History of Gnosticism

The History of Gnosticism

A Historical Timeline of Gnostic Origins, Sethian and Valentinian Developments, Ancient Survivals, and Modern Neo-Gnosticism

Introduction

The history of Gnosticism is considerably more complicated than the familiar account that presents it simply as a Christian heresy that appeared in the second century and disappeared after being defeated by the early Church. That narrative overlooks the diversity of ancient religious movements, the Jewish intellectual environment in which Gnostic ideas developed, the survival of certain communities beyond antiquity, and the rediscovery of Gnostic literature in modern times.

Gnosticism was never a single, uniform religion. The term encompasses a variety of religious and philosophical traditions whose adherents differed in their understanding of God, creation, humanity, salvation, and the relationship between the visible world and the divine realm. Some systems portrayed the material world as the product of an ignorant or rebellious creator, while others offered more complex accounts in which creation emerged through a sequence of divine manifestations, misunderstandings, or disturbances. Some traditions were strongly dualistic; others, including the Eugnostos the Blessed, present a more philosophical account of the transcendent God without relying on the familiar narrative of an evil creator.

The history of these traditions must therefore be reconstructed from several kinds of evidence: ancient texts, the writings of their opponents, archaeological discoveries, and the practices of communities that survived into later centuries. The Church Fathers provide valuable historical information, but their descriptions were often polemical. Modern interpretations can inherit their assumptions even when attempting to reconstruct Gnosticism independently.

This history follows the development of possible pre-Christian antecedents, early Jewish religious speculation, the emergence of Sethian and Valentinian traditions, the concealment of the Nag Hammadi codices, the later histories of related movements, and the development of neo-Gnosticism in the nineteenth century and beyond.

1. The Question of Pre-Christian Gnostic Origins

One of the most important questions in the history of Gnosticism is whether its earliest ideas existed before Jesus and John the Baptist.

It is reasonable to investigate this possibility. The religious environment of the Second Temple period, particularly from the third century BCE to the first century CE, contained many of the intellectual and spiritual elements that later appeared in Gnostic literature. Jewish apocalyptic writings, traditions about heavenly journeys, speculation concerning divine wisdom, interpretations of Genesis, and encounters between Jewish scripture and Greek philosophy all contributed to an environment in which new religious systems could develop.

However, the existence of these antecedents does not prove that a fully developed Gnostic religion existed before Christianity. The surviving evidence supports the more cautious conclusion that some of the ideas later incorporated into Gnostic systems may have pre-Christian origins, while recognisably developed Gnostic movements are more securely documented in the first and second centuries CE.

The distinction matters because the origins of an idea and the origins of an organised religious movement are not necessarily identical.

Josephus and Hellenised Jewish interpretation

In Against Apion 2.256–257, Josephus criticises certain Jews who, in his account, allowed their enthusiasm for Greek culture to undermine their commitment to ancestral law. The passage supplied for this discussion expresses the criticism as follows:

“Some among us have been so delighted with Greek culture that they have not only neglected their own laws, but have laughed at them and even attempted to misinterpret them with forced allegories, for the sake of Greek philosophy.”

The passage reflects Josephus's concern that Greek cultural influence could encourage Jewish writers to abandon or distort the traditional meaning of their scriptures. It demonstrates that disputes existed over the proper relationship between Jewish law, Greek philosophy, and allegorical interpretation.

It is important, however, to distinguish Josephus's historical criticism from the modern hypothesis of proto-Gnosticism. The passage does not explicitly identify a Gnostic movement, and the wording quoted above should be treated as a supplied rendering rather than assumed to be a verbatim translation of the surviving Greek text. Josephus's criticism establishes a relevant intellectual context, not direct proof of a pre-Christian Gnostic school.

Nevertheless, the underlying question is significant: could some Jewish thinkers have combined scriptural interpretation with speculative cosmology in ways that eventually contributed to Gnostic traditions?

The possibility deserves serious consideration.

Philo of Alexandria and the dangers of philosophical speculation

Philo of Alexandria, who lived approximately 20 BCE to 50 CE, offers another important perspective. He sought to interpret Jewish scripture through philosophical concepts, drawing particularly on Platonism and Stoicism. For Philo, allegorical interpretation could reveal deeper meanings within the Torah without requiring him to abandon the authority of Jewish tradition.

The passage supplied from On Dreams 1.29–31 condemns those who supposedly misuse philosophy:

“Some, boasting of wisdom falsely so-called, pervert philosophy into a cloak for impiety, weaving together fictions and monstrous tales, daring to call their own baseless opinions divine oracles… mixing plausible doctrines with ridiculous delusions.”

This criticism illustrates the tension between philosophical interpretation and speculative religious invention. Philo's own allegorical method demonstrates that Jewish scripture could be interpreted through philosophical categories, while his criticism suggests that he regarded some speculative interpretations as excessive or irreverent.

It is tempting to identify the people he criticises as proto-Gnostics. That remains a hypothesis, however, because Philo does not establish their identity as members of a recognisable Gnostic movement in this passage.

The historical significance lies in the intellectual conditions that made later developments possible. Jewish scriptural traditions could be combined with philosophical speculation, ideas about divine Wisdom, and questions about the relationship between the supreme God and the world. These were important ingredients in the environment from which several Gnostic systems emerged.

2. Eugnostos the Blessed: An Important Non-Dualistic Perspective

Approximate composition: commonly placed in the first or second century CE, although precise dating remains debated.

One of the most important texts for understanding the diversity of early Gnostic thought is Eugnostos the Blessed. Preserved in two copies within the Nag Hammadi Library, this work differs significantly from the familiar Gnostic narrative in which an ignorant creator produces an inferior material universe.

The opening of the work challenges conventional philosophical explanations of the universe:

“The wisest among them have speculated about the truth from the ordering of the world. And the speculation has not reached the truth.”

The text proceeds to examine competing explanations of the world's existence, including self-direction, providence, and fate. Its purpose is to argue that ordinary philosophical speculation has failed to reach an adequate understanding of the ultimate divine reality.

The work develops a vision of the transcendent God through a succession of divine manifestations, powers, and heavenly figures. Its principal concern is the incomprehensibility and greatness of the supreme divine principle, rather than a sustained account of cosmic rebellion or the creation of the world by an evil deity.

This makes Eugnostos especially important for any history that refuses to reduce Gnosticism to a single dualistic worldview.

It is worth being precise about the terminology. The absence of an elaborate evil-creator myth does not establish that Eugnostos rejects every possible distinction between the transcendent God and the visible cosmos. Rather, the text presents a different theological emphasis from those systems that place the Demiurge at the centre of their explanation of material existence.

There is also an important relationship between Eugnostos the Blessed and The Sophia of Jesus Christ. The latter reworks much of the former's philosophical teaching into a Christian revelation dialogue. This relationship suggests that a non-Christian or less explicitly Christian philosophical discourse could be adapted for a Christian audience without losing all its earlier conceptual material.

Consequently, Eugnostos raises a significant historical possibility: the intellectual history of Gnosticism cannot be reconstructed solely through Christian heresiology. Some of its traditions may have emerged from broader philosophical and religious environments, while others developed through the reinterpretation of Jewish scripture and Christian teachings.

3. The Emergence and Development of Sethian Gnosticism

First to third centuries CE, with later philosophical developments.

The Sethians represent one of the most important traditions in the history of Gnosticism. Their name is associated with Seth, the son of Adam and Eve, who is treated in their literature as a special figure connected with the spiritual lineage of humanity.

Sethian texts contain elaborate accounts of the transcendent God, divine manifestations, the emergence of lower cosmic powers, and the role of spiritual knowledge in salvation. Important works associated with Sethian traditions include the Apocryphon of John, the Holy Book of the Great Invisible Spirit (also known as the Gospel of the Egyptians), the Three Steles of Seth, Zostrianos, Allogenes, and Marsanes. The precise classification of individual texts remains a scholarly question, but the shared motifs allow historians to identify a recognisable Sethian tradition.

Sethianism and its Jewish background

Sethianism drew on Jewish traditions concerning Adam, Eve, Seth, divine Wisdom, and the opening chapters of Genesis. Its writers reinterpreted biblical narratives through elaborate cosmological and revelatory frameworks.

The figure of Seth became particularly significant because he could be presented as the bearer of a spiritual inheritance distinct from ordinary human genealogy. In this framework, salvation was associated with recognising one's relationship to the higher divine reality and escaping ignorance concerning one's true origin.

Scholarly reconstruction suggests that Sethianism combined several traditions: Jewish scriptural interpretation, baptismal practices, developing Christian ideas about the redeemer, and Greek philosophical speculation. John D. Turner argues that Sethian literature reflects both its roots in Second Temple Judaism and its engagement with Middle Platonism.

This combination makes it difficult to assign Sethianism exclusively to either Judaism or Christianity. Its history appears to involve interaction between both environments.

John D. Turner's Six-Phase Model of Sethian Gnosticism

Scholar John D. Turner proposed a developmental model of Sethian Gnosticism to explain how it may have evolved from Jewish religious traditions into a sophisticated Christian and Platonising movement. Rather than treating Sethianism as a single, unchanging religion, Turner reconstructs a series of historical phases involving Jewish precursors, Christian baptismal groups, the development of Sethian mythology, and later philosophical elaboration.

An important qualification is that the six phases are a scholarly reconstruction, not six independently documented historical periods. The surviving texts do not provide a complete chronological record, and scholars continue to debate the dating and classification of individual Sethian writings.

Phase 1 — Jewish precursors and the origins of Sethianism

Turner proposes that Sethianism developed from the interaction of two possible Jewish groups.

• The Barbeloites: A group associated with Barbelo, a figure representing the first manifestation or Forethought of the transcendent God.

• The Sethites: Interpreters of biblical tradition who identified themselves with the spiritual lineage of Seth, the son of Adam and Eve.

These proposed precursors provide a possible explanation for the combination of Barbelo-centred divine cosmology and the special status of Seth in later Sethian texts.

The historical existence of these groups as separate, organised communities is uncertain. They are best treated as elements in Turner's reconstruction rather than as conclusively established institutions.

The significance of this first phase is that Sethianism may have emerged from Jewish religious thought before becoming recognisably Christian and philosophical in form.

Phase 2 — The Christianisation of the Barbeloite tradition

Mid-second century CE

Turner proposes that Barbeloite baptismal groups came into contact with Christian baptismal communities. In this reconstruction, the pre-existent Christ became identified with the Autogenes, the Self-Generated One associated with Barbelo.

The baptismal rite was understood as more than an outward ceremony: it connected the initiate with a heavenly pattern of spiritual existence, described through the archetypal Son of Man and divine Christhood.

In Turner's interpretation, Jesus was understood through the language of the divine Logos, while his baptism was associated with the manifestation or reception of Christhood. This represents a reconstructed stage in the development of Sethian Christology, not a belief that can be attributed to every early Christian or every Sethian text.

Phase 3 — The fusion of Sethite and Christianised Barbeloite traditions

Later second century CE

Turner's third phase describes the combination of the Sethite tradition with the Christianised Barbeloite tradition. In his model, this fusion produced a recognisably Sethian Gnostic system.

Seth and Christ became associated with the true image of divine humanity. Seth represented the spiritual lineage descending from Adam, while Christ was interpreted through the heavenly Logos and the revelation of the divine realm.

This synthesis enabled Sethian writers to reinterpret biblical history through a larger cosmological framework. The story of Adam, Eve, and Seth could be understood as part of a sacred history concerning humanity's divine origin, spiritual inheritance, and restoration.

This phase is particularly important to the question of pre-Christian origins. It allows for the possibility that Jewish Sethite and Barbeloite traditions preceded their Christian synthesis, without requiring the conclusion that the fully developed Sethian system existed before Jesus.

Wikipedia

+1

Phase 4 — Separation from emerging Christian orthodoxy

Late second century CE

During the late second century, Sethianism increasingly diverged from the forms of Christianity that were becoming dominant.

A major point of disagreement concerned the nature of Christ and his relationship to earthly existence. Some Sethian texts employ interpretations commonly described as docetic, in which Christ's heavenly nature and apparent earthly suffering are understood differently from the emerging orthodox account of his fully human incarnation and suffering.

The conflict was therefore not simply a disagreement about whether Jesus was divine. It concerned how divine reality could become manifest in the world, how Christ related to the human Jesus, and whether the visible events of his earthly life fully expressed his heavenly identity.

As ecclesiastical authorities developed more uniform standards of acceptable Christian teaching, Sethian interpretations became increasingly marginalised.

Turner's model consequently presents this period as one in which Sethianism became more distinct from developing orthodox Christianity.

Phase 5 — The Platonising transformation of Sethianism

Early third century CE

In Turner's fifth phase, Sethianism underwent a major intellectual transformation through engagement with Middle Platonism.

Some Sethian authors increasingly emphasised philosophical contemplation, the structure of divine reality, and the soul's ascent toward transcendent principles. Their interests extended beyond narratives of cosmic origins to questions about the nature of being, intellect, divine knowledge, and the limits of human understanding.

Texts associated with this development include Zostrianos, Allogenes, and Marsanes. These writings present complex accounts of spiritual ascent and divine transcendence, employing philosophical language that reflects the intellectual environment of the third century.

This phase is particularly relevant to Eugnostos the Blessed. Its emphasis on the incomprehensibility of the highest God illustrates how Gnostic-related literature could explore divine transcendence without depending entirely on the familiar narrative of an evil creator.

Turner's reconstruction suggests that, as Sethian thinkers engaged more deeply with Platonism, some became less concerned with preserving their earlier sacred history and more concerned with the philosophical contemplation of divine reality.

Phase 6 — Conflict with Neoplatonism and fragmentation

Late third to fourth century CE and beyond

Turner's final phase concerns the increasingly complicated relationship between Sethian thinkers and the developing Neoplatonic philosophical tradition.

The relationship was not simply one of influence in a single direction. Sethian thinkers adopted and adapted Platonic concepts, while Neoplatonic philosophers examined and criticised teachings associated with Gnostic groups.

Plotinus, who taught in Rome during the third century, criticised certain Gnostic thinkers in his treatise Against the Gnostics, traditionally numbered Enneads II.9. His objections concerned their interpretations of the cosmos, their attitudes toward the visible world, and their claims about the relationship between human beings and the divine.

The philosophical debate indicates that some Gnostic thinkers participated in the same intellectual environment as Platonist philosophers, rather than existing entirely outside Greek philosophical culture.

According to Turner's reconstruction, Sethianism subsequently fragmented, and some of its mythological themes and practices continued in groups described by later heresiologists. The precise relationship between these later groups and the earlier Sethian tradition is uncertain, however, and should not be treated as a proven institutional succession.

Summary of Turner's six phases

Phase	Approximate period	Principal development
1	Before the second century	Possible Jewish Barbeloite and Sethite precursors
2	Mid-second century	Barbeloite baptismal traditions interact with Christianity
3	Later second century	Sethite and Christianised Barbeloite traditions combine
4	Late second century	Increasing separation from emerging Christian orthodoxy
5	Early third century	Greater engagement with Platonism and contemplative philosophy
6	Late third–fourth centuries	Conflict with Neoplatonism and fragmentation of Sethian-related traditions

Why Turner's model matters

Turner's model provides a historical framework for understanding how Sethianism may have developed through the interaction of Jewish religious speculation, Christian theology, and Greek philosophy.

It also offers a way to investigate the possibility that some Gnostic ideas predated Christianity. The proposed Jewish precursors belong to the first phase, while the later phases describe the incorporation of Christian ideas and the development of increasingly philosophical forms of Sethian thought.

However, the model remains a hypothesis about historical development. The surviving evidence does not establish every phase with equal certainty, and the term Sethianism itself may describe a family of related mythological and theological traditions rather than one continuously organised religious institution.

For further study, Turner's major work is Sethian Gnosticism and the Platonic Tradition (2001). It examines the Sethian literary corpus, its Jewish and Christian backgrounds, its philosophical development, and the relationship between Sethian texts and the Platonic tradition.

The Invisible Spirit and Barbelo

A distinctive feature of many Sethian systems is the supreme divine principle, often called the Invisible Spirit or the Invisible Father. The ultimate God transcends ordinary description and cannot be adequately understood through the categories used for created things.

From this transcendent principle emerges Barbelo, a central figure in Sethian cosmology. Barbelo is associated with divine Forethought and with the revelation or manifestation of the otherwise unknowable God. She is described through a range of titles and relationships, including Mother, First Thought, and the divine Mother-Father.

These descriptions should not be interpreted too simplistically. Barbelo is not merely another independent deity placed alongside the supreme God. Within the mythology, Barbelo expresses the self-manifestation and intelligibility of the transcendent divine reality. Her relationship with the Invisible Spirit is central to how Sethian texts describe the emergence of the divine realm.

In some Sethian writings, further divine attributes or manifestations are associated with Barbelo, including Foreknowledge, Indestructibility, Eternal Life, and Truth. The resulting cosmology presents a structured divine fullness rather than a simple opposition between two equal gods.

The development of the Sethian cosmic narrative

Some Sethian texts explain the appearance of lower cosmic rulers through a disturbance or error involving Sophia, the divine Wisdom. The resulting lower order is governed by powers that fail to recognise the fullness of the divine realm.

In the Apocryphon of John, the figure commonly called Yaldabaoth claims supreme authority despite lacking knowledge of the higher divine reality. The story explains ignorance and mistaken authority through a mythological narrative about cosmic origins.

Not every Sethian text develops this story in exactly the same way. Nor should every figure associated with the creator be automatically treated as identical across all Gnostic traditions. The terminology and functions of the Demiurge, Yaldabaoth, and other cosmic rulers vary between texts.

For a historical account, these distinctions are essential. The Sethian literature preserves multiple theological developments, not one unchanging system.

Sethianism and Platonism

During the second and third centuries, some Sethian writings became increasingly philosophical. Works such as Zostrianos, Allogenes, and Marsanes contain complex descriptions of divine reality and spiritual ascent. Their language engages with questions familiar from Middle and Neoplatonic philosophy, including the relationship between the One, intellect, divine manifestations, and knowledge of ultimate reality.

Turner's research identifies these works as important evidence for the interaction between Sethian thought and Platonism. Some of these texts also became subjects of discussion in the philosophical circles associated with Plotinus in third-century Rome.

This development complicates the stereotype of Gnostics as merely mythmakers who rejected philosophy. Certain Gnostic thinkers were engaged in sophisticated metaphysical reflection, attempting to explain how the human mind could approach a reality that transcends ordinary knowledge.

4. Valentinianism: The School of Valentinus

Mid-second century onward.

According to Clement of Alexandria, Valentinus was connected with a Christian teacher named Theudas, who was said to have been a disciple of the apostle Paul. Through this claimed lineage, Valentinian teachers presented their teaching as connected with a deeper tradition of Christian instruction.

This account is historically significant, although the alleged chain of transmission cannot be independently verified. It illustrates how some early Christian teachers understood their intellectual inheritance: they believed that scriptural teaching could contain deeper meanings transmitted through instruction and interpretation.

Valentinus and his followers sought to reconcile Christian theology with Greek philosophical inquiry. They were interested in the meaning of divine knowledge, the relationship between God and humanity, and the way scriptural narratives could communicate truths about spiritual existence.

Valentinianism was another major tradition, associated with Valentinus, a teacher active during the middle of the second century CE. Ancient accounts connect him with Alexandria and Rome, although the details of his life and career are not all independently verifiable.

Unlike a movement defined primarily by a shared mythological ancestor, Valentinianism developed as a philosophical and theological school whose teachers interpreted Christian scripture through a distinctive cosmology. Its adherents considered themselves Christians, although their interpretations differed from those that became dominant within the emerging orthodox Church.

The Pleroma and the divine fullness

Valentinian theology commonly describes the divine realm as the Pleroma, meaning fullness. The Pleroma is characterised by a series of divine manifestations traditionally called Aeons, associated with relationships, attributes, and expressions of the divine fullness.

Different Valentinian sources present the structure of the Pleroma in different ways. A familiar arrangement describes thirty Aeons organised into fifteen pairs, or syzygies, culminating in figures associated with the divine Word, humanity, the Church, and other aspects of the divine order.

The important point is that Valentinian cosmology cannot be reduced to a collection of unrelated gods. The Aeons belong to an ordered account of divine reality. Their relationships articulate how the fullness of the divine can be expressed and understood.

For the purposes of this history, the Aeons should not automatically be treated as independent deities. They can instead be interpreted as expressions, attributes, or relational aspects of the divine fullness, while acknowledging that individual Valentinian texts sometimes personify them as distinct figures.

Sophia and the emergence of the lower world

One influential Valentinian account describes Sophia's desire to comprehend the ultimate Father as the occasion for a disturbance within the divine order. The consequences differ among the sources, but the narrative generally explains the emergence of deficiency, ignorance, or a lower order outside the complete harmony of the Pleroma.

Valentinian traditions developed a range of explanations for the relationship between this lower order and the divine realm. They did not all describe the material world, its creator, or humanity in identical terms.

Some accounts distinguish the supreme God from the craftsman who orders the lower cosmos. Yet this distinction does not mean that every Valentinian text depicts the craftsman as absolutely evil. The craftsman's knowledge, authority, and relationship to the higher divine purpose must be examined within each particular account.

Valentinian thought therefore offers a more complex theological picture than the claim that all Gnostics simply regarded creation as the work of an evil god.

Valentinianism and the interpretation of scripture

Valentinian teachers were particularly interested in interpreting Christian scripture. They employed allegory, philosophical reasoning, and theological distinctions to explain the relationship between the visible narrative of scripture and its deeper spiritual meaning.

Heracleon, a Valentinian interpreter of the Gospel of John, is especially important. His work survives principally through quotations and discussion in Origen's Commentary on John. His interpretation of the Gospel illustrates the sophistication of Valentinian biblical exegesis.

Modern discoveries have also changed the historical picture. The Gospel of Truth, the Tripartite Tractate, and other texts preserved in the Nag Hammadi collection provide direct evidence of Valentinian-related thought. These writings demonstrate that Valentinian teachers were not merely inventing elaborate cosmologies; they were also concerned with revelation, moral instruction, spiritual transformation, and the meaning of Christian life.

The western and eastern schools

Valentinianism developed into several branches. Scholars commonly distinguish western and eastern tendencies, while warning that the division is not absolute.

Teachers such as Ptolemy and Heracleon are associated with the western tradition, while Theodotus and other writers are connected with eastern Valentinian developments. These traditions differed over questions such as the status of the creator, the interpretation of Christ, and the final destiny of different kinds of humanity.

Valentinianism survived as a recognisable movement into the later second and third centuries, and related teachings remained in circulation into the fourth century. Its subsequent decline cannot be attributed to one event. The growth of institutional Christianity, theological controversy, changing religious institutions, and the gradual loss of its textual communities all contributed to the disappearance of Valentinianism as a distinct historical school.

The decline of Valentinianism

Valentinianism spread through several parts of the Roman Empire, including Rome, Gaul, Asia Minor, and Egypt. Its communities remained involved in wider Christian debates for generations.

The growth of imperial support for the emerging orthodox Church during the fourth century changed the conditions under which such communities could operate. Legislation against groups classified as heretical, together with increasing ecclesiastical pressure, contributed to the decline of Valentinianism as a distinct movement.

Nevertheless, it did not disappear immediately. A reported attack on a Valentinian chapel at Callinicum in 388 indicates that Valentinian communities remained present in the late fourth century. Later legislation and ecclesiastical decisions also show that people associated with Valentinianism continued to be encountered.

The historical lesson is important: the disappearance of a religious movement is usually a gradual process involving changing institutions, community practices, political pressure, and the transmission of texts. Valentinianism was not extinguished in one single event.

5. The Church Fathers and the Construction of Gnostic Heresy

Second to fifth centuries CE.

The writings of the Church Fathers are indispensable for reconstructing the history of ancient Gnosticism, but they must be approached critically. Irenaeus, Hippolytus, Tertullian, and Epiphanius wrote against teachings they considered incompatible with Christianity. Their works preserve valuable information about rival teachers, theological controversies, and religious practices, but they were not neutral historians.

Irenaeus's Against Heresies, written in the second century, provides extensive descriptions of Valentinian and other Gnostic systems. His intention, however, was to refute their teachings and demonstrate the superiority of what he considered apostolic Christianity. His descriptions must therefore be distinguished from the beliefs expressed in Gnostic texts themselves.

This distinction became especially important after the twentieth-century rediscovery of writings such as the Gospel of Truth, the Apocryphon of John, and Eugnostos the Blessed. Scholars could compare the accounts written by opponents with the literature of the traditions being criticised. Valentinian writings, for example, reveal moral instruction and spiritual reflection that are not adequately captured by portrayals of Valentinians as merely speculative mythmakers.

The emergence of modern Gnostic studies has therefore involved more than the discovery of forgotten books. It has required a reassessment of the assumptions through which ancient religious movements were understood.

This does not mean that everything written by the Church Fathers was false. Their works preserve important historical evidence. The problem arises when their theological judgements are treated as objective descriptions, or when later writers repeat their classifications without checking them against surviving primary sources.

6. The Nag Hammadi Library: Concealment and Rediscovery

Probably buried in the fourth century, with the exact circumstances uncertain.

One of the most important events in the modern history of Gnosticism was the discovery of the Nag Hammadi Library in Upper Egypt in 1945.

The collection consists of thirteen ancient codices containing more than fifty tractates, including works associated with Sethian and Valentinian traditions, philosophical treatises, Christian apocrypha, and other religious writings. Some texts survive in more than one version, allowing scholars to examine how ancient readers copied, revised, and adapted religious literature.

The codices were written in Coptic, although many of the works were originally composed in Greek. The physical manuscripts generally date from the fourth century, with the evidence of their bindings helping to establish approximate dates of manufacture. Some codices may have been produced around the middle of the fourth century or later.

Why were the books buried?

The exact circumstances surrounding the burial remain uncertain. The collection may have been concealed during a period when certain religious writings were becoming less acceptable in an increasingly institutionalised Christian environment. Monastic ownership and the changing status of non-canonical books are relevant to the discussion, but the precise identity and intentions of the people who buried the codices have not been established conclusively.

The most defensible historical statement is that the books were buried in Egypt during late antiquity, probably in the fourth century or possibly around the transition into the fifth century, and remained undiscovered for approximately fifteen centuries.

The collection is not necessarily a single library belonging to one Gnostic sect. Its contents are diverse, and the manuscripts reflect the interests of ancient readers and communities rather than one uniform theological programme.

Why the discovery matters

Before the discovery, much of what scholars knew about Gnosticism came from Christian authors who opposed it. Nag Hammadi provided access to numerous texts that could be studied on their own terms.

The collection includes Eugnostos the Blessed, The Sophia of Jesus Christ, the Apocryphon of John, the Gospel of Truth, the Tripartite Tractate, and The Gospel of Thomas, among other works.

These writings reveal differences between traditions that had previously been grouped together under broad labels. They also demonstrate that ancient religious communities could preserve philosophical discussions, mythological narratives, prayers, revelations, and ethical instruction side by side.

The Nag Hammadi discovery fundamentally transformed the history of Gnosticism by allowing historians to move beyond a reconstruction based exclusively on the accounts of its opponents.

7. The Mandaeans: A Living Gnostic-Related Tradition

Ancient origins debated; communities survive today.

Mandaeism: A Living Gnostic-Related Religion

The Mandaeans occupy a distinctive place in the history of Gnostic-related traditions because Mandaeism survives as a living religion. Its scriptures include the Ginza Rabba and the Book of John, and its religious life places great emphasis on ritual immersion, knowledge, and the relationship between the worlds of Light and Darkness.

Mandaeism is closely associated with John the Baptist, but its precise historical origins remain debated. Scholars have examined possible connections with Jewish baptismal movements, the religious environment of late antique Mesopotamia, and other traditions of the ancient Near East.

It is reasonable to describe Mandaeism as a living tradition with substantial Gnostic characteristics. It is less certain to describe it as the direct and unchanged survival of a single ancient Gnostic school.

The statement that the Mandaeans are the only people with a genuine Gnostic heritage is therefore too exclusive as a historical conclusion. Their community is uniquely important, but the heritage of ancient Gnosticism must also be studied through surviving manuscripts, historical records, and the continuing influence of ancient texts.

Traditional Mandaean communities generally do not accept converts in the way that many modern religions do. Their religious identity is closely connected with inherited communal membership and established ritual practice. This helps explain why Mandaeism has preserved a distinctive communal tradition rather than becoming a modern conversion movement.

The survival of Mandaeism demonstrates that ancient religious traditions can continue through centuries of historical change. It does not prove that all ancient Gnostic movements were identical or that Mandaeism preserves every feature of their original teachings.

Mandaean continuity and conversion

Mandaeans have historically maintained a strong communal identity, and traditional Mandaean religious practice generally does not accept conversion into the community. The religion is closely connected with inherited communal membership and ritual life.

This helps explain why Mandaeism has survived differently from modern movements that adopt Gnostic teachings through individual study or spiritual conversion.

It is also important to distinguish religious tradition from historical reconstruction. The Mandaeans' own accounts of their origins deserve attention, but their chronology must be considered alongside linguistic, historical, and textual evidence.

The community's survival demonstrates that religious traditions associated with ancient forms of spiritual knowledge did not all disappear in late antiquity. It does not, however, prove that every modern Gnostic system accurately reproduces Mandaean beliefs or that all ancient Gnostic schools shared the same origins.

8. Manichaeism: A Vast Religion That Survived Beyond the Middle Ages

Founded in the third century CE; survived in parts of Asia for centuries.

Manichaeism was founded by Mani in the third century CE. It developed into an international religion that spread through the Roman Empire, Persia, Central Asia, and China.

Manichaeism should not simply be classified as another branch of Sethian or Valentinian Gnosticism. It was a distinct religion that incorporated elements from Christianity, Iranian religious traditions, and Buddhism, while developing its own scriptures, institutions, and teachings.

Its cosmology was strongly dualistic. Light and Darkness were presented as fundamental opposing realities, and human existence was understood within a cosmic struggle between them. This differs from Eugnostos the Blessed and from other systems whose accounts of divine reality cannot be reduced to an opposition between two ultimate principles.

Manichaeism faced persecution in several regions, and its institutional presence declined dramatically in the western world. Yet it survived in Central and East Asia much longer than is sometimes assumed.

The exact date of the disappearance of the last Manichaean communities is uncertain. Historical evidence demonstrates that Manichaean communities and texts persisted in China and Central Asia into the medieval period, with traces surviving after the religion had largely disappeared elsewhere.

It would therefore be too confident to identify a precise date between the thirteenth and eighteenth centuries as the definitive end of Manichaeism. The available evidence does not establish one universally accepted date for the disappearance of its final practitioners.

Its history nevertheless provides a powerful example of how a religious movement could expand across continents, survive political suppression, and eventually lose its institutional continuity.

9. The Cathars and Paulicians: Related Movements or Gnostics?

Paulicianism: late antiquity to the medieval period. Catharism: chiefly eleventh to thirteenth centuries.

The Cathars are frequently included in popular histories of Gnosticism, but their classification requires caution.

Catharism developed in medieval western Europe, particularly in parts of southern France and northern Italy. Many Cathar communities held dualistic beliefs, although the details of their theology varied. Some groups described two opposing principles, while others developed more moderate accounts of the relationship between God, the Devil, and the material world.

The movement was subjected to sustained persecution, including the Albigensian Crusade and subsequent inquisitorial activity. By the end of the thirteenth century, organised Catharism had largely been destroyed as a distinct religious movement, although isolated individuals and remnants may have survived longer.

Catharism is sometimes connected with the Paulicians of the Byzantine world or with Marcionite Christianity. These proposed connections are historically interesting, but a direct line of institutional descent has not been demonstrated conclusively.

Paulicianism itself was a medieval Christian movement with distinctive interpretations of scripture and strong opposition to aspects of the established Church. Some accounts associate it with dualism, but the descriptions written by its opponents require critical examination.

Marcionism, meanwhile, originated in the second century and centred on a radical distinction between the God revealed by Jesus Christ and the creator God associated with the Jewish scriptures. It was a separate movement, and its relationship to later medieval dualists cannot be assumed merely because similarities exist.

Consequently, the proposal that Catharism was essentially Paulician or Marcionite rather than Gnostic is a possible interpretative position, but not an established historical conclusion. The safest approach is to recognise that medieval dualist movements may have preserved or independently developed ideas resembling some ancient religious traditions without necessarily representing an unbroken continuation of Sethian or Valentinian Gnosticism.

10. Qabbalah and the Medieval History of Esoteric Thought

Early medieval antecedents; major developments from the twelfth and thirteenth centuries.

Kabbalah is sometimes included in broader histories of Gnosticism because of similarities between certain Kabbalistic concepts and ancient discussions of divine emanation, heavenly structures, and the relationship between God and creation.

However, Kabbalah is a Jewish mystical tradition with its own textual history. It should not be treated as simply another Gnostic religion.

Jewish mystical literature existed before the medieval flowering of Kabbalah. Important antecedents include traditions associated with the Hekhalot literature and the Sefer Yetzirah, whose dates and stages of development remain debated.

The major medieval development of Kabbalah took place principally from the twelfth century onward. The Bahir emerged in the late twelfth century, while the Zohar became central to Kabbalistic tradition in the late thirteenth century.

Therefore, the claim that Kabbalah was written down in the eleventh century is too simple. Earlier mystical traditions existed, but the historical formation of Kabbalah as a recognisable medieval movement is generally associated with a later period.

The comparison with Gnosticism is nevertheless valuable. Both traditions explored the relationship between the transcendent God, the structure of divine reality, and the visible world. Both also developed complex symbolic vocabularies for describing realities considered inaccessible to ordinary understanding.

These parallels do not prove direct descent. They instead invite careful investigation of shared intellectual environments, scriptural interpretation, and the recurring human attempt to understand how divine reality relates to the cosmos.

11. The Nineteenth Century and the Rise of Neo-Gnosticism

Nineteenth century onward.

The nineteenth century marked a major turning point in the modern reception of Gnosticism. Ancient Gnostic traditions had largely disappeared as organised religious schools, but interest in esoteric philosophy, occultism, comparative religion, and alternative interpretations of Christianity created new opportunities for their revival.

Modern neo-Gnosticism did not emerge from one founder or a single organised movement. Instead, it developed through several overlapping currents: the rediscovery and reinterpretation of ancient religious literature, Romantic and idealist philosophy, occult societies, comparative studies of religion, and attempts to reconstruct spiritual traditions outside established Christian institutions.

Some modern movements sought to reproduce what they understood as ancient Gnostic Christianity. Others adapted selected Gnostic themes to modern philosophical, psychological, or esoteric systems.

The result was not a straightforward continuation of ancient Gnosticism but a modern reconstruction drawing on incomplete historical knowledge.

The influence of the Church Fathers on modern narratives

A major difficulty confronted by nineteenth-century scholars was the limited availability of primary Gnostic texts. Before the Nag Hammadi discovery, researchers often relied on Irenaeus, Hippolytus, Tertullian, and other Christian authors to reconstruct the doctrines of ancient Gnostic teachers.

These accounts inevitably shaped modern interpretations. When scholars or religious founders built new Gnostic systems from the descriptions supplied by opponents, they risked reproducing the same classifications and assumptions that had originally been used to condemn the ancient movements.

This is an important point in the history of neo-Gnosticism: some modern systems retained narratives inherited from the Church Fathers, even when they regarded themselves as recovering a suppressed spiritual tradition.

However, it would be inaccurate to claim that all neo-Gnostic movements simply copied patristic descriptions. Modern approaches have differed considerably, and twentieth-century access to primary texts has enabled more critical reconstructions.

The Nag Hammadi discovery was particularly important because it allowed modern Gnostic thinkers to compare inherited accounts with ancient works in which Gnostic teachers spoke in their own voices.

The rediscovery of ancient sources

The nineteenth and twentieth centuries saw major advances in the publication, translation, and study of ancient religious texts. The Pistis Sophia, the Gospel of Mary, the Gospel of Thomas, and eventually the Nag Hammadi collection helped expand the available evidence.

Modern Gnostic movements could now draw on sources that were either previously unavailable or known only through fragmentary descriptions.

Nevertheless, the use of ancient texts does not automatically make a modern movement a direct continuation of the ancient religion from which those texts originated. Neo-Gnosticism is best understood as a family of modern religious and philosophical developments inspired by ancient materials.

Its history is one of revival, interpretation, reconstruction, and reinvention.

12. A Historical Graph of Gnosticism

The following timeline summarises the major periods discussed in this document. The dates indicate broad historical developments rather than universally agreed starting and ending points.

Timeline: From Ancient Antecedents to Neo-Gnosticism

1. Third century BCE – first century CE

   Jewish apocalyptic literature, divine Wisdom traditions, Hellenistic philosophy, and scriptural interpretation create an environment relevant to the later emergence of Gnostic thought.

2. First–second centuries CE

   Early Gnostic traditions become more clearly identifiable. Sethian literature develops from Jewish and philosophical traditions and interacts with emerging Christianity.

3. Mid-second century CE

   Valentinus and his followers establish an influential Christian philosophical school. Valentinian theology develops accounts of the Pleroma, Aeons, Sophia, and salvation.

4. Second–third centuries CE

   Sethian and Valentinian traditions develop further, including philosophical engagement with Platonism and increasingly elaborate interpretations of scripture.

5. Third century CE onward

   Manichaeism spreads across the Roman, Persian, Central Asian, and Chinese worlds as a distinct religious movement.

6. Fourth–fifth centuries CE

   The Nag Hammadi codices are produced and subsequently buried, probably in the fourth century, although the precise circumstances remain uncertain.

7. Eleventh–thirteenth centuries

   Medieval Catharism becomes prominent in parts of western Europe. Kabbalistic traditions develop substantially, particularly from the twelfth century onward.

8. Medieval period and beyond

   Manichaean communities persist in parts of Asia long after the religion has largely disappeared from the Mediterranean world. The final date of their disappearance remains uncertain.

9. Nineteenth century

   Modern interest in esotericism and alternative Christianity contributes to the emergence of neo-Gnostic interpretations and reconstructions.

10. 1945 and after

    The Nag Hammadi discovery transforms modern scholarship, allowing researchers to study many ancient Gnostic texts directly.

11. Twenty-first century

    Academic scholarship and modern Gnostic movements continue to reinterpret ancient sources, while Mandaeans preserve a living religious tradition with its own distinctive identity.

Conclusion: Recovering the History Beyond the Heresiologists

The history of Gnosticism cannot be adequately explained as the story of one religion that arose in the second century, was defeated by the Church, and then disappeared. It is better understood as a diverse history of religious and philosophical traditions that emerged in an environment shaped by Jewish scripture, Hellenistic philosophy, baptismal movements, and early Christianity.

The possibility that some Gnostic ideas preceded Jesus and John the Baptist remains a legitimate historical question. Jewish apocalyptic literature, traditions concerning divine Wisdom, and philosophical interpretations of creation provide possible antecedents. Yet the evidence does not establish that a fully developed Gnostic religion existed before Christianity.

The development of Sethianism demonstrates the importance of Jewish traditions, the figure of Seth, and later engagement with Platonism. Valentinianism shows how Christian scripture could be interpreted through a sophisticated philosophical framework centred on the divine fullness, the Aeons, and the relationship between spiritual knowledge and salvation. Eugnostos the Blessed further demonstrates that ancient Gnostic-related literature was not uniformly committed to the familiar myth of an evil creator.

The subsequent histories of the Mandaeans, Manichaeans, medieval Cathars, Paulicians, and Kabbalistic traditions reveal both the persistence of religious ideas and the dangers of assuming direct historical continuity where it cannot be demonstrated.

Finally, the rise of neo-Gnosticism in the nineteenth century created a new phase in this history. Modern movements sought to recover ancient spiritual knowledge, but their reconstructions were sometimes shaped by the inherited narratives of the Church Fathers. The discovery of the Nag Hammadi Library provided a means of testing those narratives against the ancient writings themselves.

