Messianic St. Mary Magdalene a Major Gnostic Heresy revived by Simcha Jacovici

a reply to: The angel of light

"Modern scholars suggest that the messianic concept was introduced later in the history of Judaism, during the age of the prophets. They note that the messianic concept is not explicitly mentioned anywhere in the Torah (the first five books of the Bible)."


"The term "mashiach" literally means "the anointed one," and refers to the ancient practice of anointing kings with oil when they took the throne. The mashiach is the one who will be anointed as king in the End of Days.

The word "mashiach" does not mean "savior." The notion of an innocent, divine or semi-divine being who will sacrifice himself to save us from the consequences of our own sins is a purely Christian concept that has no basis in Jewish thought. Unfortunately, this Christian concept has become so deeply ingrained in the English word "messiah" that this English word can no longer be used to refer to the Jewish concept. The word "mashiach" will be used throughout this page."

From Judaism 101

There is no "son of God " prophesied and there have been multiple messiahs.. some presaging Jesus by a millinia.

.

a reply to: The angel of light

Oh and the Dead Sea scrolls were from like 200ad...

They were hidden by "Coptic " Christians.. I think Coptic.. it's been awhile.

It's funny how quickly Christian conspiracy sites like "live science " will post falsehoods to push their narratives.

a reply to: JoshuaCox

No, sorry but you are wrong, a very important part of the dead sea scrolls come from before Christ. I don't know which sources you base your claim, but the C14 tests by three laboratories refute your statement.


With respect to the Isaiah scroll in particular, that I mentioned in this thread containing a very clear prophecy that match in all aspects with Jesus Christ as the predicted Servant of God, we have:

Qumran Isaiah is C14 dated by Tucson Laboratory with age of 2141 +/- 32

Qumran Isaiah is C14 dated by Zurich Laboratory with age of 2128 +/- 38

Qumran Isaiah is C14 dated by Libby Laboratory with age of 2050 +/- 100

Notice that none of those dates open the possibility even under the tolerances of error to date the scroll in the 200 AD

The possible date of writing of that scroll are :

Tucson Laboratory: 351-295 or 230-53 BCE

Zurich Laboratory: 351-296 or 230-48 BCE

Libby Laboratory: 200 BCE - 1 C


Here is the complete list of the C14 dating test results over all the scrolls:

Please check:
en.wikipedia.org...

Again, I really enjoy your enthusiastic participation in the thread but I encourage you to read carefully your sources and confirm they are
really reliable ones before to reply.

Thanks,

The Angel of Lightness

originally posted by: The angel of light
a reply to: JoshuaCox

No, sorry but you are wrong, a very important part of the dead sea scrolls come from before Christ. I don't know which sources you base your claim, but the C14 tests by three laboratories refute your statement.


With respect to the Isaiah scroll in particular, that I mentioned in this thread containing a very clear prophecy that match in all aspects with Jesus Christ as the predicted Servant of God, we have:

Qumran Isaiah is C14 dated by Tucson Laboratory with age of 2141 +/- 32

Qumran Isaiah is C14 dated by Zurich Laboratory with age of 2128 +/- 38

Qumran Isaiah is C14 dated by Libby Laboratory with age of 2050 +/- 100

Notice that none of those dates open the possibility even under the tolerances of error to date the scroll in the 200 AD

The possible date of writing of that scroll are :

Tucson Laboratory: 351-295 or 230-53 BCE

Zurich Laboratory: 351-296 or 230-48 BCE

Libby Laboratory: 200 BCE - 1 C


Here is the complete list of the C14 dating test results over all the scrolls:

Please check:
en.wikipedia.org...

Again, I really enjoy your enthusiastic participation in the thread but I encourage you to read carefully your sources and confirm they are
really reliable ones before to reply.

Thanks,

The Angel of Lightness

Fair enough some where older, I knew they contained NT books, so I wasn't expecting parts of the collection to be that old..

That said that still doesn't change the fact from the Jewish perspective there is no som of God prophesied..

You are pointing to CHRISTIAN scholars who are going back and cherry picking parts to claim that "everyone else was wrong" and interpreted it to mean what they wanted..

No Jew before or after thought it prophesied a son of God..

Nor was their messiah prophecy supernatural at all..

It is only referring to the next line of kings that will rule until judgment day..

Not a fisherman with superpowers who died for our sins... that Jews then nor now believe they needed some one to die for.

That was the actual point, not the date of the Dead Sea scrolls..


Also in Judaism every person wasn't burning in hell, to need Jesus to die. So God would stop torturing literally every one that died..


All of that is uniquely Christian and has nothing to do with Jews..

I understand your confusion as that is not the normal narrative Christians believe, nor is it what churches teach...

The story seems way less credible if "Jesus didn't match the prophecy and no one divine was even prophesized.."

Because at that point it is all just Jesus's word with zero evidence..

a reply to: JoshuaCox

There isn't any NT scrolls in the dead sea scroll collection...

Its OT... and much that wasn't in the books of the OT as well

www.bibliotecapleyades.net...

originally posted by: Akragon
a reply to: JoshuaCox

There isn't any NT scrolls in the dead sea scroll collection...

Its OT... and much that wasn't in the books of the OT as well

www.bibliotecapleyades.net...

Arnt the Dead Sea scrolls where we get the gospel of Tomas, Jesus and Mary magdalen ??

Just did some reading and it was from the late first century ce and includes a bunch of "NT" age books that were later rejected..

Man that is pretty discrediting...

Out of the oldest known copies of biblical texts, NONE of the things the romans later included were found?!?!



That's crazy.. shouldn't they have been first on the list???

Man if anything that calls into question the books the romans added 300+ years later..


So there is no reference to the ones they chose to include, but they chose to omit all the stuff with the best pedigree..



That isn't super definitive, but definitely is a mark against the roman bible..

a reply to: JoshuaCox

No no brother...

The gospel of Thomas and the others you referenced are gnostic texts...

The dead sea scrolls are much older then them...

Thomas has been dated to the first century but not many scholars agree with that dating... most put it in the early second century... but there are some who believe Thomas was written before anything in the NT...

These books weren't rejected from the canon of the bible... they were in fact, never even considered, but keep in mind the first canon came in 325ad... unless you want to consider Marcion who actually wrote the first unofficial canon of early Christianity.... but he ripped out 3 of the 4 gospels... and only left Luke, and Pauls writing...

Since Luke was a friend of Paul its obvious why he did that... plus he wasn't a fan of the Jews, which all of the other writers of the gospels were apparently.

There is nothing of the NT in the dead sea scrolls... some sites give allusions to Jesus but considering they were written well before he was born... its highly unlikely they were referring to Jesus, considering HE does not fit the requirements of the "Jewish messiah"

a reply to: JoshuaCox

Dear Joshua,

I sincerely suggest you to try to investigate in a more objective way the topics you have showed interest in your replies here.

If you really want to know the truth you must move away from a so much defensive position, and abandon fundamentalist positions, your posts clearly breath to much resentment against Chistian beliefs.

Try at least for one moment to understand that Jesus was Jewish, he was part of a Nation that he loved and he never intended to damage in No way, he was a good Hebrew man that respected the law and the prophets.

Again you are wrong, there were certainly clear warnings from the ancient prophets of Israel centuries before the times of the Historic Joshua Bar Joseph, announcing his role coming from God, and Isaiah was not the only one to foresee that.

St Matthew 22:

Whose Son is the Christ?
…43Jesus said to them, “How then does David in the Spirit call Him Lord? For he says: 44‘The Lord said to my Lord, “Sit at My right hand,until I put Your enemies under Your feet.”’ 45So if David calls Him Lord, how can He be David’s son?”

Psalm 110:
You are a Priest Forever

1A Psalm of David. The LORD says to my Lord: "Sit at My right hand Until I make Your enemies a footstool for Your feet." 2The LORD will stretch forth Your strong scepter from Zion, saying, "Rule in the midst of Your enemies."…

Now, i am sorry again but the first mention in the holy scriptures of God comming as a man to reprend, not to destroy, Israel is written in Genesis, in what is a clear reference to a type of Christ.

Genesis 32:
24 So Jacob was left alone, and a man wrestled with him till daybreak. 25 When the man saw that he could not overpower him, he touched the socket of Jacob’s hip so that his hip was wrenched as he wrestled with the man. 26 Then the man said, “Let me go, for it is daybreak.”

But Jacob replied, “I will not let you go unless you bless me.”

27 The man asked him, “What is your name?”

“Jacob,” he answered.

28 Then the man said, “Your name will no longer be Jacob, but Israel,[a]because you have struggled with God and with humans and have overcome.”

29 Jacob said, “Please tell me your name.”

But he replied, “Why do you ask my name?” Then he blessed him there.

