Shaul, a GNOSTIC??

by DarkChylde on Thu Jun 19, 2008 2:32 am

Ya know, I used to think that Shaul (Paul) was about as un-gnostic as he could be, but I have come to realise (besides the fact much is attributed to him that he didn't write) that I have misjudged him. I am reading his work in a new light, and getting over my aversion to him.

I mean, he NEVER speaks of a 'historical' Christ and he also talks of "Christ within you.' (But the thing about women keeping silent in church is one of the later add-ons, since the passage deals with oracles and prophecy and goes on and on, then breaks suddenly and says that women should keep silent and then goes back to oracles and prophecy. I mean, if he didn't think women should speak in church then why did he put women in charge of them?)

Provided, of course, that he himself was a 'historical' figure. The jury is still out on that one.....

by sopherim7 on Thu Jun 19, 2008 6:01 am

exactley. you are so right on . i love to read " paul" it can be discerned what is his oracles and what is the crap

by The_Passerby on Thu Jun 19, 2008 6:48 am

Paul was definitely a Gnostic. I believe the letters were tampered with and some of them were written by other individuals.

Paul's letters were edited to say "Jesus" Christ, where before only the name "Christ" was presented. This is the same thing as some changes in John Gospel, when it says Jesus Christ -- the combination of those names came way after that. Paul was referring to something quite similar to "Christ Consciousness," a sort of level of Being.

This quote from Clememnt of Alexandria (2nd Century Church Father) he quotes a verse from Paul's letters where it clearly demonstrates that Paul's letter was much more Gnostic in character, as he tells people to read Hermetic books.

"the Apostle Paul will show, saying: ‘Take also the Hellenic books, read the Sibyl, how it is shown that God is one, and how the future is indicated. And taking Hystaspes, read, and you will find much more luminously and distinctly the Son of God described, and how many kings shall draw up their forces against Christ, hating Him and those that bear His name, and His faithful ones, and His patience, and His coming.’ Then in one word he asks us, ‘Whose is the world, and all that is in the world? Are they not God’s?"

by Admin on Thu Jun 19, 2008 8:18 am

The_Passerby wrote:Paul was definitely a Gnostic. I believe the letters were tampered with and some of them were written by other individuals.

Paul's letters were edited to say "Jesus" Christ, where before only the name "Christ" was presented. This is the same thing as some changes in John Gospel, when it says Jesus Christ -- the combination of those names came way after that. Paul was referring to something quite similar to "Christ Consciousness," a sort of level of Being.

This quote from Clememnt of Alexandria (2nd Century Church Father) he quotes a verse from Paul's letters where it clearly demonstrates that Paul's letter was much more Gnostic in character, as he tells people to read Hermetic books.

"the Apostle Paul will show, saying: ‘Take also the Hellenic books, read the Sibyl, how it is shown that God is one, and how the future is indicated. And taking Hystaspes, read, and you will find much more luminously and distinctly the Son of God described, and how many kings shall draw up their forces against Christ, hating Him and those that bear His name, and His faithful ones, and His patience, and His coming.’ Then in one word he asks us, ‘Whose is the world, and all that is in the world? Are they not God’s?"

Unfortunately, it is now impossible to determine with certainty what Paul actually said (and the way he said it) and what was added to or subtracted from his words/beliefs/knowledge.

However, there is at least one episode that is clearly alluded to (although partly covered up) that I do not think anyone would have forged, and that is the serious disagreement which Paul obviously had, on various matters of doctrine, with the original (i.e. personally chosen by Yehoshua) Jerusalem Apostles. There is also the fact that the early Jewish followers of 'The Way' (known as the Ebionites) rejected Paul as a false teacher.

I keep an open mind on this subject, but according to the presently available evidence, it does not seem that Paul would have been a genuine gnostic - even though he may well have thought himself to be. I believe that he was somewhat deluded - perhaps an innocent victim of his mind.

Just my calculated guess! scratch

PLU ~ Bob

by Chukuma on Sat Jun 21, 2008 10:46 am

DarkChylde wrote:Ya know, I used to think that Shaul (Paul) was about as un-gnostic as he could be, but I have come to realise (besides the fact much is attributed to him that he didn't write) that I have misjudged him. I am reading his work in a new light, and getting over my aversion to him.

I mean, he NEVER speaks of a 'historical' Christ and he also talks of "Christ within you.' (But the thing about women keeping silent in church is one of the later add-ons, since the passage deals with oracles and prophecy and goes on and on, then breaks suddenly and says that women should keep silent and then goes back to oracles and prophecy. I mean, if he didn't think women should speak in church then why did he put women in charge of them?)

Provided, of course, that he himself was a 'historical' figure. The jury is still out on that one.....

Reply:

Hello, DC. I too believe that Paul was gnostic. I am also of the opinion that there are two Paul's in the NT and that the historical Paul is the historical Jesus.

Htp

by DarkChylde on Sun Jun 22, 2008 3:26 am

Thanx to all for your replies. Given me more food for thought, munch munch.

Sopherim, yep, having a 'crap detector' will help SOOOO much.. Razz

And I refer to him as Shaul as even with the 'change' it is still his name in the Aramaic, which I am trying to teach myself....

Passerby, I hadn't run across that quote from Clement before. Do you know where you got it? (In my discussions with the 'fundies' I have to be able to validate EVERYTHING, and I wanna use that.)

