Early Christian Writings Gospel of Thomas Saying 44 Previous - Gospel of Thomas Home - Next

You can view this web page along with Grondin's Coptic/English Interlinear in frames.
Nag Hammadi Coptic Text Funk's Parallels
Luke 12:10, Matt 12:31-
32, Mark 3:28-30, Did
11:7.

BLATZ LAYTON DORESSE

(44) Jesus said: He who
blasphemes against the
Father will be forgiven, and
he who blasphemes against
the Son will be forgiven;
but he who blasphemes
against the Holy Spirit will
not be forgiven, either on
earth or in heaven.
(44) Jesus said, "Whoever
utters blasphemy against the
father will be forgiven. And
whoever utters blasphemy
against the son will be
forgiven. But whoever
utters blasphemy against the
holy spirit will not be
forgiven - neither on earth
nor in heaven."
49 [44]. Jesus says: "He
who has blasphemed the
Father will be forgiven, and
he who has blasphemed the
Son will be forgiven: but he
who has blasphemed the
Holy Spirit will not be
forgiven either on earth or
in heaven."

Visitor Comments Scholarly Quotes

The Holy Spirt is supposed
to be the witness to all that
man does. If one were to
blaspheme against the holy
spirit one be would be
condemning himself because
the holy spirit is with us at
all times serving as the
state's (God's) most
accountable, and reliable
witness. It records all as it
happens and to call it a liar
would be calling all of the
Holy Trinity liars.
- justlooking
To rail against the innate
adult self or the innate child
self is forgivable, but to do it
against the very process of
re-integration is to choose
death.
- Rodney
F. F. Bruce writes: "This is a development of the saying found in Luke 12.10 (cf. also
Mark 3.28 f.; Matthew 12.32). Whereas the canonical saying contrasts the
unpardonable sin of blasphemy against the Holy Spirit with the relatively venial sin
of blasphemy against the Son of Man, the Gospel of Thomas (surprisingly) adds
blasphemy against the Father as relatively venial. The formulation is trinitarian, as
that in the canonical Gospels is not. For the phrase 'neither on earth nor in heaven',
cf. Matthew 12.32: 'neither in this age nor in the age to come'. The Gospel of Thomas
prefers a form of words which is not eschatological." (Jesus and Christian Origens
Outside the New Testament, p. 131)
Robert M. Grant and David Noel Freedman write: "Blasphemy against the Father is
presumably included in the 'every blasphemy' mentioned in the synoptic gospels
(Matthew 12:31; Mark 3:28), and these gospels go on to state that blasphemy against
the Son of Man is forgivable, while that against the Holy Spirit is not (also Luke
12:10). Thomas has changed 'Son of Man' to 'Son' (retained in Saying 86), and has
changed Matthew's eschatological words, 'in this age or in the one to come,' to 'either
on earth or in heaven' (as in the Lord's Prayer, Matthew 6:10). The sequence Father-
Son-Holy Spirit reflects Christian teaching (cf., Matthew 28:19)." (The Secret
Sayings of Jesus, p. 156)
R. McL. Wilson writes: "Grant and Freedman here assume a literalistic interpretation
of the synoptic saying, which is to the effect that every blasphemy will be forgiven
except that against the Holy Spirit. In this case, as they rightly say, the sequence
Father-Son-Holy Spirit reflects Christian teaching. It may be, however, that there is
Do not blaspheme
[repudiate, ignore] yourself.
You rather [creator] can
forgive you for your attitude
to him. But who is to fogive
you for your attitude to
yourself [the spirit which
animates you]?
- Thief37
I see the formulation in
Thomas by inclusion of the
Father to indicate that this is
the primary formulation. The
synoptic evangelists just
could not bring themselves
as Jews to say that
blasphemy aginst the Father
would be forgiven.
- Gregory Wonderwheel
Jesus seems to be saying that
it is acceptable to disagree
with specific religious
aspects of the Father and
son. However, Jesus asserts
that we must believe in
something, namely the Holy
Spirit, or the divine essence
in all of us.
- Hoya
The Father and The Son are
names in a metaphor that
Jesus used to avoid reference
to a specifically named god
of Judaism or any other
religion. The Holy Sipirit is
the divine essence of God,
from which we derive eternal
life, by any name he might
be called.
- Dennis H. Sheehan
44
Alias:
more to be said on this subject, that the Gnostics in fact reversed the order of the
sequence. In some systems at least 'Father' is a title of the Demiurge, while in the
Apocryphon of John the supreme God is described as the Holy Spirit. Moreover, one
of the Nag Hammadi texts bears the title 'The Sacred Book of the Great Invisible
Spirit,' which seems to point in the same direction. If this be correct, the meaning
would be that every blasphemy will be forgiven save that against the supreme God,
which is at least consistent—despite the initial shock to orthodox Christian readers.
Elsewhere, it is true, we seem to have a triad of Father, Mother and Son, in which the
Holy Spirit is the Mother, but it may be that we have here two different theories
emanating form different systems of thought. In any case some Gnostics were not
slow to adopt any views which might serve their purpose, without regard for absolute
consistency." (Studies in the Gospel of Thomas, pp. 39-40)
Gerd Ludemann writes: "These verses have a tripartite symmetrical structure. The
logion has parallels in Mark 3.28-29 and Matt. 13.32/Luke 12.10 (= Q). Only v. 1,
the blasphemy against the Father, is not contained in any of the parallels mentioned.
It may well have been added for reasons of symmetry and because of the doctrine of
the Trinity which was developing in orthodoxy. Thomas can keep the focus on the
impossibility of forgiving blasphemy against the Holy Spirit because for him this is
the spark of light which guarantees the redemption of the Gnostic." (Jesus After 2000
Years, p. 612)
Helmut Koester writes: "Luke 12:10 is considered to be closest to the original Q
version by most scholars; however, 'Son of man' as a title of Jesus would have to be
assigned to a later stage of Q. But even here it remains extremely awkward. The best
solution is to assume that Q, like Mark, was originally speaking about the blasphemy
against the Holy Spirit, uttered by 'a son of man' = any human being, and that 'son of
man' was later misunderstood as a title of Jesus. In the collection of sayings used by
the Gospel of Thomas this saying probably was formulated like Mark 3.28-29; the
elaboration in Gos. Thom. 44 is then best explained as an independent development.
The final phrase which Gos. Thom. 44 and Matt 12:32 share may have been an
original part of Q." (Ancient Christian Gospels, p. 93)
Funk and Hoover write: "According to Thomas, blasphemies against the Father and
against the son will be forgiven; only blasphemies against the holy spirit will not be
forgiven. Thomas agrees with the other versions regarding blasphemies against the
holy spirit, and Thomas supports the Q version in making blasphemies against the
son (of Adam) forgivable. Unique to Thomas is the assertion that blasphemies against
the Father are forgivable. This runs counter to the Israelite and Judean respect for
God and the divine name. Note especially the provisions of the Community Order
(cols. 6-7) found among the Dead Sea Scrolls . . . The Thomas version mentions
Father, son, and holy spirit, which appears to reflect the trinitarian formula of
emerging orthodox Christianity." (The Five Gospels, p. 497)
 Post the Note

Discuss it now at AMC

forums!
If you like the site, please purchase the Early Christian Writings CD.
Maintained by Peter Kirby. See the Gospel of Thomas Bibliography & Credits.
Early Christian Writings Gospel of Thomas Saying 44 Previous - Gospel of Thomas Home - Next