GNOSTICISM

[Johann]

GNOSTICISM (from Greek word gnosis, which means "knowledge," cf. I Tim. 6:20)

The setting of the first century
 The Roman world of the first century was a time of eclecticism between the Eastern and Western religions.
The gods of the Greek and Roman pantheons were in ill repute.
The Mystery religions were very popular because of their emphasis on
personal relationship with the deity
secret knowledge

Secular Greek philosophy was popular and was merging with other worldviews.
 Into this world of eclectic religion came the exclusiveness of the Christian faith (Jesus is the only way to God, cf. John 3:36; 14:6; 1 John 5:12). Whatever the exact background of the heresy, it was an attempt to make the exclusivism of Christianity plausible and intellectually acceptable to a wider Greek-Roman audience. It is possible that Gnostic thought influenced fringe Jewish sects (i.e., one example: DSS Essene Community). This may explain some of the Jewish elements of NT books related to Gnosticism.

Some of the basic tenets of the heresy by references from 1 John.

a denial of the incarnation of Jesus Christ
a denial of the centrality of Jesus Christ in salvation
a lack of an appropriate Christian lifestyle
an emphasis on knowledge (often secret)
a tendency toward exclusivism and elitism

Incipient Gnosticism of the first century

The basic teachings of Incipient Gnosticism of the first century seem to have been an emphasis on the ontological (eternal) dualism between spirit and matter. Spirit (high god) was considered good, while matter was inherently evil. This dichotomy resembles
Platonism’s ideal versus physical
heavenly versus earthly dualism
invisible versus visible There was also an overemphasis on the importance of secret knowledge (passwords or secret codes which allow a soul to pass through the angelic spheres [aeons] up to the high god) necessary for salvation.
possibly an influence from Zoroastrianism (also a dualism)

There are two forms of Incipient Gnosticism which apparently could be in the background of 1 John
Docetic Gnosticism, which denies the true humanity of Jesus because matter is evil
Cerinthian Gnosticism, which identifies the Christ with one of many aeons or angelic levels between the good high god and evil matter. This "Christ Spirit" indwelt the man Jesus at his baptism and left him before his crucifixion.
of these two groups some practiced asceticism (if the body wants it, it is evil), the other antinomianism (if the body wants it, do it)
There is no written evidence of a developed system of Gnosticism in the first century. It is not until the middle of the second century that documented evidence existed (see Nag Hammadi Texts). For further information about "Gnosticism" see
The Gnostic Religion by Hans Jonas, published by Beacon Press
The Gnostic Gospels by Elaine Pagels, published by Random House
The Nag Hammadi Gnostic Texts and the Bible by Andrew Helmbold
The Anchor Bible Dictionary, vol. 2, pp. 1033-1040

The Heresy Today
1-The spirit of this heresy is present with us today when people try to combine Christian truth with other systems of thought.
2-The spirit of this heresy is present with us today when people emphasize "correct" doctrine to the exclusion of personal relationship and lifestyle faith.
3-The spirit of this heresy is present with us today when people turn Christianity into an exclusive intellectual eliteness.
4-The spirit of this heresy is present with us today when religious people turn to asceticism or antinomianism as the best way to find favor with God.

SPECIAL TOPIC: GNOSTICISM

Gnosticism -- Special Topic by Dr. Bob Utley, professor of hermeneutics (retired).

www.freebiblecommentary.org

 

[Johann]

I also believe that "the God most high", the God of Abraham, is referred to by Jesus as being "the Power", as He did not at that point say "the Father". The Power is not the same as the Gnostic Monad, though they seem similar. I also believe that the resurrection of Jesus Christ was actually a translation, which causes the somatic combustion of the physical body, after which the spiritual body may assume docetic consistency, but is no longer required to transmigrate. I also believe that transmigration is shown to be true in the book of Job, where it is clearly and repeatedly written that a general physical resurrection is not true (as spiritual resurrection is true), but then Job says that he will see his redeemer with his own eyes, after his skin (and therefore his life) is destroyed, which must therefore only happen by transmigration.

You made a terrible mistake @Terraphim-


"The God most high... is referred to by Jesus as being 'the Power'"
Issue: While it’s true that God is often referred to as "the Most High" (Hebrew: El Elyon) in the Old Testament (e.g., Genesis 14:18-20), and "Power" is one of the many attributes of God, Jesus primarily referred to God as "Father" during His earthly ministry. The consistent reference to God as "Father" is central to Jesus' teaching about the intimate and relational nature of God (e.g., Matthew 6:9, John 17:1).
Clarification: The phrase "the Power" might be seen as an attribute of God (His omnipotence), but it is not commonly a distinct name for God in the Bible. Also, Jesus referred to God as "Father" even in moments of great significance, such as in the Garden of Gethsemane (Matthew 26:39).

2. Comparison of "the Power" with the Gnostic Monad
Issue: The Gnostic Monad is a concept from Gnosticism, which posits a supreme, unknowable, and transcendent being beyond creation. Gnosticism is widely considered a heresy within Christianity because it departs from biblical teachings on the nature of God, creation, and salvation.
Clarification: While "the Power" as a term for God is not inherently problematic, suggesting that it is somehow related to or similar to the Gnostic Monad may create confusion. In Christian theology, God is both transcendent and personal, and He is knowable through Christ (John 1:18, Colossians 1:15).

Gnosticism, by contrast, often teaches that the true God is unknowable and distant, which is incompatible with the biblical understanding of God's relationship with humanity.

3. "The resurrection of Jesus Christ was actually a translation" Where you err!

Issue: The word "translation" here seems to be used to describe Jesus' resurrection, but it’s unclear and misleading. In traditional Christian belief, the resurrection of Jesus is understood as a bodily resurrection, meaning Jesus was raised physically from the dead (Luke 24:39, John 20:27), not a "translation" in the sense of being transported or transformed into another state.

Clarification: The New Testament is explicit that Jesus was raised in a glorified body, not merely in a spiritual or "docetic" form. Docetism was an early heresy that claimed Jesus' body was only an illusion, which contradicts orthodox Christian teaching that Jesus was fully human and fully divine (John 1:14, 1 John 4:2-3).

4. "Somatic combustion of the physical body"
Issue: The idea of "somatic combustion" (the burning or dissolution of the physical body) is not found anywhere in Christian Scripture.

The resurrection of Jesus is described as a bodily resurrection, where the physical body is transformed and glorified, not burned or destroyed (1 Corinthians 15:42-44). The tomb was empty, which indicates that Jesus' physical body was not destroyed, but transformed.
Clarification: Traditional Christian doctrine holds that Jesus' physical body was raised from the dead (Luke 24:3-7), and this forms the basis for Christian hope in the resurrection of the body (1 Corinthians 15:20-23).

5. "Transmigration is shown to be true in the book of Job"
Issue: Transmigration (often associated with reincarnation) is not a biblical concept.

The Bible teaches resurrection, not transmigration of souls (Hebrews 9:27).

The Book of Job does not support transmigration, but rather expresses Job's hope in seeing God after his death in his own resurrected body (Job 19:25-27).

This is a reference to the resurrection of the dead, not reincarnation or transmigration.
Clarification: Christian theology asserts that there is one resurrection at the end of time, where all will rise to face judgment (Daniel 12:2, John 5:28-29). The passage in Job you referred to is traditionally understood as Job’s hope in a physical resurrection, where he will see his Redeemer with his own eyes after death, not through a cycle of rebirth.

Therefore--

Your statement incorporates several non-biblical ideas, such as transmigration, docetism, and concepts loosely related to Gnosticism. These ideas conflict with core Christian beliefs about the nature of God, the resurrection of Christ, and the resurrection of the dead. It would be helpful to clarify that Jesus' resurrection was bodily and physical, that God is personal and relational as the Father, and that transmigration/reincarnation has no basis in biblical teaching.

J.

 

[Jack]

GNOSTICISM (from Greek word gnosis, which means "knowledge," cf. I Tim. 6:20)

"Knowledge" is the FEAR of God!

Psalm 111:10
10 The fear of the LORD is the beginning of wisdom;

 

[Johann]

Johann, although our beliefs differ in some respects, I'm thankful that you began this thread some time ago, such that I may present my defense, as I am new to this forum.

Welcome to the Forum @Terraphim-will respond later, 10.05 PM here in South Africa.

Shalom

J.

 

[Jack]

I'm not sure what you are saying here, but welcome to the thread, as Johann indicated.

The FEAR of God is a MAIN Bible doctrine.

Ecclesiastes 12:13
13 Fear God and keep his commandments, for this is the whole duty of man.

 

[ChristinaL]

@Johann

If your post is the orthodox position, why did you post it in the unorthodox section?

You neglected to mention that Gnostics, who were numerous, where exterminated by the Catholic church, such that there is not very much objective information about them.

Gnostics believed that only some people may be saved. Are Calvinists therefore Gnostic?

I've read that almost a quarter of all Christians believe that reincarnation is true. Are they therefore Gnostic?

As Christians have salvation that is based upon a personal relationship with Jesus Christ, wouldn't that be indicative of salvation that is based upon a personal knowledge? Are all Christians therefore Gnostic?

The Gnostic belief that the God of the Jews was not the highest God because He created imperfectly, was based upon the popular Jewish mystical medieval doctrine of tikkun olam "the reparation of the universe", which posits that there were moral flaws inherent in creation, which situation requires Jews to implement remediation for God's flaws. Are many Jews therefore Gnostic?

I (Terraphim) was banned from christianforums.net for supposedly being a Gnostic, although I believe that the common salvation is by grace through faith alone. I believe that everyone who has the capacity to understand the basic gospel is able to be saved by a confession of faith. I believe that Jesus Christ is the only begotten Son of God, and that He was the Word made flesh, physically. I believe that God created a perfect universe, and that the world has become imperfect due to the misuse of free will by angels and mankind. None of these things are Gnostic. I am therefore fundamentally not Gnostic.

However, I am unwilling to compromise my beliefs by discarding those which coincidentally happen to be similar to Gnostic beliefs. Does that make me Gnostic? No, it does not.

I also believe that "the God most high", the God of Abraham, is referred to by Jesus as being "the Power", as He did not at that point say "the Father". The Power is not the same as the Gnostic Monad, though they seem similar. I also believe that the resurrection of Jesus Christ was actually a translation, which causes the somatic combustion of the physical body, after which the spiritual body may assume docetic consistency, but is no longer required to transmigrate. I also believe that transmigration is shown to be true in the book of Job, where it is clearly and repeatedly written that a general physical resurrection is not true (as spiritual resurrection is true), but then Job says that he will see his redeemer with his own eyes, after his skin (and therefore his life) is destroyed, which must therefore only happen by transmigration.

The Gnostics have a reputation of believing things which destroy the fundiments of Christianity. I am not of such. I am not Gnostic. Any attempt to mischaracterize me as such, even incidentally, is slanderous.

Having a detailed knowledge of scripture, sola scriptura, is not the same thing as being Gnostic; bottom line.

Neither is building upon the true foundation of Jesus Christ necessarily intellectual elitism.

1Co 3:10 According to the grace of God which was given to me, as a wise master builder I have laid the foundation, and another builds on it. But let each one take heed how he builds on it.
1Co 3:11 For no other foundation can anyone lay than that which is laid, which is Jesus Christ.

Be blessed, be well.

Jesus never called God the Power. He always called Him the Father. The resurrection of Jesus was a literal physical resurrection of body, not some vague 'translation'. transmigration of souls is also nonsense. It is not mentioned in Job which does speak of a literal physical resurrection . Not transmigration of souls

 

[ChristinaL]

Thank you for your generous response. I can sense your conviction by faith, and I am glad.

Of course, you have presented a regular sort of response, which is not a surprise to me. Jesus warned us about believing in every Jewish tradition, and the same sort of circumstance has come about in Christianity. It is not surprising, given history. Any appeal to traditional Christianity does not necessarily hold water for me. Still, I can appreciate one's determination to defend the faith.


Believing that the Power is "the God most high" does not create confusion, rather is provides clarity and stability. The Power is not of the Presence of the Trinity, though it is one with it. Further, the Holy Spirit is not of the Godhead, though it is one with it. As the Power is formless and nameless, it is unknowable and distant in itself, but as it is the Spirit of God which extends itself through the Trinity, and then into the created hierarchy as the Holy Spirit, it becomes personal. The Tetragrammaton YHWH is of four letters, which are arranged in a circle. Reading them in either direction produces YHWH, just as the ecliptic is the same regardless of whether one is looking towards the south or the north, clockwise or counterclockwise. The Power is the origin point of the Y, which branches into three, which represents the Trinity. The Trinity is therefore represented by the next three letters, but not in circular arrangement, because the Son is the express image of the Father; HH. Therefore, the proper order of linear descent, as the Father is greater than the Son, is YHHW. Going from the circular form to the linear form describes a lightning bolt in the circle. The horizontal section of the lightning bolt goes from stage east to west, as we see Jesus face us at the right hand of the Power (as indicated by the Father's right hand, as we see his back). The bottom point of the diamond is the Holy Spirit; W, as the Paraclete is God with us, UU, that's W.


Yes, that's right, Doceticism is heretical. That is why I made it clear that Jesus was the Word made flesh, physically. His body became docetic only after his resurrection, which was a perfect Translation. A general Translation, is by contrast imperfect, but it is the same docetic Translation for us, though we generally would not have the power or need to soon present ourselves to the physical world docetically.

You don't need to further wear yourself out by explaining the traditional Christian thought on this matter, but feel free, if you find it to be a personal necessity.


1Co 13:3 And though I bestow all my goods to feed the poor, and though I give my body to be burned, but have not love, it profits me nothing.


I have stated, in brief, that the contrary position is correct, as Transmigration is in fact supported by Job. Physical resurrection, except for rare miraculous events, is not what the General Resurrection is about. The General Resurrection is spiritual resurrection, that is, the resurrection of the spirit Body, 1Co.15:42,44. The General Resurrection is not end-time, it is ongoing, that is, it is concurrent spiritual resurrection, Eph.2:5,6. Further still, the General Resurrection is not en-mass, but rather it is intimate, Luk.17:21/ Gal.4:19/ Col.2:7/ Act.2:2.


That is what you believe, according to your tradition. I am beginning to show you that your traditional form does not teach the Regeneration of the spirit Body as the second birth, but instead it teaches error. That does not mean that you are not saved, or that you are not spiritually alive in the heaven of heavens, that's the juxtaposed kingdom of heaven. However, you are confused in your tradition, wherein is the actual heresy.

Be blessed, be well.

Oh come on man do you even know what transmigration of souls even is? It is the moving of the soul from one body to another. That is why john the Baptist had to correct the Pharisees, that he was not Elijah incarnate as the Pharisees had been corrupted by Greek Hellenism and believed in this heresy. JtB was not the physical reincarnation of Elijah but taught in the spirit and power of Elijah. Physical resurrection is truth because your own body is being reconstructed.

The GODHEAD is Father, Son and Holy Ghost, all part of the Godhead, not "one within it". And I dont know where you get this thing about YHWH being a circle, that is more manmade garbage like how some picture the Godhead being a triquetra or one body with 3 heads

 

[Johann]

Oh come on man do you even know what transmigration of souls even is? It is the moving of the soul from one body to another. That is why john the Baptist had to correct the Pharisees, that he was not Elijah incarnate as the Pharisees had been corrupted by Greek Hellenism and believed in this heresy. JtB was not the physical reincarnation of Elijah but taught in the spirit and power of Elijah. Physical resurrection is truth because your own body is being reconstructed.

The GODHEAD is Father, Son and Holy Ghost, all part of the Godhead, not "one within it". And I dont know where you get this thing about YHWH being a circle, that is more manmade garbage like how some picture the Godhead being a triquetra or one body with 3 heads

Welcome to the Forum @ChristinaL.

J.

 

[Johann]

Please do not deride me, I have only been polite to you. I noticed that your name is at the bottom of Johann's OP, below the signature, with a emoji. It seems that you may have some familiarity with Johann, and you may feel that it is meet for you to uphold his point of view. That is well, if you will. Please do so in a polite manner, as you are speaking with an old scholar who has imperfectly suffered the life, and who has risen from spiritual death.

I don't have any "friends" here @Terraphim , so feel free to continue this thread- you have my full permission.

J.

 

[Johann]

Right, I noticed that. I meant to mention that all of my astronomical discussions are spoken from the perspective of the northern hemisphere. Those who are in the southern hemisphere will have to adapt the material. I will try to include that in my signature piece, when I round out my profile. I've been hesitant to put the effort into it so far, as I was banned as spam, before I even posted. I was then unbanned here, however. I should put some effort into my profile, though.

Shalom Hosanna!

BbBw

Shalom Achi.

J.

 

[ChristinaL]

Hellenism exerted some influence on some Jews, and it may be supposed that that influence was more prevalent within the generally more liberal Pharisees. I am unaware of whether the Greeks or Pharisees believed in Transmigration.


Yes, thank you, I was also thinking of making mention of this along with the false "type" approach. This is actually true, but in a different manner than usually supposed.

Luk_1:17 He will also go before Him in the spirit and power of Elijah, 'TO TURN THE HEARTS OF THE FATHERS TO THE CHILDREN,' and the disobedient to the wisdom of the just, to make ready a people prepared for the Lord."

