Bushido - Wikipedia

Bushido - Wikipedia
Bushido
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
This article is about the Japanese concept of chivalry. For other uses, see Bushido (disambiguation).
-----
This article needs additional citations for verification. Please help improve this article by adding citations to reliable sources. Unsourced material may be challenged and removed. (February 2011) (Learn how and when to remove this template message)
----
Japanese samurai in armor, 1860s. Photograph by Felice Beato
Bushido (武士道?, "the way (or the moral) of the warrior") is a Japanese term for the samurai way of life, loosely analogous to the concept of chivalry in Europe. Just like the knights of Europe, the samurai had a code to live by that was also based in a moral way of life.
The "way" itself originates from the samurai moral values, most commonly stressing some combination of frugality, loyalty, martial arts mastery, and honor until death. Born from Neo-Confucianism during times of peace in Tokugawa Japan and following Confucian texts, Bushido was also influenced by Shinto and Zen Buddhism, allowing the violent existence of the samurai to be tempered by wisdom and serenity. Bushidō developed between the 16th and 20th centuries, debated by pundits who believed they were building on a legacy dating back to the 10th century, although some scholars have noted that the term bushidō itself is "rarely attested in premodern literature".[1]

Under the Tokugawa Shogunate, some aspects of warrior values became formalized into Japanese feudal law.[2]
The word was first used in Japan during the 17th century in Kōyō Gunkan.[3][4][5] It came into common usage in Japan and the West after the 1899 publication of Nitobe Inazō's Bushido: The Soul of Japan.[6]
In Bushido (1899), Nitobe wrote:
[…] Bushidō, then, is the code of moral principles which the samurai were required or instructed to observe […] More frequently it is a code unuttered and unwritten […] It was an organic growth of decades and centuries of military career. In order to become a samurai this code has to be mastered.

Nitobe was not the first to document Japanese chivalry in this way. In Feudal and Modern Japan (1896), historian Arthur May Knapp wrote: "The samurai of thirty years ago had behind him a thousand years of training in the law of honor, obedience, duty, and self-sacrifice.... It was not needed to create or establish them. As a child he had but to be instructed, as indeed he was from his earliest years, in the etiquette of self-immolation."[7]

Contents [hide]
1 Historical development of Bushido
1.1 Early history to 11th century
1.2 13th to 16th centuries
1.3 17th to 19th centuries
1.4 19th to 21st centuries

2 Tenets
2.1 Eight virtues of Bushidō (as envisioned by Nitobe Inazo)
2.2 Associated virtues

3 Modern translations

4 Major figures associated with Bushidō
4.1 Fictional characters

5 See also
6 References
7 External links and further reading
------
Historical development of Bushido[edit]

This section needs additional citations for verification. Please help improve this article by adding citations to reliable sources. Unsourced material may be challenged and removed. (May 2010) (Learn how and when to remove this template message)

Early history to 11th century[edit]
Main article: Bushido literature

Bushidō in Gyo-Kaisho style Kanji. Inscription contains 7 tenets of Bushido.
The Kojiki is Japan's oldest extant book. Written in 721, it contains passages about Yamato Takeru, the son of the Emperor Keikō. It provides an indication of early Japanese military values and literary self-image, including references to the use and admiration of the sword by Japanese warriors.
This early concept is further found in the Shoku Nihongi, an early history of Japan written in 797. The chapter covering the year 721 is notable for an early use of the term "bushi" (武士?) (albeit read as "mononofu" at the time) and a reference to the educated warrior-poet ideal. The Chinese term bushi had entered the Japanese vocabulary with the general introduction of Chinese literature, supplementing the indigenous terms tsuwamono and mononofu. It is also the usage for public placement exams.
An early reference to saburau—a verb meaning to wait upon or to accompany a person of high rank—appears in Kokin Wakashū, the first imperial anthology of poems published in the early 10th century. By the end of the 12th century, saburai ("retainer") had become largely synonymous with bushi, and closely associated with the middle and upper echelons of the warrior class.
Although many of the early literary works of Japan contain the image of the warrior, the term "bushidō" does not appear in early texts like the Kojiki. Warrior ideals and conduct may be illustrated, but the term did not appear in text until the Tokugawa period (1600-1868).[8]

13th to 16th centuries[edit]
From the literature of the 13th to 16th centuries, there exists an abundance of references to military ideals, although none of these should be viewed as early versions of bushido per se. Carl Steenstrup noted that 13th and 14th century writings (gunki monogatari) "portrayed the bushi in their natural element, war, eulogizing such virtues as reckless bravery, fierce family pride, and selfless, at times senseless devotion of master and man".
Compiled over the course of three centuries, beginning in the 1180s, the Heike Monogatari depicts a highly fictionalized and idealized story of a struggle between two warrior clans, the Minamoto and Taira, at the end of the 12th century—a conflict known as the Genpei War. Clearly depicted throughout the Heike Monogatari is the ideal of the cultivated warrior. The warriors in the Heike Monogatari served as models for the educated warriors of later generations, although the ideals depicted by them were assumed to be beyond reach. Nevertheless, during the early modern era, these ideals were vigorously pursued in the upper echelons of warrior society and recommended as the proper form of the Japanese man of arms.
Other examples of the evolution in the Bushidō literature of the 13th to 16th centuries included the Japanese:

Takeda Shingen, by artist Utagawa Kuniyoshi
The Message Of Master Gokurakuji - Hojo Shigetoki (1198–1261)
The Chikubasho - Shiba Yoshimasa (1350–1410)
The Regulations Of Imagawa Ryoshun - Imagawa Sadayo (1325–1420)
The Seventeen Articles Of Asakura Toshikage - Asakura Toshikage (1428–1481)
The Twenty-One Precepts Of Hōjō Sōun - Hojo Nagauji (1432–1519)
The Recorded Words Of Asakura Soteki - Asakura Norikage (1474–1555)
The Iwamizudera Monogatari - Takeda Shingen (1521–1573)
Opinions In Ninety-Nine Articles - Takeda Nobushige (1525–1561)
Lord Nabeshima's Wall Inscriptions - Nabeshima Naoshige (1538–1618)
The Last Statement of Torii Mototada - Torii Mototada (1539–1600)
The Precepts of Kato Kiyomasa - Kato Kiyomasa (1562–1611)
Notes On Regulations - Kuroda Nagamasa (1568–1623)
The sayings of Sengoku-period retainers and warlords such as Kato Kiyomasa and Nabeshima Naoshige were generally recorded or passed down to posterity around the turn of the 16th century when Japan had entered a period of relative peace. In a handbook addressed to "all samurai, regardless of rank", Kato states:
"If a man does not investigate into the matter of Bushido daily, it will be difficult for him to die a brave and manly death. Thus, it is essential to engrave this business of the warrior into one's mind well."
Kato was a ferocious warrior who banned even recitation of poetry, stating:
"One should put forth great effort in matters of learning. One should read books concerning military matters, and direct his attention exclusively to the virtues of loyalty and filial piety....Having been born into the house of a warrior, one's intentions should be to grasp the long and the short swords and to die."[9]
Naoshige says similarly, that it is shameful for any man to die without having risked his life in battle, regardless of rank, and that "Bushidō is in being crazy to die. Fifty or more could not kill one such a man". However, Naoshige also suggests that "everyone should personally know exertion as it is known in the lower classes".[9]

17th to 19th centuries[edit]

Miyamoto Musashi killing a giant creature, from The Book of Five Rings
Japan enjoyed a period of relative peace during the Tokugawa period from 1600 to the mid-19th century, also called the early modern or the "Edo". During this period, the samurai class played a central role in the policing and administration of the country under the Tokugawa shogunate. The bushidō literature of this time contains much thought relevant to a warrior class seeking more general application of martial principles and experience in peacetime, as well as reflection on the land's long history of war. The literature of this time includes:
The Last Statement of Torii Mototada (1539–1600)
Kuroda Nagamasa (1568–1623)
Nabeshima Naoshige (1538–1618)
Budo Shoshinshu (武道初心集) by Taira Shigesuke, Daidōji Yūzan (1639–1730)
Hagakure as related by Yamamoto Tsunetomo to Tsuramoto Tashiro.
Bugei Juhappan (武芸十八般)
A Book of Five Rings by Miyamoto Musashi
The Hagakure contains many sayings attributed to Sengoku-period retainer Nabeshima Naoshige (1537–1619) regarding Bushidō related philosophy early in the 18th century by Yamamoto Tsunetomo (1659–1719), a former retainer to Naoshige's grandson, Nabeshima Mitsushige. The Hagakure was compiled in the early 18th century, but was kept as a kind of "secret teaching" of the Nabeshima clan until was the end of the Tokugawa era (1867).[10] His saying, "I have found the way of the warrior is death", was a summation of the focus on honor and reputation over all else that bushido codified.[11]
Tokugawa-era rōnin scholar and strategist Yamaga Sokō (1622–1685) wrote extensively on matters relating to bushidō, bukyō (a "warrior's creed"), and a more general shido, a "way of gentlemen" intended for application to all stations of society. Sokō attempts to codify a kind of "universal bushidō" with a special emphasis on "pure" Confucian values, (rejecting the mystical influences of Tao and Buddhism in Neo-Confucian orthodoxy), while at the same time calling for recognition of the singular and divine nature of Japan and Japanese culture. These radical concepts—including ultimate devotion to the Emperor, regardless of rank or clan—put him at odds with the reigning shogunate. He was exiled to the Akō domain, (the future setting of the 47 Rōnin incident), and his works were not widely read until the rise of nationalism in the early 20th century.
The aging Tsunetomo's interpretation of bushidō is perhaps more illustrative of the philosophy refined by his unique station and experience, at once dutiful and defiant, ultimately incompatible with the mores and laws of an emerging civil society. Of the 47, Rōnin—to this day, generally regarded as exemplars of bushido—Tsunetomo felt they were remiss in hatching such a wily, delayed plot for revenge, and had been over-concerned with the success of their undertaking. Instead, Tsunetomo felt true samurai should act without hesitation to fulfill their duties, without regard for success or failure.
This romantic sentiment is of course expressed by warriors down through history, though it may run counter to the art of war itself. This ambivalence is found in the heart of bushidō, and perhaps all such "warrior codes". Some combination of traditional bushidō's organic contradictions and more "universal" or "progressive" formulations (like those of Yamaga Soko) would inform Japan's disastrous military ambitions in the 20th century.

19th to 21st centuries[edit]

Recent scholarship in both Japan and abroad has focused on differences between the samurai class and the bushidō theories that developed in modern Japan. Bushidō in the prewar period was often emperor-centered and placed much greater value on the virtues of loyalty and self-sacrifice than did many Tokugawa-era interpretations.[12] Bushidō was used as a propaganda tool by the government and military, who doctored it to suit their needs.[13] Scholars of Japanese history agree that the bushidō that spread throughout modern Japan was not simply a continuation of earlier traditions.
More recently, it has been argued that modern bushidō discourse originated in the 1880s as a response to foreign stimuli, such as the English concept of "gentlemanship", by Japanese with considerable exposure to Western culture. Nitobe Inazo's bushidō interpretations followed a similar trajectory, although he was following earlier trends. This relatively pacifistic bushidō was then hijacked and adapted by militarists and the government from the early 1900s onward as nationalism increased around the time of the Russo-Japanese War.[14]
The junshi suicide of General Nogi Maresuke and his wife on the death of Emperor Meiji occasioned both praise, as an example to the decaying morals of Japan, and criticism, explicitly declaring that the spirit of bushido thus exemplified should not be revived.[15]
During pre-World War II and World War II Shōwa Japan, bushido was pressed into use for militarism,[16] to present war as purifying, and death a duty.[17] This was presented as revitalizing traditional values and "transcending the modern".[18] Bushido would provide a spiritual shield to let soldiers fight to the end.[19] As the war turned, the spirit of bushido was invoked to urge that all depended on the firm and united soul of the nation.[20] When the Battle of Attu was lost, attempts were made to make the more than two thousand Japanese deaths an inspirational epic for the fighting spirit of the nation.[21] Arguments that the plans for the Battle of Leyte Gulf, involving all Japanese ships, would expose Japan to serious danger if they failed, were countered with the plea that the Navy be permitted to "bloom as flowers of death".[22] The first proposals of organized suicide attacks met resistance because while bushido called for a warrior to be always aware of death, but not to view it as the sole end, but the desperate straits brought about acceptance.[23] Such attacks were acclaimed as the true spirit of bushido.[24]
Denials of mistreatment of prisoners of war declared that they were being well-treated by virtue of bushido generosity.[25] Broadcast interviews with prisoners were also described as being not propaganda but out of sympathy with the enemy, such sympathy as only bushido could inspire.[26]
The famous writer Yukio Mishima was outspoken in his by-then anachronistic commitment to bushido in the 1960s, until his ritual suicide by seppuku after a failed coup d'état in November 1970.

Tenets[edit]

Bushidō expanded and formalized the earlier code of the samurai, and stressed frugality, loyalty, mastery of martial arts, and honor to the death. Under the bushidō ideal, if a samurai failed to uphold his honor he could only regain it by performing seppuku (ritual suicide).
In an excerpt from his book Samurai: The World of the Warrior,[27] historian Stephen Turnbull describes the role of seppuku in feudal Japan:
In the world of the warrior, seppuku was a deed of bravery that was admirable in a samurai who knew he was defeated, disgraced, or mortally wounded. It meant that he could end his days with his transgressions wiped away and with his reputation not merely intact but actually enhanced. The cutting of the abdomen released the samurai’s spirit in the most dramatic fashion, but it was an extremely painful and unpleasant way to die, and sometimes the samurai who was performing the act asked a loyal comrade to cut off his head at the moment of agony.
Bushidō varied dramatically over time, and across the geographic and socio-economic backgrounds of the samurai, who represented somewhere between 5% and 10% of the Japanese population.[28] The first Meiji-era census at the end of the 19th century counted 1,282,000 members of the "high samurai", allowed to ride a horse, and 492,000 members of the "low samurai", allowed to wear two swords but not to ride a horse, in a country of about 25 million.[29]
Some versions of Bushidō include compassion for those of lower station, and for the preservation of one's name.[9] Early bushidō literature further enforces the requirement to conduct oneself with calmness, fairness, justice, and propriety.[9] The relationship between learning and the way of the warrior is clearly articulated, one being a natural partner to the other.[9]
Other pundits pontificating on the warrior philosophy covered methods of raising children, appearance, and grooming, but all of this may be seen as part of one's constant preparation for death—to die a good death with one's honor intact, the ultimate aim in a life lived according to bushidō. Indeed, a "good death" is its own reward, and by no means assurance of "future rewards" in the afterlife. Some samurai, though certainly not all (e.g., Amakusa Shiro), have throughout history held such aims or beliefs in disdain, or expressed the awareness that their station—as it involves killing—precludes such reward, especially in Buddhism. Japanese beliefs surrounding the Samurai and the afterlife are complex and often contradictory, while the soul of a noble warrior suffering in hell or as a lingering spirit occasionally appears in Japanese art and literature, so does the idea of a warrior being reborn upon a lotus throne in paradise[30]

Eight virtues of Bushidō (as envisioned by Nitobe Inazo)[edit]

[31] The Bushidō code is typified by eight virtues:
Righteousness, Integrity (義 gi?)
Be acutely honest throughout your dealings with all people. Believe in justice, not from other people, but from yourself. To the true warrior, all points of view are deeply considered regarding honestly, justice and integrity. Warriors make a full commitment to their decisions.
Heroic Courage (勇 yū?)
Hiding like a turtle in a shell is not living at all. A true warrior must have heroic courage. It is absolutely risky. It is living life completely, fully and wonderfully. Heroic courage is not blind. It is intelligent and strong.
Benevolence, Compassion (仁 jin?)
Through intense training and hard work the true warrior becomes quick and strong. They are not as most people. They develop a power that must be used for good. They have compassion. They help their fellow man at every opportunity. If an opportunity does not arise, they go out of their way to find one.
Respect (礼 rei?)
True warriors have no reason to be cruel. They do not need to prove their strength. Warriors are not only respected for their strength in battle, but also by their dealings with others. The true strength of a warrior becomes apparent during difficult times.
Honesty and Sincerity (誠 makoto?)
When warriors say that they will perform an action, it is as good as done. Nothing will stop them from completing what they say they will do. They do not have to 'give their word'. They do not have to 'promise'. Speaking and doing are the same action.
Honour (名誉 meiyo?)
Warriors have only one judge of honor and character, and this is themselves. Decisions they make and how these decisions are carried out is a reflection of whom they truly are. You cannot hide from yourself.
Duty and Loyalty (忠義 chūgi?)
Warriors are responsible for everything that they have done and everything that they have said, and all of the consequences that follow. They are immensely loyal to all of those in their care. To everyone that they are responsible for, they remain fiercely true.
Self-Control (自制 jisei?)
Associated virtues[edit]
Filial piety (孝 kō?)
Wisdom (智 chi?)
Fraternal Respect (悌 tei?)
-----
Modern translations[edit]
Modern Western translation of documents related to Bushidō began in the 1970s with Carl Steenstrup, who performed research into the ethical codes of famous Samurai clans including Hōjō Sōun and Imagawa Sadayo.[32]
Primary research into Bushidō was later conducted by William Scott Wilson in his 1982 text Ideals of the Samurai: Writings of Japanese Warriors. The writings span hundreds of years, family lineage, geography, social class and writing style—yet share a common set of values. Wilson's work also examined the earliest Japanese writings in the 8th century: the Kojiki, Shoku Nihongi, the Kokin Wakashū, Konjaku Monogatari, and the Heike Monogatari, as well as the Chinese Classics (the Analects, the Great Learning, the Doctrine of the Mean, and the Mencius).
In May 2008, Thomas Cleary translated a collection of 22 writings on Bushido by warriors, scholars, political advisers, and educators, spanning 500 years from the 14th to the 19th centuries. Titled Training the Samurai Mind: A Bushido Sourcebook, it gave an insider's view of the samurai world: "the moral and psychological development of the warrior, the ethical standards they were meant to uphold, their training in both martial arts and strategy, and the enormous role that the traditions of Shintoism, Buddhism, Confucianism, and Taoism had in influencing samurai ideals".

----
Major figures associated with Bushidō[edit]

Asano Naganori
Imagawa Ryōshun
Katō Kiyomasa
Sakanoue no Tamuramaro
Tadakatsu Honda
Tokugawa Ieyasu
Torii Mototada
Sasaki Kojirō
Saigō Takamori
Yamaga Sokō
Yamamoto Tsunetomo
Yamaoka Tesshū
Yukio Mishima
Hijikata Toshizō
Miyamoto Musashi
----
Fictional characters[edit]

Spike Spiegel
Ogami Ittō
Samurai Jack
Roronoa Zoro
Auron
Cyan Garamonde
Miyamoto Usagi
Kenshin Himura
Jubei Yagyu
---
See also[edit]
Budō
Hagakure
Hana wa sakuragi, hito wa bushi
Shudō
Japanese martial arts
The Unfettered Mind
Zen
Zen at War
---
References[edit]
Jump up ^ "The Zen of Japanese Nationalism", by Robert H. Shart, in Curators of the Buddha, edited by Donald Lopez, p. 111

Jump up ^ Japanese Feudal Laws John Carey Hall, The Tokugawa Legislation (Yokohama, 1910), pp. 286-319 Archived October 21, 2012, at the Wayback Machine.

Jump up ^ Willcock, Hiroko (2008). The Japanese Political Thought of Uchimura Kanzō (1861-1930): Synthesizing Bushidō, Christianity, Nationalism, and Liberalism. Edwin Mellen Press. ISBN 077345151X. Koyo gunkan is the earliest comprehensive extant work that provides a notion of Bushido as a samurai ethos and the value system of the samurai tradition.

Jump up ^ Ikegami, Eiko, The Taming of the Samurai, Harvard University Press, 1995. p. 278

Jump up ^ Kasaya, Kazuhiko (2014). 武士道 第一章 武士道という語の登場 [Bushido Chapter I Appearance of the word Bushido] (in Japanese). NTT publishing. p. 7. ISBN 4757143222.

Jump up ^ Friday, Karl F. "Bushidō or Bull? A Medieval Historian's Perspective on the Imperial Army and the Japanese Warrior Tradition" The History Teacher, Vol. 27, No. 3 (May, 1994), pp. 340

Jump up ^ Arthur May Knapp (1896). "Feudal and Modern Japan". Retrieved 2010-01-02.[dead link]

Jump up ^ "The Zen of Japanese Nationalism," by Robert H. Sharf, in Curators of the Buddha, edited by Donald Lopez, p. 111

^ Jump up to: a b c d e William Scott Wilson, Ideals of the Samurai: Writings of Japanese Warriors (Kodansha, 1982) ISBN 0-89750-081-4

Jump up ^ "The Samurai Series: The Book of Five Rings, Hagakure -The Way of the Samurai & Bushido - The Soul of Japan" ELPN Press (November, 2006) ISBN 1-934255-01-7

Jump up ^ Meirion and Susie Harries, Soldiers of the Sun: The Rise and Fall of the Imperial Japanese Army p 7 ISBN 0-394-56935-0

Jump up ^ Eiko Ikegami. The Taming of the Samurai: Honorific Individualism and the Making of Modern Japan. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1995.

