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

Re: Mysticism a Regressional Experience?

Expand Messages
  • lady_caritas
    ... from ... culminating ... curtains, ... It ... Demiurge ... and ... Thank you for all your recent comments, Thomas. I was a little confused by a couple
    Message 1 of 22 , Apr 6, 2007
    • 0 Attachment
      --- In gnosticism2@yahoogroups.com, "Thomas Wycihowski"
      <tjwycihowski@...> wrote:
      > >
      > > First, I am attracted to it because i beleive that Adam and Eve
      > were the first modern humans on earth. Of course there were other
      > creautres, hominids, predecessors to Adam and Eve, but I no more
      > consider them to be human then a chimpanzee is the same as a lemur.
      > I beleive the Ethian lineage is the possessors and guardians of
      > the varied esoteric doctrines that were promulgated over the Earth.
      > Each opf these fragments of the primal knowledge was passed down
      from
      > father to son, begining with Adam to Seth, and eventually
      culminating
      > in Jesus of Nazareth.
      > At all times and all cultures, humans have known the primal
      > revelation. The apparent discrepancies come from this revelation
      > mixing with local customs and cultures.
      > The Apocalypse of Adam reveals what happened BEHIND the
      curtains,
      > and is presented as a testament by the dying Adam to his son Seth.
      It
      > reveals the TRUE reason for the discord and evil on what is a good
      > planet.
      > Basically, humans have lived under spiritual tyrrany sinmce our
      > inception. The Demiurge has played one person or religion against
      > another, in classical divide and counquer tactics of tyrants.
      > Irregardless if this "being" is called Allah, Yahweh, Jesus or
      > someother name, in the end it is the same being.
      > This deception is used to enslave our minds and keep us busy
      > fighting over words and doctrines that in the end serve the
      Demiurge
      > very well.
      > Part of it is to steal the Gnosis from us, because the Demiurge
      > knows if we remember our root and origins, we will eventually find
      > our way out of his and his Aeons clutches.
      > The Secret Book of John details, from a Sethian standpoint, the
      > associated Aeons and the planets they are related to.
      > Combine that with some Hermetic material, and you see that true
      > to the conception of demonologists, these beings are not "gods" but
      > devils! There the personification of Vice, and the downward pull of
      > evil to enslave us for eternity here.
      > IMHO, the way to escape is to shed the chains on our minds. We
      > must cast away all that holds us down and enlighten our minds with
      > the TRUTH of our manipulation by the demonic forces of Ialdabaoth
      and
      > his minions of wickedness.


      Thank you for all your recent comments, Thomas. I was a little
      confused by a couple thoughts in the post above.

      You said, "Each opf these fragments of the primal knowledge was
      passed down from father to son, begining with Adam to Seth, and
      eventually culminating in Jesus of Nazareth."

      You further stated, "Basically, humans have lived under spiritual
      tyrrany sinmce our inception. The Demiurge has played one person or
      religion against another, in classical divide and counquer tactics of
      tyrants. Irregardless if this "being" is called Allah, Yahweh, Jesus
      or someother name, in the end it is the same being.
      This deception is used to enslave our minds and keep us busy
      fighting over words and doctrines that in the end serve the Demiurge
      very well."

      When you refer to "being," are you referring to the Demiurge or
      a "being" used by the Demiurge? You mention "Jesus" in your list,
      and I am curious if you associate him with the Demiurge or whether
      you are referring to others who interpret "Jesus" in a deceptive way.

      Thanks in advance for clarifying for me.

      Cari
    • pmcvflag
      Cari and Thomas ... confused by a couple thoughts in the post above.
      Message 2 of 22 , Apr 7, 2007
      • 0 Attachment
        Cari and Thomas

        >>>Thank you for all your recent comments, Thomas. I was a little
        confused by a couple thoughts in the post above.<<<

        Cari, your observations and questions are exactly where I was leading
        as well. This is the reason I was asking Thomas where he drew the line
        between literal and allegorical. I think you hit the core of the issue
        better than I did.

        Thomas

        Your post answered many of my questions, but somehow I am still not
        sure of your stance on the issues that Cari is asking about. I don't
        want you to think you are getting the 3dr degree (so to speak), just
        that it is a genuine curiousity that I think is worth exploring.

        This is my ditto to Cari's question.

        PMCV
      • pmcvflag
        Darkchylde Lady Cari answered it pretty well. I guess I should respond also. ... did then, but this is not what is desired for discussion in this group. Or did
        Message 3 of 22 , Apr 7, 2007
        • 0 Attachment
          Darkchylde

          Lady Cari answered it pretty well. I guess I should respond also.

          >>The experience of gnosis is real, and happens to people NOW, as it
          did then, but this is not what is desired for discussion in this
          group. Or did I misunderstand?<<<

          You did, in fact, misunderstand (or perhaps I have not done a good
          job explaining... though it does seem others here understand). As
          Cari points out, this is explained in the letter that everyone gets
          when they join the forum.

          >>>Can we discuss the experience, that people ALIVE TODAY have, or
          does that not fit into the criteria of this group?<<<

          You are welcome to talk about personal experience as long as it is
          within the context of historical Gnosticism. Do you find that
          confusing? If so just ask and I will try to do a better job
          explaining it.

          We do accept there are many definitions of "Gnosis" (or "gnosis"),
          and they are valid in their own (emic) context even if they are not
          the context this forum uses. For those who are not happy sticking to
          traditional meanings of terms like "Gnosis" or "Sophia" etc., we
          would like to help them find the forums that they feel fits them
          best. Here are a few...

          The group Darkchylde suggests is run by Dick Richardson (aka Merlin,
          aka Doug, and maybe a number of other names). It seems to deal
          largely with semi-psychological notions of mysticism that it
          calls "Gnostic" (Valentinians would likely call this "Psychic"). The
          url is already posted in Darkchylde's post so I need not post it
          again.

          DharmaGnosis is a group run by Tom Ragland. The subject matter as I
          understand it is a sort of Jungian conjuction between Kabbalah,
          Eastern mysticism (especially Buddhism), and a notion of gnosis as a
          sort of general mystical realization. Though it does not seem to be
          the focus, the forum has not discouraged critical discussion when
          the subject has come up.

          http://groups.yahoo.com/group/DharmaGnosis/

          Gnostic_Cafe is run by Ms Jenny (aka Vee). The subject matter is a
          wider and looser grouping of modern spiritual mystical thinking in a
          very informal setting (as I guess the word "Cafe" in the title would
          suggest).

          http://groups.yahoo.com/group/gnostic_cafe/

          GnosticThought is run by GnosticKen (aka George). It deals with what
          Ken has termed "New Age" Gnostic thinking (which I think may be
          similar to what I would call "eclectic relativism", but I could be
          wrong and I don't intend to put words in Ken's mouth), and allows
          for some exploration of a number of systems from personal
          perspectives.

          http://groups.yahoo.com/group/GnosticThought/

          You are encouraged to be in the groups that you find helpful for
          what you are trying to discover. Each group has stronger points and
          weaker points... including this one. I will not go so far as
          Darkchylde in accusing anyone of "missing the point", since I think
          that many different functions and foci can have important places
          within a larger human search for meaning.

          While we don't disregard other contexts, we do offer a more
          specifically "historical Gnostic" conversation FOCUS. We think this
          does have an important value. Take it or leave it... but don't be
          here and heckle it.

          PMCV
        • gnostic_ken
          ... I ... a ... be ... Hi PMCV, Tom is also a moderator of GnosticThought. ... a ... would ... Jenny is Jungian Gnostic. She has disappeared as she does from
          Message 4 of 22 , Apr 8, 2007
          • 0 Attachment
            --- In gnosticism2@yahoogroups.com, pmcvflag <no_reply@...> wrote:
            >
            > DharmaGnosis is a group run by Tom Ragland. The subject matter as
            I
            > understand it is a sort of Jungian conjuction between Kabbalah,
            > Eastern mysticism (especially Buddhism), and a notion of gnosis as
            a
            > sort of general mystical realization. Though it does not seem to
            be
            > the focus, the forum has not discouraged critical discussion when
            > the subject has come up.
            >
            > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/DharmaGnosis/

            Hi PMCV,
            Tom is also a moderator of GnosticThought.

            >
            > Gnostic_Cafe is run by Ms Jenny (aka Vee). The subject matter is a
            > wider and looser grouping of modern spiritual mystical thinking in
            a
            > very informal setting (as I guess the word "Cafe" in the title
            would
            > suggest).
            >
            > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/gnostic_cafe/

            Jenny is Jungian Gnostic. She has disappeared as she does from time
            to time. The last time she disappeared she deleted her Jung cafe
            group. This time she left her cafe running on automatic.

            >
            > GnosticThought is run by GnosticKen (aka George). It deals with
            what
            > Ken has termed "New Age" Gnostic thinking (which I think may be
            > similar to what I would call "eclectic relativism", but I could be
            > wrong and I don't intend to put words in Ken's mouth), and allows
            > for some exploration of a number of systems from personal
            > perspectives.
            >
            > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/GnosticThought/

            GnosticThought is only "New Age" in the same sense this group
            is "New Age." That is we are not traditional Christian
            as "Christian" has been defined for the past 1600 or so years. We
            are part of the new age of openness, diversity and tolerance. When I
            said "we are all of the new age" I was including you ;-)

            GnosticThought could be defined as having the exact opposite focus
            of this group. While this group is about historical gnosticism and
            modern personal experiences are not off topic so long as they are
            related to historical gnosticism in some way, GnosticThought is
            about modern personal Gnosis and related mystic experiences with
            some historical discussion hopefully relating to modern personal
            experiences.

