SageTree

An excellent introduction to people who don't know about these documents and very interesting to consider and shake up what we know and think we know about Christianity and the Disciples of Jesus.



Also worth a watch.

The Lost Gospel of Judas

This is a very in depth look at another 'Lost' Gospel, not from the same dig as the Nag Hammadi finds. Its a welcomed mind blowing experience, as its a complete shift from what is presented in Church....

Although I have to say, I could never understand why Judas got such a bum wrap, when he was surely part of the 'plan' theologically speaking.

In Joy,
SageTree

__________________

Being

as soon as I have a chance to watch this (daughter sleeping or something) I will provide my feedback

__________________
R.I.P. Gov

Bad dog

christianity is idol worshipping at it's worst.
A single god divided into a father, son and holy ghost. How much bollox can that be?
If there was a jesus, he was a man and not a diety and should not be worshipped as a god.

btw who the fuck is the holy spirit anyway?

I'm sorry if this causes anyone offense but it is my genuine feeling. Jesus was jewish, he was one of ours.

__________________

this is where i live

farmergiles

That's catholicism, not christianity in general.

__________________
Cultivate a stoic calmness

Bad dog

not just catholicism, you have some pretty whacky protestant churches out there, especially state-side.

As a Jew the whole Messiah thing is a bit problematic. I'm not saying that Jesus wasn't the messiah, however, even if he was, he was completely ignored by those he was meant to be the messiah of, namely my lot, the Jews.

We're still waiting for him and if we missed it then it's the same as if it didn't happen. Technicaly.

__________________

this is where i live

Jewish Pork

Sage, do these docs actually get into the theory that the Catholic Church destroyed or hid books of the bible?

I'm actually somewhat interested in this theory.

SageTree

I certain can't argue with how some Christian understanding is very much seeing God as Three distinct beings, rather than God the Father, God the Son and God the Holy Spirit.

Speaking of "the fuck the Holy Spirit is" I think Shekhinah, the Divine Presence of God, might best sum of what it is, and likely where it came from.

Shekhinah, to my understanding is not different or separate from God.

Funny enough growing up I always thought of the Holy Spirit as embracing the Feminine side or qualities of God, and what I learned about Shekhinah, is that it's a feminine word in Hebrew, and often associated with the Feminine qualities of God!

Maybe I was Jewish in my past life?

So in this way, perhaps Yesua, which means 'Yahweh delivers' or 'Yahweh rescues' also could point to a 'God with us', or maybe better yet.... 'God through us'.

I don't particularly believe Jesus' 'Divinity' nor the later Christologies to dogmatize it.

I don't believe they were ever intended to be part of the tradition... Actually, I don't believe it was ever to be separate from Judaism... and for at least 2-3 centuries it wasn't, and Christians went to the Temple in Jerusalem.

For a long time Christianity was not formally anything as it still had it's roots in Judaism, so it was monotheistic in it's view of God.

Over time, and especially once the separation occurred (not getting into THAT history) there were many Non-Trinitarian and Unitarian Christians whic is primarily what the video talks about.

(Which is the vastness of Christianity, which was still very much a part of Judaism at the time of these writings)

Unitarian and Non-Trinitarian Christian Churches still exist today, I consider myself one of these folks as I don't need a High Christology to find meaning in Jesus' teachings,which are exegesis of the Scriptures, obviously the Hebrew ones

However I believe there are Churches and Members who have a 'correct' understanding of Unity of God, expressed in a Triune manner, and use language to reflect this.

The standard use to be to baptize and the other holy bits 'In the Name of God the Father, God the Son and God the Holy Spirit', and it still is.... however in many, particularly Protestant, Churches today the bits are only done 'In Jesus' Name'. This is confusing and odd to me. It makes it hard to be 'in' the service completely.


So sorry for getting into my own stuff there, but essentially this is what I'm saying...

• Shekinah is 'God with us' to paraphrase, and to a large extent this is what it is in the Trinitarian model. It's a way to explain how God is still present in the world around us and the world in us.
  
  (Is it needed, can't God just BE with us? IMO, sure.... but I think this Jewish idea is what gave birth to the HS in Christian thought.)

• There was and is Unitarian and Non-Trinitarian Christians. These videos talk about the early Church and ideas about Jesus based on these writings found in 1948.

• Trinitarianism smacks of polytheism, understandable from a distance as well as how some people approach the idea, but deep down know that even when it's not understood in the best of ways it still comes back to God first and only.
  • The Trinity...
    
    • Ideally and Practically, explains how God 'IS' in the World..... much like how Judaism explains it with Shekhinah.
      
    • Logically, the three elements are vaguely in the scripture (authenticity withholding) and could lead one to think this is how we're to understand God in the World.
      
    • Realistically.... The Trinity wasn't dogmatized until the Romans God their claws into making it a State religion.

I could talk for hours on this dude. About histories.... about my own thoughts and understandings... but I'll spare it till another post maybe

A personal note though, the more I learn, study and incorporate Judaism into my Life, the deeper my understanding of Jesus' Jewishness shines. In most of what he taught (but not all that was attributed to him), what he quoted, and the symbolism he chose to use.

Hopefully that helps a little from this 'side' dude

Honestly in my Christianity I probably have a lot more in common with Islam that Christianity.... and believe you me when I say I've looked into that aspect of Knowing as well.

Perhaps Bag Dog, you'd do well to watch this video and get an Alternative view of Christianity. I think it'd really be beneficial, Brother, with all do respect to your own Path and leanings.

Kindly,
SageTree

__________________

SageTree

It's not a theory exactly and 'these' books are NOT the one's who talk about it.

Catholic history large in part have documented the destruction and repression of these books pretty well.

Here's a bit of an intro if we end up talking more about it:

Developement of the Christian Biblical Canon

The Catholic, Orthodox, Oriental Orthodox, Protestant Cannons differ today.

Some acknowledge special writings, such as the Oriental Church, Protestants DO acknowledge the Apocrypha writings as useful for edification, but not canonizing, while other Protestants don't read or have them in their Bible's at all.

I'll hopefully be able to come up with some more stuff to show you,

But for now, check out the video because it DOES talk about it to some degree and gets a little into the whys of it.

Cheers.

__________________

deadhead94

Does this new stuff give the bible any credibility or its it more anonymously written ancient bullshit from the same people that brought you the "facts" of a geocentric universe and threatened anyone who proved them wrong with a horrible death?

__________________

Bad dog

Sage, Yesu was known as yesu the Nazarene (being based in Nazareth).
When Paul finally reached Rome and began preaching he referred to Yesu as the 'anointed one' Hebrew translation 'meshiach' and in Greek 'Christos'.
Therefore Jesus Christos becomes Jesus Christ and is now something completely different than the Yesu of Nazareth that was hung up to a cross.

__________________

this is where i live

SageTree

History, Sociology and Religion walk pretty closely through time, criss-crossing, intertwined..... effecting, pulling and persuading each other, as still does today.

So what this find does it sheds light onto those issues now, and in that time period, which you could say adds credibility to the facts on the subject at hand. It helps add knowledge of the time, the culture and philosophy of the world in which the early Christian community (still part of Judaism at the time) developed, which also had a large Gnostic contingent, of which wasn't always Christian, but rather a Syncretic movement of the Hellenic world.

• Religiously, it provides insights into theology and matters that were important in spirituality at the time, as well as, shows the vastness of understanding and meaning making centered around the life and teachings of Jesus, the cult developing around him and of the state which Judaism existed.

• Culturally, much like Religiously, it shows us the people of the time engaging in these ways of meaning making as a people and how they interacted with other cultures intermingling with their own.

• And Historically, as it also reflects on the other two it helps us see the events that were taking place at the time, what was going on, the people's response, why they chose to place importance on certain aspects of culture and how that was ingrained into their religious-spiritual practices.

