|
|
Post by phantasman on Aug 1, 2014 11:19:06 GMT -5
"{The Holy One said to him: "I want you to know that First Man is called 'Begetter, Self-perfected Mind'. He reflected with Great Sophia, his consort, and revealed his first-begotten, androgynous son. His male name is designated 'First Begetter, Son of God', his female name, 'First Begettress Sophia, Mother of the Universe'. Some call her 'Love'. Now First-begotten is called 'Christ'. Since he has authority from his father, he created a multitude of angels without number for retinue from Spirit and Light."
Does this verse claim a demiurge first, and claims he is "Son of God" by grant of Sophia (rather than father, small f, that Jesus revealed?
And is this the demiurge as well?:
"And his consort is the Great Sophia, who from the first was destined in him for union by Self-begotten Father, from Immortal Man, who appeared as First and divinity and kingdom, for the Father, who is called 'Man, Self-Father', revealed this. And he created a great aeon, whose name is 'Ogdoad', for his own majesty.
"He was given great authority, and he ruled over the creation of poverty. He created gods and angels, archangels, myriads without number for retinue, from that Light and the tri-male Spirit, which is that of Sophia, his consort. For from this, God originated divinity and kingdom. Therefore he was called 'God of gods' and 'King of kings'.
"First Man has his unique mind, within, and thought - just as he is it (thought) - (and) considering, reflecting, rationality, power. All the attributes that exist are perfect and immortal. In respect to imperishableness, they are indeed equal. (But) in respect to power, they are different, like the difference between father and son <, and son> and thought, and the thought and the remainder. As I said earlier, among the things that were created, the monad is first.
I have more questions, but need an idea of clarity, if the presbyter is claiming this description as God demiurge.
|
|
|
|
Post by Soulgazer on Aug 1, 2014 14:06:52 GMT -5
No. The demiurge is Sophia's illigitamate offspring(or abortion), and not her consort(Which is Christ). The demiurge is never spoken of in glowing terms.. This is speaking of the relationship between Father and Son and Man.
Hope this helps.
|
|
|
|
Post by phantasman on Aug 1, 2014 16:53:09 GMT -5
It does. And the image becomes clearer. I originally thought Ogdoad a bad thing. And the "difference in respect to power" threw me a little.
Thanks, SG.
|
|
|
|
Post by phantasman on Aug 6, 2014 13:36:26 GMT -5
It's interesting to note that Eugnostos means "good knowledge". One may conceive that a group outside of the Disciples heard Christs teaching and got the message. It was the Disciples who were first sent to the Jews, maybe to save them from a wrong belief with the true belief. The message of "good knowledge" may have been given to the Gentiles and others that had no pre conformed belief.
Mark 9
38 And John answered him, saying, Master, we saw one casting out devils in thy name, and he followeth not us: and we forbad him, because he followeth not us.
39 But Jesus said, Forbid him not: for there is no man which shall do a miracle in my name, that can lightly speak evil of me.
40 For he that is not against us is on our part.
Paul could have accepted the message of this other faction as well as the Disciples. The Sophia of Jesus Christ is just a rewriting of what the Disciples possibly knew, yet the message to Jews was slightly more in line with their former beliefs, as not to make the transition difficult before it was understood. This would make the secret books much more valuable as continued knowledge. Those the presbyters of Eugnostos taught, didn't have to use the "kid gloves" required to change a theology of thought.
The one verse in Mark may point to someone understanding it (truth in knowledge) before the Disciples did. Could this had been the Gnostics? This other faction was already healing. Who knows?
Just a thought.