Bob, yes, trying to find the truth from what he wrote and what has been changed is been the greatest problem (not only for Shaul but for the words of Yeshua as well). But in studying some of the discussions of the 'church fathers', it has come to my attention that the book of Acts (where the 'problem' Shaul had with Kepha (Peter) is even mentioned) was perhaps a way TO tie Shaul in with a 'historical' Yeshua, since the book was never mentioned in the oldest arguements but was quoted MUCH later. Acts is a newer 'book', possibly manufactured TO link the characters in some historical fashion. But I have never been convinced of the historisity of either Yeshua OR Shaul or any others, perhaps they are all characters in a Jewish version of myths, as there is NO archeological evidence for any of it anyhow. After all, there are some really startling coincidences in the likeness of Yeshua and many of the dying/resurecting 'godmen' of myth, wether it is Osiris, Mythras, the Maize god of the Aztecs, the Green man of the Druids, and the most dead-on likeness of ol' Dyonisis. Perhaps it ia all a Jewish version (as they were awfully Hellenized at the time) of the Pagan myths. I always knew the church took everything from the Pagans (then proceeded to burn them at the stake for it!!)

Chukuma, hmmmm, interesting notion. What would be the determining factors of the historical Shaul, and whom might the 'other' Shaul be? I learn so much from your posts, I am looking forward to picking your brain on this one!

by The_Passerby on Sun Jun 22, 2008 4:26 am

DarkChylde wrote:

Passerby, I hadn't run across that quote from Clement before. Do you know where you got it? (In my discussions with the 'fundies' I have to be able to validate EVERYTHING, and I wanna use that.)

Clement of Alexandra Stromata book VI, Ch V. last paragraph. http://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Ante-Nicene_Fathers/Volume_II/CLEMENT_OF_ALEXANDRIA/The_Stromata,_or_Miscellanies/Book_VI/Chapter_V.

by The_Passerby on Sun Jun 22, 2008 4:30 am

Admin wrote:
The_Passerby wrote:Paul was definitely a Gnostic. I believe the letters were tampered with and some of them were written by other individuals.

Paul's letters were edited to say "Jesus" Christ, where before only the name "Christ" was presented. This is the same thing as some changes in John Gospel, when it says Jesus Christ -- the combination of those names came way after that. Paul was referring to something quite similar to "Christ Consciousness," a sort of level of Being.

This quote from Clememnt of Alexandria (2nd Century Church Father) he quotes a verse from Paul's letters where it clearly demonstrates that Paul's letter was much more Gnostic in character, as he tells people to read Hermetic books.

"the Apostle Paul will show, saying: ‘Take also the Hellenic books, read the Sibyl, how it is shown that God is one, and how the future is indicated. And taking Hystaspes, read, and you will find much more luminously and distinctly the Son of God described, and how many kings shall draw up their forces against Christ, hating Him and those that bear His name, and His faithful ones, and His patience, and His coming.’ Then in one word he asks us, ‘Whose is the world, and all that is in the world? Are they not God’s?"

Unfortunately, it is now impossible to determine with certainty what Paul actually said (and the way he said it) and what was added to or subtracted from his words/beliefs/knowledge.

However, there is at least one episode that is clearly alluded to (although partly covered up) that I do not think anyone would have forged, and that is the serious disagreement which Paul obviously had, on various matters of doctrine, with the original (i.e. personally chosen by Yehoshua) Jerusalem Apostles. There is also the fact that the early Jewish followers of 'The Way' (known as the Ebionites) rejected Paul as a false teacher.

I keep an open mind on this subject, but according to the presently available evidence, it does not seem that Paul would have been a genuine gnostic - even though he may well have thought himself to be. I believe that he was somewhat deluded - perhaps an innocent victim of his mind.

Just my calculated guess!

PLU ~ Bob

Bob, Yes Paul was seen as a apostate of the law by the ebionites. However this has more to do with the reality that Pauls Gnosticism wasn't Yeshua's Gnosticism. Paul's gnosticism was more monastic and many people wrote under his name.

Paul's letters, some much more profound and better than others, can cause more harm than good.

by Admin on Sun Jun 22, 2008 6:23 am

The_Passerby wrote:
Admin wrote:
The_Passerby wrote:Paul was definitely a Gnostic. I believe the letters were tampered with and some of them were written by other individuals.

Paul's letters were edited to say "Jesus" Christ, where before only the name "Christ" was presented. This is the same thing as some changes in John Gospel, when it says Jesus Christ -- the combination of those names came way after that. Paul was referring to something quite similar to "Christ Consciousness," a sort of level of Being.

This quote from Clememnt of Alexandria (2nd Century Church Father) he quotes a verse from Paul's letters where it clearly demonstrates that Paul's letter was much more Gnostic in character, as he tells people to read Hermetic books.

"the Apostle Paul will show, saying: ‘Take also the Hellenic books, read the Sibyl, how it is shown that God is one, and how the future is indicated. And taking Hystaspes, read, and you will find much more luminously and distinctly the Son of God described, and how many kings shall draw up their forces against Christ, hating Him and those that bear His name, and His faithful ones, and His patience, and His coming.’ Then in one word he asks us, ‘Whose is the world, and all that is in the world? Are they not God’s?"

Unfortunately, it is now impossible to determine with certainty what Paul actually said (and the way he said it) and what was added to or subtracted from his words/beliefs/knowledge.

However, there is at least one episode that is clearly alluded to (although partly covered up) that I do not think anyone would have forged, and that is the serious disagreement which Paul obviously had, on various matters of doctrine, with the original (i.e. personally chosen by Yehoshua) Jerusalem Apostles. There is also the fact that the early Jewish followers of 'The Way' (known as the Ebionites) rejected Paul as a false teacher.

I keep an open mind on this subject, but according to the presently available evidence, it does not seem that Paul would have been a genuine gnostic - even though he may well have thought himself to be. I believe that he was somewhat deluded - perhaps an innocent victim of his mind.

Just my calculated guess!

