God is Corporeal Spirit John 4:24

John 4:24  "God is spirit; and those who worship Him must worship in spirit and truth" (RSV) 

PROBLEM: This verse is quoted to show that God is not tangible.

Most people misunderstand this verse and assume or declare that Spiritual beings are immaterial.

SOLUTION: Jesus is not saying that God is immaterial

Jesus is concerned with redemption and worship that is acceptable not with a description of whether God is tangible or not. cf. v.7 - 23.

It is in the framework of this purpose that men must worship the Father4. Jesus was teaching the woman that in the redemption he had brought, he had living waters5 to offer so that they could worship God "in spirit".

4 "To be spiritually minded is life". (Rom. 8:6).

5 the teaching of the Spirit (i.e. Word of God) (cf. v.14).

The verse does not say that we must have received some divine effluent from God into our hearts before we can worship correctly. The context shows that: 

correct knowledge ("in truth") is one necessity, "salvation is of the Jews". (v. 22). 

attitude of mind ("in spirit" i.e. sincerity, Josh. 24:14) is the other necessity6. 

"Ye shall neither in this mountain, nor yet at Jerusalem, worship the Father." (v. 21). 

6) It was not where the worship occurred (empty tradition or letter) that mattered but the attitude of the worshipper that mattered i.e. a positive response showing love and zeal for the truth. cf. 2 Cor. 3:5, 6.

God is Corporeal

"We should not assume that anything we cannot see or hear or touch is by nature, by its basic character, silent, immaterial or invisible. We cannot see God who is Spirit. We cannot, today, see angels who are spirits. We hear no voice from heaven. Yet we know that some men heard, saw and touched things which are eternal, things which may be described as eternal." 2

Stephen saw the "heavens opened, and the Son of man standing on the right hand of God",3 Acts 7:56 while those around saw nothing. So we cannot argue that God, Jesus and the angels are immaterial because we by our limited senses cannot see or touch them.4

Angels appeared as ordinary men to Abraham ("three men stood by Him", Gen.18:2).

In the future the "inhabitants of Jerusalem ... shall look upon me (Jesus) whom they have pierced". (Zech. 12:10). They will say unto him, "What are these wounds in thine hands?" 

That conception of God which thinks of Him as mere abstract power, intangible, universal, without person or locality is not true. We cannot worship abstract universal power and claim we worship God.

The phrase "God is Spirit" is sometimes offered as evidence that He is immaterial but Jesus (whom we know to be a corporeal being) is called the Lord the Spirit in 2 Cor. 3:17,18. "He is now no longer flesh and blood; but Holy Spirit Nature a flesh and bones embodiment of Spirit."

Then He said to Thomas, “Reach your finger here, and look at My hands; and reach your hand here, and put it into My side. Do not be unbelieving, but believing.” (John 20:27).

"And they gave him a piece of a broiled fish,....and he (Jesus) took it, and did eat before them" (Luke 24:43).

Dr. Thomas’ comments as follows: 

"The spiritual body is constituted of flesh and bones energized by the spirit. This appears from the testimony concerning Jesus. On a certain occasion, he unexpectedly stood in the midst of his disciples, at which they were exceedingly alarmed, supposing they beheld a spirit, or ghost, as at a former time. But, that they might be assured that it was really he himself, he invited them to handle him, and examine his hands and feet: "For", said he, "a spirit hath not flesh and bones as ye see me have". He gave them further proof by eating a piece of fish and. Thomas placed his hand into his side, and was convinced that he was the same who had been crucified. What stronger proof can we need of this that the spiritual body is corporeal and tangible in nature? It is the animal body purified, not evaporated into gas, or vapour. It is a bloodless body; for in the case of Jesus he had poured out his blood on the cross. The life of the animal body is in the blood: but not so that of the spiritual body: the life of this resides with the Father." (Elpis Israel)

Since Jesus has flesh and bones it seems inconsistent that his Father would not. The writer to the Hebrews says that Christ was "the very image of his substance"

The angels are "ministering spirits" but they were seen by men many times.

Many passages in scripture show that God is corporeal and shares emotions that we do:

"And God said, Let us make man in our image, after our likeness." (Gen. l:26).

"God created man, in the likeness10 of God made he him" (Gen. 5:1, 3).

"He that sitteth in the heaven shall laugh" (Psa. 2:4).

"Hide not thy face . . . incline thine ear unto me" (Psa. 102:2).

"He hath looked down from the height of His sanctuary" (Psa. 102:19).

" ... sat on the right hand of God" (Mark 16:19).

"Man... is the image ... of God" (1 Cor. 11:7).

"Christ, who is the image of God"11 (2 Cor. 4:4).

"Men, which are after the similitude of God" (James 3:9).

Jesus is not saying that God is immaterial nor is he just referring to the nature of God, but is stating that God is acting in a specific manner for the redemption of man, as he once acted in the past. 

We should continually remember that to Israel God was Spirit, an Angel bearing His Name. This statement can be verified by an analysis of Isaiah 48:16, 17, 20.
"The Lord Yahweh, and his Spirit hath sent me. Thus saith Yahweh, thy Redeemer, the Holy One of Israel; I am Yahweh thy God ... which leadeth thee the way that thou shouldest go."

Note that the Spirit is "the Holy One of Israel".

In this Spirit activity of redemption, there was to be corresponding spirit in their worship.

So if God is spirit - and the Bible emphatically declares this truth - it does not mean that he does not have material form! It is consistent to say that God, *in the sense of an individual person* has a body of spirit

The fact that Israel believed God has a human form is quite clear from Gen 1:26 where God makes man in their image (demut), and their likeness (tselem). That this image and likeness refers to *genetic* resemblance is made clear from Gen 5:1,3 where Adam begets a son after his own likeness (tselem) after his image (demut) and called his name Seth.

Notice that "Adam begat a son in his likeness, after his image." If this language is understood, then surely it can be seen that we are created in the image of God even as Jesus was the express image of Him. 

If we are to be one with God even as Jesus is one with the Father (John 17:22) then we must be physically and morally like Jesus was after his glorification. 

2nd Century Understanding 

Also for early Christians like Origen, Heracleon, and Theodotus understood God to be Corporeal:

Heracleon understands this verse to refer to the nature of worship and not the nature of God:

Fragment 24, on John 4:24 (In John 4:24a, it says,) “God is spirit.” Undefiled, pure, and invisible is his divine nature. (In John 4:24b, it says,) “Those who worship him must worship in spirit and truth." Worthily of the one who is worshipped, in a spiritual, not a fleshly fashion.....and they worship in truth, not in error, as the Apostle teaches when he calls this kind of piety “ a rational service.” (Romans 12:2) (Heracleon: Fragments from his Commentary on the Gospel of John)

Theodotus understood the spirit world to have shape and body: 

10 But neither the spiritual nor the intellectual things, nor the archangels <and> those created first, nor even he is shapeless and formless and figureless and incorporeal, but he also has his own shape and body proportionate to his superiority over all spiritual things, just as also those created first (have their own shape and body) proportionate to their superiority over the beings beneath them.

