Graphenium 2 points ago +2 / -0

I'm not even sure why you'd need to appeal to your ears to sustain some point from this verse.

“Let he who has ears, hear”

Speaking of which, that phrase alone is proof that Jesus had been inducted into the ancient (gnostic) mystery schools.

All your research on rabbis is well and good, but wouldn’t it be better in the relavent .win? Too bad it’s taking place in this dead thread on this board with a dozen+ posts per hour.

How do you justify banning, for a comment you a) admit is a valid discussion b) need to troll through months of comments to find any hypothetical issue with? How could this discussion ever occur? A new account with no history of posting of gnosticism? Given how ready you are to support sock puppets I guess that makes sense

Graphenium 2 points ago +2 / -0

I mentioned baptism to show that all sects baptized by this time;

I feel like you’re conflating things. Only the Essenes (amongst the jews) are recorded as practicing baptism. You’re talking about kosher rules that state after ejaculating and if you have psoriasis and if you’ve touched sick/pustuous people you should take a bath. Literally not in the same ballpark as how baptism is taught by either the essenes or Christians.

Mathematically, from the first century to the second is never "hundreds of years".

Gottem, lol

The avoidance of the title for pre-70 sages may perhaps be seen as a deliberate program on the part of these editors who wanted to create the impression that the “rabbinic movement" began with R. Yochanan b. Zakkai and that the Yavnean "academy" was something new, a notion that is sometimes already implicitly or explicitly suggested by some of the traditions available to them.

Lol, so Rabbinc^tm Judaism^tm redefined the word? (Retroactively) Hundreds of years after Christ? And how is that different from my original contention?

Regarding the rest: yes

Graphenium 2 points ago +2 / -0

As I anticipated, after Josephus mentions the Jews "had three sects"

Yes, yes, hence the edit. I’ve been upfront that I’m new to theological discourse and its millenia of debate.

One more potentially interesting note. You do suggest the question,

You missed what I thought was the more interesting implication of my more recent comments: the Essenes morphed into the Nazarites after the crucifixion as word spread. Thus the origin of Christianity lay in their efforts. But no, that apparently contradicts the “creeds”, via some obtuse contortion, out OUT DAMNED SPOT

Graphenium 1 point ago +1 / -0

I wasn’t seeking controversy, which should be obvious by the fact you had to read implied references into my posts for them to be stretched into some kind of nebulous rule violation, to justify your spastic 2nd’s tendency to react like a psycho.


These guys should know right? Let’s see what they say:

It was not until the second century that “rabbi,” which literally means “my master” or “my teacher,” became an official title. Until that time even the greatest Jewish sages and prophets were not given an honorific.

Let’s see what I said:

Rabbis, as a class of people, didn’t exist until hundreds of years after Christ

Ok, so, technicalities aside, I was right. Hardly a reason to react like such a prick.

it shows that 28 days ago you held that all Essenes were Gnostics, and thus that I was correct your recent deleted comment behaved as a test of the waters to determine if this concept could be breached again.

Wow dude it amazes me that you can read minds, and seem to waste such a gift determining the motivations behind me saying Jesus was an Essene because his immediate family and teachings (I notice you’ve ignored baptism almost entirely in your analysis... inconvenient to the narrative?) indicate that is the most likely option. You should try and use them on cuomo and see if he meant things “in an augustinian fashion” or if he’s just a spastic who can’t control himself. Also, you should try and use them on the israeli psyops you two worship.

Graphenium 2 points ago +2 / -0

If “Zealots” (capital Z, unlike your link to acts 21:20, which refers to “jews zealous for the law”) was such a real “group”, and they were not the Essenes, this should be easy for you to demonstrate, however as far as I can see, you’ve just taken the highly zealous, highly messianic Essenes, and removed all validity from them while shunting it to two new groups “Messianics” and “Zealots”. You’d think that the men of the time (josephus, Philo, etc) would have mentioned these groups...and yet... THEY DONT

Edit- oh jeez I sure embarrassed myself here, I should have known the divine, authoritative Talmud would have the answers needed for this

Graphenium 1 point ago +1 / -0

Cuomo screeching like a faggot is not “previously established inapplicability”, its cuomo screeching like a faggot. You attempt to weasel words such that you (or the faggot you’re defending) was always correct:

-yes the first rabbi was decades after Christ, but ACKSHULLY ADAM WAS THE FORST RABONI

-yes Jesus’ cousin and community were likely Essenes, but I’m going to support you being banned for saying that

-and on and on

The "gnostic subset of" the Essene library obviously exempts the Bible books and refers to the extrabiblical scrolls.

That’s funny, I don’t refer to ANY of those; I refer to JUDE and ENOCH. That’s the problem with ASSumptions.

whole very misleading

HAH! What part rabbi? Where was a single fucking ounce of “misleading”? You can read minds and read intentions, so this should be easy for you to show.

Hilarious, I’m misleading, and I’m banned for suggesting something the vast majority of scholars with two braincells to rub together think. What’s that make you two? Liars? Morons? Assholes?

Graphenium 2 points ago +2 / -0

where his past context clearly implies an intent to portray Christ as submissive to the gnostic subset of the teachings of the putative Essene library[editors note: you mean the bible?], the Dead Sea Scrolls. The inapplicability of this portrayal has been previously established.[Ed:dead link - doesn’t establish squado]

Talk about a string board.

Your analysis left out the Nasareans, or as some called them, nazarites. Epiphanius had some interesting insights on their relation to the (highly messianic, though left out of your category Messiancs, odd that) Essenes.

You know how when you were younger, you didn’t think the news was full of shit? You thought they offered these unbiased facts 100% untainted by outside interests (“and now, a word from our sponsers”, it was separate, before we all understood native advertising (“advertorials”). But then one day they reported on a subject you knew something about, and you could see them twisting facts to suit a predetermined narrative? Yeah I miss that

Graphenium 2 points ago +2 / -0

So, the community Jesus was raised in was mostly comprised of: dems, reps, or lolberts?

Also, whole lotta words to defend “gutting you like a fish” - oh wait, you skipped over that to castigate me for shit you IMAGINED that I IMPLIED

Regarding (the “class of person known as”) Rabbis, whole lotta words to prove me right, did the cuomosexual catch the part about “millenia after moshe”?

I’m not upset, I’m just disappointed in you son

Graphenium 2 points ago +2 / -0

Interesting take, and I’m largely in agreement, except how then do you account for the practice of baptism and Jesus’ cousin, John the Baptist?

Graphenium 2 points ago +2 / -0

Thanks for the link(s), I’ll check out the theory.

Graphenium 2 points ago +2 / -0

I do see what you’re saying, but Jesus frequently told his disciples to hold off on proclaiming him to be the messiah:


So while I see validity in your argument, and would potentially debate some nuanced minutiae (like whether or not prophesy was fulfilled until the crucifixion and resurrection, and whether or not all prophesy has been fulfilled (revelations for example, or the coming of a new Heaven and Earth)) I still think I’m almost missing you with my point here. Would you say Jesus was born a jew? If so, from which strand of judaism was he born?

Graphenium 6 points ago +6 / -0

Absolutely correct and insightful post. I don’t seek to imply he was “leading the Essenes” or anything along those lines, it’s just that I just got banned from c/Christianity for stating Jesus was an Essene, and I wanted to get some opinions on the matter, and see if I could be wrong.

I mean the question purely in the sense of “which strand of judaism was Jesus raised in, by his local community”

Graphenium 2 points ago +2 / -0

Yes, but what about in our historical context? Which group of people was the gift of his existence expressed through? I think, based on his teachings, it was neither the pharisees nor the sadducees, which only leaves one possibility that I can see

Graphenium 2 points ago +2 / -0

(Hate ——-and——Love) are different sides of the spectrum of the same fundamental thing, just like (Autistic ———and——-Not Autistic)

Graphenium 2 points ago +3 / -1

You must spend all fucking day on these tranny boards, you’re a faggot by proxy at this point

Graphenium 9 points ago +9 / -0


Written by the billionaires who made Pathways Into Darkness

Graphenium 4 points ago +4 / -0

Enochian language right? That is a truly fascinating discussion, and one that I’m not quite convinced is settled (I might even lean against the “consensus” and say it has effectively already been proven real.

Have you ever seen the work of Alan Green, dee-coding shakespeare? Check it out if not:



First one is quite long, second is just 20mins, but the guys whole channel is pretty mind blowing. I can’t find the link right now, but he managed to use sonar to map the inside of the (stone) holy altar at Saint Paul’s cathedral, and confirmed an idea he had (that it would be partially hollowed, potentially with documents stored in the hollow). Crazy stuff.

Edit: found it! ”The Stratford Heist” :


Graphenium 1 point ago +1 / -0

If you’re browsing via consumeproduct.win you won’t see anything he’s posted on the other domains, and I actually can’t remember if I’ve ever seen him post here, mainly just in conspiracies and the defaults.

Graphenium 1 point ago +1 / -0

There’s a user around here, u/free-will-of-choice , who will blow your mind by deconstructing any language you throw at him. Like your thought here taken to the extreme, he won’t even use words newer than a hundred years or so lol, the subversion is too much.

Graphenium 5 points ago +5 / -0

Spot on analysis...but I’m left with a question: are they hijacking a biological, neuro-linguistic programming, AND/OR, literally interfacing (at a spiritual/astral level) with influences that extend beyond mere human biology? (i.e. was 9/11 a “ritual” (with a huge array of consequences) or a “trick to get us to fight for them”)

Graphenium 2 points ago +2 / -0

That’s the magic of spelling, grimoire{grammar}, and sentencing ; If you control the dictionary, you control how smaller minds interpret the world.

Graphenium 3 points ago +3 / -0

You’ve built up walls, you aren’t allowing the things you live through into yourself as “experiences”, merely treating them as intellectual “events”...

That’s just a guess. I used to be like this, but something changed when I came to understand there is more than the material in our existence, the immaterial is just as real.

Graphenium 1 point ago +1 / -0

Link to paper please?

view more: Next ›