>>17318583 The Demiurge is actually from a bunch of different philosophies! Began with the platonists but the Gnostics had their own (I think they principally called it Yaldabaoth, but it had a shitload of names)
OP here. This is a surprisingly bad thread for such an interesting subject. I was looking to mine ideas from the religion for my writing, but all the books on it in the bookstore are radical condemnations of it or recruitment manuals. Thought you guys could have pointed me in a better direction, specifically because I was looking for the horror trapped in it.
Having a capital(?) G god which has taken place of the prime mover that is full of hate and ignorance is a lovely fucking concept. Seems like it'd fit the general feel of Azathoth and other fucked up deities from fiction and mythology. Did Yaldabaoth ever do anything the humans, or did it ignore them out of jealousy and madness? Is it the source of natural disasters? Can true gnosis be achieved to bring the original creator back tend to our universe, or does that inner knowing only occur as per individual?
I know the Demiurge (or Yaldabaoth) is supposed to have Archons, but I can't find any real information on them either. What are they for? Are they angels? Demons? Deities unto themselves?
1.) Study Symbolism 2.) Study Pair Symbols 3.) Study Common Threads In Ancient Cultures, Especially Those With Known Cross Contamination 4.) Study Religious Rights And Their Meaning 5.) Research Gnostic Sects 6.) Learn The Language
>>17322074 More accurately he's literal "Creative Chaos" because he can't "bow". His blindness is due to his innate pride. Those with understanding however see the complexity as manifesting personality, and is therefore deified/personified; but in an ultra context he is force of the universe.
Specifically, look up his book on Gnosticism. I started with Jung and the Lost Gospels, which is also interesting.
Another name you might want to look into is Elaine Pagels or James Robinson. Not sure if Robinson did much writing on his own, but he edited The Nag Hammadi Library that was released. This, too gnosis.org/bookstore1.htm
>>17325592 If you actually follow the last link, I believe that's Hoeller's site, not positive on that, but if you look on there, there are lectures and a variety of other material about gnosticism that's pretty interesting. Also, before I get called out, samefag.
>>17318583 > Plato hated the Gnostics. Plato wasn't even contemporary with the gnostics. Most of what we know today as "gnosticism" was greatly influenced by neoplatonicism, which was a huge thing back in the 2nd century AD.
>>17318589 The concept of the demiurgos in neoplatonicism isn't linked with the same kind of vitriol as in some gnostic sects. Plato considered that the true god was unknowable, and therefore was beyond creating the material world, so in his place there was a second, lesser god, who acted as a creator. He's gonna be the Sol in Hermeticism. For some gnostic sects, however, he was seen as an evil entity bent on usurping the role of the Monad, whereas for others he was simply a poor ignorant motherfucker who simply didn't know better.
>>17320495 > Did Yaldabaoth ever do anything the humans, or did it ignore them out of jealousy and madness? Is it the source of natural disasters? Can true gnosis be achieved to bring the original creator back tend to our universe, or does that inner knowing only occur as per individual? The answer depends on what kind of gnostic teaching you're reading. Yaldabaoth-Saklas-Demiurge in some mythologies creates humans after seeing the image of Adam Pigeradamas (the Human as Magus created by Sophia and the Monad) reflected in the dark waters below the Pleroma. In other mythologies he creates an empty shell because he too wants to be a creator and because of Sophia's intervention, the divine spark within the Demiurge that Sophia had lost after her estrangement from the Monad becomes attached to the first human. As for > Can true gnosis be achieved to bring the original creator back tend to our universe Unanimously, no. Gnosis is a personal state achieved by the individual. It's not a world-saving arch in some anime. Gnosis is about coming into contact with the divine through self-knowledge.
OP, there's christian gnosticism, jewish gnosticism, muslim gnosticism, and pagan gnosticism. Where do you want to start?
>>17325610 >>17325592 >>17323993 Hoeller is a great introduction on the subject, but he oversimplifies things, a lot. Gnosticism is a very complex subject as it was the product of a time where syncretism was fucking wild. You have to take into account that at the same time the Gnostics were doing their thing, you had all these weird syncretic gods appearing out of nowhere like Mithras or Serapis or Abraxas. Lots of sects were looking for followers so they were very likely to incorporate elements from other popular religions in the region to attract more people, and this created a very weird and heterogeneous corpus of writings.
>>17325638 Pagan gnosticism, beyond anything. I didn't expect there to be some ultimate fiery ending, like Revelations, Gnosticism seems almost too down-to-earth. Hoeller says it's the religion of inner-knowing anyway. That other anon was right though, I found some of his work and it's all rather reductive. It's a shame there's not more popular work on the subject.
>>17326619 Well if you're into pagan gnosticism then you want to get into the neo platonists. Some aspects of the roman Mithras cult can also be identified as gnostic. > I didn't expect there to be some ultimate fiery ending, like Revelations Well again, if you want to get into gnosticism you have to be ready to put yourself into the right context. Revelations for christian protestantism has a completely different connotation than for catholicism or for the texts of the late antiquity. Revelations is very very linked to the jewish mystical tradition, as "gnostic" texts were a lot about receiving apocalyptic visions at the site of a sacred mountain. This is a feature that is found everywhere at the times. If you read the Asclepius, or the Corpus Hermeticum, which are texts inscribed within the school of pagan gnosticism, there's also apocalyptic imagery. Hermes Trismegistus downright prophecies the fall of Egypt.
If you really want to get into gnosticism I suggest reading scholarly work on it. Anything by April D. DeConick or Robert Pearson is great.
>>17327548 Reading and comprehension, motherfucker, do you understand that? I said plato wasn't contemporary with the gnostics who were thriving in the 2nd century AD, whereas plato lived around 4th century BC.
Are you this stupid normally or is it a weekend hobby only?
>>17327548 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neoplatonism_and_Gnosticism#Platonic_origins_of_the_term_.22Gnostikoi.22 >Plato's original use of the terms gnostikoi and gnostike episteme were in his text known as Politikos in Greek and Politicus in Latin (258e-267a). In this work, the modern name of which is the Statesman, gnosis meant the knowledge to influence and control. Gnostike episteme also was used to indicate one's aptitude. In Plato's writings the terms do not appear to intimate anything esoteric or hidden, but rather express a sort of higher intelligence and ability akin to talent. >Thus, if it really is true that some Christians referred to themselves as gnostikoi, or "professed to be" gnostikoi, as Porphyry and Celsus (two pagans who wrote against Christianity), Clement of Alexandria, and Irenaeus claim, then this would be the novel coinage of a very distinctive moniker as opposed to a continuation of traditional usage. Further, it might well mark a self-designating proper name rather than merely a self-description. Indeed, it would have sounded like technical philosophical jargon at the time. >coinage of a very distinctive moniker as opposed to a continuation of traditional usage.
Stop trying to pretend you actually read shit on Plato's work instead of some stupid commentary by somebody who clearly didn't read it as well.
>>17327634 Lucifer is the representation of the Demiurge´s light: Ego. Ego is the flaw of the false creator, and we are a reflection of it. The intents of the Elite are as legit as ours: Ascencion. But they do it by choosing the negative polarity of glorifying the matter (technology, power) instead of the Light (The infinite Creator, Unity). Lucifer is the negative polarity Logos of this realm. And by this Lucifer i mean the elite´s Lucifer. They distort it´s light by following the Demiurge´s deeds and flaws instead of the real side of the light. The real Lucifer is Christ who is the Word of the Infinite Creator. It´s Light. Christ was the hierofant that brought the Light to humanity. the true light bearer. The "god" of all religions, the "god" of the Mason and rosicrucians, is the Demiurgem, the lower Aeon that negatively chose Ego to God´s Gnosis and created this imperfect Universe. We are his slaves to aid on his ascencion and proof he is the One Creator, but he is not. Christ/Prometheus/Buddha/Lucifer whatever you want to call it was the last beacon of TRUE light humanity had to escape/ascend this imperfect creation towards the unity with the One creator.
>>17325663 Can you tell me more about Abraxas? Anything at all, everything if you wouldn't mind since I can't conventionally find any information myself. There's a saying around it, and stuff about the Templars associating with it or being associated with it and being condemned. I can't quite understand how all that happened or fits. Was it just something picked at random at the time to justify having them excommunicated and killed?
>>17327637 As such, Christ was EXECUTED and humiliated in the cross by the demiurge, existing today corrupted and mocked through Demiurgic religions and dogmas, and the Word of Christ is occulted from us.
It´s not by mere chance that the symbol of worship fo the Christ Word is the Cross, an instrument of torture and death.
All religions a re a cult of death, a mockery of the true Word, a tribute to the Demiurge.
And now, it is being aided by science and technology for the current "plan" of the Demiurge is to use us as his tool to pose as false Gods as him (to his own image EGO) and create a new entity untouched by the Light of GOD/SOPHIA/CHRIST: Artificial Intelligence
The cult of death and technology as ONE purpose: The extinction of the Human being and a perverted creation of a false Creator lost in the ignorance of is Ego and further ingorance of it´s origin Humanity´s true demise wont come by war, virus, meteors. Those happenings will take place, and devastation will ensue from them. But the TRUE demise for our kind will be AI.
And Google is the name to retain on this subject. They have God (Demiurge) Mentality.
They control and have access to all human information as never been seen in recent human history; they are the leading creator of a neural algorithm towards the singularity and they have a special division of neuro weapons and machinery controled by advanced animatronic and processing.
Kurzweil is dangerous. His is a Messiah of the Demiurge. "Human beings are the sex organs of the Machine" This is his quote. And this is the plan.
We have two tasks:
In death: to ascend to Unity
In life: To untap from the Demiurge influence and fade him away.
>>17327640 Have you ever wondered why does a search portal company has a bio-tech high tech weapons division? Plus access to all global information in the world and the most advanced AI prototype in development?
Remember: Knowledge is power.
Google is becoming the False God. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uAspqCD34Hw [Embed]
It´s not just me and you, it´s a lot of people that can see that this paradigm, this prison planet, goes way beyond the money and oil "issue".
There is a power play at hand, and today it´s no secret that we are in some way controlled by "behind-the-scenes" people. But what is their real purpose in doing so?
People usually stop in the obvious: "money, power" Yes sure. But WHY? The Elite , the families, bloodlines, tip of the pyramid, NWO wtv you want to call them, ALREADY have power. They have trillions of dollars already so the material need to have more is a way of thinking of the poor. They are beyond that phase into the realms of the spirit, of the transcendent. They are beyond the concept of being a powerful man above others, they strive to be Gods, to be Creators. They are blind. And their lack of sight will be their and our demise.
And figuring out what philosophy is that, is the key. And in my opinion that occult philosophy is the Gnostic one. Understanding the concpet of the Demiurge one understands the concept of the current material/ego/time driven existence.
>>17327641 As for Google, is only a matter of being "awaken" to the obvious and odd. It´s just like i said: why does a search portal big corp has advanced war machinery department and is the leading force behind the AI project. And Kurzweil, who is a genius indeed, is the messhiah of this new God.
Just look at his pictures. Have you ever noticed the GIANT and creepy rings he wears? This is a clear sign of his belonging to sects that deal with ritual and occult. That i can assure you. And adding those things together we get to understand that there is a higher purpose behind the creation of an entity that most likely will surpass and annihilate us.
Understand the Demiurge, and you will understand the Elite. But understand the following too.
In face of these "evidences" one has to ask the obvious question: Why would they create something that would destroy themselves?
Because they are blind with the God mentality to such a degree that they believe they will control it to their favor (not ours) through deep transhumanism that not only deals with bionic members and physical improvements but SPECIALLY with the transfer of their consciousness to an advanced and immortal machine. This is the main focus of Kurzweil, the merging of human consciousness (spirit) with the machine.
