actual words of Jesus? At least this proves that there were more than one "true way" to salvation going around in the early days of the church and that interpeting the bible is a lot more complex than what fundamentalists would lead you to believe. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gospel_Of_Tho..._of_Composition

 

As a feminist, a writer and a female that part always didn't make sense to me. I like to think that it was metaphorical, to say that the qualities of women of the time, being subservant, soft spoken and shy, is what women would have give up to do to "become male." For example, be empowered, and think for themselves rather than listen to men telling them what to do.

 

Or unfortunately, yes, Jesus if he existed was a sexist. You would be correct if it was meant literally. As a poet though, most writers do NOT write literally. It is an interesting text none the less, and that quotation has always perplexed me.

I suppose that pretty much everybody back then was sexist. That doesn't necessarily mean Jesus didn't have good teachings even if he wasn't perfect, though. Plato defended slavery yet we still consider his philosophies to be valuable today. I think Jesus' teachings are more powerful as an imperfect human rather than the perfect son of god. To me, upholding Jesus to the status of a god cheapens his positive teachings because it makes it easy to take them for granted because you already expected them to be perfect and wonderful, if that makes sense. But according to further down that page where that verse is, they say that becoming male is a metaphor for being spiritual, so maybe it is metaphorical.

[mwc]

Do you know of any good reliable sites about Gnostic Christianity, Open Eyes? I've only ever read about Gnostic Christianity from Wikipedia and some of the gnostic gospels at earlychristianwritings.com but I keep meaning to read more about it.

Try the Gnostic Society Library. They have tons of texts and good translations. I've found them to be a reliable site as opposed to some (most?) of these others.

 

mwc

[mwc]

Hey open eyes, I was just wondering if you know who exactly translated this. It's certainly very interesting, but of course, with all translations, it is easy to put in some of your own ideas unintentionally. Languages never line up exactly. I think I'd be more interested in this translation if I knew that it came from a reliable source, i.e. a reputable scholar and an expert on Aramaic. But at any rate, either way, it's interesting

 

Edit: Yes, doing a quick Google search, there appears to be a good deal of controversy surrounding it (not just from Christians, either), and I've found many, many differing translations. I'd give this a quick read, anyway: http://aramaicdesigns.blogspot.com/2007/06...-of-cosmos.html

Exactly. Go here for a number of translations of the Lord's Prayer (including two from Aramaic) and they're nowhere near as "new age" as the other one posted here.

 

mwc

[Guest open eyes]

I guess when it comes down to it, there are some many translations and so many interpretations, that it is all a bunch of bs. However, you could always see hope in the one if any that makes sense to you. I suppose I am always looking for something more positive because I find Fundamentalist Christianity to be the most destructive force in the world. I know that if there was a message that fundies have definitely used it for their own political agenda. I guess the differences in the translations could ultimately say that anyone can put their spin on any ancient text. There is no way of knowing what is meant by them because no one was there. It is still interesting to ponder sometimes...instead of hearing the fire and brimestone.

[Mriana]

I find the Gospel of Thomas fascinating too and really appreciate Sayings 3 and 77, because I find it fits my lifelong views (it would take a very long post to explain). However I don't believe in a historical Jesus and see the Gospel of Thomas as being in the classification of Q. Of course, supposedly many of the sayings in Thomas are in Q. I have yet to get my hands on the Q. Some scholars say it did exist, but doesn't now and others say it does exist. I don't know, but I do know some of what is in Thomas is also in the Gospels. Not everything though.

 

I will admit, like you, ever since I saw Stigmata, I was interested in the Gospel of Thomas too. Then I got into Gospel of Mary and many other Gnostic Gospels. I don't know if you have read any of the other Gnostic Gospels, but if you haven't and can deal with some missing sections and/or words, I suggest reading the others too. You might find them interesting too. Karen Armstrong has some good books on the Gnostics too and I highly recommend her.

[Deva]

I guess when it comes down to it, there are some many translations and so many interpretations, that it is all a bunch of bs. However, you could always see hope in the one if any that makes sense to you. I suppose I am always looking for something more positive because I find Fundamentalist Christianity to be the most destructive force in the world.

 

I like this verse from Gospel of Thomas:

 

(113) His disciples said to him, "When will the kingdom come?"

<Jesus said,> "It will not come by waiting for it. It will not be a matter of saying 'here it is' or 'there it is.' Rather, the kingdom of the father is spread out upon the earth, and men do not see it."

 

 

The existence of the Gospel of Thomas shows that there were early on very different ways of seeing Jesus and different interpretations of what it was he taught.

 

Just taking the above verse - if it is true, how is it that there is so much emphasis on the future tribulation, rapture, etc., and the future rule of Christ? All of that hardly even seems "christian" since Jesus would not have understood it. The kingdom of God is the rule of god on earth and Jesus plainly said it was already there.

[Neon Genesis]

I agree with you, Deva. I wonder whatever possessed the author of the Book Of Revelation to write Jesus' character the way they did in that book since Jesus' personality in Revelation seems to be so entirely different than his personality in the gospels.

[Jeff H]

Of course, supposedly many of the sayings in Thomas are in Q. I have yet to get my hands on the Q. Some scholars say it did exist, but doesn't now and others say it does exist. I don't know, but I do know some of what is in Thomas is also in the Gospels. Not everything though.

Q doesn't "exist" as an ancient text that scholars have found. But they have pieced it together from Matthew and Luke. Essentially you take out whatever is found in Mark from both Matthew and Luke, and then compare the two to see what else is the same between them. Whatever is the same in Matthew and Luke after Mark's passages are taken out, they then attribute it to Q. So some scholars have pieced together Q from that - but no, they've never found it.

 

I like this verse from Gospel of Thomas:

 

(113) His disciples said to him, "When will the kingdom come?"

<Jesus said,> "It will not come by waiting for it. It will not be a matter of saying 'here it is' or 'there it is.' Rather, the kingdom of the father is spread out upon the earth, and men do not see it."

 

 

The existence of the Gospel of Thomas shows that there were early on very different ways of seeing Jesus and different interpretations of what it was he taught.

 

Just taking the above verse - if it is true, how is it that there is so much emphasis on the future tribulation, rapture, etc., and the future rule of Christ? All of that hardly even seems "christian" since Jesus would not have understood it. The kingdom of God is the rule of god on earth and Jesus plainly said it was already there.

It's interesting to think about that. The funny thing is that in the gospels that are in the Bible, you can also see this sort of thing. Jesus often talks about the kingdom as already being here, and being in our hearts, etc. The modern Christian interpretation of the kingdom of God as something still yet to come is as a result of trying to harmonize the entire Bible - which is fine to do as long as it was, indeed, inspired by God. But when you take that out of the equation, you see that Jesus may have had a very different message than what we normally think of him as having. Very interesting stuff

[Mriana]

Of course, supposedly many of the sayings in Thomas are in Q. I have yet to get my hands on the Q. Some scholars say it did exist, but doesn't now and others say it does exist. I don't know, but I do know some of what is in Thomas is also in the Gospels. Not everything though.

Q doesn't "exist" as an ancient text that scholars have found. But they have pieced it together from Matthew and Luke. Essentially you take out whatever is found in Mark from both Matthew and Luke, and then compare the two to see what else is the same between them. Whatever is the same in Matthew and Luke after Mark's passages are taken out, they then attribute it to Q. So some scholars have pieced together Q from that - but no, they've never found it.

 

I just reread what I said and I omitted the word "not" in the first part of what scholar say. :roll: Sorry about that. I really do need to proof read what I say.

[mwc]

I agree with you, Deva. I wonder whatever possessed the author of the Book Of Revelation to write Jesus' character the way they did in that book since Jesus' personality in Revelation seems to be so entirely different than his personality in the gospels.

This assumes the author of Revelation knew the character of jesus from the gospels. Perhaps he was influenced by a different tradition?

 

mwc