Gospels In Conflict: John and Thomas - Part 12

[Guest guest]

Dear All,

 

We concluded Part 11 with the following:

 

(p.57) " Finally Jesus reveals to Thomas that " whoever drinks from my mouth will

become as I am, and I myself will become that person, and the mysteries shall be

revealed to him. " [94] This, I believe, is the symbolic meaning of attributing

this gospel to Thomas, whose name means " twin. " By encountering the " living

Jesus, " as Thomas suggests, one may come to recognize oneself and Jesus as, so

to speak, identical twins. In the Book of Thomas the Contender, another ancient

book belonging to Syrian Thomas tradition discovered at Nag Hammadi, " the living

Jesus " addresses Thomas (and, by implication, the reader) as follows:

 

Since you are my twin and my true companion, examine yourself, and learn who you

are.... Since you will be called my [twin],...although you do not understand it

yet... you will be called " the one who knows himself. " For whoever has not known

himself knows nothing, but whoever has known himself has simultaneously come to

know the depth of all things. " [95]

 

Beyond Belief (The Secret Gospel of Thomas) Chapter 2, p.57.

 

Notes:

 

[94] Gospel of Thomas 108, in NHL 129.

 

[95] Book of Thomas the Contender 138.7-19, in NHL 189.

 

Here now, is Part 12.

 

Enjoy,

 

violet

 

 

 

Gospels In Conflict: John and Thomas - Part 12

 

(p.57) I was amazed when I went back to the Gospel of John after reading Thomas,

for Thomas and John clearly draw upon similar language and images, and both,

apparently, begin with similar " secret teaching. " (p.58) But John takes this

teaching to mean something so different from Thomas that I wondered whether John

could have written his gospel to refute what Thomas teaches. For months I

investigated this possibility, and explored the work of other scholars who also

have compared these sources, and I was finally convinced that this is what

happened. As the scholar Gregory Riley points out, John--and only John--presents

a challenging and critical portrait of the disciple he calls " Thomas, the one

called Didymus, " [96] and, as Riley suggests, it is John who invented the

character we call 'Doubting' Thomas, perhaps as a way of caricaturing those who

revered a teacher--and a version of Jesus' teaching--that he regarded as

faithless and false. The writer called John may have met Thomas Christians among

people he knew in his own city--and may have worried that their teaching would

spread to Christian groups elsewhere. John probably knew that certain Jewish

groups--as well as many pagans who read and admired Genesis 1--also taught that

the " image of God " was within humankind; in any case, John decided to write his

own gospel insisting that it is Jesus--and only Jesus--who embodies God's word,

and therefore speaks with divine authority.

 

Who, then, wrote the Gospel of John? Although we cannot answer this question

with certainty, the text itself provides some clues. The author we call John was

probably a Jewish follower of Jesus who, various scholars suggest, may have

lived in Ephesus or Antioch, the capital of Syria, and probably wrote toward the

end of the first century (c.90 to 100 C.E.). [97] (p.59) Some scholars suggest

that, as a young man, before mid-century, he may have been attracted to the

circle gathered around John the Baptist, as was Jesus of Nazareth, who also came

to hear John preach, and received baptism from him in the Jordan River, which

the Baptist John promised would prepare people for the coming day of divine

judgment. At some point--perhaps after King Herod beheaded the Baptist--this

other John may have followed Jesus. His account shows his familiarity with

Judaea and its local Jewish practices, and includes details which suggest that

he traveled with Jesus and his other disciples during their last journey to

Jerusalem, as he claims to have done.

 

The conclusion added by John to the gospel implies that after that time John

lived so long that some of Jesus' followers hoped that the kingdom of God would

come during his lifetime, and so that he would never die. [98] According to

church tradition, John lived as an old man in Ephesus, revered as the spiritual

leader of a circle of Jesus' followers--a passionate, articulate man, educated

in Jewish tradition and by no means provincial. Like many other Jews of his

time, John was influenced by Greek philosophic and religious ideas. But, if this

surmise is true--which I regard as possible, although not likely--his old age

must have been a stormy time, for he would have been excluded from his home

synagogue and threatened by Roman persecution. Thus John contended not only

against hostile outsiders but also with other Jews--including other groups of

Jesus' followers.

 

From the second century to the present, most Christians have assumed that the

author of this gospel was in fact the John who was the brother of James, whom

Jesus saw mending nets with their father, Zebedee, and called to himself--one of

those who " immediately left the boat and their father, and followed him. " [99]

(P.60) In that case, John would be one of the group called " the twelve, " headed

by Peter. Yet the gospel itself (and its possibly added conclusion) declares

that it was written by " the disciple whom Jesus loved. " If John, the son of

Zebedee, was that " beloved disciple, " why does his name never appear in the

gospel, and why does the gospel never mention either " the apostles " or " the

twelve " ? If the author had been one of them, why doesn't he say so? Why, while

acknowledging Peter as a leader, does he simultaneously denigrate Peter's

leadership in favor of the " beloved disciple " and claim that this--otherwise

anonymous--disciple's greater authority ensures the truth of his gospel? Could a

fisherman from Galilee have written the elegant, spare, philosophically

sophisticated prose of this gospel?

 

Two generations of scholars have devoted hundreds of articles and monographs to

such questions, and have proposed various solutions. Some suggest that the

author was a different John, " John the elder, " a follower of Jesus from Ephesus,

whom Christians in later generations confused with John the apostle; others say

that the disciple John was the witness whose authority stood behind the gospel

but was not its actual author; still others believe that the author was an

anonymous leader of a lesser-known circle of disciples, distinct from " the

twelve. "

 

Furthermore, while the author of this gospel accepts Peter's authority and his

teaching, he also claims that the " beloved disciple " surpasses Peter. So while

John pictures Peter as one of Jesus' first disciples, he does 'not' repeat the

story that Mark, Matthew, and Luke so prominently featured, in which Peter first

recognized Jesus--the story that Mark, and many Christians to this day, take to

mean that Peter was the disciples' leader, and the church's founder. (p.61)

Moreover, Matthew adds that Jesus promised Peter would succeed him as the

founding " rock " upon which the future church would stand [100]--a statement many

later took to mean that Peter stood first in the apostolic succession and was

the spiritual ancestor of all subsequent popes. Matthew's gospel, like Mark's

and Luke's, apparently reflects the view of the so-called Peter Christians--a

group based in Rome. Yet all four gospels that eventually formed the New

Testament either endorsed Peter's leadership--as Matthew, Mark and Luke did--or

at least grudgingly accepted it--as John did. From the mid-second century, this

group, which called themselves catholic (literally, " universal " ), remain the

founders with whom Roman Catholic and most Protestant Christians identify.

 

Beyond Belief (The Secret Gospel of Thomas)

Chapter 2, p. 57-61

Elaine Pagels

Vintage Books, New York, U.S.A

ISBN: 0-375-70316-0

 

Notes:

 

[97] For a discussion of the composition of this gospel, see, for example,

Raymond E. Brown, S.J., 'The Gospel According to John: Introduction,

Translation, and Notes' (Garden City, N.Y., 1966).

 

[98] John 21:20-24. Most scholars regard this chapter as an addition to the

original text; see, for example, Brown's discussion of chapter 21 in 'Gospel

According to John'.

 

[99] Matthew 1:18.

 

[100] Matthew 16:17.