There is a lot here, I think you explained to me this before your argument that the Gospel of Thomas has its roots before even Mark. I should mention that I did reread it after we spoke and am convinced. You can even see the John making him the one that physically touches Jesus to confirm it is true. You got a tradition of Thomas describing Jesus as a ghost so John comes around and makes Thomas the one who physically lays hands on him.
I am going to think about what you wrote today. I didn't consider the angle of Paul arguing against Epicureanism.
You got a tradition of Thomas describing Jesus as a ghost so John comes around and makes Thomas the one who physically lays hands on him.
It was less the idea that Jesus was a ghost and more the idea that everyone was a non-physical spiritual being in a world that looks and feels like it is physical but it's actually just the creator's light in the archetype of an original physical world.
This later on becomes a Jesus-only belief (docetism), but in the Gospel of Thomas it is pretty explicit about the point being about everybody, Jesus included.
It was a clever idea in the context of Epicurean naturalism to argue against their beliefs of final death, but as soon as that disappeared from the picture with the rise of Neoplatonism the leftover ideas get weird fast.
There is a lot here, I think you explained to me this before your argument that the Gospel of Thomas has its roots before even Mark. I should mention that I did reread it after we spoke and am convinced. You can even see the John making him the one that physically touches Jesus to confirm it is true. You got a tradition of Thomas describing Jesus as a ghost so John comes around and makes Thomas the one who physically lays hands on him.
I am going to think about what you wrote today. I didn't consider the angle of Paul arguing against Epicureanism.
It was less the idea that Jesus was a ghost and more the idea that everyone was a non-physical spiritual being in a world that looks and feels like it is physical but it's actually just the creator's light in the archetype of an original physical world.
This later on becomes a Jesus-only belief (docetism), but in the Gospel of Thomas it is pretty explicit about the point being about everybody, Jesus included.
It was a clever idea in the context of Epicurean naturalism to argue against their beliefs of final death, but as soon as that disappeared from the picture with the rise of Neoplatonism the leftover ideas get weird fast.
If you are curious about more regarding the Epicurean qualities to Paul's debate in 1 Cor 15, there's a paper on it: Szymik, The Corinthian Opponents of the Resurrection in 1 Cor 15:12. The Epicurean Hypothesis Reconsidered (2020)