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.

 

Understanding Gnosticism; or, a quest for accurate knowledge

page: 11
7
<< 8  9  10    12  13 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Mar, 1 2012 @ 08:14 PM
link   
reply to post by wildtimes
 

I just ordered two books myself. Just a moment ago...
amazon also, with free shipping.
Notovitch's The Unknown Life of Jesus Christ
and
The Fifth Gospel: New Evidence from the Tibetan, Sanskrit, Arabic, Persian and Urdu Sources About the Historical Life of Jesus Christ After the Crucifixion
By: Fida Hassnain, Dahan Levi
Seems you got at least one of them already, from what you posted on another thread, earlier today.
I decided to break down and buy a new book on Gnosticism and found one, Voices of Gnosticism: Interviews with Elaine Pagels, Marvin Meyer, Bart Ehrman, Bruce Chilton and Other Leading Scholars, by Miguel Conner, who has a radio show, Aeon Byte. I did not buy that one, but a book by one of those thirteen authors he interviewed, Birger Pearson, who wrote a book (actually several) which falls more in line with the type of books I like to read, GNOSTICISM, JUDAISM, AND EGYPTIAN CHRISTIANITY. Real academic, from a professor who is a specialist in what he is writing on (Coptic Literature). It's a compilation of essays from three decades, with a couple new ones, that have been worked up to be put in book form. His general argument is that the type of Gnosticism connected with the Nag Hammadi library existed before Christianity and used ideas from Judaism but put their own interpretation on it.
Thought I would mention that, in case anyone else was considering this author, I could report on what I find in it. I bought the $79 version of a Kindle reader so I can read the Kindle library I have already accumulated (without having to be tied to my computer), plus buy new ones, like what I just mentioned, since sometimes it's the least expensive option for some books. I can start reading right now (after already reading the introduction on-line before purchasing), and have it all installed in my little reading device. The idea being, I should have something to contribute to the thread tomorrow.
edit on 1-3-2012 by jmdewey60 because: (no reason given)




posted on Mar, 1 2012 @ 08:21 PM
link   
reply to post by NOTurTypical
 

No, Acts doesn't portray Paul that way, and Acts was written by the same dude that wrote the gospel according to Mark. It's Luke volume 2.
The writer of Acts merged two different meetings of the Jerusalem church elders, including one Paul did not attend, so that it has Paul accepting a compromise agreement, which in reality, Paul ever accepted.
That's one example, but it is one thing after another which has him constantly backing down from his staunch position that gentiles can be Christians and do not have to act as if they were Jewish by following Jewish laws.



posted on Mar, 2 2012 @ 08:48 AM
link   
reply to post by jmdewey60
 



Seems you got at least one of them already, from what you posted on another thread, earlier today.

I did! Both of them!
I know Kindle books are cheaper and many people love the device; but I'm not interested.
I like a book I can flip through, go back to find the words on the page as I recall them being situated....stick my finger in while I refer to the map at the beginning...
and most importantly read while not connected to anything electronic.

Plus, one day those devices won't work, and texts like the Nag Hammadi library will be the only "primary sources" ...
(nice segue to get back on topic)....
I'm halfway through the Notovitch tale (which reads more like an expedition journal so far, and we haven't even got to Jesus yet!), and have started the Haissnan/Levi (the dedication is to Notovitch among others!).
The latter also described the trouble the authors had in getting anyone interested in their years' work of research. Many just said "why would you expose this? It will just upset people", when the authors are not anti-religion at all, but only interested in getting the actual facts out there. They in no way diminish that Jesus was a divine entity made flesh, that his message was genuine;
only are telling 1) where he was in the years the Gospel skips over (12-30 yrs old), and 2) what happened after the crucifixion. (Answers: 1) India, and 2) he survived and hung around for a little while, then went back to India).

But they were told time and again by clergy and other theologians and scholars/professors that it was unnecessary to stir the pot with truth..

Some while later, the texts that Notovitch disclosed went missing. As did the texts that were with the tomb in Kashmir.
Hidden once more, from the eyes of those who would like to know.
Travesty, in my opinion.



posted on Mar, 2 2012 @ 09:11 AM
link   
reply to post by wildtimes
 

. . . go back to find the words on the page as I recall them being situated...

