War with the Benjaminites, maidens of Jabesh-gilead and the daughters of Shiloh.

originally posted by: chr0naut

originally posted by: LenatasataneL

originally posted by: chr0naut

originally posted by: LenatasataneL
a reply to: chr0naut

So are you interested in a polite conversation about the meaning of this story or did you only want confrontation?

Because I talk about the story and you vanish as if you were looking for someone to criticize and start an argument.

Your only interest was getting in an argument about differences of methodology when it comes to scripture.

Learn to live with the fact that not everyone thinks and the Bible is real recorded history. The idea is even laughable considering that the old priests and modern Rabbis teach that the stories are deliberately written to have a public meaning and a private or hidden meaning that is the real meaning only understood by the extremely learned and only taught to the proven worthy.

The Zohar is dedicated to unlocking the meaning of scripture and giving the reader a glimpse of the Divine.

I didn't run away, I have a life. I was at work.

I do understand that people don't believe that the Bible is true and I accept that.

I just think that someone who takes meaning from the Bible and at the same time derides it seems somewhat contradictory.

Who does that? I repeat I am no Bible basher I just search for a deeper meaning. Not one of my imagination but one that was designed to be a second meaning and the real meaning.

There are also far more Rebbe and Priests that urge us to take the Bible literally that there are that who suggest we should ignore its primary messages.

I assume by "us" you mean the public. This could be true. But when they teach in private you would be ridiculed for it. The Rabbis and important Jews are not so willing to share their true beliefs. In essence this is only to keep you from discovering that which they don't want you to. And you trust and believe like this is not obvious to any person familiar with Jewish beliefs. Try buying an uncensored Talmud, if you can find one in English it will be $2,000. Even a censored one. Why are they even censoring religious texts is a great question.

In regard to the meaning of this particular account (or story, I can't figure out if you think it is fiction or a history). The Benjamites and the Levite were all complicit in a true evil. They all acted as though what they were doing was just 'normal'. God wasn't behind any of it.

I don't think it is history or fiction. It is scripture. That means it it is both(myth), with the purpose of conveying profound messages and in this case propaganda.

The Benjaminites are villainized, as this story is clearly not historical this is propaganda.

More importantly Judges was probably used to convince the people that they needed a King. The wickedness and mentions of no King in those days would have been used to convince the people that a King was necessary.

And the hidden angle is that Levites are beyond reproach, the Levite who sacrificed his concubine, possibly a stealth act of revenge, or even God punishing the concubine himself who committed a form of adultery which may not have been sexual and could mean she worshipped other God's, is not seen as a coward like he should be. He is not ashamed as evidenced by his reporting of the incident and goes further and starts a war over it.

Which, was totally supported by Yahweh who instructs them even, so the Levite is not even rebuked for his act of cowardice and is backed by God despite.

This is how the scripture is taught. Layers of meaning upon layers. It's why people read it more than once. You pick up on things as you learn. Read the Bible, research the history of the Bible. Learn the history of, the real history of the Jews and the Bible.

BTW, you did mention priests in the post that I was responding to ("old priests").

As a propagandist work, the Torah & Prophets just after when the book of Judges was written, leaves a bit lacking. The problem was that no-one was actually reading God's word. They were doing their own stuff. Even the Levite, who should have had priestly duty, was called by others to perform mumbo-jumbo false religious ceremonies in return for money. I doubt that He was reading God's word which would clearly identify that what he was doing was unlawful.

You would have had to have been there to know the extent of its effectiveness. Kings were an element in Judaism into Herodian times, fake converts or not. I'd say that points to its success, not it's lacking. That Levite in the story is just in the story, so I doubt that he was reading it either.

With a busted priesthood, religious practice being forgotten, and God's word no longer being read, the Book of Judges could not have been effective as propaganda (if that is what it was written for), because it was like "who cares" at the time.

Again, you would have had to have been there, and it can be shown that it WAS effective because Israel had Kings. Even under subjugation. So replace "could not have been" with "was."

