Did Paul Invent Christianity?

a reply to: Malocchio

If you want, Google the 5 pillars of Islam and read the Qur'an. Other than that it's basically the same as Christianity, minus Paul and the Trinity.

1) Shahada: Testifying to God's One-ness: The declaration "There is no God but Allah and Muhammad is His prophet."
2) Salat: Prayer. General Features of Islamic Prayer. ...
3) Zakat: Giving charity. Originally a free-will donation (what is no called Sadaqah ). ...
4) Sawm: Fast. ...
5) Hajj: Pilgrimage.

ya?

The only truly sacred book is the Qur'an, meaning recitation. Hadiths are used in varying degrees depending on your place of residence and some prefer not to use it.

Pray 5 times a day, fast periodically (Ramadan for instance) pilgrimage.

I am still learning myself, to be perfectly honest and I have only read the Qur'an which confirms Jesus as Messiah, the virgin birth and mentions Miriam more than the New Testament.

As far as i know Jesus is mentioned as a prophet in the Quran... yet there is 4 books Dedicated to him in the NT

144,000 Prophets are said to have existed including Zoroaster and other unknown Prophets.

Sounds like revelation to me... doesn't really count lol

I don't know what else to tell you, I honestly have only been a Muslim for a year and it is a laid back low maintenance religion that doesn't ask much.

seems to be the main problem with all religion... it "asks" of you...

originally posted by: Malocchio
a reply to: Akragon

You will have to Google the exact location of Gospel of the Hebrews Clement of Alexandria, I don't know the page but I know it is vol 2 or 3 of the Ante Nicene fathers series available at CCEL or Sacred texts.com.

I know it's there though.

I've read it my friend... though its been a long while

i was wondering where Clement actually quoted Thomas...

Sounds Familiar but i can't seem to find it

originally posted by: Akragon
a reply to: Malocchio

If you want, Google the 5 pillars of Islam and read the Qur'an. Other than that it's basically the same as Christianity, minus Paul and the Trinity.

1) Shahada: Testifying to God's One-ness: The declaration "There is no God but Allah and Muhammad is His prophet."
2) Salat: Prayer. General Features of Islamic Prayer. ...
3) Zakat: Giving charity. Originally a free-will donation (what is no called Sadaqah ). ...
4) Sawm: Fast. ...
5) Hajj: Pilgrimage.

ya?

The only truly sacred book is the Qur'an, meaning recitation. Hadiths are used in varying degrees depending on your place of residence and some prefer not to use it.

Pray 5 times a day, fast periodically (Ramadan for instance) pilgrimage.

I am still learning myself, to be perfectly honest and I have only read the Qur'an which confirms Jesus as Messiah, the virgin birth and mentions Miriam more than the New Testament.

As far as i know Jesus is mentioned as a prophet in the Quran... yet there is 4 books Dedicated to him in the NT

144,000 Prophets are said to have existed including Zoroaster and other unknown Prophets.

Sounds like revelation to me... doesn't really count lol

I don't know what else to tell you, I honestly have only been a Muslim for a year and it is a laid back low maintenance religion that doesn't ask much.

seems to be the main problem with all religion... it "asks" of you...

Jesus is definitely the Messiah.

I have actually not been asked to do anything since taking Shahada, like I said they ask little though I have never personally been asked to do anything.

I go to Masjid at leisure and pray everyday, I hardly find it demanding as praying clears my head and the people are super nice at the Mosque, they have a library of books to borrow and have given me more than I have given them, which is nothing and they gave me my Qur'an.

People need community, I enjoy it. I also enjoy the looks on ignorant people's faces when I tell them I am a Muslim.

I get a kick out of it, though I live in a very tolerant area some people are...trailer park trash and hate Muslims literally because they are morons.

But theologically I do agree with Islam. Which is why I became one.

a reply to: Akragon

I will look then. Give me 5 minutes.

ETA: Stromateis 2.9.45.5, 5.14.96.3

That's according to CCEL, good luck, I don't know what the numbering system is but that's what I found.

a reply to: Akragon

I found it, chapter 9 towards the end.

Clement Gospel Hebrews

originally posted by: Malocchio
a reply to: Akragon

I found it, chapter 9 towards the end.

