(navigation image)
Home American Libraries | Canadian Libraries | Universal Library | Community Texts | Project Gutenberg | Children's Library | Biodiversity Heritage Library | Additional Collections
Search: Advanced Search
Anonymous User (login or join us)
Upload
See other formats

Full text of "New Sayings of Jesus and fragment of a lost Gospel from Oxyrhynchus;"

= CD 
fc 



CD 



EGYPT EXPLORATION FUND 
QRAECO-ROMAN BRANCH 

NEW SAYINGS OF JESUS 

AND 



FRAGMENT OF A LOST GOSPEL 

FROM OXYRHYNCHUS 

EDITED, WITH TRANSLATION AND COMMENTARY, 
BY 

BERNARD P. GRENFELL, D.Lixx., M.A. 

HON. LITT.D., DUBLIN; HON. PH.D., KOENIGSBHRG; FELLOW OF QUEEN S COLLEGE, OXFORD; LUCY 
WHARTON DRBXBL COLD MEDALLIST OF THE UNIVERSITY OF PENNSYLVANIA; 

AND 

ARTHUR S. HUNT, D.Lrrr., M.A. 

HON. PH.D., KOBNIGSBBRG; FELLOW OF LINCOLN COLLEGE, OXFORD 



WITH ONE PLATE 

AND 

THE TEXT OF THE LOGIA DISCOVERED IN 1897 



PUBLISHED FOR THE EGYPT EXPLORATION FUND BY 



BS 

2970 

L63 

1904 

c.l 

ROBARTS 



OXFORD UNIVERSITY PRESS 

114 FIFTH AVENUE, NEW YORK 
LONDON, TORONTO, MELBOURNE & BOMBAY 



NEW SAYINGS OF JESUS 

AND 

FRAGMENT OF A LOST GOSPEL 

QRENFELL AND HUNT 




..i 



NEW SAYINGS OF JESUS 



Bible 



( EGYPT EXPLORATION FUND 
QRAECO-ROMAN BRANCH 



NEW SAYINGS OF JESUS 

AND 

FRAGMENT OF A LOST GOSPEL 

FROM OXYRHYNCHUS 

EDITED, WITH TRANSLATION AND COMMENTARY, 
BY 

BERNARD P. GRENFELL, D.LITT., M.A. 

HON. LITT.D., DUBLIN; HON. PH.D., KOENIGSBERG; FELLOW OF QUEEN S COLLEGE, OXFORD; LUCY 
WHARTON DREXEL GOLD MEDALLIST OF THE UNIVERSITY OF PENNSYLVANIA; 

/, \ > 

AND 

ARTHUR S. HUNT, D.LITT., M.A. 

HON. PH.D., KOENIGSBERG; FELLOW OF LINCOLN COLLEGE, OXFORD 



WITH ONE PLATE 

AND 

THE TEXT OF THE LOGIA DISCOVERED IN 1897 



PUBLISHED FOR THE EGYPT EXPLORATION FUND BY 

OXFORD UNIVERSITY PRESS 

114 FIFTH AVENUE, NEW YORK 
LONDON, TORONTO, MELBOURNE & BOMBAY 



COPYRIGHT 1904 

BY 
OXFORD UNIVERSITY PRESS AMERICAN BRANCH 



Printed in the United States of America 



PREFACE 

THE present edition of the New Sayings of Jesus and Frag 
ment of a Lost Gospel is printed with some alterations, princi 
pally by way of abridgement, from the forthcoming publication 
of the two texts in The Oxyrhynchus Papyri, Part IV, nos. 654 
and 655, where a fuller discussion of the more technical points 
will be given, as well as collotype reproductions of both frag 
ments. The Logia discovered in 1897 (AOH A IHCOY, Say 
ings of our Lord) are reprinted from the revised text and 
translation given in The Oxyrhynchus Papyri, Part I, no. 1. 



BERNARD P. GRENFELL. 
ARTHUR S. HUNT. 



OXFORD, 

April 1904. 



CONTENTS 

PAGE 

PREFACE 5 

I. NEW SAYINGS OF JESUS : 

(0) INTRODUCTION 9 

() TEXT n 

(c) THE SAYINGS WITH TRANSLATIONS AND NOTES . 12 

(d) GENERAL REMARKS 20 

II. THE LociA DISCOVERED IN 1897 37 

III. FRAGMENT OF A LOST GOSPEL : 

(a) INTRODUCTION 39 

() TEXT 40 

(c) TRANSLATION AND NOTES 42 

(d} GENERAL REMARKS 45 



I. NEW SAYINGS OF JESUS 

(a) INTRODUCTION. 

OUR first excavations in 1897 on the site of Oxyrhynchus 
one of the chief cities of ancient Egypt, situated on the edge 
of the western desert 120 miles south of Cairo, were rewarded 
by the discovery of a very large collection of Greek papyri 
dating from the first to the seventh century of the Christian 
era. Of the numerous theological and classical texts which 
were then brought to light, none aroused wider interest than a 
page from a book containing Sayings of Jesus and published 
by us under the title of AOFIA IHCOY, Sayings of our Lord. 
After an interval of six years, during which we were principally 
engaged in the search for documents of the first three cen 
turies B. c. in the Fay urn, we returned in February 1903 to 
Oxyrhynchus, with a view to an exhaustive examination of 
what has been on the whole the richest site in Egypt for 
papyri. This process of clearing the numerous mounds on a 
large scale has already resulted in further important discoveries, 
but will necessarily be both long and costly in the case of a 
town which is more than a mile in length ; and after the ter 
mination of a third season s work there, the end is still far 
from being in sight. 

By a curious stroke of good fortune our second excavations 
at Oxyrhynchus were, like the first, signalized by the discovery 
of a fragment of a collection of Sayings of Jesus. This con 
sists of forty-two incomplete lines on the back of a survey-list 
of various pieces of land (see Frontispiece}. The survey-list, 
which was written in a cursive hand of the end of the second 
or early part of the third century before the back of the 
papyrus came to be used, provides a terminus a quo for the 
writing on the other side. This, which is an upright informal 
uncial of medium size, we should assign to the middle or end 



io I. NE\V SAYINGS OF JESUS 

of the third century ; a later date than A. D. 300 is most un 
likely. The present text is therefore nearly contemporary with 
the Logia papyrus discovered in 1 897, which also belongs to 
the third century, though probably to an earlier decade. In 
its general style and arrangement the present series of Sayings 
offers great resemblance to its predecessor. Here, as in the 
earlier Logia, the individual Sayings are introduced by the 
formula * Jesus saith, and there is the same mingling of new 
and familiar elements ; but the second series of Sayings is 
remarkable for the presence of the introduction to the whole 
collection (11. 1-5), and another novelty is the fact that one of 
the Sayings (11. 36 sqq.) is an answer to a question, the sub 
stance of which is reported (11. 32-6). It is also noticeable 
that while in the first series the Sayings had little if any con 
nection of thought with each other, in the second series the 
first four at any rate are all concerned with the Kingdom of 
Heaven. That the present text represents the beginning of a 
collection which later on included the original Logia is very 
probable ; this and the other general questions concerning the 
papyrus are discussed on pp. 20-36. 

Excluding the introduction, there are parts of five separate 
Sayings. The single column of writing is complete at the top, 
but broken at the bottom and also vertically, causing the loss 
of the ends of lines throughout. From 11. 7-8, 15, 25, and 30, 
which can be restored with certainty from extant parallel pas 
sages, it appears that the lacunae at the ends of lines range 
from twelve to sixteen or at most eighteen letters, so that of 
each line, as far as 1. 33, approximately only half is preserved. 
The introduction and the first and fourth Sayings admit of an 
almost complete reconstruction which is nearly or quite con 
clusive, but in the second, third, and fifth, which are for the 
most part entirely new, though the general sense may often be 
caught, the restorations are, except in a few lines, rather 
hazardous. The difficulties caused by the lacunae are en 
hanced by the carelessness of the scribe himself, who makes 
several clerical errors; in two cases (11. 19 and 25) words 
which were at first omitted have been added by him over the 
line. 



I. NEW SAYINGS OF JESUS 



ii 



(b) TEXT. 

We proceed now to the text, giving first a transcription 
of the papyrus and then a reconstruction in modern form. 
Square brackets [ ] indicate a lacuna, round brackets ( ) the 
resolution of an abbreviation, angular brackets { ) a mistaken 
omission in the original, braces { } a mistaken addition. Dots 
within brackets represent the approximate number of letters 
lost ; dots outside brackets indicate letters of which illegible 
traces remain. In the accompanying translation supple 
ments which are not practically certain are enclosed in round 
brackets. 



24-4 x 7-8 cm. 



01 TOIOI 01 AOroi 01 [ 
AHCeN fRC ZO)N K[ 
KAI 0O)MA KAI 6ITT6N [ 
AN TCON AOrOON TOYT[ 
5 QY MH reYCHTAI 3 [ 
MH TTAYCAC0O) ZH[ 
YPH KAI OTAN YPH [ 
BH06IC BACIA6YCH KA[ 



10 01 6AKONT6C HMAC [ 
H BACIA6IA 6N OYPA[ 

TA nereiNA TOY OYP[ 

Tl YTTO THN THN CT[ 
01 i X0YC THC 6AAA[ 

15 TC YMAC KAI H BAC[ 
NTOC YMCON [.]CTI [ 
TNCO TAYTHN YPH[ 
6AYTOYC rNO)CC0Aj [ 

YM6IC 
eCTe TOY HATPOC TOY T[ 

20 TNOOCOe AYTOYC N[ 
KAI YM6IC 6CT 



OYK AnOKNHCei AN0[ 

POON enepooTHce HA[ 
PO)N nepi TOY TonoY TH[ 

OTI 

25 C6T6 nOAAOl 6CONTAI TT[ 
01 6CXATOI TTPGOTOI KAI [ 

CIN Aerei frre \^- . [ 

0N THC OY600C COY KAI [ 
AHO COY AnOKAAY4>HCT[ 
30 TIN KPY17TON OY 4>AN6[ 
KAI 0e0AMMNON 0[ 

[. .]TAZOYCIN AYTON 0[ 

[. .]roYCiN nooc 

[ ..... ]M0A KAI 
35 [ ..... ]AI Tl HAPATHPHC[ 



[. 



