The truth about Zecharia sitchin, worth a listen

[Elizabeth]

"Many believe that the Nag Hammadi texts and thus Gnosticism is an addition to Christianity, mainly because of the way these texts are presented, translated and interpreted by certain sources. I think that is not correct and misleading, most certainly. 
It's fundamentally different from Christianity and other religions. It's not a religion, first of all, it's basically an explanation.
But hey, if truth comes through on this plane, it usually seems to get corrupted before it could catch a decent breath and stretch its legs a little. 

By his own admission, Lash couldn't make heads or tails of the Nag Hammadi writings in the beginning. 'Gibberish' was it to him. I presume he then did his best to come up with a decent translation and interpretation, but these are still influenced by his own personal biases, beliefs and outlook. I'm pretty convinced of that.

And possibly, these texts were already corrupted before they were publicly unearthed in the 1940's, or even before they were buried there, whenever that would have exactly been (Filter).

The same agencies of deceit have been operating since humanity's introduction to this world. Is is such a stretch to think that the Nag Hammadi couldn't have been tampered with to some degree the way our "truthspeaker" sources are today.

[Filter]

I think that it is impossible to be sure that these specific Nag Hammadi Codices are THE source that explains how the Gnostic worldview exactly was in those days. One reason why you cannot be sure is that in that period of time there were a number of different currents that operated under the denominator 'Gnosticism'. These currents differ from eachother, sometimes on a number of very essential matters. These Nag Hammadi texts are certainly not the only (supposed) Gnostic lore that has survived to modern times.

What I do see is that these particular Nag Hammadi texts have been rather popularised and commercialised mainstream through books, documentaries and such the past 1-2 decades or so. I think it's presented either with a heavy Christian flavour or in a way that strikes me as rather new agey, or both. I think none of these books and such that address the Nag Hammadi writings explain Gnosticism as for example is explained in the links below.

To me personally, these explanations make more sense than for example the way John Lash portrays this universe and our world on the basis of his translation and interpretation of the Nag Hammadi Codices. 

"All religious traditions acknowledge that the world is imperfect. Where they differ is in the explanations which they offer to account for this imperfection and in what they suggest might be done about it. Gnostics have their own -- perhaps quite startling -- view of these matters: they hold that the world is flawed because it was created in a flawed manner. ....."
http://gnosis.org/gnintro.htm


"Gnosticism presents a distinction between the highest, unknowable God and the demiurgic “creator” of the material. Several systems of Gnostic thought present the Demiurge as antagonistic to the will of the Supreme Being: his act of creation occurs in unconscious semblance of the divine model, and thus is fundamentally flawed, or else is formed with the malevolent intention of entrapping aspects of the divine in materiality. Thus, in such systems, the Demiurge acts as a solution to the problem of evil. ....."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demiurge#Gnosticism

[William]

Elizabeth wrote:
The Nag Hamaadi is obviously a topic you've spent a great deal of time on and is very dear to your heart. I'm not interested in fighting you on this obviously charged issue.  ------------------------------

  Not a charged issue, But yes, i have spent time researching it as i do many other topics.  So when someone repeatedly states that something is dis info i ask an honest question and want to know what is dis info about it.  Whats wrong with that?  So you state you get the info from Chiappalone then i know He quotes the Nag Hammadi .  If its dis info why is he quoting it?  Its just a question.  I only asked what was dis info about it from you.  Obviously not the parts he quotes. 

  Elizabeth, i just asked a question.  I was not twisting anything or putting words in your mouth........

Elizabeth Wrote:
I don't know where Chiappalone misquotes the Nag Hammadi but he doesn't consider it the definitive
source that you do.    ---------------------------------

  I never said it was a definitive source.  Now your putting words in my mouth....   Im only studying it and asked a question.  Are all discussions going to be blown out of proportions?    As far as i see all i did was ask a question. 
  I did not mean to do anything to you but answer your post.  I apologize and please feel free not to answer any of my posts or questions, im ok with that.   Im only looking for honest discussion of a subject that is not one sided including myself.

   There were some original translations of the Nag Hammadi but those translators did color it with their Christian belief systems.  In studying the Gnostics they were against the Christian system.  John Lash is a comparative mythologist.
  Just to understand what a comparative mythologist is would take at least a study course in that alone for many hours.

  There are not many discussions here anymore.  I was attempting to have in depth discussion.  Cant we just all get along...  lol 

  Elizabeth im not mad at you.  Lets just agree that we disagree and be done with this.

[Octahedron]

NHC can be helpful in understanding terminology of Christian Belief. as far as I do remember the NHCs don't use the specifcal term of 3-unity of Father-Son-Holy Spirit as unity. 

i.e.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gospel_of_Thomas

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Gospel_of_Truth

[William]

Please dont quote me on this but im trying to find where the original word in the Gospel of Thomas is.  Specifically the word used and translated for jesus.  Because i remember that the word used in of one the codex was translated for jesus but it turned out to be incorrect.  If you understand what im saying here.

[Octahedron]

Please dont quote me on this but im trying to find where the original word in the Gospel of Thomas is.  Specifically the word used and translated for jesus.  Because i remember that the word used in of one the codex was translated for jesus but it turned out to be incorrect.  If you understand what im saying here.

Yes.

Personally, I don't know about the "jesus" word in original NHC-texts;

likely the meaning of "Jesus" is extra "brought in" at the translations in some way. BTW there are many "translations" of GoT.

I have read some versions with interpretations of Gospel of Thomas.

I think the original NHC is a real found material.

To me, it contains very old esoterical knowledge which was in that Egypt area already widespread in mystery schools even a very long time before the time of Jesus Christ. 

Some organisations (New Age schools, Theosophists, some church factions etc.) are likely using the NHC for their own agenda.

I put the Wikipedia links only as to give 2 Gospel examples of NHC. not about the content of what is written at Wikipedia.

The NHCs and Christian philosophy/exegesis are different, but are not contradictional to each other for me. They do have different descriptions or concepts to describe esoterical truths; both concepts useful and helpful for me.

[William]

Octahedron,  Very well said, i agree with you.  
  When you have old text's, over 1000 years old, you cant just judge them in a few hours.  You have to also look
at the times and history's of that period.  You also have to acknowledge the translations and if they are biased
or not.  You must remember that back in those times these writings were condemned and all hunted down and destroyed.
  This is not something to take lightly.  No matter what we might think of them at first glance.  
   Its intriguing to me.  Also speaking of the dead sea scrolls and the Gospel of Thomas and others.   Im sure there are many
other scrolls not found yet and maybe never will be found.  Most of the scrolls were hidden because this knowledge
was not allowed and Libraries all around the world were burned by Rome and others.  Oh what thousands of books and scrolls would we have that we would find amazing beyond these scrolls.

[Octahedron]

Octahedron,  Very well said, i agree with you.  
  When you have old text's, over 1000 years old, you cant just judge them in a few hours.  You have to also look
at the times and history's of that period.  You also have to acknowledge the translations and if they are biased
or not.  You must remember that back in those times these writings were condemned and all hunted down and destroyed.
  This is not something to take lightly.  No matter what we might think of them at first glance.  
   Its intriguing to me.  Also speaking of the dead sea scrolls and the Gospel of Thomas and others.   Im sure there are many
other scrolls not found yet and maybe never will be found.  Most of the scrolls were hidden because this knowledge
was not allowed and Libraries all around the world were burned by Rome and others.  Oh what thousands of books and scrolls would we have that we would find amazing beyond these scrolls.

In Europe we had many wars since the Roman Empire. So, where first some old texts were saved into monasteries and castles, they ultimately were destroyed or burnt because of plunder, local wars and religion wars in the 16th century and so on. 