Clement Gospel Hebrews

I don't see a quote from Thomas in the last bit...

Hebrews... and said writer refers to it as "gospel"

originally posted by: Akragon

originally posted by: Malocchio
a reply to: Akragon

I found it, chapter 9 towards the end.

Clement Gospel Hebrews

I don't see a quote from Thomas in the last bit...

Hebrews... and said writer refers to it as "gospel"

Yes, as the Gospel of the Hebrews, like I said that is what he calls it but the quote is from the Gospel of Thomas, like I said.

I read it myself so I know it's there, I don't know what you are missing but it's right there.

"He that wonders shall reign, he that reigns shall rest."

Is definitely a quote from Thomas, and I gave you the location of the other quote, also from Thomas.

The full quote is repeated in book V chapter 14.

Maybe you need to reread Thomas because I am 100% positive the above quote is from Thomas and equally sure that if you looked you would find the other quote I gave you the book and location of.

It took me less than 5 mins. to find both using Google, so I don't know why you couldn't or how you could say that you couldn't find that quote, which is definitely from the G. of Thomas.

Although maybe I am just such a huge fan of Thomas I know the quotes too well and you simply didn't recognize it, I read a lot and Thomas is one of my favorites.

The best writing of Clement is his elucidation of "The True Gnostic."

Bringing me to another point, you asked for an explanation of Islam earlier but the truth is there is not one Islam, though everything starts with Quran.

Sufis for instance are like the Gnostics of the early Christian era, having all sorts of different eras of different thought, studying the philosophy of the Greeks, prefering to call God The Real and having diverse philosophies of their own.

So if you are really interested sacred-texts has an Islam section with many Sufi books that will give you an idea of just how diverse Islam really is, not at all the one way only religion people think it is.

And Sufis are an excepted and admired form of Islam, within Islam. They are essentially Gnostics and proud of it. If Gnosticism is of interest to you Sufi literature is a dream come true.

I spent the night reading about Sufism because I was curious, I knew they were Gnostics but I didn't know their history and teachings.

Very interesting and diverse is Islam.

a reply to: Malocchio

Here’s the 2 quotes you were thinking of…

The Stromata, or Miscellanies – Book 2
CHAPTER IX -- THE CONNECTION OF THE CHRISTIAN VIRTUES.
…
So also in the Gospel to the Hebrews it is written, "He that wonders shall reign, and he that has reigned shall rest.

Source

Gospel of Thomas verse 2

2. Jesus said, "Those who seek should not stop seeking until they find. When they find, they will be disturbed. When they are disturbed, they will marvel, and will reign over all. And after they have reigned they will rest."

Ok, it’s not identical, but it’s close enough!…IMO…there’s clearly a cross over theology taking place there…

Originally posted by Malocchio
Also a Gospel of the Ebionites is quoted from so I doubt that their Gospel had anything to do with Matthew, Eusebius was not that bright really.

Originally posted by Joecroft
So you think the History that the Ebionites had a book of Matthew was either fabricated by Eusebius, or that Eusebius made a mistake or some kind of error…?

I’ve been thinking about this and wondering if Eusebius made an honest mistake…

Eusebius (who lived roughly AD 265-340) would have been basing his History of the Ebonites based on critiques and quotations (tiny in some cases) by the early church Fathers.

The Gospel of Thomas has a number of repeated phrases that are also found in some of the other 4 Cannonical Gospels.

Perhaps Eusebius saw a quote from Gospel of Thomas, and just assumed (without knowing) that it was from the book of Matthew; Matthew being a book he would have been familiar with etc…

It's just an idea but it’s certianly possible…


- JC

a reply to: Joecroft

Yes, I actually did post the quote from Clement, the shorter version and provide a link but thanks for posting it.

For the record Clement, not Eusebius, was the one I was saying quoted Thomas calling it Hebrews.

I am sure Eusebius made many mistakes, honest or not I really can't say for certain.

Although there is no way I can believe that he actually didn't know that no such man as Ebion ever existed, he clearly relied on the ignorance of the day to keep that lie alive.

