Gospel of Thomas

[sky]

Originally Posted by candyfloss28

Why does it say it is wrong to pray and fast in gospel of Thomas?

See if this helps you understand CF.


' If we feel righteous when we fast, it will inflate our ego instead of freeing us. The true fast comes spontaneously, when we are absorbed in the presence of God. Then we forget about eating. This was Yeshua's state when the disciples found that he had not eaten and were surprised. He told them: 'I have something to eat, a food that you do not know ... My food is doing the will of my Father ... Do not work for perishable food, but for the food of eternal life.' (Cf. John 4:32.)

If we feel righteous when you give to charity, you do harm to your mind. You are giving to gain approval or to create a clear conscience. But we must go further than this, so that you do 'not let your left hand know what your right hand is doing.'

If your brother is hungry and you have some food, what is more natural than sharing it? This is not 'giving to charity'; it is rediscovering the spontaneity of love.

The same applies to prayer: 's long as you pray while seeing yourself as praying, you are truly not praying,' said Jean Cassien. Prayer must also become more and more spontaneous—a simple movement of the heart, so that it becomes like the perfume of the rose or song of a bird.

Yeshua is warning us against practices that are good in themselves, but that can become a hook for 'phariseeism,' or spiritual narcissism. We must allow the Presence of the Spirit to make us more and more simple, more and more spontaneous. A religion that produces complex people who feel guilty and make others feel guilty is at great risk of being a false religion. It no longer 're-links' (the original meaning of re-ligio) us with the vitality of the Living One; it instead separates us from it.

This logion encourages us in this attitude of simplicity. When we are offered hospitality, we must eat what is before us. It is not what goes into our mouth that defiles us, but what comes out of it. In general, Yeshua emphasizes that what makes us impure, what defile us, are our acts that defile others, such as useless remarks and hasty judgments. It is calumny and blame that corrupts our hearts and minds and makes our breath nauseating. What good is it to fast, give alms, and pray, if the heart is not fully engaged in these acts, if the mind harbors hate or bitterness? '

[sky]

Originally Posted by django

Fasting, prayer and alms giving are three forms of piety mentioned in the Sermon on the Mount, so as far as I'm concerned Jesus was for all three. To Gnostics they are superfluous because that is a gnostic take on these practices, not what Jesus actually said.

We don't really know what Jesus said as we weren't there

Understanding the Gospel of Thomas is a little complicated because you have to ' step outside of the box ' but once you do you find some amazing teachings.

[django]

Originally Posted by sky123

See if this helps you understand CF.


' If we feel righteous when we fast, it will inflate our ego instead of freeing us. The true fast comes spontaneously, when we are absorbed in the presence of God. Then we forget about eating. This was Yeshua's state when the disciples found that he had not eaten and were surprised. He told them: 'I have something to eat, a food that you do not know ... My food is doing the will of my Father ... Do not work for perishable food, but for the food of eternal life.' (Cf. John 4:32.)

If we feel righteous when you give to charity, you do harm to your mind. You are giving to gain approval or to create a clear conscience. But we must go further than this, so that you do 'not let your left hand know what your right hand is doing.'

If your brother is hungry and you have some food, what is more natural than sharing it? This is not 'giving to charity'; it is rediscovering the spontaneity of love.

The same applies to prayer: 's long as you pray while seeing yourself as praying, you are truly not praying,' said Jean Cassien. Prayer must also become more and more spontaneous—a simple movement of the heart, so that it becomes like the perfume of the rose or song of a bird.

Yeshua is warning us against practices that are good in themselves, but that can become a hook for 'phariseeism,' or spiritual narcissism. We must allow the Presence of the Spirit to make us more and more simple, more and more spontaneous. A religion that produces complex people who feel guilty and make others feel guilty is at great risk of being a false religion. It no longer 're-links' (the original meaning of re-ligio) us with the vitality of the Living One; it instead separates us from it.

This logion encourages us in this attitude of simplicity. When we are offered hospitality, we must eat what is before us. It is not what goes into our mouth that defiles us, but what comes out of it. In general, Yeshua emphasizes that what makes us impure, what defile us, are our acts that defile others, such as useless remarks and hasty judgments. It is calumny and blame that corrupts our hearts and minds and makes our breath nauseating. What good is it to fast, give alms, and pray, if the heart is not fully engaged in these acts, if the mind harbors hate or bitterness? '

But when you give to the needy, do not let your left hand know what your right hand is doing, so that your giving may be in secret. And your Father, who sees what is done in secret, will reward you.

And when you pray, do not be like the hypocrites. For they love to pray standing in the synagogues and on the street corners to be seen by men.

But when you pray, go into your inner room, shut your door, and pray to your Father, who is unseen.

And when you pray, do not babble on like pagans, for they think that by their many words they will be heard. Do not be like them, for your Father knows what you need before you ask Him.

So then, this is how you should pray: ‘Our Father in heaven, hallowed be Your name,…

He recognises that these things can be done insincerely, but he doesn't recommend stopping the practices, but to engage in them differently. Later Gnostics have decided that they don't need to do these things at all.

[django]

Originally Posted by sky123

We don't really know what Jesus said as we weren't there

Understanding the Gospel of Thomas is a little complicated because you have to ' step outside of the box ' but once you do you find some amazing teachings.

Trying to understand the gospel of Thomas suits people who delight in gnostic philosophy. I don't like gnostic philosophy, it doesn't ring true to me, just like I don't like neo-advaita philosophy, or Buddhist philosophy. Sometimes there might be some good idea or truth in these philosophies, but overall they're just not where I'm at. The main problem for me is that gnostics have fashioned a gnostic Jesus, if they had fashioned a gnostic Buddha or gnostic Ramana most likely I wouldn't really care, but they say they're quoting Jesus and what they quote doesn't tally with the man that Jesus was by all other accounts.

[sky]

Originally Posted by django

But when you give to the needy, do not let your left hand know what your right hand is doing, so that your giving may be in secret. And your Father, who sees what is done in secret, will reward you.

And when you pray, do not be like the hypocrites. For they love to pray standing in the synagogues and on the street corners to be seen by men. But when you pray, go into your inner room, shut your door, and pray to your Father, who is unseen. And when you pray, do not babble on like pagans, for they think that by their many words they will be heard. Do not be like them, for your Father knows what you need before you ask Him. So then, this is how you should pray: ‘Our Father in heaven, hallowed be Your name,…

He recognises that these things can be done insincerely, but he doesn't recommend stopping the practices, but to engage in them differently. Later Gnostics have decided that they don't need to do these things at all.

' Later Gnostics have decided that they don't need to do these things at all.[/quote] '


Which Gnostic Teaching say this?

[django]

Originally Posted by sky123

Which Gnostic Teaching say this?

'


GoT verse 14: Jesus said to them, "If you fast, you will acquire a sin, and if you pray you will be condemned, and if you give alms, it is evil that you will do unto your spirits. And when you go into any land and travel in the country places, when they receive you eat whatever they serve to you. Heal those among them who are sick. For, nothing that enters your mouth will defile you (plur.). Rather, it is precisely what comes out of your mouth that will defile you."

[sky]

Originally Posted by django

'


GoT verse 14: Jesus said to them, "If you fast, you will acquire a sin, and if you pray you will be condemned, and if you give alms, it is evil that you will do unto your spirits. And when you go into any land and travel in the country places, when they receive you eat whatever they serve to you. Heal those among them who are sick. For, nothing that enters your mouth will defile you (plur.). Rather, it is precisely what comes out of your mouth that will defile you."

I gave you an interpretation, if you read it you will understand it doesn't mean NOT to do these things.


The Gospel of Thomas is obviously not for you, best to stay with what your comfortable with but also wise not to discredit what you don't understand.

[django]

Originally Posted by sky123

I gave you an interpretation, if you read it you will understand it doesn't mean NOT to do these things.


The Gospel of Thomas is obviously not for you, best to stay with what your comfortable with but also wise not to discredit what you don't understand.

The GoT doesn't say 'If you don't fast the right way,' it says "If you fast, you will acquire a sin." In the bible Jesus does indeed say 'If you don't fast in the right way, then etc etc, same for prayer, the GoT says "if you pray you will be condemned," the bible says 'if you don't pray in the right way. So which are you trying to explain with your commentary, the bible or the GoT?

Scholars study the Got and its authorship, and not in some misty-eyed mystical way, but hard research, how is this sentence constructed, what language was it originally written in, how are the sentences strung together and what are they dependent on via literary analysis. None of this scholarship makes these sweeping claims that you make based on nothing more than a personal opinion.

