rgprice wrote: ↑Tue Jan 05, 2021 9:24 am
The Gospel of Thomas is some second or third century forgery derived from the other Gospels and letters of Paul. Nothing to see here...
You will regret that statement in due time, Robert
I have taken this year off and will write my Commentary on Thomas, and have published 3 logia so far.
The last one is of particular interest here as it is on logion 57, the seed and the Weed - which is "zizanion" both in Thomas and Matthew, and it is the only time in the entire history of mankind (tut tut) that this non existing word is mentioned
So either Thomas invented it and Matthew copied him, or Jesus / Matthew invented it and Thomas copied him
https://www.academia.edu/44840311/The_P ... dark_words
I have about a dozen other cases, similar in nature, but this one is a perfectly binary choice. Meier states:
Meier, ‘The Parable of the Wheat and the Weeds’, 726–727: ‘This Greek noun (probably of Semitic origin) does not occur in the LXX, in other Greek versions of the OT, in secular Greek before the Christian era, or in the Apostolic Fathers. In the NT, it occurs only in this parable of Matthew and its interpretation.’
The attractive part right here is that these two uniquely share another bit of text, which is the parable of the net. I challenged an NT scholar to argue the direction of dependency there being Thomas copying from Matthew, and he picked up the glove, and I anxiously yet patiently await that outcome
https://www.academia.edu/43780115/The_P ... ng_to_find
If you can be reasonably convincing that Thomas is dependent in both cases and manage to refute my findings in both papers, I'll owe you a book of your choice (let's cap it at 500 bucks).
If you try doing so but admit that you can't, I owe you my gratitude and you owe me the right to quote you on that
Deal?