Finally, I have settled on a subject for my term paper due in a week. I will be writing on the 13th logion of The Gospel of Thomas. For those who are unfamiliar with this text it reads this way in James M. Robinson’s translation 1:
Jesus said to his disciples, “Compare me to someone and tell me whom I am like.”
Simon Peter said to him, “You are like a righteous angel.”
Matthew said to him, “You are like a wise philosopher.”
Thomas said to him, “Master, my mouth is wholly incapable of saying whom you are like.”
Jesus said, “I am not your (sg.) master. Because you (sg.) have drunk, you (sg.) have become intoxicated from the bubbling spring which I have measured out.” And he took him and withdrew and told him three things. When Thomas returned to his companions, they asked him, “What did Jesus say to you?”
Thomas said to them, “If I tell you one of the things which he told me, you will pick up stones and throw them at me; a fire will come out of the stones and burn you up.”
This narrative echoes that which is found in Matthew 16:13-20; Mark 8:27-30; and Luke 9:18-22. In each of the Synoptic accounts unnamed disciples give half-right answers while Peter declares Jesus’ messianic identity. In Thomas 13 the author names the disciples. One is Peter; one is Matthew. Interestingly enough one of those who gives the wrong answer is the very one who gives the correct answer in the Synoptic accounts.
I have just read Nicholas Perrin’s interpretation of this text, but I would like to hear what other plausible options others out there might like to contribute before I begin writing my paper. Even if you are not familiar with Thomas but you would like to toss out a possibility please feel free to do so.
_______________________________
[1] James M. Robinson, ed. The Nag Hammadi Library. San Francisco, CA: Harper, 1990. 127.
December 5, 2009 at 10:06 pm
Brian,
Risto Uro has specifically discussed this logion in his his essay on authority and autonomy. You might want to read it.
Risto Uro, “Who Will Be Our Leader? Authority and Autonomy in the Gospel of Thomas” Fair Play: Diversity and Conflicts in Early Christianity: Essays in Honour of Heikki Raaisanen (NovTSup 103; Leiden/New York/Cologne: Brill, 2002), 466.
December 5, 2009 at 11:29 pm
Ekaputra,
Thanks for the lead! This paper is due Wednesday so it might be too late to contribute to what I am writing but I want to read it. I may see if one of the Multnomah County Libraries has it because I doubt Western Seminary or Multnomah University have it.
For the sake of curiosity, can you summarize his findings for me?
December 6, 2009 at 12:09 am
Uro has written another book, “Thomas: seeking the historical context of the Gospel of Thomas”.
In chapter 4 of that book, he included the same essay that he has published previously in Fair Play. You can read it here:
—————–
http://books.google.com/books?id=nCVPPlWbw7kC&printsec=frontcover&source=gbs_v2_summary_r&cad=0
Chapter 4 is in page 80, but the one that you might want to pay a closer attention is pp. 88-97 where he discussed about the polemic between Peter’s leadership vs Thomas.
——————-
Uro basically discusses the possibility that Logion 13 can be seen as an attack to Peter’s leadership in the early church. But for him, there is no strong evident in the gospel of Thomas itself to support that view. Logion 13 is not an attack to Peter as a person, but it is written in order to show the superiority of Thomas as a recipient of a special revelation.
December 6, 2009 at 12:16 am
Thanks! So it seems Uro sees Thomas as function in a similar way to the Gospel of John which constantly juxtaposes the Beloved Disciple with Peter in order to establish the Christian community represented by the Fourth Gospel. Of course, the Fourth Gospel does not attack Peter, it just shows that the Beloved is at least as legitimate a disciple as Peter, if not better at times.
Perrin argues that Peter is mentioned in conjunction with the depiction of Jesus in the Gospel of Mark (since early Christianity understood Mark to be based on the testimony of Peter). He argues that Jesus in Mark is seen as the messenger of God (as is John the Baptist at times). It is not as strong of an argument as his proposal that the mentioning of Matthew in logion 13 is in reference to the Gospel of Matthew which depicts Jesus as the “new Moses” and since Moses was understood by Hellenized Diaspora Jews (e.g. Philo) and some early Christians (e.g. Justin, Tatian) it could very well be that the author of Thomas saw Matthew as depicting Jesus as a wise philosopher. The response of Thomas contrast the depiction of Jesus in Matthew and Mark as the Messiah by making a semi-gnostic move toward avoiding “defining” Jesus at all.
December 6, 2009 at 12:32 am
You are right. I think that is the key to understand this gospel. From the very first logion we can see the mood of ‘secrecy’ dominating this gospel. So if in logion 13 Thomas seems to avoid defining the identity of Jesus, I think it is very understandable. Logion 13 simply affirms the general nature of the gospel itself.