The Secret Lives of Jesus Christ - Propaganda

This program has been done horribly and has a very biased view...

As someone who has read the Nag Hammadi library for over 10 years; they made no mention of the Apocryphon of John, they made no mention of Yaltabaoth or any of the other major differences in scripture .. instead they focus on trivial controversial texts about Jesus Christ and his youth instead of his more profound teachings later in his life.

The entire program has been carefully crafted to lead the viewer to assume that the Nag Hammadi texts are just a bunch of stories that are not to be believed.

Most of their views on the texts are their own opinions and conjecture and favor the Roman Catholic Churches version of Christianity.

No mention of Pistis Sophia, no mention of the Epinoia ..

The program also butchered the story of Jesus explaining the crucifixion...

It seems to me there is a concerted effort to keep these texts and revelations out of the public view and conversation so instead they focus on certain texts to make the Gnostics look like heretics.

The program made me mad

They make excuses and use their own logic to explain away why certain things were taught or written down.. like oh it must have been because they thought the crucifixion was messy and naughty so they wrote a different version so they could be happy... give me a break... or .. It must have been because they couldn't understand how he could die in such a shameful way.. blah blah.. conjecture .. disregarding the words written down...

On account of the reality of the authorities, (inspired) by the spirit of the father of truth, the great apostle - referring to the "authorities of the darkness" - told us that "our contest is not against flesh and blood; rather, the authorities of the universe and the spirits of wickedness." I have sent this (to you) because you inquire about the reality of the authorities.

Their chief is blind; because of his power and his ignorance and his arrogance he said, with his power, "It is I who am God; there is none apart from me." When he said this, he sinned against the entirety. And this speech got up to incorruptibility; then there was a voice that came forth from incorruptibility, saying, "You are mistaken, Samael" - which is, "god of the blind."

His thoughts became blind. And, having expelled his power - that is, the blasphemy he had spoken - he pursued it down to chaos and the abyss, his mother, at the instigation of Pistis Sophia. And she established each of his offspring in conformity with its power - after the pattern of the realms that are above, for by starting from the invisible world the visible world was invented.

As incorruptibility looked down into the region of the waters, her image appeared in the waters; and the authorities of the darkness became enamored of her. But they could not lay hold of that image, which had appeared to them in the waters, because of their weakness - since beings that merely possess a soul cannot lay hold of those that possess a spirit - for they were from below, while it was from above.

This is the reason why "incorruptibility looked down into the region (etc.)": so that, by the father's will, she might bring the entirety into union with the light. The rulers laid plans and said, "Come, let us create a man that will be soil from the earth." They modeled their creature as one wholly of the earth. Now the rulers [...] body [...] they have [...] female [...] is [...] with the face of a beast. They had taken some soil from the earth and modeled their man after their body and after the image of God that had appeared to them in the waters.

They said, "Come, let us lay hold of it by means of the form that we have modeled, so that it may see its male counterpart [...], and we may seize it with the form that we have modeled" - not understanding the force of God, because of their powerlessness. And he breathed into his face; and the man came to have a soul (and remained) upon the ground many days. But they could not make him arise because of their powerlessness. Like storm winds they persisted (in blowing), that they might try to capture that image, which had appeared to them in the waters. And they did not know the identity of its power.

Now all these things came to pass by the will of the father of the entirety. Afterwards, the spirit saw the soul-endowed man upon the ground. And the spirit came forth from the Adamantine Land; it descended and came to dwell within him, and that man became a living soul. It called his name Adam, since he was found moving upon the ground. A voice came forth from incorruptibility for the assistance of Adam; and the rulers gathered together all the animals of the earth and all the birds of heaven and brought them in to Adam to see what Adam would call them, that he might give a name to each of the birds and all the beasts.

They took Adam and put him the garden, that he might cultivate it and keep watch over it. And the rulers issued a command to him, saying, "From every tree in the garden shall you eat; yet from the tree of recognizing good and evil do not eat, nor touch it; for the day you eat from it, with death you are going to die."

They [...] this. They do not understand what they have said to him; rather, by the father's will, they said this in such a way that he might (in fact) eat, and that Adam might regard them as would a man of an exclusively material nature.

