Jesus discussion

[Johnny Shumate]

Robert,

Excavations at Babylon (1879-82) led to the discovery of a clay barrel, known as the Cyrus Cylinder, which contained a marvelous historical confirmation of the biblical narrative. It portrays the benevolent policies of Cyrus in the following fashion: “All of their peoples I gathered together and restored to their dwelling-placesâ€

[FAVENTIANVS]

Lawrence Gardner's BLOODLINE OF THE HOLY GRAIL.

[size=150:1c0ry1z2]OOPS!!!!!!![/size]

I thought it was a genuine inscription or reference somewhere....

this smells of Dan Brown......

:?

M.VIB.M.

Lawrence Gardner wrote this book many years earlier than Dan Brown did his famous one, and the bibliography of the first is very extensive, with mainly ancient sources...

[Comerus Gallus]

I found another interested point:

When God was about to destroy the hole Israel Nation upon the Earth,
then sed to Moses that he would do a new Race from him & will keep his promize!: Moses refuse that offer to God, then Moses asked God to erase his name from the Book of Life!...

This is interested, because to my knowledge there was not teaching or record of the Book of Life or Death in the Hebrew religion, wich would appear more clear many centuries later in the book of Revelation.

PS: How Moses knew about it? at MT Sinai spending time with God?.

BTW: About Cyrus: in OT is a pasage wich God declare like 200 years before Cyrus birth, he gived that name to him, but He would not know him (to God): you know, that personal as Abraham was with God or Moses.

In many pasages of the Bible state that, God choose people before they are on their Mothers womb, as He state with Abraham & Sarah, Kings will come from their loins, as did with Ishmael the father of the Arabs etc.

Some times its more personal statement: God himself sed I created you in the womb of your Mother, He choosed people from there.

Alexander is mention & what it would occured to him & to his empire, wich follows his general kindoms & their descendants, up to Rome, just hundreds of years before it happned.

Even the Messiah its mention since the beginning, & what it would occured to him & Satan.... even the alegory of his wound or bruise of his heel have common things with other myths.



PS: Also there are many similar alegories & events, from nations that never had contact with each other, incluying the Bible.
So I think some stuff really happened.

The Bible its interesting.

Some famous Science people I have no doubt, that they owed to the Bible from some discoverys, like the planet is round, for example, I think in the book of Isaiah state that God himself sit upon the circled earth... etc.

God created the Man from the earth, interesting, Science discovered that our body have many elements similary found onthe earth.

So I think once the Human Race were together & had a common knowledge about religion etc., & when separate, there is were these stories etc. had changed, but still has some similar roots.

[Arthes]

Christianity, on the other hand, welcomed anyone, and everyone who converted was meant to be 'equal in Christ', regardless of class, rank, wealth or sex.

I noticed this quite a while back........
Two translations from a verse of The Gospel of Thomas...
(114) Simon Peter said to him, "Let Mary leave us, for women are not worthy of life."
Jesus said, "I myself shall lead her in order to make her male, so that she too may become a living spirit resembling you males. For every woman who will make herself male will enter the kingdom of heaven."
[url:2bt6kyed]http://www.gnosis.org/naghamm/gthlamb.html[/url]
--
(114) Simon Peter said to them: Let Mary go forth from among us, for women are not worthy of the life.
Jesus said: Behold, I shall lead her, that I may make her male, in order that she also may become a living spirit like you males. For every woman who makes herself male shall enter into the kingdom of heaven.
[url:2bt6kyed]http://www.reluctant-messenger.com/gospel-thomas-Messrs-Brill_of_Leiden.htm[/url]
That does not sound very welcoming to me........ and sounds as though it is encouraging women to become a transexual :? roll:
It also reminds me very much of what a Greek philosopher, (can't remember who?) stated about feeling love for a female being a degrading base sort of love compared with love between males.....he was talking about a 'higher' spiritual and mental love apart from anything else... :oops:
It is Plato's Symposium......
And am I not right in asserting that there are two goddesses? The elder one, having no mother, who is called the heavenly Aphrodite-she is the daughter of Uranus; the younger, who is the daughter of Zeus and Dione-her we call common; and the Love who is her fellow-worker is rightly named common, as the other love is called heavenly. All the gods ought to have praise given to them, but not without distinction of their natures; and therefore I must try to distinguish the characters of the two Loves. Now actions vary according to the manner of their performance. Take, for example, that which we are now doing, drinking, singing and talking these actions are not in themselves either good or evil, but they turn out in this or that way according to the mode of performing them; and when well done they are good, and when wrongly done they are evil; and in like manner not every love, but only that which has a noble purpose, is noble and worthy of praise. The Love who is the offspring of the common Aphrodite is essentially common, and has no discrimination, being such as the meaner sort of men feel, and is apt to be of women as well as of youths, and is of the body rather than of the soul-the most foolish beings are the objects of this love which desires only to gain an end, but never thinks of accomplishing the end nobly, and therefore does good and evil quite indiscriminately. The goddess who is his mother is far younger than the other, and she was born of the union of the male and female, and partakes of both.

