Yaldabaoth (Laldabaoth)-Gnostic writings

page: 1
10
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join

posted on Dec, 20 2008 @ 03:49 PM
link   
Hello to all,

I would love to start a discussion (not a debate) with others that follow the gnostic writings from the nag Hammadi Library.

I am a believer that pretty much every belief has some truths and fallacies. Some say its a game of 'only taking what you like out of something'.....I say, its using discernment to find the 'pure nature' of what God would be and is.

Alot of gnostic writings display a 'ruler' called Yaldabaoth, who only THINKS he is God. This ruler is a co creator, making angels, demons ect...

Yaldabaoth is known to represent 'power' and 'rule'. Yaldabaoth is an offspring from the Aeon Sophia, representing wisdom. The text go in depth about how Yaldabaoth comes about, being a chaotic aborted mess who resides outsie the realm of 'light' God.

What is in question here is this. Some text display Yaldabaoth as the one who that has entrapped the 'spirit' by bonding the spirit into flesh. As long as Yaldabaoth can prevent mankind of understanding the wisdom one should seek for to ascend out of this material world, Yaldabaoth will rule over souls here. Yaldabaoth is known to be greedy, prideful and jealous.

Yaldabaoth is called an Archon, which means 'ruler'. Yaldabaoth boasted to the other archons, who he formed from his own image, "I am God and there is no other god beside me". Is there a hint of 'doubt' in this saying. Would God doubt that its even possible to doubt that God is not God? Sophia then calls him Samael (the blind god). Yaldabaoth is also called Saklas (a fool).

Gnostics tried to explain there was much more to Jesus teachings then what is found in the canonical gospels. Thes was the reason the Roman churches branded gnostics as heritics.

This was followed by the destruction of gnostic writings by 4th century AD along with the killing of those who protected them.

Someone obviously felt these writings were worth dying for.

This Yaldabaoth was not considered the 'Supreme Being' that Jesus speaks of. Yaldabaoth is considered to be the one that instructed Adam and Eve to not eat of the knowledge (not wanting them to know truth because then they are able to see evil in Yaldabaoth).

Yaldabaoth is an impostor, a jealous god, with a lions face serpent with eyes of fire. Yaldabaoth was the first ruler (archon) and stole his mothers power (wisdom). Sophia brought limitless light into matter and the region of chaos. Yaldabaoth heard Sophia and traced the voice to the abyss, Yaldabaoth saw her 'reflection' in the water and wanted to capture the spirit in a physical body.

Life is sent so that Sophia could regain her power and place. Eponoia (life) was hidden within Adam (mankind). Yaldabaoth saw that Eponia (life) was within Eve, for she was luminous. Yaldabaoth sought to create offspring with Eve, but eponia left Eves body.

Eponia is then said in one text to enter the snake, telling Adam and Eve to eat of the truth (knowledge).

So this leads to the idea of Yahweh is the watcher or Archon who keeps souls captive. These rulers are portrayed as trapping souls in endless material pursuits. It is also said that Jesus, the Aeon of Christ, sets out to reveal the truth to man.

Sophia's story goes on to show how she becomes known as the harlot, passing downwards into the lower aeons, becoming shut up in the human body suffering insults in every one of them...because she is considered a consort to the Archeons.

Yaldabaoth is known to be the one that brought the flood. His nature defiantly fits the bill for a God that demands, needs blood (death), is jealous, prideful, greedy and so on.

My thoughts are that two natures are being displayed in the Bible. The gnostic Yaldabaoth and the Supreme One that does not share Yaldabaoth's nature, but instead is pure and righteous in every way.

I dont think the entire OT is full of Bull...I think there were original writings before the ones we now see, explaining the origins of mankind.

Isnt it odd that the 4 main NT gospels dont have a name on them, or a title> But yet a whole list of writings with titles and names came from the Nag Hammadi text. Why would people waste all that time writings stuff with Johns name on it, or Peters, or Timothy, or Judas, or Mary, or ect....And how, if these writings were all cope outs of the truth, WHY are the dated to be the EARLIEST writings of christianity (believers in Christ)?

I find it ironic, in the age that we are in, writings that have been kept away for nearly 2000 yrs. have resurfaced....and they are bond in leather books. Someone thought they were precious.

Would love to hear what others think about this. Im sure many threads have been written about gnostic text....but lets start anew...and if anyone has a old thread that they would like to include...pls post it, would love to add to the convo.

