Errors Doctrines to be Rejected by Gnostic Christians

Errors Doctrines to be Rejected by Gnostic Christians 

 

Doctrines to be Rejected

(With Explanations Expressed Positively — in italics)

Valentinians and Cathars did not share all what would be classed as the classical Gnostic teachings on the Demiurge, the nature of immortality, and the nature of Christ

 1. We reject that the Bible is only partly the work of inspiration — or if wholly so, contains errors which inspiration has allowed. [The Bible, in its original text, is altogether the work of inspiration, and that God has been the true author of every part of His Word, thereby constituting it infallible — 2Tim. 3:16; 2Pet. 1:19-21.]

 2. We reject that God is three persons. [The doctrine of the trinity being false, it remains that God is a Being of Spirit; the Lord Jesus Christ is His Son, born of the virgin Mary; the Holy Spirit is His power — 1Tim. 2:5; Jn. 1:14; Lk. 24:49.]

To the Cathars, the Holy Trinity is a lie. For the Cathars, Jesus was neither divine nor man. He was a manifestation of the Holy Spirit sent by the good god to show us the way to freedom.

 3. We reject that the Son of God was co-eternal with the Father. [Jesus was begotten of the virgin Mary; he was only “known” beforehand in the mind and purpose of Yahweh from the beginning — Gal. 4:4; Jn. 1:1].

4. We reject that Christ was born with a “free life”. [A “free life” signifies that Christ’s nature was not under Adamic condemnation as is that of all other members of the human race, and that therefore his sacrifice was a substitute for the “lives” of others. However, he needed to obtain redemption himself in order to redeem his “brethren” — Gal 4:4; 1Tim. 2:6; Heb. 9:12.]

We reject the doctrine of docetism

Furthermore, they will say of him that he is unbegotten, though he has been begotten, (that) he does not eat, even though he eats, (that) he does not drink, even though he drinks, (that) he is uncircumcised, though he has been circumcised, (that) he is unfleshly, though he has come in the flesh, (that) he did not come to suffering, <though> he came to suffering, (that) he did not rise from the dead, <though> he arose from the dead. (Melchizedek text from The Nag Hammadi Library)

Odes of Solomon 8:21 

1. And you who were loved in the Beloved, and you who are kept in Him who lives, and you who are saved in Him who was saved.

42:18

1. May we also be saved with You, because You are our Savior.

The Gospel of Philip

Jesus appeared at the Jordan River with the fullness of the kingdom of heaven.
He was born before there was birth.
He was anointed once and was anointed anew.
He who was redeemed redeemed the world. 

 5. We reject that Christ’s nature was immaculate, or that he was of a different nature from other men. [Through his birth he inherited a nature sin-affected, and destined to death, being mortal, as all others — Heb. 2:14.]

Heracleon: Fragments from his
Commentary on the Gospel of John

Fragment 10, on John 1:29 (In John 1:29, “The next day he saw Jesus coming toward him, and said, ‘Behold, the Lamb of God, who takes away the sin of the world!’”) John spoke the words, "Lamb of God" as a prophet, but the words, "who takes away the sin of the world" as more than a prophet. The first expression was spoken with reference to his body, the second with reference to Him who was in that body. The lamb is an imperfect member of the genus of sheep; the same being true of the body as compared with the one that dwells in it. Had he meant to attribute perfection to the body he would have spoken of a ram about to be sacrificed.

 6. We reject that the Holy Spirit is a person distinct from the Father. [The Holy Spirit is the exclusive power which emanates only from God to perform His determination — Lk. 24:49.]

The Holy Spirit is a feminine aspect of god

 7. We reject that man has an immortal soul. [The soul of man defines his being, his life, his existence; and is related to his attitude and emotions. He is wholly mortal, and has no immortal essence hereditarily.]

Heracleon: Fragments from his
Commentary on the Gospel of John

Fragment 40, on John 4:46-53 (In John 4:46, “So he came again to Cana in Galilee, where he had made the water wine. And at Capernaum there was an official whose child was ill.) The official was the Craftsman, for he himself ruled like a king over those under him. Because his domain is small and transitory, he was called an “official,” like a petty princeling who is set over a small kingdom by the universal king. The “child” “in Capernaun” is one who is in the lower part of the Middle (i.e. of animate substance), which lies near the sea, that is, which is linked with matter. The child’s proper person was sick, that is, in a condition not in accordance with the child’s proper nature, in ignorance and sins. (In John 4:47, “When he heard that Jesus had come from Judea to Galilee, he went and begged him to come down and heal his child , for it was at the point of death.”) The words “from Judea to Galilee” mean ‘from the Judea above.’. . . By the words “it was at the point of death,” the teaching of those who claim that the soul is immortal is refuted. In agreement with this is the statement that “the body and soul are destoyed in Hell.” (Matthew 10:28) The soul is not immortal, but is possessed only of a disposition towards salvation, for it is the perishable which puts on imperishability and the mortal which puts on immortality when “its death is swallowed up in victory.” (1 Corinthians 15:54)

 8. We reject that man consciously exists in death. [At death, man ceases to exist in every respect. He has no consciousness in death — Ecc. 3:19; Psa. 49:17-20.]

20 Man that is in honour, and understandeth not, is like the beasts that perish.

The Gospel of Philip 

Ignorance is the mother of [all evil]. Ignorance leads to [death, because] those who come from [ignorance] neither were nor [are] nor will be.

 9. We reject that the wicked will suffer eternal torture in hell. [The wicked are destined to eternal oblivion in the grave, excepting only those of their number who are answerable to God and will be raised to condemnation, to return eternally to the grave. — 2Thes. 1:8-9.]

A child claims the father’s legacy,
but those who inherit the dead are dead.

Heirs to the living are alive
and are heirs to life and death.

The dead are heirs to nothing.

How can the dead inherit?
Yet if the dead inherits the living,
the living won’t die and the dead will survive.

GENTILES, JEWS, CHRISTIANS

A gentile doesn’t die, never
having been alive to die.

10. We reject that the righteous will ascend to the kingdoms beyond the skies when they die. [None ascend to heaven; the Lord Jesus being the only exception, and in this case for the purpose of his continuing mediatorial work. The righteous await the return of Christ for the bestowal of immortality — Jn . 3:13.]

Yeshua said,
If your leaders tell you, “Look, the kingdom is in heaven,”
then the birds of heaven will precede you.
If they say to you, “It’s in the sea,”
then the fish will precede you.
But the kingdom is inside you and it is outside you.
When you know yourselves,  then you will be known,
and you will understand that you are children of the living father.
But if you do not know yourselves,
then you dwell in poverty and you are poverty.

11. We reject that the devil is a supernatural personal being. 

[The devil is variously manifested as that which falsely “accuses.” It is the manifestation of the ungodly characteristics of sin’s flesh, and will cease to exist when sin is ultimately destroyed — 1Pet. 5:8; Rev. 20:10.]

We reject the doctrine that Yaldabaoth and the Demiurge is the same person

Valentinian never use the word Yaldabaoth 

As we have amply demonstrated, the Demiurge in Valentinianism is quite different in character from the hostile Ialdabaoth familiar from the Sethian school. The Demiurge acts as an intermediary between the higher powers and the material world. The Valentinian view of the world created by the Demiurge is also quite different. According to Valentinian teaching, the world is created to aid the spiritual element to return to the Fullness (pleroma). Its creation was necessitated by the primordial fall into deficiency and suffering.

We reject the doctrine that the Demiurge is evil

The Valentinian teacher Ptolemy strongly criticizes non-Valentinian Gnostics who taught that the Demiurge was evil. In his view, those who view the creator as evil "do not comprehend what was said by the Savior...Only thoughtless people have this idea, people who do not recognize the providence of the creator and so are blind not only the eye of the soul but even in the eye of the body" (Letter to Flora 3:2-6). They are as "completely in error" as orthodox Christians who taught that the Demiurge was the highest God (Letter to Flora 3:2).

