The OT = UGH

[nazz]

There are many different sects of Gnostic Christians that believe drastically different things. Some believe Jesus wasn't a real person, some dont. With regard to YHVV, many modern gnostic sects believe to be the demiurge, which is the God of Earth, but not the supreme God of the universe.

The viewpoints of demiurge vary from benevolent diety doing his best to run run a life bearing planet (a difficult task in it's own right in my opinion), to a malevolent diety bent on corrupting the world, and the rest of the galaxy given the time and oppurtunity.

The views of YHVH vs. demiurge vs. supreme diety within gnosticism vary greatly.

That is somewhat misleading. I'm not aware of any Gnostic sects that identified YHVH with the demiurge. They used their own appellations for that being: Yaldabaoth, Saklas, and Samael.

The problem with this is that most "Christians" don't even realize that the God they worship would most likely be YHVH, because this would of most likely been the diety revered by Jesus.

To say that the deity of Jesus was YHVH is also somewhat misleading if what is meant by that is the deity of the Jews. It is quite clear that to some extent Jesus rejected the Jewish conception of God. In John 8 for example Jesus says the Jews worship the devil and not God whom they do not know. In Matthew and Luke Jesus says that he has come to reveal the true God.

Who was this person? You can send me a PM if you don't want to derail this amazing thread.

The poster appears to be referencing Marcion.

Again, I haven't seen this particular viewpoint within gnosticism. I would appreciate if you would cite a website so I can find more information on this subject or just send me a PM.

It's rather long but here ya go...

The all-important concept of self-knowledge has basically been omitted from the four Gospels

 

[Koldo]

Perhaps all he could do.

Not so powerful then. What a shame.

 

[nazz]

Not so powerful then. What a shame.

Actually I'm rather thankful there are no deities that control me like a puppet.

 

[Koldo]

Actually I'm rather thankful there are no deities that control me like a puppet.

Ah, so you don't believe in the god of the bible.

 

[nazz]

Ah, so you don't believe in the god of the bible.

Actually I believe in both of them. But I follow only one

 

[Thana]

Jews are not waiting for Jesus. We are waiting for the messiah. We don't believe Jesus was the messiah, much less God. We think he was just another Jewish guy the Romans killed, with delusions of or aspirations to messiahdom-- no different than hundreds of other guys running around ancient Israel at that time.

Most likely, Jews would have been much happier in a world without Jesus, since no Christianity would've meant no oppression by governments that labeled us Christ-killers and devil-worshippers, no pogroms, no Crusades, no Inquisition, no being driven out of the countries we lived in because the church stirred up the local rulers against us-- perhaps no Holocaust, even.

Why would we ever wait for Jesus, when Christianity has brought us nothing but misery and cruelty?

As you say.
However, If you want to put it that way, One could also say the world would be better without Jews, As none of what you mentioned would have happened either way.

But enough about genocide, I was referring to The Messiah when I said Jesus. But of course, My Messiah is not your Messiah.

 

[CMike]

Originally Posted by Levite
We think he was just another Jewish guy the Romans killed, with delusions of or aspirations to messiahdom-- no different than hundreds of other guys running around ancient Israel at that time.

This, however, is outrageous and totally uncalled for. On what basis do you embrace the diaspora inspired NT depiction of some Jerusalem sect leader as accurate and authentic?

.

Levite was spot on.

 

[dantech]

Originally Posted by Levite
We think he was just another Jewish guy the Romans killed, with delusions of or aspirations to messiahdom-- no different than hundreds of other guys running around ancient Israel at that time.



Levite was spot on.

What Jay meant was that if you believe what Levite said, then you believe that the NT was accurate and authentic at describing Jesus, and therefore other events described in the NT.
I never really thought about it, until I saw Jay's post. The truth is that if we don't believe he was the Messiah, as the NT describes, then we shouldn't believe its description of the man who may or may not have even existed.

 

[idav]

I have to wonder how many christians have read the whole Old Testament and have managed to keep an unchanged opinon of their god. I have to wonder how many have turned away from it after reading the OT.

It seems to me that the OT and the NT are so different that it seems their god has multiple personalities or something.

The amount of raping that occurred in the OT was horrifying.

The explanation coming from Gnostics is that the Demiurge is a stickler and wants everything to be perfect, which we are not because we aren't the Demiurge. From the Jewish standpoint Satan is not evil and I've seen Gnostics that take this approach. What happened in the garden was enlightenment which the Demiurge did not want us to have. Similarly in the NT enlightenment is attainable but not because of the Demiurge. The NT uses forgiveness to reconcile the fact that we aren't perfect so that there is still a path to God despite our imperfections.

 

[CMike]

Originally Posted by CMike
Originally Posted by Levite
We think he was just another Jewish guy the Romans killed, with delusions of or aspirations to messiahdom-- no different than hundreds of other guys running around ancient Israel at that time.

Levite was spot on.

What Jay meant was that if you believe what Levite said, then you believe that the NT was accurate and authentic at describing Jesus, and therefore other events described in the NT.
I never really thought about it, until I saw Jay's post. The truth is that if we don't believe he was the Messiah, as the NT describes, then we shouldn't believe its description of the man who may or may not have even existed.

I see nothing wrong with what he said.

I can accept that he was a jewish guy that the romans killed with delusions of being the messiah.

Somehow I don't think the christian bible portrayed him as having delusions of being the messiah.

Neither Levite nor myself said he was the messiah. He wasn't.

 

[dantech]

Originally Posted by CMike
Originally Posted by Levite
We think he was just another Jewish guy the Romans killed, with delusions of or aspirations to messiahdom-- no different than hundreds of other guys running around ancient Israel at that time.

Levite was spot on.



I see nothing wrong with what he said.

I can accept that he was a jewish guy that the romans killed with delusions of being the messiah.

Somehow I don't think the christian bible portrayed him as having delusions of being the messiah.

Neither Levite nor myself said he was the messiah. He wasn't.

You, Levite and I all see the NT as untrue, inaccurate, and not authentic. Since it is all those things, then how do you know there was ever even a guy called Jesus? And how do you know that he tried and prove to the world that he was the Messiah?

 

[Pegg]

This is an issue that really frustrates me, Because I mean, What do you people expect a book written for people thousands of years ago to be like?

The Old testament was written for people who lived in a time where Might was Right, And an eye for an eye. Of course the OT was going to reflect that culture, Or else how would God have reached those people? They were savages and barbarians, Yet you expect them to understand modern culture and civility?

except that the bible forbids people to act in such ways.

Why do you think the OT laws prescribe the death penalty... it was for people who failed to uphold the righteous laws of God and who acted in barbaric ways.

The OT is against violence, crime and vices.

 

[ChristineES]

The whole theme of the Tanakh seems to focus on Love of G-D, obedience to G-D, Loving others, being merciful. You really have to read between the lines. People make the mistake of focusing at wars and such and ignoring what it is truly saying.

I know some disagree with me, but everything that Jesus taught was in the Tanakh.

 

[Shermana]

The Old testament was written for people who lived in a time where Might was Right

When did Might stop making right all of the sudden?

 

[nazz]

except that the bible forbids people to act in such ways.

Why do you think the OT laws prescribe the death penalty... it was for people who failed to uphold the righteous laws of God and who acted in barbaric ways.

You mean like picking up sticks on the Sabbath?

 

[Levite]

You, Levite and I all see the NT as untrue, inaccurate, and not authentic. Since it is all those things, then how do you know there was ever even a guy called Jesus? And how do you know that he tried and prove to the world that he was the Messiah?

I actually do think it's quite likely there was a historical Jesus. Aside from the history in Josephus, you have the stories in the Gemara about Yeshu haNotzri attending the yeshiva of Rabbi Yehoshua.

And I am perfectly willing to believe he claimed to be the moshiach: hundreds, if not thousands of guys in those days claimed to be the moshiach. Why is it improbable that Jesus was one of them, especially given that his followers continued to claim the title of moshiach for him, long after they changed the meaning and made it something else altogether? He might have even been a wonder-worker of some sort: there were a lot of magicians and sorcerers in those days who claimed their powers were part of religious mantles.

But I doubt that Jesus ever claimed to be God, or implied he was divine. No Jew in his right mind would do so, and it would surely have lost him many followers-- as it did for Shabtai Tzvi when he did so. It's not impossible. But I think it's unlikely.

Frankly, it seems far more likely to me that the "gospels" represent stories with a kernel of historical fact at the center that have been surrounded and obscured by endless embellishment, alteration, reshaping, and embroidering with non-Jewish ideas, philosophies, and theologies, than for the entirety of the stories of Jesus to be 100% fabrication.

 

[Shermana]

You mean like picking up sticks on the Sabbath?

The "Gathering" of sticks likely referred to hard labor of chopping them with an axe. Chopping firewood is a serious workout. Many cultures have had ideas of things that are taboo to do on a Holy Day. Think about it in perspective of Respecting a Day of Sanctity.

 

[Shermana]

long after they changed the meaning and made it something else altogether?

We have no idea if they "Changed the meaning" from what it originally meant at the time, anymore so than if we know Rabbi Akiva changed the meaning to place the mantel temporarily on Bar Kokhba.

Apparently enough people were willing to work with this "Changed meaning" that it wasn't deemed too fringe.

 

[nazz]

The "Gathering" of sticks likely referred to hard labor of chopping trees with an axe. Chopping firewood is a serious workout.

Even if that were the case that is hardly a 'barbaric' activity.

 

[Shermana]

Even if that were the case that is hardly a 'barbaric' activity.

Certain things were more about respecting Sanctity. Not everything was about barbarity, though most were. As I said in my edit, many cultures had ideas of taboos on holy days and during rituals, that if you broke this aura of holiness on that day, you would deserve death. You'd have to really imagine the situation in context to understand it as an outsider.