@AgApE010 You can speak in present tence because I am a Gnostic Christian, thank you. Mainstream (Roman) Christianity is an ad hoc religion that attempted to unite the Jewish God of war and other faiths with Christianity. Later, they almost totally wiped out the Gnostic Christians, starting with the Cathars with thier God of hatred and murder. We were/are pacifists because we worship a God of Love. The Kingdom is found with Love because Yeshua and Sophia (Holy Spirit) are Love.
There is no "Jewish God of war." The God of the Old Testament is the same as the one in the New. In both Testaments God displays power, wrath, and love. Who can read the Psalms and say "The God in the OT is not love"? Who can read Revelation or Matthew 24 and say "The God in the NT does not declare war and judgment"?
@AgApE010 I used to be a minister in the Assemblies of God, I know my bible and you need to read it. God commanded Joshua to kill everything: Even children and animals. I do not recognise Revelations as it was written after John died and is therefore, a forgery. Where in Mathew 24 does it say God does these things? If God hates and destroys, what is the need for a Devil? If you follow a God of Love, you are my brother/sister, for Yeshua is within us. The world has enough hatred.
I don't care if you were a "minister." That title is meaningless, especially in A of G.
Matthew 24, the Olivet Discourse, speaks of God's judgment and destruction of Israel.
If you don't accept Revelation, the Pauline epistles also speak of judgment an destruction of unbelievers. You can't escape the fact that God is just and holy.
@AgApE010 I will agree that ministers are meaningless, in any denomination or religion. Yeshua said we should all be ministers. He never told us to go to a church institution, he told us to BE the church. The Kingdom isn't in ministers/priests, not in a building. The Kingdom is within as Yeshua stated in the gospels of Luke and Thomas.
Mathew 24 came to pass during the destruction of Jeruselem in 70AD. By the way, I am a believer in Yeshua. Who are you to judge?
@AgApE010 Yeshua was a real person. The Logos, that existed before the Earth itself (See Gospel of John 1:1), entered Yeshua (I believe at baptism, when the dove decended). The Logos was resurected and the Logos is within those that know (Not just believe in) him. A supernatural body is not like ours. Mary Magnaline (possibly his closest desciple) was the first to see Yeshua after the crucifiction and she didn't even recognise him for a while. Physically, Yeshua was just a man.
There's nothing in the Scriptures about "the Christ" descending into "Jesus" at the baptism. In the Gospel accounts, He is always called the Christ, since birth. Indeed, the angelic announcement is "Unto you is born this day in the city of David, a Savior, who is Christ the Lord."
@AgApE010 Sure there is: When the Holy Spirit decended and said "This is my beloved son". Matthew and Luke were written after, and inspired by Mark. However, there is no nativity story in Mark. Mark starts with the baptism. Scholars have therefore concluded the nativity in Matthew and Luke is a forgery. I read scriptures differently than you. However, this is not a condition of salvation, is it? Yeshua never said I had to buy into church add-ons and he refused to do so himself.
The birth narrative isn't a forgery. Since both Luke and Matthew, who wrote independently, included a birth narrative, it is recognized as a very early tradition. Basically what it comes to is you having to select which part of the scriptures to accept and which to reject. That's fine. But such a religion clearly disqualifies it from being the religion preached by the apostles and Christ.
@AgApE010 The birth and death of Yeshua isn't improtant, any fool can be born and die. What important is what he said. It is the Church institution that selected and rejected different scriptures at the 1st Council of Nicaea in 325AD. So by your own conclusion, mainstream christianity "disqualifies it from being the religion preached by the apostles and Christ." The Gospel of Thomas possibly predates the four gospels in the cannon and the church rejected the words of Yeshua.
@AgApE010 You can look up the Council on a websearch. It is a historical fact. While you are at it, do a websearch on "Early Christian Writings". The Gospel of Thomas was written between 50-140CE. The Gospel of John (Often accepted as Gnostic) was written 90-120CE, Luke: 80-130CE, Matthew: 80-100CE and Mark: 70-160CE. Exact dates are not known. So how do you know for fact Thomas was written last when it very well may have been first? Please educate the scholars on this.
I know about the Council of Nicea. It had nothing to do with the Canon. I believe the Council you're thinking of is one of the Carthage councils.
You have no idea what you're talking about. No one gives such ridiculous dates for the Gospels. Mark between 70 and 160 CE? Some of these books were being quoted by Church Fathers already around that time! Mark is not dated later than 70 CE.
@AgApE010 OK, you are correct, it was the Carthage, my bad. However, I do wish you would go to "earlychristianwritings" before you argue that "No one gives such ridiculous dates for the Gospels." This site was given to me by Dr. Jay Forrest, who is a biblical scholar and reads Aramaic and ancient Greek. I did not digress, I defended my faith. As a Gnostic Christian, I have learned to do that alot. I often find more Love from non-Christians and that is sad.
@AgApE010 It is written in John how "The Word" became flesh. The Logos existed before the creation of the Earth and long before the birth of Yeshua. Look up the word "Christ". It does not mean "Son of God". So this proves nothing as to the Logos.
Neither Mark nor John even mention the nativity. This was later written in with the same story written on the births of other Gods. But like I said, I care more about what he said because being born is not unique.
@AgApE010 I will agree with one thing you said: "There is no "Jewish God of war."
The OT God was a man-made God. It's the same thing as happens today when people say: "God told me to kill" Why would God need people to do his dirty work? It makes God sound pretty weak when one thinks about it.
Oh, but I know you...You're a gnostic pot-smoking parasite.
Ha ha.
Don't you have a protest to attend on Wall Street, looser?
At least you'd be more productive there than you are spewing your gnostic heresy.
Tell the heady Marilyn that his black nail polish is very unbecoming. It clashes with his long flowing beautiful black hair. I recommend red nail polish.
@skoobalon You wouldn't refer to him as a gnostic "heretic" unless you were a Christian. You also know nothing about what being a Gnostic entails. Eric Voegelin was wrong on all fronts about the Gnostics, yet you spout his false premise as truth. Please do not insult his, or any one else's, intelligence.
"sheeps in wolves clothing" omg old man you f#$%ked up again. You can't even properly quote your sources. You confused the words identifying the subject. Your order is backwards!
Of course Irenaeus could not tell Valentinians apart from mainstream Christians. Irenaeus belonged to an emerging faction in the church of Rome. The Valentinians were always in the church before that time.
You were wrong yet again. Valentinus came to Rome during the episcopate (aka bishopric) of Pope Hyginus which was AD136 if not later. (That's a far cry from AD130). You were over 1,800 days off in your calculation. Valentinus was of rank in the church and was contending with Justin, a man at the time, of little note in the church. Justin is quite provably the first Catholic as well.
The Valentinians did not have to integrate themselves into the "proto-orthodox" church. They were a faction in the church since the beginning of the church. They were excommunicated.
If you cannot pronounce the words, I doubt that you are a good English student. I therefore deduce from the latter that you are probably not a very qualified writer either. You must be self published and very bored.
There was no Sethians, they are called Ophites. You are using modern scholarly designations and imposing them on ancient historians' works. Epiphanius is a late source and is known to lie as well.
Epiphanius is a late source who is admitted to have "multiplied heresies". Also for a group to be heretical they had to still hold to a belief in Jesus or Christ, therefore Manichaeans are a different religion who were dualist. Gnostics were not all dualist. Valentinus was not a dualist.
the song gives me the creeps.I once had a lucid day dream and saw a dome on a green hill and chanting(like this)I knew a trial was taking place and it wasnt good ..
I think Valentinius became aware the system he was trying to help was moving in the wrong direction with the church purporting him for herressy when he was trying to evolve religeon into science . The gears that had been set into motion required to belittle the spirits of mankind into that of a servile beast only to be set apon those of other contradictory religeons manouvered by the othodoxy in power. Believing as he did that people needed to be more independent in nature .
One final point I must make is that I would not have known this if it ws not for my Dad who told me about a time he was looking for leaflets for sightseeing at Lelant Praed and he couldn't find it. As he was about to go two sections fell forward and revealed what he was looking for. I didn't pay attention the first time but the question came up and I asked what he was lookig for which on some strange whim led me to check my family history reaching Valentinius
learning the 7 chakras also helped I think understanding psychological effects from colour. I was reading a book called 'Be your own Psychic' and plus birds have a internal compas using the magnetic field of the planet for directions and people have their own electromagnetic field which is beind discifered by science to read or control peoples minds
society is divided into three groups those know get educated about their surroundings and discifer the truth of comfort, those who go with the flow and judge by society their comfort. The third group can see the other two groups fight and learn from each like in the human brain.
