Turriff said…

In general, I see no way to deny that there are gnostic leanings in the Gospel of Thomas. That having been said, the question of redation, (either way: synoptic added to Gnostic, Gnostic added to synoptic)should first be resolved. As stated in the link by Arnal, there is still no sure way of knowing which came first. Furthermore, in perusing Mark, one can see that even the synoptic Gospels have messages that can easily be interpreted by readers as “Gnostic” as we understand it in the course so far, such as Mark 10:6-9. This passage could easily be interpreted as a gnostic attack against the sins of the flesh holding back salvation.

11:36 AM
Julia said…

I agree that some sayings could be interpreted as “Gnostic” in the Gospel of Thomas, as well as in Mark and so many other places. I have recently finished William’s book “Rethinking Gnosticism” and I would like here to emphasize his point that this is one of the major problems with the category “Gnosticism” itself- that it can be applied to almost anything. This is a very vague category that brings a lot of baggage with it, but amounts to really no more than a kind of attitude or feeling of “rebellion” or “world-hating”.

7:47 PM