I enjoy reading your posts, you're very interesting and knowledgeable! Its exciting to read about what Gnosticism means to others and how they apply it in their lives.
You mentioned two things that we have in common. That you are a Valentinian and that you have a siezure disorder. Though I rarley have siezures anymore, I have had visions during some of them. Some would say that I hallucinated, but the things that I saw were verifiable, and in one case I could not decipher until many years later, when I began my study of Gnosticism. I also had an O.B.E. once which, after a certian point in the experience, the memory of it becomes foggy. I felt absolutely energized the next morning. Like you, I haven't attempted this since, as it was spontaneous and I assume, natural. I don't want to force such things.
As for Valentinian Gnosticism? Fell in love with it right off. It touched something deep inside of me that has driven me ever since.
I look forward to having great chats with you! Blessings!
- Brightest Blessings!
Thank you! I don't feel very knowlegdable, I feel I am still
learning, but luckly my passion is books and reading and learning so
I am rarely bored. Unless the TV is on... :)
That is really interesting about your seizures and visions; I too was
only able to find real answers to mine when I got into gnostism. I
too look forward to discussions!
whirled and inner peas
**Love thy enemies. Messes with their heads!**
--- In firstname.lastname@example.org, "bicyclesophie" <imamuzd@...>
> Hello imdarkchylde,
> I enjoy reading your posts, you're very interesting and
> Its exciting to read about what Gnosticism means to others and howthey
> apply it in their lives.have
> You mentioned two things that we have in common. That you are a
> Valentinian and that you have a siezure disorder. Though I rarley
> siezures anymore, I have had visions during some of them. Somewould
> say that I hallucinated, but the things that I saw were verifiable,and
> in one case I could not decipher until many years later, when Ibegan my
> study of Gnosticism. I also had an O.B.E. once which, after acertian
> point in the experience, the memory of it becomes foggy. I feltattempted
> absolutely energized the next morning. Like you, I haven't
> this since, as it was spontaneous and I assume, natural. I don'twant
> to force such things.
> As for Valentinian Gnosticism? Fell in love with it right off. It
> touched something deep inside of me that has driven me ever since.
> I look forward to having great chats with you! Blessings!
- From DarkChyldeBlessings and wingwhispers, Nick!!
Do you know where I can get a copy of the Gospel of Eve? I heard of
it, but haven't had the chance to read it yet.
whirled and inner peas
...........................................Hi DarkChyldeThe Gospel of Eve is only a fragment that has been found as far as I am aware, there not very much to it at all so you wont get much from reading it plus you find the usual church father's propaganda associated with it.Nick
- Hi Dorina, welcome to the group. You state...
>>>The information I read seems to conflict, and if there is aGod/s, then why is He/She/It/They so aloof to our plight and does
not help us by putting an end to all this?<<<
Perhaps you could give us a little insight as to exactly where you
have come across the conflicting info. It could always be that the
problem lies with the sources rather than confusion on your part.
Allogenes and the Valentinian exposition (two historical Gnostic
texts from the two main categories of Gnosticism) offer roughly
similar cosmologies that look something like this;
It starts with a sort of negation. This source is not connected to
the world in any way, but is truly infininte. Not infinite like
numbers, or the universe, but TRUE infinity. This source isn't
a "God", or even exactly a being... it is beyond any label. At some
point there is a sort of reflection of this infinity, and this
shimmering infinity within the absolute infinity is the spiritual
source. This secondary infinity is where all the spiritual beings
(Aeons) emenate from. The Velentinian Exposition calls this source
the "Second Father", or just "Father".
What we then generally see happen in a Gnostic mythology is that
eventually there is a final Aeon who creates or begets a sort
of "God" who then creates the material world. This creator god is
often describe in a negative way, and equated with the Biblical Old
From a philosophical perspective I think part of the function of
this myth deals not only with the problem of the failings of the
material world, but also is a device meant to help describe the
problem of the concept of infinity vs the obvious fact of the finite
in front of us. How can we concieve various forms of infinity, and
if a god is absolute... how could it be smaller than the infinity
that us humans can concieve? It must be bigger, or it could not be
so absolute. The anthropomorphic gods that human minds CAN concieve
could not possibly fit this bill, but then how can we find
continuity between this infinity and the material universe? This is
a question that still bothers philosophers and scientists to this
day, though generally without the spiritual implications that
- Hey Nick You respond to Dorina...
>>>I am surprised that in studying Gnosticism you still see theGnostic God as some sort of aloof deity like the Old Testament God
of Orthodoxy. The Gnostic concepts as posted below from mainly Web
sources make it quite clear that the Transcendent God in a sense
suffers with us. God as something separate from ourselves is foreign
to Gnosticism the spark of the divine is within all creatures.
"They say that the same soul is scattered about in animals, beasts,
fish, snakes, humans, trees, and products of nature. [Epiphanius,
Panarion, 26.9.1.]" (Gospel of Eve)
"But I say that God is the spiritual one. Man has taken shape from
the substance of God. The divine soul shares partly in this one;
furthermore, it shares partly in the flesh. "(Teachings of Silvanus)
I did want to point out that the Teachings of Silvanus is likely not
a "Gnostic" text. In the intro to the text that we find in
Robinson's Nag Hammadi Library, Peel and Zandee even go so far as to
suggest part of it may have been meant as an attack on Gnostic
Also, I believe that this description in Epiphanius was very likely
talking about the world soul rather than "God" or the spiritual
This isn't to necessarily disagree with your point, but simply to
point out that I am not sure we can use these passages to imply
anything about a Gnostic theology.
Yeah, I know, I am being too picky again *lol*. The reason I mention
it though is that if we don't have those two passages informing the
theology, it opens up a number of other possible interpretations for
the texts that are Gnostic. It makes the notion of pantheism a good
deal less explicit in general Gnostic thinking, as well as opening
the question of just how the spark could relate to the source in