.]ITAI MH TTOieiT[ 
.]HC AAH0CIAC AN[ 
[ ........ .]N A[.]OKeKP[ 

40 [ ........ ]KAPI[. .] eCTIN [ 

t ........ - -]< 

I .............. LN[ 



12 I. NEW SAYINGS OF JESUS 



(c) THE SAYINGS WITH TRANSLATIONS 
AND NOTES. 

INTRODUCTION. 11. 1-5. 

{ol} Toloi oi Xdyoi ol [ .......... ov? eXa- 

\T]crv Ii7(croi})s 6 a>i/ K\_vpio<; ? .......... 

Kal a)p,a Kal CLTrev [auroi?- Tra? ocrrt? 
ai> rail/ Xdyedi> TQVT\_O>V aKova-y Oavdrov 
ov A 



* These are the (wonderful?) words which Jesus the living 
(Lord) spake to ... and Thomas, and he said unto (them), 
Every one that hearkens to these words shall never taste 
of death. 

The general sense of the introduction is clear, and most of 
the restorations are fairly certain. In 1. i an adjective such as 
* wonderful is necessary after O t [. For shall never taste of 
death cf. Matt. xvi. 28, Mark ix. i, Luke ix. 27, and especially 
John viii. 52, If a man keep my word, he shall never taste of 
death/ In these passages of the Synoptists taste of death 
simply means * die in the literal sense ; but here no doubt, 
as in the passage in St. John, the phrase has the deeper and 
metaphorical meaning that those who obey Christ s words and 
attain to the kingdom, reach a state unaffected by the death of 
the body. The beginning of 1. i requires some correction, 
oi roiot oi Aoyot ot being extremely ugly. The corruption of ovrot 
into ot rotot is not very likely, and since rotos is found in late 
prose writers for rotoo-Se, the simplest course is to omit the initial 
oi. The restoration of 1. 2 presents the chief difficulty. K[v>to? 
is very doubtful ; K[OJ. followed by e. g. a-n-oOav^ ( Jesus who 
liveth, though dead ) is equally likely, and several of the pos 
sible supplements at the end of the line require a longer word 
than *[v pios to precede. Another dative before and to Thomas 
is required, and three alternatives suggest themselves : (i) a 
proper name, in which case Philip or Matthias is most likely to 
have been coupled with Thomas. Apocryphal Gospels as 
signed to Thomas, Philip, and Matthias are known, and in the 



I. NEW SAYINGS OF JESUS 13 

second or third century Gnostic work called Pistis Sophia 701 
Philip, Thomas, and Matthias are associated as the recipients 
of a special revelation ; (2) a phrase such as to the other dis 
ciples (so Dr. Bartlet, cf. 1. 32 and John xx. 26 his disciples 
were within and Thomas with them ); (3) lov Sa TO>] KCU a>/m, 
suggested by Professor Lake, who compares the frequent occur 
rence of the double name Judas also called Thomas in the 
Acts of Thomas. The uncertainty attaching to the restoration 
is the more unfortunate, since much depends on it. If we 
adopt the first hypothesis, Thomas has only a secondary place ; 
but on either of the other two he occupies the chief position, 
and this fact would obviously be of great importance in deciding 
the origin of the Sayings. 

There is a considerable resemblance between the scheme of 
11. 1-3, the words . . . which Jesus spake . . . and he said/ 
and the formulae employed in introducing several of the ear 
liest citations of our Lord s Sayings, particularly First Epistle 
of Clement 1 3 especially remembering the words of the Lord 
Jesus which he spake in his teaching . . . for thus he said/ 
Acts xx. 35 and to remember the words of the Lord Jesus 
how he himself said. Dr. Rendel Harris had already (Con- 
temp. Rev. 1897, pp. 346-8) suggested that those formulae 
were derived from the introduction of a primitive collection of 
Sayings known to St. Paul, Clement of Rome, and Polycarp, 
and this theory gains some support from the parallel afforded 
by the introduction in the new Sayings. 

FIRST SAYING. 11. 5-9. 
5 [Xe yet *Iiy(<rov)s* 



r}ra)v ........ ew? av 

Kal OTCLV vpy [flap, fir) Oi/jcreTai KOLL BafJi- 
ls ySacriXevcrei fca[l ^acriXeucras avarra- 



Jesus saith, Let not him who seeks . . . cease until he 
finds, and when he finds he shall be astonished ; astonished 
he shall reach the kingdom, and having reached the king. 
dom he shall rest. 



I 4 I. NEW SAYINGS OF JESUS 

The conclusion of this Saying is quoted from the Gospel 
according to the Hebrews by Clement of Alexandria (Strom. 
ii. 9. 45) as it is also written in the Gospel according to the 
Hebrews " He that wonders shall reach the kingdom, and hav 
ing reached the kingdom he shall rest." In Strom, v. 14. 96 
Clement quotes the Saying in a fuller and obviously more ac 
curate form which agrees almost exactly with the papyrus, but 
without stating his source : He who seeks shall not cease 
until he finds, and when he finds he shall be astonished, and 
being astonished he shall reach the kingdom, and having reached 
the kingdom he shall rest. The word after &?[TO>V in 1. 6, to 
which there is nothing corresponding in the Clement quotation, 
is very likely the object of seek/ perhaps rty farjv, i. e. (eter 
nal) life. The purpose to which Clement turns the passage 
from the Gospel according to the Hebrews is to support the 
Platonic view that the beginning of knowledge is wonder at 
external objects, but this interpretation is clearly far removed 
from the real meaning of the Saying. 

The opening sentence Let not him who seeks . . . cease 
until he finds is parallel to Matt. vi. 33 But seek ye first the 
kingdom, and vii. 7 Seek and ye shall find ; cf. too the 2nd 
Logion Except ye fast to the world ye shall in no wise find 
the kingdom of God. The idea of the necessity for strenuous 
effort in order to attain to the kingdom has also much in com 
mon with the 5th Logion ( Raise the stone and there thou 
shalt find me ). The precise meaning of astonished in the 
second and third sentences, when he finds he shall be aston 
ished ; astonished he shall reach the kingdom, has been a mat 
ter of dispute ; but, as Professor Harnack has recently shown, 
the nearest parallel is Matt. xiii. 44 The kingdom of Heaven 
is like unto a treasure hidden in the field, which a man found 
and hid ; and in his joy he goeth and selleth all that he hath, 
and buyeth that field. Astonishment therefore is to be inter 
preted as a sign not of fear but of joy ; cf. the use of Odpftos 
for joyful astonishment in Luke v. 9 He (sc. Peter) was 
amazed and all that were with him at the draught of the fishes. 
With the clause astonished he shall reach the kingdom, i. e. 
reign with the Messiah, cf . the promise to the disciples in Matt. 



I. NEW SAYINGS OF JESUS 15 

xix. 28 Verily I say unto you that ye which have followed me 
in the regeneration when the Son of Man shall sit on the throne 
of his glory, ye also shall sit upon twelve thrones, judging the 
twelve tribes of Israel. For shall rest cf. Matt. xi. 289 
* I will give you rest ... ye shall find rest unto your souls. 
Both the language and thought of this Saying thus have marked 
parallels in the Gospels, and there are several references to it 
in early Christian literature, the most notable being in the 
Second Epistle of Clement v. 5 The promise of Christ is great 
and wonderful and rest in the kingdom to come and life eter 
nal, and in the Acts of Thomas (ed. Bonnet, p. 243) They 
who worthily partake of the goods of that world have rest, and 
in rest shall reign. While the picturesque and forcible char 
acter of the Saying is undeniable, very different views have 
been taken concerning the genuineness of it, as is the case with 
most of the uncanonical Sayings ascribed to our Lord ; but the 
tendency of recent criticism has been to assign it a very high 
place among the Sayings which do not rest on the authority 
of the Gospels, and Harnack accepts it as substantially a true 
Saying of Jesus. 

SECOND SAYING. 11. 9-21. 

Xeyet if^crovs ru/es 

10 ot eX/cozre? ^/xag [et? rrjv /3aari\Lav el 

r) ^SacrtXeta iv ovpa\y(p eo~riv ; 

ra irereiva rov ovp[avov /cat TMV @r)pta>v o- 
TL V7TO rrjv yrjv eW[iz> r) eVt rrjs yfjs /cat 
ol i\6v.<s rrjs 0a\d[cra-7)$ ovrot ol eX/coi>- 
15 re? v/Aas, /cat 17 ^acr[tXeta raw ovpavwv 
eVrog v^v [e]oTt [/cat carts av eavrov 

yva* ravTTp evprj[(reL 

eavrovs y^ojcrecr^e [/cat etS^crere ort viol 

lore v/iet? rot) Trarpos rov r[ 

20 yva>o~(o~y0e eavrov? ez/[ 

/cat v/Ltet? ecrre TITTTO\_ .... 

Jesus saith, (Ye ask ? who are those) that draw us (to 
the kingdom, if) the kingdom is in Heaven ? . . . the fowls 



16 I. NEW SAYINGS OF JESUS 

of the air, and all beasts that are under the earth or upon 
the earth, and the fishes of the sea, (these are they which 
draw) you, and the kingdom of Heaven is within you ; and 
whoever shall know himself shall find it. (Strive there 
fore ?) to know yourselves, and ye shall be aware that ye 
are the sons of the (almighty ?) Father ; (and ?) ye shall 
know that ye are in (the city of God?), and ye are (the 
city?). 

