GThomas as reaction to the proto-catholic reception of GMark and GMatthew

[mlinssen]

Re: characters Mary is interesting in that there's a standard pattern - a disciple rebukes her, Jesus defends her and rebukes the disciple
found in NT, G. Thomas, G. Mary, Pistis Sophia, G. Philip
that's an example of Thomas keeping the same character

LOL

found in G. Thomas, G. Mary, Pistis Sophia, G. Philip, NT
that's an example of all them keeping the same character

So how easy it is to drive your own evidence?

[mlinssen]

Marcion is the earliest. Not because there is any real strong evidence but because the Catholics were inherently dishonest and reactionary.

The strongest evidence is delivered by the "reconstructionists"

Who doesn't Roth even comment on "Do what you did earlier in Capernaum" when that so perfectly fits in *Ev yet not in Luke?

Why doesn't he want to restore the wineskins and the patch?

Here's what BeDuhn says on the matters:

Order: 5.37–38 precedes 5.36 Adam* 2.16; Epiphanius, Pan. 42.2.1;
Tertullian, Marc. 4.11.9–12; Ps.-Eph A 9, 15, 18. That Marcion’s text had the two parables of 5.36–38 in an order the reverse of that found in Mark, Matthew, and Luke is one of the best attested facts we have about the text, demonstrated by the order they are discussed in Tertullian, Epiphanius, Adamantius, and the anti-Marcionite tract Pseudo-Ephrem A. Particularly noteworthy is the fact that both Thomas 47 and the Diatessaron follow the order of the Evangelion.
This would suggest that the order now found in Luke may be a late conformation of the text to Matthew and Mark (apparently already so in Tertullian’s copy of Luke, see Marc. 3.15.5).

The most important of these is the expectation of the people of Nazara that Jesus would perform healings there as he had in Capharnaum (4.23)—before Jesus has ever been to Capharnaum in the narrative (4.31). It does no good to argue, as some have, that this narrative displacement is caused by Luke’s editorial decision to move the visit to Nazara to an earlier place in the activities of Jesus than where it stands in Mark (and Mat u hew), jumping it ahead of Capharnaum material. The offending phrase “what you did in Capharnaum do also here” is not found in Mark, but is unique to Luke, and presumably also found in the Evangelion.

No giant overwhelming evidence, no - but much more than mere reasonable doubt

[Kunigunde Kreuzerin]

Re: characters Mary is interesting in that there's a standard pattern - a disciple rebukes her, Jesus defends her and rebukes the disciple
found in NT, G. Thomas, G. Mary, Pistis Sophia, G. Philip
that's an example of Thomas keeping the same character

I see it very differently.

First of all, in the NT there is no "Mary" per se, but many. The „Mariam“ from GThomas certainly reflects the figure of Mary Magdalene from the late Catholic tradition, but in the NT she is always named or introduced in a pericope with her full name „Mary Magdalene“. The figure in GThomas looks at first glance more like the amalgam that the Catholic tradition had thrown together out of Mary Magdalene, Mary of Bethany, Mark‘s nameless woman with the Alabaster jar, Luke's prostitute, the woman caught in adultery and other women. It seems to me that in GThomas (logia 21 and 114) Mariam has rather the (late) role of a companion of Jesus than being a mere disciple. On the one hand she is part of the group, but she also asks about the disciples, apparently without counting herself among them, and thus sets herself apart from them.

Second, there is no passage in the NT where Mary Magdalene is rebuked by a disciple. Only in GLuke another Mary is rebuked by her sister Martha.