The reason that I did not mention it at that time is that I did not want to overly complicate that section. You see, the difficulty lies in the fact that most people understand that quote from Malachi to mean that "in the spirit and power" is saying that JtB would be like Elijah. Actually, that quote shows that "in the spirit" is referring to the Translated soul/spirit Body of JtB; "and power" refers to the spiritual Generation of JtB, that is the level of his post-Translational spiritual ascension.


I do not understand what you are saying here.


The actual quote is:

With it, not within it. I will not debate this, beyond giving an explanation.

I was referring to the ordering of the Godhead vs. the Trinity. I know that most Christians view them as being the same thing. However, even as there are two different words, the words actually refer to two different things. The Godhead is the Power, the Father, and the Son. The Trinity of the Presence is defined by the fact that these entities have spiritual form, or presence, which the Power does not. The Trinity is the usual Father, Son, and Holy Spirit, which are three in one.


Please do not deride me, I have only been polite to you. I noticed that your name is at the bottom of Johann's OP, below the signature, with a emoji. It seems that you may have some familiarity with Johann, and you may feel that it is meet for you to uphold his point of view. That is well, if you will. Please do so in a polite manner, as you are speaking with an old scholar who has imperfectly suffered the life, and who has risen from spiritual death.

The circle of justice is represented by the stone of turning, Gilgal; that's the stone of rolling, of the empty tomb. The stone of destiny is as:

Mat 21:42 Jesus said to them, "Have you never read in the Scriptures: 'THE STONE WHICH THE BUILDERS REJECTED HAS BECOME THE CHIEF CORNERSTONE. THIS WAS THE LORD'S DOING, AND IT IS MARVELOUS IN OUR EYES' ?
Mat 21:43 "Therefore I say to you, the kingdom of God will be taken from you and given to a nation bearing the fruits of it.
Mat 21:44 And whoever falls on this stone will be broken; but on whomever it falls, it will grind him to powder."

As I recall, link to: Wikipedia: Mills of God
translated into English by Henry Wadsworth Longfellow ("Retribution", Poetic Aphorisms, 1846):[11]
Though the mills of God grind slowly; Yet they grind exceeding small; Though with patience He stands waiting, With exactness grinds He all.

Indeed, as slowly as the precession of the equinoxes along the ecliptic, in the reverse direction of the monthly zodiac.


(south or north, in the northern hemisphere) That is, our north is towards the pole star, Polaris, around which the motion is counter-clockwise. Our south is towards the ecliptic, the path of the sun, which apparent direction of motion is clockwise.

Though the ancient symbolism of the zodiac may seem contrived, the lights in the firmament of the heavens are for signs and seasons, Gen.1:14. Understanding these signs is integral to a deeper understanding of scripture.

BbBw

The Godhead is the Father, Son and Holy Ghost.

I already explained to you the truth of Elijah and the lie of transmigration. It is as I said it and you choose to ignore it

"Please do not deride me" you say. Well excuse me if you find the truth painful but it is what it is. You are drawing from sources that have no place in a Christian life so of course I am going to "deride" you for it. Far too many people need a good boot up the butt for their own good because no other approach works for really hard core stubborn people.

You said
The circle of justice is represented by the stone of turning, Gilgal; that's the stone of rolling, of the empty tomb. The stone of destiny is as:

Mat 21:42 Jesus said to them, "Have you never read in the Scriptures: 'THE STONE WHICH THE BUILDERS REJECTED HAS BECOME THE CHIEF CORNERSTONE. THIS WAS THE LORD'S DOING, AND IT IS MARVELOUS IN OUR EYES' ?
Mat 21:43 "Therefore I say to you, the kingdom of God will be taken from you and given to a nation bearing the fruits of it.
Mat 21:44 And whoever falls on this stone will be broken; but on whomever it falls, it will grind him to powder."

Good golly man more mystical nonsense. Circle of justice...........stone of destiny..pagan gnostic garbage. You really need to learn to stop reading into the bible things that arent there

 

[ChristinaL]

Yes, God is love, but a man cannot see God (the Father) and live. The circle of justice, YHWH, is the same in either the clockwise or counter-clockwise direction, but in the spiritual ascension, believers see the Father as did Moses, from the back. Going in the opposite direction, that is spiritual descension, the wicked eventually see the Father face to face, which is perdition, the final death of the soul.