Robert M. Grant and David Noel Freedman write: "Positive proof that he did so [copy from the canonical gospels] seems to be provided in Saying 14. . . . The statement about healing the sick has nothing to do with the context in Thomas; it is relevant only in Luke's collection of sayings. Therefore, Thomas copied it from Luke." (Gnosticism & Early Christianity, pp. 185-186)

Gerd Ludemann writes: "This develops the notion of v. 4 about eating all that is set before one, and gives a reason for it. The dependence on Luke 10.7-8 in v. 4 also decides positively the dependence of v. 5 on Mark 7.15. For the invitation to heal the sick does not fit in v. 4 at all, and is best explained by the use of Luke 10.9." (Jesus After 2000 Years, p. 597)

F. F. Bruce writes: "Fasting, prayer and almsgiving (cf. Saying 6) are three forms of piety mentioned in the Sermon on the Mount (Matthew 6.1-18), but the instructions given here are quite different from those given there. Such pious activities, it appears, are superfluous and indeed harmful for the true Gnostic. (Similar sentiments about prayer and fasting are expressed in saying 104.) The second and third sentences in the saying are respectively parallel to Luke 10.8 f. and Matthew 15.11 (cf. Mark 7.15). The addition of the injunction 'eat what is set before you' of the words denying that food conveys defilement underlines the relevance of the injunction to the Gentile mission (cf. Acts 10.15; 1 Corinthians 10.27)." (Jesus and Christian Origins Outside the New Testament, p. 119)

Robert M. Grant and David Noel Freedman write: "This saying deals with subjects already brought up in Saying 5: fasting, prayer, almsgiving, and dietary observances. Here the statements ascribed to Jesus are more explicit than they were before. Fasting produces sin; prayer results in condemnation; almsgiving harms the spirit. Some ground for Thomas's notion is given in Mark 2:18-20 (Matthew 9:14-15; Luke 5:33-35), where Jesus says that the sons of the bridechamber cannot fast while he is with them. Since Thomas regards the kingdom as present rather than future, fasting (a fortiori, prayer, almsgiving, and dietary laws) is pointless and, indeed, sinful." (The Secret Sayings of Jesus, pp. 134-135)

R. McL. Wilson writes: "As Grant has pointed out, the condemnation at the beginning of this saying takes up three phrases from the Sermon on the Mount [Matt. vi. 16 (fasting), 5 (prayer), and 2 (alms)] in the reverse order; and such reversal of the order is characteristic of Naassene usage.

Etc., etc. http://www.earlychristianwritings.co...lthomas14.html

I suspect you will dismiss these scholars as irrelevant, because they aren't trying to justify gnostic philosophy but rely on hard facts. Nonetheless, I respect their research more than gnostic opinion, and I will continue to discredit the GoT if I don't believe these are the words of Jesus, but were written down by gnostics fond of their own gnostic philosophy, in Jesus's name.

[sky]

Originally Posted by django

The GoT doesn't say 'If you don't fast the right way,' it says "If you fast, you will acquire a sin." In the bible Jesus does indeed say 'If you don't fast in the right way, then etc etc, same for prayer, the GoT says "if you pray you will be condemned," the bible says 'if you don't pray in the right way. So which are you trying to explain with your commentary, the bible or the GoT?

Scholars study the Got and its authorship, and not in some misty-eyed mystical way, but hard research, how is this sentence constructed, what language was it originally written in, how are the sentences strung together and what are they dependent on via literary analysis. None of this scholarship makes these sweeping claims that you make based on nothing more than a personal opinion.



I suspect you will dismiss these scholars as irrelevant, because they aren't trying to justify gnostic philosophy but rely on hard facts. Nonetheless, I respect their research more than gnostic opinion, and I will continue to discredit the GoT if I don't believe these are the words of Jesus, but were written down by gnostics fond of their own gnostic philosophy, in Jesus's name.

To each their own . No need to agree or dismiss .

[django]

Originally Posted by sky123

To each their own . No need to agree or dismiss .

I believe you were dismissing my perspective when you said "I gave you an interpretation, if you read it you will understand it doesn't mean NOT to do these things."

As though your interpretation (which was an unacknowledged quote anyway unless you are Jean-Yves Leloup), was the only correct interpretation. What happened to "to each their own" there?