Church's Stance On " Gospel Of Thomas " ?

[ChicagoGuy]

Been wondering what the Church's official stance on this was. Some say it's the most authentic of the Gospels of Christ from that time and place ( ie. more autentic then the 4 gospels we have today in the New testament ), some say those are the actual words Christ spoke not a persons perspective on what Jesus said ( like the Gospels are said to be ) , then some say it's just Gnostic rabble not to be paid attention to !

Just wondering what the boards thought are on thsi and what the Church official stance is

thanks

[prisonchaplain]

I'm not LDS, but I believe I am right that the Gospel of Thomas is NOT LDS canon, so carries less official authority than the four NT gospels do. Furthermore, whether you agree with this particular writing or not, there is no question but that it is a Gnostic work. Gnosticism was rejected as heresy by the Church of its day, and I've never heard that the LDS have embraced this line of theology.

[Snow]

I don't know... but I wonder what the Church's stance is on lawn bowling and quantum physics?

[Palerider]

I don't know... but I wonder what the Church's stance is on lawn bowling and quantum physics?

lawn bowling is pretty exciting this time of year...then again so is watching paint dry.... B)

[john doe]

I've got nothing against quantum physics. I say if you are seeking the truth, go for it.

[Traveler]

I don't know... but I wonder what the Church's stance is on lawn bowling and quantum physics?

I have encountered few at church that understand quantum physics - let alone have a stand. But then many Christians (PC an exception) do not even understand their own religion let alone anything to do with science.

The Traveler

[Traveler]

I'm not LDS, but I believe I am right that the Gospel of Thomas is NOT LDS canon, so carries less official authority than the four NT gospels do. Furthermore, whether you agree with this particular writing or not, there is no question but that it is a Gnostic work. Gnosticism was rejected as heresy by the Church of its day, and I've never heard that the LDS have embraced this line of theology.

I am quite disappointed that this is the general stand of many Christians concerning any writings of the early Church they do not like. I find it interesting that the so call Gnostics made greater efforts to preserve their scripture than did the Christians since we have earlier copies of such documents than that of the other books of the NT. I believe this is done to discredit the writings as heresy in the same manner the Dead Sea Scrolls are called Essen Scripture. Even though some scribes of Damascus (Qumran) were also at Masada - that we know could not have been Essen.

Most Christians of today judge a people and their scripture according to the teaching of their clergy before they even read a word from the book or know a thing that they did. See John 7:51.

I am touched by the spirit of the writings and with out question these writings and the deeds of the people that kept these writings are as inspired (if not more so) than the Creeds and deeds coming from the Christians of 325 AD.

The Traveler

[Snow]

I find it interesting that the so call Gnostics made greater efforts to preserve their scripture than did the Christians since we have earlier copies of such documents than that of the other books of the NT.

That's hardly accurate.

Mainstream Christianity at first used amateur scribes (lots and lots of them) to maintain and transmit religious writings and then tons of "professional" scribes and copyists. Countless hours and years and more went into the effort.

The Gnostics put some writings in jars and buried them.

[Moksha]

Their stance on the Gospels of Thomas and Phillip may be similar to their stance on the Apocrypha, which I believe is to feel free to read it and get what you can out of it.

BTW, these Gnostic-like gospels are not part of the Dead Sea Scrolls. They were found in a separate trove.

It is a shame that the monks throughout the ages did not preserve all of these religious texts, whether they were cannonized or not. Of course the biggest shame of all, was when Christians torched the Great Library of Alexandria and most of the worlds history and learning were lost.

[ChicagoGuy]

<div class='quotemain'>

I find it interesting that the so call Gnostics made greater efforts to preserve their scripture than did the Christians since we have earlier copies of such documents than that of the other books of the NT.

That's hardly accurate.

Mainstream Christianity at first used amateur scribes (lots and lots of them) to maintain and transmit religious writings and then tons of "professional" scribes and copyists. Countless hours and years and more went into the effort.

The Gnostics put some writings in jars and buried them.

I have read/heard that it was the people who wrote ( pieced together ) The 4 gospels ( Mathew,Mark,Luke, John ) - went more for what everyone could agree upon rather than an accurate portrayal to the teachings of Christ. Actually that is one of the things that drew me to the BOM.

Granted I have no clue really what the "gnostics" were - or if they were really Christians at all - But the fact they have something saved that predates when the Gospels were put together is pretty signifigant. To just dismiss it as rubbish because you think they were just some cave dwellers that put a few things they found in jars and buried them I think is foolish - but then again maybe they were.

[prisonchaplain]

<div class='quotemain'>

I find it interesting that the so call Gnostics made greater efforts to preserve their scripture than did the Christians since we have earlier copies of such documents than that of the other books of the NT.

That's hardly accurate.

Mainstream Christianity at first used amateur scribes (lots and lots of them) to maintain and transmit religious writings and then tons of "professional" scribes and copyists. Countless hours and years and more went into the effort.

The Gnostics put some writings in jars and buried them.

Muslims treat their sacred writings with much greater reverence than we do ours. They are astonished that we would mark up God's word the way we do, etc. I can respect the spirit of awe they have for physical presentatons of God's message to us, but I suspect that such has little to do with the veracity of the message itself.

[Traveler]

<div class='quotemain'>

I find it interesting that the so call Gnostics made greater efforts to preserve their scripture than did the Christians since we have earlier copies of such documents than that of the other books of the NT.

That's hardly accurate.

Mainstream Christianity at first used amateur scribes (lots and lots of them) to maintain and transmit religious writings and then tons of "professional" scribes and copyists. Countless hours and years and more went into the effort.

The Gnostics put some writings in jars and buried them.

Would you highlight for me and the rest of the forum the basis difference in the doctrine and social behaviors from the scriptures and writings of the so called Gnostics of Egypt with say the Dead Sea Scrolls. the scriptures of Zoroaster in Persia and Christians pre Constantine. Lets touch on basic doctrine like the nature of G-d, the need for a Messiah, and pre-earth divine councils.

Thanks

The Traveler

<div class='quotemain'>

<div class='quotemain'>

I find it interesting that the so call Gnostics made greater efforts to preserve their scripture than did the Christians since we have earlier copies of such documents than that of the other books of the NT.

That's hardly accurate.

Mainstream Christianity at first used amateur scribes (lots and lots of them) to maintain and transmit religious writings and then tons of "professional" scribes and copyists. Countless hours and years and more went into the effort.

The Gnostics put some writings in jars and buried them.

Muslims treat their sacred writings with much greater reverence than we do ours. They are astonished that we would mark up God's word the way we do, etc. I can respect the spirit of awe they have for physical presentatons of God's message to us, but I suspect that such has little to do with the veracity of the message itself.

I would think that the effect that such message has on the behavior of the belevers has more to do with the veracity than any other consideration. For example did not Jesus tell us that we can best spot other believers by their fruits (fruits meaning deeds)?

It is because of your deeds that I value your opinion.

The Traveler

[AnthonyB]

Muslims treat their sacred writings with much greater reverence than we do ours. They are astonished that we would mark up God's word the way we do, etc. I can respect the spirit of awe they have for physical presentatons of God's message to us, but I suspect that such has little to do with the veracity of the message itself.

Isn't that because to Muslims the Koran is the only true representation of God, it is literally his words transmitted from heaven.

Whereas for Christians, Jesus is the word, the true representation of God on earth. The bible is just the pointer to Jesus, words of men written under inspiration but not the ultimate representation of God. People start with their image of God and ask how can Jesus be that. Whereas we should start with Jesus and ask what does that say about God.

[a-train]

Whereas for Christians, Jesus is the word, the true representation of God on earth. The bible is just the pointer to Jesus, words of men written under inspiration but not the ultimate representation of God. People start with their image of God and ask how can Jesus be that. Whereas we should start with Jesus and ask what does that say about God.

