Jesus was a Gnostic

a reply to: LenatasataneL

Jesus forbids oath taking and says all who take oaths are of the evil one.

Well not exactly... he said say more then Yes or no is "evil"...

but im pretty sure he was trying to make a point as opposed to condemning said verbalization

originally posted by: chr0naut

originally posted by: LenatasataneL
a reply to: chr0naut

You have shown that anything else than your opinion is incorrect and you know everything. But you don't get what I am saying if you suggest I said Nazirite equals Gnostic.

My rationale was clear. Nazarenes were declared Gnostic, Jesus was a Nazarene as James was an Ebionim. Your 200ad crap is proven wrong buy the fact that they are prominently mentioned in the Dead Sea Scrolls and even mentioned in the Bible if you are clever enough to find it.

Drops mic, walks off stage.

Of course the Nazirites are mentioned in the Dead Sea Scrolls. The Nazirite oath is outlined in Numbers 6:1-21 - in the Torah. It has been part of Judaism from the start. The Nazirites were dedicated to the one true God, YHWH. They didn't believe in Aeons, a Demiurge, an underworld, Abraxas or a female deity called Sophia. Nazirites were ultra-orthodox Jews.

K. But I was talking about the Ebionim or Ebionites because who would dispute that Jesus was a Nazarene?

Gnostic has no absolute attachment to those deities as a term. The church decided that they were Gnostic, not me. Call the Pontiff.

The Gospels tell us that Jesus took the Nazirite oath. There are no reliable documents that tell us that James was Ebionite or that they even existed in the first century. James may have been an Ebionite but there is no documentary evidence of the fact.

James tells Paul " Remember the (Ebionim)poor"

Of course they are not going to make it known that he was talking about James Ebionites after calling them Gnostic heretics.

Make your attempt to deny it but it is in front of your face.

The statement is unsubstantiated and insistence that such an unsubstantiated statement is the case, is opinion, not fact, no matter how emphatically you believe it.

I substantiated it now. I wish I didn't assume everyone knows what I do, my bad.

originally posted by: Akragon
a reply to: LenatasataneL

Jesus forbids oath taking and says all who take oaths are of the evil one.

Well not exactly... he said say more then Yes or no is "evil"...

but im pretty sure he was trying to make a point as opposed to condemning said verbalization

"Swears by heaven or earth" he also said including it in the statement and really the crux of the teaching is if you take an oath you either joining some cult or you are untrustworthy and need to convince that you are telling the truth.

But it is exact to say Jesus forbids oaths specifically and by default of the nature of oaths.

"Of the evil one" is exactly what it says.

originally posted by: Raggedyman
Nazarites are forbidden to touch the dead
Your assumption fails completely
Jesus touched the dead, recorded history

Try again

Huh heh heh. Uhhhh. No, you are grasping at straws because you hate the word Gnostic.

You are a fundamental. Awesome. Got it.

Nazarene is the evolved word for Nazirite.

If you don't know Jesus was a Nazarene...that stinks. Now you do!

Even just by the definition of the word (it isn't a religion) there was no one who was more Gnostic than Jesus. His teachings are Gnostic.

Opinions aside, that is a fact.

originally posted by: LenatasataneL

originally posted by: chr0naut

originally posted by: LenatasataneL
a reply to: chr0naut

I would expect you to say all this and try and engage in a debate.

Let me state this:

I said what I said because I know it to be correct. Stating it isn't true or acting like an expert is not going to change my mind about anything. Neither is a link. Let's just say I disagree because I have learned enough to make an educated decision based on the material I have read.

And didn't Google it 5 minutes ago.

I have known about the assertion that Nazareth may not have existed in the 1st century and about the excavation that proved it wrong, since 2009 when it made headlines.

I am not an expert on Gnosticism. That is why I use Google search. Regardless, some of the things I have found refute what you say and have fairly impressive credibility.

It doesn't matter what method I used to find the information, nor how long I have known. Those issues are rather weak deflection. The facts remain.

You generalize too far, equating things that are at odds with each other, as being the same.

You want mainstream truth to be confirmed as bad as others do and will go to literally any means to preserve the image maybe because Paul said he was not a sinner if lying ... whatever he said.

All that you hear is rigged hoaxes and pious lies.

I don't much care about your opinion on my opinion or your negative purpose.

I merely stated a few facts and made a good observation of them

But you will argue anything then you make me bombard you with the truth until you go away.

I'm not in the mood for shenanigans today. Gnostic isn't bad, Nazarene isn't bad, nothing bad is going on so I don't know why you are such a Buzz Killington but try and have fun for once or join a convent I don't know...JK .😇

Truth is truth, you can't actually have alternate versions. This regardless of if Paul said it or not (no-one in this thread was speaking about Paul until you mentioned him?).

You are bombarding me with opinion. At least I am trying to validate my position with links to supportive details.

The Bible and the Dead Sea Scrolls use the word "Ebionim" which means "the poor". The Qumran community texts refer to themselves as "Ebionim", meaning "the poor". They didn't use the word "Ebionites" because they spoke Hebrew conversationally and "Poorites" is just not a valid use of the language.

Ebionites were post-Christian Messianic Jews who believed in Jesus. There is no mention of "Ebionites" in the Bible or in the Dead Sea Scrolls, the first documented use of that word/name was by Iraneus in the 2nd century.

I said that Gnostic does not equal Nazarene, I never made any value judgements about them.

a reply to: chr0naut

OK.

originally posted by: Akragon
a reply to: chr0naut

The Gospels tell us that Jesus took the Nazirite oath.

Erm... they do?

that wouldn't be Matt 26 you'd be referring to would it?

Matthew 2:23 and Luke 1:15 actually.

The Gospel of Matthew is written with a strongly Jewish bias and is probably the most "Jewish" of the Gospels. In it the writer uses wordplay on the Hebrew language and cultural references that would elude those not steeped in it.

There is actually no directly worded prophecy that says the Messiah will be called "a Nazarene". However, Isaiah 11:1 says (in regard to the Messiah) "There shall come forth a shoot from the stump of Jesse, and a branch from his roots shall bear fruit". The word used here, and that was specifically applied to the Messiah in several places through the Old Testament, was "the Branch", in Hebrew "Netzer".

Hebrew spelling of Nazareth is "N-TS-R" or "Netzer". When transliterated to Greek (in which the Gospels were written), there is only one letter different between Nazirite "Ναζιραῖος" and Nazarene "Ναζωραῖος".

Luke 1:15 describes Jesus as being compliant with the conditions of the Nazirite vow from the womb.

So I suppose Jesus didn't actually take a Nazirite vow but He was compliant with its conditions and, as per the references, could be 'called a Nazarite'.

a reply to: chr0naut

He would have been educated as all Nazarenes were and it is a historical mystery .

I see you liked my branch to root of Jesse connection . That pleases me.

a reply to: chr0naut

Oh and you are 100 percent incorrect about your Ebionites statements. They were called the poor but it is Ebionim and that was deliberately obscured.

Ebionim is one of the 3 main sects mentioned in the Scrolls. Why do say things that are totally false? It's dishonest to say for the fact that there is no truth to it. You are wrong but you say it like a fact.

WTF is that?

originally posted by: LenatasataneL

originally posted by: chr0naut

originally posted by: LenatasataneL
a reply to: chr0naut

You have shown that anything else than your opinion is incorrect and you know everything. But you don't get what I am saying if you suggest I said Nazirite equals Gnostic.

My rationale was clear. Nazarenes were declared Gnostic, Jesus was a Nazarene as James was an Ebionim. Your 200ad crap is proven wrong buy the fact that they are prominently mentioned in the Dead Sea Scrolls and even mentioned in the Bible if you are clever enough to find it.

Drops mic, walks off stage.

Of course the Nazirites are mentioned in the Dead Sea Scrolls. The Nazirite oath is outlined in Numbers 6:1-21 - in the Torah. It has been part of Judaism from the start. The Nazirites were dedicated to the one true God, YHWH. They didn't believe in Aeons, a Demiurge, an underworld, Abraxas or a female deity called Sophia. Nazirites were ultra-orthodox Jews.

K. But I was talking about the Ebionim or Ebionites because who would dispute that Jesus was a Nazarene?

Gnostic has no absolute attachment to those deities as a term. The church decided that they were Gnostic, not me. Call the Pontiff.

The Gospels tell us that Jesus took the Nazirite oath. There are no reliable documents that tell us that James was Ebionite or that they even existed in the first century. James may have been an Ebionite but there is no documentary evidence of the fact.

James tells Paul " Remember the (Ebionim)poor"

Of course they are not going to make it known that he was talking about James Ebionites after calling them Gnostic heretics.

Make your attempt to deny it but it is in front of your face.

The statement is unsubstantiated and insistence that such an unsubstantiated statement is the case, is opinion, not fact, no matter how emphatically you believe it.

