The 72 logia of Thomas and their canonical cousins

The 72 logia of Thomas and their canonical cousins Absolute Thomasine priority, part III Martijn Linssen, MA Martijn Linssen 18-1-2020 The 72 logia of Thomas and their canonical cousins 2020 Contents Introduction ......................................................................................................................................2 The gospel of Mark and its side-effects ...........................................................................................2 Luke and Matthew take Mark's forced heirship head-on ............................................................... 3 Luke starters................................................................................................................................. 9 Luke's beatitudes and Matthew's sermon .................................................................................. 21 The dance around Elijah ............................................................................................................. 31 Mark's legacy continued ............................................................................................................. 35 The parts that Luke and Matthew play ..................................................................................... 44 The epitome of Jesus ...................................................................................................................47 Luke chapters 11 and 12: the bulk of logia .................................................................................. 61 Halfway through Luke, only a dozen more logia to go .............................................................82 The remainder of Luke ............................................................................................................. 102 Matthew's Thomas......................................................................................................................... 112 Mark's solos.................................................................................................................................... 123 John ................................................................................................................................................ 123 Conclusion .................................................................................................................................... 136 Martijn Linssen 18/01/2020 Page 1 The 72 logia of Thomas and their canonical cousins 2020 Introduction Almost 75 years ago the gospel of Thomas (Thomas) was recovered among the manuscripts of Nag Hammadi. The first photographic edition was published in 1956, and its first critical analysis appeared in 1959. Tens of thousands of attempts have been made to interpret it, among others placing it in a biblical context, a Gnostic context, even Buddhist and Zen contexts. One major question has been the issue of dependency between Thomas and the canonicals: was one party dependent on the other, or did they (also?) draw from a third source? Answers to that are unequivocally answered by me in Absolute Thomasine priority - the Synoptic Problem solved in the most unsatisfactory manner1: Thomas wrote his text, picked 'I(H)C' as a name for his main character, and it generated an entire movement that threatened the religion-based power structures of that time. In response, Mark invented his own Jesus, wrote his "gospel", and the rest is history. In a nutshell, that is what must have happened. A minor recap from the paper above will now follow. The gospel of Mark and its side-effects With all the rudimentary and sometimes clumsy writings of Mark, I've often wondered whether his creation of Jesus was even meant to start a new religion, or whether it was merely aimed at infuriating the Jews by hijacking their Messiah concept, nullifying their food laws and probably stepping on another few toes that I have missed - and thus create a counterforce against the Jesus of Thomas. Jesus is just dropped on us as an adult. No idea about his age, clothing, physique - nothing. He 'was Nazarene', that we know, but even John the Baptist (and only John, of all the people in all of the four gospels) has his clothing described - not Jesus. No background, no parentage, no lineage, no youth. It certainly is a magnificent achievement to create Mark's Jesus, and Mark does deserve more than great credit for that. But it is equally certain that what he did posed many problems for those who came after he did so, because Mark left many questions unanswered yet also raised quite a few. The essence of writing and publishing is that something becomes 'fact' when written, published, nailed onto a wall or hammered onto a church door. Mark achieved 1 https://www.academia.edu/40695711/Absolute_Thomasine_priority__the_Synoptic_Problem_solved_in_the_most_unsatisfactory_manner Martijn Linssen 18/01/2020 Page 2 The 72 logia of Thomas and their canonical cousins 2020 something miraculously, no matter what you think of his prose or purpose, conjuring his Jesus out of thin air was a miracle indeed - but he established Church legacy at the very moment that he did. All that Mark wrote became fact, and although some of it is twisted and turned by his fellow gospel-writers just as all of them twist and turn Thomas, fact it is. In terms of the Synoptic Problem: Thomas is 'Q', Mark copied a third of it, and Luke and Matthew sat side-by-side writing their different gospels together: they doubled the copies from Thomas, and simply made up the rest in unison; while Luke addressed the Thomas supporters, and Matthew the (moderate) Jews, both changed and added to Mark what was needed at that time. Luke and Matthew take Mark's forced heirship head-on Luke and Matthew serve to complete Mark's Jesus. I will treat them as one as I view them as one (rather large) editorial to Mark. Luke followed Mark and Matthew followed Luke, yet both had different audiences. Did Luke follow Matthew? He did as well - both wrote their different gospels together, each preaching to their own choir: Luke addressed the Thomas supporters, and Matthew the (moderate) Judeans. We will see that they try to accomplish three things: introduce new Thomas logia that didn't make it into Mark, add more prophecies to Mark's Church Jesus, and fix Mark's Thomas (and Mark's Church Jesus). The former two are the main goal, of course, next to supplementing the life of Jesus with some proper human context: where did he come from? What was his youth like? Mark's major struggle was to introduce the entire concept of a Jesus of his own, and that was challenging enough as it is - Luke and Matthew get to address the character of Jesus as a human being, yet also as the person who leaves his legacy "into the right hands". Matthew starts out at the very beginning, with Abraham, trying to link Jesus back to his origins in the first two chapters, naming him king of the Jews. Luke spends his first three chapters on John the Baptist and Jesus and ends chapter 3 with the beginning of chapter 1 of Matthew yet continuing it a bit further, counting down back to Adam and God. Luke takes the opportunity to fixate Jesus in time down to a precise year, and both use a word starting with 'prophe' 6 times in their first three chapters. Martijn Linssen 18/01/2020 Page 3 The 72 logia of Thomas and their canonical cousins 2020 Luke is a few chapters ahead of Matthew most of the time and we will just follow Luke and handle the verses and logia in his order. Logia will be quoted in full, bible verses are from the Berean Literal or Interlinear, Thomas translation is mine A longer word on the first three chapters of both is in order. Luke starts with justifying his writings and pretends to write his entire gospel for and to an unknown 'Theophilus', literally translated "friend of god". Then he follows up with an angel - none other than Gabriel himself elaborately foretelling Zacharias, John's future father, the birth of John the Baptist. His wife Elizabeth is old and barren so this comes as a surprise to Zacharias, who at the same time is instructed to call his son John. Gabriel later pays a visit to Mary who appears not only to be equally as childless as Elizabeth, but also related to her. Luke spends the huge number of 80 verses in his chapter 1 on mostly John and then spends the entire chapter 2 on the actual birth, and a bit of youth, of Jesus. Needless to say these scenes are meant to fix Mark's omissions, or rather, to respond to the questions which apparently remained unanswered afterwards. Mark's legacy is filled with issues and problems and two of them are addressed here. First there is Elijah who would precede the Messiah, according to Malachi 4:5 (and apparently something that was greatly stressed by the Jews) - so in Luke Gabriel elaborates on his own prediction of John's birth by also saying that John will go before him 'in the spirit and power of Elijah', neatly quoting Malachi 4:6 right after that: 1:13 But the angel said to him, "Don't be afraid, Zacharias, because your request has been heard. Your wife, Elizabeth, will bear you a son, and you shall call his name John. 14 You will have joy and gladness, and many will rejoice at his birth. 15 For he will be great in the sight of the Lord, and he will drink no wine nor strong drink. He will be filled with the Holy Spirit, even from his mother's womb. 16 He will turn many of the children of Israel to the Lord their God. 17 He will go before him in the spirit and power of Elijah, 'to turn the hearts of the fathers to the children,' and the disobedient to the wisdom of the just; to prepare a people prepared for the Lord." Even Gabriel is a team member of Project Elijah now, it seems. Will it help? That is not the last of his actions, as apparently John's name, like that of Jesus, needs even more explanation: Martijn Linssen 18/01/2020 Page 4 The 72 logia of Thomas and their canonical cousins 2020 1:59 On the eighth day, they came to circumcise the child; and they would have called him Zacharias, after the name of his father. 60 His mother answered, "Not so; but he will be called John." 61 They said to her, "There is no one among your relatives who is called by this name." 62 They made signs to his father, what he would have him called. 63 He asked for a writing tablet, and wrote, "His name is John." They all marveled. 64 His mouth was opened immediately and his tongue freed, and he spoke, blessing God. For doubting Gabriel's foretelling Zacharias was turned mute 'and not able to speak until the day that these things will happen', so it is clear that Zacharias doesn't "speak" wholly of his own accord here - there is quite an act performed around the naming of John. The Elijah problem increased after Mark, apparently? This is quite a scene, and an obvious attempt to answer questions regarding John's name, and to address them by insinuating that it was a divine instruction to name him so. Was John not an ordinary name then? Not at all, there is no John in the entire Tanakh. Luke ends chapter 1 with Zacharias possessed by the Holy Spirit and filling twelve verses with praising God, and ends with an almost casual verse that seems a mere afterthought - we'll come to that later: 1:80 The child was growing and becoming strong in spirit, and was in the desert until the day of his public appearance to Israel. A second issue is Jesus' name: again Luke has Gabriel appear and sent to Nazareth, instructing Mary to name her child Jesus - two birds with one stone: 1:30 The angel said to her, "Don't be afraid, Mary, for you have found favor with God. 31 Behold, you will conceive in your womb and give birth to a son, and shall name him 'Jesus.' 32 He will be great and will be called the Son of the Most High. The Lord God will give him the throne of his father David, 33 and he will reign over the house of Jacob forever. There will be no end to his Kingdom." 34 Mary said to the angel, "How can this be, seeing I am a virgin?" That all does, however, bear strong resemblance to Isaiah 9:6-8: Martijn Linssen 18/01/2020 Page 5 The 72 logia of Thomas and their canonical cousins 2020 (Isaiah 9:6 For a child is born to us. A son is given to us; and the government will be on his shoulders. His name will be called Wonderful Counselor, Mighty God, Everlasting Father, Prince of Peace. 7 Of the increase of his government and of peace there shall be no end, on David's throne, and on his kingdom, to establish it, and to uphold it with justice and with righteousness from that time on, even forever. The zeal of Yahweh of Armies will perform this. 8 The Lord sent a word into Jacob, and it falls on Israel.) How does Matthew handle these two issues? He stunningly ends his chapter 1 with (just) an angel instructing Joseph, not Mary, to call his child Immanuel, and two verses later Joseph names it Jesus: (Matthew 1:22 Now all this has happened that it might be fulfilled which was spoken by the Lord through the prophet, saying, 23 "Behold, the virgin shall be with child, and shall give birth to a son. They shall call his name Immanuel," which is, being interpreted, "God with us." 24 Joseph arose from his sleep, and did as the angel of the Lord commanded him, and took his wife to himself; 25 and didn't know her sexually until she had given birth to her firstborn son. He named him Jesus.) Verse 1:23 is a literal copy of Isaiah 7:14 except for the emphasis; that is an addition by Matthew and an extra excuse for not naming Jesus Immanuel. The father does the naming instead of the mother, Matthew is moved to primary canon position, and naming Jesus as Jesus by Joseph thus becomes a divine instruction fulfilling the prophecy that he would be called Immanuel: case closed, as easy as that. Did Mark just forget to mention that Jesus was born from a virgin? In chapter 2 Matthew ambitiously fulfils three prophecies about the origin of Jesus: he's from Bethlehem of Judea, Egypt, and Nazareth. Matthew's elaborate story is as follows: wise men come to Jerusalem to worship the newly born King of the Jews - a great excuse for Herod being able to know about Jesus being born. Then Herod, 'troubled, and all Jerusalem with him' asks his own priests and scribes where Jesus would be born, and they merely cite the prophet Micah: Bethlehem - they clearly have no second knowledge at that time, which is very plausible of course. Martijn Linssen 18/01/2020 Page 6 The 72 logia of Thomas and their canonical cousins 2020 Herod asks the wise men to tell him where he can find the King so he can worship him, but they are warned in a dream to not do so and go back to their country "another way". Matthew then has Herod (Herod the Great or Herod I, Roman king of Judea, and father of the later Herod Antipas of Galilee who in Luke sends Jesus back to Pilate) 'become exceedingly angry' and kill all the newborns in Bethlehem. Joseph however has been warned by an angel and takes Jesus to Egypt of all places; and according to Matthew the killing fulfils a prophecy: (Matthew 2:17 Then that which was spoken by Jeremiah the prophet was fulfilled, saying, 18 "A voice was heard in Ramah, lamentation, weeping and great mourning, Rachel weeping for her children; she wouldn't be comforted, because they are no more.") That's not a prophecy although indeed written in Jeremiah, and concerns Rachel figuratively weeping over her "children" after the Babylonians destroyed Jerusalem and the captives from Jerusalem were assembled in Ramah before being moved to Babylon - in 586 BCE: (Jeremiah 31:15 Yahweh says: "A voice is heard in Ramah, lamentation and bitter weeping, Rachel weeping for her children. She refuses to be comforted for her children, because they are no more.") What Matthew is leaving out here are the verses immediately following this one - and the reason for that doesn't need to be explained: (Jeremiah 31:16 Yahweh says: "Refrain your voice from weeping, and your eyes from tears, for your work will be rewarded," says Yahweh. "They will come again from the land of the enemy. 17 There is hope for your latter end," says Yahweh. "Your children will come again to their own territory.) Needless to say that no matter how one looks at this "prophecy", it couldn't possibly apply to the very dead children of the alleged Bethlehem massacre - who most certainly wouldn't be doing any coming back, not from the land of the enemy nor to their own territory. The fleeing to Egypt fulfils another prophecy, according to Matthew: Martijn Linssen 18/01/2020 Page 7 The 72 logia of Thomas and their canonical cousins 2020 (Matthew 2:14 He arose and took the young child and his mother by night and departed into Egypt, 15 and was there until the death of Herod, that it might be fulfilled which was spoken by the Lord through the prophet, saying, "Out of Egypt I called my son.") That last sentence is from Hosea 11:1 and relates to the exodus of the people of Israel: (Hosea 11:1 "When Israel was a child, then I loved him, and called my son out of Egypt.) Whereas the Ramah "prophecy" could - with a mindset of being exceptionally generous and most forgiving - be attributed to Matthew regrettably having access to only that one verse, such doesn't apply here - unless that generosity and forgiveness were to be extended even further, supposing Matthew to have access to only the third and last phrase of Hosea 11:1. It is beyond a doubt that Matthew is knowingly and willingly making up prophecies here, and these are not the last, and most certainly not the least that we will see. Finally, Matthew has another angel appear to Joseph to tell of Herod's death, upon which Joseph returns to Galilee: (Matthew 2:22 But when he heard that Archelaus was reigning over Judea in the place of his father, Herod, he was afraid to go there. Being warned in a dream, he withdrew into the region of Galilee, 23 and came and lived in a city called Nazareth; that it might be fulfilled which was spoken through the prophets that he will be called a Nazarene.) In order to escape the reign of Archelaus it apparently suffices to go to Galilee, where Herod Antipas reigns, who just like Archelaus is yet another son of Herod the Great - and even goes by the same name as his father? To yet again fulfil a prophecy, one of which not even a single word can be found in the entire Tanakh? Being called a Nazarene? Matthew thus starts his gospel with angels and dreams pushing prophecies into place: Jesus is named Jesus, instead of Immanuel as Micah's prophecy foretold; the wise men don't return to Herod, thus triggering the Bethlehem massacre (allegedly fulfilling Jeremiah's Ramah prophecy which wasn't a prophecy and already had taken place); Joseph flees to Egypt with Jesus (allegedly fulfilling Hosea 11:1 which wasn't a prophecy and already had taken place); Joseph Martijn Linssen 18/01/2020 Page 8 The 72 logia of Thomas and their canonical cousins 2020 and Jesus return to Israel, specifically Nazareth, instead of Judea (allegedly fulfilling a prophecy about a Nazarene that's nowhere to be found). Jesus being a Nazarene highly likely is a convoluted translation error from Hebrew (which I'll elaborate on much later). Yet Mark started the whole Nazarene story so there's no turning back now, and even John will suffer from that - hence why I'll address the Nazarene issue after John. Let's not omit that Luke also starts his gospel with angels and dreams pushing prophecies into place: an angel - the angel himself, Gabriel - foretells the birth of John the Baptist who is to be Elijah in disguise (thus fulfilling a proper prophecy by Malachi about Elijah paving the way for the Messiah). Then Gabriel continues to Mary to tell her the good news, and the way Gabriel tells that it's an almost literal copy of Isaiah 9:6. The odd thing is that in the first two chapters of Matthew there is only one proper prophecy, namely the Messiah being called Immanuel, and that only proper prophecy is broken by Matthew who has Joseph name the child Jesus instead - all other prophecies are just completely made up. It was apparently impossible to use double names and name Jesus "Jesus Immanuel" or "Immanuel also known as Jesus" or anything the like. Similarly, it was apparently impossible to name John "John Zacharias (the Baptist)" or "Zacharias John (the Baptist)", just as for instance Simon Peter was called Simon Peter - Mark even has 'Simon (to whom he gave the name Peter)' - or Judas was called Judas Iscariot. Now why would that be? Because Thomas referred to him only as IC, IHC, and perhaps even Jesus - yet most certainly not Jesus Immanuel or anything the like. This has become an excessively long introduction, and not a single logion in sight. It does, however, strongly pertain to the Jesus of Thomas, just as it does show what we can expect from Matthew when it comes to quoting from scripture in order to give ample body to the Jesus of the Church. Luke starters The first copy (logion 79a) can be found in chapter 1, and Luke perhaps uses a reference to Deuteronomy 7:13 and 28:4: (79a) A woman from the crowd said to him, "Blessed are the womb which bore you and the breasts which nourished you." Martijn Linssen 18/01/2020 Page 9 The 72 logia of Thomas and their canonical cousins 2020 (79b) He said to her, "Blessed are those who have heard the word of the father and have truly kept it. (79c) For there will be days when you will say, 'Blessed are the womb which has not conceived and the breasts which have not given milk.'" 1:42 She called out with a loud voice and said, "Blessed are you among women, and blessed is the fruit of your womb! Luke has another go at it in chapter 11, which is a literal copy of 79a and 79b: 11:27 It came to pass, as he said these things, a certain woman out of the multitude lifted up her voice, and said to him, "Blessed is the womb that bore you, and the breasts which nursed you!" 28 But he said, "On the contrary, blessed are those who hear the word of God, and keep it." It could be considered doubtful whether 1:42 comes directly from Thomas, indeed it could even be argued that Thomas himself got his logion from Genesis 49:25 as the blessing of wombs and breasts only occurs there, once, in the entire Tanakh. With Luke splitting this logion and Mark and Matthew repeating only 79b and 79c (as will be discussed later), we will never know beyond a doubt. Yet here we have the first case for Thomasine priority: Luke 11:27 is identical to Thomas 79a, Luke 11:28 to Thomas 79b. Matthew has an inverted copy of Thomas 79c in his 24:19, just like Mark 13:17. So then Thomas comes along, collects 79c from Mark (who wrote the first gospel), then 79a and 79b from Luke, and puts them together in one single logion; and the goal for doing so is... to take the words of Mark and Matthew not only out of context, but also out of content? And Thomas memorised each single verse of each gospel and had such a great mind that it came to said mind that joining Luke 11:27-28 with Mark 13:17 or Matthew 24:19 would be a perfect fit? Separate verses as those latter two are, used in an entirely different context by Mark and Matthew, namely that of foretelling the destruction of the temple? Of course. Verse 1:44 shows similarities with logion 84a, which is new, and equally uncertain: (84a) Jesus said, "When you see your likeness, you rejoice. Martijn Linssen 18/01/2020 Page 10 The 72 logia of Thomas and their canonical cousins 2020 1:44 For behold, when the voice of your greeting came into my ears, the baby leaped in my womb for joy! Luke does however reference logion 111b in 2:26: (111b) And the one who lives from the living one will not see death." 2:26 It had been revealed to him by the Holy Spirit that he should not see death before he had seen the Lord's Christ. Again, it is hard to prove that Luke's 2:26 uses logion 111b, as a large part of the gospel-writers' task is to debunk Thomas by taking his logia out of context, paraphrasing and rephrasing them as much as possible or needed, and fitting them into their own context and to their purpose and this cryptic logion is a likely candidate there. At some point it is just bean counting Thomas words used and redirected, and it comes close to second-guessing. Taking this verse as an example, how likely is it that 'seeing death' is just a coincidental way to refer to dying? See(ing) death appears 4 times in the entire bible: Book of Psalms chapter 89 verse 48, Luke 2:26, John 8:51 and Book of Hebrews 11:5 - only one book from the Tanakh, and its verse is not tempting: 89:48 What man is he who shall live and not see death, who shall deliver his soul from the power of Sheol? Selah. Did both Thomas as well as Luke draw from Psalms? Possible, but of all the references to the Tanakh Luke could have picked, this is a meagre one: no prophecy, no foretelling, it is a mere question in between others. Back to Luke, and a (first) solid case. Luke 4:23-24 turns around logion 31: (31) Jesus said, "No prophet is accepted in his own village; no physician heals those who know him." (Mark 6:4 Jesus said to them, "A prophet is not without honor, except in his own country, and among his own relatives, and in his own house.") Martijn Linssen 18/01/2020 Page 11 The 72 logia of Thomas and their canonical cousins 2020 4:23 He said to them, "Doubtless you will tell me this parable, 'Physician, heal yourself! Whatever we have heard done at Capernaum, do also here in your hometown.'" 24 He said, "Most certainly I tell you, no prophet is acceptable in his hometown. (Matthew 13:57 They were offended by him. But Jesus said to them, "A prophet is not without honor, except in his own country and in his own house.") All three gospel-writers together! Wherever verses are cited that don't belong to the current gospel subject, they're enclosed in round brackets and preceded by the appropriate book. With two or three gospel-writers citing their verses and versions of a logion, the use of emphasis (by making text bold) is intended to increase legibility and understanding of the differences and similarities. Let's first settle the Capernaum matter: it's an obvious error by Luke, as Jesus still has to go there, and in fact will do so only seven verses later (!), where he will perform the exact same miracles that Mark has him perform in Capernaum: driving out the unclean spirit, healing Simon's mother-in-law and healing all other sick. Matthew unfortunately is preoccupied with seeing yet another prophecy fulfilled by Jesus' stay in Capernaum and only vaguely mentions the sick being healed so doesn't offer any reflection on his version of Jesus in Capernaum. But let's not dwell on that. Back to the logion and verses: while naturally leaving out the physician part it befits Mark to simply stick to Thomas, adding 'own house' and the relatives: a reference to Jesus' relatives mentioned in the verse before. Matthew refers to the exact same persons yet leaves out the relatives. The physician proverb Luke mentions is highly likely an attempt to get closer to Thomas, next to the use of the word 'acceptable' - Luke introduces both and also embraces the concise version without the word house - and it seems that none of it made the cut in Matthew. This is one of the patterns we will see in Luke and Matthew: Luke usually sticks very close to Thomas, Matthew backs out from that and undoes most if not all, at least with regards to literal and thus traceable Thomas words. It would almost seem as if Matthew came after Mark and then Luke came after that, ignoring the both of them and mainly following Thomas to the Martijn Linssen 18/01/2020 Page 12 The 72 logia of Thomas and their canonical cousins 2020 letter, all on his own - but Luke usually uses some of Mark's words and Matthew uses some of Luke's. I will count one logion for both Luke and Matthew for all these four chapters, certainly not a flying start. Please keep in memory that Mark has 36 logia: you'll see them appear on the way. Next is chapter 5, and the first we encounter is about healing the sick. The healing of the sick has become one of the central themes for the gospel-writers. Why? For the only one mention of healing the sick in Thomas, there are dozens in each of the four gospels. The mention in Thomas is undoubtedly no instruction to heal physically sick; his disciples weren't doctors. There are a few mentions of sick in the Tanakh, but none justify this grand theme - unless you have a look at Isaiah chapter 53 that prophesies the fate of the Messiah; verses 3 and 4 are the ones: (Isaiah 53:3 He was despised and rejected by men, a man of suffering and acquainted with disease. He was despised as one from whom men hide their face; and we didn't respect him. 4 Surely he has borne our sickness and carried our suffering; yet we considered him plagued, struck by God, and afflicted.) Farfetched as that is, it is used by most biblical scholars to justify the canonical theme of healing the sick. Healing the sick does come from Thomas, however; it is one of the secrets that has been kept hidden by the translators. In logion 31 Thomas hints at the sick: (31) Jesus said, "No prophet is accepted in his own village; no physician heals those who know him." but the real pointer to healing the sick is in the real translation of logion 74, and the following translation is mine2: (31) Says he : oh slaveowner there-be many round-about with the separation not-to-be any however at the sickness The issue with this logion is that the two nouns, 'separation' and 'sickness' have articles of the opposite gender; the nouns are masculine yet the articles are feminine. This is the first and last, and thus only instance in Thomas where nouns have articles of the wrong gender - and the chance of that being unintentional is infinitesimally inconceivable. There are words in Coptic that can be both masculine as well as feminine, but such is not the case for these: ϫⲱⲧⲉ 2 I am about to publish my Thomas translation in the coming month, and it will become clear why I choose the word 'slaveowner' to translate the Coptic ϫⲟⲉⲓⲥ Martijn Linssen 18/01/2020 Page 13 The 72 logia of Thomas and their canonical cousins 2020 as well as ϣⲱⲛⲉ have only masculine forms, not feminine. The preferred handling of that inconsistency by Doresse, Guillaumont, Layton, Plisch, Quispel and other "Pharisees hiding the keys of knowledge" has been to not "fix" the article, but the noun. They all changed the nouns! Who would do that, and based on what? What is the likelihood that a person or scribe knows exactly the article to the word he has in mind, yet not the word itself? Tell me, seriously, all those of you who have experience with a language that has masculine and feminine nouns and articles. There isn't any likelihood at all of that happening, of course, and it should come as no surprise that none of these esteemed scholars and professors actually comment on their so-called emendation; none of them elaborates on the reason for changing these two nouns. None of them dares to touch the subject, but they simply walz over this logion, change two nouns, two excruciatingly essential nouns, and continue just like that, as if nothing happened. Gathercole is the exception to the rule and while he doesn't mention the article's gender he does bring to light that the words don't 'make good sense' - that is an abundance of explanation compared to all those who went before him. Thomas invented the theme of people being sick, diseased. His view was that all people live in separation from their self, they are dualised. None of them know, and none of them either know that it is a disease to live dualised; to Thomas you are dead when you do, and you live when you don't. People are sick, and they must be healed, heal themselves: that is where this grand theme comes from, and that is why the gospel-writers copied that as well, naturally applying it to physically sick, changing the context from a figurative one into a literal one, like everything else they copied from Thomas. That, on a rather huge side note. Luke chapter 5 follows Mark chapter 2 (and Matthew's chapter 9 follows both): (14a) Jesus said to them, "If you fast, you will give rise to sin for yourselves; and if you pray, you will be condemned; and if you give alms, you will do harm to your spirits. (14b) When you go into any land and walk about in the districts, if they receive you, eat what they will set before you, and heal the sick among them. (14c) For what goes into your mouth will not defile you, but that which issues from your mouth - it is that which will defile you." (Mark 2:17 When Jesus heard it, he said to them, "Those who are healthy have no need for a physician, but those who are sick. I came not to call the righteous, but sinners to repentance.") Martijn Linssen 18/01/2020 Page 14 The 72 logia of Thomas and their canonical cousins 2020 5:31 Jesus answered them, "Those who are healthy have no need for a physician, but those who are sick do. 32 I have not come to call the righteous, but sinners to repentance." (Matthew 9:12 When Jesus heard it, he said to them, "Those who are healthy have no need for a physician, but those who are sick do. 13 But you go and learn what this means: 'I desire mercy, and not sacrifice,' for I came not to call the righteous, but sinners to repentance.") Emphasis is on the differences. All gospel-writers stay perfectly in sync here, although Matthew adds a reference to Hosea 6:6, likely meant to also infer Hosea 6:7, thus comparing the Pharisees and scribes to covenant breakers; even better - we'll see that Matthew is very fond of scripture, implicitly referencing it where he can and not even shying away from explicitly rubbing it in: (Hosea 6:6 For I desire mercy, and not sacrifice; and the knowledge of God more than burnt offerings. 7 But they, like Adam, have broken the covenant. They were unfaithful to me, there.) Please do note very carefully that Matthew is perfectly able to read, comprehend, and literally quote scripture, as testified right here. Let me repeat that: is it perfectly crystal-clear on this occasion that Matthew can literally quote scripture? That Matthew can likely read beyond one single verse and appreciate the context of that one single verse? It is, isn't it? The order could be anything here, given the very close resemblance in all, although it is unlikely that Matthew's addition would be accidentally left out by someone else, as it's interjected in the verse. It is striking that Luke adds the physician from Thomas and that the other two don't, but we'll see that it was Luke's job to address the Thomas supporters, where it was Matthew's to address the (moderate) Jews. Luke will always have the most literal copy of Thomas, and Luke will always try to displease the Thomas supporters as little as possible, even deviating from grand and central Christology themes such as the last supper, Judas' kiss, and so on. Luke follows up with the bridegroom parable (logion 104c). In Thomas the bridegroom is a sign of non-duality, the bridegroom belongs into the bridal chamber. When he leaves it he Martijn Linssen 18/01/2020 Page 15 The 72 logia of Thomas and their canonical cousins 2020 becomes a man to a wife and all the duality hell breaks loose. Of course, the gospel-writers take it literally and personify Jesus as the bridegroom, leaving out the entire bridal chamber reference - not to mention the 'pray': (104a) They said to Jesus, "Come, let us pray today and let us fast." (104b) Jesus said, "What is the sin that I have committed, or wherein have I been defeated? (104c) But when the bridegroom leaves the bridal chamber, then let them fast and pray." (Mark 2:18 John's disciples and the Pharisees were fasting, and they came and asked him, "Why do John's disciples and the disciples of the Pharisees fast, but your disciples don't fast?" 19 Jesus said to them, "Can the groomsmen fast while the bridegroom is with them? As long as they have the bridegroom with them, they can't fast. 20 But the days will come when the bridegroom will be taken away from them, and then they will fast in that day.) 5:33 They said to him, "Why do John's disciples often fast and pray, likewise also the disciples of the Pharisees, but yours eat and drink?"34 He said to them, "Can you make the friends of the bridegroom fast while the bridegroom is with them? 35 But the days will come when the bridegroom will be taken away from them. Then they will fast in those days." (Matthew 9:14 Then John's disciples came to him, saying, "Why do we and the Pharisees fast often, but your disciples don't fast?" 15 Jesus said to them, "Can the friends of the bridegroom mourn as long as the bridegroom is with them? But the days will come when the bridegroom will be taken away from them, and then they will fast.) Emphasis is on the differences. Thomas' is a coherent story that starts with a question; Jesus follows up with an answer in the form of a question that clearly indicates he has no intention whatsoever of praying and fasting. Then he names one single (and perhaps only) occasion on which others would fast and pray - but not he himself. The gospel-writers selectively pick only one and a half sentence out of the logion and bend that to their cause, fixating only on the fasting and naturally not including the praying. The one preceding verse tells it all; Mark and Matthew pretend that the whole subject is fasting, Martijn Linssen 18/01/2020 Page 16 The 72 logia of Thomas and their canonical cousins 2020 but Luke, moving closest to Thomas, includes the word 'pray' - and then just like the others addresses only the fasting part in his answer and ignores the praying. Luke is giving away that he read a part of Thomas that they chose to omit, yet Luke included it. It is one of the fine pointers to the gospel-writers having read Thomas and not the other way around, and we'll run into more than this one. Mark tries to explain the reason for fasting in the second half of his first verse, which is a bit overdoing it (and a pioneer's fate), and juxtaposes 'the days' to 'that day', erroneously implying that the fasting (and likely also the taking away) will last only one day. Luke fixes that by changing 'that day' to 'those days' and Matthew neatly finishes it by changing the first 'fast' to 'mourn' and 'while' to 'as long'. That is another pattern that will become explicitly clear and evident: the gradual transformation of the Church story between Mark, Luke and Matthew. Whenever the three share a logion Mark's version will usually be relatively crude and clumsy and contain one or more errors, sometimes quite painful ones. Luke usually goes his own way - following Thomas to the letter where possible - but fixes Mark's errors, and Matthew comes last and combines the best of both worlds into a usually perfectly fluid set of verses, wrapped in wonderful words. Right here, Matthew decisively leaves no room for interpretation that fasting will begin only after Jesus is taken away from us by simply removing the indication of time at the end of the sentence - a most elegant solution. Luke could have come behind Matthew although it is clear that Luke read Thomas, and that both came after Mark, given the corrections to Mark that they both share. 'Groomsmen' becomes 'friends of the groom', both leave out the extra explanatory sentence and share the plural form of Mark's 'that day'. Yet Matthew copies Mark's question, not that of Luke (ignoring Luke's 'likewise'). Retains 'Jesus said to them' over 'He said to them', and has the exact same last sentence as Mark (ignoring the action imposed on the groomsmen in Luke who uses 'Can you make [...]'). Would Luke willingly leave out Matthew's great find of omitting the indication of time at the end of the final sentence? A clear but not definite order of gospels: Thomas, Mark, and then likely Luke followed by Matthew - or vice versa. Logion 47 is next: Thomas is lovely concise and complete here: he first posits his theorem that no one can handle two objects simultaneously (47a) and elaborates on that in serving two masters at the same time (47b). Then he zooms in on the aspect of time by exemplifying one Martijn Linssen 18/01/2020 Page 17 The 72 logia of Thomas and their canonical cousins 2020 side of the coin (47c), building a case for the fact that it takes time to transition from old to new. Switching to inanimate objects he then handles the compatibility of the old and the new, while shedding light on both sides: they are mutually incompatible because new destroys old and old spoils new (47d). And then in (47e) he falls back on the example in (47c) with this time looking at the other side of the coin: (47c) shows that old doesn't immediately desire new, (47e) shows that new doesn't desire or endure (a piece of) the old. Thomas is perfectly balanced, unbiased, looking at old and new from both sides, starting with the general observation that there can be only one at a time: either old or new, never both. As stated before when discussing Mark, not surprisingly the gospel-writers completely omit the old wine hurting the new skins, and likewise turn the old patch on a new garment into a new patch on an old garment. Doing so they make their version fit with the image of Christians being applied to Judaism (which would hurt) while leaving ample room for Jews flocking to Christianity (old wine drinkers can very well have an appetite for new): (47a) Jesus said, "It is impossible for a man to mount two horses or to stretch two bows. (47b) And it is impossible for a servant to serve two masters; otherwise, he will honor the one and treat the other contemptuously. (47c) No man drinks old wine and immediately desires to drink new wine. (47d) And new wine is not put into old wineskins, lest they burst; nor is old wine put into a new wineskin, lest it spoil it. (47e) An old patch is not sewn onto a new garment, because a tear would result." (Mark 2:21 No one sews a piece of unshrunk cloth on an old garment, or else the patch shrinks and the new tears away from the old, and a worse hole is made. 22 No one puts new wine into old wineskins; or else the new wine will burst the skins, and the wine pours out, and the skins will be destroyed; but they put new wine into fresh wineskins.") 5:36 He also told a parable to them. "No one puts a piece from a new garment on an old garment, or else he will tear the new, and also the piece from the new will not match the old. 37 No one puts new wine into old wine skins, or else the new wine will burst the skins, and it will be spilled, and the skins will be destroyed. 38 But new wine must be put into fresh wine skins, and both are preserved. 39 No man having drunk old wine immediately desires new, for he says, 'The old is better.'" Martijn Linssen 18/01/2020 Page 18 The 72 logia of Thomas and their canonical cousins 2020 Emphasis is on the differences. This being the third time in a row that such is stated, it usually is when there are more than two pieces of text compared. When not, the emphasis is on what the two pieces of text share, unless there is no emphasis at all because the two pieces of text are so identical that emphasis wouldn't add any value. In that case, emphasis might be used to show the difference(s) between the two texts. The volume determines where emphasis is applied: if differences between any number of text are small, emphasis will stress the differences. Where Mark focuses on the old (hole) getting damaged if the patch fails, Luke pays attention to the new (patch)! Even more surprising is that by adding verse 39, Luke adds 47c to his version of Mark - with a slight comment at the end. Should that be read 'After Jewish religion no one desires Jesus'? That can't be the general idea, I think - fortunately Luke retains the so very crucial word 'immediately' - in this bible translation. Yet it is no small wonder that Matthew leaves out 47c entirely as it is so openly pointing to Jews being converted to Christianity. Again, Matthew makes it all concise, also by leaving out the odd explanation Luke introduces by stating that the new patch will not match the old. And again, Luke shows that they read a part of Thomas that they chose to omit. What is Luke doing here? (Matthew 9:16 No one puts a piece of unshrunk cloth on an old garment; for the patch would tear away from the garment, and a worse hole is made. 17 Neither do people put new wine into old wine skins, or else the skins would burst, and the wine be spilled, and the skins ruined. No, they put new wine into fresh wine skins, and both are preserved.") Luke and Matthew share the 'both are preserved' and Mark and Matthew share the 'worse hole is made'. This is a crucial allegory for the gospel-writers, positioning their new religion next to Judaism. It is a perfect example of how, why and where the gospel-writers twist and turn Thomas, and why Thomas is first and not the other way around. Whereas Thomas also puts emphasis on negative effects of the old being applied to the new (with regards to the wine; the tear will likely be in the patch but that's inconclusive), the gospel-writers only stress the new wine being spilled and the new garment being torn. The underlying message is that the new religion and the old Judaism are incompatible, with the Martijn Linssen 18/01/2020 Page 19 The 72 logia of Thomas and their canonical cousins 2020 new - their primal focus point - being wasted and damaging the old if it were to be applied onto it. In that light, the unbiased metaphor of the two masters doesn't add to their specific business case at this point either, and is simply left out - to be used by Luke and Matthew in an entirely different context at a later point in time. Thomas is balanced, impartial, unbiased, purely showing the incompatibility between two, not picking any side - and that's the very opposite of what the so strongly polarising gospel-writers are aiming for. Let it also be noted that Thomas doesn't explain at all why or how the patch would tear the garment or vice versa, which indeed is an absolutely trivial detail if you're not interested in or biased towards either piece of cloth. That little void results in the gospel-writers taking turns in order to fill it with an explanation, each varying rather greatly from the other. Whenever the gospel-writers show vast differences among themselves, they are handling content that is entirely of their own yet very closely related to Thomas content. I call that the gospel sandbox: material that doesn't directly originate from either of their two pillars (copying Thomas and fulfilling scripture), and as such isn't subject to more or less strict rules. Especially Matthew will play around in the gospel sandbox, sometimes even grossly ignoring or elaborating on material from his predecessors. Regarding this logion and these verses, the order is strikingly clear: Thomas, Mark, Luke, Matthew: it couldn't possibly be any other way. Or could it? Is it feasible that Thomas takes these so extremely one-sided and biased verses and turns them into his beautifully unbiased logion? No. Both Luke (16:13) and Matthew (6:24) will prove that they had access to the complete logion when they use the two masters metaphor at a later point. They also prove right here that they very well knew about the old wine put into new skins because of using the word 'destroyed' (or 'ruined') in their own extra reason for not putting new wine into old skins, with all three adding the detail of the wine being poured out or spilled. The skins being destroyed or ruined are highly likely inspired by Thomas' 'spoil', the word that only occurs in the last phrase of 47d which is deliberately not used by all three. How useful is it to add that the skins are destroyed or ruined, after having stated that they (have been) burst? On a side note, the Coptic ⲡⲱϩ means "break, burst, tear, divide" and I like to translate it with "split"; a "division" or "split" is what comes to be when you sow an old rag onto new garments; when you fill a baby with all your own stories, models and habits, it will become divided, separated, dualised. Martijn Linssen 18/01/2020 Page 20 The 72 logia of Thomas and their canonical cousins 2020 This concludes Luke chapter 5; 3 logia counted in it, amounting to a total of 4 Luke's beatitudes and Matthew's sermon Luke starts off chapter 6 with his disciples and him breaking Sabbath rules. Luke's beatitudes cover six logia; five of these are new, and some will make it into Matthew's sermon on the mount (although all will be copied by Matthew in his entire gospel). Both beatitudes as sermon are ideal monologues for reiterating traditional Jewish law or scripture as well as adding logia that Mark omitted: two birds with one stone. Logion 54 is new: (54) Jesus said, "Blessed are the poor, for yours is the kingdom of heaven." 6:20 He lifted up his eyes to his disciples, and said, "Blessed are you who are poor, for God's Kingdom is yours. (Matthew 5:3 "Blessed are the poor in spirit, for theirs is the Kingdom of Heaven.) Luke uses the literal copy, yet swaps 'heaven' for 'God'. Matthew undoes that last change and adds 'in spirit' in order to leave nothing up to interpretation: the meek who think humble and lowly of themselves, those will fit the mould of the Church. The order could be anything. Could Luke (or Thomas) have ignored Matthew's 'in spirit'? Yes, possibly. Mark and Luke will take and swap Thomas' 'kingdom of heaven' for 'God's Kingdom'. Matthew will, every single time, side with 'Kingdom of Heaven' and appear to be reverting to Thomas by doing so. I think the general idea was to leave nothing up to interpretation and thus turn Thomas' neutral 'heaven' into God with a capital G. When Christianity slowly unfolded and the Trinity made its introduction (only Matthew names it once in his penultimate verse), Matthew didn't want to label it kingdom of God, Father, Son, Holy Spirit and whatnot, and reverted to heaven again. Or not - reasons are unclear to me but it's a fact that wherever Mark and Luke use 'kingdom of God' in their Thomas copies (and that's wherever Thomas uses 'kingdom of heaven'), Matthew uses 'kingdom of heaven'. Martijn Linssen 18/01/2020 Page 21 The 72 logia of Thomas and their canonical cousins 2020 I will not emphasise this difference every time, as these changes are applied consistently. Logion 69 gets quoted in full in the order of c, a and b by Luke and Matthew, and is also new: (69a) Jesus said, "Blessed are they who have been persecuted within themselves. (69b) It is they who have truly come to know the father. (69c) Blessed are the hungry, for the belly of him who desires will be filled." 6:21 Blessed are you who hunger now, for you will be filled. Blessed are you who weep now, for you will laugh. 22 Blessed are you when men hate you, and when they exclude and mock you, and throw out your name as evil, for the Son of Man's sake. 23 Rejoice in that day, and leap for joy, for behold, your reward is great in heaven, for their fathers did the same thing to the prophets. Verse 22 is inspired by Isaiah 66:5 '[...] "Your brothers who hate you, who cast you out for my name's sake, have said [...]' - and the phrase 'within themselves' is conveniently left out, of course: (Matthew 5:6 Blessed are those who hunger and thirst for righteousness, for they shall be filled. (...) 10 Blessed are those who have been persecuted for righteousness' sake, for theirs is the Kingdom of Heaven. 11 "Blessed are you when people reproach you, persecute you, and say all kinds of evil against you falsely, for my sake. 12 Rejoice, and be exceedingly glad, for great is your reward in heaven. For that is how they persecuted the prophets who were before you.) Luke addresses the crowd and starts out with 'you' in his first few verses which makes it complicated to turn them into general guidelines for all; once again Matthew profits from that and fixes it, likely inspired by Luke's convenient '(But) I tell you' from his beatitudes. Of course, both gospel-writers must twist it towards their cause and stress the reward in heaven; they also take the opportunity to tick off the scripture box another time by mentioning that the prophets were equally hated and persecuted - well done. Needless to say that 'within themselves' would give a whole different meaning to their verses. Surprisingly, Luke doesn't Martijn Linssen 18/01/2020 Page 22 The 72 logia of Thomas and their canonical cousins 2020 come up with reusing Thomas' 'persecute' yet Matthew does - didn't Matthew notice that Luke was quoting Isaiah? Again, Matthew leaves no room for interpretation, adding 'for righteousness', in both verse 6 and 10 - and throws in 'thirst' as well. Luke also leaves unclear whether the reason for hate ('for the Son of Man's sake') is justified or not, so Matthew fixes that with the word 'falsely'. Nitpicking? Not in Matthew's book - he strives for perfection every single time. Likewise, Matthew drops Luke's 'in that day' as it could be suggesting that the hate, exclusion and persecution will last only one single day. Thomas, Luke, Matthew - without a doubt. Logion 69, which starts Luke's beatitudes, will also start Matthew's sermon on the mount. Logion 95 is used by Luke, in two versions, of which the first one is the direct copy: (95) Jesus said, "If you have money, do not lend it at interest, but give it to one from whom you will not get it back." 6:34 If you lend to those from whom you hope to receive, what credit is that to you? Even sinners lend to sinners, to receive back as much. Luke turns Thomas' instruction into a question and hints at 'interest' with his last phrase, and precedes this verse with a similar idea yet one that expresses a particular liberal idea of property and ownership: 6:30 Give to everyone who asks you, and don't ask him who takes away your goods to give them back again. Matthew happily drops verse 30, combining both versions into one clear instruction: (Matthew 5:42 Give to him who asks you, and don't turn away him who desires to borrow from you.) The 'interest' is avoided by both, which is an interesting fact (I just couldn't resist). Both use the word only once in their entire gospel, in their parable of the coins, as a suggestion from the main character. And that is an odd one, as the Tanakh stimulates lending to the poor yet Martijn Linssen 18/01/2020 Page 23 The 72 logia of Thomas and their canonical cousins 2020 explicitly forbids charging interest for it, which among others is based on Exodus 22:25, Leviticus 25:36-37 and Deuteronomy 23:19 (with the first books explicitly mentioning 'poor') although Deuteronomy 23:20 allows charging interest to 'foreigners'. Merely repeating Thomas (who actually could very well be considered paraphrasing the Tanakh with his logion) would add nothing new for the gospel-writers so they take it one step further: Luke is the first copier and thus experiments, suffering the pioneer's fate with just letting goods be taken away. Matthew profits and ends up with one nice verse that surpasses both Thomas and the Tanakh: he implies to not only lend to the poor (certainly without charging interest) and explicitly states to lend to anyone who merely asks. Luke reuses his general idea in chapter 14 but Matthew doesn't reuse it; doing good intended as an overt afterlife investment probably was frowned upon: 14:12 He also said to the one who had invited him, "When you make a dinner or a supper, don't call your friends, nor your brothers, nor your kinsmen, nor rich neighbors, or perhaps they might also return the favor, and pay you back. 13 But when you make a feast, ask the poor, the maimed, the lame, or the blind; 14 and you will be blessed, because they don't have the resources to repay you. For you will be repaid in the resurrection of the righteous." Thomas, Luke, Matthew - no doubt there. Could Luke possibly have come after Matthew? Only if he were intent on explicitly making his highly peculiar point of 6:30 regardless of what Matthew said - but then why would he follow that up with 6:34 and 14:14 which clearly are rather superfluous statements when seen in the light of 6:30? What is the possibility of Thomas copying Luke or Matthew then, inserting 'interest' in his logion (with the alleged intent of creating his version of the Church Jesus)? Only if he were both too creative as well as completely ignorant of Jewish law and the Tanakh - and that is an impossible case to argue, as Thomas is full of the latter two. Another new logion is literally copied in verse 39; logion 34: (34) Jesus said, "If a blind man leads a blind man, they will both fall into a pit." 6:39 He spoke a parable to them. "Can the blind guide the blind? Won't they both fall into a pit? Martijn Linssen 18/01/2020 Page 24 The 72 logia of Thomas and their canonical cousins 2020 (Matthew 15:14 Leave them alone. They are blind guides of the blind. If the blind guide the blind, both will fall into a pit.") Luke or Matthew? The order could be anything, even Thomas could have come last. The term 'parable' is extremely loosely wielded by Luke here (it is a mere allegory and certainly not a story), and we will see more of that later on, as Luke and Matthew also feel the need to come up with parables of their own in their attempt to 'be Thomasine'. Right after that we find a literal copy of logion 26: (26a) Jesus said, "You see the mote in your brother's eye, but you do not see the beam in your own eye. (26b) When you cast the beam out of your own eye, then you will see clearly to cast the mote from your brother's eye." 6:41 Why do you see the speck of chaff that is in your brother's eye, but don't consider the beam that is in your own eye? 42 Or how can you tell your brother, 'Brother, let me remove the speck of chaff that is in your eye,' when you yourself don't see the beam that is in your own eye? You hypocrite! First remove the beam from your own eye, and then you can see clearly to remove the speck of chaff that is in your brother's eye. Emphasis is on the words that Luke has as extra, compared to Matthew. Luke stretches it a bit in making it personal, addressing an invisible audience (although likely still talking to the Pharisees and scribes). And Matthew follows him almost literally - to my surprise: (Matthew 7:3 Why do you see the speck that is in your brother's eye, but don't consider the beam that is in your own eye? 4 Or how will you tell your brother, 'Let me remove the speck from your eye,' and behold, the beam is in your own eye? 5 You hypocrite! First remove the beam out of your own eye, and then you can see clearly to remove the speck out of your brother's eye.) Once again, Matthew perfects what Luke says in very subtle ways. The double occurrence of 'brother' disappears, as does the somewhat awkward and overdone mention of 'when you yourself do not see'. Matthew is by far the most eloquent of all the three. Could it be possible Martijn Linssen 18/01/2020 Page 25 The 72 logia of Thomas and their canonical cousins 2020 that Matthew came before Luke and that Luke decided to undo his condensed beauty? Luke may have insisted on adding his 'chaff' to Matthew, and might have disliked 'and behold'. Both do a fairly literal copy of Thomas and advance their case by directing that towards the Pharisees, yet since Thomas doesn't have any such case it could also be argued that he came last and thus had to leave out that little detail. The two arguments I have for Thomas being first is that he is by far the most concise and has two sentences: one with a repetition of 'see', and one repeating 'cast' (and containing the same 'see' in a whole different meaning). Luke and Matthew miss that beauty and turn the first sentence into 'see' and 'consider' (breaking the repetition) while Luke suffers the pioneer's fate by superfluously adding an intermediate sentence with 'remove' and 'see' that Matthew omits. It is evident that Thomas usually is the most articulate and concise, beautifully mastering the Wizardry of Words, and that Matthew is close competition in that field. But none of that can ever be a sole argument for either of them being last; although I do frequently argue for Matthew being last while he makes everything concise and beautiful and is so very eloquent but only because he then uses words from Mark as well as Luke. Why is Thomas so beautiful? The mote is the imperfection or misconceptions you perceive someone else to have, their opinions - called truths - that don't correlate to yours. The beam is the collection of your own truths that you equally take for granted, considering them to be logical and correct. You see some of the other and focus on them but disregard all of your own - hence the difference in size. The first 'see' literally means seeing, focussing, whereas the second 'see' means observing, perceiving. The second sentence uses the word 'cast' for a very specific reason: it means to distance yourself from something rather than removing something, taking something out: the action of 'cast' is targeted towards changing yourself whereas the action of 'remove' is targeted towards changing something else. The Coptic ⲛⲟⲩϫⲉ occurs 14 times in 9 logia in Thomas, and is one of the crucial words: to cast from you, to discard. It is a beautiful, very perceptive and meaningful word in Thomas. You have to consider your own truths, concepts, perceptions, and cast those from you that don't survive close scrutiny - and then you will really 'see' - that the mote that you focussed on in someone else's eye was only bothering you because you felt your own semi-truths threatened by them: their truths made you doubt your truths, and that felt rather inconvenient. But now you've really 'seen' how your collection of truths is merely a heritage that has accumulated during your life by reacting to actions of others and yourself, you value Martijn Linssen 18/01/2020 Page 26 The 72 logia of Thomas and their canonical cousins 2020 them quite differently - and distance yourself from them. They're a large part of the 'world' of Thomas. And when you have done so, it has become impossible to feel threatened by other people's truths. The mote from your brother's eye wasn't in his eye, it existed only in your mind. Everything Thomas talks about is about you: me. What the gospel-writers are doing here with this very logion is exactly the opposite of what Thomas does. There's only one hypocrite, and that is you: me Brace yourselves for another lengthy commentary; a very dirty twist&turn is about to be revealed. The best word to describe my state is bewilderment, when I first read Luke's verses 6:43-45, a complete literal copy of logion 45. The emphasis is on the shocking part alone: (45a) Jesus said, "Grapes are not harvested from thorns, nor are figs gathered from thistles, for they do not produce fruit. (45b) A good man brings forth good from his storehouse; an evil man brings forth evil things from his evil storehouse, which is in his heart, and says evil things. (45c) For out of the abundance of the heart he brings forth evil things." 6:43 For there is no good tree that produces rotten fruit; nor again a rotten tree that produces good fruit. 44 For each tree is known by its own fruit. For people don't gather figs from thorns, nor do they gather grapes from a bramble bush. 45 The good man out of the good treasure of his heart brings out that which is good, and the evil man out of the evil treasure of his heart brings out that which is evil, for out of the abundance of the heart, his mouth speaks. What is this now? Luke once more turns to the literal copy of Thomas, but didn't Mark do his best to twist and turn logion 45 into original sin by leaving out the so exceptionally essential and equitable 45b? Check it out: (Mark 7:17 When he had entered into a house away from the multitude, his disciples asked him about the parable. 18 He said to them, "Are you also without understanding? Don't you perceive that whatever goes into the man from outside can't defile him, 19 because it doesn't go into his heart, but into his stomach, then into the latrine, making all foods clean?"20 He said, "That Martijn Linssen 18/01/2020 Page 27 The 72 logia of Thomas and their canonical cousins 2020 which proceeds out of the man, that defiles the man. 21 For from within, out of the hearts of men, proceed evil thoughts, adulteries, sexual sins, murders, thefts, 22 covetings, wickedness, deceit, lustful desires, an evil eye, blasphemy, pride, and foolishness.) That is what Mark did: intentionally leaving out Thomas 45b so he could build a case for original sin on top of Thomas. Is Luke spoiling everything by making himself known as a Thomas reader yet not a Mark reader, or is he missing Mark's deliberate twist, or is this just plain sabotage - or if none of those then what is it? Clearly Luke's verse 45 follows logion 45b and 45c to the letter, just as his verse 44 is a direct copy of logion 45a, although swapping fruits and changing the plants. This is not original sin, this is a Thomas-like subtle nuanced version that doesn't fit the Church's agenda at all. What does Matthew have to say on this? (Matthew 7:15 "Beware of false prophets, who come to you in sheep's clothing, but inwardly are ravening wolves. 16 By their fruits you will know them. Do you gather grapes from thorns or figs from thistles? 17 Even so, every good tree produces good fruit, but the corrupt tree produces evil fruit. 18 A good tree can't produce evil fruit, neither can a corrupt tree produce good fruit. 19 Every tree that doesn't grow good fruit is cut down and thrown into the fire. 20 Therefore by their fruits you will know them.) Nothing, or everything? Luke's message is there but in completely different metaphors: Matthew uses the fruits and plants of Thomas yet leaves out 45b entirely - in chapter 7, where he talks about false prophets. In his chapter 12 he has another go at it: (Matthew 12:33 "Either make the tree good and its fruit good, or make the tree corrupt and its fruit corrupt; for the tree is known by its fruit. 34 You offspring of vipers, how can you, being evil, speak good things? For out of the abundance of the heart, the mouth speaks. 35 The good man out of his good treasure brings out good things, and the evil man out of his evil treasure brings out evil things. 36 I tell you that every idle word that men speak, they will give account of it in the day of judgment. 37 For by your words you will be justified, and by your words you will be condemned.") Martijn Linssen 18/01/2020 Page 28 The 72 logia of Thomas and their canonical cousins 2020 Nuance - again? From Matthew? The context in Matthew here, however, is prepping people for Judgment Day while at the same time addressing and rebuking the Pharisees, who are labelled as evil - part of the plan of course. So Pharisees are bad trees and evil persons, others are or can be good trees and good persons - fair enough then. The context of chapter 7 is false prophets who can be recognised by their (bad) fruits and will be cut down and thrown into the fire at, presumably, a given point in time. There presumably are also good prophets so Matthew is in need of a comparison between good and bad - fair enough. Matthew's rebound however comes in chapter 15 when he elaborates on his own 15:11, a literal copy of 14c which in Thomas also has no context in itself, just like 45c: (Matthew 15:10 He summoned the multitude, and said to them, "Hear, and understand. 11 That which enters into the mouth doesn't defile the man; but that which proceeds out of the mouth, this defiles the man." (...) 17 Don't you understand that whatever goes into the mouth passes into the belly and then out of the body? 18 But the things which proceed out of the mouth come out of the heart, and they defile the man. 19 For out of the heart come evil thoughts, murders, adulteries, sexual sins, thefts, false testimony, and blasphemies. 20 These are the things which defile the man; but to eat with unwashed hands doesn't defile the man.") Matthew sets the record straight, according to the Church agenda - all words that leave the mouth are evil because they come from the heart, that is all evil. And he does make a highly significant other point which I'll address at the end of this paragraph. It has been a rocky ride, however, with a messy result. Luke doesn't help much with his beatitudes, which sometimes are hard to correlate and connect to one another: the context in which he makes the literal and balanced copy is difficult to sketch although Luke's verses seem to belong to a wider set of instructions about the teacher-disciple paradigm. Nonetheless, the gospel-writers once more show their true nature here, selectively quoting and misquoting when and where it befits them. Matthew deliberately leaves out the balanced sentence when he wants to make the case for original sin (all men are evil because all hearts produce evil); yet when he wants to single out the Pharisees from the crowd, or distinguish Martijn Linssen 18/01/2020 Page 29 The 72 logia of Thomas and their canonical cousins 2020 between false prophets and true ones, suddenly there appear to be also good people with good hearts? And in order to make both cases the exact same logion suffices, simply by also quoting that one sentence that purposely got left out before? How extremely unlikely is it that Thomas was last here? Once again we see a completely coherent narrative in Thomas that starts beautifully unbiased: the grapes and figs sentence in 45a shows that some objects inherently belong somewhere, and 45b elaborates on that while switching from the allegory of plants to humans: good men have a good storehouse, evil men an evil one, and the storehouse is in the heart. So far so good - but the rest of the logion is extremely one-sided, ending with the context-free last sentence in 45c that is very much unlike Thomas. Can I offer an explanation for 45c? No. Will I try to wiggle my way out of this by making up editorial changes or additions by evil scribes and translators, or come up with other conspiracies? No. Even with the last phrase of 45b naming 'evil', had logion 45c not contained that same single word, it all would have been perfectly Thomasine. Still, if Thomas would have stolen from the gospel-writers it is completely inconceivable that he would have missed the opportunity to reuse the magnificent phrase of Luke: 'for out of the abundance of the heart, his mouth speaks'. In any case, this is an example of very bad gospel management and orchestration. In the current official canonical order, people will first read Matthew and read a nuanced version in chapter 7 (the false prophets), then another nuanced version in chapter 12 (the Pharisees), and then suddenly all nuances disappear and original sin gets thrown in their faces in chapter 15 (people in general). Then Mark will reassure their sense of original sin by repeating the last verses of Matthew's chapter 15, yet Luke will end it all with his clean and honest, and beautifully nuanced, almost literal copy of Thomas - that even surpasses that of Thomas... Which is the highly significant point I mentioned? It is Matthew fixing a grave error of Mark: (Mark 7: 18 He said to them, "Are you also without understanding? Don't you perceive that whatever goes into the man from outside can't defile him, 19 because it doesn't go into his heart, but into his stomach, then into the latrine, making all foods clean?") With one stroke of the pen the overenthusiastic Mark tosses aside all the Jewish laws on food, making them null and void - that must have made a gigantic impact. I have said it before and Martijn Linssen 18/01/2020 Page 30 The 72 logia of Thomas and their canonical cousins 2020 will repeat it now: I really do wonder whether Marks' clumsiness was just that, or whether he never intended to create a new religion by inventing his Jesus. Did Mark, knowingly and willingly, intend to create a counterforce to Thomas's Jesus by creating his own Jesus who stepped on many large and painful Judaic toes? In plain English, did Mark merely want to infuriate the Jews by the actions of his Jesus? Like that theory or not, declaring all foods clean is a brutal and definite showstopper for most if not all Jews. Matthew hurries to control the damage, and turns it into: (Matthew 15: 19 For out of the heart come evil thoughts, murders, adulteries, sexual sins, thefts, false testimony, and blasphemies. 20 These are the things which defile the man; but to eat with unwashed hands doesn't defile the man.") No need to wash your hands before eating - that is an infinitely insignificant sacrifice compared to ruthlessly abolishing all the numerous and intricate food laws of the Jews, all of them delicately detailed directions directly from God himself. Matthew doesn't just save the day here, I think this comes close to saving the planet from a Christian-Jewish point of view: declaring all foods clean could have lead to people interpreting it as forbidding every observation of the Jewish food law, and that would certainly have created an impossible barrier for every Jewish convert. I count 6 logia in chapter 6; a grand total of 10. The dance around Elijah Mark didn't have Jesus meet John the Baptist, but as fortunate as storytelling goes, Luke grants Jesus the opportunity to indirectly meet and greet with John who sends his messengers to Jesus in order to verify that Jesus truly is the Messiah. Apparently, after witnessing the Holy Spirit descending from heaven on Jesus and hearing a voice from heaven say "You are my beloved Son" in Luke 3:22, John still isn't wholly convinced? Even I'd be convinced. Granted, Luke doesn't explicitly state that John witnesses the event, nor do Mark or Matthew. In Luke, Jesus is praying when the Holy Spirit visits him and the voice from heaven speaks, events that are narrated by an invisible witness: Martijn Linssen 18/01/2020 Page 31 The 72 logia of Thomas and their canonical cousins 2020 3:21 Now when all the people were baptized, Jesus also had been baptized, and was praying. The sky was opened, Both Mark and Matthew have Jesus himself see the Holy Spirit descend directly after he surfaces from the water, and then the voice speaks. Is it unlikely that John the Baptist is nearby when Jesus supposedly finishes the supposed last part of baptism? What is clear, is what is completely unclear: the whereabouts of John the Baptist when he does his baptising; is he right next to the one being baptised? Standing, sitting, lying on the ground even? Or is he at a distance and if so, how great is that distance - I could go on for many pages... and I have, in Absolute Thomasine priority. However, this new occasion lends itself for fulfilling more (Isaiah) prophecy as well as contributing to Project Elijah, next to introducing more Thomas, so it's a win-win really. In Absolute Thomasine Priority I demonstrated that, and how, Thomas meant his "Johannes the Immerser" to point to king Zedekiah, last king of the last kingdom of the Jews, who witnessed and effected the destruction of the temple, the kingdom, and the entire Jewish and Israelian dream. As we will see, logion 46 condenses the entire book of Chronicles which first word is Adam, and which very last verses narrate these last actions of and around Zedekiah. Here is the perfectly literal copy of logion 78: (78a) Jesus said, "Why have you come out into the desert? (78b) To see a reed shaken by the wind? (78c) And to see a man clothed in fine garments like your kings and your great men? (78d) Upon them are the fine garments, and they are unable to discern the truth." 7:24 When John's messengers had departed, he began to tell the multitudes about John, "What did you go out into the wilderness to see? A reed shaken by the wind? 25 But what did you go out to see? A man clothed in soft clothing? Behold, those who are gorgeously dressed, and live delicately, are in kings' courts. (Matthew 11:7 As these went their way, Jesus began to say to the multitudes concerning John, "What did you go out into the wilderness to see? A reed shaken by the wind? 8 But what did you go out to see? A man in soft clothing? Behold, those who wear soft clothing are in kings' houses.) Martijn Linssen 18/01/2020 Page 32 The 72 logia of Thomas and their canonical cousins 2020 The entire logion 78 is almost literally copied - and Matthew follows Luke almost to the letter, which is highly unusual. Substituting the word 'desert' for 'wilderness' is a favourite of course, 249 occurrences in the Tanakh of the latter versus 51 for 'desert'. The purpose here (the scene unfolds further on) is to convince the audience that John is Elijah, thus conveniently dismissing the need for his presence any further, and just to refresh your memory: Malachi 4:5 predicted that Elijah would precede the Messiah. Elijah made an appearance during the Transfiguration in Mark but at this point, in Luke as well as in Matthew, the transfiguration is yet to come, and this is their chance to build a much stronger case beforehand. In verse 5 Luke conflates 78c and 78d but leaves out the phrase about being able to discern the truth. Matthew doesn't like Luke's positive label of the clothing nor the 'live delicately' and merely repeats the 'soft clothing'. A pioneer's fate, I will often repeat this, to stick too literally to Thomas or to get stuck in wading around it, yet it is a great compliment coming from Matthew that he sticks so close to a first try. And while we're at it, I'll bring up the gospel sandbox once more: Luke's poetic variation on Thomas in verse 25 is subject to that same liberal treatment by Matthew - and only that part. Thomas, Luke, Matthew, without the slightest doubt. But there is more. A quite literal copy of logion 46 follows immediately, naturally leaving out the Thomas prerequisite of becoming like a child, as well as the first phrase of 46a: (46a) Jesus said, "Among those born of women, from Adam until John the Baptist, there is no one so superior to John the Baptist that his eyes should not be lowered (before him). (46b) Yet I have said, whichever one of you comes to be a child will be acquainted with the kingdom and will become superior to John." 7:26 But what did you go out to see? A prophet? Yes, I tell you, and much more than a prophet. 27 This is he of whom it is written, 'Behold, I send my messenger before your face, who will prepare your way before you.' 28 "For I tell you, among those who are born of women there is not a greater prophet than John the Baptizer, yet he who is least in God's Kingdom is greater than he." Martijn Linssen 18/01/2020 Page 33 The 72 logia of Thomas and their canonical cousins 2020 (Matthew 11:9 But why did you go out? To see a prophet? Yes, I tell you, and much more than a prophet. 10 For this is he, of whom it is written, 'Behold, I send my messenger before your face, who will prepare your way before you.' 11 Most certainly I tell you, among those who are born of women there has not arisen anyone greater than John the Baptizer; yet he who is least in the Kingdom of Heaven is greater than he.) Emphasis on the differences again; Luke and Matthew reuse the same Malachi 3:1 that Mark used in his 1:2. Matthew perfects Luke by using 'arisen', which is far more powerful of course, and working towards their claim: John is the "reincarnation" of Elijah, which Luke has made explicit in 1:17 and both Luke and Matthew worked out further in their chapter 3. Matthew (alone) then resorts to literally adding names and numbers: (Matthew 11:12 From the days of John the Baptizer until now, the Kingdom of Heaven suffers violence, and the violent take it by force. 