Did Jesus kill?

Originally posted by adjensen
The Gospel of Thomas is a mid-second Century forgery that was written by an anonymous Christian Gnostic, taking authentic quotations of Jesus (interestingly, likely more accurate versions of sayings in the Christian New Testament) and mixing them with things that he clearly did not say.

Although there is a widespread belief that the "Thomas" of note is the Apostle ("Doubting Thomas",) the document itself says that this is not the case:

I am going to put a wicked idea out there my friend. It is just an idea I want to see how it floats. Christ said to trust no man. Christ said that after his death, he would be with the father and would teach from within. All he asked was for is disciples to spread the good news and keep the commandments. No where did he bid one man follow another. Each Man's testimony is just one man's perspective of the life of Christ. If the master is found within, why don't we ALL have a testimony on the glory of Christ? Why do we pick and choose who's is correct?

Why can't we learn something from us all and each man's testimony be valid. It is interesting that Christ did not weigh his view greater than anyone else's. While his disciples were bickering over who was lowest in rank to have to wash the others feet, Christ went about doing it himself.

If he can humble himself to the lowest, well shouldn't we all park our opinions as the lowest as well? Who is more righteous than that man?

I always found it interesting that Man decided he had the power to decide who Christ manifests through. Personally, I believe Christ is spirit and can manifest through anyone. I have seen him in Ghandi, in Martin Luther King Jr, John Lennon, the young man who stood in Tienanmen Square against a tank, Bob Marley, and lovers of peace every where.

If you cannot see a Christ like journey in these men and see how they ultimately laid down their lives for their flock, then open your eyes wider. All of these men understood Christ's message. And they lived it. How many more will it take?

reply to post by Vicarious10000


God isn't a word I use very often, though sometimes as its conditional. I see Family, and had an experience with my Father, I know we also have Mother, and its more akin to Infinite Fractals, in Infinity, taking away time, means everything is all at once, time segments different clips in the film of our infinite journeys. So Prime Creator, Infinite Family, Infinite Creator(s), and they're our Family as well, they've walked our journey, passed the tests and progressed to states of Love and are True Adults to our child. Our Family doesnt call themselves Gods/gods though, they are filled with humility, service to others, kindness and Love.

That's what I believe and have experienced. Jesus/Yeshua to me, was his Higher Self, here in this world, was one of the Family, come to show us the way, not as a seeker, but one who had already Found. And that way is unconditional Love and service to others. Also seeking within, meditating, praying, sungazing, growing in awareness of the world around. Overcoming Gravity itself.

Jesus walked on water, and there are those who have levitated as well. It take turning our negative thoughts and seeing with Light to overcome or pull away from the gravity, the dark star, the dwarf star, the heaviness of conscience weighing on us, to become light as a feather, Love and Light, like a separation of elements, as one day, when the last day of the coloring book or dvd run occurs, will happen.

reply to post by IAMIAM


I feel so honored even to read your posts. For you have made so much room within you that His Spirit is shining so strongly within you. Your posts are very inspiring. I can feel so much light in them.

Originally posted by IAMIAM
If you cannot see a Christ like journey in these men and see how they ultimately laid down their lives for their flock, then open your eyes wider. All of these men understood Christ's message. And they lived it. How many more will it take?

Well, the problem with the Gnostics is that they are intentionally misleading, in a manner that caters to the Gnostics. If one was presented with a map, with the understanding that, no matter the path, all would eventually arrive at the same destination, that would be reasonable. I think, in fact, that this metaphor has some applicability in our world.

If, on the other hand, one was presented with a map with the understanding that no path leads to the same destination, but that the destination was of no consequence, I believe that this is invalid teaching. Because there is, and can only be, one truth, so the person who claims that the truth (exemplified as a destination for my example,) doesn't matter, is inherently a liar.

Originally posted by Unity_99
reply to post by IAMIAM

 

I feel so honored even to read your posts. For you have made so much room within you that His Spirit is shining so strongly within you. Your posts are very inspiring. I can feel so much light in them.

Don't honor me! I mean this with all my heart. Do not honor me at all. I am merely putting down what comes from within. That within is not mine to claim. The only reason my words have any value to anyone is because it is that spirit within you that hears it, and recognises it.

Honor that eternal spirit, but do not honor me.

With Love,

Your Brother

reply to post by IAMIAM


Its the Spirit in you, not you that I feel , its like opening to your source and bringing that light in. Just to clear up and word it better.

Originally posted by adjensen
Well, the problem with the Gnostics is that they are intentionally misleading, in a manner that caters to the Gnostics. If one was presented with a map, with the understanding that, no matter the path, all would eventually arrive at the same destination, that would be reasonable. I think, in fact, that this metaphor has some applicability in our world.