The reconstruction of this, the longest and most important 
of the Sayings, is extremely difficult. Beyond the supplements 
in 1. 15, which are based on the parallel in Luke xvii. 21 with 
the substitution of kingdom of Heaven, St. Matthew s 
phrase, for St. Luke s * kingdom of God which is too short for 
the lacuna, and those in 11. 12-3, 16, and 18, the general 
accuracy of which is guaranteed by the context, it is impossible 
to proceed without venturing into the region of pure conjec 
ture. There seems to be no direct parallel to or trace of this 
Saying among the other non-canonical Sayings ascribed to our 
Lord, and the materials provided by 11. 10-12 they that 
draw/ the kingdom of Heaven and the fowls of the air are 
at first sight so disparate that the recovery of the connexion 
between them may seem a hopeless task. But though no re 
storation of 11. 9-14 can hope to be very convincing, we think 
that a fairly good case can be made out in favour of our gen 
eral interpretation. The basis of it is the close parallelism 
which we have supposed to exist between 1. 1 5 res v/*as Kal rj 
(3a<r [tXei a TWV ovpavw and, on the other hand, 1. 10 ot eXKovres 
77/x5s followed in 1. 1 1 by 4 P<un**b & ofya[v<3, whereby we re 
store 01 lA/cov-] at the end of 1. 14. If this be granted 11. 9- 
16 divide themselves naturally into two parallel halves at the 
lacuna in 1. n, 11. 9-10 corresponding to 11. 12-5, and 1. II to 
11. 1 5-6. How is this correspondence to be explained ? The 
simplest solution is to suppose that 11. 9-11 are a ques 
tion to which 11. 12-6 form the answer; hence we supply 
rives in 1. 9 ; cf. the 5th Saying, which is an answer to 
a question. A difficulty then arises that we have * draw us in 
1. 10 but draw you in 11. 14-5. This may be a mere acci 
dent due to the common confusion of fyuts and ^ts in papyri 



I. NEW SAYINGS OF JESUS 17 

of this period, and perhaps you should be read in both cases. 
But us in 1. 10 can be defended in two ways, by supposing 
either that Jesus here lays stress rather on His human than 
on His divine nature, and associates Himself with the disciples, 
or that the question is put into the mouth of the disciples, i. e. 
the word before * who was ye ask or the like. There re 
mains, however, the greatest crux of all, the meaning of draw/ 
A favourable sense is here much more likely than the reverse ; 
cf . John vi. 44 No man can come to me except the Father 
which sent me draw him/ and xii. 32 I will draw all men 
unto myself. A phrase such as * to the kingdom is required 
to explain * draw/ though even with this addition the use of 
that word in such a context must be admitted to be difficult. 
The idea in 11. 12-6 seems to be that the divine element in the 
world begins in the lower stages of animal creation, and rises 
to a higher stage in man, who has within him the kingdom of 
Heaven; cf. Clement s discussion (Strom, v. 13) of Xeno- 
crates view that even irrational creatures possibly had some 
notion of the Divine, and the curious sanctity of certain animals 
in the various Apocryphal Acts, e. g. Thecla s baptized lion 
ess, Thomas s ass, Philip s leopard and kid buried at the door 
of the church. The transition from the inward character of 
the kingdom to the necessity for self-knowledge (11. 16-21) is 
natural. Since the kingdom is not an external manifestation 
but an inward principle, men must know themselves in order 
to attain to its realization. The old Greek proverb know 
thyself is thus given a fresh significance. Mr. Badham well 
compares Clement, Paedag. iii. I * It is then, as it appears, the 
greatest of all lessons to know one s self. For if a man knows 
himself he will know God/ For sons/ which is required by 
the context in 1. 18, cf. e. g. Luke xx. 36 they are . . . sons 
of God. At the end of 1. 19 v can be read in place of r : th? 
word is probably an adjective, possibly 7r[avroKpaTopos. i^rro[ iu 
1. 21 is very obscure, and it is tempting to read rj ir{r}6[\is, 
with fv [rrj 7roA.i TOV Ocov in 1. 20, as Professor Blass suggests, 
comparing for the omission of ovras Mark vi. 20 ei&ws avrbv 

aivBpa OIKO.IOV. 



i8 I. NEW SAYINGS OF JESUS 

THIRD SAYING. 11. 21-7. 

[ Ae yei I 



OVK 



pa)v Trep TOV TOTTOV 

25 CT76 OTL TToXXot CCTOZ TCU 7T\_pWTOL CCT^aTOt KOL 

01 ecr^arot TT/XWTOI /cat [ ........ 

(TLV. 

Jesus saith, A man shall not hesitate ... to ask . , . 
concerning his place (in the kingdom. Ye shall know) that 
many that are first shall be last and the last first and (they 
shall have eternal life ?). 



Line 24 may well have continued T[^S /foo-tAeia? followed by 
a word meaning * know ; but in the absence of a clear parallel 
we forbear to restore the earlier part of the Saying. Lines 25-6 
follow Mark x. 31 ( = Matt. xix. 30) Many that are first shall 
be last, and the last first. Luke xiii. 30 is rather longer. 
There are last which shall be first and there are first which 
shall be last. o-iv in 1. 27 is no doubt the termination of a 
verb : for shall have eternal life cf. John iii. 16, 36, v. 24, &c. 

FOURTH SAYING. 11. 27-31. 

Xeyet *Ii^(<r0v)s" [?ra^ TO 
Oev rrjs 6\//&>s o~ov KOL [TO 
aVo crov aTTOKa\v<f)(@)7]o-T\_aL crot. ov yap 

3 TIV KpVTTTOV O OV $OLVt\_pOV yeVTJ(TTCU 

Kal TeOafJifJievov o o[u/c eyep07j<rTaL. 



Jesus saith, Everything that is not before thy face and 
that which is hidden from thee shall be revealed to thee. 
For there is nothing hidden which shall not be made man 
ifest, nor buried which shall not be raised. 

The sense of this Saying is clear, and the supplements are 
fairly certain. Lines 29-30 are parallel to Matt. x. 26 For 
there is nothing covered that shall not be revealed, and hid that 



I. NEW SAYINGS OF JESUS 19 

shall not be known ; Luke xii. 2 But there is nothing covered 
up that shall not be revealed, and hid that shall not be known ; 
cf. Mark iv. 22 For there is nothing hid save that it should be 
manifested, neither was anything made secret but that it should 
come to light. In general arrangement the papyrus agrees 
with the versions of Matthew and Luke perhaps more than 
with that of Mark ; but the language of the first half of the 
sentence is much closer to St. Mark s (whose expression save 
that it should be manifested instead of the more pointed 
which shall not be manifested suggests the hand of an editor), 
while that of the second half diverges from all three. Buried 
makes a more forcible contrast to hidden than the correspond 
ing word in the Synoptists, which is merely a synonym for 
hidden. Instead of shall be raised a more general expres 
sion such as shall be made known can be supplied ; but this 
detracts from the picturesqueness of what is in any case a 
striking variation of a well-known Saying. 

FIFTH SAYING. 11. 32-42. 
[ef]eraoi;cn,z> avrov o\_l jjiaBrjTal avrov /ecu 

\\~\yOVO lV 7TO>? VrjO-TV^(TOfJiV KOi 

[ ..... ]/ze#a /ecu TTWS [ 
35 [. . . . K]OL Ti 7rapaTr)pTJo [oiJLi> 
[ ..... ~\v ; Xcyci Ii?(crot;)s- [ 
[ ..... ]eircu 
[ ..... JTJS 

[ ......... ~\V a 

40 [ ...... //,a]/capi[o9] ICTTLV [ 

[ ............ ]fc> ecrr[t 



His disciples question him and say, How shall we fast 
and how shall we (pray ?) . . . and what (commandment) 
shall we keep . . . Jesus saith, ... do not ... of truth 
. . . blessed is he . . . 

Though this Saying is broken beyond hope of recovery, its 
general drift may be caught. It clearly differed from the other 



20 I. NEW SAYINGS OF JESUS 

Sayings, both in this papyrus and the first series of Logia, in 
having a preliminary paragraph giving the occasion, which seems 
to be a question put by the disciples. This question consisted 
of a number of short sentences, each beginning with how or 
* what/ and so far as can be judged, they were concerned with 
the outward forms of religion, fasting, prayer, and almsgiving. 
How far, it was probably asked, are existing Jewish ordinances 
to be kept ? The answer of Jesus appears to have been a series 
of short commandments insisting on the inner side of religion 
as the pursuit of virtue and truth, and very likely concluding 
in 1. 40 with the promise * Blessed is he who doeth these 
things/ If this explanation is on the right lines, there is a 
general parallelism between this Saying and Matt. xix. 16-22 
and Luke xviii. 18-22 (the answer to the question * What shall 
I do to inherit eternal life ? ). The reference to fasting in 
1. 33 suggests a connexion with the 2nd Logion ( Except ye fast 
to the world ), which may well have been an answer to a simi 
lar question by the disciples. 

(d) GENERAL REMARKS. 

We do not propose to enter upon a detailed examination of 
the numerous and complicated problems involving the Canoni 
cal and Apocryphal Gospels and the Logia of 1897, which 
are reopened by the discovery of the new Sayings. But we 
may be permitted to indicate the broader issues at stake, and 
in the light of the wide discussion of the Logia of 1897 to 
point out some effects of the new elements now introduced 
into the controversy. 

We start therefore with a comparison of the two series of 
Sayings, which we shall henceforth call 1 (the new Sayings) 
and 2 (the Logia found in 1897). Both were found on the 
same site and the papyri are of approximately the same date, 
which is not later than about the middle of the third century, 
so that both collections must go back at least to the second 
century. The outward appearance of the two papyri is indeed 
different, 2 being a leaf from a handsomely-written book, which 
may well have been a valuable trade-copy, while 1 is in roll 



I. NEW SAYINGS OF JESUS 21 

form and was written on the back of a comparatively trivial 
document. The practice of writing important literary texts on 
such material was, however, extremely common, and the form 
of 1 lends no support to the hypothesis that the papyrus is a 
collection of notes made by the writer himself. In the uncial 
character of the handwriting, the absence of abbreviations and 
contractions other than those usually found in early theologi 
cal MSS., and the careful punctuation, 1 shares the character 
istics of an ordinary literary text such as 2. Since 2 is the 
1 1 th page of a book, it must have formed part of a large col 
lection of Sayings, while 1 comes from the beginning of a 
manuscript and provides no direct evidence of the length of 
the roll. But the document on the other side is not a letter 
or contract which would be likely to be short, but an official 
land-survey list, and these tend to be of very great length ; so 
far therefore as can be judged from externals, 1 like 2 proba 
bly belongs to an extensive collection of Sayings which may 
well have numbered several hundreds. 

Turning next to the contents of the two papyri, no one can 
fail to be struck with their formal resemblance. Postponing 
for the moment the introduction of 1 (11. 1-5), which, since it 
necessarily presupposes the existence of the Sayings introduced 
and may have been added later, stands on a different footing 
from the Sayings and requires separate treatment, the five 
Sayings partly recorded in 1 begin like those in 2 with the 
plain formula Jesus saith ; and both fragments contain Say 
ings which to a greater or less degree have parallel passages 
in the Synoptic Gospels side by side with Sayings which are 
new. In 2 the style was simple and direct, and the setting, 
with the constant balancing of the words and sentences and 
the absence of connecting particles, highly archaic ; the same 
features, though obscured unfortunately by the incompleteness 
of the papyrus, are also distinctly traceable in 1 . There is, 
however, one difference in the two papyri in point of form. 
To the 5th Saying in 1 (11. 36 sqq.) is prefixed (11. 32-6) a brief 
account of the question to which it was the answer ; but this 
is the exception, not the rule, and the fact that the Sayings in 2 
agree with the first four Sayings in 1 in omitting the context 



22 I. NEW SAYINGS OF JESUS 

rather than with the 5th obviously produces no serious conflict 
between the two documents. 

We proceed to a closer examination of the two series. In 2 
the /th Logion ( A city built on a hill ) is connected with St. 
Matthew s Gospel alone ; the 6th (< A prophet is not accept 
able ) has a marked point of contact with St. Luke in the use 
of the word acceptable, and the ist also agrees with St. Luke. 
The 5th ( Wherever there are ) starts with a parallel to St. 
Matthew, but extends into a region far beyond. Nowhere in 
2 can the influence of St. Mark be traced, nor was there any 
direct parallel with St. John s Gospel ; but the new matter, both 
in thought and expression, tended to have a mystical and Johan- 
nine character. In 1 we have one Saying (the 2nd) of which 
the central idea is parallel to a passage found in St. Luke alone, 
but of which the developments are new ; the conclusion of the 
3rd Saying connects with St. Matthew and St. Mark rather than 
with St. Luke, while the 4th is a different version of a Saying 
found in all three Synoptists, and is on the whole nearer to 
St. Mark than to the other two Evangelists. The ist Saying 
and, so far as we can judge, the 5th have little, if any, point of 
contact with the Canonical Gospels. As in 2, so in 1 the new 
elements tend to have a Johannine colouring, especially in the 
2nd Saying ; and though the Sayings in 1 contain nothing so 
markedly Johannine in style as e. g. < I stood in the midst of 
the world . . . in 2, the introduction contains a clear parallel 
to John viii. 52. This at first sight may perhaps seem to im 
ply a knowledge of St. John s Gospel on the part of the author 
of the introduction, but it must be remembered (i) that St. John 
may well not have been the sole authority for the attribution of 
that Saying to our Lord, and if so, that the author of the in 
troduction may have obtained it from another source, (2) that 
a knowledge of St. John s Gospel on the part of the author of 
the introduction does not necessarily imply a corresponding 
debt to that Gospel in the following Sayings, which, as we have 
said, stand on a somewhat different footing from the introduc 
tion. 

In our original edition of 2 we maintained (a) that the Say 
ings had no traceable thread of connexion with each other be- 



I. NEW SAYINGS OF JESUS 23 

yond the fact of their being ascribed to the same speaker, (b) 
that none of them implied a post-resurrectional point of view, 
(c) that they were not in themselves heretical, and that though 
the asceticism of Log. 2 and the mystic character of Log. 5 
were obviously capable of development in Encratite and Gnostic 
directions, the Sayings as a whole were much nearer in style to 
the New Testament than to the apocryphal literature of the mid 
dle and end of the second century. If these positions have been 
vigorously assailed, they have also been stoutly defended, and 
about the second and third no general agreement has been 
reached ; with regard to the first the balance of opinion has been 
in favour of our view, and the various attempts to trace a con 
nexion of ideas running through the Sayings have met with 
little acceptance. What answer is to be returned to the corre 
sponding problems in 1 ? 

We will take the third question first. Is there anything in 
1 to show that the Sayings originated in or circulated among 
a particular sect? We should answer this in the negative. 
There is nothing heretical in the introduction, the I st, 3rd, and 
4th Sayings, or, so far as can be judged, the 5th. The Ascetic 
leanings which have been ascribed to the 2nd Logion are con 
spicuously absent in 1 ; the remains of the 5th Saying in fact 
rather suggest an anti-Jewish point of view, from which however 
the 2nd Logion itself was not widely distant, if, as we strongly 
hold, fast and sabbatize are to be taken metaphorically. 
The absence of any Jewish-Christian element in 1 is the more 
remarkable seeing that the i st Saying also occurs in the Gospel 
according to the Hebrews. The only Saying that is at all sus 
picious is the 2nd, which like Log. 5 is sure to be called in some 
quarters Gnostic. That the profoundly mystical but, as it seems 
to us, obviously genuine Saying of our Lord recorded in Luke 
xvii. 2 1 The kingdom of God is within you should have given 
rise to much speculation was to be expected, and from Hippo- 
lytus Refut. v. 7 it is known that this Saying occupied an im 
portant place in the doctrines of the Naassenes, one of the most 
pronounced Gnostic sects of the second or early third century. 
That there is a connexion between the Sayings and the Naas 
senes through the Gospel of Thomas is quite possible and this 



24 I. NEW SAYINGS OF JESUS 

point will be discussed later ; but to import Naassene tenets 
into the 2nd Saying in 1 is not only gratuitous but a vo-rtpov 
Trporepov. Moreover, though the other ideas in the Saying con 
nected with the parallel from St. Luke, the development of 
the kingdom of Heaven through brute creation up to man (if that 
be the meaning of 11. 9-16), and the Christian turn given to the 
proverbial Know thyself (11. 16-2 1 ), may point to a later stage 
of thought than that found in the Canonical Gospels, the 2nd 
Saying as a whole, if < Gnostic, presents a very primitive kind 
of Gnosticism, and is widely separated from the fully-developed 
theosophy of e. g. the Pistis Sophia. In any case the Gnos 
ticism of 1 is on much the same level as that of 2. 

Do any of the Sayings (apart from the introduction) imply 
a post-resurrectional point of view ? This too we should answer 
in the negative. There is not only nothing in them to indicate 
that they were spoken after the resurrection, but substantial 
evidence for the opposite view. The familiar Sayings in the 
Canonical Gospels which are parallel to those found in 1 are 
there assigned to our Lord s lifetime, including even John viii. 
52. The Gospel according to the Hebrews with which the ist 
Saying is connected covered the same ground as the Synoptists, 
and there is no reason to suppose that this Saying occurred 
there as a post-resurrectional utterance. But the best argument 
is provided by the 5th Saying, especially its context, which is 
fortunately given. The questions there addressed to Jesus 
clearly belong to a class of problems which are known to have 
been raised by our Lord s disciples and others in his lifetime, 
and, if c^cra^ovo-u/ is in any case a somewhat stronger term than 
would be expected, seeing that the disciples seem to be the sub 
ject (though cf. John xxi. 12), it is most unlikely that this word 
would have been used with reference to the risen Christ. In 
fact none of the five Sayings in 1 suggests a post-resurrectional 
point of view so much as the 3rd Logion ( I stood in the midst 
of the world ) ; cf. p. 26. 

Can a definite principle or train of ideas be traced through 
the Sayings ? The first four are certainly linked together by 
the connecting idea of the kingdom of Heaven, which is the 
subject to a greater or less degree of all of them. But between 



I. NEW SAYINGS OF JESUS 25 

the 4th and the 5th Sayings the chain is certainly much weaker 
and threatens to snap altogether. It is very difficult to believe 
that if 1 was part of a large collection of similar Sayings a con 
nexion of thought could have been maintained throughout, and 
the Sayings in the later columns of 1 may well have been as 
disconnected as those in 2. Even in the five which are partly 
preserved in 1 there is a constant change in the persons ad 
dressed, the ist and 3rd being couched in the third singular, 
the 2nd and almost certainly the 5th in the second plural, and 
the 4th in the second singular. Moreover the real link is, we 
think, supplied by the introduction, the consideration of which 
can no longer be delayed. Only before proceeding further we 
would state our conviction that in all essential points, the date 
of the papyrus, the form of the Sayings, their relation to the 
Canonical Gospels, and the general character of the new ele 
ments in them, to say nothing of the parallelism of thought 
between the ist and 3rd Sayings and the 5th Logion, the re 
semblances between 1 and 2 so far outweigh the differences 
that for practical purposes they may be treated as parts of the 
same collection. 

These are the . . . words which Jesus the living (Lord) spake 
to . . . and Thomas, and he said tmto (them) " Every one that 
hearkens to these words shall never taste of death" Such is 
the remarkable opening prefixed to the collection of Sayings in 
1 by its unknown editor. The first point to be noticed is that 
the name given to the collection is, as was acutely divined by 
Dr. Lock (Two Lectures on the Sayings of Jesus, p. 16), Logoi, 
not Logia, and all questions concerning the meaning of the 
latter term may therefore be left out of account in dealing with 
the present series of Sayings. The converse of this, however, 
in our opinion by no means holds good, and as we have pointed 
out (pp. 12-3), the analogy of the present document has a con 
siderable bearing upon the problems concerning an early col 
lection of Logia. Secondly, the collection is represented as 
being spoken either to St. Thomas alone or to St. Thomas and 
another disciple or, less probably, other disciples. Does the 
compiler mean that the Sayings were the subject of a special re 
velation to St. Thomas and perhaps another disciple, from which 



26 I. NEW SAYINGS OF JESUS 

the rest were excluded ? The case in favour of an affirmative 
answer to this query would be greatly strengthened if the in 
troduction provided any indication that the editor assigned his 
collection of Sayings to the period after the Resurrection. But 
no such evidence is forthcoming. In the Canonical Gospels 
St. Thomas is indeed made prominent only in connexion with 
that period (John xx. 24 sqq.), but this circumstance, which is 
probably the strongest argument in favour of a post-resurrec- 
tional point of view, is discounted by the fact that the Gospel 
of Thomas, so far as can be judged, was not of the nature of a 
post-resurrectional Gospel but rather a Gospel of the childhood 
(cf. p. 32), and, secondly, seems to be outweighed by the indi 
cations in the Sayings themselves that some of them at any 
rate were assigned to Jesus lifetime. We are not therefore dis 
posed to consider that the introduction to the Sayings, any 
more than the Sayings by themselves, implies a post-resurrec 
tional point of view on the part of the compiler. What we 
think he did mean to imply was that the ultimate authority for 
the record of these Sayings was in his opinion St. Thomas or 
St. Thomas and another disciple. This hypothesis provides a 
satisfactory, in fact we think the only satisfactory, explanation 
of the frequent changes of persons and abrupt transitions of 
subject which characterize the Sayings as a whole. 