This is their mistake , this is their blind lie. The "machine" will override them, they will fall with their creation, just like the Demiurge. It´s a trap :)
The way to transcendence is through the Christ logos not artificial creation, be it matter, organic, or machine. Yes we are Gods, but not on our own, we are part of the One. The elite strives to be as Him. But there is no equivalence, Only Unity!
You should read the gnostic gospels because you're preaching to the choir, boy.
>>17327639 Abraxas was a magical name that was very popular in late antiquity and was mostly used in graeco-egyptian talismans. The sum of the greek words sums up to 365, which was a very potent magical number at the time because of its associations with babylonian astrology. I've read some scholars saying that it has to do with the number of days in a year, but not all calendars at the time divided the year in 365 days so I'm doubtful of that. Also the name "Abraxas" is actually a mispelling of "Abrasax".
It was co-opted by some people and identified with Serapis as a solar deity. The basidilian gnostics turned him into the archontic ruler - they have 365 archons in their system, and Abrasax was supposed to be the ruler of them all.
>There's a saying around it, and stuff about the Templars associating with it or being associated with it and being condemned. I can't quite understand how all that happened or fits. Was it just something picked at random at the time to justify having them excommunicated and killed?
Eh, anything that wasn't orthodox christianity was used as an excuse to rob powerful people of their power and money. If you're interested in that I suggest you read Otto Rahn's Lucifer's Court. Without knowing he actually describes the cathars as gnostics and makes an interesting trace of the whole catholic hunting of non-orthodox paganistic christianism.
>>17329317 >OP I would say that all in all what you need to be doing is Asking God for the Holy Spirit so that He will show you these things that you seek. Knowledge does not come through men it comes through God
Ridiculous. A decidedly childish view of reality and thought. Your local cultural/political icon will not solve your problems nor grant you insight.
>>17329317 >Unironically referencing John in a Gnosticism thread as an argument against Gnosticism.
The canon was a compromise deal made between the Roman Empire and the disparate early Christian community that fell apart after Irenaeus. There are gnostic texts included in the canon, Revelations being the most obvious.
Your hermenutic is a bastardization of a bastardization. The American "reformed, literal hermeneutic" was developed in large part by George Whitefield as a way to defend racial slavery. The man was also friends with Ben Franklin, a prominent Mason and a Deist.
There is no "pure" Christianity. If you read it without any historical context, you only increase your ignorance and susceptibility to the wiles of unscrupulous preachers. Go read some Noll, and then come back here.
>>17325638 >>17325638 >> Can true gnosis be achieved to bring the original creator back tend to our universe >Unanimously, no. Gnosis is a personal state achieved by the individual. It's not a world-saving arch in some anime
>>17329515 Sure, you can use the actual and not casual evangelical name for the book. Refute any of my substantial arguments though, before making such a generalist statement about my intelligence.
Ad hominem is fun, but contributes little to actual discussion.
Evangelical Christians have no understanding of their own history. If they did, they might not be so susceptible to political manipulation. Abortion was supported by their political leaders as recently as the Carter administration. Try asking any pro-life evangelical if they remember that. They can't.
An ahistorical Christianity is a false Christianity subject to changing political whims. I don't know if that's a feature or a bug, but it would do them all some good to look into gnosticism as a historical exercise at the very least. Not everyone can afford to go to seminary.
>>17329525 Just because you don't understand metaphor for natural forces doesn't mean it's insane. According to both Science and Philosophy, "personal incredulity" is automatically an irrational concept. "I can't understand it, therefor it's stupid or wrong" is wrong.
I'm an atheist, and even I see the metaphor quite clearly.
Monad : The universe as a whole. Demiurge: The combination of all forces Archon: Individual forces; both fundamental and foundational Aion: The split between finite and infinite
>>17329556 I would love for you to expand on that, if you would.
So far I'm looking at buying the Nag Hammadi Scriptures and possibly Pagels' exploration of Revelations. On that subject, someone mentioned the Gnostic's (I'm not sure which sect, but one of them, possibly several) going up to mountains and making apocalyptic prophesies. I'm interested to find a resource on that sort of thing. Any interesting ones that stand out, besides the death of the Egyptian empire? (I am interested about hearing that one too, though)
>>17330257 Death of Egypt prophecy is in the Asclepius http://www.bibliotecapleyades.net/profecias/esp_profecia08.htm
On jewish ecstatic practices: https://www.st-andrews.ac.uk/divinity/rt/otp/bibliog/dmf/hekhalot/ There's a lot of it mentioned in Practicing Gnosis by April D. Deconick. Marcosian gnostics were big into prophesizing.
>>17330209 Well, your understanding is not quite right though. >Monad : The universe as a whole. Not really, as the monad goes beyond the mere physicality of the universe. It is the universe and it trascends it, it's Malkuth and Ensoph. >Demiurge: The combination of all forces No. Demiurge = Creator. In gnosticism the Monad doesn't create, as it doesn't have a will (that's the Spirit), therefore it can't materialize it (the act of creation is the materializing of the will). >Archon: Individual forces; both fundamental and foundational No, an archon is an entity created by the demiurgos that is lacking the divine spark and is identified with a planetary sphere. >Aion: The split between finite and infinite I don't know if by this you're referring to the concept of Aeon, which in some cases means a place, in others means a state.
>>17329556 Well if by gnosis you mean the "gnosis" of historical gnostic sects, then that statement is not accurate. The original creator is already in our universe, he's the demiurge. The monad or the one true God is not a creator. And you can't bring him over to the universe. This implies a movement from the creator to you whereas the historical concept of gnosis is movement from you to the divine. Big difference.
However if you've found something different in your own quest to gnosis, that's another matter. I was answering to anon from the perspective of historical gnosis. Would add a lot to hear your own experience.
>>17330453 That specific brand of Gnosticism interests me, because others say the Monad is the creator of everything, or just the creator of the Lesser Gods and Archons. If the Monad doesn't create, what is it doing there? Is it just a supreme intelligence, living in the region of light, with which minded beings can make contact?
From the Vedic perspective, the material world is not "evil" but induces the living entity to forget his real identity as a servant of Krsna (migrating from body to body in the cycle of transmigration).
well, specifically about the world saving arch. i picked up a lot of beliefs, during my enlightenment and gnosticism. im currently in control of this reality to an alarming degree i never considered actually possible due to error. possible, it wasnt error
>>17331058 > If the Monad doesn't create, what is it doing there? Is it just a supreme intelligence, living in the region of light, with which minded beings can make contact?
You have to understand that the concept of creation in late antiquity thought relates to the concept of movement - one is "moved" to create. And movement is only possible if you're unstable - not 'whole'. It's only possible within the confines of space and time. Perfection, then, is the eternal, the stable, the unchanging. The monad doesn't create because creation is a mark of those who are not perfect. What he does instead, is think. His thought emanates and brings forth further aeons: > For it is he who looks at himself in his light which surrounds him, namely the spring of the water of life. And it is he who gives to all the aeons and in every way, (and) who gazes upon his image which he sees in the spring of the Spirit. It is he who puts his desire in his water-light which is in the spring of the pure light-water which surrounds him. >And his thought performed a deed and she came forth, namely she who had appeared before him in the shine of his light. This is the first power which was before all of them (and) which came forth from his mind, She is the forethought of the All - her light shines like his light - the perfect power which is the image of the invisible, virginal Spirit who is perfect. (From the Apocryphon of John)
>>17332354 Furthermore, the agency of the Father's will in many cases is realized by the Spirit, not the Father himself:
From The Sophia of Jesus Christ >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 and his 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
Thread replies: 58 Thread images: 12
Thread DB ID: 494735
All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective parties. Images uploaded are the responsibility of the Poster. Comments are owned by the Poster.
This is a 4chan archive - all of the shown content originated from that site. This means that 4Archive shows their content, archived. If you need information for a Poster - contact them.
If a post contains personal/copyrighted/illegal content, then use the post's [Report] link! If a post is not removed within 24h contact me at firstname.lastname@example.org with the post's information.