Re: [Gnosticism2] Re: Lebanese Gnostics? Crispin's questions
- 93.I find the bit about the demiurge facinating. It reminds me of a line from Liber XV, You know, Allister Crowley's Gnostic mass:"O lion and o serpent that destroy the destroyer, Be mighty among us!"That is my thought. Blessings-Rebecula
lady_caritas <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:
--- In email@example.com, "Steve" <eugnostos2000@...> wrote:
I have just finished the
> newly-released Gospel of Judas. Although apparently Sethian-
> influenced, it doesn't give the Sophia story.
Oh, you know, Steve, upon first reading the Gospel of Judas, I didn't
catch any Sophia reference. But then I read the version with
footnotes in the new book, _The Gospel of Judas_, edited by Rodolphe
Kasser, Marvin Meyer, and Gregor Wurst. And it appears that there
might be an indirect allusion in discussion of Yaldabaoth.
From text on page 37:
"And look, from the cloud there appeared an [angel] whose face
flashed with fire and whose appearance was defiled with blood. His
name was Nebro, [lll] which means `rebel';  others call him
From the end of footnote 111:
"... In Secret Book of John II:10, the demiurge Yaldabaoth has the
appearance of a snake with the face of a lion, and his eyes are like
flashing bolts of lightning. In Holy Book of the Great Invisible
Spirit III:56-57, Sophia of matter is bloody in appearance: 'A cloud
[named] Sophia of matter appeared . [She] surveyed the regions [of
chaos], and her face looked like ... in her appearance ... blood.'"
Yahoo! Messenger with Voice. PC-to-Phone calls for ridiculously low rates.
- Steve wrote:
>Doesn't seem necessary for the Quabalists and the breaking of the
>> I'm curious what others think. Going back to Plato (as Steve did
>> with his reference to Theaetetus), we see Plato's demiurge in
>> Timaeus. How is a relational demiurge of some sort necessary
>> functionally to a Gnostic system, and is this necessary to carry into
>> a modern adaptation?
> Hi Cari. IMO, it's fascinating to see how, for example, the author of
> The Apocryphon of John goes back and forth from the Timaeus to Genesis
> and uses both as a point of departure for his/her own perspective. In
> Timaeus Plato has the Demiurge using the Form of the Intelligible
> Living Creature as a template for the Cosmos. As such, Plato seems to
> be an early advocate for 'Intelligent Design'. For Plato, the world is
> intelligible, hence modeled upon an intelligible pattern. In the
> Apocryphon of John the Demiurge also seeks to work from an intelligible
> pattern, but doesn't fully understand it. Consequently his handiwork is
> flawed in ways that go beyond the inherent imperfection of a copy in
> relation to the original. IMO, it might be possible to dispense with a
> demiurgos in an Neo-Platonic emanationist system wherein the only
> problem with materiality is the inherent inferiority of copy to
> original and wherein the successive unfolding of emanations is simply
> inevitable. However, it seems to me that the problem in the Apocryphon
> of John goes deeper than this and is conceived as being an actual
> rupture in the Great Chain of Being. As such, it would be difficult to
> account for this apart from a Demiurgic figure, or at least a Sophia
> figure driven by a desire which is contrary to the will of her Consort,
> that is to say, unbalanced. What is your opinion on this? -Steve W.
vessles. Might make it better though, if he were there.