Your traditon is no different! Yours intentionally mislead others away from their own, and down a path of your choosing. You wouldn't be casting judgement on them if it wasn't true.

Originally posted by adjensen
If, on the other hand, one was presented with a map with the understanding that no path leads to the same destination, but that the destination was of no consequence, I believe that this is invalid teaching. Because there is, and can only be, one truth, so the person who claims that the truth (exemplified as a destination for my example,) doesn't matter, is inherently a liar.

I see, your argument is that YOU have found the correct path to the truth, and all others must take that exact same path.

What is the Truth? If your path has lead to it, tell me what the truth is in a way that I can understand it.

With Love,

Your Brother

reply to post by IAMIAM


Ah, but my argument is not that I am in possession of the truth, merely that there is one. To the end that there is an absolute truth, I do not agree with the Gnostics that the truth is only available to the enlightened elite -- I believe that a truly righteous truth would be openly accessible by all people.

Originally posted by adjensen
reply to post by IAMIAM

 

Ah, but my argument is not that I am in possession of the truth, merely that there is one. To the end that there is an absolute truth, I do not agree with the Gnostics that the truth is only available to the enlightened elite -- I believe that a truly righteous truth would be openly accessible by all people.

This view is flawed. No one enlightened believes that they are the ones who can access knowledge. Saying you are enlightened is like saying you are christian,athiest,catholic,satanist. If you say you are jewish does that mean you are more chosen then I'am?

Originally posted by adjensen
Ah, but my argument is not that I am in possession of the truth, merely that there is one. To the end that there is an absolute truth, I do not agree with the Gnostics that the truth is only available to the enlightened elite -- I believe that a truly righteous truth would be openly accessible by all people.

Ok, if you believe that a truly righteous truth would be openly accessible by all people,

Why then are YOU not in possession of it?

With Love,

Your Brother

Originally posted by Vicarious10000

Originally posted by adjensen
reply to post by IAMIAM

 

Ah, but my argument is not that I am in possession of the truth, merely that there is one. To the end that there is an absolute truth, I do not agree with the Gnostics that the truth is only available to the enlightened elite -- I believe that a truly righteous truth would be openly accessible by all people.

This view is flawed. No one enlightened believes that they are the ones who can access knowledge. Saying you are enlightened is like saying you are christian,athiest,catholic,satanist. If you say you are jewish does that mean you are more chosen then I'am?

You are apparently not well versed in the Gnostics. Gnosticism, from the Greek "gnosis", means that they believed that they had access to secret knowledge that led to enlightenment. In effect, that they had the "passwords" that would allow them to get past the Archons who kept spirits locked in the prison of materiality.

I am certainly not claiming such -- reread what I wrote. (And neither have I ever claimed to be Jewish, no idea where that's coming from.)

Originally posted by IAMIAM

Originally posted by adjensen
Ah, but my argument is not that I am in possession of the truth, merely that there is one. To the end that there is an absolute truth, I do not agree with the Gnostics that the truth is only available to the enlightened elite -- I believe that a truly righteous truth would be openly accessible by all people.

Ok, if you believe that a truly righteous truth would be openly accessible by all people,

Why then are YOU not in possession of it?

As I said, the argument is not related to my own beliefs, and in this thread, at least, I have made no testimony to what I believe, as it is not related to the historical and logical failings of the Gnostics and the Gospel of Thomas.

Originally posted by adjensen
You are apparently not well versed in the Gnostics. Gnosticism, from the Greek "gnosis", means that they believed that they had access to secret knowledge that led to enlightenment. In effect, that they had the "passwords" that would allow them to get past the Archons who kept spirits locked in the prison of materiality.

Interestingly, the Torah even begins with Gnosis (Genisis) and ends with a Revelation.
But don't look at the Gnosticism that is self evident. It gets in the way of the student learning from the Master.

Of course the Catholic Church said the same thing. Come to us we have the keys to heaven and hell. So do the baptists, the lutherans, all of the Churches do the same thing. They try to dictate Christ's teachings without having learned them themselves. How do you know? Look at the bitter fruit they bear.

Gnosticism is just a way of telling Christ's story in a way the Dungeons and Dragons crowd of the age would understand. Who are you to judge? If after the end of their teaching, they feel loved and at one with ALL, how do you know it isn't Christ's teaching. It comes from within remember?

Any one can follow his voice, it will come in a way that they understand it.

With Love,

Your Brother

I am certainly not claiming such -- reread what I wrote. (And neither have I ever claimed to be Jewish, no idea where that's coming from.)

