The Forbidden Gospel of Judas?

Take a look at the Gospel of Thomas. According to this gospel, only men are allowed to go to heaven(sorry, ladies). This should deeply offend the female posters around here such as Debbiejo and lilbitchieness.

Well actually in many gnostic writings it says that a woman must become a man. Now to me it could be taken as like the "Yin/Yang, or have some deeper meaning as being a "Total Person"...but yes, some of the Gnostic's are hard to understand. Maybe meant with a deeper meaning and more metaphorical...

Originally posted by debbiejo
Maybe meant with a deeper meaning and more metaphorical...

as is (allegedly) the entire bible. except, you know, for the parts that christians decide are literal. *ahemcreationcough*

Originally posted by debbiejo
Well actually in many gnostic writings it says that a woman must become a man. Now to me it could be taken as like the "Yin/Yang, or have some deeper meaning as being a "Total Person"...but yes, some of the Gnostic's are hard to understand. Maybe meant with a deeper meaning and more metaphorical...

Indeed, the Gospel of Thomas continues with, "For every woman who makes herself male will enter into the kingdom of heaven." But of a selective reading to get from "every woman (who does a specific thing) will enter the Kingdom of Heaven" to "women aren't allowed in heaven," don't you think, CosmicSurfer?

The Gospel of Thomas seems to me to treat women better then the Pastoral Epistles, anyway.

Originally posted by Gregory

The Gospel of Thomas seems to me to treat women better then the Pastoral Epistles, anyway.

Originally posted by Gregory
Indeed, the Gospel of Thomas continues with, "For every woman who makes herself male will enter into the kingdom of heaven." But of a selective reading to get from "every woman (who does a specific thing) will enter the Kingdom of Heaven" to "women aren't allowed in heaven," don't you think, CosmicSurfer?

The Gospel of Thomas seems to me to treat women better then the Pastoral Epistles, anyway.

You got it all wrong.

The passsage you just presented, "For every woman who makes herself male will enter into the kingdom of heaven", clearly means that women in general are unworthy of spiritual teachings. It states that women who transform themselves as men become worthy of spiritual teachings. Highly sexist if you ask me. I don't understand how you came up with a different interpretation from this passage.

Here's another passage that proves my point:

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."

It's pretty self-explanatory, isn't it? Even you can't debate this. This gospel is full of allegations of sexism.

Sorry Debbiejo, you should just disregard this gospel. I think it's just as bad, if not worse than Paul's epistles.

But ... you didn't claim that the Gospel was sexist. You claimed that it said women couldn't enter Heaven. Which isn't true. Stop making false statements and then pretending you said something else when you're called on it.

Sorry Debbiejo, you should just disregard this gospel. I think it's just as bad, if not worse than Paul's epistles.

I don't think Paul's that bad, when you remember that he didn't write the Pastoral Epistles, and that the stuff about how women must remain silent in church was almost certainly a later addition (since earlyier in the letter, he talked about how women should dress when they prophesy ... outloud).

Originally posted by Gregory
But ... you didn't claim that the Gospel was sexist. You claimed that it said women couldn't enter Heaven. Which isn't true. Stop making false statements and then pretending you said something else when you're called on it.

You knew exactly what I meant. Don't kid yourself. It was obvious that it was sexist when I first said that women aren't allowed to go to heaven according to the Gospel of Thomas. I don't need to say it the first time. But you thought otherwise.

It's unfortunate that the early Roman Catholic church did so much editing of the scriptures...

Originally posted by debbiejo
........OH, I've never made a stance on this gospel of Judas.......I think it's interesting though....just as the gnostics are interesting though more metaphorical....and I hate Paul.....everyone knows that....hahahahaha......Jesus is ok though...........IT'S THE CHURCH, THE CHURCH, THE CHURCH that is evil..........
📖 😇

I was talking aboout the gospel of Thomas, but yeah, the gospel of Judas should also be disregarded as well.

Originally posted by CosmicSurfer
when I first said that women aren't allowed to go to heaven according to the Gospel of Thomas *unless* they become men.

You did not say this.

Originally posted by Gregory
You did not say this.

I edited my post above. Read that.

Okay. But you can't pretend that the Gospel of Thomas' take on women isn't a little more complicated then "females need to make themselved like males." For example,

"and when you make male and female into a single one, so that the male will not be male nor the female be female ... then you will enter [the kingdom]."

Actually, I think those are the only references to women in the Gospel, other then a comment about not having children. I don't know how one would reconcile them, and I believe that saying 114 is often thought to be a later addition, although I don't know on what evidence.

Originally posted by Gregory
Okay. But you can't pretend that the Gospel of Thomas' take on women isn't a little more complicated then "females need to make themselved like males." For example,

"and when you make male and female into a single one, so that the male will not be male nor the female be female ... then you will enter [the kingdom]."

Actually, I think those are the only references to women in the Gospel, other then a comment about not having children. I don't know how one would reconcile them, and I believe that saying 114 is often thought to be a later addition, although I don't know on what evidence.

Do you agree with me that the gospel of Thomas is obviously sexist? That's what I'm trying to tell you. That's the point I'm trying to get across.

I mean, c'mon, how could anyone dispute this? It's not the least bit complicated to understand at all. There is no hidden metamorphical meanings and what not. It's self-explanatory as far as gospels go.

Originally posted by CosmicSurfer
Do you agree with me that the gospel of Thomas is obviously sexist? That's what I'm trying to tell you. That's the point I'm trying to get across.

I mean, c'mon, how could anyone dispute this? It's not the least bit complicated to understand at all. There is no hidden metamorphical meanings and what not. It's self-explanatory as far as gospels go.

This is ironic. Gospels that attempt to bring a light and revelation; truth to ALL people, isn't accepted. But show them something sexist, and everyone agrees with it...😆

Sexist? I'd say so, yes. You probably won't find many completely non-sexist documents written in that area of the world 2000 years ago. All of Gnosticism has sort of sexist undertones--a perfect universe until the foolish woman (Sophia, Wisdom), went and screwed every thing up.

For what it's worth, it's less sexist than Plato, who thought women literally had to die and be reincarnated as men before they had a chance to enter Paradise.

But what's your point? You're surly not suggesting that sexist material can't be inspired, unless you're a very unorthodox Christian (since it would mean getting rid of several books from the NT).

Originally posted by Gregory
Sexist? I'd say so, yes. You probably won't find many completely non-sexist documents written in that area of the world 2000 years ago. All of Gnosticism has sort of sexist undertones--a perfect universe until the foolish woman (Sophia, Wisdom), went and screwed every thing up.

For what it's worth, it's less sexist than Plato, who thought women literally had to die and be reincarnated as men before they had a chance to enter Paradise.

But what's your point? You're surly not suggesting that sexist material can't be inspired, unless you're a very unorthodox Christian (since it would mean getting rid of several books from the NT).

To whom was that directed?

CosmicSurfer; you posted while I was composing it.

Originally posted by Gregory
CosmicSurfer; you posted while I was composing it.

Righto euro