Wikipedia

Injil Tomas

Revisi sejak 14 Februari 2006 21.36 oleh Stephensuleeman (bicara | kontrib) (→Kebingungan dengan karya-karya lain)

Injil Tomas, yang terlestarikan lengkap dalam sebuah manuskrip papirus berbahasa Koptik, dan ditemukan pada 1945 di Nag Hammadi, Mesir, adalah sebuah kumpulan dari 114 ucapan yang diyakini berasal dari Yesus. Sebagian dari ucapan-ucapan itu ditemukan dalam keempat Injil kanonik (Injil Matius, Injil Markus, Injil Lukas, dan Injil Yohanes), namun ucapan-ucapan yang lainnya tidak dikenal sebelum penemuan naskah.

Berbeda dengan keempat injil kanonik yang menggunakan laporan naratif tentang kehidupan Yesus, Tomas mengambil bentuk yang kurang terstruktur dari kumpulan ucapan yang berasal dari Yesus, dialog-dialog singkat dengan Yesus, dan ucapan-ucapan yang dilaporkan oleh murid-muridnya kepada Didimus Yudas Tomas tanpa diletakkan dalam narasi apapun atau disusun ke dalam konteks filosofis atau retorika yang manapun.

Ketika teks yang lengkap ditemukan, dalam versi Koptik, disadari bahwa tiga bagian berbahasa Yunani yang terpisah dari Injil ini sudah ditemukan di Oxyrhynchus, Mesir, pada 1898. Manuskrip-manuskrip yang memuat potongan-potongan berbahasa Yunani dari Injil Tomas diperkirakan berasal dari tahun 200, dan manuskrip versi Koptik dari tahun 340. Meskipun versi Koptik ini tidak persis sama dengan fragmen-fragmen Yunani manapun, diyakini bahwa versi Koptik ini diterjemahkan dari versi Yunani yang sudah ada sebelumnya.

Kebingungan dengan karya-karya lain

Injil Tomas adalah karya yang berbeda dan tidak terkait dengan tulisan-tulisan apokrif atau pseudoepigrafa lainnya, Kisah Perbuatan Tomas, dan tulisan yang disebut Injil Masa Kanak-kanak Tomas, yang memperluas teks-teks kanonik untuk menggambarkan masa kanak-kanak Yesus yang ajaib. Ketika Hippolitus dan Origenes (sekitar tahun 233) merujuk kepada sebuah "Injil Tomas" di antara injil-injil apokrif yang heterodoks, tidak jelas apakah yang mereka maksudkan itu adalah Injil Masa Kanak-kanak Tomas atau Injil Tomas yang berisikan "ucapan=ucapan" ini. Injil Tomas juga berbeda dengan Kitab Tomas sang Calon, sebuah teks Gnostik.

Pada abad ke-4, Kiril dari Yerusalem menyebutkan tentang sebuah "Injil Tomas" dalam Kathekesis V-nya: "Jangan seorangpun membaca injil menurut Tomas, karena ini bukanlah karya salah seorang dari kedua belas rasul, melainkan karya dari ketiga murid Mani yang jahat". Sedikit sekali jejak yang tersisa dari dualisme Manikheis yang dapat ditemukan dalam Injil "ucapan-ucapan" ini, yaitu Injil Tomas, yang disepakati lebih sederhana, kurang berisikan legenda, dan sama sekali tidak ditulis sebagai sebuah dokumen sastrawi.

Papirus Oxyrhyncus yang sejajar

Sebelum penemuan perpustakaan Nag, ucapan-ucapan Yesus yang ditemukan di Oxyrhyncus dikenal semata-mata sebagai Logia Iesu. Potongan-potongan Injil Tomas dalam bahasa Yunani koine yang ditemukan di Oxyrhyncus adalah:

  • Oxyrhyncus 1 - ini adalah setengah lembaran papirus yang memuat potongan-potongan dari logion (kumpulan ucapan) 26 hingga 33.
  • Oxyrhyncus 654 - yang mengandung potongan-potongan dari permulaan sampai dengan logion 7, logion 24 dan logion 36 dalam lembaran sebaliknya dari sehelai papirus yang memuat data tinjauan.
  • Oxyrhyncus 655 - yang mengandung potongan-potongan dari logion 36 sampai dengan logion 39 dan sesungguhnya 8 fragmen yang dinamai a hingga h; namun f dan h sejak itu telah hilang.

Waktu penulisan

Saat ini ada banyak perdebatan tentang kapan teks ini disusun. Para pakar biasanya tergolong ke dalam dua kubu: kubu awal' yang mendukung waktu penulisan sekitar tahun 50-an sebelum injil-injil kanonik dan kubu akhir yang setuju bahwa waktu penulisannya terjadi setelah injil-injil kanonik terakhir pada tahun 100-an. Di antara para sarjana kritis, kubu awal dominan di Amerika Utara, sementara kubu akhir lebih populer di Eropa (khususnya di Britania dan Jerman).


The early camp

The early camp argues that since it consists of mostly original material and does not seem to be based on the canonical gospels, it must have been transcribed from an oral tradition. Since the practice of considering oral tradition as authoritative ended during the 1st century, the Gospel of Thomas therefore must have been written before then, perhaps as early as around 40. Since this date antecedes the dates of the traditional four gospels, there is some claim that the Gospel of Thomas is or has some connection to the Q gospel —the name for an unknown, theorised text (or oral verse) which may have spawned the parts of the gospels of Matthew and Luke known today which don't duplicate in some manner the Gospel of Mark.

The early camp argues that about half of the material in Thomas has no known parallels to the New Testament, and at least some of this material could plausibly be attributed to the historical Jesus, such as saying 42 "Be passers-by."

The early camp also notes that Q is almost universally regarded by secular biblical scholars as the most parsimonious explanation for the synoptic problem and is widely regarded to be the earliest written text of Jesus' teachings. It has been hypothesized that Q exists in 3 strata, termed Q1, Q2, and Q3, with the apocalyptic material belonging in Q2 and Q3. Secular biblical scholars have identified 37 sayings that overlap between Thomas and Q, all of which are conjectured to be in either Q1 or Q2 and none of which included the latter, apocalyptic material of Q3. Hence, Thomas shows little or no knowledge of Q3, did not incorporate or was not aware of Q3. The Q layers of Q1 and Q2 are thought to predate the four gospels. Hence the Gospel of Thomas is thought to be early.

The central argument of Elaine Pagels' Beyond Belief (2003) is that there seems to be conflict between the Gospel of John and the Gospel of Thomas. According to Pagels, who is the Harrington Spear Paine Professor of Religion at Princeton University, certain specific passages in the Gospel of John can only be understood in light of Thomas-like sayings, ideas, traditions, philosophical beliefs, and community, whether or not precisely represented in the present Gospel of Thomas itself. The most famous example in the Gospel of John is of "Doubting Thomas," which Pagels interprets as rebuttal for the Thomas community - Doubting Thomas is made, in John, to physically touch Jesus and acknowledge his fleshy nature, in contrast to the docetism of gnostic groups. Pagels' interpretation of John logically requires that Thomas-like ideas or a Thomas-like community, if not the present Gospel of Thomas, already existed when John's gospel was written. An unsympathetic evaluation of Pagels' book can be found here.

Another argument for the early camp is that there is overlap between Paul's epistles and Thomas. The authentic corpus of Paul's epistles, which include 1 Corinthians, Galatians, and Philippians are universally regarded by secular biblical scholars as predating the canonical Gospels of Mark, Matthew, Luke, and John. There are overlaps between teachings found in Paul and in Thomas that are not found in the canonical Gospels, (nor independently attested by them), and that Thomas therefore may have drawn on a common sayings pool that was drawn upon both by the canonical gospels and by Thomas. According to this theory, Paul was drawing on sayings that were widely recognized to come from Jesus, some which are uniquely preserved in Gospel of Thomas.

