Page 3 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast
Results 21 to 30 of 34

Thread: Gnostics

  1. #21
    Join Date
    Jan 2015
    Location
    Nanaimo
    Posts
    3,796
    Dear Mr. Tulip

    Hurray - some actual thought in the wilderness!

    I remain of the view that this patronising attitude towards analysis of pagan parallels is evidence of mental blockages towards simple evidence. The reasons for such blockages are complex. A key part of it is the failure to understand the role of Gnostic spirituality, and how Gnosticism was an old movement based on links between Judaism and other cultures. These links are denied point blank by the “nuts” premise of this thread which Godfrey and Huller and now Hindley have rather crassly supported.

    I would suggest astrotheology is only part of a larger syncretic (Intellectuals do integrate knowledge and wisdom is the meaning of the word Gnosis) system called Imhotep/Asklepios in Egypt and Thoth/Hermes in other places where Empire was ascendant. In his book The Rise of the Greeks by Michael Grant he says this existed for the millennia, before the mythical Jesus made by Rome.

    http://forum.world-mysteries.com/thr...g-an-Alchemist

    These systems were amalgamated under Tuthmosis along with the creation of The Great White Brotherhood of Master Craftsmen.

    I believe I put my thoughts on the Lord's Prayer being a decree (much more than mere prayer) here already.

    Hermetics in the family of Jesus is as old as alchemy perhaps. I certainly can trace the origins of both to the beginning of white people on earth (and there is no Annunaki alien or Oannes fish-man). Mircae Eliade and Haeffner's Dictionary of Alchemy both take it back for over two million years.

    Connecting the family of Jesus (many tribes and many names in various eras) to the DNN is not impossible and DNA research today confirms much of my prior writing on the matters. But it has taken me further to where I can now say the Ainu (De or "of' plus Ainu and remove the vowels) are the DNN and those who interbred humans as they were doing with other creatures, to make Denisovan Man found in a cave in their homeland recently. We also have a 2.4 million year old cave artifact in Southern China to see the spread of civilized humans with technology including rafts over most of this planet over a million years ago.

    Before his recent death Alan Thorne (genetic researcher using AMS technology) had posited the egis of this kind of reality.

    http://gnosis.org/naghamm/nhl.html

    Stephan Hoeller has these words to say about extreme early polemicists like those employed by Rome. He also correctly characterizes those who seek to point fingers rather than study. He correctly points our the early authors which are often quoting the Gospels could not in all honesty really say Gnostics were heretical because there was no orthodoxy.

    "The politicized view of Gnosticism continues to have its adherents, but these are increasingly recruited from the lunatic fringe. Gnostics are still represented as dangerous subversives in pulp magazines and obscure conspiracy pamphlets "exposing" Freemasons, Satanists, and other pests. Meanwhile, respectable conservative thinkers have dropped the Gnostic issue. Some, like scholar and former U.S. Senator S.I. Hayakawa, have subjected Voegelin and his theories to severe criticism and ridicule.

    Traditionalist Difficulties

    Another sometimes confusing voice comes from writers who are bent on proving that within the existing major religions a secret tradition of gnosis may be found which is not identical to the "heretical" Gnosticism of the early Christian centuries. In his 1947 work The Perennial Philosophy, Aldous Huxley promulgated a kind of gnosis that was in effect a mystery reserved for elites, revealed at the dawn of history and handed down through various religious traditions, where it still maintains itself in spite of its ostensible incompatibility with the official dogmas of those traditions. With this view, Huxley approximated the more radical position held by Traditionalists such as René Guénon and Frithjof Schuon.

    Huxley, on the other hand, never passed judgment on anyone who called himself a Gnostic. One could only wish the same could be said of other Traditionalists. Followers of Guénon (who, born a Catholic, converted to Islam in a somewhat untraditional manner) often castigate the early Gnostic teachers in a manner reminiscent of the more extreme ancient polemicists like Irenaeus or Tertullian. The Traditionalists' division of Gnostic writers into "false Gnostics" and "authentic Gnostics" reflects standards that are nothing if not arbitrary; contemporary research indicates that during the first three of four centuries A.D. there was as yet no true orthodoxy and thus no heresy either. Instead, many opinions on religious matters, including gnosis, flourished side by side. Certainly there were disagreements, but to arbitrarily extrapolate standards of falsity and authenticity from these polemics does not seem justified."
    Last edited by R_Baird; 03-14-2016 at 11:22 PM.