Finally! I am a modern Western Valentinian Gnostic Christian and this is very close to my beliefs. I get so tired of people misunderstanding my beliefs. Everyone says "You cannot be a Gnostic and a Christian!" The ignorance is overwhelming from 2000 years of brainwashing. Not only are we christians, we were the origional christians descended from the apostle Paul. We were beaten, tortured and murdered to genocide by the church... and we are back! Thank you and bless you.
Well presented piece - I almost thought you would say, at the close, "Jesus of Nazareth" but clearly your gnosis extends to the fact that Nazareth did not exist at the time of his birth and is a mistranslation of Nazarene - which is something else entirely.
Awesome! I hope you will get into details of their beliefs regarding salvation, redeption, sex and also about their rituals such as the Eucharist, baptism, bridal chamber and significance of the kiss, the seperation of Eve from within Adam (relating to the becoming of death),... and lots of other goodies. : ^ ) I can't wait for the next videos.
@ThincKritically The Gnostic Christian faith is back. The truth cannot be silenced forever.
astrofrk 3 months ago
@astrofrk
Gnosticism isn't truth. It was an ad hoc religion that attempted to unite Neoplatonism with Christianity and just spiraled off from there.
AgApE010 2 months ago
@AgApE010 You can speak in present tence because I am a Gnostic Christian, thank you. Mainstream (Roman) Christianity is an ad hoc religion that attempted to unite the Jewish God of war and other faiths with Christianity. Later, they almost totally wiped out the Gnostic Christians, starting with the Cathars with thier God of hatred and murder. We were/are pacifists because we worship a God of Love. The Kingdom is found with Love because Yeshua and Sophia (Holy Spirit) are Love.
astrofrk 2 months ago
@astrofrk
There is no "Jewish God of war." The God of the Old Testament is the same as the one in the New. In both Testaments God displays power, wrath, and love. Who can read the Psalms and say "The God in the OT is not love"? Who can read Revelation or Matthew 24 and say "The God in the NT does not declare war and judgment"?
AgApE010 2 months ago
@AgApE010 I used to be a minister in the Assemblies of God, I know my bible and you need to read it. God commanded Joshua to kill everything: Even children and animals. I do not recognise Revelations as it was written after John died and is therefore, a forgery. Where in Mathew 24 does it say God does these things? If God hates and destroys, what is the need for a Devil? If you follow a God of Love, you are my brother/sister, for Yeshua is within us. The world has enough hatred.
astrofrk 2 months ago
@astrofrk
I don't care if you were a "minister." That title is meaningless, especially in A of G.
Matthew 24, the Olivet Discourse, speaks of God's judgment and destruction of Israel.
If you don't accept Revelation, the Pauline epistles also speak of judgment an destruction of unbelievers. You can't escape the fact that God is just and holy.
AgApE010 2 months ago
@AgApE010 I will agree that ministers are meaningless, in any denomination or religion. Yeshua said we should all be ministers. He never told us to go to a church institution, he told us to BE the church. The Kingdom isn't in ministers/priests, not in a building. The Kingdom is within as Yeshua stated in the gospels of Luke and Thomas.
Mathew 24 came to pass during the destruction of Jeruselem in 70AD. By the way, I am a believer in Yeshua. Who are you to judge?
astrofrk 2 months ago
@astrofrk
I won't judge personally. But let us examine: do you believe Christ had and continues to have a physical body of flesh?
AgApE010 2 months ago
@AgApE010 Yeshua was a real person. The Logos, that existed before the Earth itself (See Gospel of John 1:1), entered Yeshua (I believe at baptism, when the dove decended). The Logos was resurected and the Logos is within those that know (Not just believe in) him. A supernatural body is not like ours. Mary Magnaline (possibly his closest desciple) was the first to see Yeshua after the crucifiction and she didn't even recognise him for a while. Physically, Yeshua was just a man.
astrofrk 2 months ago
@astrofrk
There's nothing in the Scriptures about "the Christ" descending into "Jesus" at the baptism. In the Gospel accounts, He is always called the Christ, since birth. Indeed, the angelic announcement is "Unto you is born this day in the city of David, a Savior, who is Christ the Lord."
AgApE010 2 months ago
@AgApE010 Sure there is: When the Holy Spirit decended and said "This is my beloved son". Matthew and Luke were written after, and inspired by Mark. However, there is no nativity story in Mark. Mark starts with the baptism. Scholars have therefore concluded the nativity in Matthew and Luke is a forgery. I read scriptures differently than you. However, this is not a condition of salvation, is it? Yeshua never said I had to buy into church add-ons and he refused to do so himself.
astrofrk 2 months ago
@astrofrk
The birth narrative isn't a forgery. Since both Luke and Matthew, who wrote independently, included a birth narrative, it is recognized as a very early tradition. Basically what it comes to is you having to select which part of the scriptures to accept and which to reject. That's fine. But such a religion clearly disqualifies it from being the religion preached by the apostles and Christ.
AgApE010 2 months ago
@AgApE010 The birth and death of Yeshua isn't improtant, any fool can be born and die. What important is what he said. It is the Church institution that selected and rejected different scriptures at the 1st Council of Nicaea in 325AD. So by your own conclusion, mainstream christianity "disqualifies it from being the religion preached by the apostles and Christ." The Gospel of Thomas possibly predates the four gospels in the cannon and the church rejected the words of Yeshua.
astrofrk 2 months ago
@astrofrk
The Council of Nicea had nothing to do with the Canon of Scripture. Absolutely nothing. I don't know where that myth started.
Scholars date the Gospel of Thomas around the middle of the second century CE.
AgApE010 2 months ago
@AgApE010 You can look up the Council on a websearch. It is a historical fact. While you are at it, do a websearch on "Early Christian Writings". The Gospel of Thomas was written between 50-140CE. The Gospel of John (Often accepted as Gnostic) was written 90-120CE, Luke: 80-130CE, Matthew: 80-100CE and Mark: 70-160CE. Exact dates are not known. So how do you know for fact Thomas was written last when it very well may have been first? Please educate the scholars on this.
astrofrk 2 months ago
@astrofrk
I know about the Council of Nicea. It had nothing to do with the Canon. I believe the Council you're thinking of is one of the Carthage councils.
You have no idea what you're talking about. No one gives such ridiculous dates for the Gospels. Mark between 70 and 160 CE? Some of these books were being quoted by Church Fathers already around that time! Mark is not dated later than 70 CE.
AgApE010 2 months ago
@AgApE010 OK, you are correct, it was the Carthage, my bad. However, I do wish you would go to "earlychristianwritings" before you argue that "No one gives such ridiculous dates for the Gospels." This site was given to me by Dr. Jay Forrest, who is a biblical scholar and reads Aramaic and ancient Greek. I did not digress, I defended my faith. As a Gnostic Christian, I have learned to do that alot. I often find more Love from non-Christians and that is sad.
astrofrk 2 months ago
@astrofrk
In any case, we digress from the original discussion and, with all due respect, I don't care to get into a YT comments debate.
AgApE010 2 months ago
@AgApE010 It is written in John how "The Word" became flesh. The Logos existed before the creation of the Earth and long before the birth of Yeshua. Look up the word "Christ". It does not mean "Son of God". So this proves nothing as to the Logos.
Neither Mark nor John even mention the nativity. This was later written in with the same story written on the births of other Gods. But like I said, I care more about what he said because being born is not unique.
astrofrk 2 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@AgApE010 I will agree with one thing you said: "There is no "Jewish God of war."
The OT God was a man-made God. It's the same thing as happens today when people say: "God told me to kill" Why would God need people to do his dirty work? It makes God sound pretty weak when one thinks about it.
astrofrk 2 months ago
@nunfonseca
Got trolls?
QuestioProVerum 4 months ago
@QuestioProVerum I bet you pronounce that as 'trowls'.
nunfonseca 4 months ago
@nunfonseca
Pronounce it however you want, a troll is still a troll regardless of how you say it.
QuestioProVerum 4 months ago
he gnostics had the same canon?
JohnTheHutDweller 4 months ago
@JohnTheHutDweller
smartypants
skoobalon 4 months ago
@skoobalon yes, smarter than mrmark262 and this is your troll channel, that you use to harrass people, how christian of you
JohnTheHutDweller 4 months ago
@JohnTheHutDweller
Who said I was Mark?
Who said I was a "christian", as you put it?
How gnostic of you to call me names.
Oh, but I know you...You're a gnostic pot-smoking parasite.
Ha ha.
Don't you have a protest to attend on Wall Street, looser?
At least you'd be more productive there than you are spewing your gnostic heresy.
Tell the heady Marilyn that his black nail polish is very unbecoming. It clashes with his long flowing beautiful black hair. I recommend red nail polish.
skoobalon 4 months ago
@skoobalon You wouldn't refer to him as a gnostic "heretic" unless you were a Christian. You also know nothing about what being a Gnostic entails. Eric Voegelin was wrong on all fronts about the Gnostics, yet you spout his false premise as truth. Please do not insult his, or any one else's, intelligence.
SonofSethoitae 4 months ago
@SonofSethoitae
Oh.
Well, la dee da.
If you want me to be a christian named Mark, that's fine with me.
Why don't you get back to your heady (yet heretical) discussions with your she-male and pot-smoker friends.
You big dummy.
skoobalon 4 months ago
@skoobalon Oh, you're trolling. Okay. Well played sir, well played.
SonofSethoitae 4 months ago
@SonofSethoitae
When it comes to loser channels like this, what other option do i have?
You big dope.
Tell mother to give you back to your ice cream and cookies, you big fat Canadian dummy.
Sincerely,
Mark, the trolling christian.
skoobalon 4 months ago
@skoobalon I may be Canadian, but I'm certainly not fat. The dopyness however I would be hard pressed to argue with.
SonofSethoitae 4 months ago
@JohnTheHutDweller
Big baby
skoobalon 4 months ago
@pandirasbox
Semantics...
QuestioProVerum 4 months ago
@QuestioProVerum Education ;)
pandirasbox 4 months ago
@pandirasbox
A Bachelors in Ancient History.
QuestioProVerum 4 months ago
"sheeps in wolves clothing" omg old man you f#$%ked up again. You can't even properly quote your sources. You confused the words identifying the subject. Your order is backwards!
pandirasbox 4 months ago
Simon MAGNUS? ROFLMAO. You are a laugh riot!
pandirasbox 4 months ago
Of course Irenaeus could not tell Valentinians apart from mainstream Christians. Irenaeus belonged to an emerging faction in the church of Rome. The Valentinians were always in the church before that time.
pandirasbox 4 months ago
You were wrong yet again. Valentinus came to Rome during the episcopate (aka bishopric) of Pope Hyginus which was AD136 if not later. (That's a far cry from AD130). You were over 1,800 days off in your calculation. Valentinus was of rank in the church and was contending with Justin, a man at the time, of little note in the church. Justin is quite provably the first Catholic as well.
pandirasbox 4 months ago
@pandirasbox
Then you disagree with Marvin Meyer's dating which I used for the video.
QuestioProVerum 4 months ago
did I not say roughly 130???
QuestioProVerum 4 months ago
Wow, you even pronounce Homily incorrectly. Lord help us. Ah-mily
pandirasbox 4 months ago
@pandirasbox
look in any dictionary, i am speaking English, not transliterating how the word sounds in Greek or any other language.
