Delafruita:
if i had known you weren't a well informed person,i probably wouldnt have posted on this thread.
m
Mr Anony on the other hand is a reasonable fella.his arguments are concise and though most of the time we dont agree,i am made to work hard and do more research just to prove my point.with you,i dont need to unless you prove me otherwise by granting my wish.tellme about the source of the magdalene gosspel

Tell me u want to hear the story, check it along the posts. Please stop using uneccessary comment to love-vendor ur way, it makes no sense.

Delafruita:
did any of this subordinates in anyway confirm paul's claim of the encounter on the road to damascus?

Please stop asking childish questions. Like i said, go and read ur bible.

Delafruita:
you mean anything that isnt in the bible isnt "inspiredby god".however,its a well known fact that not all the gospels were put in the Bible and i know you know that.so what is the basis for your condemnation of the gospel according to mary magdalene?

Dude, If you were conversant with the bible, you would know that the passage you quoted sounds completely out of place. It is not even about being canonized or not canonized.

Mr_Anony:
Dude, If you were conversant with the bible, you would know that the passage you quoted sounds completely out of place. It is not even about being canonized or not canonized.

Mr. Athony, for once who do u side? U said u somehow concur to his Magdalene gospel yet u quote his wrong. U also said u make alot of research before u comment, i don't see that guru here. Guy be frank, are u confused or are u commenting for fun?

Castos: There was this regime of a certain pope who organised a group to search for the lost cup used during the last supper(the story was a lie). When this group found the cup, they SAID that they found a scrole beside the cup.(who conjured such a coincidence?) They brought back the cup along side the scrole(holding the duplicate). After telling their story, they urged the pope to tell the people what the content was saying.(the content: that Jesus married Magdalene). As said: the pope said that it will spoil the gospel and bring chaos, confusion and loss of faith. Then he destroid the scrole(not knowing about the duplicate). Then those Anti christ went about preaching against Christ and puclishing that SAID gospel(which was a living lie). The content can be seen in a book calle The DAVINCI CODE.

now i can confirm that you are highly ignorant.do you think you're discussing with a kid in kindergaten or with one of your church kids?
you said "one pope".which pope?
you even mentioned da vinci code in your annoying theory.a novel written by dan brown is now your go-to-encyclopedia.do you even know what da vinci code is?do you know who leonardo da vinci is?it is claimed that in leonardo's potrayal of the last supper,the person at jesus right hand was actually mary magdalene and not apostle john.it is also claimed that the absence of a chalice at the table indicates that leonardo was aware of this fact .it was then claimed thay mary magdalene is the holy grail and the carrier of jesus bloodline by been his wife.her relics are believed to be protected by the priory of sion of which leonardo da vinci was a member.
this is the da vinci code.the "disciple jesus loved" was believed to refer to john but is claimed to actually refer to mary magdalene.so it is claimed that whenever jesus spoke about the "disciple he loves" he is actually speaking of mary magdalene hence why it is callled a code
as for your analogy as regards the origin of the gospel according to mary magdalene,its total bollocks.
the text was discovered in 1896 in egypt as part of a tth century papyrus codex and is believed to have been written in the 2nd century.aside from the magdalene gospel,other works contained in the codex included the "sophia of christ" and the gospel according to thomas and phillip.
one advice,whenever you're not certain of certain things,ask google

Mr_Anony:
Dude, If you were conversant with the bible, you would know that the passage you quoted sounds completely out of place. It is not even about being canonized or not canonized.

i agree that it sounds completely out of place.however,that is the reason it wasnt included in the Bible because it conflicted with paul's teachings.

Delafruita:
i agree that it sounds completely out of place.however,that is the reason it wasn't included in the Bible because it conflicted with paul's teachings.

It is not just about Paul's teachings, The "Jesus" presented here does not sound at all like the Jesus I know.

