Gnosticism

  • This topic is empty.
Viewing 20 posts - 21 through 40 (of 283 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • #48229
    NickHassan
    Participant

    topical

    #48385
    Tim2
    Participant

    Nick,

    Are you a gnostic? You apparently believe that Jesus is just a vessel for God.

    Tim

    #48399
    NickHassan
    Participant

    Hi Tim2,
    Here is what they say about themselves.
    The Gnostic World View:
    A Brief Summary of Gnosticism

    GNOSTICISM IS THE TEACHING based on Gnosis, the knowledge of transcendence arrived at by way of interior, intuitive means. Although Gnosticism thus rests on personal religious experience, it is a mistake to assume all such experience results in Gnostic recognitions. It is nearer the truth to say that Gnosticism expresses a specific religious experience, an experience that does not lend itself to the language of theology or philosophy, but which is instead closely affinitized to, and expresses itself through, the medium of myth. Indeed, one finds that most Gnostic scriptures take the forms of myths. The term “myth” should not here be taken to mean “stories that are not true”, but rather, that the truths embodied in these myths are of a different order from the dogmas of theology or the statements of philosophy.

    In the following summary, we will attempt to encapsulate in prose what the Gnostic myths express in their distinctively poetic and imaginative language.

    The Cosmos
    All religious traditions acknowledge that the world is imperfect. Where they differ is in the explanations which they offer to account for this imperfection and in what they suggest might be done about it. Gnostics have their own — perhaps quite startling — view of these matters: they hold that the world is flawed because it was created in a flawed manner.

    Like Buddhism, Gnosticism begins with the fundamental recognition that earthly life is filled with suffering. In order to nourish themselves, all forms of life consume each other, thereby visiting pain, fear, and death upon one another (even herbivorous animals live by destroying the life of plants). In addition, so-called natural catastrophes — earthquakes, floods, fires, drought, volcanic eruptions — bring further suffering and death in their wake. Human beings, with their complex physiology and psychology, are aware not only of these painful features of earthly existence. They also suffer from the frequent recognition that they are strangers living in a world that is flawed and absurd.

    Many religions advocate that humans are to be blamed for the imperfections of the world. Supporting this view, they interpret the Genesis myth as declaring that transgressions committed by the first human pair brought about a “fall” of creation resulting in the present corrupt state of the world. Gnostics respond that this interpretation of the myth is false. The blame for the world’s failings lies not with humans, but with the creator. Since — especially in the monotheistic religions — the creator is God, this Gnostic position appears blasphemous, and is often viewed with dismay even by non-believers.

    Ways of evading the recognition of the flawed creation and its flawed creator have been devised over and over, but none of these arguments have impressed Gnostics. The ancient Greeks, especially the Platonists, advised people to look to the harmony of the universe, so that by venerating its grandeur they might forget their immediate afflictions. But since this harmony still contains the cruel flaws, forlornness and alienation of existence, this advice is considered of little value by Gnostics. Nor is the Eastern idea of Karma regarded by Gnostics as an adequate explanation of creation’s imperfection and suffering. Karma at best can only explain how the chain of suffering and imperfection works. It does not inform us in the first place why such a sorrowful and malign system should exist.

    Once the initial shock of the “unusual” or “blasphemous” nature of the Gnostic explanation for suffering and imperfection of the world wears off, one may begin to recognize that it is in fact the most sensible of all explanations. To appreciate it fully, however, a familiarity with the Gnostic conception of the Godhead is required, both in its original essence as the True God and in its debased manifestation as the false or creator God.

    Deity
    The Gnostic God concept is more subtle than that of most religions. In its way, it unites and reconciles the recognitions of Monotheism and Polytheism, as well as of Theism, Deism and Pantheism.

    In the Gnostic view, there is a true, ultimate and transcendent God, who is beyond all created universes and who never created anything in the sense in which the word “create” is ordinarily understood. While this True God did not fashion or create anything, He (or, It) “emanated” or brought forth from within Himself the substance of all there is in all the worlds, visible and invisible. In a certain sense, it may therefore be true to say that all is God, for all consists of the substance of God. By the same token, it must also be recognized that many portions of the original divine essence have been projected so far from their source that they underwent unwholesome changes in the process. To worship the cosmos, or nature, or embodied creatures is thus tantamount to worshipping alienated and corrupt portions of the emanated divine essence.

    The basic Gnostic myth has many variations, but all of these refer to Aeons, intermediate deific beings who exist between the ultimate, True God and ourselves. They, together with the True God, comprise the realm of Fullness (Pleroma) wherein the potency of divinity operates fully. The Fullness stands in contrast to our existential state, which in comparison may be called emptiness.

    One of the aeonial beings who bears the name Sophia (“Wisdom”) is of great importance to the Gnostic world view. In the course of her journeyings, Sophia came to emanate from her own being a flawed consciousness, a being who became the creator of the material and psychic cosmos, all of which he created in the image of his own flaw. This being, unaware of his origins, imagined himself to be the ultimate and absolute God. Since he took the already existing divine essence and fashioned it into various forms, he is also called the Demiurgos or “half-maker” There is an authentic half, a true deific component within creation, but it is not recognized by the half-maker and by his cosmic minions, the Archons or “rulers”.

    The Human Being
    Human nature mirrors the duality found in the world: in part it was made by the false creator God and in part it consists of the light of the True God. Humankind contains a perishable physical and psychic component, as well as a spiritual component which is a fragment of the divine essence. This latter part is often symbolically referred to as the “divine spark”. The recognition of this dual nature of the world and of the human being has earned the Gnostic tradition the epithet of “dualist”.

    Humans are generally ignorant of the divine spark resident within them. This ignorance is fostered in human nature by the influence of the false creator and his Archons, who together are intent upon keeping men and women ignorant of their true nature and destiny. Anything that causes us to remain attached to earthly things serves to keep us in enslavement to these lower cosmic rulers. Death releases the divine spark from its lowly prison, but if there has not been a substantial work of Gnosis undertaken by the soul prior to death, it becomes likely that the divine spark will be hurled back into, and then re-embodied within, the pangs and slavery of the physical world.

    Not all humans are spiritual (pneumatics) and thus ready for Gnosis and liberation. Some are earthbound and materialistic beings (hyletics), who recognize only the physical reality. Others live largely in their psyche (psychics). Such people usually mistake the Demiurge for the True God and have little or no awareness of the spiritual world beyond matter and mind.

    In the course of history, humans progress from materialistic sensate slavery, by way of ethical religiosity, to spiritual freedom and liberating Gnosis. As the scholar G. Quispel wrote: “The world-spirit in exile mus
    t go through the Inferno of matter and the Purgatory of morals to arrive at the spiritual Paradise.” This kind of evolution of consciousness was envisioned by the Gnostics, long before the concept of evolution was known.

    Salvation
    Evolutionary forces alone are insufficient, however, to bring about spiritual freedom. Humans are caught in a predicament consisting of physical existence combined with ignorance of their true origins, their essential nature and their ultimate destiny. To be liberated from this predicament, human beings require help, although they must also contribute their own efforts.

    From earliest times Messengers of the Light have come forth from the True God in order to assist humans in their quest for Gnosis. Only a few of these salvific figures are mentioned in Gnostic scripture; some of the most important are Seth (the third Son of Adam), Jesus, and the Prophet Mani. The majority of Gnostics always looked to Jesus as the principal savior figure (the Soter).

    Gnostics do not look to salvation from sin (original or other), but rather from the ignorance of which sin is a consequence. Ignorance — whereby is meant ignorance of spiritual realities — is dispelled only by Gnosis, and the decisive revelation of Gnosis is brought by the Messengers of Light, especially by Christ, the Logos of the True God. It is not by His suffering and death but by His life of teaching and His establishing of mysteries that Christ has performed His work of salvation.

    The Gnostic concept of salvation, like other Gnostic concepts, is a subtle one. On the one hand, Gnostic salvation may easily be mistaken for an unmediated individual experience, a sort of spiritual do-it-yourself project. Gnostics hold that the potential for Gnosis, and thus, of salvation is present in every man and woman, and that salvation is not vicarious but individual. At the same time, they also acknowledge that Gnosis and salvation can be, indeed must be, stimulated and facilitated in order to effectively arise within consciousness. This stimulation is supplied by Messengers of Light who, in addition to their teachings, establish salvific mysteries (sacraments) which can be administered by apostles of the Messengers and their successors.

    One needs also remember that knowledge of our true nature — as well as other associated realizations — are withheld from us by our very condition of earthly existence. The True God of transcendence is unknown in this world, in fact He is often called the Unknown Father. It is thus obvious that revelation from on High is needed to bring about salvation. The indwelling spark must be awakened from its terrestrial slumber by the saving knowledge that comes “from without”.

    Conduct
    If the words “ethics” or “morality” are taken to mean a system of rules, then Gnosticism is opposed to them both. Such systems usually originate with the Demiurge and are covertly designed to serve his purposes. If, on the other hand, morality is said to consist of an inner integrity arising from the illumination of the indwelling spark, then the Gnostic will embrace this spiritually informed existential ethic as ideal.

    To the Gnostic, commandments and rules are not salvific; they are not substantially conducive to salvation. Rules of conduct may serve numerous ends, including the structuring of an ordered and peaceful society, and the maintenance of harmonious relations within social groups. Rules, however, are not relevant to salvation; that is brought about only by Gnosis. Morality therefore needs to be viewed primarily in temporal and secular terms; it is ever subject to changes and modifications in accordance with the spiritual development of the individual.

    As noted in the discussion above, “hyletic materialists” usually have little interest in morality, while “psychic disciplinarians” often grant to it a great importance. In contrast, “Pneumatic spiritual” persons are generally more concerned with other, higher matters. Different historical periods also require variant attitudes regarding human conduct. Thus both the Manichaean and Cathar Gnostic movements, which functioned in times where purity of conduct was regarded as an issue of high import, responded in kind. The present period of Western culture perhaps resembles in more ways that of second and third century Alexandria. It seems therefore appropriate that Gnostics in our age adopt the attitudes of classical Alexandrian Gnosticism, wherein matters of conduct were largely left to the insight of the individual.

    Gnosticism embraces numerous general attitudes toward life: it encourages non-attachment and non-conformity to the world, a “being in the world, but not of the world”; a lack of egotism; and a respect for the freedom and dignity of other beings. Nonetheless, it appertains to the intuition and wisdom of every individual “Gnostic” to distill from these principles individual guidelines for their personal application.

    Destiny
    When Confucius was asked about death, he replied: “Why do you ask me about death when you do not know how to live?” This answer might easily have been given by a Gnostic. To a similar question posed in the Gnostic Gospel of Thomas, Jesus answered that human beings must come by Gnosis to know the ineffable, divine reality from whence they have originated, and whither they will return. This transcendental knowledge must come to them while they are still embodied on earth.

    Death does not automatically bring about liberation from bondage in the realms of the Demiurge. Those who have not attained to a liberating Gnosis while they were in embodiment may become trapped in existence once more. It is quite likely that this might occur by way of the cycle of rebirths. Gnosticism does not emphasize the doctrine of reincarnation prominently, but it is implicitly understood in most Gnostic teachings that those who have not made effective contact with their transcendental origins while they were in embodiment would have to return into the sorrowful condition of earthly life.

    In regard to salvation, or the fate of the spirit and soul after death, one needs to be aware that help is available. Valentinus, the greatest of Gnostic teachers, taught that Christ and Sophia await the spiritual man — the pneumatic Gnostic — at the entrance of the Pleroma, and help him to enter the bridechamber of final reunion. Ptolemaeus, disciple of Valentinus, taught that even those not of pneumatic status, the psychics, could be redeemed and live in a heavenworld at the entrance of the Pleroma. In the fullness of time, every spiritual being will receive Gnosis and will be united with its higher Self — the angelic Twin — thus becoming qualified to enter the Pleroma. None of this is possible, however, without earnest striving for Gnosis.

