So I see there are a plethora of Possibilities (used my Greek I did I did :) )
I think part of this "nitpicking" of mine comes from being a genealogist.
I was a genealogist long before I joined the LDS church.
an example of what I mean
I was looking for my cousin's dad's family and I had hit a road block in the early 1800's
Larry *Smith* (the object of my search)married Ann *Jones*
Larry's brother Tom *Smith*- married Mary *Daniels*
not making headway with Larry I decided to work on Ann
Ann *Jones* parents were Sam *Jones* and Sarah *Black*
Sarah *Black*s parents were Mike *Black* and Amy *Green*
Amy *Green*s parents were George *Green* and Sarah *Daniels*
And lo and behold Sarah DANIELS great grandmother of Ann, wife of my Larry, and Mary DANIELS sister-in-law of Larry were from the same small town in Rhode Island. So I wrote to the poster of Ann JONES line and sure enough--same family and not only did my contact have the genealogy for the DANIELS family, she had the complete genealogy for the SMITHs too
And that is how genealogy often works the following of threads and comparing them and picking up similar threads and comparing them
SO that is why inconsistencies beckon to me like a hot fudge sundae--I just have to follow those threads, its in my genes
" As I besought thee to abide still at Ephesus, when I went into Macedonia, that thou mightest charge some that they TEACH NO OTHER DOCTRINE, NEITHER GIVE HEED to fables AND ENDLESS GENEALOGIES, which minister questions, rather than godly edifying which is in faith: " 1 Timothy 1: 3,4
King James version holy Bible.
" But avoid foolish questions, and GENEALOGIES, and contentions, and strivings about the LAW; for they are UNPROFITABLE and VAIN " Titus 3: 9 King James version holy Bible
" But avoid foolish questions, and GENEALOGIES, and contentions, and strivings about the LAW; for they are UNPROFITABLE and VAIN " Titus 3: 9 King James version holy Bible
As usual, Allan, you have thrown the baby out with the bathwater.
These verses refer to the practice of claiming one had the inside track with God because they could prove they were descended from a long line of faithful Jews.
It in no way says or implies that one can't do genealogy for other reasons
Please try to keep the apples and oranges straight instead of always making the bruised fruit salad you are so fond of
" As I besought thee to abide still at Ephesus, when I went into Macedonia, that thou mightest charge some that they TEACH NO OTHER DOCTRINE, NEITHER GIVE HEED to fables AND ENDLESS GENEALOGIES, which minister questions, rather than godly edifying which is in faith: " 1 Timothy 1: 3,4
King James version holy Bible.
" But avoid foolish questions, and GENEALOGIES, and contentions, and strivings about the LAW; for they are UNPROFITABLE and VAIN " Titus 3: 9 King James version holy Bible
Neither "1 Timothy" or "Titus" were written by the Apostle Paul.
You no longer need remain enslaved to this "deutero-Pauline" fictitious material.
" As I besought thee to abide still at Ephesus, when I went into Macedonia, that thou mightest charge some that they TEACH NO OTHER DOCTRINE, NEITHER GIVE HEED to fables AND ENDLESS GENEALOGIES, which minister questions, rather than godly edifying which is in faith: " 1 Timothy 1: 3,4
King James version holy Bible.
" But avoid foolish questions, and GENEALOGIES, and contentions, and strivings about the LAW; for they are UNPROFITABLE and VAIN " Titus 3: 9 King James version holy Bible
Allan... these quotes have nothing to do with tracing one's geneology... you're really becoming such a drag on our life force with your endless stalking of templelady... sheesh... does your wife know about this "other woman"?
" As I besought thee to abide still at Ephesus, when I went into Macedonia, that thou mightest charge some that they TEACH NO OTHER DOCTRINE, NEITHER GIVE HEED to fables AND ENDLESS GENEALOGIES, which minister questions, rather than godly edifying which is in faith: " 1 Timothy 1: 3,4
King James version holy Bible.
" But avoid foolish questions, and GENEALOGIES, and contentions, and strivings about the LAW; for they are UNPROFITABLE and VAIN " Titus 3: 9 King James version holy Bible
Neither "1 Timothy" or "Titus" were written by the Apostle Paul.
You no longer need remain enslaved to this "deutero-Pauline" fictitious material.
Danny
Danny, looks like you and Alan both have some serious proofs to do if y'all are gonna head down that path.
Alan, you have to prove that these personal letters addressed by Paul to Timothy and Titus were "God-breathed" and not just pastoral letters from Paul's heart to these men, and then that "geneologies" in these verses means researchng your family tree.
Danny, you have to prove that Paul didn't even write them.
I'll watch. --->
BTW, I have changed my mind about the Marcion Catechesis. I'm not in the mood for a lynching.
Danny, you have to prove that Paul didn't even write them.
I'll watch. --->
Any number of standard, critical New Testament introductions from the 20th century to the present will do more thoroughly than I desire to attempt here ( both Goodspeed's and Feine-Behm-Kummel's "Introduction to the New Testament"; Ehrman's "The New Testament: A Historical Introduction to the Early Christian Writings", to list a few); or dictionary, such as "The Oxford Companion to the Bible". Even these studies raise the issue of the distinctly anti-marcionite/anti-gnostic polemic contained therein, betraying its approx. era of writing (ranging from the end of the first to the mid second century). Even the title to Marcion's lost work "Antithesis" is given a nod therein.
The only ones in the dark about this (I dare call it) "common knowledge" are those who continue to believe that the "Word of God" (that is - the orthodox version thereof, in contrast to other versions in circulation at the time the Pastoral epistles were written) is "God-breathed", infallible and therefore, inarguable.
Don't ask stupid questions . Your leaders are appointed by God himself - do what they tell you. Stay away from those possessed heretics (including those veggies who don't marry, and get carried away with so-called "Antithesis").
Gimme a break.
The more one becomes aware of the controversies of the 2nd century era, namely, between the various Christian movements - the more transparent certain material in our canonical New Testaments will become -one will recognize the actual reasons for their presence.
I hope some will consider examining for themselves the works I have cited above.
BTW, I have changed my mind about the Marcion Catechesis. I'm not in the mood for a lynching.
a lynching by you? a lynching by me? a lynching by who? (lol).
I'll have very little time for it over the next coupla weeks - I start training for a new job on Monday. In the meantime, there's always my website for anyone interested in the topic of Marcion.
Let me further try to clarify why I take a shot at the Pastorals every opportunity they are raised.
For one, I think the ideas contained therein comprised so much of the "umpf!" or "authority" underlying Wierwille's "Biblatry" theology. Without this material, I don't believe Wierwille or his organization could have gone as far with the sway that they had captivated over so many for so long.
Certainly the belief in the "God-breathed Word" on the basis of this material is not unique to the Way. But I tend to view the Way organization and experiences as a microcosmic example of what can occur when folks take too much for granted that these old documents contain irrefutable truth of which cannot thus be contested. Wherever one may raise legitimate question concerning any matter, there's "Timothy" or "Titus" there to provide fodder against anyone raising what may be conveniently termed as "foolish questions".
It is a device tailored to deliberately suppress inquiry, and to dissuade people against hanging out with others who happened to think differently from themselves. It did so in its original function - and continues to do so even today.
CES used to have a saying in their "Dialogue" or "Sower" mags - to the effect of "Freedom through Scriptural Accuracy" - but the flipside of this coin oft receives not as much attention: "Freedom from Scriptural Tyranny".
The freedom of thought that may be acquired there, in my opinion, is so much more beneficial.
People no longer need condemn themselves for not submitting to representatives of a paper god,
or better yet - remain enslaved to the paper god itself.
If one takes away the infallible authority from the Bible, then what happens to its leaders?
How much sooner might many have left the Way, had they actually been "researchers", and learned what the majority of students and professors in Biblical literature outside the old gigantic cult have known the past century and a half?
Even those who do not reach or share my views or conclusions may agree with me - there is so much more to this ancient literature than what the Way even barely scratched - we had - and still have - a lot of "catching up" to do with becoming familiar with ideas and material to which we were previously "shut out" by our old Way "schoolmaster", favoring to feed us within our doctrinal fortress rehashed Bullinger/Stiles/Leonard.
If one thinks that the only alternatives to not believing in a "god-breathed" Bible are agnosticism and athiesm, they're woefully wrong. My personal faith -such as it is - cannot be narrowed down to a convenient chart on a wall. And I suspect others are also discovering the same. And I also think critical research is no less a "spiritual" endeavor especially when what may result is freedom from a preconceived doctrine which has done so much to actually stifle rather than encourage one's personal path. I think the notion of a god-breathed word is one such stumblingblock.
Thanks for the link, Goey! That is a fascinating read, one I will re-read a few times. I see many shades of Caballa there, as well as the oral traditions of Judaism.
a lynching by you? a lynching by me? a lynching by who? (lol).
I'll have very little time for it over the next coupla weeks - I start training for a new job on Monday. In the meantime, there's always my website for anyone interested in the topic of Marcion.
LOL, Not by me Danny - I was thinking of a few others and how they might respond to Marcion's ideas with a noose and daggers.
But, as for me, I would much rather lynch an unthinking fundamentalist than a thinking gnostic.
Ok lets talk about the book called “The Gospel of Judas”
We can thank these men for translated this book but these men did not write these book so to copy this book they have no rights. Or they copy it and so can I because this is not a new book as they say.
First no revelation was wrote to be keep secret but to be send unto the world.
Lets begin “The Earthly Ministry of Jesus” yes Jesus Christ did miracles and great wonders but the twelve were called to reach out to the good and bad about the coming of Christ to lead them into truth.
“Scene one” this is wrote like a movie and not book I ever read was wrote like a movie but stories, history, and teaching of what is truth or what is the love of God.
Now Jesus Christ would of never laugh at anyone but he may of laugh with people about some thing like we may. For he could not of laugh at a person and still be with out sin.
All so no book of the bible was wrote with sub titles so this was either added or this book was wrote differ than most.
Why Jesus not be able to name of who send Judas? Look Jesus is the son of God so he could say any name and he had to be able to call them be name to cast them out if needed.
Jesus may have told Judas he would be replaced for what he about to do but that would not of changed any thing Judas might do because what Judas does is what Judas wants to do.
Look “Scene two of the movie” Ok Jesus went to other generations maybe so maybe not I just do not know.
no one born [of] this aeon will see that [generation], and no host of angels of the stars will rule over that generation, and no person of mortal birth can associate with it, because that generation does not come from […] which has become […]. The generation of people among [you] is from the generation of humanity […] power, which [… the] other powers […] by [which] you rule.
No one born of this image Look this is talking about “No one born of this life will see fleshly the generation were Jesus went the holy generation because this generation will be spiritual and can only be seen spiritual and you have not become spiritually yet because you have not been born again yet.
More or less what this is saying which was either poorly translated or recalled poorly by Judas or who ever wrote this book
His disciples would be trouble in their spirit upon them but not in because they had not received Christ in them yet.
Dreams and visions for they saw when men who use the word of God and the name of Jesus to get riches on earth with love. Yes people with out the love of God will be put to shame at the last day.
Judas said to [him, “Rabb]i, what kind of fruit does this generation produce?” Jesus said, “The souls of every human generation will die. When these people, however, have completed the time of the kingdom and the spirit leaves them, their bodies will die but their souls will be alive, and they will be taken up.”
Judas said, “And what will the rest of the human generations do?” Jesus said, “It is impossible [44] to sow seed on [rock] and harvest its fruit. [This] is also the way […] the [defiled] generation […] and corruptible Sophia […] the hand that has created mortal people, so that their souls go up to the eternal realms above. [Truly] I say to you, […] angel […] power will be able to see that […] these to whom […] holy generations […].”
When Jesus heard this, he laughed and said to him, “You thirteenth spirit, why do you try so hard? But speak up, and I shall bear with you.” Judas said to him, “In the vision I saw myself as the twelve disciples were stoning me and [45] persecuting [me severely]. And I also came to the place where […] after you. I saw [a house …], and my eyes could not [comprehend] its size. Great people were surrounding it, and that house <had> a roof of greenery, and in the middle of the house was [a crowd—two lines missing—], saying, ‘Master, take me in along with these
[Jesus] answered and said, “Judas, your star has led you astray.” He continued, “No person of mortal birth is worthy to enter the house you have seen, for that place is reserved for the holy. Neither the sun nor the moon will rule there, nor the day, but the holy will abide there always, in the eternal realm with the holy angels. Look, I have explained to you the mysteries of the kingdom [46] and I have taught you about the error of the stars; and […] send it […] on the twelve aeons.”
Yes no one is good enough to be saved but Jesus told Judas about the coming grace that we are saved by faith but no one is good enough and that he has been led astray
Yes Judas was led astray and he sin and sin brought about more than he would deal with because he loved fleshly Jesus as a brother and he was trick but Judas was not all bad just a another sinner
The two lines missing are the part Jesus reach out to lead Judas back into truth and yes Judas has been curse because he was a sinner like we are.
Jesus teaches about the spiritual realm.
First aeon was the spiritual image Adam was born into and the second aeon was the spiritual image Jesus was born into
Yes Seth family line was of God and from his family line David was born and from David family line was Mary born and from Mary Jesus was born the human side of Christ.
Jesus never told Judas to give him up but he did tell him he has been led astray from what is right. Jesus talk with Judas about many things in this book.
Do I believe this book is real I do not know Do I believe it was wrote spiritually I do not know Who wrote it I do not know is it all bad No
Would of Jesus talk to Judas about these things why not.
Thank you
with love and a holy kiss blowing your way Roy
For all quotes of the book of Judas I take all blame Roy William Perry III 1501 North Dixie Lot 45 Radcliff Ky 40160
I don't think anyone is really holding up the Book of Judas as the Word of God. Fundamentalists are sure to reject it as to having any authority and will be crying heresy for a few months until the ferver dies down.
For me, it's significance is mostly historical, possibly revealing a little bit of about a branch of Christianity that did not follow "orthodoxy".
Hey...geneaology is geneaology full stop. Even a light perusal tends to point out it is about tracing your lineage. Your point is like trying to say that some types of homosexuality or witchcraft is o.k.
No, I'm not interested in Mo at all (although the LDS undergarments are quite 'sexy' in a religious sort of way).
Even a light perusal tends to point out it is about tracing your lineage
Apples
Tracing your lineage to find out who you are related to and your history -modern day genealogists - OT is filled with examples
Oranges
Tracing your lineage to prove that because of that lineage you have a superior claim on Gods favor -- Flaw in some followers of Jesus in the NT. Never said theat "apple" geneaolgy is bad just "orange" genealogy
I sorta get confused when folks get upset because something that has come to public knowledge after being buried for eons is discounted because it's "new". I also don't get it since now it's so much easier to get access to and learn about these older writings....Heck, many of us are just now really delving into other historical writings that have been around for ages.....
Why dismiss something just because it's "new to you"?
Given the highly influential political climate of the past, couldn't there be "ulterior motives" to what's in the Bible vs. what was subverted and kept from the public eye?
It seems that some folks get offended when their precious Bible and the integrity thereof is questioned.... especially using other writings as old as, if not older, than the writings of the Bible <_<
Here's what we were taught in TWI about Judas hanging himself....
Page 151 - ff in the blue book:
Judas was not only alive at the time of the crucifixion, but he saw the resurrected Christ and was withnes to the ascension.
1 Cor 15:3-5
Acts 1:9-11
vee pee says is when the twelve watched JC ascend, but then sometime between v.9 and v.11 Judas left the group....hence the "ye men of Galilee...."
vee pee says "hanged himself" implies to the western mind that he literally took his own life by hanging, but according to the Eastern custom - using Saul falling upon his own sword as the method of hanging for government, military personnel. It's called hanging because they suspended themselves on pointed objects....
quoting v. 16-18
vee pee says that "purshased a field" is really the word "provided" like in Matt 10:9 - meaning that he provided for himself a feild with the reward of iniquity... "field" being chorion meaning "property".
vee pee says, "Most people believe that his reward of iniquity was the thirty pieces of silver which can't be true because he cast them down in the temple."
John 12:6 - he says describes Judas as a theif.... that he was stealing money from the money bag...
The field was called "aceldama" the field of blood because that's where he hanged himself.
BUT - BUT - BUT in JC our Passover, he calls this hanging of Judas meaning Judas was "hanged with guilt" - not having anything at all to do with death.
I lost the custody of that book in the divorce, but I remember it because it contradicts this from the blue book and even has a picture of Judas doubled over with grief at what he did.
******
Goey, thanks for the link. I'm going to read it and I als want to read Mary's, too....I've got the Gnostic Gospels by Elaine Pagels and have been reading Harry Potter instead, but I'm ready to delve back into this stuff, I reckon. :) I appreciate the links.
I also appreciate the civilized discussion despite Mo's unrequieted love continuing to throw rotten fruit salad into the pot and pulling on her pigtails.
Any number of standard, critical New Testament introductions from the 20th century to the present will do more thoroughly than I desire to attempt here ( both Goodspeed's and Feine-Behm-Kummel's "Introduction to the New Testament"; Ehrman's "The New Testament: A Historical Introduction to the Early Christian Writings", to list a few); or dictionary, such as "The Oxford Companion to the Bible". Even these studies raise the issue of the distinctly anti-marcionite/anti-gnostic polemic contained therein, betraying its approx. era of writing (ranging from the end of the first to the mid second century). Even the title to Marcion's lost work "Antithesis" is given a nod therein.
The only ones in the dark about this (I dare call it) "common knowledge" are those who continue to believe that the "Word of God" (that is - the orthodox version thereof, in contrast to other versions in circulation at the time the Pastoral epistles were written) is "God-breathed", infallible and therefore, inarguable.
Don't ask stupid questions . Your leaders are appointed by God himself - do what they tell you. Stay away from those possessed heretics (including those veggies who don't marry, and get carried away with so-called "Antithesis").
Gimme a break.
The more one becomes aware of the controversies of the 2nd century era, namely, between the various Christian movements - the more transparent certain material in our canonical New Testaments will become -one will recognize the actual reasons for their presence.
I hope some will consider examining for themselves the works I have cited above.
Hmmmm Danny, I would be reluctant to suggest that folks only look at works that support the negative view or only my view. Like I have said many times before, many folks are unaware of any division at all concering Pauline authorship of these epistles.
I would agree that the fact that there is a debate is "common knowledge" but only among those who have delved into more advanced theology than TWI's kindergarten version. However I would not accept that any particular conclusion is "common knowledge".
I think that folks should look at both sides of the issue. The fact is, and you know this, is that the issue is still very much divided and that there will NEVER be a concensus. And more imnportantly that there are good arguments on both side of the issue. Best I can tell is that about 1/3 of theological academics accept Pauline authorship and 2/3 do not. As for me, I don't necessarily accept something simply because of a majority opinon. (Not saying that you do)
Anyway, my point in challenging you and Alan, was not to get actual proof. I wasn't expecting any from either of you.
My point was along the lines that Alan can no more "prove" that Tim/Titus are "God-breathed" than you "prove" that Tim and Titus are forgeries. There is no irrefutable proof of either.
IMO, establishing authorship (Pauline or any other) for the pastoral epistles a problem either way you slice it.
On another note, I think the whole idea of "god-breathed" has been mistaught, especially concering NT writiings . In its context, 2 Tim 3:16 refers specifically to OT scripture. Historically, it was many, many years later that the wirtings of Paul or any other NT writings (including 2 Tim 3:16) were considered to be the "God breathed, straight from the mouth of God, inerrant, infallible Word of God.
Here's something for folks to consider:
Lets say that the hypothetical debate is the authorship of 2 Tim.
Now, let's say that I strongly accept the fundamental doctrine of scriptural infallacy/inerrancy. I would naturally then to lean towards any evidence that 2 Tim as authentic - since it supports my established belief. Everything I contemplate is interpreted in light of that belief.
But now, let's say I am of an opposing camp, then natutrally I would want to lean towards any evidence that 2 Tim is a forgery, because doing so supports my established belief. (and I neatly get rid of any reference to "God-breathed" in my bible). Everything I contemplate is also interpreted in light of my established belief.
Both approaches are "biased". We all have bias to one extent or another. Bias is not necessarily bad but it can be. The challenge is to identitfy it in ourselves and try to approach things with that in mind. Maybe we should ask oursleves, is my bias getting in the way of my understanding?
i think people want something outside of themselves and say this is what God says so they can escape actually believing something for real-so get something and call it infallable-pff-their ain't no such thing that you go to and say look this is what it says and this is why
there is only one absolute and that is the understanding that changes
there is absolutely PEOPLE who think and live and grow and speak
so many want to narrow down their god to a set of books so they don't have to think
thinking outside the box-ha- where do you think that came from?
so limit the unlimited by declaring the word of god-what a bunch of crap
that's a stumbling block and stopsign to seeing the true riches of Christ
i think people want something outside of themselves and say this is what God says so they can escape actually believing something for real-so get something and call it infallable-pff-their ain't no such thing that you go to and say look this is what it says and this is why
What if people do need something outside of themselves? I could not imagine a solitary existence. Or a spiritual life that was void of any external input. Is is impossible for God to "speak" to us through scripture as well as other means? Must it all come from within ?
there is only one absolute and that is the understanding that changes
there is absolutely PEOPLE who think and live and grow and speak
so many want to narrow down their god to a set of books so they don't have to think
Yes, God is certainly not limited to a set of books, far from it. But let's not seem to castigage the books themselves because they are misused/misunderstood. However, think there is likely more than just one absolute.
thinking outside the box-ha- where do you think that came from?
It came from a popular puzzle where the solution required drawing a line outside of a "box" made from a square grid of dots. The term dates back to about 1975 or so.
But certainly the saying might apply to looking outside of a belief system bound by strict adherence to something like "sola scriptura" . .
so limit the unlimited by declaring the word of god-what a bunch of crap
that's a stumbling block and stopsign to seeing the true riches of Christ
Do we not as humans yet "see darkly"? There are limits to understanding. However, we certainly don't want to self-impose unnecessary limits to that which we are capable of understanding.
I do beleive that the Word of God can be gleaned from scripture as well as other sources. I think much of the problem is in the idea that the ink and paper themselves are the Word of God.
Recommended Posts
Top Posters In This Topic
12
10
18
10
Popular Days
Apr 11
18
Apr 12
18
Apr 10
17
Apr 16
9
Top Posters In This Topic
Goey 12 posts
TheInvisibleDan 10 posts
templelady 18 posts
dmiller 10 posts
Popular Days
Apr 11 2006
18 posts
Apr 12 2006
18 posts
Apr 10 2006
17 posts
Apr 16 2006
9 posts
templelady
So I see there are a plethora of Possibilities (used my Greek I did I did :) )
I think part of this "nitpicking" of mine comes from being a genealogist.
I was a genealogist long before I joined the LDS church.
an example of what I mean
I was looking for my cousin's dad's family and I had hit a road block in the early 1800's
Larry *Smith* (the object of my search)married Ann *Jones*
Larry's brother Tom *Smith*- married Mary *Daniels*
not making headway with Larry I decided to work on Ann
Ann *Jones* parents were Sam *Jones* and Sarah *Black*
Sarah *Black*s parents were Mike *Black* and Amy *Green*
Amy *Green*s parents were George *Green* and Sarah *Daniels*
And lo and behold Sarah DANIELS great grandmother of Ann, wife of my Larry, and Mary DANIELS sister-in-law of Larry were from the same small town in Rhode Island. So I wrote to the poster of Ann JONES line and sure enough--same family and not only did my contact have the genealogy for the DANIELS family, she had the complete genealogy for the SMITHs too
And that is how genealogy often works the following of threads and comparing them and picking up similar threads and comparing them
SO that is why inconsistencies beckon to me like a hot fudge sundae--I just have to follow those threads, its in my genes
Edited by templeladyLink to comment
Share on other sites
dmiller
Wow -- looks like it takes a lot of work, to look up geneologies!
Are Charlie, and Jack part of that *Daniels* family???
Link to comment
Share on other sites
allan w.
" As I besought thee to abide still at Ephesus, when I went into Macedonia, that thou mightest charge some that they TEACH NO OTHER DOCTRINE, NEITHER GIVE HEED to fables AND ENDLESS GENEALOGIES, which minister questions, rather than godly edifying which is in faith: " 1 Timothy 1: 3,4
King James version holy Bible.
" But avoid foolish questions, and GENEALOGIES, and contentions, and strivings about the LAW; for they are UNPROFITABLE and VAIN " Titus 3: 9 King James version holy Bible
Link to comment
Share on other sites
templelady
As usual, Allan, you have thrown the baby out with the bathwater.
These verses refer to the practice of claiming one had the inside track with God because they could prove they were descended from a long line of faithful Jews.
It in no way says or implies that one can't do genealogy for other reasons
Please try to keep the apples and oranges straight instead of always making the bruised fruit salad you are so fond of
Link to comment
Share on other sites
TheInvisibleDan
Neither "1 Timothy" or "Titus" were written by the Apostle Paul.
You no longer need remain enslaved to this "deutero-Pauline" fictitious material.
Danny
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Abigail
Wow Mo, the way Allen stalks you on these forums could leave one to thinking he has a crush on you or something
Kinda like the first grader who keeps on pulling the braids of the little girl in front of him.
Can anyone post more about what the Gospel of Judas actually says?
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Goey
Abi,
You can download the whole text HERE
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Tom Strange
Allan... these quotes have nothing to do with tracing one's geneology... you're really becoming such a drag on our life force with your endless stalking of templelady... sheesh... does your wife know about this "other woman"?
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Goey
Danny, looks like you and Alan both have some serious proofs to do if y'all are gonna head down that path.
Alan, you have to prove that these personal letters addressed by Paul to Timothy and Titus were "God-breathed" and not just pastoral letters from Paul's heart to these men, and then that "geneologies" in these verses means researchng your family tree.
Danny, you have to prove that Paul didn't even write them.
I'll watch. --->
BTW, I have changed my mind about the Marcion Catechesis. I'm not in the mood for a lynching.
Edited by GoeyLink to comment
Share on other sites
TheInvisibleDan
Any number of standard, critical New Testament introductions from the 20th century to the present will do more thoroughly than I desire to attempt here ( both Goodspeed's and Feine-Behm-Kummel's "Introduction to the New Testament"; Ehrman's "The New Testament: A Historical Introduction to the Early Christian Writings", to list a few); or dictionary, such as "The Oxford Companion to the Bible". Even these studies raise the issue of the distinctly anti-marcionite/anti-gnostic polemic contained therein, betraying its approx. era of writing (ranging from the end of the first to the mid second century). Even the title to Marcion's lost work "Antithesis" is given a nod therein.
The only ones in the dark about this (I dare call it) "common knowledge" are those who continue to believe that the "Word of God" (that is - the orthodox version thereof, in contrast to other versions in circulation at the time the Pastoral epistles were written) is "God-breathed", infallible and therefore, inarguable.
Don't ask stupid questions . Your leaders are appointed by God himself - do what they tell you. Stay away from those possessed heretics (including those veggies who don't marry, and get carried away with so-called "Antithesis").
Gimme a break.
The more one becomes aware of the controversies of the 2nd century era, namely, between the various Christian movements - the more transparent certain material in our canonical New Testaments will become -one will recognize the actual reasons for their presence.
I hope some will consider examining for themselves the works I have cited above.
a lynching by you? a lynching by me? a lynching by who? (lol).
I'll have very little time for it over the next coupla weeks - I start training for a new job on Monday. In the meantime, there's always my website for anyone interested in the topic of Marcion.
Danny
Edited by TheInvisibleDanLink to comment
Share on other sites
TheInvisibleDan
Let me further try to clarify why I take a shot at the Pastorals every opportunity they are raised.
For one, I think the ideas contained therein comprised so much of the "umpf!" or "authority" underlying Wierwille's "Biblatry" theology. Without this material, I don't believe Wierwille or his organization could have gone as far with the sway that they had captivated over so many for so long.
Certainly the belief in the "God-breathed Word" on the basis of this material is not unique to the Way. But I tend to view the Way organization and experiences as a microcosmic example of what can occur when folks take too much for granted that these old documents contain irrefutable truth of which cannot thus be contested. Wherever one may raise legitimate question concerning any matter, there's "Timothy" or "Titus" there to provide fodder against anyone raising what may be conveniently termed as "foolish questions".
It is a device tailored to deliberately suppress inquiry, and to dissuade people against hanging out with others who happened to think differently from themselves. It did so in its original function - and continues to do so even today.
CES used to have a saying in their "Dialogue" or "Sower" mags - to the effect of "Freedom through Scriptural Accuracy" - but the flipside of this coin oft receives not as much attention: "Freedom from Scriptural Tyranny".
The freedom of thought that may be acquired there, in my opinion, is so much more beneficial.
People no longer need condemn themselves for not submitting to representatives of a paper god,
or better yet - remain enslaved to the paper god itself.
If one takes away the infallible authority from the Bible, then what happens to its leaders?
How much sooner might many have left the Way, had they actually been "researchers", and learned what the majority of students and professors in Biblical literature outside the old gigantic cult have known the past century and a half?
Even those who do not reach or share my views or conclusions may agree with me - there is so much more to this ancient literature than what the Way even barely scratched - we had - and still have - a lot of "catching up" to do with becoming familiar with ideas and material to which we were previously "shut out" by our old Way "schoolmaster", favoring to feed us within our doctrinal fortress rehashed Bullinger/Stiles/Leonard.
If one thinks that the only alternatives to not believing in a "god-breathed" Bible are agnosticism and athiesm, they're woefully wrong. My personal faith -such as it is - cannot be narrowed down to a convenient chart on a wall. And I suspect others are also discovering the same. And I also think critical research is no less a "spiritual" endeavor especially when what may result is freedom from a preconceived doctrine which has done so much to actually stifle rather than encourage one's personal path. I think the notion of a god-breathed word is one such stumblingblock.
Danny
Edited by TheInvisibleDanLink to comment
Share on other sites
sirguessalot
funny Danny
"the paper god"
if paper is dead wood
and wood is an idol
and we cant beyond the paper in our head
perhaps it is time for a baptism of fire
and...
is it possible the "the word of God" is simply what God reads?
and the whole universe is His book?
i dunno...
it is written...all things are possible with God
so who knows?
Link to comment
Share on other sites
templelady
JUst finished reading the Gospel of Judas
Don't know where to begin
It's as if the Gospel of Judas is saying that everything the apostles belived they knew about GOd was false--
I will have to think on this more.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Abigail
Thanks for the link, Goey! That is a fascinating read, one I will re-read a few times. I see many shades of Caballa there, as well as the oral traditions of Judaism.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Goey
Danny,
LOL, Not by me Danny - I was thinking of a few others and how they might respond to Marcion's ideas with a noose and daggers.
But, as for me, I would much rather lynch an unthinking fundamentalist than a thinking gnostic.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
year2027
God first
Beloved friends
God loves you all my dear friend
Ok lets talk about the book called “The Gospel of Judas”
We can thank these men for translated this book but these men did not write these book so to copy this book they have no rights. Or they copy it and so can I because this is not a new book as they say.
First no revelation was wrote to be keep secret but to be send unto the world.
Lets begin “The Earthly Ministry of Jesus” yes Jesus Christ did miracles and great wonders but the twelve were called to reach out to the good and bad about the coming of Christ to lead them into truth.
“Scene one” this is wrote like a movie and not book I ever read was wrote like a movie but stories, history, and teaching of what is truth or what is the love of God.
Now Jesus Christ would of never laugh at anyone but he may of laugh with people about some thing like we may. For he could not of laugh at a person and still be with out sin.
All so no book of the bible was wrote with sub titles so this was either added or this book was wrote differ than most.
Why Jesus not be able to name of who send Judas? Look Jesus is the son of God so he could say any name and he had to be able to call them be name to cast them out if needed.
Jesus may have told Judas he would be replaced for what he about to do but that would not of changed any thing Judas might do because what Judas does is what Judas wants to do.
Look “Scene two of the movie” Ok Jesus went to other generations maybe so maybe not I just do not know.
From the book of Judas
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
no one born [of] this aeon will see that [generation], and no host of angels of the stars will rule over that generation, and no person of mortal birth can associate with it, because that generation does not come from […] which has become […]. The generation of people among [you] is from the generation of humanity […] power, which [… the] other powers […] by [which] you rule.
No one born of this image Look this is talking about “No one born of this life will see fleshly the generation were Jesus went the holy generation because this generation will be spiritual and can only be seen spiritual and you have not become spiritually yet because you have not been born again yet.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
More or less what this is saying which was either poorly translated or recalled poorly by Judas or who ever wrote this book
His disciples would be trouble in their spirit upon them but not in because they had not received Christ in them yet.
Dreams and visions for they saw when men who use the word of God and the name of Jesus to get riches on earth with love. Yes people with out the love of God will be put to shame at the last day.
Look a truth
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Judas said to [him, “Rabb]i, what kind of fruit does this generation produce?” Jesus said, “The souls of every human generation will die. When these people, however, have completed the time of the kingdom and the spirit leaves them, their bodies will die but their souls will be alive, and they will be taken up.”
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Yes the spirit will leave the body of flesh and put on a new body in the air.
Then we see another truth
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Judas said, “And what will the rest of the human generations do?” Jesus said, “It is impossible [44] to sow seed on [rock] and harvest its fruit. [This] is also the way […] the [defiled] generation […] and corruptible Sophia […] the hand that has created mortal people, so that their souls go up to the eternal realms above. [Truly] I say to you, […] angel […] power will be able to see that […] these to whom […] holy generations […].”
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Another truth Jesus die for all but some are like sowing Christ on a rock because the seed of Christ can not be fertilized with believing
we read
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
When Jesus heard this, he laughed and said to him, “You thirteenth spirit, why do you try so hard? But speak up, and I shall bear with you.” Judas said to him, “In the vision I saw myself as the twelve disciples were stoning me and [45] persecuting [me severely]. And I also came to the place where […] after you. I saw [a house …], and my eyes could not [comprehend] its size. Great people were surrounding it, and that house <had> a roof of greenery, and in the middle of the house was [a crowd—two lines missing—], saying, ‘Master, take me in along with these
people.’”
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Judas had a dream of what could happen but he hang himself first
Another truth
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[Jesus] answered and said, “Judas, your star has led you astray.” He continued, “No person of mortal birth is worthy to enter the house you have seen, for that place is reserved for the holy. Neither the sun nor the moon will rule there, nor the day, but the holy will abide there always, in the eternal realm with the holy angels. Look, I have explained to you the mysteries of the kingdom [46] and I have taught you about the error of the stars; and […] send it […] on the twelve aeons.”
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Yes no one is good enough to be saved but Jesus told Judas about the coming grace that we are saved by faith but no one is good enough and that he has been led astray
Yes Judas was led astray and he sin and sin brought about more than he would deal with because he loved fleshly Jesus as a brother and he was trick but Judas was not all bad just a another sinner
The two lines missing are the part Jesus reach out to lead Judas back into truth and yes Judas has been curse because he was a sinner like we are.
Jesus teaches about the spiritual realm.
First aeon was the spiritual image Adam was born into and the second aeon was the spiritual image Jesus was born into
Yes Seth family line was of God and from his family line David was born and from David family line was Mary born and from Mary Jesus was born the human side of Christ.
Jesus never told Judas to give him up but he did tell him he has been led astray from what is right. Jesus talk with Judas about many things in this book.
Do I believe this book is real I do not know Do I believe it was wrote spiritually I do not know Who wrote it I do not know is it all bad No
Would of Jesus talk to Judas about these things why not.
Thank you
with love and a holy kiss blowing your way Roy
For all quotes of the book of Judas I take all blame Roy William Perry III 1501 North Dixie Lot 45 Radcliff Ky 40160
Edited by year2027Link to comment
Share on other sites
Goey
Roy,
I don't think anyone is really holding up the Book of Judas as the Word of God. Fundamentalists are sure to reject it as to having any authority and will be crying heresy for a few months until the ferver dies down.
For me, it's significance is mostly historical, possibly revealing a little bit of about a branch of Christianity that did not follow "orthodoxy".
Link to comment
Share on other sites
year2027
God first
Beloved Goey
God loves you my dear friend
I hold the book as I just do not know
I never look to see how most see a book but I look for truth every were even in a book that I am not sure of
thank you
with love and a holy kiss blowing your way Roy
Link to comment
Share on other sites
allan w.
Hey...geneaology is geneaology full stop. Even a light perusal tends to point out it is about tracing your lineage. Your point is like trying to say that some types of homosexuality or witchcraft is o.k.
No, I'm not interested in Mo at all (although the LDS undergarments are quite 'sexy' in a religious sort of way).
Link to comment
Share on other sites
templelady
Apples
Tracing your lineage to find out who you are related to and your history -modern day genealogists - OT is filled with examples
Oranges
Tracing your lineage to prove that because of that lineage you have a superior claim on Gods favor -- Flaw in some followers of Jesus in the NT. Never said theat "apple" geneaolgy is bad just "orange" genealogy
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Belle
I sorta get confused when folks get upset because something that has come to public knowledge after being buried for eons is discounted because it's "new". I also don't get it since now it's so much easier to get access to and learn about these older writings....Heck, many of us are just now really delving into other historical writings that have been around for ages.....
Why dismiss something just because it's "new to you"?
Given the highly influential political climate of the past, couldn't there be "ulterior motives" to what's in the Bible vs. what was subverted and kept from the public eye?
It seems that some folks get offended when their precious Bible and the integrity thereof is questioned.... especially using other writings as old as, if not older, than the writings of the Bible <_<
Here's what we were taught in TWI about Judas hanging himself....
Page 151 - ff in the blue book:
Judas was not only alive at the time of the crucifixion, but he saw the resurrected Christ and was withnes to the ascension.
1 Cor 15:3-5
Acts 1:9-11
vee pee says is when the twelve watched JC ascend, but then sometime between v.9 and v.11 Judas left the group....hence the "ye men of Galilee...."
vee pee says "hanged himself" implies to the western mind that he literally took his own life by hanging, but according to the Eastern custom - using Saul falling upon his own sword as the method of hanging for government, military personnel. It's called hanging because they suspended themselves on pointed objects....
quoting v. 16-18
vee pee says that "purshased a field" is really the word "provided" like in Matt 10:9 - meaning that he provided for himself a feild with the reward of iniquity... "field" being chorion meaning "property".
vee pee says, "Most people believe that his reward of iniquity was the thirty pieces of silver which can't be true because he cast them down in the temple."
John 12:6 - he says describes Judas as a theif.... that he was stealing money from the money bag...
The field was called "aceldama" the field of blood because that's where he hanged himself.
BUT - BUT - BUT in JC our Passover, he calls this hanging of Judas meaning Judas was "hanged with guilt" - not having anything at all to do with death.
I lost the custody of that book in the divorce, but I remember it because it contradicts this from the blue book and even has a picture of Judas doubled over with grief at what he did.
******
Goey, thanks for the link. I'm going to read it and I als want to read Mary's, too....I've got the Gnostic Gospels by Elaine Pagels and have been reading Harry Potter instead, but I'm ready to delve back into this stuff, I reckon. :) I appreciate the links.
I also appreciate the civilized discussion despite Mo's unrequieted love continuing to throw rotten fruit salad into the pot and pulling on her pigtails.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Goey
Hmmmm Danny, I would be reluctant to suggest that folks only look at works that support the negative view or only my view. Like I have said many times before, many folks are unaware of any division at all concering Pauline authorship of these epistles.
I would agree that the fact that there is a debate is "common knowledge" but only among those who have delved into more advanced theology than TWI's kindergarten version. However I would not accept that any particular conclusion is "common knowledge".
I think that folks should look at both sides of the issue. The fact is, and you know this, is that the issue is still very much divided and that there will NEVER be a concensus. And more imnportantly that there are good arguments on both side of the issue. Best I can tell is that about 1/3 of theological academics accept Pauline authorship and 2/3 do not. As for me, I don't necessarily accept something simply because of a majority opinon. (Not saying that you do)
Anyway, my point in challenging you and Alan, was not to get actual proof. I wasn't expecting any from either of you.
My point was along the lines that Alan can no more "prove" that Tim/Titus are "God-breathed" than you "prove" that Tim and Titus are forgeries. There is no irrefutable proof of either.
IMO, establishing authorship (Pauline or any other) for the pastoral epistles a problem either way you slice it.
On another note, I think the whole idea of "god-breathed" has been mistaught, especially concering NT writiings . In its context, 2 Tim 3:16 refers specifically to OT scripture. Historically, it was many, many years later that the wirtings of Paul or any other NT writings (including 2 Tim 3:16) were considered to be the "God breathed, straight from the mouth of God, inerrant, infallible Word of God.
Here's something for folks to consider:
Lets say that the hypothetical debate is the authorship of 2 Tim.
Now, let's say that I strongly accept the fundamental doctrine of scriptural infallacy/inerrancy. I would naturally then to lean towards any evidence that 2 Tim as authentic - since it supports my established belief. Everything I contemplate is interpreted in light of that belief.
But now, let's say I am of an opposing camp, then natutrally I would want to lean towards any evidence that 2 Tim is a forgery, because doing so supports my established belief. (and I neatly get rid of any reference to "God-breathed" in my bible). Everything I contemplate is also interpreted in light of my established belief.
Both approaches are "biased". We all have bias to one extent or another. Bias is not necessarily bad but it can be. The challenge is to identitfy it in ourselves and try to approach things with that in mind. Maybe we should ask oursleves, is my bias getting in the way of my understanding?
Just some thoughts.
Edited by GoeyLink to comment
Share on other sites
CM
i think people want something outside of themselves and say this is what God says so they can escape actually believing something for real-so get something and call it infallable-pff-their ain't no such thing that you go to and say look this is what it says and this is why
there is only one absolute and that is the understanding that changes
there is absolutely PEOPLE who think and live and grow and speak
so many want to narrow down their god to a set of books so they don't have to think
thinking outside the box-ha- where do you think that came from?
so limit the unlimited by declaring the word of god-what a bunch of crap
that's a stumbling block and stopsign to seeing the true riches of Christ
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Goey
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.