I don't think it's an exaggeration to state that my studies have taken a lifetime and are ongoing.. The basis for this exploration is an attempt to make sense of my life. I write about some of this, on my little substack and elsewhere now and then.
I call what you are writing about here a thread from the western mystical tradition, because the themes and supports are consistent over a thousand years and more. This tradition isn't what we think of today, because it was driven underground by the murderous rise of the abrahamics.
For those who doubt this, I have but one question; what happened to the Cathars?
A major center for this tradition was ancient Alexandria.
There is not one simple source, some Bible where one can go to learn about the ancient mystical tradition, but it does live, as long as there is someone to walk this path. One scholar who does write some on this topic is Jeff Kupperman. He can be found under the heading of Theurgy. To my knowledge he is the only writer who dares to pick up the structure of Sunthema, the tokens that direct the ascent of the soul.
I see the religion of the god above god as a natural development from this ancient tradition. In every religion outside of the abrahamics, mysticism informs the praxis. It provides the realization and the intensity required for meaningful devotion.
He used to edit an online journal that covered wide ranging topics including mysticism. His writers were erudite, and themselves deeply involved practitioners. He knows his stuff. Personally I'm glad he's still around.
Your arrogant provincialism is oozing out again, Eugine. Drawing spurious conclusions is apparently your specialty. Woke derives most directly from Marxism, which was in truth a rebuttal to the hypocrisy and meaninglessness of Christian society.
Oh and by the way, Marcion was not a proto-Gnostic, whatever that term is supposed to mean.
One could just as easily claim, and with far more accuracy, that Sol Invictus was proto-christianity, and Mithras as was the philosophical proto-jesus of the abrahamics.
> Woke derives most directly from Marxism, which was in truth a rebuttal to the hypocrisy and meaninglessness of Christian society.
"Marxism is not derived from my philosophy, BTW, this Marx guy also has a point."
> Oh and by the way, Marcion was not a proto-Gnostic
Right, that they both believed that the God of the old testament was an evil Demiurge that Jesus was sent to save us from is a complete coincidence.
> One could just as easily claim, and with far more accuracy, that Sol Invictus was proto-christianity, and Mithras as was the philosophical proto-jesus of the abrahamics.
Um, yes. You as usual, don't know what you are talking about.
Fist of all, dude, Gnosticism isn't a series of beliefs codified by Philip k. Dick. Nobody sat down and created a Septuagint for Gnosis. Your proto-Gnostic term is both misleading and absurd. For the record, Gnosticism remains a significant development that directly participates in the logic, language, and mystical experience that forms the western mystical tradition. You obviously have no comprehension of this, no understanding of Emanation, and absolutely zero respect for those who do.
The Cathari were exterminated by this same, exact blockheaded ignorance that purports a series of irrational beliefs to be above any examination other than fawning obedience. If you want to celebrate this genocide as a highpoint of abrahamic culture, prepare, for you can offer no worthwhile argument to spare you and yours when the next group of murderous psychopaths paints a target on you.
Truth is, dude that the abrahamic complex can be quite easily explained throughout history, and traced through a series of societal and political developments. There is, for example, nothing in Christianity that is uniquely Christian, and that includes the self congradulatory praise the abrahamics heap upon themselves regarding monotheism..
> Gnosticism isn't a series of beliefs codified by Philip k. Dick.
The key elements of Gnosticism, i.e., the ones that lead to problems are:
1) The belief that the creator of the material world and the material world itself are evil.
2) Antinomianism, the rejection of "traditional laws" as creations of the demiurge, and ultimately the rejecting of any laws as binding on people, or at least as binding on those with access to the secret Gnosis. Instead the only command is "do what thou wilt", or in less archaic English "do whatever you want".
and not quite as bad, but still a problem:
3) The existence of secret teachings or Gnosis accessible only to the elect.
Here, briefly, I will point out a small factoid for those who can't think beyond simple categories. Gnosticism is an essential aspect of the western mystical tradition.
Thanks! It seems you have studied these issues deeply. I am still exploring and learning.
I don't think it's an exaggeration to state that my studies have taken a lifetime and are ongoing.. The basis for this exploration is an attempt to make sense of my life. I write about some of this, on my little substack and elsewhere now and then.
