The Demonic Laws of the Christian God

a reply to: Akragon

Akragon

One last question.

Which genesis accout to you bellieve?

Coomba98

a reply to: coomba98

Thats a pretty big book...

not something i usually dwell on in any case

Um... Ok so what do you make of Yeshi's references to OT material?

references to his "religion's" scripture

Ok your last part is about the gnostic stuff. Its a bit ambiguous what your saying.

You dont like it cause the Christians dont? Or because they do?

I didn't say that i didn't like gnostic writing... they're some of the earliest full texts we have of early "Christianities" and there was many... including divisions in the Nag Hammadi... but never the less... amazing to read

a reply to: Akragon

Hey digger,

You said: 'references to his "religion's" scripture'

Hmm, man are you purposefully trying to confuse me? Lol.

Yeshi follows the Mosaic Law digger.

The Mosaic Law are in the following manuscripts:
* Leviticus.
* Deuteronomy.
* Levites.

The other manuscripts of the OT Yeshi references are:

* Deuteronomy.
* Isaiah.
* Exodus.
* Leviticus.
* Numbers.
* Hosea.
* Micah.
* Genesis.
* Jeremiah.
* Psalm.
* Daniel.
* Zechariah.

But you reject these manuscripts right?

You said:
'Nag Hammadi... but never the less... amazing to read'

I agree, way better read than the bible. And much more descriptive of Pleroma and Monad. Its a more all rounded setting that is at lest understandable.

Coomba98

a reply to: coomba98

Hmm, man are you purposefully trying to confuse me? Lol.

nah... but i seem to confuse many...

Yeshi follows the Mosaic Law digger.

The Mosaic Law are in the following manuscripts:
* Leviticus.
* Deuteronomy.
* Levites.

not so much.... all of said "laws" seem to be coming from those books though...

Yet we've already established that he didn't follow all of them...

The other manuscripts of the OT Yeshi references are:

* Deuteronomy.
* Isaiah.
* Exodus.
* Leviticus.
* Numbers.
* Hosea.
* Micah.
* Genesis.
* Jeremiah.
* Psalm.
* Daniel.
* Zechariah.

But you reject these manuscripts right?

they're nifty books...

You said:
'Nag Hammadi... but never the less... amazing to read'

I agree, way better read than the bible.

the bible has had a lot of time to be refined into every language on the planet....

Nag Hammadi was discovered in 1948... and confirmed a few texts from parallel religions

And much more descriptive of Pleroma and Monad. Its a more all rounded setting that is at lest understandable.

Well... there is no story to those texts

the bible is an amazing "story"

a reply to: Akragon

Hey digger,

Its late and im pissy, time for sleep. Ill reply tomorrow, in the meantime heres my drunken short story of a...

www.abovetopsecret.com...

Nice chat digger and talk tomorrow.

Coomba98

a reply to: coomba98

originally posted by: coomba98
a reply to: Seede

Hay Seede.

Yeshi is my nickname for Yeshua. Aka Jesus.

He is the son of god and not god himself otherwise he would have said its his laws but he didnt.

John7:16-19
16. Jesus answered them and said, My doctrine is not mine, but his that sent me

The word and most high are the same in Christian Theism.

So if god said this is the law and thousands of years later his son said this law or that is wrong was god wrong?

All thoughs that went to hell, do they now get a pass. Meaning he also lied about an eternity of punishment.

Still waiting on where it is specifically said in the bible so and so law was wrong. Only opinion of text that is not what is said.

Ill wait for DISRAELI to reply with the list or rejected laws and the bible passeges that specifically reject said law.

Coomba98

Are you attempting to subject The Bible to your reasoning?