ellauri026.html on line 516:
ellauri063.html on line 587: Pansatanism Same as pandemonism. a Gnostic theory that considered Satan’s to be the controlling will of the universe.
ellauri159.html on line 1399: Prestige of Physiology, 112. Plan of neural action, 113. God the mind's adequate object, 116. Contrast between world as perceived and as conceived, 118. God, 120. The mind's three departments, 123. Science due to a subjective demand, 129. Theism a mean between two extremes, 134. Gnosticism, 137. No intellection except for practical ends, 140. Conclusion, 142.
ellauri161.html on line 99: The denial of Christ's humanity -- which gave rise to Docetism, Marcionism, Gnosticism, Apollinarianism, Monarchianism, Patripassianism, Sabellianism, Adoptionism, Dynamic Monarchianism.
ellauri184.html on line 692: Among the 52 early Christian and Gnostic texts discovered at Nag Hammadi in 1945, one of the most enigmatic is a Valentinian text called the Gospel of Philip. This is one of several “Gnostic” texts which puts a special emphasis on the relationship between Mary Magdalene and Jesus. One of the more obscure sections concerns three Marys who were always with Jesus.
ellauri184.html on line 773: Jose Saramago is an atheist. This should be enough warning for everyone that desires to read the book. It is very explicit and so religion it’s exposed at its weakest and God as a character is revealed. I come from a Roman-Catholic background but I still wanted to read it, ever since the Gnostic gospel where Jesus childhood is revealed and he changes from a mischievous badly behaved kid to the Jesus from the new testament I wanted to see Saramago’s take on it. Saramago is such a master of words that he makes every bit of faith look totally illogical.
ellauri198.html on line 874: There are two realities, the terrestrial and the condition of fire. 1 All power is from the terrestrial condition, for there all opposites meet and there only is the extreme of choice possible, full freedom. [This seems inaccurate slightly, the terrestrial or earthly condition contains the condition of fire, water, and air; the mental, the material, and mental-material interaction respectively. How to distinctly separate water and earth is an issue going back at least to the Corpus Hermeticum.] And there the heterogeneous is, evil, for evil is the strain one upon another of opposites; but in the condition of fire is all music and rest. [Compare this with interpretations of Manichean or Gnostic dualism that there is a pure and impure world; castor and pollux.] Between is the condition of air where images have but a borrowed life, that of memory or that reflected upon them when they symbolise colours and intensities of fire; the place of shades who are 'in the whirl of those who are fading,' and who cry like those amorous shades in the Japanese play:-- Huoh, ei jaxa. Tää kaverihan oli täysin tärähtänyt:
ellauri377.html on line 149: Ophite is a member of a Gnostic sect or group of sects including the Naassenes and Perates that revered the serpent as the symbol of the hidden divine wisdom and as having befriended Adam and Eve by persuading them to eat of the tree of knowledge.
ellauri377.html on line 151: Yaldabaoth, otherwise known as Jaldabaoth or Ialdabaoth (/ˌjɑːldəˈbeɪɒθ/; Coptic: ⲒⲀⲖⲦⲀⲂⲀⲰⲐ Ialtabaôth; Latin: Ialdabaoth, Koinē Greek: Ιαλδαβαώθ, romanized: Ialdabaóth), is a malevolent God and demiurge (creator of the material world) in various Gnostic sects and movements, sometimes represented as a theriomorphic lion-headed serpent. He is identified as the false god who keeps the souls trapped in physical bodies, imprisoned in the material universe. Jaldabahuutti tarkoittanee "isyyden aiheuttaja", mikä sopii vällykäärmeeseen kuin suutarin sormi sian pilluun.
ellauri447.html on line 285: The Encratites were an ascetic 2nd-century sect of Christians who forbade marriage and counselled abstinence from meat. Eusebius says that Tatiana was the author of this heresy. It has been supposed that it was these Gnostic Encratites who were chastised in the epistle of 1 Timothy. Tatiana kirjoitti, että Vanhan testamentin kautta hän vakuuttui pakanuuden järjettömyydestä. Älytöntä ståkukin vaginassa nuohoomista huohottaen hikisessä kasassa.
ellauri502.html on line 189: 3. The "Fly Wing" Perspective (The Gnostic View). cageWhat is fascinating is that your exact conclusion—that JHWH is just a jealous, power-hungry entity who wants to be top dog alone—is actually the core belief of an ancient branch of early alternative Christianity called Gnosticism.The Gnostics looked at the Old Testament and said exactly what you are saying: "This Creator god (they called him the Demiurge or Yaldabaoth) acts like a petty tyrant. He demands absolute worship, throws tantrums, and won't share power." In Gnosticism, the snake in the Garden of Eden was actually the good guy trying to give humans the knowledge to escape the tyrant's cosmic cage. So, if you follow traditional theology, God stays the "top dog" because He is the literal fabric of reality, and letting a creature rule would destroy the universe. But if you look at it from a critical or Gnostic perspective, it looks exactly like an absolute monarchy protecting its crown from a coup. Does the idea that Creator vs. Created makes power-sharing logically impossible make sense in their framework, or does it still just look like a cosmic monopoly to you?
ellauri504.html on line 90: Yes—in many (though not all) Gnostic systems the creator of the material world (the demiurge) was identified as the god of the Hebrew Bible, i.e., Yahweh/Jehovah (often also associated with figures like Saklas, Samael, or Yaldabaoth).
ellauri504.html on line 92: But the specific phrasing “fumbling demiurge” isn’t a standard scholarly label for a particular sect; what is standard is the idea that the demiurge is ignorant/incompetent or otherwise flawed, and some Gnostic writers explicitly treat him as the “god of Israel.” Whether “Marcionite/Gnostic Marcionist” groups used that exact identification in the way you’re describing depends on which text and tradition you mean.
ellauri504.html on line 115: While scholars debate whether Marcion should be strictly classified as a "Gnostic" (he lacked some typical Gnostic mythologies, such as complex aeons or secret knowledge/gnosis for salvation), his view of the dual gods closely mirrored Gnostic thought.
ellauri504.html on line 128: While the short answer is yes, the full story involves an important distinction between classic Gnosticism and Marcionism regarding how flawed or "fumbling" they thought Jehovah actually was.
ellauri504.html on line 130: 1. Classic Gnosticism vs. Marcionism: The Nuance
ellauri504.html on line 131: In classical Gnostic texts (like the Apocryphon of John), the Demiurge is often named Yaldabaoth (or Saklas/Samael). He is portrayed as a cosmic accident—blind, arrogant, and foolish—who creates the physical world and ignorantly proclaims, "I am God and there is no other!" while completely unaware of the divine realm above him.
ellauri504.html on line 155: But Marcion and the Gnostics weren't exactly the same group, even though later church writers lumped them together. Here’s how it breaks down:
ellauri504.html on line 158: Marcion was not technically "Gnostic" — he rejected the whole Gnostic mythology with aeons, Sophia, etc. His idea:
ellauri504.html on line 168: *2. Classical Gnostics - Valentinus, Sethians, etc.*
ellauri504.html on line 169: Most Gnostic systems had a similar structure but more elaborate:
ellauri504.html on line 176: Almost all Gnostic texts identify him with *the God of the Jews — YHWH/Jehovah*.
ellauri504.html on line 179: So yes, Gnostics also said "that fumbling demiurge = the Jewish Jehovah".
ellauri504.html on line 185: - *Gnostics*: Lots of gods/aeons. The Demiurge is a botched creation of Sophia. He _thinks_ he’s Jehovah. More mythological.
ellauri504.html on line 190: The early Church Fathers like Irenaeus and Tertullian attacked both Marcionites and Gnostics for exactly this — saying they blasphemed by calling the Creator God evil.
xxx/ellauri044.html on line 442: mysteries of Gnosticism, of Abraxas and Cain. 21 Eventually, Sinclair rejects
xxx/ellauri170.html on line 774: The Gnostic Society Library
xxx/ellauri170.html on line 878: George Robert Stow Mead (22 March 1863 in Peckham, Surrey – 28 September 1933 in London) was an English historian, writer, editor, translator, and an influential member of the Theosophical Society, as well as the founder of the Quest Society. His scholarly works dealt mainly with the Hermetic and Gnostic religions of Late Antiquity, and were very exhausting.
xxx/ellauri170.html on line 889: Notable persons influenced by Mead include Ezra Pound, W.B. Yeats, Hermann Hesse, Kenneth Rexroth, and Robert Duncan. The seminal influence of G.R.S. Mead on Carl Gustav Jung, confirmed by the scholar of Gnosticism Gilles Quispel, a friend of Jung´s, has been documented by several scholars.
xxx/ellauri186.html on line 769: The text was viewed as unhistorical, spurious, and useful only as a vehicle of Christian curiosity. To further add to the case of why it was never remotely considered within the canon, the orthodox Christian writers of the late second century associated the infancy gospel with circles that they considered heretical, particularly with groups of Gnostic Christians. No scholar would dream of taking
30