Satanists in the Vatican

[Guest SouthernCelt]

Spanish Exorcist Addresses Claims of Satanic Influence in Vatican

[ethsnafu]

What a bizarre read. Dan Brown would love this

Eth

[Earthnut]

Another example of the systems of men, the organized system of religion, which by the way is what crucified Jesus. Mankind has lost touch of the fact that God is a spirit, and in the spirit is the only way that we can truly worship, communicate with, and understand our Heavenly Parent. This article didn't surprise me any, it's just further proof to me that this huge religious system will fall as their works go up in flame. Most systems, and I specify systems, not individuals, are too busy going about their own business instead of the Father's. Darlene has spoken.

[Guest Seraphim]

It is an interesting claim. Whether or not "Satan" is responsible for any activities in regards to the Catholic Church is not something I am going to address; however, it would not surprise me to find out individuals within the organization are of sinister purpose. An entity as organized and large as the Catholic Church is bound to go astray and has many times in the past. As for Jesus being crucified by a similar organization, Gnostics (And Muslims) would argue that Jesus was never crucified.

[Earthnut]

People have literally gone so far as to say that Jesus had a twin brother, and that his twin is the one who was crucified. The systems of man in the world are a mess, and that's all the more reason why we as individual believers need to turn within to our spirit and seek God there. As Kahlil Gibran said about Jesus in "The Crucified" ~

He came to make the human heart a temple, and the soul an altar, and the mind a priest.

[ethsnafu]

Wasn't it Simon The Cyrene who was said to have been crucified in Christ's place in the Gnostic Gospels? As I recall, Christ observed the crucifixion of his doppelganger and mocked the Romans for believing they had killed him. I'm fairly sure I'm right though I wouldn't wager money on it.

Eth

[Earthnut]

I don't have a clue about Simon The Cyrene Mark, and I'm confident you're probably right. Of course, I wouldn't place any bets either. My faith is solely in The Christ.

[Guest Seraphim]

Wasn't it Simon The Cyrene who was said to have been crucified in Christ's place in the Gnostic Gospels? As I recall, Christ observed the crucifixion of his doppelganger and mocked the Romans for believing they had killed him. I'm fairly sure I'm right though I wouldn't wager money on it.

Eth

Yes, some Gnostics believe that it was Simon (who the Synoptic gospels indicate carried the cross when Jesus became too weak) who was crucified in his stead and that the true non-material Christ mocked them as he watched. As that which eminates purely from the Father is imperishable and cannot be destroyed. The Second Treatise of the Great Seth recounts this story. The text in amongst those found at Nag Hammadi in 1945. The text indicates that Jesus was spirit and never had a physical body. This idea is known as Docetism. Most Gnostic sects regarded/regard the material universe as a prison created by an insane and imperfect God. The Qur'an states that another took his place.

I would type up what is in my copy of the Nag Hammadi Codices, but it is easier to just quote it from a translation at gnosis.org

"For my death, which they think happened, (happened) to them in their error and blindness, since they nailed their man unto their death. For their Ennoias did not see me, for they were deaf and blind. But in doing these things, they condemn themselves. Yes, they saw me; they punished me. It was another, their father, who drank the gall and the vinegar; it was not I. They struck me with the reed; it was another, Simon, who bore the cross on his shoulder. I was another upon Whom they placed the crown of thorns. But I was rejoicing in the height over all the wealth of the archons and the offspring of their error, of their empty glory. And I was laughing at their ignorance."

[ethsnafu]

Thank you so much for such an informative answer to the question. I appreciate your time and care. If I recall rightly a number of the Gnostic gospels make mention of this event (Barnabas and Judas) spring to mind and as interest in Gnosticism has flourished, this belief has served to provoke some pretty heated debates between Gnostics and Orthodox Christians. There was a superb panel show in the UK some years ago that delved into the Gnostic Gospels (i.e picking the most sensational aspects of them to dangle in front of the orthodox panel members) and I think this was the most thorny of all topics. Thanks to this program I was interested to learn that Gnosticism and Islam agreed on the subject that Christ was not crucified and even more surprised that their shared the same candidate for the fate that supposedly befell Jesus: Simon The Cyrene. That said, if I recall correctly, a number of Islamic scholars also believed Judas was the one who was crucified in his place.

A fascinating subject and one I wish I knew more about.

Eth

[Guest Seraphim]

Thank you so much for such an informative answer to the question. I appreciate your time and care. If I recall rightly a number of the Gnostic gospels make mention of this event (Barnabas and Judas) spring to mind and as interest in Gnosticism has flourished, this belief has served to provoke some pretty heated debates between Gnostics and Orthodox Christians. There was a superb panel show in the UK some years ago that delved into the Gnostic Gospels (i.e picking the most sensational aspects of them to dangle in front of the orthodox panel members) and I think this was the most thorny of all topics. Thanks to this program I was interested to learn that Gnosticism and Islam agreed on the subject that Christ was not crucified and even more surprised that their shared the same candidate for the fate that supposedly befell Jesus: Simon The Cyrene. That said, if I recall correctly, a number of Islamic scholars also believed Judas was the one who was crucified in his place.

A fascinating subject and one I wish I knew more about.

Eth

If you have not done so, I recommend that you read through the newest edition of the Nag Hammadi Codices.

https://www.amazon.co.uk/Nag-Hammadi-Scriptures-Translation-Complete/dp/0061626007/ref=sr_1_2?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1270836059&sr=8-2

I find that to truly understand Christianity one must look beyond the canon at those Christian and Jewish texts that are regarded by orthodoxy as apocryphal or pseudepigraphal.