Page 2 of 4

Re: Gospel of Thomas narrative

Posted: Thu May 11, 2017 5:06 pm
by iskander
It seems that GOT has played no role in the development of Christianity. Why should any Christian bother to read it?
There is a general consensus among scholars that the Gospel of Thomas – discovered over a half century ago in the Egyptian desert – dates to the very beginnings of the Christian era and may well have taken first form before any of the four traditional canonical Gospels.


The Gospel of Thomas Collection
http://gnosis.org/naghamm/nhl_thomas.htm

Re: Gospel of Thomas narrative

Posted: Thu May 11, 2017 5:21 pm
by goatguy
Google sensus plenior and NT authors use of OT scripture and you will find confession after confession that modern theologians cannot reproduce the exegesis of the NT authors. Some even suggest that Jesus and the apostles would fail their Hermeneutics 101 classes for misappropriating scripture.

Maybe some people would like to learn to read the Hebrew text like a Hebrew rather than like a Greek for a change??

The Greek method of study is to hypothesize, then to argue to show who is more cleaver. But since a metaphor must be the same everywhere, this is more akin to solving a crossword puzzle, and people collaborate rather than argue. This alone may commend it to some people.

Re: Gospel of Thomas narrative

Posted: Thu May 11, 2017 5:25 pm
by goatguy
And remember, it is not the Gospel of Thomas that teaches doctrine... doctrine comes from scripture. It teaches how to read the mystery of Christ hidden in riddle.

Re: Gospel of Thomas narrative

Posted: Thu May 11, 2017 5:49 pm
by iskander
The NT was written in Greek, no need to change. Origen is credited with the introduction of the allegorical interpretation of the OT .


The allegorical approach serves to find a deeper spiritual sense in addition to the plain literal sense and this deeper method required spiritual insight . This allegorical approach was used to interpret the OT as an introduction to the NT.

Did those interpreters with spiritual insight find in the OT the confirmation of the conclusion they wanted to find?

Re: Gospel of Thomas narrative

Posted: Thu May 11, 2017 5:52 pm
by davidbrainerd
iskander wrote:It seems that GOT has played no role in the development of Christianity. Why should any Christian bother to read it?
To see how Buddhism tried to appropriate Jesus with a fake gospel.

Re: Gospel of Thomas narrative

Posted: Thu May 11, 2017 5:54 pm
by iskander
davidbrainerd wrote:
iskander wrote:It seems that GOT has played no role in the development of Christianity. Why should any Christian bother to read it?
To see how Buddhism tried to appropriate Jesus with a fake gospel.
LOL Why should a Christian bother with Buddhism?

Re: Gospel of Thomas narrative

Posted: Thu May 11, 2017 5:59 pm
by davidbrainerd
iskander wrote:
davidbrainerd wrote:
iskander wrote:It seems that GOT has played no role in the development of Christianity. Why should any Christian bother to read it?
To see how Buddhism tried to appropriate Jesus with a fake gospel.
LOL Why should a Christian bother with Buddhism?
Because at one point in Buddhist doctrine only monks could get to Nibbana and nuns had to be reborn as men before reaching full enlightenment....just like GOT claims Jesus said Mary Magdalrne must become male to be saved. Its interesting to compare. GOT named after the apostle who tradition says went to India, ends up presenting Buddhist ideas. Shocking, isn't it?

Re: Gospel of Thomas narrative

Posted: Thu May 11, 2017 6:07 pm
by iskander
davidbrainerd wrote:..
Because at one point in Buddhist doctrine only monks could get to Nibbana and nuns had to be reborn as men before reaching full enlightenment....just like GOT claims Jesus said Mary Magdalrne must become male to be saved. Its interesting to compare. GOT named after the apostle who tradition says went to India, ends up presenting Buddhist ideas. Shocking, isn't it?
Women are excluded from religion , In every religion they play an inferior role .No need to go to India to catch the poxvirus.

Re: Gospel of Thomas narrative

Posted: Thu May 11, 2017 6:23 pm
by goatguy
iskander wrote:The NT was written in Greek, no need to chage. Origen is credited with the introduction of the allegorical interpretation of the OT .

The allegorical approach serves to find a deeper spiritual sense in addition to the plain literal sense and this deeper method required spiritual insight . This allegorical approach was used to interpret the OT as an introduction to the NT.

Did those interpreters with spiritual insight find in the OT the confirmation of the conclusion they wanted to find?
It might be suggested that the NT is merely the Hebrew teaching of the apostles written in Greek for the Greek church. Paul didn't need it when he preached to the Bereans, and they validated his teaching.

You might actually check with Paul to see who started allegorical interpretation: Ga 4:24 Which things are an allegory: for these are the two covenants; the one from the mount Sinai, which gendereth to bondage, which is Agar.

Or prior to this see Jesus use the leper and law of the leper as an allegory for the poor in spirit, and ultimately of the cross. See him use the Centurion as a an allegory for the meek, and ultimately of the cross.

See Luke's allegory of the cross in Acts 12 as Peter escapes from prison.

Also Origen's allegory display elements of free-for-all which is not at all what is used here. It will only appear to be free-for-all because of the lack of rigor in detailing the evidences.

I have no doubt that those practicing free-for-all allegory often found what they were looking for. But since in this method, it appears that every verse of every chapter of every book participates in telling the story or Christ, it is doubtful that any man could impose it after the fact.

In this method, the NT is a commentary on the Old, and does not display the same character as the old. There are Hebrew sources for mammon, agape, and mustard as 'the believing ones', 'enemy' and 'bruised by anger' which not only clarify NT teaching, but illustrate that the Greeks may not have understood all the Hebrews said.

Man cannot serve God and self... not money.
Agape love is the love we have been commanded "Love your enemies"
And Mustard points to the seed of the woman with the bruised heel.

The lack of understanding on the part of the Greek church has manifold witness.
By the end of the first century they deified Mary, and soon conquered the laity, compromised with the government, and adopted Jewish ritual into the mass. These are all things they were warned against. As they killed heretics they demonstrated that they did not understand the central teaching of Christ being love. Paul would say, without love, your doctrine is useless.

Yet the core of the teaching of the Greek church is sufficient for salvation fulfilling the prophecy of Christ that those who did not see (understand) would do the great work of salvation. It is the word that does not return void no matter who preaches it.

If my observations are correct, the interpretations produced using the methods of Thomas should produce an early theology from sources outside the tradition of the Greek church; such as evidenced in the Mustard seed. We'll see. So far it appears to be largely in agreement with the major doctrines of the church.

Re: Gospel of Thomas narrative

Posted: Thu May 11, 2017 6:39 pm
by goatguy
davidbrainerd wrote: Because at one point in Buddhist doctrine only monks could get to Nibbana and nuns had to be reborn as men before reaching full enlightenment....just like GOT claims Jesus said Mary Magdalrne must become male to be saved. Its interesting to compare. GOT named after the apostle who tradition says went to India, ends up presenting Buddhist ideas. Shocking, isn't it?
In the riddle of Paul, Jeremiah, and Thomas, the Buddhist and Sikh teachings can be placed in context.
Paul says the woman was deceived. Female = blind (not understanding), male = seeing (understanding).
The woman must be made male by teaching. Those who don't understand will be taught.
The sikhs say men must become virgins. Those who understand become the bride of Christ.
Jeremiah says that all men will be pregnant: The bride of Christ will be fruitful and multiply.

Yeah, they are all probably related. But those who did not understand passed the teaching along without the understanding.
Isn't this fun?

p.s. Paul and Jeremiah didn't originate the metaphor. Jesus determines that there is no marriage in heaven, and angels don't marry from Genesis, in extensions of the riddle. Hint: the word for marriage also means doctrine.