While Judges could have been used as a lever for public opinion towards getting a King, there had been a period, before the Judges, where the conquest of Canaan went particularly well for the Hebrews, the law and religious service was strongly established and before all the rot set in. At that time, they had neither jails nor police force and still their society held together, was law abiding and prospered.

Similarly, after the mess that Monarchist Israel became, there was the captivity because ultimately having Kings didn't help them do what was actually necessary to avoid the dissolution of public morals.

That there was tribal civil war in Israel, where one side "villainized" the other, is one of the points of the book of Judges. Neither side had the moral high ground, neither side had the ear of God. The national identity that was Israel was falling apart from apathy and Godlessness.

"EVERYONE did what was right in their own eyes".

That is the whole story of the Bible. Most of the time Israel is not pleasing God.

Again, propaganda for the peasants with the Priests holding the keys to the kingdom, meaning, the true message.

I was talking about OT priests past tense.

You talked about them as if they were telling people to read it only literally. I can't believe you could possibly know about what was taught, outside of the words, about the Bible. Naturally I assumed you meant priests as in Catholic.

originally posted by: BuzzyWigs
a reply to: Raggedyman

Oh trust me, I've noticed.

I notice it every day, and sometimes I just have to take a step back.
I fight for justice all the time - I am a pacifist, remember? I am a person who wants everyone to lay down their arms (on all sides) and be nice to each other.

That is my dream for the world. Practical solutions are what I seek - cooperation, and collective well-being. None of that requires religion. Religion just mucks it up...in my opinion.

Even within there individual communities it mucks things up. Once someone assumes authority to speak the word of God it becomes a hierarchy with some people feeling more and less important than others snobbery abounds.

And religion has done more harm than good ever since pagan nature worship with its tolerance as in the Pax Romana ended.

Religious wars prove religion causes war.

Individual spirituality as in Buddhism is more pacifist. Or Gnosticism, which is similar. These were and are the most peaceful of spiritual movements.

a reply to: LenatasataneL

Gnosisifaith/. . . Szarah resurrected once again.

a reply to: LenatasataneL

you are Szarah, you are Gnosisisfaith and the other 50 user accts names you have registered, some banned and some you still hold on ATS, one day they will get you and you will never post again on ATS

a reply to: chr0naut
I know I wonder why he continues. He laughs a ATS attempts to stop him and has claimed int he past to be protected because he is working for god.

a reply to: LenatasataneL

yeah just joined under another User accct name. But you are the same old one and we are wondering why you keep coming back.

a reply to: ChesterJohn


You must be REALLY bored.

To come into a thread and not comment on the topic.

And to allow yourself to become so concerned about such irrelevancies.

Still, Not Szarah. Or any of the 50 people that have apparently gotten in your head to the point where you are getting delusional and think they are all the same person.

Coo-coo.

a reply to: ChesterJohn

I have a suggestion for you. God has given us this great gift that allows us the ability to not care about things that don't concern our own well being or that of anyone else.

It's called the ability to ignore. Since I don't know you and don't want to, I will be ignoring you. I won't acknowledge your existence or ever think about you again.

I suggest you do the same. But if you don't it is your problem not mine.

Me and Chr0naut were having a conversation about the topic. We have different ideas and opinions but I understand that I can learn from people who have different ideas and opinions from me and imagine he or she knows this too.

You are just being weird.

originally posted by: BuzzyWigs
a reply to: Raggedyman

Oh trust me, I've noticed.

I notice it every day, and sometimes I just have to take a step back.
I fight for justice all the time - I am a pacifist, remember? I am a person who wants everyone to lay down their arms (on all sides) and be nice to each other.

That is my dream for the world. Practical solutions are what I seek - cooperation, and collective well-being. None of that requires religion. Religion just mucks it up...in my opinion.

