Bingo the Clown-O

Has Mr. Doherty or anyone on this forum ever discussed the (apparent) relationship between 1 Corinthians and the Gospel of Thomas?

1 Corinthians 2:9 = Gospel of Thomas 17
1 Corinthians 4:8 = Gospel of Thomas 81
1 Corinthians 10:27 = Gospel of Thomas 14
1 Corinthians 13:2 = Gospel of Thomas 48

Does the “Two Voice Hypothesis” offer an explanation for this?

Toto

Thanks - I was not aware of this. I don't think I have seen this before. IIRC Doherty does not spend any time on the Gospel of Thomas - I am not sure if he goes along with the consensus that gThomas is late and derivative.

There is an internet site that draws these connections:

http://www.angelfire.com/dc/universalism/home.html

eta: there is also some discussion on this blog

edited again to add: I don't think this has anything to do with David Hindley's "two voice" theory.

tanya

So, this suggests that the author, we call "Paul", has seen that phrase written by another author, somewhere else, prior to quoting it. (off topic: Paul does not indicate "scriptures", off topic-2, he writes, or the scribe writes, theta sigma with a bar over the top, (theos) to indicate "god").

This English translation is based upon a manuscript, written in Coptic, buried (probably 4th century), and finally recovered half a century ago at Nag Hammadi. I wonder whether the Coptic version has something akin to the theta sigma macron found in "Paul's" text?

We don't know whether this Coptic manuscript corresponds to the text used by "Paul", or if he had been thinking of some other text. Was the original written in Aramaic? Did "Paul" then read Aramaic, or had it already been translated into Greek?...

There exist no earlier manuscripts, or scraps of papyrus, for this particular verse, (17), from the gospel of Thomas.

Until one has a better handle on the dates, I think it is premature to draw meaningful conclusions about who copied from whom.

The earliest papyrus fragments, none complete, and none with saying (17), date from the first half of the second century by handwriting analysis.

Until someone comes along with a better argument, I will hold this up, as clear evidence that the authentic letters of Paul date from no earlier than the conclusion of the third Jewish Roman conflict, circa 130 CE.

Duvduv

I think that the arguments for dependence based on similarity of aphorisms are not very strong. We see the same situation in the writings of Justin Martyr. Aphorisms and sayings can be among people without there being a direct dependence of one text to another simply because they have similar aphorisms.

In the case of 1 Corinthinians we find the same thing:

1 Corinthians 2:9 = Gospel of Thomas 17
Both are evoking Isaiah 64:4 and are not exactly the same anyway.
1 Corinthians 4:8 = Gospel of Thomas 81
Merely a part of the aphorism that also appears in Thomas 81. But this doesn't mean there is any dependence.
1 Corinthians 10:27 = Gospel of Thomas 14
These are not the same idea since one references spiritual defilement in relation to consumption of certain types of food while the other merely refers to issues of conscience.
1 Corinthians 13:2 = Gospel of Thomas 48 -
These are different as well, with one referencing faith and other referencing peace in a home.

Bingo the Clown-O

For your viewing pleasure:

Gospel of Thomas 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."

1 Corinthians 2:9
However, as it is written:
“What no eye has seen,
what no ear has heard,
and what no human mind has conceived”

1 Corinthians 4:8
Already you have all you want! Already you have become rich! You have begun to reign—and that without us! How I wish that you really had begun to reign so that we also might reign with you!

Gospel of Thomas 81
Jesus said, "Let one who has become wealthy reign, and let one who has power renounce."

Gospel of Thomas 14
Jesus said to them, "If you fast, you will bring sin upon yourselves, and if you pray, you will be condemned, and if you give to charity, you will harm your spirits. When you go into any region and walk about in the countryside, when people take you in, eat what they serve you and heal the sick among them. After all, what goes into your mouth will not defile you; rather, it's what comes out of your mouth that will defile you."

1 Corinthians 10:27
If an unbeliever invites you to a meal and you want to go, eat whatever is put before you without raising questions of conscience.

Gospel of Thomas 48
Jesus said, "If two make peace with each other in a single house, they will say to the mountain, 'Move from here!' and it will move."

1 Corinthians 13:2
If I have the gift of prophecy and can fathom all mysteries and all knowledge, and if I have a faith that can move mountains, but do not have love, I am nothing.

Bingo the Clown-O

“two make peace with each other in a single house” = “love”

Bingo the Clown-O

“when people take you in …” = “If an unbeliever invites you to a meal …”

“eat what they serve you …” = “eat whatever is put before you”

Duvduv

Yes, but the intents are different. Defilement is not the same as keeping peace at home.
If I told you to eat your dinner to please Grandma, is that the same teaching as telling you to eat the meal because it is ritually permitted?

Bingo the Clown-O

What difference do the intents make?

Remind me.

When have 'intents' ever been important?

What if “Paul’s” intent was to simply embed hidden allusions to the Gospel of Thomas in his letter to “God’s church at Corinth?”

Duvduv

Bingo, you didn't answer my question from the analogy. You must be Jewish like me, because we are often said to answer a question with a question....