CX

Where does it say that Mary Magdelene was a prostitute?

[ August 20, 2002: Message edited by: CX ]</p>

PTET

Greetings all...

Can I humbly offer my brief pages on the <a href="http://dreamwater.net/ptet/ecw/therapeutae.html" target="_blank">Therapeutae</a> and the <a href="http://dreamwater.net/ptet/ecw/ebionites.html" target="_blank">Ebionites</a> as candidates for being Christians before Christ...

<a href="http://dreamwater.net/ptet/" target="_blank">PTET</a>

Iasion

Greetings Vork,

Well,
I take the view that "kata sarka" essentially means "physically" (although it seems to include the astral or etheric or hylic or ectoplasmic sub-lunar sphere).

When the immortal soul, the Iesous Christos is incarnated in a physical human body - Iesous Christos is thus present in a physical body on the physical plane. In that sense he is present "kata sarka" as the souls of all humans.

Similarly, when a person is born, their soul is born in/with them - the person (both body and soul) is "born of woman" as we all are.

This explains why Paul makes no mention of a specific woman - he is referring to woman in a general sense - as all souls are "born of woman" when they are physically born.


May I expand my interpretations a little:[*] Iesous Christos = the immortal soul[*] the cross = the body, and by extension the physical plane[*] crucifixion = to be deadened (for a soul, to be incarnated)


So, to get on to the points you brought up - let me point out I am referring to Paul's writings - the later books have different meanings it seems, as they misunderstood Paul's esoteric language.
[*] Is it a coincidence that one Mary was a virgin while the other was a prostitute? Or does the contrast have a significance?

Paul makes no mention of Mary or a virgin mother.
[*] Who is pontius pilate? - does his name have any meaning that is reflecting his role?

Paul makes no mention of Pilate. A.B. Kuhn argues that "Pontius Pilate" is a corruption of Pontos Piletas which supposedly means the "dense sea of matter" (apparently depending on a vision of C.W. Leadbeater).
[*] Who is the virgin Mary?

Paul says nothing. Esotericists argue Mary is Mare = Matrix = Matter = Material plane.
[*] Who are the sanhedrin?

Paul mentions nothing - they appear to have been added later, like most of the Jesus story.
[*] Since the crucifixion is the incarnation, what causes this incarnation and how does it come about?

Well, are you asking how people are ensouled and born? tricky... souls may to be attracted to bodies when fertilisation nears.
[*] If the cross is the body, why did Jesus leave/resurrect with it and not leave it behind? Is the immortal soul forever nailed to the body?

No, the soul is present till death - then it leaves the body to return (rise) to the higher plane from whence it came (I take the view that re-incarnation is a reality - I suspect Paul's "old man" is the previous incarnation).


So, much of what you question is from the LATER stories of Jesus - which may be partly esoteric, partly fictional, partly spiritual themes of the day.

It amazes me how DIFFERENT the writings of Paul are from the Gospels - and how SIMILAR Paul's writings are to the Gnostics et al.

regards,
Quentin David Jones

[ August 20, 2002: Message edited by: Iasion ]</p>

Ted Hoffman

"The Biblical evidence identifies a woman who anoints Jesus with an
alabaster box at the house of a Pharisee named Simon as "a woman of the
city who was a sinner."[Lk 7:37] Jesus then forgives her all her sins,
which sins He says, "are many." In the very next section, we are told
that Mary Magdalene, "out of whom He had cast seven demons," had begun
following Jesus and the Apostles [Lk 8:2]. Jesus says that because the
woman had been forgiven much, she loved Him much [Lk :47]."<a href="http://members.tripod.com/~PetraGrail/mm.html" target="_blank">This site explains further</a>

I think "Woman of the city" is the phrase that implies she is a prostitute.

Its clear that the bible does not specifically refer to her as a prostitute but why did Jesus tell her not to touch him yet he allowed the doubting Thomas to feel his wounds?
Jesus said to her, "Do not hold on to me, because I have not yet ascended to the Father. But go to my brothers and say to them, 'I am ascending to my Father and your Father, to my God and your God.'" (John 20:17, NRSV)

Ah, here is a beautiful picture for the garden scene:


BUT, is she is NOT the woman who was healed, what inspired her to "follow" Jesus so much?

Ted Hoffman

Iasion,
I am not Vork,
I am rather glad that you mentioned Mary is material plane and NOT a flesh-and blood woman as esotericists argue.
and
I am glad you have pointed this out too.
Sorry I asked questions that are outside the scope of what Paul writes.
It brings out the sharp distinction between the Gospels and Pauls wrirings.

Ted Hoffman

Iasion,
Is the spirit/ soul visible then - I mean according to Paul?
When he says Jesus appeared to the 500, doesnt that mean they could see him? (assuming you dont espouse the idea that the passage was interpolated)

Iasion

Greetings Intensity,

my apologies - I was viewing two threads at once and got mixed up who was who

Paul apparently SAW Iesous Christos, EXPERIENCED Iesous - but it was inner vision, it was spiritual communication, not an external, objective event (note how the different accounts of Paul's conversion differ on this key issue of whether they others heard the Christos).

And Paul's mention of Iesous Christos and the cross etc. are all in spiritual terms, not physical - its all mythic, not concrete. Paul tells us he used to consider Christos kata sarka, but now kata pneuma.

So, even if the Christos DID appear to others (the 500 is a magic number, it just means "many") it was probably just a spiritual experience, an out-of-body experience as part of mystical initation perhaps - such practices seem to have been part of the mysteries.

I note that Paul boasts of his spiritual credentials as a pneumatic, he brags about rising to the THIRD HEAVEN and learning secrets.

Paul seems to want to consider himself as the last of a line of authentic Christos-experiencers, but it all seems to be about mystic initiation, to see Iesous Christos apparently to attain a rare state of consciusness.

The seekers of the day were interested in the issue of out-of-body experiences, the various beings that existed, and the various planes they inhabited - that is the context of Paul, by my readings.

Paul's boasts of his spiritual credentials as a Pneumatic (i.e. a senior aspirant initiated in spiritual matters, not a lower Psychic) and then expounds on his view on the spiritual mysteries. I don't see anything in Paul that even remotely seems to be reference to a concrete man at all - it just doesn't fit.

Thus,
I seek to understand Paul by reading the contemporary spiritual works of the seekers of his day - and I found the planar world view to be the dominant model (in fact this model exists to this day in the Western esoteric tradition).

In these terms, the Christos is a higher being of a higher plane, and it descends (becomes more dense, slower) the planes to ensoul our lives, becoming deadened or crucified in the process.

I still can't quite figure out the cross and the blood - perhaps the cross is emblematic of the wood of material plane, its life and growth.

Sorry to wax spiritual, I am not trying to preach - just trying to put this complex set of writings in perspective. And I notice that this whole area of spiritual experience, of gnosis, of visions, of out-of-body experiences is a very touchy subject - indeed almost taboo.

This sense of taboo has served to mar our understanding of the original meanings -

I wonder how many members here have had an out-of-body experience?
I wonder how many members here have risen to the third heaven?
I wonder how many members here have met a higher being?


Does that make it BETTER, or WORSE, for our understanding of Paul's writings?

Quentin David Jones

Peter Kirby

Quentin writes: I am working my way through Perseus now - so far I see nothing like the allegorical use in Philo, which I think is an important key to understanding Paul's uses.

You may also want to check out Hengel's book, <a href="http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/080061268X/InternetInfidelsA/" target="_blank">Crucifixion in the Ancient World and the Folly of the Message of the Cross</a>. This compendium of information and quotation on the practice of crucifixion is priced quite reasonably.

Quentin writes:

True,
but if he was such a minor figure that he slipped below Philo's radar, then he bears no resemblance to the Gospel Jesus.

Any such "Jesus", if he existed as a figure totally different to the Gospels stories, can hardly be called the "real Jesus" at all.

That is the sense in which I argue there was NO real Jesus in history - sure, there must have been MANY figures SOMEWHAT like Jesus in those days - but the ORIGINATING impulse for Christianity did not, in my view, start with any person Jesus of Nazareth at all. Any finding of the "real Jesus" afterwards is just wishful retro-fitting.

So, is it your opinion that the non-existence of Jesus translates into the (mere) claim that the supernatural "Gospel Jesus" did not exist in history? In other words, if there was no real person in history who walked on water, who made food for over 5000 with just a few loaves of bread and fish, whose death was accompanied by such phenomena as the risen saints walking the streets of Jerusalem -- if such a full-blown Gospel Jesus is not historical, then there was no historical Jesus?

You might be making that suggestion, or you might be suggesting something else, so I look forward to your clarification.

Quentin writes:

I argue that Paul's Iesous Christos means the immortal image of the Godhead which ensouls all humans - perhaps somewhat like an Platonic Idea of the divine man which is each humans "spark" of life.

Your interpretation of Paul is interesting and perhaps even plausible. I do not wish to enter a debate on the exegesis of the Pauline epistles at this moment.

Quentin writes:

You mentioned looking up the Greek - the only question I would have is what word Philo uses for "the cross" - the word for "crucify" has no surprises any more?

I will look up the passages with "crucify" or "the cross" that you indicated, as well as the passages quoted earlier in regards to KATA SARKA.

Quentin writes: Why do you think Paul and Philo don't seem to know each other? I would have thought they were rather similar characters - educated Jews arguing ways to rationalise Jewish with pagan ideas.

Well, this is the kind of thinking that produced the correspondence of Paul with Seneca. The importance of Paul or Philo to their contemporaries may be misjudged from the fact that they are among the few Jews from whom any extensive literature survives. Also, the motive of expressing Jewish tradition in Gentile concepts would have sprung from the general milieu of the diaspora and would not indicate dependence of one writer on another, just as much as two modern authors attempting to justify Christianity with the methods of science may have not known about each other.

best,
Peter Kirby

[Link fixed.]

[ August 21, 2002: Message edited by: Peter Kirby ]</p>

Ted Hoffman

Iasion
How did you reach the conclusion that 500 is a magic number? Does 2000(for the 2000 pigs) also mean many? And what does 40 stand for? (the 40 days during which Jesus appeared post-resurrection)
I mean, if 500 is "many", what is 2000? (ie many * 4) infinity?

Do you think Paul actually had a "paranormal" experience?

Iasion

Greetings again Intensity,

The 500 is both large and a nice round number, but the actual 500 people behind that number are unknown - not the slightest hint of identification is given for even 1 of them.

Consider too - if there had really been a list somewhere of the names of the people who had "met Christos", surely it would not be exactly 500? How often does a large group, chosen by some exact defining characteristic, turn out to be EXACTLY 500? Its just does not ring true.

Its just a nice number, written with a few characters only (I assume he used the Greek alpha-numeric coding system - perhaps someone can tell us the exact Greek letters used to represent the magic number 500?)

Similarly for the magic number 2000 - nice and convenient - do you really think there was a herd of EXACTLY 2000 beasts in that field on that day? and that they were COUNTED to an accuracy of 1?

2000 animals means little more than "a herd"
500 men means little more than "lots of people"

Just like we say : "I've told you a hundred times.."

Its not really 100, its just figurative language.


Similar thing - these biblical writers all love to repeat previous writers and themes, and the number 40 is a favourite - probably THE favourite number in the whole bible.


Do you think Paul actually had a "paranormal" experience?

Oh yes, I certainly do - he says so quite clearly :

Paul boasts (2 Cor 12) of his personal experiences - he describes a spiritual rising :

"I must boast; there is nothing to be gained by it, but I will go on to visions and revelations of the Lord I know a man in Christ who fourteen years ago was caught up to the third heaven - whether in the body or out of the body I do not know, God knows. And I know that this man was caught up into Paradise - whether in the body or out of the body I do not know, God knows. and he heard things that cannot told, which man may not utter... ''

Paul insists he is a Pneumatic (a 'spiritual man') and sees above the natural world :

2:10But to us, God revealed them through the Spirit. For the Spirit searches all things, yes, the deep things of God. ... 2:12But we received, not the spirit of the world, but the Spirit which is from God, ... 2:15But he who is spiritual discerns all things, and he himself is judged by no one

The word pneumatic and pneuma do not always come through correctly in Ehglish - good to have an Nestle-Aland handy.

Consider Romans - Paul contrasts two types of man (e.g. 1 Cor. 2:14) the psychic human does not receive the gifts of the pneumatic, Greeks vs barbarians, wise vs foolish.( Rom. 1:14), Jew vs uncircumcised ( Rom.2:28)

Paul contrasts the two types with many words :[*] Pneumatic (~spiritual, elect, wise, Greeks, Gentiles, uncircumcised, by faith/grace, chosen few, initiate, one who does not work)[*] Psychic (~formal, children, foolish, Jew, barbarians, uncircumcised, by works, the many called, outsiders, sarkic, physical, one who works)

Look carefully at his uses of pneumatic - he even refers to personally passing on spiritual initiation.

A Pneumatic is a higher level of experience or initiation than the Psychic - here is a rough outline of the Planar view in ancient times :[*](Divine)[*]Spiritual (Pneumatic)[*]Mental (Psychic)[*]Astral (Hylic, Etheric)[*]Material (Choic)

Paul uses the "masonic handshake" of the day : "We speak wisdom, however, among the initiates "
According to the grace of God given to me, like a skilled master-builder I laid a foundation...

Implying he is part of a functioning, initiating, school of the mysteries - i.e. he has travelled beyond the veil of Isis and been presented to the Gods.

Paul seems to be aware of humankind's multiple bodies - physical and non-physical :
if there is a physical body, there is also a spiritual body ''( 1 Cor.)

Paul's writings speak of man who Knows - a Gnostic who has direct personal experience (indeed the Gnostics specifically claim Paul as their fountain-head). A man who has met the "gods" - in those days, these were very important matters.


These things are often dismissed today as mere religious fantasy - yet I think Paul was one of a select few who had had a special, very rare, human experience - a lucid out-of-body journey to meet other types of beings.

Such rare persons often left a testament to their experience - leaving us such books as the Book of Enoch, the Vision of Arideus, the Vision of Isaiah etc.

Regardless of how we judge the reality of these person's experiences, after considerable study of these works, I am pretty convinced that Paul was a visionary who had some kind of great spiritual experience, and enough of his readers recognised spiritual insight in his works, to make them become famous and influential. Sadly, after he was gone, it was all misunderstood - and the rest, as they say, was history....

Quentin David Jones

[ August 22, 2002: Message edited by: Iasion ]</p>