Donald Trump - Let's Bring Back Religion In America

 

Wow, just Wow! what a leader! and what clarity of thoughts. I was in USA in the month of October, 2016, when the presidential debate between Trump and Hillary Clinton was going on and since then Trump never misses to impress me. Much of what he says is absolutely correct. All his views are in the good interests of America and American people. Read my previous post on Trump is right on Syria and on foreign plots

No wonder why Elon Musk and many people endorsed him. I have never seen any president who is so vocal about his religion. He not only has the guts to openly talk about his religion but has declared to revive it in public. Just look at the reactions of people in the comments of the video.

Trump is spot on here. Majority of the problems in America is due to the lack of religion in their hearts. I hope Trump implements it and keeps up to his words. Let's bring back religion in America and let's introduce all religions in schools. No, Daniel Dennett, we are not afraid of anything, go ahead, introduce all religions in schools and see how your militant atheism and your philosophy obliterates into thin air. 

God controls all the things all the time

Saint Paul is right, God indeed controls all the things all the time whether we like it or not. All our voluntary thoughts which lead to voluntary actions are not really voluntary at all. All our thoughts are stimulated and controlled by God.

https://www.desiringgod.org/interviews/does-god-control-all-things-all-the-time

Jesus suffered on the cross but not Christ

As a Valentinian Gnostic I do not believe that Christ was crucified and suffered on the cross. Christ was not only before Abraham in fact he was before the time of Jehovah or Yahweh, the god of the Jews. Christ requested Achamoth to bring forth Jehovah and she maneuvered him to create the heavens and the earth which was modeled according to the Pleroma above. Achamoth who was cast out of the Pleroma was saved by Christ and out of joy she emanated weak spiritual seeds and these seeds required a place for them to become mature to finally enter the Pleroma. Earth was that chosen place.

If Christ wanted us to believe and worship him as a historical person then he would have left us blueprints of his existence through out his life but as the facts show he left no relics of his existence. The shroud of Turin is a fake from the 13th century. All this shows is that Christ did not wanted us to blindly believe in bodily resurrection and hope one day that you would be saved. I still haven't seen anyone physically rise from the dead. As a Valentinian I do not believe in bodily resurrection. 

Matter and Spiritual substances do not mix and they are completely different from one another. It makes no sense for Christ who was spiritual in make to suffer like an ordinary human being engulfed in matter. Christ entered the body of Jesus at the time of his baptism and flew out of his body before the crucifixion and the flogging. The psychic Jesus having a material body was sent by Jehovah and the pneumatic Christ possessing a spiritual body was sent by the unknowable Holy Father in the Pleroma.

Sorry Irenaeus, yes we Valentinians do divide Jesus Christ and its for a valid reason and it makes perfect sense rather than wasting our lives by blindly believing in the resurrection of the dead and falsely hoping that you will be saved one day. I wish our salvation was this easy but definitely its not unless you receive the gnosis of the Father from Christ.

On the passion of the Saviour and the Eucharist

A Valentinian Interpretation of Baptism and Eucharist: And Its Critique of "Orthodox" Sacramental Theology and Practice by Elaine Pagels.

"Jews demand signs and Greeks search for wisdom, but we preach Christ crucified, a stumbling block to Jews and foolishness to Gentiles, but to those who are called, both Jews and Greeks, Christ the power of God and the wisdom of God." (1 Corinthians 22-24)

I exactly know how the Jews might be feeling in their hearts when Christians tell them that Jesus was their Messiah. The Messiah who was supposed to bring every Jew back to the promised land rebuilding the Jerusalem temple and preaching all the nations about the One God and his commandments is actually found dead on a cross. This is ridiculousness of the highest order, ROFL, laughable beyond control, blasphemy of the highest unpardonable sin, LOL.

As a Gentile I really don't like the idea of a God dying at the hands of the demons, this is the reason why I often quote Basilideans and the Sethians who viewed that it was someone else who died on the cross and that Jesus was actually mocking at the Pharisees sitting on the branch of a tree in not truly recognizing whom they were piercing with.

Well, jokes apart, I am a Valentinian Christian and I take the words of Paul and his followers quite seriously and am sensitive to it. Unlike other gnostic sects Valentinians accepted that Jesus died on the cross, that he was crucified and nailed to the Cross. However they interpret this historical event in a different way compared to the Roman Catholic Church, the above work of Miss Pagels entails just what the difference was.

It seems as though the Saviour wanted to re-enact the whole Valentinian myth on this realm in order to show its significance and taught to keep it as a remembrance for us. The passion of the Saviour actually remembers us the passion of the Sophia in seeking the unknowable Holy Father, the suffering of the Saviour at the hands of the Pharisees remembers us the suffering of Achamoth as to what she went through after she was cast out of the Pleroma and the suffering which each of her seeds had to go through at the hands of the evil archons of the world. The Saviour's crucifixion remembers us the recovery of our lost knowledge through the gnosis of the Holy Father which helps in maturing the seeds here and finally the cross represents the restoration of Achamoth inside the Pleroma and restoration of her spiritual seeds with the bridegrooms of Christ at the wedding marriage feast inside the Pleroma.

In this way the crucifixion of Jesus Christ is actually a re-enaction of the Valentinian myth and of the Demiurge and his psychic believers. I think it is better for the Jews to understand that the rule of Demiurge has ended with the reign of Christ and their god Jehovah himself is actually like the Centurion who ran towards Jesus Christ after knowing who he was and after knowing that Jesus existed before him or else the Jews will continue to suffer if they hold on to their old beliefs.

Catholicism was constructed as a defense against Marcion

What a load of shitty speculation right over there! The claim that Marcion and his followers namely the marcionites wrote the Pauline corpus is very absurd. Marcion was the man who believed that only Paul understood the true message of Christ and rejected the Old Testament and its Jewish god Jehovah completely. So for Marcion, a ship owner of Pontus to convert and arrive at the conclusion of Marcionism the Pauline Epistles must already have been in existence for him to get influenced by Paul and his teachings. Robert Price knows that this version of his view is actually a chicken and the egg problem. Marcion wrote the Pauline letters but for Marcion to get influenced in order to write the Pauline letters the Pauline corpus must have been in existent before Marcion became active.

To tackle this problem he makes an even more absurd claim that Simon Magus was actually Saint Paul of Tarsus. We cannot rely on the information of Simonism from Irenaeus because in a hurry to refute the heretics he took whatever sources that was available to him without checking there credibility and therefore his works are very unreliable. In fact the Gnostic systems which he attributed to Valentinus was not the actual system which Valentinus himself believed in instead his accusations were directed to the later modified systems of Valentinian followers like Heracleon and Ptolemy. So are the clementine homilies which cannot be trusted.