Jump up ^ Karl Friday. Bushidō or Bull? A Medieval Historian's Perspective on the Imperial Army and the Japanese Warrior Tradition. The History Teacher, Volume 27, Number 3, May 1994, pages 339-349.[1]

Jump up ^ Oleg Benesch. Inventing the Way of the Samurai: Nationalism, Internationalism, and Bushido in Modern Japan. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2014. ISBN 0198706626, ISBN 9780198706625

Jump up ^ Herbert P. Bix, Hirohito and the Making of Modern Japan p 42-3 ISBN 0-06-019314-X

Jump up ^ "No Surrender: Background History"
Jump up ^ David Powers, "Japan: No Surrender in World War Two"
Jump up ^ John W. Dower, War Without Mercy: Race & Power in the Pacific War p1 ISBN 0-394-50030-X
Jump up ^ Richard Overy, Why the Allies Won p 6 ISBN 0-393-03925-0
Jump up ^ Edwin P. Hoyt, Japan's War, p 334 ISBN 0-07-030612-5
Jump up ^ John Toland, The Rising Sun: The Decline and Fall of the Japanese Empire 1936-1945 p 444 Random House New York 1970
Jump up ^ John Toland, The Rising Sun: The Decline and Fall of the Japanese Empire 1936-1945 p 539 Random House New York 1970
Jump up ^ Edwin P. Hoyt, Japan's War, p 356 ISBN 0-07-030612-5
Jump up ^ Edwin P. Hoyt, Japan's War, p 360 ISBN 0-07-030612-5
Jump up ^ Edwin P. Hoyt, Japan's War, p 256 ISBN 0-07-030612-5
Jump up ^ Edwin P. Hoyt, Japan's War, p 257 ISBN 0-07-030612-5
Jump up ^ excerpt from Samurai: The World of the Warrior by Stephen Turnbull

Jump up ^ Cleary, Thomas Training the Samurai Mind: A Bushido Sourcebook Shambhala (May, 2008) ISBN 1-59030-572-8

Jump up ^ Mikiso Hane Modern Japan: A Historical Survey, Third Edition Westview Press (January, 2001) ISBN 0-8133-3756-9

Jump up ^ Zeami Motokiyo "Atsumori"
Jump up ^ Bushido: The Soul of Japan
Jump up ^ Monumenta Nipponica

External links and further reading[edit]

Oleg Benesch. Inventing the Way of the Samurai: Nationalism, Internationalism, and Bushido in Modern Japan. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2014. ISBN 0198706626, ISBN 9780198706625

易經道 Yijing Dao, 鳴鶴在陰 Calling crane in the shade, Biroco - The Art of Doing Nothing, 2002-2012, 馬夏 Ma, Xia, et. al., [2]
"Bushido Arcade" a Contemporary translation of the Bushido [3]
William Scott Wilson, Ideals of the Samurai: Writings of Japanese Warriors (Kodansha, 1982) ISBN 0-89750-081-4
Training the Samurai Mind: A Bushido Sourcebook by Thomas Cleary 288 pages Shambhala (May 13, 2008) ISBN 1-59030-572-8 ISBN 978-1590305720
Katsumata Shizuo with Martin Collcutt, "The Development of Sengoku Law," in Hall, Nagahara, and Yamamura (eds.), Japan Before Tokugawa: Political Consolidation and Economic Growth (1981), chapter 3.
K. A. Grossberg & N. Kanamoto 1981, The Laws of the Muromachi Bakufu: Kemmu Shikimoku (1336) and Muromachi Bakufu Tsuikaho, MN Monographs (Sophia UP)
Hall, John C. "Japanese Feudal Laws: the Magisterial Code of the Hojo Power Holders (1232) ." Transactions of the Asiatic Society of Japan 2nd ser. 34 (1906)
"Japanese Feudal laws: The Ashikaga Code." Transactions of the Asiatic Society of Japan 1st ser. 36 (1908):
John Allyn, "Forty-Seven Ronin Story" ISBN 0-8048-0196-7
Imagawa Ryoshun, The Regulations of Imagawa Ryoshun (1412 A.D.) Imagawa_Ryoshun
Algernon Bertram Freeman-Mitford, 1st Baron Redesdale, Final_Statement_of_the_47_Ronin (1701 A.D.)
The Message Of Master Gokurakuji — Hōjō Shigetoki (1198A.D.-1261A.D.) Hojo_shigetoki
Sunset of the Samurai--The True Story of Saigo Takamori Military History Magazine
Onoda, Hiroo, No Surrender: My Thirty-Year War. Trans. Charles S. Terry. (New York, Kodansha International Ltd, 1974) ISBN 1-55750-663-9

An interview with William Scott Wilson about Bushidō
Bushidō Website: a good definition of bushidō, including The Samurai Creed
The website of William Scott Wilson A 2005 recipient of the Japanese Government's Japan’s Foreign Minister’s Commendation, William Scott Wilson was honored for his research on Samurai and Bushidō.
Hojo Shigetoki (1198-1261)and His Role in the History of Political and Ethical Ideas in Japan by Carl Steenstrup; Curzon Press (1979)ISBN 0-7007-0132-X
A History of Law in Japan Until 1868 by Carl Steenstrup; Brill Academic Publishers;second edition (1996) ISBN 90-04-10453-4
Bushido — The Soul of Japan by Inazo Nitobe (1905) (ISBN 0-8048-3413-X)
Budoshoshinshu - The Code of The Warrior by Daidōji Yūzan (ISBN 0-89750-096-2)
Hagakure-The Book of the Samurai By Tsunetomo Yamamoto (ISBN 4-7700-1106-7 paperback, ISBN 4-7700-2916-0 hardcover)
Go Rin No Sho - Miyamoto Musashi (1645) (ISBN 4-7700-2801-6 hardback, ISBN 4-7700-2844-X hardback Japan only)
The Unfettered Mind - Writings of the Zen Master to the Sword master by Takuan Sōhō (Musashi's mentor) (ISBN 0-87011-851-X)
The Religion of the Samurai (1913 original text), by Kaiten Nukariya, 2007 reprint by ELPN Press ISBN 0-9773400-7-4
Tales of Old Japan by Algernon Bertram Freeman-Mitford (1871) reprinted 1910
Sakujiro Yokoyama's Account of a Samurai Sword Duel
Death Before Dishonor By Masaru Fujimoto — Special to The Japan Times: Dec. 15, 2002
Osprey, "Elite and Warrior Series" Assorted. [4]
Stephen Turnbull, "Samurai Warfare" (London, 1996), Cassell & Co ISBN 1-85409-280-4
Lee Teng-hui, former President of the Republic of China, "武士道解題 做人的根本 蕭志強譯" in Chinese，前衛, "「武士道」解題―ノーブレス・オブリージュとは" in Japanese，小学館，(2003), ISBN 4-09-387370-4

相生 > 원정 낙서 > 깨어남에서 깨달음까지를 읽고

相生 > 원정 낙서 > 깨어남에서 깨달음까지를 읽고

원정님의 "아디야산티의 <깨어남에서 깨달음까지>를 읽고"

[이와 같은 지식을 종합하여 보면, 인류의 출현은 우주가 태어난 이후 극히 최근의 일이고, 한 사람의 인생은 정말로 찰라를 살다가는 것이지요. 태양계가 폭발하고 우주가 사라지는 판국에 그 곳에 영혼이 머물 곳이 어디 있겠습니까? 천국과 지옥이 어디 있겠습니까? 죽으면 다시 우주로 모든 원소들이 흩어져 갈 것입니다.

지구상의 최초의 생물은 진화하여 현생인류가 되었습니다.
다른 한편, 모든 생물은 서로 연관이 되어 있어서 어떤 종의 존재는 다른 종의 존재의 근거입니다. 예를 들어 식물은 이산화탄소를 들이마시고 산소를 내뿜으며, 동물은 산소를 마시고 이산화탄소를 내뱉습니다. 동물과 식물은 서로를 존재케 하는 원동력이지요. 나의 존재는 다른 존재들과 이러한 방식으로 연결되어 있기 때문에 다른 존재들을 지혜롭게 사랑하는 것이 나를 사랑하는 것일 수 있다는 생각을 할 수도 있습니다.

예수나 부처에게 삶을 맡기고 살면 생각이 적어지고 에너지의 소모는 당연히 줄어들 것입니다. 이에 비하여 모든 것을 개인이 통제하고자 하는 사람이나 완벽주의자는 생각이 많을 것이고 당연히 에너지의 소비가 많을 것입니다.

과학적인 지식과 약간의 지혜를 더하면, 우주가 나를 포함하여 하나의 생명이고 그 우주의 흐름에 맡기고 사는 삶이 지혜로운 삶이라는 생각을 할 수도 있습니다. 그리고 찰라를 살다가는 인생인데, 죽으면 내 육신은 인수분해 되어 우주로 흩어질 것인데, 영혼이나 천국은 없는 것일 진대 .... 이 현실을 즐기며 사는 방법이 가장 지혜로운 방법이 아닐까 생각도 들 것입니다.

과거에 과학이나 심리학이 발달하기 전에는 종교적인 설명이 더 필요하였다고 생각합니다.
그리고 과거에는 종교 지도자들이 가장 지적인 존재들이기도 하였습니다.
저는 앞으로는 그런 설명들보다 과학적인 지식에 근거한 설명들이 더 힘을 얻지 않을까 하는 생각이 있습니다.

전 이렇게 살 것입니다.
깨달음을 추구하지도 않을 것이구요.
제가 진심으로 원하는 일을 하면서 살 것입니다.
제 자신에게 진실해야 하는 것이 가장 중요한 일임을 느끼고 있습니다.
어떻게 하면 더불어 잘 살 수 있을까 고민하면서 살 것입니다.
고정관념을 하나씩 타파하는 삶을 살겠습니다.
나만이 옳다는 생각이 매우 잘못된 생각임을 살면서 처절하게 느껴가겠습니다.
자연스럽게 순리대로 살 것입니다.
추구하는 바는 아니지만, 그러다 보면 깨달음의 경지에 까지 갈 수도 있을 것입니다]

Gospel of Thomas - Wikipedia

Gospel of Thomas - Wikipedia

Gospel of Thomas

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

For the infancy gospel, see Infancy Gospel of Thomas.

