Green Gaia
Veteran Member
Beyond Belief : The Secret Gospel of Thomas by Dr. Elaine Pagels. This book has been the topic of some discussion in the UU forum and one that I am currently reading. I recommend it to all.
-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
Beyond Belief : The Secret Gospel of Thomas by Dr. Elaine Pagels
- Thread starter Green Gaia
- Start date
James the Persian
Dreptcredincios Crestin
Well, assuming the quote is actually representative of what Elaine Pagels has written, it seems she's made some interesting historical blunders. The first list of the New Testament canon as we have it is from St. Athanasios, not Irenaeos and dates from 367, not 357. In addition, this was the personal view of one Church Father and was not binding on the Church as a whole. The first council to agree with St. Athanasios' canon was the Council of Hippo in 393, but again this was a local council and not binding on the whole Church. This canon did, however, gradually come to be accepted by the almost the whole Church (the Ethiopians still have a larger canon) in the early part of the 5th century. Whilst this does not directly bear on the authenticity or otherwise of the Gospel of Thomas, it does suggest that the author's research is either poorer than it should be or deliberately deceitful. Likewise, I find it odd that the quoted text suggests that St. Irenaios promoted the Gospel of John over Thomas without revealing that when Irenaios mentions the Gnostic Gospels he does so as examples of spurious writings invented by the Gnostic community. Of course, I shouldn't be surprised given Elaine Pagels' obvious wish to revive the Gnostic heresy even going so far as to attribute to Gnosticism some kind of early feminism even though this is in deirect contradiction of the rampant misogyny in certain Gnostic texts. She certainly is not an unbiased academic, but rather one with an agenda.
James
James
I can see why the Gospel of Thomas was not recognized by the Catholic Church, verse 12 is in direct conflict with the Catholic teaching that Peter was the first Pope.
12 The disciples said to Jesus, "We know that you are going to leave us. Who will be our leader?" Jesus said to them, "No matter where you are you are to go to James the Just, for whose sake heaven and earth came into being."
12 The disciples said to Jesus, "We know that you are going to leave us. Who will be our leader?" Jesus said to them, "No matter where you are you are to go to James the Just, for whose sake heaven and earth came into being."
Given ...
gMk 4:22
... it looks as if Luke is a redaction of Mark, suggesting that Thomas is aware of Luke. This, in turn, argues for a 2nd Century CE date, rendering Pagels' eloquent and provocative claim somewhat problematic.For nothing is hidden except to be revealed, and nothing concealed except to be brought to light.
gLk 8:17For nothing is hidden that will not be revealed, and nothing concealed that will not be made known and brought to light.
gTh 5Yeshua says: Recognize Him in front of thy face, and what is hidden from thee shall be revealed to thee.
For there is nothing concealed which shall not be manifest, {and nothing buried that shall not be raised}
For there is nothing concealed which shall not be manifest, {and nothing buried that shall not be raised}
James the Persian
Dreptcredincios Crestin
Sabio,Sabio said:
There was no Roman Catholic church at the time the Gospel of Thomas was rejected and of the 5 Patriarchates of the Pentarchy only one (Rome) ever thought that Peter was the first Pope. The other four did not then and do not now. In fact it is this rejection of papal supremacy that is one of the two major points that separates us from Rome to this day (the other four Patriarchates being Orthodox). There is absolutely no chance that Papal supremacy was even considered at this time.
I also agree with Deut - it's very likely that the Gospel of Thomas is a second century writing which post-dates John's Gospel.
James
Green Gaia
Veteran Member
From http://www.religioustolerance.org/chr_ntb1.htm
The Gospel of John:
The early church father, Irenaeus, recorded the church tradition that this gospel was written by John, son of Zebedee. Others claimed that the author was an Elder John from Ephesus. Still others, attributed it to John, the "beloved disciple." Throughout most of the history of the church, the Gospel of John was believed to have been written by Jesus' disciple. Most liberal scholars today believe that it was written by a group of authors. There is speculation that much of the gospel was written by a single, unknown writer, and that a second, later individual reworked the text in order to make it conform to contemporary church teaching. "John" contains a great deal of anti-Jewish sentiment. It holds the Jews and their descendants responsible for the execution of Jesus. It has largely responsible for inspiring Christians to violent anti-Semitic acts in the centuries since it was written.
Because of its theological principles and the emphasis on Jesus as the Son of God, it rapidly became the favorite gospel. It has remained the favorite today, particularly among conservative Christians. It was probably written between 85 and 100 CE, after believers in Jesus were expelled from Jewish synagogues.
The Gospel of Thomas:
Whereas John and the synoptic gospels include both the sayings of Jesus and a description of his birth, baptism, activities, followers, crucifixion, resurrection, etc., the Gospel of Thomas is basically a collection of 114 sayings of Jesus, including "wisdom sayings, parables, proverbs and prophecies." 18 Some theologians believe that it was first written about 60 CE and later expanded. It was written in Greek. Three fragments in Greek were found about 1900 CE. But a full Coptic (Native Egyptian) translation was unearthed in 1945 as part of the Nag Hammadi Library discovery. "The Gospel of Thomas has core elements as old as the synoptic gospels....in its later layer, Thomas is the record of a Christian community creatively accommodating influences from Gnosticism." It was probably because of this Gnostic content that the main Christian movement suppressed it and did not accept it into the Christian Scriptures (New Testament). It represents an independent tradition from the gospel of John and the synoptic gospels.
I'm still reading about all this and just find it very interesting.
The Gospel of John:
The early church father, Irenaeus, recorded the church tradition that this gospel was written by John, son of Zebedee. Others claimed that the author was an Elder John from Ephesus. Still others, attributed it to John, the "beloved disciple." Throughout most of the history of the church, the Gospel of John was believed to have been written by Jesus' disciple. Most liberal scholars today believe that it was written by a group of authors. There is speculation that much of the gospel was written by a single, unknown writer, and that a second, later individual reworked the text in order to make it conform to contemporary church teaching. "John" contains a great deal of anti-Jewish sentiment. It holds the Jews and their descendants responsible for the execution of Jesus. It has largely responsible for inspiring Christians to violent anti-Semitic acts in the centuries since it was written.
Because of its theological principles and the emphasis on Jesus as the Son of God, it rapidly became the favorite gospel. It has remained the favorite today, particularly among conservative Christians. It was probably written between 85 and 100 CE, after believers in Jesus were expelled from Jewish synagogues.
The Gospel of Thomas:
Whereas John and the synoptic gospels include both the sayings of Jesus and a description of his birth, baptism, activities, followers, crucifixion, resurrection, etc., the Gospel of Thomas is basically a collection of 114 sayings of Jesus, including "wisdom sayings, parables, proverbs and prophecies." 18 Some theologians believe that it was first written about 60 CE and later expanded. It was written in Greek. Three fragments in Greek were found about 1900 CE. But a full Coptic (Native Egyptian) translation was unearthed in 1945 as part of the Nag Hammadi Library discovery. "The Gospel of Thomas has core elements as old as the synoptic gospels....in its later layer, Thomas is the record of a Christian community creatively accommodating influences from Gnosticism." It was probably because of this Gnostic content that the main Christian movement suppressed it and did not accept it into the Christian Scriptures (New Testament). It represents an independent tradition from the gospel of John and the synoptic gospels.
I'm still reading about all this and just find it very interesting.
And others do not. There is more than enough uncertainty to reduce the status of Pagels views to that of pure speculation.Maize said:
Green Gaia
Veteran Member
Speculation, but still possible. I still find it interesting. 
Has anyone else actually read this book? Just curious.
Has anyone else actually read this book? Just curious.
Green Gaia
Veteran Member
Thanks for that riveting review of the book, joe.
Green Gaia
Veteran Member
I don't think the issue is addressed in the Thomas gospel, it is all "Jesus said.... " quotes.
Green Gaia
Veteran Member
From pg. 97 "But in 367 CE, Athanasius.... issued an Easter letter in which he demanded that Egyptian monks destory all such ("secret writings" "Gnostic") writings, except for those he specifically listed as "acceptable,"..... a list that constitutes virtually all of our present "New Testament."IacobPersul said:
This link seems to be a good source of the Gnostic Gospels along with other early Christian writings.
http://www.earlychristianwritings.com/
http://www.earlychristianwritings.com/
Green Gaia
Veteran Member
Yes, that's a good site for info.
Kirby does great work. Another site that I find pretty impressive is Wikipedia: Gospel of Thomas.Maize said:
robtex
Veteran Member
joeboonda said:
Joe, could you please provide the scripture that says Paul warned of gnostic beliefs and the one that says , "If one denies that Jesus came in the flesh, they are a liar and an anti-christ."
I am not contesting this just curious of your source within the bible.
Also when you say the Gospel of Thomas was not accepted in the holy bible. I would say that some sections of christianty accept some books and others do not. For instance the RCC does not recognize the chapters on Joseph Smith as part of the bible, but I wouldn't exactly phrase it as "the chapter's of Joseph Smith are not accepted in the holy bible " as much as I would say that the RCC does not recognize the chapters of J. Smith as a chapter in the Bible.
joeboonda
Well-Known Member
I will quote first and second Johnrobtex said:
I John 4:1-3 Beloved, believe not every spirit, but try the spirits whether they are of God; because many false prophets are gone out into the world; Hereby know ye the Spirit of God; Every spirit that confesseth that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh is of God; and every spirit that confesseth not that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh is not of God; and this is that spirit of antichrist, whereof ye have heard that it should come; and even now already is it in the world.
II John 1:7 For many deceivers are entered into the world, who confess not that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh. This is a deceiver and an antichrist.
Revelation 22:18-20 For I testify to every man that heareth the words of the prophecy of this book, If any man shall add unto these things, God shall add unto him the plagues that are written in this book; And if any man shall take away from the words of the book of this prophecy, God shall take away his part out of the book of life, and out of the holy city, and from the things which are written in this book. He which testifieth these thing saith, Surely I come Quickly. Amen, Even so, come, Lord Jesus.
The last quote may be just for that book, but seeing it is the final book that tells of the end of everything, and because, I am sure we are not to tamper with God's word, especially by adding more books that contradict the Holy Bible, and because of the strict criterion that had to be met by a book and its author, (they had to know Jesus or know someone who did, and had signs and wonders following, and the sign gifts have seemed to cease) I do not believe in any extra Biblical books to be from God. The gnostics were around back then, and did not believe Jesus came in the flesh. Hope that makes sense.
Green Gaia
Veteran Member
Deut. 32.8 said:
Thanks Deut!