The Gospel of Judas (Your views)

[Gwynhuever]

---

@dacs...ako intriga ko aning gnosticism....i only know what i heard...not reliable stuff....maong ganahan ko makig discuss....ang ako lang nabaw-an ani kay more of esoteric teachings ni siya....Christian gihapon pero straying away from the mainstream...sakto ba? naa ka ma reccomend nga reading materials about ani?

[dAmNseL jEnY]

When Jesus Christ told Peter that Peter upon this rock I will build my Church, that was the beginning of the Catholic Church.Â* There is only one Church established by God and that is the Catholic Church although it has undergone some changes for the past 2000 years.Â* Its still the original Church.

Hmmm, that is weird. Was it really a Catholic Church? Cz as far as my knowledge is concerned, Catholicism originates in Rome and not in Israel. Israel is Judaism. Christianity, they aren't.

Anyhoo, just a thought. The papyrus was original. How about the writings? I clearly heard from NGC that the experts can date the paper but not the date when it was written. Some expert frauds can use original papers and with their knowledge about calligraphy, they can write manuscript as "original" as they seem. Remember a certain episode in CSI? Let's not underestimate the frauds. They are scheme-y.

[n`gel]

@dacs: It's different to give personal insult than just merely refutting an idea. I can't see anything wrong with my post. Just because some people question the authority and authenticity of the catholic church means they deserve a rude retaliation from anybody like yourself. Wa ko ga threaten, ga remind lang ko basin mag regret ka manginsulto ka naku coz I can do something about it, okay lang kaha sa uban kung makaligtaan ug moderator, pero ug masakpan sad ang thread... pareho ra gihapon resulta... be reminded you have violated a rule in this board.
-----------------
There is relation to the councils and gnosticism and I think it's crucial to this discussion. In the first place, it was in these councils that eradicated existence of the gnostics.
-----------------
I'm not a theologian... nor is any of us around here, so walay expert nato. What's happening here is, people research based on their own conviction of the subject at hand. Kung pro-catholic ka, ngita sad ka'g defense nga mo support sa imo belief. Kung against sad kag catholic dogma... research sad ka'g imo. So dili ta mag minarunong. Yaw lang sad nang copy and paste kay walay thrill, dili kaugalingong thought. Let's just read and respect other people's point of view about the discussion. Basta man gud religion nay istoryahan, Bible, closed-minded man gud kaayo ang mga taw. But for the sake of discussion, we don't see any reason to judge these topics as walay pulos, or walay ayo, or walay kapuslanan. Perhaps to some, it could convince them otherwise of their beliefs.

Don't have time to fully express my views but here's a link that would initially explain my disbelief over catholic dogma, and basically the Bible http://www.rotten.com/library/religi...c-distortions/. Para naku, discussions gani ug ingon ani basta tirahan na ka'g verses sa Bible, considered null na daan wa nay padulngan kay tungod the Bible itself, its compilation, its discrepancies and tampering, wouldn't pass as authentic and precise to me. I guess that should give an overview of my thought on this dacs.

[dacs]

@dacs...ako intriga ko aning gnosticism....i only know what i heard...not reliable stuff....maong ganahan ko makig discuss....ang ako lang nabaw-an ani kay more of esoteric teachings ni siya....Christian gihapon pero straying away from the mainstream...sakto ba? naa ka ma reccomend nga reading materials about ani?

Catholic source : click here
Protestant source : click here
Secular source : well, there are a lot of that to go about in the web

[dacs]