In some cases libraries did survive. 
i.e. in WW2 there was the battle of Monte Cassino (Italy) in 1944.
The monastery Monte Casino which had a huge library that would be destroyed by the British and Americans, if not the Germans "saved" the complete collection of 1400 codices to Rome, except 15 cases....

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monte_Cassino

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Monte_Cassino

I think in many old monasteries we do have here, the libraries of them still contain much of old works and even original codices (i.e. brought by The Knights Templar) which are not well known for the public and are very similar to old time works like the NHC or even older.

BTW: as you mentioned already the Dead sea scrolls, other examples of codices to think about are are Pistis Sophia and codex Jung (also part of  NHC) which was taken from Egypt by Mr. G. Quispel, one of the first translaters.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pistis_Sophia

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gilles_Quispel

BTW: I've met Quispel and some other translators of NHC personally. To me the NHC is not a hoax at all. The risks of corruption and misinfo are laying in the interpretions and manipulations by the many so called "scientifical professionals" and "historians". Quispel gave an interpretation which is a bridge to far for me; even he is a official historian, that is not enough to claim to be all knowing about that code, far from that.

As you said the reader is not able to take a few hours or days to study NHC or knowledge of over 1000 years old.
It maybe needs and deserves a lifetime or more to learn it what it is all about. Esp. with the NHC I would recommend every reader to be very careful to make conclusions to early, even if some "experts" are claiming to know the truth about it.

[William]

Octahedron,  Very well said, i agree with you.  
  When you have old text's, over 1000 years old, you cant just judge them in a few hours.  You have to also look
at the times and history's of that period.  You also have to acknowledge the translations and if they are biased
or not.  You must remember that back in those times these writings were condemned and all hunted down and destroyed.
  This is not something to take lightly.  No matter what we might think of them at first glance.  
   Its intriguing to me.  Also speaking of the dead sea scrolls and the Gospel of Thomas and others.   Im sure there are many
other scrolls not found yet and maybe never will be found.  Most of the scrolls were hidden because this knowledge
was not allowed and Libraries all around the world were burned by Rome and others.  Oh what thousands of books and scrolls would we have that we would find amazing beyond these scrolls.

In Europe we had many wars since the Roman Empire. So, where first some old texts were saved into monasteries and castles, they ultimately were destroyed or burnt because of plunder, local wars and religion wars in the 16th century and so on. 


In some cases libraries did survive. 
i.e. in WW2 there was the battle of Monte Cassino (Italy) in 1944.
The monastery Monte Casino which had a huge library that would be destroyed by the British and Americans, if not the Germans "saved" the complete collection of 1400 codices to Rome, except 15 cases....

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monte_Cassino

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Monte_Cassino

I think in many old monasteries we do have here, the libraries of them still contain much of old works and even original codices (i.e. brought by The Knights Templar) which are not well known for the public and are very similar to old time works like the NHC or even older.

BTW: as you mentioned already the Dead sea scrolls, other examples of codices to think about are are Pistis Sophia and codex Jung (also part of  NHC) which was taken from Egypt by Mr. G. Quispel, one of the first translaters.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pistis_Sophia

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gilles_Quispel

BTW: I've met Quispel and some other translators of NHC personally. To me the NHC is not a hoax at all. The risks of corruption and misinfo are laying in the interpretions and manipulations by the many so called "scientifical professionals" and "historians". Quispel gave an interpretation which is a bridge to far for me; even he is a official historian, that is not enough to claim to be all knowing about that code, far from that.

As you said the reader is not able to take a few hours or days to study NHC or knowledge of over 1000 years old.
It maybe needs and deserves a lifetime or more to learn it what it is all about. Esp. with the NHC I would recommend every reader to be very careful to make conclusions to early, even if some "experts" are claiming to know the truth about it.

  Thank you Octahedron,  I knew of the Pistis of Sophia but will have to look into gilles quispel.  This stuff is living history and how some lived and thought back in those days.   The Burning of Rome libraries and others all around the world was such a loss.
  I will look into the Monte Cassino also. 
Thank you for this.

[Octahedron]

You are welcome.