I call what you are writing about here a thread from the western mystical tradition, because the themes and supports are consistent over a thousand years and more. This tradition isn't what we think of today, because it was driven underground by the murderous rise of the abrahamics.
For those who doubt this, I have but one question; what happened to the Cathars?
A major center for this tradition was ancient Alexandria.
There is not one simple source, some Bible where one can go to learn about the ancient mystical tradition, but it does live, as long as there is someone to walk this path. One scholar who does write some on this topic is Jeff Kupperman. He can be found under the heading of Theurgy. To my knowledge he is the only writer who dares to pick up the structure of Sunthema, the tokens that direct the ascent of the soul.
I see the religion of the god above god as a natural development from this ancient tradition. In every religion outside of the abrahamics, mysticism informs the praxis. It provides the realization and the intensity required for meaningful devotion.
I've read two of Jeff's books. He's very learned on these matters!
He used to edit an online journal that covered wide ranging topics including mysticism. His writers were erudite, and themselves deeply involved practitioners. He knows his stuff. Personally I'm glad he's still around.
> For those who doubt this, I have but one question; what happened to the Cathars?
Sadly, their intellectual descendants, currently called the "woke", are still with us.
Your arrogant provincialism is oozing out again, Eugine. Drawing spurious conclusions is apparently your specialty. Woke derives most directly from Marxism, which was in truth a rebuttal to the hypocrisy and meaninglessness of Christian society.
Oh and by the way, Marcion was not a proto-Gnostic, whatever that term is supposed to mean.
One could just as easily claim, and with far more accuracy, that Sol Invictus was proto-christianity, and Mithras as was the philosophical proto-jesus of the abrahamics.
> Woke derives most directly from Marxism, which was in truth a rebuttal to the hypocrisy and meaninglessness of Christian society.
"Marxism is not derived from my philosophy, BTW, this Marx guy also has a point."
> Oh and by the way, Marcion was not a proto-Gnostic
Right, that they both believed that the God of the old testament was an evil Demiurge that Jesus was sent to save us from is a complete coincidence.
> One could just as easily claim, and with far more accuracy, that Sol Invictus was proto-christianity, and Mithras as was the philosophical proto-jesus of the abrahamics.
Um, no. Complete ahistorical BS.
Um, yes. You as usual, don't know what you are talking about.
Fist of all, dude, Gnosticism isn't a series of beliefs codified by Philip k. Dick. Nobody sat down and created a Septuagint for Gnosis. Your proto-Gnostic term is both misleading and absurd. For the record, Gnosticism remains a significant development that directly participates in the logic, language, and mystical experience that forms the western mystical tradition. You obviously have no comprehension of this, no understanding of Emanation, and absolutely zero respect for those who do.
The Cathari were exterminated by this same, exact blockheaded ignorance that purports a series of irrational beliefs to be above any examination other than fawning obedience. If you want to celebrate this genocide as a highpoint of abrahamic culture, prepare, for you can offer no worthwhile argument to spare you and yours when the next group of murderous psychopaths paints a target on you.
Truth is, dude that the abrahamic complex can be quite easily explained throughout history, and traced through a series of societal and political developments. There is, for example, nothing in Christianity that is uniquely Christian, and that includes the self congradulatory praise the abrahamics heap upon themselves regarding monotheism..
> Gnosticism isn't a series of beliefs codified by Philip k. Dick.
The key elements of Gnosticism, i.e., the ones that lead to problems are:
1) The belief that the creator of the material world and the material world itself are evil.
2) Antinomianism, the rejection of "traditional laws" as creations of the demiurge, and ultimately the rejecting of any laws as binding on people, or at least as binding on those with access to the secret Gnosis. Instead the only command is "do what thou wilt", or in less archaic English "do whatever you want".
and not quite as bad, but still a problem:
3) The existence of secret teachings or Gnosis accessible only to the elect.
Here, briefly, I will point out a small factoid for those who can't think beyond simple categories. Gnosticism is an essential aspect of the western mystical tradition.
So just for the record, are you for or against Gnosticism?