Talk:Gospel of Thomas: Difference between revisions
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
imported>Larry Sanger No edit summary |
imported>Subpagination Bot m (Add {{subpages}} and remove checklist (details)) |
||
| (6 intermediate revisions by 3 users not shown) | |||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
{{subpages}} | |||
How about a link to the text? --[[User:Larry Sanger|Larry Sanger]] 13:20, 4 June 2007 (CDT) | This is just a start for an entirely new entry -- it is heavily adapted from a version which, some time ago, I wrote for the (since greatly discredited) Conservapedia under the pseudonym "Boethius", but I hope it can find a far more congenial home here. [[User:Russell Potter|Russell Potter]] 21:02, 29 April 2007 (CDT) | ||
:How about a link to the text? --[[User:Larry Sanger|Larry Sanger]] 13:20, 4 June 2007 (CDT) | |||
::Would be great, to do, but the only online "translations" I know of are at least loosely based on the copyrighted edition. I'll look about anew. [[User:Russell Potter|Russell Potter]] 14:17, 4 June 2007 (CDT) | |||
:I believe you might be thinking of the Gospel of Judas where the copyrighted version has generated some controversy. I have added a link to the "Early Christian Writings" web site section on Thomas which has a wealth of on-line material on the Gospel of Thomas. [[User:James F. Perry|James F. Perry]] 18:44, 4 June 2007 (CDT) | |||
::No, actually -- though I have copies of nearly all the Gnostic gospels in various editions -- but thanks for the link, this looks like an independent translation, just what we needed! What I had meant earlier was sites such as [http://www.thethomasgospel.com/ this] one, which is largely a paraphrase of translation given in the Harper & Row hardcover edition of 1959. [[User:Russell Potter|Russell Potter]] 22:41, 4 June 2007 (CDT) | |||
Latest revision as of 14:04, 26 September 2007
This is just a start for an entirely new entry -- it is heavily adapted from a version which, some time ago, I wrote for the (since greatly discredited) Conservapedia under the pseudonym "Boethius", but I hope it can find a far more congenial home here. Russell Potter 21:02, 29 April 2007 (CDT)
- How about a link to the text? --Larry Sanger 13:20, 4 June 2007 (CDT)
- Would be great, to do, but the only online "translations" I know of are at least loosely based on the copyrighted edition. I'll look about anew. Russell Potter 14:17, 4 June 2007 (CDT)
- I believe you might be thinking of the Gospel of Judas where the copyrighted version has generated some controversy. I have added a link to the "Early Christian Writings" web site section on Thomas which has a wealth of on-line material on the Gospel of Thomas. James F. Perry 18:44, 4 June 2007 (CDT)
- No, actually -- though I have copies of nearly all the Gnostic gospels in various editions -- but thanks for the link, this looks like an independent translation, just what we needed! What I had meant earlier was sites such as this one, which is largely a paraphrase of translation given in the Harper & Row hardcover edition of 1959. Russell Potter 22:41, 4 June 2007 (CDT)