PLU ~ Bob

Bob, Yes Paul was seen as a apostate of the law by the ebionites. However this has more to do with the reality that Pauls Gnosticism wasn't Yeshua's Gnosticism. Paul's gnosticism was more monastic and many people wrote under his name.

Paul's letters, some much more profound and better than others, can cause more harm than good.

Hi PB

Can you please expand a little on what you mean by "Paul's Gnosticism wasn't Yeshua's Gnosticism."

Is there not only ONE true and genuine (ULTIMATE) SPIRITUAL KNOWLEDGE? ONE (ULTIMATE) TRUTH? ONE (ULTIMATE) GOD? ONE (ULTIMATE) WAY? ONE (ULTIMATE) LIGHT?

Personally, I believe that all genuine Spiritual Masters (e.g. Buddha, Moses, Yehoshua, etc.) would have revealed the identical KNOWLEDGE of SPIRITUAL TRUTH. The essence of the various scriptures seem to verify this, but maybe I am wrong.

PLU ~ Bob Very Happy

by Prism1111 on Sun Jun 22, 2008 12:41 pm

What we are forgetting here is that a big Fact was that Saul(Paul) was Hired to Kill followers of Jesus teachings, He had this so called self proclaimed vision on a road to a city that was not under Romes protection, and He was a Roman. Maybe does He need a plan to get in there under cover to carry out his Job? One would think so ya? He himself said he felt no need to talk to no man after the vision. Or did He mean talk to no Apostle cause they would have found Him out, just Like the one meeting they did that Cause his incarceration in Rome later on. Saul mentions He knew all Mysteries , but never states one.
Passerby mentions that his Letters were writen with High litterary skills, yes there is a Possibility the the Sanhedrian council, the same that Hired Him as a Mercenary wrote all his letters, devised a plan to infiltrate the Gnostics, and had much money to destribute the Vast letters throughout the country in Promotion of this plan. Not unlike the agendas of today within a political structure of Power and money.

I smell Snow job all over... Paul a great instantly learned soul of Jesus in the middle of the road, where it took 11 years to teach the apostles the same, Puts down women, so he couldn`t have been Gnostic as truth states of our Being as both unto the father, and proclains the teachings of Jesus by his writtings like this one; 1Tm:1:20: Of whom is Hymenaeus and Alexander; whom I have delivered unto Satan, that they may learn not to blaspheme.
I think He got his signals crossed somewhere indeed friends. Thats Direct Blaspheme itself.
which is seeding the fear of God being Satan, not the Love of God being unto the Father.
Do figs grow on thistles? No. Whom else but thier master would one deliver anything to?

Continueing with Saul being Jailed in Rome, and the Sanhedrian council organising his followers to prepare to rescue Him with Force thus which was the real burning of Rome that extended into the Millions today, and gives just cause for Romans to hate this group that trashed thier City which was the first time They where referred to as Christians, by the Council, the same one the Sent Jesus to death, and James the Just.

All of the Epistles (assumtion of the truth) were written more than 100 years after the Gnostic scriptures. You can find Many things within Pistis sophia explained it full, but then greatly watered down in a New testement Gosple or Epistle. Also Paul Plagerises the Old testiment text quoting it for his own, and then tells everyone They do not need the Jewish text. Jeee thats apropriot huh?

In openly reading Pauls epistles He executes so much vanity within himself, allways giving reason to be forward in his words, and outspoken. Christ words mentions everything oposite to this. He continually tells of why he is an apostle, sometimes for 10 tracts before even saying one good thing of anything else. All the other books are not this way at all, only Pauls 15, which is a Majority with in the NT.

I do have to say, if one wishes to know of the lower realm of God in all this and His creation of the dark, for all the reasons Christ states in there order of Things , Paul seems to know much, with his manipulate docrines.

Be strong in Christ in thyself to see the wheat from the tares Friends.

This is why we find a Gnostic flar with his writings, He stoll them from the Gnostics. woops I`m sorry .. Borrowed.. lol
This kettle is more than black to see...
In finishing, The Christian got there radical lable against the Romans in Truth some where also Hired mercinaries, Paul fulfilled his Puppet role and They beheaded Him cause now they had to make him imortal for the next 2000 years till now. Ge..wiz I guess it worked huh? the Paulinist doctrine is imbedded throughout the world, and who dare stand against it.

The Love of God will only manifest through men seeking Him....

Brother Thomas..... Rolling Eyes

by The_Passerby on Sun Jun 22, 2008 8:05 pm

Admin wrote:
The_Passerby wrote:
Admin wrote:
The_Passerby wrote:Paul was definitely a Gnostic. I believe the letters were tampered with and some of them were written by other individuals.

Paul's letters were edited to say "Jesus" Christ, where before only the name "Christ" was presented. This is the same thing as some changes in John Gospel, when it says Jesus Christ -- the combination of those names came way after that. Paul was referring to something quite similar to "Christ Consciousness," a sort of level of Being.

This quote from Clememnt of Alexandria (2nd Century Church Father) he quotes a verse from Paul's letters where it clearly demonstrates that Paul's letter was much more Gnostic in character, as he tells people to read Hermetic books.

"the Apostle Paul will show, saying: ‘Take also the Hellenic books, read the Sibyl, how it is shown that God is one, and how the future is indicated. And taking Hystaspes, read, and you will find much more luminously and distinctly the Son of God described, and how many kings shall draw up their forces against Christ, hating Him and those that bear His name, and His faithful ones, and His patience, and His coming.’ Then in one word he asks us, ‘Whose is the world, and all that is in the world? Are they not God’s?"

Unfortunately, it is now impossible to determine with certainty what Paul actually said (and the way he said it) and what was added to or subtracted from his words/beliefs/knowledge.

