According to the Jesus of Thomas
Thursday, May 16, 2013
KNOW THYSELF!
By
Francis William Bessler
Laramie, Wyoming
5/16/2013
In one of my favorite books - THE GOSPEL ACCORDING TO THOMAS (banned by church and state in the 4th Century) - at the end of Verse 3, Jesus said: If you know yourselves, then you will be known and you will know that you are sons of the Living Father. But if you do not know yourselves, then you are in poverty and you are poverty.
That is quite a statement. Isn’t it? If true, it is to say that the only really important knowledge one needs in life is some “knowledge of oneself” - and of others by virtue of that knowledge. I will continue this little discussion a little later. OK?
To interrupt my main strain of thought, however, let me offer a non-scholarly opinion. When people ask me about so called gospels like THE GOSPEL ACCORDING TO THOMAS, mostly they wonder if they are authentic. My answer to that is I DON’T KNOW, but neither do I know that the regular gospels of the BIBLE are authentic either. I mean I was not there when any of them were written.
Being a writer myself, however, I am almost 100 % sure that all gospels were written by men - not by God. I am writing this article. God is not writing it. I am a man - not God. Thomas was a man - not God. Matthew was a man - not God. Mark was a man - not God. Luke was a man - not God. John was a man - not God. All gospels were written by men - not God.
As a man - and not God - I can err - or make up things to make a point as if they really happened. Just because I may have written something does not make it true. Does it? In all likelihood, those who wrote about Jesus probably “created events” to better persuade potential converts to follow them.
Did Jesus really heal the sick and dying? Who knows? Some gospels claim he did; but, again, one has to keep in focus why those gospels were written - to convert others of another faith or belief to a faith in Jesus. Could Mark have lied to make a convert? Of course, he could have. If I can lie to make a convert of you, then Mark or John or whoever could have lied to make others converts to their cause.
I think it worthwhile to point out one very likely fabrication; and if one of the gospel writers could have fabricated one event, there is no reason to believe that other events could not have been fabricated too.
Case in point: the story in THE GOSPEL OF JOHN that offers that Jesus raised his friend, Lazarus, from the dead after Lazarus had been dead for three days. The reason I believe that was fabricated by John is that John is believed to have written his gospel long after the first three - Mark, Matthew, and Luke (in that order) wrote their gospels. All three of the earlier gospel writers offer various miracles by Jesus to illustrate that Jesus had some extraordinary power. Yet none of the earlier three mention anything about Jesus raising Lazarus from the dead. Just how likely is it that three gospel writers could all either omit or forget a miracle so great that it is considered to be the “greatest miracle of all time”? How likely is it that three gospel writers - who all feature miracles by Jesus - could have possibly bypassed the telling of a story so great as the raising of someone from the dead? How likely is that?
Of course, we should all be left to make our own judgments about that, but I have long ago decided that the chance is almost zilch that three people, writing about the same man, would ignore telling the story of the “greatest miracle of all time.” That is to imply that the story by John was fabricated; and therein is one example of one likely fabrication offered in the regular gospels of the BIBLE; and if there is one, there may be many more too. Such is as it is.
One thing that is particularly irking to me is an assumption that some writing was written by God - or especially inspired of God where other writings were not and are not. It is really irking to have some one ask me - Do you not believe in THE WORD OF GOD? And they ask that as if they are absolutely sure that the writing of reference is really “the word of God” as if no man ever had a part in writing it. Accordingly, in being so sure that a writing is “scriptural” as they say - or written by God - no one should doubt what it says.
Thus, you are given to believe that you are not supposed to challenge the “word of God” - dictated by God but typed or scrawled by the likes of Francis William Bessler or Matthew or Mark or Luke or John - or my favorite, Thomas. You are supposed to believe that God really authored this article, but I was only His instrument in writing it - like being one who simply took notes from a real God who dictated to me what I should write.
But that claim is probably false. God does not write gospels. Men have - and men may continue to do so. I think it is very important to keep that in mind when reviewing any work - be it so called “scriptural” or otherwise. I am a man, not God. All the gospels ever written were by men - not God. The Book of Mormon was written by a man, Joseph Smith - not God. The Book of Islam was written by a man, Mohammed - not God. If we do not approach any writing with that knowledge, then we will likely never attain any true wisdom in life. Why? Because wisdom is something we know for its intrinsic truth or argument - not for what someone else claimed it to be - or claims it to be.
Is THE GOSPEL ACCORDING TO THOMAS authentic? Did Jesus really say what Thomas claimed he said? I DON’T KNOW, but my own approach to any writing is to ask myself if it makes sense. Does a writing make sense? In the end, it may or may not be “authentic” in terms of being a real statement - or something that Jesus really did say; but knowing as I do that Thomas was not God and that Thomas may have not heard what Jesus really did say, I can take all that Thomas says with that proverbial grain of salt. Let me salt every thing I read and let nothing that I read be taken like it is without possibility of error.
I do not know the complete history of THE GOSPEL ACCORDING TO THOMAS because whether it is authentic or not, we have no original - just like we have no original from any of the others either. All we have are rewrites of what may have been originals. In the case at point, the Apostle of Jesus named Thomas may have taken some kind of notes during the life of Jesus and jotted them down - and that may be what THE GOSPEL ACCORDING TO THOMAS really represents; but then it may also be true that someone wrote in the name of Thomas and wrote his original a century after the Apostle Thomas died. I DO NOT KNOW - but neither does anyone else in our times.
Some scholars argue that THE GOSPEL ACCORDING TO THOMAS was probably not written by the Apostle, Thomas and was probably written in the 2nd Century. Maybe they are right; and maybe they are wrong too. Maybe the first gospel was that of Apostle, Thomas, but given that an earlier writing had to be rewritten to be recorded safely due to some corruption of an earlier source, maybe the earliest “rewrite” was written in the 2nd Century. Who knows? I DO NOT.
I do know, however, that THE GOSPEL ACCORDING TO THOMAS was hidden away in a cave from the 4th Century or thereabouts to 1945 when a copy of it was found in a cave off the Nile River in Egypt, near a town called Nag Hammadi. The copy found was in a Coptic - or earlier Egyptian - language. In all likelihood, THE GOSPEL OF THOMAS was buried in the 4th Century to keep it from being destroyed because the Christian church of the time had just been recognized as legitimate by Emperor Constantine - and Constantine wanted the church to adopt a canon of only some gospels and ban and destroy all others - in order to make rule within the church and state more commanding - or controlling.
Well, in outlawing all books that did not fit a certain criterion, many were tossed on the scrap heap. But rather than follow an edict to destroy all books, someone probably stashed works like THE GOSPEL ACCORDING TO THOMAS away - and it would be hidden and unknown from that time of its being stashed in the 4th Century to 1945 - when it was discovered by accident by a peasant going through a cave where it was hidden. And the rest is history, as they say. The found Coptic GOSPEL OF THOMAS has been translated into lots of languages, including my English, and thus I (and we) have available for review something that most of post Jesus history has not. Thanks to Fate; and thanks to a peasant stumbling onto a hidden jar in a cave in Egypt in modern times, we now have a somewhat “alternate” view of Jesus.
Is it authentic? Again, that is not for me to either know or say. I DO NOT KNOW, but according to my own approach to any writing, “if it makes sense, it may be so.”
Personally, I consider two gospels tossed on the scrap heap in the 4th Century to be among my favorite writings - THE GOSPEL ACCORDING TO THOMAS and THE GOSPEL ACCORDING TO MARY MAGDALENE - both of which I feature as selections in my website - www.una-bella-vita.com. I do not consider either of those gospels completely authentic for no way to prove they are or are not authentic, but I consider both of them as immensely important as “food for thought.” Feel welcome to check them out as you wish.
For what it’s worth, I have gone through the trouble of formatting each of these gospels so that the pages can be printed and cut into segments. The printed segments can then be inserted like photos into clear sleeves of a standard 4” by 6” twenty-four page photo book for easy reference. My purpose in that is to make it easy to make a handbook of either or both gospels - and then people can either browse them on their own - or perhaps form discussion groups to discuss them. Again, feel welcome to do as you wish. OK?
Also, I reference the Gospels of Thomas and Mary Magdalene considerably in my general writings as found in my OUT IN THE OPEN selections of my website. In Volume 7 of that series, I offer a personal interpretation of both gospels as well. That is not to say that my interpretation of various verses is correct, but only that I offer my opinion.
Everything is opinion, as far as I am concerned - and that includes any interpretation of my favorite gospels. I am always learning. I pride myself in that. Accordingly, an interpretation of today may be quite different than an interpretation of yesterday - including the 3rd Verse of THE GOSPEL ACCORDING TO THOMAS I am featuring in this article. I may see a meaning tomorrow that I did not see yesterday. Having an open mind always allows for that. Doesn’t it?
I consider both of my favorite gospels to be like LIVING DOCUMENTS - meaning that each reading can offer a new light. If some verse does not make sense today, read it again tomorrow - and it might make more sense. If not, it’s ok to skip a verse too. If a verse does not make sense, it just might be phony for having been added to a version by a party other than the original author, too. That is always a possibility. Isn’t it?
For what it’s worth, there are 114 verses of Jesus said statements in THE GOSPEL ACCORDING TO THOMAS. It’s not a narrative - like the gospels in the BIBLE - but 114 verses is a lot of food for thought - even if a bit of it might be somewhat bitter - or incorrect or misleading. Ah, but most of THE GOSPEL ACCORDING TO THOMAS, in my opinion, is as sweet as it could be for its summary tremendous wisdom. I highly recommend it!