Peace,
LV

[edit on 20-12-2008 by LeoVirgo]




posted on Dec, 20 2008 @ 04:14 PM
link   
If this interests anyone...here are some links for those who have not read from the Nag Hammadi Library. These text are one of the very few writings that survived the burning of the Library of Alexandria. They were found in 1945 in Egypt.

The Hypostasis of the Archons
(The Reality of the Rulers)
www.gnosis.org...


The Second Treatise of the Great Seth
www.gnosis.org...


The Sophia of Jesus Christ
www.gnosis.org...

On the Origin of the World
("The Untitled Text")
www.gnosis.org...


The Secret Book of John
(The Apocryphon of John)
www.gnosis.org...



And here is a link to the rest of the writings, the ones above specifically mention Yaldabaoth.

www.thenazareneway.com...



posted on Dec, 20 2008 @ 06:05 PM
link   
I've commented on this elsewhere as the concept is fascinating to contemplate, God being evil demiurge, rather than supreme creator. This concept of the demiurge is the underlying philosophy of gnostic luciferianism as far as I can ascertain. Lucifer being the entity or such that seeks to help mankind escape this prison universe. I personally see this doctrine as the underlying spiritual driving force behind the NWO.

My judgement of this doctrine, is based on witnessing the actions of those who seem to adhere to it... neurotically selfish, greedy, destructive, showing nothing but disrespect to the earth and nature in some kind of childish rebellion. It's a great but painful lesson.

Understanding this concept I think is key to understanding western religious philosophy and its emanations flowing through our civilisation. I'll be interested to follow the thread, although I'll be away a week or so.



posted on Dec, 20 2008 @ 06:31 PM
link   

Originally posted by Shar_Chi
I've commented on this elsewhere as the concept is fascinating to contemplate, God being evil demiurge, rather than supreme creator. This concept of the demiurge is the underlying philosophy of gnostic luciferianism as far as I can ascertain. Lucifer being the entity or such that seeks to help mankind escape this prison universe. I personally see this doctrine as the underlying spiritual driving force behind the NWO.

My judgement of this doctrine, is based on witnessing the actions of those who seem to adhere to it... neurotically selfish, greedy, destructive, showing nothing but disrespect to the earth and nature in some kind of childish rebellion. It's a great but painful lesson.

Understanding this concept I think is key to understanding western religious philosophy and its emanations flowing through our civilisation. I'll be interested to follow the thread, although I'll be away a week or so.


Wow, interesting response.

Can you explain a little more why you feel this doctrine is the spiritual force driving the NWO?

Can you give any examples on the nature of what you say you see as those who seem to adhere to it...so far every one I have met that believes that the OT God was not The Most High and accepts God is only love, are very loving people, very humble. Ive met more selfish Christians then Ive met selfish agnostics....actually, Ive yet to meet a selfish gnostic.

Why is this belief selfish, rebellious, greedy....see I see all of those things in the god of the OT.

Just to note, I think there are 2 different natures in the Bible, one is the Most High....showing peace, mercy, grace...and the other shows force, through fear and demands of blood, and brings deception.

Peace,
LV



posted on Dec, 20 2008 @ 06:32 PM
link   
Yes I've read quite a bit if not all of the Nag Hammadi Library a few times ..

There's a few posts on ATS/BTS about it too

www.belowtopsecret.com...


Very profound scriptures.

Yeh I definitely don't think it's the driving force for the NWO.. it would utterly destroy them provided "they" exist and it's all completely true.

[edit on 12/20/2008 by PuRe EnErGy]



posted on Dec, 20 2008 @ 06:37 PM
link   
reply to post by PuRe EnErGy
 


Hey Pure Energy,

Thanks for that added link! I find it very curious that alot of people dont want to discuss it.

Peace,
LV



posted on Dec, 20 2008 @ 06:55 PM
link   
Just so there is no confussion...the gnostic text teach of the Supreme.....just so no one is thinking that they ONLY debunk the OT god...the claim would be that the OT is not the true nature of the Supreme one that Jesus taught of.

Just some additions....(the following is NOT talking about Yaldabaoth, it is about God)

"And I asked to know it, and he said to me, "The Monad is a monarchy with nothing above it. It is he who exists as God and Father of everything, the invisible One who is above everything, who exists as incorruption, which is in the pure light into which no eye can look.

"He is the invisible Spirit, of whom it is not right to think of him as a god, or something similar. For he is more than a god, since there is nothing above him, for no one lords it over him. For he does not exist in something inferior to him, since everything exists in him. For it is he who establishes himself. He is eternal, since he does not need anything. For he is total perfection. He did not lack anything, that he might be completed by it; rather he is always completely perfect in light. He is illimitable, since there is no one prior to him to set limits to him. He is unsearchable, since there exists no one prior to him to examine him. He is immeasurable, since there was no one prior to him to measure him. He is invisible, since no one saw him. He is eternal, since he exists eternally. He is ineffable, since no one was able to comprehend him to speak about him. He is unnameable, since there is no one prior to him to give him a name.

"He is immeasurable light, which is pure, holy (and) immaculate. He is ineffable, being perfect in incorruptibility. (He is) not in perfection, nor in blessedness, nor in divinity, but he is far superior. He is not corporeal nor is he incorporeal. He is neither large nor is he small. There is no way to say, 'What is his quantity?' or, 'What is his quality?', for no one can know him. He is not someone among (other) beings, rather he is far superior. Not that he is (simply) superior, but his essence does not partake in the aeons nor in time. For he who partakes in an aeon was prepared beforehand. Time was not apportioned to him, since he does not receive anything from another, for it would be received on loan. For he who precedes someone does not lack, that he may receive from him. For rather, it is the latter that looks expectantly at him in his light.

"For the perfection is majestic. He is pure, immeasurable mind. He is an aeon-giving aeon. He is life-giving life. He is a blessedness-giving blessed one. He is knowledge-giving knowledge. He is goodness-giving goodness. He is mercy and redemption-giving mercy. He is grace-giving grace, not because he possesses it, but because he gives the immeasurable, incomprehensible light.

"How am I to speak with you about him? His aeon is indestructible, at rest and existing in silence, reposing (and) being prior to everything. For he is the head of all the aeons, and it is he who gives them strength in his goodness. For we know not the ineffable things, and we do not understand what is immeasurable, except for him who came forth from him, namely (from) the Father. For it is he who told it to us alone. For it is he who looks at himself in his light which surrounds him, namely the spring of the water of life. And it is he who gives to all the aeons and in every way, (and) who gazes upon his image which he sees in the spring of the Spirit. It is he who puts his desire in his water-light which is in the spring of the pure light-water which surrounds him. "

www.gnosis.org...

My ideas of why this makes sense....if Love conquers all things, which is why Jesus taught love your enemies and forgive others....then God doesn't have to be wrathful or forceful. I also like how the attributes (aeons and archons) follow a order of sorts, offspringing from one another, emanations....

Just as though Jesus chose not to fight, we see the nature of the True Most High of all things. God is God, and I place faith that God has made a order that leads all lights back to Thee.

LV

[edit on 20-12-2008 by LeoVirgo]



posted on Dec, 20 2008 @ 06:59 PM
link   

Originally posted by Shar_Chi
This concept of the demiurge is the underlying philosophy of gnostic luciferianism as far as I can ascertain. Lucifer being the entity or such that seeks to help mankind escape this prison universe. I personally see this doctrine as the underlying spiritual driving force behind the NWO.


Very succinctly put.


For what it's worth, there was someone claiming to be from one of the "insider" bloodlines posting on a forum, and his posts were saved and put into pdf format, and there is an ATS discussion on what the guy had to say here: www.abovetopsecret.com...'

Also, the website he posted on was apparently hacked and his posts deleted at some point. But either way, what he said was basically the same as this doctrine. When anyone tried to accuse him of corrupting or taking advantage of mankind, etc., he basically would turn the problem back onto those accusing him and try to make them realize that this whole system would be nothing without their consent and their willing participation in it, from using money to watching TV, etc. The only way out, is the way out, the path, and people are funneled towards it by all the hardships created implicitly by their own actions and desires.

As far as the OP goes, there are a lot of concepts that seem different on the face of it but really they all stem from the same thing. And the deeper you go, the more things connect and the more pieces you find interlock and interface each other. I don't like imaging any "opposing" or contradictory forces in nature, or good or bad or any dualities if I can help it. There may be two sides to any subject, or however many you would like to perceive, but ultimately there is only the One Thing, that is Everything, including This, right Now. All the divisions are created by your perceptions of things being separate when in reality they are not.

I like Gnostic philosophy, but I think I've gotten more out of the Kabbalah. They also inter-relate, of course, as does everything eventually. The Tree of Life and its sephiroth are their own complete genesis and philosophy.



posted on Dec, 20 2008 @ 07:13 PM
link   
reply to post by bsbray11
 



Nicely said, I agree that other teachings, such as Kabbalh, have brought alot of this kinda of thing full circle, understanding how it all is really related to eachother. I do take all things with a grain of salt and I ponder many materials and teachings.

I guess what really resonates with me, is kinda on the lines of what you pointed out.....mabey there is not a 'good' and 'bad'. My issue with that is other peoples personal experiences of some really demon like characteristics. I believe I have seen a 'possession' so to say and it was the most scariest thing in the world, nothing less, it was my mother. What are your ideas on things like this?

I dont accept the wrathful idea of our God (whatever you like to call this higher one of all things...divine energy suits me fine)....so this is where Im attracted to such a thought that a lower ruler only THINKS he is God and the nature of this ruler is not rightous nor divine.

Peace,
LV



posted on Dec, 20 2008 @ 07:55 PM
link   
I like to take ideas to the absolute extreme and imagine what the repercussions or consequences would be, because all the interesting things seem to occur on the "boundaries."

So I take this teaching from Buddhism. It says, you must "cut off" or be able to transcend all your desires, possessions, opinions, absolutely anything that makes you feel like "you." This is synonymous with killing your ego, your particular sense of self as something distinct from everything else (because you are NOT different from everything else!). Someone who has 100% done this, would care no more if their own son was killed than if a total stranger was killed. That doesn't mean they wouldn't try to stop it (but maybe they wouldn't), but only that they would be completely unattached even to family loyalties, which is a form of bias. In Gnostic tradition I think Jesus once said that anyone that wanted to be his disciple must kill his parents, for killing your parents is the hardest of all (metaphorical, of course). Everyone and everything is you, except you aren't in a position to realize it very easily yet. So to make distinctions, to have favorites, things like that, really doesn't make much sense, like you having a "favorite arm" or a "favorite blood cell." If I saw two blood cells killing each other, or my two arms fighting, I would be confused, and it would represent some real stupidity in the system of my body, but I don't know what I could do about it. The only thing worthy of true distinction, that's really worth saving, is the Thing itself, which, since it is everything, you can't distinguish it from anything! (Have I started sounding crazy yet? I'm trying my hardest to stay close to the topic at hand...)

Say you did see your arms fighting each other one day, and you can't pick sides, you are only confused as to why this is happening and what the sense in it is. Same with the world. And in Taoism they talk about "non-action." This is why they talk about non-action. When the world is your body, and you see people and forces in conflict and opposition, you may not understand the sense in it, but you are also too attached to everything to pick a side and jump into the fight yourself.

So in the end, the goal state of mind is that you really "don't care," even though really you may be very compassionate, but it comes from a deeper understanding, and as far as the actual trivial things people are afraid of, or fighting over, or arguing about, you really don't care. You can't pick sides, and you don't stress or flip out, because you have nothing to lose! Your ultimate being, your "unit" of consciousness that makes you alive and sensing, is immortal and absolutely indestructible. You don't have the same fears and obstacles other people do, because you don't have the emotion and desire wrapped up in things that make you feel attached to this or that. It's all the same, literally.

So from that state of mind, I can understand why people would want to play with demons, or "ugly" forces in general, "playing with fire" in any context without actually having an unpleasant experience. It's fun. Because you can, and you have nothing to lose, and it can be exciting. It was exciting when I totaled my car and nearly died, and I enjoyed the experience. And on top of that, the insurance money bought me a new car right off the bat. So I really didn't lose much, even from a conventional point of view. The universe is accommodating like that.

I don't know anything about possessions of "unwilling" participants. I feel as though on some level they have made themselves vulnerable to such attacks, whatever their cause may be, and even if it's done accidentally. But their response of fearing it, flipping out about it, things like that, can definitely be managed with practice. It could even be made into a pleasant and enlightening experience with the strength of mind, and this is the true elixir, the "universal solvent," the "philosopher's stone" of Alchemy, the ability to do that. I love taking risks. But this is all just reckless to most people. Those people won't have the same experiences, though.

[edit on 20-12-2008 by bsbray11]



posted on Dec, 20 2008 @ 07:58 PM
link   
There is a lot to cover here, and I don't think I can do it all at once. If anyone wants to ask a specific question, I can try to answer it.

Yaldabaoth is the planet Saturn. This is not specifically Yahweh in the Old Testament, but the big daddy god, "El." The Gnostics interpreted the real story of the OT as the battle between Sophia and Yaldabaoth, which is why there can still be "good" parts of the text.

Aristotle envisioned an active, masculine element bringing life to an inert, passive, female element, and this is presupposed by the Gnostics. The story of his creation from Sophia goes back to Egyptian mythology:


Before this [sensible] cosmos became manifest, and Matter was perfected by Reason (Logos), Nature, proving herself imperfect, of herself brought forth her first birth. Wherefore also they say that that God was lame in the dark, and call him Elder Horus; for he was not cosmos, but a sort of image and phantasm of the world which was to be. (Plutarch, Isis and Osiris, LIV, 5-6)

Yaldabaoth means "child of chaos." He is wholly a product of emotion, which is, in modern occult parlance, "astral" substance.

The Gnostics conceived of everything as both macrocosm and microcosm, and there are two interpretations here: the psychological, or Jungian, and the sexual. The sexual aspect is quite interesting, but I don't quite think I can do it justice at the moment.

However, note that Yaldabaoth was perceived as the creator of human bodies, and then observe that the Gnostics, both libertine and ascetic, were almost universally opposed to having children. By doing so, they would be carrying on the work of Yaldabaoth, the Demiurge (emphasis on "urge").

In addition to the Nag Hammadi texts, the best place to go for what the Gnostics really thought is probably the Church Father Hippolytus' Refutation of All Heresies. It is valuable because Hippolytus' method of "refutation" is simply to copy out extremely lengthy passages from Gnostic texts under the presumption that they will refute themselves! He also tries to show that the Gnostics stole all of their teachings from Greek philosophy, which is quite a step up from attributing them all to the work of Satan:

www.newadvent.org...


Originally posted by Shar_Chi
I've commented on this elsewhere as the concept is fascinating to contemplate, God being evil demiurge, rather than supreme creator. This concept of the demiurge is the underlying philosophy of gnostic luciferianism as far as I can ascertain. Lucifer being the entity or such that seeks to help mankind escape this prison universe. I personally see this doctrine as the underlying spiritual driving force behind the NWO.

My judgement of this doctrine, is based on witnessing the actions of those who seem to adhere to it... neurotically selfish, greedy, destructive, showing nothing but disrespect to the earth and nature in some kind of childish rebellion. It's a great but painful lesson.

Understanding this concept I think is key to understanding western religious philosophy and its emanations flowing through our civilisation. I'll be interested to follow the thread, although I'll be away a week or so.

Eric Voegelin, who was by all estimates a well respected philosopher and not a conspiracy theorist, had much of the same ideas about how "Gnosticism" was behind totalitarian political movements. I can't say I quite buy it, but I suppose it is possible.

Supposing for a moment that there is a great global conspiracy: the posts by this "Insider" seem to have much more in common with Neoplatonism. The "Insider" envisions the world as being governed by divine hierarchies, all operating under the guidance of a "Divine Plan" from God. He also specifically says that to declare the world to be evil and flawed was blasphemous, because God could not make mistakes! So here we have him essentially echoing the same accusations that people like Plotinus and Irenaeus made against the Gnostics.

If this is is Gnosticism, "they" have obviously found it more expedient to side with the Archons. Moreover, if these Gnostic power-players want to free us from the prison universe, why would they want to do just the opposite by instituting a "New World Order" police state? Or have we misjudged their supposed intentions?

So it seems more likely that Gnosticism and so-called Luciferianism spring from a common source; those being the esoteric traditions that are thousands of years old.

Note, moreover, a very important aspect: much of the same terminology and symbols from Gnosticism are used in Hermetic Alchemy. Yaldabaoth is the "Black Sun" that must be transmuted into the true "Sun of Righteousness," Christ. And much more on this can be said.



posted on Dec, 20 2008 @ 08:02 PM
link   

Originally posted by Shar_Chi
neurotically selfish, greedy, destructive, showing nothing but disrespect to the earth and nature in some kind of childish rebellion.


These are some of the lies that gnostics talk about.