In contrast, he and other Valentinians steadfastly maintained that "the creation is not due to a god who corrupts but to one who is just and hates evil" (Letter to Flora 3:6). He carefully distinguished the Demiurge from both God and the Devil. According to Ptolemy, "he is essentially different from these two (God and the Devil) and is between them, he is rightly given the name, Middle" (Letter to Flora 7:4). He is "neither good nor evil and unjust, can properly be called just , since he is the arbitrator of the justice which depends on him" (Letter to Flora 7:5).

12. We reject that the Kingdom of God is “the church.” [The Kingdom of God is a divine political empire to be established on earth at the return of Jesus Christ. — Isa. 2:2-5]

13. We reject that the gospel is the death, burial, and resurrection of Christ merely. [The gospel includes the covenants of promise granted to Abraham and David and involves the establishment of God’s kingdom on earth — Gal. 3:8.]

14. We reject that Christ will not come until the close of the thousand years. [Jesus Christ returns to establish the millennium, and will reign as king during that period — 1Cor. 15:24-29; Rev. 20:6.]

15. We reject that the tribunal of Christ, when he comes, is not for the judgment of saints, but merely to divide among them different degrees of reward. [The Judgment seat of Christ is for the purpose of revealing the motives, actions and characteristics of all the responsible, and to prepare the righteous for the granting of immortality — Rom. 14:10; 2Cor. 5:10.]

16. We reject that the resurrection is confined to the faithful. [The resurrection will involve all who have known the Will of God, including those who have rejected that Will and those who have failed to uphold it in a faithful life — Jn. 12:48; 9:39-41; 15:22; Acts 15:24.]

17. We reject that the dead rise in an immortal state. [The dead come from the grave in the same state as they entered it; they will remain mortal as they appear before the judgment seat.]

Some are afraid that they will ascend from death naked, and they want to climb back to life in their flesh.They are unaware that those who wear their flesh are naked, and those who strip are not naked. “Flesh and blood cannot inherit the kingdom of god.” What will we not inherit? The flesh we wear on us.
But what then will we inherit as our own? The body of Jesus and his blood. And Jesus said, “Whoever will not eat my flesh and drink my blood has no life within him.”  What does he mean? His flesh is the word and blood the holy spirit.
Who has received these has food and drink and clothing. I condemn those who say the flesh won’t rise. Then both are wrong. You say the flesh won’t ascend. Tell me, what will rise so I can honor you? You say spirit in the flesh and light in the flesh. What is the flesh?
You say there is nothing outside the flesh. Then rise in the flesh, since everything exists in it. In this world those wearing garments are better than garments. In heaven the garments are better than the wearers.

18. We reject that the subject-nations of the thousand years are immortal. [The nations will consist of mortal men and women, subject to the laws of Jesus Christ — Isa. 65:20.]

19. We reject that the law of Moses is binding on believers of the gospel. [The Law being fulfilled in Jesus Christ, its demands are not binding upon Christ’s disciples, as they are now subject to his commandments — Heb. 8:13.]

20. We reject that the observance of Sunday is a matter of duty. [Although the “first day” is commonly used for remembrance of the Christ-covenant, there is no obligation to limit such observance to a Sunday. It is a matter of “as oft as we do so,” whatever the day — 1Cor. 11:25.]

21. We reject that baby sprinkling is a doctrine of Scripture. [Baptism is only valid upon a confession of understanding the complete Will and purpose of God. It is the outward manifestation of an inner conviction — Mark 16:16; Acts 8:12.]

22. We reject the doctrine - that those without knowledge - through personal choice, immaturity, or lack of mental capacity - will be saved. 

[Salvation is based upon a reasonable and logical understanding of the Truth; those who are foreign to the gospel, who lack the capacity to perceive its responsibilities; or who are unable to comprehend, are outside the sphere of salvation — Acts 8:12.]

23. We reject that man can be saved by morality or sincerity, without the gospel. [Morality and sincerity must be accompanied by an acknowledgement of the gospel for salvation — Acts 10:1-6.]

24. We reject that the gospel alone will save, without the obedience of Christ’s commandments. [Obedience to the commandments is a responsibility required of all believers; salvation will be determined upon the application of faith and obedience. Rev. 22:14; Mat. 7:26; 2Pet. 2:21; Mat. 28:20; Gal. 6:2]

25. We reject that a man cannot believe without possessing the Spirit of God. [In this case, the “Spirit of God” identifies a direct, miraculous influence from God in a person’s life. Belief comes from understanding the Word of Truth.]

26. We reject that men are pre-destined to salvation unconditionally. [Salvation is based upon a personal decision by a believer to uphold God’s Truth, and is dependent upon the grace of God — Eph. 2:8.]

27. We reject that there is no sin in the flesh. [The flesh is hereditarily related to sin, caused by the transgression of Adam, the effects of which have passed upon all men, including the Lord Jesus Christ — 2Cor. 5:21.]

28. We reject that Joseph was the actual father of Jesus. [Joseph was his guardian; Yahweh, through His Spirit acting on the virgin Mary, was his Father — Lk. 1:35.]

29. We reject that the earth will be destroyed. [The earth has been created for Yahweh’s glory, and will never be destroyed — Psa. 37:11; Num. 14:21.]

30. We reject that baptism is not necessary to salvation. [Baptism establishes a covenant-relationship, and is an act of obedience required for salvation — Acts 2:38.]

31. We reject that a knowledge of the Truth is not necessary to make baptism valid. [Baptism is only valid upon a knowledge of God’s revealed will and purpose, and an open declaration and confession thereof — Acts 8:12.]

32. We reject that some meats are to be refused on the score of uncleanness. [No foods are forbidden on the grounds of divine law or ceremonial defilement; such decisions are a matter of personal conscience — 1Cor. 6:11; Col. 2:16; Mk. 7:15.]

33. We reject that the English are the ten tribes of Israel, whose prosperity is a fulfilment of the promises made concerning Ephraim. [The ten tribes comprise the Jewish people in dispersion, descendants of Shem. The English people are descendants of Japheth, and do not form part of natural Israel — 1Pet. 1:1; Jas 1:1.]

34. We reject that marriage with an unbeliever is lawful. [Marriage with the unbeliever, or with a divorced person whose spouse is living, is forbidden by the law of Christ — 1Cor. 7:39; Mk. 10:8-12.]

35. We reject that we are at liberty to serve in the armed forces, in the police force, take part in jury duty or politics, or recover debts by legal coercion. [These constitute elements of society and its law-enforcement requirements, of which the believer will have no part. — Jn . 17:16]

36. We reject that Holy Spirit Gifts are available today. [These special and miraculous personal gifts were limited to the apostolic era, and are not manifested today — 1Cor. 13:8-10.]

37. We reject that the sacrifice of the Lord Jesus Christ was not required for the cleansing of his sin nature. [The Lord's sacrifice was necessary for his own redemption. His sacrifice was a public demonstration that his flesh was rightly related to death and a declaration of the righteousness of God that required the offering of his life in devotion to Him. By his sacrifice the ungodly propensities (diabolos) of his nature was destroyed (Heb. 2:14; 9:12; 7:27), thus providing for the granting of immortality.

 38. We reject that the Bible account of creation is figurative, or parabolic, of a type of organic evolution in which all living things evolved from simpler varieties. [The record of Genesis 1-3 describes the literal work of God in creating this world and its creatures out of the previous void and chaos. Each day was a period of 24 hours duration, and does not permit an evolutionary process].

 For this reason error was angry with him, so she persecuted him. She was distressed by him, and she was made powerless. He was nailed to a tree.  He became a fruit of the knowledge of the father. He did not, however, destroy them because they ate of it. He rather caused those who ate of it to be joyful because of this discovery.

