|
|
Post by phantasman on Jun 29, 2013 9:47:48 GMT -5
I have started to read more into the Gospel of Philip. Much of what I read seems to try and improve our way of thinking those differences between spirituality and the physical. As the catholic idea had spawned a division in the early Christian era, I believe Philip tries to take some of Jesus' parables and explains them further in depth so as not to let us get drawn into the worlds way of thinking that may have been influencing many.
Though Philip seems to have been written later, it seems to be more intent on guiding from the standpoint that early believers were being influenced by leaders that started adding false perceptions as truth. I also believe that this is why 1 and 2 John was written. It seems Philip may have been the final Gospel of the original Disciples, written to "put back on track" the truth that was being challenged by the leaders who had attained power within the Roman Empire.
I could be wrong, but my spirit says to learn and the truth will be shown to me. Hence my questions.
My first question is:
Philip says:
Those who say that the Lord died first and (then) rose up are in error, for he rose up first and (then) died. If one does not first attain the resurrection, he will not die.
I know that the verse ends abruptly. But is he saying the resurrection as in beating death? Taken from the Earth? Being spiritual?
|
|
|
|
Post by Soulgazer on Jun 29, 2013 18:54:18 GMT -5
At church, we don't call answers to these right or wrong; just layers. My answer is not any more right or wrong than yours, just a different layer.
I see it as the Lord rising above the world or "death" as it was known. If you look at the first verses in Philip, you can see that in order to die, you must first be alive. In order for Jesus to die, he first had to live, or "resurrected".
|
|
|
|
Post by phantasman on Jun 30, 2013 11:11:53 GMT -5
So........we have to live first to be able to die? And Jesus had to live before he could die? It would appear that the word resurrect is misleading. He was obviously IN resurrection while here, and completed it when he died.
It could be reference that the spirit has been and always will be, and it is the spirit that resurrects from the body, once the truth is known (as in born again).
Food for thought.
|
|
|
|
Post by phantasman on Jul 15, 2013 19:14:54 GMT -5
So, in this verse from Philip:
Jesus took them all by stealth, for he did not appear as he was, but in the manner in which they would be able to see him. He appeared to them all. He appeared to the great as great. He appeared to the small as small. He appeared to the angels as an angel, and to men as a man. Because of this, his word hid itself from everyone. Some indeed saw him, thinking that they were seeing themselves, but when he appeared to his disciples in glory on the mount, he was not small. He became great, but he made the disciples great, that they might be able to see him in his greatness.
Jesus seems to change himself (or allow people to see him differently) at various times. John didn't recognize him immediately in Secret John. Nor did the disciples after resurrection.
Could he have been spirit all along? What about John saying we need to believe he came in the "flesh"?
|
|
|
|
Post by Soulgazer on Jul 15, 2013 20:58:45 GMT -5
So, in this verse from Philip: Jesus took them all by stealth, for he did not appear as he was, but in the manner in which they would be able to see him. He appeared to them all. He appeared to the great as great. He appeared to the small as small. He appeared to the angels as an angel, and to men as a man. Because of this, his word hid itself from everyone. Some indeed saw him, thinking that they were seeing themselves, but when he appeared to his disciples in glory on the mount, he was not small. He became great, but he made the disciples great, that they might be able to see him in his greatness. Jesus seems to change himself (or allow people to see him differently) at various times. John didn't recognize him immediately in Secret John. Nor did the disciples after resurrection. Could he have been spirit all along? What about John saying we need to believe he came in the "flesh"? What is flesh but matter? If, as it says, he could change water into wine, and walk across the waves, it's still manipulating matter. |
|
|
|
Post by rmcdra on Jul 16, 2013 14:56:34 GMT -5
My understanding of the passage in the OP is that you have to receive the spiritual resurrection first or as like James said you have to rise above the world before you can die. Before the spiritual resurrection you just go with the flow of things but once you receive the spiritual resurrection, you can see the flow and move out of it. Once you have the resurrection you become at risk of getting trapped back into the flow.