However, there is at least one episode that is clearly alluded to (although partly covered up) that I do not think anyone would have forged, and that is the serious disagreement which Paul obviously had, on various matters of doctrine, with the original (i.e. personally chosen by Yehoshua) Jerusalem Apostles. There is also the fact that the early Jewish followers of 'The Way' (known as the Ebionites) rejected Paul as a false teacher.

I keep an open mind on this subject, but according to the presently available evidence, it does not seem that Paul would have been a genuine gnostic - even though he may well have thought himself to be. I believe that he was somewhat deluded - perhaps an innocent victim of his mind.

Just my calculated guess!

PLU ~ Bob

Bob, Yes Paul was seen as a apostate of the law by the ebionites. However this has more to do with the reality that Pauls Gnosticism wasn't Yeshua's Gnosticism. Paul's gnosticism was more monastic and many people wrote under his name.

Paul's letters, some much more profound and better than others, can cause more harm than good.

Hi PB

Can you please expand a little on what you mean by "Paul's Gnosticism wasn't Yeshua's Gnosticism."

Is there not only ONE true and genuine (ULTIMATE) SPIRITUAL KNOWLEDGE? ONE (ULTIMATE) TRUTH? ONE (ULTIMATE) GOD? ONE (ULTIMATE) WAY? ONE (ULTIMATE) LIGHT?

Personally, I believe that all genuine Spiritual Masters (e.g. Buddha, Moses, Yehoshua, etc.) would have revealed the identical KNOWLEDGE of SPIRITUAL TRUTH. The essence of the various scriptures seem to verify this, but maybe I am wrong.

PLU ~ Bob

I don't think it is the same when you apply Paul, Yeshua, Buddha, and others. The ancient ways have similarities in regards their knowledge and even sometimes their symbolism, but their methods to attainment are often greatly different. And this is important to understand. The Way of the Fakir, Yogi, Monk and the different ways of the Persian, Greek, Egyptians had similar knowledge but the methods differed. A Way doesn't quite mean that they do not have a similar knowledge (I am referring to scriptures), but rather a different method and not all methods have the same result of labor -- but this does not mean that they are not genuine ways, however some are more whole than others (in regards the work on oneself), some are more focused on certain things (central to chief issues with ones natures or nature), while others may be focused on one thing while negating other things. This is my opinion and added the fact that mostly anything that is mainstream or has been put in the hands of unconscious machines (the multitude after the source is gone) is going to become corrupted, often becoming the complete opposite polarity to what was once taught -- so this plays a factor. This is a schoolhouse, or an University of Experience, a common ground where there are different levels, courses of study and etc. Not every course is the same but all is there for the ultimate goal -- graduation. And by similar knowledge I am not referring to them all and nor am I referring to their knowledge being totally the same, because more often than not they aren't. Yeshua's Way is a path of WHOLENESS -- the others are not that. The scriptures are a different thing altogether, because as I believe they are all allegorical. The Torah, New Testament, and Our'an are all about the same things -- but there problem deals much more with corruption then anything. Torah was corrupted and applied literally, NT came to save people from the the demiurge of the Torah, and Ou'ran came because the NT became corrupted, but it later became corrupted as well.

Paul's Gnosticism differs greatly with Yeshua on the points. Paul's was more separated from the multitude outside of a community -- as in all of life was sinful to Paul, or better said corrupted and we must stay away from anyone who is trapped in such. Likewise, he did not put emphasis on the Life of Yeshua that needs to be imitated rather just merely the Cosmic Christ and because people didn't understand his doctrine, it could be easily misconstrued. Yeshua's Way one is supposed to be in the world but not of it. Say there were spiritual communities in this time. A people from that community would interact with those outside of it and attempt to help them to overcome their vices -- to work on themselves. They would not convert them, but rather they would help the individuals to make gains where they are at -- assist them to become more harmonious by making a turn from the former and invoking grace within themselves. And by helping these individuals one would help themselves -- reach out to natures that they possess, which relationships with others create a connection to what they reflect in ourselves. And by virtue of doing unto another, we do unto ourselves. With Paul's doctrine this was not the case -- it was much more like a monastary type of thing, probably more similar to the Essene in their approach as they lived away from the others and did not interact with them much at all. Yeshua's way is helping those who are under bondage to the force of this world and the Laws, by bringing them to knowledge about these realities and their own nature, so they can begin to work consciously and make gains. Hence why, although scriptures are allegories, Yeshua helped those who are trapped in great vices. And Yeshua didn't see all things as sinful -- Paul saw everything as sinful, the body, and everything. He went ridiculous with it. Yeshua said the condition of ones experience is a type of prison if they were ensnared, but it was not sinful -- it just needed to be made whole, and they would be freed -- a man must free himself.

Now Paul had many points which were good -- like what he said about the law. One shouldn't follow the Law literally, or else they can not unlike the power of transformation of oneself, which occurs when you take what is meant for inward application and through your organic understanding that is earth-bound subject it to the carnal and create further constraints in your literal rituals and traditions which does not bring about the necessary changes within oneself to become the Light they seek. The Torah is supposed to be applied within, one must fulfill it within themselves or else they worship a demiurge of their own divided self -- which the New Testament and the Gnostics were bent on trying to help people be free from. The Ebionites knew the scriptures were allegorical and said similar, "do not accept Moses' Pentateuch in its entirety; certain sayings they reject... stating Christ has revealed this to me, and will blespheme most of the legislation" (Panarion 30.18.7-9).

by Prism1111 on Mon Jun 23, 2008 12:21 am

Hello Friends, after reading much here about the paul Thing from a number us including myself, and stepping back to taking a Look from the outside of the Box. This Look reveals the Same, whether in a Gnostic forum, Bible study Forum, or Traditional church discussion Forum.
Now other than Jesus Himself, the one person that has held such discussion of credibility, doctrine, root belief, Personal followings and all the like Has Been Saul (Paul) why? this is friken crazy... excuse my french realy. Has John the Baptist, or Matthew been brought to this type of examination of ways? Has the Apostle John been looked at when he holds the heaviest Gnostics in the Bible and Gnostic scriptures to date? I can name countless other ones as you also have within your knowledge to take in to this effect. Paul wasn`t even an Apostle, except by his own claims and People He picked. Most others rebuked his teaching even the Apostles in that one instance. Doesn`t that count for something pretty important to consider? I sure would think so, just from common sence. But No, people will hear this and go on like nothing has changed.
Below I have pasted a few direct contradictions for all to see that Paul is proclaiming. This is the in your face true which I can go no further on, and Hope all will pick up thier ball from here on Paul... lol kinda rymes Very Happy

Paul in Red, other scriptures agreed on by all Apostles and word of God, and commentary notes in Green

2Co:12:7: And lest I should be exalted above measure through the abundance of the revelations, there was given to me a thorn in the flesh, the messenger of Satan to buffet me, lest I should be exalted above measure.

He states clearly he has recieved messangers of Satan

1Tm:1:20: Of whom is Hymenaeus and Alexander; whom I have delivered unto Satan, that they may learn not to blaspheme.

VS....

Matthue ......M't:7:1: Judge not, that ye be not judged.
Joh:5:22:..... For the Father judgeth no man, but hath committed all judgment unto the Son:
Paul does this outside the law, and even to do it is surprising ayy?

The view that the Paul's Christ is very different from the historical Jesus has been expounded by Adolf Harnack among many others. Nevertheless, he provides the first written account of the relationship of the Christian to the Risen Christ - what it is to be a Christian - and thus of Christian spirituality.

Paul's influence on Christian thinking has, arguably, been more significant than any other single New Testament author. His influence on the main strands of Christian thought have been massive

1Tm:2:14: And Adam was not deceived, but the woman being deceived was in the transgression.

Vs.

--: Gen 3 Ge:3:17: And unto Adam he said, Because thou hast hearkened unto the voice of thy wife, and hast eaten of the tree, of which I commanded thee, saying, Thou shalt not eat of it: cursed is the ground for thy sake; in sorrow shalt thou eat of it all the days of thy life;

Hay it sounds to me like they both were punished By God Huh?

Paul .....1Th:2:18: Wherefore we would have come unto you, even I Paul, once and again; but Satan hindered us.
VS.......

Lu:10:19: Behold, I give unto you power to tread on serpents and scorpions, and over all the power of the enemy: and nothing shall by any means hurt you.
Lu:10:17: And the seventy returned again with joy, saying, Lord, even the devils are subject unto us through thy name.

Again Paul is subject to Satans Power, by his own lipps

Paul ......Ga:2:16: Knowing that a man is not justified by the works of the law, but by the faith of Jesus Christ, even we have believed in Jesus Christ, that we might be justified by the faith of Christ, and not by the works of the law: for by the works of the law shall no flesh be justified

VS........

Re:2:23: And I will kill her children with death; and all the churches shall know that I am he which searcheth the reins and hearts: and I will give unto every one of you according to your works.

Re:2:26: And he that overcometh, and keepeth my works unto the end, to him will I give power over the nations

Joh:14:12: Verily, verily, I say unto you, He that believeth on me, the works that I do shall he do also; and greater works than these shall he do; because I go unto my Father

So these thinks that are here to see as a candle upon a table of Light, is it backed up by anything else other than our own common sence and undertsanding which is Much.. Yes there is friends.

Re:2:2: I know thy works, and thy labour, and thy patience, and how thou canst not bear them which are evil: and thou hast tried them which say they are apostles, and are not, and hast found them liars:

I think we pretty much did right now in all truth. I can see His serpent like twisting of words but in no way of the Light, He repeadedly draws from the Dark. Could be the answer to his popularity in todays society, veiling the truth further amung Mankind. These are only but a few examples Friends, Going through His epistles in total many pages can and have been writen by a few as I who have taken ther time to seek this contradictional Scripture. Christians are just another traditional Church of Man set in place by Paul and the Sanhedrian council 2000 years ago.

Christ has said their are only two 100% Churches upon the earth. The first and greatest; The lamb of the Elohim, the other, The Church of Satan. Any knowledge not in one voice in the lamb of the Elohim is of the Church of Satan..... Pistis Sophia.

Carefull when calling one a Christian ayy?

Be a Lamb of ther Father... in His love

Brother Thomas......... cheers

by Chukuma on Mon Jun 23, 2008 1:07 am

DarkChylde wrote:Thanx to all for your replies. Given me more food for thought, munch munch.

Sopherim, yep, having a 'crap detector' will help SOOOO much.. And I refer to him as Shaul as even with the 'change' it is still his name in the Aramaic, which I am trying to teach myself....

Passerby, I hadn't run across that quote from Clement before. Do you know where you got it? (In my discussions with the 'fundies' I have to be able to validate EVERYTHING, and I wanna use that.)

