Is it true that the Gnostic Texts are older than the New Testament books...

Because I know that there are a lot of contradictions that don't make sense in the New Testament, and there are even FALSE spiritual truths in there and honestly I find The Gospel of Thomas to have MORE truth in it...

I heard some theories that the Essenes were one of the first groups.

I agree about Thomas; I think it should of been put in the bible.

You just reminded me about something that I was going to look into. I read a few years back, that the early gnostics were persecuted because they believed the mate of Adam was a woman with reptillian features. And that the reason they were persecuted was because that meant female was first, and not male. Anyone else heard of this?

Originally posted by arpgme
Because I know that there are a lot of contradictions that don't make sense in the New Testament, and there are even FALSE spiritual truths in there and honestly I find The Gospel of Thomas to have MORE truth in it...

I heard some theories that the Essenes were one of the first groups.

But the Gospel of Thomas is all of Jesus' quotes, which are probably all in the New Testament.
I'm not 100% certain.

Would the reference to Adam's reptilian mate be Lilith?

reply to post by csimon


But we don't know that, it could be the other way around. Maybe they stole the quotes from these saying of Jesus and created a biography in the Gospels.

reply to post by arpgme


No, it isn't true.

But there were certain beliefs existing prior to Christ, especially in the Greek mythos, which the Gnostics incorporated into their beliefs.

Originally posted by arpgme
Because I know that there are a lot of contradictions that don't make sense in the New Testament, and there are even FALSE spiritual truths in there and honestly I find The Gospel of Thomas to have MORE truth in it...

I heard some theories that the Essenes were one of the first groups.

It is not true that the Gnostic texts are older than the NT books, no.
The vast majority of the gnostic gospels are MUCH more recent than the NT, and dating by scholars varies from the 2nd to 4th centuries AD, depending on the texts themselves. There are some exceptions to this: the gospel of Thomas is one (often dated anywhere between 70 and 140ad, while the text itself is reliant on an oral traidition that stems from the time of Christ).

HOWEVER...

You must be careful with the gnostic gospels. These texts stem from a tradition based upon dreams, visions and drug-induced hallucinations. To quote Wikipedia,

It is now generally believed that the evidence suggests that Gnosticism was a Jewish movement which subsequently reacted to Christianity or that Gnosticism emerged directly in reaction to Christianity.[5] The name "Christian gnostics" came to represent a segment of the Early Christian community that believed that salvation lay not in merely worshipping Christ, but in psychic or pneumatic souls learning to free themselves from the material world via the revelation.[6] According to this tradition, the answers to spiritual questions are to be found within, not without.

So... if you're talking about a chicken/egg scenario, gnosticism was a reactionary movement against Christianity, and does not predate it.

Interestingly, though, the gnostic movement was clearly in effect during the time of Paul's writing - many of his books contain specific refutations of gnostic theology.

As far as biblical contradictions and "false truths"... I'd suggest you continue studying. The Bible is a unique book; an integrated message system that bears the divine fingerprint of God. I've seen many people, many web sites claim that they've found contradictions and issues within it, but never encountered one that can't be resolved by looking at the text closely and carefully.

Here is a wonderful book, written by a brilliant guy who studied the Gnostics and the Essenes. If you are really interested in this subject, you can read his book.

www.thebreathoflight.net...

Originally posted by Awen24
I've seen many people, many web sites claim that they've found contradictions and issues within it, but never encountered one that can't be resolved by looking at the text closely and carefully.

The human brain is good at seeing things that aren't there. Of course if you believe the bible to be the 'divine fingerprint of god' then of course your brain will see things that aren't there or read to much to try to make it seem like there is absolutely NO contradictions....

reply to post by arpgme


Have you extensively read the Bible?

Is this an informed conclusion based on your personal research?

Or are you parroting what you've heard somewhere?
If so, there are many threads on ATS covering the topic of "contradictions in the Bible." You may want to take a look at the arguments presented in those debates.

reply to post by arpgme


negative ....red leader.....the brain can figure out the logic well when reading scripture, it helps to have read the whole thing as the old testament agrees with the new....some kind of masterpiece

The Gnostic texts, which are known today as Christian apocrypha, were not a "Jewish" movement.

They were not included in the bible because they hold that the god of the Jews, Yahweh, or Yaldaboath, is none other than Satan. Early Christianity was not compatible with Judaism: a supersessionist view maintained the "New Testament" was an entire replacement of the old Mosaic covenant and Pharisaic tradition. The Dispensationalist view of churches today is a contrivance of Talmudic Jews, Christian Zionists and Freemasons responsible for inventing and popularizing this concept just 200 years ago in 19th century America and the United Kingdom.

Please do not forget that the land in which Christ lived and preached was very much a multicultural one, called Palestine. Jews were not the only people living there at the time, as many would have you believe these days.

By extension, it is also absurd (and blasphemous) to call Christ a Jew, since he was in fact Galilean (a speaker of Aramaic and Greek) and none other than the Son of God.

Originally posted by Awen24

Originally posted by arpgme
Because I know that there are a lot of contradictions that don't make sense in the New Testament, and there are even FALSE spiritual truths in there and honestly I find The Gospel of Thomas to have MORE truth in it...

I heard some theories that the Essenes were one of the first groups.

It is not true that the Gnostic texts are older than the NT books, no.
The vast majority of the gnostic gospels are MUCH more recent than the NT, and dating by scholars varies from the 2nd to 4th centuries AD, depending on the texts themselves. There are some exceptions to this: the gospel of Thomas is one (often dated anywhere between 70 and 140ad, while the text itself is reliant on an oral traidition that stems from the time of Christ).

HOWEVER...

You must be careful with the gnostic gospels. These texts stem from a tradition based upon dreams, visions and drug-induced hallucinations. To quote Wikipedia,

It is now generally believed that the evidence suggests that Gnosticism was a Jewish movement which subsequently reacted to Christianity or that Gnosticism emerged directly in reaction to Christianity.[5] The name "Christian gnostics" came to represent a segment of the Early Christian community that believed that salvation lay not in merely worshipping Christ, but in psychic or pneumatic souls learning to free themselves from the material world via the revelation.[6] According to this tradition, the answers to spiritual questions are to be found within, not without.

So... if you're talking about a chicken/egg scenario, gnosticism was a reactionary movement against Christianity, and does not predate it.

Interestingly, though, the gnostic movement was clearly in effect during the time of Paul's writing - many of his books contain specific refutations of gnostic theology.

As far as biblical contradictions and "false truths"... I'd suggest you continue studying. The Bible is a unique book; an integrated message system that bears the divine fingerprint of God. I've seen many people, many web sites claim that they've found contradictions and issues within it, but never encountered one that can't be resolved by looking at the text closely and carefully.

edit on 2-5-2012 by Awen24 because: (no reason given)

Spoken like a true Christian

yes, the Bible is filled with hundreds of contradictions and many of the books written in Pauls name were not written by Paul. The books such as Thomas and the Secret Book of John are every bit as valid as Revelations and no matter whether they were wrtten in 70 AD or 200 AD, they embrace a philosophy that influenced Jesus and the Essenes at the time and can be traced back to around 400 BC.

Constantine simply didnt like these books as it put ideas in peoples heads.

reply to post by arpgme

check out this website...oodles of information. gnosis.org...
s/f, great topic.

What is Gnosticism?

Many visitors have requested some basic introductory material explaining Gnosticism. To meet this need we offer these "places to start": two short articles, The Gnostic World View: A Brief Summary of Gnosticism and What is a Gnostic?; and two audio lectures (mp3 format) on Gnosticism and its Legacy, and the Gnostic concept of Christ: The Misunderstood Redeemer. A reading of the Overview of the Library collection will give a useful brief introduction to the history and textual legacy of the Gnostic tradition.

For more in-depth reading suggestions visit the Gnostic Society Bookstore -- you will find offered there a selection of the best introductory and advanced books on Gnosticism, along with brief reviews of recommended books. And of course just "surfing" The Gnosis Archive will lead to a wealth of information. Blessings on your journey!

Originally posted by Sweetmystery
Here is a wonderful book, written by a brilliant guy who studied the Gnostics and the Essenes. If you are really interested in this subject, you can read his book.

www.thebreathoflight.net...

Here's a tiny snippet from that website. Looks very interesting....thanks.

All the sayings attributed to Jesus in his Sermon on the Mount, his gospels, in the Bible and in extra-biblical non-canonical writings, (like Thomas) number several hundred. He shows in these sayings incredible mental acumen and awareness regarding sources, from Judaistic, Gnostic, Persian, Greek, Syrian, Egyptian, Pythagorean and Essene. His was an extraordinary mind. He had an incredible communication ability.

Here's a bit more regarding the aging of the so-called originals.
I recommend looking at the page for more info...
the Essenes were very meticulous, scrupulous about copying scrolls dilligently...
and they were deliberately omitted from Constantine's "version" of "Christianity."

ou see there are no originals of ANY scroll of the New Testament (the best ones are all from the second century--like Thomas's gospel) and many of these New Testament book-scrolls are from much later--3rd or 4th centuries. We have no original from any book, to point to.

The Gospel According to Thomas is the closest we can get to that status, because # 1 it was never Romanized in editing (it was buried for nearly 2000 years). And # 2 it was as close to a Source Document as anything we have ever seen. Many Scholars believe it was the "Q" or 'Source scroll' for Matthew, Mark and Luke because of its incredible similarities to their Jesus Quotes.

However, because of the Essene Library discovery in 1947, we have what is tantamount to a group of amazing "originals' (not truly) but so close to it, it is astounding. And what do we see there with those Old Testament scroll-books (compared to the Roman Bible 500 to 700 later) that we have all been reading for 1600 years?
The Romans edited the Old Testament. Why would they do that?

Well, just as they took over the status, as purveyor of Jesus' truth teachings (not truly) they took over the publication and disbursement of the book(s) of Jewish spiritual literature, (which is where Jesus came from). That Rome persecuted, executed and crucified Christians for 300 years was hushed up.

When they took over the entire spiritual movement, making it into a religion to control the masses, they made it appear that it all started with them. I spoke to a woman recently, in their religion, and she told me Rome began Christianity. I asked what about the 300 to 400 years prior? She said, What years? I said Early Christian history. She said What history?

Yikes. So many self-proclaimed "Christians" really haven't a clue what they're missing with their blinders and ear plugs.
It's a real shame. And sadly, they're not interested in learning it. Why, though? I just can't fathom it.

Originally posted by 1nOne

By extension, it is also absurd (and blasphemous) to call Christ a Jew, since he was in fact Galilean (a speaker of Aramaic and Greek) and none other than the Son of God.

Yes he was a Jew, he even quoted from The Torah (Old Testament) and people even called him "Rabbi".

wildtimes, interesting I'm gonna check the website out.

reply to post by 1nOne


What on earth are you talking about?

Your post is absolute nonsense. Please do some research so you can speak to the topic with some knowledge.
Where did you pick all that up?? Wow. Talk about disinformation. I'd suggest you stay away from whatever source fed you those lies.

The Essenes were a sect of Jews. They were separate from the Pharisees and Sadducees, who didn't like them because they refused to go along with much of the Mosaic law, kept to themselves, and studied healing and the higher knowledge that the Jews were negative about.

reply to post by wildtimes


No -- my post is not utter nonsense.

Please show us where in the "New Testament" it is written that Jesus Christ, the Son of God, is an Essene.
Then I will show you 100 indices clearly identifying "the Jews" as an altogether distinct and different group from that of which Christ and the Apostles belonged. Christ was a Palestinian, understand? Killed, just as many, many Christians in Palestine today are at the hands of the Jews.

Christ wasn't preaching support of the Torah: He was breaking all its rules.
This is why, according to the "New Testament", the Jews had Him crucified.
According to Rabbinical Judaism, the Romans aren't even to blame for His murder: the Jews happily claim responsibility for stoning Him to death.

YOU DO YOUR OWN RESEARCH ON THE MATTER AT HAND AND STOP SPREADING DISINFORMATION.
HERE'S A START:

Wikipedia on Palestine:

In the 330s BCE, Macedonian ruler Alexander the Great conquered the region, and the region changed hands numerous times during the wars of the Diadochi. ultimately joining the Seleucid Empire between 219-200 BCE. In 116 BCE, a Seleucid civil war resulted in the independence of certain regions including the minor Hasmonean principality in the Judean Mountains. From 110 BCE, the Hasmoneans extended their authority over much of Palestine, creating a Judean-Samaritan-Idumaean-Ituraean-Galilean alliance. The Judean (Jewish, see Ioudaioi) control over the wider region resulted in it also becoming known as Judaea, a term which had previously only referred to the smaller region of the Judean Mountains.


By the way, don't believe everything Elaine Pagels & Co. manufacture about Gnosticism and regarding the life of Jesus. There is a familiar agenda at hand, and its called, "subvert and destroy".