Leolaia I am looking forward to your comments. But the anticipation is getting to me so I am going for a walk.
Does the Gospel of Thomas support the view that Jesus used the divine name?
by slimboyfat 25 Replies latest watchtower bible
-
-
Leolaia
Here is April DeConick on the passage:
It is notable that it isn't the tetragrammaton per se but the explanation of it in Exodus 3:14 that is taken as the name. This would follow the same line of exegesis as found in Philo of Alexandria: "....the Father of the universe, who in the sacred scriptures is called by his proper name, I am that I am" (De Abrahamo, 121). This recalls the use of "I AM" in the Fourth Gospel, which Jesus applies to himself, and which provokes accusations of blasphemy and the threat of stoning. This use of 'ehyeh ' a šer 'ehyeh as the divine name instead of YHWH seems to me to be one kind of substitution or avoidance of the tetragrammaton, though here it is theologically explanatory of it. If the logion is indeed about the name of God, then it is representative of the kind of attitude about the name that took it out of everyday usage. Jesus uses the three words ('ehyeh ' a šer 'ehyeh, not YHWH) and it isn't an everyday usage, he treats it as one of the most mysterious secrets that he gives in his "secret sayings", so secret that it cannot even be spelled out in the book that bears Thomas' name. That sounds a lot to me like an avoidance of even a surrogate of the tetragrammaton. Similarly, the frequent use of the name (such as Iao) in magical texts draws on its general non-use, which accorded it greater magical power from its more secret occult status.
There is another interesting explanation of the three words that I've come across. This notes the parallel between L. 13 and L. 108, in which says: "Jesus said, 'Whoever drinks from my mouth will become like me; I myself shall become that person, and the hidden things will be revealed to that person". Compare L. 13: "Jesus said, 'I am not your teacher. Because you have drunk, you have become intoxicated from the bubbling spring that I have tended' And he took him, and withdrew, and spoke three words to him". Such a person, Jesus says, would become like him, and Jesus would "become that person". Thomas is called Didymos "the Twin" in the prologue. Could the three words be something to the effect, "You are my twin" or "I am your twin" or "You and I are one" (which would sound rather Johannine). I dunno....it's an interesting thought. And possibly blasphemous for Thomas to claim equality with God (L. 77). That would possibly connect with more developed gnostic thought: pneumatics are all equally divine and embody deity, but the realization of this takes advanced gnosis and overcoming the programming that pneumatics have received from the Demiurge (through the Law) to punish anyone who commits blasphemy.
-
Phizzy
Thanks Leo, good stuff as usual, and thanks Slimboy for posting, I had never really given any weight to the Gospel of Thomas, but perhaps I need to adjust my thinking.
I did feel that a number of genuine words of Jesus may be contained in it, as indeed there may be imbedded in the Gospels and elsewhere, but how to seperate the fiction from the fact ?
Interesting thought about "The Twin" Leo, have you heard of Philip Pullman's fiction work , I forget the actual title, but it is something like "Jesus Christ and his evil twin" ? quite a good laugh to read for fun, and opens up some areas for thought.
-
slimboyfat
Thanks Leolaia, but I still think the simplest reading carries the implication that Jesus actually used the divine name. Otherwise, why should Thomas fear being stoned for using a substitute? Plus Thomas says that is was "one of the things" in particular that he was fearful of repeating. If Jesus had said only the three Hebrew words ehyeh ' a šer 'ehyeh then which single word did Thomas have in mind that he could not repeat? It seems to me to make more sense to read it as saying that Jesus used and explained that he possessed the divine name (perhaps with reference to the three Hebrew words of Exodus 3:14) and that Thomas was afraid to repeat one word, which was the actual name itself.
No doubt the divine name was at least beginning to fall out of use among Christians by the second century when the Gospel of Thomas was composed. But might it not recall an earlier tradition that remembered Jesus' use of the divine name as an integral part of his messge? An aspect of Jesus' ministry that was marginalised by subsequent generations, but remnants of which were more easily preserved within a somewhat marginal text such as Thomas rather than explicity within the four canonical gospels themselves.
Remember that the form IAW was used, not only in magical texts, but also in scripture itself, as shown by the early LXX fragment of Leviticus. Plus I am a bit sceptical about any sharp distinctions between magical texts and biblical texts for Christians in this early period. Doesn't any unequivocal demarcation between the two more likely reflect the concerns of the proto-orthodox Christians who ultimately prevailed, as well as contemporary conservative Christian scholars for whom it may be important for modern theological reasons to maintain a strict barrier between magical and biblical texts? The Nag Hammadi manuscripts suggest that at least some Christians in that particular location were cosmopolitan and eclectic in their reading. Just as they could read Plato and gospels together I assume they could read gospels alongside magical texts using divine names and other magical devices, and not suffer modern Evangelical angst about cross contamination.
Since IAW was used in both magical and biblical texts during the early years of Christianity, it is not surprising if an early gospel passage should allude to Jesus' use of the divine name also.
