D.W. Kim, «What Shall We Do? The Community Rules of Thomas in the ‘Fifth Gospel’», Vol. 88 (2007) 393-414
This article argues for the diversity of early Christianity in terms of religiocultural communities. Each early Christian group, based on a personal revelation of leadership and the group’s socio-political milieu, maintained its own tradition (oral, written, or both) of Jesus for the continuity and prosperity of the movement. The leaders of early Christianity allowed outsiders to become insiders in the condition where the new comers committed to give up their previous religious attitude and custom and then follow the new community rules. The membership of the Thomasine group is not exceptional in this case. The Logia tradition of P. Oxy. 1, 654.655, and NHC II, 2. 32: 10-51: 28 in the context of community policy will prove the pre-gnostic peculiarity of the creative and independent movement within the Graeco-Roman world.
What Shall We Do? The Community Rules 411
in his hand)â€, but the words carry a certainty that the diligent one will be
accepted (by the community), while the lazy one will be even worse
than before, as depriving “p•ke ¯ym et•ouÓ•ta•f (the little he has)â€. The
blessing of the diligent one is repeated in Logion 45: “a good man brings
forth good from his storehouse (his good heart); an evil man brings forth
evil things from his evil storehouse (his evil heart)â€. The honesty of the
good man’s story is associated positively to the concept of “diligenceâ€
which the leader of Thomas valued in the context of the social rules. The
case of an evil man who causes social problems contrasts with the lazy
man having nothing. Another parable of Jesus agrees with the principle
that the diligence of a man parallels honesty: “He leased it (the
vineyard) to tenant farmers so that they might work it and he might
collect the produce from them†(102). The vineyard owner in Logion 65,
who had good intentions, is seen as the diligent and honest person,
despite the tenant farmers having evil thoughts and plundering the
owner ’s possessions, as well as killing other innocent people, including
the son of the owner.
The activity of making or keeping “eirhnh (peace)†is also
regarded as an effective social-ethical rule, according to the saying “If
two make peace with each other in this one house†(103). If the words
“ÿmæ•pei•hei ouvt (in this one house)†are interpreted to refer to the
Thomasine community, modern readers can easily understand that the
purpose of this Logion was maintaining the community in peace. The
potentiality of “eirhnh (peace)†produces the power to move a
mountain; this is reported in the Logion 106 in which the community
policy of “eirhnh (peace)†is reinterpreted as a unifying concept of the
community: “When you make the two oneâ€. The same concept of
unity or harmony is quoted in Logion 22: “when you make the inside
like the outside and the outside like the inside, and the above like the
belowâ€. The power of unity (like keeping peace) among the
community members is expressed as “to move a mountain†in the
NHC II, 2. 50.21-22 (104). Such phrases of Thomas show that the
community leaders, through the social rules, expected the new
proselytisers to abandon their Jewish attitude and cross the boundary
into the Jesus community. The following Logion of Jesus indirectly
expresses the internal and external trouble experienced by a person
undergoing the process:
(102) Logion 65.
(103) Logion 48.
(104) “When you say, ‘mountain, move away’, it will move awayâ€.