QuestioProVerum 4 months ago
His name was Valentinus not Valentinius
pandirasbox 4 months ago
The Valentinians did not have to integrate themselves into the "proto-orthodox" church. They were a faction in the church since the beginning of the church. They were excommunicated.
pandirasbox 4 months ago
Not all 52 tractates in the Nag Hammadi Library have been determined to belong to either Sethian or Valentinian groups. Some are undetermined.
pandirasbox 4 months ago
If you cannot pronounce the words, I doubt that you are a good English student. I therefore deduce from the latter that you are probably not a very qualified writer either. You must be self published and very bored.
pandirasbox 4 months ago
There was no Sethians, they are called Ophites. You are using modern scholarly designations and imposing them on ancient historians' works. Epiphanius is a late source and is known to lie as well.
pandirasbox 4 months ago
Epiphanius is a late source who is admitted to have "multiplied heresies". Also for a group to be heretical they had to still hold to a belief in Jesus or Christ, therefore Manichaeans are a different religion who were dualist. Gnostics were not all dualist. Valentinus was not a dualist.
pandirasbox 4 months ago
It is pronounced ManiKaeans. Ch makes a K sound
pandirasbox 4 months ago
MarciOHnites? really?
pandirasbox 4 months ago
Manichaeans are not properly Gnostic
pandirasbox 4 months ago
the song gives me the creeps.I once had a lucid day dream and saw a dome on a green hill and chanting(like this)I knew a trial was taking place and it wasnt good ..
delagrazia 6 months ago
Comment removed
delagrazia 6 months ago
Questio Pro Verum eh
dvalentino007 6 months ago
I think Valentinius became aware the system he was trying to help was moving in the wrong direction with the church purporting him for herressy when he was trying to evolve religeon into science . The gears that had been set into motion required to belittle the spirits of mankind into that of a servile beast only to be set apon those of other contradictory religeons manouvered by the othodoxy in power. Believing as he did that people needed to be more independent in nature .
dvalentino007 6 months ago
this is best read from the bottom up as a note
dvalentino007 6 months ago
One final point I must make is that I would not have known this if it ws not for my Dad who told me about a time he was looking for leaflets for sightseeing at Lelant Praed and he couldn't find it. As he was about to go two sections fell forward and revealed what he was looking for. I didn't pay attention the first time but the question came up and I asked what he was lookig for which on some strange whim led me to check my family history reaching Valentinius
dvalentino007 6 months ago
Use the force luke. Yes I went there
dvalentino007 6 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
learning the 7 chakras also helped I think understanding psychological effects from colour. I was reading a book called 'Be your own Psychic' and plus birds have a internal compas using the magnetic field of the planet for directions and people have their own electromagnetic field which is beind discifered by science to read or control peoples minds
dvalentino007 6 months ago
here my version of the Gospel of Truth
dvalentino007 6 months ago
The pentagon has a video on youtube by English Patriot 777 which will show you where god comes from
dvalentino007 6 months ago
the Zeitgeist Movement has a section on this in a video for this called Moving Forward
dvalentino007 6 months ago
dna can be altered and unlocked from understanding the effects of life. psychology
dvalentino007 6 months ago
not a bad guess am I
dvalentino007 6 months ago
society is divided into three groups those know get educated about their surroundings and discifer the truth of comfort, those who go with the flow and judge by society their comfort. The third group can see the other two groups fight and learn from each like in the human brain.
dvalentino007 6 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
the father, the son and the holy spirit = dna mate
dvalentino007 6 months ago
Comment removed
dvalentino007 6 months ago
Finally! I am a modern Western Valentinian Gnostic Christian and this is very close to my beliefs. I get so tired of people misunderstanding my beliefs. Everyone says "You cannot be a Gnostic and a Christian!" The ignorance is overwhelming from 2000 years of brainwashing. Not only are we christians, we were the origional christians descended from the apostle Paul. We were beaten, tortured and murdered to genocide by the church... and we are back! Thank you and bless you.
astrofrk 8 months ago
Well presented piece - I almost thought you would say, at the close, "Jesus of Nazareth" but clearly your gnosis extends to the fact that Nazareth did not exist at the time of his birth and is a mistranslation of Nazarene - which is something else entirely.
zthetha 1 year ago
Awesome! I hope you will get into details of their beliefs regarding salvation, redeption, sex and also about their rituals such as the Eucharist, baptism, bridal chamber and significance of the kiss, the seperation of Eve from within Adam (relating to the becoming of death),... and lots of other goodies. : ^ ) I can't wait for the next videos.
manlioman 1 year ago
Well done John :) And great video very insightfull :)
All love from me Jasmine
Eopyk 1 year ago
Not common knowledge material. Nice work! Totally looking forward to the next installment.
ChelevSaRa 1 year ago