Gnosticismexplained (.org).

An interesting resonance is also obtained in Xenocrates’ maxim “that true sophia is a form of knowledge not attainable by humans”. Xenocrates.

The quote above shows that there was gnostic thinking within greek culture. So once again the academies are distorting the truth. It also refutes Kastrup’s view that humans have direct access to the ‘thing in itself’. We don’t. What Kastrup is describing is the ‘demiurgic mind matrix’…IMO.

HERE is a paper which I believe proves beyond ALL reasonable doubt that Gnosticism has its roots in Egypt and was not a zit on the face of 3rd century Roman sun worship cult called Christianity.

HERE is the home page.

I’d like to first say that this isn’t a personal attack on Daniel. In many ways I appreciate his site. Please note that I am not a scholar mainly because I intuited ‘spiritual gnosis’ from a very young age and hence saw the education system for what it is: HYLIC controlled propaganda! And that is my primary criticism of his site. I mean, I get the appeal to authority and all, but it isn’t without its problems with the appeal to authority fallacy being the least of them. Obviously having materialist and atheist (HYLIC) minded people telling gnostics what gnosticism is…well, it’s absurd!

I cover some of the ground on the meaning of HYLIC HERE and HERE and HERE. There are different views on where this cosmology originated but I’ve consistently said it’s the foundational philosophy of the material demiurge–logically coherent, no? But there are other speculations within the gnostic tradition that attempt to address this issue. One of them deals with the creation myths. It was said that Yaldabaoth raped Eve and that she bore the twins Cain and Abel who had the same corrupt disposition as their father–the offspring of Cain and Abel became the HYLICS via the Canaanite bloodlines. It was only via Adam and Eve’s son Seth that true spiritual gnosis was preserved. This story is the root of the wheat and the tares narrative in the N.T. So the children of Cain and Abel became the primary promoters of materialism and spiritual obsfucation. Although I’d point out that Bible itself is the work of the archons and their Nephilim/Archon/Spook offspring. The point is that it’s no easy task to tell what is true and not true within that book. But the demiurge uses it to control civilization. QUIZ: how can the Bible be true and not true at the same time? When it’s written by a deceptive archons!

The second issue is the issue of religion and what religion a corrupt demiurge would create on earth. In this blog, I’ll only address Judaism within the context of Daniel’s website. He wrongfully asserts the usual lie of the archons that Jesus Was Jewish. There are so many problems with this and I cover some of it HERE. But another problem is the issue of the Jewish people claiming copyright to the Aeon Christ and this is especially prevalent in today’s world, and to the Gnostics a particularly vile aspect of it is the commercialization that is ubiquitous in most every strain of the Jesus is Jewish sects–American Christian Zionism the most grotesque. This is, of course, absurd and disturbing, but also consistent with the religion of the demiurge–which today is the worldwide religion of money. The Jesus was Jewish trope is always the ace up the sleeve of almost everyone in that tribe no matter what they believe. In Daniel’s case, it involves a sect of Judaism popular at the time called Apocalypticism. But many Rabbi’s even today reject this dualist interpretation of the Torah especially in regards to Satan whom they see as a servant. They correctly understand that this was Zoroastrianism injected into the Hebrew tradition. But it gets worse: the Jewish Jesus who died on a cross motif involves issues that Gnostics reject such as original sin–there is no need for Jesus to do what is said he did or for the reasons orthodoxy suggest. Original sin and the cruxifixction are the foundation of the Jewish Jesus narrative but this isn’t a gnostic view and never was. Please try and understand the mindset of the Aeon Christ and how it views the material universe: taking human form here is simply something it would not do! It would not take the body of something the flawed and vile demiurge created–humans. The Docetic storyline of Christ is much more accurate, in my opinion, as were the Marcionite’s who clearly understood the problems associated with the Torah’s claim to Jesus, which is dubious at best–just ask Rabbi Tobias Singer!

Another area I’d like to dispute is the gnostic questions surrounding the issue of ‘how shall we live?’. Now I agree that one of the primary areas of concern is spiritual gnosis but to say gnostics don’t care about societal conditions is simply wrong. It was much easier in those times for gnostics to remove themselves from centres of power and find refuge in small communities far outside of the cities. This would be known as political anarchism today or Christian Anarchism which is something I agree with (as understood within political science).But if you consider the communities that did arise with the gnostics you see that they did CARE about the question of how they should live. The Cather’s in France are another example of this. In my view, as a gnostic, the issue comes down to simplified living as much as that is possible in any given era. A Tolkien equivalent would be the Shire. But perhaps without the naive ignorance of the brutality of the natural world: so a type of natural realism when it comes to the meat-grinding death machine that is life on this earth, but perhaps balanced with the view that the earth is not entirely malevolent. In my view, there would be room for some enjoyment for gnostics in their lived life on earth (I side with the Valentinian’s on this one). Having said that, it’s my view that breaking bad with the Golden Rule is the core issue surrounding the intersection of economic life here on earth for humans and metaphysics. So any true gnostic would understand this and would do everything possible not to break this rule which means modern capitalism would be anathema to the Christian Gnostics!

On the origins of Christian Gnostics. I lean towards predating Christianity although I think Daniel’s view is sound, too. From my research there is no prior spiritual tradition that hold the specific views held by Christian Gnostics. But Gnosticism, in general, predates Christianity most certainly, in my view. The idea of a demiurge existed with *Ptah in Egypt and less so with Brahma in the Vedas, and certainly in Greece (Plato). But these traditions are heavily immanence oriented and aren’t hostile to this cosmos. Certainly elements of gnosticism can be found in Zoroastrianism; most certainly ideas pointing towards duality. My own view is that Jewish gnosticism had it roots in Egypt (linked HERE too) and certainly Babylon wherein they also borrowed from Persian gnosticism. But again, the one element that is unique to Christian Gnosticism is the anticosmicism we hold.

Why the materialism of the hylic’s is wrong. I have to admit that I’m not a fan of Jay Dyer although it’s likely that is because of the persona he projects. But it’s worth linking to him here as he has a solid understanding of the problems associated with materialism. He lists six and I’m certainly no expert but I have a layman’s understanding of these quarrels.

Myth of the given. (Is what we perceive through our senses a sufficient description of reality).

Problems of the external world. (realism/indirect realism/idealism).

Induction. (repeated experience isn’t necessarily a reliable means of predicting the future).

Status of immaterial objects. (I know that I exist with no necessary reference to physicality).

Properly basic beliefs. (the general idea of a creator being is not inherently irrational and does not need an argument to back it).

Underdetermination of data. (not enough info).

Now I list these here because there are elements in each that argue against material cosmology from the arena of epistemology. But this blog is not the place for these explorations. Watch the video and do some research! I think Bernado Kastrup is another who is detailing the issues with materialism. HERE is a link with him in convo with Tom Campbell.

NOTE*: I think the clincher here is that the Egyptians (to some degree) didn’t see Ptah (demiurge) as that which was responsible for the divine spark–that came from higher up–and this is the ROOT of later gnostic iterations.

Liked it? Take a second to support 326061 on Patreon!