Active Users:1182 Time:22/11/2024 02:38:57 PM
Back to Messageboard Post New Thread Search Help Stats Rules
Not even Mark or Luke? Joel Send a noteboard - 22/09/2012 01:21:24 PM
They are certainly the "best" of the gospels, but the attribution of the gospels was almost certainly after the fact. The only books of the NT that I think were properly attributed were the letters (and Revelation to the extent John of Patmos isn't considered to be John the Apostle), and even then we are pretty certain some of the ones attributed to Paul aren't his (either that or he was hit on the head and stopped writing Koine well).

The former was so early false attribution might well have risked repudiation by the purported author. With the exception of John, what perplexes me about disputing the traditional view of the Gospels' authorship is that I cannot understand why anyone writing a pseudepigraph would not choose a more prominent "author" like James of Peter. The lead consultant on "Patton" was Omar Bradley, not Bill Mauldin or Kay Summersby. One would think anyone trying to legitimize their gospel would have chosen a better byline than Mark, who only gets a handful of mentions (not all favorable) in the entire NT.

I don't know where you get the assumption that Thomas is a "challenge to Christianity". Many of the sayings are similar or identical to existing ones from the NT canon. Nothing openly heretical is contained in it. If it was excluded, it was probably more because it is considered incomplete, having no narrative and just being a collection of sayings, most of which were in the four canonical gospels.

Other "Thomas" books are indeed Gnostic and/or heretical, but the Gospel of Thomas is not one of them.

What of "If you bring forth what is within you, what you have will save you"? That sounds more like Mormonisms "as God is, so man may become," than Christianitys doctrine that all men stand condemned by our sins and thus need redemption and justification in Christ. Sayings like "Split a piece of wood, and I am there. Lift a stone, and you will find me there" can be reconciled as panentheist rather than pantheist, but Thomas has some fairly strong gnostic language for a truly Christian work.
Honorbound and honored to be Bonded to Mahtaliel Sedai
Last First in wotmania Chat
Slightly better than chocolate.

Love still can't be coerced.
Please Don't Eat the Newbies!

LoL. Be well, RAFOlk.
Reply to message
So, about this silly "Jesus' wife" story making the rounds... Tom - 19/09/2012 10:55:55 PM 1225 Views
That's right! Jesus' position on marriage was "One man, no woman." *NM* TaskmasterJack - 19/09/2012 11:05:55 PM 552 Views
What is the context? The canonical bible says Christ has a wife: The Church. Joel - 19/09/2012 11:25:19 PM 857 Views
Oh please...don't confuse "wife" with "bride" Tom - 19/09/2012 11:35:09 PM 825 Views
What word do the Prophets use for Israels relationship to God? Joel - 20/09/2012 12:38:20 AM 819 Views
BRIDE Tom - 20/09/2012 03:39:30 PM 795 Views
I love your last two sentences. They're a really nice description. *NM* Rebekah - 20/09/2012 07:58:19 PM 402 Views
That makes sense for an eternal God, but sounds like a wife who remains a bride. Joel - 20/09/2012 08:56:07 PM 869 Views
It's "bride" in the Old Testament as well. Tom - 20/09/2012 09:48:37 PM 819 Views
The distinction is important for preserving the newlywed condition, but not for this fragment. Joel - 20/09/2012 11:21:52 PM 861 Views
No, the fragment is either Gnostic or a forgery. Tom - 20/09/2012 11:28:53 PM 801 Views
Fair enough; for my money it could easily be both. Joel - 21/09/2012 12:10:57 AM 752 Views
Two things why it is important Roland00 - 20/09/2012 04:24:37 AM 795 Views
Did someone hit you over the head? "Two things why it is important"? Really? Tom - 20/09/2012 03:50:02 PM 871 Views
Something I forgot to ask you about last night: What is your take on Daniels messianic prophecy? Joel - 20/09/2012 09:21:32 PM 789 Views
I don't get that at all. "And will be no more", or "And will have nothing" is better. Tom - 20/09/2012 10:13:20 PM 755 Views
It is the King James text, which I have never heard anyone call heretical. Joel - 20/09/2012 11:15:54 PM 825 Views
The King James Bible is aesthetically pleasing but a bad translation. Tom - 21/09/2012 12:03:00 AM 764 Views
I like the NKJV because it tries to include all ambiguities. Joel - 21/09/2012 12:47:38 AM 834 Views
It says nothing about the Septuagint variant reading, though. Tom - 21/09/2012 03:35:51 AM 764 Views
Hmm, you are right; uncharacteristically disappointing. Joel - 22/09/2012 12:16:51 AM 869 Views
There is a very good reason no one dismissed the illegitmate gospels as illegitimate until 180 AD: Joel - 20/09/2012 09:15:05 PM 737 Views
The Gospel of Thomas was written before 180 AD. Tom - 20/09/2012 09:33:44 PM 745 Views
What is the oldest extant text of or reference to it? Joel - 20/09/2012 11:11:03 PM 817 Views
The Oxyrhynchus fragments were dated to c. 200 AD, and they are copies Tom - 21/09/2012 12:18:33 AM 727 Views
I would buy 200 AD, of course. Joel - 21/09/2012 12:58:32 AM 797 Views
It's not about "buying" it - it's essentially proven at that point. Tom - 21/09/2012 03:26:50 AM 765 Views
Yes; all I meant was that I never disputed a date around 200 AD. Joel - 22/09/2012 12:25:41 AM 777 Views
I don't think any of the gospels were written by their purported authors. Tom - 22/09/2012 03:36:32 AM 707 Views
Not even Mark or Luke? Joel - 22/09/2012 01:21:24 PM 734 Views
Well, but everyone knew Peter didn't speak Greek Tom - 22/09/2012 09:46:57 PM 685 Views
True, but everyone also knew Paul spoke it fluently, and he would have been an ideal choice. Joel - 24/09/2012 06:20:22 AM 747 Views
Some people did "lie big". Tom - 24/09/2012 02:11:58 PM 776 Views
I forgot about (or possibly repressed memories of) the Gnostics "Gospel" of Peter. Joel - 24/09/2012 11:26:43 PM 843 Views
I'm not trying to defend Gnosticism doctrinally, but... Tom - 24/09/2012 11:51:40 PM 816 Views
I am not relying SOLELY (or chiefly) on popularity though. Joel - 25/09/2012 02:21:01 AM 772 Views
The Gnostic response would be: Tom - 25/09/2012 06:01:58 AM 717 Views
That just sounds like more conspiracy allegations based on desire rather than evidence. Joel - 25/09/2012 07:15:06 AM 863 Views
The issue of evidence for Gnosticism would make this thread unnecessarily long. Tom - 25/09/2012 07:28:22 PM 701 Views
This thread seems an ideal place, but OK. Joel - 26/09/2012 04:34:28 AM 837 Views
What about those who postulate a mid-to-late 1st century composition? Larry - 22/09/2012 02:21:18 AM 819 Views
Elaine Pagels ceased to be an impartial academic a long time ago. Tom - 22/09/2012 03:41:41 AM 765 Views
Suspected as much, but wanted to see if you thought so as well Larry - 22/09/2012 03:47:05 AM 907 Views
Let's not get started on Funk Tom - 22/09/2012 09:48:05 PM 705 Views
So true Larry - 22/09/2012 10:23:08 PM 817 Views
Bentley Layton at Yale is a noted scholar who did translations. Tom - 22/09/2012 10:47:05 PM 736 Views
don't these people have anything better to do? Yunalesca - 20/09/2012 11:39:35 PM 743 Views
Clearly not. Joel - 22/09/2012 12:27:29 AM 656 Views
then i'll escape this thread before anyone twigs Yunalesca - 22/09/2012 08:12:37 PM 817 Views
Too late, I have already twigged, branched and treed. Joel - 22/09/2012 08:58:39 PM 799 Views
I know! Camilla - 21/09/2012 06:48:33 AM 926 Views
See, Tom, you made a mistake. jh - 22/09/2012 10:25:22 AM 779 Views
Back to Messageboard Post New Thread Search Help Stats Rules

Reply to Message

Block Quote Paragraph Quote
Formatting
Smiley Codes