30 So Jacob called the place Peniel,saying, “It is because I saw God face to face, and yet my life was spared

Please open your mind and cease to read only the version of the ones that hate Christ.

The Angel of Lightness

originally posted by: JoshuaCox

originally posted by: Akragon
a reply to: JoshuaCox

There isn't any NT scrolls in the dead sea scroll collection...

Its OT... and much that wasn't in the books of the OT as well

www.bibliotecapleyades.net...

Arnt the Dead Sea scrolls where we get the gospel of Tomas, Jesus and Mary magdalen ??

Just did some reading and it was from the late first century ce and includes a bunch of "NT" age books that were later rejected..

Man that is pretty discrediting...

Out of the oldest known copies of biblical texts, NONE of the things the romans later included were found?!?!



That's crazy.. shouldn't they have been first on the list???

Man if anything that calls into question the books the romans added 300+ years later..


So there is no reference to the ones they chose to include, but they chose to omit all the stuff with the best pedigree..



That isn't super definitive, but definitely is a mark against the roman bible..

Yes. It seems They are having to create (and erase) characters to fit the narrative. Because must fulfill prophecy in "the correct" direction. After many years of research I suspect that she was his sacred Apostle. Feminine Wisdom.

originally posted by: riley

originally posted by: JoshuaCox

originally posted by: Akragon
a reply to: JoshuaCox

There isn't any NT scrolls in the dead sea scroll collection...

Its OT... and much that wasn't in the books of the OT as well

www.bibliotecapleyades.net...

Arnt the Dead Sea scrolls where we get the gospel of Tomas, Jesus and Mary magdalen ??

Just did some reading and it was from the late first century ce and includes a bunch of "NT" age books that were later rejected..

Man that is pretty discrediting...

Out of the oldest known copies of biblical texts, NONE of the things the romans later included were found?!?!



That's crazy.. shouldn't they have been first on the list???

Man if anything that calls into question the books the romans added 300+ years later..


So there is no reference to the ones they chose to include, but they chose to omit all the stuff with the best pedigree..



That isn't super definitive, but definitely is a mark against the roman bible..

Yes. It seems They are having to create (and erase) characters to fit the narrative. Because must fulfill prophecy in "the correct" direction. After many years of research I suspect that she was his sacred Apostle. Feminine Wisdom.

I started a thread asking that and found out I was wrong..

Nor about Christians revising Judaism, but about the date of the Dead Sea scrolls.

They were buried in 68ad too early for ANY books to have been in circulation..

There is a lot of debate if the Christian texts are even referring to Christ..but it makes sense most were not there.

I was merging the Dead Sea scrolls with the gnostic gospels.

originally posted by: The angel of light
a reply to: JoshuaCox

Dear Joshua,

I sincerely suggest you to try to investigate in a more objective way the topics you have showed interest in your replies here.

If you really want to know the truth you must move away from a so much defensive position, and abandon fundamentalist positions, your posts clearly breath to much resentment against Chistian beliefs.

Try at least for one moment to understand that Jesus was Jewish, he was part of a Nation that he loved and he never intended to damage in No way, he was a good Hebrew man that respected the law and the prophets.

Again you are wrong, there were certainly clear warnings from the ancient prophets of Israel centuries before the times of the Historic Joshua Bar Joseph, announcing his role coming from God, and Isaiah was not the only one to foresee that.

St Matthew 22:

Whose Son is the Christ?
…43Jesus said to them, “How then does David in the Spirit call Him Lord? For he says: 44‘The Lord said to my Lord, “Sit at My right hand,until I put Your enemies under Your feet.”’ 45So if David calls Him Lord, how can He be David’s son?”

Psalm 110:
You are a Priest Forever

1A Psalm of David. The LORD says to my Lord: "Sit at My right hand Until I make Your enemies a footstool for Your feet." 2The LORD will stretch forth Your strong scepter from Zion, saying, "Rule in the midst of Your enemies."…

Now, i am sorry again but the first mention in the holy scriptures of God comming as a man to reprend, not to destroy, Israel is written in Genesis, in what is a clear reference to a type of Christ.

Genesis 32:
24 So Jacob was left alone, and a man wrestled with him till daybreak. 25 When the man saw that he could not overpower him, he touched the socket of Jacob’s hip so that his hip was wrenched as he wrestled with the man. 26 Then the man said, “Let me go, for it is daybreak.”