For in general what has come to be is not without substance, but unlike the bodies in this world, they have form and body. For male and female here differ from each other, but there the Only-Begotten and uniquely intellectual one has been furnished with his own form and substance that is utterly pure and sovereign, and he has the immediate benefit of the Father’s power. The ones created first, even if in number they are distinct and each is bounded and delineated, in any case the likeness of their deeds demonstrates their unity, equality, and likeness. (Extracts from the Works of Theodotus)

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

apocalyptic

apocalyptic

Revelation, Apokalupsis, Apocalypse from apo, away, and kalupto, I cover or conceal. The word is applied to the " manifestation " of the sons of God (Rom. 8 : 19), and to the personal " coming " (1 Cor. 1 : 7), and "appearing" (1 Peter 1 : 7), of the Lord Jesus Christ.

Apocalyptic—from the Greek word apokalupsis meaning * 'revelation'' or "disclosure"—is an adjective 

revelation--An unveiling, a disclosure of Truth, making known that which is hidden. The revelation of Christ to all men is the ultimate revelation.

Divine revelation is much more common than is understood. The Spirit of truth is revealing the hidden wisdom  in the Nag Hammadi texts

” the Greek a·po·ka´ly·psis basically means “unveiling” or “uncovering.” Thus, the last book of the Bible is properly entitled “A Revelation.” Here we find, not a mere fatalistic message of world doom, but an uncovering of divine truths that should build in our hearts a radiant hope and an immovable faith.

Enoch is said to be "apocalyptic" literature......and it is NO such thing. Ignorant people assign the word "apocalyptic" to any writing that seems to portray what they ignorantly misunderstand as "doom and gloom" prophecy. There is nothing in the book of Enoch that is not already related in the books of the Bible. The word "apocalypse" means "REVELATION".....or the uncovering of truth that has been hidden.

 The Gnostic texts discovered in 1945 reveal the TRUTH that God is "Divine Mind". This is why this revelation when "digested" is sweet tasting in the mouth, but bitter in the stomach. It's bitter because it destroys all the carnal minded lies of false religion and people who think they know God, but do not. In other words, their "religion" is proven to be IDOLATRY. This is also why the prophet is told that he must prophesy (teach) again to many people this new revelation of TRUTH that is revealed in the Nag Hammadi texts or the "little book "...... that "God is Spirit" ( MIND / THOUGHT / CONSCIOUSNESS )

Sin is a Female Principle Psalm 7:14

Sin is a Female Principle

The first and most frequent Hebrew word to be translated as 'sin' is the feminine noun chaṭṭâ'âh (H2403). It is rendered: sin(284), punishment(3) & purification(3). As a noun rather than a verb it focuses upon the offense itself or sometimes upon the habitual sinfulness of the individual

The Greek word hamartia is a Feminine Noun meaning missing the mark; hence: (a) guilt, sin, (b) a fault, failure (in an ethical sense), sinful deed.

sin as a principle and power is personified as a king Romans 5:21; a power which reigns in the body Romans 6:12, 14; Romans 7:17, 20; Romans 6:6;

With this understanding of the word sin as a Feminine Noun it will help us to understand why sinful actions are described in terms of childbearing

Psalms: 7:14 Look! There is one that is pregnant with what is hurtful, And he has conceived trouble and is bound to give birth to falsehood.. The psalmist metaphorically pictures the typical sinner as a pregnant woman, who is ready to give birth to wicked, destructive schemes and actions.

James: 1:13 Let no one say when he is tempted, “I am tempted by God”; for God cannot be tempted by evil, nor does He Himself tempt anyone. 14 But each one is tempted when he is drawn away by his own desires and enticed. 15 Then, when desire has conceived, it gives birth to sin; and sin, when it is full-grown, brings forth death.

SIN... GIVES BIRTH TO DEATH: 1Co 5:54-56; Rom 5:12; 1Jo 2:16,17.

WOMAN a female adult. However, the word woman is sometimes used in the Bible to refer to a weak and helpless man (Is.:3:12; 19:16).

The language of child-bearing in connection with lust and sin is echoed by James (Jam 1:13-15). So wicked men bring forth "children" (that is sin) after their own "likeness" (Gal 5:19-21; Rom 1:29-31; 1Co 6:9,10), and are thus known by their "fruits" (Mat 7:16,20). The melancholy litany of birth, procreation, and death in Gen 5 ("and then he died") is the result of Adam's "likeness" being distorted, in his descendants, into the likeness of the serpent.

Mic 7:5  Trust ye not in a friend, put ye not confidence in a guide: keep the doors of thy mouth from her that lieth in thy bosom. Here the woman in thy bosom represents the soul the desire of the heart cp. Pr 13:2 23:1-3  Isa 56:11,12 Hab 2:5 Gen 34:3 Ps 27:12 35:25 41:2

Job 15:35 They conceive mischief and bring forth vanity, and their belly prepareth deceit. The wicked's iniquity is as his children: he nourishes them, and at last they turn on him.

Isa 59:4 None calleth for justice nor any pleadeth for truth : they trust in vanity , and speak lies; they conceive mischief , and bring forth iniquity.

Isa 59:5 They hatch cockatrice eggs , and weave the spider’s web : he that eateth of their eggs dieth , and that which is crushed breaketh out into a viper.
Here is all the quiet evil of the serpent, as in Eden. It is even possible that the worship of the brazen serpent, stamped out by Hezekiah, had secretly come into being again.

Now, the first clue to the "serpent's" identity is in this first line. God MADE the serpent more intelligent than any other animal on the earth. This is the mind of the natural man- very crafty indeed! This "serpent" began to coax Eve away from God and the Tree of Life. Eve represents the SOUL of man and Adam represents the spirit (mind) of man. God had made everything PERFECT, but the mind of man did not believe this and more importantly did not KNOW this. The mind of man turned away from God, His Life and PERFECTION. Eve (the mind, or soul of man) turned to knowledge for the answers. So instead of accepting that ALL is PERFECT, man chose to KNOW. This was purposed by God. Man must go through darkness and death to KNOW Light and Life! So, the "serpent" is that crafty mind of man that led our spirit into a spiritual death. The carnal mind is concerned with things of THIS world, not of heaven.

Note: The Garden,  represents the dominant power of the soul, and the Serpent represents Pleasure, and is eminently fitted to do so. His use of a human voice is considered. The praise of the "snake-fighter" in Lev. xi. 22 is referred to. Stress is laid on the fact that Pleasure assails the man through the woman. The effects of the Fall on the woman and on the man are traced.

The Soul

The word sin is related to the soul

The soul is a feminine name in Hebrew, Greek, Coptic.