On a note of 'authenticity':

There is no doubt question on what is the most authentic manuscripts and how/were they changed. Finding texts that were buried for centuries and centuries, we're able to compare the text now and then, much like were done with the Dead Sea Scrolls, as they pertain to the Hebrew Scriptures.

Perhaps surprisingly, "Bible Stuff" isn't the only things that were found.
There were many texts of the time which we influential.

It also provides authenticity to the fact that there were other religious ideas, Gnosticism, which, like I said, was a Syncretic movement, but also had strong leanings in certain groups to Christian and Jewish thought (which at the time they were distinct religions yet), Messiahism and Apocalyptism.

And it shows authentically where these ideas where taken to, which was Egypt in this case, as well, it shows how the influence there from texts from further east and north were read and understood be these people.

Basically, it has a REAL element of anthropology, which is why I said 'sociology' earlier at the beginning, fore anthropology is nothing more than ancient sociology.

One way to measure which ones were more important, for instance, is to see the prevalence of certain texts as opposed to other ones. One can say one's that were few or singular were for study or were newer and hadn't been copied. On the other hand, ones that were found in many many caves could be considered to be of great importance as they would have wanted to have these texts readily available.

I know full well what you were asking early on in this post, but have basically chosen to answer it in a way I feel is open and honest from a scientific eye, which I know is VERY important to you, Brother.


I hope that answer suits you, deadhead, because I don't want to pick on your perceptions (too much), that is the small box, you firmly and conservatively place religion in.

Which to my estimation is solidly rooted in the Abahamic line of thinking.

Very fundamentalist thinking really

I can't pretend like I don't understand where you come from, but there is zealotry in all types of thought....

Open your mind and let it out of the box and let that shit breath once in a while.

You can have a well grounded position without dripping of sarcasm every time the subject comes up.

Why do you feel the need to zealously oppose things you don't believe in? It's not like they are going to sneak up on you and bite you in the ass or that you'll accept it by accident.

I'm fully capable of hearing what you have to say without the peanut gallery sidebars, Brother.

If it's not 'real' to you, then don't sound so fired up about it all the time, ya know?

As we know with zealots of all kinds and all walks of life,
Those who are the loudest about being against an issue, often have the most inward struggle with the topic.


Cheers Dude
SageTree

__________________

SageTree

I appreciate you sharing all that Bad Dog,
and respectfully said,
I don't want you to burn your well-said-kindness out on telling me stuff I know.

So I humbly accept what you are saying as it's very thoughtfully said.

I'm aware of this part of history,
But do appreciate seeing variant translation/spelling of Yesu/Yesua/Yeshua, but thanks for that tid bit.

Paul is NOT my favourite writer nor at the psuedo writings attributed to him, which is where a lot of the exclusionary verses people love so much came from.

No doubt there are story telling the religion or spiritual path OF Jesus....
Paul taught a religion ABOUT Jesus.

I'm only interested in the previous example.

In my mind 'Christ' is something of a consciousness that lives in us all, much like a 'Buddha-nature'. Religion and Spiritual practices are a way to grow close to that Inner-Being, that piece of God or the Absolute, if you will.

Jesus would have been a man in right relationship with that part of his Self,
And therefore with God-among-us.

Of all the Gospel accounts Mark's beginning and the end (before the later additions) is one of my favourites. No virgin birth story, Jesus trusts in the Goodness of God, even though he doesn't seem to completely understand and sees uncertain at times (IE My God my God, why have you foresaken me as opposed to Luke's Forgive them for they know not what they do), which actually adds some humanness, imo, and also the ending, the women see the tomb, the stone is rolled back, and the women leave, 'not telling anyone', which is actually what Jesus repeatedly says after his healing-work to the healed through out the Gospel.... but people always do anyways AND there is no assertion into heaven in Mark's Gospel.

So along comes the 'Divine Commission' and BAM... Mark's Gospel gets a syncretic ending.... :/

__________________