And why? I can only imagine to slander the original disciples of Jesus and James, to promote the Romans version of events as more true and superior.

Calling the Nazarenes heretics is just... disturbing. Calling the Ebionim ''poor in intellect" shows he knows what Ebionim means making it obvious he knew no Ebion ever existed.

He was a liar, I have no doubt, or an idiot. God forbid the Catholics discovered (gasp!) that Jesus was a mere man and Paul a rejected apostate by the first to know Jesus.

Although the Bible itself makes that clear to anyone who is good at reading and thinking, regarding Paul, not too many people could read in Eusebius time and his ''history" was more for later generations and new priests (probably).

a reply to: Joecroft

If you use the quote from book 5 it's identical to Thomas, the book 2 version is an incomplete quote, re: Stromata by Clement.

I am also pretty sure that Eusebius met the Ebionites so he really had no excuse for falsifying their origins to a non-existent man named Ebion.

He lived in Caesarea, which is I believe the Romans name for the conquered Judea and had to have had direct contact if he had read their scriptures, being so different from the Romans version he really had no choice but to call them dumb and heretics as well as neither Jew nor Christian and denounce them.

Otherwise it would prove that Jesus was mortal and born in the natural way.

How could Romans know more about the origins of a Jewish religion based on Yeshua than the Hebrews themselves, who had been there since the beginning and didn't adopt the faith to oppress an Empire?

a reply to: whereislogic

Originally posted by whereislogic
Btw, Joecroft, Muslims do not believe Jesus was the "firstborn of all creation" (Col.1:15) and "the beginning of the creation by God" (Rev. 3:14). For them Jesus is the same as all the other prophets (or almost the same, in terms of importance and role), even Muhammad as the "last prophet" seems to be more special to them than Jesus. They also do not believe Jesus is God's appointed King (and Lord) of God's Kingdom (Acts 2:36, 5:31, Matthew 28:18, John 3:35), or our "great high priest" (Hebrews 4:14-16). And Jehovah's witnesses believe Jesus is a god, a divine being, a mighty one, see definitions 4 and 8 for the word "God" (or "god" or "gods") in the video below at 3:00.

Yes, I understand that you see Jesus as Divine…

In my reply to Chester John; Just to clarify, what I meant is that JWs don’t believe Jesus is God the Father and neither do Muslims…

Originally posted by whereislogic
Muslims do not believe that "In the beginning the Word [Jesus] was with God" (John 1:1a) because "Jehovah produced me [Jesus] as the beginning of his way, the earliest of his achievements of long ago." (Proverbs 8:22)
And like I said that Jesus "was a god/divine being/heavenly being/godlike one/mighty one" (John 1:1c) as other angels are called and that he "was beside him [Jehovah God] as a master worker."

You quoted proverbs 8 and describe Jesus being beside God as a “master worker”; (other verses render it as “…Craftsmen at His side”)…but you then go onto say this below…

Originally posted by whereislogic
…
…ask a witness of Jehovah about whether or not Jesus is a "co-creator" and they'll be able to explain in more detail why he's not, probably using terminologies such as "instrument of creation" and "agent of creation". Whereas Jehovah is the source of creation and therefore called the Creator.

How can you say the verses in Proverbs 8 are not talking about God and a co-creator…?

Verses 27 to 29 talk about the aspects of creation which were formed and then right after verse 30 states, “Then I was the craftsmen at his side…”

Which means the “Co-creator” (the craftsmen), was right there by Gods side, helping God with creation from the very beginning…


- JC

a reply to: Malocchio

Originally posted by Malocchio
If you use the quote from book 5 it's identical to Thomas, the book 2 version is an incomplete quote, re: Stromata by Clement.

Yes, I found it …that’s a much better quote…Thanks…

Originally posted by Malocchio
I am also pretty sure that Eusebius met the Ebionites so he really had no excuse for falsifying their origins to a non-existent man named Ebion.

He lived in Caesarea, which is I believe the Romans name for the conquered Judea and had to have had direct contact if he had read their scriptures, being so different from the Romans version he really had no choice but to call them dumb and heretics as well as neither Jew nor Christian and denounce them.

Otherwise it would prove that Jesus was mortal and born in the natural way.

I’m pretty sure I remember watching a documentary many years back, which talked about how the Ebionites had a Gospel of Matthew but had removed the Virgin birth etc…but I can’t remember the name of it…

But maybe history has updated itself since then, because it would appear that it was “Epiphanius of Salamis”, who misidentified the “Gospel of the Ebionites”, as being a modified version of the “Gospel of Matthew”…

The absence of the Virgin birth though continued to be a theme in the “Gospel of the Ebionites”, although this is only based again on small fragments of the text itself, found in the Church fathers writings…

But Yeah, like you were saying, any other belief (no Virgin Birth) which went against orthodoxy had to be stamped out by the early Roman Church…

How do you view this issue though, considering that you’re a Muslim and Islam believes in the Virgin birth…just curious…?

Originally posted by Malocchio
How could Romans know more about the origins of a Jewish religion based on Yeshua than the Hebrews themselves, who had been there since the beginning and didn't adopt the faith to oppress an Empire?

Yeah, exactly. The true beliefs of Jesus and the Nazarenes didn’t start inside Rome…but the Religion of Christianity was created by Rome…


- JC

a reply to: Joecroft

Honestly I view the tradition of the virgin birth as an esoteric tradition, not literally.

The virgin birth is a metaphor or allegory for the science of Gnosis or being ''born again" (illuminated, enlightened).

As is the ressurection of the dead. You die to your base passions and are cleansed of your sins in the water, the Holy Spirit then grants you Wisdom, the ability to ''see."

At which point you are born again and filled with ''fire" for the Mysteries of the Kingdom of God.

And so begins the never ending quest for knowledge.

Virgin birth=Born again, ressurected.

originally posted by: Joecroft

2. Jesus said, "Those who seek should not stop seeking until they find. When they find, they will be disturbed. When they are disturbed, they will marvel, and will reign over all. And after they have reigned they will rest."

Such an inspiring quote, especially since we know it's true from the Messiah. I'm currently in a mixture of being disturbed and marveling, and have tasted what the reign will be like.

originally posted by: Malocchio
a reply to: Joecroft

Honestly I view the tradition of the virgin birth as an esoteric tradition, not literally.
Virgin birth=Born again, ressurected.

Apparently it is more common than you think, and Jesus being born in such a way seems imperative: no poisoned seed from the biological father.

Parthenogenesis

a reply to: Joecroft

And Matthew is only the traditional author of that book.

Regardless, I find it unlikely that the Jews redacted the true Gospel of Matthew.

I find it more likely that the Romans added to it and edited it, told everyone that it was the original and burned the real original.

It's not out of character for the Romans at all. They had little interest in the truth being known to all and did actually destroy many books about Jesus that didn't fit their ideas and possibly were damaging to them.

The Apocrypha we have today all exist against extreme odds in Ethiopia and Slavonic mostly, preserved against the decrees of Athanasius and didn't start emerging until the 1800's or so.

Thank God they weren't found earlier when people were less enlightened!

a reply to: cooperton

What exactly is more common than I think?

That people view the v.b. as I do?

I will look at your link now.

ETA: Your Amazon link has a book claiming that women can self concieve, that is garbage.

The description of the book claims Zoroaster was born of a virgin though he was not and only prophecied that a savior would be born of a virgin and usher in the era of peace, the destruction of evil.

Which has yet to happen, if anything Zoroaster was the originator of the prophecy of one born of a virgin leading many to make the claim in later generations.

And, no, virgin birth is not more common than I think, it never has happened in the history of the world.

originally posted by: cooperton

originally posted by: Joecroft

2. Jesus said, "Those who seek should not stop seeking until they find. When they find, they will be disturbed. When they are disturbed, they will marvel, and will reign over all. And after they have reigned they will rest."

Such an inspiring quote, especially since we know it's true from the Messiah. I'm currently in a mixture of being disturbed and marveling, and have tasted what the reign will be like.

originally posted by: Malocchio
a reply to: Joecroft

Honestly I view the tradition of the virgin birth as an esoteric tradition, not literally.
Virgin birth=Born again, ressurected.

