Scientifically showing how you have a spirit.

[eartheconomyspirit]

<snip>
So if the GOT prescribes to the same outcomes, love your friend more than yourself,  its support the evolutionary evidence and doubling the push for positive outcomes. No woo required :-)

No, because one is scientifically sound and supported by evidence.  The GOT is some text that just says the same things as one of the MANY outcomes of evolution.

 

[Add Homonym]

Ah so their are five books in this event called paradise. There is no other evidence in the Gospel of Thomas of reference to anything other than Jesus and his view of spirituality. If your point was correct surely there would reference to other external sources. Also I watched both videos and we'll have to wait for part 3 to see if he reaches your conclusion. No mention of "pentateuch" I don't think your right on this point.

At 13:13, he says the 5 trees are the 5 books of the law of Moses. You really need that spoon-fed to you, do you?

I took a different route to the young man in the video. He has studiously researched and sort correlation in other texts. I just checked the meaning with my life experience and observations of others.

Or, you just made stuff up, and ignored its biblical context. The gnostic approach did not appear until much later.

And, yes, the man in the video has done some lookin.

Jesus won't be resurrected. That's mystical and a therefore a fallacy.  The significant difference with respect to the Gospel of Thomas and Biblical sources is that it only records what Jesus said.

Pffft. You place enormous faith in one book, because the other fake books say that Jesus is important.

No risk of the chinese whisper phenomenum. To discredit the GOT all we have to do is disprove it's age and come up with the rationale for  the author 2000 years ago creating a ficticious work.

That's more like it. Now you are sounding like a real Christian!

Why couldn't there be numerous authors from a pharisaic tradition, contributing to the book? There are lots of other fake books, and you seem to only respect Thomas, because of your own interpretation of it. What if the man in the video was its sole interpreter. Would you respect it, then?

If yuo want to understand why the Biblical texts need challenging, consider who wrote them, who was in power at the time (think sensorship) and the impact that fake mysticism has on a popultion (think witch doctor and pharisees) :-)

Not sure what you are talkin about there. Just because the gnostics came up with a different way of interpreting the quotes, later, doesn't mean they are any more true. Marcion was a sort of gnostic, and he was running with his baseless theory, around 130AD. He reckoned Jesus came from the spirit world.

=================

Here's a free-kick for you, because I can't be bothered doing the work: is there a verse in Thomas which is not used in the synoptic, which is clearly from a different paradigm? There should be. I notice that verses of Thomas that aren't used in the synoptic are gibberish.

http://www.sacred-texts.com/chr/thomas.htm

[eartheconomyspirit]

Ah so their are five books in this event called paradise. There is no other evidence in the Gospel of Thomas of reference to anything other than Jesus and his view of spirituality. If your point was correct surely there would reference to other external sources. Also I watched both videos and we'll have to wait for part 3 to see if he reaches your conclusion. No mention of "pentateuch" I don't think your right on this point.

At 13:13, he says the 5 trees are the 5 books of the law of Moses. You really need that spoon-fed to you, do you?

Apologies, I stand corrected. I was listening for the specific reference and when I heard the comment about 5 morals i must have tuned out some what. :-)

I took a different route to the young man in the video. He has studiously researched and sort correlation in other texts. I just checked the meaning with my life experience and observations of others.

Or, you just made stuff up, and ignored its biblical context. The gnostic approach did not appear until much later.

And, yes, the man in the video has done some lookin.

"Thomas was probably first written in Greek (or possibly even Syriac or Aramaic) sometime between the mid 1st and 2nd centuries."

The GOT doesn't have a biblical context. The Bible does however have some sayings that are in accord with the GOT. I haven't seen hard evidence to support which texts came first and you've got to remember its possible that there has been some rework to the Bible particularly around 300AD.

Perhaps Thomas is the theoritically missing "Q" Document.

Besides, that's ignoring the point of any of these writings. They should resolve in meaning. GOT does it for me. And your right I did make an interpretation of all the GOT sayings.  That's the point of any writings existance.   

Jesus won't be resurrected. That's mystical and a therefore a fallacy.  The significant difference with respect to the Gospel of Thomas and Biblical sources is that it only records what Jesus said.

Pffft. You place enormous faith in one book, because the other fake books say that Jesus is important.

When was the last time you saw someone rise from the dead. It's myth nothing more. Jesus in the GOT acknowledges the finality of death. Promising someone eternal life is a good way of gaining power over that individual. It requires complete and absolute faith to buy into the idea. When you submit you loose your most valuable position, your freedom. You must take heed of the "promiser" for fear of losing the "fake" promise of eternal life.

