el אֵל The Higher Power

Titles and the Name of the higher power EL אֵל


How to read the Names and Titles of the Deity from a Christian Gnostic kabbalah perspective











**Title: El אֵל — The Higher Power as a Corporeal Spirit**


In the Hebrew Scriptures, the term **El (אֵל)** stands as one of the most ancient and significant designations for the Deity. El is not an abstract title nor a generic reference to "God" in the modern sense of the word. Rather, it conveys a specific idea: **power**, **might**, **strength**, and **authority**. Unlike the English word "God," which stems from the Anglo-Saxon "god" meaning "good," the Hebrew El does not denote moral quality. It expresses instead the concept of active, dynamic force. This is confirmed by the lexicon of Gesenius, who states that the Hebrew mind always associated **El** with the idea of strength and power.


The Deity of the Bible is not a formless or immaterial essence. **El is a corporeal spirit**. That is, El exists physically—tangibly—and operates through substance. The traditional philosophical division between "spirit" and "matter" is foreign to the biblical worldview. In Hebrew thought, **spirit is not immaterial**; rather, spirit is made of finer atoms—more subtle than flesh and blood, but no less material. The idea that spirit is composed of atoms aligns with a corporeal understanding of divine substance, supported by both scripture and early interpretative tradition.


### The Power Behind the Name


The pictographic elements of the name El reinforce this idea. The letter **Aleph (א)**, shaped like an ox head, represents leadership and strength—primal energy at the root of action. The **Lamed (ל)**, shaped like a shepherd’s staff, denotes authority, direction, and instruction. Together, the word **El** communicates a force that leads, governs, and executes dominion through tangible influence. It is not the title of an incorporeal being hiding in abstraction, but of a **powerful, active presence** in the world—one that moves, speaks, creates, and reveals.


The Genesis narrative identifies El as **the Possessor of the heavens and the earth** (Genesis 14:22). El Elyon—**the Most High Power**—is the title given to the Deity by Melchizedek, priest and king of Salem. This name implies the existence of other elohim (powers), yet affirms the supremacy of one source: El Elyon, the Highest. This establishes a hierarchy of tangible, real beings, with El at the top. That these powers are referred to as elohim—plural—is consistent with the ancient understanding of **many corporeal beings** participating in the administration of the cosmos, under the authority of one supreme corporeal Spirit.


### El and the Name Yahweh


In Exodus 6:3, the Deity makes an important statement to Moses: *“I appeared to Abraham, to Isaac, and to Jacob by the name El Shaddai, but by my name Yahweh was I not known unto them.”* This passage reveals the layered character of divine self-revelation. **El Shaddai**—translated as "the Powerful Ones"—signifies not a singular, isolated being, but a **collective force**, manifesting strength through a plurality of agents. The Deity operates **through elohim**, heavenly powers that serve His will.


However, the word **El** remains singular. It is the name the Deity Himself chose when first appearing to the patriarchs. El conveys not only supreme authority, but **corporeal existence**. El *appeared* to Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob—not in visions of formless essence, but through tangible encounters, audible speech, and visible presence. The Deity walked, spoke, and made covenant. This implies materiality, not abstraction. The Deity did not simply make Himself *seem* real—He **is real**, and He is made of substance, though not like earthly flesh.


### Spirit as Tangible Substance


In many modern theological systems, **spirit is described as non-material**. But this idea derives more from Greek philosophy than Hebrew thought. In the Bible, **spirit (Hebrew: ruach)** is a force, often compared to wind or breath—not because it is immaterial, but because it is **invisible yet physically active**. Wind is real. Breath has substance. Likewise, spirit consists of particles—**fine atoms**—not perceptible to the naked eye, but nonetheless material.


This understanding is reflected in the earliest Christian and Jewish writings. Theodotus, a Valentinian teacher, declared that **even spiritual beings have form and body**, though they are made of a different substance than the flesh of mortals. The same idea is echoed in the notion that the Only-Begotten, the First-Created, and the angels all have structure. They are not ghosts or metaphors—they are **corporeal beings composed of spiritual material**. Thus, **El**, as the supreme Spirit, must likewise be **corporeal**.


### EL Shaddai and Manifestation in Plurality


The term **El Shaddai** adds another layer. The word **Shaddai** has often been translated “Almighty,” but its plural ending hints at a deeper meaning. It refers to the **powerful ones**, a plural group manifesting the will of the singular El. When Abraham received the three visitors (Genesis 18), these were corporeal beings. They walked, ate, and spoke. One of them identified as Yahweh, but all three operated as messengers of divine power. This shows how **El manifests power through physical agents**, without ceasing to be one unified Deity.


This manifestation of plurality within unity is not metaphysical mystery—it is corporeal operation. El does not project metaphors; He sends **real beings**—agents of His will, made of spiritual atoms. They act in the physical world because they themselves are physical, though of higher substance.


### Conclusion: El Is the Higher Power—A Corporeal Spirit


The title **El** does not point to an abstract God. It refers to **the Higher Power**, a Being who is **tangible, real, active**, and above all, **corporeal**. Spirit is not the opposite of matter, but a finer form of it. El is not invisible because He lacks substance, but because His substance is too fine for mortal eyes. Yet He reveals Himself, speaks, acts, and makes covenant—all actions of a real, material presence.


Understanding El as **a corporeal Spirit** restores a sense of reality and coherence to biblical theology. It grounds our view of the Deity in substance, not speculation—in strength and power, not sentimentality. El is the one true Power—**made of atoms**, yet higher than all. He is the **Possessor of heaven and earth**, the **Most High**, and the **Spirit that moves**, not in metaphor, but in **tangible power**.





 

Emanation in the Eastern Orthodox Church

Emanation in the Eastern Orthodox Church

Exploring Hierarchy, Overflow, and the Mystery of Divine Order

**Emanation in the Eastern Orthodox Church**

*An Exploration Through the Writings of Niketas Stethatos and Pseudo-Dionysius*

The concept of *emanation*—from the Latin *emanare*, meaning “to flow out” or “drip”—plays a subtle yet meaningful role in the mystical theology of the Eastern Orthodox Church. Though the term itself originates from Neoplatonic philosophy, its essence resonates with aspects of Eastern Christian cosmology and angelology, particularly in the works of authors like Niketas Stethatos and Pseudo-Dionysius the Areopagite. Within Orthodoxy, emanation does not imply an impersonal diffusion from a formless Absolute, as in some forms of Neoplatonism. Rather, it refers to an ordered procession from the transcendent God, who remains both wholly beyond creation and intimately present through His energies.

### Emanation in Neoplatonic Thought

In Neoplatonism, particularly in the thought of Plotinus, emanation describes the way in which all things come forth from the One. The One is perfectly simple and self-sufficient, yet from it flows—by necessity rather than by will—the Nous (Mind), the World Soul, and finally the material cosmos. This is not a temporal act, but a metaphysical principle. The lower derives its existence from the higher as light shines from the sun. The further from the source, the less pure and perfect the emanated being is.

This hierarchical vision, deeply influential on late antique Christian thought, was carefully adapted by Christian writers to preserve the distinction between Creator and creation, while still allowing for a graduated relationship between God and the cosmos.

### The Areopagitic Influence

In the Christian East, no writer shaped the theological language of emanation more profoundly than Pseudo-Dionysius the Areopagite. Writing under the name of Paul’s Athenian convert (Acts 17:34), this sixth-century mystic presented a theology of divine procession and return that became foundational for Eastern Orthodox mysticism.

According to Pseudo-Dionysius, God is *beyond being*—utterly transcendent and unknowable in His essence. Yet, in His love and goodness, He causes all things to exist. Creation flows from God not out of necessity, but as a free act of divine goodness. Pseudo-Dionysius writes in *The Divine Names*:

> “All things, inasmuch as they exist, partake of the Good and from It have their being. The Good is that which all desire, and it is from this Good that all things proceed, as from a single Cause.”

This vision maintains a form of emanation: all things proceed from God in an ordered manner. Yet, unlike Neoplatonism, this procession is not an impersonal overflowing but a willful and loving outreach of the Creator.

Pseudo-Dionysius develops a vast hierarchy of being: first the angelic ranks, then humanity, and finally the material world. Each order reflects the divine in its own way and acts as a mediator of divine light to those below it. The goal of all created beings is the return to the divine source, through purification, illumination, and union.

### Niketas Stethatos and the Decad of Beings

Centuries later, Niketas Stethatos (c. 1000–1090), a disciple of Symeon the New Theologian, echoed and extended the Dionysian vision of divine order. In his work *On the Practice of the Virtues* and other treatises, he elaborates on the emanational hierarchy with a distinctly Orthodox spiritual emphasis.

Niketas describes a **tenfold hierarchy of beings**, a “Decad” that begins with the highest angelic orders and ends with humanity. He writes:

> “The nine heavenly powers sing hymns of praise that have a threefold structure, in accordance with the triadic form of the divine operations.” (*On Spiritual Knowledge*, verse 99)

The ten ranks are as follows:

1. **Thrones**

2. **Cherubim**

3. **Seraphim**

4. **Authorities**

5. **Dominions**

6. **Powers**

7. **Principalities**

8. **Archangels**

9. **Angels**

10. **Humanity**

Humanity, in Niketas’s schema, is not a mere accident at the end of the hierarchy, but the **completion and fulfillment** of the divine order. This final rank is referred to in Jewish mysticism as *Ishim*, meaning “men,” which suggests a status that bridges the angelic and earthly realms. In being united to God through the Incarnation and deification, humanity is elevated to a role of cosmic significance.

Niketas does not portray these ranks as distant abstractions, but as dynamic participants in the divine plan. Each level reflects the divine energies appropriate to its order, and all exist in harmony with the divine will. The movement from the divine source into creation is mirrored by the return of creation into the divine through prayer, asceticism, and the sacramental life.

### Emanation and Divine Energies

In Orthodox theology, the doctrine of **divine energies**, clarified by Gregory Palamas in the 14th century, preserves the idea of God’s immanence without compromising His transcendence. God’s **essence** remains inaccessible, but His **energies** are how He communicates Himself to creation. This distinction guards against pantheism while allowing for real participation in divine life.

Thus, emanation in Eastern Orthodoxy is best understood not as a linear chain of declining being, but as a **procession of divine light**—from the Father, through the Son, in the Holy Spirit—to all levels of creation, and a corresponding return through the same channel.

### Conclusion

While Eastern Orthodoxy does not adopt the full metaphysical framework of Neoplatonic emanationism, it embraces a vision of **ordered procession and return** that mirrors many of its core principles. Through the writings of Pseudo-Dionysius and Niketas Stethatos, we see a Christianized doctrine of emanation: one grounded in love, will, and participation, rather than necessity or impersonal overflow. In this vision, all of creation—visible and invisible—is drawn upward toward its Source in a harmony of praise, order, and divine light.

Time, Eternity, and Divine Emanations in the Thought of Pseudo-Dionysius

---

Time, Eternity, and Divine Emanations in the Thought of Pseudo-Dionysius

The late 5th–early 6th century Christian philosopher known as Pseudo-Dionysius the Areopagite stands at the crossroads of Neoplatonism and Christian theology, synthesizing the metaphysical categories of Plotinus and Proclus with the Christian vision of God as both transcendent and immanent. Central to his mystical theology is the relationship between time and eternity, and how divine emanations structure the entire cosmos. For Dionysius, time and eternity are not opposing realities, but manifestations of the Divine, who is Himself beyond both.

---

God as Supra-Eternal and Beyond Time

For Dionysius, God is not simply eternal, but beyond eternity—transcending even the category of timelessness as we can conceive it. Time is associated with change, motion, and sequence; eternity, with permanence and simultaneity. But the Divine surpasses both categories:

“He is not only the cause of being and life and wisdom, but He is also the cause of time and of eternity and of everything that is” (Divine Names V.8).

This radical transcendence means that God is not temporally extended, nor is He imprisoned within the concept of timeless duration. He is the origin and cause of both time and eternity:

“He is the eternity of things existing in eternity, the time of things existing in time, and the being of things which have being” (Divine Names V.8).

Here, Dionysius implies a metaphysical unity where God contains all modes of being—temporal, eternal, and beyond. He pre-contains all things in Himself without division or movement. Thus, the divine being is beyond temporal sequence and also beyond static timelessness.

---

Time as a Created Participation

Time, in Dionysius’ metaphysics, is not an illusion nor a mere byproduct of the fall. It is a created and ordered reality—a lower participation in the divine order, corresponding to changeable and composite things. Though inferior to eternity, time is not evil. It is part of the orderly procession of divine light through the cosmos.

“Time is the movable image of eternity... it imitates eternity through motion” (cf. Celestial Hierarchy VII.3, echoing Plato’s Timaeus).

While this is an implicit citation of Platonic doctrine, Dionysius Christianizes it by insisting that time exists for the good of lower beings, and that temporal order is illuminated from above by eternal principles. He distinguishes beings that “exist in time,” such as humans and the natural world, from those that “exist in eternity,” such as angels and intellects.

---

Eternity and the Angelic Orders

In the Celestial Hierarchy, Dionysius teaches that the angelic beings exist in eternity. They do not undergo change, death, or temporal corruption, but exist in a mode of fixed contemplation. Eternity is characterized by unbroken unity, simultaneity, and perfect presence:

“The intelligible beings are eternal... not subject to time, but above time, participating in divine eternity according to their capacity” (Celestial Hierarchy VII.3).

The angels participate in eternity, not because they are equal to the Divine, but because they receive the illumination of timeless life from Him. They exist in a state of unceasing praise and reflection, representing a higher ontological stratum than temporal beings.

---

Divine Emanation: The Procession from the One

At the center of Dionysius’ metaphysics is the doctrine of divine emanation (proodos), which is the process by which all things come forth from God in a structured hierarchy. This emanation is not mechanical but voluntary and loving—God, who is overflowing Goodness, gives being to all things out of self-diffusive generosity:

“The Good is the cause of all beings, through the fact of its overflowing goodness” (Divine Names IV.1).

This overflowing goodness initiates a cascade of being: from the One, divine light flows downward through layers of existence—first into intellectual beings (like angels), then into souls, and finally into material nature. But each level is illuminated according to its capacity.

The process of emanation is temporal only at the lower levels. The divine causality that gives rise to angels is eternal, while the causality that gives rise to human beings and nature involves time and motion. Time, then, is a necessary medium for the unfolding of lower emanations.

---

Return (Epistrophē) and the Unity of All

For Dionysius, the process of emanation is not linear—it is circular. All things not only proceed from God but are also called to return to Him. This return (epistrophē) occurs through purification, illumination, and union.

“All things desire to participate in the divine Light, and all aspiration and movement of every being is a return toward It” (Divine Names IV.10).

The return is possible because time is not severed from eternity, but dependent on it. Temporal beings are not trapped in flux; they are capable of ascent. Through the Church, sacraments, contemplation, and love, human beings begin to reorient toward the divine source—thus escaping fragmentation and participating in eternal unity.

---

God as Simultaneously Present in All Times

Though God is beyond time, He is present to all times and fills them without being contained by them. He is before time, in time, and beyond time:

“He is the cause of all time, and is before time and in time and beyond time... and He encompasses all things while Himself remaining encompassed by none” (Divine Names V.8).

This insight reveals the paradox of divine immanence and transcendence. God is in every moment, sustaining and illuminating it, yet untouched by succession or decay. Eternity and time are not in opposition but are modes of participation in the same divine presence, each suited to different orders of being.

---

Conclusion

In Pseudo-Dionysius’ vision, time and eternity are not rival categories but expressions of divine order. Eternity belongs to the angelic and intellectual realms, while time orders the becoming of lower beings. God Himself transcends both, being the supra-eternal source of all emanation. The divine light proceeds downward through a graded hierarchy, illuminating each level according to its capacity.

But this process is not unidirectional. All things are invited to return—to transcend the temporal through purification and illumination, and to participate in the eternal unity of the Divine. As Dionysius writes:

“The divine yearning brings ecstasy so that the lover belongs not to self but to the beloved” (Divine Names IV.13).

This divine yearning is the secret thread tying time to eternity: the calling of all creation to be gathered back into the One from which it came.

---

Dionysius the Areopagite: Judge of Athens and First Bishop of the Ecclesia

**Dionysius the Areopagite: Judge of Athens and First Bishop of the Ecclesia**

The figure of Dionysius the Areopagite (Greek: *Di-o-nyʹsi-us*, meaning "belonging to Dionysus," the Greek god of wine) stands as a remarkable example of how the gospel message penetrated even the highest echelons of Greco-Roman society. His conversion, recorded in **Acts 17:34**, occurred in the intellectual heart of the ancient world—Athens—during the Apostle Paul’s bold sermon at the Areopagus, also known as Mars Hill. In a city immersed in philosophy, religious plurality, and rhetorical sophistication, Dionysius’ embrace of the truth shines as an early triumph of Christian doctrine over pagan reasoning.

### A Judge of the Areopagus

Luke, the author of Acts, recounts:

> *“Howbeit certain men clave unto him, and believed: among the which was Dionysius the Areopagite, and a woman named Damaris, and others with them”* (Acts 17:34, KJV).

The context is important. Paul had just delivered a powerful speech to the philosophers of Athens, challenging their worship of the “unknown god” and presenting the God who “made the world and all things therein” (Acts 17:24). Though some mocked, others were moved—and among them was Dionysius.

The word “clave” in the text is translated from the Greek *kollaō*, meaning “to glue” or “to fix together.” As one commentary explains:

> *“Some of the Athenians recognised the logic of Paul's presentation of Truth, and attached themselves to his company. Firmly embracing the Truth, they followed his example of discipleship.”*

This was no superficial assent. Dionysius' commitment meant breaking from the philosophical traditions of Athens and accepting a worldview centered not on speculation, but on revelation.

### Significance of the Name

His name, derived from Dionysus—the god of wine and ritual ecstasy—highlights the cultural and religious context from which he emerged. That such a man, possibly named in honor of a pagan deity, would become a Christian and church leader reveals the power of the gospel to overturn the deepest foundations of Hellenistic belief.

Unger notes that Dionysius “was eminent in Athens for his literary ability, having first studied at Athens, and then at Heliopolis in Egypt.” Such a background would have equipped him with philosophical training, rhetorical skill, and broad religious literacy. His conversion, therefore, would have been particularly striking.

> *“His conversion would have made an impression upon the community, but few followed his lead.”*

Indeed, the philosophical climate of Athens was skeptical and elitist. While Paul’s preaching bore fruit, the record suggests that the environment was not fertile ground for large-scale conversions. Still, a seed was planted.

### "The Areopagite"

The title *Areopagite* refers to Dionysius’ role as a judge on the Areopagus, Athens’ supreme court. This was no ordinary position—it was the pinnacle of civic honor and intellectual respect in the city. In fact, verse 19 of the same chapter confirms that Paul had been brought before this body to explain his “new doctrine.” Dionysius, then, was a member of the very tribunal evaluating Paul's message.

> *“He was also a member of the Supreme Court (v. 19), and, apparently, the only one of them prepared to acknowledge the Truth.”*

His embrace of Paul’s message marks him as the lone official voice from the court to receive the gospel. His faith would not have gone unnoticed; it was a public and intellectual endorsement of Paul’s teaching.

### Damaris and Others

Also mentioned is “a woman named Damaris.” Her name means “gentle,” and her inclusion in the text suggests prominence:

> *“She must also have been prominent in Athenian life to be so mentioned.”*

The passage concludes, “and others with them.” Though not a mass movement, the conversion of these few—including a judge and a notable woman—shows the subtle but significant inroads Christianity made in even the most resistant of cultural climates.

> *“Good work was effected by Paul's proclamation to the Athenians on Mars' Hill, and his instruction to those who ‘followed him,’ so that an ecclesia was established in the very heart of Gentile education!”*

This new ecclesia (assembly) was small, but notable. Unlike places like Corinth or Thessalonica, Athens did not produce a large or influential early Christian community. The text notes that “the results were not as spectacular as elsewhere,” largely due to the atmosphere of elite philosophical detachment. Even the synagogue in Athens had been influenced by this spirit, for it had failed to gain many Greek converts (v. 17).

After these events, Paul moved on.

> *“Following these experiences, Paul left Athens (Acts 18:1), never to return as far as the record is concerned.”*

> And indeed, the New Testament is silent on the future of the Athenian ecclesia.

### Later Traditions and Ecclesiastical History

Although Scripture does not record what became of Dionysius, later Christian tradition fills in some details. According to *Eusebius* (*Historia Ecclesiae* III.iv), Dionysius became the first bishop of Athens, though other sources occasionally list Hierotheus as his predecessor. This episcopal appointment implies that Dionysius not only remained committed to the faith but became a foundational figure in the Church’s institutional development in Greece.

The writings falsely attributed to him—known as those of *Pseudo-Dionysius the Areopagite*—would emerge centuries later and be influential in Christian mysticism. Though these works are pseudonymous and written in the 5th or 6th century CE, their use of his name reflects the enduring reputation Dionysius held in Christian memory.

### Conclusion

Dionysius the Areopagite stands as a bridge between the intellectual elite of Athens and the transformative power of the gospel. His story—short though it is in the New Testament—illustrates the radical reach of Paul’s mission and the beginnings of Christian influence in even the most elite and resistant circles of the Greco-Roman world. From a judge on the Areopagus to a bishop of the Church, Dionysius’ life testifies to the quiet but profound inroads the Truth made into the heart of the Gentile world.

The Doctrine of Self-Baptism in Gnostic Thought: A Biblical Perspective

 **The Doctrine of Self-Baptism in Gnostic Thought: A Biblical Perspective**

In Gnostic teachings, the idea of self-baptism or “auto-baptism” is often discussed as a valid form of initiation. This doctrine posits that the validity of baptism does not depend on the person performing the act but on the individual’s understanding and relationship with God. Theologically, self-baptism challenges the conventional understanding of the role of the baptizer in the Christian sacrament. 

### The Gnostic Argument for Self-Baptism

One central point in Gnostic reasoning is the belief that the act of baptism should not be dependent on a human intermediary, as the power to baptize is rooted in an individual’s own relationship with Christ. If salvation is to depend on one's own understanding and obedience to God, then the person performing the baptism becomes irrelevant. From this perspective, baptism is understood as a deeply personal act, symbolizing the believer’s death with Christ and subsequent resurrection (Romans 6:4). Since the believer is the one identifying with Christ in baptism, the human baptizer's role is seen as secondary. 

### Biblical Perspective on Baptism and Baptizers

The New Testament consistently emphasizes the importance of baptism in the life of the believer, but it also shows little emphasis on who performs the act of baptism. Of the numerous references to baptism in the New Testament, only a few mention the actual baptizer by name. For example, John the Baptist is known for baptizing people (Mark 1:4), and Philip baptized the Ethiopian eunuch (Acts 8:38). However, the New Testament does not prescribe a specific hierarchy for baptizing, leaving open the question of who can baptize. 

In Acts 10:48, Peter commands the Gentile converts to be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ but does not record himself as the one performing the baptism. This suggests that the act of baptism is more about the believer’s commitment and less about who performs the baptism. The New Testament focus is primarily on the act of the believer undergoing baptism as a personal declaration of faith in Christ (Acts 2:38-39). 

### Old Testament Types of Baptism and the Absence of a Baptizer

There are several Old Testament events that foreshadow baptism, none of which involve a designated "baptizer." In the case of the priests, they washed themselves in the laver (Exodus 30:18), and the cleansed leper was required to wash himself as well (Leviticus 14:8). Naaman, the Syrian general, dipped himself in the Jordan River to be healed (2 Kings 5:14). In 1 Corinthians 10:2, Paul references the Israelites crossing the Red Sea as a baptism, yet no specific person is mentioned as performing the act. The phrase “they baptized themselves” could even be applied to this event (Bullinger). These examples illustrate that the focus is on the action of the individual rather than the one performing the act.

### The Spirit as the Ultimate Baptizer

A deeper examination of baptism in the New Testament reveals that it is the Spirit of God who ultimately performs the work of baptism, whether through a human baptizer or not. Paul writes, “For by one Spirit we are all baptized into one body” (1 Corinthians 12:13), and it is the Spirit who raises us up out of the water, just as He raised Christ (Romans 8:11). Jesus Himself baptizes by the Spirit, as seen in John 1:33 and Acts 1:5. The process of baptism, therefore, is not dependent on a physical intermediary but on the work of the Holy Spirit. This understanding aligns with the Gnostic view that self-baptism is acceptable, as the Spirit of God is the true baptizer.

### The Role of Baptism in the Body of Christ

Baptism, while a personal act of commitment to Christ, is also an initiation into the community of believers. Acts 2:41-47 and 1 Corinthians 12:13 emphasize that baptism is both a personal relationship with Christ and an entry into the body of believers. However, the presence of fellow believers is a matter of fellowship and mutual support rather than a requirement for the validity of baptism.

Paul also addresses divisions within the Corinthian church over who baptized whom, urging believers not to focus on the person performing the baptism. “Christ sent me not to baptize, but to preach the Gospel” (1 Corinthians 1:17), emphasizing that the act of baptism is secondary to the message of salvation.

### Conclusion: Self-Baptism in Biblical Context

In light of these considerations, self-baptism is not explicitly condemned in Scripture. The ultimate focus of baptism is on the believer’s identification with Christ’s death and resurrection (Romans 6:3-4), and the involvement of a human baptizer is a secondary concern. The New Testament and Old Testament types show that the act of baptism is primarily about the individual’s personal act of faith, and the Spirit, not the human baptizer, is the one who truly performs the work of regeneration. Therefore, while traditional baptism with a community of believers is preferred, self-baptism is theologically valid, as it is Christ who baptizes through the Spirit.

**Bible References**:

- Matthew 28:19

- Acts 2:38-39, 2:41, 10:48, 11:24, 5:14

- Romans 6:4, 8:11

- 1 Corinthians 12:13, 1:17

- John 1:33, 6:63

- 2 Corinthians 3:18

- Titus 3:5-6

- 1 Peter 3:18-21

- 2 Kings 5:14

- Exodus 30:18, Leviticus 14:8

**Gnostic Auto-Baptism: A Biblical Exploration**

The concept of self-baptism, or “auto-baptism,” is often linked with certain Gnostic ideas, which emphasize personal spiritual insight and direct communion with the divine. From a Gnostic perspective, the act of baptism may not require the involvement of a designated priest or intermediary but is instead a personal act of devotion and spiritual transformation. This notion has been explored in various theological contexts, including New Testament references that do not specifically focus on who baptizes but rather on the meaning and symbolism of baptism itself.

In the New Testament, baptism is portrayed as an essential part of the believer’s initiation into Christ. The primary emphasis in many passages is not on the individual performing the baptism but rather on the spiritual act of identification with Christ’s death and resurrection (Romans 6:4). This suggests that the believer's understanding and commitment are more crucial than the identity of the baptizer.

**The New Testament Record**

While the New Testament contains numerous references to baptism, it is striking that only a few actually describe the baptizer. For example, in the Gospels, John the Baptist performs baptisms, but the focus is on the individual undergoing baptism rather than the baptizer’s identity (Matthew 3:6; Mark 1:9). Even when the apostle Philip baptizes the Ethiopian eunuch, the emphasis is on the eunuch’s belief and the act of baptism itself rather than on the authority of Philip as the baptizer (Acts 8:36-39). 

In Acts 10:48, Peter commands the Gentile converts to be baptized, but there is no explicit mention of him personally performing the baptism. This suggests that baptism, in the New Testament context, is more about the believer’s personal engagement with Christ through water, symbolizing both death to sin and resurrection into new life, rather than about the credentials of the person performing the baptism.

**Old Testament Types of Baptism**

The Old Testament contains several types or figures of baptism, but these do not involve a human baptizer. For instance, the priests would wash themselves in a laver, but no one else performed the washing for them (Exodus 30:18-21). Similarly, Naaman dipped himself in the Jordan River as part of his healing (2 Kings 5:14). These examples highlight the individual’s role in the process rather than a prescribed priesthood or baptizer.

In 1 Corinthians 10:2, the crossing of the Red Sea is identified as a type of baptism. The Israelites passed through the sea with the cloud above them, representing a baptism into Moses. There is no mention of a baptizer in this event, which again points to the idea that baptism is a personal, spiritual act rather than something mediated by an intermediary.

**Self-Baptism in Practice**

While the New Testament does not explicitly support or condemn self-baptism, it does allow for the possibility. The focus in passages like Romans 6:4 and Colossians 2:12 is on the believer’s identification with Christ’s death, burial, and resurrection through baptism. The act of going under the water symbolizes the believer’s death to sin and their rise to new life in Christ. The physical act of immersion is crucial to the symbolism, and the identity of the baptizer is secondary.

In extreme circumstances, such as for those isolated on a desert island or in prison, self-baptism may be the only option. While the ideal is for there to be some spiritual guidance or oversight in baptism, as shown in the importance of the community in Acts 2:41-47, the Bible does not explicitly rule out the validity of self-baptism in such situations.

**The Role of the Spirit in Baptism**

The New Testament consistently emphasizes that baptism is an act of the Spirit, and it is the Spirit who raises the believer from the water to new life in Christ. In 1 Corinthians 12:13, Paul writes, “For by one Spirit are we all baptized into one body.” This indicates that the Spirit is the true baptizer, with human participation being secondary. Jesus Himself is described as the one who baptizes with the Spirit (John 1:33), and it is through the Spirit that believers are raised from the water of baptism (Romans 8:11).

In John 3:5, Jesus teaches that one must be born of water and the Spirit to enter the kingdom of God. This highlights the essential work of the Spirit in baptism, making the physical act of immersion less significant than the spiritual transformation that it symbolizes. This spiritual perspective allows for the possibility of self-baptism, as the Spirit is the one who accomplishes the work of spiritual renewal, regardless of who physically performs the baptism.

**Conclusion**

While traditional views on baptism often emphasize the necessity of a designated baptizer, the New Testament focus on the believer’s identification with Christ and the work of the Holy Spirit allows for the possibility of self-baptism, particularly in situations where human intervention is not possible. The role of the baptizer is ultimately secondary to the spiritual significance of baptism itself, which symbolizes the believer’s death to sin and resurrection in Christ through the power of the Holy Spirit. As such, self-baptism, while not ideal in most circumstances, is not condemned in Scripture and can be considered valid when performed with the proper understanding of its spiritual significance.

The Old Man of the Flesh is the New Man of the Spirit

**The Old Man of the Flesh is the New Man of the Spirit**

The conflict between the old man of the flesh and the new man of the spirit is a central theme in Christian Scripture. The apostle Paul clearly articulates this struggle throughout his letters, urging believers to live by the Spirit rather than by the carnal mind. Understanding this battle requires rejecting modern psychological terms like “ego” or “egotism,” which carry meanings foreign to biblical thought. Instead, the New Testament reveals a profound spiritual warfare between the *carnal mind*—the old man of the flesh—and the renewed mind in Christ, the new man of the Spirit.

---

### The Carnal Mind: The Old Man of the Flesh

The carnal mind is the natural, fleshly orientation that opposes God’s will. It is driven by self-will, indulgence, and selfish ambition, and Paul warns that this mind is hostile to God:

> “For the mind set on the flesh is death, but the mind set on the Spirit is life and peace, because the mind set on the flesh is hostile toward God; for it does not subject itself to the law of God, for it is not even able to do so.”

> —Romans 8:6-7 (NKJV)

This carnal mind represents the *old man*, the inherited nature ruled by fleshly desires and self-interest. It is a mind deeply rooted in the senses and the self’s willful insistence on control. This is the “mind of the flesh” that causes division, rivalry, and strife.

Paul admonishes believers to put off this old self:

> “That you put off, concerning your former conduct, the old man which grows corrupt according to the deceitful lusts.”

> —Ephesians 4:22 (NKJV)

The *carnal mind* is the source of selfish ambition and vain conceit, described vividly in Philippians 2:

> “Do nothing out of selfish ambition or vain conceit, but in humility consider others better than yourselves.”

> —Philippians 2:3 (NKJV)

Paul urges believers to reject contentiousness and selfishness. Instead, the community of believers must cultivate humility, mutual respect, and genuine concern for others:

> “Do nothing from selfishness or empty conceit, but with humility of mind regard one another as more important than yourselves; do not merely look out for your own personal interests, but also for the interests of others.”

> —Philippians 2:3-4 (NKJV)

---

### The Spiritual Mind: The New Man in Christ

In contrast to the carnal mind, the new man lives by the Spirit and reflects the mind of Christ. This renewed mind is not merely a psychological transformation but a spiritual rebirth through union with Christ:

> “I have been crucified with Christ; it is no longer I who live, but Christ lives in me. And the life which I now live in the flesh I live by faith in the Son of God, who loved me and gave Himself for me.”

> —Galatians 2:20 (NKJV)

The *new man* is characterized by Christ-consciousness, where the believer’s identity is found not in self-will but in Christ living within. This spiritual mind governs the believer’s life with love, peace, and selflessness.

Paul exhorts believers to live according to this spiritual reality:

> “If we live in the Spirit, let us also walk in the Spirit.”

> —Galatians 5:25 (NKJV)

Walking in the Spirit means rejecting the carnal mind’s impulses that produce jealousy, strife, and envy:

> “Let us not become conceited, provoking one another, envying one another.”

> —Galatians 5:26 (NKJV)

The contrast is clear: the carnal mind produces division and selfishness, while the spiritual mind fosters unity and love.

---

### The Battle Within

Paul’s letters reveal that the struggle between the flesh and the Spirit is internal:

> “For the flesh desires what is contrary to the Spirit, and the Spirit what is contrary to the flesh. They are in conflict with each other, so that you are not to do whatever you want.”

> —Galatians 5:17 (NKJV)

This battle is one of *will*, a tension between the old man ruled by self-interest and the new man ruled by God’s Spirit. The carnal mind constantly tempts believers to revert to selfishness, but the Spirit enables them to overcome:

> “Put to death, therefore, whatever belongs to your earthly nature: sexual immorality, impurity, lust, evil desires and greed, which is idolatry.”

> —Colossians 3:5 (NKJV)

> “Since you died with Christ to the basic principles of this world, why, as though you still belonged to it, do you submit to its rules?”

> —Colossians 2:20 (NKJV)

---

### The Role of the Heart and Mind

The natural inclination toward the carnal mind is rooted deeply in the human heart, which Scripture calls “deceitful” and “desperate”:

> “The heart is deceitful above all things, and desperately wicked; who can know it?”

> —Jeremiah 17:9 (NKJV)

This deceitfulness fuels self-interest and self-exaltation, making the heart the battleground for spiritual renewal. Only through constant engagement with Scripture, prayer, and community can believers resist the carnal mind’s influence.

Paul acknowledges the ongoing tension but promises victory for those who yield to the Spirit:

> “Do not be conformed to this world, but be transformed by the renewing of your mind, that you may prove what is that good and acceptable and perfect will of God.”

> —Romans 12:2 (NKJV)

---

### Conclusion: Living as the New Man in the Spirit

The “old man of the flesh” and the “new man of the spirit” represent two opposing realities within the believer. The carnal mind—characterized by selfish ambition, rivalry, and vain conceit—is the old self that must be put off. The spiritual mind—the life-giving union with Christ—represents the new self, empowered to live humbly, lovingly, and in unity with others.

Paul’s exhortations in Philippians and Galatians emphasize this transformation:

> “If there is any encouragement in Christ, any comfort from love, any fellowship with the Spirit, any affection and compassion, make my joy complete by being like-minded, having the same love, being one in spirit and purpose.”

> —Philippians 2:1-2 (NKJV)

> “Let us not become conceited, provoking one another, envying one another.”

> —Galatians 5:26 (NKJV)

Through the Spirit’s power, believers can overcome the carnal mind’s pull and live as new creations in Christ—walking humbly, considering others above themselves, and reflecting the love of God in every relationship.

---

Would you like additional reflections on how this spiritual renewal aligns with other biblical passages or Christian practice?

Why Modern Concepts of the Ego Are Wrong

**Why Modern Concepts of the Ego Are Wrong**

The modern use of the word "ego" is far removed from its original linguistic and philosophical roots. In contemporary discourse—whether in psychology, Buddhism, or New Age spirituality—the ego is often portrayed as a false self, a source of pride, selfishness, or delusion that must be transcended or dissolved. However, this interpretation is alien to the ancient Greek and biblical worldviews, where the self was not treated as an illusion or problem to be erased, but as a rational, embodied being endowed with reason and moral responsibility. Understanding this distinction is essential for recovering a more grounded and meaningful view of personhood.

### The Etymology and Meaning of *Ego*

The word “ego” is Latin for “I.” Its Greek equivalent is *ἐγώ (egō)*, a simple first-person pronoun. It appears throughout the Septuagint, the New Testament (e.g., *egō eimi*—“I am”), and classical Greek literature. But *ἐγώ* never refers to a psychological construct or inner structure. It is not a metaphysical concept, nor a hindrance to spiritual development. Rather, it merely identifies the speaker—“I,” the person, the subject.

In contrast, Freud’s psychological model divides the self into the id, ego, and superego, with the ego functioning as a balancing mechanism between animalistic drives and moral conscience. Meanwhile, Buddhist philosophy introduces *anattā*, the doctrine of “no-self,” which teaches that the self is an illusion arising from clinging and ignorance. New Age teachings often adopt and blend these ideas, portraying the ego as a barrier to enlightenment or spiritual awakening.

None of this is rooted in Greek philosophical or Hebraic thought. These traditions do not speak of an “ego” that must be dissolved. Rather, they speak of reason, virtue, moral judgment, and the soul’s alignment with truth and divine order.

### Logos – The Rational Principle

In Stoicism and earlier Heraclitean thought, *Logos* (λόγος) refers to the rational and divine principle that orders the cosmos. Human beings, as rational creatures, are called to live in harmony with this divine reason. The self is not something to escape or deny, but something to refine and align with *Logos*.

The Logos is not a projection of pride or a delusional identity. It is the deepest and most authentic principle of personhood. A human being’s rational capacity, when properly formed, reflects this divine order. Thus, the self is fulfilled, not extinguished, when it conforms to reason and virtue.

### Hegemonikon – The Ruling Faculty

The Stoics identified the *hegemonikon* (ἡγεμονικόν) as the central ruling faculty of the human soul. It is the seat of reason, conscience, and judgment. This is the closest equivalent in Greek thought to the idea of the true self—yet it bears no resemblance to the modern "ego."

Far from being a layer to be dissolved or transcended, the *hegemonikon* is to be trained and disciplined. It is the rational core that governs the passions and directs moral action. If anything is to be “overcome” in the human person, it is not the *I* itself but the disordered passions (*pathē*) that lead away from reason.

### Thymos – Spirit and Honor

Plato, in his tripartite model of the soul in the *Republic*, identifies *thymos* (θυμός) as the spirited element of the soul. It is the source of emotions like anger, courage, and ambition—those impulses that defend honor and resist humiliation.

*Thymos* can lead to pride and violence if left unchecked, but when governed by reason, it becomes essential for courage and moral action. This is perhaps the closest ancient analogue to what modern psychology might label ego-driven behavior—but again, it is not something inherently negative. Rather, it must be harmonized with the rational part of the soul.

### Hubris – The True Danger

If there is a Greek concept that truly reflects the negative connotations often associated with the “ego” in modern thought, it is *hubris* (ὕβρις). Hubris is not merely self-confidence or a sense of identity. It is the excessive pride that leads individuals to elevate themselves above the gods, the law, or their fellow humans. It is delusional self-exaltation, a refusal to recognize limits or submit to higher order.

Hubris is condemned throughout Greek tragedy and philosophy. It is the kind of destructive self-will that brings about downfall—not because the self is inherently evil, but because pride blinds the self to reality. It is not the “I” that is the problem, but the misuse of freedom and reason.

### A More Grounded Anthropology

Modern spiritual and psychological systems often treat the self as an illusion or a problem, something to dissolve through meditation, therapy, or mystical experience. But this view is foreign to classical and biblical thought. In those traditions, the human being is not a false self in need of annihilation, but a rational, moral, and embodied being made for relationship, virtue, and truth.

The ancient understanding of the self was rooted in *logos* (reason), *nous* (mind), *psyche* (soul), and *aretē* (virtue). These were not layers of ego to be peeled away but faculties to be cultivated. What needed correction was not the self, but disordered passions, pride, and ignorance.

### A Clarifying Comparison

| Modern "Ego" Concept | Greek Equivalent | Notes |

| -------------------------- | ---------------------- | -------------------------------------------------- |

| Rational self | *Hegemonikon*, *Logos* | The true self aligned with reason and divine order |

| Pride or self-delusion | *Hubris* | Condemned in Greek ethics; leads to downfall |

| Ambition or spirited drive | *Thymos* | Neutral or positive when governed by reason |

In sum, the ancient Greeks did not conceive of the self as a false structure to be dissolved. Rather, they viewed it as a rational and moral agent, capable of alignment with cosmic order or deviation through pride. The modern "ego," as a hybrid of Buddhist and Freudian constructs, has little to do with the original *ἐγώ*. To regain a more authentic understanding of the self, we must return to a vision rooted in reason, virtue, and embodied personhood.

What Is It That the All Lacked, If Not the Knowledge of the Father

 **What Is It That the All Lacked, If Not the Knowledge of the Father?**

In the Gospel of Truth, a powerful revelation is given concerning the human condition and the divine purpose. It states:

> *“And as for him, them he found in himself, and him they found in themselves, that illimitable, inconceivable one, that perfect Father who made the all, in whom the All is, and whom the All lacks, since he retained in himself their perfection, which he had not given to the all. The Father was not jealous. What jealousy, indeed, is there between him and his members? For, even if the Aeon had received their perfection, they would not have been able to approach the perfection of the Father, because he retained their perfection in himself, giving it to them as a way to return to him and as a knowledge unique in perfection. He is the one who set the All in order and in whom the All existed and whom the All lacked. As one of whom some have no knowledge, he desires that they know him and that they love him. For what is it that the All lacked, if not the knowledge of the Father?”* — *Gospel of Truth*

This passage strikes at the very heart of human deficiency: it is not moral weakness, physical limitation, or earthly suffering that defines humanity’s lack—it is the absence of the *knowledge of the Father*. The All—meaning the totality of creation—exists in Him, and yet it *lacks* Him, because His perfection remains hidden unless revealed.

This is echoed in the Scriptures. Hosea 4:6 declares:

> *“My people are destroyed for lack of knowledge. Because you have rejected knowledge, I also will reject you from being priest for Me; Because you have forgotten the law of your God, I also will forget your children.”* — *Hosea 4:6, NKJV*

Here, the consequences of ignorance are dire. A people who reject knowledge of God—His law, His nature, His truth—become estranged from His purpose and blessing. This parallels the Gospel of Truth's vision of the Father who withholds perfection, not out of jealousy, but as a path for humanity to *seek* and *return* to Him.

The Gospel of Truth speaks of a Father who is *“illimitable, inconceivable… in whom the All is, and whom the All lacks.”* It reveals a paradox: the very source of all being is also the one most misunderstood or forgotten. This condition is not due to divine neglect but to human forgetfulness. Thus, Jesus comes as the revelation of the Father, the one who restores the lost knowledge.

Jesus says in John 17:3:

> *“And this is eternal life, that they may know You, the only true God, and Jesus Christ whom You have sent.”* — *John 17:3, NKJV*

Eternal life is not described here as unending time but as *knowing the Father*. This aligns with the Gospel of Truth: the missing element in the All is not duration or matter, but understanding—relational knowledge of the one who gives meaning to all things.

The Gospel of Truth continues:

> *“He is the one who set the All in order and in whom the All existed and whom the All lacked.”*

This identifies the Father as both the source and sustainer of creation, yet still unknown by many. Paul echoes this in Colossians 3:10:

> *“And have put on the new self who is being renewed in knowledge according to the image of the One who created him.”* — *Colossians 3:10, NASB*

The new self is not defined merely by external behavior, but by *knowledge*—a restoration of the true image of the Creator. Knowledge is transformative. It is not speculation but a relational encounter that brings restoration.

Ignorance, on the other hand, is destructive. The Gospel of Philip affirms:

> *“Ignorance is the mother of \[all evil]. Ignorance leads to \[death, because] those who come from \[ignorance] neither were nor \[are] nor will be. \[But those in the truth] will be perfect when all truth is revealed… The word says, ‘If you know the truth, the truth will make you free.’”* — *Gospel of Philip*

Jesus echoes this in John 8:32:

> *“And you shall know the truth, and the truth shall make you free.”* — *John 8:32, NKJV*

Freedom is not merely physical liberation but the removal of ignorance through revealed truth. This truth comes from the Father through Jesus, who is “the way, the truth, and the life” (John 14:6).

So why does the All lack the Father, even though it exists in Him? The answer lies in human forgetfulness and the concealment of divine perfection. The Father retained perfection “in himself,” not to withhold it in malice, but *“as a way to return to him and as a knowledge unique in perfection.”* Knowledge is the bridge; truth is the path.

Paul writes in Ephesians 1:17:

> *“That the God of our Lord Jesus Christ, the Father of glory, may give to you the spirit of wisdom and revelation in the knowledge of Him.”* — *Ephesians 1:17, NKJV*

This prayer expresses the divine will: that believers not remain in ignorance but receive the wisdom and revelation needed to know the Father.

The final words of the Gospel of Truth passage resonate with urgency and hope:

> *“As one of whom some have no knowledge, he desires that they know him and that they love him.”*

God is not content to remain hidden. He desires to be known and loved. The lack is not in Him, but in us—and He has given Jesus as the path of restoration. As the Gospel of Truth concludes: *“For what is it that the All lacked, if not the knowledge of the Father?”* That question must be asked by every generation and answered by every seeker of truth.

