Gospel of Thomas Saying 3
|
This Gospel of Thomas Commentary is part of the Gospel of Thomas page at Early Christian Writings. |
|
Funk's Parallels POxy654 3, GThom 113, GThom 51, Luke 17:20-21, Luke 17:22-25, Matt 24:23-38, Mark 13:21-23, DialSav 16, DialSav 30.
|
|
Visitor Comments There are other interesting parallels. See Deut. 30:11-14 and Romans 10:6-8. "When you know yourself then you will be known" suggests that the grammatically based distinction between subject and object vanishes when we enter the Kingdom. It suggests that our proclivity to make distinctions with our intellect obscures the unity of existence. Although this proclivity allows us to create "the world" (but only in our imagination), it also makes us miserable in it. It also leads us to do some very stupid things. There are no conceptual distinctions in the Kingdom of God. There is only life. Simply put, this saying conveys the fact that God did not give us religion. We must find our own way. Poverty is not knowing your self, for even then the birds and the fish proceed you. The first two sentences suggest that Jesus is saying that many, if not all, of the leaders of Christians do not know what they are talking about when they talk about where sincere Christians are going and where true Christianity is going, which is to the kingdom. Only if we could reach deep within ourselves God is in us. The daily evidence of God in us can be seen around us. Where is God? He does not sit in heaven or hell. He is omnipotent...just being and just here. That's a consolation. And my personal favourite verse. Poverty is a technical term ---poverty of egoism is the target. Then you will know yourself. Knowing yourself entails overcoming your lower nature [cf nafs], one becomes impoverished of its contaminants so to say "When you know yourself then you will be known"....is synonymous with "know thyself." Once we start to know ourselves then we may realize God's existense is within as it is outside of ourselves, hence finding our value among all other beings in this world. Here lies the link between Christianity and all religions of the world. Another point worth mentioning is that about "being known"; to truly know yourself will make you known to others as this is the most difficult spiritual task known to man, and other seekers will wish to know how you got there...see what happend to Jesus! For further reading check what Buddha has to say on self knowledge, and even spiritualists such as Gurdjieff or Ouspenski. Jesus is saying the kingdom is within us. Anything outside of that realization has no value. This verse expresses what I deduced about a decade ago--that the Kingdom is not a physical place or a location so much as a state of mind. The way to get there is to live a good life, not to travel. It also has implications about churches--why would one piece of land be considered holy when the Kingdom itself, the Holy of Holies, is inside us? as Buddha said, know thyself and know ten thousand things, which is his way of saying you will know the source. In Buddhism the source is named nothing, which in it contains everything and the infinite. God dwells in each of us. When we mutually acknowledge His presence, we take a step individually and as collectively toward peace, brotherhood, and equality. |
Scholarly Quotes Funk and Hoover point out a similar text in Baruch 3:29-30: "Has anyone climbed up to heaven and found wisdom? Has anyone returned with her from the clouds? Has anyone crossed the sea and discovered her? Has anyone purchased her with gold coin?" (The Five Gospels, p. 472) Marvin Meyer quotes a similar expression from the Manichaean Psalm Book 160,20-21: "Heaven's kingdom, look, it is inside us, look, it is outside us. If we believe in it, we shall live in it for ever." (The Gospel of Thomas: The Hidden Sayings of Jesus, p. 69) Robert M. Grant and David Noel Freedman write: "The Greek version of Thomas says that the kingdom is within; the Coptic adds that it is also outside, perhaps because the Naassenes spoke of the kingdom as 