Texts in Conversation
The Second Discourse of the Great Seth, a Nag Hammadi text, calls Adam a farce made by the Hebdomad. In the Gospel of Thomas, Jesus gives Adam a far higher start, from great power and great wealth, though Adam still tasted death.
Share:
2500 BCE
1000+ CE
Gospel of Thomas 1:85
Nag Hammadi
84 Jesus said, “When you see your likeness you are happy. But when you see your images that came into being before you and that neither die nor are revealed, how much you will have to bear!” 85 Jesus said, “Adam came from great power and great wealth, but he did not become worthy of you. For had he been worthy, [he would] not [have tasted] death.” 86 Jesus said, “The foxes have their holes and the birds have their nests, but the Son of Man has no place to lay his head and rest.”
Second Discourse of the Great Seth 8:4
Second Treatise of the Great Seth
Nag Hammadi
The one, however, who lives in the union and friendship of brotherly love, out of nature and not just out of obligation, perfectly and not just partly, that one is truly the desire of the Father, being universal and perfect love, because Adam was a farce, and he was created by the Hebdomad from the image of a type of a man, as if he had grown stronger than myself and my brethren, but we are innocent with regard to him, given that we did not sin. Abraham, however, was a farce, like Isaac and Jacob were, given that the Hebdomad gave them a name, that is, “patriarchs,” from the image, as if he had grown stronger than myself and my brethren, but we are innocent with regard to him, given that we did not sin.
Search:
Notes and References
“... The designation ‘a great power and a great wealth’ leaves open the possibility of some sort of demiurgic figure. Although sometimes evil (e.g. in ‘classical’ Gnostic works such as Ap. John and Gos. Jud.), two points reinforce the positive valuation of Adam’s creator here (whether Jesus or a demiurge): first, wealth of a spiritual kind is positively valued in Thomas (29.3; 81.1), as elsewhere in early Christian literature (and Nag Hammadi texts); secondly, the point of referring to this origin of Adam is to highlight the drastic nature of his fall into death (probably) from such an exalted position. Thomas may be consciously taking a position in the discussion of Adam’s origins (even if that position is not completely clear to us). It is evident that GTh 85.1 contrasts with the Second Treatise of the Great Seth, where Adam is created as a counterfeit man by the Hebdomad, an evil demiurge (62,27–31). ...”
* The use of references are not endorsements of their contents. Please read the entirety of the provided reference(s) to understand the author's full intentions regarding the use of these texts.
Your Feedback:
Leave a Comment
Anonymous comments are welcome. All comments are subject to moderation.
User Comments
,