Gnostic Saints or Fathers of Christian Gnosticism

Gnostic Saints or Fathers of Christian Gnosticism

Gnostic Saints and Fathers of Christian Gnosticism

Fathers of the Gnostic Church: James the Just, Mary Magdalene, Theudas, and Paul

Gnostic Christians trace their spiritual lineage through figures who preserved and transmitted divine knowledge (gnosis). Among them, James the Just, Mary Magdalene, Theudas, and Paul stand out as central figures in the Gnostic tradition.

James the Just, the brother of Jesus, was recognized as the leader of the early Christian community in Jerusalem (Acts 15:13-21). The Gospel of Thomas (Saying 12) affirms his authority:

“No matter where you come, it is to James the Just that you shall go, for whose sake heaven and earth have come to exist.”

Mary Magdalene was also revered in Gnostic circles. The Gospel of Mary presents her as possessing deeper understanding than the male apostles, emphasizing her role as the recipient of Jesus' hidden teachings.

Theudas, a lesser-known figure, was a disciple of Paul and played a crucial role in transmitting Pauline teachings to Valentinus, thereby linking Valentinian Gnosticism directly to the apostolic tradition.

Paul himself is sometimes regarded as a proto-Gnostic, given his emphasis on inner revelation (gnosis) and the contrast he draws between the spiritual and the material (1 Corinthians 2:6-16).

Gnostic Saints and Pre-Christian Figures

Gnostics often looked beyond the Christian tradition, seeing spiritual precursors in earlier figures. Adam and his son Seth were considered foundational, with Seth often depicted as the father of a spiritual race of gnostics. The Three Steles of Seth (Nag Hammadi Library) highlights his role in transmitting divine knowledge.

Other figures include:

• Norea, a character absent from canonical Genesis but present in Gnostic texts, who resists the forces of the Demiurge and preserves the Gnostic lineage during Noah’s time.
• The three companions of Daniel, known from biblical tradition but given unique interpretations in Gnostic writings.
• John the Baptist, sometimes seen as an early Gnostic leader, particularly in Mandaean traditions.

Jesus and the Apostolic Gnosis

Jesus is central to Gnostic thought, not merely as a redeemer through external means, but as the revealer of gnosis. His teachings, particularly in the Gospel of Thomas, emphasize self-discovery and enlightenment:

“If you bring forth what is within you, what you have will save you. If you do not bring forth what is within you, what you do not have will destroy you.” (Gospel of Thomas, Saying 70)

Several of Jesus’ apostles are considered Gnostic figures:

• Thomas the Apostle, associated with the Gospel of Thomas, which presents an esoteric understanding of Jesus' teachings.
• John the Evangelist, whom some Gnostic sects claimed as one of their own.
• Paul, whose emphasis on hidden wisdom (1 Corinthians 2:7) and spiritual transformation aligns with Gnostic themes.

The Valentinian Tradition

Valentinus, one of the most influential Gnostic teachers, was said to have been a disciple of Theudas, connecting him directly to Paul. His school of thought divided into Eastern and Western branches due to Christological differences.

Western Valentinians

• Ptolemy, a Valentinian teacher whose Letter to Flora explains the distinction between the law of the Demiurge and the higher divine law.
• Flora, a female Valentinian theologian.
• Heracleon, whose commentaries on the Gospel of John survive in Origen’s writings.
• Hermogenes, a painter and late 2nd-century Gnostic thinker.
• Monoimus the Arab, who developed a unique system of Gnostic thought.
• Prodicus, Secundus, Florinus, Alexander, and Theotimus, prominent teachers.

Eastern Valentinians

• Marcus the Valentinian, known for his use of Gematria in Gnostic teachings.
• Axionicus of Antioch, active during Tertullian’s time.
• Theodotus, whose teachings were preserved in Clement of Alexandria’s Extracts from the Works of Theodotus.
• Ambrose and Candidus, Valentinian theologians of the 3rd century.

Thecla, featured in the Acts of Paul and Thecla, is a key figure in early Christian and Gnostic traditions, portrayed as a devoted disciple of Paul. She rejected marriage, embraced asceticism, and performed self-baptism (auto-baptism) as a symbol of direct communion with the divine. This act reflects Gnostic ideals of spiritual autonomy and personal revelation. Revered in Gnostic circles, Thecla is seen as embodying divine wisdom and spiritual independence, aligning with Paul’s teachings about transcending the flesh and attaining spiritual knowledge.

Rejecting the Catholic Concept of Saints

The term "saint" in Catholic and Orthodox Christianity refers to individuals canonized by church authorities, often after performing alleged miracles. However, the biblical term hagios ("holy one") simply denotes those consecrated to God.

The early Christian understanding of holiness was not tied to posthumous veneration but to divine calling in the present life. As 1 Peter 1:3-4 states:

“Blessed be the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, who according to His great mercy has caused us to be born again to a living hope… to obtain an inheritance which is imperishable.”

The Gospel of Philip further emphasizes that holiness is intrinsic to the believer:

“The holy person is completely holy, including the person’s body. The holy person who takes up bread consecrates it, and does the same with the cup or anything else the person takes up and consecrates. So how would the person not consecrate the body also?”

This passage rejects the idea that sanctity comes through external validation, instead affirming that holiness is inherent in those who receive divine knowledge (gnosis).

Conclusion

The Gnostic tradition maintains a spiritual lineage through figures such as James the Just, Mary Magdalene, Theudas, and Paul. Unlike the institutional church, which claims authority through hierarchical succession, Gnostic Christians uphold an apostolic tradition based on inner revelation and divine knowledge. By recognizing both biblical and pre-Christian figures as transmitters of wisdom, Gnostics preserve a broader and deeper understanding of spiritual enlightenment.

Gnostic Apostolic Succession

The concept of apostolic succession is central to early Christianity, signifying the transmission of divine authority and knowledge from Jesus to his disciples and their successors. While the mainstream church claims an unbroken line through Peter and the bishops of Rome, Gnostic Christians, particularly the Valentinians, preserved a different lineage—one rooted in mystical knowledge (gnosis) and the transmission of secret teachings. This tradition, as evidenced by early Christian texts, suggests that the true apostolic succession was not limited to hierarchical structures but was instead based on spiritual enlightenment.

The True Successor: James, Not Peter

The traditional claim that Peter was the chief apostle and the foundation of the Church is not strongly supported in the earliest Christian writings. Instead, the Book of Acts chapter 15:13-21 portrays James as the leader of the early Christian community in Jerusalem, making the final ruling on doctrinal matters.

The Gospel of Thomas reinforces this claim. In saying 12, the disciples ask Jesus who will lead them after his departure, to which he replies:

“No matter where you come, it is to James the Just that you shall go, for whose sake heaven and earth have come to exist.”

This declaration affirms James' preeminent role in preserving Jesus' teachings. His leadership was based not on institutional power but on his deep spiritual insight and close relationship with Jesus.

The Transmission of Hidden Knowledge

The transmission of secret teachings was a fundamental part of early Christian mysticism. Hippolytus, a third-century Christian writer, records that the Naassenes, a sect often associated with early Christian Gnosticism, claimed to have received their secret doctrines from Mariamne (presumably Mary Magdalene), who in turn received them from James, the brother of the Lord. This transmission of knowledge through James and Mary Magdalene aligns with the existence of several important Gnostic texts, such as the Apocalypse of James, the Pistis Sophia, and the Gospel of Mary, which depict Mary Magdalene and James as primary recipients of Jesus’ hidden teachings.

Clement of Alexandria further confirms this tradition by stating that Valentinus, the greatest of the Gnostic teachers, was instructed by Theudas, who had been a disciple of Paul (Stromata 7:17). This direct connection to Paul reinforces the legitimacy of Valentinian succession, showing that their teachings were not fabrications but part of an authentic Christian lineage.

