Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

The Gospel According to Mary Magdalene
The Gnostic Society Library ^

Posted on 03/29/2008 8:24:03 PM PDT by hanfei

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-8081-97 next last
To: Invincibly Ignorant
"I'm entertained when Catholics accuse others of Gnosticism."

Why?? There is no "secret knowledge" in Catholic beliefs. Ninety-nine percent of Catholic doctrines are far more Biblically based than Protestant ones. Christ himself taught from "tradition-based" (non-written) Jewish religious sources.

21 posted on 03/30/2008 3:33:43 AM PDT by Wonder Warthog (The Hog of Steel-NRA)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: hanfei
Well, at least you acknowledge Jesus to be divine. But, seriously, are you a "History Channel Christian"? By that I mean, do you take all of the nonsense that cable channel puts out to be a serious presentation of Christianity, where any number of Gnostic writings are supposed to be "lost" or "deliberately removed" from the canon of Scripture? Then know that all of the Gnostic writings were written after the Apostolic Era, and all of the Gnostic sects died out over time and remained extinct until ersatz copiers resurrected their notions in our own day. To the extent that the writings aren't old enough to have been considered "inspired," and the fact that their proponents died out as a movement, that should say something about their genuineness as part of the Scriptural canon.

So it is not "good to have more" writings. This stuff is not Christianity; to insist otherwise is to hopelessly garble the message. Dig deeper. Don't settle for being a mere controvertialist. If you think Jesus was divine, then investigate the criteria for authentic Scripture that the early Church demanded. When you do, you will run away from the idea that the "Gospel of Mary Magdalene" is anything other than a book written by people who sought to parallel Christianity, but who were definitely confused enough to be outside the fold entirely.

22 posted on 03/30/2008 6:42:15 AM PDT by magisterium
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: beachdweller; Wonder Warthog

Gnosticism started way before Christianity and the Apostle Paul was up to his ears in it.


23 posted on 03/30/2008 7:34:49 AM PDT by Invincibly Ignorant
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: Invincibly Ignorant
"Gnosticism started way before Christianity and the Apostle Paul was up to his ears in it."

Sorry, but your shorthand reply is gibberish, and I still have no clue as to what point you're trying to make. The doctrines of the RC church are open to anyone to read/understand.

24 posted on 03/30/2008 7:43:13 AM PDT by Wonder Warthog (The Hog of Steel-NRA)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: hanfei
The disciples said to Jesus: "Tell us how our end will be."
Jesus said: "Have you then discovered the beginning that you inquire about the end? For where the beginning is, there shall be the end." ....

His disciples said to Him, "When will the kingdom come?"
Jesus said, "It will not come by expectation; they will not say "look here" or "see there". But the kingdom of the Father is spread over the earth, and men do not see it." --from The Gospel of Thomas

25 posted on 03/30/2008 9:38:11 AM PDT by onedoug
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

Comment #26 Removed by Moderator

To: Wonder Warthog
Sorry, but your shorthand reply is gibberish, and I still have no clue as to what point you're trying to make. The doctrines of the RC church are open to anyone to read/understand.

I understand their doctrine and their denial. Thanx for playing.

27 posted on 03/30/2008 10:41:14 AM PDT by Invincibly Ignorant
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: hanfei

Err, how about a link?


28 posted on 03/30/2008 10:43:38 AM PDT by dread78645 (Evolution. A doomed theory since 1859.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: magisterium

It is not clear how old any of the gospels are, though some material (the so-called “Q” material) is undoubtedly old, whether one believes the “Sayings Gospel Q” theory or not. (I don’t, though I posted Q for people to see much of the old material in pristine form).

Early Christianity was quite varied. I don’t believe in the Nicene Creed.


29 posted on 03/30/2008 10:47:15 AM PDT by hanfei
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: hanfei

ZOT for this post alone.


30 posted on 03/30/2008 11:02:23 AM PDT by xone
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: hanfei
It is not clear how old any of the gospels are, though some material (the so-called “Q” material) is undoubtedly old, whether one believes the “Sayings Gospel Q” theory or not. (I don’t, though I posted Q for people to see much of the old material in pristine form).

Well the material is taken out of the context of the New Testament so yes, in that respect, it's old. But the so-called 'Gospel of Q' is a mere academic hypothesis first posited by Herbert Marsh in 1801 and ergo is NOT that old.

I don’t believe in the Nicene Creed.

Too bad: it's the perfect succinct summa of authentic orthodox Christianity.

31 posted on 03/30/2008 11:08:23 AM PDT by TradicalRC (Ferraro/Wright: democrat racism rears its ugly head.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: Just mythoughts

This is a gnostic text dating to around A.D. 150 at the earliest. Very similar to other texts like the Gospel of Judas and Thomas. There is a reason these texts did not make the canon of Sacred Scripture.


32 posted on 03/30/2008 11:57:49 AM PDT by StAthanasiustheGreat (Vocatus Atque Non Vocatus Deus Aderit)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: StAthanasiustheGreat
This is a gnostic text dating to around A.D. 150 at the earliest. Very similar to other texts like the Gospel of Judas and Thomas. There is a reason these texts did not make the canon of Sacred Scripture.

I agree there is reason why these texts did not make the canon of Sacred Scripture.... but they are interesting to read this day in light of what did get canonized. At 150 A.D. dating, makes it impossible for Mary Magdalene, or any other person living at the time Christ walked in the flesh to have been the author.

33 posted on 03/30/2008 12:24:59 PM PDT by Just mythoughts (Isa.3:4 And I will give children to be their princes, and babes shall rule over them.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: hanfei

“The changes in the text may reflect the historical exclusion of women from their earlier leadership roles in Christian communities.”

Okay, not a scholar here. Is there some firm basis for believing that women had “leadership roles,” despite Corinthians 14:34: “Let your women keep silence in the churches: for it is not permitted unto them to speak; but they are commanded to be under obedience as also saith the law?”

I don’t remember any talk about women having “leadership roles” until the sixties and after.


34 posted on 03/30/2008 12:28:30 PM PDT by dsc
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Invincibly Ignorant
"I understand their doctrine and their denial. Thanx for playing."

Ah, I see---living up to your "nom de plume". But I seriously doubt that either is true. And I'm NOT playing---though you seem to be.

35 posted on 03/30/2008 1:05:58 PM PDT by Wonder Warthog (The Hog of Steel-NRA)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: Wonder Warthog
Ah, I see---living up to your "nom de plume". But I seriously doubt that either is true. And I'm NOT playing---though you seem to be.

Oh I think you are.

36 posted on 03/30/2008 1:20:10 PM PDT by Invincibly Ignorant
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

To: hanfei

Doesn’t take more than one reading to figure out that the guy talking about “restoring the essence of every nature to its root” is not the same guy as the one in the real Gospels of Matthew, Mark, Luke and John, my Lord and Savior.


37 posted on 03/30/2008 2:00:18 PM PDT by Dan Middleton
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: hanfei

“There’s nothing wrong with the catholicos gospels; it’s just good to have more.”

Even the Catholics deny the Gnostic gospels. You have no point but division.


38 posted on 03/30/2008 6:48:55 PM PDT by swmobuffalo ("We didn't seek the approval of Code Pink and MoveOn.org before deciding what to do")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

Comment #39 Removed by Moderator

To: Invincibly Ignorant
"Oh I think you are."

No, actually I'm not. I'm interested in finding where the truth sits. If you think you've got some, trot it out, otherwise sit down and shut up. I don't have time for sophomoric head games.

40 posted on 03/31/2008 7:12:03 AM PDT by Wonder Warthog (The Hog of Steel-NRA)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-8081-97 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson