Q Document, Gospel of Thomas

[c]

Greetings friends,

I would be interested in your input on the topic of the "sayings" gospel, the alleged Q and also the Gospel of Thomas .

I have been browsing some of the writings of Christian scholars claiming that the synoptic gospels are a mythology later created based on the earlier sayings of Jesus. The scholars claim these documents (even though the Q is merely theoretical) don't mention Jesus as Lord and savior, so that concept was later developed as a mere myth.

Any comments, info, observations would be appreciated.

Thanks,

c

[Adam]

[John Anthony]

Just about my only venture into this subject has been reading Pagels’s Beyond Belief. But it’s a fascinating subject. Thanks, c, for bringing it up.

In the Wikipedia article on The Gospel of Thomas, the following passage particularly interested me:

‘Unlike John, which distinguishes belief in Jesus as Saviour from unbelief, the Gospel of Thomas premises salvation dependent upon an enlightened understanding of the hearer's own true identity — an image of the hearer as divine. Where sayings parallel those in Matthew and Luke, i.e. those in Q, they are placed without their more familiar context; left in this manner, the sayings seem to be pregnant with gnosis though none of the apparatus of developed Gnosticism, as in Pistis Sophia, is to be found.

‘In John's Gospel, Jesus is the "only begotten son" of the Father (John 1:3). In the Gospel of Thomas Jesus is quoted as saying that "the kingdom of the Father is spread out upon the earth, and men do not see it." This too can be interpreted as Jesus' attempt to bring enlightenment through his teachings that man's existence is not as much material as it is spiritual — hence his claims to his own divinity came with an implied stipulation that this "divinity" was not limited to himself, rather belongs to anyone who is born-again spiritually. This again is a stark contrast with canonical Christianity.’

The phrase “Salvation dependent upon an enlightened understanding of the hearer’s own true identity” sounds very Buddhistic. If the sayings of Thomas have”none of the apparatus of developed Gnosticism”, then might it be that they are if not pregnant with Buddhism, then at least influenced by it? I wonder whether there is any evidence that Buddhistic thought had penetrated to any extent at this time into the Near East and Greece.

[Stylteralmaldo]

[Jeff]

My two cents (from an article by Craig Blomberg):

+The earliest evidence of Thomas is AD 150--based on Greek fragments which paralell the AD 400 Coptic Thomas.
+~1/3 of the sayings in Thomas are gnostic; 1/3-1/2 are paralelled in one of the four Canonical Gospels; the remainder are not unorthodox.
+Thomas was dependent upon every major source of the four canonical Gospels (M; L; Mark; Q; John); even the order of many of the sayings is paralelled in the canonical Gospels. The gnostic sayings, themselves, are frequently nothing more than gnosticised versions of sayings found in the canonical Gospels.

[Jeff]