Reforming Gnosticism

Last week, I started talking about the nature of this Gnostic Reformation that I’m describing here. It turns out that the approach to Gnosticism that I am sharing with you here at Gnostic Insights is a reformation of what is understood to be Gnosticism. If you haven’t listened to last week’s episode yet, it would be really good for you to start there. Go back and listen to or read the episode called, This Gnostic Reformation.

I didn’t read any books about Gnosticism; I actually read the Nag Hammadi itself. I used my own method of discernment, my own model building method called A Simple Explanation to understand what I was reading. We all do that. We all have internal structures that help us to interpret what we understand about the world around us–what we understand about the nature of anything, whether it’s God or people or oneself.

I had already previously come up with a very coherent system for understanding the things around me. That’s what I call A Simple Explanation of Absolutely Everything. That book is available. You can check it out. I’ll put the link here in the transcript.

When people say, “My goodness, your Gnosticism is so different than what I have come to understand Gnosticism to be,” that’s because I didn’t take it from secondary sources. I took it from the original sources.  Then of course, Valentinian Gnosticism is an early form of what has come to be called Christianity. Christianity diverged immensely from the original message around the 300’s and on up, when the gnostic books were taken out of Orthodoxy. Those folks that are called heresiologists are the people that went around slapping heresy labels on the early Christianity—the early Valentinian Gnosticism. They weeded it out of the official sacred texts that made their way into the New Testament.

The main book of the Nag Hammadi that I relate to is called the Tripartite Tractate. I believe it to be the purest form of gnosis. It has very little in the way of mythologies, of extraneous characters, of the names of things and the numbers of things and the astrology of it all.

Valentinian Gnosticism from the Tripartite Tractate is unique in that the fallen Aeon is not called Sophia, a female character. In the Sethian mythology, the female character—and by the way, that presupposes that there are genders among the Aeons in the Fullness of God, but that really doesn’t make much sense because there’s no sex. That is not the way that Aeons procreate. Aeons procreate by giving glory to the Father in various combinations, and it’s those various combinations of giving glory that produce amalgamations of those combinations. It’s a logarithmic progression of Aeons. It keeps growing as various Aeons recombine with one another and give glory to the Father and the Son—upstream, as I like to call it. That has nothing to do with gender. It has to do with giving glory to God with your friends and neighbors.

See, we have gender because it has to do with procreation, and this is what is causing all of the gender confusion going around now. Differences among us—what we typically call masculine or feminine—these are personality traits. They don’t have to have anything to do with your sex. So the idea that you have to change your physical sex to reconceive of your gender or reconceive of who you are or your personality—this is a false teaching. You are who you are. You are a combination of various Aeons. You are the fruit of those Aeons, and it really has nothing to do with gender.

The Father is not a male figure. Barbelo is not the mother. These are gendered identifications, but they are not truly gender because they’re not sexed. Does that make any sense?

So last week we talked about the first emanation. In Sethianism, it’s Barbelo, the mother figure, the womb of all, the matrix of divine life. In Valentinian Gnosticism, that first figure is the Son, and in most of the Valentinian texts, the Son is conflated with the Christ.

Oh, by the way, Christians get very bent out of shape about calling Christ the Christ. They say, if anybody—and I heard this from a radio preacher not long ago—“If anyone says ‘the’Christ, you know right off they’re not saved. You know right off they’re not Christians, because ‘the’ Christ is a made-up figure, whereas Jesus is Christ, and Jesus is the Son of God.” Well, Jesus is a human being, so we know that Jesus is not the originating Son of God, which an ethereal figure. The Son, in Valentinian Christianity, was the immediate self-expression of the Father. The Father emanated the Son, and the Son entirely represents the Father. Jesus is way downstream here, along with the rest of us humans.

He was called the perfect human because he expressed the Father and the Son in his human personality. Jesus came to be well downstream, along with the rest of us humans.

In Sethianism, the Barbelo, the first expression, isn’t the Savior. She’s the source of the Savior. She’s the mother of Autogenes, whom they call the Christ.

In Valentinianism, the Son is the immediate self-expression of the Father. There’s no Barbelo figure, and the Son is the primary mediator of divine knowledge. The Son is fully expressive and representative of the Father, and he stays plugged into the Father—or it stays. It’s difficult when speaking English not to use gendered pronouns, because that’s the way our grammar works. So, forgive me for saying “he” when I speak of the Son or the Father, but “it” just seems so impersonal. And the Son is personal to us. The Son is our Father, our Abba.

In Sethianism, Christ, also known as Autogenes, is not the initial revelation of the Father. He’s the restorative agent who repairs the damage caused by the fall of the Aeon. And in Sethianism, the Aeon who fell was a female figure, Sophia. Christ is often paired with Seth, and Seth is a character out of the mythology of Sethianism that is the heavenly archetype of the Gnostic race.

Sethianism has distinctions amongst humans. There are the elect and there are those who are not elect. There are those who are called hylic-only, which is material only. And so, if you’re a Sethian Gnostic, you don’t believe that all of the people that you see around here are carriers of divinity. You believe that only Gnostics are carriers of divinity, much like Christians only believe that those who have come forward and professed belief in Jesus Christ are the elect, and they’re the only ones who are saved. Gnostics have the same type of distinction, only they think only the Sethians are those who are saved. And that really doesn’t have to do with Jesus. It has to do with Christ and Seth—that Christ’s role is to descend and rescue the elect, and the elect would be Sethians. Now, in Valentinian Christianity, you don’t have that kind of distinction. Christ is the direct image of the Father.

Most of the books of the Nag Hammadi, the Valentinian as well as the Sethian, still identify Sophia as the fallen Aeon; they still have a gendered pleroma of the Fullness of God. This is one of the big, big differences between the Gnosticism that I share with you and these more ancient Gnostic strains of thought. I do not think that Aeons are gendered. It’s an unnecessary step of confusion, the idea of syzygies and marriages and pair bonds. No, that’s not necessary. At least in the Tripartite Tractate, if you read it, nowhere is anything like that mentioned. There’s no gender identification mentioned at all.

In Valentinian Christology, [which is what it’s called when you study Christ], outside of the Tripartite Tractate the rest of the books that talk about Christ say that Christ is the direct image of the Father. His incarnation is intentional, therapeutic, and as a teacher, and he brings knowledge of the Father, not merely rescue from the Fall.

Christians generally believe that Christ brings knowledge of the Father because he talked about the Father, or he taught—that he’s a pedagogical character. He’s a teacher, but that his actual salvation came from dying on the cross, from death and then overcoming death. He brings everyone who believes in him forward in overcoming death.

Now, the Tripartite Tractate doesn’t put it that way. The Tripartite Tractate explains how Christ came not to die and not only to teach, but salvation lies in the very fact that Christ came to Earth in the perfection of the Father. Jesus said, “If you see me, you see the Father. He who loves me loves the Father, and he who loves the Father loves me.” That was Jesus speaking as the embodiment of the Christ. Jesus embodied the Fullness of the Christ in his human body walking around on the Earth, and so he built a bridge between the ethereal plane and the material plane. He brought them back together for the first time since Logos fell out of the pleroma. He brings them back together, and he brings restoration in that manner.

There’s another primary difference between Sethian Gnosticism and Valentinian Gnosticism, other than Barbelo being the first emanation or the Son being the first emanation. In Sethianism, Christ’s role is as a cosmic rescuer, and in the Valentinian tradition, he is the revealer of truth and the healer. Sethians tend to think of the world as completely hostile and alien. This material world is a prison. It’s a trap. Everything’s wrong down here.  

Now, in the Valentinian system, it is also thought that the world is wrong. It’s fallen, but it is redeemable, and so salvation comes through transformation of what is around us, whereas in the Sethian system, salvation comes by escaping the trap. The goal in Sethianism is to return to Barbelo, and the goal in the Valentinian system is to return to the Father.

So, Sethianism is much more apocalyptic. It’s about crashing the world and getting out because there’s nothing good down here. Valentinian is more therapeutic because it believes in transformation through love and spreading the gospel–the good news. That’s what gospel means. The good news of Christ, the good news of the Father, the good news of eternal life beyond materiality.

In the Gnostic Reformation that I am proposing here, we can combine somewhat the two schools of thought. This is a bridge Gnosticism between Sethianism, Valentinianism, and Christianity, although churchgoers aren’t going to like any of this, right? Because they’re fine in the system that they believe it to be, and I think that’s okay. If you’re a non-hypocritical Christian who goes to church and prays, and you’re in touch with the Father, and you embody the Christ, that’s great. No problem with that.

And did you know that Valentinian Christians were accepted as full Christians for the first 300 years? They were side by side, sitting in the same churches, giving the same prayers, sharing in the same rituals. It was only after the Nicene Council and the takeover by the Catholic Church that Valentinians were excluded from Christianity. So I’m not trying to crash Christianity. I’m only trying to bring a correction to the hypocrisy and misunderstandings of Christianity. Well, we know there’s a ton of hypocrites.

I’m an idealist. That’s my nature. So when I discuss these things, it’s in their ideal form. It’s the way they ought to be. It’s the way they’re described. It’s the way they were designed by God and the Aeons. If you take your knowledge from what you see around here in this fallen world, then you have got a very poor idea of what it is. And you may sit in a Christian church, and you may go through the motions of being a cultural Christian. But unless you are in touch with the Father, and unless you are embodying the Christ, you’re taking your guidance from the world. And this is how it is that many people nowadays think they’re doing good, when actually they’re doing bad. And even worse than that, people who say they’re doing good, and they know they’re not doing good, they know they’re doing bad. That’s hypocrisy. That’s what hypocrisy is.

So when I describe these systems, or I describe the nature of the Christ, the nature of the body of believers, the nature of love, the nature of the Father, the nature of our aeonic or heavenly home in the pleroma of the Fullness of God, I’m describing it in an idealistic manner, in the way it’s designed to be. And that’s what we aim for. We aim for the ideal. You cannot take your cues from this earthly realm. And make sure that you don’t take your cues from teachers who are themselves fallen and not embodying Christ.

In this Gnostic Reformation that I’m sharing with you, the Son is the primal emanation, the direct image of the Father. He stays fully plugged into the Father. He has all of the direct knowledge, wisdom, love, consciousness of the Father–life. While Christ is a later restorative agent, formed through the prayers of the aeons, the Son, and the Logos after Logos returned back to the Fullness. They prayed for help to come to the mess that Logos made down below when he fell. They pray for help to rescue the Demiurge, which is part of Logos—it’s his ego. It’s his presenting face.

They want the Demiurge to come out of its amnesic state and remember the Father, remember the Fullness, remember Logos, its better half. And when that happens, that is when the big roll-up can occur—when all of the shadows will disappear. Because when the Demiurge comes to awareness, to Self-awareness, as being part of the Logos, as being part of the Son, then all of the shadows that have come out of the Demiurge—all of this material construction—will just vanish. Dissolve like snow, as the old hymn says.

There’s nothing in the Nag Hammadi like Armageddon. Christian theology culminates with a great bloody battle called Armageddon, where all the sinners are killed and only the elect remain. And only the elect are up there in heaven then. And that’s why it’s all good, because they killed all the bad people, and they all went to hell, and they’re locked down there in eternal torture.

Well, that does not sound like the Father Jesus spoke of. And that doesn’t appear anywhere in the Nag Hammadi. The way we Valentinian Gnostics do battle is not with swords and bullets and fists. We are to do battle with love. We love them. That’s what we’re supposed to do. We demonstrate love.

We are called the second order powers. All creatures on the earth are second order powers. The Aeons above are the first order of powers. We are their descendants. We are their children. We are their fruit. And we are called the second order of powers.

We were sent here to remind the Demiurge of love and life and consciousness. See, the Aeons and the Logos–this was their plan. They cooked it up. We were sent here to bring love and remembrance to the Demiurge. Restoration in that way. It didn’t work out, because we get caught up in this material life; because we get caught up in the never-ending war. You can’t remind people of good through evil. You cannot remind people of love through hatred. Only love breeds love.

Now let’s look at how all of this affects Christology, the study of Christ. In the Gnosticism that I am sharing with you, the Son is the primal emanation. He’s the direct image of the Father. He represents divine Self-knowledge, and he is stable, he is eternal, and he is not fallen.

The Christ is a later emanation. He’s a third order power. He’s generated for the purpose of restoration. He is shaped by the Son, Logos, and the Aeons, praying together to the Father for help to come to the Fall. He is the agent of healing, reconciliation, and revelation.

So we have a Son, which is the first emanation, and we have a Christ, which is the restorative agent that comes after the first and second order of powers. Christ teaches the soul to recognize the Son. Christ repairs the cosmic imbalance caused by ignorance, and salvation flows from the Father, through the Son, through Christ, and into our souls and the Demiurge’s soul—his ego.

You see, we all have a perfect Self that is an embodiment of the pleroma of the Fullness of God. All of the first order powers are within us as they were with Logos, within him in a fractal manner, and then we are further fractals of Logos. It’s a nested hierarchy.

So when the Christ comes into the cosmos to bring perfection and healing to the Demiurge and to us, it’s very similar, because the reason we feel less than perfect is because we have both an ego and that perfect Self, as did Logos. And it was the ego of Logos that became the Demiurge. Well, our fractal version of that same exact phenomenon is when our ego is not in alignment with our Self.

And when the ego is not in alignment with the Self, when the ego has forgotten its origin, like happened to the Demiurge, when the ego has forgotten that it’s not the boss—our boss is our big S Self because that has the direct connection to the emanations of the Father and the Aeons above. Consciousness, life, love, all come from above, and that comes through our Self.

Then when we are melded onto this material world, to the molecules of the egg, the zygote that is now splitting, splitting, splitting, and leveling up to become the organism, we become lost in the materiality of this cosmic space. And it’s harder for our Self to shine forth through the material. And our egos are more than willing to identify with the material, with the Demiurge, because the Demiurge is pure ego. And so our egos come to resonate with the Demiurge.

Even the Aeons have egos. Even the Son has an ego. Ego is merely your address. It’s your name, your rank, your function in the overall hierarchical pleroma of the Fullness of God. That’s what your ego is—it’s your ID. The Aeons in the Fullness all have their position, place, power, function. So ego in and of itself is not a bad thing. It is easily led astray once we are in these material bodies down here on the earth.

And so Christ’s function is to remind us of the purity of God, the purity of the soul, the purity of our Self, where we come from, and where we will be returning to, and what our job is down here. Because it’s only then, through the Christ, that we can feel the love, that we can embody the love, in order to share it with others and with the Demiurge. Consciousness and life only comes from above. The computers come from below. Life cannot jump into the molecular level.

Okay, we’ll come back around to all of this one more time next week. Please leave me your thoughts. Let’s have a discussion on these things. We’ll pick it up again next week.

God bless us all, and onward and upward!

A Simple Explanation of the Gnostic Gospel puts it all together for you. Please purchase the book and don’t forget to leave a review!