59 Jesus said, "Look to the living one as long as you live, otherwise you might die and then try to see the living one, and you will be unable to see."
   

No risk of the chinese whisper phenomenum. To discredit the GOT all we have to do is disprove it's age and come up with the rationale for  the author 2000 years ago creating a ficticious work.

That's more like it. Now you are sounding like a real Christian!

I am not a christian :-)

Why couldn't there be numerous authors from a pharisaic tradition, contributing to the book? There are lots of other fake books, and you seem to only respect Thomas, because of your own interpretation of it. What if the man in the video was its sole interpreter. Would you respect it, then?

Respect is something earned not given freely. It's the source , not the interpretation that must win respect.  The GOT is pure Jesus sayings that's it' elegance. Not to mention it just makes sense. Knowing instead of believing, no woo etc...

If yuo want to understand why the Biblical texts need challenging, consider who wrote them, who was in power at the time (think sensorship) and the impact that fake mysticism has on a popultion (think witch doctor and pharisees) :-)

Not sure what you are talkin about there. Just because the gnostics came up with a different way of interpreting the quotes, later, doesn't mean they are any more true. Marcion was a sort of gnostic, and he was running with his baseless theory, around 130AD. He reckoned Jesus came from the spirit world.

The term gnostics is applied, I prefer to consider the GOT as 114 (potentially) recorded sayings directly from Jesus, nothing more nothing less. A potential to get to the heart of the man himself. Kind of like a personal conversation and some worthwhile points to consider, in my opinion.
=================

Here's a free-kick for you, because I can't be bothered doing the work: is there a verse in Thomas which is not used in the synoptic, which is clearly from a different paradigm? There should be. I notice that verses of Thomas that aren't used in the synoptic are gibberish.

http://www.sacred-texts.com/chr/thomas.htm

Here's a thought. Post a couple of those that you consider gibberish and I'll give you an interpretation.  :-)
 

[ParkingPlaces]

eartheconomyspirit, I assume that since your interpretation of the bible and other religious matters is so patently obvious, that there are tens of thousands, or more probably even millions, who agree with you on the subject. What is your group called?  Cause if you convince me I'm wrong about atheism, I wanna join.

Of course we get a lot of christians here who state the various religious things that they think are patently obvious, and their interpretation is quite often very different that yours, and I assume each of them, also dealing with the patently obvious, are part of other, equally large, milliions of members religious groups. I don't know, because none of them succeeded in getting me to pretend they were right, but hey, you're still here so you have a chance.

Again, what large, agreeable group do you belong to?

And please don't tell me your opinion is your own. What sort of god would rely on such tenuous processes when souls are at stake? My great-grandmother, who was a very pleasant religious person, had very different views of christianity than you, and was a saint(humanly speaking). But if you're right, she is presumably being boiled in oil or barbecued on a spit or something right now because her personal interpretation wasn't yours. Because if you're right, she was wrong, and that sounds mighty sinful to me?

She was a calvinist of some sort. They think they're right too. Maybe you should get on one of their web sites and correct them also.

[Add Homonym]

"Thomas was probably first written in Greek (or possibly even Syriac or Aramaic) sometime between the mid 1st and 2nd centuries."

The GOT doesn't have a biblical context. The Bible does however have some sayings that are in accord with the GOT. I haven't seen hard evidence to support which texts came first and you've got to remember its possible that there has been some rework to the Bible particularly around 300AD.

Perhaps Thomas is the theoritically missing "Q" Document.

Besides, that's ignoring the point of any of these writings. They should resolve in meaning. GOT does it for me. And your right I did make an interpretation of all the GOT sayings.  That's the point of any writings existance.   

Perhaps maybe perhaps maybe.

and you've got to remember its possible that there has been some rework to the Bible particularly around 300AD.

Why would I remember that, when NT evolution probably stopped when Origen collected it, around 210AD?

That's the point of any writings existance.

So, you've found a new interpretation of Harry Potter, unintended by the author?

The GOT doesn't have a biblical context.

Within reason, you are correct. The writing in Matthew barely has a context in Paul's writings, and certainly hardly any context in John.

http://www.sacred-texts.com/chr/thomas.htm
However, 64 verses of Thomas click right into the synoptic agenda, and the 50 verses left out are a bit pointless, or contrary, but have no gnostic agenda. This could mean that Thomas was harvested by Luke and Matthew, and they left the dumb stuff out, but if you persist, saying that the 50 verses are awesome, then Thomas could have been harvested from Luke and Matthew, and had the awesome stuff added by later gnostics. It's in your interest to demonstrate that the 50 left-out verses are dull and pointless, in order to show that Luke and Matthew were copycats.

Here is some dull pointless stuff for you.


112) Jesus said, "Woe to the flesh that depends on the soul; woe
to the soul that depends on the flesh."

87)  Jesus said, "Wretched is the body that is dependant upon a
body, and wretched is the soul that is dependent on these two."

53)  His disciples said to Him, "Is circumcision beneficial or
not?"
     He said to them, "If it were beneficial, their father would
beget them already circumcised from their mother. Rather, the
true circumcision in spirit has become completely profitable."

85)  Jesus said, "Adam came into being from a great power and a
great wealth, but he did not become worthy of you. For had he
been worthy, [he would] not [have experienced] death."

92)  Jesus said, "Seek and you will find. 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 enquire after it."

88)  Jesus said, "The angels and the prophets will come to you
and give you those things you (already) have. And you too, give
them those things which you have, and say to yourselves, 'When
will they come and take what is theirs?'"

97)  Jesus said, "The Kingdom of the [Father] is like a certain
woman who was carrying a jar full of meal. While she was walking
[on] a road, still some distance from home, the handle of the jar
broke and the meal emptied out behind her on the road. She did
not realize it; she had noticed no accident. When she reached her
house, she set the jar down and found it empty."

When was the last time you saw someone rise from the dead. It's myth nothing more. Jesus in the GOT acknowledges the finality of death. Promising someone eternal life is a good way of gaining power over that individual. It requires complete and absolute faith to buy into the idea. When you submit you loose your most valuable position, your freedom. You must take heed of the "promiser" for fear of losing the "fake" promise of eternal life.

59 Jesus said, "Look to the living one as long as you live, otherwise you might die and then try to see the living one, and you will be unable to see."

That quote only makes sense if an afterlife is assumed. It is talking about a zombie soul in sheol, trying to find God.

I lifted this interp from a Hindu site:

Focus on the self (the living one) throughout your life (as long as you live). Otherwise when dying (might die), you will not be sufficiently connected to the self to truly merge with it (will be unable to see). When dying, a major part of the illusion of the world is lifted because the sense organs disappear along with the physical body. For many souls it is the most auspicious time to seek the self (try to see the living one) and merge with it. However, those that are too much attached to their body and personality and not enough turned towards the self during their lifetime, will miss the opportunity and will again be caught in the game of birth and rebirth.

[eartheconomyspirit]

eartheconomyspirit, I assume that since your interpretation of the bible and other religious matters is so patently obvious, that there are tens of thousands, or more probably even millions, who agree with you on the subject. What is your group called?  Cause if you convince me I'm wrong about atheism, I wanna join.

Of course we get a lot of christians here who state the various religious things that they think are patently obvious, and their interpretation is quite often very different that yours, and I assume each of them, also dealing with the patently obvious, are part of other, equally large, milliions of members religious groups. I don't know, because none of them succeeded in getting me to pretend they were right, but hey, you're still here so you have a chance.

Again, what large, agreeable group do you belong to?

And please don't tell me your opinion is your own. What sort of god would rely on such tenuous processes when souls are at stake? My great-grandmother, who was a very pleasant religious person, had very different views of christianity than you, and was a saint(humanly speaking). But if you're right, she is presumably being boiled in oil or barbecued on a spit or something right now because her personal interpretation wasn't yours. Because if you're right, she was wrong, and that sounds mighty sinful to me?

She was a calvinist of some sort. They think they're right too. Maybe you should get on one of their web sites and correct them also.

I don't belong to any group. I just like the message in the Gospel of Thomas. I also like Ghandi, Volunteers , Mandela, Zen, your grandmother most likely the Dalai Lama et al.

I don't consider life's journey is about group membership. Like the Jesus we hear from in the GOT(Gospel of Thomas) I think it's about coming to know ourselves and that potential and personal responsibility and from that base live up to the potential in deeds.

My opinion, I do now own, but it has been influenced/strengthened and probably changed by reading the Gospel of Thomas. 

Our 'souls' aren't at risk they are a constant, only masked by an ego and the mental chatter it generates. I'd guess that the difference between your grandmother and me would be the belief in mystical events , the afterlife, demons and angels and faith. Would that be right?

And she won't be boiled in oil. My guess, if she lived a good life she is remembered fondly (you could say she has achieved spiritual immortality through those that she touched) and is a rest. If one has been generally been good spirited in life they have also maximized the living experience.

My dad, once had a near death experience and was bought back to life on the operating table. he recalls a feeling of extreme peacefulness. He too is a good and honest man, so maybe there is something special in passing.   

I am not an evangelist. I engage in these topics to continue the exploration :-)
 

[eartheconomyspirit]

Assume for a moment that science has proven the existence of spirituality :-)

112) Jesus said, "Woe to the flesh that depends on the soul; woe
to the soul that depends on the flesh."

Avoid conflict between matters of the spiritual reality and matters of the physical reality.

87)  Jesus said, "Wretched is the body that is dependant upon a
body, and wretched is the soul that is dependent on these two."

Stand alone and depend on your innate spirituality. Another reference against depending on others and about the personal responsibility of the spiritual journey.

53)  His disciples said to Him, "Is circumcision beneficial or
not?"
     He said to them, "If it were beneficial, their father would
beget them already circumcised from their mother. Rather, the
true circumcision in spirit has become completely profitable."

It's all about spirit. Certain rituals are a false proposition if there is no authentic spiritual context. A correction for the jewish faith and it's excessive reliance on ritual perhaps.

85)  Jesus said, "Adam came into being from a great power and a
great wealth, but he did not become worthy of you. For had he
been worthy, [he would] not [have experienced] death."

The relationship is between you and the divine that is both within and outside of you

92)  Jesus said, "Seek and you will find. 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 enquire after it."

The challenge of personal responsibility in spiritual understanding is not being met.

88)  Jesus said, "The angels and the prophets will come to you
and give you those things you (already) have. And you too, give
them those things which you have, and say to yourselves, 'When
will they come and take what is theirs?'"

The spiritual quest is for something that already belongs to you. They have nothing to collect from you or if they do they are false prophets.

97)  Jesus said, "The Kingdom of the [Father] is like a certain
woman who was carrying a jar full of meal. While she was walking
[on] a road, still some distance from home, the handle of the jar
broke and the meal emptied out behind her on the road. She did
not realize it; she had noticed no accident. When she reached her
house, she set the jar down and found it empty."

Be attentive. (in the moment ohmmmm) :-)

[eartheconomyspirit]

59 Jesus said, "Look to the living one as long as you live, otherwise you might die and then try to see the living one, and you will be unable to see." [/quote]

That quote only makes sense if an afterlife is assumed. It is talking about a zombie soul in sheol, trying to find God.

I lifted this interp from a Hindu site:

Focus on the self (the living one) throughout your life (as long as you live). Otherwise when dying (might die), you will not be sufficiently connected to the self to truly merge with it (will be unable to see). When dying, a major part of the illusion of the world is lifted because the sense organs disappear along with the physical body. For many souls it is the most auspicious time to seek the self (try to see the living one) and merge with it. However, those that are too much attached to their body and personality and not enough turned towards the self during their lifetime, will miss the opportunity and will again be caught in the game of birth and rebirth.
[/quote]

...and you will be unable to see."  doesn't talk to birth an re-birth.

[Add Homonym]

That quote is pointless if you assume no afterlife...

29)  Jesus said, "If the flesh came into being because of spirit,
it is a wonder. But if spirit came into being because of the
body, it is a wonder of wonders. Indeed, I am amazed at how this
great wealth has made its home in this poverty."

The above quote is an argument that the spirit world created the physical world. Also implies we go back there.

[Add Homonym]

After reading through Thomas, I'd say that it is devoid of the characteristic threats of hell, eternal life, but also gives very few clues to what it is really on about. The introduction is a bit suspicious: 1)  He said to them: "Whoever hears these words shall never taste
death."

There are a few refs to people coming from the world of light, and spirit being superior to the flesh.

56)  Jesus said, "Whoever has come to understand the world has
found (only) a corpse, and whoever has found a corpse is superior
to the world."

80)  Jesus said, "He who has recognized the world has found the
body, but he who has found the body is superior to the world."

It still could be a compilation from other works, done by someone with an agenda. The really strange thing is that it lacks the sermon: love thy neighbour, love your enemy, etc. That's really weird.

[ungod]

That quote is pointless if you assume no afterlife...

29)  Jesus said, "If the flesh came into being because of spirit,
it is a wonder. But if spirit came into being because of the
body, it is a wonder of wonders. Indeed, I am amazed at how this
great wealth has made its home in this poverty."

The above quote is an argument that the spirit world created the physical world. Also implies we go back there.

Well, gee, and we're supposed to accept that without evidence because?

[ungod]

Assume for a moment that science has proven the existence of spirituality :-)

112) Jesus said, "Woe to the flesh that depends on the soul; woe
to the soul that depends on the flesh."

Avoid conflict between matters of the spiritual reality and matters of the physical reality.

87)  Jesus said, "Wretched is the body that is dependant upon a
body, and wretched is the soul that is dependent on these two."

Stand alone and depend on your innate spirituality. Another reference against depending on others and about the personal responsibility of the spiritual journey.

53)  His disciples said to Him, "Is circumcision beneficial or
not?"
     He said to them, "If it were beneficial, their father would
beget them already circumcised from their mother. Rather, the
true circumcision in spirit has become completely profitable."

It's all about spirit. Certain rituals are a false proposition if there is no authentic spiritual context. A correction for the jewish faith and it's excessive reliance on ritual perhaps.

When did foreskins become "spiritual"?   

[Anfauglir]

So Jesus - Jesus the all-knowing god-man - thought we only have five senses?  Not (as we know know) as many as perhaps 33?  FIVE senses sounds like something a thicko goat-herder two thousand years ago might believe.....Five senses?  Proof that Jesus WASN'T divine.  Excellent!

I agree, he wasn't divine. How ever, I think he showed our potential :-)

Fair enough.  But then.....

112) Jesus said, "Woe to the flesh that depends on the soul; woe
to the soul that depends on the flesh."......<etc, etc>

All of this, all these quotes from Jesus, mean nothing.  Maybe he has had so good ideas - well, okay.  But so what?  So have a lot of people.  Confucious, to pick but one.  Certainly, if Jesus was NOT divine, then his words cannot be used as any kind of "evidence" that what he says is correct - we would need to take anything he says as opinion until it can be proved otherwise, just as we would with any other normal, earthly person.

And isn't the true meaning of life to "try and be nice to people, avoid eating fat, read a good book every now and then, get some walking in, and try and live together in peace and harmony with people of all creeds and nations."?

[eartheconomyspirit]

That quote is pointless if you assume no afterlife...

29)  Jesus said, "If the flesh came into being because of spirit,
it is a wonder. But if spirit came into being because of the
body, it is a wonder of wonders. Indeed, I am amazed at how this
great wealth has made its home in this poverty."

The above quote is an argument that the spirit world created the physical world. Also implies we go back there.

My source is slightly different.

29 Jesus said, "If the flesh came into being because of spirit, that is a marvel, but if spirit came into being because of the body, that is a marvel of marvels.

Yet I marvel at how this great wealth has come to dwell in this poverty."

Whilst others may get bogged down with how things occur. Which came first the chicken or the egg etc...
Jesus is content to marvel at the great mystery that is our spirituality.

[eartheconomyspirit]

59 Jesus said, "Look to the living one as long as you live, otherwise you might die and then try to see the living one, and you will be unable to see."

It makes sense if you understand the value of knowing your authentic self and the value (in potential) that can bring to the lived experience. Imagine a life of continual searching for meaning, all the while not paying attention the wonders of life, due to that preoccupation. You die and the opportunity (to see) has passed. 

[eartheconomyspirit]

After reading through Thomas, I'd say that it is devoid of the characteristic threats of hell, eternal life, but also gives very few clues to what it is really on about. The introduction is a bit suspicious: 1)  He said to them: "Whoever hears these words shall never taste
death."

Its' devoid of hell and eternal life because they are a false premise requiring absolute faith. The Gospel of Thomas is about something to be known. That's independent and personally empowering in my view.

It's also about personal education with out the price tag. A genuine gift of enlightenment, perhaps . Once you get the meaning you lose the fear(taste) of death  :-)

There are a few refs to people coming from the world of light, and spirit being superior to the flesh.

56)  Jesus said, "Whoever has come to understand the world has
found (only) a corpse, and whoever has found a corpse is superior
to the world."

80)  Jesus said, "He who has recognized the world has found the
body, but he who has found the body is superior to the world."
Again a slight variation in my source

80 Jesus said, "Whoever has come to know the world has discovered the body, and whoever has discovered the body, of that one the world is not worthy."

Ever had that feeling of awe we taking in nature (some may say its a spiritual experience). It requires the world of nature though to happen. this experience, in the moment, is aligned to a belonging of the self in the grand scheme. It's in these moments we are "connected" and the "world is not worthy of us.  A potential for us all (whoever) , perhaps. 
 
It still could be a compilation from other works, done by someone with an agenda. The really strange thing is that it lacks the sermon: love thy neighbour, love your enemy, etc. That's really weird.