The early camp argues that if Thomas knew of the New Testament, including the Pauline epistles, and if it is thought that Thomas showed gnostic tendencies, then it is surprising that he did not take the opportunity to include many verses that would have supported such "gnostic" theology, which are present in the canonical New Testament, such as John 8:58 "Before Abraham was born, I AM." The Gospel of Thomas did in fact include a great deal of material unparalleled in the New Testament. It, however, lacks distinctive terms from second century Gnosticism such as archons, pleroma, aeons, demiurge that would be expected from a product of historical Gnosticism: this is seen by some as another justification for an earlier date of authorship.

The late camp

The late camp, on the other hand, dates Thomas sometime after 100, generally in the early and mid 2nd century, but a few argue that Thomas is dependent on the Diatessaron, which was composed shortly after 172. Since the Greek fragments of Thomas found in Egypt are typically dated between 140 and 200, the ultra-late, post-Diatessaronic position remains a small minority, even within the late camp.

The main argument put forth by the late camp is an argument from redaction. Under the most commonly accepted solution to the Synoptic problem, Matthew and Luke both used Mark, as well as a lost sayings collection called Q, to compose their gospels. Sometimes Matthew and Luke modified the wording of their source, Mark (or Q), and the modified text is known as redaction. Proponents of the late camp argue that some of this secondary redaction created by Matthew and Luke shows up in Thomas, which means that Thomas was written after Matthew and Luke were composed. Since Matthew and Luke are generally thought to have been composed in the 80s and 90s, Thomas would have to be composed later than that. Members of the early camp respond to this argument by suggesting that second-century scribes may have been the ones responsible for the Synoptic redaction now present in our manuscripts of Thomas, not its original author. Both camps agree, however, that the fluidity of the text in the 2nd century makes dating the Thomas very difficult.

A related argument is that Matthew and Luke independently incorporated their own local traditions into their gospels in addition to the traditions they obtained from Mark and Q. These local traditions are usually known as Sondergut or special material. The late camp notes that Thomas parallels not just the shared material in the Synoptic gospels, but also the special material found in each one of them. The late camp concludes that accessing this diverse set of materials, including local traditions, would be much easier after the canonical gospels were circulating rather than before. Those who argue for a later date for Thomas also call into question the apparent assumption of those within the early camp that "sayings" material is necessarily earlier than full-fledged gospels that include narrative.

The last major argument for Thomas's being later than the New Testament is on a History of Religions analysis. In particular, it is argued that Gnosticism is a later development, while the earliest Christianity, as evident in Paul's letters, was more Jewish than Gentile and focused on the death and resurrection of Jesus more than his words. In this connection, it is observed that the Jesus of Thomas does not seem very Jewish, and that its current form reflects the work of second-century Gnostic thought, such as the rejection of the physical world and women (see Thomas 114). It should be noted that the Gospel of John is replete with statements that involve a rejection of the physical world (see John 6:63), and all four gospels state "this world" belongs to the "devil". Graham Stanton, (The Gospels and Jesus 2002, p. 129) finds in Thomas a Gnostic document: "removal of the Gnostic veneer will never be easy."

The early camp, on the other hand, counters that Thomas reflects very little to none of the full-blown Valentinian gnosticism as seen in many of the other texts in the cache of manuscripts found at Nag Hammadi. In fact, some point out not all of the Nag Hammadi texts are gnostic; for example, one of the texts is a paraphrase of Plato's Republic, which predates gnosticism by centuries. It is also noted that gnosticism was a fluid belief system containing both new elements and old, and that material identifed as "gnostic" in Thomas may have been current as early as 50. As for the focus on the cross that Thomas lacks, early daters contend that Thomas belonged to an early form of Christianity, exemplified by Q, that concentrated on the sayings of teachings of Jesus. If one is a skeptic of Q, however, like several leading scholars in the U.K. (see Farrer hypothesis), this argument is less probative.

Allegations of sexism and Saying 114

114. Simon Peter said to them, "Make Mary leave us, for females don't deserve life." Jesus said, "Look, I will guide her to make her male, so that she too may become a living spirit resembling you males. For every female who makes herself male will enter the kingdom of Heaven."

