For all of those with an axe to grind...here's something that has even given Christians, over the years, something to bicker about. Many non-believers say that Christians have always been the misogynistic sort and this Gospel gives rise to that possibility. The Gospel itself has been declared heretical so not to worry about its acceptance within any faith-based dogma.
I'm a traditional man. I believe that man has a place and women have a place. When these parameters get muddled is when Gods plan for humanity becomes cloudy and mans plans become self-absorbed. I've said enough on this issue. My outlook shouldn't surprise anyone if you were privey to my background.
Be careful to scroll to the very bottom where the most inflamatory script resides. Not much need to read it all as most scripture is redundant.
Have a great day and GOD(willy/priapus whatever lol)bless!
OSP, I am in no way a biblical schloar, but I have read multiple versions of the bible. This seems quite different than any other part of the bible I've ever read.
For one, it does lift from other parts of the Gospel, which isn't all that unusual, at least when you're talking about the Synoptic Gospels. However, the Synoptic Gospels have something in common that this doesn't. A shared storyline.
I also noticed that the language used contains far more modern concepts. Words like "diet" is a dead giveaway. Now, one might boil this down to a modern translation, but in those days food was quite scarce. Commandments on the specifics of what not to eat appear in the bible, but a "diet" of what to eat doesn't.
There are other giveaways as well. The bible is quite redundant, and it's concepts are quite simple. You get plenty of methaphors and parables, but not many abstract ideas. You see quite a few such ideas here.
The rest of the Gospels don't seem to have much quotations from the other disciples (or any that I can think of off the top of my head), where this one does.
In my mind, none of these things add up.
As for women and men having their own place, I gotta admit to some degree I believe that. For instance, I think it's improper for women to serve in the armed forces. That's not to say that I think their rights to do so should be taken away from them. I just think that the horror of warfare should be reserved to men.
I also think that men are better suited at protecting the home, and I think there's scientific evidence for this (I won't bore people with those details, unless they want me to), while women are more suited for detail work. As mankind evolved, men were primarily the hunters, and women were the home keepers. In this day and age, I think that makes women better suited for a lot of white collar work, including running businesses.
I don't think patriarchy is very desirable, but neither is matriarchy. Bottom line: I think that while men and women are different, and are likely then going to excell at different skills, we should still have equality and equal rights.
And the supposed author, Thomas, blatantly tries to make himself appear to be the most important disciple, in Jesus' eyes.
It is a total non-sequitur.
Further, it indicates lesbians would have greater access to heaven than pretty young hetero babes. What kinda deity would make such rules?
BTW, good to have you back, John.
-- Modified on 8/25/2011 2:37:31 PM