13 For all the prophets and the law prophesied until John. 14 If you are willing to receive it, this is Elijah, who is to come. 15 He who has ears to hear, let him hear.) Quite daunting - especially the begging for acceptance of this shrewd proposition, but sometimes it just has to be rubbed in hard, it seems. Who could possibly believe that these are the words of Jesus, the Messiah? The Saviour? If I were The Son Of God, I wouldn't nor couldn't be particularly bothered with the trivialities of the hundreds of prophecies foretold regarding My Coming. This isn't Jesus speaking, this is the Church at work in an ultimate attempt to push their agenda, desperate to wrap up Project Elijah after all their apparently failed or at least unaccepted attempts to have Elijah return and precede the Messiah as Malachi foretold. The gospel-writers have no idea who Johannes the Immerser is meant to be, yet they are presented with him by Thomas, and that John does receive great attention. So they give him equal attention, yet applied to their goal - little did they know or realise that Zedekiah actually immersed the prophet Jeremiah in mud, and that this was a pun by Thomas. John the Baptist wasn't foretold, Elijah was. And in the same way that the name of Jesus wasn't quite the same as 'Immanuel', John the Baptist is very different from 'Elijah'. The solution to giving the name of Jesus to someone who was supposed to be named Immanuel was simply Martijn Linssen 18/01/2020 Page 34 The 72 logia of Thomas and their canonical cousins 2020 conceived by having an angel ordering Joseph and Mary to do so, and an identical treatment was received by John the Baptist, whose highly uncommon name plainly required to be also addressed by Luke in his very first chapter. This right here is the Church on its knees, and it's difficult to resist feeling compassion. Luke by the way crams verses 12 and 13 into his 16:16, his chapter on possessions, as an apparent afterthought. Then again Luke appears to have very little business with the Jews and seems to be solely serving those who believe in the Jesus of Thomas. Matthew tries to Thomasine it all by wrapping it up with verse 15 ('hear hear!'), which, quite frankly, works for me - a fine find. Still, Matthew can neither leave it up to chance nor resist spelling it all out in his version of the transfiguration: (Matthew 17:10 His disciples asked him, saying, "Then why do the scribes say that Elijah must come first?" 11 Jesus answered them, "Elijah indeed comes first, and will restore all things; 12 but I tell you that Elijah has come already, and they didn't recognize him, but did to him whatever they wanted to. Even so the Son of Man will also suffer by them." 13 Then the disciples understood that he spoke to them of John the Baptizer.) There. Leave it to Matthew to leave absolutely nothing to the imagination Mark's legacy continued Alright. Let's get back to the gospel-writers and see how they deal with the remainder of Mark's legacy. Luke does a very interesting mash-up of logion 13a and the first parts of 21: (13a) Jesus said to his disciples, "Compare me to someone and tell me whom I am like." (21a) Mary said to Jesus, "Whom are your disciples like?" (21b) He said, "They are like children who have settled in a field which is not theirs. (21c) When the owners of the field come, they will say, 'Let us have back our field.' (21d) They (will) undress in their presence in order to let them have back their field and to give it back to them. Martijn Linssen 18/01/2020 Page 35 The 72 logia of Thomas and their canonical cousins 2020 7:31 "To what then should I compare the people of this generation? What are they like? 32 They are like children who sit in the marketplace, and call to one another, saying, 'We piped to you, and you didn't dance. We mourned, and you didn't weep.' (Matthew 11:16 "But to what shall I compare this generation? It is like children sitting in the marketplaces, who call to their companions 17 and say, 'We played the flute for you, and you didn't dance. We mourned for you, and you didn't lament.') Matthew copies Luke fairly to the letter and makes it all concise, fluid, and, dare I say it, warm ('companions'). He does not personify the generation and thus removes Luke's 'people' but leaves the first person plural intact in the following sentence - life with Matthew is never boring. Not counting 13a, I count 3 logia in chapter 7, the grand total now stands at 13. 9 logia in chapters 6 and 7, 90% of those are new... Luke chapter 8 starts with the parable of the sower. I have copied all three here including the verse before: this is where Mark introduces the parable as a style for the first time, and even has Jesus explain it: (9a) Jesus said, "Now the sower went out, took a handful (of seeds), and scattered them. (9b) Some fell on the road; the birds came and gathered them up. (9c) Others fell on the rock, did not take root in the soil, and did not produce ears. (9d) And others fell on thorns; they choked the seed(s) and worms ate them. (9e) And others fell on the good soil and it produced good fruit: it bore sixty per measure and a hundred and twenty per measure." (Mark 4:2 He taught them many things in parables, and told them in his teaching, 3 "Listen! Behold, the farmer went out to sow, 4 and as he sowed, some seed fell by the road, and the birds came and devoured it. 5 Others fell on the rocky ground, where it had little soil, and immediately it sprang up, because it had no depth of soil. 6 When the sun had risen, it was scorched; and because it had no root, it withered away. 7 Others fell among the thorns, and the thorns grew up, and choked it, and it yielded no fruit. 8 Others fell into the good ground, Martijn Linssen 18/01/2020 Page 36 The 72 logia of Thomas and their canonical cousins 2020 and yielded fruit, growing up and increasing. Some produced thirty times, some sixty times, and some one hundred times as much." 9 He said, "Whoever has ears to hear, let him hear.") 8:4 When a great multitude came together, and people from every city were coming to him, he spoke by a parable. 5 "The farmer went out to sow his seed. As he sowed, some fell along the road, and it was trampled under foot, and the birds of the sky devoured it. 6 Other seed fell on the rock, and as soon as it grew, it withered away, because it had no moisture. 7 Other fell amid the thorns, and the thorns grew with it, and choked it. 8 Other fell into the good ground, and grew, and produced one hundred times as much fruit." As he said these things, he called out, "He who has ears to hear, let him hear!" (Matthew 13:3 He spoke to them many things in parables, saying, "Behold, a farmer went out to sow. 4 As he sowed, some seeds fell by the roadside, and the birds came and devoured them. 5 Others fell on rocky ground, where they didn't have much soil, and immediately they sprang up, because they had no depth of earth. 6 When the sun had risen, they were scorched. Because they had no root, they withered away. 7 Others fell among thorns. The thorns grew up and choked them. 8 Others fell on good soil and yielded fruit: some one hundred times as much, some sixty, and some thirty. 9 He who has ears to hear, let him hear.") Emphasis is on the differences between the three. All leave out Thomas' worms, and please observe the sandbox Thomas inadvertently leaves: 9c has an unclear outcome (if they did not produce ears, what did they produce) and cause (isn't it obvious that the seeds can't take root in the soil, if they fell on rock?) and Mark immediately takes off on the (over-)explanation trip. Luke condenses that part of Mark to the extreme, and Matthew almost literally follows Mark. Luke is condensing Mark's numeric twist and only uses 'one hundred'; where Luke usually moves closer to Thomas, this time he just goes off in a direction of his own. He expands verse 5 with the path and 'trampled', uses the odd pleonasm 'of the sky' (similar to the mustard seed parable but that is yet to come) and swaps the perfectly logical 'no depth of soil' on the rocks for 'no moisture'. Perhaps because he sticks to Mark's 'withered' but doesn't want to copy Mark's invention of the scorching sun? Or Luke was something of a gardener and it made perfect sense to him that plants on rocks wither in the sun because the only way to Martijn Linssen 18/01/2020 Page 37 The 72 logia of Thomas and their canonical cousins 2020 compensate the heat is by having (access to) moisture, which can only be achieved by having roots? I'm not being cynical; sometimes knowledge can work to someone's disadvantage. Matthew sticks entirely to Mark, not surprisingly this time, and next to the scorching sun also follows up with Mark's numbers, although this time they're reversed. Luke is out of order here but Matthew coming after Mark is undeniable. Do I have a solid case for Thomas coming first? Well, yes: follow the sandbox. All that the gospel-writers create and change is theirs alone, and I have emphasised that in bold - that which remains and all three share, is the pure content of Thomas Luke also explains why he explains the parable just as Mark does twice in chapter 4, redirecting logion 62 in order to elevate the disciples above the crowd; the second part is a mere reference to Isaiah 6:9-10, of which Luke uses the briefest form: (62a) Jesus said, "It is to those who are worthy of my mysteries that I tell my mysteries. (62b) Do not let your left (hand) know what your right (hand) is doing." (Mark 4:10 When he was alone, those who were around him with the twelve asked him about the parables. 11 He said to them, "To you is given the mystery of God's Kingdom, but to those who are outside, all things are done in parables, 12 that 'seeing they may see, and not perceive; and hearing they may hear, and not understand; lest perhaps they should turn again, and their sins should be forgiven them.'") 8:9 Then his disciples asked him, "What does this parable mean?" 10 He said, "To you it is given to know the mysteries of God's Kingdom, but to the rest in parables; that 'seeing they may not see, and hearing they may not understand.' (Matthew 13:10 The disciples came, and said to him, "Why do you speak to them in parables?" 11 He answered them, "To you it is given to know the mysteries of the Kingdom of Heaven, but it is not given to them. 12 For whoever has, to him will be given, and he will have abundance; but whoever doesn't have, from him will be taken away even that which he has. 13 Therefore I speak to them in parables, because seeing they don't see, and hearing, they don't hear, neither do they understand. 14 In them the prophecy of Isaiah is fulfilled, which says, 'By hearing you will hear, and will in no way understand; Seeing you will see, and will in no way perceive; 15 for this people's Martijn Linssen 18/01/2020 Page 38 The 72 logia of Thomas and their canonical cousins 2020 heart has grown callous, their ears are dull of hearing, and they have closed their eyes; or else perhaps they might perceive with their eyes, hear with their ears, understand with their heart, and would turn again, and I would heal them.' 16 "But blessed are your eyes, for they see; and your ears, for they hear. 17 For most certainly I tell you that many prophets and righteous men desired to see the things which you see, and didn't see them; and to hear the things which you hear, and didn't hear them.) Mark is very poor again, unwillingly suggesting that there's only one single mystery by using the singular form. Luke fixes that and also swaps Isaiah's perceiving for seeing, both of which Matthew copies. Matthew then gives us the full Monty, explicitly pointing to Isaiah, and that the prophecy is partly fulfilled, and even following up with literally quoting Isaiah 6:10 in verse 15. Best of all, however, is Matthew fixing both Mark and Luke because they are suggesting that Jesus knowingly and willingly speaks in parables in order to have Isaiah's prophecy fulfilled, by using the word '(so) that'. Matthew notices it and is shrewd enough to turn that around, telling us that Jesus is speaking in parables precisely 'because' of the callous hearts that Isaiah prophesied - it is the Jews' unbelief that is causing him to do so. More surprisingly, Matthew adds verse 12 which is a literal copy of logion 41. And closes in verse 17 with an altered copy of logion 38a conflated with Jeremiah 5:21, befitting his context (both logia will be discussed later). Matthew oh Matthew, once again you perfect it all! Thomas, Mark, Luke, Matthew: the order is undeniably clear; one simple part of a logion gets once again turned and twisted in so many Church ways, exploited to serve so many Church goals - and once more we see its gradual process of growth. The first copier makes a mistake or two, the second fixes one of them, then the third comes in and fixes the last, using the now perfect version to slap on more than a few verses full of literal scripture reference A literal copy of logion 33b follows (logion 33a is used later): (33a) Jesus said, "Preach from your housetops that which you will hear in your ear. (33b) For no one lights a lamp and puts it under a bushel, nor does he put it in a hidden place, but rather he sets it on a lampstand so that everyone who enters and leaves will see its light." Martijn Linssen 18/01/2020 Page 39 The 72 logia of Thomas and their canonical cousins 2020 (Mark 4:21 He said to them, "Is the lamp brought to be put under a basket or under a bed? Isn't it put on a stand?) 8:16 "No one, when he has lit a lamp, covers it with a container, or puts it under a bed; but puts it on a stand, that those who enter in may see the light. (Matthew 5:15 Neither do you light a lamp and put it under a measuring basket, but on a stand; and it shines to all who are in the house.) Luke, as accustomed, reverts to the literal Thomas copy. He undoes the question introduced by Mark and adds the purpose almost literally: giving light to those who enter (and leave). Matthew redacts that last bit and also makes the action concise by naming only one place where not to put the light, copying Mark's 'basket' for that and changing it into a 'measuring basket'. Matthew also copies Luke's lighting of the lamp and beautifully rephrases its purpose into a harmless prop stage, and we've already seen Mark turn the hidden place into a bed in order to prevent the need for interpretation. Thomas, Mark, Luke, Matthew - the order is crystal-clear. Apparently triggered by these verses, the next verse cites logion 6c: (6a) His disciples questioned him and said to him, "Do you want us to fast? How shall we pray? Shall we give alms? What diet shall we observe?" (6b) Jesus said, "Do not tell lies, and do not do what you hate, for all things are plain in the sight of heaven. (6c) For nothing hidden will not become manifest, and nothing covered will remain without being uncovered." (Mark 4:22 For there is nothing hidden, except that it should be made known; neither was anything made secret, but that it should come to light.) 8:17 For nothing is hidden that will not be revealed; nor anything secret that will not be known and come to light. Martijn Linssen 18/01/2020 Page 40 The 72 logia of Thomas and their canonical cousins 2020 (Matthew 10:26 Therefore don't be afraid of them, for there is nothing covered that will not be revealed, or hidden that will not be known.) Mark avoids Thomas' '(become) manifest' and struggles, turning it into the tentative '(should be) made known' and he reuses the 'should be' in the second phrase - poor as usual, at the same time implying that secrets are 'made' with the sole purpose of them coming to light. The double negative of Luke's first phrase is, of course, originally Thomas - but he also repeats that in the second phrase and it becomes confusing with the 'will not' theoretically applying to the 'come to light' as well: "secret that will not come to light". Matthew fixes it elegantly and eloquently, and puts the second part of the sentence before the first one, which actually is better than Thomas, as hidden is a more advanced and elaborate state of something invisible than covered. And revealed, of course, is a much better Church word than the evident Thomas pointer of 'made manifest'. Luke adds 'will not be known' to Mark's 'come to light' and Matthew happily adopts the result, dropping the 'come to light' only good things come to light, of course. Thomas, Mark, Luke, Matthew - once more. Quite a bit of Mark is being undone by Luke as well as Matthew. Have you noticed? And the next one is a literal copy of logion 41 seen just prior in Matthew (logion 62): (41) Jesus said, "Whoever has something in his hand will receive more, and whoever has nothing will be deprived of even the little he has." (Mark 4:24 He said to them, "Take heed what you hear. With whatever measure you measure, it will be measured to you, and more will be given to you who hear. 25 For whoever has, to him more will be given, and he who doesn't have, even that which he has will be taken away from him.") 8:18 Be careful therefore how you hear. For whoever has, to him will be given; and whoever doesn't have, from him will be taken away even that which he thinks he has." 19:26 'For I tell you that to everyone who has, will more be given; but from him who doesn't have, even that which he has will be taken away from him. Martijn Linssen 18/01/2020 Page 41 The 72 logia of Thomas and their canonical cousins 2020 (Matthew 13:12 For whoever has, to him will be given, and he will have abundance; but whoever doesn't have, from him will be taken away even that which he has. (...) Matthew 25:29 For to everyone who has will be given, and he will have abundance, but from him who doesn't have, even that which he has will be taken away.) Luke for some reason adds the verb 'think' in his first attempt which (naturally) is rejected as it leaves room for interpretation. The 'more' in Mark is from Thomas and disappears in Luke's first attempt only to resurface in his second, yet Matthew turns it into 'abundance' and beautifully switches to 'but' as correct connective to show contrast. Given the minute differences and the duplicate use, the order is a challenge here, although just as in the other cases of copying there is a story which unfolds, so perhaps this is a good time to comment on the whole process again. As concise as Thomas is, Mark is first to copy and suffers the pioneer's fate, trying to change too much: the 'hand' (crucial in Thomas, apparently) disappears and the impersonal act of receiving is changed to giving so that God becomes the main character of this story, not 'whoever' (and likewise so with 'deprived' and 'taken away'. Mark also drops the opposing 'something' and 'nothing' as those also are too specific and might evoke questions (e.g. "something of what?") - but forgets to drop 'more' along with them. On his first attempt Luke fixes the 'more' as well as Mark's crooked sentence that got stuck in the process of swapping 'deprived' for 'taken away', ending up with a very nice juxtaposing of 'whoever has, to him' versus 'whoever doesn't have, from him'. He also adds the 'think' which no one likes, perhaps to compensate for removing the 'little' of Thomas. Matthew seems to do a literal copy of that in his first attempt, keeping everything of Luke but changing the conjunction to the correct 'but' and dropping 'thinks'. As perfect as that is, Matthew can't resist and has to overdo Luke by inserting the 'abundance' phrase. Is Luke inspired by Matthew on his second attempt? He copies Matthew's 'but' and moves the indirect object to the first phrase: 'will be given' now becomes a hollow phrase so he puts the 'more' back in. Matthew likes the new Luke a lot and does a perfect literal copy although he sticks to his own 'abundance'. The order is a puzzle as Luke and Matthew each have two versions of which the last ones are identical twins. The interaction between both gospel-writers is evident, but the exact order isn't. Mark being first with his very lengthy version is evident, Thomas could be first or last Martijn Linssen 18/01/2020 Page 42 The 72 logia of Thomas and their canonical cousins 2020 Logia 99a and 99b are the last to be found in chapter 8: (99a) The disciples said to him, "Your brothers and your mother are standing outside." (99b) He said to them, "Those here who do the will of my father are my brothers and my mother. (99c) It is they who will enter the kingdom of my father." (Mark 3:31 His mother and his brothers came, and standing outside, they sent to him, calling him. 32 A multitude was sitting around him, and they told him, "Behold, your mother, your brothers, and your sisters are outside looking for you." 33 He answered them, "Who are my mother and my brothers?" 34 Looking around at those who sat around him, he said, "Behold, my mother and my brothers! 35 For whoever does the will of God is my brother, my sister, and mother.") 8:19 His mother and brothers came to him, and they could not come near him for the crowd. 20 Some people told him, "Your mother and your brothers stand outside, desiring to see you." 21 But he answered them, "My mother and my brothers are these who hear the word of God, and do it." (Matthew 12:46 While he was yet speaking to the multitudes, behold, his mother and his brothers stood outside, seeking to speak to him. 47 One said to him, "Behold, your mother and your brothers stand outside, seeking to speak to you." 48 But he answered him who spoke to him, "Who is my mother? Who are my brothers?" 49 He stretched out his hand toward his disciples, and said, "Behold, my mother and my brothers! 50 For whoever does the will of my Father who is in heaven, he is my brother, and sister, and mother.") Where Mark deviously inserts a comma so he labels all around him as doing the will of God, implying that if you follow Jesus you do the will of God, Luke just sticks to Thomas yet doesn't explicitly refer to anyone present, leaving up to interpretation who he means by 'these'. Matthew prefers all of Mark and perfects it, adding flow and eloquence: the beautiful hand gesture and the 'will of my Father who is in heaven' instead of just 'God'. And explicitly points Martijn Linssen 18/01/2020 Page 43 The 72 logia of Thomas and their canonical cousins 2020 to the disciples alone, not the crowd or 'those around him' - another affirmation of the special status of his disciples. Mark suffers the pioneer's fate very well with his elaboration and explanation, sketching the scene perfectly with a crowd between Jesus and his relatives - before starting his verses, maybe that makes a difference. Either it's a complete coincidence that Matthew addresses his disciples, or the only likely inspiration for that is Thomas. Matthew may or may not have read Luke here (just as Luke may have read only Thomas, yet his 'desiring to see you' seems inspired by Mark's 'looking for you'), but he sure did read Mark, and not the other way around. Luke really entirely goes his own way every now and then. Thomas comes first and has his usual nuanced version, without making a case by implying that his followers do the will of God. And, as usual, is utterly concise The parts that Luke and Matthew play It must be clear by now what role Luke and Matthew play. Luke, by very often reverting to Thomas, seems to have to bend the Church Jesus into the direction of the Thomas supporters. Matthew undoes most of Mark and occasionally completely ignores Luke but creates the best of both worlds out of the two, while adding scripture reference or merely dark and doom whenever befits him. Matthew is the true master of words and "comes last" in the sense that part of his job was to perfect their Jesus story, both of which must be blatantly obvious by now. He usually follows Luke over Mark although he always adds a touch of Mark to his own; he's the final redactor of the two gospels and in fact the primary foundation of Jesus, on which firm and solid basis John can mystify away without worrying about a thing. Whether John was meant to be a part of the canonicals is an entirely different matter which won't be addressed in this paper. When it comes to doctrine, Luke once again is the good cop, sticking to either Mark or Thomas, although he always sticks to Thomas and only to Mark when Mark either followed Thomas to the very letter, or just made up something so that there is no Thomas at all to follow for Luke. And Matthew is the very bad cop, really, pointing his finger of repentance and impending doom whenever he can, throwing around implicit or explicit references to the Tanakh and Isaiah's prophecies on each and every occasion. In a sense, Luke and Matthew are the perfect good cop / bad cop combo against Mark: Luke is the good cop, showing a lot more Thomas leg than Mark, and Matthew is the bad cop Martijn Linssen 18/01/2020 Page 44 The 72 logia of Thomas and their canonical cousins 2020 sweeping that same evidence under the carpet again. Or is Matthew the good cop from the point of view of the Jews, so closely embedding Jesus in the prophecies and settings of the Tanakh and the Judaic wrath of God, and Luke the bad cop, putting more stress on the benign and new Jesus? It all depends on your point of view and one thing is obvious: Luke and Matthew together accommodate many viewpoints, and certainly throw a lot more Thomas and scripture at it all. It seems that word on the streets has it that Luke served "the Gentiles", basically everybody but the Jews, and that Matthew served the Jews. I think that Luke mostly wrote to appease the people who were familiar with and fond of Thomas, and that Matthew had to try hard to convert and convince the truly Judaic Jews that Jesus really was their true Messiah As someone who's fond of words, style and wordplay, I must admit I greatly admire Matthew's eloquence. Where Mark stutters and stammers and often ends up with poor sentences without properly connecting (in)dependent clauses, and where Luke pays more attention to the literal and exact wording or phrasing of Thomas than the natural flow of the resulting sentence(s), Matthew is a natural with words: he fluently flows through everything Mark and Luke with straight A's. I'm very much inclined to the idea that even before their parts were played, the order of these three gospels was already fixed in some minds: Luke was to be last so that the most pure Thomas stuff could still be found, safely stashed away in the back. The raw initial work of Mark was to come before that, also because it was the smallest story both in content but most importantly context with simply too many open endings - and beginnings - to the Messiah; and the magnificent prose of Matthew at the very front - naturally - so it gets the most and best attention. Back to the verses and logia: (Mark 6:7 He called to himself the twelve, and began to send them out two by two; and he gave them authority over the unclean spirits. 8 He commanded them that they should take nothing for their journey, except a staff only: no bread, no wallet, no money in their purse, 9 but to wear sandals, and not put on two tunics. 10 He said to them, "Wherever you enter into a house, stay there until you depart from there. 11 Whoever will not receive you nor hear you, as you depart from there, shake off the dust that is under your feet for a testimony against them. Assuredly, I tell you, it will be more tolerable for Sodom and Gomorrah in the day of Martijn Linssen 18/01/2020 Page 45 The 72 logia of Thomas and their canonical cousins 2020 judgment than for that city!" 12 They went out and preached that people should repent. 13 They cast out many demons, and anointed many with oil who were sick, and healed them.) 9:1 He called the twelve together, and gave them power and authority over all demons, and to cure diseases. 2 He sent them out to preach God's Kingdom and to heal the sick. 3 He said to them, "Take nothing for your journey-no staffs, nor wallet, nor bread, nor money. Don't have two coats each. 4 Into whatever house you enter, stay there, and depart from there. 5 As many as don't receive you, when you depart from that city, shake off even the dust from your feet for a testimony against them." 6 They departed and went throughout the villages, preaching the Good News and healing everywhere. (Matthew 10:1 He called to himself his twelve disciples, and gave them authority over unclean spirits, to cast them out, and to heal every disease and every sickness. 2 Now the names of the twelve apostles are these. The first, Simon, who is called Peter; Andrew, his brother; James the son of Zebedee; John, his brother; 3 Philip; Bartholomew; Thomas; Matthew the tax collector; James the son of Alphaeus; Lebbaeus, who was also called Thaddaeus; 4 Simon the Zealot; and Judas Iscariot, who also betrayed him. 5 Jesus sent these twelve out and commanded them, saying, "Don't go among the Gentiles, and don't enter into any city of the Samaritans. 6 Rather, go to the lost sheep of the house of Israel. 7 As you go, preach, saying, 'The Kingdom of Heaven is at hand!' 8 Heal the sick, cleanse the lepers, and cast out demons. Freely you received, so freely give. 9 Don't take any gold, silver, or brass in your money belts. 10 Take no bag for your journey, neither two coats, nor sandals, nor staff: for the laborer is worthy of his food. 11 Into whatever city or village you enter, find out who in it is worthy, and stay there until you go on. 12 As you enter into the household, greet it. 13 If the household is worthy, let your peace come on it, but if it isn't worthy, let your peace return to you. 14 Whoever doesn't receive you or hear your words, as you go out of that house or that city, shake the dust off your feet.) A commentary-free bucket (or rather, bath tub) of words from all three, for a change. Another self-invented Thomasine riddle, with the same looseness and boundary-free application by Matthew as seen before - although it's evidently a quite lengthy remake of logion 14b: Martijn Linssen 18/01/2020 Page 46 The 72 logia of Thomas and their canonical cousins 2020 (14b) When you go into any land and walk about in the districts, if they receive you, eat what they will set before you, and heal the sick among them. What do we recognise again? The fact that, in the absence of Thomas, Luke follows Mark almost to the letter (although he includes the staff among the excluded travel item, which gets Matthew's blessing). Matthew writes an entire paragraph, adding all the names of all the disciples, the exclusion of Gentiles and Samaritans along with the inclusion of Israelites (prophecy stuff, I think), the proclamation instruction, and so forth: the gospel's sandbox at work. Even for Matthew there is a lot of poetic freedom in this, and it strikes me as a significantly different approach from what we have seen so far. Although Luke has the story twice, namely also at the start of chapter 10 (the sending out of the seventy two), which bears similarities to some of Matthew but none of his 10:1-14 The epitome of Jesus Before we continue with the next logion I'm going to take the opportunity to pay proper attention to this very essence of Thomas. It's the revelation of Thomas' revelation for me and the reason why I started reading scripture after I became acquainted with the text of Thomas, trying to find out what happened to this Jesus - and eventually found that he had been almost completely eradicated, submerged in doctrine, subordinated to original sin. The Jesus of Thomas is just a man, with a thorough understanding of how things work - I even like to think that 'IC' simply stands for consciousness, Knowledge, and that Thomas displays him as human for convenience. What the disciple Thomas experiences in logion 13 is nothing magical but just a moment of enlightenment, revelation, that will come to pass in a matter of hours, days or weeks. The disciple Thomas is "alive", right here, only to return to "death" again - albeit slightly less dead and a bit more alive than before. He is momentarily one, and will return to being two, dualised again as usual. All of Thomas' teachings and instructions lead to this moment: the perceiving of the world as it is, the observing of that world so you recognise what is in your sight: dead people everywhere, corpses, people wearing other people's clothes: everyone acting in the Grand Play and reading from Script just playing their Roles, blissfully unaware of it all. This very Aha Erlebnis will pass, but nothing will be the same afterwards. Here is my interpretation of his words: Martijn Linssen 18/01/2020 Page 47 The 72 logia of Thomas and their canonical cousins 2020 (13a) Jesus said to his disciples, 'Compare me to someone and tell me whom I am like.' (exactly those words) (13b) Simon Peter said to him, 'You are like a righteous angel.' (exactly those words). Just a flattering projection from Simon, in line with (his) mental models of Judaism or any other religion that employs angels? (13c) Matthew said to him, 'You are like a wise philosopher.' (exactly those words). A more sincere projection from Matthew, in line with (his) mental models like Greek or Roman literature? (13d) Thomas said to him, 'Master, my mouth is wholly incapable of saying whom you are like.' (exactly those words). Thomas is utterly confused here - words fall short of everything he feels, thinks, experiences - a moment of full awareness (13e) Jesus said, 'I am not your master. (exactly those words). Jesus solidly rejects the role of teacher and guru - at least directly to Thomas. And no, he doesn't mean that he's his servant either. Thomas understands and experiences what Jesus has been trying to convey all along and so now they are equals (13f) Because you have drunk, you have become intoxicated from the bubbling spring which I have measured out.' Because you've listened - and understood! - you now are utterly confused, confounded by this new view on life (13g) And he took him and withdrew and told him three things. (exactly those words). Probably "I am you" or "You are me" or something like that, or maybe Jesus told Thomas "You are God" (which would make perfect sense, as we all are God) (13h) When Thomas returned to his companions, they asked him, 'What did Jesus say to you?' (exactly those words) (13i) Thomas said to them, 'If I tell you one of the things which he told me, you will pick up stones and throw them at me; a fire will come out of the stones and burn you up.' (exactly those words). The stoning would be because of blasphemy, a proper Jewish habit back then. How would fire come out of the stones? Stoning would spiritually and emotionally backfire, as it would be fuelled by fear and hate. And fear and hate always consume and hurt their bearer far more than who or what they are directed at Martijn Linssen 18/01/2020 Page 48 The 72 logia of Thomas and their canonical cousins 2020 How did the disciple Thomas get to this very moment? By continuously seeking almost every minute of the day. And seeking, he has found: that there is nothing to seek; it is what it is and it's already complete and perfect - perfectly balanced. Everything around you is made up of one or more creations of others, figments of their imagination, mental models - and all of yours are copies of other people's, mixed a bit to your own individual liking, "choice". Everything you perceive, all your perceptions: none of them is original, none of them is really yours - it is all hearsay, mental models, mutual agreements - that are called "truths". It is the sum total of the world Thomas writes about, and the disciple Thomas perceives that at this very moment - his seeking has come to an end. Why do we seek? Because of the separation that occurs to us all. We are all one and as one we come into this world, but at a very young age we identify ourselves and then there's a feeling of disconnect; suddenly we are an individual, separated from the rest. Is it because our Mom or Dad points at us and says "Jack" or "Jill" or any other name that we were given? And then points at her- or himself and says "Dad" or "Mom"? Or is that just a major event in the beginning of the inevitable process of separation? Which reaches its climax when we ourselves utter our very first "Mom" or "Dad"? The child feels as if it is something separate, the centre of its own universe: a sense of "self" arises, "me" versus "you" - and that feels like a great loss. And from that very moment on the search for that which is lost starts: seeking has begun - the seeking for the oneness that once was. Why has it been lost? We don't know but we blame ourselves for that, because our self is the first entity we encounter when we come into being, when we identify ourselves. And blaming ourselves, we find - or rather, create - a reason: we caused the separation because we're not enough [...fill in the blanks...]. Fill in the blanks, take your pick: not loved enough, not appreciated enough, not valued enough, not powerful enough, not strong enough, not pretty enough, not skinny enough, not fat enough - the list is endless and every person picks a different item from it. A few items sometimes, but one or two of those make it to the top of the list. It is completely irrelevant which item you choose, but from that moment on your journey will consist entirely of overcompensation. If one feels not loved enough, he will make sure that the evidence of being loved will pile up in front of his door, that his or her Instagram account will be liked and loved by multitudes, surround him- or herself with animate or inanimate objects that are proof of being loved: cats, children, statues of fairies or garden gnomes - anything will Martijn Linssen 18/01/2020 Page 49 The 72 logia of Thomas and their canonical cousins 2020 do. Not powerful enough? Hard work will be put into creating a territory, extending it into something bigger, a domain, and maybe it will become a kingdom, a small empire even perhaps that takes the form of a company, but just being very influential in your own hometown can do the trick as well. Not valued enough? Diplomas will be collected, medals, achievements, and they will not be put away in the attic but hung in plain sight for everyone to see. Most of what we do on our journey is act to feel better about ourselves. The individual seeker is convinced that we have the choice and the ability to act; that out of the action comes consequence, and that things happen as a result of that individual’s choice to act - everything that happens, we take personally: as not enough [...] as we feel, we oddly think that we're driving most if not everything in this world, our world. Superstition and jinxing are fine examples of that, but the most apparent sign is guilt - or rather, Guilt. The concept of original sin perfectly fits that picture. It reaffirms our thinking that we caused that feeling of great loss, it reaffirms that we are the cause of it, it reaffirms that we have to make amends in order to become whole again, one - but it is just as false as everything else that we invent to clarify our existence, our purpose, our goal. So why does Thomas stress the fact that we have to seek, if there's nothing to be found? We have to seek in order to find out that there's nothing to be found, nothing to heal, nothing to fix. We already (should!) know that no matter the quantity and quality of overcompensation we apply to our lives, we never feel whole enough, we never feel like an end has come to our efforts and that we have achieved our goal, The Goal. Some of us persist and simply can't stop increasing their efforts, extending their domain: workaholics, drug overdose and alcoholics are clearly visible examples of that, yet it is not like we do only bad on our journey of overcompensation - some of us move mountains and sadly that reaffirms us in the assumption that we're doing the right thing. Some of the most successful people in the world are driven by a deepest feeling of [...fill in the blanks...]. Find the world, your perception of your world, observe your life for what it is: an endless journey of overcompensating for something that never occurred, never has been real - it's a dead thing, a corpse; your mission is destined to fail. You are trying to prove yourself "not guilty" of a crime that never was committed. Fast as regards the world, abstain from it, renounce that world, stop what you're doing - and you'll find yourself, become superior to that world. By casting fire on that world, continuously Martijn Linssen 18/01/2020 Page 50 The 72 logia of Thomas and their canonical cousins 2020 critically viewing it, you'll recognise what is in your sight, and what is hidden will become plain to you. Recognise that you've come into being, have become two: separated from the one that you were. You've started to wear different clothes on every occasion and made yourself one favourite set of clothes that you wear day in, day out. Cast off those clothes, trample them underfoot like the little child you once were, non-dual, one, whole. Have the two make peace in this one house, be solitary and elect, for you are from the kingdom of light. Cast your net into the sea and you'll drag it up full of small fish; you might find the large fish but you won't be able to pick it unless you first throw back all the small fish - there's only one way how that can be the case. That's it, that's the message - and in this very logion Thomas really gets it: he becomes troubled, he is astonished, and rules over the All: in this very moment. Alright. The comparison then, logion 13: (13a) Jesus said to his disciples, "Compare me to someone and tell me whom I am like." (13b) Simon Peter said to him, "You are like a righteous angel." (13c) Matthew said to him, "You are like a wise philosopher." (13d) Thomas said to him, "Master, my mouth is wholly incapable of saying whom you are like." (13e) Jesus said, "I am not your master. (13f) Because you have drunk, you have become intoxicated from the bubbling spring which I have measured out." (13g) And he took him and withdrew and told him three things. (13h) When Thomas returned to his companions, they asked him, "What did Jesus say to you?" (13i) Thomas said to them, "If I tell you one of the things which he told me, you will pick up stones and throw them at me; a fire will come out of the stones and burn you up." (Mark 8:27 Jesus went out, with his disciples, into the villages of Caesarea Philippi. On the way he asked his disciples, "Who do men say that I am?" 28 They told him, "John the Baptizer, and others say Elijah, but others, one of the prophets." 29 He said to them, "But who do you say that I am?" Peter answered, "You are the Christ.") Martijn Linssen 18/01/2020 Page 51 The 72 logia of Thomas and their canonical cousins 2020 9:18 As he was praying alone, the disciples were with him, and he asked them, "Who do the multitudes say that I am?" 19 They answered, "'John the Baptizer,' but others say, 'Elijah,' and others, that one of the old prophets has risen again." 20 He said to them, "But who do you say that I am?" Peter answered, "The Christ of God." (Matthew 16:13 Now when Jesus came into the parts of Caesarea Philippi, he asked his disciples, saying, "Who do men say that I, the Son of Man, am?" 14 They said, "Some say John the Baptizer, some, Elijah, and others, Jeremiah or one of the prophets." 15 He said to them, "But who do you say that I am?" 16 Simon Peter answered, "You are the Christ, the Son of the living God." 17 Jesus answered him, "Blessed are you, Simon Bar Jonah, for flesh and blood has not revealed this to you, but my Father who is in heaven. 18 I also tell you that you are Peter, and on this rock I will build my assembly, and the gates of Hades will not prevail against it. 19 I will give to you the keys of the Kingdom of Heaven, and whatever you bind on earth will have been bound in heaven; and whatever you release on earth will have been released in heaven.") All three make the responses and respondents anonymous save for Simon Peter, putting all the spotlights on him - while neatly name-dropping John the Baptist next to Elijah as part of Project Elijah, not to forget. Luke sticks entirely to Mark - although his 'one of the prophets of old has risen' deserves an extra point there - and again Matthew blows it all completely out of proportions. 'Who do men say that I, the Son of Man, am?' That is more than a rhetorical question; it is a brazen one. Yet the answer - not only the son of God, but of the living God - is a great find and very Thomasine. Matthew cements the future here by explicitly pointing to Peter as his follow-up, and directing all the attention to him instead of Jesus. He couldn't have overdone the theatrical drama any more: 'you are Peter, and on this rock I will build my church'. It is obvious that Matthew's gospel comes last (John is a mere mystic poet and borders on the same level of riddles as Thomas) and that he must grasp every opportunity to transgress from a Messiah to the establishment of an Institute: the Church's true primary goal of power and control is made manifest here. What happens right here is the Passing of the Deed; Peter is named and made sole heir of Jesus' legacy and all that the Church has to do from this point on is simply point (yes) to this text. Mark forgot about that, Luke doesn't (have the luxury to) care Martijn Linssen 18/01/2020 Page 52 The 72 logia of Thomas and their canonical cousins 2020 about it, but by the time that Matthew wrote his gospel, this part of the process also had to be addressed, and "fixed". Two verses, 64 words; kicking off over one and a half millennia of supreme reign and world power - who would have thought or even dared to imagine that it would really work out the way it has? How unbelievable and implausible is it that Peter gives these three vastly different answers to this most burning question by Jesus? And why is it no surprise at all that Matthew of all people dives so very deep into the gospel sandbox right here? What are the odds now, really, of Thomas taking all this religious-political prophecy-pushing manipulation and turning it into his magical logion 13? Thomas, Mark, Luke, Matthew - most undeniably so. Logion 55b, taking up the cross, is combined with logion 1: (55a) Jesus said, "Whoever does not hate his father and his mother cannot become a disciple to me. (55b) And whoever does not hate his brothers and sisters and take up his cross in my way will not be worthy of me." (1) And he said, "Whoever finds the interpretation of these sayings will not experience death." (Mark 8:34 He called the multitude to himself with his disciples, and said to them, "Whoever wants to come after me, let him deny himself, and take up his cross, and follow me. 35 For whoever wants to save his life will lose it; and whoever will lose his life for my sake and the sake of the Good News will save it. 36 For what does it profit a man, to gain the whole world, and forfeit his life? 37 For what will a man give in exchange for his life? 38 For whoever will be ashamed of me and of my words in this adulterous and sinful generation, the Son of Man also will be ashamed of him, when he comes in his Father's glory, with the holy angels.") (...) 9:1 He said to them, "Most certainly I tell you, there are some standing here who will in no way taste death until they see God's Kingdom come with power.") Martijn Linssen 18/01/2020 Page 53 The 72 logia of Thomas and their canonical cousins 2020 9:23 He said to all, "If anyone desires to come after me, let him deny himself, take up his cross, and follow me. 24 For whoever desires to save his life will lose it, but whoever will lose his life for my sake, will save it. 25 For what does it profit a man if he gains the whole world, and loses or forfeits his own self? 26 For whoever will be ashamed of me and of my words, of him will the Son of Man be ashamed, when he comes in his glory, and the glory of the Father, and of the holy angels. 27 But I tell you the truth: There are some of those who stand here who will in no way taste of death until they see God's Kingdom." (Matthew 16:24 Then Jesus said to his disciples, "If anyone desires to come after me, let him deny himself, take up his cross, and follow me. 25 For whoever desires to save his life will lose it, and whoever will lose his life for my sake will find it. 26 For what will it profit a man if he gains the whole world and forfeits his life? Or what will a man give in exchange for his life? 27 For the Son of Man will come in the glory of his Father with his angels, and then he will render to everyone according to his deeds. 28 Most certainly I tell you, there are some standing here who will in no way taste of death until they see the Son of Man coming in his Kingdom.") Emphasis on the differences; the hate towards brother and sister is turned into 'deny himself' by all three. Luke does a literal copy of Mark but drops Mark's reference to the gospel, as does Matthew I'm saving a comment on that for the next paragraph. Luke turns 'to gain' into 'if he gains' and changes 'forfeit his life' to 'loses and forfeits his own self' - Matthew keeps the first, rejects the second. Luke drops the question about what to exchange for a life but Matthew puts it back in. And of course Matthew adds the reference to the judgment that awaits. All keep the reference to logion 1 as well with 'taste death' but it changes significantly: Mark's 'God's Kingdom come with power' simply becomes 'God's Kingdom' in Luke, yet Matthew turns it all into 'Son of Man coming in his kingdom'. Matthew seems to stick to Mark here over Luke, Luke being in between can be argued by him introducing 'desires', 'if he gains', 'taste of death' and Matthew keeping those - thin threads indeed, but all three are astonishingly close to each other. Could Luke come after Matthew? No, Luke keeps the 'ashamed' verse of Mark which Matthew hasn't copied. Martijn Linssen 18/01/2020 Page 54 The 72 logia of Thomas and their canonical cousins 2020 What is very significant however is Mark's use of the word gospel in his 8:35; Mark mentions the word eight times, Luke only twice, and Matthew uses it four times - but suffixes it three times with 'of the kingdom'. Where Mark is aiming at writing a gospel as a weapon against Thomas, Luke has dropped the entire notion of one: his first use of 'gospel' is the disciples preaching it after they've been endowed by Jesus with the gift to heal and cure, and Jesus uses it just before he's challenged on his authority - perhaps a mistake. Matthew's only use is when a woman has put ointment on his head, and that gospel is likely referring to Jesus' incarnation. Mark's ambition was to invent a gospel - that goal has been greatly surpassed by now. This same logion 55 (fairly identical to logion 101) is used only by Luke and Matthew in full, or should I say, brief: (55a) Jesus said, "Whoever does not hate his father and his mother cannot become a disciple to me. (55b) And whoever does not hate his brothers and sisters and take up his cross in my way will not be worthy of me." 14:26 "If anyone comes to me, and doesn't disregard his own father, mother, wife, children, brothers, and sisters, yes, and his own life also, he can't be my disciple. 27 Whoever doesn't bear his own cross, and come after me, can't be my disciple. (Matthew 10:37 He who loves father or mother more than me is not worthy of me; and he who loves son or daughter more than me isn't worthy of me. 38 He who doesn't take his cross and follow after me isn't worthy of me.) Luke picks the short straw again and copies the literal Thomas logion, and again his fantasy runs a bit wild, probably also inspired by his earlier copy in 9:23. Trying to end with a short verse that puts emphasis on only 'cross' and 'disciple', he combines all relatives into the first verse yet also adds 'wife and children', perhaps as a warm gesture of inclusion to all. I really like his 'bear' as it emphasises the hardship of following the Church's Christ, and the 'even his own life' point to his earlier copy. It is interesting to see how Luke added 'own' to 'his own father' (and pretty much everything else) - did he understand what Thomas really meant here? Yet again Matthew ditches it all... Martijn Linssen 18/01/2020 Page 55 The 72 logia of Thomas and their canonical cousins 2020 and comes up with a very nice and concise version, once again profiting from the struggles of his predecessor. Comparing Matthew to Thomas, Luke might as well not have done anything in between if it weren't for inspiring Matthew to 'son or daughter' and the structure of his verses, reordering Thomas. Matthew deserves praise for avoiding the word 'hate' and changing that into 'not love (more than me)', surprisingly positive. Last but not least, it is evident that 'my disciple' must be swapped for 'worthy'; Luke likely got lost during the splitting and recombining of Thomas into his, ended up with the choice between 'disciple' and 'not worthy' and picked the wrong word - twice. There are only twelve disciples in this story Luke, get with the program! Logion 86: Matthew literally follows Luke, although changing 'God's Kingdom' for 'Follow me' is strong, concise, and in line with the change from God's Kingdom to Matthew's "Jesus is All"approach. However, it is very surprising that Matthew has one of the disciples object, expressing the wish to bury his father: (86) Jesus said, "The foxes have their holes and the birds have their nests, but the son of man has no place to lay his head and rest." 9:58 Jesus said to him, "The foxes have holes, and the birds of the sky have nests, but the Son of Man has no place to lay his head." 59 He said to another, "Follow me!" But he said, "Lord, allow me first to go and bury my father." 60 But Jesus said to him, "Leave the dead to bury their own dead, but you go and announce God's Kingdom." (Matthew 8:20 Jesus said to him, "The foxes have holes and the birds of the sky have nests, but the Son of Man has nowhere to lay his head." 21 Another of his disciples said to him, "Lord, allow me first to go and bury my father." 22 But Jesus said to him, "Follow me, and leave the dead to bury their own dead.") The disciple does raise questions: that which leads Jesus to his answer in 8:20 is a question by a scribe - and then Matthew follows up with 'Another (of his disciples)' speaking to him? Is he suggesting that the scribe is one of his disciples? An oddity, I presume. Martijn Linssen 18/01/2020 Page 56 The 72 logia of Thomas and their canonical cousins 2020 With regards to the order: it is unclear why the gospel-writers left out 'and rest', perhaps the Messiah wasn't supposed to rest? Or did they want to stress the idea that he didn't belong? The order could be anything, Thomas could even be last That concludes chapters 8 and 9, and I count 10 logia in them (logion 14 has been discussed in chapter 5), totalling 23 now. Chapter 10 starts off with a garbled and elaborate copy of the very start of chapter 9; sending out 72 men to heal and cure, prefaced by logion 73a - the same logion which in Matthew prefaces the version that he and Luke had prior. That logion is a literal copy of Thomas although, of course, the Lord has been replaced by the Lord of the harvest: (73a) Jesus said, "The harvest is great but the laborers are few. (73b) Beseech the Lord, therefore, to send out laborers to the harvest." 10:2 Then he said to them, "The harvest is indeed plentiful, but the laborers are few. Pray therefore to the Lord of the harvest, that he may send out laborers into his harvest. (Matthew 9:37 Then he said to his disciples, "The harvest indeed is plentiful, but the laborers are few. 38 Pray therefore that the Lord of the harvest will send out laborers into his harvest.") The differences between Thomas and the gospel-writers are subtle but telling: Jesus doesn't worship his Lord, nor is he meek towards him. He uses 'beseech', not 'pray'. Luke even adds 'may' which Matthew changes to 'will', but Thomas just beseeches his Lord to send, simple as that. His harvest? No, the harvest. And the harvest is just 'great', a fair antonym for 'few', not 'indeed plentiful'. In theory Thomas could have taken these and turned them into his logion, stripping it of all religious attributes - but it's also telling that Luke uses this immediately preceding his sending out of the 72, whereas Matthew uses it when Jesus observes the multitudes that are awaiting his healing When sending out the 72, Luke naturally reuses logion 14b. It comprises 10 verses but I'll only show the three that apply: Martijn Linssen 18/01/2020 Page 57 The 72 logia of Thomas and their canonical cousins 2020 (14b) When you go into any land and walk about in the districts, if they receive you, eat what they will set before you, and heal the sick among them. 10:7 Remain in that same house, eating and drinking the things they give, for the laborer is worthy of his wages. Don't go from house to house. 8 Into whatever city you enter, and they receive you, eat the things that are set before you. 9 Heal the sick who are there, and tell them, 'God's Kingdom has come near to you.' What is odd here is that not only Luke is the only one with this strange event, but that it shows great similarities with Matthew's version of the original event in his chapter 10 - save for logion 14b, of course. And Luke's version right here shows a lot more similarity with logion 14b than his other. That return of the seventy-two is immediately followed by logion 38a, which in Matthew prefaces the sower parable. Luke uses it twice: (38a) Jesus said, "Many times have you desired to hear these words which I am saying to you, and you have no one else to hear them from. (38b) There will be days when you will look for me and will not find me." 10:23 Turning to the disciples, he said privately, "Blessed are the eyes which see the things that you see, 24 for I tell you that many prophets and kings desired to see the things which you see, and didn't see them, and to hear the things which you hear, and didn't hear them." 17:22 He said to the disciples, "The days will come when you will desire to see one of the days of the Son of Man, and you will not see it. (Matthew 13:16 "But blessed are your eyes, for they see; and your ears, for they hear. 17 For most certainly I tell you that many prophets and righteous men desired to see the things which you see, and didn't see them; and to hear the things which you hear, and didn't hear them.) Luke as well as Matthew uses the occasion to elevate the disciples once more yet Matthew expressly directs the verse at them by changing Luke's impersonal 'the' to 'your', and doubles up with 'ears' and 'hear' which matches the logion. Of course that result is inspired by Martijn Linssen 18/01/2020 Page 58 The 72 logia of Thomas and their canonical cousins 2020 scripture, Isaiah 6:9-10 mentioned earlier. Matthew also changes 'kings' to 'righteous men'. Luke has a second attempt in his chapter 17 where he reverts to a literal copy of 38b but stands alone in doing so. Love thy neighbour is the last of this chapter. We've seen it in Mark earlier: (25) Jesus said, "Love your brother like your soul, guard him like the pupil of your eye." (Mark 12:28 One of the scribes came, and heard them questioning together, and knowing that he had answered them well, asked him, "Which commandment is the greatest of all?" 29 Jesus answered, "The greatest is, 'Hear, Israel, the Lord our God, the Lord is one: 30 you shall love the Lord your God with all your heart, and with all your soul, and with all your mind, and with all your strength.' This is the first commandment. 31 The second is like this, 'You shall love your neighbor as yourself.' There is no other commandment greater than these.") 10:25 Behold, a certain lawyer stood up and tested him, saying, "Teacher, what shall I do to inherit eternal life?" 26 He said to him, "What is written in the law? How do you read it?" 27 He answered, "You shall love the Lord your God with all your heart, with all your soul, with all your strength, and with all your mind; and your neighbor as yourself." 28 He said to him, "You have answered correctly. Do this, and you will live." 29 But he, desiring to justify himself, asked Jesus, "Who is my neighbor?" (Matthew 22:35 One of them, a lawyer, asked him a question, testing him. 36 "Teacher, which is the greatest commandment in the law?" 37 Jesus said to him, "'You shall love the Lord your God with all your heart, with all your soul, and with all your mind.' 38 This is the first and great commandment. 39 A second likewise is this, 'You shall love your neighbor as yourself.' 40 The whole law and the prophets depend on these two commandments.") The very first 'love thy neighbour' is from Leviticus 19:18, so it's quite impossible to claim that only or mostly Thomas inspired Mark here. The second part of logion 25 refers to Deuteronomy 32:10: (Leviticus 19:18 "'You shall not take vengeance, nor bear any grudge against the children of your people; but you shall love your neighbor as yourself. I am Yahweh.) Martijn Linssen 18/01/2020 Page 59 The 72 logia of Thomas and their canonical cousins 2020 (Deuteronomy 32:10 He found him in a desert land, in the waste howling wilderness. He surrounded him. He cared for him. He kept him as the apple of his eye.) Emphasis on the parts that will be commented on. Mark started singling out two of the ten commandments, and only these particular two - what an odd coincidence that is. Mark makes the mistake of explicitly labelling the two as 'the first' and 'the second' commandment, but Luke evades Mark's obvious and painful first and second nomination and just puts them together in one sentence as an answer to his question about the law - that's a great find. Matthew has the finishing touch, introducing the neighbourly love as a command that is 'likewise', at the same time so very carefully wording the first command as 'the greatest' command, and the second as 'a second' command. Both drop Mark's insertion of Deuteronomy 6:4 in his 12:29 preceding the first commandment. Did Matthew purposely ignore Luke? I think Luke's find is by far the best; although he avoids the words 'commandment' he also does avoid the words 'first' and 'second'. I can understand that Mark and Matthew, unlike Luke, do want to stress that they are commandments, and that they must state that the first is the first - but it makes it conspicuous that only these two commandments are singled out. Luke can be linked to Mark as he also uses 'strength' (and reverses the order of that and 'mind') which Matthew decides to drop. Once more we see the story unfold: a simple logion from Thomas leads to an elaborate and complex scene as the first gospel-writer incorporates it while adding (too) much detail. Then the second gospel-writer comes along and fixes most if not all mistakes. The third or last gospel-writer applies the finishing touch. I do realise that my now so oft repeated explanation on the unfolding of this story always involves the same persons in the same order, so it's not much of a generally applied pattern, is it? I could leave out some detail and state that the first copier usually introduces too much detail next to some things left to be desired, and that the last gospel-writer fixes these: that has been proven in chapters 6 and 7, where 8 out of the 9 logia were new and thus started by Luke, not Mark. The order is partially clear, and Thomas being first is visible once more through the sandbox: scribes or lawyers ask a question about the greatest commandment or how to inherit eternal life. Jesus answers or the man posing the question does. The first commandment shows minor Martijn Linssen 18/01/2020 Page 60 The 72 logia of Thomas and their canonical cousins 2020 differences every time and Mark precedes it with scripture. The introduction to the second commandment is fairly different or even absent. Then the "second commandment" is identical in all three versions ('You shall love [...] your neighbor as yourself.'), and whatever comes after is, yet again, fairly to completely different. The gospel sandbox: whatever is shared and perfectly identical comes from Thomas. If it is different, it is directly related but not from Thomas or purposely rewording Thomas. If wildly different, it is indirectly related and serving general Church purpose, usually scripture or doom and gloom. Three additional logia make 26; the next two chapters will add more than half to that total score Luke chapters 11 and 12: the bulk of logia Chapter 11 kicks off with a prayer, the next ritual a religion needs: Our Father. Matthew has that in chapter 6, and as usual it is slightly longer and more eloquent than Luke. Logion 92a and 94 follow, both identical to the letter between Luke and Matthew, and logion 92b undoubtedly inspired them for the mixed up implementation of the asking: (92a) Jesus said, "Seek and you will find. (92b) Yet, what you asked me about in former times and which I did not tell you then, now I do desire to tell, but you do not inquire after it." (94) Jesus said, "He who seeks will find, and he who knocks will be let in." 11:9 "I tell you, keep asking, and it will be given you. Keep seeking, and you will find. Keep knocking, and it will be opened to you. 10 For everyone who asks receives. He who seeks finds. To him who knocks it will be opened. (Matthew 7:7 "Ask, and it will be given you. Seek, and you will find. Knock, and it will be opened for you. 8 For everyone who asks receives. He who seeks finds. To him who knocks it will be opened.) Martijn Linssen 18/01/2020 Page 61 The 72 logia of Thomas and their canonical cousins 2020 Matthew stays surprisingly close to Luke and literally copies his very first find. The fine difference between Thomas and the gospel-writers is being let in versus being opened to - the threshold is present in the Church version. The order could be anything, really Logion 35 follows, and this time it's so garbled in Luke that Matthew reverts straight to the original - that's a first, Luke doing a Markan! The issue there probably lies in the fact that logion 35 is to be found in logion 21 as well, namely in e, f and g: the arming of the house owner is in 21f. Luke seems to combine both, tries to say an awful lot with very little words, and ends up with confusion and almost nothing that can be related to logion 35: (35) Jesus said, "It is not possible for anyone to enter the house of a strong man and take it by force unless he binds his hands; then he will (be able to) ransack his house." (21e) Therefore I say, if the owner of a house knows that the thief is coming, he will begin his vigil before he comes and will not let him dig through into his house of his domain to carry away his goods. (21f) You, then, be on your guard against the world. (21g) Arm yourselves with great strength lest the robbers find a way to come to you, for the difficulty which you expect will (surely) materialize. (Mark 3:27 But no one can enter into the house of the strong man to plunder unless he first binds the strong man; then he will plunder his house.) 11:21 "When the strong man, fully armed, guards his own dwelling, his goods are safe. 22 But when someone stronger attacks him and overcomes him, he takes from him his whole armor in which he trusted, and divides his plunder. (Matthew 12:29 Or how can one enter into the house of the strong man and plunder his goods, unless he first bind the strong man? Then he will plunder his house.) The emphasis is on Luke's words that I couldn't possibly locate elsewhere - that puzzle will remain. As commented on in Mark the binding of the hands seems significant in Thomas yet both leave it out because binding Satan merely by his hands isn't a strong enough image to fit their Martijn Linssen 18/01/2020 Page 62 The 72 logia of Thomas and their canonical cousins 2020 context; they miss the point of Thomas whose goal is to plunder the house whereas theirs is to conquer the man (Satan). Thomas points to the weak point of the strong man that is guarding the house: his hands are all that need to be bound, and with relatively little effort you can achieve a task that seems impossible: take the house of a strong man by force. This is not the only time that the gospel-writers miss a crucial point of Thomas in their zeal to possess his content and turn it into theirs, and it most certainly won't be the last. The order is dubious although Thomas evidently comes first. Luke could be anywhere and Mark and Matthew are so very close to each other that the both of them could be anywhere too, in any order. Luke stands alone in completing a logion previously touched by Mark but will save 79c for the final chapters, like Mark and Matthew do: (79a) A woman from the crowd said to him, "Blessed are the womb which bore you and the breasts which nourished you." (79b) He said to her, "Blessed are those who have heard the word of the father and have truly kept it. (79c) For there will be days when you will say, 'Blessed are the womb which has not conceived and the breasts which have not given milk.'" 11:27 It came to pass, as he said these things, a certain woman out of the multitude lifted up her voice, and said to him, "Blessed is the womb that bore you, and the breasts which nursed you!" 28 But he said, "On the contrary, blessed are those who hear the word of God, and keep it." It doesn't get more literal than that really - 'father' becomes 'God', of course. The order could be anything given the close resemblance, although this is the only scene in Thomas where he's in front of a crowd and Luke gratefully duplicates the occasion; for once the gospel-writers don't create their own scenery and context. Would it make sense for the gospel-writers to copy the past tense of 'keep'? Most certainly not, you have to work for the Church without pause. Would it make sense for Thomas to take 'keep' and turn it into 'have kept'? If only we were to know his exact meaning - I could give my interpretation but it would miraculously fit, of course: one doesn't come up with theories that don't fit the issue or challenge at hand. Martijn Linssen 18/01/2020 Page 63 The 72 logia of Thomas and their canonical cousins 2020 So instead, it's easier to point to the fact that this logion was available in its completeness but got split up by the gospel-writers; they can handle and use 79a and 79b together, but 79c is out of their league - which they'll prove by inverting it when they use it. Thomas first, then Luke - even if there are doubts at this point they'll disappear when 79c is encountered Luke introduces yet another new logion, 24c and 24d, but needs to repeat the previously mentioned logion 33b in 8:16 in order to get going. Matthew doesn't, making it nicely concise by removing the careful (over)explaining of Luke: (24a) His disciples said to him, "Show us the place where you are, since it is necessary for us to seek it." (24b) He said to them, "Whoever has ears, let him hear. (24c) There is light within a man of light, and he lights up the whole world. (24d) If he does not shine, he is darkness." 11:33 "No one, when he has lit a lamp, puts it in a cellar or under a basket, but on a stand, that those who come in may see the light. 34 The lamp of the body is the eye. Therefore when your eye is good, your whole body is also full of light; but when it is evil, your body also is full of darkness. 35 Therefore see whether the light that is in you isn't darkness. 36 If therefore your whole body is full of light, having no part dark, it will be wholly full of light, as when the lamp with its bright shining gives you light." (Matthew 6:22 "The lamp of the body is the eye. If therefore your eye is sound, your whole body will be full of light. 23 But if your eye is evil, your whole body will be full of darkness. If therefore the light that is in you is darkness, how great is the darkness! ) Matthew makes proper use of the future tense here, which Luke does only in his last verse. Following his agenda of stressing doom and gloom, Matthew has no need for Luke's joyful 11:36 focusing entirely on a body full of light, even repeating that while turning it into an allegory. Matthew is perfectly content leaving that out and ending with 'darkness', his favourite theme and mood set. Martijn Linssen 18/01/2020 Page 64 The 72 logia of Thomas and their canonical cousins 2020 Undeniably, Matthew comes after Luke here - unless Luke specifically chose to ignore Matthew completely and spread his happy message nonetheless, which actually could be fairly plausible given the peculiarities and exceptions we've seen in his prose. Matthew follows a pioneer's copy almost to the letter however and this is not the first time, although Matthew does ignore the parts of Luke that follow Thomas by putting the emphasis on the light and not the dark. It is out of the question that Thomas is first: 24 perfectly fits his logion 50, his theory of origin ('[...] We came from the light [...]') Logion 89 is next, another logion that's a bit of a riddle. Both Luke and Matthew take the opportunity to combine the Pharisee bashing of logion 39 with logion 89 in one chapter: (89) Jesus said, "Why do you wash the outside of the cup? Do you not realize that he who made the inside is the same one who made the outside?" (39a) Jesus said, "The pharisees and the scribes have taken the keys of knowledge (gnosis) and hidden them. (39b) They themselves have not entered, nor have they allowed to enter those who wish to. (39c) You, however, be as wise as serpents and as innocent as doves." 11:39 The Lord said to him, "Now you Pharisees cleanse the outside of the cup and of the platter, but your inward part is full of extortion and wickedness. 40 You foolish ones, didn't he who made the outside make the inside also? 41 But give for gifts to the needy those things which are within, and behold, all things will be clean to you. (...) 52 Woe to you lawyers! For you took away the key of knowledge. You didn't enter in yourselves, and those who were entering in, you hindered." (Matthew 23:14 "But woe to you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! Because you shut up the Kingdom of Heaven against men; for you don't enter in yourselves, neither do you allow those who are entering in to enter. (...) Martijn Linssen 18/01/2020 Page 65 The 72 logia of Thomas and their canonical cousins 2020 25 "Woe to you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! For you clean the outside of the cup and of the platter, but within they are full of extortion and unrighteousness. 26 You blind Pharisee, first clean the inside of the cup and of the platter, that its outside may become clean also.) Emphasis on the parts that are shared yet different. Matthew's Pharisee bashing takes up his entire chapter 23 - that on a side-note. Luke does a literal Thomas, copying the creator of the cup in verse 40, which Matthew - again - drops while adopting the 'full of extortion'. Luke addresses lawyers but literally copies Thomas with '(took away) the key of knowledge' albeit with the unfortunate singular form of 'key'; Matthew sticks to Thomas and addresses Pharisees and scribes, adding drama by using the beautiful '(shut up) the Kingdom of Heaven'. While so doing Matthew also avoids uncomfortable questions about those same keys of knowledge (well then what and where are those keys?). Matthew perfectly fixes Luke's indecisive 'hindered' (was the act of hindering successful or not?) with 'not allowing' - changing Thomas' past tense to present. It is telling that Matthew doesn't use the creator of the cup - we've seen it so often now that Luke usually sticks close to Thomas, and that Matthew so often moves away from that, while both share common wording and phrasing. They most certainly have different agendas. Last but most certainly not least, whereas it is clear that Thomas' Pharisees and scribes hid the keys, it is not immediately obvious that those keys belong to doors of an edifice containing knowledge that one can enter. With Matthew switching to kingdom, it is: a second time that Matthew outperforms Thomas who is just slightly too brief here. Once more Luke's pioneer's copy is followed to the letter by Matthew although there's a small sandbox where Luke twists Thomas' 'inside' into an accusation towards the Pharisees' 'inward part' that Matthew again changes to 'within' - it is striking how often the gospel-writers turn the mesmerizing, balanced and unbiased Thomas into a polarising theme befitting their Church goal, although Luke neatly preserves the creator of the cup who made both sides. Thomas, Luke, Matthew: the order is unmistakably clear. On a side note, it is clear that the gospel-writers addressed two major themes from Thomas into one: going against Judaic customs and targeting the Pharisees. Where Thomas rejects everything that Judaism came to be, the gospel-writers turn all that towards the Pharisees alone and address praying, fasting and giving alms within that new context, stressing that the Pharisees are hypocrites. Martijn Linssen 18/01/2020 Page 66 The 72 logia of Thomas and their canonical cousins 2020 8 logia, the grand total now stands at 34. We're halfway Luke and at 94% of the total that Mark achieved. Chapter 12 starts with a repetition of logion 6c found previously in 8:17, where Matthew 10:26 also has been covered, but the combination with logion 33a is new: 6c has already been combined with 33b by Luke 8:16, Matthew used 33b alone in 5:15. The 'inner rooms' is Luke's unfortunate pioneer's invention and dropped once more by Matthew: (6c) For nothing hidden will not become manifest, and nothing covered will remain without being uncovered." (33a) Jesus said, "Preach from your housetops that which you will hear in your ear. (33b) For no one lights a lamp and puts it under a bushel, nor does he put it in a hidden place, but rather he sets it on a lampstand so that everyone who enters and leaves will see its light." 12:2 But there is nothing covered up that will not be revealed, nor hidden that will not be known. 3 Therefore whatever you have said in the darkness will be heard in the light. What you have spoken in the ear in the inner rooms will be proclaimed on the housetops. (Matthew 10:26 Therefore don't be afraid of them, for there is nothing covered that will not be revealed, or hidden that will not be known. 27 What I tell you in the darkness, speak in the light; and what you hear whispered in the ear, proclaim on the housetops.) Luke is addressing a crowd, Matthew the disciples - I don't often sketch the differences in context, I believe it's more a rule than an exception that each gospel-writer has Jesus speak fairly the same under quite different circumstances. This time, however, it explains the difference in subject: Luke is warning the crowd to not do anything secret, Matthew is instructing the disciples to spread the word. Luke suffers the pioneer's fate again and (correctly) translates Thomas' 'hearing in your ear' to words that are spoken in private (inner, hidden) rooms - but keeps both of them; Matthew fixes the unfortunate pleonasm and comes up with 'whispered'. Evidently, Luke was not familiar with the saying. Martijn Linssen 18/01/2020 Page 67 The 72 logia of Thomas and their canonical cousins 2020 Luke follows Thomas, Matthew follows his agenda. Thomas, Luke, Matthew: without the slightest doubt. We see once more two logion parts that together make a perfectly coherent story: shout out loud what is whispered (33a), for no one creates light to hide it in the dark, but puts it on a pedestal to shine for all (33b). The gospel-writers split it and disperse its parts, and it is very difficult to argue that Thomas read Matthew and recognised 33a in 10:27 and 33b in 5:15, yet also used the 33a from Luke 12:3 and the 33b from Luke 8:16. Even with all material digitised and the help of sophisticated analytical search tools it would be more than a monumental task: singling out every single verse, categorising it, labelling it, and organising it all Next is logion 44 where Thomas names the father, the son and the holy spirit: all three naturally leave out blasphemy against the father or son. Luke has an extremely short version of Thomas but gets full credit from Matthew for his 'Son of Man' introduction - blasphemy against the son is changed into "speaking against", apparently something that can be condoned. Matthew combines them both, swaps 'blaspheme' for 'speak against' and reiterates the sentence. 'Either in this age, or in that which is to come' is just grand: (44) Jesus said, "Whoever blasphemes against the father will be forgiven, and whoever blasphemes against the son will be forgiven, but whoever blasphemes against the holy spirit will not be forgiven either on earth or in heaven." (Mark 3:28 "Most certainly I tell you, all sins of the descendants of man will be forgiven, including their blasphemies with which they may blaspheme; 29 but whoever may blaspheme against the Holy Spirit never has forgiveness, but is subject to eternal condemnation.") 