Re: [GTh] Misogyny in Thomas?
- Hi, Jim -
> What I meant by "one of the authors" is thatThe idea that the final saying was not part of the original collection is certainly an opinion held by some but it is by no means an established fact.
> the final logion was not part of the original
> corpus and was inserted there by some later
> I should also point out that perhaps one reasonPerhaps, but the fact that the leadership of James the Just within the church of Jerusalem is acknowledged by early Christians authors (such as Paul, for example) whose writings were not rejected by orthodox Christianity tends to argue against it. There are at least two other possibilities that have some evidence in their favor: (1.) orthodox Christianity rejected certain groups (such as the Manichaeans) as heretical and rejected their literature in the process as well and (2.) other versions of the Gospel According to Thomas existed which contained sayings of a more radically heterodox nature, such as that saying attributed to the Naassene version of the Gospel According to Thomas by Hippolytus about finding Jesus hidden in the "fourteenth aeon."
> why Thomas was rejected by orthodox Christianity
> was that it gave authority to "James the Just"
> rather than Peter (#12).
> However, before you go on to conclude Jesus was notYou have brought up a few different issues here, but I will try to focus on the misogyny angle. We must keep in mind that #105 is not passing judgement on women, but rather is indicating how "He who knows" will be maligned. It is, in my opinion, something of a leap to move from the idea that Jesus predicted a certain attitude on the part of others to saying that Jesus possessed that attitude himself. Saying 105 strikes me as more 'realistic' than 'misogynistic.' But that's just my opinion. If you want to believe that it indicates that Jesus, as portrayed in Thomas, held misogynistic views, that's up to you. I was merely trying to show that the preponderance of evidence in Thomas, taken as a whole, does not favor a misogynistic Jesus.
> misogynous, or at least wasn't as portrayed in
> Thomas, consider #105: "Whoever knows the father
> and the mother will be called 'son of a harlot'."
> This seems to also fit into the rejection of sex
> I was talking about, but in this case applied to
> the divine Hypostasis of Father and Mother.
> This also seems to be a Gnostic addition as it
> condemns the material world in acosmic dualism
> and rejects the creative principle (sex). In
> any case, no matter what "Jesus" meant here, the
> term "harlot" tends to be derogatory.
- Kevin Johnson