Now, let me continue.
Regarding the earlier quote that IF YOU KNOW YOURSELVES, YOU WILL BE KNOWN, is it true? I am not sure about the last part of that - the part about my being known if I know myself - but I don’t think the last part is very important anyway. I think it is definitely true, though, that you can’t know me unless I know myself; and “knowing myself” is the important part of the verse. What does it really matter what you think of me - or think you know about me. It only matters about what I think - and hopefully know - about myself. It is knowledge of myself that is critical - not others perception of me.
But who really knows who they really are? Do you know yourself? Do you know who you really are? Better put from my point of view, however, is - do I know myself? Do I know who I really am?
So, who am I really? If I am to gauge an answer to that based on the conclusion of Verse 3 of THE GOSPEL ACCORDING TO THOMAS, Jesus would answer that question by telling me that, in effect, “if I know that I am a son of the Living Father, then I will know who I am.” Right? I mean, if you believe that the Jesus of Thomas is accurate, the end result is that “if I know myself, I will know that I am a son of the Living Father.” And since everyone of us is the same - all sons of the Living Father - then if you do not know yourself as a “son of the Living Father,” then you do not know yourself.
Makes it pretty simple, doesn’t it? All I have to do to really know who I am is to know I am “a son of the Living Father”; and if I do not know myself as such, then what I do know is false - or what I think I know is false. If I think I am something different than a “son of the Living Father,” then I really have no handle on who I really am; and it is worthwhile, I think, that “son” in this verse probably does not mean “male progeny,” but rather “any progeny” - male, female, or otherwise.
How many do you know, however, who would answer the question about who they are in those terms- about being a “progeny of the Living Father”? If someone were to come up to you and ask you “Who are you?” - what would be your answer? Would you reply - I AM A SON (or progeny) OF THE LIVING FATHER? Or would you go about answering the question with either an “I don’t know” or some other answer?
Notice, too, that in Verse 3 of THE GOSPEL ACCORDING TO THOMAS, Jesus did not say what one would expect him to say if so many who preach about Jesus were (and are) right. Notice that Jesus did not say that to know myself, I should answer the question about who I am in terms of being a sinner. Did Jesus say such as this: If you know yourselves, then you will be known and you will know that you are sinners?
No!
But “being a sinner” and not a “son of the Living Father” is exactly what so many traditional Christians believe. Are we “sinners”? I do believe that the Jesus of Thomas would argue that if you think you are a sinner, then you think wrongly - and consequently, if you think wrongly, then you really do not know yourself. And if you believe you are a sinner, then the last part of Verse 3 is true about you too. YOU ARE IN POVERTY AND YOU ARE POVERTY.
Presto! A very succinct explanation of why the world, in general, is so impoverished. In effect, almost no one knows they are “sons of the Living Father.” Why? At least partly because for all these many hundreds of years, we have had the key to really knowing who we are, but we have buried the lesson.
Why was the lesson buried? Perhaps that is subject to debate, but I believe the answer lies simply in “control.” One cannot control another unless that other is led to believe he or she is inadequate by him or herself. Thus, the REAL JESUS was probably tossed out and a substitute was put in his place - with what amounts to a totally contrary doctrine. Why? So that some could rule over others - in the name of a Jesus who would have forbid it.
Examine yourself. Do you have need to rule over another? If you answered “yes,” then in all likelihood, you do not believe you are a “son of the Living Father.” In my opinion, if you do believe you are a son of the Living Father - or son of God - then you will also know that the one upon whom you would impose control is equally another son of the Living Father. I think the evidence of everyday life will tell you that only those who believe they have the right to impose control on others do not believe they are themselves “sons of the Living Father.” In essence, they do not know themselves - according to the dictum of the Jesus of Thomas; and I believe the Jesus of Thomas is absolutely right. How about you?
So, where did it go wrong? How come we have been led to believe that we are sinners with that message being preached like it is the ONLY GOSPEL worth believing? Why did the so called Apostle Paul preach otherwise? Why did he preach the opposite message of the likely REAL JESUS? Why did he preach that “all are sinners and all fall short of the glory of God”? Why? Ultimately, I think he preached that lesson because he did not “know himself,” as the REAL JESUS would have had him do; but he probably failed to know the real message of Jesus because he probably never heard it. That is being fair to Paul.
