Succession Of Lies

[mortify]

[quote name='reyb' timestamp='1335502284' post='2423850']
Now I said there is no 'second coming' in the same way of that 'first coming' which was believed and preached by your early fathers because that 'first coming' is a lie. There is no historical realization of coming of the Messiah of the Jews more or less 2000 years ago and therefore, there will be no 'second coming' of that Jesus because that Jesus do not exist.
[/quote]

So you believe Christ never walked this earth? And therefore He was never crucified and never resurrected?

[reyb]

[quote name='mortify' timestamp='1335595788' post='2424311']
So you believe Christ never walked this earth? And therefore He was never crucified and never resurrected?
[/quote]


Since historical realization of the coming of Christ is a lie it only follows, historical Jesus never existed in our world of realities including everything about him like his virgin-birth and passion or his death and resurrection.

Nevertheless, while historical Jesus never existed in our present realities but still, he is existing in the mind of believers thus Apostle Paul said in 2 Cor 11:3 ‘….your minds may somehow be led astray from your sincere and pure devotion to Christ’ .

Apostle Paul is not talking to non-Christians when he said these things. He is actually talking to someone like you who have sincere and pure devotion to Christ but your minds are led astray in believing ‘the day of the lord has already come’ which is a lie. He knows too you accepted these false gospel and false Jesus because he said ‘you put up with it easily enough’. As I have said before, your early father’s gospel can easily be grasped and understood, and by just accepting what they believe you are already a Christian like them. But Apostle Paul is holding on you not to be just like them (your early fathers). You must surpassed them by seeing Christ himself thus he said ‘ And I will keep on doing what I am doing in order to cut the ground from under those who want an opportunity to be considered equal with us in the things they boast about. (2 Cor 11:12). Meaning, if you truly wanted to be one with them together with Apostle Paul that ‘sin’ must be uprooted and only in Christ –not your historical Jesus but the one who will appear - that sin will be taken out. Thus, he is preparing you to become an empty vessel for Christ when he said ‘so that I might present you as a pure virgin to him’. In short, he wants those who profess to be Christians becomes a true Christian being a witness of Christ himself. Otherwise, you are a Christian obeying the tradition of man rather than God.

Now, regarding death and resurrection of Christ – are you referring to 1 Cor 15:33ff?

Edited May 1, 2012 by reyb

[Papist]

[quote name='reyb' timestamp='1335875538' post='2425604']
Since historical realization of the coming of Christ is a lie it only follows, historical Jesus never existed in our world
[/quote]

If true, that is one big, huge dupe on the world. A lie that thousands of people chose to be torn to pieces and eaten by lions for. Thanks for sharing your discovery.

[reyb]

[quote name='Papist' timestamp='1335876204' post='2425605']
If true, that is one big, huge dupe on the world. A lie that thousands of people chose to be torn to pieces and eaten by lions for. Thanks for sharing your discovery.
[/quote]


I want to learn from you since you are teaching us and telling me that I am wrong. Can you please tell us where in his letter, Apostle Paul said ‘believe what I believe’ and then you are now one with them?

Now regarding your pride - your early fathers eaten by lions or whatever. Did Apostle Paul eaten by lions?

[Groo the Wanderer]

oh yer back.

joy.


thousands of Christians were martyred by the roman government. that is a historical fact. so is the fact that St. Paul was beheaded. Do you actually read what you claim to have gnostic knowledge of?

[reyb]

[quote name='Groo the Wanderer' timestamp='1335877844' post='2425609']
oh yer back.

joy.


thousands of Christians were martyred by the roman government. that is a historical fact. so is the fact that St. Paul was beheaded. Do you actually read what you claim to have gnostic knowledge of?
[/quote]

