Why do Christians use the cross?

The cross is a symbol of every tradition. Have a look at The Symbolism of the Cross by René Guénon.

Thomas


what i like about JEHOVAHS WITNESSES is the fact that when through research they found out that something is not inline with their God JEHOVAH , and it is out of line with what the bible REALLY teaches ,they discard it .


THATS THE WAY TO DO IT :) that is humility.

Jehovah’s people first learned that Jesus Christ did not die on a T-shaped cross. On January 31, 1936,


yes true knowledge is abundant in more ways than one .
Advancement in understanding God’s Word brought about some other adjustments in Christian thinking as well and getting things right is what JEHOVAHS People are into . they like to be spiritually clean
 
Hi Mee!! Glad to see you are still around. Thought the white coats had come to take you away.


no i have my white robe on still revelation 7;9-10 along with 7 million others :)


After these things I saw, and, look! a great crowd, which no man was able to number, out of all nations and tribes and peoples and tongues, standing before the throne and before the Lamb, ;DRESSED IN WHITE ROBES and there were palm branches in their hands. 10 And they keep on crying with a loud voice, saying: “Salvation [we owe] to our God, who is seated on the throne, and to the Lamb.”






 
“It is strange, yet unquestionably a fact, that in ages long before the birth of Christ, and since then in lands untouched by the teaching of the Church, the Cross has been used as a sacred symbol. . . . The Greek Bacchus, the Tyrian Tammuz, the Chaldean Bel, and the Norse Odin, were all symbolised to their votaries by a cruciform device.”—The Cross in Ritual, Architecture, and Art (London, 1900), G. S. Tyack, p. 1.




“The cross in the form of the ‘Crux Ansata’ . . . was carried in the hands of the Egyptian priests and Pontiff kings as the symbol of their authority as priests of the Sun god and was called ‘the Sign of Life.’”—The Worship of the Dead (London, 1904), Colonel J. Garnier, p. 226.





“Various figures of crosses are found everywhere on Egyptian monuments and tombs, and are considered by many authorities as symbolical either of the phallus [a representation of the male sex organ] or of coition. . . . In Egyptian tombs the crux ansata [cross with a circle or handle on top] is found side by side with the phallus.”—A Short History of Sex-Worship (London, 1940), H. Cutner, pp. 16, 17; see also The Non-Christian Cross, p. 183.



“These crosses were used as symbols of the Babylonian sun-god, , and are first seen on a coin of Julius Cæsar, 100-44 B.C., and then on a coin struck by Cæsar’s heir (Augustus), 20 B.C.

On the coins of Constantine the symbol is used without the surrounding circle, and with the four equal arms vertical and horizontal; and this was the symbol specially venerated as the ‘Solar Wheel’. It should be stated that Constantine was a sun-god worshipper, and would not enter the ‘Church’ till some quarter of a century after the legend of his having seen such a cross in the heavens.”—The Companion Bible, Appendix No. 162; see also The Non-Christian Cross, pp. 133-141.​
 
To learn what Jesus Christ was trying to teach his followers with the verbal tools of his day, read the Gospel of Humanity. It's time to move forward. This is a new aeon, a new age and God is God of the living, not the dead.

Oh, good grief ... another fiction to the list of spurious gospels, and another branch of 'gnostic Christianity' There's so many different and contradictory 'gnostic Christianities' around these days, how's a boy to know which way to turn?

Thomas
 
how's a boy to know which way to turn?

Thomas
JOHN 17;3 listen to Jesus and we cant go wrong, and feed from the channel he is feeding and we will grow up big and strong

matthew 24;45-47 with no idol worship in sight .
 
YES pagan things are everywhere in CHRISTENDOM :) But not in true christianity

Tell that to the Jews and Muslims and any university level professor of comparative religions and see what they tell you. Read sometime the attributes of Mithra and see Jesus Christ's ancient predecessor. If you tried to cut out all the pagan religious concepts from both the Old and New Testament, you'd have a book that looks like it's been through a shredder.
 
Oh, good grief ... another fiction to the list of spurious gospels, and another branch of 'gnostic Christianity' There's so many different and contradictory 'gnostic Christianities' around these days, how's a boy to know which way to turn?