In Saying 114 of the Gospel of Thomas, Peter, who represents the orthodox viewpoint, asks Jesus to tell Mary Magdalene to leave, as women in general are unworthy of spiritual teachings. Jesus refuses Peter's request, and states that women who transform themselves as men become worthy of spiritual teachings.

In Lee Strobel's The Case for Christ, a popular evangelical apologetic work, one of the apologists makes a claim that Saying 114 in the Gospel of Thomas depicts a Jesus who rejects women, and therefore, is apocryphal. However, it must be rememberd that it is Peter, not Jesus, that is depicted as stating women are unworthy, and it was Jesus who affirmed that Mary Magdalene, a woman, had a right to receive spiritual teachings. The detection of a sexist intention behind the saying must be found without reference to modern understandings of the term, but rather in the linguistic context of first century Palestine, in which it would have had a more inclusive reverberation. Such an understanding would, in any case, cohere more fully with the attitudes to women reflected in the rest of the text. The Gospel of Thomas certainly acknowledges Jesus had female apostles, including Mary Magdalene and Salome, while by comparison all canonical Gospels acknowledge women only as disciples. This innovation on the part of Thomas could be used to argue a comparatively very early date or a very late date of composition (see Gospel of Phillip, Gospel of Mary Magdalene).

It may be noted that, in a Platonist context, 'male' and 'female' had specific philosophical meaning, as denoting 'form' and 'consituent matter' respectively. Thus, an object's maleness equate to the rules governing its formal composition, while its femaleness is the material substrate of which is is composed. This philosophical conception derives fom Platonist conceptions of human foetal development, in which the male semen was thought to possess the formal components of the eventual human embryo, while the female donated its material substrate within the womb. Thus, given these meanings, the process of becoming 'male' equates with a Platonist veneration of the Forms; thus Jesus' statement would create, in a familiar with Platonist terminology (which was, of course, more endemic in antiquity), a notion of spiritual ascent and promised perfectibility. Platonist influences on gnosticism may been detected elesewhere, for example, in th the common conception of the demiurge.

The Gospel of Thomas and the canon of the New Testament

The fact that the Gospel of Thomas does not seem to have been considered for the New Testament is seen by some as an indication of its being of a later date — had it actually been written by the apostle Thomas, they argue, it would have been at least seriously considered by those in the century immediately following Jesus' death. This opinion is more popular among Christians who accept a divinely-inspired New Testament canon as an article of their faith — especially those considering themselves fundamentalist or evangelical Christians.

The harsh and widespread reaction to Marcion's canon, the first New Testament canon known to ever have been created, may demonstrate that, by 140 C.E., it had become widely accepted that other texts formed parts of the records of the life and ministry of Jesus. Although arguments about some potential New Testament books, such as the Shepherd of Hermas and Book of Revelation, continued well into the fourth century C.E., four canonical Gospels, attributed to Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John, were universally accepted among orthodox Christians at least as early as the mid-second century. Tatian's widely-used Diatessaron, compiled between 160 and 175 C.E., utilized the four Gospels without any consideration of others. Irenaeus of Lyons wrote in the late second century C.E. that since there are four quarters of the earth, … it is fitting that the church should have four pillars, … the four Gospels (Against Heresies, 3:1), and then shortly therafter made the first known quotation from a fourth gospel - the canonical version of the Gospel of John. The late second-century C.E. Muratorian fragment also recognizes only the three synoptic Gospels and John. Bible scholar Bruce Metzger wrote regarding the formation of the New Testament canon, "Although the fringes of the emerging canon remained unsettled for generations, a high degree of unanimity concerning the greater part of the New Testament was attained among the very diverse and scattered congregations of believers not only throughout the Mediterranean world, but also over an area extending from Britain to Mesopotamia."

It should be noted that information about the historical Jesus itself was not a singular criterion for inclusion into the New Testament Canon. The canonizers chose to include many books that contain neither much information about the historical Jesus nor teachings from the historical Jesus, such as the Epistles and the book of Revelation.