James 3:15: this wisdom is not one from above coming down, but is earthly born of the soul demoniacal” (Rotherham’s Emphasized Bible) 

therefore it is within our souls that we give birth to desire, sin, and death.

Philo: Now the female offspring of the soul are wickedness and passion, by which we are made effeminate in every one of our pursuits; but a healthy state of the passions and virtue is male, by which we are excited and invigorated.

Ezekiel: 18:4 Behold, all souls are mine; as the soul of the father, so also the soul of the son is mine: the soul that sinneth, it itself shall die. Therefore, it is within our souls (bodies, or our whole being) we have a female principle within us that give birth to desire, sin, and death

Compare this with the Secret book of James:
For he knows the desire, and also what it is that the flesh needs! - (Or do you think) that it is not this (flesh) that desires the soul? For without the soul, the body does not sin, just as the soul is not saved without the spirit. But if the soul is saved (when it is) without evil, and the spirit is also saved, then the body becomes free from sin. For it is the spirit that raises the soul, but the body that kills it; that is, it is it (the soul) which kills itself.

Male and Female

 Male and female must be regarded, first of all, as principles, and secondly as the genders of certain human beings.

The male and female principles are opposed to each other.

the male principle provides ‘spirit’ and ‘form’ (which are imperishable and incorruptible) while the female principle provides ‘body’ and ‘matter’ (which are perishable and corruptible).


In many Gnostic text, the mind (nous) is regarded as male: “he is a disciple of his mind, which is male.” (Testimony of Truth)
- Meanwhile, the soul (psyche) is regarded as female.
- When the soul was in the Upper Aeons, it was ‘virgin and androgynous’: “As long as she was alone with the father, she was virgin and in form androgynous” (Exegesis on the Soul)

The ‘female’ principle includes desire: - “After I parted from the somatic darkness in me and the psychic chaos in mind and the feminine desire [...] in the darkness, I did not use it again.” (Zostrianos)

- The ‘female’ principle includes the passions, which bring division instead of unity: “And do not become female, lest you give birth to evil and (its) brothers: jealousy and division, anger and wrath, fear and a divided heart, and empty, non-existent desire.” (Second Treatise of the Great Seth)

- Hence, salvaltion requires that we reject the female principle, and ‘choose maleness’: “Flee from the madness and the bondage of femaleness, and choose for yourselves the salvation of maleness.” (Zostrianos 131:5 )

The Teachings of Silvanus: Live according to the Mind. Do not think about things pertaining to the flesh. Acquire strength, for the mind is strong. If you fall from this other, you have become male-female. And if you cast out of yourself the substance of the mind, which is thought, you have cut off the male part, and turned yourself to the female part alone. You have become psychic, since you have received the substance of the formed. If you cast out the smallest part of this, so that you do not acquire again a human part - but you have accepted for yourself the animal thought and likeness - you have become fleshly, since you have taken on animal nature. For (if) it is difficult to find a psychical man, how much more so to find the Lord?

In the Gospel of Thomas and Revelation 14 salvation is spoken of a masculinity

Rev 14:1-4
1 ¶  And I looked, and, lo, a Lamb stood on the mount Sion, and with him an hundred forty and four thousand, having his Father’s name written in their foreheads.
2  And I heard a voice from heaven, as the voice of many waters, and as the voice of a great thunder: and I heard the voice of harpers harping with their harps:
3  And they sung as it were a new song before the throne, and before the four beasts, and the elders: and no man could learn that song but the hundred and forty and four thousand, which were redeemed from the earth.
4 These are they which were not defiled with women; for they are virgins. These are they which follow the Lamb whithersoever he goeth. These were redeemed from among men, being the firstfruits unto God and to the Lamb.

In Rev 14:4, it speaks of the salvation of males that is man and women who have become males in Christ Jesus 

“Not defiled with women." Not associated with "the mother of harlots" (17:5) and her daughters - the apostate churches of Christendom from Rome downwards. Many of the redeemed are themselves women, which necessitates the symbolic interpretation.

VERSE 4

"These are they which were not defiled with women"—They were not guilty of spiritual adultery with the false women of the Apostasy (see James 4:4; Rev. 2:20; 17:5). 

"For they are virgins"—They are faithful to Christ. See 2 Cor. 11:2. "These are they which follow the Lamb"—Christ as the Lamb offered in complete dedication to God. is their example, inspiration and shepherd. They see him as the Lamb: quiet, submissive, offering himself in sacrifice to God; but also powerful to conquer the world. Cp. 1 Pet. 2:21-25.

"Withersoever he goeth"—Even unto the crucifixion of self. See Gal. 5:24.

"These were redeemed from among men, being the firstfruits unto God and to the Lamb"—See James 1:18. The privileges of the firstborn become theirs — a double portion of inheritance, the priesthood, and authority. These are obtained in Christ. "Firstfruits" imply a further harvest, for which see Rev. 20:16. 12-15.

Gospel of Thomas

The Gospel of Thomas ends with an admonition by Jesus that women must “become male” in order to find salvation! Needless to say: this would not fit in with Brown’s tale of seekers after a feminine divine!

114) Simon Peter said to Him, "Let Mary leave us, for women are not worthy of Life." Jesus said, "I myself shall lead her in order to make her male, so that she too may become a living spirit resembling you males. For every woman who will make herself male will enter the Kingdom of Heaven."

Jesus is not suggesting a sex-change operation, but is using 'male' and 'female' metaphorically to refer to the higher and lower aspects of human nature. Mary is thus to undergo a spiritual transformation from her earthly, material, passionate nature (which the Gnostics corresponds with the female) to a heavenly, spiritual, intellectual nature (which the Gnostics corresponds with the male).

The Modern Gnostic Priesthood

The Modern Gnostic Priesthood

The following is written by Tomas Kindahl

It’s either paleo-Gnostic (old Gnostic) Mandaeans tarmidas, like these:

or it is neo-Gnostics (new Gnostics), for example like these guys (Ecclesia Gnostica):

The only surviving paleo-Gnostics are the Mandaeans, they branched from Judaism probably before Jesus. They refer John the Baptist — not Jesus.

The neo-Gnostics are (almost always) Christians that has added some beliefs from what’s considered Valentinian scriptures in the Nag Hammadi library. Among them are a lot of annoying New-Age self-elected prophets. There are many branches among the neo-Gnostics.

There are a lot of pseudo-Gnostics (fake Gnostics) too: the common trait being that they don’t care about the Mandean Scriptures nor the Nag Hammadi scriptures, but instead refer to some self-elected prophet, either Aleister Crowley, or Gurdjieff, or Victor Gomez-Rodrigues (calling himself Samael Aun Weor). They’re not in any way useful.

To be “gnostic” means that you claim to have “secret knowledge;” in other words, knowledge revealed only to you which you are meant to reveal to the world in your own time and your own way.

This is a direct contradiction of ancient Christian belief which says that public revelation - that is, new knowledge revealed by God for all people - ended with the death of the last Apostle, the last person given authority directly by Christ.

Thus, a “gnostic priest” is not a “mystic,” which is a person who studies and lives the depth of the public revelation given to the Church (both in Sacred Tradition and in Scripture), but is simply a person who claims to have knowledge from God that no one else has

These people should be avoided, for the sake of your soul.

Been to that church several times. They consider themselves to be Gnostic-Catholics, which, to be sure, is a contradiction. They borrow a lot from orthodox Christian liturgies (both Roman or Protestant) and remold them to better fit the Gnostic heresy. 

Of course, it’s all anachronistic confusion. 

Ancient gnostics had their own liturgical practices and elaborate rituals. And, of course they were basically corruptions of the Christian liturgies of that time. 

Gnosticism is not Christianity though, no more than Islam is Christianity.

and an evil spirit from the LORD troubled Saul. 1Sa 16:14

 1Sa 16:14  But the Spirit of the LORD departed from Saul, and an evil spirit from the LORD troubled him.

Saul’s failure to obey Yahweh caused a bad predisposition of mind and heart, against which God’s spirit offered Saul no protection

What does this tell us one Yahweh is in control of the evil spirit not Satan the demon. Second the spirit of Yahweh is his holy spirit. The evil spirit does God’s will not Satan’s will. The Hebrew word translated “evil” may refer to the character of the spirit or to its effect upon Saul. If the latter, another translation option might be “an injurious spirit”; cf. NLT “a tormenting spirit.” 

Thus the holy spirit or spirit of Yahweh is supernatural the evil spirit is not, it is a feeling of ill will between two parties as the above usage show us and the spirit of Yahweh is always used thought-out the Hebrew Bible as the holy spirit 

AN EVIL SPIRIT FROM THE LORD TORMENTED HIM: "No man needs a heavier chastisement from God than the letting loose of his own passions upon him." God gives men over to their own sins and lusts (Rom 1:28; 2Th 2:11).

1Sa 16:15  And Saul’s servants said unto him, Behold now, an evil spirit from God troubleth thee.

They believe that this is an affliction sent by God. Where is satan in all this?

1Sa 16:16  Let our lord now command thy servants, which are before thee, to seek out a man, who is a cunning player on an harp: and it shall come to pass, when the evil spirit from God is upon thee, that he shall play with his hand, and thou shalt be well.

They recommend that they find a skilled musician, insisting that when the musician plays, Saul will be well. They make no suggestion that anything supernatural is occurring.

Now do you recommend that the best response to an attack by one of satan's minions is to play some music, in order to send it away? If not - why not?

1Sa 16:23  And it came to pass, when the evil spirit from God was upon Saul, that David took an harp, and played with his hand: so Saul was refreshed, and was well, and the evil spirit departed from him.

Whenever David plays, Saul is 'refreshed and well', and the 'evil spirit' goes away. There is no suggestion that anything supernatural is occurring. We are told very bluntly that music causes evil spirits to leave, though we know that this 'evil spirit' returned to Saul at times.

1Sa 18:10  And it came to pass on the morrow, that the evil spirit from God came upon Saul, and he prophesied in the midst of the house: and David played with his hand, as at other times: and there was a javelin in Saul’s hand.

Does the text say that the supernatural minion of satan, or a troubled spirit sent by God as an affliction? The evidence, I believe, points to the latter. This interpretation is also verifiable. Show me someone 'possessed' with an evil spirit, and let's have some good music and see what happens. 

1Sa 19:9  And the evil spirit from the LORD was upon Saul, as he sat in his house with his javelin in his hand: and David played with his hand.

The real problem for people who believe that these 'evil spirits' referred to in these two places of the Old Testament are supernatural beings, is that they cannot escape the fact that Scripture insists that supernatural means are not required to send them away. Just some good music is all that is necessary.

And the reason why these passages remain such a stumblingblock to thise who believe that they refer to supernatural beings, is that these 'evil spirits' are described in the Scriptural record as:

1) Being sent by God to do His will, not as the minions of satan.

2) Behaving in a manner identical to psychological distress.

The fact that these 'evil spirits' are sent away by taking steps which people naturally use to soothe their troubled feelings, is very telling. 

So What was that 'evil spirit' sent by God to Saul?

I believe it was a psychological affliction. Let's see what an earlier 'evil spirit' sent by God is:

Quote

Judges 9:

22When Abimelech had reigned three years over Israel, 

23Then God sent an evil spirit between Abimelech and the men of Shechem; and the men of Shechem dealt treacherously with Abimelech:

1) If these 'evil spirits' are supernatural beings who are the buddies of satan and do his evil will, then why does God always send them?

2) How do you send an supernatural evil being 'between' two groups of people? Do they have to share?

3) What do other translations say?

TLB:

22-23Three years later God stirred up trouble between King Abimelech and the citizens of Shechem, and they revolted.

Quote

NAB:

22 When Abimelech had ruled Israel for three years,

23 God put bad feelings between Abimelech and the citizens of Shechem, who rebelled against Abimelech.

Quote

NKJV:

22 After Abimelech had reigned over Israel three years, 

23 God sent a spirit of ill will between Abimelech and the men of Shechem; and the men of Shechem dealt treacherously with Abimelech,

Quote

NLT:

22 After Abimelech had ruled over Israel for three years, 

23 God stirred up trouble between Abimelech and the people of Shechem, and they revolted.

Quote

CEV:

22 Abimelech had been a military commander of Israel for three years, 

23-24 when God decided to punish him and the leaders of Shechem for killing Gideon’s seventy sons.

So God turned the leaders of Shechem against Abimelech.

Quote

TEV:

22 Abimelech ruled Israel for three years. 

23Then God made Abimelech and the men of Shechem hostile to each other, and they rebelled against him.

Jud 9:23  Then God sent an evil spirit between Abimelech and the men of Shechem; and the men of Shechem dealt treacherously with Abimelech:

That is God let develop a bad attitude between Abimelech and the landowners of Shechem

It was after this and after the anointing of David as Israel’s future king that Jehovah’s spirit left Saul. From then on “a bad spirit from Jehovah terrorized him.” Having withdrawn his spirit from Saul, Jehovah made it possible for a bad spirit to gain possession of him, depriving Saul of his peace of mind and stirring up his feelings, thoughts, and imaginations in a wrong way. Saul’s failure to obey Jehovah indicated a bad inclination of mind and heart, against which God’s spirit offered Saul no protection or resistive force. However, since Jehovah had permitted the “bad spirit” to replace his spirit and terrorize Saul, it could be termed a “bad spirit from Jehovah,” so that Saul’s servants spoke of it as “God’s bad spirit.” On the recommendation of one of his attendants, Saul requested that David be his court musician to calm him when he was troubled by the “bad spirit.”—1Sa 16:14-23; 17:15.

