Talk:Infancy Gospel of Thomas
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 |
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Christianity, an attempt to build a comprehensive guide to Christianity on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit this article, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion. If you are new to editing Wikipedia visit the welcome page to become familiar with the guidelines. | ||
| Start | This article has been rated as Start-class on the quality scale. | ||
| Low | This article has been rated as Low-importance on the importance scale. | ||
|
Assessment comments
|
|||
 |
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Religious texts, a joint subproject of WikiProject Religion and WikiProject Books, and a project to improve Wikipedia's articles on Religious texts-related subjects. Please participate by editing the article, and help us assess and improve articles to good and 1.0 standards, or visit the wikiproject page for more details. | |
| Start | This article has been rated as Start on the Project's quality scale. (If you rated the article please give a short summary at comments to explain the ratings and/or to identify the strengths and weaknesses.) |
|
 |
This page is within the scope of WikiProject Oriental Orthodoxy, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to articles on the Oriental Orthodox Church on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion. | |
 |
This article may need an appropriate infobox template. | |
| Start | This article has been rated as Start-Class on the Project's quality scale. (If you rated the article please give a short summary at comments to explain the ratings and/or to identify the strengths and weaknesses.) |
|
- Jesus at School talks about the Tring tiles mentioned in a Guardian article. --62.221.5.212 17:07, 13 February 2006 (UTC) JFG
[edit] An unwarranted deletion discovered
On December 1 2005, User:Jamesmusik deleted the following: "The first known quote from its text is from Irenaeus of Lyon, ca 185, which sets a latest possible date of authorship." What statement of simple fact could be more colorlessly presented than this? This article needs to be monitored more closely for subtle vandalism. --Wetman 19:37, 18 February 2006 (UTC)
[edit] The article claims that the clay bird story found its way into the Qur'an
How do we know that the reverse is not true, just like with the claims that the Gospel of Barnabas is a forgery? Kirbytime 04:26, 5 April 2006 (UTC)
- Chronology. --Wetman 16:03, 5 April 2006 (UTC)
Well, for one thing, Bart Ehrman in a lecture series he gives called ["History of the Bible: the Making of the New Testament Canon"], recorded for TTC, states the infancy gospel of Thomas dates from somewhere in the 2nd century (most likely guesstimate around the middle of that century)
He mentions the same gospel in ISBN:0195084810, stating:
One of the earliest is the Infancy Gospel of Thomas (not to be confused with the Coptic Gospel of Thomas discovered near Nag Hammadi), a document dated by some scholars to around the year 125 C.E. Here is a fascinating account of Jesus' youth beginning at the tender age of five. Behind the narrative lies a question that intrigues some Christians even today: if Jesus was a miracle-working Son of God as an adult, what was he like as a 'child? In this account, as it turns out, he is more than a little mischievous. When he first appears, he is making clay sparrows by a stream on the Sabbath. A Jewish man passing by sees what he has done and upbraids him for violating the Law by not keeping the Sabbath day holy. Instead of apologizing, the child Jesus claps his hands and tells the sparrows to be gone. They come to life and fly off, thereby destroying any evidence of wrongdoing!
the latter should more or less confirm what you're pulling into question here. Boombaard (talk) 22:15, 13 June 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Edits and restorations
- For a text that was mentioned by Irenaeus c. 185, the following is babble:"
The text cannot be precisely dated and the range of possible dates is extremely large. The latest possible date is that of the first manuscript, sometime in the 6th century AD. Few scholars accept a date near this end of the range." All that is useful in this, is the often-instanced instinct to make a non-canonical text late, even, as here, at the risk of nonsense.
- Since the evidence for dating has been give, the following adds nothing: "While this is fairly supportive of a second century dating, it is by no means definitive." The evidence has not been characterized as "definitive".
The two episodes said to berepresented in the Quran need to be identified and translated. --Wetman 06:13, 15 August 2006 (UTC)
