07_Biblica_AN_Kim_Layout 1 16/12/13 12:29 Pagina 595 595 WHERE DOES IT FIT? Ultimately, biblical readers started to estimate the proportion of the Thomasine parables in the 1960s. But if one notes the tendency of scholarship based on the diagram of “Surveys of the Parables in Thomas”, the result was not without doubt. For example, whilst Schoedel claimed that less than 5% of the Thomasine passages are parables, Montefiore’s estimate was much higher, at 15%. In this way each scholar had their own understanding of the definition of the Thomasine parables. Afterwards, readers in the 1980s and 1990s reached a consensus of 10–13% (11-15 parables out of 114 Logia). Among them, some were already known from the canonical traditions, but other parables were initially introduced by the Gospel of Thomas. The identity of the unknown parables is very significant in the process of verifying the independent character of Thomas. The four unknown parables of Jesus could be misinterpreted in the context of “abbreviation or omission” 47, but the peculiar character of a pre-gnostic tradition has been clearly demonstrated in each Logion. In particular, no allegorical trace is revealed in the parable of the wise fisherman (Logion 8). The parable of the empty jar (Logion 97) is genuinely related to the Jewish tradition of 1 Kgs 17,8-16. The parable of the assassin (Logion 98) is understood to be combined with an appended aphorism (cf. Exodus 3–15). The last parable about hidden treasure (Logion 109) is similar to the sapiential tradition of Proverbs and Job. Therefore, the characteristics of the four unknown parables, according to the Coptic manuscript of NHC II, 2. 34, 49, and 50-51, do not support the idealized view that Thomas is a Christian gnostic text, but predominantly support its uniqueness in that the extra-canonical text is a creatively independent source in the context of the Jewish sophia tradition, reflecting a “Thomasine-Q theory” 48. Seoul National University David W. KIM SUMMARY This article explores the genesis of some parables in the Gospel of Thomas not found elsewhere. They are not thematically related to each other. Then, how many parables exist in the text? In what way are they different or the same in comparison with the canonical Gospels? These parables in Thomas were not excluded from the concern of the post-1960s scholars, but the literary standard was not unified. The Greek fragments (P. Oxy. 654, 1, and 655) do not offer any crucial source in this case, but the Coptic manuscripts (NHC II, 2. 32-51) evince a new insight that the unknown parable tradition is not intended to show dependency on the canonical tradition; rather they commonly provide key evidence which proves the pre-gnostic Jewish sophia tradition. 47 See BLOMBERG, “Tradition and Redaction”, 186-197. 48 In the cases of Logia 97 and 98, the figures Thomas has in common with the Jewish tradition reflect a strong inter-relational proportion with the Q tradition. This could be the subject of a further study.