Part of a series on
Gnosticism
History
Syrian-Egyptic Nicolaism Marcionism Valentinianism Sethianism Mandaeism Manichaeism Sabians Druze Modern schools Chinese Manichaeism
Proto-Gnostics
Philo Simon Magus Cerinthus Valentinus Basilides Menander
Scriptures
Gnostic Gospels Nag Hammadi library Pseudo-Abdias Clementine literature Gnosticism and the New Testament Codices Codex Tchacos Cologne Mani-Codex Askew Codex Bruce Codex Berlin Codex
Lists
Gnostic sects Gnostic terms
Related articles
Gnosis Jnana Esoteric Christianity Theosophy Neoplatonism and Gnosticism
v t e

The Gospel According to Thomas is an early Christiannon-canonical sayings-gospelthat many scholars believe provides insight into the oral gospel traditions. It was discovered near Nag Hammadi, Egypt, in December 1945 among a group of books known as the Nag Hammadi library. Scholars speculate that the works were buried in response to a letter from Bishop Athanasiusdeclaring a strict canon of Christian scripture.^[1]

The Coptic-language text, the second of seven contained in what modern-day scholars have designated as Codex II, is composed of 114 sayings attributed to Jesus.^[2] Almost half of these sayings resemble those found in the Canonical Gospels, while it is speculated that the other sayings were added from Gnostic tradition.^[3]Its place of origin may have been Syria, where Thomasinetraditions were strong.^[4]

The introduction states: "These are the hidden words that the living Jesus spoke and Didymos Judas Thomas wrote them down."^[5] Didymus (Greek) and Thomas (Aramaic) both mean "twin". Some critical scholars suspect that this reference to the Apostle Thomas is false, and that therefore the true author is unknown.^[6]

It is possible that the document originated within a school of early Christians, possibly proto-Gnostics.^[7] Some critics further state that even the description of Thomas as a "gnostic" gospel is based upon little other than the fact that it was found along with gnostic texts at Nag Hammadi.^[8] The name of Thomas was also attached to the Book of Thomas the Contender, which was also in Nag Hammadi Codex II, and the Acts of Thomas. While the Gospel of Thomas does not directly point to Jesus' divinity, it also does not directly contradict it, and therefore neither supports nor contradicts gnostic beliefs. When asked his identity in the Gospel of Thomas, Jesus usually deflects, ambiguously asking the disciples why they do not see what is right in front of them, similar to some passages in the canonical gospels like John 12:16 and Luke 18:34.

The Gospel of Thomas is very different in tone and structure from other New Testament apocrypha and the four Canonical Gospels. Unlike the canonical Gospels, it is not a narrative account of the life of Jesus; instead, it consists of logia (sayings) attributed to Jesus, sometimes stand-alone, sometimes embedded in short dialogues or parables. The text contains a possible allusion to the death of Jesus in logion 65^[9](Parable of the Wicked Tenants, paralleled in the Synoptic Gospels), but doesn't mention his crucifixion, his resurrection, or the final judgment; nor does it mention a messianic understanding of Jesus.^[10][11] Since its discovery, many scholars have seen it as evidence in support of the existence of the so-called Q source, which might have been very similar in its form as a collection of sayings of Jesus without any accounts of his deeds or his life and death, a so-called "sayings gospel".^[12]

Bishop Eusebius (AD 260/265 – 339/340) included it among a group of books that he believed to be not only spurious, but "the fictions of heretics". However, it is not clear whether he was referring to this Gospel of Thomas or one of the other texts attributed to Thomas.^[13]

Contents

  [hide] 

• 1Finds and publication
  • 1.1Oxyrhynchus papyrus fragments
  • 1.2Attestation
• 2Date of composition
  • 2.1Early camp
    • 2.1.1Form of the gospel
    • 2.1.2Independence from Synoptic Gospels
    • 2.1.3Intertextuality with John's gospel
    • 2.1.4Role of James
    • 2.1.5Depiction of Peter and Matthew
    • 2.1.6Parallel with Paul
  • 2.2Late camp
    • 2.2.1Dependence on the New Testament
      • 2.2.1.1Syriac origin
      • 2.2.1.2Lack of apocalyptic themes
• 3Relation to the New Testament Canon
• 4Relation to the Thomasine Milieu
• 5Importance and author
• 6The historical Jesus
• 7Comparison of the major gospels
• 8See also
• 9Notes
• 10References
• 11External links

Finds and publication[edit]

P. Oxy. 1

Nag Hammadi Codex II, folio 32, the beginning of the Gospel of Thomas

The manuscript of the Coptic text (CG II), found in 1945 at Nag Hammadi, Egypt, is dated at around 340 AD. It was first published in a photographic edition in 1956.^[14] This was followed three years later (1959) by the first English-language translation, with Coptic transcription.^[15] In 1977, James M. Robinson edited the first complete collection of English translations of the Nag Hammadi texts.^[16] The Gospel of Thomas has been translated and annotated worldwide in many languages.

The original Coptic manuscript is now the property of the Coptic Museum in Cairo, Egypt, Department of Manuscripts.^[17]

Oxyrhynchus papyrus fragments[edit]

After the Coptic version of the complete text was discovered in 1945 at Nag Hammadi, scholars soon realized that three different Greek text fragments previously found at Oxyrhynchus (the Oxyrhynchus Papyri), also in Egypt, were part of the Gospel of Thomas.^[18][19] These three papyrus fragments of Thomas date to between 130 and 250 AD. Prior to the Nag Hammadi library discovery, the sayings of Jesus found in Oxyrhynchus were known simply as Logia Iesu. The corresponding Uncial script Greek fragments of the Gospel of Thomas, found in Oxyrhynchus are:

• P. Oxy. 1 : fragments of logia 26 through 33, with the last two sentences of logion 77 in the Coptic version included at the end of logion 30 herein.
• P. Oxy. 654 : fragments of the beginning through logion 7, logion 24 and logion 36 on the flip side of a papyrus containing surveyingdata.^[20]
• P. Oxy. 655 : fragments of logia 36 through 39. 8 fragments designated a through h, whereof f and h have since been lost.^[21]

The wording of the Coptic sometimes differs markedly from the earlier Greek Oxyrhynchus texts, the extreme case being that the last portion of logion 30 in the Greek is found at the end of logion 77 in the Coptic. This fact, along with the quite different wording Hippolytus uses when apparently quoting it (see below), suggests that the Gospel of Thomas "may have circulated in more than one form and passed through several stages of redaction."^[22]

Although it is generally thought that the Gospel of Thomas was first composed in Greek, there is evidence that the Coptic Nag Hammadi text is a translation from Syriac (see Syriac origin).

Attestation[edit]

The earliest surviving written references to the Gospel of Thomas are found in the writings of Hippolytus of Rome (c. 222–235) and Origen of Alexandria (c. 233).^[23] Hippolytus wrote in his Refutation of All Heresies5.7.20:

[The Naassenes] speak...of a nature which is both hidden and revealed at the same time and which they call the thought-for kingdom of heaven which is in a human being. They transmit a tradition concerning this in the Gospel entitled "According to Thomas," which states expressly, "The one who seeks me will find me in children of seven years and older, for there, hidden in the fourteenth aeon, I am revealed."

This appears to be a reference to saying 4 of Thomas, although the wording differs significantly.

Origen listed the "Gospel according to Thomas" as being among the heterodox apocryphal gospels known to him (Hom. in Luc. 1).

In the 4th and 5th centuries, various Church Fathers wrote that the Gospel of Thomas was highly valued by Mani. In the 4th century, Cyril of Jerusalem mentioned a "Gospel of Thomas" twice in his Catechesis: "The Manichæans also wrote a Gospel according to Thomas, which being tinctured with the fragrance of the evangelic title corrupts the souls of the simple sort."^[24] and "Let none read the Gospel according to Thomas: for it is the work not of one of the twelve Apostles, but of one of the three wicked disciples of Manes."^[25] The 5th century Decretum Gelasianum includes "A Gospel attributed to Thomas which the Manichaean use" in its list of heretical books.^[26]

Date of composition[edit]

Richard Valantasis writes:

Assigning a date to the Gospel of Thomas is very complex because it is difficult to know precisely to what a date is being assigned. Scholars have proposed a date as early as 40 AD or as late as 140 AD, depending upon whether the Gospel of Thomas is identified with the original core of sayings, or with the author's published text, or with the Greek or Coptic texts, or with parallels in other literature.^[27]

Valantasis and other scholars argue that it is difficult to date Thomas because, as a collection of logia without a narrative framework, individual sayings could have been added to it gradually over time.^[28]Valantasis dates Thomas to 100 – 110 AD, with some of the material certainly coming from the first stratum which is dated to 30 – 60 AD.^[29]J. R. Porter dates the Gospel of Thomas much later, to 250 AD.^[30]

Early camp[edit]

Robert E. Van Voorst states:

Most interpreters place its writing in the second century, understanding that many of its oral traditions are much older.^[31]

Scholars generally fall into one of two main camps: an "early camp" favoring a date for the "core" of between the years 50 and 100, before or approximately contemporary with the composition of the canonical gospels and a "late camp" favoring a date in the 2nd century, after composition of the canonical gospels.

Form of the gospel[edit]

Theissen and Merz argue the genre of a collection of sayings was one of the earliest forms in which material about Jesus was handed down.^[32]They assert that other collections of sayings, such as the Q documentand the collection underlying Mark 4, were absorbed into larger narratives and no longer survive as independent documents, and that no later collections in this form survive.^[32] Marvin Meyer also asserted that the genre of a "sayings collection" is indicative of the 1st century,^[33]and that in particular the "use of parables without allegorical amplification" seems to antedate the canonical gospels.^[33] Maurice Casey has strongly questioned the argument from genre: the "logic of the argument requires that Q and the Gospel of Thomas be also dated at the same time as both the book of Proverbs and the Sayings of Amen-em-Opet."^{[34][dubious – discuss]}

Independence from Synoptic Gospels[edit]

Stevan L. Davies argues that the apparent independence of the ordering of sayings in Thomas from that of their parallels in the synoptics shows that Thomas was not evidently reliant upon the canonical gospels and probably predated them.^{[35][citation needed]} Several authors argue that when the logia in Thomas do have parallels in the synoptics, the version in Thomas often seems closer to the source. Theissen and Merz give sayings 31 and 65 as examples of this.^[32] Koester agrees, citing especially the parables contained in sayings 8, 9, 57, 63, 64 and 65.^[36]In the few instances where the version in Thomas seems to be dependent on the Synoptics, Koester suggests, this may be due to the influence of the person who translated the text from Greek into Coptic.^[36]

Koester also argues that the absence of narrative materials (such as those found in the canonical gospels) in Thomas makes it unlikely that the gospel is "an eclectic excerpt from the gospels of the New Testament".^[36] He also cites the absence of the eschatological sayings considered characteristic of Q to show the independence of Thomas from that source.^[36]

Intertextuality with John's gospel[edit]

This section needs to be updated. Please update this article to reflect recent events or newly available information. (September 2016)

Another argument for an early date is what some scholars have suggested is an interplay between the Gospel of John and the logia of Thomas. Parallels between the two have been taken to suggest that Thomas' logia preceded John's work, and that the latter was making a point-by-point riposte to Thomas, either in real or mock conflict. This seeming dialectic has been pointed out by several New Testament scholars, notably Gregory J. Riley,^[37] April DeConick,^[38] and Elaine Pagels.^[39] Though differing in approach, they argue that several verses in the Gospel of John are best understood as responses to a Thomasine community and its beliefs. Pagels, for example, says that John's gospel makes two references to the inability of the world to recognize the divine light.^{[40][better source needed]} In contrast, several of Thomas' sayings refer to the light born 'within'.^[41]

John's gospel is the only canonical one that gives Thomas the Apostle a dramatic role and spoken part, and Thomas is the only character therein described as having apistos (unbelief), despite the failings of virtually all the Johannine characters to live up to the author's standards of belief. With respect to the famous story of "Doubting Thomas",^[42] it is suggested^[39] that John may have been denigrating or ridiculing a rival school of thought. In another apparent contrast, John's text matter-of-factly presents a bodily resurrection as if this is a sine qua non of the faith; in contrast, Thomas' insights about the spirit-and-body are more nuanced.^[43] For Thomas, resurrection seems more a cognitive event of spiritual attainment, one even involving a certain discipline or asceticism. Again, an apparently denigrating portrayal in the "Doubting Thomas" story may either be taken literally, or as a kind of mock "comeback" to Thomas' logia: not as an outright censuring of Thomas, but an improving gloss. After all, Thomas' thoughts about the spirit and body are really not so different from those which John has presented elsewhere.^[44] John portrays Thomas as physically touching the risen Jesus, inserting fingers and hands into his body, and ending with a shout. Pagels interprets this as signifying one-upmanship by John, who is forcing Thomas to acknowledge Jesus' bodily nature. She writes that "...he shows Thomas giving up his search for experiential truth – his 'unbelief' – to confess what John sees as the truth...".^[45] The point of these examples, as used by Riley and Pagels, is to support the argument that the text of Thomas must have existed and have gained a following at the time of the writing of John's Gospel, and that the importance of the Thomasine logia was great enough that John felt the necessity of weaving them into his own narrative.

As the scholarly debate continues on the issue of possible John–Thomas interplay, Christopher Skinner more recently responded in part to Riley, DeConick, and Pagels with John and Thomas – Gospels in Conflict? (Wipf and Stock, Princeton Theological Monograph Series 115, 2009).

Role of James[edit]

This section may be confusing or unclear to readers. In particular, This section reads oddly, like a poor translation, and needs at the very least copy-edited. (January 2016) (Learn how and when to remove this template message)

Albert Hogeterp argues that the Gospel's saying 12, which attributes leadership of the community to James the Just rather than to Peter, agrees with the description of the early Jerusalem church by Paul in Galatians 2:1–14 and may reflect a tradition predating AD 70.^[46]Meyer also lists "uncertainty about James the righteous, the brother of Jesus" as characteristic of a 1st-century origin.^[33]

In later traditions (most notably in the Acts of Thomas, Book of Thomas the Contender, etc.), Thomas is regarded as the twin brother of Jesus.^[47] Nonetheless, this gospel holds some sentences (log. 55, 99 y 101), that are in opposition with the familiar group of Jesus, which involves difficulties, when it tries to identify him with James, the brother, quoted by Josephus in Antiquities of the Jews. Moreover, there are some sayings, (principally log. 6, 14, 104) and Oxyrh. papyri 654 (log. 6) in which Gospel is shown in the opposite point of view to Jewish moresspecially in respect to the circumcision and dietary practices (log. 55), key issue, in the early Jewish-Christian community led by James (Acts 15: 1-35, Gal. 2:1–10).

In regard to 'Sabbath', it is very controversial the sense of the sentence: "if you do not keep the true, 'Sabbath', you will not see to Father". It seems that this saying is also contrary to strict observance of the Jewish law. Aelred Baker, quotes 'Macarius' of Syria: "For the soul that is considered worthy from the shameful and foul reflections keeps the sabbath a true sabbath and rests a true rest. . . . To all the souls that obey and come he gives rest from these . . . impure reflections . . ., (the souls) keeping the sabbath a true sabbath".^[48] Meyer also highlights as the Coptic Language employs two different spellings for the word translated 'sabbath' in saying. 27 (sambaton and sabbaton), it is conceivable - but probably that the text could be translated 'observe the (whole) week as the sabbath' ^[49]

Depiction of Peter and Matthew[edit]

In saying 13, Peter and Matthew are depicted as unable to understand the true significance or identity of Jesus. Patterson argues that this can be interpreted as a criticism against the school of Christianity associated with the Gospel of Matthew, and that "[t]his sort of rivalry seems more at home in the first century than later", when all the apostles had become revered figures.^[50]

Parallel with Paul[edit]

According to Meyer, Thomas's saying 17: "I shall give you what no eye has seen, what no ear has heard and no hand has touched, and what has not come into the human heart", is strikingly similar to what Paulwrote in 1 Corinthians 2:9^[33] (which was itself an allusion to Isaiah 64:4^[51]).

Late camp[edit]

The late camp dates Thomas some time after 100 AD, generally in the mid-2nd century.^[52][53] They generally believe that although the text was composed around the mid-2nd century, it contains earlier sayings such as those originally found in the New Testament gospels of which Thomas was in some sense dependent in addition to inauthentic and possibly authentic independent sayings not found in any other extant text. J. R. Porter dates Thomas much later, to the mid-third century.^[30]

Dependence on the New Testament[edit]

Several scholars have argued that the sayings in Thomas reflect conflations and harmonisations dependent on the canonical gospels. For example, saying 10 and 16 appear to contain a redacted harmonisation of Luke 12:49, 12:51–52 and Matthew 10:34–35. In this case it has been suggested that the dependence is best explained by the author of Thomas making use of an earlier harmonised oral tradition based on Matthew and Luke.^[54][55] Biblical scholar Craig A. Evans also subscribes to this view and notes that "Over half of the New Testament writings are quoted, paralleled, or alluded to in Thomas... I'm not aware of a Christian writing prior to AD 150 that references this much of the New Testament."^[56]

Another argument made for the late dating of Thomas is based upon the fact that Saying 5 in the original Greek (Papyrus Oxyrhynchus 654) seems to follow the vocabulary used in the gospel according to Luke (Luke 8:17), and not the vocabulary used in the gospel according to Mark (Mark 4:22). According to this argument – which presupposes firstly the rectitude of the Two-Source Hypothesis (widely held amongst current New Testament scholars), in which the author of Luke is seen as having used the pre-existing gospel according to Mark plus a lost Q document to compose his gospel – if the author of Thomas did, as Saying 5 suggests – refer to a pre-existing gospel according to Luke, rather than Mark's vocabulary, then the gospel of Thomas must have been composed after both Mark and Luke (the latter of which is dated to between 60 AD and 90 AD).

Another saying that employs similar vocabulary to that used in Luke rather than Mark is Saying 31 in the original Greek (Papyrus Oxyrhynchus 1), where Luke 4:24's term dektos (acceptable) 4:24 is employed rather than Mark 6:4's atimos (without honor). The word dektos (in all its cases and genders) is clearly typical of Luke, since it is only employed by him in the canonical gospels Luke 4:19; 4:24; Acts 10:35). Thus, the argument runs, the Greek Thomas has clearly been at least influenced by Luke's characteristic vocabulary.^[57]

J. R. Porter states that, because around half of the sayings in the Thomas have parallels in the synoptic gospels, its "possible that the sayings in the Gospel of Thomas were selected directly from the canonical gospels and were either reproduced more or less exactly or amended to fit the author's distinctive theological outlook."^[58] According to John P. Meier, scholars predominantly conclude that Thomas depends on or harmonizes the Synoptics.^[59]

Syriac origin[edit]

Several scholars argue that Thomas is dependent on Syriac writings, including unique versions of the canonical gospels. They contend that many sayings of the Gospel of Thomas are more similar to Syriac translations of the canonical gospels than their record in the original Greek. Craig A. Evans states that saying 54 in Thomas, which speaks of the poor and the kingdom of heaven, is more similar to the Syriac version of Matthew 5:3 than the Greek version of that passage or the parallel in Luke 6:20.^[60]

Klyne Snodgrass notes that saying 65–66 of Thomas containing the Parable of the Wicked Tenants appears to be dependent on the early harmonisation of Mark and Luke found in the old Syriac gospels. He concludes that, "Thomas, rather than representing the earliest form, has been shaped by this harmonizing tendency in Syria. If the Gospel of Thomas were the earliest, we would have to imagine that each of the evangelists or the traditions behind them expanded the parable in different directions and then that in the process of transmission the text was trimmed back to the form it has in the Syriac Gospels. It is much more likely that Thomas, which has a Syrian provenance, is dependent on the tradition of the canonical Gospels that has been abbreviated and harmonized by oral transmission."^[61]

Nicholas Perrin argues that Thomas is dependent on the Diatessaron, which was composed shortly after 172 by Tatian in Syria.^[62] Perrin explains the order of the sayings by attempting to demonstrate that almost all adjacent sayings are connected by Syriac catchwords, whereas in Coptic or Greek, catchwords have been found for only less than half of the pairs of adjacent sayings.^[63] Peter J. Williams analyzed Perrin's alleged Syriac catchwords and found them implausible. ^[64]Robert Shedinger wrote that since Perrin attempts to reconstruct an Old Syriac version of Thomas without first establishing Thomas' reliance on the Diatessaron, Perrin's logic seems circular.^[65]

Lack of apocalyptic themes[edit]

Bart Ehrman argues that the historical Jesus was an apocalypticpreacher, and that his apocalyptic beliefs are recorded in the earliest Christian documents: Mark and the authentic Pauline epistles. The earliest Christians believed Jesus would soon return, and their beliefs are echoed in the earliest Christian writings. The Gospel of Thomas proclaims that the Kingdom of God is already present for those who understand the secret message of Jesus (Saying 113), and lacks apocalyptic themes. Because of this, Ehrman argues, the Gospel of Thomas was probably composed by a Gnostic some time in the early 2nd century.^[66]

N.T. Wright, the former Anglican bishop and professor of NT history at Cambridge and Oxford, now Research Professor of New Testament and Early Christianity at St Mary's College in the University of St Andrews in Scotland, also sees the dating of Thomas in the 2nd or 3rd century A.D. Wright's reasoning for this dating is that the "narrative framework" of 1st century Judaism and the New Testament is radically different from the worldview expressed in the sayings collected in the Gospel of Thomas. Thomas makes an anachronistic mistake by turning Jesus the Jewish prophet into a Hellenistic/Cynic philosopher. Wright concludes his section on the Gospel of Thomas in his book "The New Testament in the People of God" in this way: "[Thomas'] implicit story has to do with a figure who imparts a secret, hidden wisdom to those close to him, so that they can perceive a new truth and be saved by it. 'The Thomas Christians are told the truth about their divine origins, and given the secret passwords that will prove effective in the return journey to their heavenly home.' This is, obviously, the non-historical story of Gnosticism... It is simply the case that, on good historical grounds, it is far more likely that the book represents a radical translation, and indeed subversion, of first-century Christianity into a quite different sort of religion, than that it represents the original of which the longer gospels are distortions... Thomas reflects a symbolic universe, and a worldview, which are radically different from those of the early Judaism and Christianity."^[67]

Relation to the New Testament Canon[edit]

Last page of the Gospel of Thomas

The harsh and widespread reaction to Marcion's canon, the first New Testament canon known to have been created, may demonstrate that, by 140 AD, it had become widely accepted that other texts formed parts of the records of the life and ministry of Jesus.^{[citation needed]} Although arguments about some potential New Testament books, such as the Shepherd of Hermas and Book of Revelation, continued well into the 4th century, four canonical gospels, attributed to Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John, were accepted among proto-orthodox Christians at least as early as the mid-2nd century. Tatian's widely used Diatessaron, compiled between 160 and 175 AD, utilized the four gospels without any consideration of others. Irenaeus of Lyons wrote in the late 2nd century that since there are four quarters of the earth ... it is fitting that the church should have four pillars ... the four Gospels(Against Heresies, 3.11.8), and then shortly thereafter made the first known quotation from a fourth gospel—the canonical version of the Gospel of John. The late 2nd-century Muratorian fragment also recognizes only the three synoptic gospels and John. Bible scholar Bruce Metzger wrote regarding the formation of the New Testament canon, "Although the fringes of the emerging canon remained unsettled for generations, a high degree of unanimity concerning the greater part of the New Testament was attained among the very diverse and scattered congregations of believers not only throughout the Mediterranean world, but also over an area extending from Britain to Mesopotamia."^[68]

Relation to the Thomasine Milieu[edit]

The question also arises as to various sects' usage of other works attributed to Thomas and their relation to this work. The Book of Thomas the Contender, also from Nag Hammadi, is foremost among these, but the extensive Acts of Thomas provides the mythological connections. The short and comparatively straightforward Apocalypse of Thomas has no immediate connection with the synoptic gospels, while the canonical Jude – if the name can be taken to refer to Judas Thomas Didymus – certainly attests to early intra-Christian conflict. The Infancy Gospel of Thomas, shorn of its mythological connections, is difficult to connect specifically to our gospel, but the Acts of Thomas contains the Hymn of the Pearl whose content is reflected in the Psalms of Thomasfound in Manichaean literature. These psalms, which otherwise reveal Mandaean connections, also contain material overlapping the Gospel of Thomas.^[69]

Importance and author[edit]

P. Oxy. 655

As one of the earliest accounts of the teachings of Jesus, the Gospel of Thomas is regarded by some scholars as one of the most important texts in understanding early Christianity outside the New Testament.^[70] In terms of faith, however, no major Christian group accepts this gospel as canonical or authoritative. It is an important work for scholars working on the Q document, which itself is thought to be a collection of sayings or teachings upon which the gospels of Matthew and Luke are partly based. Although no copy of Q has ever been discovered, the fact that Thomas is similarly a 'sayings' Gospel is viewed by some scholars as an indication that the early Christians did write collections of the sayings of Jesus, bolstering the Q hypothesis.^[71]

Most scholars do not consider Apostle Thomas the author of this document and the author remains unknown. J. Menard produced a summary of the academic consensus in the mid-1970s which stated that the gospel was probably a very late text written by a Gnostic author, thus having very little relevance to the study of the early development of Christianity. Scholarly views of Gnosticism and the Gospel of Thomas have since become more nuanced and diverse.^[72]Paterson Brown, for example, has argued forcefully that the three Coptic Gospels of Thomas, Philip and Truth are demonstrably not Gnostic writings, since all three explicitly affirm the basic reality and sanctity of incarnate life, which Gnosticism by definition considers illusory and evil.

In the 4th century Cyril of Jerusalem considered the author a disciple of Mani who was also called Thomas.^[73] Cyril stated: ^[74]

Mani had three disciples: Thomas, Baddas and Hermas. Let no one read the Gospel according to Thomas. For he is not one of the twelve apostles but one of the three wicked disciples of Mani.

Many scholars consider the Gospel of Thomas to be a gnostic text, since it was found in a library among others, it contains Gnostic themes, and perhaps presupposes a Gnostic worldview.^[75] Others reject this interpretation, because Thomas lacks the full-blown mythology of Gnosticism as described by Irenaeus of Lyons (ca. 185), and because Gnostics frequently appropriated and used a large "range of scripture from Genesis to the Psalms to Homer, from the Synoptics to John to the letters of Paul."^[76]

The historical Jesus[edit]

Some modern scholars believe that the Gospel of Thomas was written independently of the canonical gospels, and therefore is a useful guide to historical Jesus research.^[70][77] Scholars may utilize one of several critical tools in biblical scholarship, the criterion of multiple attestation, to help build cases for historical reliability of the sayings of Jesus. By finding those sayings in the Gospel of Thomas that overlap with the Gospel of the Hebrews, Q, Mark, Matthew, Luke, John, and Paul, scholars feel such sayings represent "multiple attestations" and therefore are more likely to come from a historical Jesus than sayings that are only singly attested.^[78]

Comparison of the major gospels[edit]

The material in the comparison chart is from Gospel Parallels by B. H. Throckmorton,^[79] The Five Gospels by R. W. Funk,^[80] The Gospel According to the Hebrews by E. B. Nicholson^[81] and The Hebrew Gospel and the Development of the Synoptic Tradition by J. R. Edwards.^[82]

Item	Matthew, Mark, Luke	John	Thomas	Nicholson/Edwards Hebrew Gospels
New Covenant	The central theme of the Gospels – Love God with all your heart and your neighbor as yourself[83]	The central theme – Love is the New Commandment given by Jesus[84]	Secret knowledge, love your friends[85]	The central theme – Love one another[86]
Forgiveness	Very important – particularly in Matthew and Luke[87]	Assumed[88]	Not mentioned	Very important – Forgiveness is a central theme and this gospel goes into the greatest detail[89]
The Lord's Prayer	In Matthew & Luke but not Mark[90]	Not mentioned	Not mentioned	Important – "mahar" or "tomorrow"[91][92]
Love & the poor	Very Important – The rich young man[93]	Assumed[94]	Important[95]	Very important – The rich young man[96]
Jesus starts his ministry	Jesus meets John the Baptist and is baptized in the 15th year of Tiberius Caesar[97]	Jesus meets John the Baptist, 46 years after Herod's Templeis built (John 2:20)[98]	Only speaks of John the Baptist[99]	Jesus meets John the Baptist and is baptized. This gospel goes into the greatest detail[100]
Disciples-number	Twelve[101]	Twelve[102]	not mentioned[103]	Twelve[104]
Disciples-inner circle	Peter, Andrew, James & John[101]	Peter, Andrew, the Beloved Disciple[102]	Thomas,[103]James the Just[105]	Peter, Andrew, James, & John[100]
Disciples-others	Philip, Bartholomew, Matthew, Thomas, James, Simon the Zealot, Judas Thaddaeus, & Judas Iscariot[102]	Philip, Nathanael, Thomas, Judas not Iscariot & Judas Iscariot[102]	Peter,[103][106]Matthew,[103]Mariam[106][107]	Matthew, James the Just (Brother of Jesus), Simon the Zealot, Thaddaeus, Judas Iscariot[108]
Possible Authors	Unknown;[109]Mark the Evangelist & Luke the Evangelist	The Beloved Disciple[110]	Unknown	Matthew the Evangelist (or Unknown)[111]
Virgin birth account	Described in Matthew & Luke, Mark only makes reference to a "Mother"[112]	Not mentioned, although the "Word becomes flesh" in John 1:14	N/A as this is a gospel of Jesus' sayings	Not mentioned.
Jesus' baptism	Described[90]	Seen in flash-back (John 1:32-34)[90]	N/A	Described great detail[113]
Preaching style	Brief one-liners; parables[90]	Essay format, Midrash[90]	Sayings, parables[114]	Brief one-liners; parables[90]
Storytelling	Parables[115]	Figurative language & metaphor[116]	proto-Gnostic, hidden, parables[117]	Parables[118]
Jesus' theology	1st century liberal Judaism.[119]	Critical of Jewish authorities[120]	proto-Gnostic	1st century Judaism[119]
Miracles	Many miracles	Seven Signs	N/A	Fewer miracles[121]
Duration of ministry	Not mentioned, possibly 3 years according to the Parable of the barren fig tree (Luke 13)	3 years (Four Passovers)[122]	N/A	1 year[123]
Location of ministry	Mainly Galilee	Mainly Judea, near Jerusalem	N/A	Mainly Galilee
Passover meal	Body & Blood = Bread and wine	Interrupts meal for foot washing	N/A	Hebrew Passover is celebrated but details are N/A Epiphanius[124]
Burial shroud	A single piece of cloth	Multiple pieces of cloth[125]	N/A	Given to the High Priest [126]
Resurrection	Mary and the women are the first to learn Jesus has arisen[127]	John adds detailed account of Mary's experience of the Resurrection[128]	N/A	In the Gospel of the Hebrews is the unique account of Jesus appearing to his brother, James the Just.[129]

See also[edit]

• British Library Or 4926
• Common Sayings Source
• Stigmata (film)
• Five Trees

Notes[edit]

1. Jump up^ The books, technically called codices had been bound by a method now called Coptic binding and placed in an earthenware jar. They were damaged by their discoverers, a group of peasants who broke the jar open and manhandled its contents.
2. Jump up^ Modern-day scholars have numbered the sayings and even parts of the sayings, but the text contains no numbering.
3. Jump up^ Lost Scriptures: Books that did not make it into the New Testament by Bart Ehrman, pp. 19-20
4. Jump up^ Eerdmans Commentary on the Bible by James D. G. Dunn, John William Rogerson, 2003, ISBN 0-8028-3711-5 page 1574
5. Jump up^ The Fifth Gospel, Patterson, Robinson, Bethge, 1998
6. Jump up^ April D. DeConick 2006 The Original Gospel of Thomas in TranslationISBN 0-567-04382-7 page 2
7. Jump up^ Layton, Bentley, The Gnostic Scriptures, 1987, p.361.
8. Jump up^ Davies, Stevan L., The Gospel of Thomas and Christian Wisdom, 1983, pp. 23–24.
9. Jump up^ DeConick, April D., The Original Gospel of Thomas in Translation, 2006, p.214
10. Jump up^ Alister E. McGrath, 2006 Christian Theology ISBN 1-4051-5360-1 page 12
11. Jump up^ James Dunn, John Rogerson 2003 Eerdmans Commentary on the BibleISBN 0-8028-3711-5 page 1573
12. Jump up^ Udo Schnelle, 2007 Einleitung in das Neue Testament ISBN 978-3-8252-1830-0 page 230
13. Jump up^ "CHURCH FATHERS: Church History, Book III (Eusebius)".
14. Jump up^ For photocopies of the manuscript see: http://www.gospels.net/thomas/
15. Jump up^ A. Guillaumont, Henri-Charles Puech, Gilles Quispel, Walter Till and Yassah `Abd Al Masih, The Gospel According to Thomas (E. J. Brill and Harper & Brothers, 1959).
16. Jump up^ Robinson, James M., General Editor, The Nag Hammadi Library in English, Revised Edition 1988, E.J. Brill, Leiden, and Harper and Row, San Francisco, ISBN 90-04-08856-3.
17. Jump up^ Coptic Gnostic Papyri in the Coptic Museum at Old Cairo, vol. I (Cairo, 1956) plates 80, line 10 – 99, line 28.
18. Jump up^ Bernard P. Grenfell and Arthur S. Hunt, Sayings of Our Lord from an early Greek Papyrus (Egypt Exploration Fund; 1897)
19. Jump up^ Robert M. Grant and David Noel Freedman, The Secret Sayings of Jesus according to the Gospel of Thomas (Fontana Books, 1960).
20. Jump up^ "P.Oxy.IV 0654".
21. Jump up^ "P.Oxy.IV 0655".
22. Jump up^ John P. Meier, A Marginal Jew (New York, 1990) p. 125.
23. Jump up^ Koester 1990, pp.77ff
24. Jump up^ Cyril Catechesis 4.36
25. Jump up^ Cyril Catechesis 6.31
26. Jump up^ Koester 1990 p. 78
27. Jump up^ Valantasis, p. 12
28. Jump up^ Patterson, Robinson, and Bethge (1998), p. 40
29. Jump up^ Valantasis, p. 20
30. ^ Jump up to:^a b Porter, J. R. (2010). The Lost Bible. New York: Metro Books. p. 9. ISBN 978-1-4351-4169-8.
31. Jump up^ Van Voorst, Robert (2000). Jesus Outside the New Testament: an introduction to the ancient evidence. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans. p. 189.
32. ^ Jump up to:^a b c Theissen, Gerd; Merz, Annette (1998). The Historical Jesus: A Comprehensive Guide. Minneapolis: Fortress Press. pp. 38–39. ISBN 0-8006-3122-6.
33. ^ Jump up to:^a b c d Meyer, Marvin (2001). "Albert Schweitzer and the Image of Jesus in the Gospel of Thomas". In Meyer, Marvin; Hughes, Charles. Jesus Then & Now: Images of Jesus in History and Christology. Harrisburg, PA: Trinity Press International. p. 73. ISBN 1-56338-344-6.
34. Jump up^ Casey, Maurice (2002). An Aramaic Approach to Q: Sources for the Gospels of Matthew and Luke. Society for New Testament Studies Monograph Series. 122. Cambridge University Press. p. 33. ISBN 978-0521817233.
35. Jump up^ "Misericordia University".
36. ^ Jump up to:^a b c d Koester, Helmut; Lambdin (translator), Thomas O. (1996). "The Gospel of Thomas". In Robinson, James MacConkey. The Nag Hammadi Library in English (Revised ed.). Leiden, New York, Cologne: E. J. Brill. p. 125. ISBN 90-04-08856-3.
37. Jump up^ Resurrection Reconsidered: Thomas and John in Conflict (Augsberg Fortess, 1995)
38. Jump up^ Voices of the Mystics: Early Christian Discourse in the Gospel of John and Thomas and Other Ancient Christian Literature (T&T Clark, 2001)
39. ^ Jump up to:^a b Beyond Belief: The Secret Gospel of Thomas. (New York: Vintage, 2004)
40. Jump up^ Jn 1:5, 1:10
41. Jump up^ logia 24, 50, 61, 83
42. Jump up^ (Jn. 20:26–29)
43. Jump up^ (logia 29, 80, 87)
44. Jump up^ e.g. Jn. 3:6, 6:52–6 – but pointedly contrasting these with 6:63
45. Jump up^ Pagels, Elaine. Beyond Belief: The Secret Gospel of Thomas. New York: Vintage, 2004. pp. 66–73
46. Jump up^ Hogeterp, Albert L A (2006). Paul and God's Temple. Leuven, Netherlands; Dudley, MA: Peeters. p. 137. ISBN 90-429-1722-9.
47. Jump up^ Turner, John D. [1] (NHC II,7, 138,4). Retrieved 2016/01/08
48. Jump up^ Dom Aelred Baker Vigiliae Christianae Vol. 18, No. 4 (Dec., 1964), pp. 220.
49. Jump up^ Meyer, Marvin (1992). Gospel of Thomas, The hidden sayings of JesusHarper Collins, San Francisco, ISBN 006065581X, pp. 81-82
50. Jump up^ Patterson et al. (1998), p. 42
51. Jump up^ "1 Corinthians 2:9 (footnote a.)". New International Version. Biblica, Inc. 2011. Retrieved 29 January 2011.
52. Jump up^ Darrell L. Bock, "Response to John Dominic Crossan" in The Historical Jesus ed. James K. Beilby and Paul Rhodes Eddy. 148–149. "...for most scholars the Gospel of Thomas is seen as an early-second century text." (148–149).
53. Jump up^ Darrell L. Bock, The Missing Gospels (Nashville: Thomas Nelson, 2006).61; 63. "Most date the gospel to the second century and place its origin in Syria...Most scholars regard the book as an early second-century work."(61); "However, for most scholars, the bulk of it is later reflecting a second-century work."(63)
54. Jump up^ Klyne R. Snodgrass, "The Gospel of Thomas: A Secondary Gospel" in The Historical Jesus:Critical Concepts in Religious Studies. Volume 4: Lives of Jesus and Jesus outside the Bible. Ed. Craig A. Evans. 299
55. Jump up^ Robert M. Grant and David Noel Freedman, The Secret Sayings of Jesus(Garden City, N.Y.: Doubleday & Company, 1960) 136–137.
56. Jump up^ Strobel, Lee (2007). The Case for the Real Jesus. United States: Zondervan. p. 36.
57. Jump up^ For general discussion, see John P. Meier, A Marginal Jew, (New York, 1991) pp. 137; pp. 163–64 n. 133. See also Christopher Tuckett, "Thomas and the Synoptics," Novum Testamentum 30 (1988) 132–57, esp. p. 146.
58. Jump up^ Porter, J. R. (2010). The Lost Bible. New York: Metro Books. p. 166. ISBN 978-1-4351-4169-8.
59. Jump up^ See summary in John P. Meier, A Marginal Jew (New York, 1991) pp. 135–138, especially the footnotes.
60. Jump up^ Evans, Craig A. Fabricating Jesus: How Modern Scholars Distort the Gospels. Downers Grove, IL: IVP Books, 2008.^{[page needed]}
61. Jump up^ Klyne R. Snodgrass, "The Gospel of Thomas: A Secondary Gospel" in The Historical Jesus:Critical Concepts in Religious Studies. Volume 4: Lives of Jesus and Jesus outside the Bible. Ed. Craig A. Evans. 298
62. Jump up^ Nicholas Perrin, "Thomas: The Fifth Gospel?," Journal of The Evangelical Theological Society 49 (March 2006): 66–80
63. Jump up^ Perrin, Nicholas (2003). Thomas and Tatian: The Relationship Between the Gospel of Thomas and the Diatessaron. Academia Biblica. 5. Koninklijke Brill NV, Leiden, The Netherlands: Brill Academic Publishers.
64. Jump up^ Williams, P.J., "Alleged Syriac Catchwords in the Gospel of Thomas" Vigiliae Christianae, Volume 63, Number 1, 2009, pp. 71–82(12) BRILL [2]
65. Jump up^ Robert F. Shedinger, "Thomas and Tatian: The Relationship between the Gospel of Thomas and the Diatessaron by Nicholas Perrin" Journal of Biblical Literature, Vol. 122, No. 2 (Summer, 2003), pp. 388
66. Jump up^ Ehrman, Bart D. (1999). Jesus, apocalyptic prophet of the new millennium (revised ed.). Oxford; New York: Oxford University Press. pp. 75–78. ISBN 0-19-512473-1.
67. Jump up^ Wright, N.T. (1992). The New Testament and the People of God. Fortress Press. p. 443.
68. Jump up^ Bruce M. Metzger, The Canon of the New Testament:its origin, development and significance p. 75
69. Jump up^ Masing, Uku & Kaide Rätsep, Barlaam and Joasaphat: some problems connected with the story of "Barlaam & Joasaphat", the Acts of Thomas, the Psalms of Thomas and the Gospel of Thomas, Communio Viatorum 4:1 (1961) 29–36.
70. ^ Jump up to:^a b Funk 1993 p. 15
71. Jump up^ B. Ehrman (2003) pp. 57–58
72. Jump up^ April D. De Conick (2006) The original Gospel of Thomas in translationISBN 0-567-04382-7 pages 2–3
73. Jump up^ Wilhelm Schneemelcher 2006 New Testament Apocrypha ISBN 0-664-22721-X page 111
74. Jump up^ Bentley Layton 1989 Nag Hammadi codex II, 2–7: Gospel according to Thomas ISBN 90-04-08131-3 page 106
75. Jump up^ Ehrman 2003 pp.59ff
76. Jump up^ Davies, Stevan. "Thomas: The Fourth Synoptic Gospel", The Biblical Archaeologist 1983 The American Schools of Oriental Research. pp. 6–8
77. Jump up^ Koester 1990 p. 84–6
78. Jump up^ Funk 1993 p. 16ff
79. Jump up^ Throckmorton, B. H. Gospel Parallels.
80. Jump up^ Funk, R. W. The Five Gospels.
81. Jump up^ Nicholson, E. B. The Gospel According to the Hebrews.
82. Jump up^ Edwards, J. R. The Hebrew Gospel and the Development of the Synoptic Tradition.
83. Jump up^ "In the Synoptic Gospels this is the "Greatest" Commandment" that sums up all of the "Law and the Prophets"
84. Jump up^ Jn 13:34
85. Jump up^ Logion 25
86. Jump up^ The Lord says to his disciples: "And never be you joyful, except when you behold one another with love." Jerome, Commentary on Ephesians
87. Jump up^ Matt 18:21, Lk 17:4
88. Jump up^ Jn 20:23
89. Jump up^ In the Gospel of the Hebrews, written in the Chaldee and Syriac language but in Hebrew script, and used by the Nazarenes to this day (I mean the Gospel of the Apostles, or, as it is generally maintained, the Gospel of Matthew, a copy of which is in the library at Caesarea), we find, "Behold the mother of the Lord and his brothers said to him, ‘John the Baptist baptizes for the forgiveness of sins. Let us go and be baptized by him.’ But Jesus said to them, ‘in what way have I sinned that I should go and be baptized by him? Unless perhaps, what I have just said is a sin of ignorance.’" And in the same volume, "‘If your brother sins against you in word, and makes amends, forgive him seven times a day.’ Simon, His disciple, said to Him, ‘Seven times in a day!’ The Lord answered and said to him, ‘I say to you, Seventy times seven.’ " Jerome, Against Pelagius 3.2
90. ^ Jump up to:^{a b c d e f} Trite
91. Jump up^ In the so-called Gospel of the Hebrews, for "bread essential to existence," I found "mahar", which means "of tomorrow"; so the sense is: our bread for tomorrow, that is, of the future, give us this day. Jerome, Commentary on Matthew 1
92. Jump up^ In Matthew's Hebrew Gospel it states, ‘Give us this day our bread for tomorrow." Jerome, On Psalm 135
93. Jump up^ Matt 19:16, Mk 10:17 & Lk1 8:18
94. Jump up^ Jn 12:8
95. Jump up^ Jesus said "Blessed are the poor, for to you belongs the Kingdom of Heaven" Logion 54
96. Jump up^ The second rich youth said to him, "Rabbi, what good thing can I do and live?" Jesus replied, "Fulfill the law and the prophets." "I have," was the response. Jesus said, "Go, sell all that you have and distribute to the poor; and come, follow me." The youth became uncomfortable, for it did not please him. And the Lord said, "How can you say, I have fulfilled the Law and the Prophets, when it is written in the Law: You shall love your neighbor as yourself and many of your brothers, sons of Abraham, are covered with filth, dying of hunger, and your house is full of many good things, none of which goes out to them?" And he turned and said to Simon, his disciple, who was sitting by Him, "Simon, son of Jonah, it is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle than for the rich to enter the Kingdom of Heaven. "Origen, Commentary on Matthew 15:14
97. Jump up^ Matt 3:1, Mk 1:9, 3:21, Luke 3:1
98. Jump up^ Jn 1:29
99. Jump up^ Gospel of Thomas, Logion 46: Jesus said, "From Adam to John the Baptist, among those born to women, no one is greater than John the Baptist that his eyes should not be averted. But I have said that whoever among you becomes a child will recognize the (Father's) kingdom and will become greater than John."
100. ^ Jump up to:^a b Epiphanius, Panarion 30:13
101. ^ Jump up to:^a b Matt 10:1, Mk 6:8, Lk 9:3
102. ^ Jump up to:^a b c d Jn 13:23, 19:26, 20:2, 21:7, 21:20
103. ^ Jump up to:^a b c d Logion 13
104. Jump up^ "There was a certain man named Jesus, about thirty years old, who chose us. Coming to Capernaum, He entered the house of Simon, who is called Peter, and said, ‘As I passed by the Sea of Galilee, I chose John and James, sons of Zebedee, and Simon, and Andrew, Thaddaeus, Simon the Zealot, Judas Iscariot; and you Matthew, sitting at the tax office, I called and you followed me. You therefore, I want to be the Twelve, to symbolize Israel.’"Epiphanius, Panarion 30:13
105. Jump up^ Logion 12
106. ^ Jump up to:^a b Logion 114
107. Jump up^ Logion 21
108. Jump up^ Epiphanius, Panarion 30:13, Jerome, On Illustrious Men, 2
109. Jump up^ Although several Fathers say Matthew wrote the Gospel of the Hebrews they are silent about Greek Matthew found in the Bible. Modern scholars are in agreement that Matthew did not write Greek Matthews which is 300 lines longer than the Hebrew Gospel (See James Edwards the Hebrew gospel)
110. Jump up^ Suggested by Irenaeus first
111. Jump up^ They too accept Matthew's gospel, and like the followers of Cerinthus and Merinthus, they use it alone. They call it the Gospel of the Hebrews, for in truth Matthew alone in the New Testament expounded and declared the Gospel in Hebrew using Hebrew script. Epiphanius, Panarion 30:3
112. Jump up^ Matthew 1:16, 18-25, 2:11, 13:53-55, Mark 6:2-3, Luke 1:30-35, 2:4-21, 34
113. Jump up^ "After the people were baptized, Jesus also came and was baptized by John. As Jesus came up from the water, Heaven was opened, and He saw the Holy Spirit descend in the form of a dove and enter into him. And a voice from Heaven said, ‘You are my beloved Son; with You I am well pleased.’ And again, ‘Today I have begotten you.’ "Immediately a great light shone around the place; and John, seeing it, said to him, ‘Who are you, Lord?' And again a voice from Heaven said, ‘This is my beloved Son, with whom I am well pleased.’ Then John, falling down before Him, said, ‘I beseech You, Lord, baptize me!’ But Jesus forbade him saying, ‘Let it be so as it is fitting that all things be fulfilled.’" Epiphanius, Panarion 30:13
114. Jump up^ Jesus said, "The (Father's) kingdom is like a shepherd who had a hundred sheep. One of them, the largest, went astray. He left the ninety-nine and looked for the one until he found it. After he had toiled, he said to the sheep, 'I love you more than the ninety-nine.'" Logion 107
115. Jump up^ Mercer Dictionary of the Bible.
116. Jump up^ Family of the King.
117. Jump up^ Logion 109
118. Jump up^ Hear Then the Parable.
119. ^ Jump up to:^a b Similar to beliefs taught by Hillel the Elder. (e.g. "golden rule")Hillel Hillel the Elder
120. Jump up^ Jn 7:45 & Jn 3:1
121. Jump up^ Jerome, Commentary on Matthew 2
122. Jump up^ John 2:13, 4:35, 5:1, 6:4, 19:14
123. Jump up^ Events leading up to Passover
124. Jump up^ Epiphanius, Panarion 30:22
125. Jump up^ As was the Jewish practice at the time. (John 20:5–7)
126. Jump up^ Jerome, On Illustrious Men, 2
127. Jump up^ Matt 28:1 Mk16:1 Lk24:1
128. Jump up^ Jn 20:11
129. Jump up^ Jerome, On Illustrious Men, 2

References[edit]

• Clontz, T.E. and J., "The Comprehensive New Testament", Cornerstone Publications (2008), ISBN 978-0-9778737-1-5 [3]
• Davies, Stevan (1983). The Gospel of Thomas and Christian Wisdom. Seabury Press. ISBN 0-8164-2456-X
• DeConick, April. Recovering the Original Gospel of Thomas: A History of the Gospel and Its Growth (T&T Clark, 2005)
• Ehrman, Bart (2003). Lost Scriptures: Books that Did Not Make it into the New Testament. Oxford University Press, USA. ISBN 0-19-514182-2.
• Funk, Robert Walter and Roy W. Hoover, The Five Gospels: What Did Jesus Really Say? the Search for the Authentic Words of Jesus, Polebridge Press, 1993
• Guillaumont, Antoine Jean Baptiste, Henri-Charles Puech, G. Quispel, Walter Curt Till, and Yassah ?Abd al-Masi-h, eds. 1959. Evangelium nach Thomas. Leiden: E. J. Brill Standard edition of the Coptic text
• Koester, Helmut (1990). Ancient Christian Gospels. Harrisburg, PA: Trinity Press International. ISBN 0-334-02450-1.
• Layton, Bentley (1987). The Gnostic Scriptures: A New Translation with Annotations. Doubleday. ISBN 0-385-47843-7.
• Layton, Bentley (1989). Nag Hammadi Codex II, 2 vols, E.J.Brill. The critical edition of the seven texts of Codex II, including the Gospel of Thomas. ISBN 90-04-08131-3
• Meyer, Marvin (2004). The Gospel of Thomas: The Hidden Sayings of Jesus. HarperCollins. ISBN 978-0-06-065581-5.
• Pagels, Elaine (2003). Beyond Belief : The Secret Gospel of Thomas(New York: Random House)
• Patterson, Stephen J.; Robinson, James M.; Bethge, Hans-Gebhard (1998). The Fifth Gospel: The Gospel of Thomas Comes of Age. Harrisburg, PA: Trinity Press International. ISBN 1-56338-249-0.
• Perrin, Nicholas. Thomas and Tatian: The Relationship between the Gospel of Thomas and the Diatessaron (Academia Biblica 5; Atlanta : Society of Biblical Literature; Leiden : Brill, 2002).
• Perrin, Nicholas. Thomas: The Other Gospel (London, SPCK; Louisville, KY: Westminster John Knox: 2007).
• Robinson, James M. et al., The Nag Hammadi Library in English (4th rev. ed.; Leiden; New York: E.J. Brill, 1996)
• Plisch, Uwe-Karsten (2007). Das Thomasevangelium. Originaltext mit Kommentar. Stuttgart: Deutsche Bibelgesellschaft. ISBN 3-438-05128-1.
• Snodgrass, Klyne R. "The Gospel of Thomas: A secondary Gospel," Second Century 7, 1989. pp. 19–30.
• Tuckett, Christopher M. "Thomas and the Synoptics," Novum Testamentum 30 (1988) 132–57, esp. p. 146.
• Valantasis, Richard (1997). The Gospel of Thomas. London; New York: Routledge. ISBN 0-415-11621-X.
• The Facsimile Edition of the Nag Hammadi Codices: Codex II. E.J. Brill (1974)
• Tr. Thomas O. Lambdin. The Gospel of Thomas. sacred-texts.com.

External links[edit]
Wikiquote has quotations related to: Gospel of Thomas

Wikimedia Commons has media related to Gospel of Thomas.

Wikiversity has learning materials about Gospel of Thomas

The Gospel of Thomas. With hyperlinear translation linked to Crum's Coptic Dictionary and Plumley's Coptic Grammar. Ecumenical Coptic Project online edition, 1998 ff.
Ecumenical Coptic Project at Internet Archive.
Gospel of Thomas Collection at The Gnosis Archive
Gospel of Thomas at Early Christian Writings
Gospel of Thomas Collection Commentary and Essays by Hugh McGregor Ross
Michael Grondin's Coptic–English Interlinear Translation of the Gospel of Thomas
Why is the Gospel of Thomas not in the canon. Online essay by Simonas Kiela
The Gospel of Thomas and Christian Origins by André Gagné (The Montréal Review, December 2011)
The Gospel of Thomas by Wim van den Dungen
Gospel of Thomas, bibliography