1-Minute Case for Excluding the Gospel of Thomas from the Bible

3 min readApr 7, 2024

Is the light of the world within you (Thomas saying 24) or in Jesus (John 8:12)?

Should the Gospel of Thomas be in the Bible?

Thomas contains very different teachings to the Bible. Thomas teaches salvation comes from within (24, 70 and 83), not from Jesus (eg. Lk 19:10, Matt. 20:28).

In Thomas, get naked, and take off your clothes to see the truth about Jesus (37)! Women need to become men to enter God’s kingdom (114). Fasting is a sin, praying brings condemnation, and giving alms harms you (14).

The early church fathers clearly rejected the apocryphal gospels and accepted the canonical Gospels. Irenaeus and the Muratorian Fragment supported the 4 Gospels in the 2nd century AD before Thomas was even mentioned! Hippolytus of Rome (c. 225), Origen (c.233–244), Eusebius (c.311–323), Cyril of Jerusalem (c.348 AD), Didymus the Blind and Decretum Gelasianum in c. 491 all speak against Thomas.

Thomas was not written by Thomas the Apostle. Thomas was likely written in 135–200 AD and gets no mention in the 2nd century.

Thomas alludes to Matthew, Luke, Romans, 1 Corinthians, Hebrews (Gathercole) and potentially 9 other New Testament books (Witherington). Thomas covers hidden sayings of Jesus (1), implying plain and public sayings existed at the time of writing.

Sceptics Ehrman and Goodacre contend Thomas adds no historical value. Jesus is presented as a Greek philosopher rather than a Jewish Rabbi (13). Thomas mentions Judaea once but no other location compared to the 60–99 locations mentioned in each of the canonical Gospels. NT Wright contends Thomas lacks the early Jewish identity of the early church.

Thomas is full of cryptic, “hidden” sayings, not records of deeds that are good news for humanity. Hence, Thomas is, by definition, not a gospel.

For more detail: