Gospel of Thomas narrative

[iskander]

GOT was discovered recently and it has nothing to teach to anyone after some 2000 years of Christian history . GOT is for academics interested in the detailed history of the past.

In about the fifth century the allegorical approach investigated the OT for the following four aspects :the literal meaning; the allegorical meaning , the basis for doctrine; the 'tropological' meaning , the moral implication of the text; the ' anagogical' meaning, the eschatological focus of the text.

In practice the basic distinction was between the ' literal' and the 'spiritual' sense .A central motivating factor in the insistence on the spiritual sense was the need for the church to show that its interpretation was the 'correct' meaning of the OT .
From Douglas Moo
It is late in the UK . Goodnight

[goatguy]

GOT was discovered recently and it has nothing to teach to anyone after some 2000 years of Christian history . GOT is for academics interested in the detailed history of the past.

In about the fifth century the allegorical approach investigated the OT for the following four aspects :the literal meaning; the allegorical meaning , the basis for doctrine; the 'tropological' meaning , the moral implication of the text; the ' anagogical' meaning, the eschatological focus of the text.

In practice the basic distinction was between the ' literal' and the 'spiritual' sense .A central motivating factor in the insistence on the spiritual sense was the need for the church to show that its interpretation was the 'correct' meaning of the OT .
From Douglas Moo
It is late in the UK . Goodnight

I always love it when people dismiss things off the cuff without hearing any evidence. Apparently Dr. Moo has become a repository of all truth in someone's mind. I have already said this is outside the tradition of the Greek church. It is more akin to Pardes than Quadriga. Oh, give Dr. Moo my regards. We haven't spoken in a decade.

But once the decision has been taken, there can be no more discussion since all else is just scoffing. Sleep well.

[davidbrainerd]

Some of GOT reminds me too much of bad Zen koans:

7. Jesus said, "Lucky is the lion that the human will eat, so that the lion becomes human. And foul is the human that the lion will eat, and the lion still will become human.

Huh?

[goatguy]

7. Jesus said, "Lucky is the lion that the human will eat, so that the lion becomes human. And foul is the human that the lion will eat, and the lion still will become human.

All riddle:
Jesus is the Lion of Judah
Lion is a pun to light. It represents the Holiness of God as the judge.
Eat has multiple meanings:Learn, eat, and judge.

We consume Christ, the lion of Judah, when we eat the bread of communion, he abides in us. He is blessed to have the bride. We are his body, the church. We eat (learn) the lion (holiness). Cursed is the man who is eaten (judged) by Christ.

The holiness becomes human as the church is declared holy. The lion became human (Christ) and judged men in the flesh. His perfect obedience put man to shame and removed all excuses.

[JCarp]

Perrin in his controversial work Thomas and Tatian argues that the different saying are connected by link words and link concepts. I'm not sure if this is the sort of thing you are looking for.

Andrew Criddle

Thank you for this, Andrew. This is precisely along the lines of what I have been looking at. The Coptic text is really simple, and it's very easy to translate. The trouble that I've had, is that I do not know what the Coptic pronunciation was, so finding rhymes and rhythm ("puns" if you will) is not always easy. I have been mostly looking at verses that deal with the same concepts and it's not difficult to construct a semi-narrative from the quatrain that is the GoT; time-consuming, but not difficult. Most people rather quickly notice the three main themes (possibly even four themes, depending on how you look at 'blessings') that are developed throughout the GoT. I will check out Nicholas Perrin's work. Cheers a bunch.

[DCHindley]

Some of GOT reminds me too much of bad Zen koans:

7. Jesus said, "Lucky is the lion that the human will eat, so that the lion becomes human. And foul is the human that the lion will eat, and the lion still will become human.

Huh?

This passage in the Gospel of Thomas may be, and I think is, related to the Coptic fragment of Plato's Republic book 9 (588a-589b, NHL Codex VI, tractate 5).

Below is a comparison of James M. Brashler's translation of NHL codex VI, tractate #5 (from J. M. Robinson's Nag Hammadi Library) and the well known translation Loeb translation. Plato's Republic was written, of course, in Greek. It is said that the NHL Coptic translation was so poor that critics did not at first realize it was a pericope from Plato's Republic. This is said to be due to the difficulty of translating Greek, which is a highly inflected language, into the more "clumsy" Coptic.

NHL Codex VI, 5. Coptic paraphrase of Plato's Republic 588a-589b	Plato, Republic, Book IX (588a-589b)
Translated by James Brashler, in James M. Robinson, ed., The Nag Hammadi Library, revised edition. HarperCollins, San Francisco, 1990	The Republic: With an English translation by Paul Shorey. Revised Loeb Edition: Plato in Twelve Volumes, Vols. 5 & 6. Cambridge, MA, Harvard University Press; London, William Heinemann Ltd. 1969 (sic) [vol 2, 1970 (1937)]
"Since we have come to this point in a discussion, let us again take up the first things that were said to us.	[588a] “… And now that we have come to this point in the argument, [588b] let us take up again the statement with which we began and that has brought us to this pass.
And we will find that he says, 'Good is he who has been done injustice completely. He is glorified justly.' Is not this how he was reproached?"	It was, I believe, averred that injustice is profitable to the completely unjust man who is reputed just. Was not that the proposition?”
"This is certainly the fitting way!"	“Yes, that.”
And I said, "Now then, we have spoken because he said that he who does injustice and he who does justice each has a force."	“Let us, then, reason with its proponent now that we have agreed on the essential nature of injustice and just conduct.”
''How then?"	“How?” he said.
"He said, 'An image that has no likeness is the rationality of soul,' so that he who said these things will understand.	“By fashioning in our discourse a symbolic image of the soul, that the maintainer of that proposition may see precisely what it is that he was saying.”
He [...] or not?	[588c] “What sort of an image?” he said.
We [...] is for me. But all [...] who told them [...] ruler, these now have become natural creatures - even Chimaera and Cerberus and all the rest that were mentioned. They all came down and they cast off forms and images. And they all became a single image.	“One of those natures that the ancient fables tell of,” said I, “as that of the Chimaera or Scylla or Cerberus, and the numerous other examples that are told of many forms grown together in one.”
It was said, 'Work now!'	“Yes, they do tell of them.”
Certainly it is a single image that became the image of a complex beast with many heads. Some days indeed it is like the image of a wild beast. Then it is able to cast off the first image. And all these hard and difficult forms emanate from it with effort, since these are formed now with arrogance.	“Mould, then, a single shape of a manifold and many-headed beast that has a ring of heads of tame and wild beasts and can change them and cause to spring forth from itself all such growths.”
And also all the rest that are like them are formed now through the word. For now it is a single image.	[588d] “It is the task of a cunning artist,” he said, “but nevertheless, since speech is more plastic than wax and other such media, assume that it has been so fashioned.”
For the image of the lion is the one thing and the image of the man is another. [...] single [...] is the [...] of [...] join. And this [...] much more complex than the first. And the second is small."	“Then fashion one other form of a lion and one of a man and let the first be far the largest and the second second in size.”
"It has been formed."	“That is easier,” he said, “and is done.”
"Now then, join them to each other and make them a single one - for they are three - so that they grow together,	“Join the three in one, then, so as in some sort to grow together.”
	“They are so united,” he said.
and all are in a single image outside of the image of the man just like him who is unable to see the things inside him. But what is outside only is what he sees. And it is apparent what creature his image is in and that he was formed in a human image.	“Then mould about them outside the likeness of one, that of the man, so that to anyone who is unable [588e] to look within but who can see only the external sheath it appears to be one living creature, the man.”
	“The sheath is made fast about him,” he said.
"And I spoke to him who said that there is profit in the doing of injustice for the man. He who does injustice truly does not profit nor does he benefit.	“Let us, then say to the speaker who avers that it pays this man to be unjust, and that to do justice is not for his advantage,
But what is profitable for him is this: that he cast down every image of the evil beast and trample them along with the images of the lion.	that he is affirming nothing else than that it profits him to feast and make strong the multifarious beast and the lion and all that pertains to the lion,
But the man is in weakness in this regard. And all the things that he does are weak. As a result he is drawn to the place where he spends time with them. [...].	[589a] but to starve the man and so enfeeble him that he can be pulled about whithersoever either of the others drag him,
And he [...] to him in[...]. But he brings about [...] enmity [...]. And with strife they devour each other among themselves.	and not to familiarize or reconcile with one another the two creatures but suffer them to bite and fight and devour one another.”
Yes, all these things he said to everyone who praises the doing of injustice."	“Yes,” he said, “that is precisely what the panegyrist of injustice will be found to say.”
"Then is it not profitable for him who speaks justly?"	“And on the other hand he who says that justice is the more profitable affirms that
"And if he does these things and speaks in them, within the man they take hold firmly.	all our actions and words should tend to give the man within us [589b] complete domination over the entire man
Therefore especially he strives to take care of them	and make him take charge of the many-headed beast—
and he nourishes them just like the farmer nourishes his produce daily.	like a farmer who cherishes and trains the cultivated plants
And the wild beasts keep it from growing."	but checks the growth of the wild—
	and he will make an ally of the lion's nature, and caring for all the beasts alike will first make them friendly to one another and to himself, and so foster their growth.”
http://www.gnosis.org/naghamm/plato.html	http://www.perseus.tufts.edu/hopper/tex ... ion%3D588a

I have heard it said that the Coptic translator misrepresented the intent of the Greek, in order to make it conform to certain Gnostic themes. On the other hand, it appears to me that the Coptic translator captured much of the sense, with the major divergences marked with bold. In these cases, he seems to have reversed either the meaning or the tense of verbs. The other passages, however, seem to not notice these oddities, and returns right away to following the sense of the Greek. Since I do not know Coptic, I cannot explain this, although I believe that the grammar can be interpreted more than one way depending on context.

So, how well do we really understand what the Coptic translator was trying to say? He may have been struggling,

Now, though, when I look at some sayings in the Gospel of Thomas, it seems as though the author(s) of these sayings did understand the meanings of this passage in Plato's Republic.

5a) Jesus said, "Recognize what is in your sight, and that which is hidden from you will become plain to you. [compare "Then mould about them outside the likeness of one, that of the man, so that to anyone who is unable [588e] to look within but who can see only the external sheath it appears to be one living creature, the man"]
5b) For there is nothing hidden which will not become manifest."
6b) Jesus said, "Do not tell lies, and do not do what you hate, for all things are plain in the sight of Heaven. [compare "all our actions and words should tend to give the man within us [589b] complete domination over the entire man"]
6c) For nothing hidden will not become manifest, and nothing covered will remain without being uncovered."

7) Jesus said, "Blessed is the lion which becomes man when consumed by man; and cursed is the man whom the lion consumes, and the lion becomes man." ["Consumed" here seems to correspond to "feast and make strong". Compare "that he is affirming nothing else than that it profits him to feast and make strong the multifarious beast and the lion and all that pertains to the lion, [589a] but to starve the man and so enfeeble him that he can be pulled about whithersoever either of the others drag him, and not to familiarize or reconcile with one another the two creatures but suffer them to bite and fight and devour one another.”]

22c) Jesus said to them, "When you make the two one, and when you make the inside like the outside and the outside like the inside, and the above like the below, and when you make the male and the female one and the same, so that the male not be male nor the female female;
22d) and when you fashion eyes in the place of an eye, and a hand in place of a hand, and a foot in place of a foot, and a likeness in place of a likeness;
22e) then will you enter [the Kingdom]." [this was the essential point of the passage in Plato, let the rational man tame the beast and the lion inside and so appear a rational man to others on the outside]

45b) A good man brings forth good from his storehouse; an evil man brings forth evil things from his evil storehouse, which is in his heart, and says evil things. [this is again an extension of the passage of Plato's Republic].

70) Jesus said, "If you bring forth what is within you, what you bring forth will save you. If you do not bring forth what is within you, what you do not bring forth will destroy you." [ditto]

Sometimes I am not sure whether the Coptic translator misunderstood Plato, or we are misunderstanding him. Perhaps it is the modern critics who are reading Gnostic technical nomenclature into the Coptic translation.

DCH

[DCHindley]

But, of course, if you want to think of them as Zen koans, go for it.

Funny thing is, while you seem to have given up on understanding them, over at the Gospel of Thomas list the list owner Mike Grondin once became perplexed that the meaning of many of the sayings were not obvious from the statements contained in them. I pointed out that they are "secret things" so I would expect any explanation of their possible origin to not be "obvious."

All I wanted to make clear was that there is an explanation to Gospel of Thomas #13 #7 that is not as simple as "you are what you eat," as it may come across to our modern sensibilities. Apparently, whoever wrote GoT had some interest in Platonism.

Who knew?

DCH

[Peter Kirby]

But, of course, if you want to think of them as Zen koans, go for it.

Funny thing is, while you seem to have given up on understanding them, over at the Gospel of Thomas list the list owner Mike Grondin once became perplexed that the meaning of many of the sayings were not obvious from the statements contained in them. I pointed out that they are "secret things" so I would expect any explanation of their possible origin to not be "obvious."

All I wanted to make clear was that there is an explanation to Gospel of Thomas #13 that is not as simple as "you are what you eat," as it may come across to our modern sensibilities. Apparently, whoever wrote GoT had some interest in Platonism.

Who knew?

Good stuff, thanks for sharing it and making it easy to follow. Good to know.

[andrewcriddle]

The Lion becomes Man The Gnostic Leontomorphic Creator and the Platonic Tradition by Howard M. Jackson may be of interest.

Andrew Criddle

[DCHindley]

The Lion becomes Man The Gnostic Leontomorphic Creator and the Platonic Tradition by Howard M. Jackson may be of interest.

I believe there were some posts about the position(s) of Jackson on Lion symbolism either on the FRDB BC&H forum, or on the present one. Over on FRDB BC&H I commented in the parallel between Plato Republic and GoT 7, and that I wasn't the 1st to notice, citing Jackson.
<ding dangy, I lost that url>

That being said, I think it is important that someone had a copy of a Coptic translation of Plato's Republic, right at the section that speaks of human passion as a "lion", which just happens to link by theme to GoT #7. The unfortunate part is that GoT is in Codex II (2) and the fragment of Plato's Republic in codex VI (6). Codex VI, besides this section of Plato's Republic, also contains Hermetic treatises, so this codex might have served, in part, as reference material for concepts contained in works found in other codices.

DCH