What value, if any, is to be attached to this far-reaching 
claim that the collection of Sayings derives its authority, not 
from the traditional sources of any of the four Canonical Gos 
pels, but from St. Thomas and perhaps another disciple ? The 
custom of invoking the authority of a great and familiar name 
for an anonymous and later work is so common in early Chris 
tian, as in other, writings, that the mere statement of the editor 
carries no weight by itself, and is not worth considering unless 
the internal evidence of the Sayings themselves can be shown 
to point in the same direction, or at any rate to be not incon 
sistent with his claim. We pass, therefore, to the problem of 
the general nature and origin of the Sayings in 1 and 2, and 
as a convenient method of inquiry start from an examination 
of some of the various theories already put forward in explana 
tion of 2. A useful bibliography and rhumt of the contro- 



I. NEW SAYINGS OF JESUS 27 

versy will be found in Professors Lock and Sanday s Two Lec 
tures on the Sayings of Jesus. 

In our original edition of 2 we proposed A. D. 140 as the 
latest date to which the composition of the Sayings could be re 
ferred. This terminus ad quern has generally been accepted, 
by even Dr. Sanday, who is amongst the most conservative 
of our critics; and we should propose A. D. 140 for the termi 
nus ad quern in reference to 1 with greater confidence than 
we felt about 2 in 1897. 

The chief dividing line in the controversy lies between those 
who agreed with our suggestion that 2 belonged to a collection 
of Sayings as such, and those who considered 2 to be a series 
of extracts from one or more of the numerous extra-canonical 
gospels which are known to have circulated in Egypt in the 
second century. Does 1 help to decide the question in either 
direction ? One argument which has been widely used in sup 
port of the view that 2 was really a series of extracts, viz. that 
the Sayings had no contexts, is somewhat damaged by the 
appearance of a Saying which has a context. But the formal 
presence or absence of contexts in a series of Sayings can be 
employed with equal plausibility to prove or disprove the view 
that the series consisted of extracts, and would therefore seem 
a very unsound argument to introduce into the discussion. 
The matter of the context of the 5th Saying, however, has 
perhaps a more important bearing than the form upon the ques 
tion of extracts. The phrase Jesus saith there follows two 
historic presents, question and say, and is therefore pre 
sumably itself a historic present ; and if Jesus saith is a his 
toric present in one case, it should be so throughout 1 and 2. 
Is it then probable that the formula Jesus saith has been 
taken over without alteration by the editor from his source, 
which was therefore presumably a Gospel narrative ? To this 
we should answer by a decided negative. It is not likely that 
the present tense saith would have been uniformly employed 
in a narrative, and yet 1 provides at least three more instances 
of the phrase Jesus saith (11. 9, 27, and 36). It is, we think, 
much more probable that the formula is due to the editor of 
the Collection than to his sources, whatever they were. And 



28 I. NEW SAYINGS OF JESUS 

though there is now no longer any particular reason for inter 
preting the tense of saith as more than a historic present, a 
secondary meaning is not excluded, and may be present in 
1. 36 just as much as in the other instances where there is no 
context. We should be inclined to paraphrase Jesus saith 
as This is one of those Sayings of Jesus to which I referred 
in the introduction/ and to explain the uniform repetition of 
it as marking off the several Sayings from each other, and giv 
ing greater impressiveness to the whole. The fact that the 
editor used the aorist and not the historic present in his intro 
duction suggests that by his employment of the present tense 
saith throughout the Sayings he intended to produce a 
slightly different effect from that which would have been caused 
by said. But this new light shed upon the formula Jesus 
saith does not bring with it any new reason for regarding the 
Sayings as extracts from a narrative Gospel. 

A much more important factor in deciding whether the Say 
ings are extracts or not is the introduction, which though it 
may be a later addition, and though the reference to St. Thomas 
may be merely a bold invention of the editor, is there, and its 
presence has to be accounted for. So far from stating that 
the Sayings are extracts from any work, the editor asserts that 
they are a collection of Sayings, a circumstance which seems to 
provide an adequate explanation not only of the disconnected 
character of the Sayings in part of the collection, but of the 
repetition of the formula Jesus saith before each one. It is 
now clear that 1 was meant by the editor to be regarded as an 
independent literary work, complete in itself ; and though it is 
not necessary to accept it as such, those who wish to maintain 
that the collection is something quite different from what it 
purports to be must be prepared to explain how the introduc 
tion comes to be there. Hence we think that no theory of the 
origin of the Sayings as a whole is to be considered satisfactory 
unless it at the same time provides a reasonable explanation of 
the fact that some one not later than the middle of the second 
century published the Sayings as specially connected with St. 
Thomas (and perhaps another disciple), and that the collection 
attained sufficient importance for it to be read, and presumably 



I. NEW SAYINGS OF JESUS 29 

accepted as genuine, in the chief towns of Upper Egypt in the 
century following. 

Among the different explanations of 2 which have been put 
forward the most generally accepted is probably that main 
tained, with all his usual brilliant powers of analysis, by Pro 
fessor Harnack, that 2 consisted of extracts from the Gospel ac 
cording to the Egyptians, an early Gospel covering apparently 
the same ground as the Synoptists and circulating principally 
in Egypt, where it was probably composed. The question was, 
however, complicated by the extremely divergent views held 
concerning the importance and heretical character of that Gos 
pel, to which only one passage of any length can be assigned 
with certainty (cf. p. 43, where a translation of it is given). 
There is little if any relation between that extract and anything 
in 2 ; and disagreeing as we do with Harnack s view of the 
Gospel according to the Egyptians, we have never been able 
to regard his explanation of 2 as satisfactory. The evidence 
of 1 provides fresh objections to the theory. There is no 
direct point of contact between 1 and the Gospel according to 
the Egyptians, and where one of the uncanonical Sayings hap 
pens to be known it occurs not in this Gospel but in that 
according to the Hebrews. There is, indeed, more to be said 
for regarding 1 as extracts from the latter Gospel, as has been 
suggested in the case of 2 by more than one critic, than from 
the Gospel according to the Egyptians. In their divergence 
from the Canonical Gospels, the striking character of much of 
the new matter, the Hebraic parallelisms of expression, the 
Sayings are quite in keeping with the style of the most vener 
able and important of all the uncanonical Gospels, which is 
known to have been written originally in Hebrew, and which 
is now generally regarded as independent of the four Canonical 
Gospels and but little later than the Synoptists in date. To 
these points of connexion has now to be added the far more 
solid piece of evidence afforded by the ist Saying in 1. There 
remain indeed the objections (cf. Sayings of our Lord, p. 17) 
that the Gospel according to the Hebrews would be expected 
to show greater resemblance to St. Matthew than we find in 2 
and 1, which is even further away from St. Matthew s Gospel 



30 I. NEW SAYINGS OF JESUS 

than 2, and secondly that the Johannine colouring traceable in 
the new Sayings is foreign to the extant fragments of the Gos 
pel according to the Hebrews, which seems to have been quite 
parallel to the Synoptists. But it is quite possible that the 
Gospel according to the Hebrews had a mystical side which is 
revealed to us occasionally (as e. g. in the curious passage in 
which Jesus speaks of his mother, the Holy Ghost, and in 
the Saying found also in 1), but which owing to the paucity of 
references has hitherto been underestimated. A far graver 
and in fact almost fatal objection, however, to regarding the 
Sayings as extracts culled from either the Gospel according 
to the Hebrews or the Gospel according to the Egyptians is 
the irreconcilability of such a view with the introduction of 1. 
It is very difficult to believe that an editor would have had the 
boldness to issue extracts from such widely known works as 
an independent collection of Sayings claiming the authority of 
Thomas and perhaps another disciple. Even if we supply to 
Matthew in 1. 2 before and Thomas and suppose that the 
mention of Thomas is of quite secondary importance, it is very 
hard to supply a reasonable motive for issuing a series of 
extracts from the Gospel according to the Hebrews with such 
a preface as we find in 1, and to account for the popularity of 
these supposed extracts in the century following their publica 
tion. We are therefore on the whole opposed to the view, 
attractive though it undoubtedly is, that the Sayings are all 
directly derived from the Gospel according to the Hebrews. 
But that there is a connexion between them is certain, and it 
is significant that the Stromateis of Clement of Alexandria, in 
which work Dr. Mayor (ap. Rendel Harris, Contemp. Rev. 1 897, 
pp. 344-5) has with much probability detected references to 
the 2nd Logion, are also the source of the quotation from the 
Gospel according to the Hebrews which is closely parallel to 
the ist Saying. It is not at all unlikely that the 2nd Logion 
( Except ye fast ) also presented a strong similarity to a pas 
sage in the same Gospel. 

Both views which we have discussed so far have, whether 
satisfactory or not on other grounds, been confronted by the 
initial difficulty of the introduction. Let us now consider the 



I. NEW SAYINGS OF JESUS 31 

Gospel ascribed to the disciple whose name occurs in 1. 3. It 
is obvious that the introduction would suit a series of extracts 
from the Gospel of Thomas much better than one from the 
Gospel according to the Hebrews. The Gospel of Thomas is 
known to have existed in more than one form, namely as an 
account of Jesus childhood which is extant in several late re 
censions of varying length, and as an earlier Gospel condemned 
by Hippolytus in the following passage (Refut. v. 7) But 
they (sc. the Naassenes) assert that not only is there in favour 
of their doctrine testimony to be drawn from the mysteries of 
the Assyrians, but also from those of the Phrygians concern 
ing the happy nature, concealed and yet at the same time dis 
closed, of things that have been and are coming into existence 
and moreover will be, (a happy nature) which, (the Naassene) 
says, is the kingdom of heaven to be sought for within a man. 
And concerning this (nature) they hand down an explicit 
passage occurring in the Gospel inscribed "according to 
Thomas," expressing themselves thus : " He who seeks me 
will find me in children from seven years old ; for there con 
cealed I shall in the fourteenth age (or aeon) be made mani 
fest." Here we have two remarkable points of contact 
with 1, the mention of Thomas coupled with the kingdom of 
heaven within a man (cf. the 2nd Saying). The parallels be 
tween 2 and one of the later forms of the Thomas Gospel have 
been worked out with great ingenuity and elaboration by Dr. 
Taylor on pp. 90-8 of The Oxyrhymhus Logia and the Apocry 
phal Gospels. There is much to be said for his view that the 
extant Gospel of Thomas contains some traces of 2, and the 
probability would be increased if 2, which Dr. Taylor was 
inclined to regard as extracts from the Gospel according to the 
Egyptians, be supposed to be derived from the earlier Gospel 
of Thomas. 1 does not seem to contain any clear points of 
connexion with the later Gospel of Thomas, but this is com 
pensated for by the remarkable parallel from Hippolytus quoted 
above. It is moreover noteworthy, as Mr. Badham remarks, 
that the Acts of Thomas, which may well have been partly 
built upon the Gospel, exhibit a knowledge of that Saying 
which occurs both in the Gospel according to the Hebrews and 



32 I. NEW SAYINGS OF JESUS 

in 1 (cf. p. 15), and that, as Professor Lake informs us, an Athos 
MS. (Studia Biblica, v. 2, p. 173) asserts that the story of 
Christ and the woman taken in adultery (which has found its 
way from the Gospel according to the Hebrews into St. John s 
Gospel) occurred in the Gospel of Thomas. But there are se 
rious objections to regarding 1 and 2 as extracts from that 
Gospel. In the first place though it is possible that Thomas 
is the only disciple mentioned in the introduction, it is equally 
possible that he stood second, and in that case the Gospel from 
which the Sayings may have been extracted is more likely to 
have been one which went under the name of the person who 
stood first ; though indeed, if there were two disciples men 
tioned in the introduction, it is not very satisfactory to derive 
the Sayings from any Gospel which went under the name of 
only one. A much greater difficulty arises from the diver 
gence of the Sayings from what little is known about the ear 
lier Gospel of Thomas. The saying quoted by Hippolytus is 
widely removed in character from those in 1 and 2 ; and al 
though the Gospel of Thomas has been placed before A. D. 180, 
yet from the quotation in Hippolytus, coupled with the form of 
the Gospel in later times and the scanty evidence from other 
sources, it has been generally considered to have been mainly 
at any rate a gospel of the childhood and of an advanced Gnostic 
character. If the Sayings are to be derived from it, the current 
view of the Gospel of Thomas must be entirely changed ; and 
it is very doubtful whether this can be done except by postulat 
ing the existence of an original Thomas Gospel behind that con 
demned by Hippolytus. This would lead us into a region of 
pure conjecture upon which we are unwilling to enter, at any 
rate until other less hazardous roads to a solution are closed. 
That there is a connexion between the earlier Gospel of 
Thomas and the Sayings is extremely likely, but this can be 
better explained by supposing that the Sayings influenced the 
Gospel than by the hypothesis that the Gospel is the source of 
the Sayings. 

Our conclusion, therefore, is that neither the Gospel accord 
ing to the Egyptians, nor that according to the Hebrews, nor 
that according to Thomas, still less any of the other known 



I. NEW SAYINGS OF JESUS 33 

uncanonical Gospels, is a suitable source for the Sayings as a 
whole. There is more to be said for explaining them as a series 
of extracts from several of these Gospels, as was suggested 
with regard to 2 by Dr. James, though this view evades rather 
than solves the problem. The occurrence of a Saying which 
is known to have been also found in the Gospel according to 
the Hebrews, side by side with other Sayings which it is difficult 
to ascribe to the same source, rather favours the theory of an 
eclectic series derived from different Gospels. But the intro 
duction connecting the Sayings with particular disciples is not 
very suitable for such a collection which ex hypothesi is of an 
altogether miscellaneous character; and in our opinion the 
Sayings are much more likely to be a source utilized in one or 
more of the uncanonical Gospels, than vice versa. The prob 
ability of the general explanation of 2 which we suggested in 
1897 and which has been supported by many critics, amongst 
others Drs. Swete, Rendel Harris, Sanday, Lock, and Heinrici, 
that it was part of a collection of Sayings as such, is largely 
increased by the discovery of 1, with its introduction to the 
whole collection stating that it was a collection of Logoi, which 
was obviously intended to stand as an independent literary 
work. In fact we doubt if theories of extracts are any longer 
justifiable ; and in any case such explanations will henceforth 
be placed at the initial disadvantage of starting with an assump 
tion which is distinctly contradicted by the introduction of 1. 
It is of course possible to explain away this introduction, but 
unless very strong reasons can be adduced for doing so, the 
simpler and far safer course is to accept the editor s statement 
that 1, to which, as we have said, 2 is closely allied, is a collec 
tion of Sayings of Jesus. 

The opinions of those critics who agreed with our general 
explanation of 2 as against the various theories of extracts may 
be divided into two classes : ( i ) those who regarded 2 as a 
collection of Sayings independent of the Gospels and belonging 
to the first century, and who therefore were disposed to admit 
to a greater or less extent and with much varying degrees of 
confidence the presence of genuine elements in the new matter 
(Drs. Swete, Rendel Harris, Lock, and Heinrici) ; (2) those 



34 I- NEW SAYINGS OF JESUS 

who, like Dr. Sanday, regarded the new Sayings in 2 as the 
product of the early second century, not directly dependent on 
the Canonical Gospels, but having their origin under condi 
tions of thought which these Gospels had created (Sanday, 
op. cit. p. 41), a view which necessarily carries with it the re 
jection of the new matter. It remains to ask how far 1 helps 
to decide the points at issue in favour of either side. 

With regard to the relation of 1 to the Canonical Gospels, the 
proportion of new and old matter is about the same as in 2, 
and the parallels to the Canonical Gospels in 1 exhibit the same 
freedom of treatment, which can be explained either as imply 
ing independence of the Canonical Gospels, or as the liberties 
taken by an early redactor. The introduction in 1 contains a 
clearer parallel to St. John s Gospel than anything to be found 
in 2 ; but even if it be conceded that the introduction implied 
a knowledge of St. John s Gospel, and was therefore probably 
composed in the second century, the Sayings themselves can 
(and, as we shall show, do) contain at any rate some elements 
which are not derived from the Canonical Gospels, and go back 
to the first century. So far as the evidence of 1 goes, there is 
nothing to cause any one to renounce opinions which he may 
have formed concerning the relation of 2 to the Canonical 
Gospels. No one who feels certain on this point with regard 
to the one, is likely to be convinced of the incorrectness of his 
view by the other. 

Secondly, with regard to the new matter in 1, the uncertainties 
attaching to the restoration and meaning of most of the 2nd, 
the earlier part of the 3rd, and all the 5th Saying, unfortunately 
prevent them from being of much use for purposes of critical 
analysis. Only with regard to the ist Saying ( Let not him 
that seeketh cease ) are we on quite sure ground. Concerning 
this striking sentence, as we have said, the most diverse opinions 
have been held ; but the balance of recent criticism is in favour 
of accepting it as genuine, though on account of the absence 
of widely attested authority for it, it is not placed in the highest 
class of genuine Sayings which includes * It is more blessed to 
give than to receive. The occurrence of the Saying in 1 is a 
new argument for its authority. But whatever view be taken 



I. NEW SAYINGS OF JESUS 35 

of its authenticity, and however the connexion between 1 and 
the Gospel according to the Hebrews is to be explained, the ist 
Saying in 1 establishes one important fact. Dr. Sanday may 
be right in regarding A. D. 100 as the terminus a quo for the 
composition of 2, and the same terminus a quo can of course be 
assigned to 1 in the sense that the Sayings were not put to 
gether and the introduction not written before that date. But, 
if we may accept the agreement of the leading theologians that 
the Gospel of the Hebrews was written in the first century, it 
is impossible any longer to deny that 1 and therefore, as we 
maintain, 2, contain some non-canonical elements which directly 
or indirectly go back to the first century ; and the existence of 
first century elements in one case certainly increases the prob 
ability of their presence in others. In this respect, therefore, 
1 provides a remarkable confirmation of the views of those 
critics who were prepared to allow a first century date for the 
Logia of 1 897, and accordingly to treat them as reflecting a 
substantially authentic tradition. 

Are we then, adapting to 1 Dr. Sanday s view of 2 with the 
fewest possible modifications, to regard the whole collection as 
a free compilation in the early part of the second century, by 
an Alexandrian Jewish-Christian, of Sayings ultimately derived 
from the Canonical Gospels, and very likely the Gospels accord 
ing to the Hebrews and Thomas, and perhaps others as well ; 
and shall we dismiss the new elements, except the ist Saying 
in 1, as the spurious accretions of an age of philosophic specu 
lation, and surroundings of dubious orthodoxy ? Even so the 
two papyri are of great interest as revealing a hitherto unknown 
development of primitive belief upon the nature of Christ s 
teaching, and supplying new and valuable evidence for deter 
mining the relationship of the uncanonical Gospels to the main 
current of orthodox Christianity. Or are we rather to consider 
1 and 2 to be fragments of an early collection of our Lord s 
Sayings in a form which has been influenced to some extent 
by the thought and literature of the apostolic and post-apostolic 
age, and which may well itself have influenced the Gospel 
of Thomas and perhaps others of the heretical Gospels, but 
which is ultimately connected in a large measure with a first- 



36 I. NEW SAYINGS OF JESUS 

hand source other than that of any of the Canonical Gospels ? 
Some such view has been maintained by scholars of eminence, 
e. g. Heinrici and Rendel Harris, with regard to 2 ; and if 
the claim made by the editor of the collection in his intro 
duction, that his source was St. Thomas and perhaps another 
disciple, amounts to but little more, the internal evidence of 1 
provides no obvious reason why we should concede him much 
less ; while the occurrence of one uncanonical Saying, which 
is already known to be of extreme antiquity and has been 
accepted as substantially genuine by several critics, lends con 
siderable support to the others which rest on the evidence of 1 
and 2 alone. 

That is as far as we are prepared to go ; for a really weighty 
and perfectly unbiassed estimate of the ultimate value of any 
new discovery, resort must be made to some other quarter than 
the discoverers. We conclude by pointing out that, if the view 
with regard to the Sayings which we have just indicated is on 
the right lines, the analogy of this collection has an obvious 
bearing on the question of the sources of the Synoptic Gospels, 
and that the mystical and speculative element in the early 
records of Christ s Sayings which found its highest and most 
widely accepted expression in St. John s Gospel, may well have 
been much more general and less peculiarly Johannine than 
has hitherto been taken for granted. 



