Gnosticism

Bump for similar question

Also, Demiurge explained too?

>>2748059
>>2748196
They're generally perceived as modern day attempts to revive the doctrines. Just because the philosophies died out doesn't mean they can't be reconstituted.

If you have any questions about gnosticism I can probably answer them.

>>2748059
>Does it even mean anything when someone from contemporary times say they are a "Gnostic"?
Technically speaking, yes it does mean something.

Functionally though most people I see commenting on Gnosticism apply their own concepts picked up from /fringe/ memes and/or /pol/ and apply them to the wide and diverse array of Gnostic thought and sects.

>Didn't all those mystery cults die out long ago?
Sorta, depends on what you mean and what your litmus for Gnosticism is. On a weak metric everything from the Oriental churches to early modern Antinomian cults are Gnostic, but on a tough metric it did indeed die with the Cathars.

That said we still have the source texts and many groups run with 'em.

>>2748196
Demiurge has a lot of connotations across systems. Some take the Neoplatonic view that he's more or less benevolent. Others take a slightly less optimistic approach and post that he's repentant but incompetent (Valentinians).

Still others think it's what you usually think of; YHVH is actually evil incarnate and wants to trap us in a realm of hellish matter.

So it really depends on the group in question.

I've an extensive Gnostic folder over in the /omg/ library.

>>2748059
>Does it even mean anything when someone from contemporary times say they are a "Gnostic"?
they are cringe as fuck if they identify as gnostic. the stuff is still cool to read

>>2748196

Demiurge is the being who created the physical universe, only he created it in the same way Yahweh does, by rearranging preexisting matter, not as an act of creatio ex nihilo. Hr's kind of an inbetween figure, greater than Man but lesser than the true God, who gnostics claim is unknowable. Most gnostics saw the demiurge as a flawed being but not an evil one, but there is a strong current within gnosticism that equates the demiurge with Satan.

>>2748231
hes explicitly identified as the "God" of the Old Testament ; cant neglect that fact.

>>2748246
The Demiurge is a Platonic doctrine. The first mention of Demiurge is in a non-Christian and non-Jewish context via Timaeus in which Plato describes it as a benevolent creator.

In Neopythagorianism it's equated with Divine Mind (Nous).

File: 1449505338228.png (1MB, 595x860px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 595x860px

>>2748246

Where? not being an ass, curious.

Was the Demiurge mentioned in early Judaism or Christianity? Any scrubbing of it in early Christian books?

Pic related? I'm completely ignorant on this subject.

>>2748256]
>>2748264
oh yes, I didnt mean that it was a pre-existing concept. The "demiurge" concept was already neo-platonic but the Gnostics took it and applied it to the OT God in their texts.

>>2748274
I mean, there are a number of Gnostic sects that assert and explicit and clear divide between Demiurge; he's not exactly GNOSTIC but Philo holds this doctrine, more or less.

>>2748059
They want to role play as wizards or some shit

>>2748306
Comparatively few Gnostic sects/groups worked full blown magick.

Those that did can barely be called Gnostic outside of a relatively convenient reference (for example, Mandaeans).

I'm gonna hunt down my proposed canon list for a Gnostic Catholic Bible, if y'all wanna hold Council with me.

>>2748392
Here's my proposition for a unified bare-bones and down-to-basics Gnostic canon:

OT from Origen:

>That which is called by us Genesis, but by the Hebrews, from the beginning of the book, Bresith, which means, ‘In the beginning’; Exodus, Welesmoth, that is, ‘These are the names’; Leviticus, Wikra, ‘And he called‘; Numbers, Ammesphekodeim; Deuteronomy, Eleaddebareim, ‘These are the words’; Jesus, the son of Nave, Josoue ben Noun; Judges and Ruth, among them in one book, Saphateim; the First and Second of Kings, among them one, Samouel, that is, ‘The called of God’; the Third and Fourth of Kings in one, Wammelch David, that is, ‘The kingdom of David’; of the Chronicles, the First and Second in one, Dabreïamein, that is, ‘Records of days’; Esdras, First and Second in one, Ezra, that is, ‘An assistant’; the book of Psalms, Spharthelleim; the Proverbs of Solomon, Meloth; Ecclesiastes, Koelth; the Song of Songs (not, as some suppose, Songs of Songs), Sir Hassirim; Isaiah, Jessia; Jeremiah, with Lamentations and the epistle in one, Jeremia; Daniel, Daniel; Ezekiel, Jezekiel; Job, Job; Esther, Esther. And besides these there are the Maccabees, which are entitled Sarbeth Sabanaiel.

This gives us the significant number of 22 within the Gematria, and parity to the Rose of the Rose Cross.

6 double books (Judges/Ruth, 1/2 Samuel, 1/2 Kings, 1/2 Chronicles, ½ Esdras, and Jeremiah/Lamentations) nearly finishing Hebrew letters that have double forms.

Replace Maccabees with Ethiopic Maccabees.

I dunno what I'd do about the other letters. As far as Mothers are concerned, my inclination is Genesis and Ezekiel but after that...I'm not sure.

BOOKS OF THE VEIL OF MYSTERY:

The Books of Enoch. 4 Baruch. Sefer Yetzirah. Apocalypse of Moses. Songs of Solomon. The Thanksgiving Psalms. Gnza Rba. The Qwele of the Peacock Angel.

>>2748425
The Hypostasis of the Logos (Aka, The New Testament)

SECTION ONE: THE ASSEMBLY -

The four synoptic canon gospels are a given. Matt, Mark, Luke, John.

We keep Acts.

We TOSS Hebrews as suspicious and largely irrelevant even if in sound advice (i.e. how Apocrypha gets classed in other compilations).

The other Pauline materials are in flux. Last thread had some good arguments for, and I've been reading up on for/against. I've also been reconsidering the next section:

SECTION TWO: THE ELECT -
Apocalypse of Adam
Gospel of Thomas
Gospel of Philip
Gospel of Truth
Gospel of the Lord
Coptic Gospel of the Egyptians
Gospel of Judas
Gospel of Mary
Thunder: Perfect Mind
The Naassene Psalm
The Hymn of the Pearl
Apocalypse

The first is selected for its age and parity with Apoc. The next three are admitted because the Coptic Gospels here have like zero conflict with the rest of the Christian text tradition. The next four chosen for their age and diverse usage. The next two set the stage for the Neoplatonic synthesis and as a confession of nonduality. The Hymn continues this theme and is in stunning parity with the Qwele.

>>2748392

How about you just fuck off and stop ruining these threads with your autism, faggot?

>>2748457
You sound upset about something.

>>2748440
Drop John and John and everything else is great.

>>2748467
Exegete a bit and don't leave me hanging.

>>2748425
Thanks Ape, you always deliver

>>2748457

lol there's one every thread

>>2748457
say hi to your archon masters, faggot

>>2748484
They are the two most easily misinterpreted gospels which have either dubious thirdhand credibility in the case of john, or are a peyote dream about Rome in the case of Apoc. I live in the South so having them burned out of existence in the face of sola scriptura seems like a really good idea, but maybe that's just me.

>>2748493
>93
If anyone wants to tinker with this a bit I'm open to attributions to the Hebrew letters, and while I really don't want Paul to control the narrative, my hostility may be too deep to be a good judge of what stays and what goes.

This list also does like fuckall to contextualize all the finicky little cults. It's just my baseline of understanding what an OG Gnostic probably would have been poking around in most seriously.

Books of the Veil are indeed my own exclusive and premium brand of autism, I'm open to hucking some of them too, but everything through Sefer Yetzirah should probably stay.

>>2748517
I'd toss John before I tossed Apoc.
Unless you have a clearer though equally poetic account of Eschatology.

>>2748513
>not cultivating a relationship with the Neoplatonic Archons

>>2748219
>gnostic
Considering Gnosticism is a belief system which inherently revolves around the individual as opposed to the community it isn't "cringe" at all.

>>2748457
>other belief systems make me feel angry
Do you tell your psychiatrist this, my fedorautistic friend?

Best text I've read on the broad topic of Gnosticism writ large; emphasizes how unique each of the cults were:

>Kurt Rudolph's "Gnosis: The Nature and History of Gnosticism"
>Over in my library
>Under "Gnostic Studies"

>>2748537
Then leave apoc, without John you won't have the brimstone nuts but still get the doomsday cult angle.

Are you planning to edit all this together with copious footnotes and lewd art and start a crustpunk commune if the whole academia thing doesn't work out?

>>2748566
>Kurt Rudolph's "Gnosis: The Nature and History of Gnosticism"
Not to jerk my own ego by i'm reading this now. It's great.

File: Jim_Jones2.jpg (42KB, 400x255px) Image search: [Google]

42KB, 400x255px

>>2748567
>Are you planning to edit all this together with copious footnotes and lewd art and start a crustpunk commune if the whole academia thing doesn't work out?
I dunno maybe if that dude actually buys that land in Guyana and invites me out.

FWIW there's already an edition of the three Coptic Gospels with really just rock solid exegetical notes.

>>2748570
It is great which is why I pimp the book so hard.

>>2748592
>FWIW there's already an edition of the three Coptic Gospels with really just rock solid exegetical notes.
https://ia800509.us.archive.org/15/items/Metagosp/Metagosp.pdf

File: 1-q5SRlf_4U_vmYO-qAn6k3g.jpg (263KB, 1200x800px) Image search: [Google]

263KB, 1200x800px

>>2748592
>Guyana
Oof.
Too soon.

>>2748570
>How to go to hell in three easy lessons.

>>2748644
IJS some dude in another thread was talking about land he was considering buying out there.

On the plus side that's Kanaima territory but I'd probably get myself violently murdered before initiated.

>>2748264
How can anyone believe this stupid crap?

>>2748649
>implying you dont want to eat from the fruit and access that forbidden knowledge

>>2748570
anyone know if a pdf is anywhere online?

Do all gnostic sects hate the material world?

Are there any that embrace it?

See Seznec and Runciman, anon.

File: IMG_0257.jpg (17KB, 343x429px) Image search: [Google]

17KB, 343x429px

>>2748059
>Does it even mean anything when someone from contemporary times say they are a "Gnostic"?
It means that they *tip*

>>2748059
Gnosticism is the veganism of religion

>>2748059
Why did the Gnostics keep trying to hijack the early church by circulating falsely-ascribed letters instead of depending on the strength/attractiveness of their own doctrines?