4
The Rabbit Hole of the Secret Sayings 11:46 Jackson: Okay, Lena, let’s go down the rabbit hole. Let’s talk about the sayings that *aren't* in the Bible. The ones that make you tilt your head and go, "Wait, Jesus said *what*?" Because for the listener wanting to know if these are truly Christ’s words, these "unique" sayings are the real test. Some feel like they could fit right in, and others feel like they’re from a completely different religion.
12:10 Lena: That’s exactly where it gets "Gnostic." Take Logion 77, for example. Jesus says: "I am the light that is over all. I am the All. The All came forth out of me... Split a piece of wood—I am there. Lift the stone, and you will find me there." That sounds almost like pantheism, right? The idea that the divine is physically embedded in the material world. It’s beautiful, but it’s a far cry from the Jesus of the Gospel of John who says, "I am the way, the truth, and the life."
12:42 Jackson: Right, it’s a different kind of "I am." It’s more about a cosmic presence than a personal savior. And then you have the sayings that are just straight-up cryptic. Like Logion 7: "Blessed is the lion that a person will eat and the lion will become human. And anathema is the person whom a lion will eat and the lion will become human." I’ve read interpretations of that for hours and I’m still not sure what to make of it. Is it about overcoming our animal nature? Is it a metaphor for spiritual consumption?
13:13 Lena: It’s definitely an "interpretive enigma." And that might be the point! The very first saying in the book is: "Whoever finds the meaning of these words will not taste death." It’s a challenge. It tells the reader that salvation isn't about believing in a sacrifice; it’s about *solving a puzzle*. It’s about "gnosis"—knowledge. This is a huge argument for the "against" camp. They say this "secret" focus is a hallmark of second-century Gnosticism, which was all about an elite inner circle having the "real" truth that the common people couldn't understand.
13:46 Jackson: That’s a stark contrast to the "public" nature of the gospels, where Jesus is preaching to crowds and telling them to "repent and believe." In Thomas, it’s almost like he’s a Zen master giving koans. But then—building on what you said earlier—there are sayings that feel incredibly "primitive" and "authentic." Like Logion 42: "Become passers-by." Just two words. It’s so terse, so radical. It feels like the ultimate expression of the wandering, homeless Jesus we see in the "Son of Man has no place to lay his head" passages.
14:22 Lena: "Become passers-by." It’s one of the most famous lines in the book. It captures that sense of detachment from the world that was so central to the early Jesus movement. For scholars who favor an early date, a saying like that is "pure" Jesus. It’s not cluttered with theology or church doctrine. It’s just a raw call to a specific way of life. They argue that a later Gnostic would have written a three-page discourse on *why* we should be passers-by, but the historical Jesus would have just said the two words.
14:51 Jackson: So, we have this weird mix. We have these very "earthy," radical wisdom bits, and then we have these high-flying mystical claims. This brings us back to that "rolling corpus" or "layered" idea. Could it be that the "passers-by" stuff is the original Aramaic core, and the "I am the All" stuff was added later by Gnostics in Egypt? If that’s the case, then yes, *some* of these are likely the words of Christ, while others are the words of his later followers trying to "update" him.
15:21 Lena: That is exactly what April DeConick argues. She tries to peel back the layers like an onion. But it’s hard to do that without being subjective. I mean, how do we decide which ones are "real"? If we just pick the ones we like, or the ones that fit our image of Jesus, we’re just making him in our own image. The critics point out that even the "authentic-sounding" sayings in Thomas have been "filtered." For example, the saying about the "splinter and the beam" is in Thomas (Logion 26), just like in the Sermon on the Mount. But in Thomas, it’s stripped of its context about judgment and turned into a lesson about clear-sightedness and "seeing the light."
15:56 Jackson: Right, it’s a subtle shift from "don't judge your neighbor" to "fix your own spiritual perception so you can see the truth." It’s a "mystical" pivot. And we have to talk about the "elephant in the room"—the very last saying, Logion 114. Peter says women aren't worthy of life, and Jesus says, "I will draw her in so as to make her male, so that she too may become a living male spirit... Every woman who makes herself male will enter the kingdom of heaven." That is... well, it’s problematic for a modern reader, to say the least.
16:29 Lena: It’s incredibly jarring. But in a Gnostic context, "male" and "female" weren't just about gender—they were metaphysical categories. "Male" represented the spirit, and "female" represented the soul or the material world. So, "making the female male" was Gnostic code for "rising above the material world into the spiritual realm." Still, it’s a world away from the Jesus who has a close circle of women followers in the gospels. It feels like a later, very specific theological development.
16:57 Jackson: It’s those kinds of sayings that make scholars like John P. Meier or James Dunn say, "Look, this isn't a source for the historical Jesus. This is a source for second-century mysticism." They argue that the "realized eschatology"—the idea that the resurrection has *already* happened within you (Logion 51)—is a direct reaction against the fact that the world *didn't* end like the first Christians expected it to. If the end didn't come, you have to reinvent "the end" as an internal, spiritual event.
3:25 Lena: Exactly. It’s a way of dealing with "delayed disappointment." If the Kingdom didn't appear on the clouds, you say, "Actually, it’s spread out on the earth, but people just don’t see it" (Logion 113). That feels like a second-generation theological move, not the "first-generation" proclamation of a Galilean prophet. So, for the listener, the "rabbit hole" leads to a choice: do you see Thomas as a treasure chest of lost, raw wisdom, or as a fascinating, creative, but ultimately secondary "remix" of the Jesus story?