Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Re: [GTh] But I have said - GTh46.2

Expand Messages
  • Michael Grondin
    ... As well it should be. (Better yet, avoid the SV!) Here, in addition to the SV s usual clumsy substitute for kingdom , the word child isn t right, IMO.
    Message 1 of 11 , Apr 11, 2009
    • 0 Attachment
      > "But I have said that whoever among you becomes a child
      > will recognize the Kingdom and will become greater than John."
      > - GTh46.2 SV, but with 'Kingdom' substituted for "(Father's) imperial
      > rule."

      As well it should be. (Better yet, avoid the SV!) Here, in addition to the
      SV's usual clumsy substitute for 'kingdom', the word 'child' isn't right,
      IMO. The Coptic word is KOUEI, which means 'small/little/few'. It's used
      10 times in 7 different sayings in CGTh, sometimes to modify a noun,
      sometimes not. The SV translation of the word in L46.2 agrees with
      Lambdin, but in this case I think the Germans (Bethge and Blatz) are right.
      The Patterson-Robinson-Bethge translation ("whoever among you becomes
      little...") avoids 'child', but doesn't appeal to my tastes as much as the
      NTA (B. Blatz) translation: "whoever among you becomes small ...",
      which I think is straight-forward, elegant, and accurate.

      The use of 'child' in 46.2 _may_ be a case of harmonizing one's Thomas
      translation with the canonicals, but I haven't checked the Greek to see if
      that's so. If you've done so, we need the Greek word/words in question.
      If you haven't, you should, since the passages you've cited may not all
      use the same Greek word, and that would affect your argument. One
      can't argue from English translations alone.

      Regards,
      Mike G.
    • Ron McCann
      Perhaps this is a bit off the topic you are discussing, but what interests me in this saying is whether it reflects and confirms the belief in a a realized
      Message 2 of 11 , Apr 12, 2009
      • 0 Attachment
        Perhaps this is a bit off the topic you are discussing, but what
        interests me in this saying is whether it reflects and confirms the
        belief in a a realized eschatology on the part of the Thomas community-
        that is- a belief that the Kingdom had actually come- and that all one
        had to do, was recognize it.. The saying seems to echo the same theme
        which is found in Gth 113 (and its' L-Source Lukan counterpart in Luke
        17:20). Read this way, the saying is a backhanded swipe at John for
        failing to realize that the Kingdom had already arrived, and to
        recognize it. Those who do, are greater than John.

        Such a belief (in a realized eschatology) may go along way in explaining
        why the GTh is so strangely and utterly bereft of Second Coming,
        Apocalyptic and End of Day's sayings and themes. They weren't expecting
        the ushering in of God's Kingdom on Earth with the future arrival of the
        Son of Man. It had already arrived and just had to be seen and seized.

        I haven't the foggiest what becoming "little" or " a child" might
        signify nor how becoming such would enable or assist in the perception
        of this "invisible" Kingdom.. I can just imagine the academic ink that
        has been spilled on that one.