Castos: Mr. Athony, for once who do u side? U said u somehow concur to his Magdalene gospel yet u quote his wrong. U also said u make alot of research before u comment, i don't see that guru here. Guy be frank, are u confused or are u commenting for fun?

fear not my friend.Mr_Anony and i are on different sides but we still manage to make good conversation because he doesnt respond with confusing and childish scenarios like your davinci "one pope" tale.if you read his earlier post again,he made a good case for his non-acceptance of the gospel according to mary.
in short,its like you need serious bible study.you know next to nothing about the bible,jesus and xtianityy

Mr_Anony:
It is not just about Paul's teachings, The "Jesus" presented here does not sound at all like the Jesus I know.

Mr_Anony:
It is not just about Paul's teachings, The "Jesus" presented here does not sound at all like the Jesus I know.

lol.which jesus do you know?the one potrayed by luke(who never met him) or the one potrayed by mark(who also never met him) or the one potrayed by matthew(which is obviously a work of fiction) or the one potrayed by paul(who never met him) or the one potrayed by mary magdalene(who knew jesus,ate with him,walked with him and was present at his crucifixion and was the first one to see him after he arose)

Delafruita:
now i can confirm that you are highly ignorant.do you think you're discussing with a kid in kindergaten or with one of your church kids?
you said "one pope".which pope?
you even mentioned da vinci code in your annoying theory.a novel written by dan brown is now your go-to-encyclopedia.do you even know what da vinci code is?do you know who leonardo da vinci is?it is claimed that in leonardo's potrayal of the last supper,the person at jesus right hand was actually mary magdalene and not apostle john.it is also claimed that the absence of a chalice at the table indicates that leonardo was aware of this fact .it was then claimed thay mary magdalene is the holy grail and the carrier of jesus bloodline by been his wife.her relics are believed to be protected by the priory of sion of which leonardo da vinci was a member.
this is the da vinci code.the "disciple jesus loved" was believed to refer to john but is claimed to actually refer to mary magdalene.so it is claimed that whenever jesus spoke about the "disciple he loves" he is actually speaking of mary magdalene hence why it is callled a code
as for your analogy as regards the origin of the gospel according to mary magdalene,its total bollocks.
the text was discovered in 1896 in egypt as part of a tth century papyrus codex and is believed to have been written in the 2nd century.aside from the magdalene gospel,other works contained in the codex included the "sophia of christ" and the gospel according to thomas and phillip.
one advice,whenever you're not certain of certain things,ask google

Hey take it easy there, i may not know much but this is my own side of the story. Forgive my memory for not remembering the particular pope as stated. One thing u should know: we all read read and read all those things we say. Whether read from Google or anywhere, it was a human who pasted it there not a spirit and we were no witnesses. Say ur opinion, defend it and be left with it. I knew someone will disagree with me and my guess was right,"You". I've heard u alright, but note, u're left with ur opinion.

Castos: Mr. Athony, for once who do u side? U said u somehow concur to his Magdalene gospel yet u quote his wrong. U also said u make alot of research before u comment, i don't see that guru here. Guy be frank, are u confused or are u commenting for fun?

Uhm Castos, If you were conversant with the bible, you will immediately notice that something is out of place here, what this Mary is talking about here does not tally with the message of the bible.

It sounds to me like someone trying to promote an unfavorable idea but using bible characters to give his/her idea some authenticity. My suspicion is that it is probably a gnostic text. Notice how Andrew in the passage is used to anticipate people's possible doubts and then proceeds to ease their concerns.

Even the way "Jesus" talks in the passage is unlike how Jesus really talked in other parts of scripture. It sounds like someone trying to explain some complex mystic philosophy in much the same way a New Age practitioner might do.

I assure you Castos, I am neither confused nor am I posting just for the fun of it. I am serious.

