Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Re: [Gnosticism2] Re: The meanining of the Christ?

Expand Messages
  • Ank Kelly
    It may surprise you but I take nothing at face value. As to so called conspiracy theories, that depends wholly on the beholder, mostly they are the same thing
    Message 1 of 33 , Apr 17, 2010
    • 0 Attachment
      It may surprise you but I take nothing at face value. As to so called conspiracy theories, that depends wholly on the beholder, mostly they are the same thing as what they oppose.

      My feeling about any form of organised religion is that it is like a straightjacket for the soul, no matter the form of the organisation, this is the same for the 'recognised forms of Christianity as with Buddhism, football sides, why oh why is the letter more important than the spirit? How soon, before the ritual becomes an end and not the means?

      We owe a debt of gratitude to those who dared to think outside a perceived - sometimes scholarly -  box in whatever endeavour, sometimes at great cost to themselves. Names like Socrates and Giordano Bruno spring to mind.

      I agree to a cross fertilisation of cults and followings. My personal experience of christianity has been negative, as has my experience of buddhists and of course new age followers. Hypocrites, fanatics, sheeple and bullies are everywhere.

      It is not exactly an answer to your question about virgin birth, but goes some way to explain the allegory of this.

      http://www.gnosis.org/naghamm/exe.html

      The moon is red tonight, no it is not the end of days, though the end of aviation in certain areas. A little knowledge, of even what you don't know - and therefore sets one free - goes a long way.



      --- On Sat, 17/4/10, f8s42nutsun <f8s42nutsun@...> wrote:

      From: f8s42nutsun <f8s42nutsun@...>
      Subject: [Gnosticism2] Re: The meanining of the Christ?
      To: gnosticism2@yahoogroups.com
      Date: Saturday, 17 April, 2010, 1:32

       

      Hello Ank,

      I looked at your first couple of sources and, frankly, I'm unimpressed. As dry as genuine scholarship can be at times, its really helpful to familiarize yourself with those sources (preferably multiple sources if you can swing it) before taking some of these dubious web sources at face value. For instance, this new fantasy regarding Mithras and Xianity. Those elements put forth by the unread and the conspiracy fanatics as having influenced Xianity -- or, as some have recently claimed, actually the source of certain Xian myths and rituals -- have actually been turned on their head. Prior to the advent of Xianity, for instance, Mithraism (or, more correctly, Zoroastrianism) had no virgin birth (Mithras emerged from a great stone) or wine communion. These were all late adaptations upon Zorastrian mythologies created across a portions of the empire during the late 1st to early 2nd century CE, well AFTER those Xian "myths" and rituals were fully established. So, if you think about it, the argument is much, much stronger applied in the opposite direction: Xianity could well have influenced the new Mithraic cult (primarily a soldier's cult). Bad news for the cults of Xian bashing.

      Tom U.

      --- In gnosticism2@ yahoogroups. com, Ank Kelly <ciberwytch@ ...> wrote:
      >
      > Hi Tom,
      >
      > Below is all I could find:
      > http://www.essortme nt.com/all/ christmaspagan_ rece.htm
      >
      > The page is about the origins of Christmas as we know it today. It mentions a festival in Sumer honouring the goddess Isis, who, if I recall correctly also played a major part in the Egyptian creation myth, which has allegorical elements to it.
      >
      > http://www.near- death.com/ experiences/ origen048. html
      > This link is interesting because it throws more light on the symbolism of Jesus and parallels with Mithras.
      >
      > http://ezinearticle s.com/?The- Original- Sun-of-God& id=93709
      >
      > As to Sun of God, this link goes some way to answer your question, the source is not gnostic I believe.
      >
      > That still leaves unanswered my query how people on this latitude could have this celebration as the sun would not markedly get as low in the sky around wintertime as it does where I live (52 degrees northern latitude).
      >
      > I was not consciously playing on words. As far as I can tell, the history of christianity as most people follow the rules - I was brought up in it but remember very little of the scriptures - developed over time. It will probably keep on developing.
      >
      > Ank
      >
      >
      >
      >
      >
      > laughing about yourself  can be a source of great and enduring fun!
      >
      > --- On Thu, 15/4/10, f8s42nutsun <f8s42nutsun@ ...> wrote:
      >
      > From: f8s42nutsun <f8s42nutsun@ ...>
      > Subject: [Gnosticism2] Re: The meanining of the Christ?
      > To: gnosticism2@ yahoogroups. com
      > Date: Thursday, 15 April, 2010, 23:01
      >
      >
      >
      >
      >
      >
      >
      >  
      >
      >
      >
      >
      >
      >
      >
      >
      >
      > Hey Ank,
      >
      >
      >
      > To be more specific, are there sources for the term
      >
      > "sky cross" in Egyptian theology? Ditto for the term
      >
      > "Sun of God." Is that you making a play on words --
      >
      > Sun for son instead of Ra or Aten? No foul, just
      >
      > curious.
      >
      >
      >
      > I'm persisting on this point because I'm not sure
      >
      > if you're impinging a wee bit of Xian symbolism
      >
      > where it may not originally have existed. If I'm
      >
      > mistaken please correct me.
      >
      >
      >
      > Tom U.
      >
      >
      >
      > --- In gnosticism2@ yahoogroups. com, Ank Kelly <ciberwytch@ ...> wrote:
      >
      > >
      >
      > > Mmmmm,
      >
      > > Just a wee bit of thinking here, re 25 December -(it sort of parallels a concept of the midwinter solstice alingment rift (end of mayan calendar), vs the mayans and where they lived )- the Egyptians did not live in a place like 'northern europeans' where the sun would almost disappear during wintertime.
      >
      > >
      >
      > > Apart from that I am very suspicious about 25 december and the concept of a new year on 1 January. To my feeling the spring equinox is the actual new year and the only people that I know of who still celebrate this are the Persians with their 'Now Ruz'.
      >
      > >
      >
      > > before literal christianity was spread most pagan people celebrated the solstices and equinoxes and then the christian festical celebrations were just 'plunked' on these days with some modifications over time, as well as their 'shrines' covering sacred places.
      >
      > >
      >
      > > Ank
      >
      > >
      >
      > > laughing about yourself  can be a source of great and enduring fun!
      >
      > >
      >
      > > --- On Thu, 15/4/10, Tom Urash <f8s42nutsun@ ...> wrote:
      >
      > >
      >
      > > From: Tom Urash <f8s42nutsun@ ...>
      >
      > > Subject: Re: [Gnosticism2] Re: The meanining of the Christ?
      >
      > > To: gnosticism2@ yahoogroups. com
      >
      > > Date: Thursday, 15 April, 2010, 1:24
      >
      > >
      >
      > >
      >
      > >
      >
      > >
      >
      > >
      >
      > >
      >
      > >
      >
      > >  
      >
      > >
      >
      > >
      >
      > >
      >
      > >
      >
      > >
      >
      > >
      >
      > >
      >
      > >
      >
      > >
      >
      > > Hey D.,
      >
      > >  
      >
      > > Just curious.... what are some of the specific sources re  'The ancient Egyptian solar theology (upon which Christmas may well have derived) tells the story of the Sun of God entering onto the sky cross on the winter soltice. It stays there for three days of "death". On the forth day (Dec, 25) the Sun of God comes off of the sky cross coming back to life and beats the forces of darkness?'
      >
      > >  
      >
      > > Thanks... Tom U.
      >
      > >  
      >
      > >  
      >
      > >  
      >
      > >
      >
      > > --- On Tue, 4/13/10, D. <nazgno@yahoo. com> wrote:
      >
      > >
      >
      > >
      >
      > > From: D. <nazgno@yahoo. com>
      >
      > > Subject: [Gnosticism2] Re: The meanining of the Christ?
      >
      > > To: gnosticism2@ yahoogroups. com
      >
      > > Date: Tuesday, April 13, 2010, 3:28 AM
      >
      > >
      >
      > >
      >
      > >  
      >
      > >
      >
      > > I apologize for not returning to this sooner. The meaning of the Christ is as diverse as the attitudes that are possible about it's conception. I have come to view the "Krst" or Christ as that indwelling Divine understanding that is within all of us. That understanding "as above so below" we can ascend to the realm of greater spiritual awakening. The ancient Egyptian solar theology (upon which Christmas may well have derived) tells the story of the Sun of God entering onto the sky cross on the winter soltice. It stays there for three days of "death". On the forth day (Dec, 25) the Sun of God comes off of the sky cross coming back to life and beats the forces of darkness. This victory brings longer days. Warmer weather and the salvation of mankind. Nice story and I think that Rome gave us another version of it. I have no preconception that one meaning is any better than any other. We all understand as we are meant to at that time. The Kabbalah
      >
      > > teaches that each soul is where it needs to be at all times. This well might be true. What we do to improve our lot is our choice. Thanks and peace to all. Dennis "Nazgno"
      >
      > >
      >
      > > --- In gnosticism2@ yahoogroups. com, Tom Urash <f8s42nutsun@ ...> wrote:
      >
      > > >
      >
      > > >
      >
      > > >
      >
      > > > Hello Kurt,
      >
      > > >  
      >
      > > > Forgive me for being so dense today,  but I can't for the life of me figure out what the"it" is you keep referring to in your first two paragraphs. Do you mind being a bit more specific for me?
      >
      > > >  
      >
      > > > As to G of T representing an elitist movement, it seems to me that they are represented as a rather exclusive bunch. However, tagging them as elitist may be stretching it. Yet if they were, like 17th to mid-18th century
      >
      > > Calvinism, of the belief that one was either chosen or not -- irregardless of one's past or future behavior or efforts -- then, yes, that sounds pretty elitist to me. But I don't want to wax anachronistic. Their (the Thomist community) elitism may have had as much to do with a cautiousness of character as a method of perceiving who was or was not imbued with the capacity to receive their teaching, which is more practical than belief alone (Calvinism tried, rather unsuccessfully, to develop a sure-fire method of determining who among them were the chosen of God and who were not).
      >
      > > >  
      >
      > > > Tom U.
      >
      > > >  
      >
      > > > Tom U.
      >
      > > >
      >
      > > > --- On Sun, 4/11/10, kurt31416 <kurt31416@ ..> wrote:
      >
      > > >
      >
      > > >
      >
      > > > From: kurt31416 <kurt31416@ ..>
      >
      > > > Subject: [Gnosticism2] Re: The meanining of the Christ?
      >
      > > > To: gnosticism2@ yahoogroups. com
      >
      > > > Date: Sunday, April 11, 2010, 6:38 AM
      >
      > > >
      >
      > > >
      >
      > > >  
      >
      > > >
      >
      > > >
      >
      > > >
      >
      > > > Hi Tom, perhaps that struggle between the disciples (The Gospel of Thomas?) and Paul, homogenized in the Christian New Testament, keeps it open.
      >
      > > >
      >
      > > > Perhaps it's technology building stronger armies and economies than religion, thereby breaking up the Roman Catholic church that brooked no dissent.
      >
      > > >
      >
      > > > Do you consider the Gospel of Thomas elitist too? It has 14 parallels to the Dialog of the Savior according to Funk, more than to anything other than the Synoptics and James. And none to Mary as far as I know. (And all but one of the parallels are in Matthew too. The odd man out is Thomas 37 that talks about getting naked, but
      >
      > > that's another story.)
      >
      > > >
      >
      > > > --- In gnosticism2@ yahoogroups. com, "f8s42nutsun" <f8s42nutsun@ ...> wrote:
      >
      > > > >
      >
      > > > > Hello D,
      >
      > > > >
      >
      > > > > I'd have to ask you "which Jesus?" Paul's Jesus? The Jesus
      >
      > > > > of the author of the prefacing poetry in the Gospel of John?
      >
      > > > > The Valentinian Jesus? The Gospel of Thomas's Jesus?
      >
      > > > > I.m.o., depending on the source, we are confronted with
      >
      > > > > differing essences and missions impinged upon the various
      >
      > > > > characterizations or person (maybe both, i.e., 'cause who can
      >
      > > > > empirically rule out the existence of a historical Jesus?) of
      >
      > > > > Jesus, reflecting different needs (individual and community)
      >
      > > > > and struggles of the soul, so to speak.
      >
      > > > >
      >
      > > > > As this is a gnostic discussion group (my name is Tom, by the
      >
      > > > > way, and it's good to be here, yada yada yada, blah
      >
      > > blah blah)
      >
      > > > > I'd have to say from my reading that a similar dilemma
      >
      > > > > applies to the Nag Hammadi corpus. A "gnostic" Jesus seems
      >
      > > > > just as elusive as a NT Jesus. The Jesus of The Dialogue of
      >
      > > > > the Savior is exceedingly elitist compared to the Jesus of The
      >
      > > > > Gospel of Mary Magdalene. It's uncertain if G of T is even
      >
      > > > > gnostic to begin with (even Elaine Pagels has backed off on
      >
      > > > > "gnostic" being a legitimate category, preferring for the most
      >
      > > > > part to lump one and all in the rather benign category "early
      >
      > > > > Christianities, " which I find disconcerting, being a big fan of
      >
      > > > > her The Gnostic Gospels), but, in answer to your question, it
      >
      > > > > does seem to represent and demonstrate "a metaphorical
      >
      > > > > representation of the journey" of a rather exclusive, if not
      >
      > > > > elite, community of seekers along the lines you
      >
      > > seem to
      >
      > > > > suggest.
      >
      > > > >
      >
      > > > > Let me share something from my "factoids" file.
      >
      > > > >
      >
      > > > > Depending on the source there are between 22 and 38
      >
      > > > > thousand extant Xian denominations. There are 7957
      >
      > > > > verses in most Protestant New Testament translations.
      >
      > > > > This equates with, at minimum, 2.6 Xian denominations in
      >
      > > > > this world for every one verse of said book. Which is also at
      >
      > > > > minimum about 100 new denominations a year since the
      >
      > > > > birth of Jesus according to Matthew's reckoning, though to
      >
      > > > > accurate, the vast majority of this diversity occurs after the
      >
      > > > > Reformation. Obviously that changes the math
      >
      > > > > considerably. Where this stacks up with other ancient and
      >
      > > > > contemporary religions I haven't a clue, but I suspect Xian
      >
      > > > > diversity beats them all. My point being that there was
      >
      > > > >
      >
      > > something in the nature of Xian dissemination that has
      >
      > > > > left it seemingly forever prone to being a religion of
      >
      > > > > exceeding plurality in all facets, from founder(s) to
      >
      > > > > exegesis.
      >
      > > > >
      >
      > > > > Tom U.
      >
      > > > >
      >
      > > > >
      >
      > > > > --- In gnosticism2@ yahoogroups. com, "D." <nazgno@> wrote:
      >
      > > > > >
      >
      > > > > > As a student of religous history I have studied many gnostic traditions. I have found a possible meaning of Chrst in ancient Eypgtian theology along with many others. I have one simple question that I would appreciate opinions concnerning.
      >
      > > > > > In ancient Egyptan "Christian Mytholgy" it was understood that the myth of Osiris. Isis and Horus was symbolic and metaphoric for the life of each human. That each human had to endure these things to reach enlighgtenment and release from this world. Reference(the writings of The Bet Emet Minisries on line). my
      >
      > > question is this. Is it possible that the telling of the Jesus story should be taken as the same thing, a metaphorical representation of the journey of every person? The "story" Jesus being much more a roadmap for success and not as much an historical figure? All serious opinions appreciated.
      >
      > > > > >
      >
      > > > >
      >
      > > >
      >
      > >
      >

    • pmcvflag
      Hey Regeneratia Just a quick note, Lady Cari has decided to no longer administrate this group and has unsubbed to follow other interests. PMCV
      Message 33 of 33 , Aug 8, 2010
      • 0 Attachment
        Hey Regeneratia

        Just a quick note, Lady Cari has decided to no longer administrate this group and has unsubbed to follow other interests.

        PMCV

        --- In gnosticism2@yahoogroups.com, regeneratia <no_reply@...> wrote:
        >
        > nice to see you here, Cari (M).
        > In the old days, we discussed with Old bear on a different board. Do you remember that?
        >
        > --- In gnosticism2@yahoogroups.com, lady_caritas <no_reply@> wrote:
        > >
        > > Hello, Brian. D. Tackett offered various points that could provide fodder for discussion. Unfortunately, D. left the group recently (before you posted), and so any opportunity for direct discussion with D. right now on this list is not possible.
        > >
        > > Cari
        > >
        > >
        > > --- In gnosticism2@yahoogroups.com, "brian" <humbleservant1god@> wrote:
        > > >
        > > > hello d. tackett, is that your first time reading the bible?
        > > >
        > > > --- In gnosticism2@yahoogroups.com, "D. Tackett" <nazgno@> wrote:
        > > > >
        > > > > I read the Bible today and I must admit that I was unimpressed. It's scholarly value was nill and it's authorship unknown. I can choose to accept whatever I wish and bash everything and everyone else. That is the wonder of mankind. We have ego driven thinking that clouds our Divine origin. Our minds are molded by masses that wish to have loyal followers to their thoughts. It is enough to make me think, why try? We look to the written words of men as if the truth exist only there. We call those that don't agree with us foolish and wrong. Most persons will argue to prove that we are the only ones that are right. How foolish is this? The truth is in our deepest center and we know it not. Peace to all
        > > > >
        > > >
        > >
        >
      Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.