Gospel of Thomas is Canonical

[Shade]

Gospel of Thomas is canonical

Gospel of Thomas #70
"bring out what is within you, for what you do not bring out will destroy you"

parallels mark 11:25 and luke 6:37

Mark 11:25
"And when you stand praying, if you hold anything against anyone, forgive them, so that your Father in heaven may forgive you your sins.”

Luke 6:37
"Do not judge, and you will not be judged. Do not condemn, and you will not be condemned. Forgive, and you will be forgiven"

The Dating

Gospel of Thomas was found way before the others of the Nag Hammadi in Oxyrhynhus Egypt. They named it Oxyus Papyri 1 654 and 655 dated to 150-200 C.E and it was found along with the works of Mathew and Luke that were dated to 150-190 C.E. The fragments found of Thomas are older than some of the fragments of new testament gospel text and about as old as the oldest we have.

Gospel of John is canonical and is clearly a refutation of Thomas in the greek manner of a polemic which wqas common for the time.

Gospel of John dated to around 50-90 C.E.is a polemic of the gospel of Thomas proving that the Gospel of Thomas was written even before the gospel of John, the dating of Thomas as 150-200 CE is likely a copy of an earlier version.



Helmet Kester a renowned new testament scholar believes it was composed during the first half of the first century with some of the writing even predating that of the canonical gospels. Dr Peggels, a student of his, agrees namely because that the way in which you decide on which writing predates the other is looking at the style in which it was written, styles change drastically over time, no cap. This is a very good tell in what period something was written. (science of paleography)



Thomas shares about 40% of passages with Mathew and Luke so you can actually use paleography to see that Thomas denotes an earlier source.



Hebrew Gospel of Mathew is the first gospel written that is known, Mathew was a tax collector so he had the ability to write.

The Gospel of Thomas starts off with a quote that comes from the Hebrew Gospel of Mathew

H. Gospel of Mathew

"he who seeks will not stop seeking until he finds; and having found he will be amazed; having been amazed he will reign; and having reigned. he will rest."

Gospel of Thomas

"These are the words the living Christ spoke;"

"He who seeks, let him not cease seeking until he finds; and when he finds he will be troubled, and when he is troubled he will be amazed, and he will reign over the All."

(this seems to coincide with the canonical Matt as well 7:7-11 just not in such a straightforward quote)



Other Parallels

Other parallels in Thomas to canon script include; but are not limited to.

Mark 4:30-32
=
Gospel of Thomas #20

Mathew 18:12-13
=
Gospel of Thomas #107
+ More about 40% to be more precise mimics Yeshua's Parables.
There are many more quotes and it's likely that Mathew, Mark and Luke didn't get these sayings from Thomas but rather they got them from the same original "Q" source which Thomas would have as well.



Words of the living Christ

Dr. Bert Ehrman agrees that it is possible the Gospel of Thomas got the sayings in which they were more directly said or written rather than having anything extra added to them or taken from them. That is to say...

The Sayings in Thomas are likely closer to what Jesus originally said.

John's depiction of Thomas in the gospel of John seems to of been done in jealousy and goes a route in deifying Jesus that tries to degrade the light in every man, woman and child. The truth is, Jesus is deified just by a person recognizing the light within oneself.

 

[deci belle]

Thank you, Shade, for bringing this out— especially the last part:

Dr. Bert Ehrman agrees that it is possible the Gospel of Thomas got the sayings in which they were more directly said or written rather than having anything extra added to them or taken from them. That is to say...

The Sayings in Thomas are likely closer to what Jesus originally said.

John's depiction of Thomas in the gospel of John seems to of been done in jealousy and goes a route in deifying Jesus that tries to degrade the light in every man, woman and child. The truth is, Jesus is deified just by a person recognizing the light within oneself.

Above italics, mine… this a big problem with hagiographers, and a hallmark of immature practice. I call this phenomena the conceit of ignorance. Jesus did not intimate that the light was greater or lesser; such that the light does not depend on the person.

That "Jesus is deified just by one recognizing the light within oneself.", is sublime insight.

 

[Shade]

That "Jesus is deified just by one recognizing the light within oneself.", is sublime insight.

Tyvm, when that came to mind it clicked and really resonated, I think it holds a lot of truth, more specifically I should of said "The Christ is deified just by the recognizing the light within oneself" but since this thread was on Gospel of Thomas and Yeshua, hindsight is 20/20.
I read an interesting article on biophotons and consciousness and how Halo's of light around enlightened individuals holds some scientific merit in the regard of higher states of consciousness. If i read that before this I probably would of mentioned something to that effect and the light, (enLIGHTenment)

 

[cormundum]

The whole discussion is moot since Thomas wasn't canonized. Since it wasn't canonized at Nicaea, it's not canonical, by definition.

Now Catholics/Orthodox accept all sorts of non-canonical Scripture as inspirational and important, like the Shepherd of Hermas/Hermes. Loads of oral tradition also. So does this mean that the so-called "gospel" of Thomas is evil? Absolutely not. There is wheat among the chaff, but canonical it can never be called.

 

[Omee]

I hope you don't mind this slightly joking post.

heaven-affirming jesus trans surgery​

114. Simon Peter said to them, "Make Mary leave us, for females don't deserve life." Jesus said, "Look, I will guide her to make her male, so that she too may become a living spirit resembling you males. For every female who makes herself male will enter the kingdom of Heaven."

 

[deci belle]

Fortunately, cormundum, there are those who do not depend on the politics of historical Nicaean hierarchical hegemony to determine that Thomas' record is canonical, despite the fact that its inclusion is not ordained.

Wearing the canonical blinders of Nicaea in the face of reality is apparently moot, as I see it.

 

[MorganBlack]

Right! Not canonical. But if you enjoy it, please continue.

The Gospel of Thomas, which I actually very much like, is classified as Apocrypha or Pseudepigrapha, writings falsely attributed to a biblical figure.

And let me add, speaking as a very heretical Folk Catholic, can y'all please leave the Church alone? I actually like having a stable, fixed point of tradition to circle back to when I need to pull back a bit, integrate, and reflect. There’s no need to dissolve the whole institution, even if often flawed, into individualized mystical soup.

To be clear, I absolutely and totally support, on an individual level, you following your own heart's wild prompting. But someone please tell me why the hell do Protestants always have to smear their own highly personal beef and stuff over everything, and undo tradition, culture, and institutions? Tell me why it's not just solipsism meets narcissism.

People barely even know about, let alone practice, the deeply mystical practices in Catholicism we have already - and you want to add MORE? Why? To relititage ancient Euporean tribal grudges?

Now personally, I think Buddhism (something I like) is in there somewhere. Buddhism probably influenced Hellenic mystical culture during the time of Alexander. If you enjoy this line of thinking, you might also like the book The Shape of Ancient Thought by Thomas McEvilley. It’s the gold standard for exploring how much Greek and Indian philosophy influenced each other.

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

 

[Beyond Everything]

, can y'all please leave the Church alone?

Leave the pederastic, misogynistic institution alone! lol

 

[MorganBlack]

Ha! Point. Psychopaths are 4.5% of general adult population, and nothing can cure them. One day we might have a medical test to weed the out of all institutions.

Post automatically merged: Dec 23, 2025

Ah! Latino to Anglo translation issue. Just to clarify, so what I said does not get further misinterpreted. I am not suggesting that the Church, as a bureaucratic institution, is beyond criticism.

In effect there are actually many Catholicisms, above I was referring specially only to the Church's mystical tradition. The Church has two profiles, the two main divisions, the Petrine , which is hierarchical, institutional, male-led, and my favorite, the Marian, which is mystical, interior, and inwardly nurturing. Many theologians argue the Marian profile is actually the more enduring and primary of the two. And i agree.

Some of the Church’s mystics and women, like St. Joan of Arc and St. John of the Cross were both persecuted by the institutional Church before being canonized.

Who cares what a bunch of pedophile Petrine bankers think? And I am not sure why people who are not Catholic even care.

Like, I said leave the Church alone. It's a distraction from the enduring more important interior it transmits.

 

[Shade]

The whole discussion is moot since Thomas wasn't canonized. Since it wasn't canonized at Nicaea, it's not canonical, by definition.

Now Catholics/Orthodox accept all sorts of non-canonical Scripture as inspirational and important, like the Shepherd of Hermas/Hermes. Loads of oral tradition also. So does this mean that the so-called "gospel" of Thomas is evil? Absolutely not. There is wheat among the chaff, but canonical it can never be called.

I pointed out that at least 40% of it if not more is already in canonical gospels. So I do think it can rightfully be called "canonical" whether the church agreed to add it or not, much of it already survives in the parables Jesus taught.

Post automatically merged: Monday at 11:11 AM

writings falsely attributed to a biblical figure.

Uhh.. yeah and I pointed out it clearly should not be considered to be falsely attributed to a biblical figure... The church dropped the ball on this one, mistakes happen and thats ok but Churches and scientific institutions really, really don't like going against what they have going for them, even if transparency would be beneficial which is why i give St. Jerome a lot of credit for owning up to the "lucifer" mistranslation when he translated the vulgate, he admitted it was done for convenience and he was in error for doing so. That's commendable. many bibles stopped using lucifer but the stigma remained because it's not publicly addressed, nor do people get corrected for using lucifer as a synonym for satan, I wouldn't doubt many pastors still don't know that lucifer is simply a noun and I'm sure the ones that do most probably don't bother mentioning it, correcting others for misusing it or even bother stop using it themselves (sometimes it could be out of habit rather than nefariously but regardless). I give props where its due. RN, they could make history buy just mentioning that the Gospel of Thomas has an interesting history and should be looked at and the book of John examined a s a possible polemic.

 

[juanitos]

Right! Not canonical. But if you enjoy it, please continue.

The Gospel of Thomas, which I actually very much like, is classified as Apocrypha or Pseudepigrapha, writings falsely attributed to a biblical figure.

And let me add, speaking as a very heretical Folk Catholic, can y'all please leave the Church alone? I actually like having a stable, fixed point of tradition to circle back to when I need to pull back a bit, integrate, and reflect. There’s no need to dissolve the whole institution, even if often flawed, into individualized mystical soup.

To be clear, I absolutely and totally support, on an individual level, you following your own heart's wild prompting. But someone please tell me why the hell do Protestants always have to smear their own highly personal beef and stuff over everything, and undo tradition, culture, and institutions? Tell me why it's not just solipsism meets narcissism.

People barely even know about, let alone practice, the deeply mystical practices in Catholicism we have already - and you want to add MORE? Why? To relititage ancient Euporean tribal grudges?

Now personally, I think Buddhism (something I like) is in there somewhere. Buddhism probably influenced Hellenic mystical culture during the time of Alexander. If you enjoy this line of thinking, you might also like the book The Shape of Ancient Thought by Thomas McEvilley. It’s the gold standard for exploring how much Greek and Indian philosophy influenced each other.

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

I want to point out something very interesting. Originally, the first representations of Buddha in indian art were not antropomorfic ones..!! but under the influence of greek art Buddha was represented as a nice, harmonious male figure! from second century BC onward..

 

[MorganBlack]

I have a Buddhist friend who follows the theory that Christianity is the result of direct Buddhism.

I am more of the opinion that it influenced the entire Hellenic culture during the Alexandrian Empire and shaped Neoplatonism, and Christianity. So Christianity isn't a direct result of Buddhism, but it was born into a Greco-Roman world that had already been "seeded" by Buddhist ideas for 300 years.

It is a recorded historical fact that the Indian Emperor Ashoka (3rd century BC) sent Buddhist missionaries to the Hellenistic kingdoms, including to the court of Ptolemy II in Alexandria.

Clement of Alexandria, one of the earliest Church Fathers (2nd century AD) explicitly mentions the Buddha by name ("Boutta"), noting his followers honored him for his extraordinary sanctity. This shows the early Christian fathers were at least aware of Buddhism.

And if I recall, while Wikipedia, this is decent:

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Whatever the historical reality, the Buddhist Passions (Kleshas) are in my opinion, are a pretty exact analog of the Seven Deadly Sins , that create 'Buddhist Hell 'for you, and work as two different maps of the same landscape.

 

[Sabbatius]

Never saw this post until now.

The main rejection at the Council of Nicaea for the Gospel of Thomas from the Canon was due to the rejection within the majority of parishes for Church use long before the Council itself. It was also used by the Gnostics and documented as a source text by Gnostics, whom were also rejected as a heresy even before the Council of Nicaea.

My personal take is it was a later compilation as it was not complete until the end of the first century. What was documented was not a complete copy and later copies showed multiple authorships. I personally believe the Gospel itself borrowed from others to create a reason for valid use in the parishes.

I view Gnosticism the same way as I view Theosophy. I am not a fan.

 

[MorganBlack]

Same. Theosophy and Theosophical-derived systems of modern magic bother me. I’d like to hear your thoughts more someday, Sabbatius.

In the cosmology of Iamblichus and Proclus, the Sublunar realm - the atmosphere between Earth and the Moon - is the domain of Phantasia (images), Daimons (mediating spirits), and Passions. The Church, while not perfect, hates the disorder of the Passions but loves the substance of the body. Compared to Sethian Gnosticism, where the body was called a 'tomb' or 'shackles' we had to strip off to let the divine spark return to the Light.

And in my view, in their desire to make Tantra for Europeans, in Theosophy there is too much "confusion of the planes" - using daemonic sublunar colors, shapes, and names to describe transcendent states of consciousness. I’m like, "Dickheads, where exactly do you think you’re going, space boy - outer space?" Non-visionary Zen works better here to avoid astral tourism , imho. Save the colorful stuff - all the smells and bells and dramatis personae - for a Theurgy practice.

 

[juanitos]

we should be aware that the four canonical gospels were written between 66-110..so..a generation or even more after Jesus.!!. Nobody actually knows how many things were taken out or added from the original teachings... That is a fact! Moreover, there were many versions of the Gospels that were circulating in second century or later.. but the bishops- the institution of the Church- decided what is good or dangerous..according to their preferences. Who could possiblly say after more than a century how were actually the teachings of Jesus look like?? I would say that maybe some gnostic writings would be much closer to those original teachings..

Post automatically merged: Yesterday at 8:24 PM

and there's something else... that no one imagines... I would say that these halos/nimbs around the heads of saints in Christian art from the first centuries... and later on from Byzantine paintings were borrowed precisely from Buddhist art where paintings and statues of Buddha have halos both around the head - but also around the body!

 

[MorganBlack]

Still piecing the historical picture together, but Catholicism is fundamentally esoteric.

I think the European history of brutal resource competition obscured some of that. The Eastern Church held on to more "esotericism" - in it's "outer court" of everyday families, weddings, raising children, partially because of the relative peace provided by the Byzantine Empire, and also held and nourished it the rich soil of the native Neoplatonic mysticism already implicit in medieval Greek culture. See Dr. Sasha Chaitow's substack.

Whereas the Western Church was dealing with a bunch of violent savages engaged in tribute warfare in a frozen mud hut hellscape. After the fall of Rome Europe did not recover it population levels until the 1800's, whereas Byzantium had the comparative luxury to speak more than just survival.

Estoterica:
Introduction to Merkavah Mysticism - 4 of 15 - The Visions of Paul

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

See also Dr. Sasha Chaitow's substack.
Seriously go read all her posts!

Byzantium, the West, and Europe’s Divided Cultural

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Continuity, Adaptation, and the Layered Life of Greek Ritual: Clearing the Air

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!