        Ron McCann
        Saskatoon, Canada

        Paul Lanier wrote:
        >
        >
        > "But I have said that whoever among you becomes a child will recognize
        > the Kingdom and will become greater than John."
        > - GTh46.2 SV, but with 'Kingdom' substituted for "(Father's) imperial
        > rule."
        >
        > To me the phrase "but I have said" suggests the author refers to a
        > source that precedes the composition of GTh46.2. Since the saying
        > presented does not occur anywhere else in GTh, it must have been known
        > to the author of GTh46.2. It is of course possible that the saying did
        > exist but was subsequently deleted. Simce we have no evidence for that
        > possibility, I proceeed here on the assumption that the author of
        > GTh46.2 knew of the saying, "Whoever among you becomes a child will
        > recognize the Kingdom and will become greater than John."
        >
        > Thus the linkage with GTh78 in GLk7.24-28 appears a little more
        > interesting. The review in Post #1053 refers to the joining of GTh 46
        > and GTh78 in GLk 7.24-28, but the question of how this occurred
        > remains unresolved. An answer to this question must take into account
        > the similarity in the usages of "child" in GTh46, GMt18.1-6, and
        > perhaps 1Co4.14-17, as well as the different usage shared by
        > GMk9.33-37, GMk10.13-16, GLk9.46-48, GLk9.46-48, and GLk18.15-17. (see
        > REFERENCES at the end of this post).
        >
        > In Mark and Luke, "child" carries its usual meaning, "a person between
        > birth and puberty" (www.answers.com/topic/child). However it is
        > apparent that Paul uses "child" in some spiritual sense, perhaps to
        > mean a believer converted by Paul himself:
        >
        > "I do not write these things to make you ashamed, but to admonish you
        > as my beloved children. For though you have countless guides in
        > Christ, you do not have many fathers. For I became your father in
        > Christ Jesus through the gospel. I urge you, then, be imitators of me.
        > That is why I sent you Timothy, my beloved and faithful child in the
        > Lord, to remind you of my ways in Christ, as I teach them everywhere
        > in every church."
        > - 1Co4.14-17 (ESV)
        >
        > Since Paul distinguishes "countless guides" from "many fathers," it is
        > reasonable to conclude that Paul, Timothy's "father," being more than
        > a guide, is likely the person (or one of a few persons) who converted
        > Timothy to belief in Christ. The usage of "child" to indicate a
        > special spiritual relationship resonates with a similar practice in
        > the modern Baha'i faith.
        >
        > The usage by Thomas ("whoever among you becomes a child will recognize
        > the Kingdom") and Matthew ("unless you turn and become like children,
        > you will never enter the kingdom of heaven") is similar to Paul's,
        > perhaps identical. In all three a disciple is urged to become (like) a
        > child, and in all three this is a Kingdom requirement. Matthew's usage
        > carries the explicit connotation of repentance, also explicit in the
        > message of John the Baptist.
        >
        > The difference in Mark and Luke is that "child" no longer indicates a
        > spiritual state, but rather "a person between birth and puberty." This
        > suggests that the technical term "child" - meaning a spiritual
        > condition or spiritual relationship - is reframed by Mark and Luke
        > back to its usual non-technical meaning. This suggests the following
        > explanation:
        >
        > The earlier spiritual meaning of "child" is spiritual. This is the
        > meaning understood by Thomas, Paul and Matthew (and prehaps John the
        > Baptist). But Mark discards this. Since he introduces two stories
        > about children and the Kingdom, it is likely that in Mark's time the
        > older spiritual usage of "child" was still extant. Mark deliberately
        > reframes this older meaning, perhaps to minimize the authority of
        > charismatic wandering teachers. Mark's usage is later copied by Luke.
        >
        > However the presence of the older usage in Matthew raises a very
        > interesting question. Why does the older usage persist in Matthew,
        > composed later than Mark? And why does Matthew's usage differ from Luke?
        >
        > The simple answer would be that Q contains the older usage. Mark
        > discarded the older usage of "child" and later Matthew, having to
        > choose, opted for the usage in Q. Possibly Matthew also knew of the
        > saying in Thomas. In this scheme, GTh is the source for both Mark and
        > Q. Mark and Q thus represent two diverging traditions of the early
        > church, c.50-70 CE.
        >
        > Another possibility is that GTh46.2 derives from the saying in Q or
        > Matthew, rather than from Mark or Luke. In this case GTh 46.2 is a
        > later addition to the text. I find this less satisfying, maybe because
        > of my bias on the dependence of both Mark and Q on GTh.
        >
        > Regards, Paul
        >
        > REFERENCES
        >
        > GTh46 (SV) John, Greater, Child, Kingdom
        >
        > Jesus said, "From Adam to John the Baptist, among those born of women,
        > no one is so much greater than John the Baptist that his eyes should
        > not be averted. 2 But I have said that whoever among you becomes a
        > child will recognize the (Father's) imperial rule and will become
        > greater than John."
        >
        > GTh78 (SV) ~John
        >
        > Jesus said, "Why have you come out to the countryside? To see a reed
        > shaken by the wind? 2 And to see a person dressed in soft clothes,
        > [like your] rulers and your powerful ones? 3 They are dressed in soft
        > clothes, and they cannot understand truth."
        >
        > LL. 46, 78
        >
        > GMk9.33-37 (ESV) Greatest, Servant, Child, Receives
        >
        > Mar 9:33 And they came to Capernaum. And when he was in the house he
        > asked them, "What were you discussing on the way?"
        >
        > Mar 9:34 But they kept silent, for on the way they had argued with one
        > another about who was the greatest.
        >
        > Mar 9:35 And he sat down and called the twelve. And he said to them,
        > "If anyone would be first, he must be last of all and servant of all."
        >
        > Mar 9:36 And he took a child and put him in the midst of them, and
