The Quran and Gnostiscism

[Dave]

Where does a Gnostic draw the line for source data? He doesn't.

The Gnostic Gospels, science data, historical evidence, the Book of Enoch, or the writings of Origin, or other early church fathers all hold evidence to a bigger picture of spiritual reality than "church" will admit.

Interesting thing about the Quran - an entire chapter dedicated to the Jinn. The Jinn are not exactly the same in origin as the 1/2 breed Watchers and Archons. The Jinn are born of a puff of smoke.

But the mission of each identical - mess with humanity - from a clandestine disguised false message - keeping humanity quagmired in the mud of our reality.

The concept of multidimensionalism also relies on the Quran's continued references to 7 localities of heaven.

[Ali]

Hello David!

Actually Quran does distinguish the divine word from the pseudo divine word and differentiates the former as the word of Allah and the latter as forgery:

So woe to those who write the Book with their hands, then say, 'This is from God,' that they may sell it for a little price; so woe to them for what their hands have written, and woe to them for their earnings. (2:79)

Now this big discussion comes forth that how can we know if an ancient manuscript is divine or not. Solving this is quite easy: We have Torah, we have Gospel, we have Quran, we have Psalm, thus we have a knowledge center by which we can compare and analyze other manuscripts.

Take the pseudo Gospel of Barnabas for example! The moment that we find contradictions between this book and other major books (Torah and Quran), contradictions such as "9 heavens" or "hell for seven sins only", it becomes clear that the book of Barnabas is no more than a forgery.

So my word is that as far as we acknowledge three reference points of (Torah, Gospel and Quran) as our basis, it would be easy to draw a line between the truth and the forgery. Without that reference system, we would have too much problems!

Thank you.
Ali.

[Dave]

[font=Verdana]Now this big discussion comes forth that how can we know if an ancient manuscript is divine or not. Solving this is quite easy: We have Torah, we have Gospel, we have Quran, we have Psalm, thus we have a knowledge center by which we can compare and analyze other manuscripts.

Take the pseudo Gospel of Barnabas for example! The moment that we find contradictions between this book and other major books (Torah and Quran), contradictions such as "9 heavens" or "hell for seven sins only", it becomes clear that the book of Barnabas is no more than a forgery.

How well said - just as today - religion has always been a money making proposition. The elite paying for manuscripts seeking that one sentence that would change them

So my word is that as far as we acknowledge three reference points of (Torah, Gospel and Quran) as our basis, it would be easy to draw a line between the truth and the forgery. Without that reference system, we would have too much problems!

John 16:12-15

12 "I have yet many things to say to you, but you cannot bear them now.13 When the Spirit of truth comes, he will guide you into all the truth; for he will not speak on his own authority, but whatever he hears he will speak, and he will declare to you the things that are to come. 14 He will glorify me, for he will take what is mine and declare it to you. 15 All that the Father has is mine; therefore I said that he will take what is mine and declare it to you.

The Truth Will Make You Free - John 8:31,32

31 So Jesus was saying to those Jews who had believed Him, “ If you continue in My word, then you are truly disciples of Mine; 32 and you will know the truth, and the truth will make you free.”

Ali,

First let me say - thank you for your participation

This is a great example of the difference between us. I agree 100% with Pat's question about the validity of ancient text. I agree with 98% of your response. As someone who loves old text let me say:

If the Gospel of Matthew or Luke is in agreement with the Torah, or even Quran - all that proves is that these old text agree as literature - nothing more.

The Greeks, the Romans, the Arabs, the Egyptians, as well as the Hebrew all wrote about the Romans tearing down the Temple of Salomon in 70AD - all these old text agree - doesn't mean any of the are inspired.

Christianity is a personal experience - alone in prayer - call it meditation if you want - communion with my Creator - the Helper - the Holy Spirit.

So, I would add that - for me personally - I consider ALL ancient text - in fact, ALL text regardless source or time relevance (meaning current science theory). Then each source is weighted in validity and credibility through prayer and consideration.

What does that mean? Different for each of us I think. Walking as a Gnostic - I am open to a bigger picture - God's plan, evidently chose the Jews to be separate and unique, from all other cultures. It was foretold that Israel would reject and kill their own Messiah. Followers of Christ fracture into everything from Rome to me and you. Then along comes Mohammad.

My point - Ambiguity is by design - God's plan - some are called - some are called elsewhere. The application of our callings create unity or separatism. Extrovert self ritchous people that are out to save the world are always more harmful than obscure introverted soul searching quest walkers.

[Ali]

Walking as a Gnostic - I am open to a bigger picture -

My opinion about this bigger picture:

Enter ye in at the strait gate: for wide is the gate, and broad is the way, that leadeth to destruction, and many there be which go in thereat: 14 Because strait is the gate, and narrow is the way, which leadeth unto life, and few there be that find it. Matt 7:13-14 (KJV)

I think divine revelation's picture is not as wide and big as you have portrayed. Its rather like a strait as Gospel refers.

My recommendation is to pass the gate that starts from "Torah" and ends in "Quran".

