Paul versus Thomas: who is before?

[Giuseppe]

Lets say Jesus was known for quoting it and along comes Paul quoting it, why shouldn't Paul sometimes quote something associated with Jesus?

the problem is just that: Paul quotes it without associate it with Jesus.

[davidmartin]

the problem is just that: Paul quotes it without associate it with Jesus.

but there's lots of reasons that might be that could easily explain it
If his readers did not know Jesus said this he would have no reason to say so
If his readers did know then he'd be referencing something they would be familiar with
He doesn't need to explicitly tell his readers Jesus said it, because even if he did and was known for it, Jesus is basing it on scripture anyway, Paul is just cutting out the middle man
And you have to add to this that Paul never really quotes any saying of Jesus, he either doesn't know what they were or doesn't like quoting them
It's even easy enough to imagine both Paul and Jesus independently using such a popular quote out of Isaiah

So with all these possibilities i just think it's impossible to draw any firm conclusion here at all in this one instance
there's just too many other possible explanations

[mlinssen]

Isaiah 64:4

English Standard Version
From of old no one has heard or perceived by the ear, no eye has seen a God besides you, who acts for those who wait for him.

1 Corinthians 2:9

English Standard Version
But, as it is written, “What no eye has seen, nor ear heard, nor the heart of man imagined, what God has prepared for those who love him”-

Thomas 17

17. says IS : I will give to you(PL) he-who no eye behold as-regards him and he-who no ear hear him and he-who no hand touch him and no he come-up on the.heart/mind of human

The Coptic has the beautiful word heart/mind, it means both: https://coptic-dictionary.org/entry.cgi?tla=C6869

Isaiah has ear and eye, Paul has the heart extra, Thomas has the hand extra. That order seems logical with both adding one thing, or it is Thomas rewording Isaiah and Paul dropping the Thomasine "hands" like a hot brick

The chances of the both of them either quoting Isaiah or making it all up AND adding only one word, heart, utterly independently of one another... are smaller than winning a few jackpots in a row

It's either-or, and there is no need to quote. I seem wiser when I just use wise words without disclosing that I am not the original source - these words are imposing enough.
If I do state something that is disputable, arbitrary, contested - it is then that I like to hide behind a Hero

Take the famous Churchill quote "blood, toil, tears and sweat": mimicking even only two of those words gives you an air, it enlarges. Everyone associates that with legacy, grandness, and most don't even know where it comes from

Again, the first question is: what was Paul's goal here? If you agree on that, you'll likely agree on what happened or not, but if you don't agree on the goal, you'll never agree on who copied who

[mlinssen]

https://www.academia.edu/43717037/The_P ... t_religion
.

Interesting -

.
General explanation

The second parable of Thomas, like all others it splendidly demonstrates the metamorphosis model: a subject (1) that is in a begin state, (2) transitions into a strongly contrasting, usually even opposite end state (4) by means of an action or metamorphosis catalyst (3), and when all that has come to pass is said and [d]one, there is a spin-off, an end result (5), which is strongly linked to the action. And it is that end result that is the parable goal, and it is the action, the parable catalyst, that leads straight to it.

----

There are three metamorphosis catalysts / parable actions that fail .... they are extremely important pointers that give direction to the journey. ...

---

Have you also noticed that the path, the rock, and the earth are all singular, yet the acacias are plural? There is no seed or seeds that grows into fruit, in the end it is the earth that does things: it produces fruit, and "he" "comes of 60/120 'per measure'" - and we'll also get to who or what this "he" is. You might think you know what you read when you read Thomas, but he says something slightly or even quite differently from what you think he does - hence why only a very purely literal translation can reveal his meaning ...

https://www.academia.edu/43717037/The_P ... t_religion
.

Thanks MrMacSon, glad you like it. I've done 3 in great detail now, only 111 left to go.
I'll finish the parables in the next 6 months though, those tell the central story. I've never hoped harder for the dark days than this year LOL, I'm secretly hoping to whip those all out before EOY, closing in on the 1,000 pages published (with some minor republishing)
I've gone through the 16 parables before, and it was then that I ran into the translations all being so utterly imprecise - but there was quite a story there already

[Giuseppe]

for completeness, RG Price doesn't bet on Paul quoting Isaiah, in 1 Cor 2:8. Really, he and many others don't know what was the source. Some (James Barlow) say that it was the original Ascension of Isaiah.

The point is: if Paul had Thomas before him, why didn't he attribute the quote to Jesus?

[mlinssen]

for completeness, RG Price doesn't bet on Paul quoting Isaiah, in 1 Cor 2:8. Really, he and many others don't know what was the source. Some (James Barlow) say that it was the original Ascension of Isaiah.

The point is: if Paul had Thomas before him, why didn't he attribute the quote to Jesus?

Ah, now we're getting there!
That is a very valid point Giuseppe, and the possible answers bear far and wide!!!

Why - why? And again, we find ourselves back at the most essential question of all:

Why did any one gospel writer of any kind write his Gospel?

Let's start with two of them, Mark and Thomas. Why did each of them write their gospel? What was the goal, who was the audience

[mlinssen]

I'll kick off then, very tenderly

A)

Mark clearly was introducing his Jesus, announcing him. The style is rough, sometimes blunt. It doesn't all make sense, there are quite a few complexities.
Rudimentary perhaps is the best word

Mark seems to want to share his Jesus, but it also is a rather lonely gospel, as if Mark "gives birth to Jesus".
Does Mark quote anyone who knew Jesus, quoted Jesus?
No, he doesn't. His Jesus quotes scripture, but not vice versa (LOL)

B)

Thomas clearly was introducing his IS, yet as if he needed no introduction. IS says this, IS says that - IS with his disciples, and vice versa.
Does Thomas have others quote IS? He has the one logion 52:

say they to him viz. his disciples : twenty four prophets did they speak in Israel and did they speak all they upper-part of heart/mind you
says he behold : did you(PL) place he-who live within your(PL.) presence outward and did you(PL) speak toward they-who dead

Yes, that needs some tweaking - I can't do them all at once, sorry

No denial, no confirmation: IS doesn't bite, he doesn't jump to the opportunity to say "see! I was foretold!". He doesn't care

A-B)

Like Mark, Thomas seems quite alone with his IS, but where Mark tries very hard to justify Jesus, past present and future, Thomas seems fairly self content

[Giuseppe]

Mark seems to want to share his Jesus, but it also is a rather lonely gospel, as if Mark "gives birth to Jesus".

yes. I like this quote a lot. That is a very strong reason to love Mark.

Thomas clearly was introducing his IS

I would expect wisely to hear Ben's conclusion on this story of IS versus Jesus.

Like Mark, Thomas seems quite alone with his IS, but where Mark tries very hard to justify Jesus, past present and future, Thomas seems fairly self content

True also this.

Tomorrow I will quote entirely the RG Price's argument to think that Mark preceded Thomas.

[davidmartin]

A better question might be why doesn't Paul quote any of Jesus's sayings?
There's no reason to think Paul would start quoting Jesus just because Jesus said something similar to Isaiah when he says something similar to Isaiah
Paul shows no interest in quoting Jesus directly so why should he start doing so here?
This point of Price's really doesn't seem to make much sense

[Irish1975]

Maybe the most telling point of comparison for Paul and gThomas has to do with geography.

Negative similarity: neither mentions Galilee as a setting for Jesus.

Positive similarity: Paul received his calling in Damascus, and went away into "Arabia." Although the place of composition for gThomas is disputed, Bentley Layton and many others identify Eastern Syria, perhaps Odessa, as the likely origin.