        > taking him in his arms, he said to them,
        >
        > Mar 9:37 "Whoever receives one such child in my name receives me, and
        > whoever receives me, receives not me but him who sent me."
        >
        > GMk10.13-16 (ESV) Children, Kingdom, Receive, Child
        >
        > Mar 10:13 And they were bringing children to him that he might touch
        > them, and the disciples rebuked them.
        >
        > Mar 10:14 But when Jesus saw it, he was indignant and said to them,
        > "Let the children come to me; do not hinder them, for to such belongs
        > the kingdom of God.
        >
        > Mar 10:15 Truly, I say to you, whoever does not receive the kingdom of
        > God like a child shall not enter it."
        >
        > Mar 10:16 And heGLk18.15-17 took them in his arms and blessed them,
        > laying his hands on them.
        >
        > GMt11.7-11 (ESV) John, Greater, Least, Kingdom
        >
        > Mat 11:7 As they went away, Jesus began to speak to the crowds
        > concerning John: "What did you go out into the wilderness to see? A
        > reed shaken by the wind? 1Co4.14-17
        >
        > Mat 11:8 What then did you go out to see? A man dressed in soft
        > clothing? Behold, those who wear soft clothing are in kings' houses.
        >
        > Mat 11:9 What then did you go out to see? A prophet? Yes, I tell you,
        > and more than a prophet.
        >
        > Mat 11:10 This is he of whom it is written, "'Behold, I send my
        > messenger before your face, who will prepare your way before you.'
        >
        > Mat 11:11 Truly, I say to you, among those born of women there has
        > arisen no one greater than John the Baptist. Yet the one who is least
        > in the kingdom of heaven is greater than he.
        >
        > GMt18.1-6 (ESV) Greatest, Child, Kingdom, Receives
        >
        > Mat 18:1 At that time the disciples came to Jesus, saying, "Who is the
        > greatest in the kingdom of heaven?"
        >
        > Mat 18:2 And calling to him a child, he put him in the midst of them
        >
        > Mat 18:3 and said, "Truly, I say to you, unless you turn and become
        > like children, you will never enter the kingdom of heaven.
        >
        > Mat 18:4 Whoever humbles himself like this child is the greatest in
        > the kingdom of heaven.
        >
        > Mat 18:5 "Whoever receives one such child in my name receives me,
        >
        > Mat 18:6 but whoever causes one of these little ones who believe in me
        > to sin, it would be better for him to have a great millstone fastened
        > around his neck and to be drowned in the depth of the sea (ESV).
        >
        > GLk7.24-28 (ESV) John, Greater, Least, Kingdom
        >
        > Luk 7:24 When John's messengers had gone, Jesus began to speak to the
        > crowds concerning John: "What did you go out into the wilderness to
        > see? A reed shaken by the wind?
        >
        > Luk 7:25 What then did you go out to see? A man dressed in soft
        > clothing? Behold, those who are dressed in splendid clothing and live
        > in luxury are in kings' courts.
        >
        > Luk 7:26 What then did you go out to see? A prophet? Yes, I tell you,
        > and more than a prophet.
        >
        > Luk 7:27 This is he of whom it is written, "'Behold, I send my
        > messenger before your face, who will prepare your way before you.'
        >
        > Luk 7:28 I tell you, among those born of women none is greater than
        > John. Yet the one who is least in the kingdom of God is greater than he."
        >
        > GLk9.46-48 (ESV) Greatest, Child, Receives, Least
        >
        > Luk 9:46 An argument arose among them as to which of them was the
        > greatest.
        >
        > Luk 9:47 But Jesus, knowing the reasoning of their hearts, took a
        > child and put him by his side
        >
        > Luk 9:48 and said to them, "Whoever receives this child in my name
        > receives me, and whoever receives me receives him who sent me. For he
        > who is least among you all is the one who is great."
        >
        > GLk18.15-17 (ESV) Children, Kingdom, Receive
        >
        > Luk 18:15 Now they were bringing even infants to him that he might
        > touch them. And when the disciples saw it, they rebuked them.
        >
        > Luk 18:16 But Jesus called them to him, saying, "Let the children come
        > to me, and do not hinder them, for to such belongs the kingdom of God.
        >
        > Luk 18:17 Truly, I say to you, whoever does not receive the kingdom of
        > God like a child shall not enter it."
        >
        > 1Co4.14-17 (ESV) Child, Kingdom
        >
        > 1Co 4:14 I do not write these things to make you ashamed, but to
        > admonish you as my beloved children.
        >
        > 1Co 4:15 For though you have countless guides in Christ, you do not
        > have many fathers. For I became your father in Christ Jesus through
        > the gospel.
        >
        > 1Co 4:16 I urge you, then, be imitators of me.
        >
        > 1Co 4:17 That is why I sent you Timothy, my beloved and faithful child
        > in the Lord, to remind you of my ways in Christ, as I teach them
        > everywhere in every church.
        >
        > GJn8.31-35 (ESV) Disciples, Slave, Son
        >
        > Joh 8:31 So Jesus said to the Jews who had believed in him, "If you
        > abide in my word, you are truly my disciples,
        >
        > Joh 8:32 and you will know the truth, and the truth will set you free."
        >
        > Joh 8:33 They answered him, "We are offspring of Abraham and have
        > never been enslaved to anyone. How is it that you say, 'You will
        > become free'?"
        >
        > Joh 8:34 Jesus answered them, "Truly, truly, I say to you, everyone
        > who commits sin is a slave to sin.
        >
        > Joh 8:35 The slave does not remain in the house forever; the son
        > remains forever.
        >
        > Ga4.1-2 (ESV) Child, Slave
        >
        > Gal 4:1 I mean that the heir, as long as he is a child, is no
        > different from a slave, though he is the owner of everything,
        >
        > Gal 4:2 but he is under guardians and managers until the date set by
        > his father.
        >
        >
        > ------------------------------------------------------------------------
        >
        >
        > No virus found in this incoming message.
        > Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
        > Version: 8.5.287 / Virus Database: 270.11.53/2054 - Release Date: 04/11/09 10:51:00
        >
        >