And why? (Apostle Paul is beheaded - if ever it is true).
------------------

[b]Gnosticism[/b] (from [i]gnostikos[/i], "learned", from [url="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Greek_language"]Greek[/url]: γνῶσις [i]gnōsis[/i], knowledge) is a modern scholarly term for a set of religious beliefs and spiritual practices found among some of the early Christian groups called "gnostic" ("learned") by [url="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Irenaeus"]Irenaeus[/url] and other early Christian [url="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heresiology"]heresiologists[/url]. The term also has reference to parallels and possible pre-Christian influences of the Christian gnostics.
Gnosticism was primarily defined in Christian context, or as "the acute Hellenization of Christianity" per [url="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adolf_von_Harnack"]Adolf von Harnack[/url] (1885), until [url="http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Moritz_Friedl%C3%A4nder&action=edit&redlink=1"]Moritz Friedländer[/url] (1898) advocated Hellenistic Jewish origins, and [url="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wilhelm_Bousset"]Wilhelm Bousset[/url] (1907) advocated Persian origins.[1] Consequent discussions of [url="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gnostic_Christianity"]Gnostic Christianity[/url] included pre-Christian religious beliefs and spiritual practices argued to be common to [url="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Early_Christianity"]early Christianity[/url], [url="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hellenistic_Judaism"]Hellenistic Judaism[/url], [url="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Greco-Roman_mysteries"]Greco-Roman mystery religions[/url], [url="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zoroastrianism"]Zoroastrianism[/url] (especially [url="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zurvanism"]Zurvanism[/url]), and [url="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neoplatonism"]Neoplatonism[/url]. The base of discussion of gnosticism changed radically with the discovery of the [url="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nag_Hammadi_library"]Nag Hammadi library[/url], and led to revision of older assumptions, and a reorientation of modern scholarship following the 1966 conference on gnosticism in [url="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Messina"]Messina[/url].

(from wiki)

So what is wrong to be called ‘gnostic’?

Edited May 1, 2012 by reyb

[cmotherofpirl]

Its not christian:)

[Groo the Wanderer]

its also heresy

[reyb]

[quote name='cmotherofpirl' timestamp='1335883567' post='2425636']
Its not christian:)
[/quote]
[quote name='Groo the Wanderer' timestamp='1335887212' post='2425653']
its also heresy
[/quote]

Of course, they are different from your early fathers. So, how can you say your early fathers are not false teachers while it seems they are Christians 'earlier' than them?

[cmotherofpirl]

Gnostics are not christians.

[Basilisa Marie]

Reyb - no historical Jesus at all? Oh, umm....

From Pliny the Younger, to the Emperor Trajan:
[quote][color=#000000][font=sans-serif][size=3]Those who denied that they were or had been Christians, when they invoked the gods in words dictated by me, offered prayer with incense and wine to your image, which I had ordered to be brought for this purpose together with statues of the gods, and moreover cursed Christ — none of which those who are really Christians, it is said, can be forced to do — these I thought should be discharged. Others named by the informer declared that they were Christians, but then denied it, asserting that they had been but had ceased to be, some three years before, others many years, some as much as twenty-five years. They all worshipped your image and the statues of the gods, and cursed Christ.[/size][/font][/color][/quote]

From Tacitus, in his Annals of History:
[quote][color=#000000][font=sans-serif][size=3]Nero fastened the guilt of starting the blaze and inflicted the most exquisite tortures on a class hated for their abominations, called Christians [Chrestians] by the populace. Christus, from whom the name had its origin, suffered the extreme penalty during the reign of [/size][/font][/color][url="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tiberius"]Tiberius[/url][color=#000000][font=sans-serif][size=3] at the hands of one of our procurators, [/size][/font][/color][url="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pontius_Pilatus"]Pontius Pilatus[/url][color=#000000][font=sans-serif][size=3], and a most mischievous superstition, thus checked for the moment, again broke out not only in [/size][/font][/color][url="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iudaea_Province"]Judaea[/url][color=#000000][font=sans-serif][size=3], the first source of the evil, but even in Rome, where all things hideous and shameful from every part of the world find their centre and become popular.[/size][/font][/color][/quote]

And from Lucian:
[quote][color=#000000][font=sans-serif][size=3]The Christians, you know, worship a man to this day — the distinguished personage who introduced their novel rites, and was crucified on that account… You see, these misguided creatures start with the general conviction that they are [/size][/font][/color][url="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eternal_life_(Christianity)"]immortal for all time[/url][color=#000000][font=sans-serif][size=3], which explains the contempt of death and voluntary self-devotion which are so common among them; and then it was impressed on them by their original lawgiver that they are all brothers, from the moment that they are converted, and deny the gods of Greece, and worship the crucified [/size][/font][/color][url="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wise_old_man"]sage[/url][color=#000000][font=sans-serif][size=3], and live after [/size][/font][/color][url="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Law_of_Christ"]his laws[/url][color=#000000][font=sans-serif][size=3].[/size][/font][/color][/quote]

At the very least, Christ was a person who instigated a sect of Judaism that caused lots of problems for the Roman and Greek rulers. He and his followers actually existed, you can't deny that.

