Yaldabaoth a Political Understanding

Yaldabaoth a Political Understanding 

An opening reading 


Ezekiel 28:1 The word of the Lord came to me again, saying, 2 “Son of man, say to the prince of Tyre, ‘Thus says the Lord God: “Because your heart is lifted up, And you say, ‘I am a god, I sit in the seat of gods, In the midst of the seas,’ Yet you are a man, and not a god, Though you set your heart as the heart of a god 3 (Behold, you are wiser than Daniel! There is no secret that can be hidden from you! 4 With your wisdom and your understanding You have gained riches for yourself, And gathered gold and silver into your treasuries; 5 By your great wisdom in trade you have increased your riches, And your heart is lifted up because of your riches),”

On account of the reality of the authorities, (inspired) by the spirit of the father of truth, the great apostle – referring to the "authorities of the darkness" – told us that "our contest is not against flesh and blood; rather, the authorities of the universe and the spirits of wickedness." I have sent this (to you) because you inquire about the reality of the authorities. The Hypostasis of the Archons

Since that day, the heaven has been consolidated along with its earth by means of Sophia, the daughter of Yaldabaoth, who is beneath them all. After the heavens and their powers and all of their government set themselves aright, the chief creator exalted himself and was glorified by the whole army of angels. And all the gods and their angels gave him praise and glory. On the Origin of the World

Gnostic Myths and Political Allegory in Light of Ezekiel 28

Introduction:

Gnostic scriptures, often conveyed through myths, delve into the complexities of power, rebellion, and the human psyche. The Gnostic scriptures carry layers of symbolic meanings that connect with socio-political realities, much like the allegorical dimensions found in Ezekiel 28. These myths, often misunderstood as mere fictitious tales, are detailed reflections of the social, political, and ideological landscapes of their times.

Myth as a Reflection of Mental Patterns: Myths are more than just stories; they reflect inherent patterns in human consciousness. These accounts often symbolize fixed mental structures, emphasizing contrasts like good versus evil or compassion versus cruelty, rather than unconscious feelings or desires.

Myths as Charters for Cultural Norms: Some myths, especially origin stories, serve as mythic charters that legitimize cultural norms and social institutions. They provide a foundational narrative that underpins the values and practices of a society.

Myths and Power Dynamics: Mythology is closely interconnected with power structures, political systems, and economic interests. Myths can be used as tools to reinforce or challenge existing power dynamics within a society.

Political Myths: Political myths specifically deal with political themes and typically revolve around a group of people who are portrayed as heroes or villains. These narratives often offer an ideologically charged account of a community's past, present, and future.

The majority of Gnostic scriptures take on the form of myths, but it's crucial to clarify that when using the term "myth," we don't imply falsehood. Instead, these myths convey truths of a different nature than theological dogmas or philosophical statements.

Myth as a Tool of Power and Legitimization:

Gnostic myths, including the Apocryphon of John, serve as narratives legitimizing cultural norms and societal institutions, much like how Ezekiel 28 conveys political themes through its metaphorical language. Myths, interpreted as fixed mental structures representing opposing forces, shape understanding and wield significant influence in the socio-political realm.

The Role of Myths in Gnostic Texts

Why do Gnostic texts for the most part employ myths? The answer lies in the historical context of Gnostic Christians who faced severe persecution, initially by the Roman Empire and later by orthodox Christian authorities. Unlike many early Christians who embraced martyrdom, Gnostic Christians rejected this path.

The Testimony of Truth highlights this departure from martyrdom, criticizing those who choose to be martyrs. It suggests that becoming "perfected" through martyrdom is an incomplete path. Instead, it implies that such individuals merely bear witness to themselves without achieving spiritual advancement.

Political Myths and Social Ideologies:

Like the Gnostic myths centred on opposition to political structures, Ezekiel 28 resonates with the portrayal of an arrogant ruler claiming divine status. Both accounts provide an ideologically marked account of past, present, and future, reflecting the political community's identity, much like the Gnostics' rejection of martyrdom in favour of a different ideological stance.

Gnostic Mythology and Resistance to Political Order:

The Gnostic texts, born from persecution by the Romans and rejection by orthodox Christian authorities, the Gnostic texts symbolize a revolt against established political systems. Likewise, Gnostic myths function as a mode of defiance, actively challenging the existing political order.

Allegorical Readings and Political Commentary:

An allegorical interpretation of Gnostic myths, like the Apocryphon of John, unveils parallels with the claims of Roman emperors. Just as Ezekiel 28:1-3 highlights the King of Tyre's excessive pride, these Gnostic texts are allegorically the Roman emperors' assertions of divine authority, echoing the deceptive doublespeak ingrained in imperial rule.

Interpreting Gnostic Myths

When interpreting Gnostic myths, it is crucial not to isolate them from the social, political, and economic factors that influenced their creation. The authors of Gnostic texts rejected the legitimacy of existing political orders. Gnosticism emerged as a response from a politically marginalized intellectual elite in the eastern regions of the Roman Empire during the second and first centuries CE.

These Gnostics overtly challenged the political structures of their time. While they did not explicitly detail the political views or activities of these individuals, their myths, featuring tyrannical creator-archons, serve as veiled political protests. These myths call on those living under oppressive power to rise against it.

Conclusion:

The Gnostic myths, similar to the allegorical representation in Ezekiel 28, serve as potent tools to challenge exsting socio-political structures. Their detailed accounts, misunderstood as mere stories, reflect a powerful resistance against oppressive political orders, shedding light on the ideological and power struggles of their times. The allegorical lens unveils a potential critique within these texts, offering a nuanced understanding of political resistance intertwined with mythic storytelling.

Political Deification and Cosmic Rebellion: A Gnostic Interpretation of Ezekiel 28

Introduction:

The biblical passage in Ezekiel 28 has been a subject of diverse interpretations, with some scholars drawing connections between the arrogance of rulers and the elevation of political figures to near-divine status. In this discourse, we delve into the Gnostic perspective, particularly examining the Apocryphon of John and its portrayal of Yaldabaoth, a cosmic entity associated with political power and rulership.

Yaldabaoth as a Political Image:

The Apocryphon of John paints a graphic picture of Yaldabaoth, a cosmic ruler associated with political imagery, specifically likened to the Roman emperors. Stationing seven kings over the heavens and five over the abyss, Yaldabaoth is portrayed as a figure who shares his fire but retains the power of light from his mother, representing an ignorant darkness.

Gnostic Cosmology:

The Gnostic narrative unfurls with a cosmic interplay of light and darkness, highlighting the duality emerging from the mingling of these forces. Yaldabaoth, also recognized as Sakla or Samael, asserts his divinity by declaring, "I am God." This declaration resonates with Ezekiel 28, where the King of Tyre similarly affirms, "I am a god, I sit in the seat of God." Drawing parallels between Yaldabaoth and earthly rulers, such as King Nebuchadnezzar in Isaiah 14 and Judith 3:8, 6:12, Antiochus Epiphanies in Daniel 11:36, Herod in Acts 12:21-23, and the transformative journey of figures like Julius Caesar and Augustus, Caligula and Nero (with Nero symbolizing the antichrist in typology) in Ascension of Isaiah 4:6-8. This transformation from men to Gods, within the thought world of the cosmic order, aligns with Yaldabaoth's bold claim, "I am God."

