Non christians: what do you think about Thomas?

when i refer to thomas i mean the gospel of thomas

Ive posted this before but inchristian forum and personally, as i read gospel of thomas, so much of it rings true in my mind. While translations can be cumbersome, ive managed to find a lot of my beliefs weaved into these words, regardless of whether im interpreting them right or not. however, the more i read them (different translations), particularly the earlier verses which were probably kept in better condition, the more i see my essential philosophies of life shining through.

I see the use of 'kingdom' and 'space' or place as being not really like the christians interpret it, but as a philosophical and perceptual standpoint. as in, the kingom of heaven/of god/'the kingdom' is not really a place you go to after death but a domain of those who see the world correctly.

Jesus clearly used parables and metaphors and analogies to spread his message. (It is clear that there was a man back in the day, regardless of his message or god-status). I think logically he would also have use plays on words, in order to minimalise analogies into simplest forms. If jesus played on words, then the only proper reading of his words would be not only in the language he uses but by someone who is conscious of all the subtleties of the language. Translations, into english, by people thousands of years removed with incomplete scrolls are NEVER going to capture the exact essence of anything jesus said. thus, i believe a lot of the knowlege of the gospel of thomas is lost amongst ambiguity and truism.

It just fascinates me how clearly different this jesus is to the jesus of the bible. when i first read thomas, i was amazed because it was verym uch how i had percieved jesus from a non christian viewpoint... like a charismatic philosopher.

Who else finds interest in Thomas? Something about it that just seems so real.. like if jesus said anything, this is what he was talking about.

I could go through every verse and talk about them of course but im not gonna do that unless theres lots of people interested like I am.. i think any christian is kidding themselves if they dont at least read it (regardless of whether they believe its the real jesus or not)

 

I haven't read Thomas, nor am i aware of any debates surrounding it.
Jesus' philosophy, in terms of morality, is no way integrally rooted in the supernatural. Love, kindness, selflessness, charity, and other things work positively in this world. It is sad the majority of humanity cannot be virtuous without the guarantee of immortality and comfort from something ultimately unreal. However, it is a fool who disagrees with reality, with what actually works (i.e. peace of mind, happiness). But, for the same reason, active ignorance to the origin of such clarity or to assign meaning to something unreal, is an exercise in blinding oneself.

There shouldn't be any reason that acknowledgement of the psychological explainations for the positive effects of religion and spirituality, should degrade its effectiveness. Assuming the effects are not rooted in one's desire for UNREAL comfort.

What in Thomas particularly speaks to you?

 

As a non-Christian I really haven't taken the time to look at the Gospel of Thomas. From what I've heard about it, it sounds like a nice text. But I don't think it's very correct to try to legitimize a text's authorship simply because it feels right. A text can be wonderful without having been created by Rufus T. Firefly or whoever the man of the day is.

But then again, I'm not one to worry much about the authorship of sacred texts, since I deny Divine authorship of the Torah, and any other book, and see attempts to validate Torah or any other sacred text in some way as not necessary. There's a rabbi who said that maybe the Zohar was written by automatic writing, tapping into Bar Yochai. I just don't like loads of theology much I guess. It seems so unnecessary and bogs everything down. Streamline it, I say! Who needs intricate beliefs when we've got our experiences?

Ahem... So as to GoT, does it help get you places? That's a general question. That's all that I think matters, that the text is meaning full. I don't care whether Jesus said it or not, and I think it's probably unlikely he did, based on modern scholarship. However, it might be useful to see it as a book of the mythical Jesus. That changes the experience. I don't like confusing the experience with what scholarship seems to be showing.

Dauer

 

i feel about it in a way regardless of what the actual meaning is, as in, the words simply ring true through my own interpretation. in terms of saying theyre real or not, im not making any judgement of that sort. however if i had to chose, i would chose that it was more real simply because it has been tampered with less, as well as seeming more organic in the things talked about, regardless of teh content. teh content is ambiguous. the toics talked about and the general way that its set out on teh other hand is much more like a man such as jesus would be.

at any rate, i think you two should read it in your spare time.
regardless of who said the things, just look at what is being said and think about the context of its day and what it would have meant to the people back then.

thumontico, i agree definately with this idea that jesus' teachings should be regardless of whether youre christian or not. i think that everyone should follow jesus teachings, however it seems that people associate following a teaching with believing theyre true.

the bible has a lot of good morals in it for living together.

however the thing about thomas is that to me it sort of gives a behind the scenes glimpse that maybe.. jesus really didnt have faith involved behind what he said anyway, and that the church linked it in with believing in god; basically fitting in with what youre saying, and what ive believed for a long time. gostpel of thomas talks about personal spirituality, about seeking truth, not about faith. in fact, it sort of condems the idea of faith. jesus says to keep seeking until you have found everything that you can find.

its clear why teh churches would not want this as part of thebible because it contradicts most of the -religion- aspects of christianity. it actually portrays christ's religion as a purely personal, spiritual journey, and sort of sounds like what he would have learnt if you imagine that the theories of jesus going to meet bhudda on one of his journeys, regardless of whether thats true or not.


oh and to give an idea of what its about, the gospel of thomas is not related to the other gospels. it is not a recount of jesus' life nor is it given chronology. its just a collection of a bit over 100 sayings by jesus, or answers to desciple's questions.
some of them can be found in other gospels, which gives credibility, and others cant. sometimes theyre different spins on the way the MMLJ gospels interpret jesus.

 

Are Christians allowed to say what they think about the Gospel of Thomas?

 

yes

 

I read the whole thing, then at the end read,

and it was kind of weird.


some parts that i fancied

then there were some weird parts, like
"Jesus said, "Damn the Pharisees! They are like a dog sleeping in the cattle manger: the dog neither eats nor [lets] the cattle eat.""
and
"Jesus said, "Whoever is near me is near the fire, and whoever is far from me is far from the kingdom.""

 

Thomas is a pretty cool gospel, and I agree with many of the sayings...that is, they resonate within me. It sounds much less "christian" and more like what you'd get in Eastern religion, which I find much simpler and thus more appealing.

Some interesting passages:

(3) Jesus said, "If those who lead you say to you, 'See, the kingdom is in the sky,' then the birds of the sky will precede you. If they say to you, 'It is in the sea,' then the fish will precede you. Rather, the kingdom is inside of you, and it is outside of you. When you come to know yourselves, then you will become known, and you will realize that it is you who are the sons of the living father. But if you will not know yourselves, you dwell in poverty and it is you who are that poverty."

(18) The disciples said to Jesus, "Tell us how our end will be."
Jesus said, "Have you discovered, then, the beginning, that you look for the end? For where the beginning is, there will the end be. Blessed is he who will take his place in the beginning; he will know the end and will not experience death."

(63) Jesus said, "There was a rich man who had much money. He said, 'I shall put my money to use so that I may sow, reap, plant, and fill my storehouse with produce, with the result that I shall lack nothing.' Such were his intentions, but that same night he died. Let him who has ears hear."

http://www.gnosis.org/naghamm/gthlamb.html

 

It's very interesting - too 'otherworldly' perhaps. I like the stuff about making the inside like the outside' & 'making the male like the famale and the female like the male'

 

when you read it you have to remember that its a translation. thats why a lot of it can be confusing. also gotta remember the level of discussion at the time. the world was all about simple relationships between figures and social structures, between man and environment, etc.

as for my oppinion,
"Jesus said, "Whoever is near me is near the fire, and whoever is far from me is far from the kingdom.""
he is talking about fire as in relation to the fact that the people around him were persecuted, but that if people stay away from him they wont learn.

"Jesus said, "Damn the Pharisees! They are like a dog sleeping in the cattle manger: the dog neither eats nor [lets] the cattle eat.""

i think hes saying the dog as in a carnivore, and the cattle as in a herbivore. when the dog sleeps in the cattle's eating/living area, the cattle wont intrude or go in there or whatever, but at the same time, the dog does not eat any of the food there, hes just sleeping.
the cattle could be denied food either because the dog will attack them, or perhaps the metaphor is simply referring to the status of teh creatures, or simply as if only one of the animals can be in the 'manger' at one time, meaning that if the dog is sleeping there, the cattle simply cant be there too, thus the resources are wasted.

 

as for the reference to mary's femininity, i think that passage especially must be taken into consideration different things that would be read out of the words when said, than now. as well as this, the translation may pick up wrong emphasis, male and female not necessarily relating to the fact of penis or vagina.

 

"14. Jesus said to them, "If you fast, you will bring sin upon yourselves, and if you pray, you will be condemned, and if you give to charity, you will harm your spirits."

this is clearly the biggest threat to the church. but i think you have to think of it in the context of the way jesus refers to his society. i see this as saying not to harm yourself or suffer for your religion, do not adress some higher being as if offloading your problems to god (because he talks of the answers as being everywhere, and in yourself, spirituality as a personal quest, not one of faith and asking for answers of for a better life, but finding answers, and making your life better by the way you percieve the world), and that 'charity' does not refer to the things it means now, but specifically to giving money to the church, who would have been wealthy jews most probably, who told people to donate money in order for god to love them more or whatever. just think hillsong.