Bob, yes, trying to find the truth from what he wrote and what has been changed is been the greatest problem (not only for Shaul but for the words of Yeshua as well). But in studying some of the discussions of the 'church fathers', it has come to my attention that the book of Acts (where the 'problem' Shaul had with Kepha (Peter) is even mentioned) was perhaps a way TO tie Shaul in with a 'historical' Yeshua, since the book was never mentioned in the oldest arguements but was quoted MUCH later. Acts is a newer 'book', possibly manufactured TO link the characters in some historical fashion. But I have never been convinced of the historisity of either Yeshua OR Shaul or any others, perhaps they are all characters in a Jewish version of myths, as there is NO archeological evidence for any of it anyhow. After all, there are some really startling coincidences in the likeness of Yeshua and many of the dying/resurecting 'godmen' of myth, wether it is Osiris, Mythras, the Maize god of the Aztecs, the Green man of the Druids, and the most dead-on likeness of ol' Dyonisis. Perhaps it ia all a Jewish version (as they were awfully Hellenized at the time) of the Pagan myths. I always knew the church took everything from the Pagans (then proceeded to burn them at the stake for it!!)

Chukuma, hmmmm, interesting notion. What would be the determining factors of the historical Shaul, and whom might the 'other' Shaul be? I learn so much from your posts, I am looking forward to picking your brain on this one!

Reply:

Hey, DC. I am humbled by you and the others on this richly blessed site, which possess an uncanny "teachable" (i.e. we're all learning a great deal from one another - iron sharpens iron) and lovable spirit.

The character(s) of Paul is a difficult one to nail down due to the manipulation of scripture on the part of the church. On a personal level, I see how the church has portrayed Jesus as the most influential man of the first century (or was Paul the most influential)? I believe the intertwining of the two in this sense is a tip of to the historical Paul being one and the same with the historical Jesus. I believe this is why so many Christians unknowingly revere Paul's writings on the same level as Jesus' teachings. From a documented perspective, I believe this is supported by the biography written by Flavius Philostratus (217AD) as well as other authors found in the link below. These views coupled with allegorical interpretation of scripture has enabled me to be confident that the Jesus of the gospels is not a historical personage.

http://www.mountainman.com.au/apollonius_of_tyana.htm

by Chukuma on Mon Jun 23, 2008 1:08 am

continued:

Another interesting source supporting my stance above is the work of J.M. Roberts entitled Antiquitiy Unveiled: Ancient Voices from the Spirit Realms Proving Christianity to be of Heathen Origin. In this work, Roberts received and then documented information from the spirit world via the use of a medium. Below is his documented account with the spirit of Pol/Paul.

Before entering upon this all absorbing subject, it is simply proper by way of explanation to inform the reader that previous to the date given below, Mr. Roberts had been having regular weekly sittings with the medium through whom these communications were received, but in reference to the sitting on May 25th, 1881, Mr. Roberts records in his notes the following:
"Having been informed who would next manifest through the medium, the time having arrived, I felt a thrill of astonishment and delight of the greatest intensity, and the very air of the humble apartment in which we sat seemed filled with a mighty spiritual power, as the name of Apollonius of Tyana was announced, and we were greeted for the first time by the great Cappadocian sage and philosopher, as well as the greatest teacher and benefactor that ever drew to himself the love, admiration and reverence of the civilized world,--Apollonius, the Spirit Anointed Christ of the Orient." His communication was as follows:

<BLOCKQUOTE>"Let our salutation be, the survival of truth and its conquest of Superstition. I was born, according to the Christian calendar, on the 16th day of February, A. D. 2, of wealthy parents; was educated, until my 26th year, in general philosophy and literature, when I served for six years under Euxenes, of Heracleia, learning the Pythagorian philosophy. After acquiring all I could learn from the teachings of that philosopher, I went to Antioch, and from there to Jerusalem. On account of some wonderful physical manifestations of spirit power taking place through my then young mediumship, which persons living in Jerusalem had heard of, my entrance to that city was hailed, as it has been alleged the entrance of Jesus of Nazareth was hailed, with hosannas and songs of praise to one who came in the name of the Lord. And now, mark particularly what I say; this took place when I was thirty-three years of age. I want you to pay the closest attention to what I shall here set forth. You will, by examining Josephus's work, 'War of the Jews,' see, that concerning the siege of Jerusalem a certain prophecy was given, or words were spoken, as is alleged, by Jesus of Nazareth, which were fulfilled. You will find what I refer to, in Matthew, 23d chapter and 35th verse, where the so-called Jesus is made to have asserted that that generation were guilty of all the blood that had been shed from Abel to Zacharias, the son of Baroch, slain between the temple and the altar exactly thirty-four years after the alleged death of Jesus. And you will find this prophecy then fulfilled, while Jesus is made to have said that it was fulfilled in his time; and here you have an example of the unauthenticity of the Christian Gospels. All this I learned at the very time at which Flavius Josephus wrote the history of the 'War of the Jews,' for I was employed and used by the Emperor Vespasian as his oracle, when in the same state as this medium is, who now sits before you.
"Never, during my mortal life, did I desire to be worshipped after death -- never did I, as a mortal man, teach such a doctrine. But I was deified after my death. Nine epistles were made a present to me by Phraotes of Taxila, India, or rather between Babylon and India, who was a satrap, in those days. Those epistles contained all that is embraced in the present epistles claimed to have been written by St. Paul. And from what I have learned as a spirit, I conclude that I am both the Jesus and St. Paul of the Christian scriptures. Flattering enough to my vanity, but the ruin of my happiness. It is my duty, here, to confess all I can bring to recollection, in order that spiritual darkness may disperse and the light of truth shine in.
"There is one thing that I desire particularly to speak of, and that is the ultimate of spirit power on earth. All Materialists claim that it is impossible to restore that which is dead to life. Upon this point, upon my own knowledge, I assert that if you have developed your mortal body to that extent, not into what is called mortal purity, but into a holy, trusting love, with a heart that beats for humanity, if such a person can come in contact with a fresh, young body from which the spirit has been driven out before it could accomplish its mission, take that body by the hand, and with mighty will arrest that spirit, he can force it back to the body it once inhabited and make it fulfill its mission. Three things are necessary to do this--first, a perfectly healthy organism. That does not imply a strong, powerful one--it means an organism in which the spirit is greater than the body--the excess of spirit producing this result. [Here the controlling spirit caused the form of the medium to rise, and extending his arms at full length to the right and left said:] "The spirit addressing you is not confined to the limits of the form you see before you. It not only fills the physical organism you see, but extends far around it as well. In the time when I lived in the mortal form the old was dying out and the new being born. By this I mean that superstition, gods and all such ideas were on the wane, and man was seeking, as he is to-day, for something more practical and beneficial.
"It was not through any qualities that I possessed different from, or superior to, those of any other man, that I accomplished what I did, but through the spiritual power within and with me. This fact I want to have especially marked. The highest sensitive mortals living in any age or generation, and who are living the nearest in accord with nature's divine law of truth, will bring forth a child who may be the so-called Saviour of that generation. Those men and women who utter the highest and most beneficial truths to their fellow-mortals are the Saviours of their time.
"Further, I have this to say, I retired voluntarily, for I was neither ostracised nor banished for anything I had done, said or written, to the same island to which, as is alleged, the St. John of Revelations went, in the years 69 and 70 A.D. I there wrote what occurred through me in a trance state, not knowing what I wrote, an almost identical story with that attributed to the so-called St. John the Revelator. That story was nothing more than an attempt of the spirit world to give the truth of the spirit life, through a mortal organism, in a day and generation that was not ripe to receive it. That is, the medium chosen for the expression of the teachings of spirits was too much imbued with the mysticism of Judea and neighboring countries to be well suited for that purpose.
"What is known to you moderns as the anti-Nicene Library, contained documents, some of which are still extant, that fully warrant you in challenging the translators of to-day as to the correctness of their production. Let them examine, if they dare, the manuscripts referred to and they will find what is now being published erroneous in many particulars. They have followed too much what their ancestors translated, without having translated for themselves.
"Now and here, I declare that the Christian Gospels were all preached by me--preached at Jerusalem--preached at Ephesus--preached at Athens--preached at Philippi--preached at Rome--preached at Antioch--preached at Alexandria--preached at Babylon. In all those countries I preached, and by manipulations, and certain qualities developed in me, I healed the sick, restored the sight of the blind, and, in the way herein set forth, even raised the dead. I will try to make this raising of the dead plainer. If a child, a youth, or a maiden, whose body is fresh, full of vigor and perfection, and whose spirit has become detached from it, in that case I hold that one whose power is great and whose will is indomitable, while that body is yet warm, can cause the spirit to return and continue to inhabit that organism. In this way I know the dead can be restored to life. When I lived on earth all the philosophers who taught men to expect redemption, according to more ancient authorities, taught that such redemption was to happen at that time. From what I have been able to learn as a spirit, I was the person who was designed by spirits to fulfil that mission. I claim no pre-eminence over any one. I only say that my mortal body contained more spirit than the average of men, or even the most highly developed among them, at the time I existed in mortal flesh.
"My history, as it has come down to you moderns, written by one Damis, and by others afterwards, in regard to the main incidents of my life, is correct, but in regard to the glamour, romance and mystery of the narrative, it has no relation to me whatever. The latter was the work of my disciples and followers after my death, and was promulgated by them.
"One thing more and I am through with my communication. It is this. Almost every picture that in modern times, is recognized as the likeness of Jesus, is the identical portrait of Apollonius of Tyana, painted in the reign of Vespasian. That emperor consulted me. I was the oracle in his camp. I was the means of saving the life of Flavius Josephus." [We here asked him how it came that Josephus had made no mention of that fact in his 'Jewish War?' He replied.] "The Jewish hierarchy of that day had a horror and dislike of even their best friends who were not of their faith, and Josephus being a Pharisee of the straightest sect was even more than usually prejudiced against a Gentile like myself. By this I do not mean that the Pharisees were bad people, but that they were so devoted to their religion as to be bitterly bigoted and prejudiced against those who differed from them.
"It is my opinion, from all I can learn as a spirit, that all the Christian Gospels are borrowed from, and in fact that their origin was, the books that I brought from India, obtained in part from Phraotes, who was King of Taxila. I think those books were used by the Platonists, Eclectics and Gnostics of Alexandria, about one hundred and fifty years after. I died in the year A.D. 99, at Ephesus, and was 97 or 98 years of age, although some have enlarged the period of my earthly life to 150 years. The originals of the four gospels I obtained through one Hiram Ermandi, of Taxila, who took me forward into Farther India. They were written in characters not unlike those used by the Chinese, on thin, tough paper. They treated of the four stages of the life of Buddha. The first to his incarnation and birth, the second to his childhood and youth, the third to his mature life, and the fourth to his old age and death. These books I obtained at Singapore, at the extreme point of India, on the strait between India and Sumatra." [We here mentioned to him the fact that one week before we had received a communication from a spirit purporting to be Ulphilas, the Christian bishop of the Goths, who said he had translated from Samaritan manuscripts the epistles and gospels to which he, Apollonius, had referred into the Gothic tongue; and that the manuscripts that he translated were the writings of himself, after the originals he obtained at Singapore, India. To which he replied.] "One Hegesippus made copies from my translations and modified versions of the originals in the Samaritan tongue and Ulphilas copied from the manuscripts of Hegesippus. I wrote in the Hebraic-Samaritan tongue, which was the language of my country." </BLOCKQUOTE>

by Chukuma on Mon Jun 23, 2008 1:10 am

continued:

Here the control of the medium became wholly exhausted. Bidding us a hasty and most benign adieu, he left the medium more exhausted than we had ever seen him at any previous sitting. No other control of the medium was possible, and thus ended a spirit interview, which is destined to mark an era in human progress never transcended, if ever equaled, in importance and interest to all classes of the human race. We publish such facts, as are conceded by ample authority, to be historically established concerning Apollonius. There is much that it would be desirable to add as a result of our own researches, but we will confine ourself mainly to the current history of his life and labors. As the best condensed sketch of the life of Apollonius that we have been able to find, we have chosen that of the "Penny Cyclopaedia," London, 1834:
We feel that we may safely assume as true and proven, the following historical statements concerning Apollonius. He was born of wealthy parents at Tyana in Cappadocia, at the very period when it is alleged the Christian's Jesus was born at Bethlehem. At the age of twelve years he was sent to Tarsus in Cilicia, the alleged birthplace and home of St. Paul. Not liking the frivolous habits of the people of that city, with his father's consent, he retired to Aegae, a town a short distance from Tarsus, where he remained until after attaining to man's estate. There he studied every system of philosophy, and perfected himself in rhetoric and general literature. There he took up his residence in the temple of Aesculapius, so famed for its miraculous cures, was initiated by the priests of that temple in their mysteries, and performed cures that astonished not only the people, but even those masters of the art of healing. He there finally decided to adopt the philosophy of Pythagoras, and vigorously observed the trying discipline instituted by the Samian sage. He performed the terrible task of five years silence, which he endured cheerfully and without a murmur of complaint. He abstained from animal food, wine and women--lived upon fruits and herbs--dressed only in linen garments of the plainest construction--went barefooted and with uncovered head--and wore his hair and beard uncut. He was especially distinguished for his beauty, his genial bearing, his uniform love and kindness, and his imperturbable equanimity of temper. In these respects he was the personal embodiment of the imaginary traits of the Christian Jesus, and was no doubt the original of the pictures of the so-called Nazarene, now so venerated by uninformed professors of the Christian religion. Determined to devote himself to the pursuit of knowledge and the teaching of philosophy, he gave away his large patrimony to his poor relatives and went to Antioch, then a centre of learning, but little less noted than Athens or Alexandria. There he began his great mission by teaching philosophy to a number of disciples and to the people. He entered the temple of Apollo Daphne, at Antioch, and learned the mysteries of its priesthood. Philostratus describes the style of speaking adopted by Apollonius, thus:

<BLOCKQUOTE>
"Apollonius used a style of speaking not elevated, nor swollen in the language of poetry, nor yet one too refined, nor too Attic; for whatever exceeded the Attic mediocrity was considered by him dissonant and unpleasant. He made use of no fastidious nicety in the division of his discourses, nor any fine spun sentences,; nor was he known to adopt an ironical manner, nor any kind of apostrophising with his hearers. He spoke as it were from a tripod, to wit: ' I know,' and 'It seems to me,' and 'To what purpose is this?' and, 'You must know.' His sentences were short and adamantine--his words authorative and adapted to the sense, and the bare utterance of them conveyed a sound as if they were sanctioned by the sceptre of royalty. Being asked once by a subtle disputant why he did not propose what side of a question he should take in argument? he replied: 'When I was a young man, I used to follow that practice, but that is no longer necessary as it is now become my duty not to investigate, but to teach the result of my investigations.' When he was asked, by the same logician, how a wise man should speak, he said as a legislator, for it was the part of a legislator to command the multitude to do, what he himself was convinced ought to be done. In this way he conducted himself at Antioch, and converted many who were strangers to his knowledge." </BLOCKQUOTE>

Now, when it is remembered that this description of the style in which Apollonius spoke, was written by Damis, the friend, pupil and companion of the Cappadocian sage, long before Jesus Christ or the Christian scriptures were heard of or thought of; is it not remarkably evident that the original author of those scriptures was Apollonius himself. If identity of style and sentiment is possible, then was the learned Apollonius the original author of the teachings attributed to Jesus Christ; an identity that all the altering, eliminating and interpolating by the Christian hierarchy have not been able to destroy nor even imperfectly conceal. Quoting Cudworth, Dr. Lardner, in "The Credibility of the Gospel History," says:

<BLOCKQUOTE>"Cudworth, in his "Intellectual System," says: 'It is a thing highly probable, if not unquestionable, that Apollonius Tyanaeus, shortly after the publication of the gospel to the world, was a person made choice of by the policy and assisted by the powers of the kingdom of darkness, for doing some things extraordinary, merely out of design to derogate from the miracles of our Saviour Jesus Christ, and to enable paganism the better to bear up against the attacks of Christianity.' So Cudworth, and I suppose that many learned men of late times, may have expressed themselves in a like manner; but I cannot assent to them."

He further cites Huet, as follows:
"He [Philostratus] aimed," says Huet, "and thinks it to have been his principal design 'to obstruct the progress of the Christian religion, by drawing the character of a man of great knowledge, sanctity and miraculous power. Therefore he formed Apollonius after the example of Christ, and accommodated many things in the history of our Lord to Apollonius."</BLOCKQUOTE>

Shaul, a GNOSTIC??

Shaul, a GNOSTIC??

thank you

Re: Shaul, a GNOSTIC??

Re: Shaul, a GNOSTIC??

Re: Shaul, a GNOSTIC??

Re: Shaul, a GNOSTIC??

Re: Shaul, a GNOSTIC??

Re: Shaul, a GNOSTIC??

Re: Shaul, a GNOSTIC??

Saul a Gnostic?

Re: Shaul, a GNOSTIC??

Paul................?

Re: Shaul, a GNOSTIC??

Re: Shaul, a GNOSTIC??

Re: Shaul, a GNOSTIC??