What Shall We Do? The Community Rules 397 sayings were for those who had just been converted or were in the transitional process from the traditional religion of the Jews (Judaism). The psychological sacrifice of leaving their family was the obvious obstacle during the time of crossing the boundary of the religious life (22). The anti-family sayings functioned fundamentally to encourage the new proselytisers on how to handle their former family issues. Lincoln assumed that there was a division in the community between insiders and outsiders, in terms of these family rules (23). Nevertheless, the gnostic hypothesis of Lincoln, which is based in Edessa in the second-century C.E., is not certain about the identities of “outsider” and “insider” (who were outsiders, and who were insiders?). Therefore, the community instructions about the anti-family ties, for new proselytisers of the Jesus religion, should be regarded as an indication of the “ascetic character” of the Gospel (24). The phrase “for there will be five in a house … the father against the son, and the son against the father” (25), shows family discord between the father and the son. This anti-family saying of Jesus designates “those who have been compelled to break away from their Jewish family to become followers of Jesus in the Thomasine community” (26). Valantasis focused on the part of “they will stand solitary”, insisting that “the plural form leads to a solitary or unified community understanding so that the group appears as a corporate and unified entity consisting of multiple parts” (27). If Valantasis’ interpretation is correct, the word “solitary (monaxos)” of the Logion 16, which “refers to those who have faced conflicts against their (22) This is obvious in the middle of the first century C.E. in which Jews and Romans hated Christians. They did not worship God together, even though the beginning of the new movement (30-40 C.E.) was not similar to the period before the Jewish war (50-70 C.E.). The fact that the Christian persecution was not organised by Romans themselves, but was plotted by Jews, displays the emotional level of the Jews. (23) LINCOLN, “Thomas-Gospel and Thomas-Community”, 65-76. (24) Yet, to evaluate the whole text as ascetic character, is an irresponsible risk without evidence. R. URO, “Is Thomas an Encratite Gospel?”, Thomas at the Crossroads. Essays on the Gospel of Thomas (ed. R. URO) (Edinburgh 1998) 140- 162. (25) The Logion 16 is similar to Q 12,51-53. (26) R. URO, “Asceticism and Anti-Familial Language in the Gospel of Thomas”, Constructing Early Christian Families. Family as Social Reality and Metaphor (ed. H. MOXNES) (London – New York 1997) 216-234. ID., “Is Thomas an Encratite Gospel?”, 159. (27) R. VALANTASIS, The Gospel of Thomas (London – New York 1997) 84.