Castos: Hey take it easy there, i may not know much but this is my own side of the story. Forgive my memory for not remembering the particular pope as stated. One thing u should know: we all read read and read all those things we say. Whether read from Google or anywhere, it was a human who pasted it there not a spirit and we were no witnesses. Say ur opinion, defend it and be left with it. I knew someone will disagree with me and my guess was right,"You". I've heard u alright, but note, u're left with ur opinion.

first,you dont have "your own story"
second,you didnt even quote the novel correctly
third,it was just a novel
fourth,history teaches far more than any other source.i never accept anything as fact unless it can be crossreferenced with history.

Delafruita:

lol.which jesus do you know?the one potrayed by luke(who never met him) or the one potrayed by mark(who also never met him) or the one potrayed by matthew(which is obviously a work of fiction) or the one potrayed by paul(who never met him) or the one potrayed by mary magdalene(who knew jesus,ate with him,walked with him and was present at his crucifixion and was the first one to see him after he arose)

The one who has been revealed to me.
The one who lives in me and I in Him.
The one who came died and rose again and mediates on my behalf to the Father.
The one in whom I place all my hope and all my trust.
The one who is the author and finisher of my faith.
The one who will come back for me in the fullness of time.
That's the Jesus I am talking about.

Mr_Anony:
Uhm Castos, If you were conversant with the bible, you will immediately notice that something is out of place here, what this Mary is talking about here does not tally with the message of the bible.

It sounds to me like someone trying to promote an unfavorable idea but using bible characters to give his/her idea some authenticity. My suspicion is that it is probably a gnostic text. Notice how Andrew in the passage is used to anticipate people's possible doubts and then proceeds to ease their concerns.

Even the way "Jesus" talks in the passage is unlike how Jesus really talked in other parts of scripture. It sounds like someone trying to explain some complex mystic philosophy in much the same way a New Age practitioner might do.

I assure you Castos, I am neither confused nor am I posting just for the fun of it. I am serious.

i guess you have also not read the sophia of christ.here's an excerpt

After he rose from the dead, his twelve disciples and seven women continued to be his followers, and went to Galilee onto the mountaincalled "Divination and Joy". When they gathered together and were perplexed about the underlying reality of the universe and the plan, and the holy providence, and the power of the authorities, and about everything the Savior is doing with them in the secret of the holy plan, the Savior appeared - not in his previous form, but in the invisible spirit. And his likeness resembles a great angel of light. But his resemblance I must not describe. No mortal flesh could endure it, but only pure, perfect flesh, like that which he taught us about onthe mountain called "Of the Olives" in Galilee.
And he said: "Peace be to you, My peace I give you!" And they all marveled and were afraid. The Savior laughed and said to them:"What are you thinking about? Are you perplexed? What are you searching for?"
Philip said: "For the underlying reality of the universe and the plan."
