Re: [gthom] bonfire/REPLY (why didn't it take?)
- All the listed reasons are good reasons. But, One might consider that the
GOSPEL of Thomas, is not really a Gospel (in the same sense as Matthew, Mark,
Luke or John). That is the sayings are not set down in a format that
chronicle the history of Jesus, as
The New testament (before it was a written document) Was of a necessity
an ORAL document. That is the story of the risen Christ was repeated orally
to those that heard it.
If you read Mark (especially the way that it ends. I think you will find
that the author tells it almost as a Ghost story.( or who done it). This is a
simplification, but the reader is left with the big question to ask the
teller. WHAT HAPPENED NEXT> What happened to Jesus, where did he go.
The answer< By the teller would be to explain that the Lord had risen,
conquered death. It must have been very effective, an awe inspiring chronicle
that raised questions in the Minds of all the hearers. A nail biter, as it
Compare this to Thomas, who has original, true, sayings, BUT, But there
is NO STORY. Nochronology. The reader, Must first KNOW the story before he
can make any sense out of the Sayings.
That they follow No apparent order does not help. We are Blessed NOW to
have e the 4 Gospels, In order to reference, to make comparisons. This was
not the case for the common man of that day.
That, the format, lack of story line, or chronology, Probably relegated
the Gospel of Thomas, to a group far smaller than the oral tradition, 4
gospels. These few could have considered this a reference for the initiated,
or the studious, If they died out, or a combination of both. A dying group,
the fact that it didn't form a complete story, etc. most probably did in The
Gospel of Thomas. johnmoon3717@...