II. THE LOGIA DISCOVERED IN 1897 
(THE OXYRHYNCHUS PAPYRI, PART I, i.) 

LOGION I. 

. . . Kal Tore 8io,)8Xe\/jei9 lK/3a\elv TO Kap<f>os TO Iv ro> 



TOV aeou o~ou. 

1 . . . and then shalt thou see clearly to cast out the mote 
that is in thy brother s eye. 

LOGION 2. 

Aeyei Ivjaovs, lav /AT) vr)o~Tvo~r)Te TOV KOGILQV ov p,rj 
tvpTjTe Tyv fiao~i\iav TOV Oeov Kal lav /AT) <raf3/3aTL(rr)TC 
TO o~d/3/3aTOv OVK oi//ecr^ TOV Trarepa. 

Jesus saith, Except ye fast to the world, ye shall in no 
wise find the kingdom of God ; and except ye make the 
sabbath a real sabbath, ye shall not see the Father. 

LOGION 3. 

Aeyet Irjcrovs, e[cr]ri7^ Iv /ieo~o> TOV Kocrpov Kal Iv 
(TapKi a><f>0r)v avroi?, Kal evpov TrdvTas peOvovTas Kal 
ovfteva evpov 8n|/oi^Ta Iv avrols, Kal novel rj $v)(TJ p-ov Inl 
TGI? viols To>v dv0pa>7ra)v, OTL Tv<f)\Oi elo~iv Trj Kapoia 
avra>[V] Kal ov f$\ 



Jesus saith, I stood in the midst of the world and in the 
flesh was I seen of them, and I found all men drunken, and 
none found I athirst among them, and my soul grieveth 
over the sons of men, because they are blind in their heart 
and see not . . . 

LOGION 4. 
. . . TJtp iTTco 
. . . poverty. 



38 II. THE LOGIA DISCOVERED IN 1897 

LOGION 5. 

[Aeyjei [ Irjcrous, 017] ov lav Z&iv [j OVK] e[icn,]i> 
j /ecu [O]TTOU [9] ICTTLV JJLOVOS, [Xejyw, eya> et^t 
* aur[oi)*] eyetfpjo^ rov \i6ov /ca/ce! cvprjcreLS /xe, 
TO v\ov /caycy e/cet 



* Jesus saith, Wherever there are (two), they are not 
without God, and wherever there is one alone, I say, I am 
with him. Raise the stone, and there thou shalt find me ; 
cleave the wood, and there am I. 

LOGION 6. 

Aeyei I^crovg, OVK H&TIV SCKTOS 77/30^7179 iv rfj 
avr[o]v, ouSe larpbs Trotel OepaneCa^ et9 rou 
avrov. 

( Jesus saith, A prophet is not acceptable in his own 
country, neither doth a physician work cures upon them 
that know him. 

LOGION 7. 

Aeyei Ii7o"o{59, 770X19 oJ/coSo/ATj/iei/Tj 77* atcpov [o]/3ot>9 
Kal iomfipiyp.iv Y) ovre 77e[<r]t^ SvvaraL ovre 



* Jesus saith, A city built upon the top of a high hill and 
stablished, can neither fall nor be hid. 

LOGION 8. 
Aeyet > l7yo ov9, a/covci9 [cjis TO iz> OJTLOV o*ou, ro [8e 



1 Jesus saith, Thou hearest with one ear, (but the other 
thou hast closed). 



III. FRAGMENT OF A LOST GOSPEL 

(a) INTRODUCTION. 

EIGHT fragments of a papyrus in roll form containing a lost 
Gospel, the largest (b) measuring 8.2x8.3 cm. and comprising 
parts of the middles of two narrow columns. None of the 
other fragments actually joins (b), but it is practically certain 
that the relation to it of Frs. (a) and (c), which come from the 
tops of columns, is as indicated in the text. Frs. (d) and (e), 
both of which have a margin below the writing, probably 
belong to the bottom of the same two columns which are 
partly preserved in (b} ; but how much is lost in the interval 
is uncertain. Since the upper portion of Col. i admits of a 
sure restoration of the majority of the lacunae, the first 23 
lines are nearly complete; but the remains of the second 
column are for the most part too slight for the sense to be 
recovered. The handwriting is a small uncial of the common 
sloping oval type, which in most cases belongs to the third 
century. The papyrus is a well-written specimen, suggesting 
the earlier rather than the later period during which this hand 
was in vogue, and though we should not assign it to the second 
century, it is not likely to have been written later than A. D. 
250. Lines 1-16 give the conclusion of a discourse of Jesus 
which is parallel to several sentences in the Sermon on the 
Mount. Then follows (11. 17-23) an account of a question put 
to Him by the disciples and of the answer. This, the most 
important part of the papyrus, is new, but bears an interesting 
resemblance to a known quotation from the Gospel according 
to the Egyptians ; cf. note ad loc. A passage in Col. ii seems 
to be parallel to Luke xi. 52. On the general questions con 
cerning the nature and origin of the Gospel to which the 
fragment belonged see pp. 45-7. 



40 III. FRAGMENT OF A LOST GOSPEL 



(b) TEXT. 



Col. i. 



(a) 



[. . .]170 TTPO)I [ 
[. . . .] A4> CTT[ 

[. . . .JPCOI MHT [. 

[ ...... ]MO)N Tl 

5 [ ........ 1 TH CT[. 



(b) [. .jcee [. 

[. . .]C .[...] TOON [. 
NOOISI ATI[. . .]YZA[. 

xo Nl OYA6 N[. J^J . [. 
N ^XONT[ . . .]NA[. 
MA Tj <?N[. . . .] KAI 
YM6IC TIC AN HPOCGH 
6TTI THN 6IAIKIAN 

15 YMOON AYTO[. .]0)CI 
YMIN TO 6NAYMA Y 
MOON AerOYCIN AY 
TO) 01 MA9HTAI AYTOY 
HOT6 HM6IN M<t>A 

20 NHC CI KAI HOT6 

ce OYOMeeA Aerei 

OTAN 6KAYCHC06 KAI 
MH AICXYN0HT6 



Col. ii. 

to 6[ 
30 A[ 
0[ 



35 



nrt 

KA[ 
KA[ 

HM[ 



t 

40 [ 

A[ 
THC [ 
KPYT[ 
ICHA[ 
45 ICP[ 
KAN[ 



MOIO)[ 
KPAI[ 
50 PA[ 



]TJN 



25 



]O)TIN 

]gcMO) 

]H 
]CTIN 



]KA[ 



Of) 



m 



K0[ 



(*) 



III. FRAGMENT OF A LOST GOSPEL 41 



yrjc dfi (T7r[c/3as 
[ca>s ir]pa)l ftTjVe [Tfj 
[rpo(f>rj v~\jJL<t>v ri <a- 
S [yqre f^Ve] rfj or[o- 

U/XWI/] Tt V$V- 



eg [ecrre] raij/ 



10 



/ r -i > 

p,a TL I/L. . . .J /cat 



15 

v/iti^ TO c^8u/Lta v- 

av- 



ot ,arTa avrov- 



7TOT 






20 5 e<Tl /Ctt 7TOTC 

crc 6\lt6fJL0a ; Xeyet- 



orai 



/IT) aio"xyi>6fJT 9 
41 cX[cy- TT)^ /cXetSa 



c- 

- aurol ov/c 
/cat TOIS 
45 ctcrc3oie^ots ou- 



42 III. FRAGMENT OF A LOST GOSPEL 

(c) TRANSLATION AND NOTES. 

1-23. * (Take no thought) from morning until even nor 
from evening until morning, either for your food what ye 
shall eat or for your raiment what ye shall put on. Ye are 
far better than the lilies which grow but spin not. Having 
one garment, what do ye (lack ?) . . . Who could add to 
your stature ? He himself will give you your garment. 
His disciples say unto him, When wilt thou be manifest 
to us, and when shall we see thee ? He saith, When ye 
shall be stripped and not be ashamed . . . 

41-6. * ... He said, The key of knowledge ye hid ; ye 
entered not in yourselves and to them that were entering 
in ye opened not. 

1-7. Cf. Matt. vi. 25 * Take no thought for your life, what 
ye shall eat or what ye shall drink ; nor yet for your body 
what ye shall put on. Is not the life more than the food and 
the body than the raiment ? , Luke xii. 22-3 * Take no thought 
for your life what ye shall eat ; nor yet for your body what ye 
shall put on. For the life is more than the food, and the body 
than the raiment. The papyrus probably had the equivalent 
of Take no thought at the beginning of the sentence, but 
differs ( i ) by the addition of * from morning . . . until morn 
ing, (2) by the use of a different word for body and prob 
ably for life, though it is possible that for your body or 
for your life preceded from morning in 1. i, (3) by the 
omission of the second half of the Saying as recorded in the 
Gospels. 

7-13. Cf. Matt. vi. 28 ( = Luke xii. 27) And why are ye 
anxious concerning raiment ? Consider the lilies of the field, 
how they grow ; they toil not, neither do they spin : yet I say 
unto you that even Solomon in all his glory was not arrayed 
like one of these, and Matt. vi. 26 ( = Luke xii. 4) Are ye 
not of much more value than they (sc. the birds of heaven) ? 
The corresponding passage in the papyrus is not only much 
shorter, but varies considerably, though to what extent is not 
quite clear owing to the uncertainty attaching to the restora 
tion of 11. 10-2. 

13-5. Cf. Matt. vi. 27 ( = Luke xii. 25) And which of you 



III. FRAGMENT OF A LOST GOSPEL 43 

by being anxious can add one cubit unto his stature ? The 
papyrus version is somewhat shorter, omitting by being anx 
ious and one cubit. The position in which this Saying is 
found in the papyrus is also slightly different from that in the 
Gospels, where it immediately precedes instead of following 
the verse about the lilies. 

15-6. Cf. Matt. vi. 31-3 Be not therefore anxious, saying 
What shall we eat, or What shall we drink, or Wherewithal 
shall we be clothed ? . . . for your heavenly Father knoweth 
that ye have need of all these things. But seek ye first his 
kingdom and his righteousness, and all these things shall be 
added unto you/ and Luke xii. 29-31, which is nearly identical 
and proceeds Fear not, little flock ; for it is your Father s good 
pleasure to give you the kingdom. The papyrus has the cor 
responding idea but expressed with extreme conciseness. He 
himself will give, unless Suo-ci is an error for 8o>cra>, raises a dif 
ficulty, for we should expect The Father will give or God 
will give. Apparently * He himself refers back to Father 
or God in the column preceding, or the author of the papyrus 
may have here incorporated from some source a Saying without 
its context which would have explained He himself. 

17-23. For the question cf. John xiv. 19 sqq. Yet a little 
while, and the world beholdeth me no more ; but ye behold me : 
because I live ye shall live also. . . . Judas (not Iscariot) saith 
unto him, Lord, what is come to pass that thou wilt manifest 
thyself unto us and not unto the world ? Jesus answered . . . 
If a man love me, he will keep my word, and my Father will 
love him. The answer ascribed in the papyrus to Jesus bears 
a striking resemblance to the answer made to a similar question 
in a passage of the Gospel according to the Egyptians which is 
referred to several times by Clement of Alexandria, and which 
ran thus : When Salome asked how long death would pre 
vail, the Lord said, So long as ye women bear children. For 
I have come to destroy the works of the female. And Salome 
said to him, Did I therefore well in bearing no children ? The 
Lord answered and said, Eat every herb, but eat not that which 
has bitterness. When Salome asked when those things about 
which she questioned should be made known, the Lord said, 



44 HI. FRAGMENT OF A LOST GOSPEL 

When ye trample upon the garment of shame ; when the two 
become one, and the male with the female neither male nor 
female. Cf. the Second Epistle of Clement xii. 2 (an early 
Christian homily employing other Gospel materials besides the 
Canonical Gospels) For the Lord himself being asked by some 
one when his kingdom should come, said, When the two shall 
be one, and the outside as the inside, and the male with the 
female neither male nor female/ Both When ye shall be 
stripped and not be ashamed and When ye trample upon the 
garment of shame express the same idea, a mystical reference 
to Gen. iii. 7, And they were both naked, the man and his wife, 
and they were not ashamed/ the meaning in either case being 
that Christ s kingdom on earth would not be manifested until 
man had returned to the state of innocence which existed before 
the Fall, and in which sexual ideas and relations had no place. 
The chief differences between the two passages are ( i ) the set 
ting, the questioner being in the Gospel according to the Egyp 
tians Salome, and in the papyrus the disciples, (2) the simpler 
language of the papyrus as contrasted with the more literary 
and elaborated phrase trample upon the garment of shame, 
(3) the absence in the papyrus of the Ascetic tendency found 
in the earlier part of the quotation from the Gospel accord 
ing to the Egyptians. Whether the papyrus continued after 
ashamed with something like and when the two become one 
. . . , is of course uncertain, but Fr. (d), which probably be 
longs to the bottom of this column, is concerned with some 
thing different. 

42-6. With the remains of these lines Dr. Bartlet compares 
Luke xi. 52 Woe unto you lawyers ! for ye took away (Codex 
Bezae and other MSS. ye hid ) the key of knowledge ; ye 
entered not in yourselves and them that were entering in ye 
hindered, upon which passage our restorations are based. The 
variant peculiar to the papyrus ye opened not in place of ye 
hindered is a picturesque touch. 



III. FRAGMENT OF A LOST GOSPEL 45 

(d) GENERAL REMARKS. 

This fragment (henceforth called 3) seems to belong to a 
Gospel which was closely similar in point of form to the Synop- 
tists. The narrator speaks in the third person, not in the first, 
and the portion preserved consists mainly of discourses which 
are to a large extent parallel to passages in Matthew and Luke, 
especially the latter Gospel, which alone seems to be connected 
with 11. 41 sqq. The papyrus version is, as a rule, shorter than 
the corresponding passages in the Gospels ; where it is longer 
(11. 1-3) the expansion does not alter the meaning in any way. 
The chief interest lies in the question of the disciples and its 
answer, both of which so closely correspond to a passage in 
the Gospel according to the Egyptians and the uncanonical 
Gospel or collection of Sayings used by the author of the 
Second Epistle of Clement, that the Gospel of which 3 is a 
fragment clearly belongs to the same sphere of thought. Does 
it actually belong to either of those works, which, though Har- 
nack regards them as one and the same, are, we think, more 
probably to be considered distinct ? In the Gospel according 
to the Egyptians Salome was the questioner who occasioned 
the remarkable Saying beginning, When ye trample upon 
the garment of shame, and it is much more likely that 3 pre 
sents a different version of the same incident in another Gospel, 
than a repetition of the Salome question in a slightly different 
form in another part of the Gospel according to the Egyptians. 
Nor is 3 likely to be the actual Gospel which the author of the 
Second Epistle of Clement was quoting. It is unfortunate 
that owing to the papyrus breaking off at ashamed there is no 
security that when the two become one/ or at any rate some 
thing very similar, did not follow, and the omission in the 
Clement passage of a phrase corresponding to 11. 22-3 may be 
a mere accident. But the fact that the question in the Second 
Epistle of Clement is worded somewhat differently, and is put 
into the mouth of some one instead of the disciples, as in 3, 
is a good reason for rejecting the hypothesis that 3 is the Gos 
pel quoted in the Epistle. 

The evidence of 3 as to its origin being thus largely of a 



46 III. FRAGMENT OF A LOST GOSPEL 

negative character, we do not propose to discuss in detail 
whether it is likely to belong to any of the other known Apo 
cryphal Gospels. There are several to which it might be as 
signed, but direct evidence is wanting. If the Gospel according 
to the Hebrews were thought of, it would be necessary to 
suppose that the resemblances in 3 to Matthew and Luke did 
not imply dependence upon them. In its relation to the Ca 
nonical Gospels 3 somewhat resembles the new Sayings, and 
the view that 3 was, though no doubt at least secondary, 
dependent not on Matthew and Luke, but upon some other 
document, whether behind the Synoptists or merely parallel to 
them, is tenable, but is less likely to commend itself to the 
majority of critics than the opposite hypothesis that 3 is ulti 
mately an abridgement of Matthew and Luke with considerable 
alterations. In either case the freedom with which the author 
of the papyrus Gospel handles the material grouped by St. 
Matthew and St. Luke under the Sermon on the Mount is 
remarkable. The Gospel from which 3 comes is likely to have 
been composed in Egypt before A. D. 150, and to have stood 
in intimate relation to the Gospel according to the Egyptians 
and the uncanonical source used by the author of the Second 
Epistle of Clement. Whether it was earlier or later than these 
is not clear. The answer to the question put by the disciples 
in 3 is couched in much simpler and clearer language than that 
of the corresponding sentence in the answer to Salome, the 
point of which is liable to be missed, while the meaning of 3. 
22-3 is unmistakable. But the greater directness of the allu 
sion to Gen. iii. 7 in 3 can be explained either by supposing 
that the version in the Gospel according to the Egyptians is 
an Ascetic amplification of that in 3, or, almost but not quite 
as well, in our opinion, by the view that the expression in 3 is 
a toning down of the more striking phrase When ye trample 
upon the garment of shame. 

There remains the question of the likelihood of a genuine 
element in the story of which we now have three versions, 
though how far these are independent of each other is uncer 
tain. As is usual with uncanonical Sayings, the most diverse 
opinions have been held about the two previously known pas- 



III. FRAGMENT OF A LOST GOSPEL 47 

sages. Previous criticism, which has recently tended to favour 
the view that the story possesses at least a kernel of truth, is 
now somewhat discounted by the circumstance that the phrase 
When ye trample upon the garment of shame has generally 
been considered to mean when ye put off the body/ i. e. die, 
whereas the evidence of the parallel in the papyrus gives the 
words a slightly different turn, and brings them more nearly 
into line with the following sentences when the two become 
one, &c. But those critics would nevertheless seem in the 
light of the new parallel to be right who maintain that the 
passage in the Gospel according to the Egyptians does not go 
much further in an Ascetic direction than e. g. Matt. xxii. 30 
For in the resurrection they neither marry nor are given in 
marriage, but are as angels in heaven, and Luke xx. 34-5 
The sons of this world marry and are given in marriage : but 
they that are accounted worthy to attain to that world and the 
resurrection from the dead neither marry nor are given in 
marriage. The occurrence of another version of the story is 
an important additional piece of evidence in defence of the view 
that it contains at least some elements of genuineness, and a 
special interest attaches both to the form of the Saying in 3 
on account of the clearness of its language, and to its context, 
in which other matter closely related to the Canonical Gospels 
is found in immediate proximity. All this lends fresh value to 
what is, on account of the far-reaching problems connected 
with it, one of the most important and remarkable, and, since 
the discovery of 3, one of the better attested, of the Sayings 
ascribed to our Lord outside the New Testament. 



University of Toronto 
Library 






Acme Library Card Pocket 
LOWE-MARTIN CO. LIMITED 



EGYPT EXPLORATION FUND. 



GRAECO-ROMAN BRANCH. 

THE Egypt Exploration Fund, which has conducted arch 
aeological research in Egypt continuously since 1883, in 1897 
started a special department, called the Graeco-Roman Branch, 
for the discovery and publication of remains of classical an 
tiquity and early Christianity in Egypt. It is hoped to com 
plete in the next few years the systematic excavation of the 
site of Oxyrhynchus, under the direction of Drs. B. P. Gren- 
fell and A. S. Hunt. 

The Graeco-Roman Branch issues annual volumes, each of 
about 300 quarto pages, with facsimile plates of the more im 
portant papyri, edited by Drs. B. P. Grenfell and A. S. Hunt. 

A subscription of five dollars to the Branch entitles 
subscribers to the annual memoir, and also to the annual 
Archaeological Report. A donation of $125 constitutes 
life-membership. Subscriptions may be sent to the Honorary 
Treasurer, Mr. GARDINER M. LANE, 8 Beacon Street, Bos 
ton, Mass. 



Offices of the Egypt Exploration Fund: 

37 GREAT RUSSELL STREET, LONDON, W.C. ; and 

8 BEACON STREET, BOSTON, MASS.