'hidden and manifest at the same time.' According to Saying 111, the kingdom 'is spread out upon the earth, and men do not see it.' It should be noted that Thomas does not speak of 'the kingdom of God.' Indeed, 'God' is mentioned only in Saying 97, where he is evidently subordinated to Jesus ('gods' occurs in Saying 31). Wherever the synoptic parallels speak of God, Thomas deletes the word or substitutes 'heaven' or 'the Father' or 'my Father.' Like other Gnostics, he prefers not to use the ordinary term 'God'; he may be reserving it for use as the name of an inferior power." (The Secret Sayings of Jesus, p. 121) J. D. Crossan writes: "most likely, the correct restoration for the fragmented line 15 of Papyrus Oxyrhynchus 654 is 'king[dom of God],' the same phrase that appears in lines 7-8 of Papyrus Oxyrhynchus 1. Both those expressions from the Greek fragments of the Gospel of Thomas met with, according to Harold Attridge, 'deliberate deletion' in their respective Coptic translations at Gospel of Thomas 3 and 27" (The Historical Jesus, p. 284). Stevan Davies writes: "When people actualize their inherent ability to perceive through primordial light, they perceive the world to be the kingdom of God (Gos. Thom. 3, 113)." (http://www.misericordia.edu/users/davies/thomas/jblprot.htm) Robert M. Grant and David Noel Freedman write: "The Kingdom of God is no longer an eschatological reality. It has become a present, 'spiritual' phenomenon. It is 'spread out upon the earth and men do not see it' (113/111). It is not in the heaven or in the sea (3/2; cf. Rom. 10:6-7) but 'within you and outside you.' The inwardness of the Kingdom is derived, in Gnostic exegesis, from Luke 17:21; the outwardness probably refers to its heavenly or incomprehensible nature. In any event, it is not future, but present." (Gnosticism & Early Christianity, p. 187) Funk and Hoover write: "This phrase ['know yourselves'] is a secular proverb often attributed to Socrates. It is used here to refer to the self as an entity that has descended from God - a central gnostic concept. 'Children of the living Father' (v. 4) is also a gnostic phrase (compare Thomas 49-50), which refers to people who, by virtue of their special knowledge, are able to reascend to the heavenly domain of their Father. Parallels in more orthodox Christian texts indicate that followers of Jesus are also called 'children.' The use of the term 'poverty' for life outside true knowledge (v. 5) is typical of gnostic writings." (The Five Gospels, pp. 472-473) Bruce Chilton writes: "In fact, the closest analogy in the Synoptic Gospels to the rhetoric of the argument in Thomas 3 is attributed not to Jesus but to his Sadducean opponents (Matt. 22:23-33; Mark 12:18-27; Luke 20:27-40). They set up a hypothetical question of a woman who marries a man, who then dies childless. Following the practice commanded in Deut. 23:5-6, his brother marries her to continue the deceased's name, but then he dies childless as well, as do his five remaining brothers. The point of this complicated scenario is to ridicule the idea of the resurrection of the dead by asking whose wife the woman will be in the resurrection. As in Thomas 3, the syllogism is designed to provoke mockery of the position that is attacked, and it depends on the prior acceptance of what it is reasonable to say and of how logic should be used. In short, both the Sadducees' argument and the argument of the 'living Jesus' commend themselves to schoolmen and seem as far from the ethos of Jesus himself as the concern for what the leaders of churches might say. Those who would attribute the form of Thomas 3 to Jesus reveal only their own uncritical attachment to a source that is fashionable in certain circles simply because it is not canonical." (Pure Kingdom, p. 72)
Gospel of Thomas Saying 4 |
|
This Gospel of Thomas Commentary is part of the Gospel of Thomas page at Early Christian Writings. |
|
Funk's Parallels POxy654 4, Luke 10:21-22, Luke 13:30, Matt 11:25-30, Matt 19:27-30, Matt 20:16, Mark 10:27-31, InThom 7:1-4.