  2. #22
    I ran across this "debate" in a thread titled, On dating the Gnostic literature after 325 CE over at the Historum forum.

    no "Gnostic Gospel and Acts" genre of literature before the Council of Nicaea.
    Thoughts?

  3. #23
    Join Date
    Jan 2015
    Location
    Nanaimo
    Posts
    3,796
    Yes, many thoughts.

    I have seen this kind of thing which dovetails well with the plot for Rome and denial of a person like Yeshua and his wife Mary having learned from the Essanoi (modern word being Essenes) or Therapeutae schools in Alexandria.

    Are you seeking for reference to Yeshua and his amalgam or myth in Egypt? I think Barbelo by Rian (see his thread here) has a good biblio including that.

    There also were many Councils in Nicaea. Frankly I think the Mandaeans would like to promote they are the only Gnostic schools worth listening to - and might like that but even Artful was willing to allow Plato was part of it. Plato's work was found at Dag Hammadi.


    Do you see how it supports Rome and Empire to have no person who is capable of the work of a god? It was a great thing Constantine later did when he finally gave up his own religious beliefs and allowed mankind to come under the foot of this EMPIRE who now was the only source of salvation and getting in to Heaven.

    So, yes some Gnostics are not going to want to face down Rome and they agree to go along with some new program where they get some power - so did some Druids like St. Columba and others like Columbanus. As you know the debate still rages and I have been unable to post facts including all those scholars Atwill has in his video Know Rome - Know Jesus, at any place where paradigm history rules supreme and the places who know the whole world bought the myth of Jesus have an agenda just as wrong.

    I will win the day - if humanity does not die off. I may not be alive to see it - Brotherhood acknowledged including Iesa (Jesus); but there are more people in academia every day who are proving the Gospels are Roman propaganda.
    Last edited by R_Baird; 11-03-2015 at 12:30 PM.

  4. #24
    Wanted to get back to this thread, as it a big subject, taken awhile to digest and have some questions.

    First, a few points on some recent posts.

    Frankly I think the Mandaeans would like to promote they are the only Gnostic schools worth listening to - and might like that but even Artful was willing to allow Plato was part of it. Plato's work was found at Dag Hammadi.
    Never heard of the the Mandaeans, so posting below what I came across and would have overlooked in this Catholic Encyclopedia article while reading on the Gnostic thought.


    In dealing with the origins of Gnosticism, one might be tempted to mention Manichaeism, as a number of Gnostic ideas seem to be borrowed from Manichaeism, where they are obviously at home. This, however, would hardly be correct. Manichaeism, as historically connected with Mani, its founder, could not have arisen much earlier than A.D. 250, when Gnosticism was already in rapid decline. Manichaeism, however, in many of its elements dates back far beyond its commonly accepted founder; but then it is a parallel development with the Gnosis, rather than one of its sources. Sometimes Manichaeism is even classed as a form of Gnosticism and styled Parsee Gnosis, as distinguished from Syrian and Egyptian Gnosis. This classification, however, ignores the fact that the two systems, though they have the doctrine of the evil of matter in common, start from different principles, Manichaeism from dualism, while Gnosticism, as an idealistic Pantheism, proceeds from the conception of matter as a gradual deterioration of the Godhead.
    While reading the Catholic Encyclopedia, a few questions arose, taking into consideration one of your comments from a post earlier in this thread concerning origins and the meaning of the word Gnostic.

    I equate gnosis with wisdom acquisition and I do not see an originating point in human history for this innate desire to learn and experience all that can be.
    Interesting (or not) the Catholic Encyclopedia's description is the opposite, which is not exactly surprising, but the descriptive words used to describe various religious dogmas in comparison to the Gnostic's,... hmmm

    Greek thought, which was a joyous acknowledgment of and homage to the beautiful and noble in this world,
    Egyptian thought, ... considered the universe created or evolved under the presiding wisdom of Thoth
    Iranian thought, which held to the absolute supremacy of Ahura Mazda
    Brahminic thought, which was Pantheism pure and simple,
    Semitic thought, ... saw all practical wisdom in the worship of Baal, or Marduk, or Assur, or Hadad

