Posted on 10/09/2005 11:50:56 AM PDT by PatrickHenry
There is a reason Thomas was rejected as legitimate scripture. You would have to reject much of the Bible to justify Thomas's writings. There were plenty counterfeits producing so-called scripture. Paul specifically mentions them.
The Gospel of Thomas was discovered in 1945 at Nag Hammadi, along with many other texts. It is a Coptic translation, of a Greek translation, of some of Jesus' oral Aramaic sayings (quite a pedigree, and certainly opens the door for literary license).
I can find no evidence that the Catholic Church has tried to suppress this work, but if there is any real disagreement, it comes from the following passage:
GoT 114: Simon Peter said to them, "Let Mary leave us, for women are not worthy of life." Jesus said, "I myself shall lead her in order to make her male, so that she too may become a living spirit resembling you males. For every woman who will make herself male will enter the kingdom of heaven."
Given the...ahem...flavor of middle eastern cultures then and now, I can easily imagine a sexist attitude towards women. I can also imagine Christ saying to Simon Peter as a paraphrase of the above quote, "Ok, if only males can enter Heaven, then I'll make her male. Will that satisfy your prejudice?"
Do I consider the Gospel of Thomas a true, inspired work? I am undecided, but because of it's early date (possibly written before 100 A.D.), I think it a valuable read.
BTW, would you kindly list for me the passages in the Gospel of Thomas that contradict the Bible? Other than the verse I just quoted to you, that is.
What in tarnation does I.D. have to do with "consequences and accountability?" I've never heard anyone in the ID movement claiming such a thing.
the lies of omission are legion.
Care to name a few?
Perhaps not, but the consensus among the Early Fathers, like St. Irenaeus, was that it is fradulant and heretical, being the main text of the Gnostics.
BTW, are you a modern-day Gnostic? I was not aware that the ancient heresy was making a comeback. There truly is nothing new under the sun.
Indeed, Gnosticism is alive and well, although I am not one of it's members. But it is amusing to be so quickly labeled as a gnostic "heretic" simply because I've read a something outside approved Church doctrine. Hmmm...I wonder just how many religions are so afraid that their "god" would be torn down and invalidated by the mere reading of other text and commentary. Well, I can think of one such major religion that has recently changed the way we live.
But your opinion of me is irrelevant, for God knows my heart...and He's the only one who really counts.
BTW, are you aware that the word, "Gnostic" comes from the Greek word, "gnosis"...which literally means "knowledge"? I thought not.
"Ask, and it shall be given you; seek, and ye shall find; knock, and it shall be opened unto you:" (Mat 7:7)
Forgive me, I must go. I hear sheep bleating...
I sincerely apologize. It was my perception from earlier posters that they were all too willing to attack, but not back up their claims with any evidence. I erroneously and unfairly lumped you into the same group. Please forgive me.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.