brewskiMarc wrote: ↑Wed Jun 30, 2021 10:43 am
If I'm correct, the gospel co-creation story is a fairly simple and plain one and every next stage comes not with removing present core material
, but mostly with adding more from its source, Thomas, while also adding new core material
- Paul ignores (2) completely
- Paul ignores (3) completely
- Why does Mark leave those [beatitudes] out then?
- Mark pretends to not know anything regarding (5)
I got stuck on this a bit. It kinda says, “Each next step adds and doesn’t remove. Except when it does.”
Fair enough. It's not as binary as you put it; the remark was in the context of Marcion who is accused of removing all the material that connects Jesus to Judaism. So it's not about either-or, it is about quality (does it involve primary or important material, or that of a lesser kind) and quantity (does it form a major minor (sic) part, or does it concern a handful of verses)
“Pretends to not know” is also little too mind-read-y for me. You don’t know if he was pretending. As for the beatitudes: you’d have to explain why Mark chose to leave them out and Luke chose to put them back in.
That would assume that they were available to Mark
Paul is turning it all towards Judaism
It’s entirely possible I have been misunderstanding this all along. But I always read Paul as trying to sell Judaism to the Gentiles, not the other way around.
He's doing both, really. But the stuff about circumcision, not abolishing the law, and everything Judaic in Paul - no Gentile could ever have cared for that
Those are the ones to jump out at me on first read. Oh, and there is one other thing I’d like to see:
Thomas started it all with just a text
This does you a bit of disservice. Keep going with it. I doubt that whoever compiled Thomas did so in a vacuum. The quotes didn’t come out of nowhere. (Neither do I believe they were all spoken by one person at any one time.)
That would assume that they were quotes. Spoken. By a person. That's 3 assumptions on top of each other. Can't it just be an imaginary play? Do you think Odyssey was real?
It almost looks like our choice is:
- Someone gathered up a bunch of quotes he liked, attributed them to some name, put them in a collection and then got lucky that an audience formed and decided to expand on it. Or,
- There was some existing group of people (however loosely connected) who thought some guy had sayings and wisdom and wouldn’t it be nice to gather them all together?
In short, you would need to know more about what inspired the compiler of Thomas beyond “Tao-like Eastern thought of non-duality”. Like specifically what inspired him? (And no, am not suggesting any real-life IS. But I think it will tell us a lot about how the material was treated and why.) What were his
sources? Where did the quotes he compiled come from? And then, apply your technique of Next Step and what did he add?:
Those are the right questions. And the answer is: basically everything LOL. I could try to compact my 100-page Thomas Commentary here, but he read Philo, Plato, knew his Tanakh inside out, knew most of but all Greek works, and a bit about Egypt
He teaches about the Ego and Self, the two that we create when young. And to make those two one.
He rejects any and all religion, continuously, and has the disciples portrayed as ignorant clowns who can't get out of their religious mental models.
He gets deeply, deeply philosophical, for instance in the payable of the net, the sower and the mustard seed, while demonstrating at the same time what Seeking is, and how it must be done. He also sets out in 5 sets of 3 parables how the entire Quest will unfold, and what and where the pitfalls are.
Basically, he tells everyone to rebel, to go astray. To not walk The Path, because it leads to nothing.
He is polemic, hostile, vehemently anti religious. Nothing better to create a movement than a mutual enemy - nothing connects and binds or glues better than that
TC takes individual saying, quotes, anecdotes, etc and compiles them into a volume.
You still can't shake the core of the story you have been programmed with, can you? This is a story, an enormously intricate work of poetry, made up from A through Z. Nothing in it ever happened for real - there are no sayings or quotes
TC (possibly) is the first to attribute some of all of these to IS.
CONTRIBUTION of the Compiler is unknown. (Can we isolate quotes that are unique vs any that we find, for example, in that Eastern thought?)
MOTIVATION of the Compiler is unknown. (To preserve and reference popular saying in some community perhaps?)
OPPORTUNITY of the Compiler is unknown. (I’ll buy that it is before 70 CE, though.)
Thanks for the read. I will go back over it all again in a bit.
You have to go beyond it all. What you are looking at, and what you have in your mind, basically is the same story that the nazis told the Germans about the Jews - with great success, of course. But there was not a grain of truth in it, nothing. Everything, from beginning to end, is a lie
I've been around for a while in Thomas circles. Forums, emails, discussions, all that. I've left it long ago, because even they can't shed the Christian skin. Even they still want to believe that there was a Jesus, no matter how minimal, no matter how far removed from the canonical Jesus.
Somehow, he has to exist
He doesn't. We're like the monkeys in the cage who have heard that you get the firehose up your ass when you climb up and reach for the banana.
But no one has ever tried