        [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
      • Michael Grondin
        ... But, Ron, if the author of GLk thought of 17:20-1 the way you suggest, why would the immediately following passage (17:22-37) prophesy the very things you
        Message 3 of 11 , Apr 12, 2009
        • 0 Attachment
          > [L46.2] seems to echo the same theme which is found in Gth 113
          > (and its' L-Source Lukan counterpart in Luke 17:20). Read this way,
          > the saying is a backhanded swipe at John for failing to realize that
          > the Kingdom had already arrived, and to recognize it. Those who do,
          > are greater than John.
          >
          > Such a belief (in a realized eschatology) may go along way in explaining
          > why the GTh is so strangely and utterly bereft of Second Coming,
          > Apocalyptic and End of Day's sayings and themes.

          But, Ron, if the author of GLk thought of 17:20-1 the way you suggest,
          why would the immediately following passage (17:22-37) prophesy the
          very things you think are antithetical to it? Indeed, the fact that 17:34
          is
          echoed in Th 61.1 casts doubt also on the "utterly bereft" claim.

          Mike
        • Ron McCann
          Hi Mike, Meant to get back to you earlier on this but I ve just got my Ham Radio Licence this week and have been busy to-day setting up, hooking up and tuning
          Message 4 of 11 , Apr 13, 2009
          • 0 Attachment
            Hi Mike,

            Meant to get back to you earlier on this but I've just got my Ham Radio
            Licence this week and have been busy to-day setting up, hooking up and
            tuning my Antenna System and Transmitter/Receiver to get on the air

            I'm not suggesting that Luke himself understood the saying in question
            to be a Realized Eschatology saying- in fact, it likely bewildered him
            as much as it did later theologians and Churchmen. There was no such
            animal in his day. For him, as well as for Mark and Matthew and
            especially Q, the coming of the Son of Man, the End of Days, the End of
            this World and the arrival of God's Kingdom on earth, while imminent and
            eagerly anticipated, were in the future. It's probably safe to assume
            that Luke saw it as some kind of an end-time saying and chucked it in
            with the other ones he had on the subject in those several verses on the
            topic.

            Back in the early sixties when I was working on my undergraduate degree
            at Bishop's University in Lennoxville, Quebec, as part of a well rounded
            education,we were required as part of the degree programme to take
            several undergraduate course in "Divinity". These included such things
            as a History of the Early Christian Church, and the issues and debates
            in both the early church and in modern times by current theologians.
            (The college was actually an Anglican (Episcopalian) Church college that
            turned out Anglican priests, among other things- and has since gone
            entirely secular.)

            One issue that was hotly argued then was the problem created by,
            perhaps, up to a dozen sayings of Jesus where he SEEMED to have been
            saying that the Kingdom had already come on Earth- which seemed
            strikingly at odds with other sayings that clearly spoke of a future
            arrival of the Kingdom of God on earth. Succintly- the Kingdom was
            a-coming, and yet it was already here- according to Jesus. This saying
            in Luke, which at that time, was wholly and exclusively unique to his
            Gospel alone- nobody else had it- was considered the primary and central
            saying upon which the whole Realized Eschatology debate centered, and
            around which the other sayings of Jesus claiming the Kingdom was here
            already, orbited.

            Different Christian churches struggled with the notion or how the
            kingdom could both have arrived and yet still be a-coming, and resolved
            it in different ways. The Roman Church resolved the issue by decided the
            the Church itself was the Kingdom, and when Jesus had founded it, the
            Kingdom on Earth had arrived but there would still be future End of
            Days. Some just discounted the Lukan saying as genuine- since it
            appeared no where else in the Gospels, and others came up with some
            ingenious but generally unsatisfactory ways of dealing with it- so it
            still remained an issue and a conundrum with no good answer- at least in
            biblical scholarship. My main point here is that long before it was
            known or known generally that Thomas HAD the saying too, that Lukan
            saying was recognized by nearly everybody as a Realized Eschatology
            saying- a saying that claimed that the Kingdom was already here.

            I previously said, on this list, is that one of the most intriguing
            things about the GTh, is not what it contains, rather it is what it does
            NOT contain- that is- that is if Thomas was part of the Synoptic Stream
            one would fully expect certain themes, prominent in those Gospels to be
            displayed in it. And one in particular seems to be all but absent. And
            I'm talking about the End Time Scenarios and the expected return of
            Jesus as the Son of Man. Mark, Matthew, Luke and Q (at least at the Q 2
            and Q 3) levels, are strongly Apocalyptic- so much so that Albert
            Sweitzer once persuaded almost all scholars that Jesus was an
            Apocalyptic Prophet. End of the Quest for the Historical Jesus!

            I claimed Thomas was "bereft" of these themes. That was likely and
            overstatement- which I sometimes do for emphasis. It's a bad habit of
            mine, and I should be more cautious on an Academic List. Let me just say
            that if, indeed there really are any, they are strikingly few and far
            between, and nowhere near as many as one would expect if the Synoptic
            authors and Thomas were ad idem on the subject. I am familiar with your
            view, Mike, that Thomas DOES contain some Apocalyptic themes and
            material suggestive of them- although I don't personally see many. Those
            which some people cite as such, I have to concede, MIGHT be so
            interpreted- but that's far from clear and I have doubts such
            interpretations are sound. Such takes may possibly be colored by the
            use of that saying or a similar sayings in an End of Day's language and
            context by other Gospel writers.

            Perhaps a case in point is the very brief "two men on a couch" saying
            found at the beginning of the Salome logion, also found in Luke and
            Matthew. Just because the saying appears in Luke, used by him in an
            Apocalyptic context, doesn't mean it had that meaning when it stood
            alone. And stand alone, it once likely did.
            Matthew and Luke both use it, and they got it from Q- which is quite
            Apocalypse-oriented and may have coloued their take on it and use of
            it.. But Thomas has it too- but not in any Apocalyptic context that can
            be clearly discerned, and is likely using it to make a different point.
            What's intriguing for me if the hoaryness of this saying. Since it
            appear in Q and Thomas- a double attestation in Mark or Q, or Thomas-
            it's a saying I claim was found in the still earlier Matthean Logia
            Collection which I claim was father to there three works.