But Jacob replied, “I will not let you go unless you bless me.”

27 The man asked him, “What is your name?”

“Jacob,” he answered.

28 Then the man said, “Your name will no longer be Jacob, but Israel,[a]because you have struggled with God and with humans and have overcome.”

29 Jacob said, “Please tell me your name.”

But he replied, “Why do you ask my name?” Then he blessed him there.

30 So Jacob called the place Peniel,saying, “It is because I saw God face to face, and yet my life was spared

Please open your mind and cease to read only the version of the ones that hate Christ.

The Angel of Lightness

I resent all cases of gross hypocracy.


To be fair I was merging the gnostic gospels and Dead Sea scrolls when referring to the NT not being included in the collection.

That said, everything I said about Judaism is "true" or the way it is understood by historians and Jews.

Your really accusing me of bias, as you only source Christian conspiracy sites and biblical historians (aka not actual historians).??

The tale we were all taught in suday school wasn't even remotely accurate..

It is revisionist history by Christians to validate their religion.. and there is really no need in that case.. because the whole point of Jesus (from a Christian pov) was to correct the things Judaism had gotten wrong..

So hypothetically the Jews had the messiah phrophecy wrong and Jesus straightened them out.

Lying just makes it look more questionable..

a reply to: The angel of light

Your using the Bible, to prove the what the people who follow the Torah think...


That is like proving I am super an, based only on the fact that I told you I was superman..

The way to prove the JEWS believed that they really were expecting the son of God, the messiah prophecy was referring to the Devine and that Jesus did fulfill that prophecy that was only referring to him..

You would have to find example of Jews saying that both prechrist and to this day..

You are taking the word of roman Christians 400 years later...


Imagine how much a story can change today in 80 years and remember it took that long before anyone started writing down the gospels.. all the apostles who actually met Jesus would have been dead for decades..

So none of the Bible is even a first hand account that was copied..

In the best of cases and in its most pure form it was hear say..

AND THEN THE ROMANS COMPILED IT 300 YEARS LATER!!!

Everyone except the priests were illiterate..

There would have been literally no check and balance period..

So using the Bible as evidence of the Bible is crazy talk.

a reply to: JoshuaCox

Absolutely No, any serious scholar in Bible can tell you that nothing has been added or changed substantially of the Torah, Neviim, Ketuvim, and even many of the texts commented in the Talmud, Babylonian and Palestinian, since times before Christ.

In similar way there are facsimiles of the Gospels written since the 80s or 90s of our era depending which evangelist we pick and they contain what any serious modern translation has.

Sorry but you definitely need to take some good courses in this subject with really professional experts, you have to much erroneous misinformation in your head.

There were No Roman authors in any of these sacred scriptures, that is false.

The Angel of Lightness

a reply to: JoshuaCox

Ask any Jew... I know in Sunday school they sell it like that is the case, but it is not.. Now that doesn't invalidate the Jesus story at all..because his whole point in coming was to install a new set of laws... Basically he came and said.. " your doing it wrong.. and here is how God wants us to do it now.." So there is no reason that "him being the son of God and him being a central point of Judaism " could not have been a piece of what he came to fix.. It just sounds better from the Christian pov to sell it as if Jesus perfectly fit this phrophecy that who's coming was the most important part of Christianity.. More than one Christian preacher (Green Bay packer Reggie white for one) has learned Hebrew and read the Torah , expecting it to be the same as christianities version and it is not ...

Ask any Jew...? You just did.

You say -- "because his whole point in coming was to install a new set of laws..."

Not true at all according to His apostles. - Mat_5:17 Think not that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets: I am not come to destroy, but to fulfil.

All of the laws given to creation are embraced into one law. "Love your neighbor as yourself and you will find the perfect will of The Most High."

I do not believe anyone is trying to sell you or Reggie a religion or an ideology. If you cannot believe the bible then that is your prerogative. Learning a language is not a prerequisite for either wisdom or salvation according to the doctrine of Jesus.
God Bless

a reply to: Seede

I agree in many of your points of view Seede.

If Joshua really pursue the truth, only the truth and more over All the truth w.r.t the Messiah he can not decide which among the ancient prophets of Israel to trust or Not.

To feel overwhelmed by the weight of evidence showing one is wrong, or whoever taught one was wrong it is human, but editing the sacred scriptures to expurgate from them what it is not politically convenient to recognize is sinful.

It is definitively not serious and certainly looks hypocritical or insane that every time somebody provide a prophecy coming from the times before Christ that point so clearly to his role another sceptic claims that it is "biased" through Christian "interpretation".

The prophecies of Isaiah and David about him are pretty straight forward, they don't admit to much interpretation, are extremely descriptive, full in details to don't be later blamed that the Prophet was not enough clear about to whom he was refering to.

By the way his claim that God never promised to send his own Son to act as a Messiah is also false if we trust King David:

Psalm 2

1 Why do the nations conspire[a]
    and the peoples plot in vain?
2 The kings of the earth rise up
    and the rulers band together
    against the Lord and against his anointed, saying,
3 “Let us break their chains
    and throw off their shackles.”

4 The One enthroned in heaven laughs;
    the Lord scoffs at them.
5 He rebukes them in his anger
    and terrifies them in his wrath,saying,
6 “I have installed my king
    on Zion, my holy mountain.”

7 I will proclaim the Lord’s decree:

He said to me, “You are my son;
    today I have become your father.
8 Ask me,
    and I will make the nationsyour inheritance,
    the ends of the earth your possession.
9 You will break them with a rod of iron;
    you will dash them to pieceslike pottery.”

Now, coming back to our topic Jacobovici is reducing Jesus to a mere human as anybody else, by reviving this Gnostic heresy that precisely look for that same objective, to portrait him as one more enlightened one, another Krishna, Abraham, Buddah, Moses, Mani, Plato, Kong Fu tse or Lao tse.

That is the poison in his "archaelogical" works, that began to claim he founded the "body" of Jesus somewhere in an ordinary Jewish cemetery of the first century.

Thanks

The Angel of Lightness

originally posted by: The angel of light

The thread is open to discuss this new wave of Heretic way of thinking that has found a path through popular literature in America to corrupt the collective mentality, with sensationalist fictions like the Davinci Code of Dan Brown, or archaeological 'findings' of well known old heretic apocrypha, that are inviting millions to fall in terrible capital sin.

OK of Alexander the Great is said to have said: "what me distinguishes from the gods is that I need food and drink and sex" maybe this applies to Jesus Christ to, could be true, could not be true, as everything else in The Bible

a reply to: galien8

Alexander the Great believed he was the son of a god, with this idea that his mother implanted in his mind he grew up hating his own father, became a warrior and led his people to a series of wars to build an empire that however only lasted until his death.

Christ was really the son of God and with love in his heart for all he didn't send anybody to kill or die in battle fields, instead of that he accepted to be sacrificed for all human kind. His kingdom of faith and love has extended across all nations to all who wants to accept it and still survive 2 millenia after his execution.

Do you see the difference ?

The Angel of Lightness

originally posted by: The angel of light

Christ was really the son of God and with love in his heart for all

That sounds good but is stupid when people live that way, people can be good sometimes and can be bad other times, does not matter as long as it is conform the 10 Commandments, OK Jesus taught worship the good, evil (which is also necessary) sneaks in all by it self. God is dualistic, nature is dualistic, people are dualistic, there are no angels, there are no demons, there is no devil, all dung, all dog dung, there is only a dualistic God that incorporates Good and Evil, God can also be a vicious revenger doing Vendetta (EXODUS 20:5) and killing 75% of mankind in The Great Tribulation >:-)(o)(-:[]

a reply to: galien8

The day of judgement the people that will perish, the souls that are going to hell are not there due to any revenge from God, they are there because they went far a way from their creator and so they fell due to their own sins, it is their responsibility, not God.

God has had a salvation plan offered to human kind for about two thousand years if somebody in the long run is left back by the train of salvation is not due to lack of enough waiting time or tickets available, it is because he or she didn't want to go into on time.

Dualism could be acceptable in the Parsi religion, it can be a virtue for Zoroaster, but it is not admissible at all in the light of the Bible, the sacred scriptures are clear, the Devil is not God at all, he is not any divine being and so there is no possible dualism to establish with him.

Thanks,

The Angel of Lightness

originally posted by: The angel of light
a reply to: galien8

Dualism could be acceptable in the Parsi religion, it can be a virtue for Zoroaster, but it is not admissible at all in the light of the Bible, the sacred scriptures are clear, the Devil is not God at all, he is not any divine being and so there is no possible dualism to establish with him.

The Bible must be read as: can be true, cannot be true, in all facets and verses, then there is room too for dualism