The Savior said to them: "I want you to know that all men are born on earth from the foundation of the world until now, being dust, while they have inquired about God, who he is and what he is like, have not found him. Now the wisest among them have speculated from the ordering of the world and (its) movement. But their speculation has not reached the truth. For it is said that the orderingis directed in three ways, by all the philosophers, (and) hence they do not agree. For some of them say about the world that it is directed by itself. Others, that it is providence (that directs it). Others, that it is fate. But it is none of these. Again, of the three voices I have just mentioned, none is close to the truth, and (they are) from man. But I, who came from Infinite Light, I am here - for I know him (Light) - that I might speak to you about the precise nature of the truth. For whatever is from itself is a polluted life; it is self-made. Providence has no wisdom in it. And fate does not discern. But to you it is given to know; and whoever is worthy of knowledge will receive (it), whoever has not been begotten by the sowing of unclean rubbing but by First Who Was Sent, for he is an immortal in the midst of mortal men."
Matthew said to him: "Lord, no one can find the truth except through you. Therefore teach us the truth."
The Savior said: "He Who Is is ineffable. No principle knew him, no authority, no subjection, nor any creature from the foundation of theworld until now, except he alone, and anyone to whom he wants to make revelation through him who is from First Light. From now on, Iam the Great Savior. For he is immortal and eternal. Now he is eternal, having no birth; for everyone who has birth will perish. He is unbegotten, having no beginning; for everyone who has a beginning has an end. Since no one rules over him, he has no name; for whoever has a name is the creation of another."
(BG 84, 13-17 adds: He is unnameable. He has no human form; for whoever has human form is the creation of another ).
"And he has a semblance of his own - not like what you have seen and received, but a strange semblance that surpasses all things and is better than the universe. It looks to every side and sees itself fromitself. Since it is infinite, he is ever incomprehensible. He is imperishable and has no likeness (to anything). He is unchanging good. He is faultless. He is eternal. He is blessed. While he is not known, he ever knows himself. He is immeasurable. He is untraceable. He is perfect, having no defect. He is imperishability blessed. He is called 'Father of the Universe'".
Philip said: "Lord, how, then, did he appear to the perfect ones?"
The perfect Savior said to him: "Before anything is visible of those that are visible, the majesty and the authority are in him, since he embraces the whole of the totalities, while nothing embraces him. For he is all mind. And he is thought and considering and reflecting and rationality and power. They all are equal powers. They are the sources of the totalities. And their whole race from first to last was in his foreknowledge, (that of) the infinite, unbegotten Father."
Thomas said to him: "Lord, Savior, why did these come to be, and why were these revealed?"
The perfect Savior said: "I came from the Infinite that I might tell you all things. Spirit-Who-Is was the begetter, who had the power <of> a begetter and a form-giver`s nature, that the great wealth that was hidden in him might be revealed. Because of his mercy andhis love, he wished to bring forth fruit by himself, that he might not <enjoy> his goodness alone, but (that) other spirits of the Unwavering Generation might bring forth body and fruit, glory and honor, in imperishableness and his infinite grace, that his treasure might be revealed by Self-begotten God, the father of every imperishableness and those that came to be afterward. But they hadnot yet come to visibility. Now a great difference exists among the imperishables."

Delafruita:
i guess you have also not read the sophia of christ.here's an excerpt

After he rose from the dead, his twelve disciples and seven women continued to be his followers, and went to Galilee onto the mountaincalled "Divination and Joy". When they gathered together and were perplexed about the underlying reality of the universe and the plan, and the holy providence, and the power of the authorities, and about everything the Savior is doing with them in the secret of the holy plan, the Savior appeared - not in his previous form, but in the invisible spirit. And his likeness resembles a great angel of light. But his resemblance I must not describe. No mortal flesh could endure it, but only pure, perfect flesh, like that which he taught us about onthe mountain called "Of the Olives" in Galilee.
And he said: "Peace be to you, My peace I give you!" And they all marveled and were afraid. The Savior laughed and said to them:"What are you thinking about? Are you perplexed? What are you searching for?"
Philip said: "For the underlying reality of the universe and the plan."
The Savior said to them: "I want you to know that all men are born on earth from the foundation of the world until now, being dust, while they have inquired about God, who he is and what he is like, have not found him. Now the wisest among them have speculated from the ordering of the world and (its) movement. But their speculation has not reached the truth. For it is said that the orderingis directed in three ways, by all the philosophers, (and) hence they do not agree. For some of them say about the world that it is directed by itself. Others, that it is providence (that directs it). Others, that it is fate. But it is none of these. Again, of the three voices I have just mentioned, none is close to the truth, and (they are) from man. But I, who came from Infinite Light, I am here - for I know him (Light) - that I might speak to you about the precise nature of the truth. For whatever is from itself is a polluted life; it is self-made. Providence has no wisdom in it. And fate does not discern. But to you it is given to know; and whoever is worthy of knowledge will receive (it), whoever has not been begotten by the sowing of unclean rubbing but by First Who Was Sent, for he is an immortal in the midst of mortal men."
Matthew said to him: "Lord, no one can find the truth except through you. Therefore teach us the truth."
The Savior said: "He Who Is is ineffable. No principle knew him, no authority, no subjection, nor any creature from the foundation of theworld until now, except he alone, and anyone to whom he wants to make revelation through him who is from First Light. From now on, Iam the Great Savior. For he is immortal and eternal. Now he is eternal, having no birth; for everyone who has birth will perish. He is unbegotten, having no beginning; for everyone who has a beginning has an end. Since no one rules over him, he has no name; for whoever has a name is the creation of another."
(BG 84, 13-17 adds: He is unnameable. He has no human form; for whoever has human form is the creation of another ).
"And he has a semblance of his own - not like what you have seen and received, but a strange semblance that surpasses all things and is better than the universe. It looks to every side and sees itself fromitself. Since it is infinite, he is ever incomprehensible. He is imperishable and has no likeness (to anything). He is unchanging good. He is faultless. He is eternal. He is blessed. While he is not known, he ever knows himself. He is immeasurable. He is untraceable. He is perfect, having no defect. He is imperishability blessed. He is called 'Father of the Universe'".
Philip said: "Lord, how, then, did he appear to the perfect ones?"
The perfect Savior said to him: "Before anything is visible of those that are visible, the majesty and the authority are in him, since he embraces the whole of the totalities, while nothing embraces him. For he is all mind. And he is thought and considering and reflecting and rationality and power. They all are equal powers. They are the sources of the totalities. And their whole race from first to last was in his foreknowledge, (that of) the infinite, unbegotten Father."
Thomas said to him: "Lord, Savior, why did these come to be, and why were these revealed?"
The perfect Savior said: "I came from the Infinite that I might tell you all things. Spirit-Who-Is was the begetter, who had the power <of> a begetter and a form-giver`s nature, that the great wealth that was hidden in him might be revealed. Because of his mercy andhis love, he wished to bring forth fruit by himself, that he might not <enjoy> his goodness alone, but (that) other spirits of the Unwavering Generation might bring forth body and fruit, glory and honor, in imperishableness and his infinite grace, that his treasure might be revealed by Self-begotten God, the father of every imperishableness and those that came to be afterward. But they hadnot yet come to visibility. Now a great difference exists among the imperishables."

Thanks for bringing these literature to my knowledge but I am sorry, I am not buying whatever it is you are trying to sell.

Delafruita:
first,you dont have "your own story"
second,you didnt even quote the novel correctly
third,it was just a novel
fourth,history teaches far more than any other source.i never accept anything as fact unless it can be crossreferenced with history.

History, how many histories have an accurate account of it's story trace. Some histories are twisted to have a root but are truely rootless. Don't be so much a believer of histories, unless u love stories(like u said,"i always make research" *of historical stories precisely*) Dude I did not read that from the novel. Why do i bother myself so much, like i said,"u're left with ur opinion"

Castos: History, how many histories have an accurate account of it's story trace. Some histories are twisted to have a root but are truely rootless. Don't be so much a believer of histories, unless u love stories(like u said,"i always make research" *of historical stories precisely*) Dude I did not read that from the novel. Why do i bother myself so much, like i said,"u're left with ur opinion"

my friend,you said yourself that you read it from davinci code.now da vinci code is a nnovel by dan brown.
history is not just stories,its verifiable stories

Mr_Anony:
Thanks for bringing these literature to my knowledge but I am sorry, I am not buying whatever it is you are trying to sell.

lol.this is an excerpt from the sephia(wisdom) of christ.it is believed to have been writted while jesus was alive though carbon dating puts at around 2nd century which is still relatively close to the time jesus lived.it was discovered in egypt and in 1896 but wasnt published till 1983

Delafruita:
my friend,you said yourself that you read it from davinci code.now da vinci code is a nnovel by dan brown.
history is not just stories,its verifiable stories

I never said i read or got it from davinci code. I saw a similar story in davinci code. Please don't quote me so wrong.