Thomas

Jesus tells you how. "By their fruits ye shall know them." Yes, there are a lot of contenders for spiritual authority in our times, just like there were a lot of prophets running around in Jesus' time or so history records. In our times, one has to seriously wonder if Paul was a false prophet whose gospel has overwhelmed the teachings of Jesus Christ in the minds of most Christians. Look at the un-godly history of Christianity following Paul's theology.

So I'd think twice before branding a new gospel "fiction" or "spurious". Pauline Christianity has yet to produce a majority of Christians who follow the teachings of Jesus when it comes to a choice between serving God or country, God or Mammon. Something is needed to correct the imbalance between Christian beliefs and Christian actions.

But it is true that we should look for "signs and wonders" to verify a new Christian vision's authenticity. Look to the Holy Land and see how the prophet of the Gospel of Humanity has already left a spiritual imprint and awakened over 500 Nazarean Christians at Easter six years ago to the new Word of God that needs no words to convey exactly what God desires in the Holy Land and the world. Look too to Native America where the Spirit of Christ has come in Native American form to signal that the Old World spiritual traditions have united with those of the New World. Christ has found His true Bride which never was or ever could be a human collection of warring sects but a Goddess, a deity like Jesus Christ Himself. Patriarchy is over and the Holy Family is being re-established, Father and Son, Mother and Daughter. No more phony religious warfare with polytheists for Christianity and Christians. Leave that to Jews and Muslims in these End Times of Abrahamic religions.
 
If you tried to cut out all the pagan religious concepts from both the Old and New Testament, you'd have a book that looks like it's been through a shredder.

Bearing in mind that man is the same the world over, and the same through history, and all participate in one human nature, it's hardly surprising that there are religious concepts that are generic to humanity's spiritual seeking.

But let's refine your test:
Take the New Testament, cut out all direct references to Egyptian Religion, and see if there is any change to the message or its theology (what we call oikonomia and theologia).
Let me tell you the answer: No.

Now do the same, and cut out all the direct references to the Hebrew Religion ... and then your shredder image would apply.

This simple exercise alone is sufficient to demonstrate that any Egyptian references are purely incidental and of no consequence.

Another test:
If indeed you are a gnostic in the Coptic Tradition, then you will have read the Christology of Cyril of Alexandria so often and so thoroughly that you could probably recite it blindfold.

If you haven't, then be assured the Copts will be the first to refute you and your rather presumptive theories.

Thomas
 
mee, I let this thread stand because I thought it would make for an interesting discussion, but you'll need to address points raised.....

Therefore rather than repeat the same assertions, you'll need to try and counter the objections raised for your argument to stand up.
...


Ummmmm.... are you new here, Brian?

:);)
 
Jesus tells you how. "By their fruits ye shall know them." Yes, there are a lot of contenders for spiritual authority in our times, just like there were a lot of prophets running around in Jesus' time or so history records. In our times, one has to seriously wonder if Paul was a false prophet whose gospel has overwhelmed the teachings of Jesus Christ in the minds of most Christians. Look at the un-godly history of Christianity following Paul's theology.

Christ has found His true Bride which never was or ever could be a human collection of warring sects but a Goddess, a deity like Jesus Christ Himself. Patriarchy is over and the Holy Family is being re-established, Father and Son, Mother and Daughter.


I think you've been reading too much Dan Brown, H! If you believe in the Bible, then you'll know that the Bride never was an institutional church, but rather a congregation of millions of individual souls who have found forgiveness through Christ. Force all the connections you can between Christian beliefs and other beliefs, but they will always fall short, no matter how convincing they seem. God has already revealed the future to us, and it does not involve a "Holy Family" like the one you've portrayed.

By the way, what is this "ungodly history of Christianity" that you've accused Paul of starting? By your own words, not every person who professes a belief in Jesus Christ is actually a believer, so how is it that Paul is a false prophet, while the political and religious leaders of the Crusades aren't looked at with the same skepticism?
 
Bearing in mind that man is the same the world over, and the same through history, and all participate in one human nature, it's hardly surprising that there are religious concepts that are generic to humanity's spiritual seeking.

But let's refine your test:
Take the New Testament, cut out all direct references to Egyptian Religion, and see if there is any change to the message or its theology (what we call oikonomia and theologia).
Let me tell you the answer: No.

Now do the same, and cut out all the direct references to the Hebrew Religion ... and then your shredder image would apply.

This simple exercise alone is sufficient to demonstrate that any Egyptian references are purely incidental and of no consequence.

Another test:
If indeed you are a gnostic in the Coptic Tradition, then you will have read the Christology of Cyril of Alexandria so often and so thoroughly that you could probably recite it blindfold.

If you haven't, then be assured the Copts will be the first to refute you and your rather presumptive theories.

Thomas

Thomas, where would one begin in citing all the pagan references in the Old and New Testament..

Let's start with Adam and Eve, characters and story borrowed from Sumerian and Babylonian mythologies. Noah and the Flood? Revised Epic of Gilgamesh flood story by Hebrew authors. Abraham and Sarah and Hagar? Well, you now know where these characters came from. How about old Yahweh himself and his pagan Canaanite roots starting off as Yamm until Canaanite God Most High, EL renamed him Yah or Yahwe. Then there's "Moses" whose name supposedly is Hebrew yet there are quite a few Egyptian pharaohs with "moses" in their names, e.g. Tutmoses III (Tut= Thoth) who conquered and destroyed the Canaanite confederacy right close to the time of "Moses". "Moses" is just the Egyptian proper name without the pagan god name attached. The sons of David with their pagan god names? The Song of Solomon which is derived from a hymn to the two gods in love, Shalem and Shulmitu representing the planet Venus worshiped at Jerusalem as the Morning Star and Evening Star.

Here's more pagan influence:

The word "Tabernacle" means "bivouac of green branches" which was also what the "House of Baal" was called.

Baal and Marduk's triumphs over Tiamat (or Rahab or Leviathan), Ishtar's destroying sea-creature, is celebrated in Isaiah 27:1, 51:9 and in Job 26:13.

The Book of "Esther". The book symbolizes the adoption of Ishtar ("Esther" being the Hebrew version of Her name) and Marduk into Judaic theology. "Marduk" being the translation of "Morducai" in this Old Testament story where the Jews are miraculously saved by Esther's influence. The Jewish Purim festival commemorates this act of the Goddess in Hebrew disguise.

Divination is considered idolatry in the Bible yet divination through oracle knucklebones as "Urim" and "Thummim" was part of Mosaic Law. (see Exodus 28:30 and Samuel 28:6)

Baptism comes from the Mesopotamian religious mythology of Enki, a god of water, seas and rivers and, corresponding to Hermes and Thoth, a supreme god of wisdom and magic who had the power to impose or remove spells and curses.

The Mesopotamian religion had a rite of sacrificing a sheep and throwing it into a river as a "scapegoat" for the sins of the people. The Jewish atonement ritual "Kippur" comes from the Akkadian word for this ritual "Kupparu".

The Goddess' magic number 7 representing the seven planetary rulers and it's Judeo-Christian anti-Goddess reaction as the splitting of it in half is represented in many places in the Bible. Your mysterious "42" months. The story of Joseph in Egypt preparing the Egyptians for surviving 7 years of drought and Elisha restoring the dead son of a Shunammite woman back to life which is followed by announcing a 7 year famine upon the land, (2 Kings 8:1) is the Hebrew version of the Mesopotamian myth of Ishtar sending Anu to bring a 7 year drought and famine in revenge for Gilgamesh spurning Her as a his lover. Ishtar threatens also to break down the gates to the underworld to release the dead to swallow up the living.

The Hebrew Menorah has 7 branches ending in oil cups shaped like almond blossoms. Solomon's Temple also had almond blossom shaped cornices. Almonds were one of the Goddess' sacred fruits being yoni shaped and white inside, white symbolizing the Goddess as the Moon.

The "42" months, 3 1/2 years, symbolism that shows up in Daniel and Revelation continues the Patriarchal war on pagan polytheism. Egypt had 42 named gods they worshiped. 2 female bears maul 42 youths who mocked Elisha.

Pagan origins of the Peter/rock story

From "The Chief Gods of Rome:
"There were two gods of ancient Rome which were pre-eminently worshipped as PETER-gods. One was JU-PETER (Zeus-Peter). The other, says the Classical Manual, was JANUS, called PATER or PETER (see page 389). Sometimes these two gods are confused. But they are to be reckoned as distinct -- relative to Roman paganism of the First Century. The latter god, JANUS-PETER, had some interesting roles to play in the pagan religion at Rome. These roles answer the question: Who was the original Peter of Rome? Notice a brief history and some of the activities of this god.

Plutarch in his life of Numa, gives us the identity of JANUS. Originally, according to Plutarch, Janus was an ancient prince who reigned in the infancy of the world. He brought men from a rude and savage life to a mild and rational system. HE was the first to build cities and the first to establish government over men. After his death he was deified. There can be no mistaking who this JANUS was! This title was just another of the many names of Nimrod. This ancient prince who was violently killed, was later deified by the pagan religions. Because of his high authority, he was called a PATOR or PETER.

Here are some of the religious activities of which JANUS-PETER was in charge.
It was JANUS-PETER who was pre-eminent in interpreting the times -- especially prophecy. "The past and the future was always present in his mind" (Classical Manual, pages 388 and 389). He was pictured as being double-faced. Plutarch said this was a symbol of his endeavor to change men from barbarism to civilization -- that is, bring them to the civilization of NIMROD. One of JANUS' roles, after his deification as a god, was the continuation of his sacred task of "civilizing" men.
Janus-Peter Had "Keys": The PETER-god JANUS was to the ancient Romans the "KEEPER OF THE GATES OF HEAVEN AND EARTH." "HE IS REPRESENTED WITH A KEY IN ONE HAND . . . as emblematic of his presiding over GATES and highways." The pagan Romans were calling their JANUS a PETER hundreds of years before the birth of the Apostle Peter. It was this JANUS who was in charge of the "pearly gates"! The very word JANUS means "gates," that is, the one in charge of the GATES.
The Classical Manual continues: "Ovid speaks of him [Janus] in the first book of his Fasti; his face is double to denote his equal empire over the heavens and the earth -- [does not the Pope claim the same power today?] -- and that all things are open and shut to him AT HIS WILL -- [he was infallible and answered to no one for his actions, so the Pope] -- that he governs the universe [Catholicum], and alone possesses the power of making the world revolve on its axis; THAT HE PRESIDES OVER THE GATES OF HEAVEN."
Catholics Claim the "Keys":
The Catholic Church claims Peter gave to it the keys of the gates of heaven and that no one will enter into God's presence unless that church opens the gates. The very word "Cardinal" means "hinge." The Cardinals of the Roman Church are the HINGES upon which the GATE -- the Pope -- is able to turn.

The Classical Manual continues: "the successions of day and night are regulated by his influence; and that the east and the west is at one moment open to his view." It was JANUS-PETER who also controlled the calendar by his priests. The first month of the year was named after him to show his control over the years. So, today, we still have JANU-ary as the first month. The Catholic Church, like the priests of Janus, feels it has this same authority over the calendar today."

Petra was a counterpart of Hades in Greek mythology. Petra held the Key to the Pearly Gates of Celestial Aphrodite who deposited semen in rocks as gemstones. The "Petras" stones were very much like the phallic Asherah stone pillars. And that is why "Peter" is a nickname for penis, for Pete's sake."

And the climax of pagan influence is of course Jesus Christ himself as a Jewish version of the very well-known in the ancient world dying/resurrection gods and god-men, e.g. Mithra, Osiris, Dionysis, Attis, etc.

Thomas, do you know that your name "Thomas" is derived from Tammuz?
 
I think you've been reading too much Dan Brown, H! If you believe in the Bible, then you'll know that the Bride never was an institutional church, but rather a congregation of millions of individual souls who have found forgiveness through Christ. Force all the connections you can between Christian beliefs and other beliefs, but they will always fall short, no matter how convincing they seem. God has already revealed the future to us, and it does not involve a "Holy Family" like the one you've portrayed.

By the way, what is this "ungodly history of Christianity" that you've accused Paul of starting? By your own words, not every person who professes a belief in Jesus Christ is actually a believer, so how is it that Paul is a false prophet, while the political and religious leaders of the Crusades aren't looked at with the same skepticism?

Never read Dan Brown. How does one "believe" in the Bible? The Bible is the product of men and since all human beings are fallible creatures what men produce is not perfect so I save my "belief" in the Spirit which is true. The Bible for us Gnostic Christians is not an idol as it is to most Pauline Christians, an idol that it is taboo to question or doubt. The Bible is a guide book to the ways ancients received the Spirit and spiritual instruction from the Spirit, the Great Spirit of God.

The meaning of "Church" is "congregation" and whether the congregation is scattered or collected in our world it is filled with sectarian strife and has been since the beginnings of Christianity. A single Church has no reality in our world and never has and never will. Jesus Christ is a throwback to the pagan dying/resurrection gods and as a god only a goddess is fit to be the Bride of the Groom. God is resurrecting the Divine Feminine which has been lost in the patriarchal Abrahamic religions.

The "ungodly history of Christianity" can be learned by reading most any history of the Crusades, the European invasion of the Americas, Australia, and Africa, anywhere Christians have gone and genocided indigenous peoples and their religions. I hold Paul responsible for teaching Christians to obey whatever established government they find themselves in in contrast to the teachings of Jesus who rebelled to the point of death from following established leaders he felt had abandoned the will of God.
 
Never read Dan Brown. How does one "believe" in the Bible? The Bible is the product of men and since all human beings are fallible creatures what men produce is not perfect so I save my "belief" in the Spirit which is true. The Bible for us Gnostic Christians is not an idol as it is to most Pauline Christians, an idol that it is taboo to question or doubt. The Bible is a guide book to the ways ancients received the Spirit and spiritual instruction from the Spirit, the Great Spirit of God.

The meaning of "Church" is "congregation" and whether the congregation is scattered or collected in our world it is filled with sectarian strife and has been since the beginnings of Christianity. A single Church has no reality in our world and never has and never will. Jesus Christ is a throwback to the pagan dying/resurrection gods and as a god only a goddess is fit to be the Bride of the Groom. God is resurrecting the Divine Feminine which has been lost in the patriarchal Abrahamic religions.

The "ungodly history of Christianity" can be learned by reading most any history of the Crusades, the European invasion of the Americas, Australia, and Africa, anywhere Christians have gone and genocided indigenous peoples and their religions. I hold Paul responsible for teaching Christians to obey whatever established government they find themselves in in contrast to the teachings of Jesus who rebelled to the point of death from following established leaders he felt had abandoned the will of God.
Ironically, there is a flaw in the "gnostic" view, else Christianity would have continued to be based on "Gnosis". But at the first counsel, "gnosis" was dismissed, and Gnostics are much in the minority concerning "Christianity".
 
Thomas, where would one begin in citing all the pagan references in the Old and New Testament...
What is Scripture? It is the testimony of a community and that community's dialogue with the Divine. Did that community suddenly appear out of nowhere? No. Did an angel pop and and say, 'write this down'? No. That's not the way it works. So if you really want to understand Scripture, you really have to get into it.

Noah and the Flood? Revised Epic of Gilgamesh flood story by Hebrew authors.
OK. That's the superficial reading. But let's look deeper. The Epic of Gilgamesh is a version of the quest for immortality. What sacred text isn't? The point then is what the text can tell us. In Gilgamesh the gods suffer every human vice (the same critique was offered by Plato of the occupants of Mt. Olympus). In Buddhism there is no theogony as such. In the Hindu Scriptures there is little else besides. In Gigamesh the outlook is also tragically fatalistic — the quest for immortality is hopeless.

This was not the insight of Israel. In Her texts, the metaphysical insight is superlative and unsurpassed, luminous and optimistic. She rejected the insights of Sumeria, and told the tale according to Her own. To Her, God is not cruel, mean-spirited, capricious; to Her, God is one who cares, who wants nothing but that all life participate in the good, and above that, desires to be known.

A myth is a narrative in which truths inaccessible to reductive reasoning are made accessible in a Mystery. The God of Noah is a radically different order of being compared to the gods of Gilgamesh.

I find the dualistic metaphysics of Gilgamesh — the demigod/hero/king's relationship with Enkidu, a wild and wanton creature created by the enemy gods of the gods of Gilgamesh against him, a being 'raised by animals' and 'humanised' in the bed of the prostitute/priestess of Ishtar, Shamhat (over 'six days and seven nights') then becomes his companion — deeply flawed and unappetising.

How about old Yahweh himself and his pagan Canaanite roots starting off as Yamm until Canaanite God Most High, EL renamed him Yah or Yahwe.
Precisely my point. D'you think Abraham existed in a vacuum? Genesis 12:1 marks the transition from a myth narrative (of origins) to a testimony: "And the Lord said to Abram: Go forth out of thy country, and from thy kindred, and out of thy father's house, and come into the land which I shall shew thee" — it is in this land that the Children of Israel will come to know their God, and old names will take on new meanings.

That journey still continues.

Here's more pagan influence:
The word "Tabernacle" means "bivouac of green branches" which was also what the "House of Baal" was called.
Another idea that was to take on a distinctive meaning.

You call yourself a gnostic, and yet you seem to allow no insight, no process even of purely human reasoning (let alone divine revelation) by which man grows in knowledge, understanding and wisdom. You seem to insist that man must remain stuck in the past.

A true Hermeticist would delight in the way that, for example, Christ takes every symbol, strips it to its essence, revitalises it, and restores it to a sacral dignity previously unimaginable — why did He choose twelve as the number of disciples? Why did He choose three of the twelve? Why did He speak of a 'temple', of a building 'not made with human hands' but spoke of a church founded on a 'rock'? Why use 'bread' and 'water' and 'wine' and 'fish' — d'you think those things had no symbolic significance for those present? D'you think they saw His miracles as just a wonder-worker showing off?

Why did Christ die on a Cross, a symbol if ever there was one?

John's Gospel is called 'The Book of Signs and The Book of Glory' — it's subtitle should be 'don't you see?'

Can't you see it? The most ardent anti-gnostic atheist would employ exactly your argument ... are you not saying that the ancient Egyptian Temple Teachings is just another retread of worn out superstitions — is not your doctrine just another example of the king's new clothes?

For me, Christ is the Logos of Theos, the Arche of the Apeiron, He's there in every myth, ever story, ever speculation, cloaked in the fallibility of human reason and and a tragically-truncated intellect.

Man's spiritual growth is an assent, a series of unveilings ... yet you seem intent on pulling that very first veil down in front over the eyes and insisting that is the only veil there is, and that's all it says.

"Who is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn of every creature: For in him were all things created in heaven and on earth, visible and invisible, whether thrones, or dominations, or principalities, or powers: all things were created by him and in him. And he is before all, and by him all things consist." Colossians 1:15-17

You can't tell me you call yourself a gnostic, and do not delight and revel in these verses say?

The whole of man's spiritual quest is to make the invisible visible; the unknowable accessible, and in Christ, the invisible and the unknowable has revealed Himself in an exemplary and unsurpassable manner.

All Mysteries are in Him, flow from Him and are revealed by Him.

And in Him we access all Mysteries, directly, immediately, Immanently.

Thomas
 
Ironically, there is a flaw in the "gnostic" view, else Christianity would have continued to be based on "Gnosis". But at the first counsel, "gnosis" was dismissed, and Gnostics are much in the minority concerning "Christianity".

I would ask, does quantity equal quality for you? Does an organized body of believers have more spiritual truth behind them than individual spirituality? But I do agree there was a flaw in the old Gnostic view which was to devalue institutional organization to keep religious doctrines alive and continuing on. By forgoing organization the Gnostic Christian position did become marginalized and then branded heretical and almost annihilated until God came along in our times to resurrect the lost Gnostic texts.

I am a modern Gnostic more in the line of Carl Jung's theology and not at all in agreement with classical Gnostic beliefs. I do not believe in a Demiurge for example creating Creation as a flawed enterprise and trap for human souls. I love Creation as the work of the Creator, God Most High, and know why our ideas of heaven contain the best things in our material universe. Without Creation the Spirit cannot manifest Itself.
 
"What is Scripture? It is the testimony of a community and that community's dialogue with the Divine. Did that community suddenly appear out of nowhere? No. Did an angel pop and and say, 'write this down'? No. That's not the way it works. So if you really want to understand Scripture, you really have to get into it."

--I have found if you really want to know Scripture, you have to discover the roots of where it comes from. By staying only within the Scriptures themselves you cannot learn their meanings with any sort of certainty because Scriptures are there to sell a certain theology and cannot be relied on to contain historical truth. Historical context puts the Scriptures in perspective, e.g. discovering the differences between EL as He was known and worshiped by the Canaanites vs. EL as He was known and worshiped by Hebrews and then Jews then Christians. One finds out why Jesus' "Abba" instructed Jesus so differently than did Yahweh of the Old Testament.


"OK. That's the superficial reading. But let's look deeper. The Epic of Gilgamesh is a version of the quest for immortality. What sacred text isn't? The point then is what the text can tell us. In Gilgamesh the gods suffer every human vice (the same critique was offered by Plato of the occupants of Mt. Olympus). In Buddhism there is no theogony as such. In the Hindu Scriptures there is little else besides. In Gigamesh the outlook is also tragically fatalistic — the quest for immortality is hopeless.

This was not the insight of Israel. In Her texts, the metaphysical insight is superlative and unsurpassed, luminous and optimistic. She rejected the insights of Sumeria, and told the tale according to Her own. To Her, God is not cruel, mean-spirited, capricious; to Her, God is one who cares, who wants nothing but that all life participate in the good, and above that, desires to be known."

--You seem to be forgetting God condemned all life on earth to destruction save Noah and his kin and "all the animals two by two.." Isn't that cruel and capriciousness in the same order as found in the Gilgamesh tale? Abrahamic believers are so blind to their own Scriptures that contain many many places where God is cruel and doing things downright evil by human standards. The Gospels brought us good news and a new face of a God who was the Source of Goodness but Revelation re-established the old face back as a cruel and capricious god willing to destroy most of humanity and the world to make a point.

"A myth is a narrative in which truths inaccessible to reductive reasoning are made accessible in a Mystery. The God of Noah is a radically different order of being compared to the gods of Gilgamesh."

--Is He? See above..

"I find the dualistic metaphysics of Gilgamesh — the demigod/hero/king's relationship with Enkidu, a wild and wanton creature created by the enemy gods of the gods of Gilgamesh against him, a being 'raised by animals' and 'humanised' in the bed of the prostitute/priestess of Ishtar, Shamhat (over 'six days and seven nights') then becomes his companion — deeply flawed and unappetising."

--One person's religion is not held in the same regard as anothers.


"Precisely my point. D'you think Abraham existed in a vacuum? Genesis 12:1 marks the transition from a myth narrative (of origins) to a testimony: "And the Lord said to Abram: Go forth out of thy country, and from thy kindred, and out of thy father's house, and come into the land which I shall shew thee" — it is in this land that the Children of Israel will come to know their God, and old names will take on new meanings.

That journey still continues."

--No, Abraham's mythology is toast with the discovery of Abe and Sarah's connection with Brahma and Sarasvati. With Abraham demystified and dethroned now we can actually talk freely about Abraham's insanity. Only an insane person is willing to sacrifice his children upon instruction from an invisible voice. Such a person would be put in prison for a long time for severe child abuse in today's world yet because of religious blinders being on Abrahamic believers, Abraham's willingness to sacrifice Isaac to serve God is held up as a model of "righteousness" for all Abrahamic believers.


"You call yourself a gnostic, and yet you seem to allow no insight, no process even of purely human reasoning (let alone divine revelation) by which man grows in knowledge, understanding and wisdom. You seem to insist that man must remain stuck in the past."

--Revealing ancient roots of our belief systems is insisting that man remain stuck in the past? How do you figure that?

"A true Hermeticist would delight in the way that, for example, Christ takes every symbol, strips it to its essence, revitalises it, and restores it to a sacral dignity previously unimaginable — why did He choose twelve as the number of disciples? Why did He choose three of the twelve? Why did He speak of a 'temple', of a building 'not made with human hands' but spoke of a church founded on a 'rock'? Why use 'bread' and 'water' and 'wine' and 'fish' — d'you think those things had no symbolic significance for those present? D'you think they saw His miracles as just a wonder-worker showing off?

Why did Christ die on a Cross, a symbol if ever there was one?"

--I have no quarrel with symbolism. I just think it useful to know where these symbols come from so that spiritual truth is not lost to religious propaganda, e.g. Abrahamic believers wishing to believe their Scriptures were the first to arrive at major spiritual ideas. Take circumcision for example which was an Egyptian practice Hebrews picked up yet to believe the Bible one would think the practice arose with Abraham.

"John's Gospel is called 'The Book of Signs and The Book of Glory' — it's subtitle should be 'don't you see?'

Can't you see it? The most ardent anti-gnostic atheist would employ exactly your argument ... are you not saying that the ancient Egyptian Temple Teachings is just another retread of worn out superstitions — is not your doctrine just another example of the king's new clothes?"

--Until you can answer atheist critics when they come pointing to pagan influences in Abrahamic religious beliefs they have the intellectual advantage. Through Gnosis God gives us the answers to their criticisms. Through Gnosis the evolution of knowledge of God continues to grow without fear of breaking religious taboos meant to keep believers in line and unquestioning of Abrahamic religious authority.

"For me, Christ is the Logos of Theos, the Arche of the Apeiron, He's there in every myth, ever story, ever speculation, cloaked in the fallibility of human reason and and a tragically-truncated intellect.

Man's spiritual growth is an assent, a series of unveilings ... yet you seem intent on pulling that very first veil down in front over the eyes and insisting that is the only veil there is, and that's all it says.

"Who is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn of every creature: For in him were all things created in heaven and on earth, visible and invisible, whether thrones, or dominations, or principalities, or powers: all things were created by him and in him. And he is before all, and by him all things consist." Colossians 1:15-17

You can't tell me you call yourself a gnostic, and do not delight and revel in these verses say?"

The whole of man's spiritual quest is to make the invisible visible; the unknowable accessible, and in Christ, the invisible and the unknowable has revealed Himself in an exemplary and unsurpassable manner.

All Mysteries are in Him, flow from Him and are revealed by Him.

And in Him we access all Mysteries, directly, immediately, Immanently."

--Where is She in Jesus Christ? Where is the Divine Feminine in using male deities only to represent the Godhead? When you glorify men and male deities only, women suffer the consequences. I have no beef with Jesus Christ but we now must expect God to balance the human perception of the Godhead so that Father and Mother unite as One.
 
I would ask, does quantity equal quality for you? Does an organized body of believers have more spiritual truth behind them than individual spirituality? But I do agree there was a flaw in the old Gnostic view which was to devalue institutional organization to keep religious doctrines alive and continuing on. By forgoing organization the Gnostic Christian position did become marginalized and then branded heretical and almost annihilated until God came along in our times to resurrect the lost Gnostic texts.

I am a modern Gnostic more in the line of Carl Jung's theology and not at all in agreement with classical Gnostic beliefs. I do not believe in a Demiurge for example creating Creation as a flawed enterprise and trap for human souls. I love Creation as the work of the Creator, God Most High, and know why our ideas of heaven contain the best things in our material universe. Without Creation the Spirit cannot manifest Itself.

Too many questions from too many areas, with no intention of listening to the answers, to give you a basic statment here, which is the gnostic bane. There is also the thought that you know more than me, which of course you don't (lol). :p

And the concept of "can't be bothered" with the "little people", which of course I am up to my neck in, and quite content about. See they and me are the same. ;)

Carl Jung, has some work to do, 'cause for a "gnostic", he's still missing the point.

I tried to be God once, but the responsibility was too damn much, so I gave it back to the rightful owner. :eek:
 
There is also the thought that you know more than me, which of course you don't (lol). :p



I tried to be God once, but the responsibility was too damn much, so I gave it back to the rightful owner. :eek:

You did? You quite sure about that?
 
Back
Top