[Dave]

Enter ye in at the strait gate: for wide is the gate, and broad is the way, that leadeth to destruction, and many there be which go in thereat: 14 Because strait is the gate, and narrow is the way, which leadeth unto life, and few there be that find it. Matt 7:13-14 (KJV)


I am so glad you chose this particular verse.


You are speaking to a small group here. A group that just cant regurgitate church rhetoric - or quote scripture line for line to each other (although - I/we are not afraid of that challenge either) BUT - here is the trap of quoting scripture one line at a time.

Matt 7:13-14 --- what does this mean? Does "narrow is the way" absolute doctrine proving that that narrow way is your way - my way -

" the way, which leadeth unto life, and few there be that find it. " - This verse takes on entirely new meaning if Gnostic Gospel written by Peter - tells a story about Christ appearing to Peter and Bartholomew - Christ is quoted saying - follow me into heaven and then Christ ascended right before them. Only, to return and ask - were you not listening - why did you not follow me" (from Memory)

Is that narrow way - simply salvation - redemption - justification (whatever religious term you want to apply) - Gospel - Quran -- or, could it be something more - much more - ascension? Enoch, Elisha, Christ, and even Mohammad, all are said to have ascended.

Broad is the gate - maturing from childhood to my age - has experienced much - seen much - sampled much - yet I find myself on this path today.


Because strait is the gate, and narrow is the way,
Again here we are at the same difference between us. Is this a spiritual reference - or - text reference? How can this possible indicate that this text - or that text - is the preferential text -
or preferential doctrine.

As a NT guy, I have always equated the 'narrow is the way' concept along side the 'being born again'. Only if ye be born again can you enter the Kingdom of God. I invite you to start a new thread on this very subject !!!

So my point - Broad is the gate - and it is our job to funnel all that to find that narrow path - the whole point of Gnosticism.

Ponder this - do I really see this verse differently - or am I just twisting it around to justify my point? AND - there you have the problem of line by line scripture debates.

[Ali]

No single verse of Quran points to ascension of Muhammad ! This claim is derived from hadith texts, not Quran.

I believe in literalism. Quran teaches that all scriptures from Allah have "clarity of discourse". That's why I cite Gospel/Quran/Torah verses, because I see a great amount of clarity in them.

The key for grasping the clarity of divine text is to approach them without any "doctrine, presumption or ideology". Otherwise any preoccupation will cloud the divine texture.

[Dave]

They are the best tools we have. Scripture line by line.

The point I meant to make clear is this: You are speaking to a group right here - that has tried to remove ourselves from the line by line arguments that christian preachers twist and warp into whatever they choose to believe today. - So, to throw out any one verse and claim it means something dramatic will always be met with some skepticism.

It is not that I doubt scripture in any way - here is where the doubt comes in - I - have stepped away from previously taught churchisms - so when I look at scripture - I have to make conscious effort to unlearn christian mythology - pseudo beliefs -

It must be nice that you are so confident in the literal accuracy of the Quran - as you know christendom consist on many text. Some draw the line to just the NT, some NT+OT, some include Jubilees, Maccabees - I want to read a lot from Enoch. Where does one draw the line for which to consider and which to not? The fear is in omitting something that later becomes relevant. So a Gnostic includes all the text - that is how we met - you reading the Gospel and me seeking word studies from Quran and Torah.

The Confusion I Ponder

[Ali]

David,

There is one common plantation I'm seeing everywhere across the terrain of Christianity. Its clearly a church injection and that's a false teaching, which claims after Jesus everyone could receive Holy Spirit, everyone could be "inspired" and everyone could write inspired words! This is in clear contrast with Quran where Jesus is the last "navi" (or prophet) of Israelite, where prophet-hood is finished after Jesus ascension, where the 12 individuals are called "close followers", not apostles or messengers.

But church wants to present a loose and a wide strait in which not only close followers could receive inspired words but even a non-close follower like Paul or John Patmos of revelation could write "inspired words" as well!

I see the church as a system functioning to blur the message of Gospel, by representing "human words" as "inspired words" in the course of history. But then Quran came and caught the church red handed! That's why the church's enemy #1 is Muhammad and his book!

And some there are of them that are common folk not knowing the Book, but only fancies and mere conjectures. So woe to those who write the Book with their hands, then say, 'This is from God,' that they may sell it for a little price; so woe to them for what their hands have written, and woe to them for their earnings. (2:78-79)

In my opinion, the very first thing a Christian needs to do is to refer to Quran, in order to fix his politics of naming and politics of inspiration.

I am hearing many Christians are leaving Christianity because of all these church's false representations. Unfortunately they do not know that Quran already has provided them a clear reference for fixing the historical distortions of which Christianity has gone through, without demanding the Christians to convert to Quran at all!

The point every Christian needs to understand is that Quran has never wanted Christianity to convert to Quran! Rather it has wanted them "to fix" their historical and interpretive distortions via the reference framework of the divine word of Quran.

The only problem is that most Christians don't take this book serious (triumph for the church!) and yet complain about the injections of Church at the same time!

Without a reference point, no one can do anything efficient at all.