) How does Saul’s example show that when Jehovah removes his holy spirit from a person, the vacancy can be filled by a bad spirit, or an inward urge to do wrong? (1 Sam. 16:14; Matt. 12:43-45; Gal. 5:16)

• What does the scripture at 1 Samuel 18:10 mean when it says that “God’s bad spirit became operative upon Saul, so that he behaved like a prophet within the house”?

 It is not that Jehovah actually sent an evil spirit to terrorize Saul, but by removing his holy spirit from the disobedient king a vacancy was left, a vacancy that was promptly filled by a bad spirit or mental inclination. Since Jehovah made the evilly inclined possession possible by the removal of his holy spirit, Jehovah is referred to as the source of the evil spirit.

Just how this bad spirit impelled Saul to act or behave like a prophet is not precisely stated in the account. However, it is quite likely that he “was filled with prophetic frenzy,” as one translation renders the words (AT). Others render the words “behaved like a prophet” simply as “raved,” and concerning this the Soncino version states: “he-raved. lit. ‘played the prophet,’ displaying the manifestations of physical excitement which were associated with the ecstatic frenzies of the prophetic bands.” It is quite likely that in this particular instance, since music was being played and since some prophets prophesied when music was being played, the frenzy was badly directed, which it would not have been if Saul had been under the influence of a good spirit from Jehovah. (2 Ki. 3:14, 15; 1 Sam. 10:5-13) This is what we could expect in view of what the record goes on to say: “He behaved like a prophet within the house, while David was playing music with his hand, as in former days; and the spear was in Saul’s hand. And Saul proceeded to hurl the spear and say: ‘I will pin David even to the wall!’” Certainly such an action evinced a greatly disturbed state of mind.—1 Sam. 18:10, 11.

lying spirit from God 1 Kings 22

19 Then Micaiah said, “Therefore hear the word of the Lord: I saw the Lord sitting on His throne, and all the host of heaven standing by, on His right hand and on His left. 20 And the Lord said, ‘Who will persuade Ahab to go up, that he may fall at Ramoth Gilead?’ So one spoke in this manner, and another spoke in that manner. 21 Then a spirit came forward and stood before the Lord, and said, ‘I will persuade him.’ 22 The Lord said to him, ‘In what way?’ So he said, ‘I will go out and be a lying spirit in the mouth of all his prophets.’ And the Lord said, ‘You shall persuade him, and also prevail. Go out and do so.’ 23 Therefore look! The Lord has put a lying spirit in the mouth of all these prophets of yours, and the Lord has declared disaster against you.”




While it is not in God's nature to lie, it apparently is a separate matter entirely to ask whether God can and will send people a strong delusion (through whatever means He chooses) so that they would believe a lie. Some might question the moral overtones of such actions, but the Bible doesn't. An important principle to understand and believe about God is that by the very nature of who He is, He is not bound by the same laws that He has given to man. We are commanded to not kill, and it is a sin of the highest order if we do so. But God can and does take life when He so chooses. One other point to keep in mind when thinking about God's actions of this sort: the people - as in this case and as stated in 2 Thes. 2 - whom God negatively influences are those who have already chosen - against all reason - to head down a wrong and sinful path. God wouldn't send strong delusion to people who are bent on loving and serving Him.

1Ki 22:22-23 - the prophets of Ahab were ‘lying in the spirit’: ‘the Lord hath put a lying spirit in the mouth of all these thy prophets’. Comparison Mic 2:11 - identified false prophets as those who ‘walk in the spirit and lie’




"God is a God of truth and there is no unrighteousness in Him" (verse 4);




But when circumstances call for it, He may, as a man without unrighteousness deceives a wild beast, to its capture and destruction, "send strong delusion" upon the perverse, "that they may believe a lie" (2 Thess. 2:11). On this principle we read,




"If the prophet (that is, the idolatrous prophet: see context) be deceived when he hath spoken a thing, I, the Lord, have deceived the prophet" (Ezekiel 14:9).




And again in the parable uttered before Ahab by Micaiah, the prophet of Yahweh:




"There came forth a spirit and stood before the Lord and said, I will persuade him (Ahab, to go up to battle). And the Lord said unto him, Wherewith? And he said, I will go forth and I will be a lying spirit in the mouth of all his prophets. And he said, . . . Go forth and do so. Now, therefore, the Lord hath put a lying spirit in the mouth of all these thy prophets" (1 Kings 22:21-23).




Applying this principle to the case in hand, we may understand that God stirred up Rebekah to deceive Isaac, that Isaac might be defeated in the wrong use of the divine gift of blessing which rested upon him.




The difficulty in understanding such instances, arises principally from our preconceived notions on the subject of "morality." Human speculation, alias philosophy falsely so-called, has evolved the assumption that "morality" (as men speak) is a fixed element in the constitution of things; and to this "morality," they have imagined God is as much subject as His creatures. The fact is-as the Scriptures reveal and nature accurately studied attests-that there is no such thing as fixed morality at all. The question of right and wrong is determinable in all things by the appointment of the eternal Creator. It is a simple question of what He has commanded. With Him is sovereign and irresponsible authority.




"None may say unto Him, What doest Thou?"






He may command a man to kill, and it is then sin not to kill, as in the case of Saul with the Amalekites; and righteousness to kill, as in the case of Samuel with Agag, on the same occasion; while when He chooses to command, "Thou shalt not kill," he that even hates his brother becomes a murderer. This simple principle relieves the subject of the world of difficulty that human philosophy has created. It explains, too, how it is that the belief of the gospel is righteousness, and enables us to realise how unutterably out of the right way is the present generation, with all their educated contempt for the promises and the commandments of God.




1 Kings 22:19-23 gives perhaps the most detailed picture of the Heavenly council. God told them His desire- for Ahab to die at Ramoth-Gilead. He then asked which Angel wanted to effect this- "Who shall persuade Ahab, that he may go up and fall at Ramoth Gilead? And one (Angel) said on this manner, and another said on that manner". We thus learn that like us, on hearing God's desire the elohim all have different ways of trying to fulfil it.

One "Spirit" (Angel) suggested that He would put a lying spirit in the mouth of Ahab's prophets, and this was the suggestion chosen and enabled by God. This shows that the Angels do not all automatically know the best way of bringing about God's purpose, and therefore they need to seek His advice and perhaps discuss things amongst themselves first before acting. Note that "all the host of Heaven" were there around the throne of God participating in this decision. And so all the Angels are involved in the decisions God and the Angels make about us. Lk. 15:6 implies the same. The division of the Angels into groups on His right and left is interesting. Why would it be mentioned, if it were insignificant? All the Angels are of God's nature and obedient to Him, there are no sinful Angels. But there are Angels of evil, Angels specifically tasked with bringing evil (see on Ps. 78:49). We think of the Angel called "the destroyer" at Passover time, who was restrained by the Passover Angel from destroying the Israelite firstborn. And so one wonders whether "the destroyer" was one of those on the left hand side, and the Passover Angel one of those on the right hand.