Injil Tomas mungkin tidak dimasukkan ke dalam kanon Perjanjian Baru karena:

  • Dianggap isinya sesat.
  • Dianggap tidak otentik.
  • Tidak dikenal oleh para penyusun Kanon.
  • Dianggap dikalahkan oleh Injil-injil Naratif.
  • Tergolong dalam suatu cabang kekristenan yang berada di luar lingkaran Atanasius dari Alexandria yang menang.
  • Penekanannya pada spiritualitas pribadi di luar Gereja dianggap anatema bagi kepentingan agama yang terorganisasi.

Filsafat Injil Tomas

The Gospel of Thomas is mystical — it emphasizes a direct and unmediated experience of the Divine. Jesus is presented as a mystagogue, a teacher of divine mysteries, though never the "saviour" as in the Gospel of John. While the emphasis in John is a balance between his miracles and his words, the emphasis here is exclusively the words of Jesus. A discovery of the interpretation of those words is what brings about enlightenment. The Gospel of Thomas records this as one of Jesus' sayings: "He who discovers the interpretations of these secret teachings shall never taste death" — and this secretness is in stark contrast with all the Church teachings and Canon. The theme is paralleled in John, though in order to attack it; accordingly, in John, salvation is understood as salvation from Eternal Damnation, and does not depend on any secrets.

Unlike John, which distinguishes unbelief from belief in Jesus as Saviour, the Gospel of Thomas premises salvation dependent upon an enlightened understanding of the hearer's own true identity — an image of the hearer as divine. Where sayings parallel those in Matthew and Luke, i.e. those in Q, they are placed without their more familiar context; left in this manner, the sayings seem to be pregnant with gnosis though none of the apparatus of developed Gnosticism, as in Pistis Sophia, is to be found.

John's Gospel emphasizes Jesus as the "only begotten son" of the Father (John 1:3), giving Jesus unique status among humans. In the Gospel of Thomas Jesus is quoted as saying that "the kingdom of the Father is spread out upon the earth, and men do not see it." This too can be interpreted as Jesus' attempt to bring enlightenment through his teachings that man's existence is not as much material as it is spiritual — hence his claims to his own divinity came with an implied stipulation that this "divinity" was not limited to himself, rather belongs to anyone who is spiritually reborn. This again is a stark contrast with canonical Christianity.

Elaine Pagels argued in Beyond Belief that, while this strand of Christianity died out, many great Christian mystics independently derived ideas similar to Thomas, from Meister Eckhart to Teresa of Avila to Saint John of the Cross. Mainstream Christian scholars, on the contrary, seek clear distinctions between the basic ideas of these Christian mystics and the author of the Gospel of Thomas [butuh rujukan].

The Gospel of Thomas's importance and author

The Gospel of Thomas is, in any case, one of the earliest accounts of the teaching of Jesus outside of the canonical gospels and so is considered a valuable text. Some say that this gospel makes no mention of Jesus' resurrection, an important point of faith among Christians. A minority opinion, however, interprets the opening words of the book, "These are the secret sayings which the living Jesus spoke and which Didymos Judas Thomas wrote down" (Nag Hammadi library translation, 2d. edition, ISBN 0-06-066935-7) to mean that the sayings are being presented as the teaching of Jesus Christ after the resurrection, due to the use of the term "living." The last verse in the book, which strikes many commentators as appended at a later date, perhaps reflecting a mainstream misogyny not otherwise found in this text, also refers to the "life" in a sense that can only mean the "life everlasting":

114. Simon Peter said to them, "Make Mary leave us, for females do not deserve life." Jesus said, "Look, I will guide her to make her male, so that she too may become a living spirit resembling you males. For every female who makes herself male will enter the kingdom of Heaven."

Some scholars consider this gospel to be a gnostic text, since it was found in a library among other, more clearly gnostic texts. Others reject this interpretation, because Thomas lacks the full-blown mythology of Gnosticism as described by Irenaeus of Lyons, ca 185 or recognized by modern scholarship. Still other scholars see evidence of increasingly gnostic redactions over time when they compare sayings in the New Testament with parallel sayings in the Greek versions of the Gospel of Thomas (ca. 200), and sayings in the Coptic version (ca. 340). No major Christian group accepts it as canonical or authoritative.

