From: "Antonio Jerez" To: Subject: Re: Thomas and allegory Date: Mon, 16 Feb 1998 01:51:00 +0100 Stevan Davies wrote: Stevan wrote; >> > Even if one can come up with (IMHO, >> > inevitably strained) answers to these questions, the fact >> > is, we are here dealing with an instance where one has to >> > posit a tendency in Thomas that runs counter to observed >> > tendencies of the tradition, Mark Goodacre replied: >> Once more, this is precisely the problem, the notion of 'observed >> tendencies of the tradition'. What is the evidence for a steadily >> increasing tendency towards allegorisation in this period? I think >> it boils down to one datum: Matthew's parables are on the whole >> more allegorical than Mark's. This is accurate. But this tells us >> nothing except that Matthew liked allegorising more than did Mark. >> And Luke liked allegorising less than did Mark, so the tendency >> notion does not get us anywhere. Stevan replied: >That's true. But ALL liked allegorizing to one degree or another. >It's Thomas' absence of allegory, not his further reduction of it, >that is the problem. Stevan wrote: >> > at least if one is to maintain >> > Thomas' dependence. I should also point out that there is no >> > indication at all that Thomas avoids allegories or >> > allegorical symbolism. Mark replied: >> Again, I am not an expert on Thomas, but glancing through the text in >> translation I notice that 1). his version of the Great Supper >> appears markedly less allegorical than does either Matthew's or >> Luke's; 2). his parable of the Wheat and the Tares (Thomas 57) is >> markedly less allegorical than Matthew's; 3). his parable of the >> Sower is markedly less allegorical than Mark's / Matthew's / Luke's. Stevan replied: >I don't like this "less" word. They aren't, IMO, allegorical. Period. Why "Period", Steve? What makes you so certain that the parables in Thomas are NOT allegorical at all? I took a close look again at the relevant parables in my colour synopsis this evening and found that there is little reason to claim as emphatically as you are that ALL parables in Thomas are non-allegorical. I started with the Sower and found that Thomas 9 is just as much allegorical (or nonallegorical) as Mark, Matthew or Luke. In the parable itself all versions are very alike. The message is the same. The only reason anybody would call Thomas less allegorical than the synoptics would be simply because Thomas leaves out the explanation of the parable - which isn't surprising at all given Thomas tendency not to explain anything. I also took a look at the Vineyard - Thomas 65 - and found much the same pattern there. There is nothing as far as I see that says that the parable in Thomas is totally unallegorical. Basically it is just as allegorical as the version in Mark. Thomas leaves out the last allegorical detail about the fate of the tenant farmers. This parable can in its proper Jewish context ONLY be understood as an allegory about Israel, its leaders, the fate of the prophets and the fate of Jesus (the son). The parable started its life as an allegory and has only a meaning as an allegory. As for the Great Supper, Thomas 64, I think Mark conceded to much when he said that "appears markedly less allegorical than Matthew's or Luke's". It is true compared to Matthew, but certainly not compared to Luke. Luke is on the whole about as allegorical or nonallegorical as Thomas. Best wishes Antonio