1 Kings 22:21 A spirit God makes His Angels "spirits" (Ps. 104:4), and Angels are in view here. But the word 'spirit' has a wide range of meaning. It can refer to power, but also to the thought which is then expressed through the power of action. The Angel is here called a "spirit" because the idea was to place a thought in the mind or spirit of the false prophets, and thereby Ahab. Came outThis is the same word as in :22 "I will go out". The Angel was as it were demonstrating how he intended acting. And stood before YahwehIt was the true prophets who stood before Yahweh (1 Kings 17:1). The connection is to show that the true prophets were represented by the Angels in the court of heaven, and this Angel was as it were on their side. And said, ‘I will entice him’- Ahab had been persuaded or enticed to do evil by Jezebel, and had enticed or persuaded Jehoshaphat to go to battle. But this was because he had himself been persuaded or enticed by God. 1 Kings 22:22 Yahweh said to him, ‘How?’ He said, ‘I will go out and will be a lying spirit in the mouth of all his prophets’. He said, ‘You will entice him, and will also prevailGod deceived prophets to speak things in His Name which were actually false (1 Kings 22:20-22; Ez. 14:9). He chose Israel's delusions by making their idols answer them (Is. 66:3,4). Jeremiah feared God had deceived him (Jer. 20:7)- showing he knew such a thing was possible. Dt. 13:1-3 warns Israel not to believe prophets whose prophecies came true although they taught false doctrines, because they may have been raised up to test their obedience. God deceived Israel by telling them about the peace which would come on Jerusalem in the future Kingdom; they didn't consider the other prophecies which were given at the same time concerning their imminent judgment, and therefore they thought that God was pleased with them and was about to establish the Messianic Kingdom; when actually the very opposite was about to happen (Jer. 4:10). This is why the Bible is confusing to those who aren’t humble to God’s word. Go out and do so’- This describes the Angels being sent out from the court of Heaven to do God’s word. So when we read of God sending lions (2 Kings 17:25,26), sending wild beasts and famine (Lev. 26:22; Ez. 5:17; Dt. 32:24), sending locusts (Joel 2:25), it would seem that Angels are sent forth from God’s throne in order to command animals to obey God’s word. And moreover, He sends an evil spirit between men (Jud. 9:23) and stubborn hearts are also sent from God (Ps. 81:13). The same Angels who are sent to control the animals can also therefore work to give men certain attitudes of mind. 1 Kings 22:23 Now therefore, behold, Yahweh has put a lying spirit in the mouth of all these your prophets; and Yahweh has spoken evil concerning youThis was exactly what Micaiah had said before about Ahab, and Ahab intuitively knew that this was coming.

Elisha, bones relic-worshiping 2Ki 13:20, 21

 Through God’s spirit upon Elisha, he had performed 15 miracles up to this point. But even after his death he is used by Jehovah for a 16th miracle. Elisha had been faithful till death, approved by God. The record relates that after Elisha’s burial another man was being buried when a marauding band of Moabites caused the burial party to throw the man into Elisha’s burial place and flee. Upon touching Elisha’s bones, the dead man came to life and stood upon his feet.—2Ki 13:20, 21.

A miracle performed in connection with Elisha (posthumously) was the immediate raising to life of a man whose dead body was thrown into Elisha’s burial place and touched his bones. This was proof that it was God’s power, not Elisha’s, that performed the miracles Elisha had accomplished, and it was a powerful attestation or a seal of God as to the genuineness of his faithful prophet.—2Ki 13:20, 21.

Certain advocates of the veneration of relics cite 2 Kings 13:21, which says: “It came about that as they were burying a man, why, here they saw the marauding band. At once they threw the man into [the prophet] Elisha’s burial place and went off. When the man touched the bones of Elisha, he immediately came to life and stood upon his feet.” This was a miracle involving the lifeless bones of one of God’s prophets. But Elisha was dead and “conscious of nothing at all” at the time of the miracle. (Ecclesiastes 9:5, 10) Hence, this resurrection must be attributed to the miracle-working power of Jehovah God, who effected it by means of his holy spirit, or active force. It is also noteworthy that the Scriptures do not say that Elisha’s bones were ever venerated.

The account at 2 Kings 13:21 tells how a dead man came to life after coming in contact with the bones of the prophet Elisha, but there is no record that Elisha’s bones were worshiped either before or after that miracle. It was God that performed that miracle, not the bones; so it was proper that all veneration, worship, glory, honor and praise be given to God and not to the lifeless bones.

Some in Christendom advocate devotion to relics because of what is said at Acts 19:11, 12, where we read: “God kept performing extraordinary works of power through the hands of [the apostle] Paul, so that even cloths and aprons were borne from his body to the ailing people, and the diseases left them, and the wicked spirits came out.” Please note that it was God who performed those extraordinary works through Paul. The apostle himself did not perform such works independently, and he never accepted veneration from any human.—Acts 14:8-18.

It is not a matter of having bravery or pluck to defend a theological dogma, right or wrong. Instead of hardihood, who has the honesty to examine God’s sacred and infallible Word of truth on the matter? Those who have will find that the Scriptures do not support the relic-worshiping practice at all. In the particular cases mentioned in Acts 5:15 and Acts 19:12 there is no question that God performed great miracles by the hands of Peter and Paul. Nevertheless, those men did not allow other creatures to bow down to, worship or venerate them as long as they were alive. Why, then, would anyone want to worship their bones after they are dead? (Acts 10:25, 26) 

Gnostic Teaching on Martyrdom The Testimony of Truth

The Testimony of Truth Gnostic Teaching on Martyrdom

The Testimony of Truth

The foolish - thinking in their heart that if they confess, "We are Christians," in word only (but) not with power, while giving themselves over to ignorance, to a human death, not knowing where they are going nor who Christ is, thinking that they will live, when they are (really) in error - hasten towards the principalities and authorities. They fall into their clutches because of the ignorance that is in them. For (if) only words which bear testimony were effecting salvation, the whole world would endure this thing and would be saved. But it is in this way that they drew error to themselves. ..... (3 lines unrecoverable)... they do not know that they will destroy themselves. If the Father were to desire a human sacrifice, he would become vainglorious.

For the Son of Man clothed himself with their first-fruits; he went down to Hades and performed many mighty works. He raised the dead therein; and the world-rulers of darkness became envious of him, for they did not find sin in him. But he also destroyed their works from among men, so that the lame, the blind, the paralytic, the dumb, (and) the demon-possessed were granted healing. And he walked upon the waters of the sea. For this reason he destroyed his flesh from [...] which he [...]. And he became [...] salvation [...] his death ...... (4 lines unrecoverable)... everyone [...] how many they are! They are blind guides, like the disciples. They boarded the ship; at about thirty stadies, they saw Jesus walking on the sea. These are empty martyrs, since they bear witness only to themselves. And yet they are sick, and they are not able to raise themselves.