[mlinssen]

First of all, in the NT there is no "Mary" per se, but many. The „Mariam“ from GThomas certainly reflects the figure of Mary Magdalene from the late Catholic tradition, but in the NT she is always named or introduced in a pericope with her full name „Mary Magdalene“. The figure in GThomas looks at first glance more like the amalgam that the Catholic tradition had thrown together out of Mary Magdalene, Mary of Bethany, Mark‘s nameless woman with the Alabaster jar, Luke's prostitute, the woman caught in adultery and other women. It seems to me that in GThomas (logia 21 and 114) Mariam has rather the (late) role of a companion of Jesus than being a mere disciple. On the one hand she is part of the group, but she also asks about the disciples, apparently without counting herself among them, and thus sets herself apart from them.

Highly likely that is all you have to go on for your wild and crazy assertion above that

Who are you fooling, Kunigunde? Mariham in Thomas asks one single question "Who are your disciples like", and you dare to extrapolate that into the allegations above?
You must be really desperate! It is alright to say "Well I really can't make much if anything out of it"

[davidmartin]

Mary Magdalene isn't consistently named in the NT. In Luke 8 it's 'Mary called Magdalene' (ie Magdalene is an Aramaic nickname) that's not the same as 'Mary Magdalene'

The chances are there are various Mary's in the gospels - but more than likely some of them are identical to the one named Magdalene.
I see no reason why they should be a consistency rule for her mentions, how consistent are the disciples names when they are named? (i can't answer that right now, but i'm not sure it's always consistent?)

Anyway, as for a companion her role in John kind of implies that far more than Thomas does! I never thought of her question in logian 21 being her separating herself out as not a disciple. That's actually quite interesting. I suppose it might, but only if you read it that way

So what you're saying is a late role of companion is baked into John's gospel already - which is 'late' only as John may be later than the synoptics
So your argument only pushes that date of Thomas to around the time of John's gospel that's not very late. I think a revision of Thomas around that time is possible, but other than that I agree with ML Thomas is a source to the gospels

Mary is rebuked in the NT at the anointing scene. That this is Magdalene is really a case of 1 + 1 being 2. If she is very close to Jesus given the information already in John's gospel, the Mary who anoints him at this key moment is the same one who is there in the other key moment

Mary, therefore, took a pound of ointment of pure nard, very precious, and anointed the feet of Jesus, and wiped his feet with her hair. The house was filled with the fragrance of the ointment. 12:4Then Judas Iscariot, Simon's son, one of his disciples, who would betray him, said, 12:5"Why wasn't this ointment sold for three hundred denarii, and given to the poor?" 12:6Now he said this, not because he cared for the poor, but because he was a thief, and having the money box, used to steal what was put into it. 12:7But Jesus said, "Leave her alone. She has kept this for the day of my burial. 12:8For you always have the poor with you, but you don't always have me."

[Kunigunde Kreuzerin]

Compared to the synoptic gospels, it seems unusual that Matthew is mentioned alongside Simon Peter in GThomas 13, who otherwise only plays a narrative role in the gospels as a tax collector.
...
However, this juxtaposition of Simon Peter and Matthew becomes understandable against the background of the proto-Catholic reception of GMark and GMatthew.
...
In GThomas 13, "Simon Peter" represents the Gospel of Mark how the proto-Catholics saw it.

I actually wanted to mention something else in this thread , namely GThomas' composition technique. Everyone knows that GThomas is almost without exception structured in a sequence of logia or secret sayings: Jesus said ... Jesus said, etc.

imho Melissa Harl Sellew interpreted that technique very nicely ("Reading Jesus in the Desert: The Gospel of Thomas Meets the Apophthegmata Patrum")

