Our one of the most important purposes of history is having knowledge about civilizations. We must know about their religions, languages, economic and political activities and namely their societies. It is important to be known, because they affected each other and certainly another civilizations, which lived after them. This is also the basic rule or sense of the history.

We use some kind of sources in order to reach these goals. They are named as “historical document”. There are too many kinds of historical document such as treatments, written documents and tablets. The Holy Books of monotheistic religions are also historical documents. However all historians may not share the same ideas about being historical documents of them. For instance, Bible may not be a historical document for a historian who is not Christian. Or any historians who are not Muslims may not accept Quran as a historical document. This is a normal situation because of the religious beliefs. On the other hand, there are so many historians who accept the Holy Books of the monotheistic religions although they are not members of these religions. I didn’t mention about polytheistic religions, because I think there are not as many historians as the others who believe that their written sources can be used as a historical document. Since they may not be as reliable as monotheistic religions’ Holy Books.

There is another reason that why historians don’t use some of the Holy Books: the authorship. Since although most people believe the God has sent them to the human beings, there are also people believe they have written by people. So, a religious book, which is written by people, cannot be reliable according to some historians. Since, how can it be reliable that a religious book, which is written by members of this religion. Are people able to decide obligations and rules on they own that they have to obey. This is not acceptable according to historians. From this standpoint of view historians discuss the authorship of the Holy Books in order to decide that these can be reliable or not. If they were sent by God to his prophets, they would have more chance for to be accepted than others. Since, books, which are thought as written by people, can’t be reliable as the books, which are sent by God.

First of all, we must examine the history of Christianity. Christianity started about 2000 years ago in Judea (now Israel) with Jesus Christ and His disciples. During this time, the emperor of Rome was the ruler. The Jewish at that time hated Roman rule. The polytheistic cultural beliefs of Rome were also pagan and intrusive to Jewish life. Some Jews saw that their only hope was to conform to this change. They have been waiting for the eventual coming of their Messiah as it was promised according to Jewish law.

And Jesus, their savior came. In His early thirties, Jesus traveled from village to village, teaching in the healing those who were suffering. Jesus’ teaching was revolutionary. He challenged the established religious authorities to repent from their self-righteousness. Jesus’ teachings stirred the hearts of people and created instability, something the Jewish religious authorities feared. Soon, a faithful group of men began to follow Jesus and call him teacher. These men became His disciples. After a few days something happened just as a Jesus taught, and His disciples were witnesses to an amazing miracle. Their teacher, Jesus of Nazareth, died and three days later rose again to become their Messiah. Compelled by a great commission to share the love that the God of this universe had informed upon them, the disciples began to declare this gospel of hope throughout the territory.

Though most of the historical record for the start of the Christian faith is recorded in the New Testament accounts, the history of Christianity actually began with prophecy in the Old Testament. There are over 300 prophecies (predictions) that span over a period of 1000 years that are recorded in the Old Testament concerning the coming of a Jewish Messiah. Did it all really happen?

At first glance, the history Christianity's origin may seem like nothing more than a fairy story. Many feel that it's just too unbelievable, and even intellectually dishonest, for people living in the 21st century to believe that these events actually took place. However, the Christian faith, unlike any other religion, hinges on historical events, including one of pivotal importance. If Jesus Christ died and never rose to life, then Christianity is a myth or a fraud.

Gospel Of Thomas is a collection of sayings attributed to Jesus. Despite of the fact that it seems that not all of the writings are Thomas’ sayings; we can say that Thomas is the most important historical source for knowledge of Jesus that exists outside of the Bible. Although many scholars say that it was written at about the same time as bible, some other scholars find bits of evidence that indicate that Thomas was dependent on Biblical sources. They say that Thomas must have edited almost all ideas of Biblical authors. As a result they date mid second century A.D. We don't have certain information about who wrote it. Scholars of the New Testament generally agree that none of the gospels were written by people who had ever met Jesus during his lifetime. Parts of Greek versions of the Gospel Of Thomas were found in Egypt about one hundred years ago and these can be dated to about 140 A.D. or before.

Gospel Thomas is not in the Bible. We don't have exact information about how the texts in the bible were chosen. It could have been that Thomas was unknown to those who made them. Or there might have been writings of Thomas that were distasteful to them.

And the other text is the Infancy Gospel Of Thomas that we have responsible. The Infancy Gospel Of Thomas is one of the earliest infancy gospels. It was written about 150 A.D. There are also translations in many languages. The Gospel deals with the period between Jesus’ birth and the incident of Jesus in the Temple. The work is an ethical embarrassment, for the little Jesus is not only a child prodigy but also a child terror, performing nasty miracles.

Now, I want to tell you some sayings from The Gospel Of Thomas and try to make interpretations about them.  In the 6th saying “His disciples asked him and said to him: Do you want us to fast? And how shall we pray and give alms? What diet should we observe? Jesus said: Do not lie, and what you hate, do not do; for all things are manifest in the sight of heaven; for there is nothing hidden which will not be revealed, and there is nothing covered which will remain without being uncovered.” (Barnstone, p.300)

In this saying Jesus gives the way of Heaven. Although the question is about praying, fasting and almsgiving, he does not give a direct answer. He mentions fasting is being kept away from evil words and actions not from indifferent things like food. Another standpoint is that what you hate done to you do not do to others.

In the 24th saying “His disciples said: Teach us about the place where you are, for it is necessary for us to seek it. He said to them: He, who has ears, let him hear! There is light within a man of light, and he lights the whole world. If he does not shine, there is darkness.” (Barnstone, p.302)

According to saying 24 the disciples do not need to look outside themselves, but as people of light they have light in themselves just as much as the light figure Jesus. Indeed, without this particle of light there would be darkness in the world. This statement seems to contain an indirect command to engage in mission in the world. People may actualize the light within them and thus see the world and themselves in terms of the light of creation. They will see the world in reference to its beginning perfection, stand at the beginning (saying 18), and need no future attainment.

There is an interesting story in the 64th saying. I want to tell you “Jesus said: A man had guests; and when he had prepared the dinner, he sent his servants to invite the guests. He went to the first, and said to him: My master invites you. He said: I have money with some merchants; they are coming to me this evening. I will go and give them my orders. I ask to be excused from the dinner. He went to another and said to him: My master invites you. He said to him: I have bought a house, and I am asked for a day. I shall not have time. He went to another and said to him: My master invites you. He said to him: My friend is about to be married, and I am to arrange the dinner. I shall not be able to come. I ask to be excused from dinner. He went to another, he said to him: My master invites you. He said to him: I have bought a farm; I am going to collect the rent. I shall not be able to come. I ask to be excused. The servant came back and said to his master: Those whom you have invited to dinner have asked to be excused. The master said to his servant: Go out to the roads, bring those whom you find, that they may dine. Traders and merchants shall not enter the places of my Father.” (Barnstone, p.304)

Gospel of Thomas 64 ends with the sentence, 'Tradesman and merchants shall not enter the places of my Father.' Even if the reference is, in the first place, to the wealthy that decline the invitation, its generalized terms express the idea of a sharp attack on the rich. This is an attitude of class-consciousness in this parable, which he introduces as a result to the warning not to invite the richer and wealthy, but the poor, lame, halt, and blind. We can interpret that lames, halts, and also blinds are included in addition to the poor. He indicates that one should behave like the host in the parable who symbolically invites to his table the poor, the lame, the blind, and the halt. But that is surely not the original intention of the parable: in it, as we shall see, Jesus should rather be regarded as justifying before his critics his preaching of the good news to the poor.

In the 101st saying “Jesus said: He who does not hate his father and his mother like me cannot be a disciple to me. And he who does not love his father and his mother like me cannot be a disciple to me. For my mother gave me falsehood, but my true mother gave me life.” (Barnstone, p. 307)

101. The substance of this saying has already been provided in Saying 56 [55]. Here, however, Jesus explicitly states that he himself hates his (earthly) father and mother. The repeated phrase is  'cannot be my disciple'. What he said about his mother cannot be recovered from the broken text. Perhaps he said, as in the Gospel of the Hebrews, that his mother was the Holy Spirit. The statement about loving father and mother may refer to loving the Father and the Holy Spirit. (I want to give an information that Christians believe God consists of three parts: God the Father, God the Son, and God the Holy Spirit in order to understand last saying easily.)