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.

 

Found. The third and Final Testament.

page: 4
4
<< 1  2  3    5 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Mar, 12 2012 @ 01:16 PM
link   

Originally posted by NOTurTypical
reply to post by Greatest I am
 



Found. The third and Final Testament.

The third and Final Testament is being written by Gnostic thinkers and the only truth that you can trust. The reason that you will trust it is simply because it is your truth based on your understanding of reality and largely based on your feelings. That is why you can and will have complete trust in it and your God.


LOL! A "testament" isn't a book or physical thing. Testament means "covenant". The New Testament isn't a book, its the 2nd covenant God made with mankind in the upper room the night before the eve of Passover.


God made with mankind. LOL.
You are not improving in mental capacity with age.
Belief in fantasy, miracles and magic have ruined your thinking ability.

Regards
DL




posted on Mar, 12 2012 @ 01:31 PM
link   

Originally posted by jmdewey60
reply to post by Greatest I am
 

. . . their focus is to the hierarchy of the Church and not to God.
Jesus said we all have the same rabbi, who is God.
Obviously something went wrong and the way I have thought about it for decades is that there was a priesthood class that already existed in the "pagan" religion who saw the handwriting on the wall and jumped on board the next new thing and took it over to have it shaped to provide professional positions in it for themselves.
That is why you need to go to the authentic books of the NT and skip the later forgeries made after the Apostles were dead. Second century Gnosticism I don't think is any better than second century ecclesiasticism.
Knowledge is good but not wild speculative beliefs which are not true knowledge. Revelation, as in the NT book, Revelation, is a type of gnosticism but one grounded in the Apostolic type of knowledge which saw people, specifically the people who suffered and died as martyrs, who were the true saviors of the world, but what could not exist without the instruction from heaven, sent to us through Jesus.
edit on 8-3-2012 by jmdewey60 because: (no reason given)


You are too bright my friend to be a literal believer in Jesus as divine.
Most Jews and Gnostics know better.

If Jesus is divine, then you have to accept that his father had him murdered when there was no need to and that God would promote human sacrifice.
A completely immoral doctrine and that is why Christianity is immoral.

Regards
DL
edit on 12-3-2012 by Greatest I am because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 12 2012 @ 01:38 PM
link   

Originally posted by Akragon
reply to post by Greatest I am
 


Interesting thread...

The gnostic texts are the same as the bible in that, one must be careful in what he considers truth...

Both have truths... but yet are not "entirely" truth... (imho)


The New Testament replaced that immoral God and placed an archetypal Jesus, a man with excellent but unworkable rhetoric


Unworkable?

I don't agree with that... His lessons in the bible are very workable, just hard to perfect


edit on 8-3-2012 by Akragon because: (no reason given)


Do you think his divorce policy to be workable?
No cause for divorce.
How would that work for a wife who gets beat twice a week?
Would you deny her the chance to find love?

Love is the nunber one ideal of all religions.
Would you deny her that ideal?

Show us how that works.

Regards
DL



posted on Mar, 12 2012 @ 01:48 PM
link   

Originally posted by 1nOne
The Jesus of Ms. Pagels' paperbacks engaged in sex acts with Mary Magdalene, possibly had a twin brother (facilitating the "resurrection") all the while Pagels denied the Holy Trinity and the existence of Satan.



Not from what I have read. Please give a reference to this imaginary writings.

As to the Trinity.

Originally Posted by animefan48
Well, the reality is most Christians do buy into the trinity doctrine because of persecution of the early Gnostics and non-Trinitarians, and the religious councils were dissenters were forced to agree to a Trinitarian theology. Many Unitarian and Universalist theologies argue that when Jesus said he was the way, he meant that he was an example of how to live to be united/reunited with God. As for the name, God does give other names for himself including the Alpha and Omega, as well as some believe a name that should not be written (or even spoken I believe). Honestly, I think using the name I Am That I Am would just be confusing and convoluted, seriously. I seriously do not believe that it is a continuation of Gnostic/mystical/Unitarian suppression. Even the Gnostic and mystical traditions within Islam and Christianity do not tend to use that name, and among the 99 Names of Allah, I did not find that one. Also, many Rastafarians believe that the Holy Spirit lives in humans and will sometimes say I and I instead of we, yet they don't seem to use the name I Am for God/Jah either, so I really don't think it can be related to suppressing mystical and Gnostic interpretations. I think that originally oppressing those ideas and decreeing them heretical are quite enough, the early Church did such a good job that after the split many Protestant groups continued to condemn mystical and later Gnostic sects and theologies.

Yup, the bishops voted and it was settled for all time!!1 (Some say the preliminary votes were 150 something to 140 something in favor of the trinity)

But then Constantine stepped in: After a prolonged and inconclusive debate, the impatient Constantine intervened to force an end to the conflict by demanding the adoption of the creed. The vote was taken under threat of exile for any who did not support the decision favored by Constantine. (And later, they fully endorsed the trinity idea when it all happened again at the council of Constantinople in AD 381, where only Trinitarians were invited to attend. Surprise! They also managed to carry a vote in favor of the Trinity.)

home.pacific.net.au...


Even a Trinitarian scholar admits the Earliest & Original beliefs were NOT Trinitarian!

The trinity formulation is a later corruption away from the earliest & original beliefs!

"It must be admitted by everyone who has the rudiments of an historical sense that the doctrine of the Trinity, as a doctrine, formed no part of the original message. St Paul knew it not, and would have been unable to understand the meaning of the terms used in the theological formula on which the Church ultimately agreed".
Dr. W R Matthews, Dean of St Paul's Cathedral, "God in Christian Thought and Experience", p.180

"In order to understand the doctrine of the Trinity it is necessary to understand that the doctrine is a development, and why it developed. ... It is a waste of time to attempt to read Trinitarian doctrine directly off the pages of the New Testament".
R Hanson: "Reasonable Belief, A survey of the Christian Faith, p.171-173, 1980

The doctrine of the Trinity is not taught in the Old Testament.
New Catholic Encyclopedia, 1967, Vol. XIV, p. 306.

"The formulation ‘One God in three Persons' was not solidly established, certainly not fully assimilated into Christian life and its profession of faith, prior to the end of the 4th century.... Among the Apostolic Fathers, there had been nothing even remotely approaching such a mentality or perspective"
New Catholic Encyclopedia, 1967, Vol. 14, p. 299.

"The formulation ‘One God in three Persons' was not solidly established, certainly not fully assimilated into Christian life and its profession of faith, prior to the end of the 4th century.... Among the Apostolic Fathers, there had been nothing even remotely approaching such a mentality or perspective" (New Catholic Encyclopedia, 1967, Vol. 14, p. 299).

"Fourth-century Trinitarianism did not reflect accurately early Christian teaching regarding the nature of God; it was, on the contrary a deviation from this teaching" (The Encyclopedia Americana, p. 1956, p. 2941).

Was Jesus God to Paul and other early Christians? No. . . . .
(Source: How the Bible became the Bible by Donald L. O'Dell - ISBN 0-7414-2993-4 Published by INFINITY Publishing.com)

Regards
DL



posted on Mar, 12 2012 @ 01:50 PM
link   

Originally posted by 1nOne
Most recent literature concerning Christ of the Gnostic Gospels was penned by Elaine Pagels, a Jewish feminist and member of the Rockefeller cabal.

The Jesus of Ms. Pagels' paperbacks engaged in sex acts with Mary Magdalene, possibly had a twin brother (facilitating the "resurrection") all the while Pagels denied the Holy Trinity and the existence of Satan.




As to your Satan friend. He is part of your delusion.

www.youtube.com...

Better to shovel coal in hell than to spend eternity in heaven watching friends, neighbors and our children in torture and flame forever.
Only a sick mind would conceive of such a situation or wish it upon anyone. That is why God would not do such because then, heaven would be hell.
If those in heaven did not go insane then they could not have once been human or good.

You should think of hell just a bit and recognize that God would not create such an immoral construct. Lose your barbaric tribal mentality. We are in 2012, not 112.

www.youtube.com...

www.youtube.com...

www.youtube.com...

Regards
DL



posted on Mar, 12 2012 @ 01:55 PM
link   

Originally posted by 1Sun3Mud6
reply to post by Greatest I am
 


The only way man is ever getting to the truth is to look inward rather then outward. So far all religious activists do is worship deitys that are nothing more then flesh and bone idols.

Whether you see them or not.


I agree. They idol worship.

Those that say they have found God idol worship a book or words.
They do not seek and therefore will not find God.
They do not follow Jesus who said look and ye shall find.

A true Gnostic will discard any God that he finds, raise the bar of what God is, and renew his search.

I see nothing wrong in looking outward at what is. It too is knowledge.
What you learn of it you just apply to what is within.
This is what showed me the perfection of the systems we all live in and leads to the realization that we too can see ourselves as perfect or good as is possible to be at any given point in time.

Regards
DL
edit on 12-3-2012 by Greatest I am because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 12 2012 @ 02:03 PM
link   
reply to post by Greatest I am
 


ha! blake was part of the golden dawn. along with mathers and crowley



posted on Mar, 12 2012 @ 02:05 PM
link   
reply to post by Greatest I am
 


this will be your demise my friend! better to rule in hell than to serve in heaven!



posted on Mar, 12 2012 @ 02:06 PM
link   

Originally posted by 547000
reply to post by wildtimes
 


When people talk about truth within they just mean their own opinions and feelings. What the hell does truth within mean from truth without? Truth without seems to mean having to accept truth outside of the subjective.
edit on 9-3-2012 by 547000 because: (no reason given)


Does your bible not say that the law would be written in your heart?

Is that asking you to look anywhere other than that one final destination?

Regards
DL



posted on Mar, 12 2012 @ 02:08 PM
link   
reply to post by Greatest I am
 

You are too bright my friend to be a literal believer in Jesus as divine.
Most Jews and Gnostics know better.
Depends on how you define divine.
The Gnostics understood that Jesus came from heaven.
Does that make him divine?
If you think it does, then he is.



posted on Mar, 12 2012 @ 02:10 PM
link   
reply to post by Greatest I am
 


ya and sol ivictus until his death bed!!! it was tottaly political!! rome was falling something had to be done to keep the flock in order. one religio0n or else! kill off the ones that knew the truth. keep order for our empire!.
the more things change,the more they stay the same



posted on Mar, 12 2012 @ 02:11 PM
link   

Originally posted by 547000
reply to post by wildtimes
 


Blablabla, your own feelings, got it. No different when some dude starts a new church because he thinks the Holy Spirit is leading him.

Christ said to listen to those He sent btw. I am thoroughly unimpressed with this line of reasoning. Christ wouldn't chastise people for doing their own thing and ignoring the prophets if that is what He taught.
edit on 9-3-2012 by 547000 because: (no reason given)


You ignore what God himself says in scriptures concerning the prophets whose ass you kiss.


Now, therefore, behold, the Lord hath put a lying spirit in the mouth of these thy prophets, and the Lord hath spoken evil concerning thee.
1Kings 22:23

Now therefore, behold, the Lord hath put a lying spirit in the mouth of these thy prophets.
2 Chron 18:22

Ah, Lord GOD! surely thou hast greatly deceived this people.
Jer 4:10

O Lord, thou hast deceived me, and I was deceived. Jer 20:7

And if a prophet be deceived when he hath spoken a thing, I the Lord have deceived that prophet.
Ezekiel 14:9

For this cause God shall send them strong delusion, that they should believe a lie.
Thessalonians 2:11

God is asking you to think but do not bother.

Regards
DL



posted on Mar, 12 2012 @ 02:41 PM
link   

Originally posted by jmdewey60
reply to post by 1nOne
 

Most recent literature concerning Christ of the Gnostic Gospels was penned by Elaine Pagels . . .

She wrote "Gnostic Gospels" a long time ago and more recent scholars say she got a lot of things wrong and she herself admits to being way behind current research.
edit on 9-3-2012 by jmdewey60 because: (no reason given)


What recent scholars?

Link and quote required please.

Regards
DL



posted on Mar, 12 2012 @ 02:48 PM
link   

Originally posted by Azadok

Originally posted by jmdewey60
reply to post by Azadok
 

Jesus at the last supper was celebrating Passover , he was at that point showing them he would be the sacrificial lamb his body and that his blood will be the final consamation for mans sins no more blood sacrifices , Jesus was it.
Passover was not a sin sacrifice.
People ate the lambs killed on Passover.
It was a sign that they put above their door so the angel of death would pass by their house.
Nothing to do with sins so go back to your cult and tell them you quit and want to go back to Christianity.



If following the teachings of Jesus is a cult then I am guilty . If you do not understand that blood had to be spilt for a sin offering and usually a unblemished yearling lamb then please explain what the meaning is .

You seem to be angry , is it because you Re catholic and you feel you are being attacked ?


www.youtube.com...

God does not HAVE to do anything and previous to his having his son murdered, he was forgiving people without blood.

If you prefer thinking that he had to then consider that you must believe that it was God's plan from the beginning to have Adam and Eve eat the forbidden fruit. This can be demonstrated by the fact that the bible says that Jesus "was crucified from the foundations of the Earth," that is to say, God planned to crucify Jesus as atonement for sin before he even created human beings or God damned sin.

If God had not intended humans to sin from the beginning, why did he build into the Creation this "solution" for sin? Why create a solution for a problem you do not anticipate?

God knew that the moment he said "don't eat from that tree," the die was cast. The eating was inevitable. Eve was merely following the plan.

This then begs the question.

What kind of God would plan and execute the murder of his own son when there was absolutely no need to?

Only an insane God. That’s who.

The cornerstone of Christianity is human sacrifice, thus showing it‘s immorality.

Regards
DL



posted on Mar, 12 2012 @ 02:52 PM
link   
 


off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


 



posted on Mar, 12 2012 @ 02:55 PM
link   

Originally posted by reficul
reply to post by Greatest I am
 


this will be your demise my friend! better to rule in hell than to serve in heaven!


If you think that you can be happy in heaven while watching your children and friends being burned and torture for no purpose forever then by all means, ignore good morals and believe in hell.

Regards
DL



posted on Mar, 12 2012 @ 04:13 PM
link   

Originally posted by Greatest I am

Originally posted by Akragon
reply to post by Greatest I am
 


Interesting thread...

The gnostic texts are the same as the bible in that, one must be careful in what he considers truth...

Both have truths... but yet are not "entirely" truth... (imho)


The New Testament replaced that immoral God and placed an archetypal Jesus, a man with excellent but unworkable rhetoric


Unworkable?

I don't agree with that... His lessons in the bible are very workable, just hard to perfect


edit on 8-3-2012 by Akragon because: (no reason given)


Do you think his divorce policy to be workable?
No cause for divorce.
How would that work for a wife who gets beat twice a week?
Would you deny her the chance to find love?

Love is the nunber one ideal of all religions.
Would you deny her that ideal?

Show us how that works.

Regards
DL


There is a cause for divorce as told by Jesus... IF your spouse cheats on you... divorce is a valid option...

Now in the case of a wife that gets abused... First understand this verse..

8And they twain shall be one flesh: so then they are no more twain, but one flesh.

9What therefore God hath joined together, let not man put asunder.

They are not "twain' but one flesh

This is a representation of the "harmony" and love that should exist in a marrage.... IF a man beats his wife, there is no love in that relationship. Now marrage is a union of two people by God... So the belief of God must exist within that marriage... The belief of God also must mean the belief of Love... obviously... thats what Jesus preached...

Sadly i need to quote paul to clairify this...



12But to the rest speak I, not the Lord: If any brother hath a wife that believeth not, and she be pleased to dwell with him, let him not put her away.

13And the woman which hath an husband that believeth not, and if he be pleased to dwell with her, let her not leave him.

14For the unbelieving husband is sanctified by the wife, and the unbelieving wife is sanctified by the husband: else were your children unclean; but now are they holy.

15But if the unbelieving depart, let him depart. A brother or a sister is not under bondage in such cases: but God hath called us to peace.


One that believes in the true God, The father of Jesus... would not abuse his wife, Thus that man could be considered an unbeliever... And so divorce is a valid option to those that are abused by their spouse.

A man or woman who claims to believe in God, yet abuses the ones he/she loves.... IS A LIAR.

The Vows state.... To love and respect all the days of your life.... Abuse shows neither love or respect... so the Vow before God is false




posted on Mar, 12 2012 @ 04:18 PM
link   

Originally posted by Greatest I am

Originally posted by 1Sun3Mud6
reply to post by Greatest I am
 


The only way man is ever getting to the truth is to look inward rather then outward. So far all religious activists do is worship deitys that are nothing more then flesh and bone idols.

Whether you see them or not.


I agree. They idol worship.

Those that say they have found God idol worship a book or words.
They do not seek and therefore will not find God.
They do not follow Jesus who said look and ye shall find.

A true Gnostic will discard any God that he finds, raise the bar of what God is, and renew his search.

I see nothing wrong in looking outward at what is. It too is knowledge.
What you learn of it you just apply to what is within.
This is what showed me the perfection of the systems we all live in and leads to the realization that we too can see ourselves as perfect or good as is possible to be at any given point in time.

Regards
DL
edit on 12-3-2012 by Greatest I am because: (no reason given)


So what is the final goal of a gnostic???



posted on Mar, 12 2012 @ 06:32 PM
link   
reply to post by Greatest I am
 


well if you believe in that myth!!!
i do not and either do my childen.
we're not christian!
blessed be!



posted on Mar, 27 2012 @ 10:32 AM
link   

Originally posted by Akragon


The Vows state.... To love and respect all the days of your life.... Abuse shows neither love or respect... so the Vow before God is false




As I said. Unworkable rhetoric.

Regards
DL




top topics



 
4
<< 1  2  3    5 >>

log in

join