The gospel is ostensibly written from the point of view of Didymus Judas Thomas, one of the twelve disciples of Jesus (who appears in the Gospel of John as "doubting Thomas"). It claims that special revelations and parables (recorded in the text) were made only to Thomas. However, the gospel is a collection of sayings and parables, which contains no narrative account of Jesus' life, something that all four canonical gospels include.

This Gospel is important for scholars working on the Q Gospel, which, like Thomas, is thought to be a collection of sayings or teachings. Although no copy of Q has ever been discovered, the fact that Thomas is a sayings Gospel is taken by some as indication that the early Christians did write collections of the sayings of Jesus, and thus they feel it renders the Q theory more credible.

The Gospel of Thomas and the historical Jesus

Modern scholars use three criteria to determine what the historical Jesus may have taught: multiple attestations, dissimilarity, and contextual credibility. Many modern scholars believe that the Gospel of Thomas was written independently of the New Testament, and therefore, is a useful guide to historical Jesus research.

By finding those sayings in the Gospel of Thomas that overlap with Q, Mark, Matthew, Luke, John, and Paul, scholars feel such sayings represent "multiple attestations" and therefore, are more likely to come from a historical Jesus, than sayings that are only singly attested, such as the vast majority of the material in John.

The Gospel of Thomas has also been used by Christ mythicist theorists such as Earl Doherty, author of The Jesus Puzzle, and Timothy Freke, author of The Jesus Mysteries, that Christianity did not originate with a historical Jesus, but as a Jewish adaptation of the Greek mystery religions. The collection of teachings attributed to Jesus represent part of the initiation to the mysteries of their religion.

The Gospel of Thomas is regarded by some individuals as the single most important find in understanding early Christianity outside the New Testament. It may attest to extraordinary diversity in early Christianity, and very different understandings of Jesus. It also may offer a window into the worldview of this ancient culture and a window of the debates and struggles within early Christianity, and its relationship and split with Judaism.

Differences between translations

In translating ancient texts, often the meaning of words is revealed only in abstraction, and must be transliterated, after being translated, in order for the meaning to be addressed. This is the case with all translations, as each reveals the limits and changes of languages, in the divergent tasks of; being sufficiently descriptive, and being easy to use in common speech. In the Gospel of Thomas, logion 66 is one famous example of how translation often differs subtly in its proper transliteration.

66. Jesus said, "Show me the stone that the builders rejected: that is the keystone." (From the Scholars Translation - Stephen Patterson and Marvin Meyer.)

Compare the above translation to the below interpretation:

66. Jesus said, "Teach me concerning this stone which the builders rejected; it is the corner-stone." (Brill edition.)

The use of the word "corner-stone", in the Brill edition, is inaccurate for the meaning, and the correct word is "keystone", as in the Patterson-Meyer translation. To understand the difference, we must think through the parable for its intended meaning. As in all Christian parables, the deeper meaning reflects a moral story. In this case, the meaning comes by the analogy of constructing an arch:

In selecting stones for the arch, the most odd-shaped, useless stone is rejected, and cast aside. The builders select the cornerstones first; they must be strong, squarish blocks and must serve well as the foundation. As each separate pillar is built to the top, the stones are chosen for their slight curvatures, to bring the tops of the columns together.
Finally, the keystone must be selected. It must be of a particularly acute angle to accommodate the characteristics of each of the two arch halves: According to Jesus's parable, it is the stone which was first rejected, by the initial estimations of the builders, and only when the rest of the pieces are in place do they see its usefulness.

Comparison of The Gospel of Thomas to the New Testament

The Gospel of Thomas does not refer to Jesus as "Christ" or "Lord" as the New Testament does, but simply as "Jesus." The Gospel of Thomas also lacks any mention of such classic Christian doctrines as Satan, Demons, The Second Coming, sin, or signs. However, it includes several parables similar to ones found in the canonical gospels that contain themes including Hell, eternal damnation, Heaven, the Kingdom of God, miracles (instructing his followers to heal people), and salvation.

The Gospel of Thomas does not list the canonical twelve apostles, though it does mention James the Just, who is singled out ("No matter where you are you are to go to James the Just, for whose sake heaven and earth came into being"); Simon Peter; Matthew; Thomas, who is taken aside and receives three points of revelation; Mary; and Salome. Though here Mary Magdalene and Salome are mentioned among the disciples, the canonical Gospels and Acts only mention men, but make a distinction between "disciples" and the inner group of twelve "apostles" — a Greek term that does not appear in Thomas — with varying lists of names making up the canonical twelve. Despite the favorable mention of James the Just, generally considered a "pro-circumcision" Christian, the Gospel of Thomas also dismisses circumcision:

His disciples said to him, "Is circumcision useful or not?" He said to them, "If it were useful, their father would produce children already circumcised from their mother. Rather, the true circumcision in spirit has become profitable in every respect."

Compare Thomas 8 SV

8. And Jesus said, "The person is like a wise fisherman who cast his net into the sea and drew it up from the sea full of little fish. Among them the wise fisherman discovered a fine large fish. He threw all the little fish back into the sea, and easily chose the large fish. Anyone here with two good ears had better listen!"

with Matthew 13:47-50 NIV:

47"Once again, the kingdom of heaven is like a net that was let down into the lake and caught all kinds of fish. 48When it was full, the fishermen pulled it up on the shore. Then they sat down and collected the good fish in baskets, but threw the bad away. 49This is how it will be at the end of the age. The angels will come and separate the wicked from the righteous 50and throw them into the fiery furnace, where there will be weeping and gnashing of teeth."

Note that Thomas makes a distinction between large and small fishes, whereas Matthew makes a distinction between good and bad fishes. Furthermore, Thomas' version has only one fish remaining, whereas Matthew's version implies many good fish remaining. The manner in which each Gospel concludes the parable is instructive. Thomas' version invites the reader to draw their own conclusions as to the interpretation of the saying, whereas Matthew provides an explanation connecting the text to an apocalyptic end of the age.

Another example is the parable of the lost sheep, which is paralleled by Matthew, Luke, John, and Thomas.

This is the parable of the lost sheep in Matthew 18: 12-14 NIV

12"What do you think? If a man owns a hundred sheep, and one of them wanders away, will he not leave the ninety-nine on the hills and go to look for the one that wandered off? 13And if he finds it, I tell you the truth, he is happier about that one sheep than about the ninety-nine that did not wander off. 14In the same way your Father in heaven is not willing that any of these little ones should be lost."

This is the parable of the lost sheep in Luke 15: 3-7 NIV

3Then Jesus told them this parable: 4"Suppose one of you has a hundred sheep and loses one of them. Does he not leave the ninety-nine in the open country and go after the lost sheep until he finds it? 5And when he finds it, he joyfully puts it on his shoulders 6and goes home. Then he calls his friends and neighbors together and says, 'Rejoice with me; I have found my lost sheep.' 7I tell you that in the same way there will be more rejoicing in heaven over one sinner who repents than over ninety-nine righteous persons who do not need to repent."

This is the parable of the lost sheep in Thomas 107 SV

107. Jesus said, "The kingdom is like a shepherd who had a hundred sheep. One of them, the largest, went astray. He left the ninety-nine and looked for the one until he found it. After he had toiled, he said to the sheep, I love you more than the ninety-nine."

This is the parable of the lost sheep in John 10: 1-18 NIV

1"I tell you the truth, the man who does not enter the sheep pen by the gate, but climbs in by some other way, is a thief and a robber. 2The man who enters by the gate is the shepherd of his sheep. 3The watchman opens the gate for him, and the sheep listen to his voice. He calls his own sheep by name and leads them out. 4When he has brought out all his own, he goes on ahead of them, and his sheep follow him because they know his voice. 5But they will never follow a stranger; in fact, they will run away from him because they do not recognize a stranger's voice." 6Jesus used this figure of speech, but they did not understand what he was telling them.