God loves everyone implicitly, but only some explicitly. That begins when believers spiritually ascend from the imputed righteousness of the Day of Salvation unto the forensic justification of the Day of Redemption. That's when God the Father covers the believer with His rest from His wrath. That's the Foundation of Peace, Jeru-shalom.

BbBw

Man cannot see the Holy Trinity and live. That is what the scripture reference means as well as the one that says No man hath seen God at any time. Abraham saw the face of the pre-incarnate Jesus and it was the same Jesus that Moses saw, though only from the back.

But it also mean no flesh can see God and live. When we go to heaven we shall see the faces of the Godhead.
And we are "covered" the moment we turn and are saved, not just when we go to heaven.

 

[Johann]

Thank you. I have to remind myself that it is not my OP, and therefore I am the antagonist here, not the protagonist.


It is well that brothers will have differences of opinion, and yet are still brothers in Christ.

It was not my intention to fully describe every aspect of my faith here. My thesis here is simply that I don't view myself as being Gnostic, first because I do not have the slightest bit of Gnostic background, as my beliefs are sola scriptura, and second because my soteriology is almost entirely of the Wesleyan line, unto Pentecostal holiness. However, it appeared that John Wesley had to backpedal when he was accused of tending towards synergistic semi-Pelagianism, which I do not. In this regard, I believe in natural depravity, not total depravity, which means that I reject Martin Luther's bondage of the will. Instead, I know that free will is necessary for salvation, and deterministic predestination before birth is incorrect. All may be saved, but not all will be saved, or resurrected. The Resurrection of the just and unjust refers to the Two Witnesses; the just (saved by supplicative grace) Jews and Islamics, and the unjust (saved by imputed/infused grace) Protestants and Catholics. Biblical predestination is conferred by faith, and it is in reference to one's ultimate destiny, that is either abiding security in heaven or perdition in hell. Note also the rejection of eternal security, whether here or hereafter. My view of prevenient grace is not a grace which allows one the possibility of overcoming total depravity to be saved (that's a patch that tears away), but rather it is God's grace in allowing us to live at all in a sinful, spiritually broken state, with our free will unaffected thereby, such that we may accept that which is fully "worthy of all acceptance", 1Ti.1:13, that is salvation in a personal relationship with Jesus Christ.

Mainly what I am saying is that, IMO, in order for someone to be Gnostic, they have to believe in Gnostic salvation. If one is not "saved" in a Gnostic manner, then they are not Gnostic. My common salvation is by grace through faith alone; that's man's free will faith united with God's gift of faith, "from faith to faith", Rom.1:17.

Proverbs puts it this way:
Pro 16:1 The preparations of the heart belong to man, But the answer of the tongue is from the LORD.

The free will "preparations of the heart" towards faith "belong to man". The "answer of the tongue" refers to a man's confession of faith. It's somewhat debatable whether unconfessed faith provides an assurance of salvation, as does a confessed faith, which here receives the promise of God that He will answer, undoubtedly with the free gift of salvation.

So, people will say what they will, but it is what Jesus says that matters. Scriptural Gnostic similarities aside, the central determinant concerning Gnosticism is the question of salvation, and I am clearly not Gnostic.

BbBw.

So-what's wrong here?

J.

 

[ChristinaL]

@ChristinaL
I would not likely have diginified your response with an answer if Johann had not given it a thumbs up. You have moved from being derisive to being verbally abusive, at the least.

It appears that you favor an emphatic mode of discourse, rather that a scholarly one. Mockery only shows that one is feeling threatened by superiority, and is lacking an adequate response.

I cannot help you if you cannot recognize a plainly definative Biblical proof, such as I gave for Transmigration.

I cannot help you if you cannot open your eyes and see the stars, and try to understand the signs and seasons thereof.

Ask yourself, if you will, why our Galaxy is called the Milky Way, and the Christian walk is also called the way.

What is Mazzoroth, if you truely have understanding, such that God would bring it forth? Who was the Dedicated One, the Elect One, who was like a Nazzarite, of Nazzareth, who brought forth the way, the truth, and the life? What was the sign of the Son of Man, that the Magi knew, and when will it come again? What is the bright and morning star? Let there be no shadow of turning with you.

So sorry that I cannot go out clubbing with you. Good Day.

BbBw.

First of all you are the one who needs help not me. My eyes and heart are opened and i give no quarter to the gnostic nonsense you post. Secondly if how I responded constitutes verbal abuse you need to find another board if you are so afraid of your wittle feewings being hurt (me playing the world's tiniest violin here)