Originally posted by adjensen
As I said, the argument is not related to my own beliefs, and in this thread, at least, I have made no testimony to what I believe, as it is not related to the historical and logical failings of the Gnostics and the Gospel of Thomas.

I understand the issue, however I explained the Gospel of Thomas and how it measures up to the Testaments in the Bible, I also explained why it had to be worded the way it was.

They Gnostic texts are the texts from those who actually invaded the Roman Cities. They formed Gnostic sects and hid the story of Christ in Allergory so thick Rome could not see it. It sounds wild and outlandish to the cannonised texts and was tossed out because it radically came down on the Empire and that message is hidden in Code. This wasn't preached on the Temple mount in Roman Cities, no. You had to hand select people, invite them in. You had to keep it secret.

You could get killed for telling the people that they are ALL God's Children in those days.

With Love,

Your Brother

Originally posted by IAMIAM
Gnosticism is just a way of telling Christ's story in a way the Dungeons and Dragons crowd of the age would understand. Who are you to judge? If after the end of their teaching, they feel loved and at one with ALL, how do you know it isn't Christ's teaching.

Because it is not Christ's teaching. Christ was a Jew, so the beliefs that Christ would teach would be in congruence with Jewish thought. If they are not, then there is a conflict -- either Christ was not a Jew, in which case the Bible as presented is a fabrication, or he was, but he lived a lie.

Gnosticism is classic Greek Platonism -- dualistic polytheism, which is completely counter to Judaism. If Jesus was the Divine Messenger that the Gnostic Christians claimed that he was, the first thing that he would have done would have been to denounce the claims of the demiurge that the Jews worshiped as God, and yet, he did the opposite.

You claim to be a follower of Christ, and yet you so willingly pledge allegiance to anyone who gives a nod to him, regardless of what their real message is. Though I'm not a fan of quoting scripture, I'm reminded of this:

Not everyone who says to me, 'Lord, Lord,' will enter the kingdom of heaven, but only he who does the will of my Father who is in heaven.
-- Matthew 7:21 (NIV)

Consider, please, whose agenda you support when you blindly agree with anyone who offers up a platitude in the name of Christ.

Originally posted by adjensen
Because it is not Christ's teaching. Christ was a Jew, so the beliefs that Christ would teach would be in congruence with Jewish thought. If they are not, then there is a conflict -- either Christ was not a Jew, in which case the Bible as presented is a fabrication, or he was, but he lived a lie.

Why do you only see two options? Either he was a jew and jewish law applies, or he was a liar?

That is a ridiculous position to take. That is like saying that Christ must fit into your predetermined box in order for his teachings to be valid. That doesn't sound a bit restrictive?

Christ was a Jew, but he was also rebelling against Jewish tradition. He taught on the Sabbath day, his point was that everyday is a Sabbath day so enjoy them. He stood against the Mosaic Code in his first Sermon on the Mount. It was the Jews crucified him as a Heretic

Originally posted by adjensen
You claim to be a follower of Christ, and yet you so willingly pledge allegiance to anyone who gives a nod to him, regardless of what their real message.

Christ did not put me here to judge peoples motives, he bid me do as he has done.

14If ye shall ask any thing in my name, I will do it. 15If ye love me, keep my commandments. 16And I will pray the Father, and he shall give you another Comforter, that he may abide with you for ever; 17Even the Spirit of truth; whom the world cannot receive, because it seeth him not, neither knoweth him: but ye know him; for he dwelleth with you, and shall be in you.

Originally posted by adjensen
Though I'm not a fan of quoting scripture, I'm reminded of this:

Not everyone who says to me, 'Lord, Lord,' will enter the kingdom of heaven, but only he who does the will of my Father who is in heaven.
-- Matthew 7:21 (NIV)

Yes, that is a fitting scripture.

Originally posted by adjensen
Consider, please, whose agenda you support when you blindly agree with anyone who offers up a platitude in the name of Christ.

I do not serve agendas my friend. I serve the one true Master. All I do is share points of view and see what people actually believe. I am not trying to belittle your point of view. I am merely trying to understand it.

If it is sound, it should hold up to scrutiny.

With Love,

Your Brother

Originally posted by adjensen
Because it is not Christ's teaching. Christ was a Jew, so the beliefs that Christ would teach would be in congruence with Jewish thought. If they are not, then there is a conflict -- either Christ was not a Jew, in which case the Bible as presented is a fabrication, or he was, but he lived a lie.

Why do you only see two options? Either he was a jew and jewish law applies, or he was a liar?

That is a ridiculous position to take. That is like saying that Christ must fit into your predetermined box in order for his teachings to be valid. That doesn't sound a bit restrictive?