7Therefore Jesus said again, "I tell you the truth, I am the gate for the sheep. 8All who ever came before me were thieves and robbers, but the sheep did not listen to them. 9I am the gate; whoever enters through me will be saved.[1] He will come in and go out, and find pasture. 10The thief comes only to steal and kill and destroy; I have come that they may have life, and have it to the full. 11"I am the good shepherd. The good shepherd lays down his life for the sheep. 12The hired hand is not the shepherd who owns the sheep. So when he sees the wolf coming, he abandons the sheep and runs away. Then the wolf attacks the flock and scatters it. 13The man runs away because he is a hired hand and cares nothing for the sheep.

14"I am the good shepherd; I know my sheep and my sheep know me — 15just as the Father knows me and I know the Father — and I lay down my life for the sheep. 16I have other sheep that are not of this sheep pen. I must bring them also. They too will listen to my voice, and there shall be one flock and one shepherd. 17The reason my Father loves me is that I lay down my life — only to take it up again. 18No one takes it from me, but I lay it down of my own accord. I have authority to lay it down and authority to take it up again. This command I received from my Father."

-->

Pakar Injil Tomas

Berikut ini adalah daftar para sarjana atau intelektual yang telah menulis karya-karya ilmiah penting dalam studi Injil Tomas atau yang pernah menulis tafsiran tentang Injil ini.

Seminar Yesus

Injil Tomas adalah satu di antara Lima Injil yang digunakan oleh Seminar Yesus dalam upayanya menemukan ucapan-ucapan otentik Yesus. Seminar ini memberikan warta Merah kepada ucapan-ucapan yang dianggap sepenuhnya otentik dan Merah Jambu kepada ucapan-ucapan yang diyakini kemungkinan sekali telah diucapkan oleh Yesus.

Ucapan-ucapan dalam Injil Tomas diwarnai Merah oleh Seminar Yesus, dengan persentase dari para pakar Seminar yang memeringkatnya, adalah: 54 (90%), 100:2b-3 (82%), 20:2-4 (76%), 96:1-2 (65%), 69:2 (53%).

Ucapan-ucapan dalam Injil Tomas diwarnai Merah Jambu oleh Seminar Yesus, dengan persentase dari para pakar Seminar yang memeringkatnya, adalah: 36 (75%), 31:1 (74%), 45:1a (69%), 64:1-11 (69%), 36:2 (68%), 76:1-2 (68%), 86 (67%), 14:5 (67%), 39:3 (67%), 47:2 (65%), 98 (65%), 95 (65%), 33:2-3 (63%), 65:1-7 (61%), 62:2 (60%), 26 (60%), 63:1-3 (60%), 113:2-4 (59%), 35 (59%), 5:2 (57%), 89 (57%), 109 (54%), 32 (54%), 97 (53%), 10 (52%), 47:4 (52%), 9 (52%), 99:2 (52%), 78:1-2 (51%), 94 (51%), 2:1 (51%), 47:3(51%), 41 (51%), 14:4a (51%), 6 (50%), 55:1-2a (49%), 107 (48%), 21:9 (46%), 4:2 (45%).

Budaya pop

Plot dalam film Hollywood tahun 1999 Stigmata berkisar sekitar upaya untuk menutup-nutupi Injil Tomas oleh Gereja Katolik Roma, yang ajarannya tentang imanensi Allah sangat mengancam hierarkhi Gereja.

Rujukan

  • Guillaumont, Antoine Jean Baptiste, Henri-Charles Puech, G. Quispel, Walter Curt Till, and Yassah ˁAbd al-Masīh, eds. 1959. Evangelium nach Thomas. Leiden: E. J. Brill Standard edition of the Coptic text
  • Pagels, Elaine, 2003. Beyond Belief : The Secret Gospel of Thomas (New York: Random House)

Pranala luar

Diperoleh dari "https://wiki-indonesia.club/w/index.php?title=Injil_Tomas&oldid=156556"