            Anyway, what I'm suggesting here is that the religious community the
            Gospel of Thomas was intended to serve, NEVER subscribed to the whole
            End of Days, Apocalyptic Scenario and the future arrival of the Kingdom
            of Heaven on Earth. They believed it had already come, and that it could
            be entered right way and no waiting for it's arrival was necessary.
            Their eschatology was "realized"- which sent them off in an entirely
            different theological direction and religious evolution and speculations
            than the early Synoptic-Q, Apocalyptic, Second-Coming stream of the Church.

            I suggest that this Realized Eschatology business is what made the
            Thomas Community and their Gospel so strikingly different from the
            emerging churches and gospels that grew into to-day's Christianity.

            IMHO

            Ron McCann
            Saskatoon, Canada

            Michael Grondin wrote:
            >
            > > [L46.2] seems to echo the same theme which is found in Gth 113
            > > (and its' L-Source Lukan counterpart in Luke 17:20). Read this way,
            > > the saying is a backhanded swipe at John for failing to realize that
            > > the Kingdom had already arrived, and to recognize it. Those who do,
            > > are greater than John.
            > >
            > > Such a belief (in a realized eschatology) may go along way in explaining
            > > why the GTh is so strangely and utterly bereft of Second Coming,
            > > Apocalyptic and End of Day's sayings and themes.
            >
            > But, Ron, if the author of GLk thought of 17:20-1 the way you suggest,
            > why would the immediately following passage (17:22-37) prophesy the
            > very things you think are antithetical to it? Indeed, the fact that 17:34
            > is echoed in Th 61.1 casts doubt also on the "utterly bereft" claim.
            >
            > Mike
          • Paul Lanier
            ... Thanks for this, Mike. The Coptic in L.37 supports your preference for translating kouei (BM#164) as small. Luckily this saying contains three words
            Message 5 of 11 , Apr 15, 2009
            • 0 Attachment
              --- In gthomas@yahoogroups.com, "Michael Grondin" <mwgrondin@...> wrote:
              > we need the Greek word/words in question.

              Thanks for this, Mike. The Coptic in L.37 supports your preference for translating kouei (BM#164) as "small." Luckily this saying contains three words directly relevant to your point:
              - kouei BM#164 "small," "few"
              - Sere.SEm = SEre BM#33 "sons," "daughters," "children"
              - SEm BM#195 "small," "little"

              Also interesting is this saying's comparison of disciples who are "like children," as opposed to disciples "being small" (LL. 22, 46). This saying employs four technical terms apparently shared by GMk9.42-47:
              - GTh22 Small, Eye, Hand, Foot
              - GMk9.42-47 Small, Hand, Foot, Eye

              Since these two sayings are in different languages, I delay discussing the exact Coptic and Greek definitions for now. The immediate point is that both employ a cluster of terms whose meaning appears obscure in GTh and more accessible in GMk. This suggests Thomas, the more difficult variant, may be earlier. If so Mark has reframed it, providing a meaning related to sin which appears to differ radically from the meaning in Thomas (whatever that is!).

              GTh37 Blatz-NTA (1991) Small, Children, Son
              37.1 His disciples said: On what day will you be revealed to us, and on what day shall we see you? 37.2 Jesus said: When you unclothe yourselves and are not ashamed, and take your garments and lay them beneath your feet like the little [kouei BM#164 "small," "few"] children [Sere.SEm = SEre BM#33 "sons," "daughters," "children" + SEm BM#195 "small," "little"] (and) trample on them, 37.3 then [you will see] the Son [SEre BM#33 "son"] of the Living One, and you will not be afraid.

              Since GTh37 includes a double emphasis on "small," I am wondering if "newborn" is the intended meaning. L.4 equates "ou.kouie en.SEre.SEm" (MG "a small little boy") with "ef.hen.saSef en.hoou" (MG "he being of seven days"). If so then perhaps L.37 saying refers to the developmental condition of a candidate for initiation who is ready for baptism (rebirth).

              Proceeding on to LL. 46 and 78 with this understanding, these two logia may fit into a somewhat loose grouping that employs similar terminology. This grouping revolves around the common use of terms co-occurring with John the Baptist: great, small, kingdom. The passage from 1Co is included because it shares two terms (offspring, begot) that also occur in this set.

              - GTh78 ~JB , great
              - GTh46 JB, begotten, small, kingdom
              - GMt11.7-11 JB, greater, least, kingdom
              - GLk7.24-28 JB, begotten, greater, least, kingdom
              - 1Co4.14-17 offspring, guides, fathers, begot

              Matthew and Luke use the same Greek terms for "greater" (meizon) and "least" (mikroteros), while Paul and Luke use related terms for "begotten" (gennetois) and "begot" egennesa. So if these represent technical terms their usage is consistent in this small set of passages, and it does not seem that any distinction is made among Matthew, Luke or Paul.

