#gnostic paul

[santmat]

Paul in Marcion's Apostolikon seems more mystical and gnostic. It reminds me of the Gospel of Truth by Valentinus, such as the passage below from Paul's letter to the Laodiceans (later on renamed Ephesians). This is from, The First New Testament - Marcion’s Scriptural Canon, Jason David BeDuhn, POLEBRIDGE PRESS. "He made known to us] the initiation about his will, according to the pleasing thought that he strategized [in himself] 10 for implementation of the completion of the opportune times, to sum up everything in the Christos, the things in the celestial spheres and on the earth . . . 12 that we should exist for the praise of glory, we who have previously hoped in the Christos, 13 in whom you also, when you heard the true teaching—the proclamation—and when you trusted in it, you were sealed by the sacred spirit of his promise. . . . "17 . . . May the Father of glory give you a spirit of wisdom [and revelation by experience of him], 18 when the eyes of your heart have been illuminated, [that you may know what is the hope to which he called you, what are the glorious] riches of his inheritance among the sacred ones, 19 [and what is the superlative] greatness of his power [for we who trust . . . 20 with] which he has operated in the Christos when he awakened him from the dead and seated him at his right hand [among the supercelestials."

[raspberryzingaaa]

Fake quote people attribute to Lewis: "i have a body, I AM a soul"

Real Lewis: "Man has held three views of his body. First there is that of those acetic Pagans who called it the prison or the ‘tomb’ of the soul, and of Christians like Fisher to whom it was a ‘sack of dung’, food for worms, filthy, shameful, a source of nothing but temptation to bad men and humiliation to good ones. Then there are the Neo-Pagans (they seldom know Greek), the nudists and the sufferers from Dark Gods, to whom the body is glorious. But thirdly we have the view which St. Francis expressed by calling his body ‘Brother Ass’. All three may be – I am not sure – defensible; but give me St. Francis for my money.

Ass is exquisitely right because no one in his senses can either revere or hate a donkey. It is a useful, sturdy, lazy, obstinate, patient, lovable and infuriating beast; deserving now a stick and now a carrot; both pathetically and absurdly beautiful. So the body."

[non-conventionnel]

How did the first concept of God originate?

Who was Yahweh and who was Moses? Where did the Ten Commandments originate from?

Who was Jesus Christ, and what do the Gospels which were left out of the New Testament say?

Who was St Paul, and which was the first Church before the Roman Catholic one?

How did the papal pontificate originate, and what were the repercussions of the false document which was supposedly left to the Church by Emperor Constantine the Great in order to cling to power?

Was there a different scenario to how things could have unfolded? This book, backed by the discoveries which have occurred in the last centuries, will tackle these questions unearthing new ones in the process.

"In this book, author Anton Sammut undertakes a challenging task in a race to uncover various aspects affecting the development of religion in relation to culture. This task is considered delicate and for some even dangerous. Delicate because it requires meticulous research and gathering of information; dangerous because it ventures far beyond the borders of religion which we normally restrict ourselves to because they offer security and certainty. In this respect, this book will appeal hugely to those who are not satisfied with what they have been instructed but are interested in exploring how the information arrived to them."

- Rev. Dr René Camilleri

"The laborious and careful exercise carried out by Mr Sammut, both on the Bible as well as on the History of the Church, is intended to assist the reader to view both of them from an angle which we are not accustomed to. This type of mental exercise is always useful, especially when the thoroughly researched and examined subject is not easy, not necessarily understood in one way, and is more complex than the human brain can handle."

- Rev. Prof. Peter Serracino Inglott

Anton Sammut's Fb Page

Goodreads

[friend-of-ferret]

The Gnostic Gospel of Thomas passages that feel extremely Locked Tomb 2 of ?

Line 4-7 of passage 22 of the portion found in the Nag Hammadi Libary as translated by Harold Bloom:

Jesus said to them, "When you make the two into one, and when you make the inner like the outer and the outer like inner, and the upper like the lower, and when you make male and female into a single one, so that the male will not be male nor the female be female, when you make eyes in place of an eye, a hand in place of a hand, a foot in place of a foot, an image in place of an image, then you will enter the the [Kingdom].

[shesarainbow]

The history of the devil and the idea of evil : from the earliest times to the present day, Paul Carus

[thatsastepladder]

When trans-identified people say they're "a female brain in a male body", implying that the mind is the true, right self and the body is simply a vessel for it which is evil by nature:

[tristansherwin]

CHRIST | CHOREOGRAPHY OR DANCE (Col. 2:8—3:4)

CHRIST | CHOREOGRAPHY OR DANCE (Col. 2:8-3:4) "Our faith is not about trying to attract God with our fancy footwork. Our faith is an embrace of God's movements."

Here’s my longer sermon notes from this morning’s Metro Christian Centre service (dated 2nd July 2023), continuing our series in the letter Colossians. You can also catch up with this via MCC’s YouTube channel (just give us time to get the video uploaded). ‘’Chaps who did taps aren’t tapping anymore They’re doing choreography Chicks who did kicks aren’t kicking anymore They’re doing…

[a-queer-seminarian]

I made these charts to provide an easy reference guide for comparing the four Gospels! Feel free to share around wherever.

I think tumblr's crunching up these images so visit here for crisper versions (plus they're table format instead of png format).

Alt text version is under the readmore, necessarily formatted slightly differently but with all the same info.

TEXT ONLY / NON CHART VERSION:

Images show two charts, each credited to Avery Arden with a note that the material largely derives from the abridged version of Raymond E. Brown's An Introduction to the New Testament.

Chart 1: Comparing the Gospels, Part 1 – historical context

Mark

When: 

Late 60s/early 70s

Who:

Jewish

Multi-lingual — peppers Aramaic into the Greek

Where:

Rome or Syria (clearly unfamiliar with Palestinian geography)

To whom:

Mainly to Gentiles new to Christianity who were experiencing persecution

Priorities:

Encourage audience and show them how their suffering fit into Jesus’ vision of the Kingdom of God

Matthew:

When: 

Late 70s/80s

Who: 

Jewish 

Also multi-lingual, with Aramaic phrases;

Greek more polished than Mark’s

Where:

Probably in or near Antioch (in Syria); possibly Galilee

To Whom: 

Mainly to well-educated Jews who were debating internally about how Jewish tradition fit into following Jesus

Priorities: 

Promote Messiah Jesus who fulfills audience’s Jewish scriptures

inform church life and structure

Luke

When:

mid-to-late-80s

Who:

Gentile (possibly Jewish convert)

Educated Greek “historian” familiar with Septuagint; no use of Aramaic; expert use of Greek

Where:

Probably Greece; possibly Syria; also unfamiliar with Palestine

To whom:

Mainly to wealthy Gentiles influenced by Paul’s mission; living in an urban setting

Priorities:

Promote Isaiah-like Jesus; challenge audience to live out faith more actively (e.g., by redistributing wealth)

John

When: 

90s / as late as 110

Who:

Jewish 

Student(s) of “the Beloved Disciple” (the “Johannine school”)

Where:

Traditionally Ephesus; possibly Syria

To whom:

To a mixed crowd of Jews & Gentiles, at a time when tensions between Jews who did & didn’t follow Jesus had reached an all-time high

Priorities:

Promote Jesus’s divinity; strengthen unity in a group increasingly defining itself as separate from Jewish ones

Chart 2: Comparing the Gospels, Part 2 — Thematic Content

Mark

Emphasizes Jesus as:

Jesus as miracle-worker / healer; human being 

Unafraid to depict human limitations & emotions in Jesus

Other defining attributes / content:

Focuses on Jesus’s actions, e.g., his miracles; as well as on his suffering and death

Originally ended with the empty tomb & fear; no resurrection relief

The disciples often fail to understand Jesus; Jesus is frequently secretive about his identity

Matthew

Emphasizes Jesus as:

A Moses figure, Messiah, Son of God; teacher

Removes descriptions that make Jesus seem limited, naïve

Other defining attributes / content:

Beatitudes (ch. 5); judgment of the “sheep and goats” (ch. 25); 

Instructions for intracommunal relationships; forgiveness; “Great Commission” (ch. 28)

Polishes Mark’s depiction of the disciples to present them more favorably (esp. Peter as the “rock” of the church)

Luke

Emphasizes Jesus as:

Self-aware Son of God; prophet of the poor

Removes descriptions that make Jesus seem emotional, harsh, or weak

Other defining attributes / content:

Beatitudes (ch. 6) — with added “woes”; frequent warnings about risks of wealth

Also depicts disciples more favorably

Favorable depictions of tax collectors as sinners on the way to redemption; 

negative views of Pharisees as rejectors of Jesus, juxtaposed with stories of Gentiles who express faith

John

Emphasizes Jesus as:

Divine, the Word / “I Am” made flesh; lamb of God

Often misunderstood by disciples & crowds due to his use of figurative language

Other defining attributes / content:

Poetic format, full of symbolism; similarities to Gnostic texts that arose in the same era

Lots of “testimony” and “signs”

Despite Jesus & his disciples being Jewish, John depicts “the Jews” as being against Jesus; his Jesus says things like “It is written in your law…”

[santmat]

Third Eye During Meditation: "Close your eyes as in sleep, and look sweetly, lovingly, intently into the middle of the darkness lying in front of you. You will see a dark veil. That which sees the dark veil within, without the help of your physical eyes, IS the inner eye." (Master Kirpal Singh) Finding Your Third Eye, Seeing What You Can See - Initiation Into the Mysteries - Spiritual Awakening Radio @ Youtube: https://youtu.be/YmEJWdH2kII and @ wherever you follow podcasts (Apple, Spotify, etc…): https://www.SpiritualAwakeningRadio.com Everyone has their own third eye whether they realize it or not. Through the Divine Path of Initiation one will learn of the spiritual practices that make it possible to access the third eye center, the seat of the soul, within the temple of the human body. We will discover for ourselves the Mysteries of the Spirit. The Kingdom of the Heavens will open up before us on this inward journey of the soul as we travel through vast realms of Light, Sound and Love on our way back to God. Today we explore Initiation, East and West, at first making use of Marcion's Reconstructed New Testament Apostolicon featuring an amazing, rather old and Gnostic sounding, translation of Saint Paul's First Corinthians chapter two, verses 6 through nine complete with archons and aeons. This manuscript from antiquity actually uses the word "Initiation". The goal of this Initiation is seeing in a new way with another kind of inner spiritual vision, the eye of the soul, and inner hearing with the ear of the soul. This is where we leave the outer world of the five senses behind. This is where we progress from theory, religion or philosophy to the world of practice, of inner experience. This is where the spiritual path truly begins. Also explored: The Gospel of Thomas on what "Eye Has Not Seen, Nor Ear Heard"; the mystic poetry of Sant Tulsi Sahib of Hathras on the ascension of the soul; The Inner Journey Of The Soul Back To Its Origin, by George Arnsby Jones, an initiate of Kirpal Singh; words of encouragement and satsang discourses from Sant Kirpal Singh on Initiation and Surat Shabd Yoga, Inner Light and Sound Meditation practice (sadhana of simran, dhyan and bhajan); recent satsang discourses by Baba Ram Singh also exploring this inward journey of the soul that takes place during meditation, the interior voyage back Home. The goal of this Path is not simply going TO the various inner planes or heavens of creation but to pass THROUGH them on our way back to the Most High Supreme Being given many names such as The Ocean of Love (Anurag Sagar), The Nameless One (Anami Purush, Sat Purush), and The Lord of the Soul (Radhasoami). (RadhaSwami) In Divine Love (Bhakti), Light, and Sound, At the Feet of the Masters, James Bean Spiritual Awakening Radio Podcasts Sant Mat Satsang Podcasts Sant Mat Radhasoami A Satsang Without Walls

[cymorilcinnamonroll]

What if Mary of Bethany's brainrot phase of my writing, but worse

NaNoWriMo project count: 5 now

WAIT. BUTCH MARY MAGDALENE, FEMME YOUNG GNOSTIC MARY SALOME, AND YOUNG THECLA LESBIAN MINISTRY FIC

HELP ME HELP ME I ALREADY AM 4K WORDS INTO MY NANO

[unsoundedcomic]

Would Duane like the gnostic versions of Christianity? I thought Ssaelism took inspiration from it (or rather I thought you took inspiration from Legacy of Kain, which had loads of gnostic themes)? As a mythology, the old testament Canaan Thunder God + the Gnostic Jesus feel like a very rich world, I wish more fiction would take inspiration from it. Or was I mistaken in your sources of inspiration?

