The Gospel of Judas (Your views)

[mosimos]

The GNOSTIC APOCRYPHAL GOSPELS Found at Nag Hammadi in Alphabetical Order

The Acts of Peter and the Twelve Apostles,
Allogenes,
The Apocalypse of Adam,
The (First) Apocalypse of James,
The (Second) Apocalypse of James,
The Apocalypse of Paul, The Apocalypse of Peter,
The Apocryphon of James,
The Apocryphon of John,
Asclepius 21-29,
Authoritative Teaching,
The Book of Thomas the Contender,
The Concept of Our Great Power,
The Dialogue of the Savior,
The Discourse on the Eighth and Ninth,
Eugnostos the Blessed,
The Exegesis on the Soul,
The Gospel of the Egyptians,
The Gospel of Philip,
The Gospel of Thomas,
The Gospel of Truth,
The Hypostasis of the Archons,
Hypsiphrone,
The Interpretation of Knowledge,
The Letter of Peter to Philip,
Marsanes,
Melchizedek,
On the Anointing,
On the Baptism A,
On the Baptism B,
On the Eucharist A,
On the Eucharist B,
On the Origin of the World,
The Paraphrase of Shem,
Plato,
Republic 588A-589B,
The Prayer of the Apostle Paul,
The Prayer of Thanksgiving, T
he Second Treatise of the Great Seth,
The Sentences of Sextus,
The Sophia of Jesus Christ,
The Teachings of Silvanus,
The Testimony of Truth,
The Thought of Norea,
The Three Steles of Seth,
The Thunder,
Perfect Mind,
The Treatise on the Resurrection,
Trimorphic Protennoia,
The Tripartite Tractate,
A Valentinian Exposition,
Zostrianos

[mosimos]

Were these Gnostics realy Christian and could these books be real scripture? First let us look at the Gnostics, scholars tell us that they borrowed their beliefs from Greek philosophy, Jewish cabalistic mysticism, Babylonian mythology, Mithraism, and Persian dualism:

"The chief elements of gnostic religion and philosophy were Greek philosophy, Jewish cabalistic mysticism, Babylonian mythology, Mithraism, and Persian dualism."(Funk & Wagnalls standard Reference Encyclopedia, volume 11, 1950)

So we see the Gnostics realy were not Christian but of pagan philosophy

"The remarkable form of so-called Christianity but really of pagan philosophy—to which the word in this sense was applied, is religious phenomenon as extraordinary as were the times and causes that gave it birth."(The Imperial Encyclopedia and Dictionary, Volume 16, 1890)

"Gnosticism a term applied to religious philosophies, both Christian and pagan"(Funk & Wagnalls standard Reference Encyclopedia, volume 11, 1950)

"Sects in the first ages of Christianity who taught that they alone had a true knowledge of the Christian religion, and who attempted to incorporate the tenets of the pagan philosophy with some doctrines of Christianity."(The Imperial Encyclopedia and Dictionary, Volume 16, 1890)

"We have stated a the outset, that Gnosticism was but a general name for great number of diverging nominally Christian but really heathen schools."(The Imperial Encyclopedia and Dictionary, Volume 16, 1890)

Let us look at some fundamental doctrine of the gnostics:

"A fundamental doctrine of the gnostics was a clear-cut dualism between good and evil, between the divine and the material worlds. In some gnostic teachings evil is supposed to have been generated by God or the supreme being by a series of emanations. According to this belief a less perfect world emanated from the divine world, and from this less perfect world a succession of interior worlds, until, as the divine good dwindled and became diluted by distance, the creation of evil was possible. Generally the material world in which men live was regarded as the creation of seven powers, half-angel, half-devil, called Eons, who represented the last link in the chain of emanations. The seven Eons were clearly identified with sun, moon, and five planets of the Babylonian mythology. In some gnostic systems the place of the Eons is taken by a single creative being having similar attributes, the Demiurge.

The gnostics believed that such salvation was attainable by ignoring the material world and concentrating on the divine world of light. As aids in their journey through the intermediate worlds to the perfect world, the gnostics made use of many symbols and sacraments, including sacred formulas, the names of the demons of the lower world and of the Eons and anointment with holy oil...Gnostic systems Sophia (Gr., "wisdom") or the Great Mother played a prominent part. She was regarded as the goddess of heaven and the mother of the stars. This goddess was obviously the equivalent of the mother goddess of a number of Asiatic faiths who was worshiped under such names as Aphrodite, Astarte, Cybele, and Isis. A parallel figure was the Primal Man, who existed before the creation of the world, appeared on the earth in many forms, and finally became a man in the form of Christ. The resurrection of the Primal Man and his ascent into heaven served as the basis for the hope of personal salvation among the gnostics."(Funk & Wagnalls standard Reference Encyclopedia, volume 11, 195

[Gwynhuever]

@mosimos...thank you sa imong last 2 posts....curious kaayo ko aning gnosticism....

[Gwynhuever]

bro dacs: any comment sa galileo affair? murag ur avoiding to counter gwyns post with ur own...

anyway, in my opinion grabe to na blunder sa church. one of the reasons why i turned out to be completely anti-church and almost an anti-christ. almost lang coz if i am an anti-christ then it's saying that i believe in his existence.

anti church ok lang...ayaw lang pag anti Christ oi...sige na ba....

OT: sure ate gwyn.

shoeless....padayonon ta ni bahala ma OT ta.... bitaw bro i share your disillusionment pero let me put it this way....unfortunately the word spiritual has been largely taken over by religious institutions and given a meaning - nga puerte kalahi sa iyang real meaning. Institutionalized religions often use "spiritual" to identify their concern for institutional conformity, for approved practices, apil pa gani ang Sunday collections - "your spiritual offerings." Organized religion employs the world freely...nya more often than not raba WRONGLY....nya all the while presuming ownership of it.

Careful bro...kay because of your rejection of the external practices of religion...you might feel that to be consistent you must also reject whatever is said to be spiritual....you may unwittingly be buying organized religion's presumed ownership of the term....so you end up throwing the one with the other....Please remember that the practice of spirituality long predates religious institutions....in a nutshell ang ako ra jud punto aning akong ta-as kaayo nga litanya is ...you don't have to give any kind of nod to a religious organization in order to reclaim the spiritual in your life....mao na ha...minaw jud ni ate gwyn ha....

[dacs]

shoeless....padayonon ta ni bahala ma OT ta.... bitaw bro i share your disillusionment pero let me put it this way....unfortunately the word spiritual has been largely taken over by religious institutions and given a meaning - nga puerte kalahi sa iyang real meaning.

Unsa man diay 'real meaning' sa word nga spiritual?

Institutionalized religions often use "spiritual" to identify their concern for institutional conformity, for approved practices, apil pa gani ang Sunday collections - "your spiritual offerings." Organized religion employs the world freely...nya more often than not raba WRONGLY....nya all the while presuming ownership of it.

Kinsa man jud ni nga institutionalized religions gud? With all the specifics mentioned here, this form of assertions look more like a gossip since there is no defense to it for anyone affected. Not good for purposes of dialogue, wouldn't you think so?

Careful bro...kay because of your rejection of the external practices of religion...you might feel that to be consistent you must also reject whatever is said to be spiritual....you may unwittingly be buying organized religion's presumed ownership of the term....so you end up throwing the one with the other....Please remember that the practice of spirituality long predates religious institutions....

Can you give us references to your assertion (i.e., practice of spirituality predates religious institution)?

in a nutshell ang ako ra jud punto aning akong ta-as kaayo nga litanya is ...you don't have to give any kind of nod to a religious organization in order to reclaim the spiritual in your life....mao na ha...minaw jud ni ate gwyn ha....

[Gwynhuever]

@dacs...why do you always do that? why do you pick on a person's ideas/belief? Look at your last post....the question of the real meaning of spiritual.....why do you always try to steer the discussion into a debate? Kon mo define ko bawos sad ka...nya di na sad ta mag human kay copy paste na sad ta banos2 sa atong mga "ammunitions"....of course you already know the meaning...for someone like you who has already posted "solid Catholic teachings" ang meaning na lang sa spiritual ...wala ka kabalo? What was the purpose of the question if not to undermine what I already meant?

Mora man ka abogado modala ug discussion bro....why would the specifics matter if they just inflame or turn away people from faith? Sa inyong ka specific naka convince mo ug agnostics? Ako unta tong hope nga makabig nako balik si shoeless kay ni express na intawon siya ug feeling of anti Church and hapit na jud daw siya ma anti Christ......my heart bleeds for people like him....so in my own little way i tried to throw a lifeline....pero thanks to people like you...nga pirmi mag atang ug posts nga contradictory sa inyoha ...i do not know if it will still have the impact....

unsa man jud diay purpose nimo for attending discussions like this bro? to enlighten and help...or to be superior with your ideas of how correct it is to follow the catholic church....

i used to think you were a kewl catholic...pero morag nasayop man siguro ko....but maybe na mis interpret lang nako imong post...so my apologies in advance if that is the case....

[omad]

^^^ OT: same exact reason why i don't want to express my views in the religion's thread.. somebody somehow would just shove their beliefs in my mouth then after all is said and done it would just turn out ugly.. nothing positive will be gained..

[Gwynhuever]

@omad ...kanyahay ra migo ta bro... :mrgreen: :mrgreen:

[dacs]

@dacs...why do you always do that? why do you pick on a person's ideas/belief? Look at your last post....the question of the real meaning of spiritual.....why do you always try to steer the discussion into a debate? Kon mo define ko bawos sad ka...nya di na sad ta mag human kay copy paste na sad ta banos2 sa atong mga "ammunitions"....of course you already know the meaning...for someone like you who has already posted "solid Catholic teachings" ang meaning na lang sa spiritual ...wala ka kabalo? What was the purpose of the question if not to undermine what I already meant?

Pardon me but, in all my time in the forum, you are first one (I think) to have claimed that the word spiritual has been given a different meaning than the original intent. As you can probably surmised, I am into this religion thingy. Â*You have tickled my curiosity. Â*Surprised and interested. Â*I do have a different take on that, but I really want to know your side.

Who knows? Â*Maybe I can use this incident and the consequent dialogue (if ever) on some other forum. Â*I intend to learn, to know, every argument I would be facing. Â*Please remember that you have asserted that a number of religious institutions have 'hijacked' the word. Â*So, do tell.

Mora man ka abogado modala ug discussion bro....why would the specifics matter if they just inflame or turn away people from faith? Sa inyong ka specific naka convince mo ug agnostics? Ako unta tong hope nga makabig nako balik si shoeless kay ni express na intawon siya ug feeling of anti Church and hapit na jud daw siya ma anti Christ......my heart bleeds for people like him....so in my own little way i tried to throw a lifeline....pero thanks to people like you...nga pirmi mag atang ug posts nga contradictory sa inyoha ...i do not know if it will still have the impact....

I never intended to convert anyone, but I do intend to defend the Catholic side of the argument, to show where the fault lays. Â*If my argument is accepted, good. Â*If not, may God bless you.

Anti-Christ ... huhm ...

unsa man jud diay purpose nimo for attending discussions like this bro? to enlighten and help...or to be superior with your ideas of how correct it is to follow the catholic church....

I am into apologetics and I am here to present the Catholic side. Â*If I am in error, I submit myself to the authority of the Catholic Church. Â*Truth is always superior than error. Â*I am for the Truth. Â*I am for Christ.

i used to think you were a kewl catholic...pero morag nasayop man siguro ko....but maybe na mis interpret lang nako imong post...so my apologies in advance if that is the case....

I never acted cool nor do I desire to be one. Â*I am a full-time Christian. Â*Cool or not, that would be my epitaph.

[Gwynhuever]

@dacs...then it is good i tagged an apology at the end....ha ha ha....now i understand better what motivates you...if the questions you posed were there for the sake of getting more info for a healthy discussion then it is perfectly fine by me and again my apologies for misinterpreting your intentions....most of the time man gud ang uban mag atang lang to "hijack" and to nitpick sa ideas sa uban...mao my bristles rise kon i get caught in situations like that....

by the way unsa man nang apologetics? twice nako ka read nimo refer to yourself as such....

all people who are for the TRUTH ...are kewl in my book....so there you go...(by now siguro ka kuha na sad ka sa akong dislike to argue and debate a certain point--- discuss and learn ok lang pero i absolutely don't find any point splitting hairs)