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

**Gnostic Teaching on Martyrdom**  

Welcome to Pleroma Pathways, apocalyptic and mystic Christianity, where we explore esoteric and apocalyptic texts. In this exploration, we delve into the Gnostic perspective on martyrdom, focusing particularly on the teachings found in *The Testimony of Truth*. These texts challenge conventional notions of martyrdom, emphasizing knowledge and spiritual awakening over the misguided zeal of dying for a cause.  

The concept of martyrdom in traditional Christianity is often associated with the idea of self-sacrifice for one's faith. Martyrs are seen as heroic figures who die for the name of Christ, hoping for salvation in their death. However, Gnostic texts like *The Testimony of Truth* critique this idea, presenting martyrdom as misguided and harmful for those who fail to grasp true spiritual knowledge.  

In *The Testimony of Truth*, the author addresses the misconception held by many that martyrdom ensures salvation. The text describes those who think that confessing "We are Christians" through their words, without the power of true understanding, will lead to salvation:  

> "The foolish—thinking in their heart that if they confess, 'We are Christians,' in word only (but) not with power, while giving themselves over to ignorance, to a human death, not knowing where they are going nor who Christ is, thinking that they will live, when they are (really) in error—hasten towards the principalities and authorities." (*The Testimony of Truth*, 44:10-15)  

These individuals, according to the Gnostic view, fall into error because they act out of ignorance. They believe that martyrdom through death will lead to salvation, but the text asserts that this is a flawed belief. In the Gnostic tradition, it is knowledge, not physical death, that leads to spiritual fulfillment and salvation. The death of the body cannot cleanse ignorance; only knowledge of the truth can transform and renew the mind, making a believer responsible for the Resurrection of the dead at the second coming. As it is written in Daniel 12:2, "Many of those who sleep in the dust of the earth shall awake, some to everlasting life, and some to shame and everlasting contempt." Knowledge of the truth is essential, as it brings the responsibility of the Resurrection.  

The text also challenges the idea that God desires human sacrifice, arguing that if the Father were to demand such a sacrifice, it would be an act of vanity.  

> "If the Father were to desire a human sacrifice, he would become vainglorious." (*The Testimony of Truth*, 45:2)  

For the Gnostics, God is not concerned with the death of the physical body. True spiritual growth arises from understanding and the internal realization of one's divine connection. This stands in stark contrast to the common view that death for Christ guarantees entry into eternal life.  

Furthermore, *The Testimony of Truth* critiques those who believe that martyrdom is a means of "perfection." It emphasizes that these martyrs are, in fact, "empty," as their death does not lead to true spiritual fulfillment. The text states:  

> "These are empty martyrs, since they bear witness only to themselves. And yet they are sick, and they are not able to raise themselves." (*The Testimony of Truth*, 45:20-25)  

In this view, martyrdom does not equate to spiritual perfection or salvation. Instead, it is seen as an empty act that only bears witness to the individual's misguided understanding of what it means to follow Christ. True salvation, according to the Gnostic teachings, comes from self-knowledge and an understanding of God’s truth, not from dying in physical suffering.  

The text goes on to redefine martyrdom, asserting that the true "witness" is the one who knows themselves and understands the truth.  

> "This, therefore, is the true testimony: When man comes to know himself and God, who is over the truth, he will be saved, and he will crown himself with the crown unfading." (*The Testimony of Truth*, 45:30-45:6)  

This radical shift in understanding emphasizes the inner journey of spiritual awakening rather than outward actions like martyrdom. It is through the cultivation of wisdom and personal transformation that one becomes aligned with the divine, not through death. In this sense, the Gnostic view of martyrdom is deeply introspective, valuing enlightenment over external demonstrations of faith.  

*The Testimony of Truth* further reinforces this idea by explaining that salvation comes through knowledge rather than through a literal sacrifice or martyrdom. The text teaches that Christ came to reveal the truth, which is eternal and liberating. The Gnostic faith views the physical world, with its sufferings and death, not as something to be dismissed as mere illusion, but as part of a greater cycle of transformation. This cycle is understood as comprising two distinct ages: one akin to winter, marked by mortality and decay, and the other likened to summer, representing renewal and the Resurrection of the Dead in the age to come. Through the understanding of spiritual truths, one prepares for this transition, embracing the hope of resurrection and the fullness of life in the coming age.  

In conclusion, the Gnostic teaching on martyrdom, as found in *The Testimony of Truth*, radically redefines the concept of martyrdom. It critiques the idea that physical death, particularly through martyrdom, is a pathway to salvation. Instead, salvation is found in the knowledge of the self and the divine. The Gnostic path is one of spiritual enlightenment and inner awakening, where understanding and transformation are the true markers of divine connection, not the act of dying for a cause.  

As we reflect on this, it is important to remember that those who rush into martyrdom will not be resurrected, as stated in Isaiah 26:14, "They are dead, they will not live; they are deceased, they will not rise." The ultimate salvation lies in the Resurrection of the dead, as knowledge brings responsibility for it, guiding one to true spiritual transformation. 

 **Gnostic Teaching on Martyrdom: Rethinking Church History**  

We suspect that Irenaeus was influenced by the deception of Satan, as he spoke about martyrs rushing to be with Christ, implying they would enter His presence before the resurrection. We are confident in this view because, in his account of the persecution at Lyons and Vienne, he described Vettius Epagathus, who was killed, as “a true disciple of Christ, still following the Lamb wherever He goes,” referencing Revelation 14:4—about seventy years after John’s death. Vettius could only “follow the Lamb” after his death if one believed in the idea of an immediate ascension to heaven, which was celebrated as the "birthday of martyrdom." Elsewhere, Irenaeus even mentions "eternal fire in hell" for those who had fallen away from the faith.  

Ignatius, an elder in the church at Antioch, had an obsessive desire for martyrdom. This went against Jesus’ teaching to flee to another city when facing persecution. Yet when Emperor Trajan came to Antioch around 107 AD on his way to the Parthian war, Ignatius voluntarily surrendered himself. When brought before Trajan, the emperor remarked, “What a defiant spirit you have—to disobey our commands and mislead others into the same ruin!”  

Ignatius, who had served as a bishop in Antioch for 37 years, including 26 years alongside the Apostle John, was taken to Smyrna on his way to Rome by order of Trajan. There, he was sentenced to be thrown to wild animals as public entertainment around 107 AD.  

Polycarp was executed about 60 years after Ignatius, in 167 AD. If he was among the believers in Smyrna whom the Spirit acknowledged for their works, suffering, and poverty while being spiritually "rich," then he might have remained faithful to the end. However, martyrdom in itself does not prove one’s righteousness, as even some from the "synagogue of Satan" faced persecution.  