The central task of a modern history of Gnosticism is therefore to distinguish ancient evidence from later interpretation, historical continuity from resemblance, and the teachings of Gnostic authors from the descriptions supplied by their opponents. Only by making these distinctions can the diversity of Gnostic thought—and its complicated relationship with Judaism, Christianity, philosophy, and later esoteric religion—be understood in its proper historical context.

A history graph over Gnosticism. Note that neo-Gnosticism was essentially started up in the 19th century, generally keeping some of the false narratives of the Church Fathers when designing their theology. The Nag Hammadi Library was hidden in the desert in the 4th or 5th century. The Cathars that were Paulician (or perhaps Marcionite), rather than Gnostic, went extinct in the 13th century. Qabbalah was written down in the 11th century. The last Manichaeans disappeared some time after the 13th century but before the 18th century in China. The Mandeans are the only ones that have a real Gnostic heritage, but they will not accept converts. I suspect the first real Gnostics preceeded Jesus and John the Baptist.

 #gnosticdoctrine #gnosticteachings

 

Jesus and Satan

Good and bad, wrong and right. Love and hate, joy and suffering.

Duality is the crux of human being. The physical plane provides a canvas of contrast.

This is suitable for the mind's need to understand and define. Or the mind found suit in this paradigm.

Egg meet Chicken 🧠🥚🐔

Take a Divine step back, detaching from self interest and cognitive frameworks. See the Singularity that exists in totality.

Up implies down. Happy needs sad  ☯️

Reconforming then creates a clear understanding that we are the Creator of *our* existence, perception, and fate. We are subject to circumstances, but these evolve through our response.

All forms of Dieties and Spirit exist because we are interdimensional. But they are not us, nor do they control us. We as Light Beings maintain a power of presence that can always transcend. 

Pick your potion: subject to change 😊🌊♾

Namaste  🙏💖🕉

 

Ctrl + Alt + Del: How to Reset Your Life

Reset Yourself, Get Back on Track, and Take Control of Your Future

Sometimes in life, you need to stop, step back, and reassess everything. You may feel as though you have lost direction, developed negative habits, become trapped in the same routines, or allowed circumstances to take you away from the person you want to be. You might look at your life and wonder how you ended up where you are today. The good news is that you do not have to remain stuck in the same position forever. You can pause, reflect, change your approach, and start moving forward again.

On a computer, the keyboard combination Ctrl + Alt + Del provides a way to interrupt what is happening and access options for managing the system. As a metaphor for life, it represents three powerful principles:

CTRL — Control yourself.

ALT — Alter your thinking.

DEL — Delete negativity.

Together, these three principles offer a practical way to reset your life, regain your direction, and begin building a better future.

1. CTRL: Control Yourself

The first step towards resetting your life is learning to take control of yourself. You cannot control everything that happens around you. You cannot determine how other people behave, what they think about you, or whether every situation turns out the way you hoped. However, you can work on how you respond to circumstances, what habits you develop, and which direction you choose to take.

Self-control begins with recognising the difference between what you can change and what you cannot.

Too often, people allow their emotions, frustrations, disappointments, and impulses to determine their decisions. A difficult day becomes a difficult week, a setback becomes an excuse to give up, and one negative experience influences everything that follows. Without realising it, they surrender control of their lives to temporary circumstances.

Resetting yourself means breaking this pattern.

Instead of reacting immediately, pause. Give yourself time to think before making decisions. Instead of allowing frustration to dictate your behaviour, consider what response will actually help you. Instead of repeating habits that leave you feeling dissatisfied, begin replacing them with habits that support your goals.

Self-control also means taking responsibility for your own choices. This does not mean blaming yourself for everything that has happened to you. Life can be unfair, and some circumstances are beyond your control. Responsibility means recognising where you have the power to make a difference and using that power constructively.

Start with the basics. Establish a routine, organise your surroundings, look after your physical wellbeing, and identify the tasks you have been avoiding. Set realistic goals and complete them one at a time.

You do not need to transform your entire life in a single day. You need to become more consistent in the decisions you make each day.

Control your actions before trying to control your circumstances.

2. ALT: Alter Your Thinking

The second step is to alter your thinking. Sometimes, the greatest obstacle to progress is not the situation itself but the way you have learned to interpret it.

Your thinking influences your expectations, your confidence, your motivation, and the decisions you make. If you continually tell yourself that you cannot change, that your past determines your future, or that every setback proves you are failing, you can gradually become trapped in a way of thinking that prevents you from moving forward.

Changing your thinking does not mean pretending that everything is wonderful. It means learning to examine your thoughts rather than automatically accepting every negative conclusion they produce.

For example, there is a difference between saying, "I have failed, so I will never succeed," and saying, "Something I tried did not work, so I need to learn from it and try a different approach."

The first statement turns a temporary experience into a permanent judgement. The second treats it as an opportunity to learn.

Your past is part of your story, but it does not have to dictate every chapter that follows. Mistakes can teach you something. Disappointments can help you reconsider your priorities. Periods of confusion can reveal that your current direction is no longer working for you.

The important thing is to stop treating every difficult experience as proof that your future will be equally difficult.

Begin questioning the thoughts that keep you stuck. Are they based on facts, assumptions, fear, or experiences from the past? Are they helping you solve a problem, or are they simply repeating the problem in your mind?

Replace unhelpful conclusions with realistic alternatives. You do not need to convince yourself that you can achieve absolutely anything. You need to recognise that you can learn, adapt, make different choices, and improve aspects of your life.

Alter your thinking by changing your perspective, learning new things, spending time on activities that develop your abilities, and focusing on solutions rather than endlessly revisiting problems.

Most importantly, give yourself permission to become a different version of yourself. You are allowed to outgrow old beliefs, abandon unhelpful patterns, and discover new ambitions.

Change the way you think, and you create new possibilities for the way you live.

3. DEL: Delete Negativity

The third step is to delete negativity. This does not mean erasing your memories, pretending painful experiences never happened, or eliminating every difficult emotion. Negativity is part of being human, and sadness, anger, disappointment, and fear can sometimes tell us that something needs attention.

Instead, deleting negativity means removing what unnecessarily drains your energy, damages your confidence, and prevents you from making progress.

Start by examining what you allow into your life.

Are there habits that repeatedly leave you feeling worse? Are you spending too much time comparing yourself with other people? Are you continually revisiting arguments, disappointments, and regrets that you cannot change? Are certain routines consuming your time without bringing you closer to the life you want?

Awareness is the first step towards change.

You may need to establish boundaries, reduce distractions, organise your environment, or reconsider how much attention you give to other people's opinions. You may need to stop measuring your progress against someone else's achievements and start concentrating on your own circumstances.

Negativity can also develop through the language you use about yourself. Constantly calling yourself useless, incapable, or a failure can reinforce a damaging view of your identity. Replace those labels with descriptions that leave room for growth. You may be struggling, but struggling does not make you worthless. You may have made mistakes, but mistakes do not define your entire character.

Learn to distinguish between constructive criticism and destructive self-judgement. Constructive criticism helps you identify what needs to change. Destructive self-judgement convinces you that you are incapable of changing.

Delete the second, and keep the lessons from the first.

You cannot always remove negative people or difficult circumstances from your life immediately. However, you can work towards protecting your attention, choosing healthier responses, and building routines that support your wellbeing.

Make room for things that restore your energy: meaningful activities, supportive relationships, personal interests, learning, rest, and achievable goals.

Delete the patterns that hold you back, not the lessons that help you grow.

4. Restart: Get Back on Track

Once you have taken control of your actions, altered your thinking, and begun removing unhelpful patterns, the next step is to restart.

A reset is not merely about deciding that your life will be different. It is about putting that decision into practice.

Begin by asking yourself three questions:

1. What is no longer working in my life?

2. What do I want to change?

3. What is one practical step I can take today?

Keep your answers realistic. You might decide to establish a better daily routine, complete an unfinished task, improve your living environment, learn a new skill, or devote more time to something that matters to you.

Choose one priority rather than attempting to change everything simultaneously. Break it into manageable steps and build momentum through consistent action.

Do not wait until you feel completely motivated. Motivation often develops after you begin, not before. Start small, even when your enthusiasm is limited.

Accept that you will have setbacks. A reset does not guarantee that every day will go according to plan. You may return to an old habit or experience a period when progress feels slow. That does not mean the reset has failed. It means you have another opportunity to recognise what happened, adjust your approach, and continue.

The goal is not perfection. The goal is progress.

You should also remember that resetting your life does not require you to reject everything about your past. Keep the experiences that taught you something, the relationships that genuinely support you, and the qualities that make you who you are. Change what needs changing without destroying what is already valuable.

Conclusion: Press Ctrl + Alt + Del

Life does not come with a keyboard that allows you to erase every mistake or instantly solve every problem. However, the idea behind Ctrl + Alt + Del offers a useful reminder that you can interrupt unhelpful patterns and choose a different way forward.

Ctrl — Control yourself. Take responsibility for your actions, develop self-discipline, and concentrate on the things within your influence.

Alt — Alter your thinking. Challenge limiting beliefs, learn from experience, and recognise that your future does not have to repeat your past.

Del — Delete negativity. Let go of destructive habits, unnecessary comparisons, and patterns of thinking that undermine your progress.

Then restart. Establish new routines, set meaningful goals, and take small steps towards the life you want to build.

You do not have to wait for a new year, a Monday morning, or a dramatic event to begin again. You can make a fresh start whenever you recognise that something needs to change.

Your life is not a computer, and you cannot simply erase everything that has happened. But you can reconsider your direction, change your habits, and decide what deserves your attention from this point onwards.

The past may explain where you have been, but it does not have to determine where you go next.

CTRL + ALT + DEL.

Control yourself. Alter your thinking. Delete negativity.

Reset your mindset. Reclaim your direction. Get back on track.

Your next chapter begins with the decisions you make today.

Add a practical seven-day reset planMake the advice more specific and actionableReduce repetition across the conclusion

Ctrl + Alt + Del,

 How to Reset Your Life 

Reset your self get back on track 

Ctrl + Alt + Del,

Control yourself

Alter your thinking 

 delete negativity

Empathy Plato

 So many forget that whole suspension of ego part when trying to empathize with others

We must dream to change how man measures the needs of humanity.~GEG

The Mind of Christ

 

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. 

Early Church Fathers' Understanding of God Having Breasts

The notion that God, or the Father, possesses feminine breasts may initially seem startling or unorthodox, yet it emerges within the early Christian writings as a profound theological metaphor. Early church fathers, particularly Irenæus of Lyons and Clement of Alexandria, frequently employed such imagery to express divine nurturing and life-giving attributes, often symbolizing the intimate relationship between God and humanity. This metaphorical understanding is rooted in the concept of God as both masculine and feminine, emphasizing the inclusive nature of divine care.

Irenæus, the bishop of Lyons in the late second century, is one of the earliest church fathers to employ this imagery. In his seminal work Against Heresies (ca. 180 CE), he speaks of the nurturing role of God, comparing divine sustenance to the act of a mother nursing her children. Irenæus writes, "Those who do not have a share in the Spirit are not nourished to life by the Mother's breasts" (Irenæus, Against Heresies, book 3, chapter 24:1). Here, the metaphor of the "Mother's breasts" refers to the nurturing aspect of the Spirit, which sustains and nourishes believers to spiritual life. This imagery is aligned with the broader Christian tradition of depicting God as a source of life and care, invoking maternal imagery to underscore the divine's role in spiritual rebirth.

Clement of Alexandria, another significant early church figure, is perhaps best known for his rich theological metaphors that portray God in both masculine and feminine terms. Clement, who flourished in the late second and early third centuries, frequently utilized the imagery of nurturing and mothering to describe the relationship between God and humanity. In his work Exhortation to the Greeks and other writings, he characterizes the divine Logos (Word) as a nourishing force, likening it to a mother who feeds her child. Clement writes, "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." (Clement of Alexandria, Exhortation to the Greeks).

For Clement, the "milk of the Father" is a symbol of the divine Word, which sustains and nourishes the soul. The act of "sucking" or "seeking" the Word is likened to a child feeding at the breast, an intimate act of reception and growth. This maternal metaphor aligns with the Christian understanding of salvation as a nurturing and life-giving process, where God, as both Father and Mother, provides the sustenance needed for spiritual growth.

Elaine Pagels, a renowned scholar of early Christianity, highlights the theological significance of Clement's use of maternal imagery. She notes that for Clement, "the Word alone supplies us children with the milk of love," presenting God as both a nurturing mother and a guiding father. The dual nature of God, encompassing both masculine and feminine qualities, is a recurring theme in Clement's thought, reflecting the early church's complex and evolving understanding of the divine. Pagels points out that, "seeking is called sucking; to those infants who seek the Word, the Father's loving breasts supply milk." This comparison underscores the tender and nourishing aspects of divine love, which are accessible to all believers who seek the Word in humility and faith.

Moreover, the metaphor of divine breasts in early Christian thought can be traced to the Old Testament, where God is sometimes portrayed in maternal terms. The Hebrew name El Shaddai, often translated as "God Almighty," is etymologically linked to the word "Shadd," which means "breast." This connection suggests that the biblical understanding of God includes an aspect of maternal care and sustenance, a theme that early Christian writers like Irenæus and Clement would later draw upon to express the fullness of God's nature.

Jerome, another prominent church father, acknowledged the complexity of gendered language in relation to the divine. In his commentary on the Bible, Jerome famously noted that "the word for Spirit is feminine in Hebrew, masculine in Latin, and neuter in Greek," reflecting the diversity of ways in which the divine Spirit was understood in different cultural and linguistic contexts. Jerome's observation indicates that debates surrounding the gendered language of God were taking place within the early church, particularly regarding the use of feminine language for the Spirit. While Jerome maintained that God transcends gender, his remarks suggest an awareness of the theological implications of feminine imagery in relation to the divine.

In conclusion, the use of maternal imagery to describe God, including the metaphor of divine breasts, is not a foreign or isolated concept within early Christian thought. Church fathers like Irenæus and Clement of Alexandria utilized this imagery to express the nurturing and life-giving aspects of God’s nature. By portraying God as both Father and Mother, they sought to convey the fullness of divine care and love, emphasizing God’s intimate relationship with humanity. This theological perspective, enriched by biblical tradition and the linguistic flexibility of early Christian writers, underscores the depth and complexity of the early church’s understanding of the divine..

**Shaddai and the Breasts of God**

The idea that God has breasts may sound surprising or even radical today, but it arises directly from ancient Hebrew language, biblical imagery, and early Jewish and Christian theological reflection. One of the key places this concept appears is in the name **El Shaddai**, a title for God in the Hebrew Bible, and its ancient etymological connections.

### The Meaning of 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), offer various possibilities for the etymology of the word **Shaddai**. One suggestion is that it derives from the verb **שדד shadad**, meaning “to deal violently with,” but none of these sources suggest that **Shaddai** means “God of violence.” Another possibility listed in BDB is that it comes from **שדה shadah**, meaning “to pour out,” referring to God as “rain giver.” 

The *Kohler-Baumgartner lexicon (HALOT)* suggests that the word could be based on the **Akkadian shadu**, meaning “mountain.” Thus, **El Shaddai** would mean “The God of the Mountain(s).” This is the prevailing scholarly consensus today. HALOT also notes other suggestions, including the idea that **Shaddai** refers to one of the ancestral gods, though the exact meaning remains uncertain.

However, one compelling possibility not noted in BDB or HALOT but found in both *Theological Dictionary of the Old Testament (TDOT)* and *New International Dictionary of Old Testament Theology and Exegesis (NIDOTTE)* is that **Shaddai** comes from **שד shad**, the Hebrew word for “breast.” In Hebrew, the word **שד shad** means “breast,” and although the noun is masculine in form, it refers specifically to female breasts.

TDOT observes that **Shaddai** follows a pattern of divine names that pair a natural element with an adjectival suffix. TDOT mentions:  

> “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 naturally mean “The Breasted One.”

Although TDOT ultimately favors the interpretation “God of the Mountain,” it acknowledges “The God of Breasts” as a meaningful and significant alternative.  

TDOT notes:  

> “Despite several attempted and suggested explanations the etymology of שדי has still not been completely clarified.” (TDOT, I:257)

This ambiguity should caution against dismissing the “God of Breasts” interpretation simply because of later scholarly trends toward “God of the Mountain(s).”

### El Shaddai — The Strong Breasted One

The title **El Shaddai** can be literally understood as “The Strong Breasted One.” This maternal imagery is deeply linked to ideas of sustenance, provision, and intimate care, much like a mother nourishing her child.

The Hebrew Bible portrays God under this name as a Provider and Sustainer. God introduced Himself to Abraham saying:  

> “I am El Shaddai; walk before me and be blameless.” (Genesis 17:1)

In Deuteronomy, we read:  

> “He found him in a desert land, and in the howling waste of the wilderness; He encircled him, He cared for him, He guarded him as the pupil of His eye.” (Deut. 32:10)

These nurturing qualities resonate with the image of God having life-giving, sustaining “breasts.”

### Early Jewish Interpretation — Shaddai the All-Sufficer

Early Jewish thinkers often associated **Shaddai** with sufficiency and nourishment. El Shaddai was the “All-Sufficer,” the One who nourishes and sustains like a mother caring for her children.

Philo of Alexandria, a Hellenistic Jewish philosopher, linked the name **Shaddai** with sufficiency:  

> “The name Shaddai signifies ‘one who is sufficient,’ meaning that God stands in need of nothing.” (*On the Change of Names* 5:23)

This echoes the idea of maternal abundance and provision, associating God’s sufficiency with nourishment.

### The Dual Nature of God — Father and Mother

Early Christians extended this imagery to describe God’s dual nature as both Father and Mother. The name **El Shaddai** hints at this duality. In its original Hebrew form:

- **El** means “God” or “Strength.”

- **Shaddai**, derived from **shad**, means “breast” — feminine and nurturing.

Some early Christian thinkers saw this as reflecting the unity of masculine and feminine within the Deity. The duality is beautifully expressed in *Genesis*:

> “So God created man in his own image, in the image of God created He him; male and female created He them.” (Genesis 1:27)

This indicates that both male and female characteristics are found in the image of God — a reflection of both strength and nurturing.

### Clement of Alexandria on the Breasts of God

Clement of Alexandria is one of the most explicit early Church Fathers using maternal imagery for God. In his *Paedagogus*, Clement writes:  

> “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.” (Paedagogus 1.6)

This passage illustrates how Clement envisions the Divine as possessing metaphorical breasts — nourishing believers with spiritual milk.

### Conclusion

Though the etymology of **El Shaddai** remains debated, the ancient possibility of it meaning **“The Breasted One”** is supported by Hebrew linguistics and early theological interpretation. This title highlights God’s nurturing, maternal aspects alongside strength and power. Far from being shocking, the image of God as possessing life-giving, sustaining breasts was meaningful to ancient Jewish and Christian thinkers alike, reflecting a more complete, encompassing image of the Divine.

The Breasts of the Father and Christ: Nurturing Divine Sustenance and Motherhood

The concept of divine nourishment in Christian esoteric thought is often portrayed through maternal imagery, especially in the context of Christ and the Father. The symbolism of breasts as sources of milk represents spiritual sustenance and care. The Odes of Solomon, an early Christian hymn collection, provides profound insights into the maternal and nurturing aspects of both Christ and the Father. These hymns articulate divine motherhood through imagery of the Father’s breasts and Christ’s role as the provider of spiritual nourishment. In this exploration, we will examine how these maternal symbols reflect the nurturing nature of Christ and the Father, and their connection to the Church, seen in passages like Ode 8 and Ode 19.

Christ as Mother in Ode 8

One of the most striking examples of Christ depicted as a mother appears in Ode 8: “My own breasts did I prepare for them” (8:14). In this verse, Christ is not only the giver of life but also the maternal provider of milk, which sustains the faithful. The idea of Christ as the nursing mother is a radical departure from traditional representations of God as exclusively paternal, emphasizing a nurturing, feminine role. The verse continues: “I fashioned their limbs / and my own breasts I prepared for them / that they might drink my holy milk and live by it.” This passage envisions Christ not only as a father figure but as one who cares for His followers in the most intimate and nurturing way, offering life-sustaining nourishment.

This maternal image is reinforced by the contrast between the physical nourishment of milk and its spiritual parallel: just as a mother’s milk nourishes the infant body, Christ’s spiritual nourishment sustains the soul. The faithful, drinking from Christ's milk, are imbued with life, symbolizing the life-giving relationship between Christ and His followers. The image of the divine as a mother providing for the people reflects both a compassionate and intimate relationship with humanity.

The Father as Source of Nourishment in Ode 19

In Ode 19, we encounter an even more striking portrayal of the Father as a nurturing figure. The text reads: "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" (Ode 19:2). In this passage, the Father is described as having “breasts,” an image traditionally associated with femininity. The Father, often depicted in masculine terms in Scripture, is here portrayed in a wholly feminine light. This reversal of typical gender roles emphasizes the fullness of divine nurturing and care, further complicated by the Holy Spirit’s role in “milking” the Father, symbolizing her action of distributing divine sustenance.

The metaphor of divine milk being "ineffectively released" suggests that God’s nurturing energy must be properly channeled, ensuring that it reaches the people in a life-giving manner. This imagery of the Father as the milked one, the Son as the cup, and the Holy Spirit as the one who milks points to a harmonious, triune action that nourishes the faithful, further highlighting the maternal role within the divine relationship.

The Virgin as the Church in Ode 19

Another significant aspect of Ode 19 is the imagery of the Virgin. The Virgin is described as “becoming a Mother” and “laboring and bearing the Son but without pain, because it did not occur without purpose” (Ode 19:6). In this context, the Virgin is not referring to Mary, but rather to the Church, which is often symbolized as a virgin in Christian esoteric thought. 2 Corinthians 11:2 states: "For I am jealous for you with godly jealousy. For I have betrothed you to one husband, that I may present you as a chaste virgin to Christ," emphasizing the purity and sanctity of the Church, the Bride of Christ.

Similarly, Ephesians 5:27 speaks of the Church as a “glorious church, not having spot or wrinkle or any such thing, but that she should be holy and without blemish,” reinforcing the idea that the Church is the Virgin that receives and nurtures the divine. Galatians 4:26 further adds, "Jerusalem above is free, which is the mother of us all," symbolizing the heavenly, nurturing aspect of the Church as the mother of all believers. The Church, as the Virgin, receives the milk of divine sustenance and gives birth to spiritual life.

The Breasts of the Father as a Source of Spiritual Life

The Odes of Solomon make repeated references to the "milk" of the Father and the role of the Father’s "breasts" in the nourishment of the faithful. Ode 19 highlights this: “the milk from the two breasts of the Father” (Ode 19:4). The Father, traditionally envisioned as a powerful, authoritative figure, is here portrayed as a source of maternal care, providing spiritual sustenance through His “breasts.” The use of feminine imagery to describe the Father does not diminish His role as the Creator but rather expands the understanding of His nature to include both masculine and feminine aspects.

This imagery finds its roots in Old Testament metaphors of God as a nurturing figure. Psalm 22:9-10 portrays God as a midwife, taking a maternal role in the formation of the believer: “Yet You are He who took me out of the womb; You made me trust while on my mother’s breasts.” Similarly, Isaiah 49:15 and Isaiah 66:13 depict God as a comforting mother, nurturing and caring for His people. In Isaiah 42:14b, God is described as “travailing in the throes of divine labor pangs,” a vivid metaphor for God’s active participation in the birthing of new life, further emphasizing the maternal aspects of His nature.

Conclusion

The imagery of divine breasts and milk in the Odes of Solomon provides a profound theological vision of God as both Father and Mother, embodying a fullness of care and nurturing that transcends traditional gender roles. Christ, portrayed as a nursing mother in Ode 8, provides spiritual nourishment, while the Father, in Ode 19, is depicted with maternal breasts that sustain the faithful. The Virgin, symbolizing the Church, receives this divine milk and gives birth to new spiritual life. This rich imagery serves to deepen our understanding of the divine nature as one that is both strong and nurturing, offering life and sustenance to all who seek it. Through these poetic and symbolic representations, we encounter a more holistic vision of God’s love, care, and provision for His people.

Medieval Christian Mystics 

In exploring the maternal imagery in Christian theology, particularly the representation of Christ as both a father and a mother, we find numerous historical figures and writings that echo this theme. From medieval mystics to monastic teachings, the concept of divine motherly affection, nourishment, and protection takes center stage, offering a powerful understanding of divine love and care for humanity.

Bernard of Clairvaux (1090-1153), a Cistercian monk, powerfully conveyed the need for spiritual leaders to embody both paternal authority and maternal tenderness. In his sermon to prelates, Bernard emphasizes the dual role of a leader: “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.” This passage highlights the importance of gentle, nurturing care—representing the motherly aspect of Christ—while still maintaining the necessary discipline of a father. The metaphor of exposing one’s breasts and allowing the bosom to swell with milk emphasizes the nourishment and comfort leaders must provide to their spiritual charges. Furthermore, Bernard asks, “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?” This question illustrates how a priest, like Christ, is called to be a refuge, a nurturing presence, offering spiritual sustenance as a mother would to her child.

Similarly, Guerric of Igny, another Cistercian, reflects on Christ’s dual role as both father and mother. He writes, “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.” Here, Guerric acknowledges Christ’s nurturing role, comparing the Holy Spirit’s role to the milk that is poured out from the breasts of Christ. This divine nourishment is not only a sign of maternal affection but also a symbol of the life-giving and sustaining power of the divine.

In Clare of Assisi's vision, she experiences a deeply personal and spiritual encounter with St. Francis, which evokes the imagery of Christ as a mother. In her dream, “St. Francis bared his breast, saying ‘Come, take and drink.’ And she did so. Then St. Francis bid her suckle a second time.” The sweetness and delight Clare experiences in this vision further deepens the maternal metaphor, as she feels spiritually nourished by the divine presence. After the experience, she describes the nipple of the breast remaining between her lips, and what she finds in her mouth is "pure shining gold." The image of gold here symbolizes the purity and preciousness of the divine milk that Clare receives, reinforcing the notion of spiritual nourishment that transcends mere physical sustenance.

Catherine of Siena (1347-1380) also wrote about this intimate relationship with the divine through the imagery of Christ's milk. In her work, she reflects, “...the soul who has in truth entered the house of self-knowledge ... receives me, through affection of love, seeking to draw herself the milk of my sweetness from the breast of the doctrine of Christ crucified.” For Catherine, the “milk of sweetness” signifies the profound spiritual nourishment that comes from understanding and uniting with Christ’s sacrifice. She elaborates in another passage, describing how the soul “reposes on the breast of my divine charity, keeping in the mouth of holy desire the flesh of Christ crucified, ... the soul reposes at the breast of Christ crucified, who is the Truth, and thus draws to herself the milk of virtue.” Catherine’s writings depict a nurturing Christ who offers His milk as a source of spiritual life and sustenance, drawing those who approach Him into an intimate union.

In Julian of Norwich (1342-1413+), the image of Christ as a mother reaches its zenith. She writes, “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.” Julian sees Christ not only as the nurturing mother who cares for us with tenderness but also as the mother who feeds us with His own flesh. She writes, “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 motherly imagery of Christ feeding His children with Himself underscores the deep bond between Christ and the believer, one of complete self-giving and love.

In Christian folklore, the maternal imagery extends into stories of saints, such as St. Agatha, whose breasts were tortured during her martyrdom. Yet, she responded, “Know that in my soul I have other breasts, whose milk sustains all of my senses, which I have long since dedicated to God!” This powerful statement highlights how the nourishment of the soul transcends physical suffering. Agatha’s declaration of spiritual breasts points to the idea of divine sustenance available to the soul, independent of earthly tribulations.

The Golden Legend by Jacobus de Voragine also includes a story about a woman martyr who, while suffering, continued to feed her children with “the sweetness of thy milk,” even as her flesh was torn. The miracle that followed—milk spurted forth from her wounds instead of blood—reinforces the symbolism of the spiritual nourishment that martyrs offer through their suffering.

Finally, the life of St. Bernard’s mother illustrates the maternal role of virtue and devotion. Bernard's mother, who bore seven children, is said to have imparted to her children “the nature of their mother's virtue” through her milk. This story links maternal love with moral and spiritual development, where the physical act of nursing becomes a metaphor for the transmission of virtue and devotion to God.

In all these accounts, the metaphor of divine milk and breasts serves as a rich image of nurturing, spiritual nourishment, and affection. Whether through the writings of mystics like Bernard, Guerric, and Catherine, or through visions like those of Clare and Julian, the figure of Christ as both Father and Mother offers profound insights into the divine care and affection that believers experience in their relationship with the sacred. These maternal images remind us that divine love is both a source of authority and of intimate, tender care, providing believers with the nourishment necessary for spiritual growth and salvation.

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 Gnostic Gospels Illuminated by Cyd Ropp

 The Gnostic Gospels Illuminated by Cyd Ropp 

Fishes - 153 of them (John 21:11)

Fishes - 153 of them (John 21:11)

A fishing party, which included the present writer, once caught in a fairly short time off the coast of British Columbia, six splendid salmon. Their total weight was sixty-three pounds. If the "great fishes" caught in Galilee were on a par with these, this would make the total catch now under consideration to be about three-quarters of a ton.

But why — the question may well be asked — was John so careful as to specify meticulously how many fish were caught? At different times thousands of his readers have scented a special significance here. There is a sound instinct behind this.

Here, then, is a list of suggestions (doubtless incomplete). Some of these have a good Biblical flavour; others not at all.

1.	153 = 9x17: and 9 is the number of judgment (is it?), whilst 17 combines the ideas of "spirit" and "order": 10 + 7 (do they?). So it is said! (Companion Bible).
2.	There were not 153 fishes, but 154—and this is 11 x 14 (or 22 x 7), again with corresponding numerical meaning. Sic!
3.	Contemporary Greek zoologists asserted that the sea contains precisely 153 different species of fishes. So John saw this number as symbolizing men out of all nations within the gospel net (Hoskyns).
4.	By Gematria (that is, substituting the numerical value of each letter), the Greek word for "fishes' (ichthues) gives 1224 which is 153 x 8. Thus, "fishes" suggests those caught in the gospel net according to the eighth sign.
5.	When "Sons of God" is written in Hebrew characters it gives, by Gematria once again (par.4): 153. This result only holds true, however, if the Hebrew definite article is included: B'nei ha-Elohim, which could signify: Sons (disciples, converts) of the Mighty (the Apostles), that is, the fruits of their preaching.
6.	2 Chronicles 2:17 gives 153 thousand and six hundred as the number of "strangers", i.e. Gentiles, in Israel who were numbered by David. And in Exodus 30:14-16, numbering of the people is associated with atonement and redemption.
7.	And now, mathematics. For the reason made plain by this diagram, 10 is called a triangular number 4.
	* ** *** ****
	The next in the set is, of course, 15; and then 21, and so on.
	153 is one of this family. 153 = triangular number 17.
	Similarly, 120 (Acts 1:15) = triangular number 15 (and 15 = triangular number 5).
	276 (Acts 27:37) = triangular number 23.
	666 (Rev. 13:18) = triangular number 36 (and 36 = triangular number 8).
	These are the most noteworthy, but not the only, examples to be found in the NT The odds against all the three-figure numbers in the NT being "triangular" are enormous. Has such a thing happened by "chance"? So it looks as though the early church saw special meaning in the idea of triangular numbers. But what? Possibly, but not certainly, according to Matthew 28:19, thus:
			Father
			/	\
		Son		Holy Spirit
	There may be some other more satisfactory explanation of 153 outside the range of the seven suggestions listed here. But it is not necessary to believe that the eighth sign has eight different meanings. Studies in the Gospels. By Harry Whittaker

The Preexistence of the Son of Man in the book of Enoch

 The Preexistence of the Son of Man in the book of Enoch 

In this study we will look at the Preexistence of the son of man in the book of Enoch to begin we will have an opening reading from the book of Enoch Chapter 46:

1 And there I saw One who had a head of days,
And His head was white like wool,
And with Him was another being whose countenance had the appearance of a man,
And his face was full of graciousness, like one of the holy angels.
2 And I asked the angel who went with me and showed me all the hidden things, concerning that
3 Son of Man, who he was, and whence he was, (and) why he went with the Head of Days? And he answered and said unto me:
This is the son of Man who hath righteousness,
With whom dwelleth righteousness,
And who revealeth all the treasures of that which is hidden,
Because the Lord of Spirits hath chosen him,
And whose lot hath the pre-eminence before the Lord of Spirits in uprightness for ever.
4 And this Son of Man whom thou hast seen
Shall raise up the kings and the mighty from their seats,
[And the strong from their thrones]
And shall loosen the reins of the strong,
And break the teeth of the sinners.
5 [And he shall put down the kings from their thrones and kingdoms]
Because they do not extol and praise Him,
Nor humbly acknowledge whence the kingdom was bestowed upon them.
6 And he shall put down the countenance of the strong,
And shall fill them with shame.
And darkness shall be their dwelling,
And worms shall be their bed,
And they shall have no hope of rising from their beds,
Because they do not extol the name of the Lord of Spirits.
[And raise their hands against the Most High],
And tread upon the earth and dwell upon it.
And all their deeds manifest unrighteousness,
And their power rests upon their riches,
And their faith is in the gods which they have made with their hands,
And they deny the name of the Lord of Spirits,
8 And they persecute the houses of His congregations,
And the faithful who hang upon the name of the Lord of Spirits. 

(book of Enoch Chapter 46)

First the book of Enoch is a prophecy about the end times what Enoch saw was to take place in the future not the past

In Chapter One, Enoch is called to prophecy events that will take place in the last generation, in visions given to him by God. In the visions, he describes Jesus' Second Coming with the saints, and the judgment of the unrighteous).

[*And he took up his parable and said "Enoch, a righteous man, whose eyes were opened by God, saw

the vision of the Holy One (God) in the heavens, which the Angels (of God) showed me and from them, I heard everything; and from them, I understood as I saw, but (what I saw, and what I heard was) not for this (my) generation, but for a remote one which is 3.) for to come (in the Last Days)."]

(The generation "for to come" that Enoch alludes to in Verse 3. above is this generation, "Our Generation.

" The generation that will see the climax of all the dreams, visions, insights, experiences and wisdom given to Enoch by God concerning the last generation come to pass).

What Enoch sees or saw in this book is going to take place in the last days he did not see the Son of Man in his own time but in the latter generations when he will return at the end time. But some others understand this and Daniel’s reference to mean that the Son of Man had pre-existence before he was born, but this is not so.

Concerning the Elect (the Redeemed), I (Enoch) said and took up my parable concerning them.

BIBLE REFERENCE: [****MARK 4:10-12 As soon as He was alone, His followers, along with 

the twelve, began asking Him about the parables. 11 And He was saying to them, "To you 

has been given the mystery of the Kingdom of God, but those who are outside, get everything

in parables, 12 so that while SEEING, they may see and not perceive, and while HEARING, 

they may hear and not UNDERSTAND; otherwise, they might return and be forgiven."] NASU

This helps us to understand chapter 46 evidently the son of man is a symbolic figure 

It should be noted that chapter 46 speaks about the pre-eminence of the son of man before the Lord of spirits: 

And whose lot hath the pre-eminence before the Lord of Spirits in uprightness for ever.

48.1 And in that place I saw an inexhaustible spring of righteousness and many springs of wisdom surrounded it, and all the thirsty drank from them and were filled with wisdom, and their dwelling was with the Righteous and the Holy and the Chosen.

48.2 And at that hour that Son of Man was named, in the presence of the Lord of Spirits, the Head of Days.

48.3 Even before the Sun and the constellations were created, before the Stars of Heaven were made, his name was named in front of the Lord of Spirits.

Just says he was named and chosen, doesn't say he actually existed.
We were also chosen before the foundation of the Earth.

Eph 1:4 For he chose us in Christ before the foundation of the world that we may be holy and unblemished in his sight in love. (NET)

Rom 4:17 as it is written, “I have made you the father of many nations”—in the presence of the God in whom he believed, who gives life to the dead and calls into existence the things that do not exist  (English Standard Version)

just look at the context: after saying that his name was named, it is explained:
"He shall be a staff to the righteous...he shall be a light to the Gentiles..." etc. The naming of a thing is the defining of a thing. This is like when Abraham is named a father of many nations before he has a child, and how Immanuel is named before his time. This has to do with God's purposes. Peter also said that God chose him before the foundation of the world, so why would it be a surprise?

Just ask yourself which makes more contextual sense.
For some more idea of how this makes more sense in the first case, look at chapter 71, verses 14-16, where the author is called that son of man.

what is rendered as existence in the one translation pertains to how he was with the Father beforehand, which, in the context, has to do with how he was determined to come into His presence. The Son of Man figure, after all, is based on Daniel, where the Son of Man COMES INTO God's presence --- not that he's created in His presence.

The idea of anachronistic life (pre and post existence) is rife in the Hebrew Scriptures. Reading these in their contexts, any rational minded person should be able to discern symbolic nature of these, often metaphorical, and designed to instill eschatological truths (related to covenantal history). Levi, “being in the loins of Sbraham” when he met Melchizedek is one example (Heb 7:3-10).

Yahweh said to Jeremiah (chapter i, 5): "Before I formed you in the belly I KNEW YOU; and before you came forth out of the womb, I SANCTIFIED YOU: and I ordained you a prophet unto the nations." Now Jeremiah did not exist before his conception. Yet these words would seem to teach it, if understood as those who believe in the pre-existence of Christ, understood the statements about him. As a purpose Jeremiah existed; his person was as clearly present to the divine mind as if he had stood before Him in actual fact. This is the explanation of words, which, rigidly construed, would imply Jeremiah's pre-existence.

The principle of the argument is expressed in the words of Paul (Romans 4:17) "God who quickens the dead, and calls those things which be not (but are to be) AS THOUGH THEY WERE." See also the introductions of the gospel of John and the letter to the Colossians.
"And now, Father, glorify me at your side with the glory I had with you before the world was created . . .you loved me before the creation of the world" (John 17:5,24)
Here our difficulty is to understand how Jesus could have been honoured and loved by the Father before he actually existed as an independent person. The problem really arises from our limited view of time.
To us the passage of time is like a line. Separate events are distinct points on that line. So if we were to indicate the relative places in time of Abraham, Moses, David, Daniel, Christ and the apostles, we should get something like this:

1800 BC . . Abraham
1400 BC . . Moses
1000 BC . . David
600 BC . . Daniel
BC / AD . . Christ
50 AD etc. Apostles

An order of appearance inevitably arises. We cannot think of their place in history in any other way. But this is because of our finite minds. We have no consciousness of the distant past; and none at all of the future.
But the mind of God is not subject to these limitations. His mind is infinite in power. He is just as capable of being conscious of past situations, or of future ones, as He is of the present. So we cannot represent the Divine experience of time by a line. It must be more like the following diagram.

Now we know that Moses did not exist before Abraham, and that David lived about four centuries before Daniel. But in our diagram God is the centre of the arc; He is the same distance from them all. Our "distance" represents God's infinite consciousness. He was just as "conscious" of the sort of person they would each be, long before they were born. He could visualise them, and speak prophetically of them. So the Father knew what sort of person the Son would be before he was actually born and began to exist as a separate person. He could plan what He would eventually accomplish through him. He could "glorify" and "love" in advance His own Son, "the only-begotten of the Father".

As the Apostle Peter put it:

"Christ was foreknown indeed before the foundation of the world, but was manifested at the 

end of the times for your sake" (1 Peter 1:20, R.V.). (The A.V. uses "foreordain" here, but elsewhere translates the same word by "foreknow".)

So too the saying of Jesus to the Jews:
"Your father Abraham rejoiced to see my day; and he saw it, and was glad . . . Before Abraham was, I am" (John 8:56-58).

Abraham, having received the promises, looked forward to the coming of the One in whom "all families of the earth shall be blessed" (Genesis 12:3). Jesus knew that he was that One, having priority even over Abraham in God's purpose.