12:10 Everyone who speaks a word against the Son of Man will be forgiven, but those who blaspheme against the Holy Spirit will not be forgiven. (Matthew 12:31 Therefore I tell you, every sin and blasphemy will be forgiven men, but the blasphemy against the Spirit will not be forgiven men. 32 Whoever speaks a word against the Son of Man, it will be forgiven him; but whoever speaks against the Holy Spirit, it will not be forgiven him, either in this age, or in that which is to come.) Martijn Linssen 18/01/2020 Page 68 The 72 logia of Thomas and their canonical cousins 2020 Once more we witness the gospel-writers struggle from close-by: the triple blasphemy of Thomas is challenging them; which parts of that can be copied? Starting with the easy part, Mark feels confident to state that blasphemy against the Holy Spirit isn't allowed, and doesn't dare take it any further. Luke feels that he can move closer to Thomas by stating that "speaking against" the Son is to be forgiven, refraining from using the word 'blasphemy' for that. The Father? Not going there. Matthew condones Luke's condoning and also doesn't dare to make any statement of going against the Father, but gratefully accepts Luke's find of 'Son of Man' and 'speaking against' and uses the latter on both occasions, once more avoiding typical Thomas words. Thomas, Mark, Luke, Matthew: undeniably so. Logion 72 is the second occasion where Luke tries out a new logion that doesn't get a followup. And it is an odd one here: Thomas humorously notes that he is a unifier, not a divider (and then verifies that with his disciples), and uses the strength of the word divide for the verb as well as the noun in order to enforce that, yet Luke breaks it all: (72a) A man said to him, "Tell my brothers to divide my father's possessions with me." (72b) He said to him, "O man, who has made me a divider?" (72c) He turned to his disciples and said to them, "I am not a divider, am I?" 12:13 One of the multitude said to him, "Teacher, tell my brother to divide the inheritance with me." 14 But he said to him, "Man, who made me a judge or an arbitrator over you?" Luke probably refers to Moses, although he swaps the roles because it is Jesus making the comment: (Exodus 2:14 He said, "Who made you a prince and a judge over us? Do you plan to kill me, as you killed the Egyptian?" Moses was afraid, and said, "Surely this thing is known.") It is a fine joke by Thomas of course, to state that he is not a divider and then test his foolish disciples; yet another pointer to separation and duality. Another lone logion is 63: Martijn Linssen 18/01/2020 Page 69 The 72 logia of Thomas and their canonical cousins 2020 (63a) Jesus said, "There was a rich man who had much money. (63b) He said, 'I shall put my money to use so that I may sow, reap, plant, and fill my storehouse with produce, with the result that I shall lack nothing.' (63c) Such were his intentions, but that same night he died. (63d) Let him who has ears hear." 12:16 He spoke a parable to them, saying, "The ground of a certain rich man produced abundantly. 17 He reasoned within himself, saying, 'What will I do, because I don't have room to store my crops?' 18 He said, 'This is what I will do. I will pull down my barns, build bigger ones, and there I will store all my grain and my goods. 19 I will tell my soul, "Soul, you have many goods laid up for many years. Take your ease, eat, drink, and be merry."' 20 "But God said to him, 'You foolish one, tonight your soul is required of you. The things which you have prepared-whose will they be?' 21 So is he who lays up treasure for himself, and is not rich toward God." The verse is unusually lengthy for Luke, who widely expands the original logion and suffers the pioneer's fate - I have emphasised what he shares with Thomas, trying to match Thomas' content that he so greatly expanded. We have seen it before in Mark: if you're the first to copy a logion, you tend to trip over your own tongue, explaining at length the why and how and whatnot. Of course Luke finds a goal to apply the logion to: verse 21. The Lambdin translation, like all others, is particularly flawed here. The man is not rich but needy, and it is part of a set of three parables (63, 64, 65) which all are about being needy. It is the missing word in logion 65 where most think it is supposed to say ⲭⲣⲏⲥⲧⲟⲥ but it isn't; the Coptic word is a Greek loanword and it is ⲭⲣⲏⲙⲁ: χρῆμα "need, property, money, matter, affair" - more on that in my literal translation. Logion 36 is in the next two verses, and the last verse seems inspired by logion 63b (sow, reap, barn): (36) Jesus said, "Do not be concerned from morning until evening and from evening until morning about what you will wear." 12:22 He said to his disciples, "Therefore I tell you, don't be anxious for your life, what you will eat, nor yet for your body, what you will wear. 23 Life is more than food, and the body is more than Martijn Linssen 18/01/2020 Page 70 The 72 logia of Thomas and their canonical cousins 2020 clothing. 24 Consider the ravens: they don't sow, they don't reap, they have no warehouse or barn, and God feeds them. How much more valuable are you than birds! (Matthew 6:25 Therefore I tell you, don't be anxious for your life: what you will eat, or what you will drink; nor yet for your body, what you will wear. Isn't life more than food, and the body more than clothing? 26 See the birds of the sky, that they don't sow, neither do they reap, nor gather into barns. Your heavenly Father feeds them. Aren't you of much more value than they?) And once more Matthew sticks to Luke's first try, and perfects it. Fine finds are the rhetorical questions in the last sentence of verse 25 and verse 26 as well as the action implied by the word 'gather', and of course he has to replace the word 'God' by 'heavenly Father' - thus imposing a warm, human image of a man feeding birds (not ravens of course, that's an odd special from Luke). Ravens are one of the birds that God forbade Moses and the Israelites in Leviticus 11:15 although it is them who God has bring food to Elijah by the brook in 1 Kings 17:4-6. Eerily close however is the resemblance to Job 38:41 'Who provides for the raven his prey, when his young ones cry to God, and wander for lack of food?'). Why does Matthew substitute 'birds' for 'they'? Because it is the very last word of the sentence and he wants to draw the emphasis away from them towards 'you'. Why does Matthew change Luke's last phrase into a rhetorical question? Because Luke evokes a question with it, while Matthew provokes a "Yes!" with his - mightily fine nuances is what Matthew is after, and what he manages to achieve. It is very interesting to see how both Luke and Matthew also quote from Oxyrhynchus (Attridge translation) which has an additional part to this logion: (36) [Jesus said, “Do not be concerned] from morning [until evening and] from evening [until] morning, neither [about] your [food] and what [you will] eat, [nor] about [your clothing] and what you [will] wear. [You are far] better than the [lilies] which [neither] card nor [spin]. As for you, when you have no garment, what [will you put on]? Who might add to your stature? He it is who will give you your cloak.” 12:25 Which of you by being anxious can add a cubit to his height? 26 If then you aren't able to do even the least things, why are you anxious about the rest? 27 Consider the lilies, Martijn Linssen 18/01/2020 Page 71 The 72 logia of Thomas and their canonical cousins 2020 how they grow. They don't toil, neither do they spin; yet I tell you, even Solomon in all his glory was not arrayed like one of these. 28 But if this is how God clothes the grass in the field, which today exists, and tomorrow is cast into the oven, how much more will he clothe you, O you of little faith? (Matthew 6:27 "Which of you by being anxious, can add one moment to his lifespan? 28 Why are you anxious about clothing? Consider the lilies of the field, how they grow. They don't toil, neither do they spin, 29 yet I tell you that even Solomon in all his glory was not dressed like one of these. 30 But if God so clothes the grass of the field, which today exists and tomorrow is thrown into the oven, won't he much more clothe you, you of little faith?) Needless to say it all is applied to the general Church context where God provides, and so on. I'm trying to not state that in detail every single time as it would become rather obnoxious and ad nauseam. I reckon it is clear by now that every single occasion that lends itself for a twist of Thomas into Church context is grabbed with both hands. On Oxyrhynchus: Luke and Matthew have identical copies save for the beginning; Luke has verse 26 as extra and both read Oxyrhynchus, struggled with interpreting the riddling "Who might add to your stature" and came up with different explanations. Yet they also read each other, as they share the rest of which only half is similar to Oxyrhynchus, even considering the order of the sentences in Oxyrhynchus. The order of gospel-writers is inconclusive here, as the two of them stick together so very closely. They expand Thomas greatly, or Thomas greatly condenses them - I will leave it undecided. Logion 76d (mixed with 21e) is hard to recognise in Luke, but Matthew makes sense of it and implicitly discloses the reason for the copy: instructing people to pay yet more attention to the afterlife than the only life that they know - which is an ongoing theme throughout this chapter: (76a) Jesus said, "The kingdom of the father is like a merchant who had a consignment of merchandise and who discovered a pearl. (76b) That merchant was shrewd. (76c) He sold the merchandise and bought the pearl alone for himself. Martijn Linssen 18/01/2020 Page 72 The 72 logia of Thomas and their canonical cousins 2020 (76d) You too, seek his unfailing and enduring treasure where no moth comes near to devour and no worm destroys." 12:33 Sell what you have and give gifts to the needy. Make for yourselves purses which don't grow old, a treasure in the heavens that doesn't fail, where no thief approaches, neither moth destroys. 34 For where your treasure is, there will your heart be also. (Matthew 6:19 "Don't lay up treasures for yourselves on the earth, where moth and rust consume, and where thieves break through and steal; 20 but lay up for yourselves treasures in heaven, where neither moth nor rust consume, and where thieves don't break through and steal; 21 for where your treasure is, there your heart will be also.) Is Thomas referring to Isaiah 51:8 with 76d? (Isaiah 51:7 "Listen to me, you who know righteousness, the people in whose heart is my law. Don't fear the reproach of men, and don't be dismayed at their insults. 8 For the moth will eat them up like a garment, and the worm will eat them like wool; but my righteousness will be forever, and my salvation to all generations.") Bodies will be consumed like this when dead, so it's no use hoping that something great will happen after you're dead: seek elsewhere, is what Thomas seems to imply - although 'his treasure' is puzzling. Unaware of the Isaiah reference or not, the gospel-writers revert Thomas' message, pointing to heaven instead of earth - an opportunity that can't be missed out on. Luke swaps the 'moth' for 'thief' and the 'worm' for 'moth'; his 'no thief approaches' is a rewording of 'no moth comes near' and once again Matthew changes that to the natural action of a thief: 'thieves don't break through and steal', highly likely inspired as well by logion 21e, which comes next. Luke is not very fluid with his 'treasure in the heavens that doesn't fail', rewording 76d, and Matthew drops it. Thomas' 'destroys' is copied by Luke and changed to 'consume' by Matthew. Matthew also adds the very unique 'rust', possibly to move away from Thomas and cover his source, and repeats the dependent clause, juxtaposing earth to heaven - a beautiful effect. If Thomas copied anyone, it could only be Luke, as usual. He would have had access to Mark, Luke and Matthew given the time frame of writing the gospels (although he also shares text Martijn Linssen 18/01/2020 Page 73 The 72 logia of Thomas and their canonical cousins 2020 with John) but over and over again, every single time, Thomas would have picked Luke over all the others. Why? It fits perfectly the other way around: 'no moth' and 'no worm' inspire and become 'no thief' and 'neither moth' in Luke, 'neither moth nor rust' and 'thieves don't break through and steal' in Matthew; gradual changing of one word in a phrase to two, gradual disappearance of 'no ...'. That same gradual change would have been perfectly sensible the other way around: Matthew, Luke, Thomas - if Thomas had been one of the gospel-writers. Thomas, Luke, Matthew - it couldn't be any other way. Even though this also is a logion that gets split and we'll see 76a-c later on, 76d is too different from 76a-c to argue that they belong together. Logia 103 and / or 21e and 21f are once again shared by all three: Mark's only residue is 'master of the house' who he portrays as the Lord, Luke puts the thief back in, naturally changing the carrying away of goods for breaking in, in order to fit his context (his chapter on possessions). He keeps close to Mark where the master went on a journey, and sticks to the returning master. Matthew reverts completely to Thomas and lets the master stay at home. And magnificently changes Luke's 'hour' to 'part of night' for his usual dramatic effect. Once more, pay attention to the logion, the cryptic parts in it that are not copied, the part that is used elsewhere (21i), and how each evangelist takes 21e and 21f mostly out of content and entirely out of context; emphasis on what is shared and different: (103) Jesus said, "Fortunate is the man who knows where the brigands will enter, so that he may get up, muster his domain, and arm himself before they invade." (21a) Mary said to Jesus, "Whom are your disciples like?" (21b) He said, "They are like children who have settled in a field which is not theirs. (21c) When the owners of the field come, they will say, 'Let us have back our field.' (21d) They (will) undress in their presence in order to let them have back their field and to give it back to them. (21e) Therefore I say, if the owner of a house knows that the thief is coming, he will begin his vigil before he comes and will not let him dig through into his house of his domain to carry away his goods. (21f) You, then, be on your guard against the world. Martijn Linssen 18/01/2020 Page 74 The 72 logia of Thomas and their canonical cousins 2020 (21g) Arm yourselves with great strength lest the robbers find a way to come to you, for the difficulty which you expect will (surely) materialize. (21h) Let there be among you a man of understanding. (21i) When the grain ripened, he came quickly with his sickle in his hand and reaped it. (21j) Whoever has ears to hear, let him hear." (Mark 13:33 Watch, keep alert, and pray; for you don't know when the time is. 34 "It is like a man, traveling to another country, having left his house, and given authority to his servants, and to each one his work, and also commanded the doorkeeper to keep watch. 35 Watch therefore, for you don't know when the lord of the house is coming, whether at evening, or at midnight, or when the rooster crows, or in the morning; 36 lest coming suddenly he might find you sleeping. 37 What I tell you, I tell all: Watch.") 12:35 "Let your waist be dressed and your lamps burning. 36 Be like men watching for their lord, when he returns from the wedding feast; that when he comes and knocks, they may immediately open to him. 37 Blessed are those servants whom the lord will find watching when he comes. Most certainly I tell you that he will dress himself, make them recline, and will come and serve them. 38 They will be blessed if he comes in the second or third watch, and finds them so. 39 But know this, that if the master of the house had known in what hour the thief was coming, he would have watched, and not allowed his house to be broken into. 40 Therefore be ready also, for the Son of Man is coming in an hour that you don't expect him." (Matthew 24:42 Watch therefore, for you don't know in what hour your Lord comes. 43 But know this, that if the master of the house had known in what watch of the night the thief was coming, he would have watched, and would not have allowed his house to be broken into. 44 Therefore also be ready, for in an hour that you don't expect, the Son of Man will come.) The order is once again completely clear, but let me work it out. Thomas has an owner of the house, at home, expecting a thief. Mark has a man, away - travelling - commanding the doorkeeper to keep watch. The commanding of the doorkeeper to keep watch for the (suddenly introduced) lord of the house leads to Mark's imperative 'Watch!' This is Mark in his most progressed state, twisting and turning Thomas so hard that nothing remains but a poor allegory in a complicated verse Martijn Linssen 18/01/2020 Page 75 The 72 logia of Thomas and their canonical cousins 2020 (giving authority to servants while also commanding the doorkeeper to watch) without an easily visible shred of Thomas - there are just too many compromises. Having no Thomas to revert to, Luke goes off on his own: the sandbox kicks in. He copies Mark's general context and scene, drops the doorkeeper like a hot brick, and has a lord, away at a wedding feast - returning to find servants watching and opening the door (combining the action(s) of the doorkeeper with the servants as subject), but creates the master of the house serving the servants and also introduces the thief. Be ready! It is still messy, but just a different mess. Matthew sighs at the complexity, and decides to stick to one action; the watching (of Mark). He has a Lord, naturally with a capital L, and then starts the story with Luke's master of the house, who's not away but just not watching (likely being asleep), and Matthew reuses Luke's thief. Be ready! Matthew ends up with a perfectly sensible and concise metaphor fitting the Church agenda while also fitting Thomas. Where the gospel-writers confuse means with goals in not binding the strong man's hands, they do the same here and think that the breaking in is the goal, whereas in Thomas it is just a means to an end: carrying away the goods. I've mentioned before that Mark didn't do a lot of rubbing in, and that it seems as if he took the interpretation of his hints for granted; while his verse 35 is obviously referring to the coming of the Messiah, both Luke as well as Matthew feel the need to explicitly spell out the punch line at the end. Could Mark have written his after Luke or Matthew? Reverting from the general 'Be ready' to the (too) specific 'Watch', throwing away the 'Son of Man', the thief, and most importantly of all the fairly literal copy of logion 21e? Not even in theory - so he comes first. Could Luke follow up on Matthew then? Introducing the servants from scratch, or put them back in from Mark's version? Swapping the perfectly normal act of sleeping for a man returning to his house at night from a wedding feast? Over-explaining the first outcome with the master dressing himself for service and the servants reclining at table, overdoing it quite a bit? Only the first editor over-explains when having an initial go at Thomas, or the second editor when trying to fix a hopeless Mark when there's no Thomas to revert to - never the third Matthew's eloquence and mastery of words and style alone would be more than enough reason to have him as third gospel-writer each and every time; he almost always has some words of both Luke and Mark for which he has a far better synonym, a better order, a dull statement Martijn Linssen 18/01/2020 Page 76 The 72 logia of Thomas and their canonical cousins 2020 turned into a powerful rhetorical question, an amateur 'and..and' at the very least turned into an 'and..but'. Content-wise Matthew has the darkest doom and gloom, slamming down his beloved Isaiah implicitly or explicitly whenever he can. Threatening, and focusing on the bad, not the good; almost always choosing to end with the negative, the punishment that awaits the disobedient. Is that enough proof? No, the best proof comes from the evolution of the story between the first gospel-writer and the last, the subtle changes in the words and scenery, the fixing of mistakes, the omission of superfluous or distracting details, and the continuous honing of the results, ever working towards the Church goals. Logion 10 is a lone one again, and Luke applies its core as the fire of judgment day, not a fire that is already burning and that is meant to burn away the Thomas 'world' - of course Luke uses 'kindle' and directs it not towards the world but the earth, neatly in line with Deuteronomy: (Deuteronomy 32:22 For a fire is kindled in my anger, that burns to the lowest Sheol, devours the earth with its increase, and sets the foundations of the mountains on fire.) (10) Jesus said, "I have cast fire upon the world, and see, I am guarding it until it blazes." 12:49 "I came to throw fire on the earth. I wish it were already kindled. Chapter 12 closes with two more logia, and the completeness of the first is a huge surprise, given its lack of apparent intelligibility in Thomas as well: logion 16. Mark trying to reference it earlier in 3:25 remains unconfirmed, or rather, is disproven - 13:12 seems to be the (difficult to recognise) fit. Luke sticks to the riddling Thomas original! While adding mother and daughter (in-law), completely in line with the mirroring in Thomas of the relative clause. Matthew dismisses 'division' and opts for one of the other original words ('sword'), and also undoes Luke's addition: (16a) Jesus said, "Men think, perhaps, that it is peace which I have come to cast upon the world. Martijn Linssen 18/01/2020 Page 77 The 72 logia of Thomas and their canonical cousins 2020 (16b) They do not know that it is dissension which I have come to cast upon the earth: fire, sword, and war. (16c) For there will be five in a house: three will be against two, and two against three, the father against the son, and the son against the father. (16d) And they will stand solitary." (Mark 13:12 "Brother will deliver up brother to death, and the father his child. Children will rise up against parents, and cause them to be put to death.) 12:51 Do you think that I have come to give peace in the earth? I tell you, no, but rather division. 52 For from now on, there will be five in one house divided, three against two, and two against three. 53 They will be divided, father against son, and son against father; mother against daughter, and daughter against her mother; mother-in-law against her daughter-inlaw, and daughter-in-law against her mother-in-law." (Matthew 10:34 "Don't think that I came to send peace on the earth. I didn't come to send peace, but a sword. 35 For I came to set a man at odds against his father, and a daughter against her mother, and a daughter-in-law against her mother-in-law. 36 A man's foes will be those of his own household.) The emphasis stresses what Luke and Matthew share. Matthew undoes most of Luke's Thomas, getting rid of the cryptic numbers game. Matthew is never afraid to completely redo the totality of the verses lying before him and turning them into what he himself deems right, spending great attention to detail and adding action and intimacy. The passive uses of Thomas he turns to intimate action: for example the passive 'there will be' becomes the so very strong 'For I came to', putting Jesus in the lead and even adding it as a motive for his advent. Matthew also condenses, making it all concise, and frequently connects phrases by a conclusive conjunction such as "therefore", "for", "then". Extra points to Matthew here for installing fear in people's hearts by finishing with his rather well-fitting conclusion (in his context, of course) that a person's enemies will be in his own household. And double bonus points to Luke for copying this riddling Thomas logion in full, word by word. His chapter 12 is slightly mysterious so it fits well but he doesn't turn this logion to a real Martijn Linssen 18/01/2020 Page 78 The 72 logia of Thomas and their canonical cousins 2020 advantage - Matthew does, naturally, by directly following up with Thomas' hating of father and mother. Thomas, Luke, Matthew - it couldn't be any other way. Mark's version is a shy summary of what all three say and could be anywhere From this chapter I will give three examples of the perfection Matthew strives for: Thomas uses 'either on earth or in heaven', Mark swaps that for 'eternal', Matthew rejects both yet combines them into the poetic 'either in this age or in the age to come'. Luke's 'Of how much more value are you than the birds!' must be changed by Matthew into 'Are you not of more value than they?' because Luke leaves room for an open answer instead of a closed one. Matthew changes the style to a rhetorical question - one which can only elicit a positive 'Yes!'. Finally, Matthew isn't able to bear that the focus on the last word distracts from the subject and the message itself, and thus obscures it by replacing the noun 'birds' by the personal pronoun 'they'. Finally, in these very verses Luke starts with a question 'Do you think that' that could get answered the wrong way, hence Matthew adjusts it ever so slightly to 'Don't think that'. To such lengths is Matthew prepared to go and invest his time in, and he does ameliorate almost everything he touches this way. He is by far the best stylist and word wizard of the three. Logion 91b: (91a) They said to him, "Tell us who you are so that we may believe in you." (91b) He said to them, "You read the face of the sky and of the earth, but you have not recognized the one who is before you, and you do not know how to read this moment." 12:54 He said to the multitudes also, "When you see a cloud rising from the west, immediately you say, 'A shower is coming,' and so it happens. 55 When a south wind blows, you say, 'There will be a scorching heat,' and it happens. 56 You hypocrites! You know how to interpret the appearance of the earth and the sky, but how is it that you don't interpret this time? (Matthew 16:1 The Pharisees and Sadducees came, and testing him, asked him to show them a sign from heaven. 2 But he answered them, "When it is evening, you say, 'It will be fair weather, Martijn Linssen 18/01/2020 Page 79 The 72 logia of Thomas and their canonical cousins 2020 for the sky is red.' 3 In the morning, 'It will be foul weather today, for the sky is red and threatening.' Hypocrites! You know how to discern the appearance of the sky, but you can't discern the signs of the times! 4 An evil and adulterous generation seeks after a sign, and there will be no sign given to it, except the sign of the prophet Jonah." He left them and departed.) Emphasis on what is shared yet different, Matthew 16:4 is an addition. As usual, Luke sticks to Thomas by mentioning both earth and sky, and almost literally translates 'reading the moment' to 'interpreting this time'. Matthew sacrifices earth, and feels obliged once more to interject a prophecy reference, being the word 'sign' (and then following up on that with this pointer to his own invention of 'the sign of Jonah' (in 12:40-41) Can it be more obvious that the entire reason for Luke as well as Matthew writing both these significantly dissimilar verses is only what they have in common? Reading the earth and sky yet not being able to read this moment, which are the original parts of the Thomas logion? Luke addresses a multitude of many thousands, Matthew addresses the Pharisees. Both use utterly different kinds and uses of weathers, points of the winds and times of day: Luke uses a cloud from the west and rain versus a wind from the south and heat, Matthew uses evening and fair weather given a red sky versus morning and foul weather given a red sky. Now why would they change all that so radically, and how could they justify that? There is a great difference between tweaking or swapping a word here and there and smoothing out a sentence by changing word order or changing a passive imperative to an affirmative rhetorical, as we've grown accustomed to by now, thanks to Matthew. Luke's regular great changes towards Mark are understandable because we know that when he does that, it is because he then prefers Thomas over Mark (although the reason for doing so we can only speculate about). But why, or rather, how, could we possibly justify these great discrepancies right here? These are the very words of the very Lord that he spoke, aren't they (supposed to be)? It will probably be argued that in fact these were two separate occasions and that Luke missed out on one just like Matthew did on the other, but in fact this situation is very similar to logion 21 with the master of the house and the servants; this is the gospel sandbox in one of its wildest forms, shared between two gospel-writers. And it serves a really fine goal: whatever the gospelwriters share is their mutual core, and the rest is additional creativity. Martijn Linssen 18/01/2020 Page 80 The 72 logia of Thomas and their canonical cousins 2020 I count 8 logia in chapter 12 that haven't been discussed before, totalling 42. Martijn Linssen 18/01/2020 Page 81 The 72 logia of Thomas and their canonical cousins 2020 Halfway through Luke, only a dozen more logia to go Chapter 13 has its first logion, 20, in the parable of the mustard seed. The beautifully concise Thomas is amazingly perfect here and doesn't waste a single word. It is time to shed some light on the way Thomas constructs his parables using five stages: • the turning into an allegory of the subject, the kingdom of heaven (to a mustard seed); • the naming of the most distinguishing property of that allegory (the smallest of all): it is the starting state for the parable; • mentioning the required action and condition for the start of the transformation of the allegory: falling is passive, and anyone or anything could have caused it or undergone it; tilled soil, not necessarily fertile, but soil that is worked upon and has received attention - anyone can meet the conditions for entering the kingdom: together these form the trigger for the transformation; • mentioning the most distinguishing property of its finished transformation (producing something entirely different and - relatively extremely - great): it is the end state for the parable and always stands in stark contrast, usually even opposite, to the starting state; • ... and the result of its completed transformation (attracting higher beings, objects, images): that is the result of the parable, the spin-off from the end state The requirement forms the trigger for the parable and its transformation; it can be split here in a required action and a required condition but together those form the complete requirement for the parable. I have dubbed this phenomenon the metamorphosis model, and you can find all about it in The perfectly sensible, (chrono)logically ordered Jesus parables of Thomas3. All three gospel-writers ruin at least one of these five: (20a) The disciples said to Jesus, "Tell us what the kingdom of heaven is like." (20b) He said to them, "It is like a mustard seed. (20c) It is the smallest of all seeds. 3 https://www.academia.edu/40301171/The_perfectly_sensible_chrono_logically_ordered_Jesus_parables_ of_Thomas Martijn Linssen 18/01/2020 Page 82 The 72 logia of Thomas and their canonical cousins 2020 (20d) But when it falls on tilled soil, it produces a great plant and becomes a shelter for birds of the sky." (Mark 4:30 He said, "How will we liken God's Kingdom? Or with what parable will we illustrate it? 31 It's like a grain of mustard seed, which, when it is sown in the earth, although it is less than all the seeds that are on the earth, 32 yet when it is sown, grows up, and becomes greater than all the herbs, and puts out great branches, so that the birds of the sky can lodge under its shadow.") 13:18 He said, "What is God's Kingdom like? To what shall I compare it? 19 It is like a grain of mustard seed which a man took and put in his own garden. It grew and became a large tree, and the birds of the sky live in its branches." (Matthew 13:31 He set another parable before them, saying, "The Kingdom of Heaven is like a grain of mustard seed which a man took, and sowed in his field, 32 which indeed is smaller than all seeds. But when it is grown, it is greater than the herbs and becomes a tree, so that the birds of the air come and lodge in its branches.") Mark uses the compare phrase again with the word 'liken' and makes sure to drop the word 'parable'; being the first one to copy the concise Thomas he turns to over-explaining. The emphasis on sown, twice, is overdoing it; the mustard seed is the smallest even when it is just lying on a shelf, for instance. Naturally, the gospel-writers feel the need to stress that the seed is sown or put - it is human action that delivers its transformation just like it is the Church that curates its believers. Where Mark uses earth and Luke uses garden, Matthew turns it into field. Mark misses the requirement of tilled soil; I will overlook the odd property of 'smallest when sown' and count it as clue. Luke remarkably leaves out most clues (the requirement and the begin state; the property of being the smallest) although he removes the stuttering 'sown' and 'greater / great' and substitutes Mark's invention of 'shadow' for 'branches'. Matthew, naturally, holds the most complete and fluid version, using a relatively significant portion of Mark this time. Like the others, he misses out on the trigger as well and, like Luke, sticks to the so very wondrous mustard tree instead of plant. Martijn Linssen 18/01/2020 Page 83 The 72 logia of Thomas and their canonical cousins 2020 In theory Luke could be anywhere with his (typical) past tense, and majority of clues missing: with Matthew he shares the man taking and sowing the seed as well as the tree and branches, and with Mark he shares the 'compare' and 'It is like': Thomas, Mark, (Luke,) Matthew without a doubt. Please do note that all leave out 'falling on tilled soil'. The 'birds of the sky' in Thomas points to his logion 3, and intends to say: toil that tilled soil, work on yourself, and you'll be in real heaven. Yet another pun by Thomas, and likewise completely overlooked and misunderstood by the gospel-writers. The leaven and the loaf give us logion 96. The gospel-writers compare the leaven to the kingdom instead of the woman - of course. Highly likely inspired by the mustard seed in their previous verse: (96a) Jesus said, "The kingdom of the father is like a certain woman. (96b) She took a little leaven, concealed it in some dough, and made it into large loaves. (96c) Let him who has ears hear." 13:20 Again he said, "To what shall I compare God's Kingdom? 21 It is like yeast, which a woman took and hid in three measures of flour, until it was all leavened." (Matthew 13:33 He spoke another parable to them. "The Kingdom of Heaven is like yeast which a woman took and hid in three measures of meal, until it was all leavened.") Luke continues and copies his start of the mustard seed, Matthew does the same and again takes the opportunity to use the word parable like Mark did there. Kingdom of the father naturally must become God's Kingdom in Luke, and as a rule Matthew reverts that to 'Heaven'. In theory the order could be anything. The three measures seem to be inspired by Genesis when God suddenly appears and Abraham rushes to give him bread: (Genesis 18:6 Abraham hurried into the tent to Sarah, and said, "Quickly prepare three seahs of fine meal, knead it, and make cakes.") Martijn Linssen 18/01/2020 Page 84 The 72 logia of Thomas and their canonical cousins 2020 Logion 4b concludes this chapter: Unclear why Luke adds 'behold' and 'some' and reverses the order, not surprisingly Matthew undoes that: (4a) Jesus said, "The man old in days will not hesitate to ask a small child seven days old about the place of life, and he will live. (4b) For many who are first will become last, and they will become one and the same." (Mark 10:31 But many who are first will be last; and the last first.") 13:30 Behold, there are some who are last who will be first, and there are some who are first who will be last." (Matthew 19:30 But many will be last who are first, and first who are last.) No idea why Luke is being different again, with his 'some' instead of 'many' he is almost stating the exact opposite. Needless to say that 4a as well as the last phrase of 4b isn't much of a bait for the gospelwriters; to them it suffices to take only a part of this logion and put it into their context as we have seen happening over and over again by now. In Oxyrhynchus (Attridge translation) 4b has the same mirrored phrase as the gospel-writers: "first-last last-first". This is the second occasion where the Oxyrhynchus differs from Nag Hammadi, and the second occasion that we find the entire Oxyrhynchus in the gospel-writers' text: For many who are [first] will become [last, and] the last will be first, and [they will become one and the same].” It stands to reason that the gospel-writers used a Thomas gospel that contained the text that we see in the Oxyrhynchus papyri, and chapter 14 will give us a shred of Thomas that is neither in Oxyrhynchus nor in the Greek version that we have, thus providing us with a piece of content that as of yet hasn't been found in the wild. Martijn Linssen 18/01/2020 Page 85 The 72 logia of Thomas and their canonical cousins 2020 Chapter 14 hands out logion 64, and between the gospel-writers it varies from slightly different to outrageously dissimilar. As it is so very large I'll put the comments in between each version hope that helps: (64a) Jesus said, "A man had received visitors. (64b) And when he had prepared the dinner, he sent his servant to invite the guests. (64c) He went to the first one and said to him, 'My master invites you.' (64d) He said, 'I have claims against some merchants. (64e) They are coming to me this evening. (64f) I must go and give them my orders. (64g) I ask to be excused from the dinner.' (64h) He went to another and said to him, 'My master has invited you.' (64i) He said to him, 'I have just bought a house and am required for the day. (64j) I shall not have any spare time.' (64k) He went to another and said to him, 'My master invites you.' (64l) He said to him, 'My friend is going to get married, and I am to prepare the banquet. (64m) I shall not be able to come. (64n) I ask to be excused from the dinner. (64o) He went to another and said to him, 'My master invites you.' (64p) He said to him, 'I have just bought a farm, and I am on my way to collect the rent. (64q) I shall not be able to come. (64r) I ask to be excused.' (64s) The servant returned and said to his master, 'Those whom you invited to the dinner have asked to be excused.' (64t) The master said to his servant, 'Go outside to the streets and bring back those whom you happen to meet, so that they may dine.' (64u) Businessmen and merchants will not enter the places of my father." 14:16 But he said to him, "A certain man made a great supper, and he invited many people. 17 He sent out his servant at supper time to tell those who were invited, 'Come, for everything is ready now.' 18 They all as one began to make excuses. "The first said to him, 'I have bought a field, and I must go and see it. Please have me excused.' 19 "Another said, 'I have bought five yoke of Martijn Linssen 18/01/2020 Page 86 The 72 logia of Thomas and their canonical cousins 2020 oxen, and I must go try them out. Please have me excused.' 