|
|
|
|
Post by phantasman on Aug 14, 2013 9:03:37 GMT -5
"Names given to the worldly are very deceptive, for they divert our thoughts from what is correct to what is incorrect. Thus one who hears the word "God" does not perceive what is correct, but perceives what is incorrect. So also with "the Father" and "the Son" and "the Holy Spirit" and "life" and "light" and "resurrection" and "the Church (Ekklesia)" and all the rest - people do not perceive what is correct but they perceive what is incorrect, unless they have come to know what is correct. The names which are heard are in the world [...] deceive. If they were in the Aeon (eternal realm), they would at no time be used as names in the world. Nor were they set among worldly things. They have an end in the Aeon. "-Gospel of Philip
Any incite here? Words are words?
Sometimes I try to wrap my mind around Philip, and he seems to not talk in mysteries, but more like opposites. What this is, isn't, kind of thing.
|
|
|
|
Post by rmcdra on Aug 14, 2013 11:24:24 GMT -5
"Names given to the worldly are very deceptive, for they divert our thoughts from what is correct to what is incorrect. Thus one who hears the word "God" does not perceive what is correct, but perceives what is incorrect. So also with "the Father" and "the Son" and "the Holy Spirit" and "life" and "light" and "resurrection" and "the Church (Ekklesia)" and all the rest - people do not perceive what is correct but they perceive what is incorrect, unless they have come to know what is correct. The names which are heard are in the world [...] deceive. If they were in the Aeon (eternal realm), they would at no time be used as names in the world. Nor were they set among worldly things. They have an end in the Aeon. "-Gospel of Philip Any incite here? Words are words? Sometimes I try to wrap my mind around Philip, and he seems to not talk in mysteries, but more like opposites. What this is, isn't, kind of thing. My understanding of this passage is, words used to describe certain things aren't always accurate but it's the best we have. Like the word "God". It can mean 1,000,001 things to a 1,000,000 people. Or, "A rose would be rose if it were given any other name." |
|
|
|
Post by phantasman on Sept 4, 2013 13:21:54 GMT -5
The saints are served by evil powers, for they are blinded by the Holy Spirit into thinking that they are serving an (ordinary) man whenever they do so for the saints. Because of this, a disciple asked the Lord one day for something of this world. He said to him, "Ask your mother, and she will give you of the things which are another's."-Philip
Has anyone figured this out? The "saints" probably don't see it that way. Who does Philip believe these saints are?
|
|
|
|
Post by xpistissopheiax on Sept 4, 2013 17:01:09 GMT -5
good question  |
|
|
|
Post by Soulgazer on Sept 5, 2013 18:34:33 GMT -5
It means that the "saints" are served by all powers, being "saints". Even a sinner has access to evil powers--- however the evil powers don't know who they serve when blinded by the Spirit.
|
|
|
|
Post by phantasman on Sept 6, 2013 10:04:48 GMT -5
I see  |
|
|
|
Post by phantasman on Oct 1, 2013 12:50:31 GMT -5
Is there a hidden meaning in this?
"The Father" and "the Son" are single names; "the Holy Spirit" is a double name. For they are everywhere: they are above, they are below; they are in the concealed, they are in the revealed. The Holy Spirit is in the revealed: it is below. It is in the concealed: it is above."
|
|
|
|
Post by Soulgazer on Oct 4, 2013 8:26:25 GMT -5
I don't thinkk so.
|
|
|
|
Post by phantasman on Oct 13, 2013 10:49:58 GMT -5
One single name is not uttered in the world, the name which the Father gave to the Son; it is the name above all things: the name of the Father. For the Son would not become Father unless he wore the name of the Father. Those who have this name know it, but they do not speak it. But those who do not have it do not know it. -Philip
Is this saying Christ and the Father are the same person?
|
|
