If Jesus existed, he was likely a *nāṣorāyi*—a Nasorean—belonging to a Gnostic sect. Gnostic groups existed all the way from Persia to Turkey. I even suspect that the figure of Simon Magus, who is demonized in the Bible, was based on a real person who founded a Gnostic group known as the Simonians.It seems plausible to me that Jesus was associated with one of these Gnostic groups; he may have been an apocalyptic Gnostic, preaching the end of the material world—a world created by the Demiurge—and urging people to disregard the laws of Rome because the end was near. This, in turn, could have led to his crucifixion for the crime of *anomia* (lawlessness). I believe the figure of "Jesus son of Ananias," mentioned by Josephus, carries echoes of this individual.The Gospels found in the Bible, as well as the writings of Paul, are replete with Gnostic elements.Rome possessed copies of Gnostic texts and incorporated excerpts or concepts from them into the Gospels and the Pauline epistles. Furthermore, they utilized this crucified, apocalyptic figure to mock the Jewish concept of a messiah.I contend that the original Gospel of Mark was composed as a theatrical play, intended for performance during the Triumph of Titus in 71 AD.Subsequently, Titus ordered that the Gospels of Matthew and Luke be developed from this satirical work—Matthew, perhaps, for the Jews enslaved in Rome, and Luke, possibly, for the enslaved Samaritans. In this context, the figure of Jesus served as a composite representation of the Caesars, designed to facilitate the transition of these enslaved Jews and Samaritans into the imperial cult.
>>18749480The Gospel of John was written for the Romans in general, following the death of Titus—who had prohibited the preaching of this religion to non-Jews.The Synoptic Gospels are apocalyptic, proclaiming that the end of a corrupt world was near; therefore, it was considered better not to procreate. Did the authors of Matthew and Luke intend for Jews to stop reproducing? I do not know.One of the reasons Gnostic groups disappeared is that their members generally refused to procreate.I suspect that the Gnostic gospels merely utilized these characters—created by the imperial court—as a vehicle to convey their own religious ideas. Perhaps the authors were members of the elite who happened to be Gnostics? Or perhaps they were individuals seeking to challenge this religion—known as Christianity—by co-opting its own cast of characters? The Roman elite frequently created cults and religions; an emperor would rise to power, establish a new cult or elevate a specific deity to prominence, only for his successor to dismantle what had been established. The Roman elite were constantly in conflict with one another.I suppose we will never truly know.However, it is my view that if Jesus existed, he was a Gnostic preacher crucified for the crime of *anomia* (lawlessness). Subsequently, his figure was employed to mock the Jewish messiah within the satirical Gospel of Mark.Yet, we can never be certain, as more than 90% of what was produced in Rome has been lost—either through a failure to reproduce the texts or through deliberate destruction. Furthermore, most of the "Roman" documents we possess today are copies made during the Middle Ages.Nevertheless, it is 90% certain that Christian literature was a product of the Roman elite. Given that this elite was perpetually engaged in lethal infighting, this may well explain the presence of so many contradictions
>>18749480illiterates think now that 'gnostic' simply means 'heretic' and apply it to an absurd degree. you have learned a word, did not understand its meaning but use it left and right because you think it makes you look smart.
>>18749480>and urging people to disregard the laws of Romelol, lmao.He urged people not to obsess over their own laws to such a degree as to confuse the earthly laws of Rome and religious laws of Israel.John the Baptist as well was a proponent of maintaining Egyptian-Israelitic law, which had been verified as valid Roman law through the integration of Egypts own law as valid within the Roman system.in short; the pharisees were anti-Israel and barely even jewish.
>>18749537you sound like a hylic
>>18749480You are implying that Gnosticism was a separate pre-Christian religion, which was not the case. "Gnostic" was just a term used by Nicenean Christians to describe a bunch of very diverse early Christian sects they disagreed with.Much of the "Gnostic" elements come from Middle-Platonism, so the tradition comes fom educated, hellenized people. Jesus and his followers came from lower classes, it was more like a Jewish peasant reformist/fundamentalist/apocalyptic movement adjecent to the Pharisees. The stereotypical "Gnostic" traditions about the real world being evil emerged after the Jewish Wars, as people endured a lot of suffering, and concluded that the God of the Earth must be evil.
Gnostic just means knowledgeable. You only have to look at the history/etymology of things to get a real grasp on reality. A moment doesn't exist, some argue that moment is different from being to being. But that's just untrue, you have an untrue opinion, if you would look at the etymology you'll realize moment and momentum are the same thing. What is a momentum? Is it different from being to being? No, everything is momentum, everything is a movement or agitation, especially when you talk about the mind. So next time you talk about gnostics understand that it refers to knowledgeable people like me. Not whatever fanfic you got going in your head.
>>18749480Linda
>>18749480Jesus didn't write the gospels, nor did he write the letters of Paul. From the actual descriptions of Jesus, he was clearly a Pharisee. Belief in a physical resurrection, angels, and the coming of the messiah are Pharisaic beliefs.Jesus tells crowds that the Pharisees sit in the seat of Moses and to follow everything they teach (the Oral Torah).>Then Jesus said to the crowds and to his disciples: 2“The teachers of the law and the Pharisees sit in Moses’ seat. 3 So you must be careful to do everything they tell you. But do not do what they do, for they do not practice what they preach. Matthew 23:1-3
>>18749480>>18749483You're missing the context of the Roman-Jewish Wars, of which the Jesus movement seems to have been the core issue. His family fought at Masada.
>>18749705>From the actual descriptions of Jesus, he was clearly a Pharisee. Belief in a physical resurrection, angels, and the coming of the messiah are Pharisaic beliefs.Jesus was trained in many schools and the things you mention are also very common in many schools. Your logical deduction doesn't work here.
>>18749480Post her OF
>>18751325No
>>18749480Hot