              - GTh78 ~JB [later interpretation], great [megistanos MG "powerful ones"]
              - GTh46 JB, begotten [jpo BM#155 "to beget," "acquire"], small [kouei BM#164 "small," "few"], kingdom [mentero BM#115 "kingdom," "reign"]
              - GMt11.7-11 JB, greater [meizon G3187 "greater," "elder," "stronger"], least [mikroteros G3398 "small," "young"], kingdom
              - GLk7.24-28 JB, begotten [gennetois G1084 "begotten," "born"], greater [meizon G3187 "greater," "elder," "stronger"], least [mikroteros G3398 "smallest," "youngest," "least"], kingdom [basileia G932 "kingdom," "kingship," "rule"]
              - 1Co4.14-17 offspring [tekna G5043 "offspring," "children"], guides [paidagogous G3807 "tutors," "guides," "trustworthy slaves"], fathers [pateras "fathers," "forefathers"], begot [egennesa G1080 "to be begotten"]

              This set also reflects the distinctive usages of "kingdom" in GTh, GMt, and GLk. Mark and Luke use exclusively "kingdom of God," while Matthew employs "kingdom of the heavens." In Coptic Thomas it is simply "kingdom," however in Grk. GTh3 "kingdom of God" occurs. This suggests the original usage in Thomas, "kingdom," may have caused difficulties after the Jewish War, when reference to "kingdom" would likely have offended to Romans. Thus Mark amplified this to "kingdom of God." Mark's usage was retained by Luke and apparently also inserted into a Greek manuscript of GTh. However Matthew opted for "kingdom of the heavens." The simplest explanation here is that Q introduced "kingdom of the heavens" and that Luke opted to follow Mark usage while Matthew followed Q.

              So I think here is more evidence suggesting that both Mark and Q depend on Thomas, and that the extant Coptic version more closely resembles original Thomas than the P.Oxy. fragments do.

              I will be exploring more precisely the usage of "child," in GTh, GMk, GMt, GLk, and Paul in an upcoming post.

              Regards, Paul

              KINGDOM

              GTh: Cop. mentero BM#115 "kingdom," "reign," also Grk. basileai "kingdom" (L.3) or basileia ton t(he)u "kingdom of God" (L.27)
              GMk, GLk: Grk. basileaia ton theou "kingdom of God"
              GMt: Grk. basileia ton ouranon "kingdom of the heavens"

              PASSAGES

              GTh78 Blatz-NTA (1991) ~JB, Great
              Jesus said: 78.1 Why did you come out into the field? To see a reed shaken by the wind? 78.2 And to see a man clothed in soft raiment? [Look, your] kings and your great [megistanos MG "powerful ones"] men, 78.3 these are the ones who wear soft clothing, and they [will] not be able to know the truth.

              GTh46 Blatz-NTA (1991) JB, Begotten, Small, Kingdom
              Jesus said, 46.1 From Adam to John the Baptist there is among the children [jpo BM#155 "to beget," "acquire"] of women none higher than John the Baptist, for his eyes were not destroyed (?). 46.2 But I have said: Whoever among you becomes small [kouei BM#164 "small," "few"] will know the kingdom [mentero BM#115 "kingdom," "reign"] and will be higher than John.

              GMt11.7-11 (ESV) JB, Greater, Least, Kingdom
              Mat 11:7 As they went away, Jesus began to speak to the crowds concerning John: "What did you go out into the wilderness to see? A reed shaken by the wind?
              Mat 11:8 What then did you go out to see? A man dressed in soft clothing? Behold, those who wear soft clothing are in kings' houses.
              Mat 11:9 What then did you go out to see? A prophet? Yes, I tell you, and more than a prophet.
              Mat 11:10 This is he of whom it is written, "'Behold, I send my messenger before your face, who will prepare your way before you.'
              Mat 11:11 Truly, I say to you, among those born of women there has arisen no one greater than John the Baptist. Yet the one who is least [mikroteros G3398 "small," "young"] in the kingdom [basileia G932 "kingdom," "kingship," "rule"] of heaven is greater [meizon G3187 "greater," "elder," "stronger"] than he.

              GLk7.24-28 (ESV) JB, Begotten, Greater, Least, Kingdom
              Luk 7:24 When John's messengers had gone, Jesus began to speak to the crowds concerning John: "What did you go out into the wilderness to see? A reed shaken by the wind?
              Luk 7:25 What then did you go out to see? A man dressed in soft clothing? Behold, those who are dressed in splendid clothing and live in luxury are in kings' courts.
              Luk 7:26 What then did you go out to see? A prophet? Yes, I tell you, and more than a prophet.
              Luk 7:27 This is he of whom it is written, "'Behold, I send my messenger before your face, who will prepare your way before you.'
              Luk 7:28 I tell you, among those born [gennetois G1084 "begotten," "born"] of women none is greater than John. Yet the one who is least [mikroteros G3398 "smallest," "youngest," "least"] in the kingdom kingdom [basileia G932 "kingdom," "kingship," "rule"] of God is greater than he."

              1Co4.14-17 (ESV) Offspring, Guides, Fathers, Begot, Kingdom
              1Co 4:14 I do not write these things to make you ashamed, but to admonish you as my beloved children [tekna G5043 "offspring," "children"].
              1Co 4:15 For though you have countless guides [paidagogous G3807 "tutors," "guides," "trustworthy slaves"] in Christ, you do not have many fathers [pateras "fathers," "forefathers"]. For I became your father [egennesa G1080 "to be begotten"] in Christ Jesus through the gospel.
              1Co 4:16 I urge you, then, be imitators [mimitai G3402 "imitators"] of me.
              1Co 4:17 That is why I sent you Timothy, my beloved and faithful child [teknon G5043 "offspring," "child"] in the Lord, to remind you of my ways in Christ, as I teach them everywhere in every church.
            • Paul Lanier
              ... Hi Ron, Mike: I think there are two other possibilities that explain, in general, why Thomas tends toward some flavor of realized eschatology, but Luke
              Message 6 of 11 , Apr 15, 2009
              • 0 Attachment
                --- In gthomas@yahoogroups.com, Ron McCann <ronmccann1@...> wrote:
                >
                > It's probably safe to assume that Luke saw it as some kind of an end-time saying and chucked it in > with the other ones he had on the subject in those several verses on the topic.