Delafruita:
lol.this is an excerpt from the sephia(wisdom) of christ.it is believed to have been writted while jesus was alive though carbon dating puts at around 2nd century which is still relatively close to the time jesus lived.it was discovered in egypt and in 1896 but wasnt published till 1983

Are u trying to prove ur knowledge no how here or what? Guy u really diverted my topic to another thing worsened by Mr. Athony. Jah bless una.

Castos: Are u trying to prove ur knowledge no how here or what? Guy u really diverted my topic to another thing worsened by Mr. Athony. Jah bless una.

Aww, ok let's come back to your topic: What was the topic again? Women preaching in church? Galatians 3:28

Mr_Anony:
Aww, ok let's come back to your topic: What was the topic again? Women preaching in church? Galatians 3:28

Ofcourse yes!

Castos: Are u trying to prove ur knowledge no how here or what? Guy u really diverted my topic to another thing worsened by Mr. Athony. Jah bless una.

has your topic been diverted?ooooohhhhhhhhh,sorrrrryyyyyyyyyy.at least you got to learn something

Castos: Ofcourse yes!

according to paul,women should be seen and not heard.his opinion was based on the prevailing culture of his time.you have to understand that at the time,women were considered inferior not just to christians but to majority of the world.religion is influenced by the society and thats the way it has always been.
in the old days,Yahweh required burnt offering,later he sacrificed his son and now just requires faith.thats a change.also in the old days,wars were fought with aim of expanding territory but in this age that would be unthinkable.if the isrealites were to invade a city and kill all life including infants and animals in this century,they'd definitely face the ICC for war crimes and genocide.
essence,time changes yesterday.our culture now gives women freedom courtesy of the beijing conference.women now lead countries,states and cities.paul wrote those letters based on the culture of his time,its left for us to act based on the culture of these times

Delafruita:
according to paul,women should be seen and not heard.his opinion was based on the prevailing culture of his time.you have to understand that at the time,women were considered inferior not just to christians but to majority of the world.religion is influenced by the society and thats the way it has always been.
in the old days,Yahweh required burnt offering,later he sacrificed his son and now just requires faith.thats a change.also in the old days,wars were fought with aim of expanding territory but in this age that would be unthinkable.if the isrealites were to invade a city and kill all life including infants and animals in this century,they'd definitely face the ICC for war crimes and genocide.
essence,time changes yesterday.our culture now gives women freedom courtesy of the beijing conference.women now lead countries,states and cities.paul wrote those letters based on the culture of his time,its left for us to act based on the culture of these times

Please let us not derail her thread any further. We can take up these issues on another thread

Mr_Anony:

Please let us not derail her thread any further. We can take up these issues on another thread

how does this derail the thread?i just gave my opinion on the issue of women been pastors.i think you should read it again

Delafruita:
how does this derail the thread?i just gave my opinion on the issue of women been pastors.i think you should read it again

It is not your post as such but the argument it will lead to will derail this thread because we will move away from women in churches to the morality of God in general and those are two different debates entirely

Mr_Anony:
It is not your post as such but the argument it will lead to will derail this thread because we will move away from women in churches to the morality of God in general and those are two different debates entirely

so you agree there a question of the "morality of God"

Delafruita:
so you agree there a question of the "morality of God"

Dude, you are doing the exact thing I am asking you not to do

Mr_Anony:
Dude, you are doing the exact thing I am asking you not to do

by the way,why arent you in church?seems castos has gone to church so derailing the thread a little would do no harm

Delafruita:
by the way,why arent you in church?seems castos has gone to church so derailing the thread a little would do no harm

Lol, I go to church in the evening. Thanks for your concern. Abeg, let's leave Castos' thread for her.

It's like you guys knew where I was. Good afternoon guys. Just coming back from church. Anyway, today is a new day guys, lets leave yesterday to bury it's dead. I must say, I really appreciate your comments sofar guys atleast yesterday was a heck of things to learn. You can discuss any other thing here (sofar it's religious) am not offend.