John; The trial and the judgement

a reply to: DISRAELI

I take it you know that this is "him" again.

Was thinking the same thing .As usual D a very good post and looking forward to your next one ....peace

The whole story of Jesus crucifixion is an allegory for an initiation into the higher mysteries of God. His last words on the cross or the psalm they were taken from have been translated wrong.

My God, My God, how you glorify me!

Those are the words recited in the original and in the Pyramid Mystery Religions initiation.

The Baptism an allegory for enlightenment via the Holy Spirit. He actually may have been killed for teaching what he learned in Egypt about immortality and reincarnation and although the Bible has zero history in it it is full of Divine Secrets preserved by the Spirit and and not man.

The logos metaphor is the philosophy of Philo Judaeas who was a philosopher and Jew.



He who believes in death is dead already.

John is the last Gospel to be added and scholars have abandoned hope that it was written in Jesus time which is why it is so different from the other three.

Philo invented the Word concept not Christianity

The Bible is a book of secrets and allegorical codes containing a Divine Message that is impossible to hear if you try and make it history.

Judgment in the New Testament is based on the idea that if you don't pass the test the first time you don't get a second chance so get it right.

Prior to Nicea reincarnation called resurrection was the norm but the fear element of religion is too successful a method of control so that was censored.

Clement of Rome wrote some good stuff on the secrets of Jesus.

Gnostic thought and doctrine were a problem in Pauls day and is present today as well . From Dr. Martins Book the People History Forgot Chapter 17

An observer during the time of Constantine was the great Christian historian Eusebius. He mentioned that Simon Magus was indeed the originator of all heresy in the Christian community and that even in his day there were people who were feigning Christianity but at the same time were bringing into vogue the use of idolatrous images. Note what Eusebius said. "Simon was the author of all heresy. From his time down to the present those who have followed his heresy have feigned the sober philosophy of the Christians, which is celebrated among all on account of its purity of life. But they [the Simonians] have embraced again the superstitions of idols, which they seemed to have renounced; and they fall down before pictures and images of Simon himself and of the above mentioned Helena who was with him [the images were those of Jupiter and Minerva as I have shown in previous quotes]; and they venture to worship them with incense and sacrifices and libations." Eusebius, Ecclesiastical History, II.13.5–6, emphasis mine Recall that Eusebius was upset with Constantia, the emperor’s sister, that even she had wanted to have pictures and images of Christ and the apostles but that Eusebius displayed great abhorrence of such a request. He said, "[S]uch practices are illegal for us. ...

Are not such things [as pictures and images] excluded and banished from churches all over the world. [Eusebius thought such pictures should be destroyed] lest we appear, like idol worshipers, to carry our God around in an image." Eusebius, Letter to Constantia To Eusebius, the use of pictures, images or icons of Jesus and the apostles by Christians was a forbidden thing, though he admitted that some were beginning to use them. He said that the use of such depictions was like those who followed Simon Magus. Though Eusebius had a watchful eye and said that most followers of Simon were banished from active participation in church services at his time, he nonetheless understood that they were a pestilence that were still a menace that people should be aware of. "And what is more surprising, the same thing [faking conversion] is done to this day by those who follow his [Simon Magus’] most impure heresy. For they, after the manner of their forefather, slipping into the church, like a pestilential and leprous disease greatly affect those into who they are able to infuse the deadly and terrible poison concealed in themselves" Eusebius, Letter to Constantia, II.1.12

a reply to: the2ofusr1

Gnostic thought is by definition any knowledge of a spiritual nature.


It was not a problem it was a competitor because they had more to offer the intellectual and Rome wasn't having it.

So they sent some soldiers to convert people by the sword, all who refused were killed.

So yeah the murdering psychos in Rome were the good guys for killing those damn "Gnostics" who were hurting nobody and teaching people to use their minds to know God instead of a pedo priest.


So you just believe whatever whoever is running the show says huh?

a reply to: the2ofusr1

And you can not take the word of the Catholics on Simon Magus who is mentioned once in Acts and the rest are Apocrypha.

Most of the Simon Magus stories in the Apocrypha are Ebionite books using Simon Magus as a pseudonym for Paul. Paul is not the founder of "Gnostic" thought but he is the cause because no thinking man is going to believe his b.s. story that has more holes in it than a screen door.

"Curse anyone who teaches a gospel other than the one I received from heaven and not from man"

That is a paraphrase but it is also the motto for every cult ever. And Paul said it. Jesus taught a different gospel, I don't think you want to be following a religious bigot but I am not you.


The so called Gnostic thought you speak of as being problematic is the same thought that created every religion.

Religion is only the search for God.

Gnosticism is finding God.

This thread may be seen as a sequel to
The light and the darkness
And also
The truth and the witness

a reply to: Parazurvan

Gnosticism is finding God.

Jesus said He came to seek and save those who were lost .Gnostic s teach man can find God like He is here or there ...that's really rich if you ask me ,but please don't......really ...don't .

a reply to: the2ofusr1

Christianity is a tool for social control for people who will believe anything.

Gnosticism doesn't have a set of teachings because it isn't a religion. No Church called the Gnostics existed at the time the word was coined.

You just need to do your homework because you really don't know what you are talking about.

And you act like trying to know God is bad when that is the premise of every religion except the one called Gnostic from the Nag Hammadi scriptures who felt God was unknowable.

Pretty ironic that they get called Gnostics but claim God is unknowable. Gnosis means to know, in a spiritual sense and is no different than the Christian faith praying or meditating or going to church. It isn't a claim to secret spiritual knowledge.