25 Jesus said, "Love your friends like your own soul, protect them like the pupil of your eye."

Selflessness is akin to authentic spirituality. What moment of true joy was ever born out of an egos delight. Treat each other with the greatest respect. Another hint for equality and the relationship of compassion to spirituality. Imagine the love if everyone made this their personal standard

26 Jesus said, "You see the sliver in your friend's eye, but you don't see the timber in your own eye. When you take the timber out of your own eye, then you will see well enough to remove the sliver from your friend's eye."

A common behavior exhibited in spiritual immaturity.

106 Jesus said, "When you make the two into one, you will become children of Adam, and when you say, 'Mountain, move from here!' it will move."

It is a great moment when two make peace with each other. A call to unify as children of the same source, perhaps? A reference to the spiritual importance of the often illogical act of forgiveness.

[eartheconomyspirit]

Assume for a moment that science has proven the existence of spirituality :-)

112) Jesus said, "Woe to the flesh that depends on the soul; woe
to the soul that depends on the flesh."

Avoid conflict between matters of the spiritual reality and matters of the physical reality.

87)  Jesus said, "Wretched is the body that is dependant upon a
body, and wretched is the soul that is dependent on these two."

Stand alone and depend on your innate spirituality. Another reference against depending on others and about the personal responsibility of the spiritual journey.

53)  His disciples said to Him, "Is circumcision beneficial or
not?"
     He said to them, "If it were beneficial, their father would
beget them already circumcised from their mother. Rather, the
true circumcision in spirit has become completely profitable."

It's all about spirit. Certain rituals are a false proposition if there is no authentic spiritual context. A correction for the jewish faith and it's excessive reliance on ritual perhaps.

When did foreskins become "spiritual"?   

Exactly my point :-)

[eartheconomyspirit]

So Jesus - Jesus the all-knowing god-man - thought we only have five senses?  Not (as we know know) as many as perhaps 33?  FIVE senses sounds like something a thicko goat-herder two thousand years ago might believe.....Five senses?  Proof that Jesus WASN'T divine.  Excellent!

I agree, he wasn't divine. How ever, I think he showed our potential :-)

Fair enough.  But then.....

112) Jesus said, "Woe to the flesh that depends on the soul; woe
to the soul that depends on the flesh."......<etc, etc>

All of this, all these quotes from Jesus, mean nothing.  Maybe he has had so good ideas - well, okay.  But so what?  So have a lot of people.  Confucious, to pick but one.  Certainly, if Jesus was NOT divine, then his words cannot be used as any kind of "evidence" that what he says is correct - we would need to take anything he says as opinion until it can be proved otherwise, just as we would with any other normal, earthly person.

And isn't the true meaning of life to "try and be nice to people, avoid eating fat, read a good book every now and then, get some walking in, and try and live together in peace and harmony with people of all creeds and nations."?

I have a feeling it's not Jesus that's seeking divinity or recognition. He may feel he has an insight that will help others.
As you say he is just another dude that cared for others just like martin luther king, mandela, ghandi, john lennon et al, no more perhaps  and no less. But like the former, he may have been impressive in his time.

A repeat from above.

25 Jesus said, "Love your friends like your own soul, protect them like the pupil of your eye."

Selflessness is akin to authentic spirituality. What moment of true joy was ever born out of an egos delight. Treat each other with the greatest respect. Another hint for equality and the relationship of compassion to spirituality.

[Add Homonym]

Its' devoid of hell and eternal life because they are a false premise requiring absolute faith. The Gospel of Thomas is about something to be known. That's independent and personally empowering in my view.

It's devoid of heaven and hell because the person compiling the list did not believe in it.

Something which stands out on the front of Thomas, is the assertion that the sayings are "the secret sayings", which implies that the author acknowledges and rebels against the non-secret sayings, which are plentiful in Matthew and Luke.

The dating of Thomas (70-150) suggests that the compiler could be totally aware of other established Christian sayings, which is what he implies at the start. If this is the case, then it's not a set of innocent original quotes.

The analysis of which came first, typically via logia order, and primitiveness, seems to ignore the premise of the gospel.

[eartheconomyspirit]

Its' devoid of hell and eternal life because they are a false premise requiring absolute faith. The Gospel of Thomas is about something to be known. That's independent and personally empowering in my view.

It's devoid of heaven and hell because the person compiling the list did not believe in it.

Something which stands out on the front of Thomas, is the assertion that the sayings are "the secret sayings", which implies that the author acknowledges and rebels against the non-secret sayings, which are plentiful in Matthew and Luke.

The dating of Thomas (70-150) suggests that the compiler could be totally aware of other established Christian sayings, which is what he implies at the start. If this is the case, then it's not a set of innocent original quotes.

The analysis of which came first, typically via logia order, and primitiveness, seems to ignore the premise of the gospel.

Your assuming that the Bible came first, when there are a number of scholars who have subscribed to the theory of a Q Document - A source for the synoptic gospels,  to explain variations.

This quote is from the Wikipedia article on the Q_Source.

"... This ancient text supposedly contained the logia or quotations from Jesus"

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Q_source

(In reviewing this article please note: The Gospel of Thomas was not discovered until 1945,  sometime after this theory was put forward)

What if we take the opposite view, that GOT came first. In this scenario we have a document containing the quotations from Jesus (GOT) and Q theory may be validated.

What then of the missing mystical elements?

Well perhaps they are the man made additions. Why? Perhaps the Romans, still in power long after Jesus was killed, where responsible for the inclusion of mysticism.

The Roman emperors before Constantine were well aware of the benefits from associating the throne to pagan gods. This gave them a god like status increasing their hold over the masses. Do we still think Zeus or Thor et al are valid today?

3 Jesus said, "If your leaders say to you, 'Look, the (Father's) kingdom is in the sky,' then the birds of the sky will precede you. If they say to you, 'It is in the sea,' then the fish will precede you. Rather, the kingdom is within you and it is outside you.

When you know yourselves, then you will be known, and you will understand that you are children of the living Father. But if you do not know yourselves, then you live in poverty, and you are the poverty."
 
Besides when you come to understand the Gospel of Thomas, Heaven and Hell concepts fail to have any value save for the immature.

Jesus went to the cross probably because  he challenged the status quo of the powerful, both the Religious (Pharisees) and the Political (Romans). We see this sort of behavior occurs in history. 

It's then not to much of a stretch to consider that his word would have been taboo for some time after his death. The same leaders that sort his demise were still in power after Jesus passed.

There could have been a band of faithful who kept the sayings in secret. This sort of secrecy has happened before through history and particularly around spirituality and leadership.

Heck, even Constantine might have been the driving force behind the shaping of the contemporary bible. Shaping it to suit his political ambitions in the guise of enlightenment.

Just an alternate scenario, certainly no less strange than believing in fictitious tales such as heaven and hell being real.     

 

[Add Homonym]

Your assuming that the Bible came first, when there

Q is an unproven hypothesis. The synoptics can be just as badly explained by the Farrer version, where no Q is needed.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Farrer_hypothesis

IMHO, Q is a mirage, and is based on the absurd idea that there were only 1or2 synoptic gospels, rather than tens of redacted variants. It's a Christian idea that is very broken, because they can't accept that Christianity was diverse. Their own inclusion of 4 conflicting rewrites shows just a small sample of the gospels that were out there. They shoot themselves in the foot.

"Q" differs from Thomas. Thomas is ideologically different and lacks eschatological sayings of "Q". I don't think Thomas has enough parallel in it, to be regarded as a serious source. If Thomas is a true source, then why is most of it ignored? Even stuff that would make sense in a synoptic gospel?

We have no idea what was written in Thomas in the early stages. Some Christian apologists cite wildly different text:

The earliest surviving written references to the Gospel of Thomas are found in the writings of Hippolytus of Rome (c. 222–235) and Origen of Alexandria (c. 233).[24] Hippolytus wrote in his Refutation of All Heresies 5.7.20:

    "[The Naassenes] speak...of a nature which is both hidden and revealed at the same time and which they call the thought-for kingdom of heaven which is in a human being. They transmit a tradition concerning this in the Gospel entitled "According to Thomas," which states expressly, "The one who seeks me will find me in children of seven years and older, for there, hidden in the fourteenth aeon, I am revealed."

I don't think Thomas is likely to be different to the other biblical texts, and perhaps even more viciously redacted than the canonical ones.

The gospel of John shows severe isolation from the synoptics, even though the narrative is identical. In itself, Christianity has shown that the branches can have similar elements and yet, diverge terribly as well. If Thomas is a source, then which parts of it were actually looked at by synoptic writers? Not all scholars agree that all of it is ancient. How many divergent version of it were there?

The bias of whether Thomas is early or late, depends on whether you are bashing Christians or supporting Christians, but has no bearing on the truth.

[eartheconomyspirit]

"The Q source (also Q document or Q) is a hypothetical written source for the Gospel of Matthew and Gospel of Luke. Q (short for the German Quelle, or "source") is defined as the "common" material found in Matthew and Luke but not in the Gospel of Mark. This ancient text supposedly contained the logia or quotations from Jesus.[1]

Along with Markan priority, Q was hypothesized by 1900,  (Th eGospel of Thomas remained undiscoverd until 1945) and it is one of the foundations of modern gospel scholarship.[2] B. H. Streeter formulated a widely accepted view of Q: that it was a written document (not an oral tradition) composed in Greek; that almost all of its contents appear in Matthew, in Luke, or in both; and that Luke more often preserves the original order of the text than Matthew. In the two-source hypothesis, Matthew and Luke both used Mark and Q as sources. Some scholars have postulated that Q is actually a plurality of sources, some written and some oral. Others have attempted to determine the stages in which Q was composed.[3]

The existence of Q has sometimes been challenged.[3] The existence of a highly treasured dominical document, being omitted from all the early Church catalogs and going unmentioned by all the fathers of the early Church, remains one of the great conundrums of modern Biblical scholarship.[4] Despite challenges, the two source hypothesis retains wide support.[3]"

Ultimately spirituality will never be resolved personally in language. It will remain a personal revelation.  For me it's resolved and the Jesus sayings resonate a timeless truth devoid of faith or fiction and embodied with a personal responsibility.

Ask not what your spirituality can do for you, rather ask what can you do for your spirituality.

5 Jesus said, "Know what is in front of your face, and what is hidden from you will be disclosed to you.
For there is nothing hidden that will not be revealed. [And there is nothing buried that will not be raised."]

Like a tear of joy or sadness,  our shared spirituality is often on display. Right in front of our face. The physical warmth of joy we feel when giving so freely and selflessly. We see it in others, right in front of our face. The truth can never be hidden. In time, conscience and history all is revealed.

6 His disciples asked him and said to him, "Do you want us to fast? How should we pray? Should we give to charity? What diet should we observe?"

Jesus said, "Don't lie, and don't do what you hate, because all things are disclosed before heaven. After all, there is nothing hidden that will not be revealed, and there is nothing covered up that will remain undisclosed."

If one acts in accord with spirit, nothing is left to be done. All in conscience is known and cannot be hidden. This seem to be an obvious invitation to live every moment in accord with what makes us authentically happy. Now, pause a moment, to reflect on what has given you the greatest authentic joy and has as it’s signature a physical warm and/or sense of true meaning.

17 Jesus said, "I will give you what no eye has seen, what no ear has heard, what no hand has touched, what has not arisen in the human heart."

The gift is the knowledge of a spiritual reality that touches all humanity, if we all but knew. :-) Peace and joy it's of our own making.

[Samothec]

Some people experience a piece of burnt bread that looks like Jesus and see it as evidence of divinity.  Rational people see the same bread, recognize the facial pattern, realize that humans naturally see faces in inanimate objects and write it off to chance.

You don't believe in the Fetter, Bun & Holy Toast?     

(Apologies for mixing metaphors.)

[Samothec]

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."

So female-to-male transsexuals get into heaven automatically? Cool - not that it helps me at all but I knew someone who qualifies.

[Samothec]

If something can fit inside me, then "kingdom" is a misleading word for it.

...Am I the only one who knows what Azdgari means but can't stop thinking about something else?
 

Oh, you wish that Jesus' "kingdom" was inside you...

Who wouldn't[1]? After all, Jesus was hung[2].

So, we seem to have three threads interwined here: the fun naughty one, the equally off topic Gospel of Thomas one, and the empty of any proof on topic one. Correct?

1.	if you're attracted to guys
2.	on the cross

[eartheconomyspirit]

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."

So female-to-male transsexuals get into heaven automatically? Cool - not that it helps me at all but I knew someone who qualifies.

The kingdom of heaven is available to all humanity, even though it may not be what some think. It has to do with the living not death :-)

[Samothec]

I we value the integrity of the outcome, does it matter how that outcome is achieved. woo woo :-)

So you are saying that the end is all that matters? The means to that end are of no concern? That is a foolish and even dangerous path to travel.

[One Above All]

So, we seem to have three threads interwined here: the fun naughty one, the equally off topic Gospel of Thomas one, and the empty of any proof on topic one. Correct?

Yup.

[eartheconomyspirit]

Your assuming that the Bible came first, when there

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."

Which do you suppose was based on the other?

The GOT meaning relates to how in life we can often get caught up in many trivialities (small fish -  materiality ) until a time comes when we become aware of what's  really important (the big fish). I'm sure there will be people who can relate to that experience.

Marks verses seem designed to scare the bejesus out of someone for some reason, in my opinion. Not to mention the addition of the spooky (false) stuff  :-)