The Valentinian Claim to Apostolic Succession

Unlike the emerging Orthodox Church, which emphasized external authority, the Valentinians believed that true succession was based on spiritual revelation. The Gospel of Truth, attributed to Valentinus, emphasizes the necessity of divine revelation:

“No one could have been revealed among those who had been entrusted with salvation unless the book had appeared.”

This statement highlights the idea that salvation is linked to knowledge (gnosis), which must be revealed rather than imposed through institutional structures. The Valentinians saw themselves as the rightful inheritors of the apostolic tradition, possessing the hidden wisdom necessary for salvation.

The Gospel of Philip expands on this idea, emphasizing the importance of chrism over baptism:

“We are called Christians from the word ‘chrism,’ not from the word ‘baptism.’ Christ also has his name from chrism, for the Father anointed the Son, the Son anointed the apostles, and the apostles anointed us. Whoever is anointed has everything: resurrection, light, cross, Holy Spirit.”

Here, the text explicitly outlines the Valentinian understanding of apostolic succession. The Father anointed the Son, the Son anointed the apostles, and the apostles anointed their successors. This passage demonstrates that the transmission of divine authority was not merely symbolic but followed a direct, spiritual lineage. This succession was not dependent on institutional hierarchy but on the continued transmission of divine knowledge and power through the laying on of hands and anointing.

The Apostolic Tradition in Valentinianism

The Valentinian tradition was not a deviation from Christianity but a continuation of its deepest mysteries. In The Treatise on the Resurrection, a Gnostic teacher reassures a disciple:

“These words I have received from the generosity of my Lord, Jesus the Christ. I have taught you and your brothers and sisters, who are my children, about them, and have omitted nothing that may strengthen you.”

This reflects the personal transmission of knowledge, a hallmark of true apostolic succession. Similarly, in Ptolemy's Letter to Flora, the Valentinian teacher affirms:

“For, if God permits, you will later learn about their origin and generation, when you are judged worthy of the apostolic tradition which we too have received by succession.”

This statement underscores that Valentinian teachers saw themselves as part of an unbroken lineage, tracing their wisdom back to Jesus and his apostles. Unlike the institutional church, which relied on external ordination, the Valentinians maintained that only those who were spiritually prepared could receive and pass on the true apostolic tradition.

Conclusion

The Valentinian claim to apostolic succession challenges the mainstream narrative of an unbroken institutional hierarchy. By tracing their lineage through James, Mary Magdalene, and Paul, and by emphasizing gnosis over ecclesiastical authority, the Valentinians preserved a different but equally valid Christian tradition. Their teachings reveal that apostolic succession was not about titles and offices but about receiving and transmitting divine knowledge. In this light, the Valentinians—not the bishops of Rome—are the true heirs of the apostolic tradition.

Valentinus

Bentley Layton has sketched out a relationship between the various gnostic movements in his introduction to The Gnostic Scriptures (SCM Press, London, 1987). In this model, "Classical Gnosticism" and "The School of Thomas" antedated and influenced the development of Valentinus, who was to found his own school of Gnosticism in both Alexandria and Rome, whom Layton called "the great [Gnostic] reformer" and "the focal point" of Gnostic development. While in Alexandria, where he was born, Valentinus probably would have had contact with the Gnostic teacher Basilides, and may have been influenced by him.

Valentinianism flourished after the middle of the 2nd century AD. This movement was named after its founder Valentinus (c. 100 – 180 AD). The school is also known to have been extremely popular: several varieties of their central myth are known, and we know of "reports from outsiders from which the intellectual liveliness of the group is evident." It is known that Valentinus' students elaborated on his teachings and materials (though the exact extent of their changes remains unknown), for example, in the version of the Valentinian myth brought to us through Ptolemy.

Valentinianism might be described as the most elaborate and philosophically "dense" form of the Syrian-Egyptian schools of Gnosticism, though it should be acknowledged that this in no way debarred other schools from attracting followers. Basilides' own school was popular also, and survived in Egypt until the 4th century.

Simone Petrement, in A Separate God, in arguing for a Christian origin of Gnosticism, places Valentinus after Basilides, but before the Sethians. It is her assertion that Valentinus represented a moderation of the anti-Judaism of the earlier Hellenized teachers; the demiurge, widely regarded as a mythological depiction of the Old Testament God of the Hebrews, is depicted as more ignorant than evil


Valentinian works are named in reference to the Bishop and teacher Valentinius. Circa 153 AD, Valentinius developed a complex cosmology outside of the Sethian tradition. At one point he was close to being appointed the Bishop of Rome of what is now the Roman Catholic Church. Works attributed to his school are listed below, and fragmentary pieces directly linked to him are noted with an asterisk:

• The Divine Word Present in the Infant (Fragment A) *
• On the Three Natures (Fragment B) *
• Adam's Faculty of Speech (Fragment C) *
• To Agathopous: Jesus' Digestive System (Fragment D) *
• Annihilation of the Realm of Death (Fragment F) *
• On Friends: The Source of Common Wisdom (Fragment G) *
• Epistle on Attachments (Fragment H) *
• Summer Harvest*
• The Gospel of Truth*
• Ptolemy's Version of the Gnostic Myth
• Prayer of the Apostle Paul
• Ptolemy's Epistle to Flora
• Treatise on the Resurrection (Epistle to Rheginus)
• Gospel of Philip

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).

God has Breasts El Shaddai

 The Breasts of the Father Ode 19

In this study we will look at the feminine aspects of God but first we will start with an opening reading from the Odes of Solomon Ode 19:

Ode 19 
A cup of milk was offered to me, and I drank it in the sweetness of the Lord's kindness. 
The Son is the cup, and the Father is He who was milked; and the Holy Spirit is She who milked Him; 
Because His breasts were full, and it was undesirable that His milk should be ineffectually released. 
The Holy Spirit opened Her bosom, and mixed the milk of the two breasts of the Father. 
Then She gave the mixture to the generation without their knowing, and those who have received it are in the perfection of the right hand. 
The womb of the Virgin took it, and she received conception and gave birth. 
So the Virgin became a mother with great mercies. 
And she labored and bore the Son but without pain, because it did not occur without purpose. 
And she did not require a midwife, because He caused her to give life. 
She brought forth like a strong man with desire, and she bore according to the manifestation, and she acquired according to the Great Power. 
And she loved with redemption, and guarded with kindness, and declared with grandeur.
Hallelujah. 

The teaching that the Father has feminine breasts might seem shocking at first but if we look deeper into this we will find that this is very common among early church writings  

Church Father: Irenæus, bishop of Lyons from 178-ca. 200 ce wrote in his major work Against Heresies, "Those who do not have a share in the Spirit are not nourished to life by the Mother's breasts." (Irenæus, Against Heresies (Adversus Omnes Hæreses), book 3, ch. 24:1; in Stramara, 'El Shaddai ...' ibid., p. 7)

Clement of Alexandria is perhaps the best known patristic author in this regard, with his use of images of mothering and nurturing—but no common development akin to the Syriac tradition of the feminine Spirit took place.

Elaine Pagels writes: 

Clement characterizes God in feminine as well as masculine terms:

The Word is everything to the child, both father and mother, teacher and nurse . . . The nutriment is the milk of the Father . . . and the Word alone supplies us children with the milk of love, and only those who suck at this breast are truly happy.  For this reason, seeking is called sucking; to those infants who seek the Word, the Father's loving breasts supply milk.

One can recall Jerome's admonition that the word for Spirit is feminine in Hebrew, masculine in Latin, and neuter in Greek, instructing us that God is without gender. But Jerome's comment may well indicate that debate on this matter was taking place.

El Shaddai

The idea that God has breasts comes from the Hebrew word El Shaddai:

The main Hebrew lexicons, Brown-Driver-Briggs (BDB) and The Hebrew and Aramaic Lexicon of the Old Testament (HALOT, also known as K-B for its editors, Kohler and Baumgartner), both offer various possibilities for the etymology of the word shaddai. One possibility is that it derives from the verb שדד shadad. שדד shadad means “to deal violently with,” but none of the lexicons or theological word books suggest that shaddai means “God of violence.” Another possibility, found only in BDB, is that the name comes from שדה shadah , which means “to pour out,” and refers to God as “rain giver.” The Kohler-Baumgartner lexicon (HALOT) suggests that the word could be based on the Akkadian shadu which means “mountain.” Thus, El Shaddai means “The God of the mountain(s).” This seems to be the current favorite among scholars. HALOT also suggests another possibility, such as the idea that El Shaddai refers to one of the ancestral gods, but the meaning of the name is uncertain.

One possibility that is not mentioned in either BDB or HALOT is found in both the Theological Dictionary of the Old Testament (TDOT) and also in the New International Dictionary of Old Testament Theology and Exegesis (NIDOTTE). And that is that the name Shaddai comes from the word thdw/y which means “breast” (or “mountain.”) (See TDOT, I:257; NIDOTTE, I:401). Although TDOT concludes that “God of the mountain” is the best translation, the fact that it recognizes “The God of Breasts” as a possibility is significant.

In Hebrew the word שד shad means “breast.” The noun itself is masculine in form even though it refers only to female breasts. TDOT notes that shaddai follows a common pattern for divine name formation using a “natural element plus an adjectival suffix. One thinks of ‘Artsay, Tallay, and Pidray, wives of Ba`al whose names mean “One of the Earth,” “The Dewy One,” and “the Misty One” (TDOT, I:256). Thus Shaddai would mean “The Breasted One.” [1]

The etymology of El Shaddai remains uncertain and contested. As HALOT concludes, “Despite several attempted and suggested explanations the etymology of שדי has still not been completely clarified” (II:1421). For this reason, we should not dismiss possibilities like “The God of Breasts” simply because some scholars have come to an admittedly uncertain consensus on “God of the Mountain(s).”

El Shaddai literally translated means the strong breasted one

He provided for the people of Israel when He "led" them in the wilderness (Deut. 32:10 12). It was He that (Exod. 20:2) "led" them out of Egypt. He, also, said to Abraham (Gen. xvii. i 2) "I am thy God (Heb. El Shaddai), be-well-pleasing before me." Thus, "in the manner of a true Child-leader, He secretly fashions Abraham so as to be a faithful" a remark that would seem more to the point if we could suppose that Clement had some vague notions about "Shaddai" as being connected with the All-sufficing Father, and perhaps with "breasts." 

Compare the early Jewish interpretation of the Abrahamic title of God, Shaddai the All-sufficer

El Shaddai All-Sufficient Sustainer

God is One Person but there is a dual aspect to God's nature the Deity is both Father and Mother The very name God, Almighty, in its original Hebrew form El Shaddai, reveals the infinite quality. El, God, its first meaning, Strength: Shaddi, the plural whose singular, Shad, signifies a Breast and is feminine. Our natural father and mother, with their united strength and wisdom, truth and love are types of that Perfect Parentage, our Father and Mother which are in Heaven

The duality of God is expressed in the book of "Genesis" as follows: "Let us make man in our image, after our likeness. So God created man in his own image; male and female created He them; and called their name Adam." 

Ode 19

Ode 8 "My own breasts did I prepare for them" This indicates a recognition of Christ as Mother

In Ode 8, Christ too is the nursing mother: "I fashioned their limbs/ and my own breasts I prepared for them/ that they might drink my holy milk and live by it." (8:14)

Odes (19:2 foil.) while continuing to represent God, and not man, as the Giver of the Milk, mentions also the Holy Spirit (whom the poet ventures to describe as "milking" the Father "because His breasts were full ") and the Son apparently the pre-incarnate Son whom he has previously (ib. 2) called "the Cup." Afterwards (ib. 6) the Ode goes on to speak of the Virgin as "becoming a Mother." 

In Ode 19 it is not a male chest (Rev 1:13) the author bestows a mother's breast on the Father 

The Father is imaged in wholly feminine terms: nursing from his breasts, and midwife at Mary's birthgiving.

Again, the images for God in this Ode recall certain Old Testament metaphors: God as midwife in Ps 22:9-10, God as comforting mother in Isa 49:15 and 66:13, and God travailing in the throes of divine labor pangs in Isa 42:14b.

Almost the only mention of "mother" in the Odes is (35:6) "I was carried like a child by his mother, and the dew of the Lord gave me milk" (comp. 35:i "The dew of the Lord... hath He distilled upon me"). 

The Son is the cup, and He who was milked is the Father^ 19:4 "...the milk from the two breasts of the Father." 

"Milk," on the other hand, they frequently mention, and even as coming from the "breasts" of the Father 

Medieval Christian Mystics 

Bernard of Clairvaux (1090-1153) (Cistercian) Sermon to prelates Show affection as a mother would, correct like a father. Be gentle, avoid harshness, do not resort to blows, expose your breasts: let your bosoms swell with milk, not swell with passion. ... Why will the young man, bitten by the serpent, shy away from the judgment of the priest, to whom he ought to run as to the bosom of a mother?(42)212 

Guerric of Igny (Cistercian) [Christ] is a father in virtue of natural creation ... and authority. ... He is a mother too in the mildness of his affection, and a nurse. ... The Holy Spirit (is) like milk poured out from Christ's own breasts.(39) 

Clare (1194-1253) --Clare's dream The Lady Clare also told that once she had seen St. Francis in a vision and she was bringing him a jug of hot water and a towel for wiping his hands and with this she was ascending a long stairway, but so easily that it was as though she walked on the level earth. When she reached St. Francis, he bared his breast, saying "Come, take and drink." And she did so. Then St. Francis bid her suckle a second time. And what she tasted seemed to her so sweet and delightful that she could not describe it in any way. And after she had suckled, the nipple of the breast from which the milk came, remained between the lips of the happy Clare; she took what remained in her mouth into her hands, and it seemed to be such pure shining gold that she saw her own reflection in it, as in a mirror.213 

Catherine of Siena (1347-1380)214 Catherine wrote down her visions and her interpretations of Christian scripture, of which the first of the following excerpts from her 'dialogue' is based on the saying of Jesus, "Whosoever thirsteth, let him come to me and drink." It is offered here as a contrast to the further writings of Catherine focused on drinking. 

ch. LIII "... And why did her say 'Let him come to me and drink'? Because whoever follows his doctrine, whether in the most perfect way or by dwelling in the life of common charity, finds to drink, tasting the fruit of the blood, through the union of the divine nature with the human nature. ch. LXXII "... But the soul who has in truth entered the house of self-knowledge, and by the exercise of perfect prayer has raised herself from the imperfect love of imperfect prayer, by the means of which I [the Father] speak to thee in this treatise on prayer, receives me, through affection of love, seeking to draw herself the milk of my sweetness from the breast of the doctrine of Christ crucified. ch. XCVI "... She receives the fruit of quietness of mind, a union with my sweet divine nature, where she tastes the milk, as when the child, who sleeps at peace on the breast of its mother, draws to itself milk by means of the flesh of its mother; so the soul, arrived at this last state, reposes on the breast of my divine charity, keeping in the mouth of holy desire the flesh of Christ crucified, ... So the soul reposes at the breast of Christ crucified, who is the Truth, and thus draws to herself the milk of virtue, in which she finds the life of grace, tasting in herself my divine nature, ... "Now look, sweet daughter, how sweet and glorious is this state, in which the soul has made so close a union with the breast of charity, that the mouth is not found without the breast, neither the breast without the milk. And so this soul does not find herself without Christ crucified or without me, the Eternal Father, whom she finds, tasting the supreme and Eternal Deity. ... "At this breast of love the memory fills itself, ... ch. CX "Now I will reply to that which thou didst ask me concerning the ministers of the holy Church ... And since one thing is better known by means of contrast with its contrary, I will show thee the dignity of those who use virtuously the treasure I have placed in their hands; and in this way thou wilt the better see the misery of those who to-day are suckled at the breast of my Spouse." Then this soul obediently contemplated the truth, in which she saw virtue resplendent in those who truly taste it. ... "Thou knowest that thou wentest one morning to church at sunrise to hear Mass, ... When the minister came to consecrate, thou raisedst thine eyes above his head while he was saying the words of consecration, and I manifested myself to thee, and thou didst see issue from my breast a light, like a ray from the sun, ... out of the midst of which light came a dove and hovered over the host, in virtue of the words which the minister was saying. ch. CXXXIX "... Wherefore his religion is a delightful garden, broad and joyous and fragrant, but the wretches who do not observe the order, but transgress its vows, have turned it into a desert and defiled it with their scanty virtue and light of science, though they are nourished at its breast. 

Julian of Norwich (1342-1413+)215 Jesus is our true Mother in nature by our first Creation, and he is our true Mother in grace by his taking our created Nature. (15) The mother can give her child suck of her milk, but our precious Mother Jesus can feed us with himself, and does most courteously and most tenderly with the blessed sacrament, which is the precious food of true life. ... The mother can lay her child tenderly to her breast, but our tender Mother Jesus can lead us easily into his blessed breast through his sweet open side.(19) 

Christian folklore From the Golden Legend of Jacobus de Voragine (1229-1298) --the tale of seven women followers in the martyrdom of Saint Blaise in 287 ce Meanwhile the governor, seeing that he could not force the saint [Blaise] to worship idols, had him bound to a stake, and commanded that his flesh be torn with iron spikes; after which he was again led back to gaol. Seven women, however, followed the saint, and gathered up the drops of his blood. ... Then one of the women, who was the mother of two children, laid hold of the [pagan] robes and threw them into the fire. And her babes said to her: 'Dearest mother, do not leave us behind, but as thou hast plenished us with the sweetness of thy milk, so now fill us with the sweetness of the Kingdom of Heaven!' Then the [pagan] governor had them lashed to the stake, and the executioners laid open their flesh with iron points. But their flesh remained as white as snow, and from it milk spurted forth instead of blood.217 

--the martyrdom of Saint Agatha in 253 ce On the morrow, the consul said to her: 'Renounce Christ and adore the gods!' Upon her refusal, he had her bound to a rack to be tortured. ... Enraged, the consul ordered that her breasts by roughly twisted, and then commanded that they be torn off. And Agatha cried: 'Cruel and impious tyrant, does it not shame thee to torture, in a woman, that with which thy mother suckled thee? But know that in my soul I have other breasts, whose milk sustains all of my senses, which I have long since dedicated to God!'218 

--Saint Bernard [Bernard's mother] bore seven children, six children and one daughter, and dedicated all the sons to be monks, and the daughter to be a nun. For as soon as she had given birth to a child, she offered it to God with her own hands. Nor would she allow her children to be suckled at the breasts of other women, but imparted to them, with the maternal milk, the nature of their mother's virtue.219 

The Shakers

Shaker theology is based on the idea of the dualism of God as male and female: "So God created him; male and female he created them" (Genesis 1:27). This passage was interpreted as showing the dual nature of the Creator

An all-important, sublime, and foundational doctrine of the Shakers is the Existence of an Eternal Father and an Eternal Mother in Deity — the Heavenly Parents of all angelical and human beings.