That is one definite advantage to physical books, the memory cues it leaves you with, and not just the location in a book, but also which book it was you were reading when you found this interesting bit of information.
My thing right now is maximizing the number of books I can accumulate, which means the least expensive ways I can acquire them.
From my memory of what I read decades ago, it was Thomas who went to India as a missionary to spread the Gospel. What I am thinking now is that people associated him with Jesus where over time, they could have thought of him as actually being Jesus.
Here is an interesting bit in the Gospel of John, about Jesus:

At that point some of the people of Jerusalem began to ask, “Isn’t this the man they are trying to kill?
Here he is, speaking publicly, and they are not saying a word to him. Have the authorities really concluded that he is the Christ?
But we know where this man is from; when the Christ comes, no one will know where he is from.”
These were not the people of his "home-town" who knew Jesus as associated with the family members who lived there. These were people in Jerusalem, and there is no mention of a connection to these people living in far-off Galilee. So how did the people in the Jerusalem temple know Jesus? I would say because he was associated with the temple earlier on in a different sort of capacity that is not explained in John. This makes me think he led a double life, there the people of Nazareth did not know much at all about him other than they knew his other family members, but the people of Jerusalem knew him in another way which had nothing to do with those people in Nazareth.

edit on 2-3-2012 by jmdewey60 because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 2 2012 @ 09:36 AM
link   
reply to post by rwfresh
 


The more honest a person becomes with themselves the more they can draw a contrast to what is not Real and what is Real. And even without ever hearing about Jesus or the bible that person can have a profound insight into the reality of Jesus.

Exactly, I totally agree with the second sentence; one can be filled with the indwelling Truth -- the Holy Spirit that he shared with all -- that Jesus the man described without even knowing he existed.

The first sentence makes me think hard (I feel like I'm reading Watts all over again, trying to wrap my head around this stuff).

reply to post by EnochWasRight
 

The video was excellent, and well-spoken. I will look further into Ravi's lectures.

The Haissnan book The Fifth Gospel link here for a "look-inside" listing on amazon states in its Introduction:

The present day knowledge of man is not the end of total knowledge.
Those who have experienced or have some contact with the mystics do acclaim rightly that Jesus Christ was a diving being incarnated in human flesh....
Questions that have been raised about the authenticity of the Gospels were condemned by the Church. It is also certain that the compilers of the authorized Gospels recorded with sincerity what they heard about Christ, what they knew of him and what they experienced. Had they had to "cook" things, they could not have ignored the gaps in the life of Jesus. This is a conclusive proof of the authenticity of the Gospels, whether they are authorized or unauthorized.

As such, it is necessary to compile afresh the Old as well as the New Testament. By doing this, it will be possible for all of us to absorb the real teachings of Jesus Christ, according to our inherent capacity.

There is no need for theologians and the so-called Biblical scholars to guide us -- we can be our own guides in search of truth. It may be mentioned at the outset that truth is not the monopoly of any sect, religion or church. Humanity has to find God, and this exercise requires that it be done without the uncalled help of the clergy.

Let every truth-seeking innocent man be his own guide.

Later in the intro it sys

It is not our intention to shake your faith in Jesus Christ or his mission. Our main aim in writing this book is to inform the West that we in the East have some source material about the historical Jesus who lived on after the crucifixion.


Who would not be interested in hearing that information?
It's not heresy. A "distinguished Methodist leader, Lord Donald Soper (I never heard of him but Soper is one of my family names from the 17th century) says:

After all, it would not be particularly heretic if the Church in particular, and humanity in general, had one day to accept the truth. That would not in any case alter the basic greatness of Jesus Christ and his teachings.


I totally agree with that.
I think this book will prove to be a jewel on my shelf, next to the Notovitch text and all the other spiritual/religious volumes I have collected, from faiths of all kinds.


edit on 2-3-2012 by wildtimes because: (no reason given)

edit on 2-3-2012 by wildtimes because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 2 2012 @ 01:45 PM
link   

Originally posted by wildtimes
reply to post by rwfresh
 


The more honest a person becomes with themselves the more they can draw a contrast to what is not Real and what is Real. And even without ever hearing about Jesus or the bible that person can have a profound insight into the reality of Jesus.

Exactly, I totally agree with the second sentence; one can be filled with the indwelling Truth -- the Holy Spirit that he shared with all -- that Jesus the man described without even knowing he existed.

The first sentence makes me think hard (I feel like I'm reading Watts all over again, trying to wrap my head around this stuff).


Hey Wildtimes, the statement can be misleading.. But i have no way of clarifying it.. I know you are already doing that for yourself anyway!

Check out the definition of honest:

hon·est/ˈänist/
Adjective:
Free of deceit and untruthfulness

We can't know or express Truth without honesty. I gotta practice it more
Peace to you!



posted on Mar, 3 2012 @ 10:14 AM
link   

The revelation which Adam taught his son Seth in the seven hundreth year, saying:
www.gnosis.org...
Pre-Christian Gnostics interpreted an obscure verse in Genesis of the Hebrew Old Testament of "another seed" as an explanation of why Seth was the true man, the "Son of Man" after the spiritual, un-fallen and perfect man who was in heaven.

She taught me a word of knowledge of the eternal God.
In Aramaic, the name of Eve, as spelled out in the Hebrew alphabet, means, teacher.

. . . we were higher than the god who had created us . . .
the secret knowledge kept from them by separating Adam and Eve.

Since that time, we learned about dead things, like men.
forced to have to experience things from the viewpoint of being in a corrupted physical world.

Then the whole multitude of flesh will be left behind in the waters.
an apparent prophecy of a flood, seeing how this was a testament given while Adam was still alive.

The men will be like those angels . . .
those who are taken up, to heaven, out of the great cataclysm.

those who reflect upon the knowledge of the eternal God in their heart(s) will not perish. For they have not received spirit from this kingdom alone, but they have received (it) from a [...] eternal angel. [...] illuminator [...] will come upon [...] that is dead [...] of Seth. And he will perform signs and wonders in order to scorn the powers and their ruler.
those who believe, and are not blind to the spiritual truth will not die but will have everlasting life. There will be a manifestation of the power of this truth so those who will be saved will believe.

. . . He was nourished in the heavens.
this is where he gained knowledge.

. . . he came from a great prophet.
before him, a great prophet must be known.

. . . brought him onto a high mountain.
the path to his power first was to the mountain top.

. . . he came from a virgin womb.
he came from the spiritual seed of the un-fallen.

. . . He was brought to a desert place.
his knowledge did not come from men.

. . . Sauel and his armies, which had been sent out.
with an army of demons to attack him.

. . . he came from a drop from heaven.
the source that drove him onward to glory.

. . . a cloud came upon the earth and enveloped a rock. He came from it.
this sounds like the mount of transfiguration, where Jesus is on top of the mountain as Peter, James, and John looked on, a cloud envelopes him and he comes out of it transformed.

. . . he came from two illuminators.
Moses and Elijah, who were seen with Jesus?

You are full of works that are not of the truth, but your ways are full of joy and rejoicing.
people who were baptized and think they are saved, and celebrate their success, without really achieving what the purpose of the baptism was, which is to live for good deeds.
edit on 3-3-2012 by jmdewey60 because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 5 2012 @ 09:40 AM
link   
reply to post by jmdewey60
 



Moses and Elijah, who were seen with Jesus?

Hi dewey, I've taken the weekend to indulge in reading my new books; both of them were very interesting, and they offered correlations between the Hellenistic and Buddhist tenets, as well as
in "The Fifth Gospel", a look at the pattern of migration of the various races during the time before, during, and after the birth of Jesus. I found it to be an excellent prose story of his life and times, far more helpful and straightforward than the mythic, cryptic Bible.

It also discloses the many, many things that the Roman Catholic Church suppressed and changed, with the result that I no longer can consider the King James Version as the "best" (and barely even a "real" source-book).

As for Moses and Elijah, who were "seen" with Jesus on the mountaintop during his transfiguration into a being of light, they told the story as it is generally told. That two beings of brilliant light appeared with him to have a conference; it is said that he summoned them from the ethereal. The authors do discuss the Eastern phenomenon among gurus and adepts at being capable of these types of "illusions", even invisibility, and that other miracles that Jesus performed are taught by those who he studied with.

The story is changed from those two beings as Moses and Elijah, however, to make them Nicodemus and Joseph of Arimathea, who were two of Jesus' closest friends and Essenes with whom he had lived and studied for many years.

The authors suggest (from evidence and texts), that these two had made a secret deal with Pilate, who did not really want to kill Christ, to have him rescued, while satisfying the mob that he had been crucified unto death. He agreed to let Joseph take Christ away. The Essenes were the most skilled at medicines, and they knew how to treat his wounds; Jesus also was an adept at the healing arts, and yoga, and he knew how to put himself in a coma-like trance. When the soldier jabbed his right side, between the fifth and sixth rib, water and blood came forth (which, if he had been dead, would not have happened). But, his trance was so deep that the body showed no sign of convulsion or response to the injury, and the Centurion (who is reported as being friendly), left immediately to tell Pilate that Jesus had died; the Essenes then carefully took him down, wrapped him in ointments and balms within the linen, treated his wounds, and when he was sufficiently recovered after a few hourse they whisked him away, out of the tomb (which was a brand new one there in the Golgotha garden belonging to Joseph), through a secret passage.

Another version says that when Mary came the next day she saw two beings (angels) at the tomb, but no Jesus. Then she was asked why she was looking for the living among the dead, and that Jesus had said to tell her he'd meet up with her in Galilee.

The authors then establish that it was these two, determined to save Jesus' life, who had been seen with him on the mountain, all with transfiguration of bright light.

The Essenes were the sect of healers that Mary and Joseph lived with (as well as Jesus) during his early childhood, after Herod ordered all two-year-old babies killed and they fled to Egypt. They remained faithful friends of his throughout his ministry, and saw to it that he survived and was allowed to get to safety.

I learned a great deal of the historical facts and also some various suggestions of the conception's occurence.
The authors in no way deny that Jesus performed these miraculous feats, but explain it as his training and his divinity combined. Interesting book, although somewhat jumbled and each topic is treated separately, so that it instead of being a linear story, from day A to day Z, it goes back to day A each time a new topic is brought up.

The Eastern texts the authors present include letters and other sources unknown to the West except by a very few.
Good read for a person at this stage of my journey.

It remains for me to cross-reference the online data now, before I'm ready to make more comments on your post viz the book.
Thanks, though!



posted on Mar, 5 2012 @ 10:16 AM
link   
reply to post by jmdewey60
 



it was Thomas who went to India as a missionary to spread the Gospel. What I am thinking now is that people associated him with Jesus where over time, they could have thought of him as actually being Jesus.
Here is an interesting bit in the Gospel of John, about Jesus:

At that point some of the people of Jerusalem began to ask, “Isn’t this the man they are trying to kill?
Here he is, speaking publicly, and they are not saying a word to him. Have the authorities really concluded that he is the Christ?
But we know where this man is from; when the Christ comes, no one will know where he is from.”

These were not the people of his "home-town" who knew Jesus as associated with the family members who lived there. These were people in Jerusalem, and there is no mention of a connection to these people living in far-off Galilee. So how did the people in the Jerusalem temple know Jesus? I would say because he was associated with the temple earlier on in a different sort of capacity that is not explained in John. This makes me think he led a double life, there the people of Nazareth did not know much at all about him other than they knew his other family members, but the people of Jerusalem knew him in another way which had nothing to do with those people in Nazareth.


Apparently Jesus deliberately went to Jerusalem at Passover to disclose his mission and to denounce the Pharisees. This, naturally, pissed them off. But it wasn't only people who lived in Jerusalem, it was people from all around who came there for that festival.

Many of the people did recognize him, and called him the Messiah, and listened to him, much to the anger of the priests, who he called wolves misleading people.

Jesus had decided to go to Jerusalem, and along the way he stayed at Ephraim for a while with his disciples (of which there were dozens); Nicodemus had pleaded Jesus' case to the Pharisees, who had plotted to kill him and hired assassins. Nicodemus told them it was illegal to sentence a man without hearing him first, but they refused. Although there were orthodox among them who wanted him dead, there were also less conservative members who liked his message.

Nicodemus caught up with Jesus at Bethany and told him of their plot, so Jesus decided to stop walking openly among the Jews. He went into the hills of Ephraim, then to Capernaum en route to Galilee. There he met up with a group of people traveling to Jerusalem, most of whom were from Galilee. His crowd having grown bigger, he moved on to Jericho. The huge mass of people then approached Jerusalem with him, and he was surrounded by his bodyguards and devotees, who had got him a donkey and went with them. They chanted and waved palm fronds and put their clothes on the ground preceding him.

The Priests asked Jesus to stop their noisomeness he said

"if these should hold their peace,
the stones would immediately cry out." Luke 19:40

There were too many people for the priests to get close to him, let alone the fact that there'd have been a riot if they tried to arrest him when he was preaching in the Temple daily (after having first routed out the money-changers and merchants, upturning tables, etc) or kill him, so they didn't. At night he'd go to Bethany and the Garden of Gethsemane.

As I understand it, though, he was always surrounded by a great throng of people when he entered to declare his mission. He was well-known all around the region by that time, hated by the priests, but adored by many people. He was safe by force of sheer numbers, but the Priests then hired Judas Iscariot to betray him when he was alone later that night in the garden. Which he did, and the disciples all ran away in fear after Jesus told Peter to put away his sword.

Jesus was sure he'd be saved by God, and sent his followers away and the soldiers took him.



edit on 5-3-2012 by wildtimes because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 5 2012 @ 10:33 AM
link   
reply to post by jmdewey60
 



From my memory of what I read decades ago, it was Thomas who went to India as a missionary to spread the Gospel. What I am thinking now is that people associated him with Jesus where over time, they could have thought of him as actually being Jesus.

Yes, he did go to India (as Jesus had bade him do).

Apparently, Thomas was his twin? That part I'm really sketchy on. Why is it never once mentioned in the Bible that he had a twin at the time of his birth? I'm going to have to look further into that one.

But there was at least one instance in which he was at a wedding party and they thought he was Jesus and he said "no, I'm his brother".



posted on Mar, 5 2012 @ 10:46 AM
link   
reply to post by wildtimes
 

. . . before I'm ready to make more comments on your post viz the book.

The book by Pearson I am reading is a little hard to describe without just copying parts of it.
He is doing a scholarly type of book which is going down a list of subjects in the Gnostic writings and looking at everything currently known about a particular name or whatever, and trying to see how these ideas are borrowed and modified between one source and another.
What I was doing in my earlier post was going to one of the texts that the author mentioned, and reading it through the understandings I was able to pick up from his book.
The impression I am getting from his book, Gnosticism, Judaism, and Egyptian Christianity, is that the pre-Christian Gnostics of Egypt were not really distinguishable from what would have been main-stream Judaism for that area. The reason it caught notice was that a lot of the adherents crossed over into Christianity when that ability to do so presented itself, and came under the ire of those who had decided they were the appointed arbiters of orthodoxy in the newly established "official" Church.



posted on Mar, 5 2012 @ 10:56 AM
link   
reply to post by wildtimes
 

Jesus was sure he'd be saved by God, and sent his followers away and the soldiers took him.

There was this sort of thing brought up years ago in The Passover Plot, by Hugh J. Schonfield.
I have that, and another one of his books that I bought in the early eighties. There really was not too much else available back before his work, that got into the legendary stories of Jesus.



posted on Mar, 5 2012 @ 11:15 AM
link   
reply to post by jmdewey60
 


I just found some online sources about this theory of Thomas (Judas Thomas)

Tradition has it that he was the twin brother of a sister Lysias (his parents being Diophanes and Rhoa, and his birthplace Antioch; "XII. Apost. Patriae," in Citron. Pasch. ii. 142),

or of a brother Eliezer (Horn. Clem. ii. I), or, according to the Syriac Acta Thomae (ed. Wright, Eng. trans. pp. 155, 180),

of Jesus Himself. The last form of the tradition seems to be derived from the name Judas Thomas, which he bears in Edessene legend (cf. Eusebius, H. E. i. 13, 10), and implies the identification of Thomas with Judas, the brother of the Lord.

The most ancient tradition makes Thomas the evangelist of Parthia (Eus. H.E. iii. 1, I); and at Edessa, which claimed to possess his bones, it was related that their missionary Addai (Doctrine of Addai, ed. Phillips, 1876, p. 5), whom Eusebius calls Thaddaeus (H.E. i. 13), was sent to them by him

www.theodora.com...


There is nothing surprising in the fact that the Gospels leave us in ignorance concerning the parents of Jesus and his earthly life. The early Christians must have possessed more accurate information about them; but there were very strong reasons for not transmitting them to the second generation of Christians.

Almost immediately after the crucifixion was begun that labour of faith which resolved to elevate Jesus more and more above humanity, which must necessarily have condemned everything that tended in the opposite direction. Too many details about the earthly family of Jesus, and its actual status, which was certainly not too distinguished, could not fail at that time to be very embarrassing.

When Paul announced that he was interested only in the crucified and glorified Christ (1 Cor, 1 : 18, 23-24; 2 : 2), he gave the exact formula for the transformation of the life of Jesus in the minds of the earliest generation of Christians.

At the same time he revealed the secret of the rapidity with which authentic recollections concerning the family of Jesus, and his life prior to baptism, were obliterated.

aaiil.org...