    The Gnostics, it is true, borrowed their terminology almost entirely from existing religions, but they only used it to illustrate their great idea of the essential evil of this present existence and the duty to escape it by the help of magic spells and a superhuman Saviour. Whatever they borrowed, this pessimism they did not borrow — not from Greek thought, which was a joyous acknowledgment of and homage to the beautiful and noble in this world, with a studied disregard of the element of sorrow; not from Egyptian thought, which did not allow its elaborate speculations on retribution and judgment in the netherworld to cast a gloom on this present existence, but considered the universe created or evolved under the presiding wisdom of Thoth; not from Iranian thought, which held to the absolute supremacy of Ahura Mazda and only allowed Ahriman a subordinate share in the creation, or rather counter-creation, of the world; not from Indian Brahminic thought, which was Pantheism pure and simple, or God dwelling in, nay identified with, the universe, rather than the Universe existing as the contradictory of God; not, lastly, from Semitic thought, for Semitic religions were strangely reticent as to the fate of the soul after death, and saw all practical wisdom in the worship of Baal, or Marduk, or Assur, or Hadad, that they might live long on this earth.
    Going to back track a little and state - what eventually led to the Catholic Encyclopedia was researching another topic, the serpents egg ovum anguium druid amulet

    Thus began with a painting by Peter Paul Rubens, The Finding of Erichthonius. Side-note, apparently there is a copy of this entire painting (as the below link only shows partial) located in the collection of the Duke of Rutland at Belvoir Castle. Mentioning this because to think of all the artwork held in private collections - a fascinating but off topic area to be discussed in another thread - after this is another important aspect containing knowledge from the past.

    The story of the discovery of the snake-legged infant Erichthonius, son of Vulcan and Gaea, by the daughters of the Attic King Cecrops is retold by numerous classical authors from Euripides to Ovid. This vibrant canvas is the only extant fragment of a much larger composition painted by Rubens in about 1632-33.
    While noting the phrase snake-legged infant, what is striking about the picture, (beyond the background of the story/myth (which can be found in more detail in an article published in Vol. 86, No. 1 (Mar., 2004), pp. 58-74 College Art Association, From Ovid's Cecrops to Rubens's City of God in "The Finding of Erichthonius" Author(s): Aneta Georgievska-ShineSource. In which the whole painting and others provided can be viewed) is this the snake-legged infant Erichthonius is found in a basket. Although the above link is a fascinating read, I did not catch any reference to the meaning/symbol of the basket (maybe I over-looked it..) Nonetheless, a baby in a basket is also found in the story of Moses....

    In any event, this led to an article from an article on the SERPENT FAITH

    The Abraxis of the Christian Gnostics of the early centuries had serpents for legs.
    Having never come across the word/concept of Abraxis this took ahwile to research and digest, if even completely grasp, yet... or will even to attempt to go further after this discussion.

  5. #25
    Continuing on Part II - too long of a post - had to break it up.

    Anyways....

    First going to point out that the Catholic Encyclopedia in their article, Abrasax states -

    The true name, moreover, is Abrasax, and not, as incorrectly written, Abraxas, a reading due to the confusion made by the Latins between Sigma and Xi. Among the early Gnostics,
    Familiar to a limited degree, that the snake/serpent is equated with knowledge and going back to that puzzling initial passage, "The Abraxis of the Christian Gnostic's of the early centuries had serpents for legs." is what led to the above mentioned Catholic Encyclopedia quotes on Gnostic's.

    In addition, kept wondering what was meant by the declined interview with Moe from Gnostic Warriors... along with you mentioning and the conversations concerning the difference between the old and new schools....

    I have some concerns and would like you to post some things at World-Mysteries regarding what your impressions about 'worms' or demons are. We may have lots to discuss if you are open minded but I am not interested in trying to explain the science behind energy forms and CONstructs to someone who is a dogmatic individual. I am open to possibilities including portalling through informational wormholes but I give demonic energy forms as little energy or consciousness as a worm has. Actually I am kidding, a worm has more.

    I will not be doing the interview he requested. He indeed is into hallucinations about worms and other matters.
    This eventually led to (won't post all the other material ran across while researching) The Serpent Symbol and Abraxas found in an article at Moe's site because it is here readers find the reference to a worm representing Abraxas. Begins with -

    The God Abraxas (Abrasax, Abraxis and Latin-Afipacrdl) comes to us from ancient Egypt and Abraxas Greece. He is associated with the early beginnings of Gnosticism which would later influence many of the first Gnostics who had went on to form the various Abrahamic religions such as Judaism and Christianity.
    and later in the article states

    Sir Godfrey Higgins, in his book the Celtic Druids had said that the word may have come from the Druids.
    Thus, leads back to your post comment

    So, Moe said he has followed my work showing the Gnostics originate with the Great Pyramid builders which MacDari clued me in to. Why then do all so many sects of Gnosticism today stink of the same Roman Gospel propaganda and racism against Jews and anything more ancient?
    Clearly, if Moe wrote the above article and from the quotes above - he states with affirmation that the God Abraxas connects with the beginnings of Gnosticism (but does not state when - in this article - have not gone through the whole website), yet only alludes to the possibility by referencing another author's work to any connection with the Druids, nor MacDari.

    In this article, also, found reference to "the great Gnostic Basilides"

    No idea who was Basilides... so back to the Catholic Encyclopedia.... Basilides and again find it leading back to the name Abrasax

    the highest god, i.e. the Unborn Father, bears the mystical name Abrasax, as origin of the 365 heavens. The Angels that made the world formed it out of Eternal Matter; but matter is the principle of all evil and hence both the contempt of the Gnostics for it and their docetic Christology. To undergo martyrdom in order to confess the Crucified is useless, for it is to die for Simon of Cyrene, not for Christ.
    For those interested, click on the above links for further explanation.

    For now, going back to one of your first posts here in this thread....

    It is fair to call any wise person an ecumenicist and humanist. The Gnostic revivalists are ecumenical but there are some 'elements' of apocalypse thinking and having to be something before being accepted into a hereafter of purpose. I prefer to think the wise people like Carl Jung would say we all are perfecti (As the Cathars did) if we work at it, and all are worthy of acceptance without some test for having sinned. So when I see Jung being termed a Gnostic I agree and disagree.
    Connecting Jung and Basilides led to THE SEVEN SERMONS TO THE DEAD WRITTEN BY BASILIDES IN ALEXANDRIA, THE CITY WHERE THE EAST TOUCHETH THE WEST.and Jung's Red Book, also referred to as a "collection of seven mystical or "Gnostic" texts privately published by Jung" Otherwise known as The Seven Sermons to the Dead Septem Sermones ad Mortuos
    Scrolling to the middle of the above link, is a translation by H. G. Baynes in which goes into further depth on Abraxas.

    Since, the focus question today is not in connection between Jung and Gnostic's, not going to insert any quotes - oh miisplaced the url - anyone go google to find it...

    Okay, so posting all this - not because think you are not familiar with this information, but as a reference.

    Although many questions, will simply today ask

    Question # 1

    Do Gnostic's have a school of thought that there is a struggle between good and evil - taking this a step further - that an Evil God rules this world and beyond is a Good God? Or is Abrasax/ Abraxas the combination of a God that rules or does not rule over humans?

    Furthermore, is the God Abrasax/ Abraxas thought to be within and outside ourselves (AS ABOVE - SO BELOW - Macrocosms = Microcosms) or is this line of thinking actually going back to Bible and the idea there is a separation between Humans, God and the Devil (Satan)?

    Question # 2

    What do you think about Abrasax/ Abraxas?


    P.S.
    In regards to my last post I was not seeking any reference, per se.
    Merely re-emphasizing you point about Know Rome - Know Jesus from another angle.

    I am actually attempting to get to the bottom between the different schools of thought between old and new school of Gnostic thought.
    Last edited by iSal; 11-05-2015 at 03:13 PM.

  6. #26
    Join Date
    Jan 2015
    Location
    Nanaimo
    Posts
    3,796
    Dear Sal

    The Catholic Encyclopedia obviously has an agenda to disinform.

    Moe has a source - my writing. And no other Gnostic today has agreed with him probably. Artful certainly did not even know about his Order of Gnostics. Here is Artful addressing the Mandaeans http://vigilantcitizen.com/forums/Th...-the-Mandaeans

    I have never been able to find a lot of writing on the Johannites who followed John the Baptist (Da Vinci was one) but I say it is akin to this stuff Artful is detailing. No one leader or sect was first - just first to say it was first (over and over again for many millennia as Pharaohs robbed graves and usurped prior culture). Rome was no originator of propaganda or anything. But the families inside what ruled Rome had true histories which we might wonder about. Where did they come from - and where did those people come from - I know!

    Mani was an alchemist according to truthful sources including the Dictionary of Alchemy by Haeffner. So the Catholics are simply lying - Mani tried to ecumenically enjoin all the religions of the regions they speak about. You should see how this all requires constant questions about where this thought came from - and why7 I am the only purveyor of truth - BECAUSE I am the only one always asking who, what, where and when?

    MacDari took me back to the Great Pyramid and now I am back a lot further - my books took it back to the origin of white people with a couple of insights going back further than Campbell's 462,000 years of culture - now I am back a million years. So would he if he had lived to see how right he was about the 462,000 years of civilization and so would Churchward who only took it back to about 250,000 years.

    I think I have described Abraxas many times here (Oroborous thread maybe) as the same thing as The Rule of Complementarity as Bohr put it. The opposite of a great truth is also true, whereas the opposite of a trivial truth is merely false. I also liken it to the serpent eating it's tail and how we must understand both sides of every issue in order to understand any point on the continuum from good to evil.

    This is so important (see thread on Sin and Evil) and you know it when you agreed yesterday about having no fixed position or Belief!

    It is so utterly simple I am reminded of a lot of top physicists who say when we have the Theory of Everything it will be fully understood by the man on the street.

    Well - we do already have it! It is in Abraxas which originates where the Druid's Egg in the Saharan culture starts and in the architects of the Great Pyramid knowledge. There was a movie which had the Pyramid being built with the help of Mastodons of recent vintage which showed the wise men of old in the Altaic had an influence. NOW - it was pretty basic and not historical but it was more correct than any history taught in school or by any religion.

    I really had to choke on the bent thought of the Catholic Encyclopedia running down Ahura Mazda - where they stole their mighty omnipotent master from. All these religions are Johnny-Come-Latelies and when you see The Cradle of Civilization was a cradle of BS you are starting to see how bad this society has become and WHY!

    Starting with the idea of equality (lack of misogyny) and Brotherhood I have found SCIENCE galore - and MacDari is vindicated along with many other great and daring thinkers like Socrates, Pythagoras (Abaris) and Campbell. I know my effort has their acceptance - and that is what makes me proud.

    If you seek for the origin of a word and there was no words for anything when the thought system began - you will have a major problem and that is why the politics of Hellenizing Empires (along with their destruction of all books and stelae they could find) has a pre-eminent position in schools where quotes prove something. You get marks for quotes and not for real understanding - see why Socrates abhorred Sophists.

    But we actually do have origins of Gnosis with the Gaedhils who are part of the founding of Egypt with Isis and Osiris (King Bairds). You remember this from MacDari I hope. Thoth is their language schools as is the name Ptah - but that does not mean either of those words has real meaning as an origin. Remember Marshack's lunar calendar!
    Last edited by R_Baird; 11-05-2015 at 05:02 PM.

  7. #27
    Join Date
    Jan 2015
    Location
    Nanaimo
    Posts
    3,796
    Back to the Gnostic Roman Christian fools like Artful Revealer (even Gnostic Bishop) at Vigilant Citizen where christian extremists and Muslims flourish under the mercenary gaze of a guy who banned me for putting up facts galore - which prove him wrong.

    I asked many times if any of them understood the Corpus Hermeticum of Thoth/Hermes and Imhotep/Asklepios was a more correct Gnosis than any Roman Gospel. I mentioned how the Cathar language Langue D'oc is Langue D'Occamy (alchemy) and tried to get any person there to address the roots of the family of Jesus and Solomon's knowledge. I have had this debate at every Christian or Biblical site - as well as every history and alien site - and I have been to them all - it seems. People lie and attack me all the time - because I do KNOW, have the WILL and DARE not 'keep silent' (removed from the law of the Magi) early last century (IMHO). I have joined Alchemy sites (Rosicrucian wanna-bes) and more. At World-Mysteries people were telling me about alchemy - and quoting people who took my work and did not give me credit. These people refused to debate me - and it is sad indeed.