|
|
Visitor Comments There are some striking resemblances with the "Conversation with God" books by Neale Donald Walsche, especially about us becoming one. To me, the most profound and important statement in Neale Walshe's books is "There is only One of us." We don't so much become one as we are already and always One and have forgotten. Why does a man full of life experience ask a new born babe who cannot even speak about the place of life? In this action, we see his humbleness, respect, and will of seeking life that is known through the Lord, who sees all of God's children as the same. Death as we perceive it as adults is the remembrance of the death of our innate selves when we found our parents were not the parents we expected them to be. Learn from the child and you will not taste death. The infant knows life. But the infant does not know "place". The concept of place is a feature of the real world which the intellect of the infant has not yet created. Asking the infant about the place of life is as foolish and as wise as wondering "where" the life which you know and which is your birthright really "is" in "the real world". (Note: This saying is best and completely understood when within speaking distance of an infant.) Once life is known, all are the same, of the same soul. This passage means that the correlation between wisdom and knowledge about the truth of life does not depend on a person's age in years. Our chronological age is not concurrent with our soul's age. We are being told that if we are wise, we will find "what we are looking for" (whatever this thing is we all feel we are seeking) we will not find it in any one person of any one age. Some people live all their lives with dirty, greedy souls and never seem to get it. Some people were born knowing "it." You get into the club when you figure this out, there's no age limit, and some never make it. {Comparisons are better made to parallels of everyday life than to other texts.} No oneness with the divine can happen while we are continually self identifying and self determining...only when we surrender all that we are to the divine can we become one with that which is eternal...what human is more surrendered to what they are and what may come than a seven day old child that has no point of referance to for which self identification can be made, and to whom even basic sustenance must be provided in faith to the mother. The soul is eternal. Our life on Earth is but a mere speck of time. The old man, who has not enjoyed spiritual communion with God for such a long time, seeks communion through the baby who has only recently departed the bliss of the heavenly Father. The aged man must realize that he is the babe - spiritually speaking. He must realize that he knows as much of the spiritual world as the babe knows of the physical world. This attitude of humility is one aspect of his salvation. I believe that there may be an even deeper meaning here. Perhaps the term "single one" refers to the original Adam. Perhaps "single one" means exactly that, one individual unit. It could also be the reuniting of the spiritual enlightenment (Holy Ghost) that exists in all believer. It is not a matter of who is first or last but of timing, of readiness or ripeness. The aged man in calendar years should seek that childlike element now encrusted by accretions if his quest is to succeed For me this seems to have echoes of Eastern (perhaps Buddhist) ideas, particularly of the concept of the Bodhisattva. The old person has the realization that the child's experiences, however limited, are unique. By learning from the child the old person better prepares for the time in which 'he shall live; and there are many first who shall be last', that is, the time in which he will return to physical life to help along any souls traveling on a path toward oneness. Just a thought. The reason the man "aged in days" would ask the child about the "place of life" is that the child has just come from the source from which we all come, and to which we all return. "They will become a single one" when they realize the true unitive nature of our existence. We are One. The illusion of our separateness is due to our egocentric perpective. When you realize this, you will not taste death. The child has yet to learn the concepts of earthly life ... such as a denial of self in order to belong, respecting your elders as opposed to listening to your own heart; all the illusions our society demands we buy into in order to be safe, when in fact there is nothing to be safe from if you see. Hence, the child has not been brainwashed. Jesus said to be like the children. Children aren't afraid to say hello to strangers; we teach them this fear. In modern times, we issue birth certificates to memorialize that a child, understood to be its body, has come into existence on a specific date, at a specific place, has a specific earthly father, and has been given a proper name which differentiates it from all others. In the time of Jesus and in the Jewish culture, these tasks were the responsibility of the parents, and traditionally names were given on the eighth day. Jesus would have disagreed with birth certificates. He said, blessed are they that were before they came into being. He said that we should call no man "Father." He said our true "Father" was in Heaven. And he never referred to either himself or his "Father" by name. Naming is the first step in a very popular deception, taught by parents, which lead little ones to perceive that they are a separated self, defined by their body, and are independent of the eternal One. To see the wisdom of a child of seven days, you need to recognize the deception which begins on the eighth. |
Scholarly Quotes Jack Finegan refers to a quote by Hippolytus from a Gospel according to Thomas used by the Naassenes: "He who seeks me will find me in children from seven years old; for there in the fourteenth age, having been hidden, I shall become manifest." (Hidden Records of the Life of Jesus, p. 243) Jack Finegan writes: "The saying ascribed by Hippolytus (Text 85 §282) to the Gospel according to Thomas, as used by the Naassenes, bears at least some similarity ot the present text, and this makes it probable that the work to which Hippolytus referred was the same as that with which we are dealing, although the Naassenes may have had their own revision of it. Likewise the Manicheans may have made use of the Gospel according to Thomas, which would account for Cyril's statements (§285) connecting it with them; but since the Gospel must now be dated well prior to Hippolytus (230) it could not have been written, as Cyril claimed, by a disciple of Mani, since the latter only began to preach in 242 (§115)." (Hidden Records of the Life of Jesus, p. 246) Marvin Meyer writes of the words "a little child seven days old" in the Gospel of Thomas: "This phrase probably indicates an uncircumcised child (a Jewish boy was to be circumcised on the eighth day), otherwise a child of the sabbath of the week of creation (compare Genesis 2:2-3)." (The Gospel of Thomas: The Hidden Sayings of Jesus, p. 70) Gerd Ludemann writes: "This verse contains the Gnostic theme of the child as a revealer (cf. 22.1-2). In Gnostic texts Jesus appears as a little child (Acts of John 88), or Gnostic teachers claim to have seen a little newborn child which is identical with the divine Word (Valentinus)." (Jesus After 2000 Years, p. 592) Jean Doresse writes: "Jesus, 'he who was not born of woman' (16), is also frequently called 'Jesus the Living'. Could it also perhaps be Jesus who is referred to under the appearance of 'the child of seven days' (4)?" (The Secret Books of the Egyptian Gnostics, p. 344) Robert M. Grant and David Noel Freedman write: "If knowledge about the 'place of life' can be given to an old man by an infant, it is evident that the knowledge is not ordinary human wisdom but something derived from revelation. This saying is probably the Gnostic explanation of the words of Jesus in Mark 10:14-15: 'Let the children come to me and do not hinder them, for of such is the kingdom of God; verily I say to you, whoever does not receive the kingdom of God as a child will not enter into it' (cf., Matthew 19:14; cf. also Matthew 11:25; Luke 10:21). A little farther on in both Mark and Matthew we find the words which Thomas has added to the statement about the old man and the infant. 'Many who are first will be last' (Mark 10:31; Matthew 19:30; 20:16; and Luke 13:30). The Coptic version has omitted the words, found in the synoptic gospels and in the Greek Thomas, 'and the last, first.' These words are necessary in order to lead to the conclusion, 'And they will become a single one.' Those who have been last will become first and will be united in the unity which means transcending differences of age and of sex (cf., Sayings 10, 16, 24, 49, 50, 75, 103, 112). It means returning to the original unity of creation (if one can speak of creation in a Gnostic system)." (The Secret Sayings of Jesus, p. 122-123) F. F. Bruce writes: "The point of this saying is at least superficially similar to that of the canonical sayings about children, such as 'whoever does not receive the kingdom of God like a child shall not enter it' (Mark 10.15). After the words 'many that are first will be last', the Greek text (P. Oxy. 654.4) adds 'and the last, first' (cf. Mark 10.31, etc.); this has probably been omitted by accident from our Coptic text. The 'single one' at the end of the saying is the personality that has finally transcended differentiation of age and sex - the latter is an ideal which finds recurring expression in the Gospel of Thomas (cf. Sayings 11, 16, 23, 49, 75, 106, 114). The underlying thought is that Adam, as first created, was androgynous, before being divided into male and female (Genesis 2.21-23); the pristine arrangement will be restored in the life to come. [This belief is ascribed to the Naassenes by Hippolytus, Refutation v. 6.5; 7.14 f.]" (Jesus and Christian Origins Outside the New Testament, p. 114) Joseph A. Fitzmyer writes: "Evelyn White (p. 16) has a remark that is worth quoting here. 'The Saying - however we restore it - is a remarkable instance of that salient characteristic of the Oxyrhynchus collection as a whole - the mixture of elements at once parallel to and divergent from the Synoptics. For while the first part of the Saying has nothing exactly similar in the Synoptics, it nevertheless seems related to a clearly marked group of episodes in the Gospels. On the other hand the second part of the Saying corresponds exactly with the Synoptic version. . . . The Synoptics and the Saying are indeed so close that it is incredible that the two are independent, and the evidence . . . goes to show that it is the writer of the Sayings who is the borrower.'" (Essays on the Semitic Background of the New Testament, pp. 380-381) Joseph A. Fitzmyer writes: "The heavily Gnostic character of many of the sayings in the Coptic Gospel has already led to the conclusion that the latter is most likely the Manichean version of which Cyril speaks. The deliberate change of ending in the fourth saying, which is paralleled in the Manichean Kephalaia, is certainly evidence in this direction, as H.-Ch. Puech has already pointed out." (Essays on the Semitic Background of the New Testament, p. 418) Funk and Hoover write: "Its affinity with other sayings in Thomas relate the status of a child to salvation. In Thom 22:2, Jesus says, 'These nursing babies are like those who enter the <Father's> domain.' The image of the baby or child appealed to the gnostic sensibility as an appropriate image for salvation. The quest for life is also a Thomean theme: 'Congratulations to the person who has toiled and has found life' (Thomas 58). The similarity of theme and language suggests that Thomas has revised the saying to his own perspectives." (The Five Gospels, p. 473) J. D. Crossan writes: "Marcovich (60; see Schrage, 1964a:258) concludes that the Coptic translator or copyist has omitted 'and the last first' by simple oversight. This means that the two-stich aphorism was originally in Thomas, and in the Markan sequence and opening rather than in the Q formulation. It also means that the original chiastic two-stich aphorism was expanded by the addition of a third stich: 'and they will become one and the same' (Lambdin: 118) or, possibly better, 'and they shall become a single one' (Guillaumont, 1959:5; Wilson, 1973:511)." (In Fragments, pp. 45-46) J. D. Crossan writes: "Klijn (271) has noted that 'three different words are used to render the word "single one"' in Thomas: (1) wa (11, 22, 106); (2) wa wot (4, 22, 23); (3) monachos (16, 49, 75). The meaning is the same, and that last (Greek) expression 'cannot have its usual meaning "monk" in this early text' (Till: 452 note 2). The meaning of this very important Thomistic theme has been summarized by Klijn (272) as follows: '(a) The word "single one" is equivalent to the elect and saved ones. (b) Originally man was a "single one," but he became "two." In order to be saved he has to become a "single one" again. This means that he has to return to his original state. (c) The original "single one" has become "two" by becoming male and female. This means that originally man was not male and female. As a result we may say that the Gospel of Thomas speaks about salvation as a return to the original state and that it rejects the division of man into male and female.' When Gos. Thom. 4 is compared with Gos. Thom. 22, one can conclude that 'becoming as a child, and entering the kingdom, and achieving a stte of asexuality are very nearly interchangeable terms' (Kee, 1963:313; see also Menard, 1975:83)." (In Fragments, p. 46) Stevan Davies writes: "A person who has actualized the primordial light has become (is reborn as) an infant (saying 22) precisely seven days of age (saying 4), for he dwells in the seventh day of Genesis." (http://www.misericordia.edu/users/davies/thomas/jblprot.htm) Funk and Hoover write: "Becoming 'a single one' (v. 3) is a motif that appears elsewhere in Thomas. In Thom 22:5, male and female are turned into a single one; in Thomas 23, one and two become a single one; the two made into one become children of Adam in Thom 106:1. The last reference suggests the androgynous state before the creation of human beings, when male and female had not yet been differentiated. In gnostic theory, Adam and Eve were created by a lesser god, who bungled the job in making two sexes. These ideas are foreign to Jesus." (The Five Gospels, p. 473) Marvin Meyer writes: "This theme (becoming one, the two becoming one) occurs in Gospel of Thomas sayings 4, 22, 23, 48, and 106, as well as elsewhere in ancient literature. It is often associated with the primordial union achieved in sexual intercourse (for the Hebrews, heterosexual intercourse; for the Greeks, homosexual or heterosexual intercourse) as the two joined together at the beginning become one again (compare Genesis 2:21-24; Plato, Symposium 192DE). By extension, this oneness can designate an integrated existence beyond all the divisive features of human life." (The Gospel of Thomas: The Hidden Sayings of Jesus, p. 70)
Gospel of Thomas Saying 5 |
|
This Gospel of Thomas Commentary is part of the Gospel of Thomas page at Early Christian Writings. |
|
Funk's Parallels POxy654 5, POxy 654 6:4, GThom 6:4, Luke 8:16-17, Luke 12:1-3, Matt 10:26-33, Mark 4:21-23, Oxyrhynchus Shroud.
|
|
Visitor Comments Listen to what God is saying to you in a continuing dialogue which you have been failing to hear. You pray. God answers. Learn how to listen and see what is being offered to you. Know what the Gospel of Thomas is and its hidden meaning will become clear to you. The Gospel of Thomas did not remain buried forever, and its meaning will not be hidden forever. No secret remains a secret forever. Be aware of your own and others' thoughts and you will become aware of the emotions which drive them. In doing so, the buried self is raised to consciousness. When you know who you are, you will know all. I believe this means that we were given intuition as a gift. Go with your instincts. Everything you need to know about anything has already been given to you in your heart and conscience. Go with your first impression, what your heart tells you--because it's right--the voice of god. Every fraud will be revealed sooner or later, but if you fall for the fraud you weren't listening to your instincts--you weren't listening to God. This reminds me of "Know the truth and the truth will make you free." It seems to me that the more truthful we become to ourselves, the aware we become of the truth of others, regardless of whether or not the are telling the truth. As we devote less mental energy towrd the task of lying to ourselves, that energy is redirected to our intuition. If we can not understand what we know about God now, how will we be able to understand the things hidden from us. To me Jesus is saying here that by experiencing the moment in the moment rather than entertaining fears about 'that which is hidden' one becomes aware of the hidden, that is, the ultimate reality. If we can grab hold of and live out the simple, basic truths that we know, the deeper ones will be revealed in time. To paraphrase these words in a current idiom, "It's all as plain as the nose on your face." There is much in front of you that you see, but there is more that you must look for, more perceptions that are within and without your immediate sight. If you are still within yourself, and can connect that which you can see, that which is hidden will be made manifest. There is nothing in the Universe(s) that you will not learn if you seek to know. |
Scholarly Quotes Marvin Meyer quotes a parallel in a saying of Jesus from Manichaean Kephalaia LXV 163,26-29: "Understand what is in front of your face, and then what is hidden from you will be disclosed to you." (The Gospel of Thomas: The Hidden Sayings of Jesus, p. 71) Funk gives the citation from the Oxyrhynchus Shroud inscription: "Jesus says, 'Nothing has been buried that will not be raised.'" (New Gospel Parallels, v. 2., p. 107) Doresse gives the translation: "Jesus says: 'There is nothing buried which shall not be raised up.'" (The Secret Books of the Egyptian Gnostics, p. 356) Fitzmyer gives the Greek of the inscription found on the shroud discovered in Behnesa, "legei Ihsous: ouk estin teqamme non ho ouk egerqhsetai." Joseph A. Fitzmyer says that the inscription "is dated palaeographically to the fifth or sixth century A.D." (Essays on the Semitic Background of the New Testament, p. 383) Robert M. Grant and David Noel Freedman write: "But it seems hard to believe that this is the sense here, where - as in the rest of Thomas - there is no mention of resurrection. Perhaps one might regard the inscription as an orthodox, or semi-orthodox, revision of the saying in Thomas." (The Secret Sayings of Jesus, p. 125) Jean Doresse writes: "In its Coptic edition, the work does contain Gnostic additions or corrections; but the work as a whole contains elements which are scarcely consonant with Gnosticism. There is, for example, the allusion to the resurrection of the body, in Saying 5 of the Greek edition - no doubt this is suppressed in the Coptic edition because it so blatantly scandalized the Gnostics who used the work." (The Secret Books of the Egyptian Gnostics, p. 348) Funk and Hoover write of the saying "there is nothing hidden that will not be revealed" as follows: "The meaning assigned to the saying varies with the context in which it appears. In Mark 4:22 it refers to Mark's theory about the enigmatic character of the parables. In Luke 12:2 and Thom 6:5 it cautions against hypocrisy or speaking falsely. In Matt 10:26, which is the parallel to Luke 12:2, cited about from Q, it enjoins the disciples to preach boldly. Luke also records a version in 8:17, which he hsa taken from Mark; it ins context in Luke 8, it legitimizes the mission of the Christian movement." (The Five Gospels, pp. 475-476) R. McL. Wilson writes: "Logion 5 calls for a somewhat fuller notice. Discussing a saying quoted by Clement of Alexandria from the Traditions of Matthias (QAUMASON TA MARONTA), Puech compares this logion in Thomas and remarks that it may perhaps derive from the Gospel of the Hebrews; in which case it would afford no proof of a Gnostic origin. More important is the point which emerges from a comparison with the Oxyrhynchus fragments: in POx 654, unfortunately fragmentary, the saying is slightly longer than in the Coptic. After the words just quoted, both continue 'For there is nothing hidden which will not be manifest,' but the Greek alone has a further line, completing a parallelism, 'and buried which . . .'. An inscription on a shroud, also found at Oxyrhynchus, reads 'Jesus says, There is nothing buried which will not be raised,' and on the basis of this Puech restores the text to include a reference to the resurrection. Other scholars had done the same before him, but without the support of the shround inscription. As a mere conjecture this restoration would have to be regarded as uncertain, but the shroud inscription, quite recently discovered, adds materially to its probability. Now the saying is quoted in the shorter (Coptic) form in the Manichean Kephalai, and Puech argues that the reference to the resurrection has been excised by a Gnostic editor in whose theology the doctrine of the resurrection had no place. If this be so, we should have here an instance of a gnosticizing redaction of an originally more orthodox document. Fitzmyer, following Bultmann and Jeremias, prefers to consider the longer version as a secondary expansion of the canonical saying, noting that the short version is the one found in our Gospels, but this is to raise a different question: which of the two forms represents the authentic words of Jesus. It is not entirely impossible that the short and canonical version is original, but has been expanded in POx 654, and that subsequently the reference to the resurrection has been removed by a Gnostic editor. Such an example may serve to indicate the complexity of the problems raised by the new document." (Studies in the Gospel of Thomas, pp. 28-29)
Gospel of Thomas Saying 6 |
|
This Gospel of Thomas Commentary is part of the Gospel of Thomas page at Early Christian Writings. |
|
Funk's Parallels POxy654 6, GThom 14:1, POxy1 27, GThom 27, GThom 104, POxy654 5:2-3, GThom 5:2, Tob 4:15, Luke 11:1-4, Luke 6:31, Luke 8:16-17, Luke 12:1-3, Matt 6:2-4, Matt 6:5-15, Matt 6:16-18, Matt 7:12, Matt 10:26-33, Mark 4:21-22, Did 8:1-3, POxy1224 2, Did 1:1-2.
