The Gnostic Gospels

[regnauld]

---

are you now one of them?

Amen brother!

[mordecai_327]

You are referring to the Pauline version of Christianity my friend. You see, the earliest Christians were the Gnostics according to history.

Pauline version? Is Paul the only writer of the so-called "Christianity"? C'mon. Try getting to know who are the authors of the books in the Bible.

Earliest Christians? I don't see any supporting manuscripts that proves to do so. Show it to me please! If you may, re-read History then. I don't see anything even the Church Fathers mentioned about the gnostics as the earliest Christians. I bet you forgot (or not even know) that John lived up to the later part of the first century (AD 90s).

Then, why is it that the four gospels are contradicting each other when it comes to Jesus' life if they were of the highest level? Didn't you know that the authors of the gospels were not really the aposles of Christ as what the Bible Scholars had proclaimed?

Have you researched about who are the audience/recipients of each Gospel? unless you did not then you can say there are contradictions. Try getting to know the 'blends' each writer has based on their literary composition and historical context before you say so. Let me give you an example: Matthew's Gospel is geared towards the Jews. Luke's is toward a certain patron, Theophilus (cf. the Book of Acts), a Gentile. Start from this my friend and you will see why the Gospels are written that way. This is a good start.

If you have any questions, feel free to ask me and I would be willing, in a respectful manner, to share to you my answers.

[mordecai_327]

You think The Gnostic Gospels are not profound? Well, I can't balme you for as Jesus said, "Don't give your pearls to the swine."

Profound, maybe. Truthful? Doubtful! Being profound does not necessarily mean truthful.

[regnauld]

Profound, maybe. Truthful? Doubtful! Being profound does not necessarily mean truthful.

It's ok to doubt like Thomas and we can never deny the fact that the Gnostic Gospels are indeed authentic documents found in Nag Hammadi, Egypt.

[mordecai_327]

It's ok to doubt like Thomas and we can never deny the fact that the Gnostic Gospels are indeed authentic documents found in Nag Hammadi, Egypt.

It's not a question whether those documents are authentic or not...the real issue here is it doesn't answer the question whether it is truthful or not, does it?

After all, "Being profound does not necessarily mean truthful."

[regnauld]

Pauline version? Is Paul the only writer of the so-called "Christianity"? C'mon. Try getting to know who are the authors of the books in the Bible.

Earliest Christians? I don't see any supporting manuscripts that proves to do so. Show it to me please! If you may, re-read History then. I don't see anything even the Church Fathers mentioned about the gnostics as the earliest Christians. I bet you forgot (or not even know) that John lived up to the later part of the first century (AD 90s).



Have you researched about who are the audience/recipients of each Gospel? unless you did not then you can say there are contradictions. Try getting to know the 'blends' each writer has based on their literary composition and historical context before you say so. Let me give you an example: Matthew's Gospel is geared towards the Jews. Luke's is toward a certain patron, Theophilus (cf. the Book of Acts), a Gentile. Start from this my friend and you will see why the Gospels are written that way. This is a good start.

If you have any questions, feel free to ask me and I would be willing, in a respectful manner, to share to you my answers.

Try to study this version of christianity first and I will go to the earliest Christians, The Gnostics.

Pauline Christianity is a term used to refer to a branch of Early Christianity associated with the beliefs and doctrines espoused by Paul the Apostle through his writings. Most of orthodox Christianity relies heavily on these teachings and considers them to be amplifications and explanations of the teachings of Jesus. Others perceive in Paul's writings teachings that are radically different from the original teachings of Jesus documented in the canonical gospels, early Acts and the rest of the New Testament, such as the Epistle of James. The term is generally considered a pejorative by traditionalist Christians as it carries the assumption that Christianity as it is known is a corruption of the original teachings of Jesus.
Proponents of the perceived Pauline distinctive include Marcion of Sinope, the 2nd century theologian, an excommunicated heretic who asserted that Paul was the only apostle who had rightly understood the new message of salvation as delivered by Christ. Opponents of the same era include the Ebionites and Nazarenes, Jewish Christians who rejected Paul for straying from "normative" Judaism, see also List of events in early Christianity.
Pauline Christianity, as an expression, first came into use in the twentieth century amongst those scholars who proposed different strands of thought within Early Christianity, wherein Paul was a powerful influence.[1] It has come into widespread use amongst non-Christian scholars and depends on the claim, advanced in different ages, that the form of the faith found in the writings of Paul is radically different from that found elsewhere in the New Testament, but also that his influence came to predominate. Reference is also made to the large number of non-canonical texts,[2] some of which have been discovered during the last hundred years, and which show the many movements and strands of thought emanating from Jesus's life and teaching or which may be contemporary with them, some of which can be contrasted with Paul's thought.Of the more significant are Ebionism and Gnosticism (see below). However, there is no universal agreement as to Gnosticism's relationship either to Christianity in general or the writings of Paul in particular.
The expression is also used by modern Christian scholars, such as Ziesler[3] and Mount, whose interest is in the recovery of Christian origins and the contribution made by Paul to Christian doctrine.
The critical use of the expression relies in part upon a thesis that Paul's supporters, as a distinct group, had an undue influence on the formation of the canon of scripture, and also that certain bishops, especially the Bishop of Rome, influenced the debates by which the dogmatic formulations known as the Creeds came to be produced, thus ensuring a Pauline interpretation of the gospel. The thesis is founded on the differences between the views of Paul and the Church in Jerusalem revealed in his letters,[4] and also between the picture of Paul in the Acts of the Apostles and his own writings, such that the essential Jewish or Old Testament character of the faith is said to have been lost, see also Jewish Christianity. It has arguably been given impetus by the growth in importance of Evangelical Christianity, most especially in the United States, which rely very much on certain of Paul's writings, in particular the Epistle to the Romans.

Pauline Christianity - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

[necrotic freak]

Amen brother!

since when? so you can now have a direct communication to God?

[regnauld]

since when? so you can now have a direct communication to God?

Did I say that my friend?

I can talk to GOD as much as you do and GOD never stop communicating to all of us. Why not? ")

[mordecai_327]

...edited...

[regnauld]

Why Are Gnostic Teachings Missing?

At great cost to all of us, Jesus' private/Gnostic teachings were "outlawed" with the Roman Emperor Constantine's decision to make Christianity the state religion. For along with that decision came his command that all Christian bishops choose between Jesus' public/Orthodox and private/Gnostic teachings. In this way Constantine could unite the empire under one official church doctrine. His command was carried out at the Council of Nicaea (325 AD) in the document Christians call the Nicene Creed and its shorter version, the Apostles' Creed. In effect, the Nicene Creed, which reflects Jesus' public teachings, became the one official doctrine of Orthodox Christianity, and in turn, made his private Gnostic teachings an outlawed heresy.
Soon after the Council, "an imperial edict ordered that all books by Arius [the principal advocate of Jesus' Gnostic teachings at Nicaea], and others like him, should be burned, and made concealment of such a book punishable by death." (2) Bishop Eusebius (260-340), Constantine's court historian, restructured all Biblical literature to coincide with the council's decision. In 325, Eusebius issued an "Ecclesiastical history [in which time was portrayed as] the battleground of God and Satan, and all events as advancing the triumph of Christ." (3) From that time on, Eusebius' Ecclesiastical history acted as the official supernatural model for future interpretations of Jesus' ministry. The intellectual character of Gnosticism was in conflict with Eusebius' supernatural model and was outlawed. "The Middle Ages had begun." (4)
The Emperor is long dead. We no longer need to live in the dark ignorance of Constantine's shadow. We can now examine for ourselves every aspect of Jesus' outlawed Gnostic teachings, and bring back into our lives that part of Jesus' ministry which Constantine stole from us.
This is not an easy mission for it is, as it was for Jesus, a difficult idea to teach. Now, like then, most priests * and scribes *, meaning theologians, intellectuals, and academics, were so convinced of their own beliefs that they could not grasp Jesus' teachings. When asked why he taught in parables, Jesus said, "The reason I talk to them in parables is that they look without seeing and listen without hearing or understanding," (Matt 13:13) "Those who saw so dimly could only be further blinded by the light of full revelation, (Mk 1:34+). Jesus, therefore, does not reveal with complete clarity the true nature of the Messianic kingdom which is unostentatious [natural]. Instead he filters the light [or ideas he presents] through symbols, the resulting half-light is nevertheless a grace from God, an invitation to ask for something better, and accept something greater." (Note C 13:13 jbv)
Note: We cannot accept, without question, the traditional historical accounts of Jesus' teachings to be totally accurate. They are limited to interpretations of his ministry since the Council of Nicaea. We must not overlook the fact that today's dictionaries and accepted translations of Greek words, and even thesauruses, also reflect the Judaeo-Christian worldview, which is a product of that same council, and not necessarily that of 1st century philosophy or Gnostic Christians. The word "pagan" in Webster's Dictionary, for example, is said to mean "a person without religion." This definition is consistent with Judaism or Christianity, which consider their God, and therefore their religion, the only true religion. But this definition does not represent pagans, who worshiped God in other ways.

Gnostic Christianity