I substantiated it now. I wish I didn't assume everyone knows what I do, my bad.

James said "remember the poor", not "remember the poorites".

Here is the Dead Sea Scrolls, I own the book but I will provide a link to where it talks about the Ebionites.

Hymns to the Poor

There are more mentions and they are definitely a sect.

originally posted by: chr0naut

originally posted by: LenatasataneL

originally posted by: chr0naut

originally posted by: LenatasataneL
a reply to: chr0naut

You have shown that anything else than your opinion is incorrect and you know everything. But you don't get what I am saying if you suggest I said Nazirite equals Gnostic.

My rationale was clear. Nazarenes were declared Gnostic, Jesus was a Nazarene as James was an Ebionim. Your 200ad crap is proven wrong buy the fact that they are prominently mentioned in the Dead Sea Scrolls and even mentioned in the Bible if you are clever enough to find it.

Drops mic, walks off stage.

Of course the Nazirites are mentioned in the Dead Sea Scrolls. The Nazirite oath is outlined in Numbers 6:1-21 - in the Torah. It has been part of Judaism from the start. The Nazirites were dedicated to the one true God, YHWH. They didn't believe in Aeons, a Demiurge, an underworld, Abraxas or a female deity called Sophia. Nazirites were ultra-orthodox Jews.

K. But I was talking about the Ebionim or Ebionites because who would dispute that Jesus was a Nazarene?

Gnostic has no absolute attachment to those deities as a term. The church decided that they were Gnostic, not me. Call the Pontiff.

The Gospels tell us that Jesus took the Nazirite oath. There are no reliable documents that tell us that James was Ebionite or that they even existed in the first century. James may have been an Ebionite but there is no documentary evidence of the fact.

James tells Paul " Remember the (Ebionim)poor"

Of course they are not going to make it known that he was talking about James Ebionites after calling them Gnostic heretics.

Make your attempt to deny it but it is in front of your face.

The statement is unsubstantiated and insistence that such an unsubstantiated statement is the case, is opinion, not fact, no matter how emphatically you believe it.

I substantiated it now. I wish I didn't assume everyone knows what I do, my bad.

James said "remember the poor", not "remember the poorites".

That is absurd and one of the worst arguments ever. I can't help you.


Click on that link to the Dead Sea Scrolls and find out the extent of your wrongness.

You will make a reason why I am wrong but I know that you know. I don't need to hear you say it and denial is just confirming it more than it is actually denying it.

originally posted by: LenatasataneL

originally posted by: Raggedyman
Nazarites are forbidden to touch the dead
Your assumption fails completely
Jesus touched the dead, recorded history

Try again

Huh heh heh. Uhhhh. No, you are grasping at straws because you hate the word Gnostic.

You are a fundamental. Awesome. Got it.

Nazarene is the evolved word for Nazirite.

If you don't know Jesus was a Nazarene...that stinks. Now you do!

You might want to put in a little more research, you seem a little lost

Start with researching the difference between Nazarene and nazarite, in your own time gnosisfaith, in your own time

I can be the fundamentalist if that makes you happy

a reply to: Raggedyman

You are hilarious to the extreme!!! Hahahaha.


Why are the people who claim to know the truth about God so afraid of the truth?

Or any kind of unapproved thought?

I think that is the source of the word Goyim.

a reply to: Raggedyman

I mean, think about it. You're life is trashing any non Christian religion on the internet. You think you are a Jesus cop or something. That you can even think that a lone soul in this world is interested in your negative b.s. then you just don't have the ability to asses your own character.

You don't know much rather but you have no problem pretending.

You are the same person. Padawan , whatever your name is today. Your responses are the same. Please stop this and please mods why do you allow this to happen.

It's a shame because this is a debate website, where people can challenge your views without being branded fundamentalists or "satanic chrisitans". What letter did you write to mods for them to allow this to persist. It's a plague on what this website was designed for. How can everyone be wrong and you right on all subjects?

a reply to: GemmyMcGemJew

Who is it I called a Satanic Christian and you are quite mad. I am debating it isn't my fault I happen to be right.

At least I have a greater purpose than finding a pawadan.

a reply to: LenatasataneL

Lol. You happen to be right. Fluent in ancient Arabic no doubt. You mock others for believing poor translation yet it does not apply to you. Strange.

Please stop the I am right all the time. You are not. You are only showing your inability to look at other sources and interpret the information in front of you. That is all.

Not fooling anyone. I was right with my assumption. Your responses are identical.

a reply to: Akragon

what specific verse in Matt 26 are you referring too?