 

Hi StonerBill ~ just responding to you invitation from the other thread where this came up.
Putting aside all of the religious hokus-pokus, misinterpretation & mistranslation (intentional, incidental, or unintentional, whatever the case may be), and whether or not JC was an actual historically present divine person..........
I believe that there was archaic knowledge that was spoken throughout the ages which taught the truth of life and reality to those who truly sought to find. Knowledge of this truth could set anyone knowing it free from the "shackles" of the existential paradigm that prevails in the material world, as well as more importantly open the seeker to the great truth and power of reality. This archaic knowledge was taught in secret so as to aviod retribution by those who would enslave humankind for their own gain and power. Certain personages taught this knowledge, and the powers (& principalities) that be in the world put such teachers to horrendous death so as to deter followers, the myth of which is perpetuated (though highly distorted) in the christian relgion (one of the powers and principalities in my view).
The essence of the archaic knowledge was preserved for the good of humankind over vast tracts of time in order to pass on the truth of being so as to free people from the paradigm of a limited world view, and was hidden in secret locations when the most concerted attack on this truth & knowledge came about at the hands of the early to medieval christian church. The book of thomas is a remnant relic of such knowledge.
Thus my post in the other thread ~
108 Jesus said, "Whosoever drinks from my mouth will become like me; I myself shall become that person, and the hidden things will be revealed to that person."
Place this with the 'jesus' messages ~
Ask and it shall be given; seek and ye shall find; knock and it will be opened unto thee....
The Kingdom of God is within you
Know the truth and the truth will set you free
~ and you have a prescription for opening the mind to the truth of life and reality as well as a divine creative power (GOD) that resides within each and every person.
All you need do is put it into practice.
This knoweledge is the motivation behind my CDSubliminal products which are designed to greatly accelerate the process.
But the bad people don't want anyone to know this! and such people fight tooth and nail to rope as many people into false beliefs (religion).

Know the truth and the truth will set you free

 

i believe the wise knows only that he knows nothing, I see it as a continuous search of truth, that there is always more to learn. do you believe there is a truth that can be known in its entirety?

 

From what you've just said I firstly believe that you might be reading something into what I've written.
My post is not a claim of absolute knowledge. Absolutism is a self-defeating paradigmatic mind-set.
One of the greatest problems with posting is that whoever reads the post is liable to read their own idiosyncracies, prejudices, beliefs, fears into the post. ie from theiir paradigmatic viewpoint. This happens so often that I never reveal my discoveries unl;ess personally requested.
Read my post as a sharing of a discovery. That is all that it is. Take it or leave it. It is not a dissertation on belief (paradigm). What I believe is neither here nor there. What you discover using the method as outlined in my post is much much more important were you wise enough to put it into practice instead of talking about it.
But maybe I've misread the intention of your post as well. LOL Clarify, maybe?

 

im referring to 'know the truth and it will set you free'. but i dont believe anyone can ever know the absolute truth.

so i assumed since you repeated the 'know the truth and it will set you free', because you believe so(because of what i stated), and so i was asking whether my interpretation of your post was correct, that you believe that there is a truth that you can fully descover and thus be set free of whatever it is one is bound by in ignorance

 

to me it sounds like jesus knows the ultimate truth in these passages. if youre enlightened isnt that knowing ultimate truth?

 

One must wonder if the "ultimate truth" is an end, or a beginning.

I think the point is that the Pharisees did not have gnosis, and neither did they allow anyone else to have it. They held the people in thrawl to them, slaves to the false wisdom they doled out in bits and pieces to the people, calling it the Law. They were unenlightened, and because they desired power, fame, and riches, they did not allow others to be enlightened either, so they could decieve, manipulate and take from them all they wanted.

 

i guess the manger is the position of resource (knowlege/gnosis), yet theyre not using it, and due to their occupation as authority, the people cant use it either



i personally see englightenment as perspective to view knowlege, not the knowlege itself

(light is shone on the knowlege so that it can be seen, the term englightenment making no reference to what the light is allowing to be seen)

 

I think you may have nailed it Bill. An enlightened person can't see all of reality all at the same time, but he can see whatever part of reality he's looking at.

"Recognise that which is within your sight, and that which is hidden from you will become plain to you. For there is nothing hidden which will not become manifest".