Missing Gospels Myth No. 2 – Are These Texts Pro-Female? (June 8)

Now we turn our attention to the claim that this material is pro-female. Here we can cite Gospel of Thomas, saying 114. This text comes from the most famous of the extra-biblical gospels. This gospel does have overlaps with teaching from the better known first century gospels, but about half of it has fresh material.

Now we turn our attention to the claim that this material is pro-female. Here we can cite Gospel of Thomas, saying 114. This text comes from the most famous of the extra-biblical gospels. This gospel does have overlaps with teaching from the better known first century gospels, but about half of it has fresh material. It is dated as a final work by most to the first third of the second century. The text in question reads as follows: "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.’" As one can easily see, this is hardly a pro-female text. Now explanations of what is going on here include the claim that this text was added later, but the idea of their being no male and female at the end does parallel saying 22 in Thomas. In saying 22, the gospel says, "Jesus said to them, ‘When you make the two into one, and when you make the inner like the outer and the outer like the inner, and the upper like the lower, and when you make male and female into a single one, so that the male will not be male nor the female be female, when you make eyes in place of an eye, a hand in place of a hand, a foot in place of a foot, an image in place of an image, then you will enter [the kingdom].’" In 114, the additional idea is that this oneness is related to maleness. This other saying 22 also tells us what is going on. In the end, according to Thomas, all will be made the same with regard to gender. So saying 114 likely metaphorically pictures reconciliation, but it is reconciliation through a decidedly male lens. One Scandinavian writer who writes regularly and with sympathy about this material has said that there is no way to spin this text in a positive direction for women. I think this claim is absolutely correct and is an important observation about what is seen as a key missing gospel. By the way, it is likely that Thomas is not a Gnostic gospel, as it lacks the key creation story that Gnostic gospels have. It does have gnostic-like elements, but appears to be a document with a mix of influences. For example, saying 75 refers to the "bridal chamber," which is a common image in Gnostic texts. That saying reads, Jesus said, ‘There are many standing at the door, but those who are alone will enter the bridal chamber."" Also saying 87 has strong words against the physical body, another Gnostic trait. It reads, "Jesus said, ‘How miserable is the body that depends on a body, and how miserable is the soul that depends on these two.’" Nonetheless, this gospel seems to move in a Gnostic direction without having the key element that clearly shows it to be Gnostic.