A Gnostic Catholic Canon

I know but I sorta wanna fundamentally de-emphasize Paul's role here...moreover our best example is The Apocalypse of Paul which contains assumptions about the Father which don't exactly sit well with some of my tendencies but if someone wants to make a solid pitch I'm all ears.

>To restore Israel you have to leave Babylon.
Babalon IS Israel if you admit the Woman Clothed with the Sun as Babalon, which most Thelemites do. We are her remnant sons and daughters in the body of Her Universal Assembly, are we not?

Then why not everything?
I want a core of the the texts that are older, more significant, and most stable across doctrines of cultic groups.

That's why the list of Elected readings are relatively short and don't deal with much Neoplatonism.

Paul has direct revelation of Christ, within Gnosis this is more significant than the idea that church came from Paul, because Paul was also martyred, so obviously something Paul taught broke down the "walls" the same way with Christ.

Like for example, we can see that in the 21st degree of Masonry there is a shield and a poison arrow.

>In all circumstances take up the shield of faith with which you can extinguish all the flaming darts of the evil one (Ephesians 6)

Paul is an initiate, this reflects Pike's opinion of unbelievers in Prussian Knight

>Slander and calumny were never so insolently licentious in any country as they are this day in ours. The most retiring disposition, the most unobtrusive demeanor, is no shield against their poisoned arrows.

I see, but what about manicheism? keep in mind it was a gnostic religion with about the same geographic reach than abrahamic faiths

I'm fundamentally skeptical of Paul's Gnostic cred.

The martyr thing is a decent point, tho, but you'll probably need more than Elaine Pagels' conjecture to flip my opinion on this.

James was left in charge of Jerusalem, a much more significant position in the early days of the church, and as a blood relative has more insight into the MIND of Christ having (most likely) lived with the dude longer than others (I also reject perpetual virginity here).

Babylon oppresses Israel throughout the Bible, allegorically it is the duality between the world and the spirit, which is the underlying base of all religion.

The "trinity" in is the opposite polarity of practical theology

Coptic Psalm-book maybe? It'd provide the seeds for later elaboration not unlike Thunder does for Pistis Sophia which isn't included.

There is so much more to Paul, considering you have libraries of material why would you deny this one that is a true perspective on Gnostic theology.

>And so, from the day we heard, we have not ceased to pray for you, asking that you may be filled with the knowledge of his will in all spiritual wisdom and understanding, so as to walk in a manner worthy of the Lord, fully pleasing to him, bearing fruit in every good work and increasing in the knowledge of God. May you be strengthened with all power, according to his glorious might, for all endurance and patience with joy, giving thanks to the Father, who has qualified you to share in the inheritance of the saints in light. He has delivered us from the domain of darkness and transferred us to the kingdom of his beloved Son, ...

These terms reference the Tree of Life

>Gnostic
>Catholicism
>doctrinally sound

>The "trinity" in is the opposite polarity of practical theology
I'd beg to differ but at that point it becomes a matter of mystical interpretation. I'll only say that the people who wrote were fine with , largely for the reasons already cited, it's the lack of focus on actual biblical canon and (Gnostic) quasi-canon that was EGA's objection.

How would YOU bridge the gap between those two legitimate (in terms of cult praxis) strains of Gnostic sentiment?

Gnostic Christianity is different than Gnostic Catholicism

>These terms reference the Tree of Life
The Koine Greek leaves me weary of this but you may be correct in terms of endurance and saints' light.

In terms of interior consistency between as many sects as possible, thus far I'm trying to rep Valentinians, Ebionites, Sethites, Qayinites, Ophites, Mandaeans, Kabbalists, Miaphysites and Monophysites and a few others. Y'know, that whole thing about universality (catholicism).

yeah and the unified atheist league is different from the allied atheist alliance

youtube.com/watch?v=4fx_I4piqpY

We like to direct the Father, the Mother, and the Son in a different way than Chaos, Babylon, and "Baphomet"

They are polarities. The "Father" is basically on the best scale, Spirit, and the opposite negative paradigm is a negative view of the demiurge. The "Mother" in positive light is divine feminine energy while the "Scarlet" is embracing the negative polarity of whoredom. Then the positive scale of "Son" Christ does the "thelema"(they use thelema in the Bible meaning will) of the Father, while the "Baphomet" does its own thelema.

It is not necessarily "separate" but you see which polarity one embraces leads to different outcomes.

come on now there is no canonized doctrine of (((gnosticism))) so what are you talking about consistency for?

The farther back you go, the less variability in terms of Neoplatonist-like doctrine, and hence more texts from those early brackets would be more palatable to a general """Gnostic""" audience. I'm well aware these guys were all doing their own elaborations and you could break "Gnostic" down into multiple headers but it's the language we have not the language I want.

Filled with knowledge (Daath) of His (Kether) will (...) in all Wisdom (Chokma) and Understanding (Binah). Walk in a manner worthy of the Lord (Mercy)... May you be strengthened (strength) with all power (Beauty) according to His glorious might (Splendor) endurance patience and joy giving thanks to the Father who has qualified you (Victory) to the inheritance of the saints light (Foundation), he has delivered us from darkness and transferred us to the kingdom (Kingdom) of His beloved Son

if it was a neoplatonist audience just call it that because there is no such thing as """"""""""consistent gnostic doctrine""""""""""""

A lot of Christian Gnosticism had extreme varieties. One person could read a Nag Hammadi text and tell you why they think Lucifer is the light, and others can read Nag Hammadi texts and tell you that Christ is the light.

Not everyone has the same opinions, so some might accept some and reject others.

The reason why I said they were different is because ECG, or Ecclesiastical Gnostic Catholicism has more of a "canonized" theology and practically forces the negative polarity of religion, the "darker" side of "thelema" not secessarily dark, but if you look here - that is just a subtle manifestation of this "branch" of Gnosis.

Other branches will embrace holier light and there are so many different ideas and interpretations they could break down into so many divisions, that is why Gnosis is often seen as heresy, because some schools do embrace the "heresies" while other have a different interpretations of thee symbols all together

>(((gnosticism)))

Really? Are we really at the point of claiming that sects of Christianity you don't like are Jewish plots?

Are you parents proud of you?

>His (Kether
Incredibly debatable. His can equate with Tifaret. Lemme pull the interlinear back up...

>Him
>αὐτοῦ
Not even Tifaret

>Wisdom (Chokma) and Understanding (Binah
Score on Wisdom. Understanding? synesei can be easily rendered as comprehension.

>Lord
I"d expect Kyriou to be more prominent, but w/e, I'll give you the points on that one.

>Power
dynamei...not exactly beauty in the sense of Tifaret here.

Why is might splendor? Easily renders as dominion.

hikanōsanti easily renders as 'sufficient' which I'd hardly equate to victory.

I'll take back 'light of the saints' but give you 'kingdom'.

christian gnosticism is an oxymoron and you yourself point out that gnostics cant even figure out what light is and yet you think the distinctions they draw within themselves have any meaning

judaizers are a thing

>judaizers are a thing

And would still bear nothing in common with Gnostics.

they both hate jesus

>implying you aren't worried about the perfidiousness of the Eternal Hebrew

It's a sticky situation. In there spirit of the nonduality of Thunder: Perfect Mind, there's got to be a nondual middle ground for Creeds.

Oh so you're a crazy person. Are you that dipshit that spergs out whenever someone criticizes the shroud of Turin's authenticity?

are you jewish?

>implying you aren't worried about the perfidiousness of the Eternal Hebrew

Not even slightly.

EGC's list of Saints (Reuss adds Dante Alighieri, Ludwig von Fischer, Doktor Franz Hartmann and Charles Détré):

Lao-tze
Siddhârtha
Krishna
Tahuti
Mosheh
Dionysus
Mohammed
To Mega Thêrion
Hermês
Pan
Priapus
Osiris
Melchizedek
Khem
Amoun
Mentu
Hêraclês
Orpheus
Odysseus
Vergilius
Catullus
Martialis
Rabelais
Swinburne
Apollonius Tyanæus
Simon Magus
Manes
Pythagoras
Basilides
Valentinus
Bardesanes
Hippolytus
Merlin
Arthur
Kamuret
Parzival
Carolus Magnus
William of Schyren
Frederick of Hohenstaufen
Roger Bacon
Jacobus Burgundus Molensis the Martyr
Christian Rosencreutz
Ulrich von Hutten
Paracelsus
Michael Maier
Roderic Borgia Pope Alexander the Sixth
Jacob Boehme
Francis Bacon Lord Verulam
Andrea
Robertus de Fluctibus
Giordano Bruno
Johannes Dee
Sir Edward Kelly
Thomas Vaughan
Elias Ashmole
Molinos
Adam Weishaupt
Wolfgang von Goethe
William Blake
Ludovicus Rex Bavariæ
Richard Wagner
Alphonse Louis Constant
Friedrich Nietzsche
Hargrave Jennings
Carl Kellner
Forlong dux
Sir Richard Payne Knight
Sir Richard Francis Burton
Paul Gauguin
Docteur Gérard Encausse
Doctor Theodor Reuss
Sir Aleister Crowley

I'm trying to have a giggle mate.

Not even slightly. I think the Old Testament is every bit as crazy and retarded at the New Testament. Though I suspect there's no answer I could give that would satisfy you on that.

God is the Crown.

To be filled with ἐπίγνωσιν (epiGNOSIN) knowledge (Daath) of the will (thelēmatos) θελήματος of Him (God, Crown, Kether) in all wisdom (σοφίᾳ SOPHIA) and understanding (συνέσει synesei)

This is the Kabbalah "Trinity" From Daath (Gnosis) to God / God's will (The Highest in Christian theology, therefore the Crown), filled with Wisdom (2) and Understanding (3)

>so that you may live a life worthy of the Lord and please him in every way: bearing fruit in every good work, growing in the knowledge of God,
This is an example of Mercy, the quality of Mercy
Strength
>being strengthened

>with all power
Power comes from the heart, Aloah va Daath, it is the power of the Daath in verse 9 manifesting in this verse.
>according to his glorious might so that you may have great endurance and patience,
Glorious might (Hod) Endurence and Patience leads to Victory.

The light of the saints is the foundation, the second chakra, this is where controlling this energy, "the waters of the loins" one can go transmute this sexual energy, hence the light of the saints.

We go to the Kingdom, (Kingdom) of the Son when we leave the darkness, and the darkness can anything that goes against the law and the will of God

>christian gnosticism is an oxymoron and you yourself point out that gnostics cant even figure out what light is and yet you think the distinctions they draw within themselves have any meaning
What it really is that everyone has to find the light for themselves. Two people don't always think the same, and sometimes doctrines are manufactured to suit one's interest, but for everyone by themselves has to open their bibles and books and discern for themselves.

> no Carl Jung
> no Boethius

Sorry. Sarcasm and humor don't carry over, and I legitimately didn't know if you were another loopy anti-semite (a lot of the occultists around here seem to be Evolaists).

no way you are definitely at the very least slightly jewish

light is meant to be shared, if they dont share it its because they dont have it.

>ask question
>receive answer
>reject answer

It's like trying to talk to someone with body image problems.

oy vey

sounds like something a psychiatrist would say

>occultist
>Evolite
Pick one and only one.

>God is the Crown.
Cool, but I don't know how you draw that rendering from αὐτοῦ. Synesei doesn't carry the transcendent connotation I'd couple with a supernal attribution.

It IS a nice attribution system and I hate to be the mystical text-interpretive party-pooper but I'm just not seeing it in the Koine Greek man.

I may side closer with that "Light of the Saints" interpretation but that opens a whole different can of worms in terms of relation to the Tantras which it's pretty clear there's some weird parity with Hebrew systems (Ain/Sahaja).

You are right, Christ tells us to shine the light
>People don't light a lamp and put it under a basket but on a lamp stand, and it gives light to everyone in the house.

He also tells us not to cast our pearls before swine
>Mat 7:6 Give not that which is holy unto the dogs, neither cast ye your pearls before swine, lest they trample them under their feet, and turn again and rend you.

How can someone learn how computer programming works if they never learned the alphabet? How can someone tell you about algebra if you never learned how to add or subtract? How can you add numbers without knowing the numbers?

More of a psychologist thing. If I were a psychiatrist I'd be focusing on pharmacological solutions. But I'm sure you have an irrational fear of any and all psychological or psychiatric help; which is tragic, as it always seems to be those who most need it that fear it.

>Pick one and only one.

Isn't occultism a component of Evolaism?

>mfw

>Isn't occultism a component of Evolaism?
Nah, you're think of LARP that's a component of Evolaism. Nigga renounced his pagan tendencies and died a Christist.

The good news is that I don't have to abandon MY paganistic tendencies because I've got Gnostic Catholicism ;^)

im referring to mystery schools specifically who won't clue you in on the #realsecret until you've #advanced

you oughtta be a professor or something is brandeis hiring?

I've an academic text on the components of Gnostic initiation in my normative library.

>Cool, but I don't know how you draw that rendering from αὐτοῦ.
Because the prayer starts in verse 3, "We always thank God, the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, when we pray for you," then in 9 "we have not ceased to pray for you" obviously we know who they are praying to

>Synesei doesn't carry the transcendent connotation I'd couple with a supernal attribution.
In the context, it is supernal understanding, it might not be your taste of "mystic greek work for understanding" but it still is understanding.

do you collect stamps too?

>im referring to mystery schools specifically who won't clue you in on the real secret until you've advanced

That is because there is a lot of information, which is always available, but you have to be careful of the sources you get them from, and what material you choose to read, and you have to be ready to understand the next set of information before you can advance otherwise it what use is reading it all in one day that is it? It is because Gnosis is supposed to be experienced.

As for others, they do not give handouts because they are basically "casting pearls before swine",

what it is is a scam to get into your pants and pockets

Nope.

Neither is that the Crown nor the Will itself, and I can make a decent argument for Tifaret based on the rendering of Lord.

You could make a stronger argument, imho, by leaning on Εὐχαριστοῦμεν and the stations of either versions of Gnostic Mass which are less overtly Kabbalistic in a macrocosmic sense (not unlike some of Crowley's other initiations) but more at an internal succession of emanation.

My only point is that it looks like a rendering of correlation after translation which while significant in spots may be overreaching a touch.

I'd say you're at least half right, but it's hard for me to swallow that Paul is talking about a Sefira system that's still like a thousand years from being formulated when you look at things more contemporary to him like Hekalot Rabbati and the rest of that mystical tradition.

then you should start because it sounds like you need better hobbies

>i'm only here to spam doggos and fuckpost am i kewl yet guise?

i know you are but what am i

A fucking retard?

You don't have to join a "secret society" or Ecclesiastical Gnostic church. You are the only person you need to learn anything you want.

God is the highest for in Christian theology, therefore God/God's Will is the Crown. The qualities then come after God. If it were an algebra equation, God would be the Highest Variable, therefore is the Crown.

Paul also speaks in symbols and parables, this is just one reference to Kabbalah Tree of Life. Even "if" the "tree of life" same out "way later" you have to take into consideration how long it existed before people knew about it, and the fact that it was already manifested by God before it was uttered.

>an ancient commentary on part of the Hebrew scriptures, attached to the biblical text. The earliest Midrashim come from the 2nd century AD, although much of their content is older.
>According to Jewish tradition dating from the 13th century, this knowledge has come down as a revelation to elect saints from a remote past, and preserved only by a privileged few. It is considered part of the Jewish Oral Law by the majority of religious Jews in modern times, although this was not agreed upon by many Talmudic and medieval scholars, as well as many modern liberal rabbis and a minority of Orthodox rabbis.

The information was always available, so Paul's mystery reference to this tree of life was already known, because even Solomon hints at it constantly, or Paul was revealed this parable from Christ during his series of revelation.

seriously?

>even Solomon hints at it constantly
I'd posit we have much more solid ground here.

>Even "if" the "tree of life" same out "way later" you have to take into consideration how long it existed before people knew about it, and the fact that it was already manifested by God before it was uttered.
Hence my reference to other forms of this knowledge and repping Sefer Yetzirah in the canonical list.

Alright, you've baited me, what's your list of most solid mystical Paul, I wanna crack open the interlinear a bit more before I pass out.

>You are the only person you need to learn anything you want.

I'm not baiting you. Paul is clearly misunderstood by everybody even myself, but a lot of gnostics and protestant sects might deny him, and a lot of orthodox and catholic sects just say the words "knowledge, wisdom and understanding" but they are just saying them, not really explaining them, but sometimes using them to draw people in with all the pretty words they are using.

Those are my bias stereotypes, but you see what mean.

What the hell does that have to do with being a legitimate occultist?

The Church Itself has cranked out plenty of occultists. Trithemius et al.

Evola might not have been a GOOD occultist, but he was still an occultist. Don't be intellectually dishonest, Ape.

wtf is a 'legitimate occultist?'

>Long ago the Freemasonic movement alongside Martinism decided ain't no Pope gonna keep them away from the Eucharist.
No Pope did to begin with. And very few Masons are Martinists, nor does it preclude them from belonging to other sects of Christianity.
Furthermore, most Grand Lodges preclude OTO fags, and all the Rosicrucian groups certainly do.

>"The faithful who enroll in Masonic associations are in a state of grave sin and may not receive Holy Communion."

vatican.va/roman_curia/congregations/cfaith/documents/rc_con_cfaith_doc_19831126_declaration-masonic_en.html

>most Grand Lodges preclude OTO fags
Not in the US, I know PLENTY of OTO associated Freemasons. The OTO no longer claims to make Freemasons so it isn't even irregular.

>All Rosicrucian groups
What is the Thelemic Order of the Golden Dawn, then?

Again I'm having a giggle but frankly I don't trust someone who was weak enough in the praxes to renounce them to tell me much of value.

What a horrid canon.

The only worthwhile Gnostic canon is:
Gospel of the Lord (+ Epistles)
Gospel of Thomas
The Shepherd of Hermas
Apocryphon of James

Go /GnosticMarcionism/ or go home.

>Marcionism
>catering to dualism in a system with huge stacks of nondualist materials
Not to mention assumptions about the Father that don't sit well with me compared to Platonic notions of Demiurge.

There are plenty of Gnostic groups that didn't view Demiurge as an entity of abject malevolence.

>no Wisdom
>no Sirach
...

i think you should treat the genuine pauline epistles the way you propose to treat hebrews, on the grounds that i love them

>I confess the two Baptisms and the three other Mysteries for the remission of sins.
what are these?

can they all be saints if many deny the existence of others, or would, in the other sense, given a rifle and a clear shot?

i guess so, what's the point then? what did odysseus, mohammed and Dante have in common aside from being famous and well traveled?

How many weirdass angels/archons/deities did you just add to the list of things to revere besides the trinity by taking in all those other books?

Also by taking in mandean teachings you have to ditch abraham and the holy ghost who are seen as evil by them, dont you?

What's this Church position on licking refugee feet?

In other words how do I know that this isn't just another open borders NWO cult like mainstream Christianity?

EGC rites and teachings, as well as a hint at Crowley's sexual praxes.

>aside from being famous and well traveled?
>"I am a native of Corinth, a freeman of the city of Athens, the ally of Mitylene, and that I am travelling peacable to Heliopolis, the City of the Sun, in search of Light and Truth, of Wisdom and of Peace.... I demand participation in your MYSTERIES"

Lots.
Sorta. I'm incorporating it for discourse on Mahazael, the Angel of the Logos. You can decide for yourself if you want to ditch certain patriarchal figures for others. There's something to be said for looking to John the Baptist as a gateway to the Mysteries.

>NWO cult
You're talking to a Thelemite mate.

>You're talking to a Thelemite mate.
What's that supposed to mean?

Wat

That means I'm in an ritualistic NWO cult.

Gnostic Catholicism, mate, get with the program.

So you're a Jew puppet that supports multiculuralism and open borders for everyone save for Israel?

Nope.
I support open borders for Israel too.
And a society in which the primary mechanism of legislation is Spirit Cooking.

For the folks griping about:
Yank out CHAOS for Teli
Yank out BABALON for Babrbelo
Yank out BAPHOMET for Eloah Va Daath

I missed you Ape of Thoth. The only good tripfag on this board. I'm not even into occult shit but your threads are always quality.

thoth how do I summon a succubus

Blow your brains out then hit me up in the astral flux and we can chat.

Thanks mate, it'd be cool of some other Gnostic leaning folks (other than the Paulfag) had some contribution ideas because so far this is a two man council on canonicity.

>I support open borders for Israel too
Kek. So you're not even an insider, just a useful idiot then. Get it.

Are you just here to complain about jews ad infinitum? Because there's already a board for that.

>vatican.va/roman_curia/congregations/cfaith/documents/rc_con_cfaith_doc_19831126_declaration-masonic_en.html
That's only Catholics. And there have always been plenty of Catholic members who don't care about the Vatican's petty tiff.
>Not in the US
Ergo i said most, not all. Because the OTO's beliefs are at many points contrary to Masonry's teachings (good and moral men, useful to society, educated, dutiful to God, etc), even the places which don't outright ban them, membership is an unwritten justification for a blackball.
>What is the Thelemic Order of the Golden Dawn, then?
Not a Masonic Rosicrucian group?

>good and moral men
How does Crowley's program of morality outlined in Duty conflict with Freemasonry? Be specific please.

>useful to society, educated
Thelema emphasizes both of these.

>Rosicrucian
You simply said Rosicurcian, not specifically Freemasonic Rosicrucianism. Even then I can quibble because GD is a natural comasonic extension of SRIA.

>How does Crowley's program of morality outlined in Duty conflict with Freemasonry?
Firstly, "Do what thou wilt" conflicts with temperance and prudence. Plus, there's all the sex and turd stuff. And doesn't he shit talk the Bible? I'm not an expert in Crowleyism, just going from what's been said.
>You simply said Rosicurcian, not specifically Freemasonic Rosicrucianism.
Which is my mistake, aye.
>Even then I can quibble because GD is a natural comasonic extension of SRIA.
Doesn't mean anything without recognition. Any member could make any extension of a SRIA or a Masonic group and have it mean bugger all unless it gets recognition.

>Firstly, "Do what thou wilt" conflicts with temperance and prudence
A fundamental misunderstanding of Will, not as desire, but closer to Schnelling's trajectory of natural being:
>where the principle of God before God is divine will striving for being, the present age, which is still part of this growth and hence a mediated fulfillment, and a finality where God is consciously and consummately Himself to Himself.
I suggest you read up on Crowley.

>sex and turd stuff
Crowley ate shit on a dare to get him to shut up. And that's tame as fuck compared to an Aghori. Moreover, did God not command us to be fruitful and multiply?

>And doesn't he shit talk the Bible
I dunno would you qualify the Gospel of St. Bernard Shaw as shit talking the Bible?

>recognition
Yeahyeahyeah, my point is only that categorization is fuzzy here.

Besides, given that I'm a highly irregular initiate, I'm already sympathetic to irregular orders be it OTO or Memphis Mizraim or Weishaupt's Perfectibilism. So that's my bias. I'm of the unpopular position that the Grand Orients are every bit as 'legit' as the UGLE.

>Schnelling's
Schelling's, pardon.
Some folks put it closer to Neitzche or Schope but I think that's too far off of Crowley's commentary on the Holy Books.

The guy going on earlier in the thread about Paul and the Divine Crown of Will is pretty close to this interpretation of Will, as is St. Augustine.