Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by Andrew Ferley on February 19, 2011 at 5:36am

It was a little more complicated than that I think.  There were apparently a lot of different groups of Christians romping about before Christianity was shall we say... "Normalized".  Gnostics were just another group kicking about.  The other names are currently escaping me, but I recall there being a great many.

 

As for your question, I think a lot of early christians would have beef with an organization that had them killed and their (equally crazy) interpretations of other (equally crazy) extra-biblical texts declared heretical.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by jharbs on February 19, 2011 at 3:02pm

Yea im sure. but there had to be a source, even if it cant necessarily be pinned down. look to the scholars i guess

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Hope on February 19, 2011 at 6:08am

I was a Muslim onday and interested in debates with the orthodox christians

Muslims believe that the originial who were his friends and relatives of muhammad are the real christians (nestorians and ebionites).

 

What I understood about all this is,

Those who lived in arabia were nestorians and ebionites are the ones who helped Muhammad making his heresy.

Here is a priest that muhammad used to love...He told the Muslims that this priest is in heaven.

even muhammad attempted to commit suicide after that priest died..

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by jharbs on February 19, 2011 at 3:10pm

interesting, seems like something muslims would believe, although i dont know much about islamic ties with christianity. thnks for the link

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Kirk Holden on February 19, 2011 at 8:46am

The two towers were brought down by powdered thermite sprayed on the walls by the Gnostics just before the planes hit the towers. All these facts can be re-arranged randomly to explain this topic and many others.

 

Dude, they were just people with the equivalent of a kindergarten education and the foresight of the Walmart associate at the slowest check-out lane. You are reading - if you are actually reading and not repeating conversations you heard at a party - from a culture steeped in the kind of intellectual interconnections that clear information in seconds. That is us not them. Every day for these people was like every day for their parents etc. back to the dawn of the cultivation of plants and counting numbers above two with a handfull of shells.

 

These poor fools lived entire lives thinking about exactly one rhetorical problem - a problem posed by their great-great-uncle who was even more ignorant than they were. Was life animated by a soul or the wind in the trees? Did the moon hide her face to show displeasure? They did the best they could and the almost never talked to anyone who was not born in the next hut and could never guess at a better answer than they could.

 

The writings of the +/- 0AD (-2000 Google Time) were about hundreds of saviors, messiahs, kings, prophets, fools, charlatans, dupes, grifters, carnival barkers and sincere schitzophrenics. There was not A Christ - there were hundreds. The Syrian Hellenistic culture ruled the Levant just like the state of Isreal rules the Levant today. The Jews played the part of Hamas and Fatah. There was a century long intafada with the Jews getting the worst of it. Turn about is not fair play - this cycle repeats and repeats with the top dog today the bitch tomorrow.

 

No body suppressed anything and no body hid some critical document that is soon to be found which straightens everything out. Darwin did not come along to clean it up until the 19th century.

 

Theology is an evolved edifice with many designers and no plan.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by jharbs on February 19, 2011 at 3:55pm

Dude. I dont actually think that the pope is the historical antichrist, i just posted that to attract attention  I have no knowledge of the subject, I was just interested to see if anyone could direct me towards scholarly knowledge regarding gnostic christianity. Gnosticism is rather different from judaism and orthodox christianity, so when I was told by someone (yes told by someone, another human being face to face, not at a party unfortunately) that the original chritians were gnostic and systematically killed off by the roman empire i thought to myself "gee, that sounds plausible",

your point is well taken, but im not trying to instantly understand religion through asking my question, i am only trying to learn more about gnosticism and its ties to christianity.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Loop Johnny on February 19, 2011 at 9:22am

How can you even define the anti-Christ when the real Christ was a social construct?

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Adam Weber on February 19, 2011 at 10:24am

Just like Socrates and Pythagoras.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Hope on February 19, 2011 at 11:00am

Just a discussing this subject about the Antichrist

is enough lead anyone to insanity..

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Dave G on February 19, 2011 at 3:55pm

Quite possibly. The only information we have on Socrates comes from Plato, who may well have invented him as a teaching tool. And with Pythagoras, we do not have any of his actual writings, just things written about him well after the fact and he too may have been an ideal rather than an actual person.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Eoganacht on February 19, 2011 at 4:18pm

Whoa. Freaky thought that such important people in western culture, mathatics and science could have been teaching devices and metaphors.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by jharbs on February 19, 2011 at 3:22pm

you define it through religious terms, understanding that, as you say, religion is a social construct.  Gnostic christianity posited that christ was something to be sought in this life to live this life, not as a source of eternal salvation; so the antichrist of gnosticism was the monotheistic revelation of God on earth, and his promise of everlasting life. There is no true God in gnosticism, so declaring a belief in God would be the antithesis of gnosticism. thats the anti christ im talking about.  So the anti christ you are thinking of is not the anti christ i am talking about, because i am talking about it in reference to gnosticism (which is of course a social construction in and of itself)

 

• ▶ Reply

• ‹ Previous
• 1
• 2
• 3
• Next ›
• Page