The original gospel?

aged hippy · #1 (**permalink**) 8th September 2007, 01:17 PM

One of those fascinating pages which one stumbles across whilst wandering: http://www.globalserve.net/~yuku/w2ha.htm

Quote:

If the evidence presented here is found to be valid, then this may be the most important book about biblical history to have been published in the last few hundred years. Because this volume introduces what appears to be the most ancient Christian gospel of them all. As will be argued further, this is a text that is earlier than any of New Testament gospels. For the first time, this document is now translated for the benefit of the general reader, and analysed as a whole. It is probable that, sooner or later, it will change biblical history as we now know it.

This gospel does not really have a name attached to it. It seems like the Christian believers who used it for great many centuries called it simply "the Gospel". Its anonymity is a very good sign, because, as it is widely accepted by scholars, all earliest Christian communities started out with just one anonymous gospel. Those were the times when they did not yet have the New Testament with its four gospels that needed to be distinguished from each other by name.

Quote:

And now about the main results of my investigation. They are really quite shocking, and many of them will surprise even those people who think they already know their biblical history quite well. My conclusions are as follows.

* In the beginning, Christianity was an entirely Jewish movement. So this is where the Historical Jesus was coming from.

* This situation prevailed for a long time, much longer than most people may suspect. Indeed, there is good evidence that the movement was still overwhelmingly Jewish-Christian even as late as 135 CE (Common Era).

* It was at that time, in the terrible aftermath of the Second Jewish War, which was one of the darkest periods of Jewish history -- when Judaism was basically outlawed by the Roman state -- that the leadership of the movement had been seized by Gentile Christians -- in Rome, as well as in Jerusalem. So this, as I see it, was the Great Gentile Hijacking of Christianity.

* Then, in the aftermath of the Hijacking, a Big Cover-up began. This was an attempt by newly emerging Catholic orthodoxy to falsify the true story of Christian beginnings, which were essentially Jewish-Christian beginnings. And so, this was also the time when the gospels were being re-edited substantially to reflect these doctrinal changes.

* Although far from being trouble-free and easy to impose, still, the Cover-up proved to be remarkably successful -- because it has survived mostly intact even until now. In fact, the academic biblical historians are still very much taken in by that official cover story -- that foundational Catholic myth that was cobbled together back in the second century CE.

His translation is here: http://www.globalserve.net/~yuku/mgtext.htm

Peace, Love, & Light

wwwdlhow27 · #2 (**permalink**) 8th September 2007, 07:11 PM

Thank you my friend. Although the qoutes you've included here have been commonly accepted by many non-"Roman" Catholics for a very long time, I look forward to reading the contents of his investigation, in all it's parts. I, for one, have not heard of the Magdeline Gospel but suspect will be very interesting. Thanks again.

aged hippy · #3 (**permalink**) 8th September 2007, 09:00 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by wwwdlhow27

Thank you my friend. Although the qoutes you've included here have been commonly accepted by many non-"Roman" Catholics for a very long time, I look forward to reading the contents of his investigation, in all it's parts. I, for one, have not heard of the Magdeline Gospel but suspect will be very interesting. Thanks again.

You're most Welcome.

I apologise, wwwdl, i missed pasting a crucial bit of the quote i intended, it's called the "Magdalene Gospel" because it's at Magdalene College, Cambridge, not because it's the Gospel of Mary Magdalene..

There is a Gospel of Mary (Magdalene) http://www.earlychristianwritings.com/
- some of the works on those pages give a fascinating insight to what shape the Christian belief system could have taken - if the choice of what was to be included was made by people of a more spiritual nature than those who actually did the choosing seemed to have had.

It's a grievous shame that the first six pages no longer exist, the Gospel starts at the very end of what seems to have been an extremely illuminating conversation, and another seemingly-crucial part is missing in the middle, from a discussion of the soul.

The last three paragraphs, however, give an insight into the attitude of Andrew and Peter towards women - and Mary in particular:

"When Mary had said this, she was silent, since the Savior had spoken thus far with her. But Andrew answered and said to the brethren, 'Say what you think concerning what she said. For I do not believe that the Savior said this. For certainly these teachings are of other ideas."