            I don't remember ever saying GnosticThought is "New Age" because
            spelling it with capital letters usually refers to the loose
            movement personified by Shirley MacLaine. The only Gnostic movement
            I know of that would fit that definition of New Age would be Sylvia
            Browne's Gnostics. While Sylvia Browne Gnostics are welcome on
            GnosticThought they are generally not real comfortable with the
            range of viewpoints there. They generally want to talk about
            Sylvia's personal mythology and most of us relate more to historical
            Gnostic mythology than to Sylvia's mythology. Several, such as Tom
            and Steve, seem to relate most to Buddhism.

            Ken
          • pmcvflag
            Hey Ken ... Ah, yes... and after I posted I thought about at and realized I should have posted all of the mods of the groups. Isn t Brenda also a mod there?
            Message 5 of 22 , Apr 8, 2007
            • 0 Attachment
              Hey Ken

              >>>Tom is also a moderator of GnosticThought.<<<

              Ah, yes... and after I posted I thought about at and realized I
              should have posted all of the mods of the groups. Isn't Brenda also
              a mod there?

              >>>GnosticThought is only "New Age" in the same sense this group
              is "New Age." That is we are not traditional Christian
              as "Christian" has been defined for the past 1600 or so years. We
              are part of the new age of openness, diversity and tolerance. When I
              said "we are all of the new age" I was including you ;-)<<<

              That sounds like what I picked up as well. So my term "eclective
              relativism" seems not so far off the mark in intent.

              >>>GnosticThought could be defined as having the exact opposite focus
              of this group. While this group is about historical gnosticism and
              modern personal experiences are not off topic so long as they are
              related to historical gnosticism in some way, GnosticThought is
              about modern personal Gnosis and related mystic experiences with
              some historical discussion hopefully relating to modern personal
              experiences.<<<

              I think that is a good observation of the primary differences
              between the groups. I am glad to see that there are others here who
              understand how this forum is meant to function so that it is not
              simply that us mods have completely failed to communicate it.

              PMCV
            • gnostic_ken
              ... also ... I ... focus ... who ... Hi PMCV, Yes Brenda is also one of the GnosticThought moderators. You have always been quite clear about the focus of this
              Message 6 of 22 , Apr 9, 2007
              • 0 Attachment
                --- In gnosticism2@yahoogroups.com, pmcvflag <no_reply@...> wrote:
                >
                > Hey Ken
                >
                > >>>Tom is also a moderator of GnosticThought.<<<
                >
                > Ah, yes... and after I posted I thought about at and realized I
                > should have posted all of the mods of the groups. Isn't Brenda
                also
                > a mod there?
                >
                > >>>GnosticThought is only "New Age" in the same sense this group
                > is "New Age." That is we are not traditional Christian
                > as "Christian" has been defined for the past 1600 or so years. We
                > are part of the new age of openness, diversity and tolerance. When
                I
                > said "we are all of the new age" I was including you ;-)<<<
                >
                > That sounds like what I picked up as well. So my term "eclective
                > relativism" seems not so far off the mark in intent.
                >
                > >>>GnosticThought could be defined as having the exact opposite
                focus
                > of this group. While this group is about historical gnosticism and
                > modern personal experiences are not off topic so long as they are
                > related to historical gnosticism in some way, GnosticThought is
                > about modern personal Gnosis and related mystic experiences with
                > some historical discussion hopefully relating to modern personal
                > experiences.<<<
                >
                > I think that is a good observation of the primary differences
                > between the groups. I am glad to see that there are others here
                who
                > understand how this forum is meant to function so that it is not
                > simply that us mods have completely failed to communicate it.
                >
                > PMCV

                Hi PMCV,
                Yes Brenda is also one of the GnosticThought moderators.

                You have always been quite clear about the focus of this group. I
                have no idea why so many people seem to misunderstand.

                I do know from experience that no matter how clear we try to be
                somebody will always misunderstand. Those who misunderstand seem to
                talk (write) the most ;-)

                So my point is it's certainly not your fault. You are and always
                have been as clear as you possibly can be.

                Ken
              • gnostic_ken
                ... Update: Jenny is now back. Ken
                Message 7 of 22 , Apr 26, 2007
                • 0 Attachment
                  > Jenny is Jungian Gnostic. She has disappeared as she does from time
                  > to time. The last time she disappeared she deleted her Jung cafe
                  > group. This time she left her cafe running on automatic.

                  Update: Jenny is now back.

                  Ken
                Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.