Yet I am supposed to chill, I have a problem because I note the problems
Sounds like your more interested in complaining about religion than the real issues that I have noted
Pacifist?
Sounds like you are as militant and nasty towards the religious as I was towards the people I was complaining about
The word for that kind of person starts with hip and ends with ocrit
Sorry, that's just my opinion when I read your words is all... Nice ellipsis

Have any practical solutions by the way, or just an idealism

originally posted by: Raggedyman

originally posted by: BuzzyWigs
a reply to: Raggedyman

Oh trust me, I've noticed.

I notice it every day, and sometimes I just have to take a step back.
I fight for justice all the time - I am a pacifist, remember? I am a person who wants everyone to lay down their arms (on all sides) and be nice to each other.

That is my dream for the world. Practical solutions are what I seek - cooperation, and collective well-being. None of that requires religion. Religion just mucks it up...in my opinion.

Yet I am supposed to chill, I have a problem because I note the problems
Sounds like your more interested in complaining about religion than the real issues that I have noted
Pacifist?
Sounds like you are as militant and nasty towards the religious as I was towards the people I was complaining about?

How could you determine if a person was militant (militant means organized combatant, ready to kill for a cause) based on those comments? And also call someone nasty for complaining about religion, then in the next sentence admit to complaining about people (probably religious)yourself? And to make matter worse your next comment is:

The word for that kind of person starts with hip and ends with ocrit
Sorry, that's just my opinion when I read your words is all... Nice ellipsis

In addition to BEING the hypocrite in this little back and forth you accuse someone else of being the hypocrite you have shown yourself to be. I mentioned before that you project your own flaws on other people, I repeat it here. Also insulting people is very immature in of all things a religious discussion. You can politely rebuke if someone is wrong without complaint from me. But you are the one starting trouble with your attacks on people's character. Are you an actual Christian or someone who just says they are but never Acts like it?

Have any practical solutions by the way, or just an idealism

I would LOVE to hear your ideas and practical solutions for anything. Enlighten us PLEASE!

originally posted by: LenatasataneL
a reply to: ChesterJohn

I have a suggestion for you. God has given us this great gift that allows us the ability to not care about things that don't concern our own well being or that of anyone else.

It's called the ability to ignore. Since I don't know you and don't want to, I will be ignoring you. I won't acknowledge your existence or ever think about you again.

I suggest you do the same. But if you don't it is your problem not mine.

Me and Chr0naut were having a conversation about the topic. We have different ideas and opinions but I understand that I can learn from people who have different ideas and opinions from me and imagine he or she knows this too.

You are just being weird.

In Chester's defence, you have several times suggested that I permanently exit the conversation between us and that you will no longer respond to me (perhaps you reconsidered later).

I also have stated my belief that you are the same person who gets serially banned and then just creates another logon and continues with the same topic threads. I still believe that to be the case. Even the construction of your logon name is a dead giveaway.

Similarly, I have suggested that looking for alternate 'hidden' meanings while ignoring the plain and clear meaning of the text of the Bible is neither helpful nor a particularly rigorous application of reasoning.

The Bible is not a work encoded with 1970's East German Automotive manufacturing secrets. It does not exist to contain the secret CocaCola formula and/or Swiss Chocolate recipes. Nor does it 'secretly' contain Gnostic philosophies (it says nearly nothing about Gnosticism because the Bible was written well before formalized Gnosticism arose).

The Bible DOES recount descriptions of Paganism, which it plainly decries - unequivocally, repeatedly and clearly. It isn't calling us to embrace those pagan practices and beliefs nor is it 'secretly' carrying instruction in them.

The primary faiths of the Bible (Judaism and Christianity) are not mystery religions. The lead us to questions that are unknowns but there are no secret 'initiate' type ceremonies involved in those faiths. One does not embrace these faiths and work one's way up through the ranks towards revelation of new secrets. The beliefs and practices of Christianity and Judaism are open and clear from day one. Occult means 'hidden', Christianity and Judaism are, simply, not occult.

You have suggested that YHWH is evil, that there are other gods and goddesses (that YHWH is, perhaps, hiding from us), that Jesus Christ is more mythical than real, that He wasn't deity, that He didn't actually die on the cross & didn't subsequently resurrect. You also discard large sections of the Bible to make your points that can be demonstrated as misunderstanding of the clear intent of the text.

You are neither following Jewish faith nor are you Christian. Have the backbone enough to say it.

We cannot argue against what you say if it is the plain truth, but we can argue against untruth, especially if clear reason and fact exposes it.

originally posted by: chr0naut

originally posted by: LenatasataneL
a reply to: ChesterJohn

I have a suggestion for you. God has given us this great gift that allows us the ability to not care about things that don't concern our own well being or that of anyone else.

It's called the ability to ignore. Since I don't know you and don't want to, I will be ignoring you. I won't acknowledge your existence or ever think about you again.

I suggest you do the same. But if you don't it is your problem not mine.

Me and Chr0naut were having a conversation about the topic. We have different ideas and opinions but I understand that I can learn from people who have different ideas and opinions from me and imagine he or she knows this too.

You are just being weird.

In Chester's defence, you have several times suggested that I permanently exit the conversation between us and that you will no longer respond to me (perhaps you reconsidered later).

There is no defense for that guy.

Only because you changed your tone. You were over arguing an off topic topic aggressively. I only said I would not argue, not that you should permanently exit. I actually invited you to have a polite discussion so that statement is bunk. Defending that guy is ridiculous, he's ridiculous for doing that.

Similarly, I have suggested that looking for alternate 'hidden' meanings while ignoring the plain and clear meaning of the text of the Bible is neither helpful nor a particularly rigorous application of reasoning.

Your opinion, you're entitled. I strongly disagree, and would reverse your statement to say the plain and clear meaning is for beginners and less helpful to the spirit than the actual meaning of what sometimes seem like absurd stories.

The Bible is not a work encoded with 1970's East German Automotive manufacturing secrets. It does not exist to contain the secret CocaCola formula and/or Swiss Chocolate recipes. Nor does it 'secretly' contain Gnostic philosophies (it says nearly nothing about Gnosticism because the Bible was written well before formalized Gnosticism arose).

That's good to know now I can stop looking for the secret recipe for Dr. pepper. I would have to say, Gnosticism, not the word but its definition, existed before the Bible, is in the Bible with a book called the Zohar to prove it. While the Zohar may not be old as a book, the traditions in it are as old as the Bible, most at least. 22 volumes of hidden meaning in the Torah (first 5 books). It is Jewish Gnosticism and Kabbalah is Jewish Occultism and the Father of modern Occultism.

People have been trying to know God or the gods since Egypt and the Brahmins. You mean Christian Gnosticism. Certainly the Bible was influential to them and they extracted many truths from it with their intellect. They had their own version of the Zohar which we have few texts left.

The Bible DOES recount descriptions of Paganism, which it plainly decries - unequivocally, repeatedly and clearly. It isn't calling us to embrace those pagan practices and beliefs nor is it 'secretly' carrying instruction in them.

The primary faiths of the Bible (Judaism and Christianity) are not mystery religions. The lead us to questions that are unknowns but there are no secret 'initiate' type ceremonies involved in those faiths. One does not embrace these faiths and work one's way up through the ranks towards revelation of new secrets. The beliefs and practices of Christianity and Judaism are open and clear from day one. Occult means 'hidden', Christianity and Judaism are, simply, not occult.

If you only knew. They are very occult (especially Judaism, see: Kabbalah) and Christianity is based off the mystery religions like Mithraism and Egyptian. You will have to learn that on your own. It was necessary and what Rome was used to.

The Jesuits (society of Jesus) are Christian occultists. The Catholic Church is so pagan/mystery based it is ridiculous. Maybe the fundamental Christians are not, but the Catholic Church is the original Christianity and thus, Christian. With pagan leanings.

You have suggested that YHWH is evil, that there are other gods and goddesses (that YHWH is, perhaps, hiding from us), that Jesus Christ is more mythical than real, that He wasn't deity, that He didn't actually die on the cross & didn't subsequently resurrect. You also discard large sections of the Bible to make your points that can be demonstrated as misunderstanding of the clear intent of the text.

Other than Yahweh being evil I never did or said any of that. Yahweh is the god of Israel and by extension Christianity. He isn't my God.

Can't have a God without a Goddess. Remember Asherah? The consort of Yahweh and Baal AFTER being El's, who is the Father of the gods.

You are neither following Jewish faith nor are you Christian. Have the backbone enough to say it.

I follow the teachings of many religions but follow no one religion. If I claimed to be a Christian or Jew show me where? Now you're attacking my character, and you wonder why I would ignore you.

One thing I have never lacked is backbone. That was uncalled for and rude. I have done nothing to display a lack of backbone and have nothing I have to admit to or deny.

We cannot argue against what you say if it is the plain truth, but we can argue against untruth, especially if clear reason and fact exposes it.

You can have fun trying. So can I.

originally posted by: LenatasataneL
I'm also interested in the fact the Levites concubine was cut into 12 pieces and dispersed among the lands.

This calls to mind the story of Osiris who was killed by Set and dismembered into 13 pieces. The thirteenth piece was Osiris penis.

Isis finds 12 pieces and fashions the 13th.

I think Osiris is resurrected as Horus but don't quote me, I don't know too much about the religion of ancient Egypt.

I do know that the obelisk is a symbol for Osiris phallus. The Catholic Church is in possession of an original Egyptian obelisk.

So I will now do some research on this and get back to you.

I am no Bible basher btw, I just like finding the greater meaning of the seemingly mundane stories.

This brings the scripture to life.

So, a single similar number (not even the same) brings scripture to life?

originally posted by: LenatasataneL
a reply to: Chr0naut



Me and Chr0naut were having a conversation about the topic. We have different ideas and opinions but I understand that I can learn from people who have different ideas and opinions from me and imagine he or she knows this too.

I guess my imagining this was in error.

originally posted by: chr0naut

originally posted by: LenatasataneL
I'm also interested in the fact the Levites concubine was cut into 12 pieces and dispersed among the lands.

This calls to mind the story of Osiris who was killed by Set and dismembered into 13 pieces. The thirteenth piece was Osiris penis.

Isis finds 12 pieces and fashions the 13th.

I think Osiris is resurrected as Horus but don't quote me, I don't know too much about the religion of ancient Egypt.

I do know that the obelisk is a symbol for Osiris phallus. The Catholic Church is in possession of an original Egyptian obelisk.

So I will now do some research on this and get back to you.

I am no Bible basher btw, I just like finding the greater meaning of the seemingly mundane stories.

This brings the scripture to life.

So, a single similar number (not even the same) brings scripture to life?

Well, the concubine didn't have the anatomical equipment for the 13th piece, she was a woman.

It is the act of dismemberment and the scattering of the parts of Osiris/Nimrod that is similar. And she never found the phallus so the number 12 is still significant.

Borrowing from other nations mythology was very common among the Israelites when writing the Bible.

Utanapishtim becomes Noah

Osiris becomes Nimrod.

Eden is an old Chaldean/Akkadian/Mesopotamian tale altered to a Hebrew perspective.

The vast angelology and demonology of second temple and later Judaism comes from the Persians who had divisions of angels. Before that angels were nameless representatives of God with a possible exception of one maybe two.

Seraphim, the serpentine angels, are based on the Greco-Egyptian serpent god Serapis. Kind of obvious just by the name but the reptilian nature seals the deal.

Gilgamesh was the first tale of a giant or giants before the flood and the epic of Gilgamesh was borrowed from again.

Abraham and Brahma, Sara and Sarasvati. Not that Abraham IS Brahma, just how he got the name. BRHM. BRHM. With there being no vowels then, the names are identical. Sarah must have just been shortened. But both have a sister/wife too, so I have no doubt of some link.

And so on.

Yes, this stuff and more brings scripture to life. Knowledge of other religions doesn't hurt. The scriptures are for extracting every possible meaning and that is how the Jews do it starting with Sepher Yezirah. It's different if you read Hebrew also, more can be learned from it then. But I make due without.

originally posted by: LenatasataneL

originally posted by: chr0naut

originally posted by: LenatasataneL
a reply to: ChesterJohn

I have a suggestion for you. God has given us this great gift that allows us the ability to not care about things that don't concern our own well being or that of anyone else.

It's called the ability to ignore. Since I don't know you and don't want to, I will be ignoring you. I won't acknowledge your existence or ever think about you again.

I suggest you do the same. But if you don't it is your problem not mine.

Me and Chr0naut were having a conversation about the topic. We have different ideas and opinions but I understand that I can learn from people who have different ideas and opinions from me and imagine he or she knows this too.

You are just being weird.

In Chester's defence, you have several times suggested that I permanently exit the conversation between us and that you will no longer respond to me (perhaps you reconsidered later).

There is no defense for that guy.

Only because you changed your tone. You were over arguing an off topic topic aggressively. I only said I would not argue, not that you should permanently exit. I actually invited you to have a polite discussion so that statement is bunk. Defending that guy is ridiculous, he's ridiculous for doing that.

Similarly, I have suggested that looking for alternate 'hidden' meanings while ignoring the plain and clear meaning of the text of the Bible is neither helpful nor a particularly rigorous application of reasoning.

Your opinion, you're entitled. I strongly disagree, and would reverse your statement to say the plain and clear meaning is for beginners and less helpful to the spirit than the actual meaning of what sometimes seem like absurd stories.

The Bible is not a work encoded with 1970's East German Automotive manufacturing secrets. It does not exist to contain the secret CocaCola formula and/or Swiss Chocolate recipes. Nor does it 'secretly' contain Gnostic philosophies (it says nearly nothing about Gnosticism because the Bible was written well before formalized Gnosticism arose).

That's good to know now I can stop looking for the secret recipe for Dr. pepper. I would have to say, Gnosticism, not the word but its definition, existed before the Bible, is in the Bible with a book called the Zohar to prove it. While the Zohar may not be old as a book, the traditions in it are as old as the Bible, most at least. 22 volumes of hidden meaning in the Torah (first 5 books). It is Jewish Gnosticism and Kabbalah is Jewish Occultism and the Father of modern Occultism.

People have been trying to know God or the gods since Egypt and the Brahmins. You mean Christian Gnosticism. Certainly the Bible was influential to them and they extracted many truths from it with their intellect. They had their own version of the Zohar which we have few texts left.

The Bible DOES recount descriptions of Paganism, which it plainly decries - unequivocally, repeatedly and clearly. It isn't calling us to embrace those pagan practices and beliefs nor is it 'secretly' carrying instruction in them.

The primary faiths of the Bible (Judaism and Christianity) are not mystery religions. The lead us to questions that are unknowns but there are no secret 'initiate' type ceremonies involved in those faiths. One does not embrace these faiths and work one's way up through the ranks towards revelation of new secrets. The beliefs and practices of Christianity and Judaism are open and clear from day one. Occult means 'hidden', Christianity and Judaism are, simply, not occult.

If you only knew. They are very occult (especially Judaism, see: Kabbalah) and Christianity is based off the mystery religions like Mithraism and Egyptian. You will have to learn that on your own. It was necessary and what Rome was used to.

The Jesuits (society of Jesus) are Christian occultists. The Catholic Church is so pagan/mystery based it is ridiculous. Maybe the fundamental Christians are not, but the Catholic Church is the original Christianity and thus, Christian. With pagan leanings.

You have suggested that YHWH is evil, that there are other gods and goddesses (that YHWH is, perhaps, hiding from us), that Jesus Christ is more mythical than real, that He wasn't deity, that He didn't actually die on the cross & didn't subsequently resurrect. You also discard large sections of the Bible to make your points that can be demonstrated as misunderstanding of the clear intent of the text.

Other than Yahweh being evil I never did or said any of that. Yahweh is the god of Israel and by extension Christianity. He isn't my God.

Can't have a God without a Goddess. Remember Asherah? The consort of Yahweh and Baal AFTER being El's, who is the Father of the gods.

You are neither following Jewish faith nor are you Christian. Have the backbone enough to say it.

I follow the teachings of many religions but follow no one religion. If I claimed to be a Christian or Jew show me where? Now you're attacking my character, and you wonder why I would ignore you.

One thing I have never lacked is backbone. That was uncalled for and rude. I have done nothing to display a lack of backbone and have nothing I have to admit to or deny.

We cannot argue against what you say if it is the plain truth, but we can argue against untruth, especially if clear reason and fact exposes it.

You can have fun trying. So can I.

I apologize but I was combining the statements that have been put by the many logon author (assuming that you are that same person). You have stated that the Bible is not 100% factual. Your denigration of the God of the bible (stating He is evil) alone identifies that you are, in fact, "batting for the opposite team".

The Zohar was supposed to have been penned by Shimon bar Yochai ("Rashbi") about 200 years after Christ. It isn't even written in Hebrew, which perhaps indicates how 'Jewish' it actually was. The work actually was first published an enormous 1,300 years after Christ by Moses de Leon, who scholars suspect was the true author.

Kabbalah is later even than the Zohar. So, no way could the Zohar or Kabbalah have influenced Gnostic philosophy, however, the reverse is possibly true.

Also, while components of Mithraism existed prior to Christianity, those components that echo Christian belief, arose AFTER Christanity (if you anylyze the historical progression of Mithraism).

originally posted by: chr0naut

The Zohar was supposed to have been penned by Shimon bar Yochai ("Rashbi") about 200 years after Christ. It isn't even written in Hebrew, which perhaps indicates how 'Jewish' it actually was. The work actually was first published an enormous 1,300 years after Christ by Moses de Leon, who scholars suspect was the true author.

Oh, were you under the impression that I didn't already know this? Everyone, Jews included, know this. Nevertheless most accept the legend that it was handed down mouth to ear from Moses regardless. It is a brilliant book.

Kabbalah is later even than the Zohar. So, no way could the Zohar or Kabbalah have influenced Gnostic philosophy, however, the reverse is possibly true.

Funny, I never said that Kabbalah influenced Gnosticism. Misread my quote about the Gnostic's having their own Zohar as if I was saying that the Zohar existed then, huh? Next time I will be more specific because you shouldn't have misinterpreted that at all. They had their own "Zohar", is that better. Never did I say that Kabbalah influenced Gnosticism and I agree, other way around.

Also, while components of Mithraism existed prior to Christianity, those components that echo Christian belief, arose AFTER Christanity (if you anylyze the historical progression of Mithraism).

There is no analyzing the historical progression of Mithraism. Mystery school teachings are lost, information scant. He was born December 25th, he was viewed as the invincible sun, Sol Invictus, by Constantine. Was a Persian yazata or angel that was popular in Persia and bastardized by Rome.

Any sun deity, born on Dec. 25, is related, and I agree that the original Way of Christ did not embrace these things. But the Romans did, and Christianity is dominated by Roman Catholicism's creation, the Bible. And Christmas and Easter originate in paganism also. The imagery, symbols and rites of Catholicism are mostly pagan, many done in secret.

And Mithras birthday on Dec. 25th has nothing to do with Christianity and the similarities are because Mithras comes from the Mazdayaznian (Greeks called it Zoroastrian) Mithra, and from Persians some Jews adopted Mazdayaznian themes into their faith (see Dead Sea Scrolls) which then seeped into Christianity. Mithraism was not influenced by Christianity at all in any historically provable way.

Sacraments true meaning is mystery b.t.w.

a reply to: LenatasataneL

Really no violence in Buddhism, seriously, you are missing out on secret knowledge thats not even secret, google is your friend

As for gnostics and violence, no better than anyone else, off your high horse.

Not only that buts its clear that some gnostics are blatantly dishonest and unscrupulous, pretending to be some one else.

You said
" Once someone assumes authority to speak the word of God it becomes a hierarchy with some people feeling more and less important than others snobbery abounds. "
and there you are, meet the mirror

originally posted by: Raggedyman
a reply to: LenatasataneL

Really no violence in Buddhism, seriously, you are missing out on secret knowledge thats not even secret, google is your friend

Quote me saying that. I said they were the MOST PACIFIST. How do you get "no violence" out of that?

I'm not missing anything, the world is in the palm of my hand.

As for gnostics and violence, no better than anyone else, off your high horse.

Not only that buts its clear that some gnostics are blatantly dishonest and unscrupulous, pretending to be some one else.

Who? How is that? I want names, and alleged incidents of dishonesty and unscrupulousness.

Really? Because I seem to remember something about the Catholic Church killing off all Gnostic churches, by sword or forced conversion.

But I have never heard of any war or battle started by them. They would not worship a violent god so I don't think violence was tolerated. Name one war started by Gnostics. You don't even know what Gnostic means.

You said
" Once someone assumes authority to speak the word of God it becomes a hierarchy with some people feeling more and less important than others snobbery abounds. "
and there you are, meet the mirror

Yeah... I don't assume authority, belong to any hierarchy, feel important and am not a snob. I certainly don't speak for God.

I enjoy spirituality and talking about it.

You just harass and insult.

Well, whatever I said that has you so vexed, let me know and I will tell you what I mean.

In the meantime, stop being a brat.

originally posted by: Raggedyman
a reply to: chr0naut

There is no doubt the poor persons confusion, stating that harming anyone in public needs to be contested

Please quote where I said this. Although harming anyone in public OR private DOES need to be contested. We have courts for that today. But the Biblical Israelites always received punishment from Yahweh. He kills or orders killed thousands of them for making a golden calf.

Kidnapping going unpunished in light of the golden calf incident seems pretty stupid to me. What is worse, arts and crafts or kidnapping AND forced marriage which is a lifetime of rape for the female victim?

Rape is unacceptable,

Ya think? Does that need to said? If one thinks otherwise they are probably in jail right now.

I am thinking another text, happy to show why this delusion is wrong

What delusion? Yes PLEASE show me.

It's funny, some people think because it's in the bible it's acceptable, the bible tells the story because it's so terrible, so despicable

Oh, then why did Yahweh order the war? That was the cause of all the terrible and despicable events.

If Yahweh had rejected the oath not to marry into Benjamin, then the slaughter and kidnapping of innocents never would have happened.

I don't find this acceptable at all. Who would?

There is a reason I love God, the promise of justice in the future, bring on Gods justice

What is, at least in your mind, "God's" justice?

The reason you love "God" is because of the promise of justice? You mean Armageddon and hell for the non Christian right? Heaven for the Christian?

While everyone else suffers eternally, good or evil?

That's not justice, it's called the thoughts and opinions of Christianity. And sickening. You actually WANT people to be punished like the "justice" of Yahweh in the OT? You are in love with God because he will take revenge against the"sinners" and non Christians who didn't accept Christ?

Not because he is merciful and forgiving and loves all his sons and daughters?

But because of his avenging justice that you are fiendishly looking forward to?

Damn, you must hate a LOT of people. I don't want anyone to go to hell save the absolute worst people who are unrepentant. Rapists and the like, serial killers.

Not peaceful , loving non Christians who just didn't choose the"correct" religion.

But that is not God's justice. God is unknown and unknowable. You are basing this on a book about ancient myths of the god of Israel. You don't know God or his justice because nobody does.

Have fun with your Armageddon fantasy.