    Gnosis and Psyche: The Depth Psychological Connection
    Throughout the twentieth Century the new scientific discipline of depth psychology has gained much prominence. Among the depth psychologists who have shown a pronounced and informed interest in Gnosticism, a place of signal distinction belongs to C. G. Jung. Jung was instrumental in calling attention to the Nag Hammadi library of Gnostic writings in the 1950's because he perceived the outstanding psychological relevance of Gnostic insights.

    The noted scholar of Gnosticism, G. Filoramo, wrote: “Jung's reflections had long been immersed in the thought of the ancient Gnostics to such an extent that he considered them the virtual discoverers of 'depth psychology' . . . ancient Gnosis, albeit in its form of universal religion, in a certain sense prefigured, and at the same time helped to clarify, the nature of Jungian spiritual therapy.” In the light of such recognitions one may ask: “Is Gnosticism a religion or a psychology?” The answer is that it may very-well be both. Most mythologems found in Gnostic scriptures possess psychological relevance and applicability. For instance the blind and arrogant creator-demiurge bears a close resemblance
    to the alienated human ego that has lost contact with the ontological Self. Also, the myth of Sophia resembles closely the story of the human psyche that loses its connection with the collective unconscious and needs to be rescued by the Self. Analogies of this sort exist in great profusion.

    Many esoteric teachings have proclaimed, “As it is above, so it is below.” Our psychological nature (the microcosm) mirrors metaphysical nature (the macrocosm), thus Gnosticism may possess both a psychological and a religious authenticity. Gnostic psychology and Gnostic religion need not be exclusive of one another but may complement each other within an implicit order of wholeness. Gnostics have always held that divinity is immanent within the human spirit, although it is not limited to it. The convergence of Gnostic religious teaching with psychological insight is thus quite understandable in terms of time-honored Gnostic principles.

    Conclusion
    Some writers make a distinction between “Gnosis” and “Gnosticism”. Such distinctions are both helpful and misleading. Gnosis is undoubtedly an experience based not in concepts and precepts, but in the sensibility of the heart. Gnosticism, on the other hand, is the world-view based on the experience of Gnosis. For this reason, in languages other than English, the word Gnosis is often used to denote both the experience and the world view (die Gnosis in German, la Gnose in French).

    In a sense, there is no Gnosis without Gnosticism, for the experience of Gnosis inevitably calls forth a world view wherein it finds its place. The Gnostic world view is experiential, it is based on a certain kind of spiritual experience of Gnosis. Therefore, it will not do to omit, or to dilute, various parts of the Gnostic world view, for were one to do this, the world view would no longer conform to experience.

    Theology has been called an intellectual wrapping around the spiritual kernel of a religion. If this is true, then it is also true that most religions are being strangled and stifled by their wrappings. Gnosticism does not run this danger, because its world view is stated in myth rather than in theology. Myths, including the Gnostic myths, may be interpreted in diverse ways. Transcendence, numinosity, as well as psychological archetypes along with other elements, play a role in such interpretation. Still, such mythic statements tell of profound truths that will not be denied.

    Gnosticism can bring us such truths with a high authority, for it speaks with the voice of the highest part of the human — the spirit. Of this spirit, it has been said, “it bloweth where it listeth”. This then is the reason why the Gnostic world view could not be extirpated in spite of many centuries of persecution.

    The Gnostic world view has always been timely, for it always responded best to the “knowledge of the heart” that is true Gnosis. Yet today, its timeliness is increasing, for the end of the second millennium has seen the radical deterioration of many ideologies which evaded the great questions and answers addressed by Gnosticism. The clarity, frankness, and authenticity of the Gnostic answer to the questions of the human predicament cannot fail to impress and (in time) to convince. If your reactions to this summary have been of a similarly positive order, then perhaps you are a Gnostic yourself!

    If you stay within scripture you are safe but your leaders and masters often stray Tim so you should really drink from your own cistern, the truth of Christ if you are reborn from above.

    #48403
    Tim2
    Participant

    Nick,

    It seems to me your statement of faith regarding Jesus is something like this:

    The Word was God.
    The Word became flesh.
    This flesh is Jesus.
    Jesus on earth was a vessel for God and the Holy Spirit.
    Jesus/the Word is not God.

    Is this right?

    Tim

    #48409
    NickHassan
    Participant

    Quote (Tim2 @ April 11 2007,10:28)
    Nick,

    It seems to me your statement of faith regarding Jesus is something like this:

    The Word was God.
    The Word became flesh.
    This flesh is Jesus.
    Jesus on earth was a vessel for God and the Holy Spirit.
    Jesus/the Word is not God.

    Is this right?

    Tim


    Hi Tim2,
    Yes
    Yes

    No.
    Jesus is the Glorious unique monogenes Son of God, the greatest spirit being under God who partook of our flesh nature. He, with life in himself and a will of his own, came in the flesh.

    No.
    Jesus was a typical human vessel and was like to us and was filled with God AS the Holy Spirit at the Jordan and allowed himself to be led by that Spirit unto death. We can follow him.

    Yes.
    The Word is the Son of God

    #48411
    martian
    Participant

    One of the sources of the doctrine of the Trinity in Christianity is Gnosticism and Dualism.

    A one-sentence description of Gnosticism is; A religion that differentiates the evil god of this world (who is identified with the God of the Old Testament) from a higher more abstract God revealed by Jesus Christ, a religion that regards this world as the creation of a series of evil archons/powers who wish to keep the human soul trapped in an evil physical body. Gnostics conjured up the idea that Christ was a spiritual being in a physical shell in order to avoid the concept of him having an “Evil Physical Body of the “Evil physical realm”.

    Dualism is a Greek Philosophy that takes gnosticim even farther. It teaches there are two realms, one evil and one holy. Dualists believe that only the transcendental spiritual realm of God like forces is holy. The lower natural earthly realm was considered evil and nothing good could be of that world.

    When Christianity spread to the Greek thinking world it was heavily influenced by their philosophies. Many students of Greek philosophy were being saved and as such brought their concepts into the church. As is often the case some so called “scholars”, from this period forward, began to interpret scripture with preconceived ideas of a gnostic or dualistic world. From gnosticim came the concept of Jesus being a separate God from the God of the Old Testament. From Dualism came the concept that Jesus could never be fully of the natural realm or fully human. His humanity needed to be augmented in some way to avoid him being of the evil natural realm.

    Dualism was contrary to Hebrew belief and culture. Hebrews thought of all creation as part of the kingdom of God. Because God was infinite they believed that God was an integral part of the physical realm and, in fact, revealed himself thru the natural world. To the Hebrews everything in the natural realm was in the presence of God and He overshadowed everyhing there.

    Many early Christian leaders were influenced by Greek thinking.

    Clement of Alexandria (150-213 AD), head of one of the early Christian schools, which was heavily influenced by philosophy and gnosticism, admitted that he was opposed by those who still considered philosophy “evil”. He made light of their opposition and said that they were light and “ignorant”. He denounced the “so-called orthodoxy who, like beasts which work from fear, do good works without knowing what they are doing”. But Clement, of course, knew what he was doing. He had a special gnosis (knowledge) that the ignorant “orthodox” did not possess.

    Friedrich Ueberweg says that “Gnosticism was the first comprehensive attempt to construct a philosophy of Christianity”. The more flagrant gnostics, such as Cerdo, Cerinthus, Saturninus, and even Marcion, had been expelled from the church. These more flambuoyant gnostics were only the “tip of the iceberg”. There was still a large remnant in the churches, who obviously began developing some philosophical system of Christianity that would compete, so they thought, in the Gentile world.

    The apostle Paul was troubled with gnostics, and spoke against those who clung to “falsely-named science” (knowledge or gnosis) (1 Timothy 6.20).
    20) Oh Timothy, guard what has been entrusted to you, avoiding worldly and empty chatter and the opposing arguments of what is falsely called knowledge (gnosis)
    21) which some have professed and gone astray from the faith.
    Paul says that gnosis/gnosticism causes a falling away from the faith.

    Albrecht Ritschl (1822-89) saw the Trinity doctrine as flagrantly Hellenistic. It had corrupted the Christian message by introducing an alien “layer of metaphysical concepts, derived from the natural philosophy of the Greeks,” and it had nothing to do with early Christianity.

    Gnosticism and dualism had a foot in the door in the early church. Many founding fathers fought against it's beliefs and dogmas.
    In the third century gnostics and their philosophy would get their greatest boost from the Emperor of Rome himself.

    Constantine emperor of Rome had a problem. His kingdom was in turmoil because of strife between different religious factions. He had christians, gnostics, pagans, druids and many more. Constantine solved this problem by merging all these various factions together and forming The Holy Roman Catholic Church.

    Following the example of his father and earlier 3rd-century emperors, Constantine throughout His life was a solar henotheist, believing that the Roman sun god, Sol, was the visible “manifestation” of an invisible “Highest God” {a plural God?} (summus deus), who was the principle behind the universe. Does this sound familiar? This god was thought to be the companion of the Roman emperor.

    Constantine's adherence to this faith is evident from his claim of having had a vision of the sun god in 310 while in a grove of Apollo in Gaul.

    In 325 AD – Constantine convenes the Council of Nicaea in order to develop a statement of faith that can unify the Catholic Church and therefore his empire. The Nicene Creed is written, declaring that “the Father and the Son are of the same substance” (homoousios). Let me point out that the substance of God is spirit therefor if Jesus is of the same substance then he was spirit and did not live in the flesh and therefor did not really die or be physically raised from the dead.

    #48412
    NickHassan
    Participant

    Hi and thanks martian,
    You say
    “From gnosticim came the concept of Jesus being a separate God from the God of the Old Testament.”
    The old trinity polytheism.
    For us IN Christ there is one God.
    We do not worship the one we are IN.

    #48421
    Tim2
    Participant

    Martian,

    Thanks. That's some interesting history.

    Nick,

    Regarding your statement of faith, it's something like:

    The Word was God.
    The Word is not God.
    The Word became flesh.
    The Word is Jesus.
    Jesus is the Glorious unique monogenes Son of God, the greatest spirit being under God who partook of our flesh nature. He, with life in himself and a will of his own, came in the flesh.
    Jesus was a typical human vessel and was like to us and was filled with God AS the Holy Spirit at the Jordan and allowed himself to be led by that Spirit unto death. We can follow him.

    I just copied your statements; the only change I made was to insert “The Word is Jesus.”

    It also seems that you believe:

    The Spirit is a manifestation of God.

    If all of this is true, do you have any explanation for “The Word was God” and “The Word is not God.” Do you believe there was a time when the Word ceased to be God?

    Tim

    #48427
    NickHassan
    Participant

    Hi Tim2,
    Show me where scripture says the WORD IS GOD and we can go from there.
    The rest you offer is philosophical garnishings designed to make your theory of God look at least slightly plausible.

    But of course you would need more evidence than that to dare to preach it if you fear God more than your human masters.

    #48438
    Tim2
    Participant

    Hi Nick,

    Thanks for the warning. I'd just like to know what you believe. You're called to share your faith with others, aren't you? So is what I listed above your faith?

    Tim

    #48440
    Proclaimer
    Participant

    Quote (Tim2 @ April 12 2007,04:43)
    Nick,

    Are you a gnostic? You apparently believe that Jesus is just a vessel for God.

    Tim


    Tim.

    Jesus is the image of God, the firstborn.

    An image is not the source but an image.

    That is why he is like God.

    God > Christ > Man

    Scripture teaches the above as the correct order.

    Not

    Trinity > Man.

    If you are honest Tim, you will admit that this is true.

    #48448
    Tim2
    Participant

    t8,

    I agree that the Father is the source of the Son. This is the only eternal difference between their persons.

    Scripture does not say that He is like God. It says He is God.

    Tim

    #48450
    NickHassan
    Participant

    Hi Tim,
    Wrong again
    Col1
    ” 12Giving thanks unto the Father, which hath made us meet to be partakers of the inheritance of the saints in light:

    13Who hath delivered us from the power of darkness, and hath translated us into the kingdom of his dear Son:

    14In whom we have redemption through his blood, even the forgiveness of sins:

    15Who is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn of every creature:”

    I believe an image is rather like that which it images.

    #48453
    Tim2
    Participant

    Nick,

    You said, “I believe an image is rather like that which it images.” Thanks for the inference! We can debate its merit later. But for now let's agree that inferences are ok so long as they're true.

    Tim

    #48455
    Proclaimer
    Participant

    Quote (Tim2 @ April 12 2007,10:48)
    t8,

    I agree that the Father is the source of the Son. This is the only eternal difference between their persons.

    Scripture does not say that He is like God. It says He is God.

    Tim


    To Tim2.

    You admit then that you have no understanding of the word “Image”.

    Well I can assure you that “Image” doesn't mean “Source”.

    God is the source of all, and Jesus is the image.

    God is invisible and no man has seen him. Jesus is the image of that invisible God.

    It is actually easy to understand. But if you are already full of mens ideas, then perhaps you haven't made room for that which the Spirit has revealed to us in scripture. Or perhaps you find safety in numbers like many scientists do regarding the theory of evolution.

    But at least believe Tim2, that the truth is a narrow path, that the whole world is under the sway of the evil one, and that it was prophesied that there would be a great falling away.

    Take a look at the foundation of many people's faith today and you will find it is the Trinity. Ask yourself why it wasn't the foundation of the Christians faith who were around when the New Testament was written.

    Nearly 2000 years of error upon error can never become the truth can it. The history of creeds has led men to worship the Trinity and even Mary (the so-called mother of God).

    It's quite scary how men defend their own doctrines.

    #48456
    Tim2
    Participant

    Quote (t8 @ April 11 2007,16:07)

    Quote (Tim2 @ April 12 2007,10:48)
    t8,

    I agree that the Father is the source of the Son.  This is the only eternal difference between their persons.

    Scripture does not say that He is like God.  It says He is God.

    Tim


    To Tim2.

    You admit then that you have no understanding of the word “Image”.

    Well I can assure you that “Image” doesn't mean “Source”.

    God is the source of all, and Jesus is the image.

    God is invisible and no man has seen him. Jesus is the image of that invisible God.

    It is actually easy to understand. But if you are already full of mens ideas, then perhaps you haven't made room for that which the Spirit has revealed to us in scripture. Or perhaps you find safety in numbers like many scientists do regarding the theory of evolution.

    But at least believe Tim2, that the truth is a narrow path, that the whole world is under the sway of the evil one, and that it was prophesied that there would be a great falling away.

    Take a look at the foundation of many people's faith today and you will find it is the Trinity. Ask yourself why it wasn't the foundation of the Christians faith who were around when the New Testament was written.

    Nearly 2000 years of error upon error can never become the truth can it. The history of creeds has led men to worship the Trinity and even Mary (the so-called mother of God).

    It's quite scary how men defend their own doctrines.


    t8,

    Sorry for the misunderstanding. I thought I clearly wrote that the Father is the source of the Son, and I think this is what you believe, right?

    The saints haven't been led astray for 2000 years. They've been following the truth ever since Thomas confessed Jesus as his Lord and God.

    Tim

    #48495
    NickHassan
    Participant

    Hi Tim2,
    Did Thomas take over from Jesus bringing new revelation about Jesus? Should we rather follow him?

    #60823
    NickHassan
    Participant

    topical

    #73842
    NickHassan
    Participant

    Hi ,
    MS suggests we should not ignore Gnosticism as a source of spiritual truth. Who can agree?

    #73847
    Morningstar
    Participant

    Quote (Nick Hassan @ Dec. 04 2007,05:17)
    Hi ,
    MS suggests we should not ignore Gnosticism as a source of spiritual truth. Who can agree?


    I do not suggest that at all, nick.

    I referenced them to demonstrate how they splintered off from the early church because they believed that Jesus couldn't be the creator because their philosophies stated the material realm was evil. So they created a splinter group stating that Jesus was a brand new son of God and not YHWH the biblical son of El Elyon.

Viewing 20 posts - 21 through 40 (of 283 total)
  • You must be logged in to reply to this topic.

© 1999 - 2024 Heaven Net

Navigation

© 1999 - 2023 - Heaven Net
or

Log in with your credentials

or    

Forgot your details?

or

Create Account