/h/lit House Racist Founder
Red_Shill drip/dropped I know you ain't a pimp, but pimp remember what I taught ya  1yr ago (image post) 112 thread views #171990

What's your favorite text in the Nag Hammadi Library?

Unable to load image

https://i.rdrama.net/images/16846159662756286.webp

I personally enjoy the Apocryphon of John, because my name is also John.

https://i.rdrama.net/images/16846159698930836.webp

I also enjoy the Gospel of Truth. I admit I've not read through the whole thing yet. And you?

7
New Old Top Bottom Controversial Random
Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

Gospel of Thomas is pretty gud

Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

It would be Canon had it not mentioned gnosis. The early church is fricked, they don't care about Christ whatsoever

Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

Yea its funny people believe that a 4th century committee can pick and choose what is or isnt the word of God. But certain concepts needed to be eliminated to further empower the church and make people more fearful and easy to control

Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

Gnostic Christian sects were certainly far too independent in their thought to be a part of what the early church was. It also does lead to nihilistic viewpoints, so it's somewhat understandable, but the way Gnostics had their books burned and were censored/killed/casted out as heretics is fascinating from a historical viewpoint. They were just as much Christians as the early church members were in their own minds, and the Romans'. I am very much of the belief that Jesus himself preached something closer to what you can find in non-canonical Gnostic texts, although maybe not exactly that.

Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

Probably just minus all the weird esoteric and mythological stuff. It also seems that the bulk of the scribes' additions and forgeries are meant to neutralize any possible "gnostic" understandings of said material.

Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

Personal salvation would be my best guess at what he thought. Impossible to say for sure of course. The gnostic texts are very interesting for their own reasons. It's a very deep topic that I have not read quite enough of to argue too much about tbh. It's all very fascinating though.

Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

I can tell you that the gospels and Paul were expanded quite a bit, largely to neutralize any "wrong" glistenings from the originals. Entire books are forgeries by orthodox propagandists. So for example, when the gospels and Paul advise against marrying, the pastoral letters insist that everyone marry and have lots of kids.

There was a guy named Marcion who caught them doing it, and because of that he was made the scapegoat for every single problem the church had. Despite his clear conviction and generosity to them. The excuse was his very understandable misunderstanding of the Old Testament

This is all ignored by modern researchers of course, with the sole exception of recognizing a few books as "pseudographical".

Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

Do you have any recommendations for further reading on that? Sounds very interesting. It's very obvious to me that no modern biblical scholar or anything of the sort seem to care about getting to the bottom of the time as it was. They just want to skip over it and let sleeping dogs lie (for lack of a better way to put it).

Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

Translators also falsely insert terms like heaven and heck, which don't exist in the original languages.

Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

Unfortunately it's considered fringe, so there's not many good places to find it other than Google (which is increasingly useless). Everyone just ignores the fact that every book of the Bible is full of edits and interpolations, some of which are obvious. An easy way to verify this is Marcion. If you look closely, the style of the parts he's missing doesn't match what he does have.

And some of it is even blatant mistranslation. Examples include modifying Jeremiah 7:22 to conceal the obvious conflict with the idea of Bible inerrancy, 1 Corinthians 11:16 to make it say women should wear head coverings rather than that they need not wear them, and of course changing Leviticus 18:22, 20:13, and 1 Corinthians 6:9 to blast gays. Not to mention all the transliterations. Words like "apostle" aren't even actual words in English, but translators refuse to translate them so they can make them mean anything they want.

Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

:#marseyitsoverwerebackyall:

Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

Link copied to clipboard
Action successful!
Error, please refresh the page and try again.