Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.
 

Re: satan

Expand Messages
  • phillipetaylor
    ... wrote: I am curious what is the gnostics attitude towards Satan/Devil. Are there gnostic scriptures that also deal with this subject? Well, I can tell
    Message 1 of 16 , Mar 6, 2006
      --- In gnosticism2@yahoogroups.com, Angel Ruling Scorpion <sosol@...>
      wrote:

      "I am curious what is the gnostics attitude towards Satan/Devil. Are
      there gnostic scriptures that also deal with this subject?"

      Well, I can tell you what a Sophian Gnostic perspective is on this
      subject. There is the perspective of a Cosmic Ignorance, which is
      proposed in several texts that Sophian Gnostic use, such as the Zohar,
      the Origin of the World and all the texts of the Bible. I don't think
      the Bible ISN'T a Gnostic text, I think they key to this idea is that
      Gnostic tend to INTERPRET the bible quite differently than
      Funamdentalists do. But regardless, Cosmic Ignorance plays itself out
      as both forces that oppose the divine will and forces that don't always
      oppose it, but that also don't always help it along. The forces that
      oppose the Divine will are personified by Satan, or the Devil, and the
      forces that don't oppose but don't support the Divine plan are
      called "Archons" and the Demiurge. But both proceed from a Cosmic
      Ignorance, according to Sophian Gnostic Tradition.


      I'm not really sure what this other part you wrote is about, and am
      unsure how to respond, it seems a bit tangential to your question...:

      "Tarot is hocus pocus, Crystal Balls are for ladies with neon signs to
      squeeze money out of people who need therapy, Pentacles are for Harry
      Potter wannabes who play RPG, there is no sex in the champagne room,
      and any possibilities of me knowing magick is just an imagination."



      Phillip
    • pmcvflag
      Hey Frederick ... probably come to view Satan just about exactly as gnostics might say they view the Demiurge -- as a very real, yet supra-personal, entity. As
      Message 2 of 16 , Mar 6, 2006
        Hey Frederick

        >>>By the same logic, why does there need to be "THE DEMIURGE" at all?
        :-) As a Christian with strongly esoteric and gnostic leanings, I've
        probably come to view Satan just about exactly as gnostics might say
        they view the Demiurge -- as a very real, yet supra-personal, entity.
        As a way of saying there's more to ignorance than just what's going
        on inside my own head -- a field of ignorace, if you will, that my own
        individual ignorance participates in.<<<

        Well, whether the historical Gnostics viewed the Demiurge as "real
        but supra-personal" is possible, but open to debate. For instance, at
        least some texts do seem to present the Demiurge as allegorical
        rather than literal. If taken literally (though I doubt they should
        be) other texts present the Demiurge in a quite personal way. I would
        question whether the historical Gnostics were generally simply
        replacing Satan with the Demiurge, but still giving the same
        essential picture.

        So, while the Demiurge as a being, or "entity", is open to
        discussion, I do think that this sort of "field of ignorance" idea
        you present has some similarity with several Gnostic concepts.

        The answer as to why there needs to be a Demiurge would be that the
        mythological construct of Gnosticism depends on presenting the flaw
        in common hylic religious thinking as something to overcome. Since
        the creator god that most people worship cannot be philosophically
        reconciled with the deeper apophatic notion of spirit, the obvious
        literary device would be to set that creator up in contrast to the
        spiritual goal for the sake of explaining the philosophical/spiritual
        point of the "Mystery".