I'll say that I find these Gnostic gospels to be far more likely as authentic documentation at this time. There is no question that the Roman church squelched these, and tweaked what they did include. Again, confirming that the Bible as we know it is fundamentally flawed.

This Pearson book sounds like a 'next step' for me. The Haissnan/Levi, though The Fifth Gospel is written in a very accessible way, and, as I said, I learned a helluva lot about the story, and the Essene version seems to be closest to what is the Truth.

So far.



posted on Mar, 5 2012 @ 11:39 AM
link   
reply to post by wildtimes
 

This Pearson book sounds like a 'next step' for me.
Probably a better one by the same author would be, Ancient Gnosticism: Traditions And Literature, where the one I am reading is mainly about how to make the most basic classifications of Gnostics, comparing what we can see now, with what we knew in the long ago past written about them by what he calls the Patristic writers, meaning the "Church Fathers" to those who revere them.
The Traditions And Literature one is a better sort of introductory type book which describes all the different writings available to us now, and gets into an explanation of their beliefs.
edit on 5-3-2012 by jmdewey60 because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 5 2012 @ 11:57 AM
link   
reply to post by wildtimes
 




This Pearson book sounds like a 'next step' for me.





posted on Mar, 5 2012 @ 12:09 PM
link   

Originally posted by NOTurTypical
reply to post by wildtimes
 




This Pearson book sounds like a 'next step' for me.



Oh, well, NuT, if you disapprove it must definitely be worth the read!


I'll ignore the brevity of the post, but point out you could at least let me know on what grounds you
me.

I was thinking of you while reading The Fifth Gospel, especially the description of the crucifixion. There was no spear jabbed through Jesus' heart. That is a lie and/or a huge mistake. I felt sorry that you have been fed a cock and bull story and believed it.

What is your objection to Pearsons' book? That he might uncover the best-kept secrets of modern Christianity's manufactured 'Truths'?

EDIT TO ADD:
You partake in censorship, then? Do you burn books you don't like? Beware your soul's future if you preach false doctrine. That was Jesus' main point. By promoting the Bible and discouraging other reading, you are practicing censorship just like the Church does. Fail.

edit on 5-3-2012 by wildtimes because: (no reason given)

edit on 5-3-2012 by wildtimes because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 5 2012 @ 03:50 PM
link   

Originally posted by wildtimes

Originally posted by NOTurTypical
reply to post by wildtimes
 




This Pearson book sounds like a 'next step' for me.



Oh, well, NuT, if you disapprove it must definitely be worth the read!


I'll ignore the brevity of the post, but point out you could at least let me know on what grounds you
me.


There are books I asked you to check out a while ago, that's all. Not at all really upset about the other book per se.


I was thinking of you while reading The Fifth Gospel, especially the description of the crucifixion.


Isaiah? that's usually referred to as the 'fifth Gospel' because of how much it talks about Christ. And you should listen to what Medical Doctors say about the crucifixion and not some scholar. The AMA did a study on the crucifixion and they detailed the cause of death as crucifixion from just the description in Psalm 22.


There was no spear jabbed through Jesus' heart. That is a lie and/or a huge mistake. I felt sorry that you have been fed a cock and bull story and believed it.


Medical doctors don't have an issue with that. A heart sack full of mostly blood and water is expected in a death by asphyxiation as the cross would have been.


What is your objection to Pearsons' book? That he might uncover the best-kept secrets of modern Christianity's manufactured 'Truths'?


Manufactured truths huh? You know what? I don't have any issues with Pearson's book, knock yourself out, forget I even posted here. All truth in the world is probably found in Pearson's book.


EDIT TO ADD:
You partake in censorship, then? Do you burn books you don't like? Beware your soul's future if you preach false doctrine. That was Jesus' main point. By promoting the Bible and discouraging other reading, you are practicing censorship just like the Church does. Fail.


It actually had nothing to do at all with Pearson's book, but okay whatever.



edit on 5-3-2012 by NOTurTypical because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 5 2012 @ 04:50 PM
link   
I know these dudes are only doctors, but here is their conclusion in 1986:


"Jesus of Nazareth underwent Jewish and Roman trials, was flogged, and was sentenced to death by crucifixion. The scourging produced deep stripelike lacerations and appreciable blood loss, and it probably set the stage for hypovolemic shock, as evidenced by the fact that Jesus was too weakened to carry the crossbar (patibulum) to Golgotha. At the site of crucifixion, his wrists were nailed to the patibulum and, after the patibulum was lifted onto the upright post (stipes), his feet were nailed to the stipes. The major pathophysiologic effect of crucifixion was an interference with normal respirations. Accordingly, death resulted primarily from hypovolemic shock and exhaustion asphyxia. Jesus' death was ensured by the thrust of a soldier's spear into his side. Modern medical interpretation of the historical evidence indicates that Jesus was dead when taken down from the cross.


