and official narratives in short, terse pithy aphorisms!
and official narratives in short, terse pithy aphorisms!
It is clear that the Gnostics appreciated the linguistic reflection of the cosmos into a lower demiurgic realm of false stories and a higher realm of true insight.
In this study I do not intend to simply posit Egyptian historical antecedence for foundational dualist/emanationist views and leave it at that; rather, I am proposing that a large amount of direct historical connectedness in the lineage of this mode of Egyptian philosophical/theological thought is in fact the case.
The larger issue is that the Gnostics, indeed all the dualistic groups in Egypt at this time, manifest a profound dualist “world-view” metamorphosis which had occurred within the Egyptian psyche, not just the Greek-Hellenistic. This fact is central. A hermeneutic which insists upon viewing this development as a rogue species of Greek thought, a parasitical syncretism, or an eccentric Christian mutation or influence, is a hermeneutic without socio-historical foundations.
While the physical body belongs to sensible creation, the spiritual elements originate from on high, from the intelligible sphere of cosmic intelligence. When released from the physical, the Ba and Akh (generally, the psyche and pneuma) return to their spiritual originator. A point to be made here is that this special nature of humankind does not come from the demiurge, but from the highest theogonic levels of the Creator. The special nature of humankind is thus a key element in the rise of later Gnostic sects, for in itself it anticipates the contradiction of higher and lower originations. One has to agree with Iverson in his assessment of this split in terms of its later impact upon philosophy:
THE EGYPTIAN FOUNDATIONS OF GNOSTIC THOUGHT
Daniel Richard McBride
Those are a few pertinent quotes from his paper attached HERE.
I don’t know who this guy is but he nails it! By far the best treatise on Gnosticism that I’ve come across. Gnosticism’s roots go back as far as early Egypt and perhaps earlier although the latter portion is speculative; the former fact.
I can’t find anything on this guy and that has happened once before with David Astle’s the Babylonian Woe, which I also highly recommend. These guys are ghosts, or so it appears. But their works are Stellar!
It’s clear the academies are promoting false historical narratives to protect vested interests hidden or otherwise.
It’s clear Christianity was created as a proxy for these hybrid pharaonic bloodlines and that the *sacking of knowledge in and of Egypt was intentional; meant to obscure the truth about Egypt, which has been thoroughly black-washed by the powers that be. The continued obfuscation with Constantine’s church changed the Republic into feudal serfdom and ushered in an intentional dark age of disinformation. Sound familiar? Think of the internet as Alexandria and observe the same ‘burning’ of knowledge that is underway but in a techno-dystopian disaster. Moreover, it’s easy to see how Islam was used in the same manner and how it was used to control the narrative of northern Africa and the Middle East—planned for long-term control of the narrative. No coincidence that both religions protect the character of the Old Testament god.
If one isn’t convinced that Gnosticism wasn’t rooted in Egypt and far predates Christianity after reading this then one is so biased that they are beyond any hope of attaining truth and more accurately likely hold a deep disdain for TRUTH. Of course, a different issue is what is true about existence, and that topic is far from settled.
Another separate issue within these inquiries is the nature of those early pharaohs and the Egyptian civilization itself. I haven’t made up my mind about that. On one hand, I see that it would be nearly impossible to build and sustain that civilization for as long as they did if it was sickeningly internally corrupt—lacking truth and justice (MAAT)—like today’s rulers, but I’m not convinced that the rulers in those times were of the Aeons. I’d seek out Wes Penre’s works and see if there are any clues as to the intention of the rulers in his writings. That the rulers held dualist emanationism as their core metaphysics speaks loudly to me as a Christian Gnostic—so, something I agree with. But even the Demiurge knows the fact of this. In my case, I don’t have enough info on Egypt’s golden age to gauge what the intention was of the rulers and who, exactly, these pharaohs were.
Of course, we have a new psy-op in recent internet times where the typewriters in Tel Aviv are spewing the endless b.s. that Egypt was fake and didn’t exist! So extraordinarily predictable and the inversion of the truth: it’s Israel that didn’t exist in the way that’s asserted in the Torah–at least from all the research I’ve done.
I’ve been watching HBO’s Rome again and the propaganda and black-washing of Egypt is obvious. The focus, it seems to me, was to black-wash Cleopatra and throw shade over who Caesarian was—they make her out to be a cheap whore in the scene with Titus Pollo which is obviously inserted to add to the confusion about who that child was—born of Isis, by the God King—Caesar. In my opinion, a hybrid bloodline of Semitic and Egyptian origin—or, what I call nephilim archon spooks. Again, it’s extraordinarily difficult to tell who the black and white hats are in this arena of inquiry, especially in light of the idea of a false replicant Christ who can mimic the true one in ways that are uncanny— yet false.
Another quote from the referenced thesis:
The emanationist view in turn finds its expression between two poles – the dualist and the monist. This division, of course, is not always a neat one as I shall demonstrate. However, we may note at the outset that the monist idealism of Stoicism places it far to the right of this spectrum, whereas the radically dualist Manichaean system is about as far “left” as one can go – off the scale in fact. Egyptian Gnostic thought, representing various shades of mitigated dualisms is more towards the centre between the two extremes; Hermeticism and the Chaldean system, along with the thought of Philo of Alexandria and the Platonists, Speusippus, Xenocrates, Harpocration, Atticus, Plutarch, Ammonius, and Numenius for that matter, are all left of centre – that is, distinctly dualistic – whereas other modes verge to the right, never more strongly than when Neoplatonism finally attempted to define itself as being anti-Gnostic under Plotinus.
Yeah, I’ve even gone as far as saying that Plotinus was Jewish–that would make simple sense of his stance. And, yes…Wilber’s Integral Plotinus-ism is far right, too, IMO.
Another great quote:
I define emanationism as follows. It is essentially based upon one insight:
Although there is a complete Monad, Source, Parent, Primal Waters, or One at the centre of all reality, and although it is inexpressibly perfect in every sense, still there arose the need for differentiation. This streaming forth, “extension”, hypostasising, procreation, or emanation through the sheer power of Thought, Word, Generation, or Intellect, in the Source, resulted in the appearance of various lesser entities, natures, or levels of metaphysical reality culminating in the natural world. These are referred to as specific natures in the more philosophical systems (e.g. nous, logos, dynamis etc.) and their numbers are limited by the ancient Egyptian emphasis upon ogdoads and enneads, and later Pythagorean number-systems as a rule; as more personalised entities they appear in the so-called “mythological” systems (e.g. Atum, Ma’at, Isis, Sophia, Barbelo, Seth, Anthropos etc.) wherein the “aeons” or “syzygies” are more numerous, their dramatis persona taking on a sexualised role. The emphasis then is upon the need for theogonic process, for differentiation arising out of the Undifferentiated. This need, put simply, is one of distancing. The idealism of the Perfect One is perceived to be at a certain remove from this world which in some sense must be lower or inferior than the perfect State of Being represented in the Primal Source.
NOTE*: I suspect that relations between Egyptian royals and the Hebrew descendants of Akhenaten were not at all cordial; especially by the time the Torah was put together. The Egyptian royals and priests would have known that Ole Akhen’s descendants ‘borrowed’ the 18th dynasty and turned it into their own–cultural theft. If this is true then we are not getting the true story of Egypt from at least 500 B.C.E. on and especially not getting life in Alexandria correct which would have been much more hostile than what we are told. Again, the sacking of Alexandria and Egypt starts to make sense of this (if this is true) and that the Roman church was used as proxies for this war between Egyptian and Hebrew royal bloodlines. And this quote from the Babylonian Woe which points to an ‘outside’ Kabal interfering in Egypt in those times:
From chapter 7:
“Through “liberalism,” and so-called “progressive teachings” . . . (the) international money creative force seems to have brought the host land of Egypt to where it was at the time of Akhenaton (1375 to 1358 B.C.), and the Tel Amarna letters which tell of self-destruction and decay, the rejection of old values and beliefs, and the indifference of the a Egyptian rulers to their trust, and to the crumbling of Empire. The degeneracy and complacence of the age was revealed by the fruitless outcry out of Asia from the vassals of the Pharaoh; being particularly exemplified by the despairing pleas of king Abdikhiba of the most ancient city of Jerusalem for assistance against the pressure of the armed assaults of the Habiru.”