Secondly, one of the other argument of Robert Price is that there are contradictions with in the Pauline Corpus for example comparing Corinthians and Galatians where Paul says that he received his wisdom of Christ while talking with the elders of Jerusalem and on the other hand in Galatians he says that his teachings were mainly derived from his personal revelations of divine and not taught by any human or angel. Robert Price thinks that such contradictions shouldn't be there in a corpus if it was claimed to be written by only one man so he concludes that Marcion wrote Galatians.

What I believe is that instead of Marcion writing Galatians it is more likely that the sentinels of the Catholic church edited Corinthians to make it appear more mainstream and made it leaning towards their own dogmatic beliefs. Suppressing the truth that the relationship between Paul and the church at Jeruasalem was not smooth and suppressing the portrayal of a zeolot anti-Semitic Paul who used to accuse them straight on their faces.

The last idea of Paul being Simon Magus is ridiculous because:

• Paul was a tent maker while Simon was a sorcerer.
• Paul was born and brought up in Tarsus while Simon was from Gitta, a village in Samaria.
• Paul loved the Gentiles and his mission was directed towards the Gentiles but we have no evidence to prove that Simon had any interests in converting and persuading the Gentiles to the ministry of Jesus. Paul's division of teaching one thing to the Jews and another to the Gentiles appears as early as in Romans.
• Paul displayed sensitivity towards a wide range of complex issues but Simon lacked any such sensitivity.
• It was Saul who was under the tutelage of the great Gamaliel and not Simon.
• It was Saul who was struck blind fold on his road to Damascus and not Simon.
• It was Paul who held a Roman citizenship and could fluently read and write Greek and not Simon.

Marcion may have indeed been the first person to collect the different Pauline letters and showed the value of them to the world and his polemic indeed triggered his rivals to establish a different canon of their own by editing and adding verses and by forging new Gospels in the name of Paul which suited to their own agendas. Well if not Marcion I am damn sure Valentinians would have collected and compiled the Pauline Corpus irrespective of whether Marcion collected it or not because no one on earth loved Paul so much other than the Valentinians. Even the Gospel of John has gone through a series of successive editions before making it to the biblical canon of the Catholics because there are many verses in them which are offensive to the Gnostics and equally there are anti-Semitic verses in it which goes to the extreme supporting Gnosticism in full force. All this shows that the New Testament as we have today is not the same version as people saw it two thousand years ago.

The real historical Paul was never really like the Paul of the Catholics as we know today. He was a zealot anti-Semite and more of a Valentinian than a Catholic.

The Psychic Jesus vs the Pneumatic Christ

"They (Valentinians) confess with their mouth that they believe in one Lord Jesus Christ but in their minds and hearts they divide him".

- Irenaeus

Valentinians indeed believed in two different Jesus Christs. A psychic one sent by the Demiurge, Jehovah, the God of the Jews and a pneumatic one sent by the un-knowable Holy Father from the above Pleroma.

This dual concept of the Valentinians perfectly explains many hard to resolve problems residing at the heart of the Bible. For example -  The Jesus in Matthew teaches his followers to completely observe the Torah Law till the last stroke of the prophecy is fulfilled but Paul completely contradicts this and says people are only saved by grace and apart from the works of the Torah. Christians often go mum when they are asked this specific question. Scriptures cannot contradict each other because they are the true words of a God and it would mean God is a person who makes contradictory claims  which would be blasphemous to assert. 

The above problem can be easily reconciled with the understanding that the Jesus who walked on earth with the twelve apostles was a completely different person from the Jesus who appeared to Saint Paul of Tarsus on his road to Damascus. Without understanding this basic truth the Ebionites and the Jewish Christians run a huge polemic against the innocent Saint Paul and make him a villain of Jesus of Nazareth while the actual truth is that Paul is basing his Gospel on an entirely different Jesus Christ who never ever walked on earth.

Ebionites, Jewish Christians and many famous scholars, thinkers and philosophers of all ages have accused Saint Paul as the first arch-heretic and are angry against him because he never gave any authority or any concerns whatsoever to the Jesus who walked on earth.

The Ebionite Home Page

Paul placed his authority over the authority of Jesus Christ because the Jesus of Paul was completely different from the Jesus who walked on earth with the other twelve apostles. Paul being a pneumatic is only concerned about the pneumatic Christ and his teachings and not with the teachings of the psychic Jesus of Nazareth who walked on earth. When the Bible is interpreted in this way all the problems between Paul and Jesus Christ of Nazareth and all the problems between the Jewish Christians and the Roman Catholic Church will be resolved quite easily.

The Pneumatic Christ flew down from the above Pleroma and entered inside the body of the psychic Jesus at the time of his Baptism and flew out of his body at the time of his crucifixion and was mocking at the Pharisees by sitting on the branch of a tree in not recognizing the one whom they were piercing. When the earthly Jesus was dead after his crucifixion at the hands of the Pharisees and when his dead body was placed inside a tomb and when his soul was already placed at the right hand of Jehovah how could he resurrect all by himself while he was a dead man lying inside lifeless inside a dark tomb? The fact is that it was the pneumatic Christ who raised the body of the earthly Jesus from death and took the psychic and the spiritual elements from his dead body and appeared in the likeness of the flesh to all the apostles including Saint Paul as the post resurrected Christ. The post resurrected Christ was not the same Jesus as the one who walked on earth before he was nailed to the cross. 

Psychic Christ gives salvation to Catholics, Protestants, Jewish Christians and the countless many other sects of Christianity and the Pneumatic Christ on the other hand gives salvation to the pneumatic Gentiles and to the followers of the Gospel of Saint Paul of Tarsus. In this way there is no contradiction between the Gospels of the twelve apostles who followed the teachings of the Psychic Jesus and the Gospel of Paul who followed the teachings of the Pneumatic Christ.

Five compromises which transformed Christianity into a world beater

With out the efforts of Saint Paul Christianity today would have ended up just like an another sect of Judaism confined only to a small state something like Israel. If not for the charismatic envision of Paul and his acquaintance with the Gentiles, in fully understanding the mindsets of the Gentiles, in clearly knowing what they like and what they don't, I'm afraid with out Paul it would have been impossible for the other apostles of Jesus to gain Gentile converts.

1. Gentile converts need not have to follow the Laws of the Old Testament. 

No Gentile would have converted to Christianity if Christians had enforced strict Jewish Laws on the Gentile souls because the whole concept of a divine law which human beings have to strictly follow to avoid a God's wrath was an alien concept to them and they would have never liked it at all.

2. Gentile converts need not have to undergo circumcision.

If the Jewish Christians just like Saint Peter had insisted that even Gentiles must undergo circumcision in order to become Christians I am sure Gentiles would have distanced themselves from Christianity.

3. Heavenly redemption by ascension

Every Gentiles eyes and ears would have lit up when Paul says this in Corinthians because Gentiles loved apocalyptic literature and ascension to various heavens.

I know a man in Christ who fourteen years ago-- whether in the body I do not know, or out of the body I do not know, God knows-- such a man was caught up to the third heaven. (2 Corinthians 12:2)

4. Christianity as a mystery religion.

Gentiles loved those religions having a mystery surrounding them and many Gentiles of that time were initiated into Dionysian, Orphic, Eleusinian, Osiris and Mithraic mysteries. Paul by transforming the human Jesus into a heavenly father preached his Gospel with a salvation theme similar to the mystery religions and guess what Gentiles loved his Gospel more than anything else.

5. Jesus as the first born God.

No Gentile would have worshiped a human as God or in other words no Gentile would have worshiped Jesus if he was just a human being without giving salvation to the Gentiles in return no matter how divine his parables were or no matter what miracles he made. Paul very well knew this hence he established Jesus as the first born God just as the pagan sun god Helios-Mithras.

One can see that in all the five points which led to the success of Christianity Paul's influence is punched on every one of them.

Saint Paul, the arch-enemy of the resurrection of the flesh

     By Valentin de Boulogne - Blaffer Foundation Collection, Houston, TX.

Saint Paul was never really a part of the orthodox church. According to the Apostolic creed of the Catholics the doctrine of the resurrection of the flesh is very important to their belief in Christ.

"I believe in . . . the forgiveness of sins, the resurrection of the flesh. Amen" (Old Roman Symbol [A.D. 125]). 

- Apostle creed

But did Saint Paul ever believed in the resurrection of the flesh? No, he did not as these below verses show.

"For what the law could not do, in that it was weak through the flesh, God did: sending His own Son in the likeness of sinful flesh, and for sin, condemned sin in the flesh."

 - Romans 8:3

"Now I say this, brethren, that flesh and blood cannot inherit the kingdom of God; nor does the perishable inherit the imperishable."

1 Corinthians 15:50 

Which agrees with the view in the Gospel of Philip.

"Those who say they will die first and then rise are in error. If they do not first receive the resurrection while they live, when they die they will receive nothing."

 - Gospel of Philip

Paul did not believed in bodily resurrection instead he believed only in spiritual resurrection. If the resurrection of the flesh was so important to the Catholics and if Saint Paul vehemently opposed such a doctrine how could Saint Paul be the first pope and the leader of the Catholic Church? The truth is that he was never ever a part of the orthodox church.

Paul, the self hating Jew also hated the doctrine of the resurrection of the flesh espoused by the three pillars of the church at Jerusalem who were Jesus brother James, Peter and John who did not fully comprehend the message of the Saviour. Paul had a gospel of his own and the zealot pneumatic Charismatic Paul never once compromised on the doctrines of his Gospel because he received his knowledge not from any man or from an another God or angel or from an another mystery cult but he received his knowledge directly from the Christ with in.

After the death of Saint Paul, his arch-enemies who were members of the Catholic church who claimed themselves to be true Christians hijacked his mission and silenced his polemic against them by carefully manipulating his letters and by forging in his name produced one of the vast cover up in human history. Anyone who did not agreed to the Catholics ended up as Gnostics. Finally they dragged him and submerged him into their own cult giving a false impression to the world as though there was no schism inside Christianity. A new false history emerged with a syncretism of Pauline and Peterine theology and the main mission which Paul passionately preached, stood and died for ended with the mass persecution of the Gnostics in the name of the Catholic Inquisition.

Paul the gnostic opponent of Peter, Not an apostle of orthodox Christianity by Gerald Massey

The time has come to separate Saint Paul from the Catholic Church and to reignite a new hope to his pneumatic mission to the Gentiles and to finally spread the true Gospel of the only true Apostle, Saint Paul of Tarsus. No wonder Marcian of Sinope long figured out this truth and split himself up from the false church of the Catholics.

God Became Man that Man Might Become God

The above image was created by Ron Goetz and you can read his full article here which makes a lot of sense. I specifically love this passage from him where he shares his experience of what happened to him after he understood the in depth teachings of Pauline and the Johnian traditions.

I was stopped cold. My accomplishment and goals were, as Paul said of his own in his letter to the Philippians, simply σκυβαλα, skubala, just so much shit. My degrees, my shiny little victories, my goals and aspirations, were nothing. My loss of enthusiasm was “spontaneous and unrehearsed.”

I was reminded of those motivational shutdowns recently when I saw something in Corinthians I hadn’t noticed before. The old way, with laws chiseled in stone, led to death, though it began with such glory that the people of Israel could not bear to look at Moses’ face. On those previous occasions, when I caught a glimpse of the mystery of the new covenant, the glory was unbearable.

- Ron Goetz

Arrogance: My problems with the western world

“The Western arrogance of feeling that it has everything to teach others and nothing to learn from them is not just.” 

― Martin Luther King Jr., The Autobiography of Martin Luther King, Jr.

Martin is right here because when I was discussing esoteric concepts which most westerners have no knowledge of one of the person immediately threw at me a rhetoric question asking "You're educating us?" which echoes with what Martin said above. Either the person was extremely jealous of me that I knew more on this subject compared to all of them put together or he was extremely arrogant and did not wanted to learn anything from an easterner.

God hates arrogance and I am a believer in God which in turn makes me hate all those people who are arrogant. Since the person cannot be separated from his arrogance one has to inevitably attack the person to teach them a lesson and to bring them back on the path of humility and righteousness.

Another problem with the western world is their cultural misappropriation of Yoga. According to them Yoga is just a stretch, one of them said, "We just practice Yoga and we don't give a damn fuck about its spiritual nature, we are not indoctrinated by anything." which contradicts with loads of evidence that Yoga is more than just a stretch and actually it is a pagan ritual practice to unify oneself with the pagan Sun God despite this blatant fact they continue to abuse the roots of Yoga and the Sun God while taking all the benefits from him. Well, what shall we say to this kind of arrogance? Mind you if there is ever a reason for the next world war it could be for this reason, it will be for the War on Yoga. Its real and its coming.

Western Arrogance and Decline

The world’s not been this dangerous for 30 years and the West’s arrogance is to blame writes DOMINIC SANDBROOK

The Arrogance of Scientism

Just as evil should be fought with evil even arrogance should be fought with arrogance. We have to believe that the western world can be beaten and believe that they can be easily brought to their knees just as Jehovah wanted to see the Egyptian Pharaoh on his knees because they are ordinary men and women like us and are no special as they often boast and behave themselves to be. As long as the western world does not believe that all knowledge has come down to us from God and give up Intellectual property rights and their pride in having discovered technology it will never win the grace of God and the wrath of God will be surely on its head. 