-
Jaime l de Aragon
Dr. Francesca Stavrakopoulou, made ??an amazing discovery, it is an inscription which appears Tetragrammaton, ???? with ancient characters related to wife Ashera ???? (Yahweh) ???? is an image with a penis and his male lover behind this of samaria
Who is this Jehovah (????)?
In the story of Exodus says: They told Aaron, 'Make us gods who will go before us, for this Moses who led us out of the land of Egypt, we wot not what is become of him. "(KJV) And he made ??a golden calf in honor of ???? Jehovah Aaron built an altar before it and proclaimed saying - Tomorrow shall be a feast to the Lord! "
(That was not the Almighty Jehovah was a god who learned to worship in Egypt and that even today is in excavations, archaeologists disorienting as Francesca)
Note that even before Moise down from the mountain, said Jehovah, Moses still had not told them anything about name, that Jehovah was the becerrro they did
That "Tetragrammaton" adulterating inserted text appears in Isaiah
The famous Dead Sea Scroll of Isaiah written in Babylonian Aramaic
and sample interpolation (insertion is clearly noted) the Tetragrammaton written in ancient paleo-Hebrew script in a blank in the original document.
This shows us that where there should have been a definition or as Creator and Lord in the ancient text, these gaps were created to insert the fake name. Inserting the Tetragrammaton in these gaps has been a mystery than 2,800 years. Who did it and on what authority? That is an insert that Isaias not originally put in the text is clearly inserted
Rightly said Iesous Xristo Woe unto you , scribes and Pharisees , hypocrites !
-
jwfacts
I am not sure why you are switching from three things to three words, and claiming they are the same.
As Leo mentioned, " This recalls the use of "I AM" in the Fourth Gospel, which Jesus applies to himself, and which provokes accusations of blasphemy and the threat of stoning." Jesus was accused of blasphemy also for saying he was the son of God. So it is not "clear" that he was referring to the divine name.
-
mP
go check the codex sinaticus the oldest complete bible.. its avialable online and you can see and read the entire thing, seeing a picture of the parchment, the original language and english.
Your will shocked to find that your bible has a considerable amounts of theology and religious bias in its wording. All religions have their own bibles for this reason, they make scriptures match what they believe. They rarely shout out how dishonest others are changing their bibles simply because they all do it. Its kind of like politicians never knock islam, because they dont want islam to bad mouth xianity for being a fraud itself.
-
Jaime l de Aragon
the tetragrammaton is a diabolical invention, the calf was Jehovah, the gave no name, what he said is a description, no names, but donkeys are blind, and analyzing original writings of the New Testament, not appears nowhere
Jehovah was invented by a Dominican monk in the 12th century, never before used that expression, therefore it can not appear anywhere, or 7,000 times, or 8,000 times
The nickname "Jehovah", a Catholic invention .. The first recorded use of this spelling was made ??by a Spanish Dominican monk, Raymundus Martini, in 1270.
The WT acknowledges that the pronunciation “Jehovah” was originally a “blunder”:
As to the Old Testament name of God, certainly the spelling and pronunciation “Jehovah” were originally a blunder (The Bible in Living English, 1972, p.7).
The WT acknowledges that the pronunciation “Jehovah” originated not until the thirteenth century A.D.:
The first recorded use of this form [Jehovah] dates from the thirteenth century C.E. Raymundus Martini, a Spanish [Roman Catholic] monk of the Dominican Order, used it in his book Pugeo Fidei of the year 1270 C.E. (Aid To Bible Understanding, 1971, p. 884-5).
The WT acknowledges that there is no NT Greek manuscript that contains “the divine name”:
One of the remarkable facts, not only about the extent manuscripts of the original Greek text, but
of many versions, ancient and modern, is the absence of the Divine name (NWT, 1950 ed., Foreword, p. 10; the same quote is found in the Awake magazine, 1957, January 8, 25).
No ancient Greek manuscript that we possess today of the books from Matthew to Revelation contains God’s name in full (The Divine Name That Will Endure Forever, 1984, p. 23).
This clear or repeat
-
slimboyfat
I am not sure why you are switching from three things to three words, and claiming they are the same.
Because Paul Foster translates it as "one word" whereas Ehrman and Plese translate is as "one of the sayings" and the online version I found says "one thing". I should have quoted the translation that rather supported my point to avoid confusion! Apparently the Coptic word (shaje) can mean word, saying or affair according to Crum's dictionary.
I really think the most straightforward reading is that Jesus said the divine name to Thomas and that Thomas was afraid to repeat it. Not the only possibility, but the most likely. Especially because Thomas specifically singled out the "one word/thing" that he would not repeat for fear of being stoned.
But I don't think it is anything to get excited about from a Watchtower perspective because, as I say, the chances that they are going to start quoting apocryphal gospels to support doctrine is vanishingly small.
I don't agree with Leolaia that Jesus 'applies I AM to himself' in John's gospel, if that means to say he assumes it as a divine title that substitutes for the divine name, but that is a whole other story.
-
slimboyfat
Paul Foster says about the passage: "It is likely that Jesus has revealed to Thomas that he is the one who bears the divine name - and because of the sacred nature of this name Thomas cannot reveal this to his fellow disciples." The Apocryphal Gospels: A Very Short Introduction, page 39.