        PMCV
      • Steve
        ... all? ... I ve ... entity. ... going ... own ... at ... would ... philosophical/spiritual ... Hi Karl. Yes I, too, tend to think in terms of a field of
        Message 3 of 16 , Mar 17, 2006
          --- In gnosticism2@yahoogroups.com, pmcvflag <no_reply@...> wrote:
          >
          > Hey Frederick
          >
          > >>>By the same logic, why does there need to be "THE DEMIURGE" at
          all?
          > :-) As a Christian with strongly esoteric and gnostic leanings,
          I've
          > probably come to view Satan just about exactly as gnostics might say
          > they view the Demiurge -- as a very real, yet supra-personal,
          entity.
          > As a way of saying there's more to ignorance than just what's
          going
          > on inside my own head -- a field of ignorace, if you will, that my
          own
          > individual ignorance participates in.<<<
          >
          > Well, whether the historical Gnostics viewed the Demiurge as "real
          > but supra-personal" is possible, but open to debate. For instance,
          at
          > least some texts do seem to present the Demiurge as allegorical
          > rather than literal. If taken literally (though I doubt they should
          > be) other texts present the Demiurge in a quite personal way. I
          would
          > question whether the historical Gnostics were generally simply
          > replacing Satan with the Demiurge, but still giving the same
          > essential picture.
          >
          > So, while the Demiurge as a being, or "entity", is open to
          > discussion, I do think that this sort of "field of ignorance" idea
          > you present has some similarity with several Gnostic concepts.
          >
          > The answer as to why there needs to be a Demiurge would be that the
          > mythological construct of Gnosticism depends on presenting the flaw
          > in common hylic religious thinking as something to overcome. Since
          > the creator god that most people worship cannot be philosophically
          > reconciled with the deeper apophatic notion of spirit, the obvious
          > literary device would be to set that creator up in contrast to the
          > spiritual goal for the sake of explaining the
          philosophical/spiritual
          > point of the "Mystery".
          >
          > PMCV
          >
          Hi Karl. Yes I, too, tend to think in terms of a "field of
          ignorance" when I try to explain my personal take on the Demiurge
          idea. I try, now, to avoid both the solipsistic tendancy to reduce it
          all to just an aspect of my personal consciousness as well as the
          tendancy to literalize it as a nasty Satanic being out to get us.
          Obviously (at least to me), the material world is a flawed image of
          the divine world as are certain aspects of my own mind. Both strike
          me as being a distorted reflection.
          Yours, Steve W.
        • lady_caritas
          ... say ... my ... as real ... instance, ... should ... idea ... the ... flaw ... Since ... philosophically ... obvious ... the ... it ... Well put, Steve.
          Message 4 of 16 , Mar 20, 2006
            --- In gnosticism2@yahoogroups.com, "Steve" <eugnostos2000@...> wrote:
            >
            > --- In gnosticism2@yahoogroups.com, pmcvflag <no_reply@> wrote:
            > >
            > > Hey Frederick
            > >
            > > >>>By the same logic, why does there need to be "THE DEMIURGE" at
            > all?
            > > :-) As a Christian with strongly esoteric and gnostic leanings,
            > I've
            > > probably come to view Satan just about exactly as gnostics might
            say
            > > they view the Demiurge -- as a very real, yet supra-personal,
            > entity.
            > > As a way of saying there's more to ignorance than just what's
            > going
            > > on inside my own head -- a field of ignorace, if you will, that
            my
            > own
            > > individual ignorance participates in.<<<
            > >
            > > Well, whether the historical Gnostics viewed the Demiurge
            as "real
            > > but supra-personal" is possible, but open to debate. For
            instance,
            > at
            > > least some texts do seem to present the Demiurge as allegorical
            > > rather than literal. If taken literally (though I doubt they
            should
            > > be) other texts present the Demiurge in a quite personal way. I
            > would
            > > question whether the historical Gnostics were generally simply
            > > replacing Satan with the Demiurge, but still giving the same
            > > essential picture.
            > >
            > > So, while the Demiurge as a being, or "entity", is open to
            > > discussion, I do think that this sort of "field of ignorance"
            idea
            > > you present has some similarity with several Gnostic concepts.
            > >
            > > The answer as to why there needs to be a Demiurge would be that
            the
            > > mythological construct of Gnosticism depends on presenting the
            flaw
            > > in common hylic religious thinking as something to overcome.
            Since
            > > the creator god that most people worship cannot be
            philosophically
            > > reconciled with the deeper apophatic notion of spirit, the
            obvious
            > > literary device would be to set that creator up in contrast to
            the
            > > spiritual goal for the sake of explaining the
            > philosophical/spiritual
            > > point of the "Mystery".
            > >
            > > PMCV
            > >
            > Hi Karl. Yes I, too, tend to think in terms of a "field of
            > ignorance" when I try to explain my personal take on the Demiurge
            > idea. I try, now, to avoid both the solipsistic tendancy to reduce
            it
            > all to just an aspect of my personal consciousness as well as the
            > tendancy to literalize it as a nasty Satanic being out to get us.
            > Obviously (at least to me), the material world is a flawed image of
            > the divine world as are certain aspects of my own mind. Both strike
            > me as being a distorted reflection.
            > Yours, Steve W.
            >


            Well put, Steve.

            Cari
          • thalprin
            Sorry I m a bit busy at the moment. I am enjoying the discussion though and I will try and reply soon. Best wishes, Terrie
            Message 5 of 16 , Apr 13, 2006
              Sorry I'm a bit busy at the moment. I am enjoying the discussion
              though and I will try and reply soon.

              Best wishes,

              Terrie
            • esapress@ymail.com
              Hi, It s been awhile since I said hello and I thought I d like to today. I am, and have been, very busy these days and/but gnosticism remains and abiding
              Message 6 of 16 , Oct 3 2:04 PM
                Hi,

                It's been awhile since I said hello and I thought I'd like to today.

                I am, and have been, very busy these days and/but gnosticism remains and abiding interest for me.

                Best wishes,

                Terrie
                http://www.esapress.com/
              • esapress@ymail.com
                Just wanted to add that I enjoy the historical and academic efforts/research of/in this group; truth is history is very important, especially so in religious
                Message 7 of 16 , Oct 3 2:14 PM
                  Just wanted to add that I enjoy the historical and academic efforts/research of/in this group; truth is history is very important, especially so in religious fields, and/but getting our facts as accurate as is actually possible is, yup, no small task.


                  Best wishes,

                  Terrie
                  http://www.esapress.com/
                • lady_caritas
                  ... Hello, Terrie. Thanks for stopping by and offering your encouraging comments. It seems that a lot of us are busy, too. Getting facts straight is
                  Message 8 of 16 , Oct 7 11:47 AM
                    --- In gnosticism2@yahoogroups.com, "esapress@..." <esapress@...> wrote:
                    >
                    > Just wanted to add that I enjoy the historical and academic efforts/research of/in this group; truth is history is very important, especially so in religious fields, and/but getting our facts as accurate as is actually possible is, yup, no small task.
                    >
                    >
                    > Best wishes,
                    >
                    > Terrie
                    > http://www.esapress.com/
                    >


                    Hello, Terrie. Thanks for stopping by and offering your encouraging comments. It seems that a lot of us are busy, too.

                    Getting facts straight is certainly no small task. It's an ongoing process. We appreciate members bringing questions and comments to the board, so we can research together and offer each other feedback.

                    Cari
                  • esapress@ymail.com
                    Hi Cari, thanks for the kindly note. Sure is an ongoing process isn t it, and there s so very much to research. Hopefully some of our schedules will clear up
                    Message 9 of 16 , Oct 14 10:29 AM
                      Hi Cari, thanks for the kindly note. Sure is an ongoing process isn't it, and there's so very much to research. Hopefully some of our schedules will clear up a bit here pretty soon,

                      Always a pleasure,

                      Terrie


                      >
                      > Hello, Terrie. Thanks for stopping by and offering your encouraging comments. It seems that a lot of us are busy, too.
                      >
                      > Getting facts straight is certainly no small task. It's an ongoing process. We appreciate members bringing questions and comments to the board, so we can research together and offer each other feedback.
                      >
                      > Cari
                      >
                    Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.