The Deification of Rome:

A key aspect of this Gnostic interpretation is the association of Samael with Rome, particularly the Roman angel or prince. Drawing from Jewish texts like the Ascension of Isaiah and the Third Book of Enoch, Samael becomes the symbolic representation of the Roman Empire's divine authority. The Gnostic rejection of political legitimacy is reflected in their view of Samael as the angel of Rome, challenging the ideals propagated by the Roman rulers.

Samael in Jewish Texts:

Jewish texts from the same period identify Samael with the angel of Edom, a reference to Rome. This cosmic connection between angels and earthly nations provides a context for interpreting Samael's role in the Gnostic worldview. The angelic embodiment of Rome, coupled with the rejection of political order, underscores the Gnostic rejection of the Roman Empire's claims to peace and justice.

Gnostic Resistance:

The Gnostic texts, emerging as a response to political marginalization in the Roman Empire, express a rejection of the legitimacy of political authority. The irony of Rome's claim to a peaceful reign, juxtaposed with the violence and displacement used to maintain control, reflects the Gnostic critique of the Empire's lofty ideals. The Gnostics perceive Roman virtues like peace, justice, and wisdom as veiled expressions of war, injustice, and ignorance for those under Roman rule.

Conclusion:

In conclusion, the Gnostic interpretation of Ezekiel 28, as reflected in the Apocryphon of John, presents a cosmic narrative intertwining political power, angelic entities, and the rejection of earthly rulership. By aligning Yaldabaoth with Rome and drawing parallels between the King of Tyre and other historical rulers, the Gnostics offer a unique lens through which to view the complexities of cosmic rebellion and political resistance in the ancient world.

The Allegorical Lens: Roman Emperors as Yaldabaoth

Consider the possibility of reading texts like the Apocryphon of John allegorically, interpreting Yaldabaoth as a representation of Roman emperors who claimed divine status and rulership over the world. In this interpretation, the term "Cosmocrator," meaning "lord or ruler of the world," parallels the contemporary Greek belief that rulers and authorities were controlled by malevolent forces.

The Apostle Paul's words in Ephesians 6:12&13, urging individuals to combat spiritual wickedness in high places, become a call to resist the manipulative machinations of emperors and authorities.

Notably, the Apocryphon of John assigns Yaldabaoth multiple names, including Saklas and Samael. The association of Samael with the angel of Rome aligns with the ancient belief that heavenly battles corresponded to earthly nations.

In the ancient world, politics and religiosity were deeply interconnected. Rather than solely viewing the material world as a realm where divine sparks are trapped, it becomes conceivable to interpret these Gnostic texts as critiques of Roman emperors' claims to godhood and their creation of a world in their image.

Yaldabaoth, in this context, symbolizes an arrogant ruler who ensnares people within the structures of the political system. This perspective prompts us to question the spiritual implications of such entanglement and offers a nuanced lens through which to understand the complex relationship between religion and politics within Gnostic narratives.

A Description of Yaltabaoth

And when she saw (the consequences of) her desire, it changed into a form of a lion-faced serpent. And its eyes were like lightning fires which flash. She cast it away from her, outside that place, that no one of the immortal ones might see it, for she had created it in ignorance. And she surrounded it with a luminous cloud, and she placed a throne in the middle of the cloud that no one might see it except the holy Spirit who is called the mother of the living. And she called his name Yaltabaoth. (The Apocryphon of John)

And when Pistis Sophia desired to cause the thing that had no spirit to be formed into a likeness and to rule over matter and over all her forces, there appeared for the first time a ruler, out of the waters, lion-like in appearance, androgynous, having great authority within him, and ignorant of whence he had come into being. Now when Pistis Sophia saw him moving about in the depth of the waters, she said to him, "Child, pass through to here," whose equivalent is 'yalda baoth'. (On the Origin of the World)

Since that day, there appeared the principle of verbal expression, which reached the gods and the angels and mankind. And what came into being as a result of verbal expression, the gods and the angels and mankind finished. Now as for the ruler Yaltabaoth, he is ignorant of the force of Pistis: he did not see her face, rather he saw in the water the likeness that spoke with him. And because of that voice, he called himself 'Yaldabaoth'. But 'Ariael' is what the perfect call him, for he was like a lion. Now when he had come to have authority over matter, Pistis Sophia withdrew up to her light. (On the Origin of the World)

Within Gnostic texts, Yaldabaoth embodies a symbolic representation reminiscent of a lion or a lion-faced serpent, both emblematic of kingship, rulership, and imperial power.

Yaldabaoth, as the ruler of the world, personifies the human ego, emerging as a manifestation within the political heavens.

This entity, representing ignorance rooted in the ego, arises when rationality succumbs to the influence of emotions or external senses.

Yaldabaoth: A Gnostic Symbol of Ego and Political Power

Introduction:

In Gnostic thought, Yaldabaoth emerges as a complex symbol representing the lord of this world, influencing the human condition and shaping psychological existence. This discussion explores the Gnostic perspective on Yaldabaoth, portraying this cosmic entity as the shadow of ego development and an archetype integral to human consciousness.

Yaldabaoth and the Ego:

For the Gnostics, the development of the individual ego is intertwined with the influence of Yaldabaoth. This cosmic figure becomes the archetype that propels human consciousness towards the formation of a focal narcissistic ego. Yaldabaoth, as the lord of this world, defines the human will and intellect, leading to the development of individual judgment and rulership.

The Will and Intellectual Learning:

Yaldabaoth's representation in individuals manifests as the human will and intellect, potent up to a certain point. Those embodying Yaldabaoth characteristics often exhibit reluctance to stand on their own judgment, seeking external sources for decision-making. The Gnostic view likens these individuals to rulers who rule arbitrarily, refusing to tap into their own wisdom. This behaviour can lead to a regression to an animal-instinct plane of consciousness, as observed in Daniel 5:21.

Yaldabaoth as a Symbol of Human Consciousness:

In Gnostic cosmology, Yaldabaoth symbolizes human consciousness, both individually and collectively in organized opposition to God. The lion-faced serpent imagery emphasizes Yaldabaoth's connection to the civil and military power of the Roman Empire. The serpent, representing the flesh in political manifestation, becomes identified with the civil and military authority of a supposedly Christianized Empire under Constantine. (Isa. 27:1; Ezek, 29:3; Jer. 51:34; Job 41:1),

Lion Symbolism in the Bible:

The Gnostic interpretation draws on biblical symbolism, where lions are associated with fierce and predatory characteristics. Wicked individuals, nations, false prophets, and oppressive rulers are depicted as lions in various biblical passages (wicked ones (Ps 10:9), persons who oppose God and his people (Ps 22:13; 35:17; 57:4; Jer 12:8), false prophets (Eze 22:25), wicked rulers and princes (Pr 28:15; Zep 3:3), the Babylonian World Power (Da 7:4). The lion's mouth is also employed to describe the seven-headed, ten-horned wild beast in Revelation 13:2, further aligning with the Gnostic view of Yaldabaoth.