The rulers took counsel with one another and said, "Come, let us cause a deep sleep to fall upon Adam." And he slept. - Now the deep sleep that they "caused to fall upon him, and he slept" is Ignorance. - They opened his side like a living woman. And they built up his side with some flesh in place of her, and Adam came to be endowed only with soul.

And the spirit-endowed woman came to him and spoke with him, saying, "Arise, Adam." And when he saw her, he said, "It is you who have given me life; you will be called 'mother of the living'. - For it is she who is my mother. It is she who is the physician, and the woman, and she who has given birth."

Then the authorities came up to their Adam. And when they saw his female counterpart speaking with him, they became agitated with great agitation; and they became enamored of her. They said to one another, "Come, let us sow our seed in her," and they pursued her. And she laughed at them for their witlessness and their blindness; and in their clutches she became a tree, and left before them her shadowy reflection resembling herself; and they defiled it foully. - And they defiled the stamp of her voice, so that by the form they had modeled, together with their (own) image, they made themselves liable to condemnation.

No mention in the entire program about anything that actually matters.. it's sad really because as you can see from the above quote that the Gnostic scriptures taught that the God which created us is an ignorant God and not the Father-God Jesus taught of, in fact he exposed the Old Testament God as Yaltabaoth whom also has many other names, Sakla being another.
Everyone who barks at me about the Bible and worrying about my soul, forgets themselves that perhaps they've been lied to.

reply to post by PuRe EnErGy

The entire program has been carefully crafted to lead the viewer to assume that the Nag Hammadi texts are just a bunch of stories that are not to be believed.

I don't watch videos, so I don't know what it had to say, but unless one is a Gnostic Christian, there is, in fact, no reason to believe anything found in Nag Hammadi. They are interesting texts, from an historical perspective, but they represent the teachings of a religion that died out 1600 years ago, and the predominant reason that it died out is that it was impractical.

I enjoy reading and studying the texts, but it is readily apparent that the effort to hijack Jesus Christ into the religious interpretation of Platonism was a futile one. Gnosticism might have lasted longer, had it not attempted to do that, which raised the ire of the orthodox church.

reply to post by PuRe EnErGy


The Catholic church has been working diligently for the past 1800 years to eliminate, discredit, demonize, destroy and mock the Gnostics and their texts. Is is any wonder that these sentiments and tactics are still being used today and that they still linger among the clergy and Christian apologetics today? Nope.

Is it any wonder that "Spell Check" still doesn't even recognize the word "gnostic"?

Wherever there is this much resistance, misconception and deception, there must be some truth that's being hidden.

reply to post by PuRe EnErGy


I would be interested in hearing your view of the Lord of the Old Testament by the light of the Nag Hammadi texts. Where do you place Jesus into the story with Sophia and how do they relate to the Lord? Also, how do you see the differences between Ehohim in Genesis 1 creating with no restrictions of the fruit as compared to the Lord creating in Genesis 2? The Gnostic view sees Genesis 1 as an Androgynous Adam. Genesis 2 would be the splitting of Adam into Male and Female duality. What is your view?

Originally posted by windword
Is it any wonder that "Spell Check" still doesn't even recognize the word "gnostic"?

Are you implying that Microsoft is in cahoots with the Catholic church? My Mac OS spell checker has no issues with the word gnostic (though it should be properly capitalized, which you didn't do, so maybe MS Spell Check is more on the ball than you think )

The 'mystical' schools of Gnosticism, Kabbalism, Sufism, Buddhism, Daoism, Jainism, and Hinduism share many core metaphysical concepts.

Additionally, the 'mystery' schools of secret and public societies and fraternities also share many core metaphysical concepts with the above mentioned mystical traditions.


It appears that the self-empowering teachings found in the mystical traditions and mystery schools has been suppressed in favor of the control mechanisms found within mainstream religion.


The New Age movement continues to propagate ancient metaphysical concepts, but even then it is ridiculed as some newly created system.



Some who control the media and propaganda are in favor of control rather than enlightened freedom.

reply to post by adjensen


What is the general consensus among scholars concerning these writings Jen ?

Or Enoch ?

reply to post by adjensen


At this point in time, I see no reason why Christianity would last any longer than previously established religions that lasted between 4 and 10,000 years. Hell, there have been religions that last longer than that and still fell in the end. It all depends on the cultures of the world.

Originally posted by adjensen

Originally posted by windword
Is it any wonder that "Spell Check" still doesn't even recognize the word "gnostic"?

Are you implying that Microsoft is in cahoots with the Catholic church? My Mac OS spell checker has no issues with the word gnostic (though it should be properly capitalized, which you didn't do, so maybe MS Spell Check is more on the ball than you think

)

I'm implying that the word "Gnostic" was so obscure to common language that whatever dictionary that was used to plug into Spell Check didn't include the word, until recently. Gnostic, has always had be addressed (added) in my spell check programs, until just recently.

It used to really bother me, whether capitalized or not, cut and pasted from another source, the word (used to) always alert the spell checker.

Originally posted by randyvs
reply to post by adjensen

 

What is the general consensus among scholars concerning these writings Jen ?

Which writings? Nag Hammadi? They're texts from a Gnostic Christian community, which are Coptic translations from the Fourth Century of Greek texts from the Second and Third Centuries. The texts which involve Christ are generally dated post 150AD, because they reflect the teachings of Valentinus and his followers, and that's when they were around. There are other texts which don't reflect the Christian influence which could be earlier, because Gnosticism pre-dates Christianity by a couple hundred years.

Originally posted by AfterInfinity
reply to post by adjensen

 

At this point in time, I see no reason why Christianity would last any longer than previously established religions that lasted between 4 and 10,000 years. Hell, there have been religions that last longer than that and still fell in the end. It all depends on the cultures of the world.

What does that have to do with the post of mine that you replied to? Are you claiming that a religion, that was around for a couple of hundred years and failed to attract many followers because it tried to combine two theologies that were diametrically opposed to one another, is on a par with Christianity, which has two billion (with a "B") followers and has shaped the development of Western civilization for almost 2,000 years?

M'kay.

By the way, what is this 10,000 year old religion that you speak of? That would pre-date recorded history.

Originally posted by EnochWasRight
reply to post by PuRe EnErGy

 

I would be interested in hearing your view of the Lord of the Old Testament by the light of the Nag Hammadi texts. Where do you place Jesus into the story with Sophia and how do they relate to the Lord? Also, how do you see the differences between Ehohim in Genesis 1 creating with no restrictions of the fruit as compared to the Lord creating in Genesis 2? The Gnostic view sees Genesis 1 as an Androgynous Adam. Genesis 2 would be the splitting of Adam into Male and Female duality. What is your view?

The "Lord" of the OT is the creation of Pistis Sophia, whom she created alone without the permission of her consort, he is ignorant and does not know where he came from and claimed himself to be God because of this ignorance.

"Now the archon who is weak has three names. The first name is Yaltabaoth, the second is Saklas, and the third is Samael. And he is impious in his arrogance which is in him. For he said, 'I am God and there is no other God beside me,' for he is ignorant of his strength, the place from which he had come.

"This is the first archon who took a great power from his mother. And he removed himself from her and moved away from the places in which he was born. He became strong and created for himself other aeons with a flame of luminous fire which (still) exists now. And he joined with his arrogance which is in him and begot authorities for himself. The name of the first one is Athoth, whom the generations call the reaper. The second one is Harmas, who is the eye of envy. The third one is Kalila-Oumbri. The fourth one is Yabel. The fifth one is Adonaiou, who is called Sabaoth. The sixth one is Cain, whom the generations of men call the sun. The seventh is Abel. The eighth is Abrisene. The ninth is Yobel. The tenth is Armoupieel. The eleventh is Melceir-Adonein. The twelfth is Belias, it is he who is over the depth of Hades. And he placed seven kings - each corresponding to the firmaments of heaven - over the seven heavens, and five over the depth of the abyss, that they may reign. And he shared his fire with them, but he did not send forth from the power of the light which he had taken from his mother, for he is ignorant darkness.