    Atwill and the Caesar's Messiah scholars are way behind the curve - Archarya S is pretty good and I have communicated with others who were good. Truth is - no person who actually studies hard with an open mind really wants to waste their time arguing with those who do not study. So please refrain from making the usual ad hominem or born again arguments born of brainwashing. Invite any you know who you think are knowledgeable. "I'm your Huckleberry!"

    The Astralpulse forum, and Icke's forum are just as bad. At Hancock's site they told me they had easy step by step descriptions of how to heal by Firewalking or make a Stone - the Great Work is part of almost every video game (not to mention TV shows etc) in one way or another - and Harry Potter is the best of them - but no one really wants to study. They all want power and ego. I have yet to find a person with much knowledge about esoterics who really will study what is good for all life on Earth - RIGHT THOUGHT = RIGHT ACTION (one of the three Magian Laws). If any one knows anyone who will address what I have compiled and rip my threads on these matters apart - I have always offered to address the FACTS and debate - PostFlavian fools to Philosophy forums with top teacher-types - all vacuous vascerri at best!!!!!!!!!

    Here is a site offering free alchemy courses - a Gnostic site.

    http://gnosticteachings.org/courses/...2bQaAnuQ8P8HAQ
    Last edited by R_Baird; 11-20-2015 at 12:47 PM.

  8. #28
    Join Date
    Jan 2015
    Location
    Nanaimo
    Posts
    3,796
    The argument is moot unless the arguer is informed. The debate requires a lot of stipulations before a focus can be achieved. It serves no purpose to argue only upon the tenets of written words by liars and church fathers. Is there is a difference between Hellenizers and destroyers of knowledge or the Empire our culture and laws are based upon; and the people seeking truth wherever it may exist? I find facts from every scientific discipline prove ancient knowledge was far more than we have been lead to BELIEVE. I have confessions from the social engineers and politicians as to why and what they and their forbears have done. There are many decent historians throughout time who have attempted to tell the truth as best they could. But no one of them alone has the kind of available tools we have today - and few attempt to integrate all knowledge if they have spent a decade in a university having wisdom drilled out of their head.

    The following discourse from a decent site is worth reading and I agree with this sentiment expressed in it. However, I have more than a lay-student appreciation and experience as relates to the subject. High Rosicrucians within the inner sanctum of the best Rosicrucian societies have said I am an alchemist or able "to make Franz Bardon credible". I have a very high bar for what I consider an alchemist to be ("or NOT to BE") so I do not consider myself an alchemist.

    "As far as I can tell (and I certainly don't know everything!), gnosticism is an ancient, even pre-historic, practice....

    And it is my "lay-student" opinion that it has heavily influenced modern Abrahamic religious doctrine. "
    http://www.abovetopsecret.com/forum/thread997176/pg1

  9. #29
    Join Date
    Jan 2015
    Location
    Nanaimo
    Posts
    3,796
    If it is true that knowledge is power and that power corrupts when few are in possession of it - is it any surprise that there is a disconnect of immense proportions in our society? The near vacuum in the region between adepthood or wisdom and the hoi polloi or commonly held belief or civic morality varies from region to cultural region but the breadth of the disconnect or vacuum stays pretty similar. Of course there are distinctions or hierarchies which have been fostered and the role of specialized knowledge has become synarchy instead of anarchy or democracy. The use and abuse of words like anarchy or liberal and conservative in political venues from communist to Nazi or fascist makes it somewhat difficult for a poor wordsmith like myself to capture the immensity of our malaise or full out ignorance which the Gnostics say is the Original Sin. Sin, and evil are words worth deconstruction and my nieces once told me 'sin' is self-inflicted nonsense - my oldest brother is a fine example of it. The spiritual milieu or ether of energy which surrounds us has what early adepts or shamans over two million years ago sought to make sense of - and tried to convey that 'sense' to others long before language as we know it, developed . Specialized jargon, anaphora religious terminologies and metaphors or analogies, story tellers and troubadours, or outright political liars and ecclesiasties of feudal Dark Age deceit still remain from the beginnings of Empire and the needed management of people.

    The stages of language development and timing thereof is a large philosophic debate which hard scientists studying the human physiology are focussing on to the extent that some people say we only recently had the speech lobes to be able to talk and therefore language or communication did not exist. I heartily contest that myopic and cultural bias which was truly 'evil' when John Locke developed a Scale of Nature with a 'tabula rasa' saying no consciousness could be existent without language. That Scale of Nature put the English WASP at the top of the charts and black man down with the Hottentot that some thought had come into existence from the interbreeding of an orangutan and human. In his early life Thomas Jefferson held this revolting concept that still pervailed (a word I will leave here even though it was a typo, because a pervert prevails would not be acceptable linguistic usage) - and in my own lifetime some people have proposed similar unscientific viewpoints. It is said Neanderthal only developed speech lobes about 150,000 years ago and we now know they interbred with other hominids. But they had a larger brain and I think were entirely able to consciously apprehend nature and reality as well as share it through a variety of communication forms - signing became one origin of Ogham, ESP another. The Sumatran Gibbon or Bonobos in Africa have language as do porpoises and some day we may even learn to speak with our 'diggies' who certainly understand words like 'walk'. Kanzai, and Koko could teach John Locke a lot.

    There is 'of course' no such thing as evil demons to the extent some religions have built the pantheon and I consider Gods to have a rather recent origin of an anthropomorphed psychological 'easy answer' and political 'social engineering' Genesis. I did not need Francis Fukayama in his book The End of History and The Last Man to confirm or confess "all absolute religions have been tools for social engineers" like himself. He deserved his promotion from the US Department in charge of Policy to the shadow governing ethos or construct and Rand Corporation role in that Shadow Government which has devolved or evolved from various Illuminized (Gnosis translates as wisdom or 'enlightenment' not Salvation as Romanism foisted or injected into a cult similar to Christian Gospel lies now called Caesar's Messiah by some scholars) efforts including the advent of organized religion about 600 BCE. Even Confucianism and Buddhism which have no God are found coming out of the woodwork at this particular point in time. The title of my first book Diverse Druids gives some idea of earlier origins before 600 BCE. But I do not think it (What one language calls Druidry) was as much a religion as it was a scientific shared Brotherhood with transparent and freely available access to higher layers of study - if a person wished to study! Before the time of Caesar it was a 25 year course of study and included Bairds, Ovates and Druids as well as vascerri (priests), pheryllts (scientists or alchemists like Merlin), bards or kapnobatai like Orpheus and later Pythagoras, all starting with mimes, minstrels and jesters who might become orators and language experts before moving into more specialized realms of study as they showed merit and had interest.

    That brings me to the first area we would have to stipulate to or agree upon if we were to debate the origins of Gnostic or Hermetic thought. Was mankind conscious and able to communicate 2 million years ago - after he had developed tools greater than those we know apes used.

    It reminds me of a comment by a Mr. Tulip on a Biblical Interpretation site I was recently revolted by as they ridiculed any attempt to deconstruct the Biblical early writings as mere Phoenician or Keltoi mythology as the Father of Biblical Archaeology asserted from his lofty professorship at Johns Hopkins. Mr. Tulip and I agree Acharya S has done good work penetrating the ethos of Empire and I supported her contention when she, I and Vincent Bridges discussed the Language of the BRDs (my last name therein) about a dozen years ago. Here is my response to him just before leaving the austere company of Mr. Hindley et al.

    Dear Mr. Tulip

    Hurray - some actual thought in the wilderness!

    I remain of the view that this patronising attitude towards analysis of pagan parallels is evidence of mental blockages towards simple evidence. The reasons for such blockages are complex. A key part of it is the failure to understand the role of Gnostic spirituality, and how Gnosticism was an old movement based on links between Judaism and other cultures. These links are denied point blank by the “nuts” premise of this thread which Godfrey and Huller and now Hindley have rather crassly supported.
    Last edited by R_Baird; 03-14-2016 at 11:46 PM.

  10. #30
    Join Date
    Jan 2015
    Location
    Nanaimo
    Posts
    3,796
    Origen was a learned man and at some point might even have been a truth teller but by the time he wrote Contra Celsum I am inclined to think he was thoroughly corrupted by Roman threats and entreaties. The matter of Celsus is likewise of interest and uncertainty when I find it in a library of Gnostic literature. Nonetheless this debate had import in its era and we who seek history or some element of truth in it have to sift through the chaff and see what real gnosis or wisdom is obtained therein. There is code and insight galore in all scripture to be sure.

    http://gnosis.org/library/orig_cc1.htm

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •