It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Gnostic Christianity

page: 1
6
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Feb, 12 2016 @ 02:37 AM
link   
We're all familiar with the Nag Hammadi Library, the texts written by Christians who despised (rightfully so) Yahweh, the OT "god" who acts more like a deranged monarch than a merciful God.

Everyone goes to the early church fathers for info on the Telestai (what they called themselves) or Gnostics, a term meant to be insulting. It's like calling them know it all's in modern terms. But I've read most of the NHL, and there is nothing evil at all in there. They quote prophets, love Jesus, have Gospels that aren't in the bible, and basically just despise Yahweh/Yaldaboath who they call the Demiurge. They have Sophia(Wisdom) and some fascinating cosmology but most people think of it as science fiction without realizing angels, demons and fallen angels are basically the same thing.

This is regarding Christian "Gnostics" who did NOT call themselves Gnostics. Telestai would be more correct but for the sake of ease I will use the term Gnostic from here on out.

For the record, gnostic is taken to mean secret knowledge, but they weren't claiming secret knowledge just evolved knowledge. They were decent enough people that they rejected Yahweh because he doesn't act like the merciful god he says he is. To them he sounded deranged and DEFINITELY not worthy of worship. They believe in a higher, self manifested unknowable God. And they LOVED Jesus. And hated material things.

Now if you are looking for reliable information on someone, the last people you trust are the people who hate(d) them. Iraneus is no exception. So why should we trust the ancient RCC, when we know the evil things they did.

Gnostic Christianity is not a church. It's not about secret knowledge but it is about getting to know God through knowledge (all knowledge leads back to its source). It's not an organization. It's a way to love the Messiah without bowing down to the Demiurge. Jesus father was not Yahweh, so no big deal there.

Also it's about controlling fleshly and worldly desires, not letting them control you. Basically just being good. Being like Immanuel(Yeshua).

For the record gnosis, illumination, are concepts as old as history. But this isn't about that kind of gnosis which I call false light gnosis. This is about Christian gnosis, that is: [ faith+knowledge is essential to our salvation, rather than either separately.]

Words in brackets are my personal philosophy.

Last, I am not talking about Marcion, Simon Magus(who was not the founder of Gnosticism) the Ophites or even Sethians. Or the OTO or any secret society. Strictly the Nag Hammadi sect of Christians who were eliminated because they were a threat to the RCC, Not because they were evil.

Thoughts?


edit on 12-2-2016 by Rasalghul because: (no reason given)




posted on Feb, 12 2016 @ 02:48 AM
link   
how could they be wise to thumb their noses at God. That makes no sense. If there is a God, which there probably is, he can act anyway he wants whenever he wants, because he's God. Why would a god have to give a man a reason for what he's doing. If you see a cockroach you might step on it and squish it. Do you have to explain to the cockroach what your'e doing or apologies to it after you do? No your bigger, tough luck, you can do what you want to that bug. more so if there is God they can do whatever they want to us and we can't say sh#t. The fear of God is the beginning of wisdom



posted on Feb, 12 2016 @ 02:53 AM
link   
a reply to: Rasalghul

Christ is reputed to have said "I didn't come to change the law". Therein lies an interesting conundrum.

Anyone whose read the Nag Hammadi 'books' knows the difference is that Constantine and his merry church fathers wanted to make the Emperor look to the people as a depiction of God on earth. hence Jesus had to be the son of God to pass the mantle of power down through the later generations and that claim does it.

Jesus himself said he was an ordinary man who would call anyone brother who followed 'the law'. YHWH's followers decided they wanted their own interpretation so others who didn't like it left and after becoming a number of factions united under Christianity. Those who didn't back the main stream were wiped out of history by the church fathers.

I am surprised at how many people don't brother to read some of the other documents from the early christian times and question what was left out of the bible and why. Reincarnation and the books of Enoch were very strong in people's belief up to 300 AD however Christianity can never get away from its roots of having been created by the council of Nicea. Judaism was created by Moses and we all know about islam's roots. All three were created to put power into certain people's hands and not for a pure spiritual relationship between man and his belief of a higher being.



posted on Feb, 12 2016 @ 03:02 AM
link   
a reply to: Shiloh7
Ive read almost every Apocryphal book under the sun. That's were the true gems of wisdom are sometimes. Enoch yes, by far my favorite. Jubilees,Jasher, Testament of Solomon, Judeo-Christianity has so much more than just the bible. Indoctrination is crucial so they call them non-canonical and say don't read that.