@dacs: It's different to give personal insult than just merely refutting an idea. I can't see anything wrong with my post. Just because some people question the authority and authenticity of the catholic church means they deserve a rude retaliation from anybody like yourself. Wa ko ga threaten, ga remind lang ko basin mag regret ka manginsulto ka naku coz I can do something about it, okay lang kaha sa uban kung makaligtaan ug moderator, pero ug masakpan sad ang thread... pareho ra gihapon resulta... be reminded you have violated a rule in this board.
-----------------
There is relation to the councils and gnosticism and I think it's crucial to this discussion. In the first place, it was in these councils that eradicated existence of the gnostics.
-----------------
I'm not a theologian... nor is any of us around here, so walay expert nato. What's happening here is, people research based on their own conviction of the subject at hand. Kung pro-catholic ka, ngita sad ka'g defense nga mo support sa imo belief. Kung against sad kag catholic dogma... research sad ka'g imo. So dili ta mag minarunong. Yaw lang sad nang copy and paste kay walay thrill, dili kaugalingong thought. Let's just read and respect other people's point of view about the discussion. Basta man gud religion nay istoryahan, Bible, closed-minded man gud kaayo ang mga taw. But for the sake of discussion, we don't see any reason to judge these topics as walay pulos, or walay ayo, or walay kapuslanan. Perhaps to some, it could convince them otherwise of their beliefs.

Don't have time to fully express my views but here's a link that would initially explain my disbelief over catholic dogma, and basically the Bible http://www.rotten.com/library/religi...c-distortions/. Para naku, discussions gani ug ingon ani basta tirahan na ka'g verses sa Bible, considered null na daan wa nay padulngan kay tungod the Bible itself, its compilation, its discrepancies and tampering, wouldn't pass as authentic and precise to me. I guess that should give an overview of my thought on this dacs.

Thanks you, n'gel, and am sorry for causing you to be offended of what I have written. My mistake entirely.

I rather not continue where this discussion will be leading. A separate topic would serve the purpose. It would be great if we could focus on the topic at hand : Gospel of Judas (and, consequently, gnosticism). Lastly, if you truly want my side of the argument, then let us sent PMs to continue the discussion. The webpage you want me to read actually destroys the credibility of the Protestant sects - unfortunately, not the Catholic Church. Sacred Scriptures, Sacred Traditions and Church Magisterium - the source of all Catholic beliefs.

Again, thank you.

[who1]

Every creature has his place on this world and beyond,one must do what he has to do or life loses its meaning that is also truth about the mystery of betrayal somebody has to do it .It might not be Judas or it could have been Peter or you or might be me,but somebody has to do it to fulfill the the crucifixion.Just imagine if the betrayal never happened,what would it be.

For Judas he is just doing his job and doing it well,by serving his master.By doing the betrayal he already hanged himself..God bless Judas for his faith on his master.

[dacs]

Every creature has his place on this world and beyond,one must do what he has to do or life loses its meaning that is also truth about the mystery of betrayal somebody has to do it .It might not be Judas or it could have been Peter or you or might be me,but somebody has to do it to fulfill the the crucifixion.

Why is it that 'somebody has to do it to fulfill the crucifixion'? What made you think that the betrayal had to be done?

Just imagine if the betrayal never happened,what would it be.

What do you think would happen?

For Judas he is just doing his job and doing it well,by serving his master.

Who is his master?

By doing the betrayal he already hanged himself..God bless Judas for his faith on his master.

Do you mean that his faith on his master made him betray his master?

[nomadix]

Quote from: nomadix on Today at 05:10:48 AM
Dacs, who wrote the book of Romans?


and your point is ..?

Paul wrote the book of Romans-- i didn't see any relevance with your verses...and you admittedly said that it was your mistake.

So, what's your point here? Â*Are you saying that King Saul has no authority because he is not 'ordained' (I am not quite sure if I understood your usage of this word)? Â*All authority comes from God. Â*From whence did the authority of King Saul com or did he have no authority?

no i wasn't saying King Saul has no authority.---as i've said, let's not dig up about King Saul. I was just citing an example about Who was in authority but has never been ordained by God. King Saul was an example.

and as what you said Leaders are ordained by God...I was merely opposing your statement and cited King Saul. You should know his history, since you sounded like you know the whole thing by heart.

"And I will give to thee the keys of the kingdom of heaven." In the following verse (Matthew 16:19) He promises to bestow on Peter the keys of the kingdom of heaven.

why don't you read the verses after verse 19 of Matthew 16--

In all countries the key is the symbol of authority. Thus, Christ's words are a promise that He will confer on Peter supreme power to govern the Church. Peter is to be His vicegerent, to rule in His place.

Peter is to be His vicegerent, to rule in His place? Why do Christ need Peter to rule in his place?

read I Timothy 2:5-6 ( or the whole chapter itself)

For there is one God, and one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus;
Who gave himself a ransom for all, to be testified in due time.


real church history? What is a church by way?

I wondered why you have never commented on the first half of my post. Â*It contained a lot of references to the writings of the early Christians

I don't know how to say this in a modest way. what do you mean early Christians? you mean the early Christian catholics that you mentioned in your previous posts? (bible characters not included) -- it's a matter of my conviction that i'd believe their claims. ( i really don't though) Â*mura ra gud nag ikaw, motuo ba gud ka sa akong gi pang post? clearly, NO. cos if you do, we won't post this long.


we have a different views on the Bible. I doubt if you are reading the same bible i am reading. I'm pretty much sure it's a catholic bible. so i rest my case.

You can site , copy/paste for proofs that Peter was the founder of catholism or whatever you derive it. it's your belief. i respect that.

this thread was about the Judas..for pete's sake!


and yeah, about the Gospel of Judas, my view is--- sa mailad lang.

read in full details

http://www.bible-history.com/backd2/jot_tittle.html

Not One "Jot Or Tittle"

Matt 5:18 "For assuredly, I say to you, till heaven and earth pass away, one jot or one tittle will by no means pass from the law till all is fulfilled." Â*

The "Jot" is the Hebrew word "Yodh" which is the 10th letter of the Hebrew alphabet. It is also the smallest letter. It's European or English equivalent is the letter "Y" as in the English term Yahweh or in Hebrew YHVH since there were no vowel's used in the ancient script.

The word "jot" itself is an English transliteration of "iota" which is the 9th letter of the Greek alphabet. "Iota," in turn, is the nearest Greek equivalent for the Hebrew yodh.

The "tittle" is the small decorative spur or point on the upper edge of the yodh. If you can imagine a tiny letter with a slightly visible decorative mark.

Tittle is used by Greek grammarians of the accents and diacritical points. It means the little lines or projections by which the Hebrew letters differ from each other. One example would be the difference between the letter L and I. The difference is only one small mark. We use phrases like "the dotting of the i, and the crossing of the t," and "every iota."

It is interesting that the Jewish scribes who copied the MT (Massoretic Text) of the Hebrew Bible scrolls paid the greatest attention to the minutiae of detail and such marks attached to each consonant throughout the entire text. They even numbered every letter, word, sentence, paragraph, chapter, section, and scroll to insure that the total equalled that of the text being copied before allowing it to enter the holy synagogue.

The meaning of the passage is very clear. Not even the smallest letter or even its decorative spur will ever disappear from the "God Breathed" Word until all is fulfilled. In fact when heaven and earth are replaced by a new heaven and earth, the Word of the Lord will have accomplished its purpose and will be fulfilled in every detail even to the very letter.


The Bible contains 66 Books nothing more nothing less
39 Old Testaments and 27 New Testament Books

[tearsforfears]

If the Gnostics were guilty of portraying Judas in a positive light, then the scribes were guilty of crossing out text that do not conform to their belief. And Irenaeus was equally guilty of ignoring the other gospels.

The Christian churches have been conditioning (and actually threatening) us of not adding anything or taking anything away from the bible texts, when in fact, it was the early church that deleted text from the original scrolls.

Just wanna pose this question to open minded ones: What if more evidence will be unearthed that will challenge or perhaps shatter our present belief? What do you do?

[Gwynhuever]

@tearsforfears...ako bro personally ok ra nako....kay di kaayo ko sold out how a few people controlled what is now the accepted dogma....edited version man ila gipagawas....nya unfair sad kay subjective na man gud kon i-edit na....take for example the book ni Dan Brown nga The Da Vinci Code....puerteng gubota na nuon....ako after reading about it...ok lang...so what if nag igat2 si Jesus with Magdalene...mas ganahan gani ko mag huna2 nga tinuod to nga conspiracy theory.....that will put Him above the other sages...kay He is in touch with the feminine side sad....all in all....i believe God is already within us.....dili na mistil pangitaon....