The Gospel Of Thomas

[lifeisgood]

When did Jesus say that "every woman who makes herself male". Where in the Bible does it say that I can make myself a male?

Will reading the Gospel of Thomas damage or destroy your faith? No—if anything, it strengthened mine, by highlighting the consistency of the canonical Gospel accounts.

I am very thankful of the work the early Church did in making sure that the Bible passed down to us did not include everything that anyone claiming to be a Christian wrote.

What I got from reading the Gospel of Thomas is that it is an attempt to make Jesus into a different kind of savior.

I also remember reading something about Jesus being in India somewhere when he was very young (you know the missing years). I said, then, as I say now after reading the Gospel of Thomas, I'll stick with my KJV Bible. It won't confuse me as to who the real Jesus is.

Just my 2 cents.

 

[unknown]

When did Jesus say that "every woman who makes herself male". Where in the Bible does it say that I can make myself a male?

As far as I know, the bible doesn't say any such thing.

Will reading the Gospel of Thomas damage or destroy your faith? No—if anything, it strengthened mine, by highlighting the consistency of the canonical Gospel accounts.

I am very thankful of the work the early Church did in making sure that the Bible passed down to us did not include everything that anyone claiming to be a Christian wrote.

What I got from reading the Gospel of Thomas is that it is an attempt to make Jesus into a different kind of savior.

I also remember reading something about Jesus being in India somewhere when he was very young (you know the missing years). I said, then, as I say now after reading the Gospel of Thomas, I'll stick with my KJV Bible. It won't confuse me as to who the real Jesus is.

Just my 2 cents.

John 10:15-16
15 As the Father knoweth me, even so know I the Father: and I lay down my life for the sheep. 16 And other sheep I have, which are not of this fold: them also I must bring, and they shall hear my voice; and there shall be one fold, and one shepherd.

 

[jeremysdemo]

guess it means nothing that His Word is in the Thomas manuscript....John 6:63.

 

[unknown]

On to 12,, this is the Logia that started this thread.

The disciples said to Jesus, "We know that you will depart from us. Who is to be our leader?" Jesus said to them, "Wherever you are, you are to go to James the righteous, for whose sake heaven and earth came into being”.

This only means, to me, that heaven and earth came into being for the righteous. Many will get side tracked discussing James but I don't.

This agrees with what the Kabbalists said, that earth was made for "man" (a spiritual being).

 

[unknown]

guess it means nothing that His Word is in the Thomas manuscript....John 6:63.

You know, a lot of people don't understand that. They cling to the literal words and it is no wonder they are confused about much.

 

[jeremysdemo]

You know, a lot of people don't understand that. They cling to the literal words and it is no wonder they are confused about much.

if I knew someone's word was Truth and Life I would want to hear as much of it from as many reliable sources as I could find.

Thomas, though rejected by many early religious types is just a good a source as any for that record, in fact in some cases better since it is missing the narrative embellishments and Pauline influences, IMHO.

if memory serves me correct it collaborates the gospels in places they have no synopsis.

 

[unknown]

if I knew someone's word was Truth and Life I would want to hear as much of it from as many reliable sources as I could find.

AMEN! That is exactly the reason I reason I read it the first time.

 

[unknown]

Hmm... no student of Gamaliel would use the text his Greek students are reading? That is a rather wild conclusion.

Why do you suppose that Paul boasted about confronting Peter in his (Peter's) own tongue (Hebrew)? If Paul had been a student of Gamaliel, he would need no such boast. Paul was a poser, plain and simple.

 

[lifeisgood]

As far as I know, the bible doesn't say any such thing.

However, the Gospel of Thomas does.

(114) Simon Peter said to them: Let Mary go forth from among us, for women are not worthy of the life. Jesus said: Behold, I shall lead her, that I may make her male, in order that she also may become a living spirit like you males. For every woman who makes herself male shall enter into the kingdom of heaven.

 

[unknown]

However, the Gospel of Thomas does.

(114) Simon Peter said to them: Let Mary go forth from among us, for women are not worthy of the life. Jesus said: Behold, I shall lead her, that I may make her male, in order that she also may become a living spirit like you males. For every woman who makes herself male shall enter into the kingdom of heaven.

We discussed this saying in the early part of this thread. I take it you hold a literal interpretation of the words male and female. Then do you think when Jesus said He came to bring a sword he meant a literal sword?

 

[jeremysdemo]

However, the Gospel of Thomas does.

(114) Simon Peter said to them: Let Mary go forth from among us, for women are not worthy of the life. Jesus said: Behold, I shall lead her, that I may make her male, in order that she also may become a living spirit like you males. For every woman who makes herself male shall enter into the kingdom of heaven.

spurious verse already discussed, most likely an addition to the original text.

 

[JosephR]

I agree this logia is about man, and that James the Just understood Jesus and his teachings and that is who the world was made for, the ones who follow Jesus.


Posted from the TOL App!

 

[Angel4Truth]

When did Jesus say that "every woman who makes herself male". Where in the Bible does it say that I can make myself a male?

Will reading the Gospel of Thomas damage or destroy your faith? No—if anything, it strengthened mine, by highlighting the consistency of the canonical Gospel accounts.

I am very thankful of the work the early Church did in making sure that the Bible passed down to us did not include everything that anyone claiming to be a Christian wrote.

What I got from reading the Gospel of Thomas is that it is an attempt to make Jesus into a different kind of savior.

I also remember reading something about Jesus being in India somewhere when he was very young (you know the missing years). I said, then, as I say now after reading the Gospel of Thomas, I'll stick with my KJV Bible. It won't confuse me as to who the real Jesus is.

Just my 2 cents.

Amen! Well said.

 

[jeremysdemo]

ya when he says early church your actually talking 3-4hundred years after the fact.

a lot can happen in that time, took less time for the Industrial revolution.

 

[aikido7]

...

Seems enough by itself to know the writing is a piece of trash.

____________________________
--First, read the verse.
--Second, answer the question "What did that passage mean at the time to the people who wrote it?"
--Third, meditate on what such a verse might mean for us living in the modern world.

Sacred literature of all faiths has metaphor, legend, symbolism, poetry, parable, some history and mythology. If we take those forms of literature in a concrete, literal sense, we will often miss the meaning.

We used to think ancient people ("OTHER people") told dumb, literal stories that--since the Enlightenment--we were now intelligent and liberal enough to recognize as such.

But hold on. What was really going on is that those ancient people told profound, smart, metaphorical stories. It's just that too many of us got dumb and started taking them literally.

 

[freelight]

Gender is ultimately outshined in the primal Unity

Gender is ultimately outshined in the primal Unity

However, the Gospel of Thomas does.

(114) Simon Peter said to them: Let Mary go forth from among us, for women are not worthy of the life. Jesus said: Behold, I shall lead her, that I may make her male, in order that she also may become a living spirit like you males. For every woman who makes herself male shall enter into the kingdom of heaven.

hi life,......Its good to read the whole thread first if interested in the subject, to see what has been 'covered' so far (this thread isn't that big yet so will take less time).

The first few pages address this saying, and I chime in on page 10 addressing it (here is more added). A more thorough commentary (scholarly quotes on right, visitor comments on left) is found here.

A background of Peter's 'issues' found in other non-canonical regarding women (particularly Mary Magdalene), the 'cult-ural context' and 'figurative meanings' are 'key' here. In general, the 'female' element must be transformed (or 'inner-merged') into the original 'male' essence of the true 'Man', the two genders being made 'one', re-integrated into that pure condition before any division took place (before Eve was taken out of Adam), so that in such 'fusion of oneness' the 'two are made one', AS WELL as both genders being outshined (or 'transcended') in the unity of the Spirit.

The social mores and attitudes towards 'gender' hold here, but must be resolved into their spiritual meanings and archetypes, in the 'bridal chamber' where the 'two' become 'one' (the 'divine wedding'). 'Denominations' are outshined in the living divine, where there is only that undifferentiated LIGHT. 'Duality' is swallowed up in 'non-duality', into that original state that is undifferentiated, indivisible.

This particular saying is further comprehended with saying #22

(22) Jesus saw some infants who were being suckled. He said to his disciples: These infants being suckled are like those who enter the kingdom. They said to him: If we then become children, shall we enter the kingdom? Jesus said to them: When you make the two one, and when you make the inside as the outside, and the outside as the inside, and the upper as the lower, and when you make the male and the female into a single one, so that the male is not male and the female not female, and when you make eyes in place of an eye, and a hand in place of a hand, and a foot in place of a foot, an image in place of an image, then shall you enter [the kingdom].

- Blatz

While saying 114 uses defined gender types emphasizing the 'male' meaning a 'living spirit' or a condition of 'qualified spirituality', saying 22 ultimately dissolves such 'definitions' for absorption into 'The All' itself....since there is only that One That IS (absolute, infinite, all-encompassing, omnipresent, eternal).

We would also note that saying 22 (on gender particularly) is further attested to in 2 Clement, Gospel of the Egyptians and the Gospel of the holy 12.



pj

 

[unknown]

Another irony meter just blew up.

How is it that male Christians can call themselves the bride of Christ and have a problem with the verses in GoT that deal with this metaphor?

Add: They also say there is no male or female.....

 

[noguru]

Another irony meter just blew up.

How is it that male Christians can call themselves the bride of Christ and have a problem with the verses in GoT that deal with this metaphor?

A serious lack of introspection.

 

[unknown]

A serious lack of introspection.

Bingo !

 

[freelight]

Outshined

Outshined

Another irony meter just blew up.

*tilt* :crackup:

How is it that male Christians can call themselves the bride of Christ and have a problem with the verses in GoT that deal with this metaphor?

A 'key-note' here is that in 'God' there are both 'male' and 'female' elements and these are 'related' and 'relating' in the realm of 'co-creation' (substance and form inter-acting), and are to be 'com-prehended' in their various relations appropriately within any given context. Hence we can assume and theorize various placements and attributes to each gender in their form and function.

The 'soul' itself can be likened to the 'female' aspect in its receptive mode to the 'Spirit', which is the active-life-giving principle. In any case, these gender relations only play themselves out as far as they are 'inter-active' or 'synergistically' RELATING. When 'man' (who is male & female) assumes his 'original state' prior to any differentiation or even 'relation' (back to the non-dual condition), there is only 'that' (the indivisible Spirit). This 'priority' of 'original nature' is foremost essential. Gender identification and attributes appear only where 'perception' and 'knowledge' are differentially perceived or able to be 'related'. The beautiful thing here, is when you are 'outshined' in the Spirit, all defining lines and intellectual concepts are obliterated as it were, although when you return to the material world of forms and live your life in this dimension,...differences, duality and relativity naturally 'appear' and have their 'place'.

Add: They also say there is no male or female

Only where these 'appearances' and 'perceptions' exist to be 'related'. Prior to divisions, there is no difference, no separation.


pj