The Greatest Reset: Beast Rising BIBLICAL (I searched GAW and did not find this so I'm posting)
(free2shine.net)
GREAT COVID RED PILL 💊
You're viewing a single comment thread. View all comments, or full comment thread.
Comments (91)
sorted by:
All the books not included in the 66 book cannon actually have doctrine that contradicts Christ's and the Apostle's teachings. The early Christian community recognized this, which is why those books were never included in the cannon to begin with.
FTFY.
Conflating the works of Paul (or his underlings) as the teachings of Jesus has been a huge misdirection. If you look at the gospel of Thomas for example (quite possibly written by the brother of Jesus), there is nothing in there that contradicts any quote by Jesus in the Bible (red letters).
There are the actual sayings of Jesus, and there is the narrative overlay. There is substantial evidence of additions to that overlay as time went on. (That is just a place to start, it's not "the evidence").
FTFY
Remember what happened as a result of this effort. We had the creation of The Church, at the behest of Emperor Constantine, which made into Law, on penalty of death, certain beliefs (like the Trinity, which was not doctrine before 383 AD). The resulting outcome of these efforts of creating official doctrine set up a God-Emperor as the highest official mouthpiece of The Truth of Jesus Christ's Teachings. This same institution became the Holy Roman Empire which created the Dark Ages, where all of humanity was ruled by The Church. A thousand years of darkness...
Or two thousand years. I mean, we are still in it. It has just changed from one dark room to another, run by the same group of people.
The assertion that conflating Pauline writings with the teachings of Jesus is a misdirection and that the Gospel of Thomas aligns seamlessly with Jesus' recorded sayings requires careful consideration of both Paul's letters and the content of the Gospel of Thomas.
Distinctive Messages:
Theological Emphasis:
Jesus' Teachings in Canonical Gospels:
Authorship and Historical Context:
Here are a few examples that highlight the distinctive nature of the sayings in the Gospel of Thomas compared to the teachings found in canonical Gospels and Pauline writings:
Example of Hidden Knowledge:
Example of Gnostic Themes:
Example of Spiritual Insight:
It's important to note that the Gnostic flavor in the Gospel of Thomas lies in its emphasis on esoteric knowledge, spiritual transformation, and unique perspectives on gender and salvation. These aspects distinguish it from the more straightforward ethical teachings and narratives found in canonical Gospels and the theological focus of Paul's letters.
The authorship and dating of all writings are subjects of scholarly discussion. Suggesting that it is "more so" with Thomas is ludicrous. No one agrees on anything.
Did they come from a different "Theological" milleu? Maybe. But the key word there is "theological" (belief system about the fundamental underpinnings of reality). That doesn't mean they didn't have a common original source (the teachings of Jesus). Maybe it was just that some people (disciples of Saul) felt that some things fit better with Saul's teachings than others did, so they labeled them as heretical and forbid people from looking at them. I mean, the winners literally burnt the books. How can you not appreciate that?
That Saul had a larger impact on the Christian Doctrine we got than Jesus did is not really debatable (though I wouldn't be surprised if you try). Why do you not appreciate how large of an impact he had? He was a self proclaimed Levite Agent. The person personally responsible for the Martyrdom of Stephen, not to mention very likely numerous other deaths of "heretics." Almost every single piece of Doctrine that exists today (a notable exception being the Trinity) comes from Saul's interpretation, or as you call it, "Theological explanation" of what "God" is to him, not from Jesus himself.
As I said, all of the red letters of Jesus are decidedly in congruence with the gospel of Thomas. If you find "discrepancies," I suggest it is through the theology of Saul and the later doctrine from the Constantine Church that you make it not fit.
It suggests that by looking inward (meditation) we can find an appreciation of Reality. It is by looking inward that we will find our Connection to Source. This is completely consistent with other teachings found in Canon (from Jesus, not from Saul's interpretation).
The focus on gender wasn't "Christian," it was cultural (both Jewish and Roman culture, though especially Jewish, which became Christian culture as well). Saying "she will become male" likely has more to do with suggesting "all people are created equal." They are created equal, in the sense that all people, no matter their station, accomplishments, strengths, gender, whatever, are all equally connected to the Source of All Things. Sounds to me like a pretty good idea.
Just because all people are equal (in the sense given), doesn't mean there aren't differences. You are applying a smaller scope, under your understanding of "equality," as presented to us by the Cabal, to something that is actually rather profound. It is true that we are all equal. It is also true that we are not the same. They are just different "Truths in scope." They are only at odds when you try to force one scope onto the other. That is what the Cabal does. And you are falling for it.
And what in the red letters suggests otherwise?
Having said that, this goes along with the general theme of all teachings of Jesus that is the understanding that the Kingdom of God (the Jurisdiction of Source) is everything (Reality). If there are different "realms," or "dimensions," or whatever within Reality, then that is how it is. There is nothing here at odds with those ideas.
What is "Gnostic?" It is a box where you can place things to discredit them, nothing more. A teaching is what it is. Putting it into a box is only done as an association fallacy. It has no place in reasoned discussion. Not to say it's easy to not do that. We have definitions for a reason. But in this case it misleads from the discussion. "Gnostic" is just a word that means "to know." It means to know the teachings of Jesus in this case. It wasn't about hiding the knowledge (as suggested by the word "esoteric"). It was about trying to show people the knowledge that was hidden from them by the dogma of the time.