|
|
Visitor Comments Questions about fasting relate to the body; Jesus points the way to the truth that those who worship God must do so in truth and in spirit. The specific questions were ignored as irrelevant, not the important thing to know. The thing to realize is that you are engaged in a continuing dialogue with God (and never not in the presence of God) in which every act of your life is in effect a prayer to God. In return, God is continually speaking to you, revealing all that you really need to know. Learn to see and hear this. From these words, we can see that the disciples are asking for methods, just as the Pharisees of that time who follow rules only for the sake of the rules, no heart, no love. Action that does not follow one's true heart is lying. I like that Jesus is stating things in a much more simple manner than many would like to believe he is here. The questions asked of him are very specific in nature, not unlike many of the same specific things people pray for or about. Saying 6 helps to remind the world that such things are constant and never ending. Praying for example does not end just because you say amen. Our life is a constant prayer, or a communication with God if you will. Meaning that, just because we aren't openly speaking with him, nothing about us is out of his realm. In a way I'd like to think that part of what Jesus has said here is that the specific things in life that we no doubt "worry" ourselves with, need not be so specific and complexing at all. The simple truth of it all is that everything eventually ends up where it started...the heaven that is in you and all around you. If one follows a path dictated by others, you will be lying and doing what you hate. The "divine" is aware of you anyway. Again we being told to do whatever our hearts tell us is right. Evil and sin come from not listening to or rebelling against that little voice of conscience that is our gift. Jesus was telling them, Hey do what you feel is right--trust yourself that you are doing good, and you will not be surprised that it's also what God wants for you. There are no rituals that can make you a good person, only good intended actions and thoughts. Whether this was transposed with 14 or not, the meaning is the same either way. Old rules and "laws" are meaningingless. As long as you are true to yourself and God, you will not do evil. If this verse is accurate, the way he utterly ignores their specific questions suggests a very broad rejection of ALL the meticulous old laws. It won't do you any good to lie, Heaven promises to expose you...So tell the truth and take your licks, better here than there. And you know all those things you say you hate, i.e. greed, injustice, liars, cheats and thieves, well you better make sure you are not any of those things because Heaven promises you judgment "by your own words" i.e. I've found to my regret that I'm guilty of gossiping, complaining and murmuring even though I am constantly stating how much I 'hate' these things. Heaven is just and by what measure I judged will I be judged. And all the praying and fasting and giving in the world won't prevent judgment. What of fasting? Prayer? Tzidakah? Diet? How shall we know what is right? Jesus said, "If you can perceive all of these things, the Universe and the Universal can perceive more and deeper than any can know, so don't lie, don't do what you know doesn't seem right. All that is hidden will be revealed before the Universe and the truth therein, and you will have to answer for it, like it or not." This verse seems to parallel the story where Jesus tells his disciples that all food is good to eat--the message is that evil comes from within, as does good. In this statement, Christ tells us the walk, and to get walking. Be careful that devotional activities don't hinder your work in the real world. |