|
|
|
|
Post by Soulgazer on Aug 6, 2014 23:09:31 GMT -5
It's interesting to note that Eugnostos means "good knowledge". One may conceive that a group outside of the Disciples heard Christs teaching and got the message. It was the Disciples who were first sent to the Jews, maybe to save them from a wrong belief with the true belief. The message of "good knowledge" may have been given to the Gentiles and others that had no pre conformed belief. Mark 9 38 And John answered him, saying, Master, we saw one casting out devils in thy name, and he followeth not us: and we forbad him, because he followeth not us. 39 But Jesus said, Forbid him not: for there is no man which shall do a miracle in my name, that can lightly speak evil of me. 40 For he that is not against us is on our part. Paul could have accepted the message of this other faction as well as the Disciples. The Sophia of Jesus Christ is just a rewriting of what the Disciples possibly knew, yet the message to Jews was slightly more in line with their former beliefs, as not to make the transition difficult before it was understood. This would make the secret books much more valuable as continued knowledge. Those the presbyters of Eugnostos taught, didn't have to use the "kid gloves" required to change a theology of thought. The one verse in Mark may point to someone understanding it (truth in knowledge) before the Disciples did. Could this had been the Gnostics? This other faction was already healing. Who knows? Just a thought. Those words recorded in Mark have a remarkable clarity; everyone who calls on Jesus is our brethren(even if they can't acknowledge it). That being said, the visionary Christ of Paul was undoubtably different than the flesh and blood Jesus of James---- I would submit that Paul himself was the first "gnostic" as we understand it, speaking from the "root" of Christian gnosticism. "Could this outsider, this person, have known Jesus as well as we, who journied withg him, saw him laugh and cry, sacrificed our lives just to see him executed", must have been in the minds of the original eleven plus. We can relate to this; "could these outsiders, these people, really call themselves Christian, without treating the Bible as the word of Gawd, and dancing all over the Nicene Creed?" |
|
|
|
Post by friendofsophia on Sept 15, 2014 11:53:28 GMT -5
It does. And the image becomes clearer. I originally thought Ogdoad a bad thing. And the "difference in respect to power" threw me a little. Thanks, SG. The first time I encountered the concept of the Ogdoad was when I read the Pistis Sophia several years ago (which I later found out is probably not the best text for a novice in Gnosticism since its kind of a jumbled mix of gnostic and proto-orthodox mythology.......making it often times a confusing and somewhat misleading read). Anyway in the Pistis Sophia, the Ogdoad is more or less a kind of purgatory just outside of the Pleroma where Sophia has to stay until she gathers all her sparks out of the Kenoma. In some gnostic texts the Ogdoad is the highest realm and actually part of the Pleroma.......or perhaps is the Pleroma. Valentinians (always the diplomats) saw part of the Ogdoad in the Pleroma and part of it in the Kenoma. It all seems confusing and convoluted until you realize that the various versions stem from existing cosmologies from earlier ideologies revisioned in a gnostic light. The Ogdoad in the Pistis Sophia was likely a purgatory type of idea from emerging catholic mythology. In many Egyptian mythologies the Ogdoad is seen as the highest realm so naturally when they experienced Christ's message they naturally would assume it came from the Ogdoad and wrote mythologies to express this. The Ogdoad (as well as the Monad, Tetrad, etc) have an important role in the teachings of Pythagoras (when you read about his conception of the Monad, Diad, Tetrad, etc; its remarkably similar to gnostic emanation mythology) so the Ogdoad is seen similar to this in more Greek leaning gnostic schools of thought. There is no concept of an Ogdoad (by that name anyway) in Judaism (though the Jews were probably familiar with the idea like everyone else in this region). There are likely countless more examples from cultures we've never heard of that had a concept of the Ogdoad in some form, some have even seeped into our culture today......after all, the number eight is basically an infinity symbol and of course there is great importance on the number eight in music! Yet today we read about the concept of the Ogdoad primarily in gnostic writings (and often scratch out heads) as well as many other odd sounding concepts that in the ancient world were commonly understood (Gospel of the Egyptians is a good example of this). The cool thing about reading these old texts is that not only do we get a glimpse of ideas that were written out of history but also an inspiration to allow Christ and Sophia to shine light on our own understandings of reality today......making concepts that work for us ......but that would likely leave others (without eyes to see and ears to hear) scratching their heads! |
|
|
|
Post by phantasman on Sept 15, 2014 13:09:03 GMT -5
The cool thing about reading these old texts is that not only do we get a glimpse of ideas that were written out of history but also an inspiration to allow Christ and Sophia to shine light on our own understandings of reality today......making concepts that work for us ......but would likely leave others (without eyes to see and ears to hear) scratching their heads! This is how I see it as well. While our minds understand differently from different experiences, the spark of knowledge is the same spark. It's the illusion that changes as well, but still driven by the same desires. Just because rocks became guns changes only the material, but the quest for inner spiritual knowledge remains constant and unchanged. I hope you see the depth in what I just wrote. |
|
|
|
Post by friendofsophia on Sept 15, 2014 13:31:59 GMT -5
The cool thing about reading these old texts is that not only do we get a glimpse of ideas that were written out of history but also an inspiration to allow Christ and Sophia to shine light on our own understandings of reality today......making concepts that work for us ......but would likely leave others (without eyes to see and ears to hear) scratching their heads! This is how I see it as well. While our minds understand differently from different experiences, the spark of knowledge is the same spark. It's the illusion that changes as well, but still driven by the same desires. Just because rocks became guns changes only the material, but the quest for inner spiritual knowledge remains constant and unchanged. I hope you see the depth in what I just wrote. That's why on this small little forum, we can understand what each other is getting at despite likely differences in experiences, understandings, biases, wisdom, and even areas of ignorance. I think it makes a big difference that we all come here seeking that spark of knowledge and accept that on some level, we dwell in ignorance. This way of looking at things allows us to seek the wisdom trapped in ignorance in others, in ideologies and ancient texts, and even in ourselves. Too bad much of the world insists on killing each other over doctrines and belief systems that are as material and temporal as the weapons they fight with. |
|
|
|
Post by friendofsophia on Sept 15, 2014 15:19:31 GMT -5
This thread brought out some really good insights. I think I need to get out my Nag Hammadi and give this particular text another read. I think I might get more out of it this time around.
|
|
