click the images to enlarge
To comply with the wishes of vridar
…please make it clear that I may not personally endorse other views on the site or blog where it is posted.
See also “The Great Declaration of Simon Magus” Introduction and Translation by Robert Price at thegodabovegod.com
Ancient Texts and Modern People
JORUNN JACOBSEN BUCKLEY
Good resource for Gnostic literature, in our opinion 🙂
A Gnostic for All Seasons
by Stephan A. Hoeller
Excerpt from the article:
The proposition that the human mind lives in a largely self-created world of illusion from whence only the enlightenment of a kind of Gnosis can rescue it finds powerful analogues in the two great religions of the East, i.e., Hinduism and Buddhism. The following statement from the Upanishads could easily have been written by Valentinus or another Gnostic: “This (world) is God’s Maya, through which he deceives himself.” According to the teachings of Buddha, the world of apparent reality consists of ignorance, impermanence, and the lack of authentic selfhood. Valentinus is in very good company indeed when he establishes the proposition of the wrong system of false reality that can be set aright by the human spirit.
Read full article here:
Archon (Gr. ἄρχων, pl. ἄρχοντες) is a Greek word that means “ruler” or “lord,” frequently used as the title of a specific public office. It is the masculine present participle of the verb stem ἀρχ-, meaning “to rule,” derived from the same root as monarch, hierarchy, and anarchy.
In ancient Greece the chief magistrate in various Greek city states was called Archon. The term was also used throughout Greek history in a more general sense, ranging from “club leader” to “master of the tables” at syssitia.
In Athens a system of nine concurrent Archons evolved, led by three respective remits over the civic, military, and religious affairs of the state: the three office holders being known as the Eponymos archon (Ἐπώνυμος ἄρχων; the “name” ruler, who gave his name to the year in which he held office), the Polemarch (“war ruler”), and the Archon Basileus (“king ruler”). The six others were the Thesmothétai, Judicial Officers. Originally these offices were filled from the wealthier classes by elections every ten years. During this period the eponymous Archon was the chief magistrate, the Polemarch was the head of the armed forces, and the Archon Basileus was responsible for some civic religious arrangements, and for the supervision of some major trials in the law courts. After 683 BC the offices were held for only a single year, and the year was named after the Archōn Epōnymos. (Many ancient calendar systems did not number their years consecutively.)
After 487 BC the archonships were assigned by lot to any citizen and the Polemarch’s military duties were taken over by new class of generals known as stratēgoí. The ten stratēgoí (one per tribe) were elected, and the office of Polemarch was rotated among them on a daily basis. The Polemarch thereafter had only minor religious duties, and the titular headship over the strategoi. The Archon Eponymos remained the titular head of state under democracy, though of much reduced political importance. The Archons were assisted by “junior” archons, called Thesmothétai (Θεσμοθέται “Institutors”). After 457 BC ex-archons were automatically enrolled as life members of the Areopagus, though that assembly was no longer extremely important politically at that time. (See Archons of Athens.)………cont’d at the link
What is a Johannite? Are they representatives of a continuous tradition that began with John the Baptist? Are they instead a group that began at a later date spontaneously as did the Mormons? Are there actually both or several types of Johannites? What do they believe? Do they think that the Baptist was Christ and Jesus was not? Do they believe that they were both Christs? Do they believe that John the Baptist was something more like a prophet or an apostle? Are there a range of different beliefs among different Johannite groups?
In general I think we can define Johannites as people who disagree with the Christian mainstream about the importance of John the Baptist. As to when they began or what they believe we need historical references.
cont’d at the link above
JOHN THE BAPTIZER AND CHRISTIAN ORIGINS.
A RECENT STUDY ON JOHN’S SYMBOLISM.
A DISTINCT ray of light has been cast on the obscure background of Christian origins by Dr. Robert Eisler in a series of detailed studies on the movement and doctrines of John the Baptizer. These studies, with other cognate essays, appeared originally in the pages of The Quest (1909-14), and are now available in book-form in an arresting volume, called Orpheus—the Fisher: Comparative Studies in Orphic and Christian Cult Symbolism.1
By way of introduction and as the most complete contrast to the Mandæan tradition of the Gnostic John, I will set forth in my own way the chief points of these detailed and fully-documented essays in summary fashion. Eisler’s main point of view is that John based his doctrines and practices largely, if not entirely, on the Hebrew scriptures—the Law and the Prophets—of which, he contends, he was a profound knower. The John-movement is thus regarded as a characteristic Jewish prophetical reform founded on absolute faith in the present fulfilment of prior prophecy. Hereby is brought out in the strongest possible manner the Jewish conditioning of John’s preaching and teaching, and this stands in the sharpest contradiction to the p. 2 Mandæan tradition which claims that John was a Gnostic and not a Torah-man, and declares that the Jews could by no means understand him, but on the contrary rejected his revelation and drove out his community.
In Eisler we have a ripe scholar in whom the heredity of Rabbinical lore is so to say innate. He has almost an uncanny flair for biblical texts; it is not too much to say that his knowledge of the religious literature of his people is profound, his acquaintance with oriental sources very extensive and his linguistic accomplishments are enviable. Few are thus better able to enter with sympathy and understanding into the idiosyncrasies and depths of the Jewish mind in the various periods of its development, and thus for the time to live in the prophetical, apocalyptic and rabbinical thought-world of the days of the Baptist and share in its old-time beliefs and hopes and fears. Our exponent is thus an excellent advocate of the theme he sets forth. If his wide-flung net has not caught all the fish of the literary and archæological ocean, he has fished most carefully the stream of John the Baptist tradition, apart from the Mandæan, landed a rich catch and shown others how most fruitfully to set about bringing to the surface things about John which have long been hidden in the depths of a buried past. cont’d at the link
Sabeans, Mandæans and John the Baptist
The Mandaeans often called the “Christians of Saint John’ because they claim to be followers of John the Baptist. They seem to follow an ancient form of Gnosticism, which practices initiation and some rituals that have been said to resemble those of the Freemasons. Their allegiance is to John the Baptist and not at all to Jesus.
Temple of Mysteries
Uploaded on Nov 30, 2010
Talk by Steve Wilson
Steve discusses the followers of John the Baptist. Known as the Mandaens, they still exist to this day. Also includes information on Freemasonry, Templars, Cathars and Gnostics.
Part 2 of 2
Standard YouTube License