Guest guest Posted June 16, 2003 Report Share Posted June 16, 2003 In a message dated 6/16/03 10:05:16 AM Eastern Daylight Time, Ammachi writes: > Christianity split early on into the Gnostic or John church and the Peter > church. The former was forced underground by the latter (Inquisition) in the > form of Free Masonry. It split over the role of the feminine (women were > spiritual leaders in the John church) and over the issue that Avram notes: > no priest is required to contact God who is within I do not know much about church history, but this does not seem correct to me. I thought that the John church was the mainstream? It looks like the Peter is the mainstream. The Thomas church (is there one?) is not mentioned. Because the author is saying that the Thomas gospel disagrees with the John gospel, the latter which is in the "official" church. Since Pagels includes the John gospel in the official church, contrasting it with the withheld Thomas gospel, it seemed to me that John is the main church view. She never mentioned Peter in the article I read; he did not write a gospel, I guess. Care to educate me a bit on church matters? Avram Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 16, 2003 Report Share Posted June 16, 2003 Regarding the IAM technique, is this intended to replace the mantra She has given? I don't know much about this technique right now, and would appreciate this clarification. Avram Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 16, 2003 Report Share Posted June 16, 2003 In an odd coincidence I have been listening to a lot of the local "Sacred Heart" Catholic radio programs. They have to fill air time with something, so have a lot of church scholars talking about the history of the church. They were just discussing the fact that the Church of Constantinople (Eastern Orthodox) followed John and the western Church (Rome) followed Peter. At least that's what I think I heard. Thomas wasn't mentioned. However, this is the same Thomas (Thomas of Syria) that some scholars (and myself) believe went to India in 6 A.D. and founded the Syrian Christian Church, which to this day still has Aramaic words in its liturgy. Thomas was evenutally killed in India, not for preaching about Jesus, but for refusing to bow to the Hindu dieties. It was the Portugese, who came much later (15th century?) who conducted the Portugese inquisition against the Keralan Christians because they were horrified to find Christians believing in astrology and reincarnation. As I understand it, the Syrian Christians (one of whom I used to work with) are the old upper crust, and the Catholic Christians are lower on the social totem pole. And now the musical interlude.... Hare Krsna, Krsna! Jyotsna --- sprose1 wrote: > In a message dated 6/16/03 10:05:16 AM Eastern > Daylight Time, > Ammachi writes: > > > Christianity split early on into the Gnostic or > John church and the Peter > > church. The former was forced underground by the > latter (Inquisition) in the > > form of Free Masonry. It split over the role of > the feminine (women were > > spiritual leaders in the John church) and over the > issue that Avram notes: > > no priest is required to contact God who is within > > I do not know much about church history, but this > does not seem correct to > me. I thought that the John church was the > mainstream? It looks like the Peter > is the mainstream. The Thomas church (is there > one?) is not mentioned. > Because the author is saying that the Thomas gospel > disagrees with the John > gospel, the latter which is in the "official" > church. Since Pagels includes the > John gospel in the official church, contrasting it > with the withheld Thomas > gospel, it seemed to me that John is the main church > view. She never mentioned > Peter in the article I read; he did not write a > gospel, I guess. > > Care to educate me a bit on church matters? Avram > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been > removed] > > SBC DSL - Now only $29.95 per month! http://sbc. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 16, 2003 Report Share Posted June 16, 2003 Namah Shivaya, > I do not know much about church history, but this does not seem correct to me. > I thought that the John church was the mainstream? It looks like the Peter is > the mainstream. The Thomas church (is there one?) is not mentioned. Because > the author is saying that the Thomas gospel disagrees with the John gospel, > the latter which is in the "official" church. Since Pagels includes the John > gospel in the official church, contrasting it with the withheld Thomas gospel, > it seemed to me that John is the main church view. She never mentioned Peter > in the article I read; he did not write a gospel, I guess. You are referring to "John the Evangalist". In the book to which I referred, they are talking about John the Baptist, who was marginalized by the official church. "the Council [of Nicea] established that only four Gospels would be included in the New Testament and rejected forever over fifty other books with more less equal claim to be considered authentic...." Among them the Gospels of Thomas, Philip and Mary. premarupa Aum Amriteshvaryai Namah Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.