ON LOVE; PART XDII
ΑΩ•ΑΩ•ΑΩ•ΑΩ•ΑΩ•ΑΩ•ΑΩ•ΑΩ•ΑΩ•ΑΩ•ΑΩ•ΑΩ•ΑΩ•ΑΩ•ΑΩ•ΑΩ•ΑΩ•ΑΩ•ΑΩ•ΑΩ•ΑΩ•ΑΩ•ΑΩ•ΑΩ•ΑΩ•ΑΩ•ΑΩ•ΑΩ•ΑΩ•ΑΩ•ΑΩ•ΑΩ•ΑΩ•ΑΩ•Α
GoodWill IS Love in Action
ΑΩ•ΑΩ•ΑΩ•ΑΩ•ΑΩ•ΑΩ•ΑΩ•ΑΩ•ΑΩ•ΑΩ•ΑΩ•ΑΩ•ΑΩ•ΑΩ•ΑΩ•ΑΩ•ΑΩ•ΑΩ•ΑΩ•ΑΩ•ΑΩ•ΑΩ•ΑΩ•ΑΩ•ΑΩ•ΑΩ•ΑΩ•ΑΩ•ΑΩ•ΑΩ•ΑΩ•ΑΩ•ΑΩ•ΑΩ•Α
The Gospel of Thomas
These are the hidden words that the living Jesus spoke. And Didymos Judas Thomas wrote them down.
(40) Jesus says: “A grapevine was planted outside (the vineyard) of the Father. And since it is not supported, it will be pulled up by its roots (and) will perish.“
(41) Jesus says: “Whoever has (something) in his hand, (something more) will be given to him. And whoever has nothing, even the little he has will be taken from him.“
(42) Jesus says: “Become passers-by.“
(43) His disciples said to him: “Who are you to say this to us?”….”Do you not realized from what I say to you who I am? But you have become like the Jews! They love the tree, (but) they hate its fruit. Or they love the fruit, (but) they hate the tree.”
(44) Jesus says: “Whoever blasphemes against the Father, it will be forgiven him. And whoever blasphemes against the Son, it will be forgiven him. But whoever blasphemes against the Holy Spirit, it will not be forgiven him, neither on earth nor in heaven.“
(45) Jesus says: “Grapes are not harvested from thorns, nor are figs picked from thistles, for they do not produce fruit. A good person brings forth good from his treasure. A bad person brings (forth) evil from the bad treasure that is in his heart, and (in fact) he speaks evil. For out of the abundance of the heart he brings forth evil.“14
In the last essay we began our discussion of the forty third saying from Thomas’ Gospel and we found here a rather obscure question and a seemingly more obscure answer. Yesterday we looked at the question as though it could not be as confrontational as it appears to be and this is yet our understanding as the very word disciple prohibits if you will this kind of address to one’s Master. From Doresse we read this as “Who art thou, who tellest us these things?” and it IS in this tone that we suspect that this is intended to be read. The question has precedence in the Master’s words from the accepted gospels and we KNOW from reading the gospels that the disciples, even the Twelve, have some difficulty in Truly understanding the just who the Master is; here, while they may KNOW that He is the Christ, they do not quite understand what the Christ Truly IS as they try, like we do yet today, to overcome all the contrary things that they had learned, some of them being rather religious Jews according to the doctrines of the day. We gave several examples of times where the disciples are told the nature of the Christ, seem to understand, and yet ask again or wonder some more about who His Truly IS. So here in Thomas’ Gospel we have but another question though one without the context of time; we KNOW only that Jesus had been teaching them and they are here questioning not so much who He is, they KNOW that He IS the Christ while they do not understand this, and they want to KNOW who He is in relation to the revelation they are receiving from Him.
As we read the Gospels, especially Luke and John, we find that there are more, many more, disciples than just the Twelve; in Luke we read about the Seventy that are sent out after the first twelve and in John we read that: “From that time many of his disciples went back, and walked no more with him” (John 6:66) and here, with no number, we can only assume that it is many. We should understand here two things about the nature of the disciple and these are perplexities that exist yet today; first the idea of disciple as we use it in relation be being a disciple of the Master is tied to Jesus own words on what exactly a disciple IS; that the disciple has forsaken ALL and that the disciple keeps His word and that the disciple produces much fruit which is the outward appearance of keeping His words. We understand this from His sayings:
- “So likewise, whosoever he be of you that forsaketh not all that he hath, he cannot be my disciple“; and this is the culmination of His previous sayings that “If any man come to me, and hate not his father, and mother, and wife, and children, and brethren, and sisters, yea, and his own life also, he cannot be my disciple. And whosoever doth not bear his cross, and come after me, cannot be my disciple” (Luke 14;33, 26-27). We must of course remember that hate here in this context should be understood as to love less as it is framed in the like verses from Matthew’s version of these sayings.
- “If ye continue in my word, then are ye my disciples indeed“. This is said in conjunction with John’s words that “Then said Jesus to those Jews which believed on him” (John 8:31), and we should see here a hint of the duplicity of which we speak regarding the meaning of this word. Here we see disciples as those who are keeping His word and “disciples indeed” as those who should continue to do so.
- “Herein is my Father glorified, that ye bear much fruit; so shall ye be my disciples” (John 15:8). In these words we see the relationship of the disciple with the fruit that he bears in his Life and this would not likely be those who DO NOT continue in His word.
On this we based our view of the disciple of the Lord; these are His words and these are the True criteria for what we call discipleship. But we DO NOT KNOW what is meant by John when the word disciple is used as we see above in those who leave Him because they could not accept what it is that He said. In this light we do not KNOW Thomas’ meaning either. This is the other meaning perhaps of the word disciple as it is commonly used yet today; the lexicon tells us that this Greek word mathetes means: a learner, pupil, disciple 2; and it is perhaps from here that the idea of learner and pupil are attached to the word disciple rather that the word disciple being another meaning for the Greek word and being one that maintains the Master’s standards. Here then, if the idea of Thomas above regarding disciple is in reference to the weaker understanding of the word, we can liken this to the whole of the exchange that we find in John’s Gospel where “many of his disciples went back“; not that this will change the nature of the question because we see this in the overall confusion of ALL the disciples and this including the Twelve for whom we have evidence of this. The question then being valid and non-confrontational by a myriad of disciples including the Twelve; let us move to the answer.
If we can liken the answer to the words from John’s Gospel where the Master speaks of Himself as the “bread of life” in an exchange that begins with the ‘question’ from the gathered disciples and others: “What sign shewest thou then, that we may see, and believe thee? what dost thou work“. Now this is the question of these same people of whom the apostle later call at least some disciples, these are those that followed the Master to Capernaum across the sea and it is in this context that we present these ideas from Thomas. Not necessarily the same time and place but rather one similar to what we read from John:
“What sign shewest thou then, that we may see, and believe thee? what dost thou work? Our fathers did eat manna in the desert; as it is written, He gave them bread from heaven to eat. Then Jesus said unto them, Verily, verily, I say unto you, Moses gave you not that bread from heaven; but my Father giveth you the true bread from heaven. For the bread of God is he which cometh down from heaven, and giveth life unto the world. Then said they unto him, Lord, evermore give us this bread. And Jesus said unto them, I am the bread of life: he that cometh to me shall never hunger; and he that believeth on me shall never thirst. But I said unto you, That ye also have seen me, and believe not. All that the Father giveth me shall come to me; and him that cometh to me I will in no wise cast out. For I came down from heaven, not to do mine own will, but the will of him that sent me” (John 6:30-38).
Can we see here the type of response that one would give? perhaps even as disciples who are not among the Twelve or of their ilk? can we see here the question posed above “Who are you to say this to us“? Again we say that if the Twelve and others like them are involved in asking the question, it would not be confrontational. The dialogue continues:
“The Jews then murmured at him, because he said, I am the bread which came down from heaven. And they said, Is not this Jesus, the son of Joseph, whose father and mother we know? how is it then that he saith, I came down from heaven?” (John 6:41-42).
These are not disciples in John’s text but there are disciples among these as we read on and the Twelve are here as well. Here, after the Master’s dissertation on the “bread of life” and on the eating of His flesh and the drinking of His blood, words that yet today are sore hard to understand, we find the further response of those in His audience as the apostle tells us:
“Many therefore of his disciples, when they had heard this, said, This is an hard saying; who can hear it? When Jesus knew in himself that his disciples murmured at it, he said unto them, Doth this offend you? What and if ye shall see the Son of man ascend up where he was before? It is the spirit that quickeneth; the flesh profiteth nothing: the words that I speak unto you, they are spirit, and they are life. But there are some of you that believe not. For Jesus knew from the beginning who they were that believed not, and who should betray him. And he said, Therefore said I unto you, that no man can come unto me, except it were given unto him of my Father. From that time many of his disciples went back, and walked no more with him” (John 6:60:66).
We should be able to sense in this part the ideas that we present above regarding two types of disciples in the eyes of John as he calls them disciples here who the Master would KNOW “believed not” and that we KNOW do not meet the Master’s criteria. We should note as well that this may be the context that Thomas uses as well in the ideas presented in this saying. Here in Thomas we should be able to understand also the point in the Master’s response saying that “Do you not realized from what I say to you who I am?” as the same is True in these words from John; the Master clearly points out to ALL who He IS and His relationship to God the Father and this after many miracles and the feeding of the multitude that many had witnessed and had taken part in.