The Sea Symbolism:

Yaldabaoth's ascent from the sea mirrors biblical symbolism where the sea represents nations and empires. (Isa. 57:20; Jer. 51:13 Rev. 17:15 ) Rising from the waters signifies the exercise of power over nations and international influence. The imagery parallels the Beast described in Revelation 13:1, emphasizing the political connotations of Yaldabaoth's symbolism.

Conclusion:

In conclusion, the Gnostic interpretation of Yaldabaoth offers a unique perspective on the interplay between ego development, political power, and cosmic symbolism. Yaldabaoth, as the lord of this world, becomes a powerful symbol in the Gnostic worldview, intimately linked to the human condition and the challenges of rulership in opposition to divine principles.

Original text

What are Myths

Since the term myth is widely used to imply that a story is not objectively true, the identification of a narrative as a myth can be highly political:

Myths reflect patterns in the mind and we interpret those patterns more as fixed mental structures, specifically pairs of opposites (good/evil, compassionate/callous), rather than unconscious feelings or urges.

Myths such as origin stories might provide a "mythic charter"—a legitimisation—for cultural norms and social institutions.

Myth is a form of understanding and telling stories that are connected to power, political structures, and political and economic interests.

Political myths simply deal with political topics and always use a group of people as the hero or protagonist

A myth is considered a political myth when the narrative provides an ideologically marked account of the past, present, and future of the political community.

One finds that most Gnostic scriptures take the form of myths. The term “myth” should not here be taken to mean “stories that are not true”, but rather, that the truths embodied in these myths are of a different order from the dogmas of theology or the statements of philosophy.

Why myths?

Why would the Gnostic text use myths the answer is because of persecution!

Gnostic Christians have been heavily persecuted, first by the Roman Empire and for centuries afterwards by orthodox Christian authorities

The Gnostic Christians rejected martyrdom

The Testimony of Truth They are blind guides, like the disciples. They boarded the ship; at about thirty stadies, they saw Jesus walking on the sea. These are empty martyrs since they bear witness only to themselves. And yet they are sick, and they are not able to raise themselves.

But when they are "perfected" with a (martyr's) death, this is the thought that they have within them: "If we deliver ourselves over to death for the sake of the Name we will be saved." These matters are not settled in this way. But through the agency of the wandering stars they say they have "completed" their futile "course", and [...] say, [...]. But these [...] they have delivered themselves ...
... (7 lines unrecoverable)

How does one Interpret the Gnostic myths?

Interpretation should not take place in isolation, of the social, political, and economic factors which influenced how the writers wrote these texts.

The writers of the Gnostic texts were rejecting the legitimacy of all political order, ancient Gnosticism arose as a reaction of a politically marginalized intellectual elite in the eastern regions of the Roman Empire in the second and first centuries C.E.

The Gnostics were explicit in revolt against the political structures of their age, and/or they showed little or no interest in surrounding society, or had even somehow radically severed their connections with society or were at least completely indifferent to the political well-being and future of society?

Gnostics never made any direct testimony about the political views or activity of these people, but rather in their myths about demiurges. In the mythic characters of tyrannical creator-archons. These demiurgical myths are veiled political protests, calling people who live under such power to rebellion. World rejection was therefore equivalent to the rejection of the legitimacy of all political structures in the world or the political structure of the Roman Empire.

Though the Roman rulers claimed  peaceful reign the violence intimidation and displacement used to maintain this piece made it ironic the lofty ideals with which the Empire framed itself were a type of double-speak for those under its rule The Peace of the Roman Empire meant War for those subjected by it Justice meant injustice Wisdom meant ignorance

What if the texts, such as the Apocryphon of John, were meant to be read allegorically, symbolizing the Roman emperors' assertions of divinity and their claims as saviors of the world, suggesting they've crafted the known world in their likeness? What if this aspect forms a significant part of the narrative?

for instance, the Apocryphon of John describes Yaldabaoth as a political image of the Roman emperor

"Cosmocrator" was the title of the Roman emperor, meaning "lord or ruler of the world", and contemporary Greek thought was, that rulers and authorities, were controlled by demonic forces of evil. The apostle Paul declares that the evil machinations of the emperor and those in high authority can be overcome, by putting on the whole panoply of God, which is described in the verses that follow as: the belt of truth, the breastplate of righteousness, sandals of peace, the shield of faith, the helmet of salvation and the sword of the Spirit. 

Ephesians 6:12&13 - "For we wrestle not against flesh and blood ['haimakai surka'], but against principalities ['archas', 'rulers'], against powers ['exousias', 'authorities'], against the rulers ['tous kosmokratoras'. 'world rulers'] of the darkness of the world, against spiritual wickedness in high places ['ta pneumatika tes ponerias en tois epouraniois', 'the spiritual hosts of evil in the heavenlies']. Wherefore take unto you the whole armour of God ['ten panoplian tou theou'], that you may be able to stand in the evil day ['te hemera te ponera'], and having done all, to stand."

The Apocryphon of John Now this weak ruler has three names. The first name is Yaltabaoth. The second is Saklas. The third is Samael. He is impious in his Madness, she who dwells in him. For he said, am God and no other god exists except me,' since he is ignorant of the place from which his strength had come.

In the ancient world politics and religiosity are not two separate things they're part and parcel of one another and interwoven with one another and what might it mean instead of saying you know instead of saying this horrible material world where these divine sparks are trapped what if this was was about the Roman emperors in particular.

What if we consider Yaldabaoth as an embodiment of an overbearing ruler, akin to a Roman emperor, ensnaring people within the structures of a political system? How might this impact our spiritual understanding and perception of such circumstances?

Understanding the religious, political, social, and cultural significance embedded in the Gnostic texts is crucial in reshaping our interpretation. Neglecting these contextual layers inhibits a comprehensive comprehension of the myths.

It's essential to delve into the intricate interconnections among these facets of human existence, evident in the characters of Adam and Eve within these texts. They embody the complexities woven into human life.

The pursuit of transcending this world's disorder involves attaining extraordinary insight, knowledge, or understanding—a state referred to as gnosis.

To escape this disorder of the world one can transcend it by extraordinary insight, learning, or knowledge, called a gnosis

Ialdabaoth Greek Ιαλνταμπαόθ Yaldabaoth Hebrew ילדאבהות (Literally "Children of the Void," or Children of the Abyss (depth of the waters) from ילדה = yalda= child; בהו = bohu = void; אבהות = abbott = fatherhood, parentage, paternity).

a description of Yaltabaoth

And when she saw (the consequences of) her desire, it changed into a form of a lion-faced serpent. And its eyes were like lightning fires which flash. She cast it away from her, outside that place, that no one of the immortal ones might see it, for she had created it in ignorance. And she surrounded it with a luminous cloud, and she placed a throne in the middle of the cloud that no one might see it except the holy Spirit who is called the mother of the living. And she called his name Yaltabaoth.

The Apocryphon of John

And when Pistis Sophia desired to cause the thing that had no spirit to be formed into a likeness and to rule over matter and over all her forces, there appeared for the first time a ruler, out of the waters, lion-like in appearance, androgynous, having great authority within him, and ignorant of whence he had come into being. Now when Pistis Sophia saw him moving about in the depth of the waters, she said to him, "Child, pass through to here," whose equivalent is 'yalda baoth'.

On the Origin of the World

Since that day, there appeared the principle of verbal expression, which reached the gods and the angels and mankind. And what came into being as a result of verbal expression, the gods and the angels and mankind finished. Now as for the ruler Yaltabaoth, he is ignorant of the force of Pistis: he did not see her face, rather he saw in the water the likeness that spoke with him. And because of that voice, he called himself 'Yaldabaoth'. But 'Ariael' is what the perfect call him, for he was like a lion. Now when he had come to have authority over matter, Pistis Sophia withdrew up to her light.

On the Origin of the World

In the Gnostic scriptures Yaldabaoth is described as a lion or a lion-faced serpent these are symbols of kings rulers and empires

O Ialdabaoth, who art the ruler of the world, Yaldabaoth is a personification of the human ego manifested in the political heavens

Yaldabaoth (ignorance via the ego) is created when reason follows the emotions or outward senses

I am God

Secret Book of John
This gloomy ruler has three names: the first name is Yaldabaoth, the second is Sakla, the third is Samael.

He is wicked in his mindlessness that is in him. He said, I am god and there is no other god but me, since he did not know where his own strength had come from.

Yaldabaoth is also referred to as Sakla or Samael. Samael God of the Romes in Jewish texts see the Ascension of Isaiah and the third book of Enoch Sammael is identified with the angel of Edom (Rome) the prince arkon of the Roman people is also frequently given the title of Prince of the world

The Reality of the Rulers (The Hypostasis of the Archons)

Their chief is blind. Because of his power and his ignorance and his arrogance, he said, with his power, “I am god; there is no other but me.”

On the Origin of the World

Since that day, the heaven has been consolidated along with its earth by means of Sophia, the daughter of Yaldabaoth, who is beneath them all. After the heavens and their powers and all of their government set themselves aright, the chief creator exalted himself and was glorified by the whole army of angels. And all the gods and their angels gave him praise and glory.

And he rejoiced in his heart, and he boasted continually, saying to them, “I do not need anything. I am god and there is no other god but me.” But when he said these things, he sinned against all of the immortal imperishable ones, and they kept their eyes on him.

the statement I am God comes from Ezekiel 28 Yaldabaoth is described as proclaiming himself to be God or saying I am God this is a reference to the Deification of the Rome Emperors the same is also said of the King of Tyre Ezekiel 28:2 Son of man, say unto the prince of Tyre, Thus saith the Lord Yahweh: Because thy heart is lifted up, and thou hast said, I am a god, I sit in the seat of God, in the midst of the seas; yet thou art man, and not God, though thou didst set thy heart as the heart of God

The arrogant statement by Yaldabaoth the chief archon I am God should be explained in terms of Isaiah 14 a lamentation for the King of Babylon. in Ezekiel 28:2,9 the king of Tyre said "I am god" Notice other arrogant rulers who claimed to be divine or were acclaimed as gods King Nebuchadnezzar in Judith 3:8 6:12 Antiochus Epiphanies in Daniel 11:36 Herod in Acts 12:21-23 thus the transformation of Julius Caesar and Augustus, Caligula and Nero (Nero is symbol of the antichrist in typology) in Ascension of Isaiah 4:6-8 from men to Gods which in the thought world of the cosmologies would be akin to Yaldabaoth's claim I am God. 

The Gnostics held that Yaldabaoth was the lord of this world who dominates the human condition. Yaldabaoth defines human psychological existence. humans are of necessity ego-bound in the sense of being required to develop an individual ego for the gnostics the figure of Yaldabaoth is the shadow of ego development. Yaldabaoth is the archetype that creates and sustains an inevitable development within human consciousness toward the formation of the focal narcissistic ego.

Yaldabaoth represents in us the human will and intellect; this brings about human judgment. A ruler always represents some function of the will. The Will entrenched in intellectual learning, giving its full attention to material subjects, is very powerful up to a certain point. The world is full of these Yaldabaoth people. 

They are loath to stand on their own judgment in any matter. When a decision is required of them they fly to some oracle. It may be a friend whose good advice they ask or a medium, or they may even resort to the tossing of a coin or the cutting of a deck of cards. They are willful and they rule arbitrarily. Refusing to bring forth their own good judgment, they become mendacious and tyrannical. The ultimate of this sort of action is a return to the animal-instinct plane of consciousness, as described in Daniel 5:21.

Mankind animal characteristic

Mankind has observed the characteristics and habits of animals and has applied them in a figurative or symbolic sense to persons, peoples, governments, and organizations. Thus Yaldabaoth is a symbol of human consciousness individually and organised collectively (that is politically) in opposition to God

The lion-faced serpent The "serpent" represents the civil, or military power of the Roman Empire. The word is also rendered leviathan (Isa. 27:1; Ezek, 29:3; Jer. 51:34; Job 41:1), and is used as representing the flesh in political manifestation.

Finally, when Constantine transferred his civil and military headquarters from Rome to Constantinople (previously the very centre of pagan resistance), the "serpent" became identified with the civil and military power of a so-called Christianised Empire.

In the Bible wicked people and nations are described as a lion

.Because of the lion’s fierce and predatory characteristics, the animal was also used to represent wicked ones (Ps 10:9), persons who oppose God and his people (Ps 22:13; 35:17; 57:4; Jer 12:8), false prophets (Eze 22:25), wicked rulers and princes (Pr 28:15; Zep 3:3), the Babylonian World Power (Da 7:4). And the seven-headed, ten-horned wild beast out of the sea, which gets its authority from the dragon, was depicted as having a lion’s mouth. (Re 13:2) At Psalm 91:13 the lion and the cobra seem to denote the power of the enemy, the lion being representative of open attack and the cobra of underhanded scheming, or attacks from a concealed place.—Compare Lu 10:19; 2Co 11

The dragon stood on the shore of the sea. And I saw a beast coming out of the sea. It had ten horns and seven heads, with ten crowns on its horns, and on each head a blasphemous name.

Rev 13:2 And the beast which I saw was like unto a leopard, and his feet were as the feet of a bear, and his mouth as the mouth of a lion: and the dragon gave him his power, and his seat, and great authority.

Like the Beast in Rev 13:1 Yaldabaoth is described as ascending out of the sea there appeared for the first time a ruler, out of the waters, lion-like in appearance the beast of the sea

And when she saw (the consequences of) her desire, it changed into a form of a lion-faced serpent.

And when Pistis Sophia desired to cause the thing that had no spirit to be formed into a likeness and to rule over matter and over all her forces, there appeared for the first time a ruler, out of the waters, lion-like in appearance,

The "Seas" Sea is symbolic of nations and empires (Isa. 57:20; Jer. 51:13 Rev. 17:15 ). it is international in its influence; it dominates "the waters," or nations. To rise out of the waters is to exercise power over them


Yaldabaoth is not Yahweh but represents the carnal mind or the ego

Yaldabaoth is a personification of human nature

Yaldabaoth describes human psychological existence

the figure of Yaldabaoth is the shadow of ego development Yaldabaoth is the archetype that creates and sustains an inevitable development within human consciousness toward the formation of the focal narcissistic ego

demons are not evil by nature Dionysius the Areopagite or pseudo dionysius

demons are not evil by nature

Dionysius the Areopagite or pseudo dionysius

But, neither are the demons evil by nature; for, if they are evil by nature, neither are they from the Good, nor amongst things existing; nor, in fact, did they change from good, being by nature, and always, evil. Then, are they evil to themselves or to others? If to themselves, they also destroy themselves; but if to others, how destroying, or what destroying?—Essence, or power, or energy? If indeed Essence, in the first place, it is not contrary to nature; for they do not destroy things indestructible by nature, but things receptive of destruction. Then, neither is this an evil for every one, and in every case; but, not even any existing thing is destroyed, in so far as it is essence and  nature, but by the defect of nature’s order, the principle of harmony and proportion lacks the power to remain as it was. But the lack of strength is not complete, for the complete lack of power takes away even the disease and the subject; and such a disease will be even a destruction of itself; so that, such a thing is not an evil, but a defective good, for that which has no part of the Good will not be amongst things which exist. And with regard to the destruction of power and energy the principle is the same. Then, how are the demons, seeing they come into being from God, evil? For the Good brings forth and sustains good things. Yet they are called evil, some one may say. But not as they are (for they are from the Good, and obtained a good being), but, as they are not, by not having had strength, as the Oracles affirm, “to keep their first estate.” For in what, tell me, do we affirm that the demons become evil, except in the ceasing in the habit and energy for good things Divine? Otherwise, if the demons are evil by nature, they are always evil; yet evil is unstable. Therefore, if they are always in the same condition, they are not evil; for to be ever the same is a characteristic of the Good. But, if they are not always evil, they are not evil by nature, but by wavering from the angelic good qualities. And they are not altogether without part in the good, in so far as they both are, and live and think, and in one word—as there is a sort of movement of aspiration in them. But they are said to be evil, by reason of their weakness as regards their action according to nature. The evil then, in them, is a turning aside and a stepping out of things befitting themselves, and a missing of aim, and imperfection and impotence, and a weakness and departure, and falling away from the power which preserves their integrity in them. Otherwise, what is evil in demons? An irrational anger—a senseless desire—a headlong fancy.—But these, even if they are in demons, are not altogether, nor in every respect, nor in themselves alone, evils. For even with regard to other living creatures, not the possession of these, but the loss, is both destruction to the creature, and an evil. But the possession saves, and makes to be, the nature of the living creature which possesses them. The tribe of demons then is not evil, so far as it is according to nature, but so far as it is not; and the whole good which was given to them was not changed, but themselves fell from the whole good given. And the angelic gifts which were given to them, we by no means affirm that they were changed, but they exist, and are complete, and all luminous, although the demons themselves do not see, through having blunted their powers of seeing good. So far as they are, they are both from the Good, and are good, and aspire to the Beautiful and the Good, by aspiring to the realities, Being, and Life, and Thought; and by the privation and departure and declension from the good things befitting them, they are called evil, and are evil as regards what they are not: and by aspiring to the non-existent, they aspire to the Evil

But does some one say that souls are evil? If it be that they meet with evil things providentially, and with a view to their preservation, this is not an evil, but a good, and from the Good, Who makes even the evil good. But, if we say that souls become evil, in what respect do they become evil, except in the failure of their good habits and energies; and, by reason of their own lack of strength, missing their aim and tripping? For we also say, that the air around us becomes dark by failure and absence of light, and yet the light itself is always light, that which enlightens even the darkness. The Evil, then, is neither in demons nor in us, as an existent evil, but as a failure and dearth of the perfection of our own proper goods.

Extracts from the Works of Theodotus

14 The demons are said to be incorporeal, not because they have no bodies (for they have even shape and are, therefore, capable of feeling punishment), but they are said to be incorporeal because, in comparison with the spiritual bodies which are saved, they are a shade. And the angels are bodies; at any rate they are seen. Why even the soul is a body, for the Apostle says, “It is sown a body of soul, it is raised a body of spirit.” And how can the souls which are being punished be sensible of it, if they are not bodies? Certainly he says, “Fear him who, after death, is able to cast soul and body into hell.” Now that which is visible is not purged by fire, but is dissolved into dust. But, from the story of Lazarus and Dives, the soul is directly shown by its possession of bodily limbs to be a body.

Debunking Misconceptions: Demons and Their Nature

In the realm of ancient theological and philosophical discussions, the concept of demons has often been associated with inherent evil. However, a closer examination of the writings attributed to Dionysius the Areopagite, also known as pseudo-Dionysius, reveals a more nuanced perspective.

Demons Not Inherently Evil

Contrary to the prevalent belief that demons are evil by nature, pseudo-Dionysius presents a compelling argument that challenges this assumption. He starts by asserting that if demons were inherently evil, it would follow that they could not be attributed to the realm of the Good, nor would they be considered among existing entities. Furthermore, if their nature was evil, they would either harm themselves or others. This leads to a crucial question: are they evil to themselves or to others?

The Nature of Evil in Demons

The analysis then delves into the nature of evil within demons. Pseudo-Dionysius proposes that the evil attributed to demons is not inherent but rather a result of their deviation from their original state of goodness. The demons' inability to maintain their initial state of goodness is a consequence of their own lack of strength, which subsequently leads to their straying from their divine essence.

Understanding the Transition from Good to Evil

Pseudo-Dionysius raises the essential question of how demons transition from being creations of God to beings perceived as evil. He argues that demons undergo this transformation due to their diminishing capacity for engaging in divine and virtuous actions. In essence, their goodness declines as they lose the strength and energy required to partake in acts aligned with the divine.

The Complex Reality of Demons

Rather than viewing demons as purely evil entities, pseudo-Dionysius emphasizes that demons still possess certain aspects of the good. They continue to exist, live, think, and exhibit a form of aspiration. It is their departure from their inherent nature and their inability to act in harmony with it that leads to their characterization as evil.

The Role of Weakness in Evil

The text further explores the concept of evil within demons, highlighting that it manifests as weakness, deviation, and a failure to fulfill their intended purpose. While demons may experience irrational anger, senseless desires, and unfounded fantasies, these traits are not inherently evil in themselves. Instead, it is the demons' inability to harness and direct these qualities in a virtuous manner that leads to their perceived evil.

Souls and Evil

The discussion extends to souls and whether they can be considered evil. Pseudo-Dionysius argues that souls do not inherently possess evil; rather, they can exhibit evil characteristics when their virtuous habits and energies falter. Evil in souls arises from their own weakness, leading to a departure from their intended state of goodness.

The Concept of Evil as Absence

Ultimately, the text asserts that evil, whether in demons or souls, is not a tangible entity but rather a dearth and absence of the perfection of one's inherent goodness. It likens this absence to the darkness that envelops the air when light is absent, emphasizing that even in such cases, the light itself remains intrinsically good and capable of illuminating the darkness.

In summary, pseudo-Dionysius challenges the conventional notion of demons as inherently evil beings. He invites readers to consider the complexity of their nature, highlighting that their perceived evil is a result of their own shortcomings and a departure from their original state of goodness. This nuanced perspective encourages a more profound exploration of the relationship between good and evil in theological and philosophical discussions.

Christian Gnostic Understanding of Satan The devil

Christian Gnostic Understanding of Satan The devil

The theology of orthodox Christianity places the devil in juxtaposition with God. As the one is presented for worship as the source and embodiment of all good, so the other is held up for detestation and dread, as the instigator and promoter of all evil. Practically, the one is regarded in the light of the good God, and the other as the bad god. It is the polytheism of paganism in its smallest form: and the philosophy of the ancients embodied in names and forms supplied by the Bible.

The first thing we have to address is the definition of Satan. While fundamentalists will tell you that Satan was present in the Bible from the very foundations laid in Genesis, history tells us a different story. The words Satan, Devil, demon, Lucifer, fallen angel etc. simply don't occur in the whole of the book of Genesis. Throughout the Old Testament, the one and only God is presented as all powerful, without equal and in no competition with any other cosmic force. The Old Testament makes it clear that any 'adversary' to God's people was ultimately under the control of God Himself.

The period between the Old and New Testaments saw the production of a huge volume of Jewish literature advocating a personal Satan. Jewish writings speak of a figure called Beliar, a kind of personal Satan figure. The Book of Enoch and the story of the "watchers" became accepted as dogma amongst the Jews- i.e. that the "watcher" Angels had sinned and come to earth at the time of Genesis 6 and married beautiful women. Thus the Book Of Jubilees, dating from around 104 B.C., claims that God placed "over all nations and peoples, spirits in authority, to lead them astray" (15:31). Why would the righteous God place His people under the authority of those who would lead them astray- and then judge us for going astray? Jubilees 5:2 blames the flood on the fact that the earth was morally corrupt, but it claims that the animal creation also sinned and brought about the state of corruptness which required the destruction of the flood- thereby taking the spotlight off human sin as the sole cause for the flood.

The Bible clearly states that the suffering and disease that there is in the earth is a result of Adam's sin; but Jubilees claims that all such illnesses were a result of evil spirits, "And we explained to Noah all the medicines of their diseases, together with their seductions, how he might heal them with herbs of the earth" (Jub. 10:12-13).

After the fall of the second temple Rabbinical scholars rejected all of the Enochian writings mentioning Satan as a literal, heavenly figure and fallen angels, and viewing Satan to symbolize evil inclination (malicious impulses) yetzer hara (Hebrew: יֵצֶר הַרַע‎)

Satan

SATAN is a Hebrew word that has been transferred to the New Testament and to the English. It denotes an adversary, an opponent or an enemy. It has been translated seven times: “adversary”; five times: “be an adversary”; once each: “resist” and “to withstand”; nineteen times: “satan” (as in Numbers 22:22; Matthew 16:23).

The Accuser (often said by clergy to be Satan) in the Book of Job is literally an agent of the court, much like Prosecutors in the modern legal system. There’s no indication that this is a fallen angel. (One has to ask, how on earth did a fallen angel even appear before God if said fallen angel is supposed to be suffering in the fires of Hell?) The original Hebrew word HaSatan simply means adversary or accuser.

The first place where it occurs is Num. 22:22 :--"And God's anger was kindled because he (Balaam) went; and the angel of the Lord stood in the way for an adversary (SATAN) against him."

It next occurs in the same chapter, verse 32 :--

"And the angel of the Lord said unto him, Wherefore hast thou smitten thine ass these three times? Behold, I went out to withstand (marg., to be AN ADVERSARY--a Satan to) thee."

In this case, Satan was a holy angel. Understanding "Satan" to mean adversary in its simple and general sense, we can see how this could be; but, understanding it as the evil being of popular belief, it would be a different matter. The following are other cases in which the word is translated "adversary," in the common version of the Scriptures:--

"Let him not go down with us to battle, lest in the battle he be an adversary (SATAN) to us" (1 Sam 29:4).

"And David said, What have I to do with you, ye sons of Zeruiah, that ye should this day be adversaries (SATANS) unto me?" (2 Sam 19:22).

"But now the Lord my God hath given me rest on every side, so that there is neither adversary (SATAN) nor evil occurrent" (1 Kings 5:4).

"And the Lord stirred up an adversary (SATAN) unto Solomon, Hadad the Edomite: he was of the king's seed in Edom" (1 Kings 11:14).

"And God stirred him up another adversary (SATAN), Rezon, the son of Eliadah, which fled from his lord Hadadezer king of Zobah."

"And he was an adversary (SATAN) to Israel all the days of Solomon" (1 Kings 11:23, 25).

Matthew 16:23 - “But he turned, and said unto Peter, Get thee behind me, Satan: thou art an offense unto me: for thou savourest not the things that be of God, but those that be of MEN.”

The foregoing literal definitions indicate certain characteristics applicable to mankind and NOT to a superhuman evil god of the lower regions.

These definitions indicate characteristics of mankind, NOT a superhuman evil god.

The devil of popular opinion (the demigod of the lower region) cannot be found in the Hebrew Old testament writings.

The deceiving phase of mind in man that has fixed ideas in opposition to Truth (adversary, lier in wait, accuser, opposer, hater, an enemy). Satan assumes various forms in man's consciousness, among which may be mentioned egotism, a puffing up of the personality; and the opposite of this, self-deprecation, which admits the "accuser" into the consciousness. This "accuser" makes man believe that he is inherently evil.

Satan is the "Devil," a state of mind formed by man's personal ideas of his power and completeness and sufficiency apart from God. Besides at times puffing up the personality, this satanic thought often turns about and, after having tempted one to do evil, discourages the soul by accusing it of sin. Summed up, it is the state of mind in man that believes in its own sufficiency independent of its creative Source.

Satan--The Adversary, the great universal negative whose power is derived from the unlawful expression of man's own being. The serpent as "Satan" is sensation suggesting indulgence in pleasures beyond the law fixed by creative Mind.

The Devil

In the New Testament, the word DEVIL is derived from the Greek word ‘diabolos’ which literally means a slanderer, a false witness, or a liar, which can only apply to mankind and not to one of God’s heavenly hosts.

As Jesus applied "Satan" to Peter, so he applied "devil" to Judas: "Have not I chosen you twelve, and one of you is A DEVIL?" (John 6:70). Judas proved a liar, a betrayer, a false accuser, and, therefore, a devil. Paul, in 1 Tim 3:11, tells the wives of deacons not to be devils. His exhortation, it is true, does not appear in this form in the English version. The words, as translated, are "Even so must their wives be grave, not slanderers (diabolous)." The same remark applies to 2 Tim 3:2, 3 "For men shall be... without natural affection, truce-breakers, false accusers (diaboloi)"; and to Titus 2:3: "The aged women likewise, that they be in behaviour as becometh holiness, not false accusers (diabolous)."

"Forasmuch then as the children are partakers of flesh and blood, he (Jesus) also himself likewise took part of the same, that through death he might DESTROY him that had the power of death, THAT IS, THE DEVIL."

On the supposition that the devil here referred to is the orthodox devil, or a personal devil of any kind, there are four absurdities on the face of this passage.

In the first place, to take on the weakness of flesh and blood was a strange way of preparing to fight a powerful devil, who, it would be imagined, would be more successfully encountered in the panoply of angelic strength, which Paul expressly says Jesus did not array himself in; for he says, "He took not on him the nature of angels" (Heb. 2:16).

In the second place it was stranger still that the process of destroying the devil should be submission to death himself! One would have thought that to vanquish and destroy the devil, life inextinguishable, and strength indomitable, would have been the qualification. Undoubtedly they would have been so, if, the Bible devil had been the orthodox devil--a personal monster.

In the third place, the devil ought now to be dead, or whatever else is imported by the word "destroyed," for Christ died nineteen centuries ago, for the purpose of destroying him by that process. How comes it then, that the devil is clerically represented to be alive and busier than ever in the work of hunting immortal souls with gin and snare, and exporting them to his own grim domain?

 The devil Christ has come to destroy is sin. If anyone doubts this, let .him reconsider Paul's words quoted above. What did Christ accomplish in his death? Let the following testimonies answer:--

"He put away SIN by the sacrifice of himself" (Heb. 9:26).

"Christ died for our sins according to the Scriptures" (1 Cor 15:3).

"He was wounded for our transgressions; he was bruised for our iniquities" (Isa. liii, 5).

"His own self bare our sins in his own body on the tree" (2 Pet 2:24).

"He was manifested to take away OUR SINS" (1 John 3:5).

Christ, through death, destroyed, or took out of the way, "the sin of the world ". In this, he destroyed the Bible devil. He certainly did not destroy the popular devil in his death, for that devil is supposed to be still at large, but in his own person, as a representative man, he extinguished the power of sin by surrendering to its full consequences, and then escaping by resurrection, through the power of his own holiness, to live for evermore. This is described as "God sending His own Son in the likeness of sinful flesh, and for sin, condemned sin in the flesh" (Rom. viii, 3). Sin in the flesh, then, is the devil destroyed by Jesus in his death. This is the devil having the power of death, for it is sin, and nothing else but sin that causes death to men. Does anyone doubt this ? Let him read the following testimonies:

By one man sin entered into the world, and death BY sin" (Rom. v, 12)

"By man CAME DEATH (I Cor. xv, 21).

"The wages of sin is DEATH" (Rom. vi, 23). "SIN hath reigned unto death" (Rom. v, 21). "SIN... bringeth forth death" (James i, 15). "The sting of death is SIN" (I Cor. xv, 56).

The devil, a Bible synonym for sin - abstract and concrete - existing as the spirit of disobedience in the children of men and embodied and manifested in the persons and institutions of present order of things.


Satan The devil is a personification of human nature this is not an abstraction but that physical principle of the animal nature, which is the cause of all its diseases, death, and resolution into dust. It is that in the flesh "which has the power of death" and it is called sin, because the development, or fixation, of this evil in the flesh, was the result of transgression. Inasmuch as this evil principle pervades every part of the flesh, the animal nature is styled "sinful flesh," that is, "flesh full of sin"; so that sin, in the sacred style, came to stand for the substance called man. In human flesh "dwells no good thing" (Rom. 7:17,18); and all the evil a man does is the result of this principle dwelling in him.

the devil

Same as Satan, which see. The "devil" signifies the mass of thoughts that have been built up in consciousness through many generations of earthly experiences and crystallized into what may be termed human personality, or carnal mind. Another name of the "devil" is sense consciousness; all the thoughts in one that fight against and are adverse to Truth belong to the state of mind that is known to metaphysicians as the Devil.

The "devil" is a state of consciousness adverse to the divine good. Other names for this state of consciousness are the Adversary, carnal mind, the accuser, and the old man. There is no personal devil. God is the one omnipresent Principle of the universe, and there is no room for any principle of evil, personified or otherwise.

Devil, how to overcome the--The Devil is overcome by denying his existence and by affirming universal Christ love for God and all men. The devils that we encounter are fear, anger, jealousy, and other similar negative traits, and they are in ourselves. Christ gives us the power to cast out these devils, thereby cleansing our consciousness.

Who is Satan in Gnosticism?

If we take, for example, the Valentinian Gnostic cosmogony, the Christian notion of Satan doesn’t come into play at all.

According to the sethian Gnostics The God of the Jews and the Christians is either Yaldabaoth or Sabaoth the ill-begotten son of Sophia, who gave birth outside of the normal pattern of reproduction for the Divine Syzygies in the Pleroma.

It is I who am God, and there is none apart from me.’  When he said this, he sinned against the whole place. And a voice came forth from above the realm of absolute power, saying,

“You are wrong, Samael,” that is, “God of the blind.” . . .

And he said, “If anything else exists before me, let it become visible to me!”

Samael  is an archangel in Talmudic and post-Talmudic lore; a figure who is the accuser (Ha-Satan), In the Apocryphon of John, On the Origin of the World, and Hypostasis of the Archons, found in the Nag Hammadi library, Samael is one of three names of the creator God, whose other names are Yaldabaoth and Saklas. 

In the system depicted by the sethians there is no satan and there is no need for one, for “Yahweh”—the God of Jews and Christians alike—himself acts as chief of the fallen angels who seduces and enslaves human beings. By declaring himself to be the supreme and unique God of the universe

The Albigenses or Cathari believed that the "the creator of the material world is the source of all evil (Albigenses by Nicholas Weber in Catholic Encyclopedia, 1907)

In the Old testament Yahweh is referred to as Satan by comparing 1 Chronicles 21, and 2 Samuel 24 In the Book of Samuel, Yahweh himself is the agent in punishing Israel, while in 1 Chronicles an "adversary" is introduced. The adversary seems to have been God; for we read in 2 Sam. 24:1, "The anger of the Lord was kindled against Israel, and HE moved David against them to say, Go, number Israel and Judah." The angel of God was a Satan to Balaam, as we have seen, and, in this case, God proved a Satan to Israel. Moved, doubtless, by the general perversity of the people, He impelled David to a course which resulted in calamity to the nation.

In contrast, Ptolemy, 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)

In the gospel of Thomas and the Gospel of Philip Satan and the devil never appear. however the devil appeas once in the Gospel of Truth  

Be concerned about yourselves. Don’t be concerned about other things which you’ve rejected from yourselves. Don’t return to eat your vomit. Don’t be eaten by worms, because you’ve already shaken it off. Don’t become a dwelling-place for the devil, because you’ve already brought him to naught. Don’t strengthen your obstacles which are collapsing, as though you’re a support. For the lawless one is nothing, to be treated more harshly than the just, doing his works among others. (Gospel of Truth)

To be “a dwelling-place for the devil” implies that the Devil enters us. “The lusts of other (sinful) things entering in” (Mk. 4:19) cause us to sin. Our lusts are described several times as physically moving into our heart from our evil nature where they are stored "an evil man brings forth evil things from his evil storehouse, which is in his heart, and says evil things. For out of the abundance of the heart he brings forth evil things." (Gospel of Thomas Saying 45)

Do not become a place for the Devil, for you have already defeated him defeating the devil or bringing him to naught refers to 1 John 2:13: ‘because you have overcome the evil one.’

From the use of the word in Matthew 6:13; 13:19, it is obvious that it is the flesh that John is referring to, and which these ''young men had conquered by their acceptance of Christ. The evil propensities of the flesh dominate the world (1 John 3:12; 5:18-19), but these "young men had come out of the world, and had learned to conquer the flesh.

The Gospel of Philip like the book of Isaiah (45:7) does not see good and evil as cosmic opposites instead—“light and dark, life and death, good and evil”—are in reality pairs of interdependent terms in which each implies the other.

Philip, on the other hand, interprets the human inclination to sin without recourse to Satan

The gospel of Thomas and Philip teach that within each person's heart lies the root of wickedness. This is Philip’s interpretation of the traditional Jewish teaching of the yetzer hara, which the rabbis called the “evil inclination.” So long as we remain unaware of “the root of evil” within us, Philip says, “it is powerful; but when it is recognized, it is destroyed.” 

45. Jesus said, "Grapes are not harvested from thorn trees, nor are figs gathered from thistles, for they yield no fruit. Good persons produce good from what they've stored up; bad persons produce evil from the wickedness they've stored up in their hearts, and say evil things. For from the overflow of the heart they produce evil."

The Root of Evil

Let each of us also dig down after the root of evil within us and pull it out of our hearts from the root. It will be uprooted if we recognize it. But if we are ignorant of it, it takes root in us and produces fruit in our hearts. It dominates us. We are its slaves, and it takes us captive so that we do what we do [not] want and do [not] do what we want. [cf. Rom. 7:14—15] It is powerful because we do not recognize it. As long as [it] exists, it stays active. .

Essential to gnosis is to “know” one’s own potential for evil. According to Philip, recognizing evil within oneself is necessarily an individual process: no one can dictate to another what is good or evil; instead, each one must strive to recognize his or her own inner state, and so to identify acts that spring from the “root of evil,” which consists in such impulses as anger, lust, envy, pride, and greed. This teacher assumes that when one recognizes that a certain act derives from such sources, one loses the conviction needed to sustain the action. In order to do evil— whether to indulge in an angry tirade, commit murder, or declare aggressive war—one seems to require the illusion that one’s action is justified, that one is acting for right reasons. This author holds, then, the optimistic conviction that “truth ... is more powerful than ignorance of error.”90 Knowing the truth in this way involves more than an intellectual process; it involves transformation of one’s being, transformation of one’s way of living: “If we know the truth, we shall find its fruits within us; if we join ourselves with it, we shall receive our fulfillment

https://www.gnosticdoctrine.com/2018/09/elaine-pagels-on-satan-and-devil.html

Who is Lucifer Isaiah 14:12-14

Isaiah 14:12-14 How you are fallen from heaven, O Lucifer,son of the morning!
How you are cut down to the ground,You who weakened the nations!
For you have said in your heart:
‘I will ascend into heaven,
I will exalt my throne above the stars of God;
I will also sit on the mount of the congregation
On the farthest sides of the north;
14 I will ascend above the heights of the clouds,
I will be like the Most High.’.


These verse is used to prove that Satan is a fallen angel.

The words “devil” , “satan” and “angel” never occur in this chapter. This is the only place in Scripture where the word “Lucifer” occurs.

There is no evidence that Isaiah 14 is describing anything that happened in the garden of Eden; if it is, then why are we left 3,000 years from the time of Genesis before being told what really happened there?

Lucifer is identified in the chapter, but not with a rebel angel. It is clearly stated: "Take up this proverb2 against the king of Babylon, and say, How hath the oppressor ceased!" (vs. 4). (The preceding chapter is a prophecy against Babylon itself, but now the prophecy is directed against the king of Babylon). This is fullfilled in daniel chapter 4 with Nabuzzar going mad and daniel 5 with the writing on the wall A secondary fulfillment would be the overthrow of Gog or the Antichrist at Armageddon

Why is Lucifer punished for saying, “I will ascend into heaven” (v. 13), if he was already there?

5. Lucifer is to rot in the grave: “your splendour is brought down to the grave...and the worms cover you” (v. 11). Seeing angels cannot die (Lk. 20:35-36), Lucifer therefore cannot be an angel; the language is more suited to a man.

"Ascending to heaven" is symbol for increase in pride or exaltation, and "falling from heaven", symbolic complete humiliation. See Jer. 51:53 (refers to Babylon); Lam. 2:1; Matt. 11:23 (refers to Capernaum).

The meaning of Lucifer: day-star (mbd) "light-bearer" 1) shining one, morning star,

The passage in Isaiah regarding the day-star, or Lucifer (A.V.), is believed by many to refer to the fall from heaven of angels who had sinned against God; Lucifer, their leader, is supposed to be Satan. In so far as the literal understanding is concerned, this is a mistake; the text has no such implications. It refers to the fall of the king of Babylon, who had ruled in such brilliance and greatness, in such pomp and splendor, that Isaiah likened him to the morning star (Isa. 14:12; II Pet. 1:19).

The text in Isaiah, "O Lucifer, son of the morning!" signifies man's uplifting of the ruling ego (represented here by the king of Babylon), and attributing to the outward senses those qualities of light, understanding, and greatness that belong only to God. This is unfavourable and comes from the carnal mind in the individual; it must be overthrown, cast down and out of consciousness

Lucifer the thinking of the flesh or carnal mind in man that has fixed ideas in opposition to Truth. Lucifer assumes various forms in man's consciousness, among which may be mentioned egotism, a puffing up of the personality; self deception. This "self deception" makes man believe that he is genetically good.