For this reason Jesus appeared; he put on that book; he was nailed to a tree; he published the edict of the Father on the cross. O such great teaching! He draws himself down to death, though life eternal clothes him. Having stripped himself of the perishable rags, he put on imperishability, which no one can possibly take away from him. Having entered the empty spaces of terrors, he passed through those who were stripped naked by oblivion, being knowledge and perfection, proclaiming the things that are in the heart, [...] teach those who will receive teaching.

 Not only (that, but) I have come to reveal to you the truth, which is within the brethren. He included himself in the living offering, together with your offspring. He offered them up as an offering to the All. For it is not cattle that you will offer up for sin(s) of unbelief, and for the ignorances, and (for) all the wicked deeds which they will do [...]. And they do not reach the Father of the All [...] the faith ...

I have offered up myself to you as an offering, together with those that are mine, to you yourself, (O) Father of the All, and those whom you love, who have come forth from you who are holy (and) living. And <according to> the perfect laws, I shall pronounce my name as I receive baptism now (and) forever, (as a name) among the living (and) holy names, and (now) in the waters. Amen."

(The Nag Hammadi Library Melchizedek)

infant baptism

Infant baptism

History

The origins of infant baptism are uncertain.

The first incontestable evidence for the practice of infant baptism comes in the writings of Tertullian. He asks,Why should innocent infancy be in such a hurry to come to the forgiveness of sins? Let them come while they are maturing, while they are learning, while they are being taught what it is they are coming to. Let them be made Christians when they have become able to know Christ. (On Baptism 18.5 quoted in Pelikan, 290)

Cathar teachings shared by the Waldensians became defining features of Protestant belief. Many of these teachings follow from the rejection of Roman Catholic "tradition" in favour of scripture. Examples include the rejection of a priesthood, the rejection of graven images and the idolatry associated with them, rejection of the cults of saints and relics, denial of Purgatory, and a rejection of the Roman Church's sacraments.

Protestants, like Cathars, rejected the medieval Roman doctrine of transubstantiation and infant baptism.

For the Cathars, infant baptism with water was not merely unscriptural, it was an appanage of the bad god Jehovah, and had been expressly rejected by Christ. (Taken from https://www.cathar.info/cathar_legacy.htm)

The doctrine of baptism

BAPTISM is an act of obedience required of all who believe the Gospel. It is a bodily immersion in, and not a face-sprinkling or head-pouring with, water. Its administration to infants, in any form, is unauthorized and useless;* it is only enjoined on those who have intelligence enough to believe the glad tidings of the kingdom of God and the things concerning the name of Jesus Christ. To such, it is the means of that present (legal) union with Christ, which is preparatory to perfect assimilation at the resurrection. It is, therefore, necessary to salvation.

If the reader of the New Testament will substitute for the words 'baptise' and baptism'wherever used, the words *pour' or ' sprinkle,' or their substantives, he cannot fail to perceive that such construction is frequently senseless and incongruous: but if he will use the words to immerse' or 'immersion,' he will readily perceive that they harmonise in every instance with the sense and figure


The evil effect of inquiring of God's word in order to sustain an adopted theory, is manifest in the pertinacity with which theologians wrest the scripture, in order to build up one of their imaginations—infant baptism. The Saviour says, Mat. xix. 14, " Suffer little children, and forbid them not, to come unto me, for of such is the kingdom of heaven." If the kingdom of heaven be sinless, then little children are sinless, for such as they compose it the Lord himself hath declared. Paul asserts, Rom. iv. 15, "Where no law is, there is no transgression;" and John says, I. Epis. iii. 4, " Sin is the transgression of law." But the wildest theorist has never yet pretended that infants can transgress or be amenable to any law, human or divine. No transgression no sin, say the apostles, and thus with their Great Master bear testimony to the innocence of children. Baptism is instituted by the Lord for remission of sins. Surely nothing but a strong delusion could persuade mankind to take from the penitent believing sinner this gracious institution, this balm for all his fears, and confer it on those who can neither believe nor sin.

Infants are made the subjects of a religious ceremony to regenerate them because of original sin; on account of which, acoording to Geneva philosophy they are liable to the flames of hell for ever! If original sin, which is in fact sin in the flesh, were neutralized, then all "baptismally regenerated" babes ought to live for ever, as Adam would have done had he eaten of the Tree of Life after he had sinned. But they die; which is a proof that the "regeneration" does not "cure their souls"; and is, therefore, mere theological quackery. 

Go ye into all the world and preach the Gospel to every creature. He that believeth and is baptized  shall be saved; but he that believeth not shall be damned.
-*Maarrkk xvi, 16, l<f.

Jesus answered, Verily, verily, I say unto you, Except a man be born of water, and of the Spirit, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God.—/no. iii, 6. Then Peter said unto them, Repent and be baptized every one of you, in the name of Jesus Christ. * * * Then they that gladly received his word were baptized.
—Actt ii, 38, 41.

And when they (the people of Samaria) believed Philip, preaching the things concerning the kingdom of God and the name of Jesus Christ, they were baptized, both MEN AND WOMEN.—Acts viii, 12.

And he commanded the chariot to stand still; and they went down into the water, both Philip and the eunuch; and HE BAPTIZED HIM.—Actt viii, 39.

Paul (after his conversion) arose and WAS BXTTizvD.—Acts ix, 18.

Lydia was BAPTIZED, and her household.—Acts xvi, 15.

The keeper of the prison (at Philippi) * • * v a s BAPTIZED, he and all his straightway, * * * believing in God with all his house.—Acts zvi, 27, 33, 34.

When they (twelve men at Ephesus) heard this, they were baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus.—Acts xix, o.

The like figure whereunto even BAPTISM DOTH ALSO NOW SAVE us (not the putting away of the filth of the flesh, but the answer of a good conscience toward God) by the resurrection of Jesus Christ.—1 "Peter iii, 21.

At what age should one be immersed?

Preferably when one has reached the age of reason, however infant Baptisms or baby sprinkling, are meaningless and useless.

We reject that infant baptism or baby sprinkling is a doctrine of Scripture. [Baptism is only valid upon a confession of understanding the complete Will and purpose of God. It is the outward manifestation of an inner conviction — Mark 16:16; Acts 8:12.]

We reject that baptism is not necessary to salvation. [Baptism establishes a covenant-relationship, and is an act of obedience required for salvation — Acts 2:38.]

We reject that a knowledge of the Truth is not necessary to make baptism valid. [Baptism is only valid upon a knowledge of God’s revealed will and purpose, and an open declaration and confession thereof — Acts 8:12.]

Gnostic Teaching on Purgatory

Traditional Gnostic Teaching on Purgatory 

Is there a purgatory ? 

And if so, can the priest by his masses bring the faithful out of it ?''

The Roman Catholic Church teaches that the undying souls of men leave their bodies at death. The wicked (those who die in mortal sin) go to hell for eternal torment. The righteous, dying with unforgiven venial sin or undischarged temporal punishment, go to a painful purification before being fit for heaven.

Purgatory is a half-way house between 'heaven' and 'hell'. The Roman Catholic church teaches that Purgatory is a place of purging, in which the soul will suffer for a while before being fit to gain salvation in heaven. The prayers, candle-burning and financial gifts to the church of a person and his friends is supposed to shorten the length of time that the soul suffers in 'purgatory'.

The word Purgatory is not used in the Bible nor the nag hammadi texts 

Gnostic sects like the Bogomils, Pauliciani, Cathars rejected the doctrine of Purgatory

Ralph of Coggeshale goes into considerable detail of the doctrines of the Pauliciani in Flanders and England, and thereby establishes their complete identity with the Bogomils. They held, he says, to two principles-of good and evil; they rejected purgatory, prayers for the dead, the invocation of saints, infant baptism, and the use of pictures, images, and crucifixes in the churches ;

The Albigenses (also known as Cathari), named after the town of Albi, where they had many followers. They had their own celibate clergy class, who expected to be greeted with reverence. They believed that Jesus spoke figuratively in his last supper when he said of the bread, “This is my body.” (Matthew 26:26, NAB) They rejected the doctrines of the Trinity, the Virgin Birth, hellfire, and purgatory. Thus they actively put in doubt the teachings of Rome. Pope Innocent III gave instructions that the Albigenses be persecuted. “If necessary,” he said, “suppress them with the sword.” 

Protestants, like Cathars, rejected the medieval Roman doctrine of transubstantiation and infant baptism. Like Cathars and Waldensians, Protestant Churches encourage laymen to read the scriptures for themselves. Most accept women as ministers, and most affirm the dignity of labour. Churchmen themselves are increasingly working for a living rather than living off tithes. Protestant theology is that of mitigated dualism, embracing predestination and rejecting the Catholic position on Free Will. Protestants, like Cathars, reject the medieval Roman Catholic notion of Purgatory, along with the practice of praying for the dead, and the entire system of indulgences.

The Jews had originally had no concept of an afterlife, but under Greek influence they had developed an ill-defined belief in an afterlife by the time of Jesus Christ. (The words translated as hell in the Old Testament actually mean grave or rubbish-tip). In the 2nd Century BCE the Jews had developed a  belief that there was a afterlife in heaven or hell. Ideas such as Purgatory and Limbo were developed much later. More conservative Jews at the time of Jesus still held ideas of an afterlife to be an offensive novelty. As they pointed out the many punishments promised by God in scripture are all punishments in this world. None is promised for an afterlife.

Man has conceived that there is such a condition as life separate from God, and obedient to man’s thought; he has produced such a state of mind. When man changes his mind he will find that he lives in heaven continually, but by the power of his thought has made all kinds of places: earth, purgatory, heaven, hell and numerous intermediate states

The righteous are never promised salvation in heaven. The granting of salvation will be at the judgment seat at Christ's return, rather than at some time after death when we supposedly leave 'purgatory' (Matt. 25:31-34; Rev. 22:12).

All the righteous receive their rewards at the same time, rather than each person gaining salvation at different times (Heb. 11:39,40; 2 Tim. 4:8).

Death is followed by complete unconsciousness, rather than the activities suggested by the doctrine of purgatory.

We are purged from our sins through baptism into Christ and developing a firm faith in his work during our present life, rather than through some period of suffering after death. We are told to "purge out therefore the old leaven" of sin in our lives (1 Cor. 5:7); to purge ourselves from the works of sin (2 Tim. 2:21; Heb. 9:14). Our time of purging is therefore now, in this life, rather than in a place of purging ('purgatory') which we enter after death. "Now is the day of salvation...now is the accepted time" (2 Cor. 6:2). Our obedience to God in baptism and development of a spiritual character in this life, will lead to our salvation (Gal. 6:8) - not to the spending of a period in 'purgatory'.

The efforts of others to save us through candle-burning and other donations to the Catholic church, will not affect our salvation at all. "They that trust in their wealth...none of them can by any means redeem his brother, nor give to God a ransom for him...that he should still live for ever" (Ps. 49:6-9).

Gnostic Sacraments

Gnostic Sacraments

The English word "sacrament" is derived indirectly from the Ecclesiastical Latin sacrāmentum, from Latin sacrō ("hallow, consecrate"), from sacer ("sacred, holy"). This in turn is derived from the Greek New Testament word "mysterion".

The master [did] everything in a mystery: baptism, chrism, eucharist, redemption, and bridal chamber.[For this reason] he said, “I have come to make [the lower] like the [upper and the] outer like the [inner, and to unite] them in that place.” [He spoke] here in symbols [and images].

Some cliam that the word mystery refers to five Gnostic Sacraments 

Is this correct? 

The claim that the word "mystery" in the Gospel of Philip refers to five Gnostic sacraments is not entirely accurate. While it is true that the text mentions "mystery" in connection with baptism, chrism, eucharist, redemption, and the bridal chamber, it is important to understand the context in which the word is used.

The word mystery is a Greek word used in the bible

Concerning the Greek mysterion, Vine’s Expository Dictionary of Old and New Testament Words explains: “In the [New Testament] it denotes, not the mysterious (as with the Eng. word), but that which, being outside the range of unassisted natural apprehension, can be made known only by Divine revelation, and is made known in a manner and at a time appointed by God, and to those only who are illumined by His Spirit. In the ordinary sense a mystery implies knowledge withheld; its Scriptural significance is truth revealed. Hence the terms especially associated with the subject are ‘made known,’ ‘manifested,’ ‘revealed,’ ‘preached,’ ‘understand,’ ‘dispensation.’”—1981, Vol. 3, p. 97.

The language surrounding ‘sacraments’ did not develop in the Church for some time. We hear of a ritual of baptism in the Christian community of the Acts of the Apostles, and of the ‘breaking of bread’ – the Eucharist (Acts 2:38, 41- 42). These celebrations were called by their name, there was no generic term for these experiences.

The Bible does not teach that salvation is given in any religious rites.

The master [did] everything in a mystery: baptism, chrism, eucharist, redemption, and bridal chamber.[For this reason] he said, “I have come to make [the lower] like the [upper and the] outer like the [inner, and to unite] them in that place.” [He spoke] here in symbols [and images].

Here the word mystery is musthrion 3466: μυστήριον meaning means ‘something hidden or secret’ – our word ‘mystery’.

a secret, of which initiation is necessary; in the NT: the counsels of God, once hidden but now revealed in the Gospel or some fact thereof; the Christian revelation generally; particular truths or details of the Christian revelation.

Therefore the word does not mean a "sacrament(s)"

With this knowlage that the Greek word means a something hidden or a secret, we could translate the text from the Gospel of Philip the following way 

The Lord [did] everything in a sacred secret: a baptism, and a anointing, and a eucharist, and a redemption, and a bridal chamber. [For this reason] he said, “I have come to make [the lower] like the [upper and the] outer like the [inner, and to unite] them in that place.” [He spoke] here in symbols [and images].

The Lord [did] everything in a symbolic secret: a baptism, and a anointing, and a eucharist, and a redemption, and a bridal chamber. [For this reason] he said, “I have come to make [the lower] like the [upper and the] outer like the [inner, and to unite] them in that place.” [He spoke] here in symbols [and images].

It is clear, however, that this text does not speak about “mysteries” in the sense of sacraments, but about the hidden, symbolic meaning of the Saviour’s deeds in the world. (Baptism in the Gospel of Philip Einar Thomassen)

the Lord's actions including baptism, anointing, eucharist, redemption, and bridal chamber, were done in a manner that carried hidden, profound, and symbolic meanings.

The sacred secrets were seen as symbols and images of the internal process of redemption. The Gospel of Philip put it this way, "Truth did not come into the world naked. Rather it came in prototypes and images, for the world will not receive it in any other form." (Gospel of Philip 67:9-12) Valentinians regarded their worship as purely spiritual (Heracleon 20-24, Irenaeus Against Heresies 1:21:4), with the external forms as symbolic.

Baptism is closely associated with the concept of resurrection from the dead. The person symbolically participated in the death and resurrection of Christ (Gospel of Philip 67:9-19, 69:25-26, 73:1-7). As Theodotus says, "Baptism is called death and an end of the old life . . . but it is also life according to Christ" (Excepts of Theodotus 77:1). The old sinful person dies and the new spiritual person is raised up. Cleansed of sin (Valentinian Exposition 41:21-22, Irenaeus Against Heresies 1:21:2), the person symbolically put on the perfect human being (Gospel of Philip 75:21-24) and was restored to the perfect realm (Gospel of Philip 67:9-12, Valentinian Exposition 41:29-38, Irenaeus Against Heresies 1:21:3).