I asked a Christian pastor what I had to do to get baptized once, and he said, " Forget everything you know about the bible" I said no, I don't throw away knowledge. He said, "Well then we won't baptize you."

I've never been back.



posted on Feb, 12 2016 @ 03:05 AM
link   
One thing I liked was in the Gospel of Thomas, wherein Jesus says that heaven is not a literal place you go to, but rather a state of mind.

Just as the modern church (maybe not in America) believes that hell is not a literal place, but once again, a state of mind.

I'm not a Biblical scholar, so I may be incorrect, but it seems like the decision over which gospels to include the Bible was subject to politics and personal agendas. The Gnostic texts tend to portray Jesus as a human being (such as describing Jesus as a little sh*t when he was a kid), rather than a perfect idealisation.

I think it's really important for people to remember that the Bible is comprised of texts written by people, with certain texts selected and others rejected due to political agenda. For instance, who knew that women were instrumental in the establishment of Christianity, organising ceremonies and teaching others before men took over? That's just one little thing that's been deliberately overlooked by Biblical composers, because it just wasn't fitting at the time.

And for you Christians: don't you think that the official Bible's condemnation of the pursuit of knowledge a little... convenient for medieval rulers? After all, how could one ever come close to comprehending the nature of God without knowledge?

Some religious idiots condemn science because... I don't know, because they're idiots, and because they think it's not what God would like or something. But if you know how gravity works, how particles travel, how the weather changes, and so on, would that not give you a deeper appreciation of the world, or "God's work"?

The Muslims used to be the pioneers of science and knowledge, because according to them, God encourages it. In the West, we've only really progressed after adhering so strictly to the doctrines of the church, and it's only really in the US, which is way more conservatively Christian than most other Western countries, that there is a real problem of science and religion clashing.



posted on Feb, 12 2016 @ 03:20 AM
link   

originally posted by: Volchitsa



I'm not a Biblical scholar, so I may be incorrect, but it seems like the decision over which gospels to include the Bible was subject to politics and personal agendas. The Gnostic texts tend to portray Jesus as a human being (such as describing Jesus as a little sh*t when he was a kid), rather than a perfect idealisation.

I think it's really important for people to remember that the Bible is comprised of texts written by people, with certain texts selected and others rejected due to political agenda. For instance, who knew that women were instrumental in the establishment of Christianity, organising ceremonies and teaching others before men took over? That's just one little thing that's been deliberately overlooked by Biblical composers, because it just wasn't fitting at the time.

And for you Christians: don't you think that the official Bible's condemnation of the pursuit of knowledge a little... convenient for medieval rulers? After all, how could one ever come close to comprehending the nature of God without knowledge?

Some religious idiots condemn science because... I don't know, because they're idiots, and because they think it's not what God would like or something. But if you know how gravity works, how particles travel, how the weather changes, and so on, would that not give you a deeper appreciation of the world, or "God's work"?

The Muslims used to be the pioneers of science and knowledge, because according to them, God encourages it. In the West, we've only really progressed after adhering so strictly to the doctrines of the church, and it's only really in the US, which is way more conservatively Christian than most other Western countries, that there is a real problem of science and religion clashing.


Wise words. Thank you, and your correct it was almost entirely political. When you lived under an Emporor, you live at his beck and call. If he hires you to do something, you do it in a way so as not to lose your head, literally.

What good has the RCC done that could ever make up for the evil.

These aren't people I would trust. Now or then.



posted on Feb, 12 2016 @ 03:24 AM
link   
a reply to: Volchitsa
Like when Paul says "knowledge puffs up" . Very convenient for the early church. Don't learn, learnings evil, it makes you arrogant. No it makes you smart, they don't want that.



posted on Feb, 12 2016 @ 03:49 AM
link   
What is it that can know knowledge?
Knowledge is information but what is being in formed?

Instead of putting faith in what can be known - find that which knows. That which is knowing is the same in you as it is in me.
The knowing presence is the one that never changes and that which never changes is the stable one that can be felt as rest/peace.

From where is all this manifestation being seen/known.

Saint Francis of Assisi said 'What is looking is what we are looking for'. It is so easy to overlook.



posted on Feb, 12 2016 @ 04:04 AM
link   
a reply to: Rasalghul

I'm glad to see a thread like this! I was blown away when i first stumbled upon the NHL back in the late 90's. ( the internet sucked back then if you recall. )

Growing up RC, nothing of the apocrypha was ever even mentioned, let alone the treasure trove from Nag Hammadi. Gotta love knowledge suppression!

I agree wholeheartedly that the books are fascinating and provide another angle of Christianity. To me, the most important avenue is metaphysics, which is carefully intertwined with the words of Jesus in our modern day translation ( which who knows how much has been lost in translation. )

S & F



posted on Feb, 12 2016 @ 04:14 AM
link   
a reply to: AgarthaSeedAh thanks, that was a nice compliment. The funny thing is the early church fathers read these Apocryphal(which means hidden) texts themselves and wrote about them. Basically they kept them hidden.

You would love the Lost books of the bible. Google it and you'll be able to read it right away, I highly recommend it.

You couldn't even read the bible as a "peasant" for so long. I am so glad I didn't live then. I'm happy to just imagine the ancient world, information is so readily available today I wouldn't want to live in any other time ( wasn't always like that).

Oh yeah, the books by Rutherford Platte, compiled by at least. They are the books that didn't make it and aren't in the NHL

edit on 12-2-2016 by Rasalghul because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 12 2016 @ 04:20 AM
link   
a reply to: Itisnowagainsearch for the one who seeks, then you will find the one who will know.



posted on Feb, 12 2016 @ 04:59 AM
link   

originally posted by: Rasalghul
a reply to: Itisnowagain
search for the one who seeks, then you will find the one who will know.


The one is never not knowing - knowing looks 'out' to know the apparent something and then looks 'back' to see what is knowing the apparent something



posted on Feb, 12 2016 @ 05:02 AM
link   
a reply to: Itisnowagain

The one who looks out and back must also look in and beyond.



posted on Feb, 12 2016 @ 05:17 AM
link   
a reply to: Rasalghul

I had my eldest baptised but I didn't my younger son. I left the choice up to him because I felt I had made the choice for my elder without consulting him which was wrong.

Neither boy has religious inclinations, despite coming from a family with Jewish, Muslim and Christian members - all of whom get on happily.

I did encourage them both to read up on how all the dessert religions came into being and especially why. It all started in Egypt and Babylon and myths got utilised somewhat imaginatively and especially to fit the needs of the political situations at the time and from which three religions have flourished albeit on the flimsiest and borrowed foundations ever.

I do believe Christ was right when he said heaven is within because a human, satisfied with their lot and content in the knowledge they do their best never to harm others but help them is already in what we understand as heaven.



posted on Feb, 12 2016 @ 05:30 AM
link   
a reply to: Volchitsa

Back in New Testament times knowledge was every where , much like today . And that knowledge of the day was valued and believed and even made its way into the authors minds and so they addressed issues explaining to congregations what was the proper way to act . In Corinthians the subject of a son getting it on with his dads wife is mentioned ,along with other things the author or others had witnessed happening in the new groups .

The saying that when in Rome do as the Romans comes to mind and I want to share some of the wisdom of the day and mention a issue discussed by a author of the new testament . This knowledge was developed outside of what could be considered scripture of the day .Science was very young in those days but they had names that are very recognizable even in our day .

So what did they think ...Well for one thing they thought that hair was genitalia .Because of this women we requested to ware a head covering ,as it seemed proper at the time because of having this misunderstanding of what constituted genitalia . The ancients were dealing with the myth of the day and it seems there was no shortage of a new thing to talk about . Acts describes such gatherings and it seems that there were a few that made it a full time thing to do .

So the though of that day was that the brain was involved in reproduction .So they imagined that there were tubes from the brain to the vagina and penis .It was also thought that the hair was hollow and it was a vacuum . This vacuum was necessary to draw the sperm up to the woman's brain .Because of this natural function it seemed to them that the woman should have long hair (more vacuum ) while the man should be shaved (less vacuum ) From this knowledge of old we see that the women should where a head covering while in church .

The wisdom of the day is not explained within the Bible ,but the bible was quite clear that the women were required to wear a hat because it was written to people of the day and not to us .A simple true explanation of human anatomy to the author may have resulted in him not addressing the subject but because the world out side the church would view them as running around naked . So it seemed fitting to God to let man have his misunderstandings about the world because He is God and He knows how to communicate . Doesn't matter how dumb or stupid someone is ,God can get His message through .When in Roam or Romania be considerate of the sensitivities of the culture . Do good and shun evil .



posted on Feb, 12 2016 @ 05:32 AM
link   

originally posted by: Rasalghul
This is regarding Christian "Gnostics"

The word oxymoron immediately comes to mind...

Just like Lavatrance said above, it makes NO sense.




originally posted by: Rasalghul
Now if you are looking for reliable information on someone, the last people you trust are the people who hate(d) them. Iraneus is no exception. So why should we trust the ancient RCC, when we know the evil things they did.

This is the primary reason that Gnosticism has zero credibility...

In fact, no one hates God more than the creator of Gnosticism.


Satanic practices throughout the world can be traced in an unbroken line directly back to Gnosticism...

Curse of Canaan

The current Illuminati religion is based on Gnosticism...

Simon Magus -- The lluminati's Jesus?



originally posted by: Rasalghul
So why should we trust the ancient RCC...

So WHY should we trust Gnosticism?

Just like Gonosticism, RCC is a cult and therefore has no credibility.

You said it yourself, the last people you trust are the people who hate them.




edit on Feb000000Fri, 12 Feb 2016 06:21:54 -06006am29Fri, 12 Feb 2016 06:21:54 -060020162112 by Murgatroid because: felt like it...



posted on Feb, 12 2016 @ 06:09 AM
link   
a reply to: MurgatroidThat is a matter of opinion.



posted on Feb, 12 2016 @ 06:14 AM
link   

originally posted by: Rasalghul
I've read most of the NHL, and there is nothing evil at all in there.

Gnosticism is a trap and a dead end just like all the other fake religions...

It is a counterfeit, do NOT fall for it.


Originally posted by c1138
if you believe the Nag Hammadi Library/gnostic scriptures you WILL believe the REAL NWO and the gnostic view of life of the NWO. These were written centuries after the true Gospels and are false.

Gnostics texts are not the Word of God, so they never were “part of the Bible” its obvious when you read them that they dont belong.. The Bible is the key to everything. It tells how many attempts will be made to deceive.

originally posted by: adjensen
In a very real way, Gnostic Christianity was the Scientology of the Second Century.

originally posted by: stupid girl
Most of the Apostlic letters that make up the last half of the New Testament were written with the intent to refute the increasing heresies of Gnosticism. So in essence, Gnostic beliefs are based on the opposite of what Jesus instructed those who follow Him to do. Gnostic beliefs go against the Truths revealed to us by Christ Himself through His Apostles.

To understand how people are being brainwashed by The Illuminati to hate God and accept the coming Anti-Christ ... You must understand gnosticism! Even the first century church had to deal with these heretics... They claim that the devil is the savior and our God is a devil! They invert the truth!

Illuminati Satanic Gnosticism EXPOSED



posted on Feb, 12 2016 @ 06:19 AM
link   

originally posted by: Rasalghul
That is a matter of opinion.

FYI: SOME opinions are actually based upon facts...



posted on Feb, 12 2016 @ 06:22 AM
link   
a reply to: Shiloh7
Wow that is a great quote. I bet you are a good parent. My mom made me stop going to church after my confirmation, I developed an interest in the bible after reading a little and going to studies.

But as a grown man I am not under the plague of mind control, which is exactly what organized religion does, control minds

I prefer independence. I finally read the whole bible and that is when I discovered my beliefs were incorrect, what the churches teach, incorrect. It's been a fascinating journey, discovering the truth. Not to many people seem to care about the truth, they care more about being absolutely correct, so they hardly ever admit to being wrong (about Christianity).



new topics

top topics



 
6
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join