Dr John Thomas Christadelphian Connection to Medieval Gnosticism

Dr John Thomas Christadelphian Connection to Medieval Gnosticism

Christadelphian origins come from Dr. John Thomas 1805–1871), who emigrated to North America from England in 1832 John Thomas was born in Hoxton Square, Hackney, London, on 12 April 1805,^[1] was the son of a Dissenting minister, also named John Thomas. His family is reputed to be descended from French Huguenot refugees[2] Blore, Charles B. Dr John Thomas: His Family and the Background of his Times The distinctive family name "Bloy" comes from Blois in Normandy, and the Blois family settled in Norfolk in 1769.

In Greek Christadelphian means "Brethren of Christ." They trace their spiritual roots through such groups as the Waldenses, Albigenses and Huguenots.

Cathari

The Cathari  (/ˈkæθərɪzəm/; from the Greek: καθαροί, katharoi, "the pure [ones]" was a Christian dualist or Gnostic revival movement that thrived in some areas of Southern Europe, particularly what is now northern Italy and southern France, between the 12th and 14th centuries.

The followers were known as Cathars The adherents were sometimes known as Albigensians, after the city Albi in southern France where the movement first took hold.

It is evident, that the term Albigenses, or rather Albienses, employed by our author, was taken from the town of Albi, where the Waldenses flourished. (The Late Rev. Joseph Milner  The History Of The Church Of Christ 1794–1809)

Many medieval  "heresies" were named after their  founders but some ‐‐ the Albigenses,  for example ‐ were derived  from particular localities or their manner of life The Protesters Alan Eyre

In Eureka: An Exposition of the Apocalypse Dr Thomas calls the Paulicians and Albigenses "the remnants of the woman's seed" and claims they are part of the groups which make up the two Witnesses:

Thus, I have briefly tracked "the remnants of the woman's seed," under the names of Novatians, Donatists, Aerians, Paulicians and Albigenses, through a long and sanguinary period of sack-cloth-witnessing of a thousand years, against the Apostasy as by law established in "the two Wings of the Great Eagle."


Now, the Puritan Woman, styled by her enemies and persecutors "the Donatists;" but by the children of her body, Cathari, or the Pure Ones; for the first 1260 years of her existence was Providentially settled in the wings of the Roman Eagle. Her remnants were not to be found in Persia, India, China, or America: but after the discovery and settlement of America, the persecutions and massacre of her seed by the Serpent-Powers of Europe caused her to seek refuge in the American wilderness, whereby the help of "the earth," which styles itself "the unterrified democracy," she is fed and nourished to the full.

The truth was corrupted into the Catholic apostacy in the 2nd and 3rd centuries (2 Thess 2), enthroned by Constantine AD312-324 (Rev 12,13,17). Then the true witnesses fled into the wilderness and were given succour in 'the two wings of the great eagle' (eastern and western provinces of the Roman empire) for 1260 days of years. (Rev 12.6,14).They were variously known as the Paulicians, the Novations, the Donatists, the Albigenses of Southern France, the Waldenses of the Alps, the Vaudois, the Hugenots, the Anabaptists.

The 3rd Editor of the Christadelphian magazine C. C. Walker also agree with this interpretation

Rev 12 Verse 14.—“Two wings of a great eagle.” The extremities of the Roman Empire. “The wilderness.” Exile from place and power. Geographically, Northern Africa first, and many other countries afterwards in the course of the 1,260 years. The wilderness wanderings of the woman are illustrated in the experiences of the Donatists, Novatians, Paulicians, Waldenses, Albigenses, &c. Notes On The Apocalypse C. C. Walker, The Christadelphian


contemporary Christadelphian writers have tried to distance themselves from such groups as the Paulicians and  Albigenses: 

Harry Whittaker says Dr Thomas "turned a blind eye to the massive perversions of Truth by Donatists and Waldenses and Albigenses and Huguenots in desperate attempts to identify them with the Lord’s faithful remnant." Revelation - A Biblical Approach Harry Whittaker

The Cathari were said to be a sect of the Albigenses. Both showed gnostic tendencies. The Protesters Alan Eyre

Some Christadelphians have embraced the Socinians as their theological forebears. This is particularly evident in Alan Eyre's historiographical works The Protesters and Brethren in Christ, which have enjoyed great popularity within the Christadelphian community.

however Dr. Thomas knew of the Socinian and Unitarianism he has antipathy towards them as well as toward Trinitarianism and Arianism

But the New Man of the Spirit is free, looking searchingly into the perfect law of liberty, and having no respect to "the philosophy and empty delusion," and antitheses of gnosis, or "oppositions of science," falsely so called, in which the flesh delights. He troubles not himself about Trinitarianism, or Antitrinitarianism, Unitarianism, Arianism, or Socinianism. He has no more deference for these than for any other of "the works of the Devil," or for the Old Man himself.

Eureka: An Exposition of the Apocalypse

Christadelphians are neither Arians, Socinians, nor Trinitarians; but believers in the "great mystery of godliness, Deity manifested in Flesh," as set forth in "the Revelation of the Mystery," preached by the apostles.

The Huguenots

 The label Huguenot was purportedly first applied in France to those conspirators (all of them aristocratic members of the Reformed Church) who were involved in the Amboise plot of 1560:

an interesting artical on the derivation of the word huguenot will be found in the Encyclopaedia Meropolitana, Vol XX, p. 381. Pasquier, in his Recherches de la France, vol. VIII., p. 53, has an entire chaper on the origin of the name and we read hat in the Vita S. Irenaei Op., ed. Lutet (Paris), 1675 the witer of ha work in describing the desecration of him who was the great assailant of he gnostic heresies, says

"Qui gnosticos represserat, ejus reliquiae Hu-Gnosticorum cruentatas jam pridem 

sanguine bonorum ac barbaras onanus, effugere non potuerunt."

and the term Hu-Gnostici is deliberately reatained in the notes hrough the 1675 edition above named 

The Huguenots, officially called the Hu-Gnosticorum began in the sixteenth century, where the word Huguenot came to designate French Calvinist Protestants, members of the Reformed Church established in France by John Calvin in about 1555. 

The Christadelphians and Knowledge

The Christadelphians and Knowledge

Most Christadelphians would disagree that their faith is Gnostic but there are two types of gnosis the Mythological Gnosis and Non-Mythological Gnosis I would class the Christadelphians as a gnostic group which does not believe in Mythological Gnosis 

I have studied Christadelphian teachings since 2006 I was baptized in 2009, there is a great enpsis on knowledge in Christadelphian meetings 

I began to study the Old Testament Pseudepigrapha and the Nag Hammadi Texts around 2011
after studying certain Gnostic groups I have come to the conclusion that Christadelphians share some understandings with the Valentinians

what is Gnosicism Gnostics considered the principal element of salvation to be direct knowledge of the remote supreme divine being, esoteric knowledge (gnosis) of whom enabled the redemption of the human spirit

Christadelphians believe that there is a process based around knowledge and work that leads to salvation.

One must also possess knowledge of what the Bible teaches if one would be saved Christadelphian Messenger, No. 4, “The One Hope of Everlasting Salvation”; No. 47, “Christendom Creeds not Christianity,” p. 1; No. 11, “A Refuge from the Judgment Storm,” p. 4
Christadelphians believe the Correct Knowledge (ἐπίγνωσις, εως, ἡ, epignósis ) of the Gospel is essential for salvation. Christadelphians call this Resurrectional Responsibility the teaching is summarized in Bible Basics by Duncan Heaster:

1. Knowledge of God's Word brings responsibility to Him.

2. Only the responsible will be resurrected and judged.

3. Those who do not know the true God will therefore remain dead like the animals.


the Christadelphian Statement of Faith also known as the Birmingham Amended Statement of Faith (BASF) The entire Christadelphian Statement of Faith includes the truth to be recieved, the Commandments of Christ, and the Doctrines to be Rejected.

In Clause 24 of the truth to be recieved we read
 
That at the appearing of Christ prior to the establishment of the Kingdom, the responsible (namely, those who know the revealed will of God, and have been called upon to submit to it), dead and living -- obedient and disobedient -- will be summoned before his judgment seat "to be judged according to their works," and "receive in body according to what they have done, whether it be good or bad."

2 Cor. 5:10; 2 Tim. 4:1; Rom. 2:5-6, 16; 14:10-12; 1 Cor. 4:5; Rev. 11:18.

The part underlined was inserted to rule out the belief that baptism made a person responsible rather than knowledge.

In Clause 22 the Doctrines to be Rejected

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

23. We reject the doctrine - that man can be saved by morality or sincerity, without the Gospel.

24. We reject the doctrine - that the Gospel alone will save, without obedience to Christ's commandments.

Christadelphians have a dualism between the flesh which these view has sin is self and he spirit what they want to be come called God manifestation

There are two basic doctrines of the Bible: (a) The nature of flesh; and (b) the spirit manifestation of God. The former teaches us what we are, and what we must guard against; the latter outlines what we can become, and what we must aim for.

Men were not ushered into being for the purpose of being saved or lost! God manifestation not human salvation was the great purpose of the Eternal Spirit. The salvation of a multitude is incidental to the manifestation, but was not the end proposed. The Eternal Spirit intended to enthrone Himself on the earth, and in so doing, to develop a Divine family from among men, every one of whom shall be Spirit, because born of the Spirit, and that this family shall be large enough to fill the earth, when perfected, to the entire exclusion of flesh and blood (1 Cor. 15:28)."

Christadelphians also have two classles of believers like some gnostic groups 

into two classes the one the fellowservants, and the other the brethren, of the deceased souls. The brethren are fellowservants, but all the fellowservants were not brethren -- even as Christadelphians are christians, but all christians so-called are not Christadelphians.

I am a Gnostic Christadelphian

I am a Gnostic Christadelphian

You may say that this is, is a contradiction if ever I've heard one. That's like saying "I'm a Muslim Catholic" or "I'm a Buddhist Mormon".

Well it is a self-definition and self-designation, it is very good to defy the laws of labels and be who you are!

The Evil Inclination Jeremiah 17:9

The Evil Inclination

There are numerous texts about the Yetzer HaRa (the Evil Inclination, aka "Satan") in the Jewish Talmud. The Jewish sages were in no way monolithic in their understanding of the source of our human capacity to do evil. They all agreed that humans are born with it. Here are a number of selections which present proof texts for this:

The following curt statement by Reish Lakish is the most controversial understanding of the Evil Inclination:

Baba Batra 16a:

R. Simeon ben Lakish said: Satan, impulse to evil, and angel of death: all three are the same thing.

So how persuasive is the Evil Inclination?

Brachot 61b:

It has been taught: R. Jose HaGalili says, The righteous are swayed by their good inclination, as it says, My heart is slain within me.

The wicked are swayed by their evil inclination, as it says, Transgression speaks to the wicked, I believe, there is no fear of God before his eyes.

Average people are swayed by both inclinations, as it says, Because He stands at the right hand of the needy, to save him from them that judge his soul.

Raba said: People such as we are of the average.

Said Abaye to him: The Master gives no one a chance to live!

Raba further said: The world was created only for either the totally wicked or the totally righteous.

Raba said: Let a man know concerning himself whether he is completely righteous or not!

Three people never had any problem with the Evil Inclination:

Baba Batra 17a

Three there were over whom the evil inclination had no dominion: Abraham, Isaac and Jacob...

For the rest of us, however, who are the most susceptible to the wiles of the Evil Inclination?

SCHOLARS!

Sukkah 52b

Abaye explained, Against scholars more than against anyone;

as was the case when Abaye heard a certain man saying to a woman, ‘Let us arise now and go on our way.'

‘I will', said Abaye, ‘follow them in order to keep them away from transgression' and he followed them for three parasangs across the meadows.

When they parted company he heard them say, ‘Our company is pleasant, the way is long.'

‘If it were I,' said Abaye, ‘I could not have restrained myself,' and so he went and leaned in deep anguish against a doorpost, when a certain old man came up to him and taught him: The greater the man, the greater his Evil Inclination.

Even when we mourn, we're not safe from the Evil Inclination's influence:

Chagigah 16a

For behold R. Elai the elder said: If a man sees that his [evil] inclination is prevailing upon him, let him go to a place where he is not known, and put on black garments, and wrap himself up in black garments, and let him do what his heart desires; but let him not profane the Name of Heaven publicly!

R. Judah son of R. Nahmani, the speaker of Resh Lakish expounded: What is the meaning of the verse: Trust not in a friend, put not confidence in a familiar friend.

If the evil inclination says to you: Sin and the Holy One, blessed be He, will pardon, believe it not, for it is said: ‘Trust not in a friend,' and ‘friend' [Rea'] means none other than one's evil inclination, for it is said: For the inclination of man's heart is evil [Ra']...

Oy! The Evil Inclination is so bad that it's one of the things God regrets creating:

Sukkah 52b

R. Hana b. Abba stated: It was said at the schoolhouse, There are four things of which the Holy One, blessed be He, regrets that He had created them, and they are the following: Exile, the Chaldeans, the Ishmaelites and Evil Inclination.

‘The Exile', since it is written, Now, therefore, what do I here, says Adonai, seeing that My people is taken away for nothing; (Isaiah 52:5)

‘the Chaldeans', since it is written, Behold the land of the Chaldeans; this is the people that was not." (Isaiah 23:13)

‘the Ishmaelites', since it is written, The tents of the robbers prosper, and they that provoke God are secure since God brought them with His hand." (Job 12)

‘the Evil Inclination', since it is written, [And I will gather her that is driven away] and her that I have afflicted.(Micah 4:6)

Is there no hope against the Evil Inclination? Of course there is!

Sukkah 52b:

The school of R. Ishmael taught, If this repulsive wretch meets you, drag him to the Beit Hamidrash, the House of Study.

Despite the power of the Evil Inclination, we are still held responsible; we can beat it. The following selection deals with Psalm 4:5: Tremble and sin not; Commune with your own heart upon your bed and be still. Sela."

Brachot 5a:

R. Levi b. Hama says in the name of R. Simeon b. Lakish: A man should always incite the good impulse to fight against the evil impulse.

For it is written: Tremble and sin not.

If he subdues it, well and good.

If not, let him study the Torah. For it is written: ‘Commune with your own heart.'

If he subdues it, well and good. If not, let him recite the Shema'.

For it is written: ‘Upon your bed.'

If he subdues it, well and good. If not, let him remind himself of the day of death. For it is written: ‘And be still, Selah.'

Avot D'Rabbi Natan 16:

"The impulse of man's heart was evil from the time he was expelled from his mother's womb." (Gen. 8:21).

If you argue: "Is it not the Holy One Himself who created the impulse to evil, of which it is written, 'The impulse of man's heart was evil from the time he was expelled from his mother's womb?' Who then can possibly make it good?"

the Holy One replies, "You are the one who makes the impulse to evil stay evil.

How? When you were a child, you did not sin. Only when you grew up, you began to sin."

If you argue: "But no man can guard himself against it!"

the Holy One replies, "How many things in the world are even less bearable and more bitter than the impulse to evil, yet you manage to sweeten them.

Nothing is more bitter than the lupine, and yet, in order to sweeten it, you carefully boil it in water seven times, until it becomes sweet.

Now, if you sweeten for your need bitter things that I alone created, all the greater is your responsibility for the impulse to evil, which was placed under your control."

Baba Batra 16a

"Although you know that I am not wicked, and there is none that can deliver out of your hand."

Raba said: Job sought to exculpate the whole world.

He said: Sovereign of the Universe, You have created the ox with cloven hoofs and you have created the ass with whole hoofs;

you have created Paradise and you have created Gehinnom:

you have created righteous men and you have created wicked men, and who can prevent you?

His companions answered him: Yea, you do away with fear and restrain devotion before God.

If God created the evil inclination, He also created the Torah as its antidote.

Baba Metzia 32b

Come and hear: If a friend requires unloading, and an enemy loading, one's [first] obligation is towards his enemy, in order to subdue his evil inclinations.

Now if you should think that [relieving the suffering of an animal is Biblically [enjoined], [surely] the other is preferable!

Even so, [the motive] ‘in order to subdue his evil inclination' is more compelling.

The most extraordinary story about a sage overcoming his Evil Inclination is not found in the Talmud: it's from a midrash collection called the Tanchuma. However, because of its remarkable imagery, I'm including it here.

A story of Matia ben Heresh: He was rich and feared Heaven and, like R. Meir, his teacher, sat all his days in the house of study occupying himself with Torah.

Now, the splendor of his countenance shone like the radiance of the sun, and the beauty of his features resembled that of the ministering angels. It was said of him that never in his life had he raised his eyes upon a woman.

Once, Satan passed by and, seeing him, was overcome with envy as he said: Is it possible that there is a righteous man entirely without sin in the world? At once he went up to the height above, stood before the Holy One, and said, "Master of the universe, Matia ben Heresh:what sort of man is he in Your sight?"

God: "He is utterly righteous."

Satan: "Give me permission, and I will test him."

God: "You will not prevail over him."

Satan: "Nevertheless!"

So God gave him permission.

Satan went and found R. Matia seated and occupied with Torah. So he appeared to him in the guise of a beautiful woman, the like of which there had not been in the world since the days of Naamah, Tubal-Cain's sister, on account of whom ministering angels went astray.

Satan stood in front of R. Matia, who, upon seeing him, turned his back to him.

Satan went around and again stood in front of R. Matia. When R. Matia turned his face to still another direction, Satan was once more in front of him.

When R. Matia saw that Satan [in the woman's guise] turned up on all sides, he said to himself: I fear that the impulse to evil will gain mastery over me and cause me to sin.

What did that righteous man do then?

He summoned one of his disciples, who acted as his attendant, and said to him: My son, go and bring me fire and nails.

After he brought them, R. Matia passed the nails through the fire, then plunged them into his own eyes.

When Satan saw this, he was shaken, all but knocked out, and left R. Matia.

In that instant, the Holy One summoned Raphael, prince of healings, and said to him, "Go and heal the eyes of Matia ben Heresh."

When Raphael came and stood before him, Matia asked, "Who are you?"

Raphael answered, "I am the angel Raphael, whom the Holy One had sent to heal your eyes."

Matia: "Let me be. What happened has happened."

Raphael returned to the Holy One and reported to Him, "Master of the universe, thus-and-thus did Matia ben Heresh answer me."

The Holy One said, "Go and tell him: From this day and henceforth, fear not. I guarantee you in this matter that, throughout your days, the impulse to evil will have no sway over you."

When Matia ben Heresh heard God's guarantee from the angel, he was willing to accept the angel's healing and was healed.

The Evil Inclination
(continued)

There are numerous texts about the Yetzer HaRa (the Evil Inclination, aka "Satan") in the Jewish Talmud. The Jewish sages were in no way monolithic in their understanding of the source of our human capacity to do evil. They all agreed that humans are born with it. Here are a number of selections which present proof texts for this:

Brachot 61a

R. Nachman b. R. Hisda expounded: What is meant by the text, Then the Lord God formed [va-yitzer] man?

[The word va-yitzer] is written with two yods, to show that God created two inclinations, one good and the other evil.

R. Nachman b. Isaac demurred to this. According to this, he said, animals, of which it is not written va-yitzer (with two yods), should have no evil inclination yet we see that they injure and bite and kick?

In truth [the point of the two yods] is as stated by R. Simeon b. Pazzi; for R. Simeon b. Pazzi said: Woe is me because of my Creator [yotzri]; woe is me because of my evil inclination [yitzri]!

Or again as explained by R. Jeremiah b. Eleazar; for R. Jeremiah b. Eleazar said: God created two countenances in the first man, as it says, Behind and before have You formed me....
Sanhedrin 91b:

Antoninus asked Rabbi, "At what time does the impulse to evil gain mastery over man: at the time of his conception or at the time he is born?"

Rabbi: "At the time of his conception."

Antoninus: "If so, he would have kicked his way out of his mother's womb. Accordingly, the impulse to evil must gain mastery at the time of birth."

Subsequently, Rabbi used to say: This is one thing that Antoninus taught me, and Scripture supports him, for it is said, "At the door [through which the newborn child issues], sin crouches" (Gen. 4:7).
Avot D'Rabbi Natan 16:

Come and observe: a kid or a lamb, when it sees a pit, turns back, since in an animal there is no impulse to evil [to lead it to harm].

But an infant: the impulse to evil drives him headlong [to destruction], so that the infant places his hand on a serpent or a scorpion and is stung by it, or he places his hand on glowing coals and is burned....

The following text from Avot D'Rabbi Natan 16 is the most depressing statement about the Evil Inclination that I've read; it provides such a sense of futility about a child's development!

The sages said: The impulse to evil is [at least] thirteen years older than the impulse to good.

It begins growing with a child in the mother's womb and comes out with him. If the child is about to profane the Sabbath, it does not deter him;

if the child is about to take a life, it does not deter him;

if the child is about to commit an act of unchastity, it does not deter him.

Only at the age of thirteen is the impulse to good born in a child.<BR.
If then he is about to profane the Sabbath, it warns him: "You fool! Scripture states, 'Everyone that profanes it shall surely be put to death.' " (Exodus 31:14)

If he is about to take a life, it warns him: "You fool! Scripture says, 'Whoever sheds man's blood, by man shall his blood be shed.' " (Genesis 9:6)

If he is about to commit an act of unchastity, it warns him: "You fool! Scripture states, 'Both the adulterer and the adulteress shall surely be put to death.' " (Leviticus 20:10)

When a man stirs up his passion and is about to commit an act of lewdness, all parts of his body are ready to obey him. On the other hand, when a man is about to perform an act of piety, all his parts become laggard, because the impulse to evil in his innards is ruler of the two hundred and forty-eight parts of his body, whereas the impulse to good is like a man confined in a prison.
The following selections all try to describe the site and basic "nature" of the evil inclination

Brachot 61a:

Rav said: The evil inclination resembles a fly and dwells between the two entrances of the heart, as it says, Dead flies make the ointment of the perfumers fetid and putrid.

Samuel said: It is a like a kind of wheat [chittah], as it says, Sin [chattat] couches at the door.

Our Rabbis taught: Man has two kidneys, one of which prompts him to good, the other to evil; and it is natural to suppose that the good one is on his right side and the bad one on his left, as it is written, A wise man's understanding is at his right hand, but a fool's understanding is at his left. (Ecclesiastes 10:2)
Sukkah 52a:

R. Assi stated, The Evil Inclination is at first like the thread of a spider, but ultimately becomes like cart ropes, as it is said, Woe to them that draw iniquity with cords of vanity, and sin as it were with a cart-rope.
Sukkah 52b:

R. Yochanan remarked, There is a small organ in man which satisfies him when in hunger and makes him hunger when he's satisfied, as it is said, When they were starved they became full. (Hosea 13:6)

R. Isaac said: A man's impulse to evil renews itself [in allure] every day, as is said, "Every impulse wrought by his mind was sheer evil every day" (Gen. 6:5).

R. Simeon ben Lakish said: A man's impulse to evil grows in strength from day to day and seeks to slay him, as is said, "The wicked watch the righteous, and seek to slay him." (Psalm 37:32)

And but for the Holy One who is his help, he could not withstand it, as is said, "The Lord will not leave him in his hand." (Psalm 37:33)
Shabbat 105b

"There shall no strange god be in you." (Psalm 81:10). What is the strange god within a man's body? It is none other than the impulse to evil.
Sotah 8a:

Rava said: We have a tradition that the impulse to evil dominates only what its eyes see.
Kiddushin 30b:

Our masters taught: The impulse to evil is hard to bear, since even its Creator called it evil, for He said, "From his youth the impulse in man's heart is evil." (Gen. 8:21)
Niddah 13b:

Rav stated: ‘A man who wilfully causes erection should be placed under the ban.'

But why did he not say, ‘This is forbidden?'

Because the man merely incites his evil inclination against himself.

R. Ammi, however, stated: He is called a renegade, because such is the art of the evil inclination: Today it incites man to do one wrong thing, and tomorrow it incites him to worship idols and he proceeds to worship them.
Sukkah 52a-b:

In the time to come the Holy One, blessed be He, will bring the Evil Inclination and slay it in the presence of the righteous and the wicked.

To the righteous it will have the appearance of a towering hill,

and to the wicked it will have the appearance of a hair thread.

Both the former and the latter will weep;

the righteous will weep saying, ‘How were we able to overcome such a towering hill!'

The wicked also will weep saying, ‘How is it that we were unable to conquer this hair thread!'

And the Holy One, blessed be He, will also marvel together with them, as it is said, Thus says the Lord of Hosts, If it be marvelous in the eyes of the remnant of this people in those days, it shall also be marvelous in My eyes.

R. ‘Avira or, as some say, R. Joshua b. Levi, made the following exposition: The Evil Inclination has seven names.

The Holy One, blessed be He, called it Evil, as it is said, For the imagination of man's heart is evil from his youth.

Moses called it the Uncircumcised, as it is said, Circumcise therefore the foreskin of your heart.

David called it Unclean, as it is said, Create me a clean heart, O Lord, which implies that there is an unclean one.

Solomon called it the Enemy, as it is said, If your enemy be hungry, give him bread to eat and if he be thirsty give him water to drink. For you will heap coals of fire upon his head, and the Lord will reward you;

read not, ‘will reward you' but ‘will cause it to be at peace with you.'

Isaiah called it the Stumbling-Block, as it is said, Cast you up, Cast you up, clear the way, take up the stumbling-block out of the way of my people.

Ezekiel called it Stone, as it is said, And I will take away the heart of stone out of your flesh and I will give you a heart of flesh.

Joel called it the Hidden One, as it is said, But I will remove far off from you the hidden one.


　

The Serpent is not the devil but Adam

The Serpent is not the devil but Adam

The Serpent, through his lie, deceived the woman causing her to die. This is that devil who was a murder and a liar from the beginning, and Jesus says he was the father of those Jews who were making of none effect His Father’s words by their “traditions of men”, thereby deceiving the people. Here the “seed of the Serpent” is defined by Jesus as men who are deceived by the evil imaginations of their hearts.

If the seed of the serpent are men, then the forefather must have been “man”; and the temptation of the woman in the Garden of Eden was “the drawing away of her own desire and seduced”; however, it pleases God to designate this as a Serpent. Now the serpent was more crafty than any of the wild animals. Jesus said to his followers “be ye WISE AS SERPENTS but harmless as doves” (Matthew 10:16).

It is well known that serpents (reptiles) possess no particular intelligence to imitate. The nature of the curse pronounced is suggestive of something more than mere serpent life and intellect, so the serpent as used by the Lord is a figure of speech and symbolizes ungodly men. Also the curse upon the serpent was that “dust shalt thou eat” (Genesis 3:14) and “dust shall be the serpent’s MEAT” (Isaiah 65:25).

This is in keeping with God’s statement to Adam, “Dust thou art and unto dust shalt thou return.” The reward (meat) of obedience is “Life” while the reward (meat) of disobedience is “Death” (dust). Adam and Eve associated and communed with the angels in the Garden of Eden.

They had no way of knowing what death was, they had not experienced it. The wicked thought in Eve’s mind (heart), relative to the Adam’s instructions, deceived her and it was recorded in the Bible as a conversation between a serpent and the woman. It was the same with Jesus. He had thoughts of temptation in his mind (heart) relating to his Father’s words; however, he was not deceived by them nor was he drawn away by the lust (desire) to use that great power given Him at His baptism for personal satisfaction and gain. So by one man’s disobedience, sin entered the world and death by sin, so also by one man’s obedience life has been made sure unto many.

We may deduce that the “Serpent” is a symbol of cunning and crafty deceit in the heart of man. So when a man “becomes as a child” and receives instruction by the “Word of the Lord” and his thoughts are those of the spirit then the cunning and crafty deceit and disobedience (the Serpent, that old devil and Satan) are crushed and put to death by the “spirit of obedience.” Of course we (men) can do nothing of ourselves but God gives us the victory through Jesus who accomplished the work perfectly.

What are the Three Keys to Enlightenment?

what are the three keys to enlightenment?

what are the keys to enlightenment?

There are three keys which open the door to enlightenment

The keys are

Brotherly love, an humble mind, and solid in the faith.

The thing about faith is this if you do not have it you can not understand it. However if you do, no explanation is necessary.

1 Peter 3:8 Finally, all of YOU be like-minded, showing fellow feeling, having brotherly affection, tenderly compassionate, humble in mind, 9 not paying back injury for injury or reviling for reviling, but, to the contrary, bestowing a blessing, because YOU were called to this [course], so that YOU might inherit a blessing.

2 Peter 1:5 Yes, for this very reason, by YOUR contributing in response all earnest effort, supply to YOUR faith virtue, to [YOUR] virtue knowledge, 6 to [YOUR] knowledge self-control, to [YOUR] self-control endurance, to [YOUR] endurance godly devotion, 7 to [YOUR] godly devotion brotherly affection, to [YOUR] brotherly affection love. 8 For if these things exist in YOU and overflow, they will prevent YOU from being either inactive or unfruitful regarding the accurate knowledge of our Lord Jesus Christ.

A short Hymn

Amen. Blessing and glory, and wisdom and
thanksgiving, and honour, and pow’r, and might,
be unto our God for ever and ever.

Blessing and glory, and wisdom, and thanksgiving, and honour,
and pow’r, and might, be unto our God for
ever and ever. Amen.

Fortigurn

Fortigurn once wrote (trying to be sarcastic):

QUOTE (Gospel of the Egyptians)

Domedon Doxomedon came forth, the aeon of the aeons, and the throne which is in him, and the powers which surround him, the glories and the incorruptions. The Father of the great light who came forth from the silence, he is the great Doxomedon-aeon, in which the thrice- male child rests.

And the throne of his glory was established in it, this one on which his unrevealable name is inscribed, on the tablet [...] one is the word, the Father of the light of everything, he who came forth from the silence, while he rests in the silence, he whose name is in an invisible symbol. A hidden, invisible mystery came forth:

iiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiii EEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE oooooooooooooooooooooo uuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuu eeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO.

QUOTE (Gospel of the Egyptians)

IE ieus EO ou EO Oua! Really, truly, O Yesseus Mazareus Yessedekeus, O living water, O child of the child, O glorious name! Really truly, aiOn o On (or: O existing aeon), iiii EEEE eeee oooo uuuu OOOO aaaa{a}. Really, truly, Ei aaaa OOOO, O existing one who sees the aeons! Really, truly, aee EEE iiii uuuuuu OOOOOOOO, who is eternally eternal! Really, truly, iEa aiO, in the heart, who exists, u aei eis aei, ei o ei, ei os ei (or: (Son) forever, You are what you are, You are who you are)!

Yeah, I get it.


My Reply:

"Here in the Holy book of the Great Invisible Spirit or the Gospel of the Egyptians each of the vowels is written 22 times and there are 22 letters in the Hebrew alphabet

iiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiii EEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE oooooooooooooooooooooo uuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuu eeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO.

this means Ieou, or Yao is alpha and omega"

 the Greek equivalent Ieou of the Hebrew Yah, which is most likely "a graecizcd form of Ya(hw)ê,

Sethian Gnosticism

Sethian Gnosticism 

CLOSELY connected with the Gnostics above described are the Sethians, to whom Hippolytus next devotes Seth. his attention. He speaks of their "innumerable commentaries," and refers his readers especially to a certain treatise, called The Paraphrase of Seth, for a digest of their doctrines. But whether or not Hippolytus quotes from this document himself, or from some other treatise or treatises, is not apparent. The title, Paraphrase of Seth, is exceedingly puzzling; it is difficult to say what is the exact meaning of the term "paraphrasis," and the doctrines set forth by Hippolytus have no connection with the Seth-legend.

The term Sethians, as used by Hippolytus, is not only puzzling on this account, but also because his summary differs entirely from the scraps of information on the system of the Sethites supposed to have been mentioned in his lost Syntagma, and allied to the doctrine of the Nicolaïtans by the epitomizers. In the latter fragments the hero Seth was chosen as the type of the good man, the perfect, the prototype of Christ.

The Sethian cosmogony as most famously contained in the Apocryphon ("Secret book") of John describes an unknown God, very similar to the orthodox apophatic theology, although very different from the orthodox credal teachings that there is one such god who is identified also as creator of heaven and earth. In describing the nature of a creator god associated with Biblical texts, orthodox theologians often attempt to define God through a series of explicit positive statements, themselves universal but in the divine taken to their superlative degrees: he is omniscient, omnipotent and truly benevolent. The Sethian conception of the most hidden transcendent God is, by contrast, defined through negative theology: he is immovable, invisible, intangible, ineffable; commonly, "he" is seen as being hermaphroditic, a potent symbol for being, as it were, "all-containing". In the Apocryphon of John, this god is good in that it bestows goodness. After the apophatic statements, the process of the Divine in action are used to describe the effect of such a god.

Sethian works typically include:

• The Apocryphon of John

• The Apocalypse of Adam

• The Reality of the Rulers, Also known as The Hypostasis of the Archons

• The Thunder, Perfect Mind

• The Three-fold First Thought (Trimorphic Protennoia)

• The Holy Book of the Great Invisible Spirit (also known as the (Coptic) Gospel of the Egyptians)

• Zostrianos

• Allogenes

• The Three Steles of Seth

• The Gospel of Judas

• Marsanes

• The Coptic Apocalypse of Paul

• The Thought of Norea

• The Second Treatise of the Great Seth

I am a Gnostic Christadelphian

I am a Gnostic Christadelphian

I am a Gnostic Christadelphian

You may say that this is, is a contradiction if ever I've heard one. That's like saying "I'm a Muslim Catholic" or "I'm a Buddhist Mormon".

Well it is a self-definition and self-designation, it is very good to defy the laws of labels and be who you are!

Doctrine is Important

Doctrine is Important

Many People seem to think that being a Gnostic is Post Doctrinal claiming "Gnostic Is Not about Doctrines! That’s Orthodox."

Well Valentinian Cosmology is pretty complicated doctrinal things and some modern Gnostics have a tendency to think that Gnosticism is post doctrinal and that dogma and doctrine are bad things but to the classical Gnostics they were important and and for us as modern Gnostics they're important because cosmology (Cosmogony is the study of the creation of the universe.) determines anthropology (Christian anthropology is the study of the human ("anthropology") as it relates to God) our view of mankind.

Doctrine (from Latin: doctrina, meaning "teaching" or "instruction")

1Co 14:6  Now, brethren, if I come unto you speaking with tongues, what shall I profit you, except I shall speak to you either by revelation, or by knowledge <1108 gnosis>, or by prophesying, or by doctrine <1322>?

1322. διδαχή didache [did-akh-ay’]; from 1321; instruction (the act or the matter): —  doctrine, hath been taught.

1321. διδάσκω didasko [did-as’-ko]; a prolonged (causative) form of a primary verb δαω dao (to learn); to teach (in the same broad application): —  teach.

1319. διδασκαλία didaskalia [did-as-kal-ee’-ah]; from 1320; instruction (the function or the information): —  doctrine, learning, teaching.

1319. διδασκαλία didaskalia [did-as-kal-ee’-ah]; from 1320; instruction (the function or the information): — doctrine, learning, teaching.

2085 ἑτεροδιδασκαλέω heterodidaskaleo [het-er-od-id-as-kal-eh’-o]

from 2087 and 1320; v; TDNT-2:163,161; [{See TDNT 190 }]

AV-teach other doctrine 1, teach otherwise 1; 2

1) to teach other or different doctrine

1a) deviating from the truth

1321. διδάσκω didasko [did-as’-ko]; a prolonged (causative) form of a primary verb δαω dao (to learn); to teach (in the same broad application): — teach.

Finding the meaning of Jesus's secret teachings brings eternal life  

These are the hidden sayings that the living Jesus spoke and that Didymus Judas Thomas wrote down.
1. And he said, "Whoever finds the correct interpretation of these sayings will never die." (Translated by Stevan Davies)

The hidden or secret sayings are in signs or signified the sayings, they are symbolical that is why we are told to find the correct interpretation of these sayings. (Cp. Saying 63) 

There can be only one true correct interpretation of these sayings it is called  single doctrine in the Second Treatise of the Great Seth:

And he is entirely one, being the All with them all in a single doctrine, because all these are from a single spirit. O unseeing ones, why did you not know the mystery rightly? (The Second Treatise of the Great Seth)

The Nag Hammadi Library The Book of Thomas (the Contender)

Again the savior answered and said, "Therefore it is necessary for us to speak to you, since this is the DOCTRINE of the perfect. If, now, you desire to become perfect, you shall observe these things; if not, your name is 'Ignorant', since it is impossible for an intelligent man to dwell with a fool, for the intelligent man is perfect in all wisdom. To the fool, however, the good and bad are the same—indeed the wise man will be nourished by the truth and (Ps.1:3) "will be like a tree growing by the meandering stream"—seeing that there are some who, although having wings, rush upon the visible things, things that are far from the truth.

Thomas answered and said, "What have we to say in the face of these things? What shall we say to blind men? What doctrine should we express to these miserable mortals who say, "We came to do good and not curse," and yet claim, "Had we not been begotten in the flesh, we would not have known iniquity"?"

Then Jesus continued and said to them, "Woe to you, for you did not receive the doctrine, and those who are [...] will labor at preaching [...]. And you are rushing into [...] will send them down [...] you kill them daily in order that they might rise from death.

For it was ludicrous. It is I who bear witness that it was ludicrous, since the archons do not know that it is an ineffable union of undefiled truth, as exists among the sons of light, of which they made an imitation, having proclaimed a doctrine of a dead man and lies so as to resemble the freedom and purity of the perfect assembly, (and) <joining> themselves with their doctrine to fear and slavery, worldly cares, and abandoned worship, being small (and) ignorant, since they do not contain the nobility of the truth, for they hate the one in whom they are, and love the one in whom they are not. For they did not know the Knowledge of the Greatness, that it is from above and (from) a fountain of truth, and that it is not from slavery and jealousy, fear and love of worldly matter. For that which is not theirs and that which is theirs they use fearlessly and freely. They do not desire, because they have authority, and a law from themselves over whatever they will wish.

It sufficed for some persons to pay attention to the teaching and understand 'The Shepherds' and 'The Seed' and 'The Building' and 'The Lamps of the Virgins' and 'The Wage of the Workers' and 'The Double Drachma' and 'The Woman

From these texts we can see a strong emphasis on doctrine or teaching

From The Nag Hammadi Library we can see disagreements over doctrine. These disputes are about the nature of Jesus, the resurrection,

Melchizedek From The Nag Hammadi Library Translated by Søren Giversen and Birger A. Pearson

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

The Gospel of Philip

Naked and Not Naked


Some people are afraid that they may arise from the dead naked, and so they want to arise in flesh. They do not know that it is those who wear the [flesh] who are naked. Those who are [able] to take it off are not naked.

“Flesh [and blood will] not inherit God’s kingdom.” What is this flesh that will not [57] inherit? It is what we are wearing. And what is this flesh that will inherit? It is the flesh and blood of Jesus.

For this reason he said, “One who does not eat my flesh and drink my blood does not have life within.” What does this mean? His flesh is the word and his blood is the holy spirit. Whoever has received these has food, drink, and clothing.

And I also disagree with others who say that the flesh will not arise. Both views are wrong. You say that the flesh will not arise? Then tell me what will arise, so we may salute you. You say it is the spirit in the flesh, and also the light in the flesh? But what is in the flesh is the word, and what you are talking about is nothing other than flesh. It is necessary to arise in this sort of flesh, since everything exists in it.

In this world those who wear clothes are superior to the clothes. In heaven’s kingdom the clothes are superior to those who wear them.

Is God a Holy Trinity?

Is God a Holy Trinity?

Is there a difference between emanations of the pleroma and the trinity?

Yes there is a difference between emanations of the pleroma and the catholic trinity

The Ogdoad is a group of 8 aeons which make up the primal emanations of the Pleroma or Godhead

The Trinity is a group of 3 divine beings or persons all claiming to be the same Person at the same time which makes up the Catholic Godhead

The emanations are all aspects of the One Deity 

The Deity has male and female aspects. However the 3 persons of the Catholic  Trinity are all male 

He existed before anything other than himself came into being. The Father is singular while being many, for he is the first one and the one who is only himself. (The Tripartite Tractate Einar Thomassen Translation)

It is not "One God in three Gods," and "Three Gods in One;" but one Deity in a countless multitude revealed in the memorial name, and set forth in the mystery of godliness.

This multitudinous manifestation of the one Deity - one in many, and many in one, by His spirit - was proclaimed to the Hebrew nation in the formula of Deut. 6:4, "Hear, O lsrael, YAHWEH our ELOHIM is the ONE YAHWEH;" that is, "He who shall be our Mighty Ones is the One who shall be."

There are not three Gods in the Godhead; nor are there but three in manifestation; nevertheless, the Father is God and Jesus is God; and we may add, so are all the brethren of Jesus gods; and "a multitude which no man can number." The Godhead is the homogeneous fountain of the Deity; these other gods are the many streams which form this fountain flow. The springhead of Deity is one, not many; the streams as numerous as the orbs of the universe, in which a manifestation of Deity may have hitherto occurred.

Is God a Holy Trinity?

No God is not Trinity the reason why it is called the Holy Trinity is because there are many pagan Trinitis

Valentinian tradition rejects the teaching of the trinity

Marcellus was a contemporary of the Church historian Eusebius and he was present with the latter at the Council of Nicea (c. 325). Marcellus claimed a connection between the Trinity and the teachings of the great Gnostic sage, Valentinus (c. 85–150 AD).

“Valentinus, the leader of a sect, was the first to devise the notion of three subsistent entities in a work that he entitled On the Three Natures. For he devised the notion of three subsistent entities and three persons—father, son and holy spirit.” (B. Layton, Gnostic Scriptures, pg. 232)

To understand the meaning of Marcellus’s statement it must be seen against the background of the time in which it was written. Both Marcellus and Eusebius lived in an age where the Catholic Church had achieved total dominance; and had received recognition and support from the Roman emperor. In this period the Church was split between two theological factions. One of these factions (the “orthodox”) believed that the Father, Son and Holy Spirit were three distinct persons who shared one nature or essence (homoousion). This was the position of the majority of the Catholic clergy. In opposition was the heretical faction led by an Egyptian priest named Arius (c. 250–336), who led a rebellion against the bishop of Alexandria. Arius and his followers insisted that the Father and Son had separate natures [1]. (This controversy was probably based on the paradox between Matthew 19:17 and John 10:30.) In the fragment above Marcellus is crediting the notorious heretic Valentinus with being the originator of the separate natures position as taken by the followers of Arius. I believe Marcellus is basically twisting the facts in order to smear the followers of Arius [2]. (In a similar manner Arius claimed in his Confession of Faith that the doctrine of one nature originated from the teachings of Valentinus and the Manicheans.[3])

Ironically Marcellus was later condemned by the Catholic Church for going too far toward the Monarchian position (Sabellianism) in his fanatical opposition to the Arians. Thus while Marcellus affirmed the shared essence of the Trinity, he did so to the point of denying the reality of their separate persons. http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/09642a.htm

In extant ecclesiastical literature the first use of the word homoousion in theology first appears in the doctrine of Valentinus as reported by Irenaeus, Against Heresies, 1.5.1.; see B. Layton, Gnostic Scriptures, pg. 290, footnote b. Of significance is that Irenaeus never used this word in his own doctrine, just as he never used the word “trinity.”

The problem here is that Marcellus is stretching the truth when he states that Valentinus’s concept of “Three Natures” is connected with the notion of “three subsistent entities and three persons—father, son and holy spirit.” The fact is, no other historical witness makes this claim about Valentinus; and there is no evidence in any Valentinian text that shows a connection of this sort. Valentinian texts do contain infrequent and obscure references to the “Father, Son and Holy Spirit” as I have shown above. But again there is no evidence either in Catholic or Valentinian sources that there was a prevailing theological system in Valentinian tradition that revolved around the phrase “Father, Son and Holy Spirit.” Much to the contrary, the historic evidence available shows that the “trinity” of Valentinus, and of the Valentinians, referred to something entirely different and unique.

The report of Marcellus above may be compared with the reports of the early Latin Father, Tertullian of Carthage. Tertullian lived at least 50 years before Marcellus and his writings are especially important because they show the origin and development of the word “trinity” in early Christian thought [4].

4] In extant ecclesiastical literature the notion of a three-person Godhead first appears with Justin Martyr, Athenagorus, and Irenaeus (Justin, 1 Apology, 6, 60; Athenagorus, A Plea for the Christians, 12; Irenaeus, Against Heresies, 4.20.4). These writers never use the word “trinity” but the three-fold idea is emerging in their thoughts. Most important is that these writers do not derive their three-fold ideas from any theological consensus in the NT. At best these writers refer to certain ideas that appear infrequently in certain NT passages, i.e. Mt. 28:19 and 2 Cor. 13:14. But again, there is no consensus in the NT that the Godhead is comprised of three persons. If there is any consensus at all in the NT, then the evidence most often shows that the Godhead is comprised of two figures, Father and Son (cf. Col. 2: 1–3, Jn. 1:1–3, 10:30). It is also notable that, in their polemics against heretics, neither Justin nor Irenaeus refer to any “trinity”; nor do they labor repeatedly on the notion that the godhead is ‘three-fold’ or is comprised of ‘three persons.’ This particular form of dogmatic opinion began with Tertullian (and the Montanists) and no one else (i.e. Tertullian, Against Praxeas).

Historically, Tertullian was the first Catholic writer to begin using the word “trinity” in reference to a systematic dogma.

The irony is that when Tertullian first used the word “trinity” in his earliest Catholic writings, this term was used in reference to Valentinian doctrine. Tertullian actually described this doctrine with the words “Valentinian trinity” (in Latin: trinitas Valentiniana [8]). Hence the first mention of the trinity in ecclesiastical literature actually refers to an idea that belonged to the Valentinians. Here is an example from Tertullian’s Treatise on the Soul:

“[The heretics] deny that nature is susceptible to any change, in order that they may be able to establish their three-fold theory, or ‘trinity,’ (“trinitas”) in all its characteristics as to the several natures, because ‘a good tree cannot produce evil fruit, nor a corrupt tree, good fruit; and nobody gathers figs of thorns, nor grapes of brambles’.” (Tertullian, A Treatise on the Soul, 21)

Tertullian’s description of the Valentinian “trinity” shows no connection with the three persons but instead refers to a doctrine of three natures. What Tertullian actually describes is a Valentinian doctrine which maintains that the universe is comprised of three fundamental substances or natures, which are identified as spirit, soul and matter (ibid., pg. 202; see below). Tertullian here accuses the Valentinians of teaching that the three natures are not subject to change, which he construes to mean that there is no hope for salvation, because the soul’s nature can’t change. Of course he has misstated the Valentinian doctrine; which maintains that the soul is in fact subject to change, i.e. redemption. It is the natures of spirit and matter which are not subject to change. Tertullian correctly reports this doctrine in his later treatise Against Valentinians, 25, where he admits that the soul (animal) “oscillates between the material and the spiritual, and is sure to fall at last on the side to which it has mainly gravitated.” (ibid., pg. 515f.) What Tertullian half-hazardly describes is the “trinity” which was the central tenet of ancient Valentinian tradition, and which provided the structure by which Valentinians defined their concepts of the universe, theology, christology and human nature

Photinus taught that Jesus was the sinless Messiah and redeemer, and the only perfect human son of God, but that he had no pre-human existence. They interpret verses such as John 1:1 to refer to God's "plan" existing in God's mind before Christ's birth;

Many Gnostic traditions held that the Christ is a heavenly Aeon but not one with the Father.

Nontrinitarianism was later renewed by Cathars in the 11th through 13th centuries:

Yet another movement got started in the 12th century in the south of France—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.” (mankind's search for god watchtower)

The Bogomils ("Friends of God") or Bulgars were a Gnostic Christian sect that flourished in Thrace and Bulgaria in the 10th Century. Their beliefs spread throughout Europe: to Italy, Northern Spain, the Languedoc, France, Germany, and Flanders. Bulgars rejected the Trinity and the sacraments, denied the Catholic Church's teachings on images, infant baptism, saints, and the virgin birth, and held that matter is inherently evil. A derivative sect which came to be known as Cathari flourished in the Languedoc (now Southern France) and Northern Italy . They followed a life of severe asceticism and found little difficulty in attracting the bulk of the population who were, according to Church records, sated with the corruption of the local clergy.

Those groups with early Unitarian or Socinian Christology such as Christadelphians and the Church of God General Conference identify the Angel of the Lord in the Old Testament much as Jews do, simply as angels. Early Christadelphians, notably John Thomas (Phanerosis 1869) and C. C. Walker (1929 Theophany: The Bible doctrine of the manifestation of God upon earth in the angels, in the Lord Jesus Christ, and hereafter in
"the manifestation of sons of God" Birmingham 1929) integrated angelic theophanies and God as revealed in his various divine names into a doctrine of God Manifestation which carries on into a Unitarian understanding of God's theophany in Christ and God being manifested in resurrected believers.

Think

Test Everything Truth in the Father