Peter also opposed her in regard to these matters and asked them about the Savior. "Did he then speak secretly with a woman [cf. John 4:27], in preference to us, and not openly? Are we to turn back and all listen to her? Did he prefer her to us?" Then Mary grieved and said to Peter, "My brother Peter, what do you think? Do you think that I thought this up myself in my heart or that I am lying concerning the Savior?"

Levi answered and said to Peter, "Peter, you are always irate. Now I see that you are contending against the woman like the adversaries. But if the Savior made her worthy, who are you to reject her? Surely the Savior knew her very well [cf. Luke 10:38- 42]. For this reason he loved her more than us [cf. John 11:5]. And we should rather be ashamed and put on the Perfect Man, to form us [?] as he commanded us, and proclaim the gospel, without publishing a further commandment or a further law than the one which the Savior spoke." When Levi had said this, they began to go out in order to proclaim him and preach him. "

Peace, Love, & Light

vivamis123 · #4 (**permalink**) 8th September 2007, 10:27 PM

Yes, aged hippy I did notice a difference between the Magdalene Gospel and the Gospel of Mary Magdalene. I found the Gospel of Mary Magdalene to be very insightful. It's a shame that not more was found of it : (

aged hippy · #5 (**permalink**) 8th September 2007, 11:07 PM

Yes, it is a shame that so much is missing.
It appears to have been a highly esoteric text.

Where Jesus says: "I have left no commandment but what I have commanded you, and I have given you no law, as the lawgiver did, lest you be bound by it.", do you think "the lawgiver" he refers to is the Lord God? Jesus himself gave no commandments or laws, but Yahweh/Jehovah dished them out left, right, and centre.

That's who i feel he's referring to, i'd be interested to hear someone else's thoughts on the matter.

Peace, Love, & Light

vivamis123 · #6 (**permalink**) 9th September 2007, 02:22 AM

I agree A.H. but I would say Jesus is referring to the scripture. In the NT Jesus said our understanding must exceed that of the scripture, Just as Jesus' understanding surpassed the scriptures. So our own understanding must exceed even that which Jesus taught.

aged hippy · #7 (**permalink**) 9th September 2007, 10:11 AM

But the problem is that what's in the NT has been selected, arranged, and re-written by men, men with their own agendas and motives.

To understand the inner teachings of Jesus - those which it's necessary to have "ears to hear" - it's necessary to know what he originally said, unfortunately most of this seems to have somehow been 'lost' along the way....
.... but let's face it, "Love thy neighbour" is pretty straight-forward.

It's a great shame that the Library of Alexandria was burnt down, many of the original scrolls there would have given us (today) a deeper insight into the original message, as well as the origin of the texts and the messenger himself - in my opinion.
It was probably an Act of God.

Peace, Love, & Light

vivamis123 · #8 (**permalink**) 9th September 2007, 10:23 AM

Yes A.H. I agree, who knows if the bible and other holy scrptures are not holding us back from receiveing what we seek. It's great to have something we can "rub" our own awareness against, but many seek the Truth in these scriptures where I believe that the Truth is within our very being.

aged hippy · #9 (**permalink**) 9th September 2007, 11:21 AM

LOL
That was quick....
I only had time to char some toast and make a pot of tea...

I think that the bible does "hold back" from spiritual knowledge those who try to find that knowledge within it's pages.

There are so many seemingly-irreconcilable contradictions - the two creations, the two very different gods, the list goes on and on, ending up with people being led to worship Jesus - rather than following the message he brought.

The simple truth is - in my opinion - we are all aspects of what Jesus referred to as "My heavenly Father", and as such we should behave like him - in order to become like him.

Peace, Love, & Light

vivamis123 · #10 (**permalink**) 9th September 2007, 11:34 AM

Yes, I can be quick if I want to LOL

I see my father being perfection itself. Jesus said to be perfect as our father is perfect. Perfect only means to me not to think I am a sinner, I am bad, I am guilty or I am anything other than perfect AND to see everyone else as the same. To me that is what I call to be pure of heart.

I can see where the bible is not a source of "clear -clean" spiritual knowledge, but I trust that what I need will be brought to my attention.

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version Email this Page	Search this Thread: Advanced Search
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode