Learn more Shop now Learn more Shop now Shop now Shop now Shop now Shop now Shop now Shop now Shop now Shop now Learn More Shop now Learn more Click Here Shop Kindle Learn More Shop now Shop Women's Shop Men's



on 1 June 2013
Nyland’s book is a well presented introduction to this non-canonical gospel with a comparison of the Coptic and Greek versions alongside New Testament logia which cover the same topics, plus an in depth appendix for the justification of her translations of key words and phrases. Apart from notes regarding each lotion there is no overall theological discussion. There has been a renewed interest in this gospel, with a variety of theories being put forward as to its origins, its relationship with the canonical gospels, especially that of John, and this is a good volume to have for instant reference to the logia in Thomas. In her brief introduction Nyland favours early dates for the canonical gospels, which can slew the interpretation accepted by other theologians and biblical scholars. This may be based on her own evangelical beliefs. She also avoids getting into the ‘Gnosticism’ of Thomas, which is not apparent without it being assumed to be, indeed, Gnostic. I liked the book, but award it only 4 stars rather than 5, because of the limitation of the work. This is two-fold. Although Nyland stresses her own lexicographic academic background in Greek, she has had to start from scratch, presumably in Coptic — and there are differences between Indo-European and Hamitic languages. Secondly, I am not convinced totally by the historic interpretations of Koinē Greek through Classical Greek. Words are very flexibly interpreted by each generation and context — the uses of ‘wicked’ and ‘dry‘ in contemporary UK youth idiom are an example of this. The historical development and understanding of such words for ‘poor’ — ‘ptokhos’ and ‘penikhros’ — illuminate but do not necessarily convince, because language usage is interactive as a social and cultural coinage, not just as an inherited conceptualisation. With this proviso, I very much commend the book.
0Comment|Was this review helpful to you?YesNoReport abuse
on 29 January 2014
...you start with the film "Stigmata" and then if you're still curious you reach for this translation.
I wouldn't recommend to people that just want to find out about some secrets of the world. IT IS NOT another
Da Vinci code...
Gospel of Thomas is probably one of the most "attacked" sources. Why? Just beacuse it wasn't discovered by
one of "celebrities" in science and Christian studies therefore "celebrities" will call it: "nonsense", "rubbish", "heresy", "side product", "gnostic".
It basically tells original teachings of Christ which happened to exist in oral form for at about hundred years and then it was written down and printed.

not for beginners
0Comment|Was this review helpful to you?YesNoReport abuse
TOP 500 REVIEWERVINE VOICEon 2 July 2011
This Kindle book provides decent translations of the Gospel of Thomas from the Nag Hammadi library plus the equivalent fragments from the Oxyrhynchus papyri. Parallels from the Canonical gospels are given along with each logion.

An introduction considers the approach to the translations, a slightly out of place criticism of public domain publishing (the subtext here appears to be the implication that Dr Nyland's translation is vastly superior to anything else you will find in the public domain), the manuscripts of the Gospel of Thomas, the dating of the Gospel and a discussion of the name 'Thomas'. There is no commentary provided; the end notes which are hyperlinked via superscripts in the text discuss various points of word meaning and translation.

The translation itself can often be seemingly unnecessarily pedantic - for example Dr Nyland insists on translating the Coptic 'tipe' in Logion 1 as 'experience' rather than the usual 'taste' given everywhere else, asserting that it only has the latter meaning when used in relation to food (in my albeit admittedly short Coptic dictionary 'tipe' is given only the meaning 'taste' and nothing else).

Such insistence on accuracy is a bit at odds with the practice elsewhere of bowdlerisation, such as translating 'Son of Man' via the politically correct gender neutral 'Human Being' - the endnote discussion engineering this PC variant is slightly unconvincing and inexplicably claims that the Koine 'anthropos' is 'grammatically common gender'.

Despite such points this is a rather decent translation, great value and I'll certainly make a lot of use of it.
0Comment| 7 people found this helpful. Was this review helpful to you?YesNoReport abuse
on 29 December 2013
This book is OK not quite what I thought it would be, but was interesting in parts, but it makes a good book shelf item to back up other Books I have
0Comment|Was this review helpful to you?YesNoReport abuse
on 7 June 2014
Very interesting read,as a Catholic it opened up my mind and has made me review a few things.Thank you so much
0Comment|Was this review helpful to you?YesNoReport abuse
on 18 February 2015
Informative
0Comment|Was this review helpful to you?YesNoReport abuse

Sponsored Links

  (What is this?)