To know the Father is to be made whole. To know Him is to find in Him the perfection that He held from the beginning—not to deny us, but to give us something worth returning to: knowledge that leads to life, freedom, and love.

The Pseudo-Dionysian System of Emanation

---

The Pseudo-Dionysian System of Emanation

The system of emanation described by Pseudo-Dionysius the Areopagite (late 5th–early 6th century CE) is a remarkable synthesis of Christian theology and Neoplatonic philosophy. In his principal works—The Divine Names, The Celestial Hierarchy, The Ecclesiastical Hierarchy, and The Mystical Theology—Dionysius constructs a metaphysical framework in which all reality flows from a single divine source and returns to it through an ordered ascent. The universe, in this view, is a structured hierarchy of beings, each participating in the divine light to the degree of its proximity to the source.

---

The One / The Divine / God (ὁ θεός)

At the pinnacle of Dionysius’s system is The One—identified with God in Christian theology. This ultimate source is:

• Ineffable: Beyond words and language.

• Unnameable: No name can properly describe it.

• Unknowable in essence: Its true nature is inaccessible to the human mind.

• Beyond being: It is not simply the highest being but the cause of being itself.

Dionysius writes, “The Cause of all is above all and is not in any way like the things that are” (Mystical Theology I.1). Drawing from Neoplatonic thought, he affirms that God is not one being among others but the ground of all being, the origin of everything, and the end toward which all things strive.

Yet this God, though unknowable in essence, is not distant: “The Good is the cause of all beings, through excess of goodness” (Divine Names IV.1). Divine goodness is diffusive—it overflows outwardly in creative, loving generosity. This movement is what Dionysius describes as emanation.

---

Emanation and Procession (πρόοδος)

The process of emanation is called procession (proodos), the outward flow of divine energy from the ineffable One into the cosmos. All things—angelic, human, and material—exist because they proceed from the divine. Yet this procession is neither chaotic nor impersonal; it is structured through hierarchy, a key concept in Dionysian metaphysics.

“Every divine illumination proceeds in an order from the most exalted realities down to the lowest” (Celestial Hierarchy XV.6). Each level receives and transmits divine light according to its capacity, in a descending chain that maintains both order and participation in the divine source.

---

The Celestial Hierarchy

The Celestial Hierarchy is the first level in the structured emanation of the divine. It consists of nine orders of angels, arranged in three triads:

1. First triad: Seraphim, Cherubim, Thrones

2. Second triad: Dominions, Virtues, Powers

3. Third triad: Principalities, Archangels, Angels

The Seraphim are the highest and most God-like, while angels are closest to the human realm. Dionysius writes, “The purpose of hierarchy is to enable beings to be as much as possible like God and to be at one with Him” (Celestial Hierarchy III.1).

Each angelic order reflects the divine light, and in turn, illuminates the order below. They serve not just as messengers, but as dynamic participants in divine activity, leading beings toward their fulfillment in God.

---

The Ecclesiastical Hierarchy

Mirroring the celestial order is the Ecclesiastical Hierarchy, composed of bishops, priests, deacons, and the sacraments. This visible hierarchy serves as the earthly image of the heavenly order and is a key part of the soul’s return.

“The sacred order of the Church is a divinely-established system for the upliftment and salvation of all who follow it” (Ecclesiastical Hierarchy V.3). Through ritual, symbol, and sacrament, the ecclesiastical hierarchy mediates divine grace and leads souls into deeper participation in divine life.

Just as angels guide souls through knowledge and light, so too do bishops and clergy guide the faithful through sacramental means, each role reflecting an aspect of divine order.

---

Return to the One (Epistrophē)

The movement of return (epistrophē) completes the cycle of procession. What has emanated from the divine seeks to return to its source through a process of purification, illumination, and union.

1. Purification (katharsis): Cleansing the soul of passions and ignorance.

2. Illumination (photismos): Receiving divine light and truth.

3. Union (henōsis): Becoming one with the divine in a mystical way.

“We must lift the mind upward... stripping it of all things and looking beyond every holiness, every knowledge, to that which is beyond being” (Mystical Theology I.3). This path is not merely intellectual but mystical and participatory—a movement of the entire being toward God, resulting in theosis, or deification by grace.

---

Symbol and Mystery

Dionysius insists that because God is beyond comprehension, symbols are necessary: “We use perceptible signs for the sake of our understanding, so that through them we may be lifted up to spiritual realities” (Ecclesiastical Hierarchy I.2).

Symbols are not just reminders—they are sacramental conduits of divine reality. The angelic forms, liturgical rites, and scriptural language all serve to mediate divine presence, enabling the soul’s ascent. In both the celestial and ecclesiastical realms, the world is saturated with mystery—not confusion, but divine depth.

---

Conclusion

The Pseudo-Dionysian system of emanation offers a profound vision of reality: a cosmos flowing from an ineffable source, ordered through hierarchy, and destined for return through mystical union. This is not a system of abstraction but one of participation, illumination, and transformation.

Emanation is not the loss of God’s presence but its diffusion in love—“The divine light is the source of all order, all harmony, and all return” (Divine Names IV.2). Through the hierarchies of angels, the sacraments of the Church, and the symbolic fabric of creation, the soul is invited into a journey upward: to see, to know, and ultimately to be united with the One who is above all, through all, and in all.

---

The Real Christian Meaning of Meditation

The Real Christian Meaning of Meditation
A discourse expressing considered thoughts on the subject

In today’s world, the word meditation is often associated with Eastern religious practices, yoga, or techniques for stress relief through the “emptying of the mind.” However, this modern view does not reflect the real Christian meaning of meditation as found in the Bible. The Scriptures present meditation as a deeply reflective, spiritual activity focused on the contemplation of God’s word, His works, and His purpose. Meditation, in its biblical sense, is a form of communion—where thought becomes prayer and contemplation becomes worship.

The Meaning of Meditation in the Old Testament

The first mention of meditation in Scripture is found in Genesis 24:63, where we read:

"And Isaac was out walking in order to meditate in the field at about the falling of evening."

This early example shows that meditation was a personal, reflective practice done in solitude. The Hebrew word used here for “meditate” is הגה (hagah), Strong’s Concordance 1897, which means:

“to murmur (in pleasure or anger); by implication, to ponder: — imagine, meditate, mourn, mutter, roar, speak, study, talk, utter.”

This reveals that meditation was not about silence and emptiness, but about murmuring, pondering, and speaking to oneself—a deliberate act of reflection. Closely related is the Hebrew word higgaion, meaning:

“a low, vibrant sound; chant; to speak in a low voice to oneself; deep reflection; contemplation.”

Meditation in the Hebrew context involved thoughtful, spoken reflection—often over Scripture, God's promises, or His works.

Meditation in the New Testament

In the Greek Scriptures, similar ideas emerge. The verb θεωρέω (theoreo), Strong’s 2334, means:

“to behold, consider, look on, perceive, see.”

It is used in Luke 23:48:

“And all the people that came together to that sight [θεωρία], beholding the things which were done, smote their breasts, and returned.”

Here, theoria (sight, from Strong’s 2335) does not mean mystical absorption, but attentiveness—beholding and considering something deeply. Among early Christians, theoria came to mean studying the Scriptures with spiritual understanding, not abstract philosophical contemplation of Platonic forms.

Paul uses the word μελετάω (meletao) in 1 Timothy 4:15:

“Meditate upon these things; give thyself wholly to them; that thy profiting may appear to all.”

The word meletao (Strong’s 3191) means:

“to take care of, i.e. (by implication) revolve in the mind: — imagine, (pre-)meditate.”

This again shows the biblical meaning of meditation as intentional thinking—serious reflection, not emptying of thought. The same word is used in Acts 4:25:

“Why did nations become tumultuous and peoples meditate upon empty things?”—a warning against unprofitable meditations.

The Practice of Christian Meditation

Biblical meditation is most often practiced in solitude. Jesus taught:

“Go into your room or closet and shut the door and pray to your Father who is in secret.” —Matthew 6:6

This echoes the pattern of Isaac, who went out into the field alone at eventide to reflect. The Psalmist also meditated during the night watches:

“When I remember you upon my bed, and meditate on you in the watches of the night.” —Psalm 63:6

Meditation is distinguished from prayer, even silent prayer, in that it is not directed speaking to God but thinking about God—His works, His word, and His will. It is in this quiet, inward space that a person may “ponder,” “murmur,” or “revolve in the mind” what they have read or experienced.

Meditation begins with the reading of Scripture. It is written:

“His delight is in the law of the LORD, and on his law he meditates day and night.” —Psalm 1:2
“I will meditate also of all thy work, and talk of thy doings.” —Psalm 77:12

This is not a passive exercise. The spirit of man becomes one with the Spirit of God in these contemplative thoughts (cf. 1 Corinthians 6:17). A deep harmony is formed when the believer aligns his thoughts with divine teaching.

The Goal and Fruit of Meditation

Christian meditation is not for the purpose of mental escape or self-enlightenment. It is for growth in wisdom and righteousness. The heart becomes trained to discern what is good. As it is written:

“Let the words of my mouth, and the meditation of my heart, be acceptable in your sight, O LORD, my rock and my redeemer.” —Psalm 19:14
“My mouth shall speak wisdom; and the meditation of my heart shall be of understanding.” —Psalm 49:3

Profitable meditation leads to wise speech and spiritual maturity:

“The heart of the righteous studieth to answer: but the mouth of the wicked poureth out evil things.” —Proverbs 15:28

Paul echoes this principle in Philippians 4:8:

“Whatsoever things are true, whatsoever things are honest, whatsoever things are just, whatsoever things are pure… think on these things.”

Meditation becomes the foundation of a life directed toward the good, the holy, and the eternal.

Conclusion

Christian meditation is a discipline of thought and reflection, not a mystical practice of mental silence or disembodiment. It involves murmuring, pondering, studying, and speaking to oneself about the truths of God. It is rooted in Scripture, practiced in solitude, and aimed at transformation. As David wrote:

“I remember the days of old; I meditate on all thy works; I muse on the work of thy hands.” —Psalm 143:5

The real Christian meaning of meditation is not emptiness, but fullness—filling the mind and heart with the knowledge of God.

The Real Christian Meaning of Meditation

The meaning of meditation

Genesis 24:62 Now Isaac had come from the way that goes to Beerlahairoi, for he was dwelling in the land of the Negeb. 63 And Isaac was out walking in order to meditate in the field at about the falling of evening. When he raised his eyes and looked, why, there camels were coming!

The Hebrew word for “meditate” is haghah´. 01897. הגה hagah [haw-gaw’]; a primitive root [compare 01901]; to murmur (in pleasure or anger); by implication, to ponder: — imagine, meditate, mourn, mutter, roar, X sore, speak, study, talk, utter.

Higgaion, hig-ga'-ion (Heb.)--hum; murmur; a low, vibrant sound; chant; enchantment; meditate, i.e., to speak in a low voice to oneself; thought; deep reflection; contemplation.

Lu 23:48 And all the people that came together to that sight <2335>, beholding the things which were done, smote their breasts, and returned.

Both Greek θεωρία (Theoria) and Latin contemplatio primarily meant looking at things, whether with the eyes or with the mind

Among the Greek Fathers, Christian theoria was not contemplation of Platonic Ideas nor of the astronomical heavens of Pontic Heraclitus, but "studying the Scriptures", with an emphasis on the spiritual sense

2335. θεωρία theoria [theh-o-ree’-ah]; from the same as 2334; spectatorship, i.e. (concretely) a spectacle: — sight.

2334. θεωρέω theoreo [theh-o-reh’-o]; from a derivative of 2300 (perhaps by add. of 3708); to be a spectator of, i.e. discern, (literally, figuratively [experience] or intensively [acknowledge]): — behold, consider, look on, perceive, see. Compare 3700.

Acts 4:25 and who through holy spirit said by the mouth of our forefather David, your servant, ‘Why did nations become tumultuous and peoples meditate <3191> upon empty things?

1Ti 4:15 Meditate upon <3191> these things; give thyself wholly to them; that thy profiting may appear to all.

3191. μελετάω meletao [mel-et-ah’-o]; from a presumed derivative of 3199; to take care of, i.e. (by implication) revolve in the mind: — imagine, (pre-)meditate.


Christian contemplation


go into your room or closet and shut the door and pray to your father who is in secret (Matthew 6:6)

In order to meditate properly, a person needs to be free from distractions, alone with his thoughts, so to speak. Isaac, for example, went out walking alone in the early evening to meditate, possibly about his coming marriage to Rebekah. (Gen 24:63)

It was during the solitude of the night watches that the psalmist meditated on the greatness of his Creator. (Psa 63:6)

The kind of deep, concentrated thinking in which a person seriously reflects on past experiences, ponders over current matters, or thoughtfully contemplates possible future events.

Meditation differs from prayer, even from silent prayer, in that meditation is thought about God and contemplation of His word and His works.

Meditation normally begins by reading from the holy Scriptures, the Word of God. In such contemplative thoughts the spirit of man becomes one with the Spirit of God (cf. 1 Cor 6.17).

There is also the type of meditation and contemplation done totally in silence, without any words or images or thoughtful activity at all, not even reading or chanting the psalms. The person merely sits in silence, and emptying his mind of all thoughts, imaginations and desires, listens to God in silence, the divine “language of the Kingdom of heaven”.

The meditations of the heart should be focused on beneficial things, on God’s splendour and works, on things pleasing to him (Psa 19:14; 49:3; 77:12; 143:5; Php 4:8), and not on the ways of the wicked.—Prov 24:1, 2.

By engaging in profitable meditation, one will not be inclined to give foolish answers. He will seriously think out these matters of importance, and as a result, the answers given will be from the heart and will not be something to regret later on.—Prov 15:28.

Meditation and sustained reflection upon the characteristics of God as epitomized and memorialized in His Name will of itself lead to a conformation of personality to that same Name. If we declare that Name to others, they too have the chance to be transformed by it- thus Moses comments: “Because I will publish the name of the Lord, ascribe ye greatness unto our God” (Dt. 32:3).meditation is the continual and contemplative thought; to dwell mentally on anything; realising the reality of the Divine Mind; a steady effort of the mind to know God; man's spiritual approach to God.

The purpose of meditation is to expand the mind higher into the mind of Christ; to bring into realisation divine Truth; to be transformed by the renewing of the mind.

There are 4 steps to meditation. The first, relaxation, deals with the body and gives directions for physical training. The second, concentration, relates to the mind and its nature and concerns mental training. The third, is meditation. Meditation induces a union of the mental and the spiritual. The fourth is realisation in realisation we become more and more conscious of the Christ mind in us






meditation raises us into higher spiritual realms of thought, where we contact God and realise our oneness with Him. This realisation is an eternal state of being.










Hear O' Israel.






Yahweh is our God,






Yahweh is One.






I am a Son of God,






I am a son of the living Father.






I am essentially One with Jesus






in the Communion of the Father.






I accept Jesus as my Personal Image,






whose Twinship is the Light of the World.






I seek all these things,






in the name of the Living One.






...Amen.


The Jesus Prayer is very simple:



"Lord Jesus Christ Son of God, have mercy on me a sinner,"


Prayer helps us to be able to “stand in God’s presence.” Prayer helps us to focus our mind exclusively on God with “no other thought” occupying our mind but the thought of God. At this moment when our mind is totally concentrated on God, we discover a very personal and direct relationship with Him.