[reyb]

[quote name='cmotherofpirl' timestamp='1335892418' post='2425670'] Gnostics are not christians. [/quote] [quote name='Basilisa Marie' timestamp='1335895319' post='2425696'] Reyb - no historical Jesus at all? Oh, umm.... From Pliny the Younger, to the Emperor Trajan: From Tacitus, in his Annals of History: And from Lucian: At the very least, Christ was a person who instigated a sect of Judaism that caused lots of problems for the Roman and Greek rulers. He and his followers actually existed, you can't deny that. [/quote]

If that is the case, Christians of yesterday are like hard core Muslim terrorist of today who is always ready to give their life for a cause. So, what is their difference? Is Apostle Paul one of them in doing it? Do you think he will do the same to go against governments and their leaders considering he fights for spiritual battle rather than governmental issues?

How can you say a man is ‘The light of God’ or ‘The word of God’ or ‘The power of God’ or ‘The mediator between God and Man’ or ‘The mystery of God’ and many other calling for ‘The Christ of God’ – how can you say Jesus is man or at least a man having such title and then, (who will) fight for or against a particular form of government just for you? It is already an insult for God to become a Man. How much more if you will tell him to lead you against your useless issues? Do you really think the Christ of God can do it?

Yes, Gnostic are not Christians like you. But how about Apostle Paul? Is he an orthodox Christians like you and your early fathers? (Let us discuss this is in another topic).

Edited May 2, 2012 by reyb

[Groo the Wanderer]

St. Paul was a Catholic bishop. He ordained St. Timothy for one.



Oh that's right. You want to see the video of the ordination Mass as proof.

Edited May 2, 2012 by Groo the Wanderer

[mortify]

[quote name='reyb' timestamp='1335875538' post='2425604']
Since historical realization of the coming of Christ is a lie it only follows, historical Jesus never existed in our world of realities including everything about him like his virgin-birth and passion or his death and resurrection.
[/quote]

In other words, the Son of God never incarnated. He never walked the earth, never tought apostles, and never suffered on the cross. You must also believe that the Bible we have in our hand is corrupted.

Please let me know if I am wrong here

[Basilisa Marie]

[quote name='reyb' timestamp='1335917806' post='2425853']
If that is the case, Christians of yesterday are like hard core Muslim terrorist of today who is always ready to give their life for a cause. So, what is their difference? Is Apostle Paul one of them in doing it? Do you think he will do the same to go against governments and their leaders considering he fights for spiritual battle rather than governmental issues?

How can you say a man is ‘The light of God’ or ‘The word of God’ or ‘The power of God’ or ‘The mediator between God and Man’ or ‘The mystery of God’ and many other calling for ‘The Christ of God’ – how can you say Jesus is man or at least a man having such title and then, (who will) fight for or against a particular form of government just for you? It is already an insult for God to become a Man. How much more if you will tell him to lead you against your useless issues? Do you really think the Christ of God can do it?

Yes, Gnostic are not Christians like you. But how about Apostle Paul? Is he an orthodox Christians like you and your early fathers? (Let us discuss this is in another topic).
[/quote]

There's a big difference between Muslims giving their lives and Christians giving their lives. Early Christians were told, "Convert or die, or better yet we'll torture your kids in front of you." Muslims committed acts of war on people in the name of the faith. See the difference?

No, it's not insulting. It's actually quite in line with ancient Jewish tradition.

If you read the texts that aren't included in the Old Testament, because ancient Jews didn't have the same idea of canon that we do, you see plenty of examples of God generously sharing aspects of his divinity with people like Enoch and Jacob and Elijah and Moses. It's all in stuff like the Dead Sea Scrolls and other literature from different areas. Like, in one story God shares so much with Enoch (because He loves Enoch) that the rabbis get confused about which one is actually God, so God has a bunch of angels beat the croutons out of Enoch to show them the difference. So the whole idea of a human becoming God-like (or even vice-versa) is not insulting and actually has strong roots in the tradition, and isn't just something the Early Christians pulled out of a hat. The idea of God "sharing" aspects of his divinity with people is actually a testament to how great God's generosity and love are. And actually, all the ideas about Christ have some kind of beginning in ancient Jewish traditions about different prophets or chosen people of God. It's like all the ideas are melded together in Christ. There's loads of ideological precedent, if you bother to go looking for it in history.

Plus, why would it be an insult? God has a pretty high opinion of humanity...because God loves us. Act of great humility, yes, obviously. But there's an important difference between humility and insult.

Furthermore, some of the ancient Jews were looking for a political Messiah...because everyone kept conquering and exiling the Jews, so when they studied their holy books, it was pretty reasonable that some people thought they were talking about a political uprising.
And Useless Issues? Really?

Look, the problems you seem to be having were the same problems many people were having in the fourth century. There were people who thought Christ had to be fully divine and not human, or fully human and not divine. Go check out the Council of Nicaea.