I think Duane would find gnostic Christianity more comprehensible than many of the other types (Mormonism would perk his ears too). Jesus is missing a lot of what your typical Ssaelit love about Ssael though. Ssael is so very relatable because he lived a full mortal life. Jesus never loved a partner or had kids or fought in a war; he's written as being utterly perfect and basically just a god, whether there's a demiurge out there or no. Sonum Ssael was explicitly a mortal man, with all the foibles that come with mortality, and no divine powers to elevate him above his peers; just talent, wisdom, and his labour.

There's a lot more Siddhartha Gautama in Ssael. The Buddha gave up a life of privilege in order to spread his enlightenment to others, and Duane would jive with that enormously, as well as the idea of escaping reincarnation and getting out from under the thumb of the gods.

Inspiration-wise, I pulled from all over. Because Ssaelism proclaims the demiurges WERE destroyed - not going to be destroyed, or have the potential to be destroyed, or maybe you can destroy them yourself - I always am reminded of the Olympians overthrowing the Titans. The great potential of humanity above all others, including the senets, reminds me of the potential of humans within Hinduism and Buddhism. Humans are the only ones able to consciously choose good or evil; but like senets, divine/spiritual beings are bound to act according to their nature, so their karma is stuck until they're reborn human.

I do agree that there's a lot of really interesting Christian and Jewish mythology. Early Christianity actually fascinates me a lot, and I listen to Bart Ehrman's podcast every week for a helping of it. Jesus is really the least interesting part of any of that; I'd love writers to delve more into Paul and his clashes with Peter. I think there should be a JC Superstar sequel about this, with Paul cast as like a shrewd record producer who starts recutting the hits that Jesus left behind and bickering with his "band" :D Webber, write this! Leave Phantom alone!

[jeannereames]

Did Christianity change the perception of Alexander in a meaningful way?

Perhaps a bit surprisingly, the rise of Christianity didn’t really alter perceptions of Alexander that much, largely for two reasons.

First, imperial authors (both Greek and Latin) had already shaped those perceptions according to popular philosophic virtues—using Alexander as either an exempla of Bad Behavior or of Proper Restraint (or both, depending on the writer).

Second, in an attempt to gain acceptance, or at least tolerance, for Christianity among the larger Roman imperial public, some early Christian theologians began presenting Christianity as a form of philosophy (Justin Martyr and Origen are good examples, as well as Augustine later). Some non-Christian philosophers fought back directly (Celsus and Plotinus, most notably), and some Christian authors actively resisted this “philosophizing” of Christianity (Tertullian). Yet several philosophic ideas (and ideals) seeped into early Christian thought in ways that might have surprised Jesus.

Probably the most influential were Neoplatonism (thank you, Origen), and Stoicism. Notions of self-control, ataraxia (equilibrium), and asceticism folded into Christianity as early as Paul, but certainly by Justin Martyr (early/middle first century CE) and Origen (early second century CE). These then became part of Christian discourse. Christian Gnosticism, after all, is just a particular flavor of gnostic thought found throughout the Mediterranean and ancient near east. Gnosticism owes to Neoplatonism mixing with an influx of Persian and Hindu notions that had floated west even before Alexander but certainly accelerated after. (One could even debate to what degree Plato himself was influenced by eastern ideas; after all, philosophy was born in Asia Minor with Thales & Friends, then bypassed mainland Greece for a bit to land in Sicily and south Italy. Athens was a johnny-come-lately to the party.)

In any case, “Alexander” had already been firmly situated in philosophic and rhetorical discourse in ways that were easily adopted and adapted by Church theologians. He remained a negative example of anger and worldly ambition, and a positive one of (military) leadership and physical (especially sexual) restraint.

One might point to the elimination of Alexander’s bisexual interests as Christianizing, but that’s too simple. We already find Roman literature headed that way. Romans had mixed receptions of “Greek love,” even when expressed “properly” between older men and younger boys/male slaves. It’s Roman Curtius who gives us the very negative impact of the eunuch Bagoas as part of the larger depiction of Alexander corrupted by Eastern (Asian) influence. It’s also Curtius, however, who gives us clues to other (freeborn) boys who may have been Alexander’s beloveds, but always presented in coded language as “favorites.” There’s more to say about that, but it depicts pretty well, imo, the Roman mixed mind on the matter. Also, Plutarch’s presentation of Alexander’s indignation when offered pretty boys is, even now, used by those who want to deny Alexander’s interest in males. While we can quibble over exactly what Plutarch meant Alexander to object to (it’s important to contextualize where this anecdote appears), it’s certainly not the open praise of beautiful boys found in, say, the poetry of Solon.

None of that is Christian.

Also—and conversely—we find several Renaissance-and-later paintings that depict Hephaistion and Alexander, some homoeroticized, such as the tapestry made from LeBrun’s sketch of Alexander taking leave of Hephaistion (by kissing him). Yes, kissing was a normal hello and goodbye, but the overtones are, imo, intentional.

It’s really not until the latter 1800s that Hephaistion starts to disappear from ATG discourse as heightened homophobic fears require him to be excised from Alexander’s narrative to protect the conqueror from THOSE allegations. Yes, that’s related to Christianity, but I’d argue it’s more about rising homophobia in Europe, even if Christianity is used as the excuse—just as slavery pre-existed Christianity, but Christianity was later employed to justify its continuation.

So, perhaps surprisingly, no, Christianity didn’t significantly alter popular consciousness of Alexander.

I’m not a specialist on the Alexander Romance, but it’s here you’d find more obvious Christianizing, and Islamizing, as well. Look up the work of Richard Stoneman on the Romance. Also checkout Ken Moore’s Brill's Companion to the Reception of Alexander the Great.

[victor-aguilar]

cym the guy who didnt like musicals:3

PAUL — @the-implications your guy

EMMA — @thecrabbybarista the you ever

TED — @grimdark-gnostic have fun

CHARLOTTE — @cherrieguroo (ik we're not mutuals but i can't see anyone else as char)

BILL — you bc ur a sweetheart

HIDGENS — @biologyologyy have fun

ZOEY — @zoeyslament duh

MR DAVIDSON — @frenchgirlocean i think you'd have fun

[tristansherwin]

CHRIST | ACCESS ALL AREAS (Col. 1:1-8)

CHRIST | ACCESS ALL AREAS (Col. 1:1-8) 'If you want to know the whole of God, the depth of who God is, the so-called "hiddenness" of God, then Jesus has revealed it all.'

Here’s my longer sermon notes from this morning’s Metro Christian Centre service (dated 21st May 2023), introducing our new series in the letter Colossians. You can also catch up with this via MCC’s YouTube channel (just give us time to get the video uploaded). ‘One life but we’re not the sameWe get to carry each other, carry each otherOne’ U2, One, Actung Baby, 1991 READ: COLOSSIANS 1:1—8…

[jh-newman-opn]

did the blessed Virgin Mary see the apostles martyred

A question that occurred to me during my daily rosary, and which I am now going to attempt to answer.

According to Hippolytus of Thebes, our blessed mother was assumed around the year 41AD. The 18thC mystic Catherine Emmerich says she was aged around 64 at the time of the Dormition (source: a vision), which would put the date between 45-49AD. Based on these two extremely accurate and definitely not questionable dates, I will now show how many of her children Our Lady had to watch die (while on earth). Edited upon being reminded from "she did not see this" to "she saw this from heaven", because. well. she did.

Jesus: 33AD. Obviously.

Judas: 33AD. She did not see this bc she was a bit busy with our boy JC but she was around and in the area.

James (the Greater) son of Zebedee: killed by Herod Agrippa in 44AD. Our Lady apparently bilocated to see him on his mission (ur mum could never) so maybe she did that for his death as well.

Andrew: Crucified on an X-shaped cross in Achaia (Greece) in the year 60-61AD. She saw this from heaven.

James (the Lesser) son of Alphaeus: stoned to death in the AD60s. She saw this from heaven.

Philip: Crucified upside down in Hierapolis in 62AD. She saw this from heaven.

Matthew: martyred in Ethiopia in 65AD. She saw this from heaven.

Matthias (replaced Judas): martyred in 65AD, either hacked to death or crucified. She saw this from heaven.

Peter: crucified upside down during the Neronian persecutions of 67-68AD. She saw this from heaven.

Paul: beheaded in Rome on the same day (BFF goals). She saw this from heaven.

Bartholomew/Nathaniel: skinned alive in Armenia in 72AD. She saw this from heaven.

(Doubting) Thomas: was in Persia and India (VERY funny story about this in the gnostic Gospel of Thomas) but was teleported back to Jerusalem three days after Our Lady's Dormition, and was there to see that her body had been assumed. He was later stabbed to death in India in 74AD. She saw this from heaven.

John: Probably died of natural causes at the end of the 1st century. He's winning. St Robert Bellarmine thinks his body was assumed into heaven so they even reunited on the same day (side note: John's conviction that he is Jesus's specialest little apostle is consistent with the favourite child syndrome he clearly also has from Our Lady, and this cannot have helped. Who is the greatest disciple? Doesn't matter, mummy loves John most). She saw this from heaven and then immediately they had a touching reunion :))))))

Simon the Zealot/Jude and Jude/Thaddeus: unknown but probably martyred together. We assume she saw this from heaven, because the alternative would make me sad.

[rastronomicals]

4:19 AM EDT July 11, 2024:

Led Zeppelin - "Nobody's Fault But Mine" From the album Presence (March 31, 1976)

Last song scrobbled from iTunes at Last.fm

Much in the same way that the lyrics to The Beatles' "Glass Onion" acknowledged with a nod and a reluctant wink the gnostic cult of Paul-is-Dead, the packaging of Led Zeppelin's Presence acknowledged the I'm sure at-least-somewhat-discomfitting fact that their group had long since become the most humongous rock band in the world.

By the time of The White Album, and by the time of Presence, respectively, things had gotten to the point where expedience was no longer expedient. The Beatles had tried not to feed the conspiracy theorists, and Zeppelin--modest at least in this one regard--had stayed away from licensing lunchboxes and appearances on Don Kirshner's Rock Concert. But at a certain point, things get so big, and so plain, that they become the elephant in the room.

Presence seems to be Zep's acceptance of their own status (beyond even their own control) as Big Dumb Object, an enormous artifact of unfathomable consequence.

That's dumb as in "incapable of speech," not as in "stupid," just so we're straight. But since we're there, let me note that Presence perhaps more than any Zeppelin album save II demonstrates that a certain amount of stoopidity is unavoidable or even desired if you're going to play the cock-rock game.

Plant's lyrics to "Achilles" reference some etching or the other of William Blake's, so my point is not to disparage Zeppelin's obvious operational intelligence. Still, Zeppelin were all about contrast: I dare you to check out the live video from '77, and tell me that Plant's suggestive mannerisms as he sings the band's 11-minute epic aren't a little stoopid . . . .

Ah, but I digress, 'cause the key concept here is not "Dumb" but "Big." Think thunder. Think "Hammer of the Gods," if that helps.

After four albums where at least part of the idea had been to leaven the heaviness with keyboards or acoustic instruments, Presence was a return to the undiluted bombast of the second album. Guitar bass drums voice recorded in a mere 18 days--not necessarily simple, but certainly direct.

The instrumental contrasts that for good or ill had been there on III, IV, Houses of the Holy, and Physical Graffiti were absent on the band's seventh album--and maybe that's why it's long been their least popular. Funny thought, that: maybe Zeppelin were so goddamned popular not because of the parts that rocked, but because of the parts that didn't!

I don't want to go overboard, however. I don't want to make it sound as if Presence were a piece of the nascent pub rock of the time, because the very first track belies that. "Achilles" is the third longest studio track for the band and features perhaps Page's most intricate guitar orchestration, with as many as 12 overdubs. It's routinely described as proggy, or even Yes-like (and if you don't believe that, consider that Dream Theater is one of the many acts who have covered the song). And note that Jonesy is playing an eight-string bass.

Leave it to this band of contrasts to feature a 10-1/2 minute song about a Greek demigod with painstakingly multitracked guitars on their back-to-basics record . . . Presence is perhaps Led Zeppelin's most misunderstood album, but for Page Plant Jones & Bonham, that may have been The Object all along.

File under: The Object Of It All

--