The root culprit for this isolation from other cultures and this kind of mindless arrogance is not due to their wealth, science or even militant atheism. The main culprit for the current state of the western world is the Roman Catholic Church and its other orthodox Christian offshoots. Majority of the westerners just don't like to even read any other religious scripture other than the Bible because according to them anything which is not from the Bible has come from the Devil. Bible is not the only religious scripture in the world. If you do not even make an attempt to read the literature of other people how can you even understand their values, culture or even appreciate it for that matter. Its not that other cultures are incompatible with the western world it is the western people who with their arrogant mindset are intolerant of other cultures. This kind of attitude and cultural isolation to demonize other cultures is the prime culture which the western world has learnt itself from Catholicism and its ilks.

Its shocking to believe that they claim themselves to be Christians and yet behave so arrogantly which is so unlike of Saint Paul and Jesus Christ. If Saint Paul if by any chance was teleported to two thousand years ahead in future which is the present time now since the era of Saint Paul he surely would have been saddened seeing the arrogance of his fellow Christians and would have immediately started a polemic campaign against the Roman Catholic Church in having hijacked and corrupted his true teachings. As long as Saint Paul is falsely associated to the Roman Catholic Church his true legacy will never be known to people. Catholicism is the most ridiculous of all religions in having combined elements from both Peterine Christianity and Pauline Christianity into an incoherent whole which were poles apart from one another at the time of early Christianity. Saint Paul would have been devastated seeing that the church which he established is actually preaching and spreading a good news which is very different from the one he intended to spread.

Why is church attendance is declining and atheism is growing in the west? The Roman Catholic Church has utterly failed to bring back atheists into Christianity. In fact its ridiculous nature is pushing many people to convert to atheism instead and with no God in their lives its quite easy for the evil archons to enamour them with worldly pleasures and make them arrogant and lead them to a sinful life. The problem of the western world is not due to lack of good political leaders who have a stiff backbone rather it is due to the lack of knowledge in the matters of the divine.

 Look who have the highest retention rates and this says it all.

Hindus, Muslims and Jews Have Highest Retention Rates

The mystic of Tarsus and the pagan mystery cults

Was Saint Paul influenced by the pagan mystery religions? For me, this is a billion dollar question and the very foundation of Christianity and of its followers depend on it.

St Paul in the early 20th century history of religions. “The mystic of Tarsus”and the pagan mystery cults. After the correspondence of Franz Cumont and Alfred Loisy

As I long argued that Christianity is a mystery religion of Valentinian Christians similarly both these scholars agree with me that Christianity itself became a mystery religion in the hands of Saint Paul. But where they differ from my view is that they believe Paul either unconsciously or deliberately borrowed Pagan doctrines into his form of theology while I maintain that Paul truly received the Pleromic revelation from the Pneumatic Christ and based his doctrines solely from the revelation that he received from the Pneumatic Christ.

The reason why I hold such a view is that Saint Paul knew about the highest revelation of all the mysteries. Saint Paul seems to know more about the deity of Mithras than Julian the Emperor himself who self-proclaimed himself to be initiated into the mystery of Mithraism. Even Julian was aware of the calibre of Saint Paul but he spoke negatively against him because he was irritated and annoyed by the literal interpretation of the Bible enforced upon him by his orthodox Christian teachers when he was young. Julian himself says that Saint Paul surpassed every magician of every place and of every time but accuses him of being a polypus who changes his colour according to circumstances like the polypus changes its colour to match its rocks.

But that from the beginning God cared only for the Jews and that He chose them out as his portion, has been clearly asserted not only by Moses and Jesus but by Paul as well; though in Paul's case this is strange. For according to circumstances he keeps changing his views about God, as the polypus changes its colours to match the rocks, and now he insists that the Jews alone are God's portion, and then again, when he is trying to persuade the Hellenes to take sides with him, he says : "Do not think that he is the God of Jews only, but also of Gentiles : yea of Gentiles also."  Therefore it is fair to ask of Paul why God, if he was not the God of the Jews only but also of the Gentiles, sent the blessed gift of prophecy to the Jews in abundance and gave them Moses and the oil of anointing, and the prophets and the law and the incredible and monstrous elements in their myths? For you hear them crying aloud: "Man did eat angels' food." And finally God sent unto them Jesus also, but unto us no prophet, no oil of anointing, no teacher, no herald to announce his love for man which should one day, though late, reach even unto us also. Nay he even looked on for myriads, or if you prefer, for thousands of years, while men in extreme ignorance served idols, as you call them, from where the sun rises to where he sets, yes and from North to South, save only that |345 little tribe which less than two thousand years before had settled in one part of Palestine. For if he is the God of all of us alike, and the creator of all, why did he neglect us? Wherefore it is natural to think that the God of the Hebrews was not the begetter of the whole universe with lordship over the Avhole, but rather, as I said before, that he is confined within limits, and that since his empire has bounds we must conceive of him as only one of the crowd of other gods. Then are we to pay further heed to you because you or one of your stock imagined the God of the universe, though in any case you attained only to a bare conception of Him? Is not all this partiality? God, you say, is a jealous God. But why is he so jealous, even avenging the sins of the fathers on the children?

- Julian, Against the Galileans

Julian is entirely ignorant of the Valentinian tradition whose leader was Saint Paul of Tarsus. Julian though knew that there were hidden secret teachings associated to stories in the Bible was completely ignorant about the esoteric teachings of Saint Paul and as such none of his criticisms against Saint Paul hold now because we now know that Saint Paul was a gnostic and held beliefs contradictory to the Roman Catholic Church.

But the problem still remains how can Saint Paul who was a convert of Jesus Christ knew more about the mystery cults and the deity and the doctrines of Mithras compared to emperors like Julian who were fully initiated into the mystery of Mithraism and yet looked puny in front of a giant like Saint Paul when it comes to the pagan mystery religions. May be his birth place Tarsus might have had a huge influence on Saint Paul's thinking but still how did he figured out the highest esoteric truth of Mithraism which only the worshippers of Mithras can know.

This problem cannot be solved without taking some extreme positions like either Saint Paul was a priest of Mithras as some of his detractors claimed or he truly received the highest revelation from Christ himself. The former view seems absurd to me because why would a priest of Mithras hide the divinity of Mithras and proclaim Jesus Christ as the first-begotten in place of him.

Its true that the salvation preached by Saint Paul is identical to the salvation that we see in the mystery cults but the reason for that similarity is not because Saint Paul intentionally borrowed pagan elements into his doctrines which as I have shown above is a charge if we are making on Saint Paul we have to admit that he was a priest of Mithras because the kind of doctrines espoused by Saint Paul is not something like how a nut-job can just plagiarize blindly someone's else idea because the pagan mysteries requires one to participate and take part in the rituals to fully understand the mystery behind them and Saint Paul does in no way look like an outside copy cat of pagan mystery cults in fact he looks like someone who has attained the highest mastery of Mithraism.

If we deny the view that Saint Paul was a priest of Mithras which is very unlikely and absurd to believe then how can we account for the similarities between the Pauline doctrine of salvation and the salvation of the pagan mystery cults and other such similarities. The answer to that question is my belief that the Pneumatic Christ or the post-resurrected Christ was sent by none other than King Helios-Mithras himself, the unknowable Holy Father of the Gnostics.

This is the reason why Pauline Christianity is so similar to the pagan mystery cults. It is not because Paul borrowed from it but instead it is because the post-resurrected Christ was actually the son of King Helios-Mithras. There is no wonder why Saint Paul knew so much about Mithraism compared to the fellow initiates of Mithraism.

According to Valentinianism there are two Christs a psychic one at the Kenoma and a pneumatic one at the Pleroma, the psychic Christ was sent by Jehovah, the god of the Old Testament and the god of the Jews, also known as the Demiurge while the pneumatic Christ was sent by King Helios-Mithras, the god of the New Testament and the god of the Gentiles, also known as the unknowable Father of the Gnostics or the representation of the GOOD form according to Plato.

Catholics should abandon the doctrine of Trinity

This is an another example of the hypocrisy of the Roman Catholic Church. Their utter foolishness in not recognizing that the doctrine of Trinity is a Gnostic doctrine. What kind of an orthodox church chooses a Gnostic doctrine as their foundational belief system and at the same time charge these same Gnostics for heresy when they themselves are believing in a Gnostic doctrine? Are they so blind or the God of this age has made them blind?

Father, Son and the Holy Spirit

Holy Spirit here actually represents the feminine goddess. In Valentinianism the Holy Father is androgynous, he is both male and female. In the psychic world the bride of Jesus Christ is Mary Magdalene who represent the Holy Spirit.

"Jesus Christ used to often kiss Mary Magdalene on her mouth."

- Gospel of Philip

How can these three individual distinct persons, the Holy Father, the Son (Jesus Christ) and the Holy Spirit (Sophia) can be one and the same thing? Mary Magdalene was Jesus Christ's companion in the psychic world. Its quite clear that these three persons are distinct individual beings and at the same time they are basically one and the same God. This can only be understood through Valentinian Monism.

Trinity is a disguised form of the doctrine of Emanationism.

The doctrine of Trinity indirectly implies Emanationism. The Father emanated the Son and the Holy Spirit which is in direct opposition to the creationism of Catholicism.

Marcellus of Ancyra warned the church fathers of the Nicene Creed to abandon the doctrine of Trinity as it was a Gnostic heresy.

In the fourth-century, Marcellus of Ancyra declared that the idea of the Godhead existing as three hypostases (hidden spiritual realities) came from Plato through the teachings of Valentinus, who is quoted as teaching that God is three hypostases and three prosopa (persons) called the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit: 

"Now with the heresy of the Ariomaniacs, which has corrupted the Church of God... These then teach three hypostases, just as Valentinus the heresiarch first invented in the book entitled by him 'On the Three Natures'. For he was the first to invent three hypostases and three persons of the Father, Son and Holy Spirit, and he is discovered to have filched this from Hermes and Plato." 

Since Valentinus had used the term hypostases, his name came up in the Arian disputes in the fourth century. Marcellus of Ancyra, who was a staunch opponent of Arianism but also denounced the belief in God existing in three hypostases as heretical, and was later condemned for his views, attacked his opponents (On the Holy Church, 9) by linking them to Valentinus: 

"Valentinus, the leader of a sect, was the first to devise the notion of three subsistent entities (hypostases), in a work that he entitled On the Three Natures. For, he devised the notion of three subsistent entities and three persons — father, son, and holy spirit."

It should be noted that the Nag Hammadi library Sethian text Trimorphic Protennoia identifies Gnosticism as professing Father, Son and feminine wisdom Sophia or as Professor John D. Turner denotes, God the Father, Sophia the Mother, and Logos the Son.

Muslims are right in accusing Christians for practising Polytheism and Idolatry. 
  
The doctrine of trinity is nothing but Emanationism in a disguised form and there by, by believing in three distinct individual persons and by attributing a feminine companion to God the charge of the Muslims is absolutely right on Christians as it goes entirely against the will of their God Jehovah. We can safely conclude that Jehovah is not representing the Holy Father in the doctrine of Trinity as Saint Paul was a Gnostic and believed in a higher god above him who was residing inside the Pleroma.

The worship of Jesus Christ by nailing him to a cross and there by making an idol of him also goes against the will of their God Jehovah. Either Catholics should admit that they no longer believe in Jehovah, the God of the Old Testament or abandon the Gnostic doctrine of Trinity. I hate hypocrites.

Romans 9: Election, Predestination and Free Will

This post is a continuation of the post 'God is both a murderer and a saviour'. I actually wanted to make this post as part-II of "God is both a murderer and a saviour' but retracted from it as I thought the above title was better suited for this post even though the topic was on the similar lines.

I didn't knew that Saint Paul has already touched on this topic in Romans and that it is an hotly debated topic among Christian circles as the below sources show.

Is God’s Grace Arbitrary?

Lesson 59: Is God Unfair? (Romans 9:14-18)

Romans: God is Not Fair, Part 2 (Romans 9 – 11)
Calvinism: What does the Bible really say?

Romans 9 and Predestination

The Argument of Romans 9:14-16 God's Purpose According To Election: Paul's Argument in Romans 9 

Christians should be grateful to Saint Paul since they have such a great doctor to guide them and always places them closer to truth compared to the people of other religions who don't have charismatic people like Saint Paul to guide them to truth. As you can see from the above links this is an hotly debated subject among Christian circles and it upsets a lot of people and others rest in peace by not questioning too much believing that their finite minds cannot possibly understand the works of God.

We can safely conclude from my previous post "God is both a murderer and a Saviour" that our salvation is not in our hands. I think we (Christians and myself) including Saint Paul can all agree on this one single point. Now the problem is does God elects few people and rejects some based only on his personal whim? Does he play dice while choosing his elect or does he say in pin safety pin in pin out and selects the elect? LOL. Isn't this unfair on the part of God? If God is doing that then obviously he must be a malevolent bully but read on.

The answer is a clear NO. There is a logic behind his election. When God said I love Jacob and not Esau he is not literally loving Jacob and hating Esau instead he is only loving the pneumatic nature of Jacob and rejecting the psychic nature of Esau. Now was it preordained that Jacob will be born with a pneumatic nature and Esau will be born with a psychic one? Yes, it was predestined like that. Why did God gave a pneumatic heart to Jacob and a psychic one to Esau? Is God's grace arbitrary? Is God being unfair here? Is he doing partiality to the soul of Esau? 

The answer is again a clear NO. Well these three qualities Pneumatic, Psychic and Hylic was pre-existent inside the Pleroma from the very beginning, all these three qualities were there inside the Pleroma in an un-manifested state before the creation i.e. even before the manifestation of the cosmos. Now since the unknowable Holy Father of the Pleroma did not gave full knowledge to his emanated Aeons and retained their perfection with in himself they all fell into ignorance and ignorance gave rise to error and sin which in turn led to the tripartite division of human beings according to their respective qualities which is Pneumatic, Psychic and Hylic.

Now what we have to understand is that a soul's nature will not be fixed through out its journey instead God prepares those souls and molds them for a pneumatic nature. Now the only way to receive redemption is through the grace of God which is provided only when the Holy Spirit gives permission to release the soul from the bondage of this world. So when God elected Jacob and rejected Esau its not that Esau was rejected forever from ever returning to his Kingdom instead it only means that Jacob's time to return had come now and Esau's soul is still being prepared and molded to receive a pneumatic heart in the future and finally his soul too will receive salvation. All of this is a part of God's divine plan. Saint Paul is right this is his world, this is his body and who are we to question him as to what was in store for us when none of the things belongs to us in the first place.

All this is for habitation by the Lord, whatsoever is individual universe of movement in the universal motion. By that renounced thou shouldst enjoy; lust not after any man’s possession.

 - Isha Upanishad, Verse 1

Roman Catholic - The most embarrassed church

Roman Catholic church is neither established on the principles of Jesus Christ nor it adheres to the teachings of Saint Paul of Tarsus instead it seems to be a political organization to control the masses into believing that only they have the sole authority over the God's power on earth and they are the only sole way to attain human salvation.

No wonder why they murdered and silenced the Gnostics because their gnosis of the Father was a huge threat to their whole agenda. If people knew that human salvation can be attained through revelation and by doing sacraments alone then the power of Church on earth would become mute.

What is Gospel of John and the Pauline Epistles doing in the biblical canon of the Catholics?

This is the biggest embarrassment to the Roman Catholic Church and no wonder why they go mum by not answering this question or react to it strongly and aggressively towards those who raise this topic.

The simple truth is that neither the Gospel of John nor the Pauline Epistles is in accordance with the apostolic creed of the Catholics as these below sources show.

Gnostic enigmas in the Gospel of John
Gospel of John
Gnostic exegesis of Pauline Letters

A big embarrassment to the members of the Nicene creed, the councils of the Roman Catholic Church and to Irenaeus and Tertullian who failed to differentiate between those Gospels which were the true words of God from the rest.

Either their apostolic creed is fundamentally flawed or they have included the wrong Gospels as part of their biblical canon. A small revision to exclude the fourth Gospel and the Pauline corpus from their biblical canon and sticking their heads only onto the Synoptic Gospels and the Book of Revelation would make more sense to their arrogant religion rather than falsely believing that Gospel of John and Saint Paul of Tarsus is on their side.

Otherwise it really makes a mockery of their apostolic creed and the whole world is laughing at their mode of denial.

Christians - whether you follow the Law or not follow it you simply cannot sin.

There are three salvation paths in Christianity, which are:

1. Strictly follow the Law of Moses to the last word. (Ex: Jewish Christians)

2. Accept Jesus Christ as your saviour, have blind faith in him and receive salvation by doing good deeds. (Ex: Catholics, Protestants, Mormons etc)

3. Abandon the Law, put your old self to death and live your new life in Christ and receive salvation through his grace and not by doing works of the Law. (Ex: Valentinian Christians)

The latter Christians (Valentinian) are preordained to be saved and the former two category of Christians will be judged according to the works of the Law and Faith respectively. So in the end all three category of Christians who have succeeded in their respective paths will receive the salvation in the end with the only difference being some will receive a higher salvation than others while others will receive a lower one. (Excerpt of Theodotus).

What many Christians, irrespective of the sect they belong to are not realizing is that irrespective of which ever salvation path you take the basic message is simply you cannot sin as a Christian.

Just because you have abandon the Law and have become free from all bondage and death it doesn't necessarily mean that you can start sinning now as much as you want, believing that Christ is going to forgive all your sins anyway as he has promised us having no responsibility on your shoulders what so ever. No, The Gospel of Philip is quite clear that,

Those who think that they will die first and then raise are in error if they do not receive the resurrection while they live when they die they receive nothing.

- Gospel of Philip

The third salvation path preached by the great doctor of the church Saint Paul of Tarsus is not an easy path and his letters were not definitely written to be read by every nut job in the world. Saint Paul wrote his letters to matured Christians who were already sincere followers of Christ and he wanted to raise them to a all new higher level by preaching the good news of his Gospel. Not understanding this, atheists and many of his detractors seeing the contradictions between his teachings and the teachings of Jesus Christ start yelling to the world that Saint Paul was a false apostle and start doubting him.

Jesus Christ gave different teachings to different people according to the measure of faith one possessed with in himself. Atheists and unstable men not understanding this come to the stubborn conclusion that scriptures are contradictory and declare that Saint Paul was a false apostle. They cannot see beyond those contradictions the beautiful harmony of the truth that both Paul's teachings and Jesus teachings convey the same message since they lack wisdom which was warned by Simon Peter long time ago.

 Bear in mind that our Lord’s patience means salvation, just as our dear brother Paul also wrote you with the wisdom that God gave him. He writes the same way in all his letters, speaking in them of these matters. His letters contain some things that are hard to understand, which ignorant and unstable people distort, as they do the other Scriptures, to their own destruction.

- II Peter 3:15-16

Saint Paul won out against Simon Peter and Jesus's brother, James because Gentile Christians were quickly able to grasp his message and soon his version of Christianity spread out like wild fire and conquered the whole world. If Jewish Christians and atheists are jealous of it and can not tolerate the success of Saint Paul and if you want to detract him by saying the worst things about him, you can go ahead and do it by all means and I'll leave the judgement to Christ.

The third path which is salvation through grace compels one to give up all forms of boasting and lead a simple life in Christ. It sounds easy but implementing it is hard and it is one of the reasons why such a character has to come by nature and not by doing good deeds i.e. one needs to have a pure heart by nature to be above sin and lead a sinless existence. Experience shows that the other two paths are far more easier to follow than this one and it is definitely not for everyone.

So whichever category you fall into as a Christian there can be no excuse for your sins and there is no free lunch for receiving redemption, anyone who is believing otherwise is basically destroying himself.

Localization of the Pleroma: Where do the Gnostics stand?

If anyone had carefully read my posts I repeatedly assert that Pleroma has a local existence, what do I mean by that? Well, if you have read "On the meaning of the Pleroma" by J.B Lightfoot you would probably get an idea as to from where I'm coming from. I did gave a link in an another post to this work but I think most of them do not care to read it.

Thanks to J.B Lightfoot,

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

On the meaning of the word Pleroma

"When we turn from Catholic Christianity to the Gnostic sects we find this term used, though (with one important exception) not in great frequency. Probably however, if the writings of the earlier Gnostics had been preserved, we should have found that it occupied a more important place than at present appears. One class of early Gnostics separated the spiritual being Christ from the man Jesus ; they supposed that the Christ entered Jesus at the time of His baptism and left him at the moment of His crucifixion. Thus the Christ was neither born as a man nor suffered as a man. In this way they obviated the difficulty, insuperable to the Gnostic mind, of conceiving the connexion between the highest spiritual agency and gross corporeal matter, which was involved in the Catholic doctrine of the Incarnation and Passion, and which Gnostics of another type more effectually set aside by the theory of docetism, i.e. by assuming that the human body of our Lord was only a phantom body and not real flesh and blood.

Irenaeus represents the former class as teaching that 'Jesus was the receptacle of the Christ', and that the Christ 'descended upon him from heaven in the form of a dove and after He had declared (to mankind) the nameless Father, entered (again) into the pleroma imperceptibly and invisibly. Here no names are given. But in another passage he ascribes precisely the same doctrine, without however naming the pleroma, to Cerinthus. And in a third passage, which links together the other two, this same father, after mentioning this heresiarch, again alludes to the doctrine which maintained that the Christ, having descended on Jesus at his baptism, 'flew back again into His own pleroma' In this last passage indeed the opinions of Cerinthus are mentioned in connexion with those of other Gnostics, more especially the Valentinians, so that we cannot with any certainty attribute this expression to Cerinthus himself. But in the first passage the unnamed heretics who maintained this return of the Christ 'into the pleroma are expressly distinguished from the Valentinians ; and presumably therefore the allusion is to the Cerinthians, to whom the doctrine, though not the expression, is ascribed in the second passage. Thus there seems to be sufficient reason Connexion for attributing the use of the term to Cerinthus This indeed is probable of this use on other grounds. The term pleroma, we may presume, was common to St Paul and the Colossian heretics whom he controverts. To both alike it conveyed the same idea, the totality of the divine powers or attributes or Colossiaa agencies or manifestations. But after this the divergence begins. The heretics, maintained that a single divine power, a fraction of the pleroma, resided in our Lord : the Apostle urges on the contrary, that the whole pleroma has its abode in Him-. The doctrine of Cerinthus was a development of the Colossian heresy, as I have endeavoured to show above. He would therefore inherit the term pleroma from it. At the same time he seems to have given a poetical colouring to his doctrine, and so doing to have treated the pleroma as a locality, a higher spiritual region, from which this divine power, typified by the dove-like form, issued forth as on wings, and to which, taking flight again, it reascended before the Passion. If so, his language would prepare the way for the still more elaborate poetic imagery of the Valentinians, in which the pleroma, conceived as a locality, a region, an abode of the divine powers, is conspicuous.

The attitude of later Gnostics towards this term is widely divergent. The term The word is not, so far as I am aware, once mentioned in connexion with avoided by the system of Basilides. Indeed the nomenclature of this heresiarch, longs to a wholly different type ; and, as he altogether repudiated the doctrine of emanations*, it is not probable that he would have any fondness for a term which was almost inextricably entangled with this doctrine.

On the other hand with Valentinus and the Valentinians the doctrine of the pleroma was the very key-stone of their system; and, since at first in sight it is somewhat difficult to connect their use of the term with St Paul's, a few words on this subject may not be out of place.

Valentinus then dressed his system in a poetic imagery not unlike the myths of his master Plato. But a myth or story involves action, and action requires a scene of action. Hence the mysteries of theology and cosmogony and redemption call for a topographical representation, and the pleroraa appears not as an abstract idea, but as a locality.

Topogra- The Valentinian system accordingly maps out the universe of things great regions, called respectively the pleroma and the kenoma, the 'fulness' and the 'void'. From a Christian point of view these may be described as the kingdoms of light and of darkness respectively. From Antithesis the side of Platonism, they are the regions of real and of phenomenal of pleroma existences — the world of eternal archetypes or ideas, and the world of material and sensible things. The identification of these two antitheses was rendered easy for the Gnostic ; because with him knowledge was one with morality and with salvation, and because also matter was absolutely bound up with evil. It is difficult to say whether the Platonism or the Christianity predominates in the Valentinian theology ; but the former at all events is especially prominent in their conception of the relations between the pleroma and tlie kenoma. The pleroma is the abode of the AEons, who are thirty in number. These AEons are successive emanations, of which the first pair sprang immediately from the pre-existent Bythus or Depth. This Bythus is deity in itself, the absolute first principle, as the name suggests ; the profound, unfathomable, limitless, of whom or of which nothing can be predicated and nothing known. Here again we have something like a local representation. The AEons or emanations are plainly the attributes and energies of deity ; they are, or they comprise, the eternal ideas or archetypes of the Platonic philosophy. In short they are deity relative, deity under self-imposed limitations, deity derived and divided up, as it were, so as at length to be conceivable.

The topographical relation of Bythus to the derived AEons was differently given in different developments of the Valentinian teaching. According to one representation he was outside the pleroma; others placed his abode within it, but even in this case he was separated from the rest by Horus {"Opos), a personified Boundary or Fence, whom none, not even the AEons themselves, could pass^ The former mode of representation might be thought to accord better with the imagery, at the same time that it is more accurate if regarded as the embodiment of a philosophical conception. Nevertheless the latter was the favourite mode of delineation; and it had at least this recommendation, that it combined in one all that is real, as opposed to all that is phenomenal. In this pleroma every existence which is supra-sensual and therefore true has its abode.

Separated from this celestial region by Horus, another Horus or Kerwma, Boundary, which, or who, like the former is impassable, lies the ' kenoma ' the region or void '—the kingdom of this world, the region of matter and material things, the land of shadow and darkness Here is the empire of the Demiurge or Creator, who is not a celestial Man at all, but was born in this very void over which he reigns. Here reside all those phenomenal, deceptive, transitory things, of which the eternal counterparts are found only in the pleroma.

It is in this antithesis that the Platonism of the Valentinian theory Platonism reaches its climax. All things are set off one against another in these two of this antithesis.

The swan on still St Mary's lake

Floats double, swan and shadow.

Not only have the thirty AEons their terrestrial counterparts; but their subdivisions also are represented in this lower region. The kenoma too has its ogdoad, its decad, its dodecad, like the pleroma. There is one Sophia in the supra-mundane region, and another in the mundane; there is one Christ who redeems the AEons in the spiritual world, and a second Christ who redeems mankind, or rather a portion of mankind, in the sensible world. There is an Aeon Man and another Aeon Ecclesia in the celestial kingdom, the ideal counterparts of the Human Race and the Christian Church in the terrestrial. Even individual men and women, as we shall see presently, have their archetypes in this higher sphere of intelligible being.

The localisation of the plerOma carried out in detail. 

The topographical conception of the pleroma moreover is carried out in the details of the imagery. The second Sophia, called also Achamoth, is the desire, the offspring, of her elder namesake, separated from her mother, cast out of the pleroma, and left ' stranded ' in the void beyond^, being prevented from returning by the inexorable Horus who guards the frontier of the supra-mundane kingdom. The second Christ — a being compounded of elements contributed by all the AEons— was sent down from the pleroma, first of all at the eve of creation to infuse something like order and to provide for a spiritual element in this lower world ; and secondly, when He united Himself with the man Jesus for the sake of redeeming those who were capable of redemption^. At the end of all things Sophia Achamoth, and with her the spiritual portion of mankind, shall be redeemed and received up into the pleroma, while the psychical portion will be left outside to form another kingdom under the dominion of their father the Demiurge. This redemption and ascension of Achamoth (by a perversion of a scriptural image) was represented as her espousals with the Saviour, the second Christ; and the pleroma, the scene of this happy union, was called the bridal-chamber Indeed the localisation of the pleroma is as complete as language can make it. The constant repetition of the words * within * and 'without', 'above' and 'beneath', in the development of this philosophical and religious myth still further impresses this local sense on the term^.

In this topographical representation the connexion of meaning in the word pleroma as employed by St Paul and by Valentinus respectively seems at first sight to be entirely lost. When we read of the contrast between the pleroma and the kenoma, the fullness and the void, we are naturally reminded of the plenum and the vacuum of physical speculations. The sense of pleroma, as expressing completeness and so denoting the aggregate or totality of the Divine powers, seems altogether to have disappeared. But in fact this antithesis of Keuwfia was, so far as we can make out, a mere afterthought, and appears to have been borrowed, as Irenaeus states, from the physical theories of Democritus and Epicurus^. It would naturally suggest itself both because the opposition of ifK-qpr^s and K€vos was obvious, and because the word Kevcofia materially assisted the imagery as a description of the kingdom of waste and shadow. But in itself it is a false antithesis. The true antithesis appears in another, and borrowed probably an earlier, term used to describe the mundane kingdom.

In this earlier representation, which there is good reason for ascribing to Valentinus himself, it is called not Kevafia ' the void', * the deficiency, incompleteness '1. Moreover the common phraseology of this appears in Valentinian schools shows that the idea suggested by this opposition to theirs was not the original idea of the term. They speak of the whole aggregate of the AEons. And this (making allowance for the personification of the Aeons) corresponds exactly to its use in St Paul.

Again the teaching of the Valentinian schools supplies other uses which serve to illustrate its meaning. Not only does the supra-mundane kingdom as a whole bear this name, but each separate AEon, of which that shown kingdom is the aggregation, is likewise called a pleroraa This designation is given to an AEon, because it is the fullness, the perfection, of which its mundane counterpart is only a shadow and defective copy. Nor does the narrowing of the term stop here. There likewise dwells in this higher region a pleroma, or eternal archetype, not only of every comprehensive mundane power, but of each individual man; and to wed himself with this heavenly partner, this Divine ideal of himself, must be the study of his life. The profound moral significance which underlies the exaggerated Platonism and perverse exegesis of this conception will be at once apparent.

But the manner in which the theory was carried out is curiously illustrated by the commentary of the Valentinian Heracleon on our Lord's discourse with the Samaritan woman"*. This woman, such is his explanation, belongs to the spiritual portion of mankind. But she had had six husbands, or in other words she laid entangled herself with the material world, had defiled herself with sensuous things. The husband however, whom she now has, is not her husband; herein she has spoken rightly: the Saviour in fact means 'her partner from the pleroma'. Hence she is bidden to go and call him ; that is, she must find ' her pleroma, that coming to the Saviour visit him (or it), she may be able to obtain from Him the power and the union and the combination with her pleroma' {rfiv bvvap.iv Koi TTjv evcocriv koI ttjv avaKpacriv rffv Trpbs to irKr^papa avTTjs), * For', adds Heracleon, ' He did not speak of a mundane {KoaptKov) husband when He told her to call him, since He was not ignorant that she had no lawful husband'.

Impossible as it seems to us to reconcile the Valentinian system with the teaching of the Apostles, the Valentinians themselves felt no such difficulty. They intended their philosophy not to supersede or contradict Apostolic doctrine, but to supplement it and to explain it on philosophical principles. Hence the Canon of the Valentinians comprehended the Canon of Catholic Christianity in all its essential parts, though some Valentinian schools at all events supplemented it with Apocryphal writings. More particularly the Gospel of St John and the Epistles to the Colossians and Ephesians were regarded with especial favour; and those passages which speak of the pleroma are quoted more than once in their writings to illustrate their teaching. By isolating a few words from the context and interpreting them wholly Without reference to their setting, and quote they had no difficulty in finding a confirmation of their views, where we see them in only an incongruity or even a contradiction. For instance, their second Christ — the redeemer of the spiritual element in the mundane world — was, views. as we saw, compacted of gifts contributed by all the Aeons of the pleroma. Hence he was called ' the common fruit of the pleroma', ' the fruit of all the pleroma'^, 'the most perfect beauty and constellation of the pleroma; hence also he was designated 'All' (natf) and 'All things' (navTay.

Accordingly, to this second Christ, not to the first, they applied these texts; Col. iii. 11 * And He is all things', Rom. xi. 36 'All things are unto Him and from Him are all things'. Col. ii. 9 ' In Him dwells all the fulness of the Godhead', Ephes. i. 10 ' To gather together in one all things in Christ through God '2. So too they styled him EvdoKrjTos, with a reference to Col. i. 19, because 'all the pleroma was pleased through Him to glorify the Father'^ And inasmuch as this second Christ was according to the Valentinian theory instrumental in the creation of the mundane powers, they quoted, or rather misquoted, as referring to this participation in the work of the Demiurge, the passage Col. i. 16 ' In Him were created all things, visible and invisible, thrones, deities, dominions'*. Indeed it seems clear that these adaptations were not always afterthoughts, but that in several instances at least their nomenclature was originally chosen for the sake of fitting the theory to isolated phrases and expressions in the Apostolic writings, however much it might conflict with the Apostolic doctrine in its main lines°. "

- St.Paul's Epistles to Colossians and to Philemon by J.B LightFoot.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Saint Paul was right, all the pleroma(totality of divine powers or Aeons) of deity(Father) dwells in Christ and form his body and moreover this pleroma has a local existence, it locally exists just as it is said in the Gospel of Thomas - "The kingdom of God is spread out upon earth but men don't see it".

As anyone can see Christ is at the very heart of the doctrine of Valentinian theology it is ridiculous to assert that there is no special place for Christ in Valentinian theology or in gnosticism as a whole. Christ is at the very soul of their doctrine.