Title: Dated, but detailed
Product review: While this book has a 1993 publication date, it was originally written in 1960 and little (if any) changed. The book offers a good discussion of gnosticism and of the relationship between the canonical gospels and the Gospel of Thomas. It also benefits from a discussion of each of the sayings, and relates the Thomas sayings to the existing Gospel sayings. What the book lacks is any attempt at analysing the sayings to create a coherent picture of Jesus, or at least, the Jesus whom the gnostics chose to remember. The authors flatly say that such an analysis is not warranted, but, in my humble opinion, I beg to differ. Also the book rarely discusses other gnostic gospels, and when it does so, it does it relatively superficially. Nonetheless, compared to other Gospels of Thomas, this version is better than average.
Would you say this review depicts the product in a flattering or unflattering light?