Scholarly Quotes Funk and Hoover write: "The answers Jesus is represented as giving in 6:2-6 appear to be unrelated to the questions about fasting, praying, and giving posed by the disciples in v. 1. Jesus does answer these three questions directly in 14:1-3. The discrepancy between Thom 6:1 and 2-6 has led some scholars to speculate that the texts of Thomas 6 and 14 have somehow been confused." (The Five Gospels, p. 476) Fitzmyer reconstructs the lines appended to saying six in the Greek fragment as follows: "[Ha]ppy is [he who does not do these things. For all] will be mani[fest before the Father who] is [in heaven.]" Fitzmyer writes: "Is this part of the same saying? If so, then we have a different ending in the Greek that is not found in the Coptic. J. Doresse (Thomas, p. 91) treats this as part of a distinct saying. He has in his favour the fact that makarios is preserved in the Coptic of the following saying. But it would then seem that we must either shorten our restoration of l. 39 and the beginning of l. 40 or suppose that the usual introduciton, 'Jesus says', has been omitted. Neither seems possible. Moreover, the letters that remain on the following lines do not seem to agree with any possible reconstruction of the Greek of the following Coptic saying. For an attempt to reconstruct it as a separate saying, see M. Marcovich, JTS 20 (1969) 66-7." (Essays on the Semitic Background of the New Testament, p. 387) Other scholars consider this part of P. Oxy. 654 simply to represent the saying concerning the lion who is fortunate to be eaten by man. Gerd Ludemann writes: "The disciples' question is about fasting, prayer, almsgiving and the food laws. The first three also appear in the regulations about piety in Matt. 6.1-18 (cf. Tobit 12.8) and are discussed once again later (Thomas 14; cf. 104). In the present verse the question about food completes the sphere of the Jewish law." (Jesus After 2000 Years, p. 593) Jean Doresse writes: "'nothing hidden will fail to be revealed' no doubt refers to hidden virtues such as those mentioned by Jesus: they are preferable to ostentatious practices of piety, and will one day be made public." (The Secret Books of the Egyptian Gnostics, p. 371) Jack Finegan writes: "The reply of Jesus in Line 19, 'and what you hate, do not do,' is evidently derived from Tob 4:15, 'And what you hate, do not do to any one,' with omission of the words, 'to any one,' which reduces the saying from a form of the 'Golden Rule' to a self-centered saying." (Hidden Records of the Life of Jesus, p. 247) F. F. Bruce writes: "In this and other sayings (cf. Sayings 14, 27, 104) it is insisted that true fasting is abstinence from evil words and actions, not from indifferent things like food. The negative form of the golden rule, 'Do not [to others] what is hateful to yourselves', appears repeatedly in early Jewish ethics, e.g. Tobit 4.15 ('What you hate, do not to any one') and Hillel's words in TB Shabbath 31a ('What is hateful to you, do not to your fellow; this is the whole law; everything else is commentary')." (Jesus and Christian Origins Outside the New Testament, p. 115) J. D. Crossan writes: "This somewhat truncated version of the rule's negative formulation ['do not do what you hate', compared to Mt 7:12, Lk 6:31, Did 1:2b] has the following context. 'His disciples questioned Him and said to Him, "Do you want us to fast? How shall we pray? Shall we give alms? What diet shall we observe?" Jesus said, "Do not tell lies, and do not do what you hate, for all things are plain in the sight of Heaven. For nothing hidden will not become manifest, and nothing covered will remain without being uncovered.'" (In Fragments, p. 52) J. D. Crossan writes: "The text is found not only in the Coptic translation of Thomas, but also among the Oxyrhynchus Papyri fragments of the Greek Thomas in Oxy P 654. The badly mutilated Greek text has been restored from the Coptic version as follows: [ha mis]eite me poiet[e] or '[what] you [ha]te do not do' (Hofius: 41; see also Fitzmyer, 1974:385; Marcovich: 65). The Coptic version is a close translation of that sequence: 'that which you hate, do not do' (with Wilson, 1973:511; rather than Guillaumont, 1959:5; or Lambdin: 118). Thus the sequence here is as in Tob. 4:15, ho miseis, medeni poieses, although the former is plural 'you' while this latter is singular 'you.' Those differences are dictated primarily by context. It is, of course, quite unlikely that Thomas is in any way quoting directly from Tobit (Menard, 1975:87). But his negative version says: What you hate (done to you) do not do (to others)." (In Fragments, pp. 52-53) |