"On the Physical Death of Jesus Christ" By: William D. Edwards, MD; Wesley J. Gabel, MDiv; Floyd E. Hosmer, MS, AMI, Journal of American Medical Association, 1986, 255:1455-1463.

Here.
















*stupid doctors*



posted on Mar, 5 2012 @ 09:11 PM
link   
reply to post by NOTurTypical
 


Okay, I spent about a half-hour trying to compose a response to you. My formatting was not sufficient, so I finally just exited the whole attempt. I want to do so, though, so here I'll try again....

The "Fifth Gospel" being Isaiah? No. It had more to do with the Gnostic/Essene, Coptic, Oriental texts. Thomas, James, etc.

And you should listen to what Medical Doctors say about the crucifixion and not some scholar. The AMA did a study on the crucifixion and they detailed the cause of death as crucifixion from just the description in Psalm 22.

Not some scholar who quotes a doctor?

Doctors examined the Shroud of Turin, and read the Essene "version" of the crucifixion and the rescue of Jesus Christ. He underwent a crucifixion but was on the cross for only less than a handful of hours, and his legs were not broken (as was the custom). It generally took 2+ days for a "crucified" criminal to die on the cross, and after the authorities felt the torture was sufficient, they had the vicitims' legs broken so they could not longer prop themselves up to get a breath or two.

How do you explain a 3-hour crucifixion and that Jesus' legs were not broken? Aside from him being a trained and adept healer and guru whose friends were ready, and who himself knew how to produce a death-like state?


Manufactured truths huh? You know what? I don't have any issues with Pearson's book, knock yourself out, forget I even posted here. All truth in the world is probably found in Pearson's book.

NuT, you are behaving a little immaturely here. I did not in anyway say that I refused to read the books you recommended. I consider my journey a private one, and my goal to research as my soul directs me to. I'm glad you responded! Please, be patient with me, but also show some respect for things you A) may not have been aware of, and B) that challenge your convictions.

I'm not judging. I'm seeking.



posted on Mar, 6 2012 @ 07:58 AM
link   
I should probably quote a paragraph from Gnosticism, Judaism, and Egyptian Christianity, by Birger A. Pearson, to back up what I said in the previous post, about what sort of conclusion I had come to in my reading of it so far.

In what follows I shall attempt to interpret the significance of the Jewish elements in Gnosticism and the attitude toward Judaism expressed in the Gnostics' use of the Jewish traditions. I shall also attempt to interpret the essential characteristics of the Gnostic self-understanding manifest in the various expressions utilized by Gnostics to refer to themselves and their fellow Gnostics. From such an investigation some interesting historical conclusions may be drawn.
He says this pretty far into the book, on page 125, in a book where the indexes start at page 215.
To do what he says in the quote I just gave, Pearson makes use of the Gnostic books he believes
(as he shows in the previous hundred plus pages) to be pre-Christian in origin. He lists them as:
The Apocryphon of John
Codex Berolinensis Gnosticus, 2; + parallel text in Irenaeus
The Hypostasis of the Archons
The Gospel of the Egyptians
The Apocalypse of Adam
The Three Steles of Seth
Zostrianos
Melchizedek
The Thought of Norea
Marsanes
Allogenes
The Trimorphic Protennoia

Edit to add: as an example of what gets me annoyed, if you are on the Amazon page for this book, you see a list of frequently bought books with this one, and on that list, Gnosticism and Christianity in Roman and Coptic Egypt (Studies In Antiquity & Christianity), so you think to yourself, "That sounds great, just the sort of thing I would be interested in", so you click on it and you notice the price, $47.94, and the bad news: this is relatively cheep for books like this, that are limited printings for "professionals", meaning, not amateur scholars. The good news: books like the one I am reviewing, that you can download the Kindle version of for $9.99 are a bargain.
edit on 6-3-2012 by jmdewey60 because: (no reason given)



new topics

top topics



 
7
<< 8  9  10    12  13 >>

log in

join