Thomas seeks to project its readers back into a time and place of uncertain stability – an unspecified location where ‘the living Jesus’ speaks, and a shifting group of largely nameless disciples approaches to listen and question him. Just as nearly all the statements in Thomas are introduced without explicit connection to their neighboring logia but merely with a simple phrase like “Jesus said …” (ⲡⲉϫⲉ ⲓ︤ⲥ︥ ϫⲉ-)
...
Thomas prefers to present the words … with a minimum of narrative dressing, a compositional strategy that compels or enables the reader to ‘hear’ the words in his or her own context, unbounded by historical constraints of ‘original’ time and place.
...
The literary design of the Gospel of Thomas, for its part, is well suited to function as a spiritual guidebook. Here we lack the framing of the teachings of Jesus within a biographical narrative familiar from the New Testament gospels, which tell his story punctuated with geographical and chronological signposts.
...
The sayings challenge, puzzle, sometimes even provide conflicting information about a given subject, and in so confronting the readers and hearers force them to create in their own minds the place where all the elements fit together.
...
The Gospel of Thomas stresses the values of solitude and autonomy over community and subordination, and it does so most decisively. Leaders and leadership are disparaged, while singleness and the solitary state are championed.

GThomas presents the living voice of Jesus and it is directed against hierarchical groups in which overseers set rules for the members. A good tip could therefore be that GThomas may also have been directed against Papias and the other proto-Catholics.

Papias	GThomas
"Exposition of the Sayings of the Lord"	"The secret sayings which the living Jesus spoke"
Just as the Elders teached …	Jesus said ...
And the Elder John said ...	Jesus said ...

That makes sense - right?

[davidmartin]

part of the problem with that is a number of canonical sayings and statements are against hierarchical organisation and overseers, and the trappings of religion. this phenomenon seems to occur also working off the epistles which starts going down that path then chooom it's reversed or blocked by all the appointment of elders and whatnot. so this non-worldly outlook of Thomas isn't at all foreign to a bunch of the canonical material

this raises the question, does Thomas have this outlook as part of an agenda or is it innocently reporting early material from the same background of the similar canonical material?

another point is on the solitary spirituality. i suspect that's more than a little informed by western solitary preferences just 'seeing' it that way. there's actually a number of communal sayings in Thomas and addressing of a bunch of disciples. it doesn't look much like a church, but the idea of a church is you go once a week so you don't have to live like Jesus all the time maybe that idea just wasn't that early and Thomas kind of is

[Kunigunde Kreuzerin]

part of the problem with that is a number of canonical sayings and statements are against hierarchical organisation and overseers, and the trappings of religion. this phenomenon seems to occur also working off the epistles which starts going down that path then chooom it's reversed or blocked by all the appointment of elders and whatnot. so this non-worldly outlook of Thomas isn't at all foreign to a bunch of the canonical material

this raises the question, does Thomas have this outlook as part of an agenda or is it innocently reporting early material from the same background of the similar canonical material?

another point is on the solitary spirituality. i suspect that's more than a little informed by western solitary preferences just 'seeing' it that way. there's actually a number of communal sayings in Thomas and addressing of a bunch of disciples. it doesn't look much like a church, but the idea of a church is you go once a week so you don't have to live like Jesus all the time maybe that idea just wasn't that early and Thomas kind of is

Hi David, I can agree with all of your arguments, but I don't think it hits the main point of my post yesterday.

imho Papias and GThomas have one thing in common that clearly distinguishes them from other early Christian authors and works: both focus on oral teachings. This is not a minor matter for either, but rather a main feature. Papias is a bit obsessed with oral traditions and GThomas is also known as a Sayings Gospel. I therefore think it is a legitimate question whether and to what extent Papias and GThomas were part of a common tendency or reacted to one another.

This question arises urgently if one takes GThomas seriously as an author's work. If you only look at GThomas as material and ask which sayings are older (those in GThomas or those in the canonical Gospels) or whether even sayings go back to the historical Jesus, then of course you ignore it. Likewise if one thinks that GThomas is a collection of sayings that has grown out of tradition (as some scholars imagine Q). But if you ask what literary goal the author pursued and why he chose this literary form of presentation, then the similarities with Papias are unmistakable. The difference between Papias and GThomas is that Papias locates himself historically as an author and collects and interprets sayings that he claims have come to him from a tight chain of tradition.

In this thread I discussed primarily with Martijn, who of course felt attacked because he claimed GThomas has priority over the canonical Gospels. Of course I questioned it in passing, but it wasn't my main concern. I see the author of GThomas as an innovative writer who has found a new literary form, probably to respond in a literary way to such people as Papias and the emerging theorization. In this sense, this author seems to me to be a legitimate successor of Mark as a writer, even if he of course takes completely different paths in terms of content.

[davidmartin]

well ok, I think i get where you're coming from
from the perspective of a presumed body of existing Christian texts Thomas can appear like a novel, new form. A sayings gospel
But from the perspective of literary texts in general it is not a new form it's just a collection of sayings like Proverbs or the sentences of Sextus. It's just a list of sayings like if you go shopping you write down a list of all the items to be bought so you don't forget

From your perspective of seeing it as innovate it's difficult to prove the form it takes isn't just based on traditional wisdom sayings collections and is responding to a later body of texts

I think it's fair to ask why the author of Thomas just dives straight in with a brief note the original scribe was the twin. This is the author showing the collection is authentic from a disciple and of a Thomasine tradition.

Really, the idea Thomas might have had some problem with emerging orthodox Christianity ok that's normal just not sure can go further and say it's responding to a way later situation following Papias and so on 'let's invent a sayings gospel' when the genre wasn't new. It's just as likely Papias wrote his book using Thomas as a source and he was responding to Thomas!

[andrewcriddle]

Compared to the synoptic gospels, it seems unusual that Matthew is mentioned alongside Simon Peter in GThomas 13, who otherwise only plays a narrative role in the gospels as a tax collector.
...
However, this juxtaposition of Simon Peter and Matthew becomes understandable against the background of the proto-Catholic reception of GMark and GMatthew.
...
In GThomas 13, "Simon Peter" represents the Gospel of Mark how the proto-Catholics saw it.

I actually wanted to mention something else in this thread , namely GThomas' composition technique. Everyone knows that GThomas is almost without exception structured in a sequence of logia or secret sayings: Jesus said ... Jesus said, etc.

imho Melissa Harl Sellew interpreted that technique very nicely ("Reading Jesus in the Desert: The Gospel of Thomas Meets the Apophthegmata Patrum")

Thomas seeks to project its readers back into a time and place of uncertain stability – an unspecified location where ‘the living Jesus’ speaks, and a shifting group of largely nameless disciples approaches to listen and question him. Just as nearly all the statements in Thomas are introduced without explicit connection to their neighboring logia but merely with a simple phrase like “Jesus said …” (ⲡⲉϫⲉ ⲓ︤ⲥ︥ ϫⲉ-)
...
Thomas prefers to present the words … with a minimum of narrative dressing, a compositional strategy that compels or enables the reader to ‘hear’ the words in his or her own context, unbounded by historical constraints of ‘original’ time and place.
...
The literary design of the Gospel of Thomas, for its part, is well suited to function as a spiritual guidebook. Here we lack the framing of the teachings of Jesus within a biographical narrative familiar from the New Testament gospels, which tell his story punctuated with geographical and chronological signposts.
...
The sayings challenge, puzzle, sometimes even provide conflicting information about a given subject, and in so confronting the readers and hearers force them to create in their own minds the place where all the elements fit together.
...
The Gospel of Thomas stresses the values of solitude and autonomy over community and subordination, and it does so most decisively. Leaders and leadership are disparaged, while singleness and the solitary state are championed.

GThomas presents the living voice of Jesus and it is directed against hierarchical groups in which overseers set rules for the members. A good tip could therefore be that GThomas may also have been directed against Papias and the other proto-Catholics.

Papias	GThomas
"Exposition of the Sayings of the Lord"	"The secret sayings which the living Jesus spoke"
Just as the Elders teached …	Jesus said ...
And the Elder John said ...	Jesus said ...

That makes sense - right?

Another possibility is that the sayings are removed from context so as to make them ambiguous so as to need interpreting on the basis of the oral tradition provided by the group that composed Thomas.

Andrew Criddle