It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by vethumanbeing
reply to post by Akragon
Still waiting for any meaningful discussion of The Book of Thomas; TICK TOCK. (or is that the point). The last (114) of the book states: Simon Peter said to them, "Let Mary leave us, for women are not worthy of life." Jesus said, "I myself shall lead her in order to make her male, so that she too may become a living spirit resembling you males. For every woman who will make herself male will enter the kingdom of heaven." What is this a joke; I can see in now on the Colbert Report (breaking news, Jesus secretly a Masogynist and caves to false self chosen apostle/disciple peer pressure; unfortunately his TRUE peers crucified him).
windword
Personally, I think this relates to reincarnation, and that we incarnated as both male and female before we reach enlightenment, or "gnosis." I really don't see much difference between the claim that Jesus said this about Mary and about sexual transformation, when so many male Christians refer to themselves as the "Bride of Christ" by being part of the "church". The "church" that Christians believe that Jesus designated to Peter, the rock, not James the Just.
windword
The Essenes were often referred to as "Pythagorean Gnostics" and part of their rituals consisted of the gathering assemblies of angels, who, they claimed ministered to them. Paul hated these people, calling them puffed up and proud and warned others that if the angels contradicted Paul's words, then they shouldn't be listened to.
Originally posted by adjensen
Well, sort of, but not quite.
The Gnostic Christians sorted people into three categories.
Gnostics, who knew the Gnosis, and would ascend to the highest realm of God, upon death
Ordinary Christians, as well as Gnostics who didn't know the Gnosis, who would be "kicked to the curb" by the Archons and be reincarnated to give it another go
Everyone else, who would be obliterated upon death
Originally posted by Joecroft
(Christian) Gnosticism – knew and accepted, the standard Christian version of salvation, and also taught a different, higher form of salvation…
Originally posted by adjensen
That is not correct -- they did not accept "the standard Christian version of salvation", which is one life, one death and everlasting life with Christ in heaven for those who are saved. Rather, they figured that if you didn't get past the Archons, you were tossed back to Earth for another try at getting it right, and if you failed to, at least, accept Christ, that was the end of it.
Originally posted by adjensen
Originally posted by vethumanbeing
reply to post by Akragon
Still waiting for any meaningful discussion of The Book of Thomas; TICK TOCK. (or is that the point). The last (114) of the book states:
As EightBits has pointed out, it is almost universally accepted that 114 is a late addition, late even for the Gnostics -- they were fairly liberal in their view of women (particularly when compared to the Jewish cultural view,) so there is some speculation that it was added by a non-Gnostic to discredit Thomas, though I'm not really sure how that would work.
As with saying #1, I can conclusively state that Jesus did not say #114.
Originally posted by vethumanbeing
I have no idea why anyone would care about the writings attributed to Thomas.
They were supposed to be discarded and forgotten (well that didnt happen).
I would imagine the Essenes being gnostic
Originally posted by vethumanbeing
I have no idea why anyone would care about the writings attributed to Thomas.
adjensen[i/]
I am an historian by training (in part - it was my cognate in graduate school) and I am very interested in early church history, all aspects of it, and a lot of that circulates around the development of Christian orthodoxy. That's my interest in Thomas, as well as the other non-canonical texts of the time. They are snapshots of what some people thought about Christ in the centuries that followed his death, and for me, at least, they are extremely interesting. They were supposed to be discarded and forgotten (well that dint happen).
adjensen
Even though I am an orthodox Christian, I consider the suppression and destruction of these texts by the church to be a tragedy, a crime against history. These texts testify to the thought, the passion and the dreams of a people whose story deserves to be told. They were wrong, there is no doubt in my mind, but that doesn't make them any less human, or any less worthy of study. Though some speculate about it, the Essenes weren't Gnostics -- they were, for want of a better term, hyper-Jews.
Originally posted by vethumanbeing
The Essenes were the closest to the original Gnostics and in no way Hyper-Jews;
They were so scrupulous regarding the observance of the Sabbath that they refrained from sexual intercourse on all days of the week except Wednesday, lest in accordance with their singular calculation of the time of pregnancy the birth of a child might take place on a Sabbath and thereby cause the violation of the sacred day. (Source)
Originally posted by adjensen
Originally posted by vethumanbeing
The Essenes were the closest to the original Gnostics and in no way Hyper-Jews;
I guess that, in order to proceed, we need to clarify this. What is your source for thinking that the Essenes were Gnostics?
Geez, they wouldn't even have sex except on a Wednesday because they thought it might result in a birth on a Sabbath!
They were so scrupulous regarding the observance of the Sabbath that they refrained from sexual intercourse on all days of the week except Wednesday, lest in accordance with their singular calculation of the time of pregnancy the birth of a child might take place on a Sabbath and thereby cause the violation of the sacred day. (Source)
That sounds like hyper-Judaism to me, not Gnosticism.
Originally posted by NOTurTypical
reply to post by vethumanbeing
The Essences spoke Paleo-Hebrew?
Originally posted by vethumanbeing
Originally posted by NOTurTypical
reply to post by vethumanbeing
The Essences spoke Paleo-Hebrew?
Coptic Egyptian.
Originally posted by adjensen
reply to post by vethumanbeing
I cited the source there, did you miss it? The Jewish Encyclopedia.
The Essenes were Jews, not Gnostics.
Originally posted by NOTurTypical
Originally posted by vethumanbeing
Originally posted by NOTurTypical
reply to post by vethumanbeing
The Essences spoke Paleo-Hebrew?
Coptic Egyptian.
Then they didn't speak the original Hebrew.
The Paleo-Hebrew alphabet (Hebrew: הכתב העברי הקדום) (Yiddish: כתב עברי) is an abjad offshoot of the ancient Semitic alphabet and closely related to the Phoenician alphabet from which it descends. It dates to the 10th century BCE or earlier. It was used as the main vehicle for writing the Hebrew language by the Israelites, who would later split into Jews and Samaritans.
It began to fall out of use by the Jews in the 5th century BCE when they adopted the Aramaic alphabet as their writing system for Hebrew, from which the present Jewish "square-script" Hebrew alphabet descends. The Samaritans, who now number less than one thousand people, continue to use a derivative of the Old Hebrew alphabet, known as the Samaritan alphabet.
Originally posted by NOTurTypical
reply to post by vethumanbeing
The Paleo-Hebrew alphabet (Hebrew: הכתב העברי הקדום) (Yiddish: כתב עברי) is an abjad offshoot of the ancient Semitic alphabet and closely related to the Phoenician alphabet from which it descends. It dates to the 10th century BCE or earlier. It was used as the main vehicle for writing the Hebrew language by the Israelites, who would later split into Jews and Samaritans.
It began to fall out of use by the Jews in the 5th century BCE when they adopted the Aramaic alphabet as their writing system for Hebrew, from which the present Jewish "square-script" Hebrew alphabet descends. The Samaritans, who now number less than one thousand people, continue to use a derivative of the Old Hebrew alphabet, known as the Samaritan alphabet.
"Paleo-Hebrew". ~ Wiki
Originally posted by NOTurTypical
reply to post by vethumanbeing
What I'm saying is, paleo-Hebrew is "original Hebrew".
Even though I am an orthodox Christian, I consider the suppression and destruction of these texts by the church to be a tragedy, a crime against history. These texts testify to the thought, the passion and the dreams of a people whose story deserves to be told. They were wrong, there is no doubt in my mind, but that doesn't make them any less human, or any less worthy of study.