20 "Another said, 'I have married a wife, and therefore I can't come.' 21 "That servant came, and told his lord these things. Then the master of the house, being angry, said to his servant, 'Go out quickly into the streets and lanes of the city, and bring in the poor, maimed, blind, and lame.' 22 "The servant said, 'Lord, it is done as you commanded, and there is still room.' 23 "The lord said to the servant, 'Go out into the highways and hedges, and compel them to come in, that my house may be filled. 24 For I tell you that none of those men who were invited will taste of my supper.'" Thomas has the servant sent out four times. The four excuses are: claims against merchants, just bought a house, prepare the banquet for a friend's marriage, collect the rent for a farm just bought. Jesus then tells the servant to go out and invite just anyone, as businessmen and merchants will not enter the places of his father. That is all completely coherent - although the friend's banquet doesn't seem to fit, assuming that he doesn't make any money preparing it (but, likely being either a businessman or merchant, he probably does). It is significant in Thomas that the man has received visitors for whom he 'prepares dinner'. The visitors are probably outside, in the study, or just around the house. Suddenly, when they are notified of the dinner being ready, they start making excuses - of an economical or financial type; a process has started where they have advanced to a certain stage but suddenly they pull out of entering the next. This parable seems to be like one of those occasions on which you find out "who your real friends are". Luke retains that same starting point yet sends three times, albeit with similarly enough excuses, and then adds the invitation to the poor and disabled - a fairly logical yet unmotivated twist. In the final verse Luke fails to give a reason why the people originally invited aren't welcome anymore, and it ends up as a logion wasted, without a clue - pointless. But there is a message, and the message is that the poor and disabled are invited to the Lord's banquet, which is nice of course - this is the benign Jesus. Once again we see the first evangelist to copy Thomas, struggle - when he significantly changes content by adding yet another group of people to be brought in: just any people for no reason. The meaning of Luke appears to be that God meant the Jews to receive the kingdom by accepting the Messiah but they decline so Luke invites the poor instead and then extends the invitation to foreigners, heathen - anyone who isn't a Jew. Yet he doesn't take the opportunity to motivate that; Luke sometimes seems somewhat reluctant to deliver the gospel-writers' message Martijn Linssen 18/01/2020 Page 87 The 72 logia of Thomas and their canonical cousins 2020 And then, we witness the third occasion where Matthew goes wild, as one may have anticipated by now, given the wandering off by Luke (and the amount of text spent on that?): (Matthew 22:2 "The Kingdom of Heaven is like a certain king, who made a wedding feast for his son, 3 and sent out his servants to call those who were invited to the wedding feast, but they would not come. 4 Again he sent out other servants, saying, 'Tell those who are invited, "Behold, I have prepared my dinner. My cattle and my fatlings are killed, and all things are ready. Come to the wedding feast!"' 5 But they made light of it, and went their ways, one to his own farm, another to his merchandise; 6 and the rest grabbed his servants, treated them shamefully, and killed them. 7 When the king heard that, he was angry, and sent his armies, destroyed those murderers, and burned their city. 8 "Then he said to his servants, 'The wedding is ready, but those who were invited weren't worthy. 9 Go therefore to the intersections of the highways, and as many as you may find, invite to the wedding feast.' 10 Those servants went out into the highways and gathered together as many as they found, both bad and good. The wedding was filled with guests. 11 "But when the king came in to see the guests, he saw there a man who didn't have on wedding clothing, 12 and he said to him, 'Friend, how did you come in here not wearing wedding clothing?' He was speechless. 13 Then the king said to the servants, 'Bind him hand and foot, take him away, and throw him into the outer darkness. That is where the weeping and grinding of teeth will be.' 14 For many are called, but few chosen.") Man becomes king, servant becomes servants, they are sent out twice almost as an afterthought and their reasoning is mostly neglected. The oxen that one of Luke's guests has bought turn into the oxen the king has prepared. A hint of Thomas returns as invited guests go to their farm and business, which is not in Luke so Matthew must have read that in Thomas. And then Matthew loses it all and has the servants seized and killed, the king destroying the murderers along with their entire city - and then abruptly returns to normalcy and continues the inviting. The remainder, with the king spotting (apparently only) one wedding guest out of 'as many as they found, both bad and good' wearing no wedding garment and consequently jailing him into the -outer - darkness, can best be described as absurd. This is a mad king who punishes an apparent misdemeanour as if it were a vicious crime. Where Luke portrays the loving Jesus, Martijn Linssen 18/01/2020 Page 88 The 72 logia of Thomas and their canonical cousins 2020 this Matthew depicts the wrath of the angry God - and theirs are essentially one and the same story. Again we see the reoccurring theme of great deviation: when and where the first gospel-writer creates his own story on top of Thomas, the ones who follow are prone to take that even further, this time into absurdity. It is, however, apart from everything else, a very interesting logion to take when discussing the order of things. Matthew writing this first and then Luke turning it into his version? Absolutely impossible. Thomas copying any of them could be possible, if he truly were the most supreme of all writers in the history of mankind. As a matter of fact, the three parables vary so extremely wildly that in theory the order could be anything, they have next to nothing in common save for the dining theme: it is hard to argue that even one of them is a copy of another. Logion 93 is one of those uncomfortable ones. Mark has an awkward attempt at it combining the verb of 93b with the content of 93a. Luke undertakes an entirely new experiment, inspired by Mark 9:50 which is on the next page: (93a) [Jesus said] "Do not give what is holy to dogs, lest they throw them on the dungheap. (93b) Do not throw the pearls to swine, lest they [...] it [...]." (Mark 7:27 But Jesus said to her, "Let the children be filled first, for it is not appropriate to take the children's bread and throw it to the dogs." 28 But she answered him, "Yes, Lord. Yet even the dogs under the table eat the children's crumbs.") 14:34 Salt is good, but if the salt becomes flat and tasteless, with what do you season it? 35 It is fit neither for the soil nor for the manure pile. It is thrown out. He who has ears to hear, let him hear." (Matthew 15:26 But he answered, "It is not appropriate to take the children's bread and throw it to the dogs." 27 But she said, "Yes, Lord, but even the dogs eat the crumbs which fall from their masters' table.") Martijn Linssen 18/01/2020 Page 89 The 72 logia of Thomas and their canonical cousins 2020 The scene we have seen before in Mark, it is the Syrophoenician woman, prototype of a nonJew here. The children are the Jews who are supposed to be the first to be invited to God's kingdom, the heathen indeed are compared to dogs by Jesus himself - highly unusually harsh for a statement that is not targeted at the Pharisees. Matthew follows Mark to the letter here, turning it all into action (the crumbs fall from the table) and drama: the emphasis is laid on the table, not the children's crumbs; and it is the master's table, not just a table. On a side-note, Matthew might have the missing logion piece here, especially given the similarities between Matthew 5:13 and 7:6: more on that when Matthew is discussed; it is there that we will see that Thomas is a perfectly coherent logion which the gospel-writers split and disperse across the gospels. Here it is clear that Matthew came after Mark, Luke is on his own, and that Thomas only could have inspired Mark (and Matthew) to turn 'holy' into 'children's bread', and not vice versa. Chapter 13 and 14 together give us 5 logia. And the total now amounts to 47 Chapter 15 gives us the parable of the lost sheep, logion 107 in full. I think that it is irony of Thomas and refers to Isaiah 53:6 6 'All we like sheep have gone astray. Everyone has turned to his own way; and Yahweh has laid on him the iniquity of us all.'. Thomas' goal certainly isn't to return the sheep to the other 99, he just takes "pride" in the fact that it goes astray, deviating from the regular and advertised path (the "world" of Thomas); that is why the "shepherd" cares for it more than for the other 99. In Thomas, this is a dual metamorphosis where both the sheep and the shepherd leave "the flock"; both indulge in introspection and self-investigation, and it is out of the question that either of them should ever return. (107a) Jesus said, "The kingdom is like a shepherd who had a hundred sheep. (107b) One of them, the largest, went astray. (107c) He left the ninety-nine sheep and looked for that one until he found it. (107d) When he had gone to such trouble, he said to the sheep, 'I care for you more than the ninety-nine.'" 15:4 "Which of you men, if you had one hundred sheep, and lost one of them, wouldn't leave the ninety-nine in the wilderness, and go after the one that was lost, until he found it? 5 When he has Martijn Linssen 18/01/2020 Page 90 The 72 logia of Thomas and their canonical cousins 2020 found it, he carries it on his shoulders, rejoicing. 6 When he comes home, he calls together his friends and his neighbors, saying to them, 'Rejoice with me, for I have found my sheep which was lost!' 7 I tell you that even so there will be more joy in heaven over one sinner who repents, than over ninety-nine righteous people who need no repentance. (Matthew 18:12 "What do you think? If a man has one hundred sheep, and one of them goes astray, doesn't he leave the ninety-nine, go to the mountains, and seek that which has gone astray? 13 If he finds it, most certainly I tell you, he rejoices over it more than over the ninety-nine which have not gone astray. 14 Even so it is not the will of your Father who is in heaven that one of these little ones should perish.) Luke does a Mark and adds insignificant detail in order to try making a story out of the short, sharp, concise Thomas, distracting from the clue - although Luke's clue is clear in his verse 7. Matthew profits once again from the preliminary work done by his predecessor(s), removes all the extra details yet copies Luke's style and construct, and ends up with something quite similar to the Thomas original. Both omit the clue of the sheep being the largest (like the fish in the net of logion 8, which is copied by Matthew alone, much later) in order to allow for their own moralistic clues. Matthew evidently considers Luke's moral to be flawed but I'm disappointed with Matthew's bland clue, no matter how clearly he applies this logion in order to satisfy his goal of chapter 18, the importance and significance of little children. The sandbox is very much present again, with Luke bringing back the sheep but Matthew not - not such an insignificant detail, one would think? Thomas, Luke, Matthew - no surprises here. Luke spends the remainder of chapter 15 on his self-invented parables of the lost coin and the prodigal son (and even continues in chapter 16 with his dishonest manager). Devoid of allegories and metaphors they are just moralistic stories filled to the rim with humans interacting with humans, sharply contrasting with Thomas - although the parable of the coin is a proper parable according to the rules of Thomas. I discuss all of that in Two types of Jesus parables: canonical vs Thomasine - like night and day4 where I pay extra attention to the stark 4 https://www.academia.edu/40951733/Two_types_of_Jesus_parables_canonical_vs_Thomasine__like_night_and_day Martijn Linssen 18/01/2020 Page 91 The 72 logia of Thomas and their canonical cousins 2020 differences between the Thomas parables and those which the gospel-writers invented themselves. Chapter 16 finally delivers logion 47b, thus far missing from the copies all three made (old wine, new wine, patch, remember?). Luke adds his own clue of 'God and money' (Mammon) which is quite limitative and rather unimaginative but perfectly fits the theme of his chapter here. Matthew copies Luke word by word and uses it in his sermon on the mount: (47a) Jesus said, "It is impossible for a man to mount two horses or to stretch two bows. (47b) And it is impossible for a servant to serve two masters; otherwise, he will honor the one and treat the other contemptuously. (47c) No man drinks old wine and immediately desires to drink new wine. (47d) And new wine is not put into old wineskins, lest they burst; nor is old wine put into a new wineskin, lest it spoil it. (47e) An old patch is not sewn onto a new garment, because a tear would result." 16:13 No servant can serve two masters, for either he will hate the one, and love the other; or else he will hold to one, and despise the other. You aren't able to serve God and Mammon." (Matthew 6:24 "No one can serve two masters, for either he will hate the one and love the other, or else he will be devoted to one and despise the other. You can't serve both God and Mammon.) Mammon in Hebrew means money. Even here it is evident that Matthew comes after Luke as he drops the Thomas pointer of 'servant' - it's the only word that differs between the two of them. Of course one could make the case that Luke chose to specify 'servant' over the general 'one', possibly also wanting to get closer to Thomas, and came after Matthew. And that Matthew dropped the Mammon moral entirely out of the blue in his Sermon, and forced Luke to write an entire paragraph on money just to accommodate... We have the logion complete now, and perhaps with the knowledge gained it now is so very clear that these 5 sentences perfectly fit together? How feasible is it that these really are two separate pieces in the gospels that Thomas more than magically managed to piece together? Luke has the other part in chapter 5, Matthew has it in chapter 9. Martijn Linssen 18/01/2020 Page 92 The 72 logia of Thomas and their canonical cousins 2020 Given the fact that Matthew follows Luke to the letter here, could it be that this is what "Oxyrhynchus would have said"? We saw logion 4 in there where the "first and last" phrase was repeated, swapping first with last - what I referred to as "mirroring": the same occurs here with "love and hate". I think it is very likely that such is the case, and that "Oxyrhynchus 47b would read": (47b) And it is impossible for a servant to serve two masters; he will hate the one and love the other, otherwise, he will honor the one and treat the other contemptuously. Logion 11a is next, and Luke and Matthew both have two tries at it: (11a) Jesus said, "This heaven will pass away, and the one above it will pass away. (11b) The dead are not alive, and the living will not die. (11c) In the days when you consumed what is dead, you made it what is alive. (11d) When you come to dwell in the light, what will you do? (11e) On the day when you were one you became two. (11f) But when you become two, what will you do?" (Mark 13:30 Most certainly I say to you, this generation will not pass away until all these things happen. 31 Heaven and earth will pass away, but my words will not pass away. 32 But of that day or that hour no one knows, not even the angels in heaven, nor the Son, but only the Father.) 16:17 But it is easier for heaven and earth to pass away than for one tiny stroke of a pen in the law to fall. These verses Matthew copies in 5:18, but Luke also has a fuller version further on, which Matthew also follows up on: 21:32 Most certainly I tell you, this generation will not pass away until all things are accomplished. 33 Heaven and earth will pass away, but my words will by no means pass away. 34 "So be careful, or your hearts will be loaded down with carousing, drunkenness, and cares of this life, and that day will come on you suddenly. Martijn Linssen 18/01/2020 Page 93 The 72 logia of Thomas and their canonical cousins 2020 (Matthew 5:18 For most certainly, I tell you, until heaven and earth pass away, not even one smallest letter or one tiny pen stroke shall in any way pass away from the law, until all things are accomplished. (...) 24:34 Most certainly I tell you, this generation will not pass away until all these things are accomplished. 35 Heaven and earth will pass away, but my words will not pass away. 36 "But no one knows of that day and hour, not even the angels of heaven, but my Father only.) Emphasis is on what is shared yet worded differently. I want to point, once again, to all the cryptic parts in this logion that get completely ignored. One word does Matthew change, 'nor the Son' - from Mark's version. Luke seems to be on his own, although Matthew will use his first copy in his sermon on the mount. If one looks at the logion and what remains of it, it is scant evidence indeed that the gospel-writers copied from Thomas here - 11a is the only phrase that remains untouched throughout the three. The order could be anything really, there are very little differences and Matthew following Luke is equally as plausible as Luke following Matthew. Or am I pointing to the wrong logion? Isaiah has strong resemblance to what the gospelwriters say: (Isaiah 51:6 Lift up your eyes to the heavens, and look at the earth beneath; for the heavens will vanish away like smoke, and the earth will wear out like a garment. Its inhabitants will die in the same way, but my salvation will be forever, and my righteousness will not be abolished.) 'Its inhabitants' points to 'this generation', and 'my righteousness' points to 'my words'. And that very same Isaiah seems to be more identical to another logion: (111a) Jesus said, "The heavens and the earth will be rolled up in your presence. (111b) And the one who lives from the living one will not see death." (111c) Does not Jesus say, "Whoever finds himself is superior to the world?" This appears to be a much better fit, with 'in your presence' also pointing to 'this generation'; even though logion 111 seems to be a mere summary of logion 11, it is likely that the gospel- Martijn Linssen 18/01/2020 Page 94 The 72 logia of Thomas and their canonical cousins 2020 writers used this version. It is a puzzle without borders and an endless supply of pieces sometimes. And indeed, again we see a likeness between Isaiah and Thomas. Chapter 17 starts with either logion 48 or 106 leading Mark to his verse: (48) Jesus said, "If two make peace with each other in this one house, they will say to the mountain, 'Move Away,' and it will move away." (106) Jesus said, "When you make the two one, you will become the sons of man, and when you say, 'Mountain, move away,' it will move away." (Mark 11:23 For most certainly I tell you, whoever may tell this mountain, 'Be taken up and cast into the sea,' and doesn't doubt in his heart, but believes that what he says is happening; he shall have whatever he says.) 17:6 The Lord said, "If you had faith like a grain of mustard seed, you would tell this sycamore tree, 'Be uprooted, and be planted in the sea,' and it would obey you. (Matthew 17:20 He said to them, "Because of your unbelief. For most certainly I tell you, if you have faith as a grain of mustard seed, you will tell this mountain, 'Move from here to there,' and it will move; and nothing will be impossible for you. (...) 21:21 Jesus answered them, "Most certainly I tell you, if you have faith and don't doubt, you will not only do what was done to the fig tree, but even if you told this mountain, 'Be taken up and cast into the sea,' it would be done.) In Mark the mountain moving into the sea is highly likely inspired by Psalms 46:2, but Luke replaces the mountain by a sycamore tree: 7 mentions of those in the Tanakh, and it is apparently a very common tree bearing figs: Kings, Chronicles and Isaiah 9:10 mention it. Matthew copies the logion twice, once coming up with the rather unimaginative 'Move from here to there'. Speaking to a mountain is unique and mentioned only in Thomas, where obviously the mere action of moving a mountain is the monumental achievement - where it moves to is Martijn Linssen 18/01/2020 Page 95 The 72 logia of Thomas and their canonical cousins 2020 completely irrelevant. Mark trying yet one more time to combine his two goals (incorporate Thomas and refer to scripture) in one sentence distracts Matthew here, and it is one of the rare occasions on which Matthew disappoints from a semantic point of view. He does get it right in his chapter 21 although he evidently feels like he still has to move the mountain somewhere. It is a very nice evolution that we see here. Thomas has his own context (if you make the two one you can achieve anything, even far beyond what is deemed possible) and the mere moving of the mountain; Mark wraps only the moving mountain in his context and unfortunately suffixes it with the actions of (not) doubting, and believing. Luke spots the weakness and has the stress on faith precede the commanding of the inanimate object, and comes up with the beautiful find of the phrase 'faith like a grain of mustard seed' - which is a cringing allegory but can be allocated value if we acknowledge the way in which the gospel-writers interpreted the parable of the mustard seed. Does the mustard seed tempt Luke to use the sycamore tree instead of the mountain? Isaiah chapter 9 of course is a very important chapter: (Isaiah 9:2 The people who walked in darkness have seen a great light. The light has shined on those who lived in the land of the shadow of death. (...) 6 For a child is born to us. A son is given to us; and the government will be on his shoulders. His name will be called Wonderful Counselor, Mighty God, Everlasting Father, Prince of Peace. (...) 9 All the people will know, including Ephraim and the inhabitants of Samaria, who say in pride and in arrogance of heart, 10 "The bricks have fallen, but we will build with cut stone. The sycamore fig trees have been cut down, but we will put cedars in their place.") It would be surprising to find Luke quoting scripture all by himself, I think? Matthew puts the mountain back in, opting for the so very poor move phrase, but cherishes Luke's find and keeps the 'faith as a grain'. And in his second attempt combines it all: Luke's 'faith', Mark's 'doubt', his context at that moment which is the cursed fig tree, and the original first copy of Mark Logion 113 is next, and it's quite a bit of a story. Mark and Matthew use 113c twice, in different context and content; first in response to the Pharisees and later when talking to the disciples: Martijn Linssen 18/01/2020 Page 96 The 72 logia of Thomas and their canonical cousins 2020 (113a) His disciples said to him, "When will the kingdom come?" (113b) [Jesus said] "It will not come by waiting for it. (113c) It will not be a matter of saying 'here it is' or 'there it is.' (113d) Rather, the kingdom of the father is spread out upon the earth, and men do not see it." (Mark 8:11 The Pharisees came out and began to question him, seeking from him a sign from heaven, and testing him. 12 He sighed deeply in his spirit, and said, "Why does this generation seek a sign? Most certainly I tell you, no sign will be given to this generation.") 17:20 Being asked by the Pharisees when God's Kingdom would come, he answered them, "God's Kingdom doesn't come with observation; 21 neither will they say, 'Look, here!' or, 'Look, there!' for behold, God's Kingdom is within you." One of the most debated verses, Luke once more reverts to the very literal Thomas copy, composing his verse 21 not from 113d but from the first part of logion 3c - with great repercussions. (3a) Jesus said, "If those who lead you say to you, 'See, the kingdom is in the sky,' then the birds of the sky will precede you. (3b) If they say to you, 'It is in the sea,' then the fish will precede you. (3c) Rather, the kingdom is inside of you, and it is outside of you. (3d) When you come to know yourselves, then you will become known, and you will realize that it is you who are the sons of the living father. (3e) But if you will not know yourselves, you dwell in poverty and it is you who are that poverty." The Greek word ἐντὸς ('entos') has only one meaning: (in)side. Nowadays Luke's verse 17:21 usually gets haphazardly translated to 'in the midst (of you)' (the World English Bible is an exception here) instead of 'in(side)', and even in those bible translations when and where it literally says 'in' it is accompanied by an apologetic explanation from biblical commentators. Supposedly Jesus is referring to himself standing in the midst of the Pharisees, so the word 'in' Martijn Linssen 18/01/2020 Page 97 The 72 logia of Thomas and their canonical cousins 2020 really must be read as "among": naturally, it doesn't particularly fit the agenda of the Church that the kingdom is already available to everyone, let alone that it resides within themselves. Luke, oh Luke, we know it was the most important part of your mission to revert to Thomas as much as possible, but did you really have to copy all of this logion, and in this way? The word 'entos' occurs only twice in the entire New Testament, the other instance being when Jesus also is in the presence of the Pharisees, and accuses them of (not) washing the 'inside' of the cup. And upon checking century-old versions of bibles, it becomes clear: man wird auch nicht sagen: Siehe hier! oder: da ist es! Denn sehet, das Reich Gottes ist inwendig in euch (Luther Bible 1912) - inwendig in euch = internal in you (plural) On ne dira point: Il est ici, ou: Il est là. Car voici, le royaume de Dieu est au milieu de vous (Louis Segonde 1910) - au milieu de vous = in the middle of you (plural) En men zal niet zeggen: Ziet hier, of ziet daar, want, ziet, het Koninkrijk Gods is binnen ulieden (Statenvertaling 1637) - binnen ulieden = inside you (plural) E non si dirà: Eccolo qui, o eccolo là; perciocchè ecco, il regno di Dio è dentro di voi (Giovanni Diodati 1649) - dentro di voi = inside of you (plural) ni dirán: Helo aquí, o helo allí; porque he aquí el Reino de Dios entre vosotros está (Sagradas Escrituras 1569) - entre vosotros está = in between you (plural) is Nem dirão: Eilo aqui, ou eilo ali; porque eis que o Reyno de Deus entre vos outros está (Bíblia Sagrada Almeida 1681) - entre vos outros está = in between you (plural) is neque dicent ecce hic aut ecce illic ecce enim regnum Dei intra vos est (Latin Vulgate late 4th century) - intra vos est = inside you (plural) is Neither shall they say, Loe here, or loe there: for behold, the kingdome of God is within you (King James 1611) Martijn Linssen 18/01/2020 Page 98 The 72 logia of Thomas and their canonical cousins 2020 The French uses in the middle, the Spanish and Portuguese use (in) between, the rest uses in(side). The debate will continue, I'm afraid - in vain. Luke does it again, not only copying the literal Thomas as much as he can, but here he even rephrases the very core of Thomas: the kingdom is right here on earth for everyone, in everyone, ready and waiting - for you, and not the other way around. Luke gravely damages the so carefully constructed story of Jesus that the Church is fabricating - with one single word. But, back to work... Matthew doesn't copy this occurrence (he uses an entirely different logion for the Pharisees testing Jesus) so it's only Mark and Luke here. All three copy the real occasion (with the disciples asking about the kingdom) further on, and Mark takes the opportunity to insert a whole new story around it, which I've left out as it is two dozen verses. Luke and Matthew follow up on the story but with regards to Thomas this time Luke copies only 113c: (Mark 13:3 As he sat on the Mount of Olives opposite the temple, Peter, James, John, and Andrew asked him privately, 4 "Tell us, when will these things be? What is the sign that these things are all about to be fulfilled?" (...) 21 Then if anyone tells you, 'Look, here is the Christ!' or, 'Look, there!' don't believe it.) 21:7 They asked him, "Teacher, so when will these things be? What is the sign that these things are about to happen?" (Matthew 24:3 As he sat on the Mount of Olives, the disciples came to him privately, saying, "Tell us, when will these things be? What is the sign of your coming, and of the end of the age?" (...) 23 "Then if any man tells you, 'Behold, here is the Christ!' or, 'There!' don't believe it.) Luke fixes Mark's elaborate phrase about the sign and Matthew magnificently condenses and personalises it with 'your coming'. Matthew gladly accepts Mark's first find of contracting logion 113c and 113d and changing Thomas' 'men do not see it' to 'do not believe it', thereby completely skipping the tricky part of the kingdom being spread out upon the earth. Matthew perfects it, as usual, with the beautifully poetic 'end of the age' used earlier during the parable of the seed and the weeds. Martijn Linssen 18/01/2020 Page 99 The 72 logia of Thomas and their canonical cousins 2020 No need to once more explicitly rub in the now so very regular and accustomed order, is there? Logion 79c is next, completing the full logion, and Mark has put his own Thomasine invention in front of it. Luke copies the invention yet leaves out 79c itself; he will copy that in 21:23. I will insert that here as well and can only wonder why Luke, upon being presented with the opportunity to simply copy all three verses in a row, decided to delay the third until he narrates his version of the Abomination of Desolation. That foretelling of the abomination is the exact moment when Mark and Matthew use these, so technically speaking Luke expedited the first two topics. Again, 79c is inversed by the gospel-writers, and of course applied completely out of context, and befitting theirs - no surprises there: (79a) A woman from the crowd said to him, "Blessed are the womb which bore you and the breasts which nourished you." (79b) He said to her, "Blessed are those who have heard the word of the father and have truly kept it. (79c) For there will be days when you will say, 'Blessed are the womb which has not conceived and the breasts which have not given milk.'" (Mark 13:15 and let him who is on the housetop not go down, nor enter in, to take anything out of his house. 16 Let him who is in the field not return back to take his cloak. 17 But woe to those who are with child and to those who nurse babies in those days!) 17:31 In that day, he who will be on the housetop and his goods in the house, let him not go down to take them away. Let him who is in the field likewise not turn back. 21:23 Woe to those who are pregnant and to those who nurse infants in those days! For there will be great distress in the land, and wrath to this people. (Matthew 24:17 Let him who is on the housetop not go down to take out the things that are in his house. 18 Let him who is in the field not return back to get his clothes. 19 But woe to those who are with child and to nursing mothers in those days!) Martijn Linssen 18/01/2020 Page 100 The 72 logia of Thomas and their canonical cousins 2020 Matthew blindly follows Mark again, on a side-note. That seems to be the rule when Luke's version is absent. The sandbox shows itself again: with child, pregnant, with child; nurse babies, nurse infants, nursing mothers. For such a very small sentence the two crucial subjects certainly do undergo large changes in descriptions. The order could be anything, really Logion 61a appears in verse 34. Luke opts for the literal copy and then repeats that in a variant of his own, creating the poor phrase 'there will be two grinding (grain) together'. Fortunately, as usual, Matthew once more makes changes fixing that ugliness, switching the scene from the bed to a field, and swapping 'other' for 'one'. Once more it is perfectly clear that Thomas leads Luke who copies some of his significant literal words, and that Matthew is trying to hide that fact. (61a) Jesus said, "Two will rest on a bed: the one will die, and the other will live." (61b) Salome said, "Who are you, man, that you ... have come up on my couch and eaten from my table?" Jesus said to her, "I am he who exists from the undivided. (61c) I was given some of the things of my father." [...] 17:34 I tell you, in that night there will be two people in one bed. One will be taken and the other will be left. 35 There will be two grinding grain together. One will be taken and the other will be left." (Matthew 24:40 Then two men will be in the field: one will be taken and one will be left. 41 Two women will be grinding at the mill: one will be taken and one will be left.) And that concludes chapter 17. 6 previously not discussed logia in the last three chapters, added to the 47 counted so far makes for a grand total of 53 logia. Martijn Linssen 18/01/2020 Page 101 The 72 logia of Thomas and their canonical cousins 2020 The remainder of Luke We find my favourite, logion 22: entering the kingdom when you have become like a child again; unlearned, de-dualised, liberated of all your identities, or rather, them-dentities. You'll have to forgive me my poetic freedom here: (22a) Jesus saw infants being suckled. (22b) He said to his disciples, "These infants being suckled are like those who enter the kingdom." (22c) They said to him, "Shall we then, as children, enter the kingdom?" (22d) Jesus said to them, "When you make the two one, and when you make the inside like the outside and the outside like the inside, and the above like the below, and when you make the male and the female one and the same, so that the male not be male nor the female female; and when you fashion eyes in the place of an eye, and a hand in place of a hand, and a foot in place of a foot, and a likeness in place of a likeness; then will you enter the kingdom." (Mark 10:14 But when Jesus saw it, he was moved with indignation, and said to them, "Allow the little children to come to me! Don't forbid them, for God's Kingdom belongs to such as these. 15 Most certainly I tell you, whoever will not receive God's Kingdom like a little child, he will in no way enter into it.") 18:16 Jesus summoned them, saying, "Allow the little children to come to me, and don't hinder them, for God's Kingdom belongs to such as these. 17 Most certainly, I tell you, whoever doesn't receive God's Kingdom like a little child, he will in no way enter into it." (Matthew 19:14 But Jesus said, "Allow the little children, and don't forbid them to come to me; for the Kingdom of Heaven belongs to ones like these." 15 He laid his hands on them, and departed from there.) Luke follows Mark although that order could be reversed as well, in theory, given their close resemblance. Matthew copies Mark but leaves out logion 22c (although he changes the Martijn Linssen 18/01/2020 Page 102 The 72 logia of Thomas and their canonical cousins 2020 message in stating that the kingdom belongs to children) - because he has put his version in the previous chapter, slightly longer: (Matthew 18:1 In that hour the disciples came to Jesus, saying, "Who then is greatest in the Kingdom of Heaven?" 2 Jesus called a little child to himself, and set him in the middle of them 3 and said, "Most certainly I tell you, unless you turn and become as little children, you will in no way enter into the Kingdom of Heaven. 4 Whoever therefore humbles himself as this little child is the greatest in the Kingdom of Heaven. 5 Whoever receives one such little child in my name receives me, 6 but whoever causes one of these little ones who believe in me to stumble, it would be better for him if a huge millstone were hung around his neck and that he were sunk in the depths of the sea.) Luke has his version of that story, without entering the kingdom: Luke 9:46 An argument arose among them about which of them was the greatest. 47 Jesus, perceiving the reasoning of their hearts, took a little child, and set him by his side, 48 and said to them, "Whoever receives this little child in my name receives me. Whoever receives me receives him who sent me. For whoever is least among you all, this one will be great." And so does Mark: (Mark 9:34 But they were silent, for they had disputed with one another on the way about who was the greatest. 35 He sat down, and called the twelve; and he said to them, "If any man wants to be first, he shall be last of all, and servant of all." 36 He took a little child, and set him in the middle of them. Taking him in his arms, he said to them, 37 "Whoever receives one such little child in my name, receives me, and whoever receives me, doesn't receive me, but him who sent me.") Matthew wins again. Mark fails to give a reason why receiving (like) a child would lead to the kingdom, Luke manages only once to express the unimpressive statement 'For whoever is least among you all, this one will be great' without explaining that "explanation" any further. Matthew makes one statement and his immediate disappearance on one occasion, and then enters the lion's den: he cites the Thomas original - only to break it entirely, and bend it to his Martijn Linssen 18/01/2020 Page 103 The 72 logia of Thomas and their canonical cousins 2020 own agenda by explicitly stating that you will have to humble yourself (like a child) in order to enter the kingdom. Be humble. Be financially poor. Be meek. Serve and believe, just hear and accept the Word. That is the message, and it is consistent; and Matthew now applies it to little children: be humble like a little child. To the best of my knowledge, little children are far from humble: they are outspoken, not shy, they're direct, speak their mind, they're the centre of their universe and act like it, having little to no consideration for all the complexities and intricacies of adult life. Humble? Maybe after the age of 6 to 8 or so a child can be taught to be humble, but no little child is humble by nature. In my next paper we will have a look at how the gospel-writers have handled the themes of Thomas, and Matthew's verse right here is guaranteed to be in it, elaborately detailed. Only logion 41 is in chapter 19, which Luke used earlier in 8:18 and it was commented on there, together with all occurrences of Mark and Matthew; nothing changed really - the context here is that it ends Luke's version of the ten coins. The parable of the vineyard is next in Luke; it is going to be a lot of text with all three so brace yourselves, as I will add the cornerstone too while we're at it. I will be using emphasis and first discuss what the next gospel-writer has changed, then show the text: (65a) He said, "There was a good man who owned a vineyard. (65b) He leased it to tenant farmers so that they might work it and he might collect the produce from them. (65c) He sent his servant so that the tenants might give him the produce of the vineyard. (65d) They seized his servant and beat him, all but killing him. (65e) The servant went back and told his master. (65f) The master said, 'Perhaps he did not recognize them.' (65g) He sent another servant. (65h) The tenants beat this one as well. (65i) Then the owner sent his son and said, 'Perhaps they will show respect to my son.' (65j) Because the tenants knew that it was he who was the heir to the vineyard, they seized him and killed him. (65k) Let him who has ears hear." Martijn Linssen 18/01/2020 Page 104 The 72 logia of Thomas and their canonical cousins 2020 (66a) Jesus said, "Show me the stone which the builders have rejected. (66b) That one is the cornerstone." The hedge, pit and tower are a reference to Isaiah 5:2, and invented by Mark, as is the phrase 'beloved son' - the word 'beloved' occurs twice in the first sentence of Isaiah 5, no doubt inspiring Mark there. Mark sticks to Thomas and sends one servant at a time. Thomas sends two servants and one son, but Mark sends out at least a dozen, by the looks of it. Mark also starts the killing before the son has arrived. The throwing out of the son after he is killed, his ejection from the vineyard, is inserted in order to make the connection to logion 66, the rejected cornerstone - which of course is supposed to be Jesus, as the builders are supposed to be the leaders of Israel. An oblique reference to Isaiah 28:16, it is a literal copy of Psalms 118:22. Is that the case in Thomas as well? Undoubtedly - but it serves as an instruction that you should do what the official teachers reject, not what they teach and instruct you to do. Don't do what the Pharisees and priests tell you to do, do what they tell you not to do. Last but not least, Mark finishes with the wrath of God. In Isaiah 5:5-6 the vineyard gets destroyed yet it would make no sense for the owner to destroy his own vineyard as a punishment for the tenants killing his son - now would it. So we so very evidently have here a Thomas logion, cleverly linked to Isaiah, twisted and turned by the gospel-writers, yet with a completely different conclusion than the verses in Isaiah simply because it is not based on Isaiah, nor spoken by Jesus, nor even invented from scratch by the gospel-writers: it is Thomas' and Thomas' alone. (Mark 12:1 He began to speak to them in parables. "A man planted a vineyard, put a hedge around it, dug a pit for the wine press, built a tower, rented it out to a farmer, and went into another country. 2 When it was time, he sent a servant to the farmer to get from the farmer his share of the fruit of the vineyard. 3 They took him, beat him, and sent him away empty. 4 Again, he sent another servant to them; and they threw stones at him, wounded him in the head, and sent him away shamefully treated. 5 Again he sent another; and they killed him; and many others, beating some, and killing some. 6 Therefore still having one, his beloved son, he sent him last to them, saying, 'They will respect my son.' 7 But those farmers said among themselves, 'This is the heir. Come, let's kill him, and the inheritance will be ours.' 8 They took him, killed Martijn Linssen 18/01/2020 Page 105 The 72 logia of Thomas and their canonical cousins 2020 him, and cast him out of the vineyard. 9 What therefore will the lord of the vineyard do? He will come and destroy the farmers, and will give the vineyard to others. 10 Haven't you even read this Scripture: 'The stone which the builders rejected was made the head of the corner. 11 This was from the Lord. It is marvelous in our eyes'?") Luke plays his usual part: he sticks entirely to Thomas. And undoes almost everything Mark made up, except for the wrath part. It is very interesting to see that even with regards to the servants Luke adds only one, who only gets wounded and cast out(!), not sent away emptyhanded... is that sabotage I see there, Luke trying to confuse the third servant with Jesus? Luke fixes Mark's 'farmer' by using the plural so it can be more easily linked to the Israelites, but sticks to 'beloved son' yet has him thrown out first and then killed: not very pragmatic. Luke finishes with a reference to Isaiah 8:15 in verse 18 - yet another surprise. 20:9 He began to tell the people this parable. "A man planted a vineyard, and rented it out to some farmers, and went into another country for a long time. 10 At the proper season, he sent a servant to the farmers to collect his share of the fruit of the vineyard. But the farmers beat him, and sent him away empty. 11 He sent yet another servant, and they also beat him, and treated him shamefully, and sent him away empty. 12 He sent yet a third, and they also wounded him, and threw him out. 13 The lord of the vineyard said, 'What shall I do? I will send my beloved son. It may be that seeing him, they will respect him.' 14 "But when the farmers saw him, they reasoned among themselves, saying, 'This is the heir. Come, let's kill him, that the inheritance may be ours.' 15 Then they threw him out of the vineyard and killed him. What therefore will the lord of the vineyard do to them? 16 He will come and destroy these farmers, and will give the vineyard to others." When they heard that, they said, "May that never be!" 17 But he looked at them and said, "Then what is this that is written, 'The stone which the builders rejected was made the chief cornerstone?' 18 Everyone who falls on that stone will be broken to pieces, but it will crush whomever it falls on to dust." Matthew copies Mark and changes the man to master of the house - now there is a neat metaphor used before. He changes servant to servants so the likeness to the prophets (sent out by God to the people of Israel) is easier to make. Where the first servant only gets a beating in Thomas, Mark and Luke, these ones get beaten, killed and stoned - Matthew naturally has to overdo it. He highly likely recognised Thomas' three-act-structure and reverts to it, which is Martijn Linssen 18/01/2020 Page 106 The 72 logia of Thomas and their canonical cousins 2020 now possible because he sends lots of servants the first two times before he sends in the son (dropping the 'beloved' of Mark and Luke) who also gets thrown out first and then killed, as in Luke, yet Matthew adds that he is taken before that. Presumably Jesus is still in the presence of the chief priests and the elders and narrating this story. Where Mark has a monologue and Luke just people who say only two words, Matthew has the priests and elders give him the correct answer to the question what will happen to the tenants, and then rubs it in that they are the tenants in the story, to fall on Luke's stone: (Matthew 21:33 "Hear another parable. There was a man who was a master of a household who planted a vineyard, set a hedge about it, dug a wine press in it, built a tower, leased it out to farmers, and went into another country. 34 When the season for the fruit came near, he sent his servants to the farmers to receive his fruit. 35 The farmers took his servants, beat one, killed another, and stoned another. 36 Again, he sent other servants more than the first; and they treated them the same way. 37 But afterward he sent to them his son, saying, 'They will respect my son.' 38 But the farmers, when they saw the son, said among themselves, 'This is the heir. Come, let's kill him and seize his inheritance.' 39 So they took him and threw him out of the vineyard, then killed him. 40 When therefore the lord of the vineyard comes, what will he do to those farmers?" 41 They told him, "He will miserably destroy those miserable men, and will lease out the vineyard to other farmers who will give him the fruit in its season." 42 Jesus said to them, "Did you never read in the Scriptures, 'The stone which the builders rejected was made the head of the corner. This was from the Lord. It is marvelous in our eyes'? 43 "Therefore I tell you, God's Kingdom will be taken away from you and will be given to a nation producing its fruit. 44 He who falls on this stone will be broken to pieces, but on whomever it will fall, it will scatter him as dust.") A perfect Matthean ending, as usual - if you ask the Church. Thomas, Mark, Luke, Matthew - it couldn't possibly be any other way, with the gradual transformation, the subtle changes. The by far most important gospel sandbox here is the ejecting of the son, the throwing out of the vineyard of him, in an attempt to mirror the rejection of the cornerstone. The best evidence for it being invented by Mark is the fact that it is toyed with by the gospel-writers; Mark has the son first killed and then thrown out, Luke has him first thrown out and then killed - Luke even has a servant thrown out (!). Matthew has him taken, thrown out, and then killed. Martijn Linssen 18/01/2020 Page 107 The 72 logia of Thomas and their canonical cousins 2020 Now how can that possibly be, if this entire story serves only one goal for the gospel-writers, namely the narrative of God sending all the prophets to the people of Israel in vain and then, finally, in a desperate last move, sending his one and only son in the certain knowledge (of course, as God knows all) that he will be killed? Isn't the entire and only truth, the grand finale of this small play here, that Jesus will get killed by the Jews? Then how on earth can it be that each gospel-writer has a more than significantly different version on that so very small act, that tiny mini play of essentially only (one or) two verbs, one subject and one object? Logion 100, Caesar's coin. How extraordinarily concise Thomas is. Such a simple and short logion and so very essential in its core, juxtaposing Caesar next to God as just another deity that is required by society to be glorified or divinised by its own means, while reserving the primary position in life for the one and only: me - give me what is mine: (100a) They showed Jesus a gold coin and said to him, "Caesar's men demand taxes from us." (100b) He said to them, "Give Caesar what belongs to Caesar, give God what belongs to God, and give me what is mine." (Mark 12:13 They sent some of the Pharisees and the Herodians to him, that they might trap him with words. 14 When they had come, they asked him, "Teacher, we know that you are honest, and don't defer to anyone; for you aren't partial to anyone, but truly teach the way of God. Is it lawful to pay taxes to Caesar, or not? 15 Shall we give, or shall we not give?" But he, knowing their hypocrisy, said to them, "Why do you test me? Bring me a denarius, that I may see it." 16 They brought it. He said to them, "Whose is this image and inscription?" They said to him, "Caesar's." 17 Jesus answered them, "Render to Caesar the things that are Caesar's, and to God the things that are God's." They marveled greatly at him.) 20:21 They asked him, "Teacher, we know that you say and teach what is right, and aren't partial to anyone, but truly teach the way of God. 22 Is it lawful for us to pay taxes to Caesar, or not?" 23 But he perceived their craftiness, and said to them, "Why do you test me? 24 Show me a denarius. Whose image and inscription are on it?" They answered, "Caesar's." 25 He said to them, "Then give to Caesar the things that are Caesar's, and to God the things that are God's." 26 Martijn Linssen 18/01/2020 Page 108 The 72 logia of Thomas and their canonical cousins 2020 They weren't able to trap him in his words before the people. They marveled at his answer and were silent. (Matthew 22:16 They sent their disciples to him, along with the Herodians, saying, "Teacher, we know that you are honest, and teach the way of God in truth, no matter whom you teach; for you aren't partial to anyone. 17 Tell us therefore, what do you think? Is it lawful to pay taxes to Caesar, or not?" 18 But Jesus perceived their wickedness, and said, "Why do you test me, you hypocrites? 19 Show me the tax money." They brought to him a denarius. 20 He asked them, "Whose is this image and inscription?" 21 They said to him, "Caesar's." Then he said to them, "Give therefore to Caesar the things that are Caesar's, and to God the things that are God's." 22 When they heard it, they marveled, and left him and went away.) Luke swaps 'honest' for 'right' but sticks to 'truly teach the way of God'. Matthew undoes his first change and nudges up the other to 'teach the way of God in truth'. With regards to the story: praising Jesus for his particular ability to teach God's way and then questioning him about something so trivial, mundane and worldly as paying taxes strikes me as a wondrous pretext, but the Pharisees probably are supposed to play with the word Law. I commented before that the gospel-writers once more miss the point of Thomas and go to extreme lengths in order to link the image on the coin to the punch line, thus introducing a silver coin (the denarius) instead of a gold one - most people would know that a denarius bears his image, and most people would have almost never even seen a gold coin. In Thomas it is unclear whether or not Caesar's image is on the coin and it is a trivial detail: who cares who you pay taxes to, it is part of the rules of society that you do so: this Caesar will die but he will just be replaced by another Caesar. Likewise it is part of the rules of society that you give to God, and that is equally as insignificant; this God might be replaced by another God but that won't change the System, you will still always be required to give to (a) God just as you're always required to give to (a) Caesar. Only one thing is most significant in your entire life, and that is you yourself: me - give me what is mine. Yet both Luke as well as Matthew follow Mark's scene almost to the letter; where I labelled Mark as longwinded earlier, apparently his verses perfectly serve the gospel-writers' goal. Praising Jesus, putting down the tricky Pharisees (and Herodians) and showing Jesus' marvellous cunning (and hostile attitude towards them) all at once: that is how they want it. Martijn Linssen 18/01/2020 Page 109 The 72 logia of Thomas and their canonical cousins 2020 Given their close similarity, what about the order? The threads I have for Mark-Luke-Matthew are merely two. The end result in Mark is marvelled Pharisees, in Luke they marvel and become silent, in Matthew they marvel, leave him and go away; Luke expands Mark and Matthew expands Luke there. Similarly 'hypocrisy', 'craftiness' and 'wickedness' show a gradual change from just slightly evil and hiding it to outright evil. Matthew's utmost accomplishment naturally is the fact that Jesus demands to see a tax coin, presumably unprepared, and on apparently suddenly seeing that it bears Caesar's face instantly creates the cunning one-liner - a perfection like that is highly unlikely to come from a first strike. Matthew certainly is last, Mark certainly comes before him, and Luke probably is in between. And Thomas undeniably is first with his beautifully concise version lacking any and all Church motive, directed solely at the true punch line of 'give me what is mine'. I count 4 logia in chapters 18 through 20, totalling 57. Chapter 21 foretells the destruction of the temple, logion 71: (71) Jesus said, "I shall destroy this house, and no one will be able to build it [...]." (Mark 13:1 As he went out of the temple, one of his disciples said to him, "Teacher, see what kind of stones and what kind of buildings!" 2 Jesus said to him, "Do you see these great buildings? There will not be left here one stone on another, which will not be thrown down.") 21:5 As some were talking about the temple and how it was decorated with beautiful stones and gifts, he said, 6 "As for these things which you see, the days will come, in which there will not be left here one stone on another that will not be thrown down." (Matthew 24:1 Jesus went out from the temple, and was going on his way. His disciples came to him to show him the buildings of the temple. 2 But he answered them, "You see all of these things, don't you? Most certainly I tell you, there will not be left here one stone on another, that will not be thrown down.") Mark's description (and certainly the pretext) of the temple is odd, with Jesus even using the word great - the translation is correct at this point but using high or tall would have been less associative - one can't state anything good about the Temple of course. Luke handles Mark's Martijn Linssen 18/01/2020 Page 110 The 72 logia of Thomas and their canonical cousins 2020 awkward disciple comment very nicely by turning it into a passive form and also swaps 'great buildings' for the pejorative 'these things' but at the cost of the question. Matthew accepts Luke's finds yet puts the question back in, beautifully turning it into a rhetorical one. Where Luke makes the commentators anonymous, Matthew retains the disciples but has them merely show the buildings, thereby avoiding any and all description of the temple. Thomas, Mark, Luke, Matthew - unquestionably. Logion 68 is used in full, and Matthew is the best pointer there: (68a) Jesus said, "Blessed are you when you are hated and persecuted. (68b) Wherever you have been persecuted they will find no place." (Mark 13:13 You will be hated by all men for my name's sake, but he who endures to the end will be saved. 14 But when you see the abomination of desolation, spoken of by Daniel the prophet, standing where it ought not" (let the reader understand), "then let those who are in Judea flee to the mountains,) 21:17 You will be hated by all men for my name's sake. 18 And not a hair of your head will perish. 19 "By your endurance you will win your lives. 20 "But when you see Jerusalem surrounded by armies, then know that its desolation is at hand. 21 Then let those who are in Judea flee to the mountains. Let those who are in the middle of her depart. Let those who are in the country not enter therein. (Matthew 10:22 You will be hated by all men for my name's sake, but he who endures to the end will be saved. 23 But when they persecute you in this city, flee into the next, for most certainly I tell you, you will not have gone through the cities of Israel until the Son of Man has come.) (Matthew 24:15 "When, therefore, you see the abomination of desolation, which was spoken of through Daniel the prophet, standing in the holy place (let the reader understand), 16 then let those who are in Judea flee to the mountains.) Martijn Linssen 18/01/2020 Page 111 The 72 logia of Thomas and their canonical cousins 2020 The abomination of desolation is from Daniel 9:27 (and 11:31 and 12:11) and interpretations of what it has been in the first century CE seem to point to the destruction of Jerusalem's Temple in 70 CE. Matthew mentions his in chapter 24 yet uses chapter 10 to copy and elaborate on Mark and Luke, and Thomas. Mark's cryptic 'standing where he ought not to be' is changed by Matthew to 'standing in the holy place' yet left out completely by Luke. What all three have in common is the desolation which is directly followed by the fleeing to the mountains by those who are in Judea. So why did Matthew insert his 10:23? Is that not a fine variation on logion 68b? If so, the preceding verse can only be inspired by logion 68a. Granted, it is a thin thread - but I think it is thick enough. Logion 79 we have seen earlier in 17:31, Luke once more uses it in 21:23 (and 23:29). Logion 11a in 21:32-33 has been commented on earlier, regarding its sibling in chapter 16. The last three chapters of Luke are free of Thomas. What is left are the logia that are unique to each gospel-writer. We have covered all of Mark, we have covered all of Luke with all the versions of his verses that Mark and / or Matthew shared: we will now cover Matthew and see what he did or did not share with Mark. The count of logia will be continued, with the last 2 it currently stands at 59 unique logia Matthew's Thomas Matthew tackles some cryptic logia alone, and rightfully so; I wouldn't trust Mark or Luke with them either. John perhaps? Just wait and see... Matthew's first logion not shared with Luke is found in chapter 5, his sermon on the mount. It combines 24c with 32: (24a) His disciples said to him, "Show us the place where you are, since it is necessary for us to seek it." (24b) He said to them, "Whoever has ears, let him hear. (24c) There is light within a man of light, and he lights up the whole world. (24d) If he does not shine, he is darkness." Martijn Linssen 18/01/2020 Page 112 The 72 logia of Thomas and their canonical cousins 2020 (32) Jesus said, "A city being built on a high mountain and fortified cannot fall, nor can it be hidden." 5:14 You are the light of the world. A city located on a hill can't be hidden. It is the very best find by far, if you ask John: he will use it as a unique description of Jesus, and John will use it six times. Honestly, it is magnificent. Matthew has Jesus use it here to describe the people but credits go to him for inventing it. Why no one else used logion 32 before remains a puzzle; it is perfectly innocent yet strong and very intelligible Logion 22d is next, the grand remake of it - it is one of the Thomas logia impossible to incorporate without grave change. Matthew has a relatively short copy of Mark in his sermon on the mount, and an identical yet slightly different one afterwards: (22a) Jesus saw infants being suckled. (22b) He said to his disciples, "These infants being suckled are like those who enter the kingdom." (22c) They said to him, "Shall we then, as children, enter the kingdom?" (22d) Jesus said to them, "When you make the two one, and when you make the inside like the outside and the outside like the inside, and the above like the below, and when you make the male and the female one and the same, so that the male not be male nor the female female; and when you fashion eyes in the place of an eye, and a hand in place of a hand, and a foot in place of a foot, and a likeness in place of a likeness; then will you enter the kingdom." (Mark 9:42 Whoever will cause one of these little ones who believe in me to stumble, it would be better for him if he were thrown into the sea with a millstone hung around his neck. 43 If your hand causes you to stumble, cut it off. It is better for you to enter into life maimed, rather than having your two hands to go into Gehenna, into the unquenchable fire, 44 'where their worm doesn't die, and the fire is not quenched.' 45 If your foot causes you to stumble, cut it off. It is better for you to enter into life lame, rather than having your two feet to be cast into Gehenna, into the fire that will never be quenched- 46 'where their worm doesn't die, and the fire is not Martijn Linssen 18/01/2020 Page 113 The 72 logia of Thomas and their canonical cousins 2020 quenched.' 47 If your eye causes you to stumble, cast it out. It is better for you to enter into God's Kingdom with one eye, rather than having two eyes to be cast into the Gehenna of fire, 48 'where their worm doesn't die, and the fire is not quenched.') 5:29 If your right eye causes you to stumble, pluck it out and throw it away from you. For it is more profitable for you that one of your members should perish than for your whole body to be cast into Gehenna. 30 If your right hand causes you to stumble, cut it off, and throw it away from you. For it is more profitable for you that one of your members should perish, than for your whole body to be cast into Gehenna. 18:5 Whoever receives one such little child in my name receives me, 6 but whoever causes one of these little ones who believe in me to stumble, it would be better for him if a huge millstone were hung around his neck and that he were sunk in the depths of the sea. 7 "Woe to the world because of occasions of stumbling! For it must be that the occasions come, but woe to that person through whom the occasion comes! 8 If your hand or your foot causes you to stumble, cut it off and cast it from you. It is better for you to enter into life maimed or crippled, rather than having two hands or two feet to be cast into the eternal fire. 9 If your eye causes you to stumble, pluck it out and cast it from you. It is better for you to enter into life with one eye, rather than having two eyes to be cast into the Gehenna of fire. 10 See that you don't despise one of these little ones, for I tell you that in heaven their angels always see the face of my Father who is in heaven. Luke has the millstone verse (18:6) in 17:2 in his Temptations to Sin, by the way - just as one single verse. He doesn't have the rest. Matthew uses 'right eye' and 'right hand' in his sermon - only those, and in that order, yet Matthew's longer version basically is a copy of Mark. The first verse is identical but then Matthew interjects his woes to temptations and condenses the hand and foot verses into one. The only occurrence of Mark's 'God's Kingdom' is replaced by a simple 'life'; apparently the two are interchangeable? The odds of Matthew executing such a brutal edit on Mark are immensely higher than vice versa In logion 62b there is the mention of a left hand and a right hand. Could it be referring to Genesis chapter 48, where Israel blesses Ephraim over the firstborn Manasseh, Joseph Martijn Linssen 18/01/2020 Page 114 The 72 logia of Thomas and their canonical cousins 2020 protesting that in vain? The more likely assumption is that it is a common enough saying (for which I have no proof whatsoever), and in the context here its meaning is clear: not everything is to be handed out alike. Logion 62a we have seen applied many times, with Jesus singling out his disciples and elevating them above the crowd. (62a) Jesus said, "It is to those who are worthy of my mysteries that I tell my mysteries. (62b) Do not let your left (hand) know what your right (hand) is doing." 6:3 But when you do merciful deeds, don't let your left hand know what your right hand does, Logion 93b has been mentioned before and slightly commented on, it is the missing piece in what has been used from the logion thus far. Where 93a underwent great reconstruction, this one is intact. In fact, it is more complete than Thomas and chances are highly likely that it is an exact copy: this is the first (and only) copy by the gospel-writers and it is short; no chance of this addition being a longwinded elaboration by Matthew. Harmless enough in both forms as it is, pigs can't do much more with pearls than crush them, either in their mouth or underfoot. Turning and attacking might be an addition by Matthew put probably isn't; the object simply going to waste in both occasions wouldn't be befitting in Thomas. Stressing an identical outcome under (slightly) different circumstances would be a waste of words, yet it would be valuable to distinguish between the two kinds of recipients: some might simply waste what is valued (by you), others may even destroy it and be offended by your action. There is, however, a highly likely Church edit in 'trample underfoot' and in the turning: the original wording is probably different but the action is one of destroying and highly likely to mirror the action towards you; my guess is that the original states: 'Do not throw the pearls to swine, lest they grind it and rip you' The pearls go to pieces or bits, and so do you. The ripping would be too cryptic and specific for Matthew's taste and he'd likely have also added the 'turn to' in order to clarify that the two actions don't take place simultaneously (93a) [Jesus said] "Do not give what is holy to dogs, lest they throw them on the dungheap. Martijn Linssen 18/01/2020 Page 115 The 72 logia of Thomas and their canonical cousins 2020 (93b) Do not throw the pearls to swine, lest they [...] it [...]." 7:6 "Don't give that which is holy to the dogs, neither throw your pearls before the pigs, lest perhaps they trample them under their feet, and turn and tear you to pieces. Logion 39 has been commented before yet 39c we haven't encountered yet (39a) Jesus said, "The pharisees and the scribes have taken the keys of knowledge (gnosis) and hidden them. (39b) They themselves have not entered, nor have they allowed to enter those who wish to. (39c) You, however, be as wise as serpents and as innocent as doves." 10:16 "Behold, I send you out as sheep among wolves. Therefore be wise as serpents and harmless as doves. It is yet another occasion where a logion gets split and we find the various parts in very different places. The sheep and wolves are a great find of course, and Matthew has those prepped in 7:15 where he compares false prophets to wolves in sheep's clothing - adding the (awkward) serpents and doves here fits like a glove. I am going to take a very cynical approach to those who believe that Thomas copied the canonicals in stead of vice versa. I am going to ignore that there are parallels to Tomas even in Acts and Paul, and that such means that Thomas would have had the entire "New Testament" available at a time when such a thing wouldn't come into existence until many centuries afterwards. Of course it is perfectly logical for Thomas to take 39a from Luke 11:52, the only place in the gospels where the keys of knowledge appear, and combine that with 39c from Matthew 10:16, the only place where the serpents and doves are mentioned - or is it? Much more logical than only Matthew daring to lay his hands on this riddling and vague logion part? Logion 90 is a double surprise. Not only does it come from Matthew here (I would have expected Luke, to be honest) but it is also a quite literal copy: Martijn Linssen 18/01/2020 Page 116 The 72 logia of Thomas and their canonical cousins 2020 (90) Jesus said, "Come unto me, for my yoke is easy and my lordship is mild, and you will find repose for yourselves." 11:28 "Come to me, all you who labor and are heavily burdened, and I will give you rest. 29 Take my yoke upon you and learn from me, for I am gentle and humble in heart; and you will find rest for your souls. 30 For my yoke is easy, and my burden is light." I am puzzled and confused - no idea what that does here or how it would fit in. Matthew of all people claiming that Jesus' yoke is easy? Matthew precedes the logion with basically the same message, addressing his flock and reinforcing the teacher-student paradigm. And he throws in 'souls' in another attempt to steer his version of this logion into the right direction. Matthew evidently can't use 'lordship', so he replaces it with 'burden'. Mark has copied logion 57 in combination with 21i but I saved the comment for now: (57a) Jesus said, "The kingdom of the father is like a man who had good seed. (57b) His enemy came by night and sowed weeds among the good seed. (57c) The man did not allow them to pull up the weeds; he said to them, 'I am afraid that you will go intending to pull up the weeds and pull up the wheat along with them.' (57d) For on the day of the harvest the weeds will be plainly visible, and they will be pulled up and burned." (21i) When the grain ripened, he came quickly with his sickle in his hand and reaped it. (Mark 4:26 He said, "God's Kingdom is as if a man should cast seed on the earth, 27 and should sleep and rise night and day, and the seed should spring up and grow, although he doesn't know how. 28 For the earth bears fruit by itself: first the blade, then the ear, then the full grain in the ear. 29 But when the fruit is ripe, immediately he puts in the sickle, because the harvest has come.") 13:24 He set another parable before them, saying, "The Kingdom of Heaven is like a man who sowed good seed in his field, 25 but while people slept, his enemy came and sowed darnel weeds also among the wheat, and went away. 26 But when the blade sprang up and produced grain, then the darnel weeds appeared also. 27 The servants of the householder came and said to Martijn Linssen 18/01/2020 Page 117 The 72 logia of Thomas and their canonical cousins 2020 him, 'Sir, didn't you sow good seed in your field? Where did these darnel weeds come from?' 28 "He said to them, 'An enemy has done this.' "The servants asked him, 'Do you want us to go and gather them up?' 29 "But he said, 'No, lest perhaps while you gather up the darnel weeds, you root up the wheat with them. 30 Let both grow together until the harvest, and in the harvest time I will tell the reapers, "First, gather up the darnel weeds, and bind them in bundles to burn them; but gather the wheat into my barn."'" The similarities between Mark and Matthew are hard to find, equally as hard as the similarities between Mark and Thomas; Mark contributes next to nothing with his version of the logion. Yet Matthew helps to prove that Mark used the logion: the 'sleep', 'springing up' and the wondering about the origin of the plants is what they have in common - and it is clear that Matthew does use the logion. Matthew leaves out the part of logion 21 and sticks to Thomas fairly closely; he even preserves the clue yet ruins it at the end in order to fit his zealous goal: of course the wicked must be punished first before the good are praised and saved. Matthew being practically the first copier makes the usual mistakes: he becomes longwinded and over-explains, introducing verses 26-28 (which of course have to have servants in it), whereas Thomas just needs anyone so he can voice his thoughts. Whether those are servants, slaves, sons or daughters, friends or foes is completely irrelevant - it is personnel that receives instructions regarding the way to handle the sowing of the weeds, with the sole purpose that the man doesn't have to talk to himself in order to voice the action of the parable. Matthew spends too much eye on detail: the bearing of grain, his sleeping men, the enemy going away again - those are all irrelevant details without cause and effect, contributing nothing to the story. Thomas is completely comfortable with merely mentioning that the enemy came by night and sowed the seed; no need to explain how someone could know that without having stopped the enemy - that is simply how short stories, parables, work. Matthew tries enormously hard to "make it intelligible" by letting the weeds first grow so they become visible and can become noticed, upon which the servants have a pretext to question their appearance (naturally stressing the dogma that the dear God brought forth only good "seeds"). So then their master can tell that an enemy has done it, but is that any better than what Thomas does? No, it's futile and useless, because now the master is theoretically still tasked with explaining how he could know without having stopped the enemy - did the enemy just leave a note? Martijn Linssen 18/01/2020 Page 118 The 72 logia of Thomas and their canonical cousins 2020 Matthew also tries hard to put the spotlight on the man whom he wants to appear to be in power and wise - but a parable can have only one main character or subject, and here that is the single observation that the enemy's sowing of the weeds will have a negligible effect on the harvest. Under one simple condition: the weeds and seeds now might be equal (in size and / or appearance), but when the process of growth has completed they will be very easy to distinguish from one another - so just let it be, the enemy's action won't have any consequences, if only your action regarding this "threat" is inaction. Thomas' perfectly sensible burning of the weeds (you can't throw away weeds nor e.g. drown them nor hammer them to a pulp, they will just persist and keep spreading and growing) inspires Matthew to his first gathering up the weeds and (of course) binding and burning them, on which he elaborates in 13:37-43, ending with 'furnace of fire. There will be weeping and gnashing of teeth'. Matthew really is fond of stressing the impending Judgment Day punishment while flogging his much beloved theme of weeping and gnashing of teeth. One more comment: it is clear that Mark took his material from Thomas, with this extremely tentative first copy. At the very start of Mark, he hadn't found his right angle yet, which was to make fairly literal copies of Thomas' content and use those in his own context; Mark 4:26-29 is perfect proof for what we perhaps could call a proof of concept, a try-out. Bear in mind that we are used to writing whatever we want these days, and that we can move any parts around that we like. We can drop stuff, duplicate stuff, anything: but in the age of handwriting the process of storytelling was fixed and sequential: once something was written, it couldn't be changed unless the entire text from that point on were to be rewritten. Matthew next combines the only convenient parts of three logia into one cluster, with the purpose to twist and turn the outcome into his customary message of dark doom again, ending with his beloved "weeping and gnashing of teeth"; 109a, 76a and 76c, and 8a: (109a) Jesus said, "The kingdom is like a man who had a hidden treasure in his field without knowing it. (109b) And after he died, he left it to his son. (109c) The son did not know (about the treasure). (109d) He inherited the field and sold it. (109e) And the one who bought it went plowing and found the treasure. (109f) He began to lend money at interest to whomever he wished." Martijn Linssen 18/01/2020 Page 119 The 72 logia of Thomas and their canonical cousins 2020 (76a) Jesus said, "The kingdom of the father is like a merchant who had a consignment of merchandise and who discovered a pearl. (76b) That merchant was shrewd. (76c) He sold the merchandise and bought the pearl alone for himself. (76d) You too, seek his unfailing and enduring treasure where no moth comes near to devour and no worm destroys." (8a) And he said, "The man is like a wise fisherman who cast his net into the sea and drew it up from the sea full of small fish. (8b) Among them the wise fisherman found a fine large fish. (8c) He threw all the small fish back into the sea and chose the large fish without difficulty. (8d) Whoever has ears to hear, let him hear." 13:44 "Again, the Kingdom of Heaven is like treasure hidden in the field, which a man found and hid. In his joy, he goes and sells all that he has and buys that field. 45 "Again, the Kingdom of Heaven is like a man who is a merchant seeking fine pearls, 46 who having found one pearl of great price, he went and sold all that he had and bought it. 47 "Again, the Kingdom of Heaven is like a dragnet that was cast into the sea and gathered some fish of every kind, 48 which, when it was filled, fishermen drew up on the beach. They sat down and gathered the good into containers, but the bad they threw away. 49 So it will be in the end of the world. The angels will come and separate the wicked from among the righteous, 50 and will cast them into the furnace of fire. There will be weeping and gnashing of teeth." 51 Jesus said to them, "Have you understood all these things?" They answered him, "Yes, Lord." Apart from completely breaking the first and the last logion, Matthew compares the kingdom not to the people but to the objects, save for the merchant with the pearl. The most polite word to describe verse 48 is "direct", yet it does pave the way for the conclusions of verse 49 and 50. Matthew is the only one to copy these - what are the chances of Thomas taking these very verses 44 through 48 and turning them into his three logia as they stand? These are quickies, only used to up the logia score and nothing else - there's no connection, no content to either three that leads up to the only one inevitable Matthean conclusion of dark and doom. Martijn Linssen 18/01/2020 Page 120 The 72 logia of Thomas and their canonical cousins 2020 Even in the parable of the pearl Matthew misses the clue of the merchandise being a consignment; it is not his: he is shrewd because he sells or uses something that doesn't belong to him, or rather, something that he refuses to accept! Matthew also stands alone in copying logion 40. Apart from his make-over it basically means the same here, even though Thomas' father and Matthew's Father are utterly different concepts: (40) Jesus said, "A grapevine has been planted outside of the father, but being unsound, it will be pulled up by its roots and destroyed." 15:12 Then the disciples came and said to him, "Do you know that the Pharisees were offended when they heard this saying?" 13 But he answered, "Every plant which my heavenly Father didn't plant will be uprooted. Matthew certainly doesn't shy away from the more cryptic ones, here is logion 30: (30a) Jesus said, "Where there are three gods, they are gods. (30b) Where there are two or one, I am with him." 18:19 Again, assuredly I tell you, that if two of you will agree on earth concerning anything that they will ask, it will be done for them by my Father who is in heaven. 20 For where two or three are gathered together in my name, there I am in the middle of them." One last time we see a fairly different logion on papyrus (Attridge translation): [Jesus said], “Where there are [three], they are without God, and where there is but [a single one], I say that I am with [him]. Lift up the stone, and you will find me there. Split the piece of wood, and I am there.” An even more puzzling logion, although it seems to point to the solitary and elect as only those who can find (the) God (in themselves) - all other Gods are mere deities and have little to nothing to do with finding revelations. Martijn Linssen 18/01/2020 Page 121 The 72 logia of Thomas and their canonical cousins 2020 On a side note, it has become utterly clear by now that the gospel-writers used (something like) the text of Thomas as it is in Oxyrhynchus, not the complete Greek text that we have today. The last two sentences here, with the stone and the wood, appear in reversed order in logion 77 but aren't to be found in logion 30. The next chapter is chapter 19 and we are presented with Matthew's take on Mark's interpretation of making the two one - I will address that in a few pages from now but will first finish Matthew. Logion 108 is next: (108a) Jesus said, "He who will drink from my mouth will become like me. (108b) I myself shall become he, and the things that are hidden will be revealed to him." (Mark 10:38 But Jesus said to them, "You don't know what you are asking. Are you able to drink the cup that I drink, and to be baptized with the baptism that I am baptized with?" 39 They said to him, "We are able." Jesus said to them, "You shall indeed drink the cup that I drink, and you shall be baptized with the baptism that I am baptized with; 40 but to sit at my right hand and at my left hand is not mine to give, but for whom it has been prepared.") (Luke 12:50 But I have a baptism to be baptized with, and how distressed I am until it is accomplished!) 20:22 But Jesus answered, "You don't know what you are asking. Are you able to drink the cup that I am about to drink, and be baptized with the baptism that I am baptized with?" They said to him, "We are able." 23 He said to them, "You will indeed drink my cup, and be baptized with the baptism that I am baptized with; but to sit on my right hand and on my left hand is not mine to give, but it is for whom it has been prepared by my Father." Luke is mentioned on the side here; his is the only mention of the baptism to be baptised with - but that is not part of this logion anyway. Matthew follows Mark to the letter, only adding 'by my Father'. Martijn Linssen 18/01/2020 Page 122 The 72 logia of Thomas and their canonical cousins 2020 15 logia in this Matthew chapter, 6 of which were already commented on. 9 logia to add to the total, which now stands at 69. What remains are Mark's lone logia, and it will be a very brief chapter. Mark's solos Mark has only a handful of logia that haven't been adopted by Luke or Matthew. They won't be repeated here, for reasons that will become clear during this very small chapter. As there are no copies of these verses that I suspected to be inspired by Thomas yet didn't count, the verdict is easy. As stated before, Mark 15:21 could refer to logion 42 - the passer-by phrase, but it's dubious and very thin. Mark 6:31 (the deserted place where to find rest) could refer to logion 60f but it's equally thin, and besides Mark there are no takers. The deserted place itself is used by Luke while referring to the place where Jesus feeds 5,000, and by Matthew to refer to the place where Jesus feeds 4,000. It is a perfect pretext for being in need of a miracle in order to feed thousands, as there is nowhere else to get food from, and as such it is merely likely that logion 60 is used to include on this occasion. There is also little to nothing to gain by copying this part of the logion, certainly not without putting it to use. Mark 6:50 then? That is when Jesus shows himself walking on the sea and tells the disciples to not be afraid - I am afraid that is equally as thin and hard to trace back to Thomas' last part of 37b. Mark 8:11 is where the Pharisees are testing Jesus and seeking a sign - that could be 51a or 113a where the disciples pose the same question to Jesus; but it is so common to test a Messiah and seek a sign from him that it is impossible to build any case. So, apart from these four supposedly copied logia, Luke and Matthew incorporated all of Mark that he copied from Thomas. John The last gospel-writer to check for Thomas is John; the count of Thomas logia used so far stands at 69. Martijn Linssen 18/01/2020 Page 123 The 72 logia of Thomas and their canonical cousins 2020 John is without a doubt different from the other three; he narrates a continuous story that is fairly close to prose, very different from the others. A great part of it is Jesus repeatedly equating himself to the Father and vice versa, in lengthy monologues and filled with allegories, claiming that Jesus is the bread, the drink, the shepherd, the door, the resurrection and the life, and so on - in a way it resembles some of Thomas; for instance: 14:23 Jesus answered him, "If a man loves me, he will keep my word. My Father will love him, and we will come to him, and make our home with him. 24 He who doesn't love me doesn't keep my words. The word which you hear isn't mine, but the Father's who sent me. This starts off one continuous monologue by Jesus and lasts until 16:16: two full chapters. Two verses of interaction with his disciples follow, and then the monologue continues until the start of chapter 18, his betrayal - only to be interrupted by another interaction with his disciples in 16:29-30. Such form does the work of John take; there are 75 verses containing the phrase "I am" in his entire gospel (compare Mark, Luke and Matthew with respectively 10, 22 and 20). John finishes off what his three predecessors started and builds upon their foundation, and uses very little of Thomas - but it is not the quantity, it is the quality that counts, as we will see. And John will also help in other ways, next to copying logia, to build a more than solid case for the creation of Jesus by the Church If I were to describe the gospel of John in one word, the word would be "absolute". John is resolute in every statement he has his Jesus make, who is speaking absolute "truths". This Jesus is not of the inclusive kind, he is absolutely exclusive. I will quote two parts and leave it at that, for a flying start into a relatively short discussion of John's gospel: 10:7 Jesus therefore said to them again, "Most certainly, I tell you, I am the sheep's door. 8 All who came before me are thieves and robbers, but the sheep didn't listen to them. 9 I am the door. If anyone enters in by me, he will be saved, and will go in and go out, and will find pasture. 14:5 Thomas said to him, "Lord, we don't know where you are going. How can we know the way?" 6 Jesus said to him, "I am the way, the truth, and the life. No one comes to the Father, except Martijn Linssen 18/01/2020 Page 124 The 72 logia of Thomas and their canonical cousins 2020 through me. 7 If you had known me, you would have known my Father also. From now on, you know him, and have seen him." John starts off with logion 28a: (28a) Jesus said, "I took my place in the midst of the world, and I appeared to them in flesh. (28b) I found all of them intoxicated; I found none of them thirsty. (28c) And my soul became afflicted for the sons of men, because they are blind in their hearts and do not have sight; for empty they came into the world, and empty too they seek to leave the world. (28d) But for the moment they are intoxicated. (28e) When they shake off their wine, then they will repent." 1:14 The Word became flesh, and lived among us. We saw his glory, such glory as of the only born Son of the Father, full of grace and truth. John stands alone in copying this one, as he does with most. Hard to build a solid case here as he leaves out the other four sentences and only has a few words from 28a. Is that because his verse has got nothing to do with the entire logion? Could well be; John won't get any points from any Thomas followers for copying it this way even if he did, but he does get many points for this introduction of Jesus: it is just magnificent John moves the Temple scene (Jesus chasing out the sellers) all the way up to the front, in chapter 2, and we see logion 71: this is the first logion copy by all four (71) Jesus said, "I shall destroy this house, and no one will be able to build it [...]." 2:19 Jesus answered them, "Destroy this temple, and in three days I will raise it up." However, John is the first to use it in an entirely different context: Jesus himself. And that's the reason why he adds the phrase about raising it up again in three days. The gospel-writers seem to have a hard time agreeing on the exact time in between Jesus' death and resurrection: Mark Martijn Linssen 18/01/2020 Page 125 The 72 logia of Thomas and their canonical cousins 2020 said 'after three days', Luke and Matthew said 'on the third day' and now John uses 'in three days' - which is essentially the same as Luke and Matthew, but still: why does John have to be different? John likely got the inspiration for this verse from one of the false witnesses of Mark and Matthew: (Matthew 26:61 and said, "This man said, 'I am able to destroy the temple of God, and to build it in three days.'") Alright, logion 31 follows, thus cited by all four: (31) Jesus said, "No prophet is accepted in his own village; no physician heals those who know him." 4:43 After the two days he went out from there and went into Galilee. 44 For Jesus himself testified that a prophet has no honor in his own country. John seemingly wants to place Jesus' home country in Galilee and Judea (see 7:41-42) at the same time, perhaps trying to follow Matthew, who in his endeavour to fulfil as many prophecies as possible came up with the convoluted story about Jesus originating from Judea (Bethlehem) and from Egypt (on the run from Herod) and from Galilee (Nazareth). The logia continue in chapter 7: (38a) Jesus said, "Many times have you desired to hear these words which I am saying to you, and you have no one else to hear them from. (38b) There will be days when you will look for me and will not find me." 7:33 Then Jesus said, "I will be with you a little while longer, then I go to him who sent me. 34 You will seek me, and won't find me. You can't come where I am." Martijn Linssen 18/01/2020 Page 126 The 72 logia of Thomas and their canonical cousins 2020 John shares this logion with Luke and Matthew. As mystic and cryptic as John is, this is as close as it gets to this logion. Throwing in the word 'seek' is brilliant of course - or is John inspired by logion 59? (59) Jesus said, "Take heed of the living one while you are alive, lest you die and seek to see him and be unable to do so." Of course it is Jesus who's doing the dying here, but John's verses are possibly a conflation of the two logia. Logion 13 is barely recognisable, and John seems to use it to address Jesus' origin - it really does seem that he wants Jesus to originate from Judea, not Galilee. I will copy only the first parts of logion 13, that has been presented enough by now: (13a) Jesus said to his disciples, "Compare me to someone and tell me whom I am like." (13b) Simon Peter said to him, "You are like a righteous angel." (13c) Matthew said to him, "You are like a wise philosopher." (13d) Thomas said to him, "Master, my mouth is wholly incapable of saying whom you are like." 7:40 Many of the multitude therefore, when they heard these words, said, "This is truly the prophet." 41 Others said, "This is the Christ." But some said, "What, does the Christ come out of Galilee? 42 Hasn't the Scripture said that the Christ comes of the offspring of David, and from Bethlehem, the village where David was?" 43 So a division arose in the multitude because of him. (...) 52 They answered him, "Are you also from Galilee? Search, and see that no prophet has arisen out of Galilee." Granted, this is a more than flimsy correlation, and I'm not counting it. 8:12 Again, therefore, Jesus spoke to them, saying, "I am the light of the world. He who follows me will not walk in the darkness, but will have the light of life." Martijn Linssen 18/01/2020 Page 127 The 72 logia of Thomas and their canonical cousins 2020 I thought I'd just drop that in there, to get back on track again. I certainly didn't expect parts of logion 77 to be copied by the gospel-writers, but John dares to do so: (77a) Jesus said, "It is I who am the light which is above them all. (77b) It is I who am the all. (77c) From me did the all come forth, and unto me did the all extend. (77d) Split a piece of wood, and I am there. (77e) Lift up the stone, and you will find me there." I - the Self. It is above all other selves, it drives all perceptions and it is the centre of its own universe. And it is All - everything comes forth from it, and it is inside everything. Naturally, Jesus is talking not only about himself, but about us all: we view everything from our own perception, we each view our own world through our own eyes and mind. Whatever it is that we look at, we perceive it through our own lens: ask ten people to describe an object with two words, and no description will be the same. That is what Thomas means, and it is not what John intends to say here, yet it is highly likely that many would disagree with this interpretation. John is Thomas in disguise; he takes Jesus and makes him divine. Given the difference in time Thomas could never have written John, but if he had been challenged to do so, just to see if he could play the devil's advocate, I think his content wouldn't have been far off from what we read in John. Credit is due to Matthew for using '(you are) the light of the world' first, but the application by John is magnificent. I am not counting it, solely because Matthew invented it; John coming up with this mostly by his own would have been very plausible otherwise. Still, it befits John to use it and it is a worthy beginning of his chapter 8 that he so magnificently concludes with: 8:58 Jesus said to them, "Most certainly, I tell you, before Abraham came into existence, I AM." I AM. Is John really getting Thomas? Where Luke seems to have to address Thomas believers and Matthew the traditional Jews, John goes an entirely new way and combines both in an unprecedented manner, mystifying the deeper meaning of Thomas. Bluntly counting only the sentences containing the words 'fulfil', 'prophe' and 'written' in the four gospels (and verifying Martijn Linssen 18/01/2020 Page 128 The 72 logia of Thomas and their canonical cousins 2020 that those indeed all do contain only direct references to fulfilment of scripture), Mark only has 13 verses, Luke has 21, Matthew a grand 28. John? A mere 17. John doesn't need scripture, he is simply writing his own. Chapter 8 is full of Thomas, logion 59 is also new: (59) Jesus said, "Take heed of the living one while you are alive, lest you die and seek to see him and be unable to do so." 8:21 Jesus said therefore again to them, "I am going away, and you will seek me, and you will die in your sins. Where I go, you can't come." Where Thomas means oneself with the living one and stresses to cherish a momentary "enlightenment", John couldn't have made a more literal copy given his own context. Logion 43 is new, and Thomas' answer is a typical one. John makes a slip of the tongue here, contradicting his earlier statement in 3:17: 'For God didn't send his Son into the world to judge the world, but that the world should be saved through him.' (43a) His disciples said to him, "Who are you, that you should say these things to us?" (43b) [Jesus said to them] "You do not realize who I am from what I say to you, but you have become like the Jews, for they (either) love the tree and hate its fruit (or) love the fruit and hate the tree." 8:25 They said therefore to him, "Who are you?" Jesus said to them, "Just what I have been saying to you from the beginning. 26 I have many things to speak and to judge concerning you. However he who sent me is true; and the things which I heard from him, these I say to the world." 27 They didn't understand that he spoke to them about the Father. Verse 51 uses logion 1, which is now mentioned by all four gospel-writers. 8:51 Most certainly, I tell you, if a person keeps my word, he will never see death." Logion 108 is in chapter 10, yet quite different and fairly literally used, quite in line with the bubbling spring used by Thomas in logion 13: Martijn Linssen 18/01/2020 Page 129 The 72 logia of Thomas and their canonical cousins 2020 (108a) Jesus said, "He who will drink from my mouth will become like me. (108b) I myself shall become he, and the things that are hidden will be revealed to him." 10:37 Now on the last and greatest day of the feast, Jesus stood and cried out, "If anyone is thirsty, let him come to me and drink! 38 He who believes in me, as the Scripture has said, from within him will flow rivers of living water." Chapter 11 has logion 111b, and its theme is similar to the previous logion: (111a) Jesus said, "The heavens and the earth will be rolled up in your presence. (111b) And the one who lives from the living one will not see death." (111c) Does not Jesus say, "Whoever finds himself is superior to the world?" 11:23 Jesus said to her, "Your brother will rise again." 24 Martha said to him, "I know that he will rise again in the resurrection at the last day." 25 Jesus said to her, "I am the resurrection and the life. He who believes in me will still live, even if he dies. 26 Whoever lives and believes in me will never die. Do you believe this?" The last sentence of verse 26 is an echo of 111c. Another mystic logion, and John again is the only one to copy it. It certainly isn't an obvious copy, and I find myself reluctantly reusing my previous argument of it being as close a copy as it could possibly have been. Unexpectedly, John has a big surprise: all of a sudden, a prime scene for Caiaphas: 11:47 The chief priests therefore and the Pharisees gathered a council, and said, "What are we doing? For this man does many signs. 48 If we leave him alone like this, everyone will believe in him, and the Romans will come and take away both our place and our nation." 49 But a certain one of them, Caiaphas, being high priest that year, said to them, "You know nothing at all, 50 nor do you consider that it is advantageous for us that one man should die for the people, and that the whole nation not perish." 51 Now he didn't say this of himself, but being high priest that year, he prophesied that Jesus would die for the nation, 52 and not for the nation only, Martijn Linssen 18/01/2020 Page 130 The 72 logia of Thomas and their canonical cousins 2020 but that he might also gather together into one the children of God who are scattered abroad. 53 So from that day forward they took counsel that they might put him to death. Five mentions of Caiaphas in John, against zero, one and two in respectively Mark, Luke and Matthew. Caiaphas as an oracle of God - that is quite more than a surprise. Was Caiaphas a sponsor of this text? This is a case of 'shoot first then ask' with Caiaphas acting out a prophecy before it is revealed. It is almost as if the author had already written down verse 50 and then realised he should have come up with an excuse first. Not opting for the removal or change of verse 50 he just added verse 51 and 52? This is totally unexpected, to include Caiaphas of all people into the grand scheme of God; it is almost turning the Jews into instruments of God as well, with Caiaphas apparently pushing them to kill Jesus. Caiaphas suddenly gets his own stage here, and a very major act and script. Is this an attempt to reconcile with the Jews, excusing them for what they allegedly have done? Is there a need to do so, at the time of this writing? Was there something contemporary going on that made John do this? Perhaps Christians coming from the Gentiles (basically everyone but the Jews, thus also including the Thomas believers who aren't Jewish) numbering less than expected or desired, or is this merely opening a door? It undeniably must have purpose, this is everything but an insignificant turn. That is not all, Caiaphas has another very significant part in John's gospel; that of a stage prop: 18:24 Annas sent him bound to Caiaphas, the high priest. 25 Now Simon Peter was standing and warming himself. They said therefore to him, "You aren't also one of his disciples, are you?" He denied it and said, "I am not." 26 One of the servants of the high priest, being a relative of him whose ear Peter had cut off, said, "Didn't I see you in the garden with him?" 27 Peter therefore denied it again, and immediately the rooster crowed. 28 They led Jesus therefore from Caiaphas into the Praetorium. It was early, and they themselves didn't enter into the Praetorium, that they might not be defiled, but might eat the Passover. Once more I am puzzled, baffled even - Caiaphas and Jesus face each other and nothing happens. Jesus is sent to Caiaphas, and immediately the spotlights turn to Peter who denies Jesus a second and third time, the rooster crows and immediately the spotlights turn to Jesus being led away from Caiaphas. What?! That is impossible: the high priest has been in this scene since Mark, using false witnesses to try and get him to confess, and then tearing Jesus' Martijn Linssen 18/01/2020 Page 131 The 72 logia of Thomas and their canonical cousins 2020 clothes and striking and insulting him (all in order to fulfil prophecies, most from Isaiah chapter 53) - only Luke has a different scene without false witnesses, but with everything else in it. In Matthew the high priest received a name, and it was Caiaphas - that name remains in John but any and all action vanishes in thin air: simply because Annas is his proxy; Caiaphas gets completely off the hook. It is a marvel of marvels: 18:12 So the detachment, the commanding officer, and the officers of the Jews seized Jesus and bound him, 13 and led him to Annas first, for he was father-in-law to Caiaphas, who was high priest that year. 14 Now it was Caiaphas who advised the Jews that it was expedient that one man should perish for the people. The usual scene unfolds after this, although there is no insulting, striking, spitting or slapping; just one little slap and that is it. Verse 18:28 is the last time that Caiaphas is mentioned although he does seem to address Jesus while he is not on the stage: 18:19 The high priest therefore asked Jesus about his disciples and about his teaching. Jesus has been led to Annas just before that, in 18:13, and is led to Caiaphas in 18:24 - it is all a riddle and (only) one thing is clear: the role of the high priest is reduced to nothing. It is a riddle of riddles - why on earth is John making this great scene around Caiaphas? Caiaphas is said to have lived from 14 BCE till 46 CE, and John is writing at least half a century later (there's more on dating the gospels in the chapter on Judas and Thomas). Is this John's attempt to fixate his gospel in the first half of the first century CE, by handing out new information about and from Caiaphas? I have no idea at all, but the sudden attention for and role of Caiaphas is notable. Back to the last few logia; John is the fourth to use logion 55: (55a) Jesus said, "Whoever does not hate his father and his mother cannot become a disciple to me. (55b) And whoever does not hate his brothers and sisters and take up his cross in my way will not be worthy of me." Martijn Linssen 18/01/2020 Page 132 The 72 logia of Thomas and their canonical cousins 2020 12:25 He who loves his life will lose it. He who hates his life in this world will keep it to eternal life. 26 If anyone serves me, let him follow me. Where I am, there my servant will also be. If anyone serves me, the Father will honor him. 'Father and mother' are turned into 'life in this world', and 'becoming a disciple' equated to 'keeping eternal life'. Logion 55b is split across the first and third sentence of verse 26 with 'hating brothers and sisters' substituted for 'serving Jesus', and being worthy of Jesus swapped for 'Father will honor'. Granted, it's out of the box - yet not so out of the box as the next: (24a) His disciples said to him, "Show us the place where you are, since it is necessary for us to seek it." (24b) He said to them, "Whoever has ears, let him hear. (24c) There is light within a man of light, and he lights up the whole world. (24d) If he does not shine, he is darkness." (59) Jesus said, "Take heed of the living one while you are alive, lest you die and seek to see him and be unable to do so." (50a) Jesus said, "If they say to you, 'Where did you come from?', say to them, 'We came from the light, the place where the light came into being on its own accord and established itself and became manifest through their image.' (50b) If they say to you, 'Is it you?', say, 'We are its children, we are the elect of the living father.' (50c) If they ask you, 'What is the sign of your father in you?', say to them, 'It is movement and repose.'" 12:34 The multitude answered him, "We have heard out of the law that the Christ remains forever. How do you say, 'The Son of Man must be lifted up?' Who is this Son of Man?" 35 Jesus therefore said to them, "Yet a little while the light is with you. Walk while you have the light, that darkness doesn't overtake you. He who walks in the darkness doesn't know where he is going. 36 While you have the light, believe in the light, that you may become children of light." Jesus said these things, and he departed and hid himself from them. Verse 34 is inspired by either 24a or 50a or both, questioning the presence and future of Jesus' whereabouts. Verse 35 is a conflation of 24c, 24d and 59, and verse 36 is driven by 50b. Martijn Linssen 18/01/2020 Page 133 The 72 logia of Thomas and their canonical cousins 2020 Farfetched? Possibly, but it is a beautiful play on Thomas' themes. John's gospel is full of 'light' and 'dark': Mark has 4 and 3 verses with those words, Luke 15 and 8, Matthew 15 and 10, John has 25 and 9. I won't count anything for these, it is just too difficult to claim anything; verse 12:35 is a variation on 8:12, (only) such is for sure. Remarkably, in John Jesus explicitly triggers the possession of Judas: 13:26 Jesus therefore answered, "It is he to whom I will give this piece of bread when I have dipped it." So when he had dipped the piece of bread, he gave it to Judas, the son of Simon Iscariot. 27 After the piece of bread, then Satan entered into him. Then Jesus said to him, "What you do, do quickly." I'll comment on that in the next chapter, among others. Chapter 15 suggests that we have a variation on Matthew's use of logion 40: (40) Jesus said, "A grapevine has been planted outside of the father, but being unsound, it will be pulled up by its roots and destroyed." 15:1 "I am the true vine, and my Father is the farmer. There are 61 verses in the Tanakh with the word vine in it, which is hardly surprising given the count of the word vineyard. It is not unthinkable that John would compare Jesus to a vine, and it is very feasible that he would use the Father in the same verse when doing so. The remainder of John is logia-free although he mixes a lot of Thomas in a wonderfully poetic way over and over again - although it is evident that by now John has as much right to Thomasine context as Thomas does. John ends with a last remark: 21: 24 This is the disciple who testifies about these things, and wrote these things. We know that his witness is true. 25 There are also many other things which Jesus did, which if they would all be written, I suppose that even the world itself wouldn't have room for the books that would be written. Martijn Linssen 18/01/2020 Page 134 The 72 logia of Thomas and their canonical cousins 2020 In an effort to appear as a reliable witness, the writer testifies about himself from the "we perspective", stating that his testimony is true. His ego has been playing up throughout the gospel, referring to himself as Jesus' beloved disciple, but this is highly amusing. Five times he refers to himself as the disciple whom Jesus loved, and in all honesty I think that he has every right to be loved by the Church Jesus: without John, I really wonder what would have become of Christianity. What is the final logia score? It was 69 at the start of John, I've counted 3 new ones: 77, 59 and 111 - the total amount of logia copied from Thomas by the gospel-writers is 72, out of the theoretical maximum of 114: 63%. Martijn Linssen 18/01/2020 Page 135 The 72 logia of Thomas and their canonical cousins 2020 Conclusion There are 72 logia from Thomas that have been copied into the canonicals, when we consider only the four gospel-writers. There are more when we use the benefit of the doubt, perhaps, but these 72 are, in my eyes, fairly indisputable. There is clear progression and evolution from the first copier to the last copier: words get dropped or added or both, words get ameliorated, context gets dragged in and reapplied. Words are slightly altered and perfected by Matthew, and he usually has the last say. Mark is the first copier on half of the occasions, and it shows. What are the typical patterns that show throughout these texts? The splitting of logia by the gospel-writers, such as logion 79, is a solid case for them copying Thomas and not the other way around. Thomas joining Luke 11:27-28 with Mark 13:17 or Matthew 24:19? Good luck with arguing that case. Thomas joining the two masters of Luke 16:13 or Matthew 6:24 to their 5:36-39 respectively 9:16-17, so that he can have his logion 47 complete? The most brutal split occurs around logion 45 where the essential middle sentence is left out, that of the good man and his good storehouse, and the evil man and his evil storehouse. When and where it befits the gospel-writers they include it, and when and where it befits them they exclude it. Logion 39 has its doves and serpents moved to Matthew 10:16 whereas he has the other parts in chapter 23; he is the only one who has it so Thomas must have combined those two parts into one logion, because? Logion 76 is used only by Matthew in a particularly poor version in 13:45-46 while ramming through three logia in a row, yet it is Luke and Matthew who use 79d in 12:33-34 respectively 6:19-21. What on earth would the motive be for Thomas to combine these, and isn't it perfectly intelligible why Matthew didn't want it to follow his copy? Luke copies Thomas each and every time, and there are signs of that where Luke is the only one with a reference to Thomas: Luke 4:23 copies the last phrase of Thomas logion 31, Luke 5:33 mentions the word pray from logion 104 yet doesn't put it to any further use. Luke's 17:21 "kingdom inside you" perhaps is the most well-known example. The light of the lamp in Luke 8:16 comes from Thomas 33b, and in 11:21 Luke introduces a part of logion 21 whereas the topic at hand is logion 35. Luke joyfully goes on about a body full of light in 11:36 after exhorting to see to it that the light isn't darkness in 11:35. It is Luke who has to copy logion 72 where the Martijn Linssen 18/01/2020 Page 136 The 72 logia of Thomas and their canonical cousins 2020 Jesus of Thomas states he's not a divider, silently hinting at making the two one. Likely with the goal to debunk the entire context, Luke replays the entire scene but swaps 'divider' for 'judge or arbitrator'. In 12:33 Luke replaces the moth of logion 76 by thief, and it is Matthew who then synchronises the inherent action to that of a thief - and it is impossible for any of that to have happened the other way around. Luke 14:34 shows a glimpse of logion 93. Luke 17:34 borrows the bed from Thomas 61, and Matthew changes it to field - not a likely association, is it. It is clear that the gospel-writers combine two themes of Thomas: the anti-Pharisee attitude, and his rejection of praying, fasting and giving alms in general. The gospel-writers cleverly use the overall rejection by the Jesus of Thomas of those religious habits and apply them only to the Pharisees, with the initial exception made by Mark, and thus fixated in history as fact, of Jesus' disciples not fasting. And they don't even state that those habits are frowned upon, of course: they only suggest that the Pharisees use them hypocritically. Would Thomas really copy them and reject those habits on a whole without even once referring to the Pharisees, perhaps jesting that they at least partially understood his point because they didn't take those habits seriously? It is also clear that Mark sometimes struggles with copying Thomas and has trouble to apply his version to a goal; logion 14c somehow forces Mark to have Jesus declare all foods clean in his 7:19, a true disaster and showstopper for Jews joining their fresh Jesus movement. Then Matthew comes along and fixes it with his 15:20 where he mitigates it all to eating with unwashed hands. I will elaborate on it in a separate paper but Mark trying to apply the Thomas theme of making the two one causes Matthew to commit blasphemy in order to fix it, putting words in the very mouth of God himself. Loving your neighbour like yourself has Mark invent it as the second commandment, and Matthew and even Luke circumvent that unfortunate designation. Mark occasionally also lacks courage in copying Thomas, being the first to do so. The blasphemy logion 44 is started by Mark who dares only to mention blasphemy against the spirit, yet Luke and Matthew feel comfortable to add the Son of Man. None touches the subject of blasphemy against the father, naturally. Mark is reluctant in 13:12 to copy logion 16, yet Luke and Matthew give it all away in 12:51ff respectively 10:34ff. The seed and the weed is touched Martijn Linssen 18/01/2020 Page 137 The 72 logia of Thomas and their canonical cousins 2020 and dropped like a hot potato in Mark 4:26-28, and it comes out so garbled that it takes Matthew 13:24ff to confirm that he did do so. Over-explanation is also something that the first copier suffers: Mark and Luke are most prone to that, and especially Mark sometimes makes a rather painful show of it: the parable of the sower is a fine example. Luke struggles with the parable of the dinner, the parable of the shepherd and the sheep. The pains that all gospel-writers go through in making clear that it is Caesar's coin that which leads Jesus to make the statement - it is painful to watch, they had no idea what Thomas was all about. At times the gospel-writers try to combine Thomas with the Tanakh; Isaiah and Jeremiah are favourite here. The parable of the leaven gets combined with Genesis 18:6, the moving mountain of logion 48 / 106 gets combined with Psalms 46:2, the parable of the vineyard gets the scenery from Isaiah chapter 5. Matthew combines Tanakh in his solos, where he tackles some tricky logia, such as 22d. Matthew also dares to touch the more difficult ones (without Tanakh references) like logion 30, 40, 90, and even 39c. John tackles 59, 77 and 111 - no small feat either. The "gospel sandbox" is another fine example of the canonical copying: the gospel-writers all make up extra content of their own which sometimes varies greatly while handling the same subject. If one disregards all the variation, usually what remains is the literal content of Thomas, their common source. Mark 13:33ff, Luke 12:35ff and Matthew 24:42ff tell a wonderful story of how that can evolve back and forth. The signs of the sky in logion 91 take an extremely wild ride in Luke 12:54ff and Matthew 16:1ff, and the only thing they have in common is the literal text from Thomas. The throwing out of the heir in the parable of the vineyard before killing him, combined with the seizing of him, perhaps is the best example: the essential scene of the entire parable, both in Thomas and the canonicals - how on earth can that be any different at all between any of the four, let alone be so completely different in between the canonicals alone. The gospel-writers also omit significant details, like the mustard seed falling on tilled soil (infamously labelled by Crossan as a 'Gnostic admonition' in his In Parables), the binding of the hands of the strong man. The incredible pace at which Matthew shoves through the parables of the hidden treasure, the pearl and the net: what are the humongously incredible Martijn Linssen 18/01/2020 Page 138 The 72 logia of Thomas and their canonical cousins 2020 odds that Thomas even dared to think that he could make something out of those, let alone the intricately mysterious riddles that he has them in? They also introduce details, such as the lord of the harvest whereas Thomas merely uses lord. The gold in Caesar's logion is essential: no matter what the cost, just fulfil your obligatory duty towards all deities alike, whether they're called Caesar or God, is what Thomas intends to say and then continue with your own goal and god. The destroying of the house of logion 68, which is the image of your own part of the world that you live in, gets applied to the temple which in effect is giving away that the gospel-writers wrote that only after 70 CE, and not before, as it naturally is impossible that their Jesus predicted anything. I'm just squeezing in this little detail, maybe it will get noticed, but I'll address that in my last part of this series, part V of Absolute Thomasine priority. The essence of what the gospel-writers have done is clear: take Thomas content, ignore the inconvenient parts, and apply that to your own context. On top of that, feel free to even change the content, as the goal legitimises any and all means. And all of it has to be explained, of course: exemplified, elaborated on, justified. Almost nothing of what they copy from Thomas save a handful of logia does not get explained, in words or via Tanakh references, be those real or not. Especially Matthew brutally invents and creates scripture where that suits him, happily ripping out of context Tanakh words and lines, entire verses, if that serves his goal. Needless to say, even if Thomas copied anything from the canonicals - what is his business case of doing so, when absolutely nothing in his text gets any explanation, elaboration or justification? The metamorphosis model is a clear and evident indication of Thomas being original, although it is technically possible - yet extremely unlikely - that he took all of his from the (at that point not extant) New Testament, up to including Acts and Paul, and applied his beautifully intricate model to it. The pointer to the entire Judaic and Israelian history, detailed in the book of Chronicles, magically condensed into one single logion, 46, where Thomas relishes in the destruction of the temple and the last kingdom of the Jews, the complete shattering of the Israelian dream, by Zedekiah, aka Johannes the Immerser, who immersed Jeremiah in mud, had his eyes broken by Nebuchadnezzar, and whose cousin got a seat above all other kings, finally, at the very end of Chronicles - that alone is evidence enough that Thomas was first and foremost. Martijn Linssen 18/01/2020 Page 139 The 72 logia of Thomas and their canonical cousins 2020 Yet following these 72 logia, witnessing their evolution close-by, seeing how little words are changed, shifted, inverted, reapplied. Peeking at the evidence left behind by Luke who has Thomas content that no one else has, several times; that does speak volumes about exactly how the content gets changed in between these four storytellers, and it is up to you to judge in which direction the dependence unfolds, with every single letter of every single word of every single shared logion at your disposal, right here, free of charge. And finally, with the revelation of logion 74 in its true meaning, its original meaning, it is clear where 'healing the sick' comes from, and what it means, and which purpose it serves. And there is more, far more, to the true meaning of Thomas in my translation - expected Q1 2020. After 2,000 years, the words of Thomas will finally be revealed as they were supposed to be revealed. And they are truly beautiful, hopeful, healing, and liberating Martijn Linssen 18/01/2020 Page 140