Keep in mind that Paul did not know Jesus in his lifetime. He only “came to know” Jesus after Jesus was crucified - crucified probably for arguing that people are not really true sinners - in terms of being “short of the glory of God.” In all likelihood, Paul never heard that Jesus ever taught that to know yourself is to know you are a “son of the Living Father.” That is probably why Paul carried on as he did - sincerely believing in the Jesus others preached to him; and given the lack of reference to Thomas in the so called “scriptures” after Jesus died, it is likely that Thomas was not one of the “others” that Paul may have heard.
Where was Thomas after Jesus died? What happened to him? Thomas was one of the original twelve apostles of Jesus; and yet after Jesus died, it seems that Thomas just disappeared. What happened to him? Who knows? But reasonably if he was not part of the Israeli segment of Christianity after Jesus died, then it is likely he left Israel - and took his notes about Jesus (or gospel) with him - thereby depriving the likes of Paul from any exposure to an alternate view of Jesus. Paul probably depended entirely upon Israeli Christians like Peter and associates - and since Peter probably did not subscribe to the notion that all are “sons of the Living Father,” Paul probably never heard the idea.
Again, what happened to Thomas? No one knows; and it has been my experience that no one wonders either. Some scholars think that Thomas may have been of Greek heritage. If so, maybe Thomas originated from a foreign country like Egypt - and perhaps, from a city like Alexandria, Egypt - known for its Greek oriented culture. Maybe after Jesus died, Thomas returned to Alexandria - or some other foreign establishment. If so, he would have taken his “notes” or “gospel” with him. Makes sense to me.
Some say that Thomas eventually made his way to India and championed a form of Christianity there. I do not know, but whatever happened to him, he probably left Israel and took his version of Jesus with him - thus subjecting Israeli Christianity to a single view of Jesus - that of Peter and his comrades. With Thomas gone, Paul may have never heard that “his” Jesus really preached that all are “sons of the Living Father.”
And as it may have happened to Paul, it has happened to lots of us who claim we are Christian - myself included. How was Paul to know that Jesus probably really believed that “knowledge of self is the most important knowledge of all” if no one told him? How are you to believe in that message if all you ever hear is that Jesus preached that all are sinners and that all “fall short of the glory of God”?
Indeed, who would really want to “know himself (or herself)” if one’s perception of oneself is that one is “short of the glory of God”? Sadly, Paul probably believed that Jesus taught we are all “short of the glory of God” because that is what he heard from Peter - and associates. If Thomas was right, however, Jesus probably taught that all are “full of the glory of God.” That would put a whole different light on “oneself.” Wouldn’t it?
As a kid growing up, no one told me that Jesus may have preached that I am “a son of the Living Father” because, in all fairness to everyone who ever taught me anything - no one was aware of such an expression. My dear Dad did not know that he was “a son of the Living Father.” My dear Mom - who passed away exactly nine years ago today on May 16th, 2004 - did not know she was “a son of the Living Father.” My seven siblings, 4 brothers and 3 sisters, did not know they were “sons of the Living Father.” Leastwise, none of us ever addressed ourselves as that. My dear and wonderful priest, Father Carroll, did not know he was “a son of the Living Father.” No! No one knew - and that is why I did not know for a long, long time in this wonderful life; but I do know now; and I encourage all to share in that knowledge.
Hey! Time to say “Good Night!” In the end, we all have to make up our own minds; and that is the way it should be. Right? Are you “a son of the Living Father”? I do believe I am because I believe it is impossible to be other than that. No one can escape being a “progeny of the Living Father” - no matter how much they might try - or wish it to be.
Indeed, it’s quite a notion - being “a son of the Living Father.” I think it is THE KEY to living a good life. Knowing yourself is important, but knowing yourself as what you truly are - a son of the Living Father - is the most important knowledge of all. At least I think so.
Let me leave you with the front part of that Verse 3 I quoted up front. If you would, and if you dare, try this one on for size. I offered the last part at the beginning of this article, but the entire verse is below. I leave you to ponder the lines - and maybe come to KNOW THYSELF - not in any personal detail - but JUST GENERALLY as an equal “Son of The Living Father”!
Really, shouldn’t that be ENOUGH?
JESUS SAID: IF THOSE WHO LEAD YOU SAY TO YOU: “SEE, THE KINGDOM IS IN HEAVEN,” THEN THE BIRDS OF THE HEAVEN WILL PRECEDE YOU. IF THEY SAY TO YOU: “IT IS IN THE SEA,” THEN THE FISH WILL PRECEDE YOU. BUT THE KINGDOM IS WITHIN YOU AND IT IS WITHOUT YOU. IF YOU (WILL) KNOW YOURSELVES, THEN YOU WILL BE KNOWN AND YOU WILL KNOW THAT YOU ARE SONS OF THE LIVING FATHER. BUT IF YOU DO NOT KNOW YOURSELVES, THEN YOU ARE IN POVERTY AND YOU ARE POVERTY.
Thanks! (FWB)