I concur. I've read some of the gnostics as well.<quoted text>
I don't hold Erhaman as a perfect by any means. IMHO he missed a lot and is far too "Christian" for my tastes.
I was merely ponting out the current mainstream scholarly stance on the matter.
Willopst soon my own short analysis of the Gospel of Thomas and why I believe it is a very historically significant text, while theologically it is immaterial.
Many go with the mainstream way of thinking without doing much objective digging into the evidence as it is presented from different perspectives.
My understanding of the Gospel of Thomas is that it is a collection or compilation of some of Jesus' sayings, some of which are in the canonical Gospel accounts. As far as who wrote it or when it was written, no one truly knows, although there has been a lot of speculation.