Comments on: Gnostic Jesus Different From New Testament Jesus? http://www.timboucher.com/journal/2005/07/13/gnostic-jesus-different-from-new-testament-jesus/ public domain playground. friendly entities welcome. Sun, 22 Nov 2009 23:03:09 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.7 hourly 1 By: jar.io http://www.timboucher.com/journal/2005/07/13/gnostic-jesus-different-from-new-testament-jesus/comment-page-1/#comment-208405 jar.io Sat, 25 Jul 2009 18:26:04 +0000 http://www.timboucher.com/journal/2005/07/13/gnostic-jesus-different-from-new-testament-jesus/#comment-208405 <strong>IAO meu mantra fundamental...</strong> O antigos gnósticos tinham mania de colocar nos seus rituais mais secretos e sagrados a palavra grega formada pelas letras Iota, Alfa e Omega, obtendo assim o mantra IAO. Eu também desmedidamente uso este mantra no meu cotidiano. ...... IAO meu mantra fundamental…

O antigos gnósticos tinham mania de colocar nos seus rituais mais secretos e sagrados a palavra grega formada pelas letras Iota, Alfa e Omega, obtendo assim o mantra IAO. Eu também desmedidamente uso este mantra no meu cotidiano.
……

]]> By: King Felix Cipher » Blog Archive » Who is the “Regular” Jesus? http://www.timboucher.com/journal/2005/07/13/gnostic-jesus-different-from-new-testament-jesus/comment-page-1/#comment-84078 King Felix Cipher » Blog Archive » Who is the “Regular” Jesus? Tue, 14 Aug 2007 03:00:18 +0000 http://www.timboucher.com/journal/2005/07/13/gnostic-jesus-different-from-new-testament-jesus/#comment-84078 [...] Personally I don’t see this as too much of a problem. I’ve not spent any time with the original Coptic or even read all the Nag Hammadi texts themselves. But is there really any value in saying their Jesus (let’s call him “Super-Jesus”) is different from the “regular” Jesus of the New Testament? I’m personally more drawn to the distinction that *some* Gnostics make between Jesus and the Christos, a sort of force that comes down and dwells within Jesus at his Baptism. Even that though I’m not too hung up on. You can switch around the details, have Jesus wear sneakers instead of sandals, and there’s still room for everybody’s interpretations. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. Responses are currently closed, but you can trackback from your own site. [...] [...] Personally I don’t see this as too much of a problem. I’ve not spent any time with the original Coptic or even read all the Nag Hammadi texts themselves. But is there really any value in saying their Jesus (let’s call him “Super-Jesus”) is different from the “regular” Jesus of the New Testament? I’m personally more drawn to the distinction that *some* Gnostics make between Jesus and the Christos, a sort of force that comes down and dwells within Jesus at his Baptism. Even that though I’m not too hung up on. You can switch around the details, have Jesus wear sneakers instead of sandals, and there’s still room for everybody’s interpretations. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. Responses are currently closed, but you can trackback from your own site. [...]

]]> By: Occult Investigator http://www.timboucher.com/journal/2005/07/13/gnostic-jesus-different-from-new-testament-jesus/comment-page-1/#comment-3175 Occult Investigator Thu, 14 Jul 2005 16:08:21 +0000 http://www.timboucher.com/journal/2005/07/13/gnostic-jesus-different-from-new-testament-jesus/#comment-3175 Well, you should read that interview, then you'll really be suspicious. At one point the interviewer asks him why the Dead Sea Scrolls don't warn about the archons, and Lash responds: "The DSS do not warn us about the Archons because they were written by an extremist sect who were manipulated by the Archons." I mean, it's one thing to recognize this as interesting conjecture, but it is QUITE another to state this as solid fact. Well, you should read that interview, then you’ll really be suspicious. At one point the interviewer asks him why the Dead Sea Scrolls don’t warn about the archons, and Lash responds: “The DSS do not warn us about the Archons because they were written by an extremist sect who were manipulated by the Archons.” I mean, it’s one thing to recognize this as interesting conjecture, but it is QUITE another to state this as solid fact.

]]> By: jp http://www.timboucher.com/journal/2005/07/13/gnostic-jesus-different-from-new-testament-jesus/comment-page-1/#comment-3170 jp Thu, 14 Jul 2005 15:59:42 +0000 http://www.timboucher.com/journal/2005/07/13/gnostic-jesus-different-from-new-testament-jesus/#comment-3170 well, i dunno about all that. speaking as someone who has the coptic editions of some of the nhl texts right in front of me, i don't see any real basis for his claim. 'IC,' 'HC,' etc. were common abbreviations for 'jesus christ' throughout the ancient world, in coptic and in greek, and don't just occur in the nhl. the gnostics differentiated between 'the christos,' a spirit of the logos who descended into jesus, and jesus the man, but to claim the two are different in different texts is, well, patently absurd. there's also the historical fact that most gnostic groups utilized many of the canonical texts, esp. john, luke and paul, so is the jesus in those different, too? makes me suspicious of lash & his claims. he's spot-on in his comparisons of the gnostic archons & the ufo/ultradimensional entity connection, but i think he's extrapolating a bit too much w/in his literalist interpretation. well, i dunno about all that. speaking as someone who has the coptic editions of some of the nhl texts right in front of me, i don’t see any real basis for his claim. ‘IC,’ ‘HC,’ etc. were common abbreviations for ‘jesus christ’ throughout the ancient world, in coptic and in greek, and don’t just occur in the nhl. the gnostics differentiated between ‘the christos,’ a spirit of the logos who descended into jesus, and jesus the man, but to claim the two are different in different texts is, well, patently absurd. there’s also the historical fact that most gnostic groups utilized many of the canonical texts, esp. john, luke and paul, so is the jesus in those different, too? makes me suspicious of lash & his claims. he’s spot-on in his comparisons of the gnostic archons & the ufo/ultradimensional entity connection, but i think he’s extrapolating a bit too much w/in his literalist interpretation.

]]>