Apparently it is more common than you think, and Jesus being born in such a way seems imperative: no poisoned seed from the biological father.

Parthenogenesis

Since when did normal conception become ''poisonous"?

My seed is not poison, no woman has ever died from receiving my "seed."

originally posted by: Akragon

brother... Even Jesus said he did not come to bring peace... but a sword

Isn't a sword meant to cause division... both physically and spiritually in this case?

Divide the grain from the chaff, the goats from the sheep, yes. But should a house be divided?

"...whoever is not against us is for us"

originally posted by: Malocchio

And, no, virgin birth is not more common than I think, it never has happened in the history of the world.

Do you not understand the power of God?

I'm not sure why I posted that link to the amazon book. Here is a more relevant link regarding parthenogenesis:

Parthenogenesis

if It happens naturally, it can definitely happen with supernatural influence.

originally posted by: Malocchio
a reply to: Joecroft

The virgin birth is a metaphor or allegory for the science of Gnosis or being ''born again" (illuminated, enlightened).

The events in Jesus's life are metaphorically, spiritually, and literally true. The Truth in its absolute form manifests on all levels

originally posted by: cooperton

originally posted by: Akragon

brother... Even Jesus said he did not come to bring peace... but a sword

Isn't a sword meant to cause division... both physically and spiritually in this case?

Divide the grain from the chaff, the goats from the sheep, yes. But should a house be divided?

"...whoever is not against us is for us"

originally posted by: Malocchio

And, no, virgin birth is not more common than I think, it never has happened in the history of the world.

Do you not understand the power of God?

This is your argument for the reality of virgin birth?

Quite rhetorical if you ask me, regardless of God power he doesn't allow virgins to get pregnant.

And nobody ''understands" the power of God.

I do understand the power of esoteric mythology, devolved into a story taken literally it loses its intended meaning and people start believing things that don't happen did.

Because of a book, mythological in nature, you want to convince yourself that it is a historical fact and scientifically possible?

Sorry, it doesn't happen. You can convince yourself all you want that an esoteric legend is actually historical but I am a bit too enlightened for such nonsense and understand it has a deeper meaning that is voided by literally believing it.

I'm not sure why I posted that link to the amazon book. Here is a more relevant link regarding parthenogenesis:

Parthenogenesis

if It happens naturally, it can definitely happen with supernatural influence.

Ok? Sounds like b.s. to me but whatever.

originally posted by: Malocchio
a reply to: Joecroft

The virgin birth is a metaphor or allegory for the science of Gnosis or being ''born again" (illuminated, enlightened).

The events in Jesus's life are metaphorically, spiritually, and literally true. The Truth in its absolute form manifests on all levels

In your mind maybe, not in reality though. Literal is out of the question and frankly not possible.

originally posted by: Malocchio

Since when did normal conception become ''poisonous"?

My seed is not poison, no woman has ever died from receiving my "seed."

"Blessed are those who have heard the Father's Word and truly kept it! For days are coming when you will say, 'Blessed are the womb that has not conceived and the breasts that have not given milk!'"

It's noteworthy that he says this on the way to the cross... So it was clearly something he normally would not have mentioned to most people. I hesitate to elaborate on this topic because it clearly is going to be divisive.

"Through the sacred embrace, we are invited into the interior. As long as this is hidden, unhappiness prevails; it always poisons the seeds [sperma], and evil is at work." -Gospel of Philip L 125

Ever wonder why conception coincided with the fall of humankind?

Interesting views. While it is beyond dispute that a virgin can't get pregnant without sperm I think your claim that "Every event in the Bible is literal" are only something you personally believe.

That's far from truth though.

originally posted by: Malocchio

Since when did normal conception become ''poisonous"?

My seed is not poison, no woman has ever died from receiving my "seed."

Moaning occurs during physical and spiritual torture. Physical torture is obvious. Spiritual torture is wanton sexual behavior with a facade of pleasure veiling the torment of the soul.

"Through the sacred embrace, we are invited into the interior. As long as this is hidden, unhappiness prevails; it always poisons the seeds [sperma], and evil is at work." Gospel of Philip verse 125

All is forgivable. No one threw any rocks at the adulteress, but this does not mean the actions are justified.