chapter five
observable in harmonizing collections of Jesus sayings. This is clearly
demonstrated in several studies.^133 Harmonizing collections focused on
certain topics rather than on following the narrative setting of the synop-
tic gospels or on a coherent repetition of the style and favorite expressions
of individual synoptic editors. Therefore, their impact on gospel tradi-
tions cannot be traced with conventional redaction-critical tools. For the
study of theGospel of Thomas, this means that if the hypothesis of the
influence of harmonistic tradition onThomasis taken seriously—and
many observations suggest that this is what should be done—then the
discussion aboutThomas’ dependence should make more room for com-
parison with harmonizing collections and less room for assessingThomas
merely on the basis of what is known about the work of the editors of the
synoptic gospels.
intentionally borrowing thistopos[“scribes and pharisees”] from Matthew one would
expect to see it incorporated into Thomas’ text more frequently.”
(^133) See, Bellinzoni , –; Koester , –; Kline , –. Kline
makes a helpful distinction (p. ) between “harmonized readings” (from different
gospels) and “conflated readings” (from different parts of the same gospel).