Truth did not come into the world naked, but it came in types and images. The world cannot receive truth in any other way. There is a rebirth and an image of rebirth. It is necessary to be born again truly through the image. How is it with the resurrection and the image? Through the image it must rise. The bridal chamber and the image? Through the image one must enter the truth: this is the restoration.



Cosmas writes that the sect was founded by a priest named Bogomil, but there is both controversy over what his name means, and whether it was his real name at all. Some interpret Bogomil as meaning ‘beloved of God’, while others opt for ‘worthy of God’s mercy’ and ‘one who entreats God’. Cosmas describes the Bogomils as rejecting the Old Testament and Church sacraments; the only prayer they used being the Lord’s Prayer. They did not venerate Icons or relics, while the cross was denounced as the instrument of Christ’s torture.The Church itself was seen as being in league with the devil, whom they regarded as not only the creator of the visible world, but also as Christ’s brother.Their priests were strict ascetics, abstaining from meat, wine and marriage (the gnostics by sean martin)

In the West, the heresy became known as Catharism, from the Greek word katharos, meaning ‘pure’.177 The first Cathars known in the West were discovered at Cologne in 1143, where a group of them blew their cover by arguing over a point of doctrine. Hauled up before the bishop of Cologne, it was discovered that

The Cathars told the bishop that they had ‘lain concealed from the time of the martyrs even to their own day [1143]’.178


Both the Cathars and the Bogomils completely rejected the Church and all its sacraments, regarding it as the church of Satan.The only sacrament they observed was the consolamentum, which served as baptism or, if administered on the deathbed, extreme unction. The only prayer both churches used was the Lord’s Prayer, with the Cathars substituting ‘supersubstantial bread’ for ‘daily bread’.(the gnostics by sean martin)


Both movements regarded the entity of the Church – Catholic in the West, Orthodox in the East – as the church of Satan, rejecting it utterly. Church buildings – the churches, chapels and cathedrals themselves – were likewise seen as no more holy than any other building; neither sect built any, preferring instead to meet in people’s homes, or in barns or fields.The Cross was seen as the instrument of Christ’s torture, and Bogomils and Cathars alike refused to venerate it. They interpreted the eucharist allegorically (the gnostics by sean martin)



Gnostic rosary

gnostics and transubstantiation

Why Gnostic Christians Should Not Use the Rosary!

Why Gnostic Christians Should Not Use the Rosary!

There are many websites claiming to be Gnostics on the internet most of them advocate the use of the rosary with prayers similar to those used by the Roman Catholic Church which have been adapted for a more Gnostic style. However not many people know the true origin of the rosary and how it was used as a spiritual weapon against Gnostic Christians this study will look into this:

Rosary a string of beads for keeping count in a rosary or in the devotions of some other religions, in Roman Catholic use 55 or 165 in number.

The term “rosary” Latin: rosarium, means "crown of roses" or "garland of roses"

The rosary was not used by Jesus, by His apostles, or by the early church fathers, nor is it referred to in the Gnostic Gospels.

A Troubled history

The original, lengthy prayer cycle is devoted to the Virgin Mary and was composed by St Dominic as an antidote to heresy at a time when the Catholic Church was seeking to crush the Cathar sect in what is now south-western France.

The crusade against the Cathars stands as one of the bloodiest episodes in Church history.

The Rosary was roundly cursed by Martin Luther during the Protestant Reformation in the 16th Century as "mere babbling, as stupid as it is wicked, nourishing a false confidence". (Pope updates ancient Rosary prayer BBC NEWS Monday, 21 October, 2002, 14:55 GMT 15:55 UK)

One Catholic website says "Our Lady gave Saint Dominic the Rosary as a weapon to combat the awful Cathar (Albigensian) heresy."

St. Dominic set up his headquarters in the town of Fanjeaux in 1206, becoming its parish priest and taking charge of its ancient church, Notre Dame de Prouille. In Fanjeaux, St. Dominic founded a convent for young women fleeing the vice and debauchery of the Cathar sect. Soon after, St. Dominic added monks to his growing community. From these small beginnings, he planted the seeds of what would later become the Dominican Order.

Church tradition tells us that, in the year 1208, St. Dominic had a vision of the Virgin Mary while praying in his church. The Blessed Mother reportedly taught him to pray the Rosary, telling him to use this weapon to defeat the heretics.

Aflame with enthusiasm, St. Dominic called on Catholics and heretics alike to pray the Rosary. By 1213, many Catholic Crusaders had taken St. Dominic’s advice. Devotion to the Rosary had spread among them like wildfire.


That year, a Crusader army under Simon de Montfort met a Cathar army under Raymond of Toulouse in the battle of Muret. The heretics were routed. Years later, when the Cathar heresy was finally extinguished, many Catholics attributed its defeat as much to St. Dominic’s zeal as to the Crusaders’ arms. (From a Catholic Website)


From a Cathar website:

Leo XIII claims that the Cathars were defeated not by human force, but by Mary's Rosary:

8. Moreover, we may well believe that the Queen of Heaven herself has granted an especial efficacy to this mode of supplication, for it was by her command and counsel that the devotion was begun and spread abroad by the holy Patriarch Dominic [Dominic Guzmán] as a most potent weapon against the enemies of the faith at an epoch not, indeed, unlike our own, of great danger to our holy religion. The heresy of the Albigenses had in effect, one while covertly, another while openly, overrun many countries, and this most vile offspring of the Manicheans, whose deadly errors it reproduced, were the cause in stirring up against the Church the most bitter animosity and a virulent persecution. There seemed to be no human hope of opposing this fanatical and most pernicious sect when timely succour came from on high through the instrument of Mary's Rosary. Thus under the favour of the powerful Virgin, the glorious vanquisher of all heresies, the forces of the wicked were destroyed and dispersed, and faith issued forth unharmed and more shining than before.


1891-09-22- SS Leo XIII - Octobri Mense: Encyclical of Pope Leo XIII promulgated on September 22, 1891 On the Rosary


Leo does not explain why Mary's Rosary had so little effect before Catharism was exterminated by physical force - a long war of extermination followed by operations of the Inquisition over generations.


Leo still seems to accept that Catharism was descended from Manicheism, as the medieval Catholic Church held, but the modern Catholic Church doubts.


Pius XI elaborates on The Rosary and likens Catharism to Communism:

19. The Holy Virgin who once victoriously drove the terrible sect of the Albigenses from Christian countries, now suppliantly invoked by us, will turn aside the new errors, especially those of Communism, which reminds us in many ways, in its motives and misdeeds, of the ancient ones.

20. And as in the times of the Crusades, in all Europe there was raised one voice of the people, one supplication; so today, in all the world, the cities, and even the smallest villages, united with courage and strength, with filial and constant insistence, the people seek to obtain from the great Mother of God the defeat of the enemies of Christian and human civilization, to the end that true peace may shine again over tired and erring men.

BUT IS IT CHRISTIAN?

Does God’s Word authorize such repetitious praying? No. Jesus said: “But when praying, do not say the same things over and over again, just as the people of the nations do, for they imagine they will get a hearing for their use of many words. So, do not make yourselves like them, for God your Father knows what things you are needing before ever you ask him.” How well Jesus knew the human tendency to want to repeat prayers! And, in view of his warning, the fact that the use of the rosary is widespread among the people of the nations carries no weight with it whatsoever!—Matt. 6:7, 8.

Apologists for the rosary try to rob Jesus’ words of their effect by pointing to Revelation 4:8, in which the word “holy” appears three times: “Holy, holy, holy.” But it is quite different from repeating one word twice in a prayer for a total of three words to repeating the forty words in Hail Mary fifty-two times for a total of 2,120 words, not to say anything of the other repetitions involved. Repeating a thing twice for emphasis is done throughout the Scriptures and makes sense. Thus when Jesus was faced with his greatest test he prayed three times to Jehovah his Father. Likewise Paul three times asked God to remove a certain “thorn in the flesh.” There is nothing, however, in the Scriptures to indicate that Jesus and Paul had memorized these prayers or had used them at some other time in their lives. These prayers were born out of the serious trials they were undergoing.—Matt. 26:39-44; 2 Cor. 12:7.

But trying to remember all the various recitations required in saying the rosary and to repeat them in their proper order makes saying the rosary a memory test rather than a spontaneous expression of heartfelt prayer. Besides, one’s mind cannot help but wander when one has to say the same forty words fifty-three times in one prayer. Such repetition is but a variation of the prayer wheel of certain Oriental religions. It consists of a cylinder in which written prayers are placed. Each time the cylinder is revolved the prayers in it are supposed to have been repeated.

Nor is that all. The Hail Mary is said nine times as often as the Paternoster, or “Our Father,” fifty-three times as compared with six times. Is the prayer composed by men and directed to Mary nine times as important or effective as the prayer taught by Jesus and directed to God himself? The fact is that, look where we will in the Scriptures, not once do we read of anyone seeking access either to God or to Jesus by way of Mary.

NO BENEFITS

As for the benefits of indulgences promised those reciting the rosary: How can anyone gain such benefits when, look where we will in God’s Word, not a word do we find about a purgatory? On the contrary, we are plainly told the following: “The wages sin pays is death.” When man “goes back to his ground, in that day his thoughts do perish.” The dead “are conscious of nothing at all.” Man’s hope lies in a resurrection from the dead, “of both the righteous and the unrighteous.”—Rom. 6:23; Ps. 146:4; Eccl. 9:5; Acts 24:15.

And regarding the forgiveness of our sins, we are assured that it is “the blood of Jesus his Son [that] cleanses us from all sin.” And “if we confess our sins, he is faithful and righteous so as to forgive us our sins and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness.”—1 John 1:7, 9.

The repeating of fifty-three Hail Marys every time the rosary is recited flies in the face of Jesus’ express condemnation of saying the “same things over and over again.” Its widespread use outside of professedly Christian lands argues that its origin is pagan. And the same must also be said regarding its associated features, the exaltation of Mary, the offering of indulgences for saying the rosary, the crediting of victories to it and its claimed power to decrease purgatorial suffering. None of these find any support in the Scriptures, but they do find parallels in pagan religions.

In view of all these facts, can the rosary be said to be Christian? It cannot!

Not Biblical

Unsurprisingly, we are given various advice in the Bible, both about how we should, and how we should not pray.

In particular, we look to the words of Jesus himself, as reported in the Gospel according to Matthew, chapter 6, verses 5-13. Please, look at what Jesus said and then repeated, to clearly stress the importance of what he was saying (Matthew 6:7-8 AMP)

7 “And when you pray, do not use meaningless repetition as the Gentiles do, for they think they will be heard because of their many words.
8 So do not be like them [praying as they do]; for your Father knows what you need before you ask Him.”

Can you see this? Jesus says “do not use meaningless repetition“. If you prefer the KJV, these two verses are even stronger

7 But when ye pray, use not vain repetitions, as the heathen do: for they think that they shall be heard for their much speaking.
8 Be not ye therefore like unto them: for your Father knoweth what things ye have need of, before ye ask him.

In the KJV, we are told even more clearly not to use vain repetitions as the heathens do.

Jesus then “doubles down”. First he castigates people who use vain/meaningless repetition and calls them unGodly, and then he tells us not to be like them.

Can this be any clearer? How can Jesus’ own words, speaking clearly and literally, be reconciled with 53 identical prayers in a row to the mother of Jesus (an unkind person would suggest that the act of praying to anyone other than the Father is in and of itself a heathenish act)?


One of the justifications for using a rosary is that it helps us to concentrate and gives us a format for our prayer. But do we need a necklace of beads to help us pray? No. We don’t. God offers us all the help we need, in the form of the Holy Spirit. In Paul’s Epistle to the Romans (Rom 8:26-27), we are told (AMP)

26 In the same way the Spirit [comes to us and] helps us in our weakness. We do not know what prayer to offer or how to offer it as we should, but the Spirit Himself [knows our need and at the right time] intercedes on our behalf with sighs and groanings too deep for words.
27 And He who searches the hearts knows what the mind of the Spirit is, because the Spirit intercedes [before God] on behalf of God’s people in accordance with God’s will.

We are also encouraged not just to “not repeat empty incantations”, but to make our requests specifically known. Philippians 4:6 (AMP) says

Do not be anxious or worried about anything, but in everything [every circumstance and situation] by prayer and petition with thanksgiving, continue to make your [specific] requests known to God.

Summary

The word “Rosary” is not found in the Bible
The Rosary was created as a spiritual weapon to use against Gnostic Christians called the Cathai or the Albigensians for this reason alone Gnostic Christians today should reject the use of the Rosary.

Since gnosis does not come by repetitive praying Gnostics should not use the Rosary
Repetitive praying is a type of brainwashing or mind control 

at war prayer manual by Traci Morin:

Father God, I repent and renounce using Demons of candle burning, rosary prayers and idol worship to do evil or through ceremonies, and I take authority, dominion, bin and break and cast out all demonic spirits of curses to go to the pit of hell, in the name of Jesus Christ of Nazareth.

The Gospel of Philip and Transubstantiation

The Gospel of Philip and Transubstantiation

Ignatius identifies the flesh with faith and the blood with love (Trall 8 Ign Rom 8:3)  My love has been crucified, and there is no fire in me that loves anything; but there is living water springing up in me, and which says to me inwardly, Come to the Father. I have no delight in corruptible food, nor in the pleasures of this life. I desire the bread of God, the heavenly bread, the bread of life, which is the flesh of Jesus Christ, the Son of God, who became afterwards of the seed of David and Abraham; and I desire the drink, namely His blood, which is incorruptible love and eternal life.

The Didache, written in the late-first or early-second century, referred to the elements of the Lord’s table as “spiritual food and drink” (The Didache, chapter 10). The long passage detailing the Lord's Table in this early Christian document gives no hint of transubstantiation whatsoever.

We thank Thee, holy Father, for Thy holy name which You didst cause to tabernacle in our hearts, and for the knowledge and faith and immortality, which You modest known to us through Jesus Thy Servant; to Thee be the glory for ever. Thou, Master almighty, didst create all things for Thy name's sake; You gavest food and drink to men for enjoyment, that they might give thanks to Thee; but to us You didst freely give spiritual food and drink and life eternal through Thy Servant.

Jesus often used metaphor in order to communicate a point. For example, he says “I am the door,” “I am the vine,” “You are the salt of the earth,” and “You are the light of the world” (Matthew 5:13-14) but people know that we don’t take such statement literally. After all, who believes that Christ is literally a door swinging on a hinge?

Does the Gospel of Philip teach the doctrine of Transubstantiation?

A superficial reading of the the Gospel of Philip may lead one to conclude that it teaches Transubstantiation with sayings like "The eucharist is Jesus" but this is not the case as we will see below

The master [did] everything in a mystery: baptism, chrism, eucharist, redemption, and bridal chamber.[For this reason] he said, “I have come to make [the lower] like the [upper and the] outer like the [inner, and to unite] them in that place.” [He spoke] here in symbols [and images].

Here the word mystery is musthrion 3466: μυστήριον meaning means ‘something hidden or secret’ – our word ‘mystery’.

a secret, of which initiation is necessary; in the NT: the counsels of God, once hidden but now revealed in the Gospel or some fact thereof; the Christian revelation generally; particular truths or details of the Christian revelation.

The word does not mean a "sacrament(s)"

The language surrounding ‘sacraments’ did not develop in the Church for some time. We hear of a ritual of baptism in the Christian community of the Acts of the Apostles, and of the ‘breaking of bread’ – the Eucharist (Acts 2:38, 41- 42). These celebrations were called by their name, there was no generic term for these experiences.

The Lord [did] everything in a symbolic secret: a baptism, and a anointing, and a eucharist, and a redemption, and a bridal chamber. [For this reason] he said, “I have come to make [the lower] like the [upper and the] outer like the [inner, and to unite] them in that place.” [He spoke] here in symbols [and images].

The Greek word musthrion, translated “symbolic secret,” has reference primarily to that which is known by those who are initiated.

GPh 67:27–30:“The Lord did everything like a symbolic secret: baptism, chrism, Eucharist, redemption and bridal chamber.”

It is clear, however, that this text does not speak about “mysteries” in the sense of sacraments, but about the hidden, symbolic meaning of the Saviour’s deeds in the world. (Einar Thomassen)

Truth did not come into the world naked, but it came in types and images. The world cannot receive truth in any other way. There is a rebirth and an image of rebirth. It is necessary to be born again truly through the image. How is it with the resurrection and the image? Through the image it must rise. The bridal chamber and the image? Through the image one must enter the truth: this is the restoration.

Flesh and Blood Symbolic 

24 Some are afraid lest they rise naked. Because of this they wish to rise in the flesh, and they do not know that it is those who wear the flesh who are naked. It is those who [...] to unclothe themselves who are not naked. "Flesh and blood shall not inherit the kingdom of God" (1 Co 15:50). What is this which will not inherit? This which is on us. But what is this, too, which will inherit? It is that which belongs to Jesus and his blood. Because of this he said "He who shall not eat my flesh and drink my blood has not life in him" (Jn 6:53). What is it? His flesh is the word, and his blood is the Holy Spirit. He who has received these has food and he has drink and clothing. I find fault with the others who say that it will not rise. Then both of them are at fault. You say that the flesh will not rise. But tell me what will rise, that we may honor you. You say the Spirit in the flesh, and it is also this light in the flesh. (But) this too is a matter which is in the flesh, for whatever you shall say, you say nothing outside the flesh. It is necessary to rise in this flesh, since everything exists in it. In this world, those who put on garments are better than the garments. In the Kingdom of Heaven, the garments are better than those that put them on. (Gospel of Philip)

The Gospel of Philip in particular shows that Valentinians understood the flesh and the blood of the Savior to be symbolic thus, for instance, the “flesh” is the Logos and the “blood” is the Holy Spirit

According to the Gnostic perspective, the "flesh" of the Savior is equated with the Logos, which means the divine Word or wisdom, and the "blood" is identified with the Holy Spirit. The Gnostic interpretation suggests that the true essence of Jesus' teachings lies in his spiritual wisdom (Logos) and the transformative power of the Holy Spirit.

This interpretation aligns with Gnostic beliefs, where attaining gnosis (hidden knowledge) and spiritual enlightenment are seen as the keys to salvation and union with the divine. Gnostics often approached religious concepts and biblical narratives allegorically, seeking to reveal deeper mystical insights.

Literally, the blood of Christ which was shed on Calvary would be of no use to them. It trickled down his side; it oozed from his hands and feet; it gushed from the spear gash; and fell on the ground and dried away like any other blood, and nobody could find it if they tried, and if they could, it would not be of any spiritual value.

Wisdom steers a middle course and aims to get that nice equilibrium of facts which results from a comprehensive study of the scriptures.

The 'blood of Christ' refers to the essence, or life-giving properties, of Jesus' teachings.

The spirit and the blood are one and the same:

Jesus shocked everyone by saying: “Unless you eat the flesh of the Son of Man and drink his blood, you have no life in you.  Whoever eats my flesh and drinks my blood has eternal life, and I will raise him up at the last day.” (John 6:53-54).

Jesus tried in vain to explain that he was not speaking about drinking the blood that flows in his natural body.  He was talking of the “blood” that flows in his spiritual body.  He said: “It is the Spirit who gives life; the flesh profits nothing. The words that I speak to you are spirit, and they are life.” (John 6:63).

Rising naked and wearing the flesh: Some people fear rising naked, which could signify being stripped of the physical body. Instead, they wish to rise in the flesh, not realizing that those who "wear the flesh" are the ones who are actually naked. Here, "wearing the flesh" may refer to identifying too closely with the physical body and not recognizing the deeper spiritual reality.

"Flesh and blood shall not inherit the kingdom of God" (1 Corinthians 15:50): The text quotes this verse from the New Testament, suggesting that the physical body alone cannot attain spiritual enlightenment or enter the kingdom of God.

"He who shall not eat my flesh and drink my blood has not life in him" (John 6:53): This quote from the Gospel of John is also interpreted symbolically. Here, Jesus' flesh is identified with the "word" or divine wisdom (Logos), and his blood is associated with the Holy Spirit. To "eat his flesh and drink his blood" symbolizes partaking in the spiritual essence of Jesus' teachings and receiving the Holy Spirit.

"His flesh is the word, and his blood is the Holy Spirit": The text explicitly explains that Jesus' flesh is the Logos (the divine word or wisdom), and his blood is the Holy Spirit. Both are seen as spiritual essences, not to be taken literally as physical elements.

The Gospel of Philip indeed presents a symbolic interpretation of Jesus' flesh and blood, equating them with the Logos (the divine Word or wisdom) and the Holy Spirit, respectively. This symbolic understanding is central to the Gnostic perspective on Jesus and the Eucharist.

The Flesh as the Logos: In the Gnostic view, the Logos represents divine wisdom, the creative force, and the guiding principle of the universe. It is the embodiment of spiritual truth and knowledge. The Gospel of Philip associates the flesh of Jesus with the Logos, implying that the true essence of Jesus lies in his teachings and divine wisdom. The emphasis is on the spiritual aspect of Jesus, rather than his physical body.


The Blood as the Holy Spirit: Similarly, the Gospel of Philip identifies the blood of Jesus with the Holy Spirit. The Holy Spirit, in Gnostic thought, is the divine presence that brings spiritual enlightenment and transformation. It is the active force that awakens the divine spark within individuals and leads them to gnosis, or hidden knowledge. By equating Jesus' blood with the Holy Spirit, the Gospel of Philip emphasizes the role of spiritual enlightenment and divine revelation in understanding the true essence of Jesus.

Symbolic Eating and Drinking: The passage in the Gospel of Philip, "He who shall not eat my flesh and drink my blood has not life in him" (John 6:53), takes on a symbolic meaning in Gnostic thought. Rather than endorsing a literal consumption of Jesus' physical body and blood, the passage suggests partaking in the spiritual essence of Jesus' teachings (flesh as the Logos) and receiving the transformative power of the Holy Spirit (blood as the Holy Spirit).

Rejecting Transubstantiation: The Gnostic understanding of the Eucharist as a symbolic communion with Jesus' spiritual essence (Logos and Holy Spirit) stands in contrast to the Catholic doctrine of transubstantiation. Transubstantiation teaches that the substance of the bread and wine literally changes into the physical body and blood of Christ during the consecration of the Eucharist. The Gnostic interpretation in the Gospel of Philip rejects this literal transformation in favor of a symbolic and spiritual understanding of the Eucharist.

Conclusion: The Gospel of Philip's teaching that the flesh and blood of Jesus are symbolically associated with the Logos and the Holy Spirit reflects the Gnostic emphasis on hidden knowledge, spiritual enlightenment, and the inner Christ. This symbolic interpretation of Jesus' teachings and the Eucharist highlights the Gnostic belief in the spiritual nature of Christianity, diverging from the traditional understanding of sacraments and transubstantiation found in orthodox Christianity.

For more information on this saying from the Gospel of Philip see:

Valentinian Teaching on the Resurrection
What is the blood and Flesh of Christ

13 He is “heavenly bread” and “spiritual food” furnishing life by food and knowledge, “the light of men,” that is, of the Church. Therefore those who ate the heavenly bread died, but he who eats the true bread of the Spirit shall not die. The Son is the living bread which was given by the Father to those who wish to eat. “And my flesh is the bread which I will give,” he says, that is, to him whose flesh is nourished by the Eucharist; or better still, the flesh is his body, “which is the Church,” “heavenly bread,” a blessed Assembly. And perhaps just as the elect are essentially derived from the same substance, and as they will also attain the same end. . .(Extracts from the Works of Theodotus and the So-Called Oriental Teachings at the Time of Valentinu)

The excerpt you provided appears to be from "Excerpta ex Theodotus" or "Extracts from the Works of Theodotus," which is a Gnostic text attributed to Theodotus and is associated with the teachings of Valentinus, a prominent Gnostic teacher of the 2nd century. It contains Gnostic interpretations of spiritual concepts, including references to "heavenly bread," "spiritual food," and the Eucharist. Let's break down the key points:

"Heavenly bread" and "spiritual food": In this context, these terms likely refer to the spiritual nourishment and knowledge that the Gnostic community believes they receive through their mystical understanding of Jesus' teachings and the hidden truths of existence.

"The light of men": This phrase is likely interpreted allegorically to represent the illumination and enlightenment provided to the Gnostic community through their Gnosis or spiritual knowledge.

"The Son is the living bread which was given by the Father": This statement reflects the Gnostic belief that Jesus, the Son, is the one who imparts spiritual life and knowledge to those who seek it.

"And my flesh is the bread which I will give": Here, the Gnostic interpretation of Jesus' words about his flesh as the bread may refer to the spiritual significance they attribute to the Eucharist or communion. It suggests that partaking in the Eucharistic ritual symbolizes nourishment by the true spiritual essence embodied by Jesus.

"The flesh is his body, 'which is the Church'": The Gnostic understanding may equate the true body of Christ not with the physical form but with the spiritual essence of the Church, which is the assembly of the enlightened believers.

"Perhaps just as the elect are essentially derived from the same substance": This phrase likely highlights the Gnostic belief in the spiritual unity and divine origin of the enlightened ones or the elect within their community.

57 The eucharist is Jesus. For he is called in Syriac "Pharisatha," which is "the one who is spread out," for Jesus came to crucify the world.

this saying does not prove much just that Jesus is the eucharist that's all 

eucharist literally thanksgiving, actually the Lord's Last Supper 

spread out has a double meaning breaking of bread and the death on the cross

  

Men too walk long distances but do not get anywhere, When evening came for them, they saw neither city nor village, neither creation nor nature, power and angel. In vain have these miserable men taken trouble over the Eucharist'

Segelberg suggests that this passage 'might be a criticism of the eucharistic practices of the Church,' and renders 'Men too walk long distances but do not get anywhere' (15-17) and 'In vain have these miserable men taken trouble over the Eucharist' (20-21). This interpretation is certainly valid in that the passage is a condemnation of unproductive effort. (Gospel of Philip, R. McL. Wilson)

The Eucharist of the Churches lacks pneuma or spirit it does not give life. Therefore those who have frequently taken communion have nevertheless not received anything but when the evening of life comes then they are as un-spiritual as when they began life. Their church is a donkey church. ( Segelberg)


For more information on this saying from the Gospel of Philip see
Jesus the Measurement Spread Out

,106 The cup of prayer contains wine and water, for it represents the blood for which thanksgiving is offered. It is full of the holy spirit, and it belongs to the completely perfect human. When we drink it, we take to ourselves the perfect human. The living water is a body, and we must put on the living human. Thus, when one is about to go down into the water, one strips in order to put on the living human.

The cup represents Jesus at the last supper

Priest or Holy Man

114 The priest is completely holy, down to his very body. For if he has taken the bread, he will consecrate it. Or the cup or anything else that he gets, he will consecrate. Then how will he not consecrate the body also?

In the Coptic the word "priest" is not used, the word used is a "holy man" or a "saint" it is a dishonest translation to use the word "priest" it changes the meaning of the text. The Valentinians did not have a priesthood. According to Tertullian, "Today one man is bishop and tomorrow another; the person who is a deacon today, tomorrow is a reader; the one who is a priest is a layman tomorrow. For even on the laity they impose the functions of priesthood." ( Tertullian Against the Valentinians 1) He goes on to relate that even women could take the role of bishop, much to his horror. 

From the Quote from Tertullian we can see that the Valentinian congregations were organised autonomously.

The correct word to be used is "holy man" or "saint" this is seen from the translations by Thomas Paterson Brown and R. McL. Wilson:

The holy man is holy altogether, down to his body. For if he has received the bread he .will make it holy, or the cup, or anything else that he receives, purifying them. And how will he not purify the body also? (Gospel of Philip R. McL. Wilson Translation)

How does a person purify the body? The answer is given in the Gospel of Truth: 'Through the unity shall each one find himself Through knowledge he will purify himself from diversity into unity, swallowing up the matter in him like a flame, darkness by light, death by life.' He who is holy is capable of making everything holy, even to the body. (Gospel of Truth)

according to Philip a believer becomes 'not a Christian but a Christ at the anointing

The saint respresents Jesus' flesh He must consecrate the bread which is his body. Likewise the saint represents the blood of Christ  the saint or holy person must consecrate the blood

Eating Blood

Eating or drinking blood is forbidden

Acts 15:19 “It is my judgment, therefore, that we should not make it difficult for the Gentiles who are turning to God. 20 Instead we should write to them, telling them to abstain from food polluted by idols, from sexual immorality, from the meat of strangled animals and from blood. 21 For the law of Moses has been preached in every city from the earliest times and is read in the synagogues on every Sabbath.”

When they had said these things in the prayer, they embraced each other and they went to eat their holy food, which has no blood in it. (The Prayer of Thanksgiving The Nag Hammadi Library)


104. Furthermore, thus it is regarding the Bread with the Cup and the Chrism: there is nonetheless another (sacrament) exalted over these (Gospel of Philip)

Holy communion

communion, kept secret--There are times when it is to our own spiritual benefit and to God's glory to keep things concealed and, like Mary, to ponder them in our heart until the due time for expression. There are joys of the Spirit that are secret between a man and his Lord. One feels a sense of condemnation and depletion if he talks too freely about his communion with the Lord.

Christians have lost the mystical meaning of the communion service. The object of the ritual was to enable the worshipper to establish oneness with the Deity, to symbolically die and rise again from the dead and have a new life with the Deity in a new world. This was a well-cultivated theme in many religions of the day. The people believed that by drinking the blood and eating the bread it would be possible to absorb the qualities of the Deity.

But what is the mystical meaning that Jesus was seeking to convey to us? Communion is union in consciousness with God. It is more than an intellectual thought or a feeling even though these are included. In a moment of union the soul is quickened and we are exhilarated both mentally and emotionally. This is especially true when an individual first begins the practice of communion or silent meditation.

The communion service that Jesus instituted is contained in His words, “When you pray, go within your closet and shut the door and pray to your Father Who is in secret.” Many people reach out in thought and feeling to a god they think is out in space. But the true God, the Source of Creativity and Intelligence, is within you. Of course, God is omnipresent, but your place of contact or communion with Him is within your consciousness. What happens or can happen in a true communion service? The soul can experience a feeling of security and peace even though outer circumstances may seem to indicate turmoil and instability.