But the offspring of the heavenly Aphrodite is derived from a mother in whose birth the female has no part,-she is from the male only; this is that love which is of youths, and the goddess being older, there is nothing of wantonness in her. Those who are inspired by this love turn to the male, and delight in him who is the more valiant and intelligent nature; any one may recognise the pure enthusiasts in the very character of their attachments. For they love not boys, but intelligent, beings whose reason is beginning to be developed, much about the time at which their beards begin to grow. And in choosing young men to be their companions, they mean to be faithful to them, and pass their whole life in company with them, not to take them in their inexperience, and deceive them, and play the fool with them, or run away from one to another of them. But the love of young boys should be forbidden by law, because their future is uncertain; they may turn out good or bad, either in body or soul, and much noble enthusiasm may be thrown away upon them; in this matter the good are a law to themselves, and the coarser sort of lovers ought to be restrained by force; as we restrain or attempt to restrain them from fixing their affections on women of free birth. These are the persons who bring a reproach on love; and some have been led to deny the lawfulness of such attachments because they see the impropriety and evil of them; for surely nothing that is decorously and lawfully done can justly be censured.
From:Internet Classics Archive

regards
Arthes

[Johnny Shumate]

That's the problem with the Gnostic gospels. It downgrades women. The teachings of the New Testament put women on a higher level.

"Husbands, love your wives as Christ loved the church and gave himself up for her,..." Ephesians 5:25

Johnny

[Comerus Gallus]

Christianity, on the other hand, welcomed anyone, and everyone who converted was meant to be 'equal in Christ', regardless of class, rank, wealth or sex.

I noticed this quite a while back........
Two translations from a verse of The Gospel of Thomas...
(114) Simon Peter said to him, "Let Mary leave us, for women are not worthy of life."
Jesus said, "I myself shall lead her in order to make her male, so that she too may become a living spirit resembling you males. For every woman who will make herself male will enter the kingdom of heaven."
[url:nfcf6qpq]http://www.gnosis.org/naghamm/gthlamb.html[/url]
--
(114) Simon Peter said to them: Let Mary go forth from among us, for women are not worthy of the life.
Jesus said: Behold, I shall lead her, that I may make her male, in order that she also may become a living spirit like you males. For every woman who makes herself male shall enter into the kingdom of heaven.
[url:nfcf6qpq]http://www.reluctant-messenger.com/gospel-thomas-Messrs-Brill_of_Leiden.htm[/url]
That does not sound very welcoming to me........ and sounds as though it is encouraging women to become a transexual :? roll:
It also reminds me very much of what a Greek philosopher, (can't remember who?) stated about feeling love for a female being a degrading base sort of love compared with love between males.....he was talking about a 'higher' spiritual and mental love apart from anything else... :oops:
It is Plato's Symposium......
And am I not right in asserting that there are two goddesses? The elder one, having no mother, who is called the heavenly Aphrodite-she is the daughter of Uranus; the younger, who is the daughter of Zeus and Dione-her we call common; and the Love who is her fellow-worker is rightly named common, as the other love is called heavenly. All the gods ought to have praise given to them, but not without distinction of their natures; and therefore I must try to distinguish the characters of the two Loves. Now actions vary according to the manner of their performance. Take, for example, that which we are now doing, drinking, singing and talking these actions are not in themselves either good or evil, but they turn out in this or that way according to the mode of performing them; and when well done they are good, and when wrongly done they are evil; and in like manner not every love, but only that which has a noble purpose, is noble and worthy of praise. The Love who is the offspring of the common Aphrodite is essentially common, and has no discrimination, being such as the meaner sort of men feel, and is apt to be of women as well as of youths, and is of the body rather than of the soul-the most foolish beings are the objects of this love which desires only to gain an end, but never thinks of accomplishing the end nobly, and therefore does good and evil quite indiscriminately. The goddess who is his mother is far younger than the other, and she was born of the union of the male and female, and partakes of both.

But the offspring of the heavenly Aphrodite is derived from a mother in whose birth the female has no part,-she is from the male only; this is that love which is of youths, and the goddess being older, there is nothing of wantonness in her. Those who are inspired by this love turn to the male, and delight in him who is the more valiant and intelligent nature; any one may recognise the pure enthusiasts in the very character of their attachments. For they love not boys, but intelligent, beings whose reason is beginning to be developed, much about the time at which their beards begin to grow. And in choosing young men to be their companions, they mean to be faithful to them, and pass their whole life in company with them, not to take them in their inexperience, and deceive them, and play the fool with them, or run away from one to another of them. But the love of young boys should be forbidden by law, because their future is uncertain; they may turn out good or bad, either in body or soul, and much noble enthusiasm may be thrown away upon them; in this matter the good are a law to themselves, and the coarser sort of lovers ought to be restrained by force; as we restrain or attempt to restrain them from fixing their affections on women of free birth. These are the persons who bring a reproach on love; and some have been led to deny the lawfulness of such attachments because they see the impropriety and evil of them; for surely nothing that is decorously and lawfully done can justly be censured.
From:Internet Classics Archive

regards
Arthes

Arthes I think Paul himself would called that Gospel an Anathema.

there are some books out of canon that are good & arent Anathema, but arent included...

You have to remember that in Paul's days many false people stand up agains the true Gospel, and he state that many letters didnt come from him but had his pretending signature.

that would occured with other Gospels even if the name of the autor its not on it....

Paul state even if an Angel come to you with another diferent gospel, the one be an Anathema.

I think the books that are in the Catholic & Evangelist are ok.


So this is another case, wich are the false Gospels & wich arent ?

TNarcher is write, the Gnositc its a speudo jewish sect, wich contrast with one another, even their god is half men & woman.

[Johnny Shumate]

These are the main ones:

Gnostic: The Gospel of Thomas
Gnostic: The Secret Book of James
Gnostic: Basilides
Gnostic: Naassene Fragment
Gnostic: Gospel of Mary
Gnostic: Dialogue of the Savior
Gnostic: Gospel of the Savior
Gnostic: Marcion
Gnostic: Epiphanes
Gnostic: Ophite Diagrams
Gnostic: Ptolemy
Gnostic: Gospel of Truth
Gnostic: Excerpts of Theodotus
Gnostic: Heracleon
Gnostic: Acts of Peter
Gnostic: Acts of Thomas

Johnny

[Comerus Gallus]

Thanks Johnny!

[Arthes]

Gnostic: Ptolemy
Johnny

Ptolemy......I assume this is not Alexander's Ptolemy I Soter, but the other one from Alexandria......?
er.....you know the one I mean.....the astromoner.... :oops:

[MARCvSVIBIvSMAvRINvS]

What i find interesting is that when you look at the Roman system of religio, and also in other polytheistic religions, you hardly ever see an apocalyptic view on life. For Romans there simply was the Hades, as for the Greeks, for the Egyptians there was the after life, and i musty say i have never come across these linear/apocalyptic thoughts in any ancient religions except for the Jewish religion and the ones Daniel mentioned.

Also very interesting is that when i studied Japanese and had to do research in Bhuddist art, there were clear hellenistic traits in the robes of Bhudda and Bodhisattva statues, and the further you travelled east, the less hellenistic they became, It could well be an indication that Bhuddism was known to the Roman society, but probably in a non vedic form.

any ideas about the non-existence of apocalyptic/linear beliefs in the Roman world?

M.VIB.M.

[Robert Vermaat]

TNarcher\\n[quote]Robert,
Excavations at Babylon (1879-82) led to the discovery of a clay barrel, known as the Cyrus Cylinder, which contained a marvelous historical confirmation of the biblical narrative. It portrays the benevolent policies of Cyrus in the following fashion: “All of their peoples I gathered together and restored to their dwelling-placesâ€

[Robert Vermaat]

I think the books that are in the Catholic & Evangelist are ok.
So this is another case, wich are the false Gospels & wich arent ?
TNarcher is write, the Gnositc its a speudo jewish sect, wich contrast with one another, even their god is half men & woman.

Gioi,
There are no false gospels. At some point it was decided to exclude some gospels and to retain other gospels, thereby forming the New Testament as we know it today.
True, some of these excluded ones, like the recently resurfaced 'Gospel of Judas', are very different from what we would call 'mainstream Christianity'. But that does not mean they are false.

[Johnny Shumate]

Robert,
I would have to disagree with you on this one. The gospel of Judas was written around 180 BC by the Cainites( a group of Gnostics). It makes the God of the New Testament a female character and teaches many false doctrines that contradict the New Testament. The early church father Irenaeus rejected it as with others. All of the Gnostic gospels are false and teaches "another gospel"(Galatians 1:6) apart from the inspired 27 books...
Johnny

[MARCvSVIBIvSMAvRINvS]

false according to The early church father Irenaeus his own Christian doctrine, you mean!

that is the important thing here in this discussion, we first need to look at every bit of evidence, then agree on or "believe" read; find plausible, one part or more parts of that evidence, and then decide what we like or dislike about these theories...

that is why the denomination False in this discussion is not valid, at least not in an objective, scientific manner. since it is clearly a subjective one.

and now i am going to put a few doves under an earthenware pot......

:wink:

M.VIB.M.

just this once, posting from the LXF outpost.........

[Johnny Shumate]

Irenaeus had no doctrine of his own, he simply quoted the inspired scriptures! Did you know if all Bibles were destroyed, the New Testament could be printed from all the quotations of the early church fathers..?
Johnny