Many followers of Jezebel, part of the so-called synagogue of Satan, had spiritual gifts—speaking in tongues, prophesying, understanding mysteries, and showing great generosity. Some even had faith capable of metaphorically moving mountains and gave all their possessions to the poor. In many cases, they willingly surrendered themselves to death, whether by fire or other brutal means, craving martyrdom so much that Roman authorities eventually refused to kill them, suggesting they execute themselves instead. Yet, as Paul taught, without true love, these deeds were meaningless.  

There was a widespread obsession with martyrdom during this time. Many believed sacrificing their lives in brutal ways could atone for their sins and errors. These individuals were likened to "those who committed adultery with Jezebel"—religious leaders and their followers who blindly revered them as modern congregants do their clergy.  

Those who sought martyrdom, whether by fire, wild animals, or other methods, were described as mere "clanging cymbals" without meaning. They became destined for judgment in the "Second Death." Lacking true faith, they failed to overcome the world and instead succumbed to it, exposing themselves to punishment after the resurrection. At that point, Jezebel and her followers will be cast into their “bed of tribulation,” representing the great distress in which anti-Christian apostasy will be destroyed during the final judgment. Babylon, the corrupt "Great City," will fall for its immorality and blasphemy. The entire religious establishment, along with its clergy, will be eradicated by God’s wrath, as described in Revelation 14:7-11 and 18:2.  

This misguided zeal for martyrdom stemmed from ignorance and misdirected passion, not evidence of a person's belonging to Christ. While their sincerity and devotion may be acknowledged, Paul made it clear that offering one's body to be burned is meaningless without the love that fulfills God's law, as outlined in 1 Corinthians 13.  

Martyrdom proves only one’s dedication to their beliefs, not their membership in Christ’s body. For instance, the deaths of figures like Huss, Jerome, Cranmer, and Servetus demonstrated their sincerity in opposing Roman Catholic and Calvinist doctrines. However, their martyrdoms did not erase their involvement in religious error. Only an informed belief in and obedience to the truth can remove such stains—not the flames of martyrdom.

Study 

The Testimony of Truth the author is anonymous—it challenges the idea that God wants people to die as martyrs

The word "martyr" is from martus, elsewhere rendered witness, it indicates one who bears witness to the truth 

3144. martus ► Strong's Concordance
martus: a witness

Original Word: μάρτυς, υρος, ὁ

in a legal sense: Matthew 18:16; Matthew 26:65; Mark 14:63; Acts 6:13; Acts 7:58; 2 Corinthians 13:1; 1 Timothy 5:19; Hebrews 10:28.
in an historical sense: Acts 10:41; 1 Timothy 6:12; (2 Timothy 2:2);
one who is a spectator of anything, e. g. of a contest, Hebrews 12:1;
with a genitive of the object, Luke 24:48; Acts 1:22; Acts 2:32; Acts 3:15; Acts 5:32 G L T Tr WH; Acts 10:39; Acts 26:16; 1 Peter 5:1;
with a genitive of the possessor 'one who testifies for one', Acts 1:8 L T Tr WH; ; with a genitive of the possessor and of the object, Acts 5:32 Rec.; μάρτυρα εἶναι τίνι, to be a witness for one, serve him by testimony, Acts 1:8 R G; ; (Luke 11:48 T Tr WH).
He is said to be a witness, to whose attestation appeal is made; hence, the formulas μάρτυς μου ἐστιν ὁ Θεός, Romans 1:9; Philippians 1:8;
It's author is challenging the radical christian bishops who encourage "martyrdom" and accuse them of complicity in murder

Its focus on martyrdom also indicates composition during a period of persecution, making a date prior to the early fourth century more likely

Testim. Truth is clearly not sympathetic to Christians who confess before the Roman authorities and consequently suffer martyrdom. The author describes the ignorance and error of martyrs-by-death as follow:

The Testimony of Truth
The foolish - thinking in their heart that if they confess, "We are Christians," in word only (but) not with power, while giving themselves over to ignorance, to a human death, not knowing where they are going nor who Christ is, thinking that they will live, when they are (really) in error - hasten towards the principalities and authorities. They fall into their clutches because of the ignorance that is in them. For (if) only words which bear testimony were effecting salvation, the whole world would endure this thing and would be saved. But it is in this way that they drew error to themselves. ...... they do not know that they will destroy themselves. If the Father were to desire a human sacrifice, he would become vainglorious. (The Testimony of Truth)

This text depicts “so-called Christians” who undergo martyrdom at the hands of persecutors as misguided fools, who mistakenly believe that “death for the sake of the name will offer them salvation

According to Testim. Truth then, ignorance fosters a misguided desire for martyrdom— “they do not know they will destroy themselves”

 If the Father were to desire a human sacrifice, he would become vainglorious. (The Testimony of Truth)

The author of Testimony of Truth notes that if God were to desire human sacrifice, then he would be guilty of vanity

"We are Christians," in word only (but) not with power, For (if) only words which bear testimony were effecting salvation, the whole world would endure this thing and would be saved. (The Testimony of Truth)

Testim. Truth casts the idea that a simple confession, “mere words,” saves as so easy that it is ridiculous

 

He reflects that those who claim to witness via death are like the disciples, as “blind guides,” confused at the shore of Sea of Galilee (33,21-24).35 On the futility of their efforts, he remarks

These are empty martyrs, since they bear witness only to themselves. And yet they are sick, and they are not able to raise themselves. (The Testimony of Truth)

The author rejects the notion that a martyr’s death brings perfection and automatic salvation, and adds that the only “witness” martyrs bear is to themselves 

Note Exposing the misguided motives and “emptiness” of a martyr’s death

The description of their erroneous logic continues: “When they are ‘perfected’ with passion (paqos), this is the thought they have within them, ‘If we deliver ourselves over to death for the sake of the name, we will be saved’”

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

This, therefore, is the true testimony: When man comes to know himself and God, who is over the truth, he will be saved, and he will crown himself with the crown unfading. (The Testimony of Truth)

Having rejected testimony by death, Testim. Truth redefines appropriate martyrdom as an individual enterprise centered on knowledge, relating, “This, therefore, is the true testimony When one knows himself and God who is over the truth, he will be saved, and he will be crowned with the crown unfading” (44,30-45,6).

Heracleon disparaged literal martyrdom, arguing that it was useless to confess Christ with a martyr’s death and yet to have denied him by one’s conduct (Strom. 4.71–72). Heracleon is said to have argued that “there is confession with faith and conduct, and there is vocal confession. Vocal confession takes place also in the presence of authorities, and most people wrongly think that this alone is truly confession. Yet hypocrites are capable of making this same kind of confession” (Fragment 50, on Luke 12:8 Strom. 4.71.1–2).