Abstract

The question of the provenance of the "Gospel of Thomas" raises a rather disturbing ambiguity that may seriously challenge a long-held consensus regarding Thomas’ Syrian origin. Both versions of the document (in Greek and Coptic) were found in Egypt, and there is no extant Syriac text or fragment that could conclusively confirm the Syrian phase of transmission of this "gospel". Nevertheless, the conviction of scholars as to the eastern Syrian birthplace of our document is still adamant. This view was rarely disputed during the 20th century, after having gained almost instant confirmation among the most renowned scholars in the field. In this paper, I dispute the most frequent arguments employed by advocates of the Syrian origin of "Thomas": 1) the argument based upon the triple name of the apostle Thomas (i.e. Didymus Judas Thomas); 2) the argument based on parallels with Syrian Christian documents; 3) the linguistic argument.