The FULL STORY Of The Archons - Every Gnostic MUST Know This
(www.youtube.com)
You're viewing a single comment thread. View all comments, or full comment thread.
Comments (39)
sorted by:
ot god and nt god are different entities
How so?
a) Entity implies each being within God. Only within God (motion) can flowing abstract (momentum) form entity (matter).
b) Old Testament versus New Testament implies a circular conflict among differences turning against one another, hence making them ALIKE one another. Old vs new implies the mutual destruction of different entities, and it's based on a test/teks (to weave) of ment (mind) aka few weaving the minds of many together into a conflict.
c) "The thing that hath been, it is that which shall be; and that which is done is that which shall be done: and there is no NEW thing under the sun." ~Ecclesiastes 1:9
New implies the inversion of now, within which one old/al (to grow; nourish) aka God nourishing growth now....not before (old) or after (new). If one chooses new or old, then one ignores now aka living within k-NOW-ledge.
Maybe that's why Jesus was praying to the Father and not the god of the OT. When Jesus said, "I and the father are one," he was not claiming to be Yahweh. He was describing his consciousness in complete synthesis with the ultimate source beyond all creation.
Where do you find this?
I'm surprised you don't know this. In Gnostic belief systems, Jesus prayed to the Father (Monad) as the ultimate, ineffable source of all being, often referred to as the "God above God" or Bythos, distinct from the lesser creator deity known as the Demiurge (aka Yahweh in the OT). Gnostics viewed the Monad as a singular, formless essence without name, emotion, or form, from which all spiritual emanations (Aeons) flow, including the Christ spirit. That's what many of the early Christians believed as well.
I was curious to know what you know about it.
From my understanding, Jesus is the part of the Trinity as God's Form, and He has had other Forms before His Jesus Flesh. God's Form is inextricabley connected to His Holy Spirit and His Godhead. I've been given this knowledge from His word and Him teaching me by His Spirit.
The lesser (Samael) is so much less that he does not deserve the titles creator, deity, demiurge, or Yahweh. If gnostics are so monist you'd think they wouldn't deify some subaeonic upstart. The whole Sophia shtik is simply kicking theodicy down the road. Christ is about timeless emanation, not sequential emanation, which literally comes from Kek of the Egyptian ogdoad.