Pistis Sophia was the consort of the Mother-Father of the All, together they created Christ (but not as a flesh and blood being) it wasn't until Jesus that Christ took human form (in my understanding)
and the Lord of the OT was the creation of Pistis Sophia whom created him (Yaltabaoth) without the permission of Mother-Father of the All.

"And the Sophia of the Epinoia, being an aeon, conceived a thought from herself and the conception of the invisible Spirit and foreknowledge. She wanted to bring forth a likeness out of herself without the consent of the Spirit, - he had not approved - and without her consort, and without his consideration. And though the person of her maleness had not approved, and she had not found her agreement, and she had thought without the consent of the Spirit and the knowledge of her agreement, (yet) she brought forth. And because of the invincible power which is in her, her thought did not remain idle, and something came out of her which was imperfect and different from her appearance, because she had created it without her consort. And it was dissimilar to the likeness of its mother, for it has another form.

"And when she saw (the consequences of) her desire, it changed into a form of a lion-faced serpent. And its eyes were like lightning fires which flash. She cast it away from her, outside that place, that no one of the immortal ones might see it, for she had created it in ignorance. And she surrounded it with a luminous cloud, and she placed a throne in the middle of the cloud that no one might see it except the holy Spirit who is called the mother of the living. And she called his name Yaltabaoth.

It's seems to me from reading the scriptures that before the flesh and blood creations there were "other" forms or creations that lead up to our existence as it is today; the differences I see between what you call Genesis 1 and 2 are part of the struggle that Yaltabaoth went through trying to capture the power within Adam (from what I understand before he was flesh and blood) because Yaltabaoth was tricked into breathing the power he stole from his mother into Adam to cause him to live and once Yaltabaoth realized the power in Adam he became jealous and attempted to steal the power back from Adam thus creating the female counterpart to Adam. Whom Yaltabaoth and his creations raped and created copies of the bodies through intercourse in attempts to steal the power and inspired them through a counterfeit spirit.

Originally posted by adjensen
... unless one is a Gnostic Christian, there is, in fact, no reason to believe anything found in Nag Hammadi. They are interesting texts, from an historical perspective, but they represent the teachings of a religion that died out 1600 years ago, and the predominant reason that it died out is that it was impractical.

I enjoy reading and studying the texts, but it is readily apparent that the effort to hijack Jesus Christ into the religious interpretation of Platonism was a futile one. Gnosticism might have lasted longer, had it not attempted to do that, which raised the ire of the orthodox church.

There is really little wonder that these books were not chosen to become a part of the New Testament, or that the Gnostic sects enjoyed a popular front in Egypt. In many ways, the theology was an extension of the more ancient Egyptian religion, where common people were not allowed into the inner sanctuaries of churches nor were they privy to the inner workings and the magical rituals of their own religion. Impractical, you betcha.

A New Testament canon was needed in order to fix these traditions against future adulterations. How'd that workout lol At the same time, to set a New Testament canon beside the Old carried implications of the concept of "inspiration", and there were certain formulas in pre-Christianity that set out the theories of inspiration. One of these was the view that inspiration was a type of possession, where the divine took over the voice of the prophet, literally swapping spirit natures leaving behind a medium of direct voice which had no mind of its own.

As early as the second century, this view of inspiration took hold in the Christian community. The fathers of the church knew the earliest compositions of the apostles, who must have been divinely inspired , and they applied their view of inspiration to the NH. This implied that all Christians rightly believing are agreed, and that the cacophony of dissension is a characteristic of either heretics or of pagan philosophers.

The NH completely oppose the words of the apostles, and hence could not have come from the same divine source. The very nature of Gnosticism, of such secret knowledge, precluded it from their faith. Jesus, after all, came to spread the word, and obviously did so to more than a selected few chosen people.

Hence, the Gnostic texts were considered heresy by the Orthodox church and that is the remainder of the story.

reply to post by PuRe EnErGy

As someone who has read the Nag Hammadi library for over 10 years; they made no mention of the Apocryphon of John, they made no mention of Yaltabaoth or any of the other major differences in scripture ..

Gnostic texts have been considered heresy since the official creation of the religion...

Its like expecting them to accept Buddha as truth

Or even Issa

gonna watch this video now.... Probably should have done so before posting a comment...

reply to post by PuRe EnErGy


after actually watching this video I really don't see anything wrong with the conclusions it comes to... Keep in mind this was likely directed towards "Christians" who have looked over or at least know about gnostic writing...

You seem to focus on the lack of mention of the Apocryphon of John, yet one must realise that accepting that particular book, one must also dismiss a good portion of the Old testament.... IF not all of it...

IF this video was designed for Christian viewing in general... that particular book would be considered one of the most heretical books of all the gnostic scripture because it makes the OT God out to be almost a satanic diety... In actuality I do agree with that idea... but that isn't something you will ever get a Christian to accept, no matter what evidence there is in books outside of the bible... or within it for that matter!

They consider the bible to be one book... not many separate books which is the reality of the bible...

So asking a Christian to accept anything that falls outside of the bible is futile... furthermore asking a Christian to dismiss anything within the bible is also a lesson in futility because to them the bible is "the word of God" and infallible...

Thanks for the video though...

Im quite interested in the discussion this thread might create.... the members who have already commented on this thread are some of my favorites

S&F

Originally posted by Akragon
reply to post by PuRe EnErGy

 

after actually watching this video I really don't see anything wrong with the conclusions it comes to... Keep in mind this was likely directed towards "Christians" who have looked over or at least know about gnostic writing...

You seem to focus on the lack of mention of the Apocryphon of John, yet one must realise that accepting that particular book, one must also dismiss a good portion of the Old testament.... IF not all of it...

IF this video was designed for Christian viewing in general... that particular book would be considered one of the most heretical books of all the gnostic scripture because it makes the OT God out to be almost a satanic diety... In actuality I do agree with that idea... but that isn't something you will ever get a Christian to accept, no matter what evidence there is in books outside of the bible... or within it for that matter!

They consider the bible to be one book... not many separate books which is the reality of the bible...

So asking a Christian to accept anything that falls outside of the bible is futile... furthermore asking a Christian to dismiss anything within the bible is also a lesson in futility because to them the bible is "the word of God" and infallible...

Thanks for the video though...

Im quite interested in the discussion this thread might create.... the members who have already commented on this thread are some of my favorites

S&F

edit on 3-8-2013 by Akragon because: (no reason given)

Adam - Man
Seth - Appointed
Enosh – Mortal
Kenan – Sorrow
Mahalalel – The blessed God
Jared – Shall come down
Enoch – Teaching
Methuselah – His death shall bring
Lamech – Despairing
Noah – Comfort and rest

There is the Bible as declared from the beginning. It's always been there but not for many to see. He is the same today as yesterday. If He tells us why He speaks in parables in the NT the same reason applies to the OT. Anyone can come along and say "look at this horrific passage and see how satanic he appears", but does it make it true when it's a parable and the understanding of it has not been given to that person? Of course not. Knowing this, you still question why some Christians will refuse to accept another gospel than the one given to them? Right there in Genesis is the entire scripture from start to finish - "the blessed God shall come down teaching, his death shall bring dispairing, comfort and rest". This IS the gospel.

reply to post by WhoKnows100


Nope... The "gospel" starts at Matthew and ends at John...

Originally posted by Akragon
reply to post by WhoKnows100

 

Nope... The "gospel" starts at Matthew and ends at John...

Or one might say it began with Jmmanuel and ended with Thomas.

reply to post by TheOd


Well yes... I personally would include Thomas... Christians would not though...

It was mentioned in the video briefly... but it seems the OP's main concern was the lack of mention of the Apocryphon of John... And I explained the obvious reasons why that book Is not accepted or even mentioned in the video...

Originally posted by Akragon
reply to post by TheOd

 

Well yes... I personally would include Thomas... Christians would not though...

It was mentioned in the video briefly... but it seems the OP's main concern was the lack of mention of the Apocryphon of John... And I explained the obvious reasons why that book Is not accepted or even mentioned in the video...

I have no idea what is going on with NatGeo and pretty much quit watching their stuff a long time ago. I can't comment on the video for obvious reasons.

They were neat when they had naked women in the 60s - African regardless