Christ was a Jew, but he was also rebelling against Jewish tradition. He taught on the Sabbath day, his point was that everyday is a Sabbath day so enjoy them. He stood against the Mosaic Code in his first Sermon on the Mount. It was the Jews crucified him as a Heretic

Originally posted by adjensen
You claim to be a follower of Christ, and yet you so willingly pledge allegiance to anyone who gives a nod to him, regardless of what their real message.

Christ did not put me here to judge peoples motives, he bid me do as he has done.

14If ye shall ask any thing in my name, I will do it. 15If ye love me, keep my commandments. 16And I will pray the Father, and he shall give you another Comforter, that he may abide with you for ever; 17Even the Spirit of truth; whom the world cannot receive, because it seeth him not, neither knoweth him: but ye know him; for he dwelleth with you, and shall be in you.

Originally posted by adjensen
Though I'm not a fan of quoting scripture, I'm reminded of this:

Not everyone who says to me, 'Lord, Lord,' will enter the kingdom of heaven, but only he who does the will of my Father who is in heaven.
-- Matthew 7:21 (NIV)

Yes, that is a fitting scripture.

Originally posted by adjensen
Consider, please, whose agenda you support when you blindly agree with anyone who offers up a platitude in the name of Christ.

I do not serve agendas my friend. I serve the one true Master. All I do is share points of view and see what people actually believe. I am not trying to belittle your point of view. I am merely trying to understand it.

If it is sound, it should hold up to scrutiny.

With Love,

Your Brother

Originally posted by IAMIAM
That is a ridiculous position to take. That is like saying that Christ must fit into your predetermined box in order for his teachings to be valid. That doesn't sound a bit restrictive?

No, it is not a matter of fitting into a box, it is a matter of his testimony of who he was. If you dismiss it, you dismiss him, his teaching, and all that he was.

Christ was a Jew, but he was also rebelling against Jewish tradition. He taught on the Sabbath day, his point was that everyday is a Sabbath day so enjoy them. He stood against the Mosaic Code in his first Sermon on the Mount. It was the Jews crucified him as a Heretic

Christ did not rebel against the Law -- he affirmed the Law, in fact. Christ rebelled against the perversion of the Law by the established authority. This could be a legitimate argument against the current state of the church, but it is not a legitimate claim against the second century heresy of the Gnostics.

What is the first commandment, both of the Ten and the Two? There is one God. What do the Gnostics teach? There are many Gods, and the one that the Jews worship is an ignorant bumbler, and not a god at all.

If you honestly believe that Jesus taught anything that was compatible with the notion that the God of the Jews, the one that he declared his father, was a bumbling demiurge, I don't know what Christ you are following.

Look, I understand that you want to be all inclusive, all loving and all accepting. That's fine. But you cannot dismiss the fact that some teachings are not correct and do not lead to the truth, or else you must dismiss the very fact that there is a truth.

Originally posted by TedHodgson
I think in the Original Bible there is a Story in the Book of Thomas That jesu (Jesus) Possibly pushed another boy of a Roof, However Noone was around at the Time to witness this But the Boy did die

The Gospel of Thomas wasn't in the "original Bible", it's a 3rd century Gnostic text out of Alexandria, Egypt.

Originally posted by adjensen
No, it is not a matter of fitting into a box, it is a matter of his testimony of who he was. If you dismiss it, you dismiss him, his teaching, and all that he was.

Really? If I had never known of Christ, yet I lived in a land agreeable to his commandments, I loved everyone and I loved my idea of God, would your idea of Christ condemn me?

Originally posted by adjensen
Christ did not rebel against the Law -- he affirmed the Law, in fact. Christ rebelled against the perversion of the Law by the established authority. This could be a legitimate argument against the current state of the church, but it is not a legitimate claim against the second century heresy of the Gnostics.

I believe the word he used was "FULFIL". He came to fulfil the law and the prophets, and he did. When he died on the cross, from his own lips he said "it is finished".

Originally posted by adjensen
What is the first commandment, both of the Ten and the Two? There is one God. What do the Gnostics teach? There are many Gods, and the one that the Jews worship is an ignorant bumbler, and not a god at all.

Have you studied Gnosticism enough to know they are not speaking of the Same God, but in a way that they understand it?

Originally posted by adjensen
Look, I understand that you want to be all inclusive, all loving and all accepting. That's fine. But you cannot dismiss the fact that some teachings are not correct and do not lead to the truth, or else you must dismiss the very fact that there is a truth.

My friend, on the matter of truth, by your own words you have not found it yet. I say I have found the truth of things with my path and my path is simply walking in Christ's footsteps. Why should I believe on anything you say if you cannot say you have found the truth.

With Love,

Your Brother