                Hi Ron, Mike:

                I think there are two other possibilities that explain, in general, why Thomas tends toward some flavor of realized eschatology, but Luke emphasizes future:
                1 - Luke follows Mark in reframing "kingdom" as future;
                2 - Luke follows Mark's amplification of "kingdom" as other than Roman kingdom. This seems like a natural way to avoid trouble!

                I think too there is partial dependence of later Thomas on the synoptics, just as there is partial dependence on early gnostic themes. Both introduced more developed themes not originally presented.

                I realize that is a very broad generalization. But I think that sort of development is to be expected among early competing Jesus communities. Early textual instability has long been recognized for Mark, and there seems to be decent support for it in Thomas as well. Of course it depends on analysis of technical terms and thematic parallels, both of which are less obvious than direct parallels.

                Regards, Paul
              • Michael Grondin
                Ron - I agree with you that the GTh logia that seem to refer to end-times are few and far between. In fact, I don t think L61.1 is the strongest example,
                Message 7 of 11 , Apr 17, 2009
                • 0 Attachment
                  Ron -

                  I agree with you that the GTh logia that seem to refer to end-times are
                  few and far between. In fact, I don't think L61.1 is the strongest example,
                  although DeConick takes it to refer to "the End" (TGOTT, p.200). To my
                  mind, though, a stronger example is L57's "day of the harvest". I think
                  it's stronger because it's not so easily susceptible to an interpretation
                  in terms of individuals, rather than humanity as a whole.

                  On the other hand, I recognize that some sayings indicate the opposite
                  at least as strongly, perhaps even more so. A good example is L.51,
                  wherein it's stated that the "new world" has already come. How can that
                  be reconciled with the above? One possibility I'm attracted to is the
                  DeConick model, which allows for eschatological emphasis to have been
                  altered over time, such that what we find in CGTh is possibly the fading
                  remnants of traditional end-time thinking, coupled with an emerging
                  contrary view which had become ascendant. In particular, notice that
                  L.51 is a disciples' question, which to DeConick indicates a later
                  development, while L61.1 and L57 are simple Jesus-statements.

                  Interestingly, one of the Q-and-A sayings has seemed to serve as one
                  basis for the theory that (later?) GTh envisioned a different kind of
                  end-times, viz., one in which "where the beginning is, there the end will
                  be", i.e., a kind of rolling-back of history caused by (presumably) the
                  adoption of an ascetic life-style by the masses, resulting in progressively
                  fewer children until the world's population shrinks back to "the Garden".
                  As I recall, this was a view expressed by Steve Davies, and I think it
                  gets its plausibility actually more from other Thomasine writings (T. the
                  Contender, and the Acts of T.) than from GTh, though again there's
                  some stuff in GTh for that view. (A little something for everyone?)

                  Now on this "realized eschatology" thingy, my sense is that lumping
                  different things together and trying to reach a judgement on all of
                  them at once is counter-productive. In particular, I don't see that
                  much of a difference between the third century Thomas and the way
                  the canonicals were developing on the question of when the kingdom
                  would come, but I do see a big difference on the question of whether
                  there would be a parousia. The Synoptics at least were stuck with the
                  notion that Jesus was the messiah. Since he hadn't accomplished
                  what a messiah was supposed to do, it was necessary that he come
                  back "in power" to finish the job. The Thomasines don't seem to have
                  ever had this problem, but even if they did, they had the advantage
                  over the church in that their Jesus-gospel apparently continued to
                  develop after the canonical gospels had been pretty much locked-in.

                  Mike Grondin
                  Mt. Clemens, MI
                • Michael Grondin
                  ... Thanks for noting that important point about Greek Thomas, Paul, but Coptic Thomas occasionally has kingdom of the heavens also. ... Other than that, the
                  Message 8 of 11 , Apr 17, 2009
                  • 0 Attachment
                    > Mark and Luke use exclusively "kingdom of God," while Matthew
                    > employs "kingdom of the heavens." In Coptic Thomas it is simply
                    > "kingdom," however in Grk. GTh3 "kingdom of God" occurs.

                    Thanks for noting that important point about Greek Thomas, Paul,
                    but Coptic Thomas occasionally has "kingdom of the heavens" also.
                    (See 114, e.g.) That contravenes your suggestion:

                    > This suggests the original usage in Thomas, "kingdom," may have
                    > caused difficulties after the Jewish War ...

                    Other than that, the deluge of data kinda obscured the theses for me.

                    Cheers,
                    Mike
                  • Paul Lanier
                    ... Woops! You re right. L.114 is very late but there are other instances of kingdom of heaven and kingdom of God. I will need to rearrange my position!
                    Message 9 of 11 , Apr 17, 2009
                    • 0 Attachment
                      --- In gthomas@yahoogroups.com, "Michael Grondin" <mwgrondin@...> wrote:
                      > Coptic Thomas occasionally has "kingdom of the heavens" also.

                      Woops! You're right. L.114 is very late but there are other instances of "kingdom of heaven" and "kingdom of God." I will need to rearrange my position!

                      > Other than that, the deluge of data kinda obscured the theses for me.

                      Me too. I am exploring the thesis that GMk and Q both depend on original GTh. I am looking for distinctive usages of technical terms (kingdom, child, small, and some others). This is, I think, made more complex by what appears to me to be insertion of later corrections into GTh to harmonize with the synoptics. Of course it may be that original GTh included all three usages of "kingdom." But the very distinctive usages by Mark and Luke ("kingdom of God") as opposed to Matthew ("Kingdom of the heavens") suggests polarization between the Mark-Luke trajectory and Matthew. That in turn would suggest an earlier shared usage, such as "kingdom" in original GTh. But I agree, in the case of "kingdom," the usage in Thomas is mixed.

                      Thank you for attempting to hold me to the same very high standards of this board!

                      regards, Paul
                    • Ron McCann
                      Hi Mike, Thanks for the thoughtful response, Mike. I agree [L.57] is a stronger example, and when first I encountered it, I designated it as a clear
                      Message 10 of 11 , Apr 17, 2009
                      • 0 Attachment
                        Hi Mike,

                        Thanks for the thoughtful response, Mike.

                        I agree [L.57] is a stronger example, and when first I encountered it, I
                        designated it as a clear Apocalyptic Saying. It has a single attestation
                        in Matthew's Gospel ( From Special Matthew) where it is unquestionably
                        presented as such, and the only significant variation is that in Thomas
                        no mention of the wheat being gathered into the barn, is made. I think
                        the original parable was simply about why God allows evil men and good
                        men to co-exist and why he does nothing about it right now- it would
                        uproot the intended and desired growth and development of the good men.
                        So wait until the desired crop is fully matured- harvest day. Matthew
                        may have changed it to an end-time separation of the sheep from the
                        goats, or the good fish from the bad on Judgment Day. That does not mean
                        we should be reading it that way in Thomas or that it was intended to be
                        read that way. I guess the question is what "the day of the harvest"
                        meant to the Thomasines.

                        I think the Thomas crowd also believed that a selection process for
                        entry to the Kingdom was involved. But since the Kingdom was here, the
                        sorting and selection for admission or entry to it was now going on. And
                        just like in the Matthew examples some would be found acceptable, and
                        some not. The spiritually mature or spiritually ready presumably get
                        admitted. The Wise Fisherman who nets the fish, selects the Fine Big
                        Fish ( mature, developed) and throws the smaller back. The Wise man of
                        understanding comes quickly when the crop is ripe (mature) and plies the
                        sickle. The Man who sowed good seed discards the weeds and gathers his
                        wheat. For the Thomasines, the Day of the Harvest might have meant that
                        day in which the individual is actually selected and taken into the
                        Kingdom. It's hard to say. But your point is taken.

                        I think Deconick's approach makes a lot of sense too. As expectations of
                        Judgment Day and the Parousia faded, as well they might have by the end
                        of the First Century and the beginning of the Second, thinking
                        Christian's may have gravitated to the "Kingdom is already here" sayings
                        of Jesus and focused their speculations on how to enter that kingdom in
                        the here and now, whereas the groups of Christians adhering to the old
                        Messianic/Parousia/Judgment Day scenario re-entrenched, stayed the
                        course, eventually becoming the modern Church. My point is that late or
                        early, there was a bifurcation with the Thomas crowd apparently on the
                        leading edge of "Realized Eschatology" exploration, speculation and
                        innovation, and going their own way.

                        Davie's idea is indeed interesting, but my own view on this logion and
                        others like it is that the Thomasines envisioned the process of entry to
                        the Kingdom as a return to the Pre-Fall state of Adam and Eve and a
                        consequent re-entry to Eden, and further, that they believed this was
                        accomplished one by one, individually.
                        In Thomas, individual, rather than collective "salvation" seems the
                        focus, and it's up to the individual, him or herself, to win entry to
                        the Kingdom.

                        I take your point about lumping too many things together- and perhaps I
                        have here- using Realized Eschatology to describe the Gospel of Thomas
                        position on the Kingdom. You are right. It might be more useful to
                        divide those elements up and look at each of them individually. My
                        problem with Thomas, is that we can get so easily get lost in the
                        minutia and the non-homogeneous and sometimes conflicting material that
                        we miss spotting the common overarching themes. So from time to time, I
                        try to stand back and try to view the sweep and thrust of Thomas and a
                        whole to see if I can discover what, in at least broad and general
                        terms, we can say about the beliefs the people this gospel served had in
                        common, and how these might have differed from the emerging Church's- no
                        easy task given the complexity of the material. So although my
                        conclusion is a generality, and only operates in overview, the
                        conclusion seems well grounded and useful- although, like any other
                        proposal about Thomas, some specific sayings can be found that argue
                        against it..

                        Thanks Mike. You always get me thinking.

                        Ron McCann
                        Saskatoon, Canada
                      Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.