posted on Jan, 1 2011 @ 08:34 AM
Funny you should ask.
A few days ago I was checking into the tenets of Christian Gnosticism - basically to see if my AutoGenesisism theological premise has any conceptual
linkage to any aspect of it. This has been an ongoing research effort since I finished and published my book last summer and fall, since I know that
someone, somewhere, must've done something with at least some of the aspects of this theological premise before I stumbled over it. I got wind of
Gnosticism after reading a book called THE JESUS MYSTERIES by Timothy Freke and Peter Grandy, that theorizes that the Jesus narrative is a
continuation of a perennial myth that started with the Egyptians. The two authors are Gnostics, I guess. Or they really like the Gnostic thing. So,
I got another book (called GNOSTICISM by Stephen Hoeller) and figured I'd see if I could find any linkage to my Auto-G theology there. I tried the
web, but the information was too diverse and scattered. This Hoeller guy is a bit of an authority in the American Gnostic Society, and I had a Barnes
& Nobles gift card.
I was floored with what I discovered.
Now, what you need to understand is that I've discovered a very specific metaphoric formula that seems to work throughout the entire Bible - New and
Old Testament - and when used, describes something that is extremely different than what I've ever read or heard from any source, published or not,
concerning what the Bible exists to describe. In fact, this metaphoric formula causes this gathering of disparate documents to unite in a description
that is anything but religious or even spiritual. Mundane and biological is more in line with what's being detailed. Of course, you have to take
into consideration the fact that each of these texts were heavily edited for a specific purpose, so the only useable material is the stuff that's
presented in significant redundancy. After all, redundancy is what bases the structure of physical existence in general, and is woven into the
foundational whole. If informational redundancy within any whole presentation is significant enough, it becomes impossible to vacate or substitute
without destroying what it is that is being altered for whatever purpose you've chosen for it. Just like the structural redundancy within any
composition determines that composition's true essence. Therefore, redundancy is always the initial criterion when listing criteria to be used in
sorting out original notions from later edits.
When I applied this same metaphoric formula to the basic Gnostic myths - specifically the Story of Sophia - I discovered that this Hellenistic myth
describes the general outline of the central impetus (why and how God has done what God has done, and where we fit into the whole of it) of my
AutoGenesisism premise. Of course, the Sophia myth is highly allegorized, but the alignment is unmistakable. I'm presently tearing into where these
traditions originally came from, if such a thing can ever be determined of course, so that I can structure a proper point-to-point alignment
presentation, as well as a workable thesis concerning how such a highly technical (it really is extremely technical but completely divisible via
elemental logic) could have been translated into the myths (at least - so far - the Myth of Sophia) of such ancient people. Not hard to figure out why
people took what they took from these myths, but the origins of the myths is a very different issue.
So yes, I have experienced what you're describing. Recently. Like three days ago. And this, after working years to allow (and ensure) the entire
layout of AutoGenesisism to fully emerge without any influence or distraction from anyone or anything. Now, it's like I'm a detective trying to find
the fingerprints of the source where I got it from, and to establish its identity. I hope this path of inquiry leads somewhere.