Amen and Amen.

-a-train

[prisonchaplain]

I would think that the effect that such message has on the behavior of the belevers has more to do with the veracity than any other consideration. For example did not Jesus tell us that we can best spot other believers by their fruits (fruits meaning deeds)?

It is because of your deeds that I value your opinion.

The Traveler

Well, sure. And the fruit of the spirit (know them by their fruits) is love. Some of the hardest, most productive workers are also insufferable. :-)

Also, keep in mind that Jesus makes us better than we are, not better than others. A Muslim could be very good on the goodness scale, whereas I might merely be good. However, without Jesus I would be unbearable. With Jesus, that Muslim might be an outright saint (think Catholic here).

So, if you want to get better, get more of the Holy Spirit in ya.

[Traveler]

<div class='quotemain'>

I would think that the effect that such message has on the behavior of the belevers has more to do with the veracity than any other consideration. For example did not Jesus tell us that we can best spot other believers by their fruits (fruits meaning deeds)?

It is because of your deeds that I value your opinion.

The Traveler

Well, sure. And the fruit of the spirit (know them by their fruits) is love. Some of the hardest, most productive workers are also insufferable. :-)

Also, keep in mind that Jesus makes us better than we are, not better than others. A Muslim could be very good on the goodness scale, whereas I might merely be good. However, without Jesus I would be unbearable. With Jesus, that Muslim might be an outright saint (think Catholic here).

So, if you want to get better, get more of the Holy Spirit in ya.

I am not sure I agree - If we as believers in Christ do not add light to the world we should realize our error and seek the greater light. Are not we commanded that we glorify G-d by seeing the light of G-d in the good works of others?

I believe there is a connection that cannot be broken between believing in G-d and being the example of G-d to others. I am not sure that an honest person will be converted by doctrine, regardless how pure or wonderful it its, from a hypocrite.

The Traveler

The Traveler

[prisonchaplain]

Traveler, perhaps you are comparing good and bad? I'm comparing good and better. I'm saying that the Spirit makes me better than I am, but that it is certainly conceivable that a non-believer is, simply by his nature, more humble, more giving, more altruistic than I am. The fact that someone else does better, minus the Spirit, does not negate the work the Holy Spirit has indeed done in me.

[Traveler]

Traveler, perhaps you are comparing good and bad? I'm comparing good and better. I'm saying that the Spirit makes me better than I am, but that it is certainly conceivable that a non-believer is, simply by his nature, more humble, more giving, more altruistic than I am. The fact that someone else does better, minus the Spirit, does not negate the work the Holy Spirit has indeed done in me.

I have no doubt that the spirit of G-d has been able to touch your heart and because of that you are a better person. Every heart that the spirit of G-d touches results is a better person.

I am suggesting that every good thing done by every person is because the Holy Spirit has touched them and influenced them for the good. Indeed I believe that G-d and the influence of the Holy Spirit are behind every good in every person.

But I am also putting forth the idea that men (all of us) are fallen and by our fallen nature are enemies of G-d. No one has, by their nature, a propensity or an acclivity of the good nature of G-d. Therefore, if any person demonstrates the goodness of divine nature it must be because of the Holy Spirit working within them.

One of the tenets of the LDS faith and doctrine is that we must seek by covenant after anything that is virtuous, lovely, of good report or praiseworthy. I believe this is much of the essence of Christ and those that are “borne” of the spirit and have become by covenant and ordinance new (not just better) creatures in Christ. Until we are borne of the spirit and new creatures in Christ we should not look upon any one of the good nature of G-d and think ourselves better off because we believe what we think is better. And after we are borne of Christ – I do not think a person that is borne of the Spirit can look upon that which is the good nature of G-d and not give praise to where it is due – even if that person is not sure themselves from where that goodness came.

The Traveler

[prisonchaplain]

I'm not sure I disagree with any of what you just said, Traveler. Further, I'm wondering if you are touching on a subject I'm currently reading about, in a book by Amos Yong. His interest is in a global pentecostal theology--one that finds the Spirit moving in all cultures, and in most faiths (yikes...non-Christian ones too).

He's not arguing for universalism, but rather that we look with discerning eyes for the goodness of God, wherever it might be found. In so doing, we might speak the life of our God unto the utter most parts of the world.

[Traveler]

I'm not sure I disagree with any of what you just said, Traveler. Further, I'm wondering if you are touching on a subject I'm currently reading about, in a book by Amos Yong. His interest is in a global pentecostal theology--one that finds the Spirit moving in all cultures, and in most faiths (yikes...non-Christian ones too).

He's not arguing for universalism, but rather that we look with discerning eyes for the goodness of God, wherever it might be found. In so doing, we might speak the life of our God unto the utter most parts of the world.

Already I like Amos Yong. However, I hate to admit, but the name Yong appears to be Asian. I believe Paul taught we should look for the goodness of G-d in ever person we encounter. But for some odd reason the idea seams to come from the East better than it does from the West.

Just for fun, I have a theory about this. I wonder if the Apostle Thomas had a hand in it. According to some traditions Thomas went to teach in the East. Buddhism (which had been around for about 150 years) suddenly explodes in Asia about the time Thomas may have been teaching. I have wondered if Christianity developed in Asia with differences because of culture and traditions with a look many Western Christians would not recognize. We LDS believe that even though much good remained in the world there were critical and necessary elements that were lost and needed to be restored before Christ returns. I find it interesting that the early Buddhist were very interested in Christian scripture and many of the early Buddhist temples kept copies of many of the NT Scriptures. Many of the early Buddhist have doctrines similar to Christ - for example there were 12 Bodhisattvas of tradition that in many ways is similar to the role of Apostle.

The Traveler

[prisonchaplain]

Interesting you should mention Buddhism. Professor Yong is a member of the Society for Christian-Buddhist Studies. See link for more information (and yes, he is Asian).

http://www.regent.edu/acad/schdiv/faculty_staff/yong.shtml

[Traveler]

Interesting you should mention Buddhism. Professor Yong is a member of the Society for Christian-Buddhist Studies. See link for more information (and yes, he is Asian).

http://www.regent.edu/acad/schdiv/faculty_staff/yong.shtml

Thank you for the tip. I have found an e-mail and I think professor Yong and I may have a little e-mail chat. I have some notes about a particular sect of Buddhism that I have always had a keen interest in. This would have been too funny had Professor Yong's first name been Brigham. :) maybe they are related

The Traveler

[orrinjelo]

Gospel of Thomas...

If you ever get a hold of it, look for the Hymn of the Pearl, it's amazing!!!

From what I understand, the GoT is considered not cannon, but can have value when read with the spirit of discernment.

[prisonchaplain]

Kinda like many of the posts at LDStalk, Orrin.

[snipe123]

Gospel of Thomas...

If you ever get a hold of it, look for the Hymn of the Pearl, it's amazing!!!

From what I understand, the GoT is considered not cannon, but can have value when read with the spirit of discernment.

The Gospel of Thomas and just about every other non-canoninical (sp?) work can be found here:

http://www.earlychristianwritings.com/

If you are interested in reading any and every great Christian work, including the works of the 5 apostolic fathers and 9 early apologists, they can be found here:

http://www.ccel.org/ccel/schaff/anf01.i.html

This particular link is to volume 1 in a ten volume series...all of which are on this site...I am currently reading the letters of Ignatius, Bishop of Antioch...fascinating...

The 1st Epistle of Clement to the Corinthians I found to be particularly good and it is filled with the Spirit...In part of it (chapt 45) he reprimands the Corinthians for expelling two bishops who had executed their duties with honor due to some unnamed controversy that was occuring locally...in chapter 55 he talks about the willing sacrifices of the early Christians, including one woman who sold herself into servitude in order to help feed the poor...pretty amazing stuff...By the way, Clement is thought to be a companion of Paul...

Thought some people might be interested in the links...