31. As Father, God is the infinite Fountain of intelligence, and the Source of all power — "the Almighty, great and terrible in majesty;" "the high and lofty One, that inhabiteth eternity, whose name is Holy, dwelling in the high and holy place;" and "a consuming fire." 

32. But, as Mother, "God is love" and tenderness! If all the maternal affections of all the female or bearing spirits in animated nature were combined together, and then concentered in one individual human female, that person would be but as a type or image of our Eternal Heavenly Mother. 

The Calendar of Enoch

The Calendar of Enoch

The greatest treasure of the book of Enoch is found in chapters 72-82. These are the calendar instructions that allow us to obey the Sabbath commands of the fourth commandment and Exodus 31:13. The calendar of Enoch is a solar only calendar that consists of twelve months of thirty days plus four days that divide the seasons of the year every 90 days.


Enoch 72:10 The day is slightly longer than the night. Enoch begins the new year with the spring equinox according to Israel Standard Time on March 20th. The spring equinox is a pin point of time when the sun crosses the equatorial plane of the earth at the intersection of the ecliptic of the stars, which are at a 23.4 degree angle to the equator. This agrees with Genesis 1:14, where we are told the lights of the heavens, the stars, are for signs, appointed times, days and years. This day is what Enoch refers to as the first leader of the seasons and should be regarded as a Sabbath. Jubilees 6 tells us the four leaders of the seasons are a remembrance to Noah and the flood for saving us from the terrible Nephilim. When counted correctly, the four leaders of the seasons will always fall on the weekly Sabbath of the thirteenth week of each season. However, per Enoch 82, the four leaders of the seasons are not counted in the days of the months, they stand alone to lead their respective season.


The day following the spring equinox, March 21st, is the first day of month one, when we begin a count of thirty days for each month. The count for each season looks like this, 1 + 30 + 30 + 30. Beginning with day one month one we count every seventh day as the weekly Sabbath. The appointed times are counted to per the instructions of Leviticus 23.


When referenced to the Roman calendar, the spring equinox will cycle through the days of the week as the years pass. This is due to the perpetual nature of the Roman calendar. However, the dates of the Sabbath and appointed times are always on the same date every year, this is why a universal time is needed. Unlike the calendars of man, the calendar of Enoch is self-adjusting, needing no involvement by man or his religions. This self-adjustment occurs on a four-year cycle to compensate for the .25 day of the solar 365.25 day year, according to the timing of the spring equinox at Israel standard Time.


Twice in the book of Jubilees, four times in the book of Enoch, we are commanded to make the year a count of 364 days "only". The 365th day is uncounted as we await the day of the spring equinox to begin a new count of days. However, the 365th day serves some purpose. First, the 365th day acts as a partition between the old year and the new year to stop the count of days. Second, the 365th day is a buffer that allows the whole earth to finish it's count of days and begin a new count all together.

The calendar of Enoch comes with an accuracy test. In astronomy circles it's known as "The Spring Phenomena". This phenomena occurs on alternating cycles of eight and eleven years. When this phenomena occurs, the calendar of Enoch will align with the lunar calendar of Judaism for the first month. This alignment took place on the crucifixion year of 30 AD, which is also confirmed in the Talmud. The last alignment took place on the new year of 2015, with the next alignment to take place on the new year of 2023. Messiah Yahshua sacrificed himself on HIS Sabbath, the fourteenth day of the first month, known as Passover. Although Judaism has done away with Passover on the fourteenth day of the first month, relegating it to nothing more than a day of preparation.

See the attached calendars for use as a visual aid to understanding the calendar.

72:10 On that day, the day is longer than the night by one day turns be exactly ten p72:10 On that day, the day is longer than the night by one ninth; 

Article by  Wayne Thibodeaux

https://www.facebook.com/groups/510297315738557/?ref=share

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.