And this then is the context of the final part of the saying and the reference here to the Jews should be seen as those who do not follow Him and are not among His many disciples but are rather followers of the Pharisees and the other religious rulers of the day. In John the Master confounds them with His talk of eating His flesh and drinking His blood and He KNOWS in saying these things that many would not understand these parabolic words. In Thomas, as the Master says: “you have become like the Jews! They love the tree, (but) they hate its fruit. Or they love the fruit, (but) they hate the tree“, we should see similarly the confounding idea of His saying which to us would say that they don’t KNOW what they like and what they believe and, combining these two frames of reference from John and Thomas we can see Jesus saying: ‘you can believe in me and what I say when you are partaking of the miracles; witnessing healing and perhaps being healed, and eating of the bread that was created for your pleasure but when I tell you these Truths that are contrary to your doctrinal beliefs, you CAN NOT accept them’. Can we see here that He is saying that some Love the things He does but not who He is while others the contrary? There are different renderings of this saying among our translators but ALL say basically the same thing; without the added conjunctions of and and but and or the ideas do take on a slightly different tone where it IS NOT one or the other but rather that these Judeans do both and all at the same time. The Interlinear renders this as “rather, you, have come to be like those Judeans, for they love the tree, they hate his fruit, and, they love the fruit, they hate the tree“.
The next saying is one that is found in the synoptic gospels in much the same way as that is offered by Thomas:
- “Whoever blasphemes against the Father, it will be forgiven him. And whoever blasphemes against the Son, it will be forgiven him. But whoever blasphemes against the Holy Spirit, it will not be forgiven him, neither on earth nor in heaven” (Thomas 44).
- “And whosoever shall speak a word against the Son of man, it shall be forgiven him: but unto him that blasphemeth against the Holy Ghost it shall not be forgiven” (Luke 12:10).
- “Verily I say unto you, All sins shall be forgiven unto the sons of men, and blasphemies wherewith soever they shall blaspheme: But he that shall blaspheme against the Holy Ghost hath never forgiveness, but is in danger of eternal damnation” (Mark 3:28-29).
- “Wherefore I say unto you, All manner of sin and blasphemy shall be forgiven unto men: but the blasphemy against the Holy Ghost shall not be forgiven unto men. And whosoever speaketh a word against the Son of man, it shall be forgiven him: but whosoever speaketh against the Holy Ghost, it shall not be forgiven him, neither in this world, neither in the world to come” (Matthew 12:31-32).
We should note here that even in the synoptic gospels this is an obscure saying that is only understandable by many in the nebulous doctrines of the church where meanings are ascribed to Holy Ghost and the idea of how one would blaspheme Him. In our view there is naught that is not forgivable and that there is a meaning here that is much deeper and not nearly understood by doctrine. Some of the available commentary on this saying:
- F. F. Bruce writes: “This is a development of the saying found in Luke 12.10 (cf. also Mark 3.28 f.; Matthew 12.32). Whereas the canonical saying contrasts the unpardonable sin of blasphemy against the Holy Spirit with the relatively venial sin of blasphemy against the Son of Man, the Gospel of Thomas (surprisingly) adds blasphemy against the Father as relatively venial. The formulation is trinitarian, as that in the canonical Gospels is not. For the phrase ‘neither on earth nor in heaven’, cf. Matthew 12.32: ‘neither in this age nor in the age to come’. The Gospel of Thomas prefers a form of words which is not eschatological.” (Jesus and Christian Origens Outside the New Testament, p. 131).
- Robert M. Grant and David Noel Freedman write: “Blasphemy against the Father is presumably included in the ‘every blasphemy’ mentioned in the synoptic gospels (Matthew 12:31; Mark 3:28), and these gospels go on to state that blasphemy against the Son of Man is forgivable, while that against the Holy Spirit is not (also Luke 12:10). Thomas has changed ‘Son of Man’ to ‘Son’ (retained in Saying 86), and has changed Matthew’s eschatological words, ‘in this age or in the one to come,’ to ‘either on earth or in heaven’ (as in the Lord’s Prayer, Matthew 6:10). The sequence Father-Son-Holy Spirit reflects Christian teaching (cf., Matthew 28:19).” (The Secret Sayings of Jesus, p. 156).
- R. McL. Wilson writes: “Grant and Freedman here assume a literalistic interpretation of the synoptic saying, which is to the effect that every blasphemy will be forgiven except that against the Holy Spirit. In this case, as they rightly say, the sequence Father-Son-Holy Spirit reflects Christian teaching. It may be, however, that there is more to be said on this subject, that the Gnostics in fact reversed the order of the sequence. In some systems at least ‘Father’ is a title of the Demiurge, while in the Apocryphon of John the supreme God is described as the Holy Spirit. Moreover, one of the Nag Hammadi texts bears the title ‘The Sacred Book of the Great Invisible Spirit,’ which seems to point in the same direction. If this be correct, the meaning would be that every blasphemy will be forgiven save that against the supreme God, which is at least consistent—despite the initial shock to orthodox Christian readers. Elsewhere, it is true, we seem to have a triad of Father, Mother and Son, in which the Holy Spirit is the Mother, but it may be that we have here two different theories emanating form different systems of thought. In any case some Gnostics were not slow to adopt any views which might serve their purpose, without regard for absolute consistency.” (Studies in the Gospel of Thomas, pp. 39-40).
- Gerd Ludemann writes: “These verses have a tripartite symmetrical structure. The logion has parallels in Mark 3.28-29 and Matt. 13.32/Luke 12.10 (= Q). Only v. 1, the blasphemy against the Father, is not contained in any of the parallels mentioned. It may well have been added for reasons of symmetry and because of the doctrine of the Trinity which was developing in orthodoxy. Thomas can keep the focus on the impossibility of forgiving blasphemy against the Holy Spirit because for him this is the spark of light which guarantees the redemption of the Gnostic.” (Jesus After 2000 Years, p. 612).
- Helmut Koester writes: “Luke 12:10 is considered to be closest to the original Q version by most scholars; however, ‘Son of man’ as a title of Jesus would have to be assigned to a later stage of Q. But even here it remains extremely awkward. The best solution is to assume that Q, like Mark, was originally speaking about the blasphemy against the Holy Spirit, uttered by ‘a son of man’ = any human being, and that ‘son of man’ was later misunderstood as a title of Jesus. In the collection of sayings used by the Gospel of Thomas this saying probably was formulated like Mark 3.28-29; the elaboration in Gos. Thom. 44 is then best explained as an independent development. The final phrase which Gos. Thom. 44 and Matt 12:32 share may have been an original part of Q.” (Ancient Christian Gospels, p. 93).
- Funk and Hoover write: “According to Thomas, blasphemies against the Father and against the son will be forgiven; only blasphemies against the holy spirit will not be forgiven. Thomas agrees with the other versions regarding blasphemies against the holy spirit, and Thomas supports the Q version in making blasphemies against the son (of Adam) forgivable. Unique to Thomas is the assertion that blasphemies against the Father are forgivable. This runs counter to the Israelite and Judean respect for God and the divine name. Note especially the provisions of the Community Order (cols. 6-7) found among the Dead Sea Scrolls . . . The Thomas version mentions Father, son, and holy spirit, which appears to reflect the trinitarian formula of emerging orthodox Christianity.” (The Five Gospels, p. 497).
There are many varied ideas here and, of course, we have many of our own in relation to the Holy Spirit; some of these are reflected in our chart below.
We will continue with our thoughts in the next post.
| Aspect of God |
Potency |
Aspect of Man |
In Relation to the Great Invocation |
In relation to the Christ |
|
GOD, The Father |
Will or Power |
Spirit or Life |
Center where the Will of God IS KNOWN |
Life |
|
Son, The Christ |
Love and Wisdom |
Soul or Christ Within |
Heart of God |
Truth |
|
Holy Spirit |
Light or Activity |
Life Within |
Mind of God |
Way |
Note on the Quote of the Day
This daily blog also has a Quote of the Day which may not be in any way related to the essay. Many of these will be from the Bible and some just prayers or meditations that may have an influence on you and are in line with the subject matter of this blog. As the quote will change daily and will not store with the post, it is repeated in this section with the book reference and comment.
We repeat here a Quote of the Day that we spent much time with over the course of our essays. In this affirmation we find the Truth of discipleship as we have been ever been expressing and here we can relate our themes of the last few days; “take no thought” for the things of the world and that we approach the Kingdom and discipleship in the nature of the little child, in humbleness, meekness, unashamed in any way and unassuming. The message that this imparts for us today IS that it IS the Soul that is at work in the world of men as it expresses to some degree the purpose, power and the will through Life in this world. These words are from a meditation offered to his students by our Tibetan brother and in which we find greater understanding of the message of the Master. This IS Truly the way of the disciple.
My Soul has purpose, power and will; these three are needed on the Way of Liberation.
My Soul must foster love among the sons of men; this is its major purpose.
I, therefore, will to love and tread the Way of Love.
All that hinders and obstructs the showing of the Light must disappear before the purposes of the Soul.
My will is one with the great Will of God; that Holy Will requires that all men serve.
And unto the purposes of the Plan I lend my little will.
Let the peace of God rule in your hearts!
- 2 New Testament Greek Lexicon on BibleStudyTools.com
- 14 The Gospel of Thomas; Translated by Stephen J. Patterson and James M. Robinson; http://gnosis.org/