Matter thrives off the destruction of other matter.

You can't live in this world without being all those things, not being able to admit that is childish, sorry.



posted on Dec, 20 2008 @ 08:06 PM
link   
reply to post by bsbray11
 



You remind me of all the things I need reminded of. I have experienced these things, like what you say...but I bounce back and forth. I figure there has to be some sort of needed knowledge from history...but mabey its not needed except to help us feel the waters from many springs.

Interesting what you say about 'unwilling' participants.

I think before things were of a physical nature, a 'willingness' had to be before spirit came into matter. Gods will, our own will....Im not sure, I would say our own.

Peace,
LV



posted on Dec, 20 2008 @ 08:17 PM
link   
I recently stumbled across the nag hammadi, and was really intrigued buy the gnostic texts. I think the one thing that shocked me the most was this story you are talking about and its description of the different levels of heaven?

the whole idea of reincarnation and getting to try it again, is something i didnt know existed in christianity until i read these. was i right in reading that if you were really bad they would send you back in a worse body than you had before as like a punishment?

oh and it also puts a twist on sin. according to those books you would really have to do terrible acts to get sent to hell.



posted on Dec, 20 2008 @ 08:28 PM
link   
cutting yourself off from everything is supposed to make you realize what you are and what the material world tells/makes you think.

the realization is all that matters.

they don't get sad if people die because they know nobody really dies.

it would be like a bunch of snakes mourning the skin shed by another snake well it's off doing whatever.



posted on Dec, 20 2008 @ 08:39 PM
link   

Originally posted by thetruthhurts78
I recently stumbled across the nag hammadi, and was really intrigued buy the gnostic texts. I think the one thing that shocked me the most was this story you are talking about and its description of the different levels of heaven?

Yes, they envisioned the Earth as being surrounded by seven heaven realms, basically corresponding to the astral plane. This was called the "hebdomad" and basically extends as far as the moon. Now, what is really interesting is that the First Apocalypse of James states that there are twelve "hebdomads," which seems to mean that they thought there were twelve planets! (Of course, the more sensible explanation is that they referred to the twelve signs of the Zodiac.)


James said, "Rabbi, are there then twelve hebdomads and not seven as there are in the scriptures?"
The Lord said, "James, he who spoke concerning this scripture had a limited understanding."

So I guess that Yaldabaoth is not actually the physical planet Saturn, but more like the planetary genius of Saturn.


the whole idea of reincarnation and getting to try it again, is something i didnt know existed in christianity until i read these. was i right in reading that if you were really bad they would send you back in a worse body than you had before as like a punishment?

oh and it also puts a twist on sin. according to those books you would really have to do terrible acts to get sent to hell.

They seemed to view reincarnation by itself as the ultimate punishment. What I often find funny is that Hell was a place reserved solely for other Gnostics that the particular writer didn't like.

[edit on 20-12-2008 by Eleleth]



posted on Dec, 20 2008 @ 08:48 PM
link   
Just to note, I posted this thread in the Religious Conspiracy forum and it got moved to here.

Kinda peeved me....people were killed for these writings at one time....someone must of thought there was a conspiracy somewhere.

But anyways...moving on, mabey Ill get some great responses.

LV



posted on Dec, 20 2008 @ 08:55 PM
link   
thanks eleth for the reply. I thought it was 10 realms but it was actually 12? I need to read those again. was it in the book of thomas?



posted on Dec, 20 2008 @ 09:34 PM
link   
reply to post by thetruthhurts78
 


Hi turthhurts, thanks for the replys and thoughts...it is very interesting to see Christian beliefs that go with the gnostic text, I agree. Two sects of Christians that believe two different things. I guess its no different then the other thousands of sects off of one belief, which we see today in the many churches.

I do think that the Apocolyspe of John is one that talks about the 12...on the sites I used in the earlier posts, there is a search mode if you go to the home page.....you can search any word with in the nag hammadi text. Very convinent....

Peace,
LV



posted on Dec, 20 2008 @ 10:19 PM
link   
In response to what you said Eleleth...about the OT being the happenings between Sophia and Yaldabaoth, that gets me looking at it a whole other way. This makes sense!!

Also, we see Sophia in the OT when I think it was Solomon who lusted for this 'wisdom' (sophia)....Ill have to link some of that here....the love of Solomon. He called wisdom 'she'.

LV





new topics
 
10
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join