THESIS

A Defense of the Gnostic Cosmos, or The Gnostic Doctrine of
Christianity
A THESIS FOR THE DEGREE OF INTERFAITH MINISTER

Ph.D. AT NORTHERNWAY SEMINARY
by
Victoria Bonnell
I. Introduction
In an ever-expanding scientific worldview, faith is losing its tenacity and validity. Where once
demonic spirits lurked behind the veil ready to possess those who took too steeply toward sin, we now
understand diagnoses such as seizures. We may now quantify the consequences of unintended consumption
of lysergic acid in place of visions from God or [the] gods. Germ theory has replaced much of what was
once considered to be sickness sent by the hand of God as punishment for disobedience. The earth is no
longer a flat circle but an oblate spheroid. We understand the earth does not rest upon the backs of endless
sea turtles, nor does the sun revolve around the earth, but the earth around the sun. Evolution and
panspermia now stand as the herald for life over spontaneous generation. As the berth for scientific
progress grows larger, the question must be considered: Is there now any room left for faith? I will propose
that there is indeed a very rational basis for faith over the course of this thesis, which I have broken down
into seven sections. The first, which you are currently reading, will include the arguments posed against
faith in general, the opening statements defending my position, and the basis from which my claims
originate. The second section will argue what separates us as human beings from the rest of manifest
reality. The third section will more eloquently categorize manifest reality into broad, overarching groups to
help simplify the understanding of our reality. The fourth section will consider natural laws such as
evolution, heliocentric theory, and germ theory in the light of a modern faith-based understanding. The fifth
section will deal primarily with what could be termed “God’s Salvation For Humankind;” the argument that
we are not a doomed species like the dinosaur and the reasoning behind this worldview. The sixth section
will delve into the two primary consciousnesses at war within the human spirit and why these two primary
understandings of reality have caused so much destruction. The seventh, and final section, will deal in what
is to become of our species and address perhaps one of the most pernicious question that has plagued
philosophers for millennia: Why are we here? This thesis will address the position the author takes
theologically as a Gnostic, both answering atheists and defending the author’s theology against other
denominations.
There is a common rule in science summed up in Occam’s Razor to seek out the least complex
answer to a problem. All sorts of hypotheses1 have arisen over the course of human history to explain our
existence. Many of these so-called explanations have become more of an apology or justification rather
than a simple “god-breathed” observation. A literalizing of Scripture, from the Bhagavad-Gita to the Q’ran
has led many to seek truth outside of religion, and rightly so. A third-century mindset cannot be held up to
modern standards of living. The pace of technological advance has rapidly picked up pace over the course
of the last century at near breakneck speed, and with its advance, fewer instances of so-called “miracles”
and angelic sightings. Science threatens to overcome religion and possibly replace it. Yet, the refuge for the
mystic still remains, tucked away in hidden symbolism, and removed from the sight of the profane. The
Freemasons, the Sufis of Islam, the Kabbalists of Judaism, the Gnostics of Christianity, and the Vajrayana
of Hinduism are but a few examples of this hidden thread which cycles throughout all religions, giving rise
to an impermeable understanding of the esoteric truths contained within the sacred Scriptures of the world
which surpass most clergy and the profane who literalize and then revere the poor misinterpretation of these
books. These strains of esoteric philosophies read the sacred Scriptures with the same veneration a child
might read The Brother’s Grimm; with an understanding that while the stories themselves may not be true,
A DEFENSE OF THE GNOSTIC COSMOS VICTORIA BONNELL

the message and the guidance of morality contained therein is.
Much of Scripture is an allegory, never intended by its authors to be taken literally. Galatiyim iv.
242 tells us directly that the story of Hagar and Sarah was such an example. Romiyim ii.28-29 also directly
tells us that circumcision is meant to be an internal process; one of creating a heart of flesh out of a heart of
stone. This is what the alchemists considered the Great Work; to transmute our lower selves into our
highest selves. Another example of this allegorical storytelling can be seen in the story of Iêsous. Joḥanon
i.1 tells us that “the Word became flesh and pitched his TENT among us.”
This becomes an especially interesting turn of phrase when we consider II Qorintiyim v.1, which
says “for we know that if the TENT of our earthly house is destroyed, we have a building from Elohim, a
house not made with hands, everlasting in the heavens.” The Greek word for “Word” used in Johanon i.1 is
lahgahss. We must bear in mind that Aristotle’s conception of God, [or Absolute Idea] is noesis noeseos (or
thought-thinking-itself). The abstract idea is a corollary to a familial one: the noeses being masculine is the
Father thinking, whereas noeseos is the Mother who is thought. The masculine is the idea and the feminine
is the ideal. When these two come into union with one another, we have produced the lahgahss, or speech.
And when the lahgahss encounters wisdom viz-a-vis Sophia, they together become noesis noeseos noesis
(or thinking a thought of itself thinking). Indeed, “BEING IS BEING: the reason of Being is in Being: in the
Beginning is the Word, and the Word in logic formulated Speech, the spoken Reason; the Word is in God,
and is God Himself, manifested to the Intelligence.”3
These are but a few droplets of water in the ocean of text we know as the Holy Bible and the
exegesis I have provided rests on a basis set apart by a more rational understanding of the Scriptures over a
superstitious one. That other gods and goddesses not considered among the pantheon of Christianity are
mentioned by name in the Bible, including Diana in Ma’asei xix.24, 27-28, 34-35 and Zeus in Ma’asei
xix.35 as well as other philosophical sects such as the Epicureans and Stoics in Ma’asei xvii.18 should be
noted. To believe that the culture from which Christians sprang had absolutely no influence over their
developing creeds must be dismissed as short-sighted. Concepts such as xenos (or xenia) appear in the
original Greek text of Ib’rim xi.13; the idea of a god or goddess disguising themselves as flesh-and-blood
human beings, this is what “these all having died in faith” confessed to being. The context of Mattithyahu
xvi.13-14 must be considered beneath the light of subtext to reincarnation. Why would some men believe
Iêsous to be ‘Ēlȋyâ, or Yirməyāhū, or one of the other prophets if not for the transmigration of souls? Of
course, Alexander the Great had visited the epicenter from which this belief arose nearly 300 years before
Christ’s supposed birth, excluding of course the idea of transmigration within the philosophical systems of
Neo-Platonism. All of these ideas come together to form the most wonderful tapestry of philosophical
thought in the history of humankind: the Bible. It is a mosaic full of depth and richness and if not regarded
as spiritually inspired, should at least be regarded with the same amount of veneration as the literary
classics.
II. God As Consciousness
God has been deemed omnipresent and omniscient, or ever-present and all-knowing. All sorts of
illogical hoops have been jumped theologically in order to justify the idea that ONE being can be
EVERYWHERE at once. Scientifically, this seems to be an impossible feat. What argument could
sufficiently answer this theology as well as the materialist who desires proof that deity exists?
The author argues that God has given us an indestructible and tamper-proof evidence of a spiritual
reality and that would be what the author considers consciousness. Consciousness separates human beings
from every other species. Our ability to cognize, build, plan, construct, read, and write are entirely unique
to the human experience. The Neo-Platonists answered the idea of God by presenting a dualistic model of
creation: one in which the spiritual is eternal and represents the polarity to our temporal reality. Something
that is eternal is, by it’s very nature, and by the very nature of it’s opposite, unable to inscribe itself
permanently into creation. Even appealing to this consciousness, our bodies which house it eventually die.
Entropy is the primary law of three-dimensional being. However, that same consciousness has helped to
create medicines which have doubled the lifespan of our species, effectively making us “immortal” in a
sense.
The Neo-Platonists understood a concept known as the Ideal Form. Inside the mind of every
person exists their Ideal Form; flawless, physically and morally perfect. Every person is able to justify their
actions by appealing to their Ideal Form. Because the Ideal Form exists only in the imagination, what is real
is flawed and imperfect. The imaginative realm belongs to the spiritual and God, who is purely Spirit, and
the cumulatively potent Ideal Form. From this understanding, Ideal Form could not impress itself upon
material reality in a manner that wouldn’t obfuscate it. This is the answer to the materialists who question
why God doesn’t manifest in a manner that unquestionably proves [it’s] existence.
In the Hindu mythology, Brahma creates a counterpart out of boredom who he names Maya. Maya
suggests that she and Brahma play a game. Brahma agrees, so Maya tells him to create the universe; the
sun, moon, and stars. She then instructs him to create all life on earth, including a being rational enough to
appreciate Brahma’s creation and this he does also. Once he has finished his creation, Maya tells Brahma
that now the game will begin, and wielding a sword, cuts Brahma into thousands of pieces. Taking each
piece and placing it into each individual being who is rational enough to appreciate Brahma’s creation, she
said “Now the game begins. The rules are this: for Brahma to remember who he is and reconcile each piece
of himself to the whole until he is once again one being.” In this understanding, God (or Consciousness)
acts as a passive observer who must ascend above [his] Creation.
It could be said that consciousness, from this perspective, is the ubiquitous message “preloaded”
into our brains; the mental firmware, that when coupled with conscience (or empathy), acts as the
“compass” which points to deity. Rust Cohle, a character played by Matthew McConaughey in the
television show True Detective quotes a Nietzchean philosophy, saying that “sentience cycles in and out of
our lives like carts on a track.”4 No more salient quote in mainstream media better sums up this concept.
This idea can be reconciled scientifically with the Cyclic (or Oscillating) Model of the Universe as
proposed by Paul Steinhardt and Neil Turok5, although it should be noted that such a model reduces the
transmigration of souls to once approximately every 20 billion years.
These explanations may seem like an easy out to the materialist; a rather convenient excuse to
shirk the responsibility of evidence but they are nevertheless the sincere perspective of many a philosopher
and is the end of the logical conclusion which answers what differentiates human beings from the rest of
material reality. This perspective does not deny science, nor does it bend science to its will, but rather
embraces it and conforms to its laws to exposit further understanding. Another quote, this time by the
character Erin Greene, played by Kate Siegel, from Midnight Mass, sums up this concept of reconciliation
perfectly: “What happens when I die? Speaking for myself. Myself. My self. That’s the problem. That’s the
whole problem with the whole thing; that word, “self.” That’s not the word. That’s not right, that isn’t. That
isn’t. How did I forget that? When did I forget that? The body stops a cell at a time, but the brain keeps
firing those neurons. Little lightning bolts, like fireworks inside, and I thought I’d despair or feel afraid, but
I don’t feel any of that. None of it. Because I’m too busy. I’m too busy in this moment. Remembering. Of
course. I remember that every atom in my body was forged in a star. This matter, this body is mostly just
empty space after all, and solid matter? It’s just energy vibrating very slowly and there is no me. There
never was. The electrons of my body mingle and dance with the electrons of the ground below me and the
air I’m no longer breathing. And I remember there is no point where any of that ends and I begin. I
remember I am energy. Not memory. Not “self.” My name, my personality, my choices, all came after me. I
was before them and I will be after, and everything else is just pictures, picked up along the way. Fleeting
little dreams printed on the tissue of my dying brain. And I am the lightning that jumps between. I am the
energy firing the neurons, and I’m returning. Just by remembering, I’m returning home. And it’s like a drop
of water falling back into the ocean, of which it’s always been a part. All things…a part. All of us…a part.
You, me, and my little girl, and my father and my mother, everyone who’s ever been, every plant, every
animal, every atom, every star, every galaxy, all of it. More galaxies in the universe than grains of sand on
the beach. And that’s what we’re talking about when we say “God.” The one. The cosmos and its infinite
dreams. We are the cosmos dreaming of itself. It’s simply a dream that I think is my life, every time. But
I’ll forget this. I always do. I always forget my dreams. But now, in this split-second, in this moment, the
instant I remember, I comprehend everything at once. There is no time. There is no death. Life is a dream.
It’s a wish. Made again and again and again and again and again and again and on into eternity. And I am
all of it. I am everything. I am all. I am that I am.”6
Who then, is the Christ in this context? This is perhaps the most important question central to
Christianity. The author has shown how the story about Hagar is allegory and the concept of circumcision
one revolving around a deeper emotional meaning connected to empathy and justice. In the same vein,
Christ Himself is a fiction who “reveals a solar allegory which is Hellenic in form and substance,” 7 with the
twelve apostles representing the twelve signs of the Zodiac. Alongside this understanding, Christ also
represents the spinal fire of the Kundalînî, as he was crucified between two thieves representing the right
and left hemispheres of the brain, upon the hill of the skull, which would be known as the Ajna chakra to
the Hindus and also as the pineal gland.8 Again, I refer to a point made in Section I that these concepts
would not have been foreign to the first century Roman empire, who would have extricated them from the
Grecian empire.
III. The Three Types of Consciousness
The Gnostic understanding of the cosmos is predicated on there being a distinction between spirit,
soul, and body. The SPIRIT is what gives us the ability to cognize, imagine, and is in whom we move, live,
and have our being or course of life. It is the seat of the Intellect, Will, and all Mental Faculties. The SOUL
is composed of our individuated passions, appetites, and desires, and is directly influenced by EGO-or our
desire to stand out from others and individualize. “EGO” in Greek is translated directly to the personal
pronoun “I” in English. All stimuli responses are borne out of the SOUL, whether from fight-or-flight
responses or pleasant sensations. The FLESH is of course our mortal coil, constituted by matter and atoms
and what begins to decay the moment we exhale our last breath.
Each one of these words are differentiated in both the Hebrew and the Greek languages of the
Bible. Haya corresponds to the Greek noesis meaning “sense-perception” or “direct cognition.”
Neshawmaw is what we would consider our subtle bodies or our spiritual nature. It is the highest mind and
pursues the higher aspirations of the soul (i.e. “imagination”). The corresponding Greek word to
neshawmaw is dianoia meaning “thoroughly from side-to-side,” or “philosophic reasoning and the human
cognitive capacity for, process of, or result of discursive thinking, and stands in contrast to the immediate,
cognitive process of intuitive apprehension, also called noesis, which corresponds to mathematic and
technical thinking. Ruwech, which answers to the mind and reasoning powers and corresponds to the Greek
pistis means “faith” or “psychic groping.” Nephish answers to animal instincts and corresponds to the
Greek word eikasia, meaning “perception of images.” Haya and neshawmaw (or noesis and dianoia
respectively) belong to the VISIBLE, SENSUOUS WORLD, whereas ruwech and nephish (or pistis and
eikasia respectively) belong to the INTELLIGIBLE, SUPRASENSUOUS WORLD. As an aside, the word
Gnostic comes from the Greek gnôsis meaning “to have knowledge,” “direct cognition of,” or “learned.” It
is a separate term that will be dealt with more fully in sections IV-VI.9
Our EGO carries with it a judgmental and exacting nature full of prejudice by way of
differentiating skin color, sex, sexual orientation, heritage, religion, financial disparities, and even the
astrological sign beneath which another is born. It is inflated with personal preference, the overindulgence
of which produces the narcissistic and codependent personality types. One who leans too heavily into their
egoic nature will inevitably lead to all sort of dysfunctions, for all sins are based in the egoic nature. If the
EGO is the vehicle, then it is fear-based separation which fuels it. As the Apostle Paul writes, “All things
are lawful [that is, morally legitimate, permissible], but not all things are beneficial or advantageous. All
things are lawful, but not all things are constructive [to character] and edifying [to spiritual life].” 10
The SOUL is also composed of our subconscious impressions. It is the part of us which observes a
frightening movie and reacts to it as though it were ACTUALLY happening.11 Whatever the SOUL is fed, it
will tend toward, and because the world tends toward an egoic and separation mindset, so the SOUL will
follow by predilect. We must harness the vehicle of the SOUL and become it’s master to obey us, for by
enveloping our being in SOUL we may react to all ills of life as it’s victim of circumstance, or we may peer
beyond the Veil to see a more perfect Reality. We may choose to take a course of action that does not serve
our intentions but such actions should not be conflated with our identities. It is only what we ABSORB that
we BECOME and BECOMING is ever mutable, so we must therefore consciously CHOOSE to focus our
attention only upon what is virtuous and noble. Such is summed up by Iêsous in the following two
commands: “As Iêsous spoke, “Upon two commandments hang the entire Law; Love the Lord your God
with all your heart, mind, and soul, and the second is like unto it, Love your neighbor even as you love
yourself.”” This Law operates through empathy. Would I want what I have done to others done to me?
Perhaps the most overlooked aspect regarding the second of these two charges is to “love oneself”
with agapao, or unconditional love. It should be noted this same word used for “love” is also used in I
Kepha iv.8: “agapao, or love, covers a multitude of sins.” The word for “sins” here used is hamartia in
Greek. Hamartia is an archery term meaning “to miss the mark,” however, the etymology of hamartia
comes from the prefix “ha-” which acts as a negative article meaning “no,” “without,” or “not,” and the
suffix “-meros” which means “form,” “origin,” or “being,” which hearkens to the Neo-Platonic idea of the
“Perfect (or Idealized) Forms” discussed in the previous section and the “Shadow (or Reflective) Forms.”
In other words, there is the Ideal Form of Humankind, also called the Sublime Anthropos, which is
Perfection, and who lives by Virtue and Ethics. However, when we fall short of that Form, we become a
shadow of who we truly are. In other words, hamartia could be defined as “missing the mark of one’s
origin and being” or the Truth of Who that person is. In the darkness of ignorance do we violate what is
True about ourselves.
The Sublime Anthropos is our spiritual self, led forth by the two laws which govern our heart-led
natures; to worship our Higher Power(s) in spirit and in truth, loving that First Principle with all our heart,
all our minds, and all our souls; and loving our neighbors even as we love ourselves. That this ideal is not
consistently realized is evident by the state of chaos that we often find ourselves and the world in; one’s
will overcomes another’s without compromise and Harmony does not always flourish alongside Peace.
Our so-called “Lower Nature” corresponds to our FLESH; that which leads us to sin against either
another or against the Most High. The only remedy to this situation is to remove our SOUL from this
struggle, for it tends toward the Ego. Instead, it should be replaced by the Morals and Virtues of the Spirit
which does right simply because it is right regardless of the situation. It is integrity, it is character, and it is
kindness. This kindness is not the common definition we are accustomed to, but instead presupposes an
aspect to existence that is known to the Buddhists as “DHARMA.” It is the action of equilibrium, a
recognition of the immutable law that “for every action there is an equal and opposite reaction.” We must
come to recognize that our wealth comes by the kindness we live by. Romiyim chapter vii is an entire tract
unto itself discussing this tension.
IV. The Nature of The Demiurge And His Archons
In order to understand the Gnostic structure of the cosmos, we must first be introduced to the
maxim “as above, so below.“ The ancients were able to cognize and perceive far more rationally than most
modern-day skeptics would care to admit. Even the philosophy of skepticism with which atheists cling so
desperately to was created by Sextus Epiricus in the 2nd century C.E. Of course, the author has repeatedly
made mention of Neo-Platonic thought which was obviously established by Plato and revived by Plotinus.
Eratosthenes proposed the earth as a circumferential shape and measured it with an error on the real value
between -2.4% and 0.8% almost two centuries before the supposed birth of Christ. This is an astounding
accomplishment for somebody without the modern technology with which we have at our disposal in
modern times. Pythagoras invented the Pythagorean Theorem, which of course is still used in mathematics
today. These examples have been given as a shortlist to provide context for the maxim the author has
mentioned and it’s exposition, which follows:
The seers and stargazers of antiquity were able to note, based upon observations of the heavenly
bodies, that when certain planets trined, or squared, or opposed one another, there were corresponding
events that took place on the earth. Seers and stargazers were revered for this reason: that they could
perceptibly and mathematically position a planet’s future transits as juxtaposed against the other planets
and thus foretell future events with an astounding degree of accuracy. This medium became known as
“astrology;” that is, the reading of events based upon the psychic pull impressed upon the earth by the
movements of the heavenly bodies.
With this knowledge, the Jewish Rabbis paired a name with each of the planetary spheres: Eheieh
to Pluto, YAH to Neptune, YHVH Elohim to Saturn, El to Jupiter, Elohim Gibor to Mars, YHVH Eloah
Vedaath to the Sun, YHVH Tzabaoth to Venus, Elohim Tzabaoth to Mercury, Shaddai El Chai to the Moon,
Adonai ha-Aretz to the Earth, and Ain Soph; the Boundless Who exists beyond the edge of visible space.
The Gnostics assigned them the following names: Athoth for Saturn, Harmas Eloaiou for Jupiter, Kalila-
Oumbri Astaphaios for Mars, Yabel Yao for the Sun, Adonaiou Sabaoth for Venus, Cain Adonin for
Mercury, and Abel Sabbede for the Moon. Each one of these planets, along with their names, correspond to
a Sephiroth on the Tree of Life in Kabbalism.11 The Jewish Old Testament praises them throughout the
original text, whereas the New Testament cries out for freedom from their oppressive rule. The Old and
New Testaments are the two conscripted Pillars of Severity and Mercy of Kabbalism, respectively. 12 Even
the tetragrammaton, the holy name of God typically translated LORD is composed of these complimentary
but differentiated aspects, with the Y being a masculine letter, the H being a feminine letter, the V being a
masculine letter, and again, the H being a feminine letter.
The Gnostics understood material reality, along with it’s rulers, to be a despotic and inhospitable
wasteland to Spirit. The Gnostics were those who felt alien to this world, who did not understand it and
could not comprehend it’s cruelty; the lion which eats the antelope or the parasite that burrows in the eyes
of it’s host. And while there may seem to be great beauty in the colors of a sunrise, it is still overshadowed
by the death of not only ourselves, but every person we love or have loved. This dissonance created an
internal rebellion against natural order and natural law, but a servant to the highest Natural Law, which is
entropy.
The mythos contained in The Hypostasis of the Archons, combined with The Apocryphon of
Iôannês, answered the nature of the archē mentioned in Eph’siym vi.12, and the “rulers of darkness” of
Qolasim i.13. Building upon the Kabbalists’ understanding of the cosmos, they speak to the Ineffable Deity,
Ain Soph, using a process similar to mitosis in order to create a hierarchal creation. Being that the Ain Soph
is perfect, everything which emanates from Ain Soph must of necessity also be perfect. In the unfailing
perfection of the Ain Soph is Sophia created; who is the personification of Wisdom. As she has been
created directly from the Ain Soph, she also has the same capacity to create as does the Infinite. Being
divided, however, she must copulate with a masculine counterpart in order to continue producing the
perfection of the Perfect Illimitable. Peering beyond the Veil of perfect reality into Chaos, she desires to
manifest a reality like herself and by “the invincible power within her, her thought was not an idle thought.”
What she gives birth to is a reflection of that which she purposed when she peered into Chaos; a lion-
headed serpent whose eyes are like flashing bolts of lightning. Disgusted and frightened, she casts the beast
into the Abyss of Chaos where the lion-headed serpent immediately begins to work. Being able to peer past
the Veil of Perfection, the creature begins to model Chaos after the pattern of the Upper Aeons from which
Sophia was born, taking the power of her light in order to create it. In his recklessness, the deformed
creature also creates beings beneath himself; the planetary bodies who he names Archons, meaning
“rulers,” and they archons beneath them. In his arrogance, drunk on pride and power, the creature to whom
Sophia gave birth declares himself the only God, and the One Above All. Sophia, in anger and sadness,
cries out from the Upper Aeons that which the creature is to be named: Samael, 13 meaning “he who is
blind,” for his arrogance clouded his vision. Sophia then withdraws her light so that Samael may no longer
siphon it to create darkness, but he retains the light which he has already stolen from her. Banished from the
Pleroma (or the place of Pure Light), she repents to the Upper Aeons, asking them to help her retrieve her
light that Samael has stolen, and subsequently a voice calls out from the Upper Aeons to the darkness in
which Samael dwells, impressing the image of a human being upon the darkness of the waters of Chaos.
This is meant to imply that it is human beings who will reconcile the Chaos of the Demiurge with the
Upper Aeons, as we shall see.
Samael then sets about to create a being “after the image of God and with a likeness to
themselves.” All the archons, including Samael, work to create Adam but fail to bring him to life. Sophia
then commands Samael to breathe some of the light (which is spirit) into the face of Adam and then he will
arise. Because Samael is ignorant, he does not recognize the spirit is the power of his mother. When Samael
breathes this spirit into Adam, Adam arises as an intelligent and enlightened being, his body made from the
darkness, but his consciousness deriving from the Light of the Upper Aeons. Because of his intelligence,
the Archons become jealous and resentful, and cast him down to the lowest part of the whole material
realm, which would be earth.
Iêsous then further reveals in The Apocryphon of Iôannês that the Archons commanded Adam not
to eat of the Tree of Knowledge of Good & Evil, which is the enlightened afterthought. It is important to
note that the word translated to “knowledge” in Bərêšîṯ ii.17 is “DA’ATH,” or the third Sephiroth on the
Tree of Life. Samael, desiring to recover the power he had lost, causes a deep sleep to fall upon Adam. This
“deep sleep” is the veil of ignorance; a loss of sense to make the mind sluggish that Adam could neither
understand nor discern. Here too, we must understand Adam and Eve to represent two intrapsychic
principles; the Pillar of Severity and the Pillar of Mercy respectively, or Adam as Psyche (the Idea), and
Eve as Pneuma (the Ideal). In The Hypostasis of the Archons, it is said that Sophia came upon the serpent in
the Garden of Eden and spoke to Eve, urging her to partake of the fruit, and after her eyes had been opened,
she then “wakes up” her counterpart Adam, by giving to him the fruit to partake of as well. The fruit has
been theologically argued for centuries as to whether it was an apple or a pomegranate that the pair ate.
This argument is as useful in context as arguing what color the sky is on any given day, for it completely
misses the point. The ”fruit” is symbolic and more than likely refers to original “sin;” i.e. sexual
reproduction, for the word “fruit” in Hebrew is “pehr̃ee” and can mean fruit from the earth, but can also
refer to the fruitfulness of the womb. Because of these multiple meanings, fruitfulness here could also
imply the generation of spirit into matter. Manly P. Hall writes in “How To Understand Your Bible: A
Philosopher’s Interpretation of Obscure and Puzzling Passages” that “Madame Blavatsky, in Isis Unveiled,
showed that the 3rd chapter of Genesis was part of an ancient Mystery ritual representing the initiation into
the higher grades of the esoteric school. In the Cabala, Adam is described as attending a school of the

angels in heaven. It was in this celestial academy that the first man received the keys to that secret doctrine
which has descended through an unbroken hierarchy of initiated priests since the first dawning of human
consciousness. The angel Raphael visited Adam and Eve in the Garden and discoursed with them
concerning the mysteries of the soul. According to Madame Blavatsky, the disobedience of Adam and the
eating of the forbidden fruit represented an effort to secure the esoteric wisdom without being properly and
duly initiated. In other words, it was a violation of the laws of the Mystery Schools, an attempt to storm the
gates of heaven. For this violation primitive humanity was exiled from the spiritual state, and the symbolic
Fall occurred.” Once Adam and Eve has eaten from the Tree of the Knowledge of Good & Evil, ‫יהוה‬
’ĕlōhîym is quoted as saying “See, the man has become like one of Us, to know good and evil. And now,
lest he put out his hand and take also of the TREE OF LIFE, and eat, and live forever…” a very telling
statement when we understand that the Tree of Life is symbolic of humanitarian virtues in Judaism (see
note 12, Footnotes).
In the light of all this symbolism, the Demiurge may be repurposed to be understood as the law of
evolution; that law which formed the planets, humankind, and our procreative (base) urges. The seven
major archons have already come to be understood as the seven visible planets and the 365 archons beneath
them who create Adam’s body could be repurposed to be understood as the law of physics which govern
material reality, or alternatively time, as 365 is also the number of days in the year according to the
Gregorian calendar. Poseidon is as indistinguishable from the sea as his anthropomorphic form. It would be
no less logical to assume the archons and the Demiurge correspond to symbolic and natural forces of
nature. Psychologically, we may frame the Demiurge as our ego. Michael Mirdad writes:
“And when she [Sophia or our rebellious souls] saw the consequences of her desire [to separate
from God], it [her desire] changed into a form of a lion-faced serpent [kundalînî]. And its
two eyes [Ida & Pingala] were like lightning flashes. So she cast the lion serpent away from her, so
that none of the immortal ones might see it, for she had created it in ignorance [and then feared their
judgment]. Then she surrounded it with a luminous cloud [body and aura], and placed a throne
[center of the head] in the middle of the cloud that non one might see it except the Holy Spirit.
This creature [our ego or false self that arose from our belief in separation] took a great power
from his mother [our soul]. He is impious in his arrogance. For he said, ‘I am God and there is no
other God beside me,’ for he had forgotten the place from which he had come.”14
V. The Myth of Sophia and the Kundalînî Serpent
According to Gnostic thought, salvation is obtained through the divine knowledge given to us by
Sophia, so the symbolic representation tying Sophia to the serpent of Bərêšîṯ iii becomes evermore
important. This imagery is further reinforced with the Brazen Serpent Nehushtan of B'ammidbār xxi.9 &
Iêsous’ mention of being raised up like the serpent of the wilderness in Yôḥānān iii.14. As mentioned in
Section II, Iêsous is crucified at the 33rd spine upon the hill of the skull, or just north of the glabella, called
the Glandula Pinealis, the Pineal Gland, or the Pᵊnû'ēl that Yaʿăqōḇ experiences in Bərêšîṯ xxxii, who “saw
the ’ĕlōhîym face to face and was preserved.” This spinal fire is known as the Kundalînî force in Hinduism
and the serpent, Kundali Shakti, or “Serpent Power,” ascends through each chakra, beginning with the base,
or root chakra, called Mûlâdhâra, which then snakes it’s way through the sacral chakra, called
Svādhisthāna, the solar plexus chakra, called Manipura, the heart chakra, called Anahata, the throat chakra,
called Vishuddha, the “third eye,” Pineal Gland of Ajna, and finally the crown chakra, called Sahasrâra.
According to Manly P. Hall:
“The Masonic Mysteries teach the initiate how to prepare within his own soul a miraculous powder of
projection by which it is possible for him to transmute the base lump of human ignorance, perversion, and
discord into an ingot of spiritual and philosophic gold. Sufficient similarity exists between the Masonic
CHiram and the Kundalini of Hindu mysticism to warrant the assumption that Chiram may be considered a
symbol also of the Spirit Fire moving through the sixth ventricle of the spinal column. The exact science of
human regeneration is the Lost Key of Masonry, for when the Spirit Fire is lifted up through the thirty-three
degrees, or segments of the spinal column, and enters into the domed chamber of the human skull, it finally
passes into the pituitary body (Isis), where it invokes Ra (the pineal gland) and demands the Sacred Name.
Operative Masonry, in the fullest meaning of that term, signifies the process by which the Eye of Horus is
opened. E. A. Wallis Budge has noted that in some of the papyri illustrating the entrance of the souls of the
dead into the judgment hall of Osiris the deceased person has a pine cone attached to the crown of his head.
The Greek mystics also carried a symbolic staff, the upper end being in the form of a pine cone, which was
called the thyrsus of Bacchus. In the human brain there is a tiny gland called the pineal body, which is the
sacred eye of the ancients, and corresponds to the third eye of the Cyclops. Little is known concerning the
function of the pineal body, which Descartes suggested (more wisely than he knew) might be the abode of
the spirit of man. As its name signifies, the pineal gland is the sacred pine cone in man – the eye single,
which cannot be opened until CHiram (the Spirit Fire) is raised through the sacred seals which are called
the seven Churches in Asia.”15
There is significant evidence put forth by James Morgan Pryse in his book “The Apocalypse
Unsealed” that the Apocalypse of Iôannes is a dramatized Grecian play recounting the process of these
“seven seals” being opened, cleverly disguised behind wordplay and arithmetical expressions, as he wrote:
“Proficiency in the noetic contemplation, with the arousing of the speirêma and the conquest of the life-
centres, leads to knowledge of spiritual realities (the science of which constitutes the Gnôsis), and the
acquirement of certain mystic powers, and it culminates in emancipation from physical existence through
the "birth from above" when the deathless solar body has been fully formed. This telestic work requires the
unremitting effort of many years, not in one life only but carried on through a series of incarnations until
the final result is achieved. But almost in its initial stages the consciousness of the aspirant becomes
disengaged from the mortal phrênic mind and centred in the immortal noetic mind, so that from incarnation
to incarnation his memory carries over, more or less clearly according to the degree he has attained, the
knowledge acquired; and with this unbroken memory and certainty of knowledge he is in truth immortal
even before his final liberation from the cycle of reincarnation.
In arousing the kundalînî by conscious effort in meditation, the sushumnâ, though it is the all-
important force, is ignored, and the mind is concentrated upon the two side-currents; for the sushumnâ can
not be energized alone, and it does not start into activity until the îdâ and the pingala have preceded it,
forming a positive and a negative current along the spinal cord. These two currents, on reaching the sixth
chakra, situated back of the nasal passages, radiate to the right and left, along the line of the eyebrows; then
the sushumnâ, starting at the base of the spinal cord, proceeds along the spinal marrow, its passage through
each section thereof corresponding to a sympathetic ganglion being accompanied by a violent shock, or
rushing sensation, due to the accession of force—increased "voltage"—until it reaches the conarium, and
thence passes outward through the brahmarandra, the three currents thus forming a cross in the brain. In
the initial stage the seven psychic colors are seen, and when the sushumnâ impinges upon the brain there
follows the lofty consciousness of the seer, whose mystic "third eye" now becomes, as it has been
poetically expressed, "a window into space." In the next stage, as the brain-centres are successively "raised
from the dead" by the serpent-force, the seven "spiritual sounds" are heard in the tense and
vibrant aura of the seer. In the succeeding stage, sight and hearing become blended into a single sense, by
which colors are heard, and sounds are seen—or, to word it differently, color and sound become one, and
are perceived by a sense that is neither sight nor hearing but both. Similarly, the psychic senses of taste and
smell become unified; and next the two senses thus reduced from the four are merged in the interior,
intimate sense of touch, which in turn vanishes into the epistemonic faculty; the gnostic power of the seer
—exalted above all sense-perception—to cognize eternal realities. This is the sacred trance called in
Sanskrit samâdhi, and in Greek manteia; and in the ancient literature of both these languages four such
trances are spoken of. These stages of seership, however, are but the beginning of the telestic labor, the
culmination of which is, as already explained, rebirth in the imperishable solar body. As the Apocalypse has
for its sole theme this spiritual rebirth, it should now be apparent why that book has ever been unintelligible
to the conventional theologian, and has never yielded its secrets to the mere man of letters.” 16
The spirit which resides within every individual is not their own, but rather a breath-spark of the
divine Sophia. As it is written in I Qorintiyim iii.16:
“Do you not know that you are a temple of Theos and the Spirit of Theos dwells in you?”
This conscious self-realization is the entire basis for gnōsis. It is the resurrection (anastasis)
referred to so many times in the New Testament. When our spirits ascend from our base natures to connect
with the Divine, we have reclaimed ourselves from the Demiurge and the cycle of Saṃsāra, reconciling it
to the home from which we came. The Gnostic religion is one that preaches an alien God mentioned in
Section IV. That alien is the spark of Sophia which lives within us. The author now quotes from Hans
Jonas’ The Gnostic Religion:
(a) THE "ALIEN”
"In the name of the great first alien Life from the worlds of light, the sublime that stands above all
works": this is the standard opening of Mandaean compositions, and "alien" is a constant attribute of the
"Life" that by its nature is alien to this world and under certain conditions alien within it. The formula
quoted speaks of the "first" Life "that stands above all works," where we have to supply "of creation," ie.,
above the world. The concept of the alien Life is one of the great impressive word-symbols which we
encounter in gnostic speech, and it is new in the history of human speech in general. It has equivalents
throughout gnostic literature, for example Marcion's concept of the "alien God" or just "the Alien," "the
Other," "the Unknown," "the Nameless," "the Hidden"; or the "unknown Father" in many Christian-gnostic
writings. Its philosophic counterpart is the "absolute transcendence" of Neoplatonic thought. But even apart
from these theological uses where it is one of the predicates of God or of the highest Being, the word
"alien" (and its equivalents) has its own symbolic significance as an expression of an elemental human
experience, and this underlies the different uses of the word in the more theoretical contexts. Regarding this
underlying experience, the combination "the alien life" is particularly instructive.
The alien is that which stems from elsewhere and does not belong here. To those who do belong
here it is thus the strange, the unfamiliar and incomprehensible; but their world on its part is just as
incomprehensible to the alien that comes to dwell here, and like a foreign land where it is far from home.
Then it suffers the lot of the stranger who is lonely, unprotected, uncomprehended, and uncomprehending
in a situation full of danger. Anguish and homesickness are a part of the stranger's lot. The stranger who
does not know the ways of the foreign land wanders about lost; if he learns its ways too well, he forgets that
he is a stranger and gets lost in a different sense by succumbing to the lure of the alien world and becoming
estranged from his own origin. Then he has become a "son of the house". This too is part of the alien'a fate.
In his alienation from himself the distress has gone but this very fact is the culmination of the stranger's
tragedy. The recollection of his own alienness, the recognition of his place of exile for what it is, is the first
step back; the awakened homesickness is the beginning of the return. All this belongs to the "suffering" side
of alien-ness. Yet with relation to its origin it is at the same time a mark of excellence, a source of power
and of a secret life unknown to the environment and in the last resort impregnable to it, as it is
incomprehensible to the creatures of this world. This superiority of the alien which distinguishes it even
here, though secretly, is its manifest glory in its own native realm, which is outside this world. In such
position the alien is the remote, the inaccessible, and its strangeness means majesty. Thus the alien taken
absolutely is the wholly transcendent, the "beyond," and an eminent attribute of God.
Both sides of the idea of the "Alien," the positive and the negative, alienness as superiority and as
suffering, as the prerogative of remoteness and as the fate of involvement, alternate as the characteristics of
one and the same subject—the "Life."As the “great first Life" it partakes in the positive aspect alone: it is
"beyond," "above the world," "in the worlds of light," "in the fruits of splendor, in the courts of light, in the
house of perfection," and so forth. In its split-off existence in the world it tragically partakes in the
interpenetration of both sides; and the actualization of all the features outlined above, in a dramatic
succession that is gor-erned by the theme of salvation, makes up the metaphysical history of the light exiled
from Light, of the life exiled from Life and involved in the world-the history of its alienation and recovery,
its "way" down and through the nether world and up again. According to the various stages of this history,
the term "alien" or its equivalents can enter into manifold combinations: "my alien soul," “my worldsick
heart," "the lonely vine," apply to the human condition, while "the alien man" and "the stranger" apply to
the messenser from the world of Light-though he may apply to himself the former terms as well, as we
shall see when we consider the "redeemed redeemer." Thus by implication the very concept of the "alien"
includes in its meaning all the aspects which the “way” explicates in the form of temporally distinct phases.
At the same time it most directly expresses the basic experience which first led to this conception of the
"way" of existence--the elementary experience of alienness and transcendence. We may therefore regard
the figure of the "alien Life" as a primary symbol of Gnosticism.
(b) "BEYOND," "WITHOUT," "THIS WORLD,” AND "THE OTHER WORLD”

To this central concept other terms and images are organically related. If the "Life" is originally
alien, then its home is "outside" or "beyond" this world. "Beyond" here means beyond everything that is of
the cosmos, heaven and its stars included. And "included" literally: the idea of an absolute "without" limits
the world to a closed and bounded system, terrifying in its vastness and inclusiveness to those who are lost
in it, yet finite within the total scope of being. It is a power-system, a demonic entity charged with personal
tendencies and compulsive forces. The limitation by the idea of the "beyond" deprives the "world" of its
claim to totality. As long as "world" means "the All," the sum total of reality, there is only "the" world, and
further specification would be pointless: if the cosmos ceases to be the All, if it is limited by something
radically "other" yet eminently real, then it must be designated as "this" world. All relations of man's
terrestrial existence are "in this world,” "of this world," which is in contrast to "the other world," the
habitation of "Life." Seen from beyond, however, and in the eyes of the inhabitants of the worlds of Light
and Life, it is our world which appears as "that world." The demonstrative pronoun has thus become a
relevant addition to the term "world"; and the combination is again a fundamental linguistic symbol of
Gnosticism, closely related to the primary concept of the "alien."17
VI. The Structures of Asceticism vs. Hedonism In Gnosticism
This section will deal largely with the stance of the author regarding doctrinal issues that are
greatly affecting the modern-day Christian movement. The author sets aside any personal biases one way or
the other and instead relies on her academic sources and Gnostic lens through which to view Scripture and
its interpretation regarding these issues. The subsections to this section are listed in no particular order, of
either ascending or descending importance, but only as the author felt compelled to create a new subsection
discussing each topic.
Ascetism
Certain sects of Gnosticism adhered to a stringent morality while others adhered to an almost
reckless hedonism. The Archontics, the Marcionite followers of Severus, Cerinthians, Sethians, Ophites,
Marcellians, Marchosians, Valentinians (or the followers of Valentinus), Menander, Cerinthus, Cerdon,
Basilides, Isidore, Ptolemaeus, Heracleon, Theodotus, Marcus, Marcion, Bardesanes, Mani, and the
Saturnilus (or followers of Saturninus) Gnostics upheld an almost Monastic approach to their faith.
Saturninus was also said to be a disciple of Menander, who was in turn said to be a disciple of Simon
Magus.
Simon Magus and his followers, the Simonians, however, held to an amoral and libertine
philosophy when compared to the other Gnostic sects; eating food offered to idols, marrying and
reproducing. The Carpocratians (or the followers of Carpocrates), the Cainites, and the Phibionites of
Epiphanius also held a more libertine philosophy, sometimes allowing for an almost hedonistic philosophy
based on the premise that “the seed [of light] which was sent out from it in its infancy…is made perfect
here [on earth]” and not “the conduct of man.”18 This sort of worldview presents itself from what the author
understands as the most wretched of philosophies: that good and evil are in the eye of the beholder.
Isidore, while understanding the struggle between the spirit and the flesh, permitted a moderate
view but required the “strength of rational reflection (lahgahss)” and the “domination over the lower orders
of creation.”18 Basilidians (or followers of Basilides) “held the view that only sins committed “involuntarily
and in ignorance” will be forgiven.”18
The author upholds a moderate to conservative understanding of Gnosticism, while maintaining a
liberal sociological viewpoint. We now have information that the Gnostics did not, like for example that
eating any living thing, including plants, harms the thing being eaten.19 That plant-life has a communicatory
system much like a nervous system which uses the tendrils of the plant’s roots to communicate with others
is significant and only speaks to further reinforce the cruelty of the Demiurge. 20 This understanding cannot
be reconciled by either a purely vegan, vegetarian, or pescetarian diet. The phosphorene found in plants is
the phosphorous light spoken of in Hazon, and therefore eating a vegetarian, vegan, or pescetarian diet that
is not polluted with the density of matter but rather fed by pure light, is recommended while any initiate
undergoes their Kundalȋnȋ awakening. The author maintains the prohibition against procreation, but gives
exception to marriage, or at least, long-standing romantic relationships, as “two are better than one.” 21
Ultimately, every individual is the divine incarnation of their own experience and no by-laws or nitpicking
dogma will, nor should, be lorded over another person’s heart, mind, and spirit. As the reader will come to
understand, the author views sociological issues through a rather liberal lens, but this liberal lens does not
constitute either a hedonistic or amoral philosophy. All behavior must be weighed against the growth of the
spirit. If it is not conducive to spiritual gnōsis, the behavior is of no benefit morally, and it should be
avoided.
Slavery & Racism
The issue of slavery seems to be widely understood to be settled, however, the accusations levied
by atheists, combined with the Neo-Nazi movement that has recently resurrected it’s eugenic, fascistic, and
anti-human views based on so-called “Biblical principles” must be addressed by the author.
The concept of slavery is only ever in the Scriptures an idealized concept and does not refer to the
concrete concept of a literal person being owned by another literal person, but the abstract concept of a
literal person being owned by a concept, like peace except where it is used in a historical manner. For
example, the only words that literally mean servant in the manner we would understand the word “slave” is
Strong’s #5649 ‫‘( עבר‬ǎbad) and Strong’s #3816 παις (paheece). ‘Ăbad is used of literal slaves belonging to
‘Artaḥšaštₔ’ (Artaxerxes) in ‘Ezrā iv.11, of the servant to ‘Ělâ, (or God) in ‘Ezrā v.11, to Nĕbuchadnĕz’zar in
Dānîyêl ii.4,7, in iii.26, 28 of Shā’drach, Mē’shach, and Ābĕd’negō belonging to ‘Ělâ ‘Illay (God Most
High), and vi. 20 of Dānîyêl belonging to ‘Ělâ Ḥay ‘Ělâ (The Living God). Paheece is used in Mattithyahu
xiv.2 of Hērōdē’s slaves and of the slaves belonging the prodigal son’s father in Luqas xv.26.
Strong’s #5288 ‫( נער‬na’ar), meaning “adolescent” and #3610 meaning “domestic servant” relies
heavily on a close-knit familial dynamic where each individual in the family helps to carry the overall
weight of the family through the division of labor. Strong’s #5650 ‫‘( עבר‬ebed), #1401 δουλος (dǒulǒs) and
#1402 δουλόω (dǒulǒō) all mean “to bring into or under bondage, to bind; a bondservant” and can all be
interpreted through the following exegesis by Manly P. Hall:
“The opening chapter of Exodus is devoted to an account of the oppression of the Jews in Egypt. Here
again history becomes the instrument of a secret metaphysical tradition.
Egypt is not a country in this account but a condition of consciousness. The story of the wanderings of
the twelve tribes is identical in meaning with the account of the Prodigal son who took his patrimony and
went down to spend it in the fleshpots of Egypt.
Natural processes are accomplished by two cosmic motions. One of these is termed INVOLUTION, or
the descent of life into form. In this process, units of radiant energy take upon themselves ever more of the
material elements, until they are hopelessly obscured by the forms with which they have surrounded
themselves. This state is typified by the seed, the hard shell, and the living germ within. The second cosmic
motion is EVOLUTION. This is life releasing itself from form by the process of growth. It requires billions
of years for the cosmic plant to grow up, but by the evolutionary process all things are ultimately released
from form and are restored to their divine state.
The bondage in Egypt represents evolving life at its nadir, its low point. Involution has reduced the
spiritual monads or germs to a condition of complete impotency by enmeshing them in material elements.
Physically this corresponds to the period in the evolution of life when nature consisted entirely of
monocellular organisms. Gradually, over a vast period of time, evolution released through these cells the
entities which we now term plants, animals, and men. The wanderings of the twelve tribes therefore
represent the ages of growth and development, the slow and painful courses of evolution.
The third key to this ancient allegory is truly mystical. The human soul in a state of complete
materiality is in bondage in a land of darkness. Man searching for truth, humanity collectively searching for
truth, is well represented by a nation wandering in the wilderness searching for the promised land. The
promised land is always happiness, security, and the end of strife. It is the Nirvana, the peace which results
from accomplishment. The Exodus of Israel is in part at least an ancient initiation ritual, depicting vividly
the liberation of the human soul from bondage to its animal desires and appetites and those creature
comforts most men live for.”22
The Synoptic (and also Gnostic) Gospels, being a drama, are not meant to imply that because a
historical or parabolic figure is recorded as having slaves that it is permissible at best and an injunction at
worst for the acceptance of slavery. In fact, the very opposite is the message of the Gospel, or the Good
News, for “there is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither bond nor free, there is neither male nor female,
circumcision nor uncircumcision: but ye all one in Christōs Iêsous for Christōs is all, and in all” 23 and
“knowing that your Master also is in heaven; neither is there respect of persons with him.” 24 This is the
“Good” News. The Gospel is the great equalizer. We must all stand naked before our own conscience and
have our heart weighed against the feather. Whether we remain in bondage to our lower natures or rise
above it and become a slave to the light is the truest test we are given. In The Prince of Egypt, speaking of
the Pharoah to Aaron, Moses says “Yes Aaron, it’s true Pharoah has the power. He can take away your
food, your home, your freedom. He can take away your sons and daughters. With one word, Pharoah can
take away your very lives. But there is one thing he cannot take away from you; your faith. Believe.” 25 This
understanding will be the basis from which the author will operate concerning the following fourteen
subsections.
Being written beneath the Roman empire, which persecuted early Christians, much of the New
Testament is written in veiled language not for the pleasure of wit like much of the Old Testament, but
through prudent wariness of persecution. An example of this is put forth in Eph’siym vi.5-8. A careful
reading will exposit the passage of it’s own accord, which I will place in EMPHASIS:
SERVANTS, OBEY YOUR MASTERS according to the flesh, WITH FEAR AND TREMBLING, IN
SINCERITY OF HEART, AS TO MESSIAH; NOT WITH EYE-SERVICE AS MEN-PLEASERS, BUT
AS SERVANTS OF MESSIAH, DOING THE DESIRE OF GOD FROM THE INNER SELF,
RENDERING SERVICE WITH PLEASURE, AS TO THE MASTER, AND NOT TO MEN.
Now, examine the following cross-references:
SERVANTS, OBEY YOUR MASTERS with Romiyim i.1, SHA’UL, A BONDSERVANT OF IÊSOUS
CHRISTŌS;
WITH FEAR AND TREMBLING with Təhillîm ii.11, SERVE ‫ יהוה‬WITH FEAR, AND REJOICE
WITH TREMBLING;
IN SINCERITY OF HEART with Joḥanon iv.24, GOD IS SPIRIT, AND THOSE WHO WORSHIP
HIM NEED TO WORSHIP IN SPIRIT AND TRUTH;
RENDERING SERVICE WITH PLEASURE, AS TO THE MASTER, AND NOT TO MEN with
Mattithyahu xxv.40, TRULY, I SAY TO YOU, IN SO FAR AS YOU DID IT TO ONE OF THE LEAST OF
THESE MY BROTHERS, YOU DID IT TO ME.
The text is subverting what it means to be a “slave” in the context of the Roman empire. To openly and
directly upend what was at that time considered the “natural order” would have been considered treason
and resulted in a death sentence, a scenario which will be more fully explored under the subsection
“Feminism.” The “service rendered” in this passage will be more fully explored in the final subsection of
this section, titled “Servants, Obey Your Master.”
It must now be noted that there are several more uses of the word “servant” and “slave” regarding
concepts to which a mind adheres to. The Founding Fathers of the United States of America, being
oppressed in expressing religious freedom, became single-minded in their desire to create a country where
atheists, agnostics, Christians, Muslims, Hindus, Buddhists, Gnostics, and all other flavors of religion could
co-exist without worry of persecution. One could say that the Founding Fathers became slaves to this idea,
and shed literal blood, sweat, and tears to bring this idea into manifestation. This is the proper
understanding of the word “slave” and “servant” in many passages of the Bible. Below the author will list a
few examples:
Təhillîm cxix.65-66 reads: for beautiful, pleasant, and pure are the SLAVES TO THE FABRICATED
EDICTS OF ‫ !יהוה‬Chastise me with goodness and kindness that I may taste the flavor of judgment; and
the DA’ATH of your supportive and stable mitṣvâh (commands).
Təhillîm xviii.1 opens with Dāwid claiming to be a slave of ‫יהוה‬.

Təhillîm xxxv.27 reads: “And I shall tumultuously rejoice at the desire and will of tṣeh’deq (the just weight
and measure), and I will continuously bring forth speech, ‫יהוה‬, that my desire and will be interwoven with
it (tṣeh’deq), AS A SLAVE OF ŠHĀLÔWM (peace).
Every other usage of any Hebrew and Greek words that are typically translated as “slave” or “servant”
is listed below with their corresponding Strong’s reference number and definition so that the reader may of
their own volition research and come to their own conclusions about what each passage where these words
are used means to them personally.
#582 ‫‘( ;אנוש‬ĕnôwsh) mortal (man)

#5647 ‫‘( ;עבר‬âbad) to work
#5657 ‫‘( ;עברה‬âbbudâh) a wrought service, past tense of #5647
#1249 διακουέω; (diakŏněō) an attendant; somebody who waits in subservience to another such as a
pastor or a deacon; a servant in the same sense Iêsous was a servant
#3407 μίσθιος; (misthiŏs) a wage-earner
#5257 ύπηρέτης; (hupērětēs) a subordinate; one of inferior rank in a hierarchy
Bərêšîṯ xxiv.1-4 records a story of ‘Abrāhām forbidding ‘Ĕlî’ezer from taking a wife of Kₔna’ănî
(Canaanite) descent for Yiṣḥāq. This is not a story of intermarrying between races, but rather a
metaphorical allegory with a deeper meaning. In order to properly exposit this passage, the author will
define the names ‘Abrāhām, ‘Ĕlî’ezer, Kₔna’ănî, and Yiṣḥāq according to Charles Fillmore’s Metaphysical
Bible Dictionary.
Abraham, a'-brå-ham (Heb.)--father (source, founder) of a multitude… Metaphysical. The power of

the mind to reproduce its ideas in unlimited expression. This ability of the mind to make substance out of
ideas is called faith. When told by Jehovah that he was henceforth to be Abraham, Abram was told also that
he was to be the father of a multitude. This means that one is to express faith by bringing the faith of God
into the multitude of manifested thoughts and acts.
The first step in spiritual development is the awakening of faith (represented by Abraham). We must
have faith in the reality of the power of the realms invisible. Abraham, inspired by the Lord, went forth into
another country, where his progeny, or manifestations, increased tremendously.
Through faithful obedience to the inner urge of Spirit, we gradually develop communication with the
supermind; then in various ways we receive the assurance that we are guided by Spirit.
The early growth of faith is not very deeply rooted. Abraham lived in a tent, which illustrates that faith
has not yet become an abiding quality of the consciousness. Through certain experiences and movements of
the mind, faith takes a firmer hold; it establishes the firmament mentioned in the 1st chapter of Genesis.
In Matthew 3: 9 Abraham represents a certain phase of consciousness in the development of the
Adam man, who was formed out of the "dust of the ground." "God is able of these stones to raise up
children unto Abraham." What we want is a baptism of mind that will free us from all the limitations of the
Adam man and open our eyes to the Christ state, with its New Jerusalem environment, now forming in the
heavens all about us.
Eliezer, e-h-e'-zer (Heb.)--God of help; God my help; God of succor; God is help…Metaphysical. A
belief in God as one's sustaining power, as the power that relieves one in distress and assists one to better
conditions and to higher attainments (God my help God is help; see Exod. 18:4)
Canaanite, ca'-naan-lte (Heb.)--one who exists in and for material things; a merchant; a pirate;
trafficker in materiality…Metaphysical. The elemental life forces in the subconsciousness. Under sense
thought and expression they are all that the meaning of Canaanite implies. The Canaanites are delivered by
Jehovah into the hands of the Israelites, and by them are destroyed. "And the name of the place was called
Hormah." Hormah is from the same root as herem, a devoted thing. (See Num. 21:1-3, with margin.) The
significance of this is that through our I AM (Jehovah) we gain control of our subconscious elemental life
forces. Then by means of high, spiritual thinking (Israelites) these life forces come under the law of Spirit,
and are transmuted into spiritual energy.

Isaac, I'-saac (Heb.)--He (God) laughs; He will laugh; laughter; joy; singing; leaping…Metaphysical.
Divine sonship. Isaac, meaning laughter, signifies the joy of the new birth and the new life in Christ, which
is the spiritual consciousness of relationship to God the Father. Man rejoices greatly in his privilege of
expressing as the son of God.
According to the text, Isaac was born after Sarah was past the age for bringing forth. Besides, she was
barren, so that there was no possibility of his conception under the natural course of things. So we, when
born of Spirit, are born, "not... of the will of the flesh, nor of the will of man, but of God." The natural man
has no power to bring forth "the new man" in Christ Jesus. So Hagar's son could not be the chosen seed and
heir. The new man is a "new creature," begotten by the divine seed, the Word. An entirely new state of
consciousness is formed, fulfilling the admonition, let "Christ be formed in you."
When Isaac was weaned, Ishmael, Hagar's son, mocked him. This is the experience of every one in
the new birth. The thoughts that are the fruit of the "mind of the flesh" rise up within and mock the new
man. Here the overcomer has a work to do. Hagar, the bondmaid and her son must be cast out. Abraham
grieves at this. So we sometimes grieve over giving up the fruits that we have brought forth in the natural-
man consciousness.
Isaac was not noted for his achievements; he represents the serenity, peace, and joy that man has when
he accepts spiritual things as real, and lives "as seeing him who is invisible.
With these definitions in mind, the author will now rework these metaphysical and symbolic
interpretations into the text: The power of the mind to reproduce its ideas in unlimited expression
forbade belief in God as one's sustaining power, as the power that relieves one in distress and assists
one to better conditions and to higher attainments from taking a wife of one who exists in and for
material things for the spiritual consciousness of relationship to God the Father.
The subtext to the Scriptures can be found quite easily when one simply defines the names of the
characters involved. For example, Qayin means “a spear,” “possession,” or “acquired,” whereas Hebel
means “exhalation” or “breath of the mouth.” Placed together, Qayin and Hebel mean “I have acquired
breath.” This becomes interesting when referenced against the pronunciation of the Holy Name-typically
substituted as Hashem or Adonai, the Tetragrammaton is composed of four letters; Yod, Heh, Vav, and Heh.
In Yəšha‘yāhū lii.11, ‫ יהוה‬says “Therefore my people shall know my name...”
This passage is composed of a mitzvah, or command. When the consonants are spoken alone, we
would pronounce the Tetragrammaton Yah-hah-vah, with the final ‘heh’ being silent. We know “Yah” is the
correct pronunciation for the first third of the Tetragrammaton, for that is how the shorthand Holy Name is
written in Təhillîm lxviii.4. This pronunciation hides several Hebrew words within itself that tie into and
are supported by the Scriptures. “Hayah” means “to be” and is where we understand the Holy Name to be
connected to the “I AM THAT I AM (’ehye ’ăšer ’ehye),” revealed to Mōšhȇ in Šəmōwṯ iii.14 although, as
Albert Pike notes, “The Kabalists consider God as the Intelligent, Animated, Living Infinite. He is not, for
them, either the aggregate of existences, or existence in the abstract, or a being philosophically definable.
He is in all, distinct from all, and greater than all. His name even is ineffable; and yet this name only
expresses the human ideal of His divinity. What God is in Himself, it is not given to man to comprehend.
God is the absolute of Faith; but the absolute of Reason is BEING, "I AM THAT I AM," is a wretched
translation. Being, Existence, is by itself, and because it Is. The reason of Being, is Being itself. We may
inquire, "Why does something exist?" that is, "Why does such or such a thing exist?" But we cannot,
without being absurd, ask, "Why Is Being?" That would be to suppose Being before Being. If Being had a
cause, that cause would necessarily Be; that is, the cause and effect would be identical.” 26
This ’ehye ’ăšer ’ehye is etymologically linked to “hayah” and “hayah” is etymologically linked to
“ahaya,” which is linked to “havah” which means “to breathe” as in Bərêšîṯ ii.7: “And ‫‘ יהוה‬ĕlōhîym formed
‘ādām from the dust of the ground, and breathed into his notrils the breath OF LIVES (ḤAY); and ‘ādām
BECAME (HĀYÂ) a LIVING SOUL (NEPHEŠH).” Also hidden in this pronunciation is the word “Yah,”
which means “to exist” or “to be,” “Av” (or Ab) from where we get “Abba” or “father” and “ahava” which
is the Hebrew word for “love.” Pronouncing the Tetragrammaton as Yah-hah-vah would give the feeling of
breath as well as indicate a hidden definition of “the Self-Existant and Eternal Father of Love.”
In Yoḥanon xvii.26, Iêsous says “And I HAVE MADE KNOWN TO THEM [the disciples] THY
NAME, and WILL MAKE IT KNOWN; that the LOVE with which Thou hast loved me MAY BE IN
THEM AND I IN THEM.” Furthermore, in I Yoḥanon iv.8, the author says “God IS LOVE.” In Hebrew,
this would be written [with the aforementioned pronunciation] “Yahavah is ahavah.” In D'əḇārîm vi.5, we
have the command to “ahavah Yahavah.” Yəšha‘yāhū lvi.6 also reinforces this concept to “ahavah
Yahavah” or to “love the holy name.”
‫יהוה‬, is comprised of aspirated consonants that, spoken, are the sound of breathing...In his Nooma
video, Breathe, Rob Bell (a pastor whose obvious gifts of curiosity and a knack for asking provocative
questions can get him into trouble) wonders what this means in key moments like when a baby is born –
newly arrived on planet earth, must they take their first breath, or rather speak the name of God if they are
to be alive here? On our deathbed, do we breathe our last breath? Or is it that we cease to be alive when the
name of God is no longer on our lips? The most ironic of his questions is also the most beautiful: he
wonders about the moment when an atheist friend looks across the table at you and says, “There. Is. No.
God”. And of course what you hear is “Yod. He. Vav. He.”* Hence, the tie to “I have acquired breath” when
Ḥaȗȃ names Qayin and Hebel. Likewise, we could further interpret Bərêšîṯ iv.8 as “possessions,” or greed
killing the “breath,” or spiritual consciousness. It is interesting to note that greed closes the heart chakra in
the Hindu religious systems.
Nearly every other passage that supposedly forbids intermarriage can be interpreted using this
method and it will become abundantly clear what the passage is attempting to convey has nothing to do
with a racist ideology. Furthermore, any use of the word gôy in the Old Testament, typically translated
“nations” does not represent an actual, literal nation, but rather our lower, base appetites and natures
contrary to our enlightened, or best selves, whereas the name Yiśrā’ēl is combined from the Hebrew root
“yashar,” meaning “the straight, or uncrooked path,” and ‘Ēl,” meaning “the Most High God.” 27 When
Yiśrā’ēl conquers the gôy, or nations in the Old Testament, it is allegorically meant to imply higher
consciousness overcoming lower nature. To weaponize passages of Scripture in order to justify slavery as a
concrete method to build up society, or as a means to justify racism, bigotry, and intolerance is a poor,
insufficient, and unsound theology and exegesis of the Scriptures which lacks the dynamis, or power, with
which it was written.
*It should be noted that the author does not correlate the Demiurge with YHVH, but rather follows the
mythology of William Blake and the Apocryphon of St. Iôannes, which places YHVH as a son of the
Demiurge alongside the four elements who are His siblings.
Feminism
Contrary to popular perception, the Bible is not a misogynistic book, and actually contains some
of the most enlightened views toward women in ancient history. As per the previous subsection, the author
will go over certain passages, highlighting key words and illuminating the deeper truths contained in them.
To begin, the author has personally retranslated I Timotiyos ii.11-12:
Let a woman increase in knowledge in the quietude of one who stays at home doing their own work and not
officiously meddling with the affairs of others in all obedience (to knowledge). But I do not permit a
woman to impart instruction or to exercise abusive autocratic and authoritarian dominion over a man, but
rather in the quietude of one who stays at home doing their own work and not officiously meddling with the
affairs of others.
The word typically translated “silence” (here translated “in the quietude of one who stays at home
doing their own work and not officiously meddling with the affairs of others”) describes a way of being
rather than an act of submission. The prohibition against women “imparting instruction” is integral to a
misperception used to justify misogynistic theology but we must remember the setting this letter was
written in. The early Christians were a blend of Neo-Platonic philosophy woven together with Kabbalistic
teachings of the Scriptures, which the Roman empire sought to eradicate due to it’s politically charged
dictate that there was only one Kingdom; the Kingdom of God. This automatically denounced the Roman
empire as being holy or unique, which did not sit well with those in power. Because so much of early
Christian theology rested upon the Tanakh, a rabbi was required to teach it. A rabbi is the person in the
Jewish community who imparts instruction and the first female rabbi, named Sally Priesand, was ordained
only 50 years ago. This passage is not so much a mandate as it is a protective custom rooted in tradition, as
a woman, or multiple women teaching, would draw unnecessary attention to the Christians who were
already risking their lives by meeting in secret. If the rabbis were caught teaching an assembly, they could
easily point to the Tanakh from which they were reading to avoid suspicion. A woman teaching an

assembly would immediately raise questions, as this was not the custom.
We have also the dictate,
“Wives, submit yourselves unto your own husbands…”
The language used to translate this passage is fairly accurate. There is a Tyler Perry film called
“Why Did I Get Married?” and in it, a married couple is having an argument when one of them says “What
is submission?” The response from their partner is as follows: “In relationships, “I” becomes “we,” and
“me” becomes “us.”” Submission is placing a loving, committed relationship before the individuals who
comprise the relationship, caring for the whole over the parts that comprise it. This passage goes on to
further state that “husbands should love their wives even as their own bodies.” It is a reciprocal, give-and-
take relationship the author of this passage has in mind when it was written.
And then there is the problem of v.15 which says “But she shall be saved in childbearing if they
continue in belief, and love, and set-apartness, with sensibleness.” Most translations will render the first
half of this verse to say “Yet she [the woman] will be saved through childbearing…” which Henry Alford
has noted that being saved through something is not the same as having being saved by it. I Qorintiyim uses
this turn of phrase in iii.15 when the author writes: If anyone’s work is burned up, he will suffer loss,
though he himself will be saved, but only as through fire.28 This is not an edict that women must procreate
in order to be saved, but rather more in line with Gnostic undertones; that a woman may still be saved even
if she has given birth.
An interesting passage of note should be brought to attention, and that is Bərêšîṯ v.2, which says,
“Male and female [the ‘ĕlōhîym] created them, and He blessed them, and called THEIR name ‘Ǎdam.”
In Hebrew, every letter of the alphabet is connected to a number. The sum of each number
comprising each word composes what is called gematria. The gematria value for ‘Ǎdam is 45, whereas the
gematria value for YHVH is 26. In Bərêšîṯ iii.20, we read the following:
“And ‘Ǎdam called his wife’s name Ḥaȗȃ…”
There are two important things to note regarding this passage: 1.) it is ‘Ǎdam who names Ḥaȗȃ
and 2.) the gematria value for the name Ḥaȗȃ is 19. If we take 45, which represents ‘Ǎdam, and subtract 26,
which represents YHVH, we get 19, which represents Ḥaȗȃ. This ties into the idea of Adam Kadmon, or
Adam Bifrons; an androgynous being, bi-sexual in the truest sense of the word, who was created ‘double-
faced,’ then cut in twain. The word used for “rib” in Bərêšîṯ ii.21 is ‫( ﹹצלע‬ṣēlā) and would more accurately
be translated as “side.” Aristophanes refers to this being in Plato’s Symposium, 189c-193e. The modern-day
concept of “Twin Flames” is based upon this concept, as well as where we get the saying “my other half” to
refer to a lover. When ‘Ǎdam and Ḥaȗȃ were still one being, according to the Symposium, they could
reproduce at will. Once they “fell” from the Garden of ‘Ēden, their spirits generating into matter, they were
split in twain and the division of the sexes enforced. Hence, ‘Ǎdam toils in labor and Ḥaȗȃ is pained in
childbirth. It is a divine allegory of the masculine and feminine principle, which all of us have experienced
from one lifetime to the next in various forms.
As discussed in the previous subsection, titled Slavery & Racism, and applied to this one, any
passage which names a character who experiences misogyny can always be understood through a
metaphysical lens. D'əḇārîm xxii.23-24, 29 uses the word ‫‘( ﬠנﬣ‬ānâ) to describe the sexual act performed
between the participants and denotes a consensual act rather than one of force. Nowhere in the Scriptures is
rape condoned, and, as mentioned in the previous subsection Slavery & Racism, the Synoptic (and also
Gnostic) Gospels, being a drama, are not meant to imply that because a historical or parabolic figure is
recorded as having behaved in a certain manner that it is permissible at best and an injunction at worst for
the acceptance of said behavior beneath the exoteric light of the Scriptures.
Abortion
Once again, the author feels personally that there are no passages from the Scriptures that speak
directly to the idea of abortion being immoral or a heinous act that affronts the Most High. The author will
examine passages used specifically by Evangelical Christians to promote their pro-life ideology and
contrast that view beneath the Gnostic lens. The following three passages will be quoted and then answered
at once:
Təhillîm cxxxix.13: For you ‫ יהוה‬have possessed my innermost being, you have covered me in my mother’s
womb.
Yirməyāhū i.4-5: Now the word of ‫ יהוה‬came to me, saying “before I formed you in the belly I knew you,
and before you came out of the womb I did set you apart – I appointed you a prophet to nations.”
Yəša‘yāhū xlix.1b: ‫ יהוה‬has called me from the womb, from my mother’s belly He has caused my name to
be remembered.
Just as unacceptable behavior is recorded in Scripture that is not applicable to any of us today in a
literal sense, so these passages may be seen as acceptable behaviors that are not applicable to any of us
today in a literal sense. A question here arises of predestination versus free-will. Not all of us are meant to
be prophets, or great. Stepping outside of the esoteric understanding, according to Marqos xiv.17-21, Iêsous
says of Ioudas that not only did he have no choice in the matter of betraying Him, but that it would have
been better had he not been born. That is quite the far cry from the rallying calls used by pro-life
supporters. The question that this behavior from God Incarnate produces is this: Does God truly call each
and every one of us according to a higher purpose, or according to His purpose? In other words, is it God’s
will that some babies be aborted, and some be given birth? These contradictory passages is where the
literal, conservative, Evangelical arguments using Scripture falls apart and the Gnostic and mystic
understandings step in.
As far as procreation goes, Təhillîm li.5 reinforces the Gnostic idea that procreation is anything
but holy, using the author’s personal translation, as it reads “I was twisted in perverse and depraved sin, for
in the sexual heat of my mother was I conceived.” We read of commands against sacrificing children to
Pagan gods in the Tanakh, but is this due to being a prohibition from worshipping other gods, or a
prohibition against murder? Or is it both? The question that the debate surrounding abortion reduces down
to one of philosophy, a question as unanswerable with certainty as the question as to what happens to us
when we die, and that is When does life begin? Most pro-life supporters will answer that life begins at
conception, whereas most pro-choice supporters will answer that life begins at birth. So far as the author is
concerned, there is no prohibition against abortion given in the Scriptures.
Homosexuality
To address homosexuality, we must fully embrace the context of the passages that are used to
condemn it’s practice. Wayyāraḥ xviii.22 is often the first passage theologians and apologists will point to
in order to justify homosexuality as a sin. There are two prominent points which undermine this exegesis:
1.) When the passage says that “man shall not lie with man, for it is an abomination,” the word used for
“abomination” is toevah. This is quite interesting considering that toevah refers not to moral misconduct
but ritual impurity. “Ritual impurity is a contagious but generally impermanent sort of defilement, while
moral impurity results from what are believed to be immoral acts…” (Jonathon Klawans, Ritual and Moral
Impurity in the Hebrew Bible, Oxford University Press). Moral misconduct, and especially sexual
perversion is typically denoted by the word tehvel. 2.) The verse immediately preceding v.22 reads “And do
not give any of your offspring to pass through to Molek. And do not profane the Name of your elohim.. I
am YHVH.” To quote Finis Jenning Dake’s commentary on this verse, note e, p. 139, “Molech means
“king.” This was the name of the main god of Amon - called Chemosh by Moabites. Molech was
worshipped in Egypt as Amun, or Amun-Ra, “the king of gods.” What was supposed to be his likeness was
a statue of brass resting on a pedestal or throne of brass - his head crowned and resembling that of a calf,
and his arms extended as if to embrace all who came near. Children were his victims. The statue was heated
red-hot by fire inside and children were shaken over the flames or passed through the hot arms in
dedication to it, to receive Molech’s favor. It was believed that all children not so dedicated would die in
infancy. Many were actually burned alive in the idol.”29 The prohibitions against the rites of Molech begin
in v. 3 of chapter xviii, reiterated in v. 21, rounded off with the proscription against the rites and orgy
practices that took place during a child’s sacrifice to drown out their screams as they were burned alive in
sacrifice, and ends in v. 30 with the directive “I am YHVH your ‘ělōhȋym.” This connection between
promiscuous behavior is further reinforced in Romiyim i.20-32 and especially in v. 23. Yəḥezqêl xvi.49-50
states clearly the sins of Sedom are pride, greed, sloth, and apathy toward the poor. The “abomination”
committed before ‘Ădōnāy YHVH in v. 50 is toevah. The story contained in Bərêšîṯ xix.4-25 is very clearly
one of forceful coercion and not homosexuality alone and the author will not spend any more time in
exposition on it than this sentence.
The word translated “effeminate” in I Qorintiyim vi.9 is a poor translation of the Greek word
malakos rooted in misogynistic assumption. In truth malakos means “weak-willed” or “without a
backbone.” It’s antonym is karteria, which means “patient endurance” or “perseverance.” A wonderful
example regarding the usage of malakos is put forth in the Nicomachean Ethics which was published in 350
B.C.E. Aristotle’s discourse goes as follows:
“…of the disposions described above, the deliberate avoidance of pain is rather a kind of softness
(malakia); the deliberate pursuit of pleasure is profligacy in the strict sense.”;
“One who is deficient in resistance to pains that most men withstand with success, is soft (malakos) or
luxurious, for luxury is a kind of softness (malakia); such a man lets his cloak trail on the ground to
ecape the fatigue and troubles of lifting it, or feigns sickness, not seeing that to counterfeit misery is
to be miserable.”
“People too fond of amusement are thought to be profligate, but really they are soft (malakos); for
amusement is rest, and therefore a slackening of effort, and addiction to amusement is a form of
excessive slackness.”30
Not once is this word being used to describe sexuality and that it is used to the effect of being bold
can also be supported by Hazon xxi.8 which explicitly condemns cowards to the second death in the Lake
of Fire.
The word arsenokoites, translated to “homosexuals” in the same passage as malakos has been
studied in great length by Dr. Ann Nyland, who is a scholar with a doctorate in ancient languages and word
meanings. She is a former college professor at the University of New England, Australia, Faculty in
Ancient Greek Language and Ancient History and says of the word arsenokoites “When used in the
meaning “anal penetrator,” it does not apply exclusively to males as the receptors, as it was also used for
women receptors.31
The author’s translation of I Timotiyos i.9-10, the passage in which arsenokoites is used, follows:
“We perceive this: that for the virtuous who observe the law, the law was not laid down, but for the
violators of the law; the insubordinate, the profane, for those devoted to missing the mark, for those who
live without purity, unhallowed, for those who commit patricide, for those who commit matricide, for those
who commit homicide, for prostitutes, arsenokoites [“arseno-“ man “-koites” bed], those who enslave
others, for those who break faith and lie, for perjurers, and any others in opposition to sound and whole
teaching.”
There is not one Scripture to support the idea of condemning a committed, monogamous, and
loving homosexual relationship. Even were we to read this as “males lying with males,” the esoteric veil
protects it from the profane literal understanding. Romiyim i.20-28 will be especially important to
understand the multi-layered meaning to this understanding. There is an adage in Sophian Gnosticism
which says “We can not see the sun, only the glory of the sun.” The sun here is represented both literally
and figuratively insofar that were any individual to gaze directly at the sun with no protective equipment,
they would go blind. However, this adage goes even deeper to mean the “spiritual sun” or the “source of
enlightenment.” We can never gaze directly at it’s truest form, only it’s emanations. This of course ties back
into the concept of the Sublime Anthropos and hamartia, covered in Section III. This is the mystery of the
Ineffable One, termed Ain Soph. The power of the Ain Soph is called “Shekhinah,” or “Glory.” Here the
author quotes Madame Blavatsky:
“— “ in the treatment of the Primal cause, two things must be considered, the Primal Cause per se, and the
relation and connection of the Primal Cause with the visible and unseen universe.’ Thus he shows the
early Hebrews following in the steps of the Oriental philosophy — Chaldean, Persian, Hindu, Arabic, etc.
Their Primal Cause was designated at first “ by the triadic Shaddaï, the (triune) Almighty, subsequently by
the Tetragrammaton, YHVH, symbol of the Past, Present, and Future,” and, let us add, of the eternal Is, or
the I Am. Moreover, in the Kabala the name YHVH (or Jehovah) expresses a He and a She, male and
female, two in one, or Hokhmah and Binah, and his, or rather their Shekinah or synthesizing spirit (grace),
which makes again of the Duad a Triad. This is demonstrated in the Jewish Liturgy for Pentecost, and the
prayer, “ In the name of Unity, of the Holy and Blessed Hû (He), and His Shekinah, the Hidden and
Concealed Hû, blessed be YHVH (the Quaternary) for ever.” “ Hû is said to be masculine and YAH
feminine, together they make the ‫ יהוה אחד‬i.e., one YHVH. One, but of a male-female nature. The Shekinah
is always considered in the Qabbalah as feminine ” (p. 175). And so it is considered in the exoteric Purânas,
for Shekinah is no more than Sakti — the female double or lining of any god, in such case. And so it was
with the early Christians whose Holy Spirit was feminine, as Sophia was with the Gnostics. But in the
transcendental Chaldean Kabala or “ Book of Numbers,” “ Shekinah ” is sexless, and the purest abstraction,
a State, like Nirvana, not subject or object or anything except an absolute Presence.” 32
If we understand “God’s invisible qualities…having been clearly seen, being understood from
what has been made, so that men are without excuse” in v. 20 of Romiyim i to refer to this idea, the context
changes entirely, for “though they knew God they did not honour him and exchanged the glory of the
immortal God for IMAGES RESEMBLING mortal things.” What Paul is describing here is the antithesis
of illumination, enlightenment, and wisdom; i.e. ignorance. This also ties into the Christian Kabbalistic
understanding of the Sephiroth on the Tree of Life having inherently masculine and feminine qualities. 12 If
there is a disruption within the relationships between the Sephiroth, we remove ourselves from the
Shekinah. The Sephiroth, just like humans, have shadow aspects connected to their natures. These shadow
aspects form the “Tree of Death,” called Qlipoth and the corollaries to the Sephiroth are as follows:
Thaumiel (The Twin Gods) for Kether, Ghogiel (The Hinderers) for Chokmah, Satoriel (The Concealers)
for Binah, Belial (The Worthless Ones) for Da’ath, Gha Agsheblah (The Smiters) for Chesed, Golohab (The
Flaming Ones) for Geburah, Tagimron (The Disputers) for Tiphareth, Gharab (The Ravens of Dispersion)
for Netzach, Samael (The Poison of God) for Hod, Gomaliel (The Obscene Ones) for Yesod, and Lilith
(The Queen of the Night) for Malkuth. These “husks of darkness” could be the “degradation” Paul refers to
in v.24. Rather than clinging to the higher grades of the Sephiroth, the people Paul refers to in this passage
have clung to a grade beneath them.
We must all, individually, balance our masculine and feminine qualities on the path to
enlightenment. This sacred marriage, or union, of opposites – called hieros gamos – is precluded by either
Pillar on the Tree of Life, of either Mercy or Severity. When human beings choose to worship God in spirit
and in truth and cling to the higher grades of the Sephiroth, they represent the Sephiroth Malkuth and are
reconciled to these higher Sephiroth on the Tree of Life. This union also restores the final “heh” in
YHV(H). However, when human beings refuse to worship God in spirit and in truth and do not cling to the
higher grades of the Sephiroth, the final “heh” is separated from the Holy Name and there is a breach in
Malkuth. Through this negativity, shefa (influxes of spiritual powers) and ruhaniyot (essence or breath)
flows only to one side, the masculine unobstructed and unmitigated by the feminine or vice-versa. The
feminine in Christian Kabbalah is understood to represent receptivity and the masculine is understood to
represent insemination, not in the sense of physical reproduction, but rather, in the sense of emotional and
psychic balances. The so-called “prohibitions against homosexuality” in the Pistis Sophia, Book III,
Chapter 121, the Pistis Sophia, Book IV, Chapter 127, the Pistis Sophia, Book VI, Chapter 147, The Gospel
of Judas v.1-3, Wayyāraḥ xviii.22, and Romiyim i.20-28 can all be interpreted through the lens of this
understanding.
Polygamy
Polygamy stands as a subject not covered in the literal sense through the Scriptures. While a
different type of condition entirely, anytime faithlessness to one’s spouse is mentioned, it is always used in
the context of Yiśrā’ēl straying from ‫ יהוה‬. A cursory reading of Hōwōšêa‘ combined with passages like
Yəša‘yāhū liv.6 will illuminate this idea quite plainly. So it is with polygamy, which represents a far greater
idea than that of the literal definition of engaging with, having, and/or marrying more than one sexual
and/or romantic partner. It has been mentioned on multiple occasions thus far that names bear a significant
meaning to the exegesis of certain passages throughout the Scriptures. Examples of polygamy tied to this
exegesis may be found in Bərêšîṯ iv.19, xxvi.34, xxviii.9, xxix.28, etc.
When passages such as II Divrê Hayyāmîm xiii.21 say that “’Ăbȋâ waxed mighty, and married
fourteen wives…” we may interpret this to mean feminine principles rather than literal wives, an
overabundance of which causes spiritual infidelity, as we read in I Məl'āḵhîm xi.3 that Š ǝlōmô had seven
hundred wives, princesses, and three hundred concubines: and his wives turned away his heart from ‫יהוה‬. It
is important to note the similarity between the wives turning away the heart of Š ǝlōmô in the same manner
the heart of Yiśrā’ēl strayed from ‫יהוה‬. The act of polygamy in this context may read more accurately of
Šǝlōmô pursuing a pantheon of deities rather than remaining true to ‫יהוה‬, while also tying the behavior to an
overabundance of the feminine aspects, which produced an unbalanced heiros gamos, as mentioned in the
previous subsection, titled Homosexuality.
As far as polygamy in the literal sense, the author sternly recommends monogamy from a personal
perspective on the basis of belief that every person has a Divine Masculine or Divine Feminine counterpart
(as Adam Kadmon), but makes no doctrine or dogma regarding it. So long as all parties are equal to in
consent, the author has no say one way or the other regarding their choices and preferences.
Transexuality
Regarding transgender people, it should be noted that no firm reference is made to them in the text
of the Holy Scriptures. Iêsous mentions eunuchs, or men who were castrated in the service of a king so as
to not copulate with the women in service of the king who the eunuch would cohabitate with, as well as
some who “were borne this way of their mother’s womb” in Mattithyahu xix.12, but the author would
wager this is more than likely a reference to intersexed individuals over an individual who lives as the
gender opposite what they were assigned at birth. There is an interesting etymological reference that
appears regarding the name of ‘Abrāhām’s wife in the Old Testament. It must first be noted that the suffix -
ai is a masculine one. Adon in Hebrew means “lord” or “sovereign” and Adonai would therefore mean “my
[masculine] lord.” The suffix -ah, however, is a feminine one. The root sar- means “prince” in Hebrew.
Therefore, the name Sarai would translate to “my [masculine] prince,” whereas Sarah would translate to
“princess.” It should also be considered that the Hebrew word saris means “eunuch.” The author once again
reinforces the idea that Scripture is not literal but rather esoteric, and should therefore be read as a
masculine principle becoming a feminine one rather than a literal sex change. The author makes no
theological basis for exclusion or discrimination against members of the transgender community. To
discriminate against such a person plays into the egoic mindset of separation. The behavior is what should
be examined over the person’s identity: Are they kind? Are they loyal and giving? Do they embody higher
principles beyond their identity? This should be the focus, and any other judgment cast at them is only as
good as the judgments cast at the self making them.
As far as biology is concerned, while the highest Natural Law is entropy, Nature seems to favor
diversity over uniformity. We know there are at least a dozen and a half chromosome differentiations, 33 and
even have record of a woman with XY chromosome variation giving birth to a child. 34 That cisgender
women may develop hirsutism due to Polycystic Ovary Syndrome, which is typically a male secondary sex
characteristic, or that the SRY gene may be unable to process testosterone, or that any number of
discoordination could develop in genes like DMRT1 or FOXL2, which maintain certain sexual
characteristics, alongside the other examples the author has listed, shows sex to be more complex than the
average individual takes for granted. There is a study that has been done showing that when a person of one
gender performs tasks associated with the other gender, that there is a greater risk of anxiety, discomfort,
and stress associated with doing such a task.35 There is yet another study done regarding the Reimer twins.
Brian, who would later change his name to David, was raised as a girl due to a botched circumcision. I will
refer to him as David from this point forward. The psychologist John Money oversaw David and believed
David’s gender transition to be successful, however, a sexologist by the name of Milton Diamond would go
on to say years later that David realized he was not a girl between the ages of 9 to 11 and subsequently
began living as a male by the time he was 15. Brian had been forced by Dr. Money to perform “thrusting
acts” against his brother during the course of “training” David not only to be more feminine but to prepare
for receptive sex.
The parents of the Reimer twins would go on to say that the methods that Dr. Money used, as well
as the dysphoria that David would feel which accompanied him throughout his entire life, would contribute
to Brian dying of a drug overdose by the time he was 36 and David committing suicide by the time he was
38. The irony is not lost on the author that conservatives often use this study to maintain transgender people
should not be allowed to transition, but the author finds that a transgender individual is more likely in the
position of David post-op rather than pre-op. This can be gleaned by the horrifying statistics that up to 43%
of transgender individuals have attempted suicide at some point in their lives, while a study put out by Dr.
Caitlin Ryan and the Family Acceptance Project found that LGBTQ+ youth who were accepted by their
families are almost 50% less likely to attempt suicide.36
The author finds in this discourse that not recognizing a person’s gender identity, whether it differs
from the sex they were assigned at birth or not, is cruel and unusual punishment brought down upon these
individuals not by any judicial system but by the public, for a crime of which they are not guilty.
Cannabis & Other Recreational Substances
That marijuana among many other stimulants and depressants have been used throughout history
in nearly every culture and especially as they relate to spiritual practices should not be a controversial
subject, as the author feels a vast majority of the topics having been covered should not be either. These
substances may be grouped together beneath the term “Entheogen Substances” and will refer strictly to
substances that are ingested and not to substances used as incense, oil, or any other manner of ceremonial
magick with the exception of any passages in the Bible referencing such uses. Ayahuasca is a
hallucinogenic drug that has been used by indigenous people who live in the Amazonian Basin for at least
1,000 years for shamanic purposes. Tobacco has been used by American Indians and Alaskan Natives for
centuries in a medicinal and spiritual context. Mushrooms, or Psilocybin, DMT, and LSD are all modern
substances that many individuals use to obtain a spiritual or shamanic experience, and in some cases, for
recreational use that leads to a spiritual awakening, such as in the examples of Timothy Leary and Philip K.
Dick. Terence McKenna, an American ethnobiologist, developed a theory based on our primate ancestors
developing consciousness from ingesting Psilocybin in his “Stoned Ape Hypothesis.”
The Marijuana plant has been used for centuries for its hemp and for medicinal purposes,
beginning as early as 500 B.C.E. in Asia. In Šəmōwṯ xxx.23, we read “And take for yourself choice spices,
five hundred sheqels of liquid myrrh, and half as much – two hundred and fifty – of sweet-smelling
cinnamon, and two hundred and fifty of sweet-smelling cane.” This term, “sweet-smelling cane” in Hebrew
is qānê beśem and its exact use is uncertain, however, many linguists seem to agree that it refers to
cannabis. This conclusion, brought forward by such people as Dr. Martin Booth and Sula Benet,37 excludes
the obvious etymological similarities between CANNA against QĀNȆ and BIS against BEŚEM. What
makes this passage particularly important is that it highlights the ingredients used for incense in the temple
of ‫יהוה‬. It is well documented that the incense burned before the goddess ‘Ăŝērȃ by the Scythians was a
topical hallucinogen containing cannabis, the same incense and goddess to whom the Yiśrā’ēlites sacrifice
to in I Məl'āḵhîm xiv.15, 23, xv.13, xvi.33, xviii.19, etc. A cursory study of Strong’s #842 will reveal the
use of ‘Ăŝērȃ’s name and the multiple times the Yiśrā’ēlites trafficked with her throughout the Tanakh.
Of course, we read in Bərêšîṯ i.29 “And the ‘ělōhȋym said, “See, I have given you every plant that
yields seed which is on the face of all the earth, and every tree whose fruit yields seed, to you it is for
food.” This is a self-explanatory passage that many Evangelical Christians who wage a war on drugs seem
to ignore in the premise of their arguments. As a Gnostic, the author will temper any such indulgence with I
Qorintiyim vi.12, which reads “All things are permissible, but not all things are beneficial. All things are
permissible, but I shall not be brought beneath the authority of anything.” In other words, so long as any
substance is used in moderation and not as a manner of emotional escape or as an addiction, the author
finds no fault in engaging with prudent use. This view will be extended by the author to substances such as
nicotine and alcohol, however, the author is hesitant to extend this same gracious usage to the common
substances known as methamphetamine, cocaine, and fentanyl, with therapeutic exemptions given to
opioids and narcotics when used prudently with a physician’s scrip. Any use of psychoactive drugs should
be used in personal self-development and to encourage one’s spiritual cultivation, or as a medicine to
alleviate physical pain, rather than as a hedonistic indulgence.
Many a reader may ask, if the Scriptures are esoteric, as the author has argued, why should this
sort of exposition matter? The cultural symbolism the authors of the Scriptures used and the mere fact that
cannabis is even mentioned, albeit passively, but especially in reference to the temple incense in Scripture,
is important to deconstructing the Evangelical Christian worldview that Marijuana is inherently “evil.”
Euthanasia & Suicide
Similar to the subsection titled Transexuality, the author writes from the understanding that there
is no clear passage of the Scriptures which directly addresses this topic, so the author will instead draw
from a philosophical perspective. We may define murder or homicide as “the unlawful killing of an
unwilling participant.” In other words, what separates murder from euthanasia and suicide is that a
homicide victim has no desire for their life to end. In certain cases, a person who is being considered for
euthanasia may no longer be able to communicate their wants or needs and this topic becomes even more
morally convoluted in such situations. Just as the subsection titled Cannabis & Other Recreational
Substances, we must look at this topic through the lens of what cultivates personal spiritual development.
Is euthanasia or suicide conducive in any way, shape, or form to a spiritual life? The answer is both yes and
no.
For one who has suffered from an accident which has left them permanently immobile, unable to
speak, move, or live any kind of life with even a modicum of comfort and no chance of recovery, the
question must be asked whether it is more tortuous to keep such an individual alive or if ending their life
would in all reality be a kindness. This question must also be asked regarding one who ends their own life
due to mental impairment, including any of the various mental illnesses which impedes itself upon modern
society. There must be a differentiation here made between mental impairment and mental affliction.
Mental affliction may come from any number of outside, situational sources; poverty, social ostracization,
grief, etc., whereas mental impairment is the result of biological processes and an inherent aspect to one’s
personality with no hope of recovery.
This perspective requires an immense amount of empathy. No real change can be made upon the
neuroses of humankind without the intervention of science, and while there is hope for the future, at the
present moment the author writes, the only amelioration to this problem comes in the form of medicinal
substances with dozens of side effects, each worse than the last, with no permanent solution. It cannot be
quipped that suicide is a “permanent solution for a temporary problem” in such cases as mental impairment.
Nobody would dare argue this against a person who is wheelchair-bound and has a desire to end their life.
The author does not imply that euthanization should be pushed upon those who live in such a state, only
that empathy and understanding should be used in such a situation that euthanization be something they
desire.
How does any of this benefit spiritual development? The first aspect we must examine is whether
a person has the mental capacity to further their spiritual development. If they are cognizant and can reason
well, having their mental faculties intact, they are well-equipped for examining their conscience and
consciousness, which is to say, they are mentally competent. If, however, such a person is not cognizant,
and cannot reason well, who does not have their mental faculties intact, they are not well-equipped for
examining their conscience and consciousness. There is also a differentiation between being able to
function in society and conscientiousness. There are many people deemed “competent” who supposedly
have their mental faculties yet have no capability to reflect upon their inward natures. The author brings
this up to contrast the variables that have led to this conversation.
The second aspect we must examine is the heart of intent for the person who desires to end their
life. Being in excruciatingly physical or psychical pain on a daily basis is in no manner living well. For
society to disregard such pain in lieu of desiring a person to remain present takes into no account the
individual who is suffering. Requesting an individual stay alive for a community rather than allowing a
community to grieve is selfish. The author stands by those who wish to end their lives for whatever reasons
they deem valid. Society cannot know the mind of a single individual and it has no right to impede an
individual’s right to end their life. There is a nuance to this conversation that gets missed more often than
not, and the author does not feel adequate justice has been given to examining this perspective from the
vantage of those who desire to end their own life, for whatever reason it may be. The author will temper
this subsection with a final modifier; that the author in no way, shape, or form supports eugenics. A
temporal reading of this subsection, or even casual perusal may lead one to such a conclusion but that is far
from the intent of this passage. Eugenics is on par with homicide, of which both the author vehemently
decries.
Reincarnation
The author has previously mentioned the cycle of Saṃsāra in Section V but will now place this
philosophical idea in the context of the Scriptures. Unlike many of the previous subsections, this subject is
referenced multiple times throughout the Scriptures. The author will begin by examining Mattithyahu
xvi.13-20 with Marqos viii.27-31 and Luqas ix.18-22, which says:
And Iêsous…put a question to his pupils, saying to them: “Who do men say that the Son of Man is?” And
they said: “Some [say] Iôannes the Lustrator; some, ‘Ēlȋyâ; and others, Yirməyāhū, or one of the Seers.” He
says to them: “But who do you say that I am?” And Simōn Petros , answering, said: “Thou art the Anointed,
the Son of the Living God!” And Iêsous, answering, said to him: “Immortal you are, Simōn, Son of
Yōwnāh! for flesh and blood did not unveil [this secret] to you, but my Father who is in the Skies. And I
say to you, too, You are a Rock (Petrōs), and on this rock (petra) I will build my Society, and the Gates of
the Underworld shall not prevail against it. And I will give you the Keys of the Realm of the Skies; and
whatsoever you shall bind on the Earth shall be bound in the Skies, and whatsoever you shall loose on the
Earth shall be loosed in the Skies.” Then he warned his pupils that they should say to no one, “He himself
is the Anointed.” From that time on, Iêsous began to show his pupils that he must go away to Yǝrûšālam,
and suffer many [indignities] from the Pharisees and Sadducees and Scribes, and be killed, and awaken
[from the dead] the third day.
It might seem odd that there were individuals who believed Iêsous was Iôannes, or ‘Ēlȋyâ, or
Yirməyāhū, or one of the other Seers known to the public in the Old Testament. That ‘Ēlȋyâ is mentioned is
significant when read in the context of Mal’āḵî iv.5-6, which says:
See, I am sending you ‘Ēlȋyâ the prophet before the coming of the great and awesome day of ‫יהוה‬. And he
shall turn the hearts of the fathers to the children, and the hearts of the children to their fathers, lest I come
and strike the earth with utter destruction.
There was clearly confusion among many people as to the identity of Christ. Christian Kabbalism
maintains that Christōs was a reincarnation of Dāwid, who was, in turn, a reincarnation of ‘Ādām. This
process is known in Hebrew as gilgul, meaning “cycle” or “wheel.” This conversation surrounding the
identity of not only Christōs, but of Iôannes the Lustrator as well, continues in Yoḥanon i.21 of which
priests and Levites ask of Iôannes “Art thou Ēlias?” Ēlias in Greek is Hêlias, which many a student of
Greek mythology will understand to be etymologically connected to the god of the Solar body in their
pantheon named Hêlios. This question was posed in reference to Mal’āḵî iv.2, which says:
But to you who fear My Name the Sun of Righteousness shall arise with healing in His wings.
The question was placed as an etymological play on words. This sort of intellectual wordplay is
left unnoticed in any translation of Scripture that isn’t in the original languages it was written in. The
automatic rebuttal to any concept of transmigration from the modern Christian immediately points to is
Ib’rim ix.27-28, which reads:
And as it awaits MEN TO DIE ONCE, and after this the judgment, so also the Messiah, having been
offered once to bear the sins of many, shall appear a second time, apart from sin, to those waiting for Him,
unto deliverance.
This passage can be interpreted through the lens of I Kěpha ii.21, 24, which reads:
because Messiah also suffered for us…who Himself bore our sins in His body on the timber, so that we,
having DIED TO SINS, might live unto righteousness – by whose stripes you were healed.
The death referenced in Ib’rim ix.27 is not a physical and literal one, but a death to sin, or
repentance. This is even indicated by the phrasing of the passage: And as it awaits men to die once, and
after this the judgment, SO ALSO the Messiah…
If we are to take this passage as referencing physical existence, the wording would make sense in
light of the Cyclic Model of the Universe, as mentioned in Section II. In other words, this passage would
read that we live once per manifestation of the universe, die, and then return after the universe has been
destroyed and recreated. Many reincarnationists read this passage to mean that we die once per lifetime, are
judged and then returned to the earth but the author finds this argument flimsy at best and prefers to
interpret Ib’rim ix.27 alongside I Kěpha ii.24.
Then we have the passage in Ya’aqob iii.6, which reads in the Amplified Version:
And the tongue [is] a fire. [The tongues is a] world of wickedness set among our members, contaminating
and depraving the whole body and setting of fire the WHEEL OF BIRTH – the cycle of man’s nature –
being itself ignited by hell (Gehenna).
This phrase, emphasized by the author, “WHEEL OF BIRTH” is precisely the wording one would
expect to describe the situation of reincarnation. The Stoic philosophers of Greece adopted the view of
transmigration, albeit through the eyes of a cyclic universe and labelled their concept of Eternal Return
palingenesia. It is interesting to note that this word appears twice in the New Testament, once in
Mattithyahu xix.28 and again in Titos iii.5.
Overall, the author accepts the tenet of reincarnation as Scriptural, having taken no note in this
subsection to reference the transmigration of spirits mentioned in the Nag Hammadi Codices of which there
are many instances. Instead, the author has chosen to defend the position from a purely canonical
standpoint due to it’s controversy in the mainstream church.
Government
There is only one government acceptable to the Gnostic religion and that is a theocracy. This is not
the theocracy of the frantic or fanatic Evangelical Christian, but one involved with the “kingdom of heaven
residing within each individual” [c.f. Luqas xvii.20-21, The Gospel of Thomas, saying 77b, and Ma’sei
vii.48]. We have gradually evolved from the Coliseum of murder to one of physical competition and were
one to be murdered in such a public place, most civilized individuals would be horrified rather than
entertained by it. This evolution must continue. The scientist who solves for an equation to produce a
universal theory, or an artist who paints with tools an artwork as glorious a spectacle as that of the Sistine
Chapel, these are the competitions we must embody, to further ourselves and the greater humanities.
Humankind has accepted for far too long that war, poverty, and crime is an inevitable condition.
But in order to create peace, we must first cultivate peace within ourselves. In order to create a better, more
helpful world, we must first become helpful and useful as individuals. Pure and undefiled religion is to look
after orphans and widows in their distress while remaining unpolluted from the kosmos.38 As Darrell
Martinie said: “It is a wise person who rules the stars [but] a fool who is ruled by them.” To the brute and
the unenlightened, the government must govern with the threat of punishment, and the only remedy to this
situation is to improve our education, and learn not only the basic required courses for the sciences but also
the science of human conduct summed up in the Golden Rule. The amelioration and dissolution of
government will only arrive when individuals are personally empowered to deal with the ills of life in a
creative manner instead of in an institutionalized one.
There is a sacredness in the Mona Lisa and in Heisenberg’s Uncertainty Principle which most of
secular society will not acknowledge. This sacredness is inherent in all of humankind. Every person has the
capacity to compose the next symphony or to build an architectural feat that rivals the Taj Mahal. That this
latent ability is not recognized in most people is evident. The potential for humankind is dwindling, but the
embers of the flame can always be reignited. Evangelical fanaticists scream on and on about abortion
killing the possible scientist who will cure cancer, but then does nothing to prepare those who have been
born to be the one who cures it. The Conservative Party has given itself over to this fascistic mode of
emotional operation, or rather, lack of it, as well.
This frantic work to convert others to a certain manner of thinking is detrimental to the progress of
humanity, which sees a problem outside of itself and seeks to improve the conditions, rather than
conversion. Our minds have conquered nature and must continue doing so, or we otherwise forfeit our
God-given gift of rationality and become merely intelligent and clever beasts. This sociological
advancement will be the only way to maintain a permanent peace among nations. As Manly P. Hall writes:
“This was the philosophic democracy, with all men having the right to become wise through self-discipline
and self-improvement, thus achieving the only aristocracy recognized by Natural Law.” 39
For a more extensive and thorough understanding of the author’s stance on government, it is
recommended the reader looks into obtaining a copy of Manly P. Hall’s “The Secret Destiny of America,”
which is a short, 53-page essay discussing the manner in which the author’s vision so stated in this
subsection could possibly come to fruition.
Pacifism
The author maintains the philosophy of such towering giants as Henry David Thoreau, Dietrich
Bonhoeffer, and Martin Luther King, Jr. that the Gospel is at worst silent on the concept of war and murder
in the literal sense and at best supports a peaceable disposition in each individual’s dealings with the human
experience at large. As it is written in Romiyim xii.18: If possible, on your part, be at peace with all men.
To berate the point that the Scriptures are to be understood as symbolic becomes too redundant so the
author will instead focus once more on a more philosophical argument, such as presented in the subsection
titled Euthanasia & Suicide. It does become necessary in certain times of physical distress to fight back in
order to protect one’s self and what one values, but not in the way our lower and base natures would fight
back.
There is a story regarding the Gnostic sect of the Cathars who thrived in Southern Europe between
the 12th and 14th centuries. Their spiritual practices stood in stark contrast to the Catholic church’s,
including a ritual called the consolamentum which required the initiates to renounce the world, abstain from
eating flesh, and abstinence from sexual contact. This ritual was performed by way of baptism and
afterward, the initiate was raised to the status of Perfecti, an adept in Catharism meant to help other
initiates in their spiritual journey. The Cathars also identified the Jove of the Old Testament with the
Demiurge, who they called Satan, and believed that the spirits of humans were angels trapped in physical
form which would reincarnate until their consolamentum. Pope Eugene III attempted to stifle the progress
of the Cathars but was largely unsuccessful until Pope Innocent III came to power. Pope Innocent III would
attempt to convert the Cathars to Catholicism but when that was met with futility, the Pope then ordered a
war to exterminate the Cathars.
The response to this hostile declaration of war by the Cathars was swift. They wrote a ballad titled
Lo Boièr, meaning “The Oxherd,” which contained in it’s lyrics all the symbolism regarding the philosophy
of the Cathars one would need to reconstruct in order to obtain their rituals. The Albignesian Crusade was
waged for twenty years by the Pope and it has been said that the Cathars would sing this song to the pyre
upon which they were to be burned to death. The lyrics go as such:
Quand lo boièr ven de laurar When the ploughman returns from plowing
Quand lo boièr ven de laurar When the ploughman returns from plowing
Plantas son agulhada He plants his cattle prod
AH, AY, E, OH, OOH A, E, I, O, U
Plantas son agulhada He plants his cattle prod

Tròba sa femna al pè del fuòc He finds his wife at the foot of the fire
Tròba sa femna al pè del fuòc He finds his wife at the foot of the fire
Tota desconsolada Completely inconsolable
Tota desconsolada Completely inconsolable

Se n’es malauta digas-o If you are sad, then tell me
Se n’es malauta digas-o If you are sad, then tell me
Te farai un potatge I’ll make you a stew
Te farai un potatge I’ll make you a stew

Am buna rava, amb un caulet With a turnip, with a cabbage
Am buna rava, amb un caulet With a turnip, with a cabbage
Una lauseta magra And a skinny lark
Una lauseta magra And a skinny lark

Quand serai mòrta enterratz-me When I am dead bury me
Quand serai mòrta enterratz-me When I am dead bury me
Al pus prigond de la cava In the deepest part of the cave
Al pus prigond de la cava In the deepest part of the cave

Los pès virats a la paret My feet towards the wall
Los pès virats a la paret My feet towards the wall
Lo cap jos la canela My head in the path of the water
Lo cap jos la canela My head in the path of the water

E los romius que passaràn The pilgrims that will pass by
E los romius que passaràn The pilgrims that will pass by
Prendràn d’aiga senhada Will take from the holy water
Prendràn d’aiga senhada Will take from the holy water

E diràn: Qual es mort aicí? And they will ask: Who died here?
E diràn: Qual es mort aicí? And they will ask: Who died here?
Aquò es la paura Joana Here lies the poor Joanne
Se n’es anada al paradís She went to paradise

Se n’es anada al paradís She went to paradise
Al cèl ambe sas cabras To heaven with her goats
An exposition on these lyrics will not be necessary for the point being made in this subsection, but
should any reader desire to understand the deeper meaning to this beautiful hymn, please see note. 40 The
author reinforces this idea of the Cathars; those who lived by pious affection of spiritual practice saw their
bodies only as a temporal syzygy between flesh and spirit and sought to free their spirit from the bonds of
the flesh. Their fight was truly not “against flesh and blood” but against “the rulers and authorities.”
The Eucharist
The mystery of the Eucharist in the Gnostic tradition the author follows is understood in this
regard: Iêsous Christōs, being a representation of the solar body, gives ‘his’ life for the grapes which grow
on the vine, which we use to create wine, while also giving ‘his’ life for the wheat to grow, which we will
use for bread. Hence, in this concept, Iêsous Christōs truly is the bread and wine of life. The sun uses
energy by crushing hydrogen alongside other atoms until they fuse together. The energetic output of this
process results in the Sun losing 350 billion tonnes daily, or 0.0000000000000000002% of it’s mass. The
Sun truly sheds his blood for us daily. The Solar Deity is a ubiquitous concept across every culture from
every time dating back as far as humanity began speaking and telling stories.
Beaneath the heading THE SUN, A UNIVERSAL DEITY, Manly P. Hall writes:

Recognizing the sun as the supreme benefactor of the material world, Hermetists believed that there was a
spiritual sun which ministered to the needs of the invisible and divine part of Nature--human and universal.
Anent this subject, the great Paracelsus wrote: "There is an earthly sun, which is the cause of all heat, and
all who are able to see may see the sun; and those who are blind and cannot see him may feel his heat.
There is an Eternal Sun, which is the source of all wisdom, and those whose spiritual senses have awakened
to life will see that sun and be conscious of His existence; but those who have not attained spiritual
consciousness may yet feel His power by an inner faculty which is called Intuition."
Certain Rosicrucian scholars have given special appellations to these three phases of the sun: the spiritual
sun they called Vulcan; the soular and intellectual sun, Christ and Lucifer respectively; and the material
sun, the Jewish Demiurgus Jehovah. Lucifer here represents the intellectual mind without the illumination
of the spiritual mind; therefore it is "the false light. " The false light is finally overcome and redeemed by
the true light of the soul, called the Second Logos or Christ. The secret processes by which the Luciferian
intellect is transmuted into the Christly intellect constitute one of the great secrets of alchemy, and are
symbolized by the process of transmuting base metals into gold.
In the rare treatise The Secret Symbols of The Rosicrucians, Franz Hartmann defines the sun alchemically
as: "The symbol of Wisdom. The Centre of Power or Heart of things. The Sun is a centre of energy and a
storehouse of power. Each living being contains within itself a centre of life, which may grow to be a Sun.
In the heart of the regenerated, the divine power, stimulated by the Light of the Logos, grows into a Sun
which illuminates his mind." In a note, the same author amplifies his description by adding: "The terrestrial
sun is the image or reflection of the invisible celestial sun; the former is in the realm of Spirit what the
latter is in the realm of Matter; but the latter receives its power from the former."
In the majority of cases, the religions of antiquity agree that the material visible sun was a reflector rather
than a source of power. The sun was sometimes represented as a shield carried on the arm of the Sun God,
as for example, Frey, the Scandinavian Solar Deity. This sun reflected the light of the invisible spiritual
sun, which was the true source of life, light, and truth. The physical nature of the universe is receptive; it is
a realm of effects. The invisible causes of these effects belong to the spiritual world. Hence, the spiritual
world is the sphere of causation; the material world is the sphere of effects; while the intellectual--or soul--
world is the sphere of mediation. Thus Christ, the personified higher intellect and soul nature, is called "the
Mediator" who, by virtue of His position and power, says: "No man cometh to the Father, but by me."
What the sun is to the solar system, the spirit is to the bodies of man; for his natures, organs, and functions
are as planets surrounding the central life (or sun) and living upon its emanations. The solar power in man
is divided into three parts, which are termed the threefold human spirit of man. All three of these spiritual
natures are said to be radiant and transcendent; united, they form the Divinity in man. Man's threefold
lower nature--consisting of his physical organism, his emotional nature, and his mental faculties--reflects
the light of his threefold Divinity and bears witness of It in the physical world. Man's three bodies are
symbolized by an upright triangle; his threefold spiritual nature by an inverted triangle. These two triangles,
when united in the form of a six-pointed star, were called by the Jews "the Star of David," "the Signet of
Solomon," and are more commonly known today as "the Star of Zion." These triangles symbolize the
spiritual and material universes linked together in the constitution of the human creature, who partakes of
both Nature and Divinity. Man's animal nature partakes of the earth; his divine nature of the heavens; his
human nature of the mediator.41
And Alison Bailey writes:
"Vulcan is the ray or planet of isolation for, in a peculiar sense, it governs the fourth initiation wherein the
depths of aloneness are plumbed and the man stands completely isolated. He stands detached from “that
which is above and this which is below.” There comes a dramatic moment when all desire is renounced; the
will of God or the Plan is seen as the only desirable objective but as yet the man has not proved to himself,
to the world of men or his Master whether he has the strength to move forward along the line of service.
There is revealed to him (as there was revealed to Christ at the fourth great initiatory crisis in His life) some
definite, active undertaking which embodies that aspect of the will of God which it is his peculiar function
to appropriate and make possible of expression. This has been called in Christian phraseology, “the
Gethsemane experience.” The Christ, kneeling beside the rock (symbolic of the depths of the mineral
kingdom and of the activity of Vulcan, the fashioner), raises His eyes upward to where the light of
revelation breaks forth and knows at that moment what it is He has to do. Such is the test of Vulcan, ruling
Taurus, if the soul, ruling desire, of the Son of God, fashioning His instrument of expression in the depths,
grasping the divine purpose and so bending the will of the little self to that of the greater Self." 42
This is the celebration the Eucharist praises.
Servants, Obey Your Master
That these issues have become so magnified and overshadow most of the conversation in modern
Christianity is disheartening. Gnosticism, as the author understands it, does not concern itself on taking
sides in these ego-based division tactics, but rather takes a broader view from the vantage of a spiritual
perspective. The bulk of Scripture does not focus intently on these human trivialities that are based in the
EGO, but rather, in transforming our inner natures to glorify and illuminate our kindnesses, and to highlight
our humanity rather than our judgments and hostilities. As the quote by Confucius says: “To put the world
in order, we must first put the nation in order; to put the nation in order, we must first put the family in
order; to put the family in order, we must first cultivate our personal life; we must first set our hearts right.”
If there is no example to aspire to, humanity becomes lost. We MUST set the example first; not by some
external show of force, but by the quiet internal work of personal development. Below are a set of three
passages personally translated by the author who feels most accurately sums up the message of the
Scriptures:
My beloved fast is to open the mouth; to speak about the tightly fastened bonds of unrighteousness
which cause the heart to tremble; to tear away the oppressive bonds of the yoke and send freedom in it’s
place;
to break in twain and divide my sustenance among to hungry who enter the dwelling place of the
afflicted and persecuted, and to cover and conceal the flesh of the naked who I behold.
Light shall cleave asunder the dawn and the healing wound shall sprout forth (in healing growth) with
celerity as the countenance of tṣeh’deq (the just weight and measure) goes along in heavy honour and ‫יהוה‬
receives and takes them in (with hospitality).
For the recitations of ‫ יהוה‬are this: to pronounce helpful speech of edification, to turn aside the center
of the yoke, to dismiss the finger pointed with the edict of vanity and falsehood,
to furnish the nep̄ hešh with satiated hunger, to command “Light be!” upon the nep̄ hešh, that rays of
light are scattered and rise over the calamitous darkness and in it’s stead remains the tsohar (radiance of
light).
‫ יהוה‬leads forth the nep̄ hešh to perpetual satiation among the arid places, so that even the bones are
invigoured; a satiated garden with flowing waters whose waters do not lie.
Yəšha‘yāhū lviii.6-11
Rûwacḥ ‘Ădōnāy ‫יהוה יהוה‬, you have drawn your hand over me and anointed me to chastise and teach
the miserable and afflicted flesh that which is upright and honest; to frequently tread in and inquire of your
straightforward and prosperous verdict, to litigate for the oppressed orphan, to plead the case and contend
for the widow, to dismiss and send away the bonds of that which breaks the heart, to recite “liberty” and
open the prison to the fastened captives, to name them MIGHTY ONES OF TṢEH’DEQ, PLANTED AND
ADORNED BY ‫יהוה‬,
to recite “delight” in the year of‫ יהוה‬and to console and comfort those who mourn the yowm (day) of
vengeance of the ‘ĕlōhîym.
Construct from the immemorial times of antiquity that which has become desolate and ruined; Former
construction, arise! so that which was astonishingly laid to waste becomes new, yea, that city of drought
and desolation which was astonishingly laid waste for generation after generation.
Yəšha‘yāhū lxi.1a, i.17, lxi.1b-4
I shall litigate for the powerless minority, the fatherless, those in affliction and need, and the
impoverished through tṣādaq (the justice of the just weight and measure),
the sleek escape to the powerless minority in want and oppression whose hand vehemently
snatches away the wicked.
Nobody witnesses, nobody attentively distinguishes with intelligent prudence as darkness goes
forth Môṭ (a Ugaritic god of death, typically translated “shake”) every foundation of the ‘eretṣ (earth).
I bring forth speech of the ‘ĕlōhîym to you children of ‘Ēlyôwn:
Surely, truly, ‘ādām beneath Môṭ is as a prince who shall nāp̄ hal (the descent of spirit generating
into matter).
Təhillîm lxxxii.3-7
The entirety of these mitsvahs (or commands) can be summed up by Iêsous Christōs when He says
“Love the Lord your God (or that First Principle) with everything inside of you and love your neighbor
even as you love yourself.
Finally, the author will quote from I Qorintiyim xiii: If I speak with the tongues of men and of
angels, but do not have agapao (universal, unconditional love for humankind), I have become as sounding
brass or a clanging symbol. And if I have prophecy, and know all secrets and all gnôsis, and if I have all
belief, so as to remove mountains, but do not have love, I am none at all. And if I give out all my
possessions to feed the poor, and if I give my body to be burned, but do not have love, I am not profited at
all.
These passages are so self-explanatory, the author will not expound upon them, but only add a
comment: if personal self-development does not lead to a change in character, it is useless. To repent means
to slant one’s mind in a different direction. A changed mind is useless without changed behavior. Gnōsis
without action is empty and void. Faith without works is dead. The passages quoted in this subsection are
what the author feels sums up the entire message of the Gospel. The literalization of the Scriptures has
caused so many great maladies, afflictions, and abuses of power throughout history without reconciling
such actions with the heart of the Gospel. The EGO has taken that which is meant to be sacred and
perverted it to justify all its misogyny, racism, ableism, homophobia, and transphobia, but always just
beneath the surface lies the true spirit in which the Scriptures were written, for Christōs Iêsous has given us
the ministry of reconciliation, and not one of alienation.
VII. The Reconciliation Of All Things
This section will continue from Section V, tying all the pieces of information that has been
presented in this essay into a unified structure of salvation. There is a quote by Hermes Trismegistus, or the
“Thrice-Great Hermes,” which says that “God is an infinite sphere, the center of which is everywhere, the
circumference nowhere.”43 This idea is fleshed out in Qolasim i. 16-20, which says:
“For it was in Him that all things were created, in heaven and on earth, things seen and things unseen,
whether thrones (thronos), dominions (kyriotes), rulers (arkhe), or authorities (exousia); all things were
created and exist through Him (by His service, intervention) and in and for Him. And He Himself existed
before all things and in Him all things consist – cohere, are held together. He also is the Head of [His] body,
the church; seeing He is the Beginning (arkhe), the First-born from among the dead, so that He alone in
everything and in every respect might occupy the chief place – stand first and be pre-eminent. For it has
pleased [the Father] that all the divine fullness (pleroma) – the sum total of the divine perfection, powers
and attributes – should dwell in Him permanently. And God purposed that through – by the service, the
intervention of – of Him (the Son) all things should be completely reconciled back to Himself, whether on
earth or in heaven, as through Him [the Father] made peace by means of the blood of His cross.” 44
and Yohanon i.1-3, which says:
“In the beginning [before all time] was the Word [Christ], and the Word was with God, and the Word was
God Himself. He was present originally with God. All things were made and came into existence through
Him; and without Him was not even one thing made that has come into being.”45
If all things were made and came into existence through this First Principle and if without this First
Principle is not even one thing made manifest in creation, then there is no delineating separation between
Creator and Creation. As was discussed in Section V, the spirit that resides within us does not belong to us,
but is a loan, meant to awaken each individual to the Divinity that lives within their bodies. If Christōs
Iêsous is in everything, as Qolasim i.16-17 states, and there is no thing apart from Him, then any thing cast
into oblivion or some form of eternal torture would be casting an aspect of Christōs’ own divinity into
eternal torment or oblivion. Since the all cannot be contained by the some, any statement to this effect
would be nonsensical.
It is the author’s understanding that the intent of the Gnostic Cosmos46 is meant to push us back to
a state of entropy, complete silence, or the Night of Brahma. As discussed in Section II, it is proposed in the
Gnostic model of the universe that all creation goes through successive stages of rest and activity, just as all
manifest creation does on a microcosmic scale. Helena Blavatsky writes:
“Upon inaugurating an active period, says the Secret Doctrine, an expansion of this Divine essence from
without inwardly and from within outwardly, occurs in obedience to eternal and immutable law, and the
phenomenal or visible universe is the ultimate result of the long chain of cosmical forces thus progressively
set in motion. In like manner, when the passive condition is resumed, a contraction of the Divine essence
takes place, and the previous work of creation is gradually and progressively undone. The visible universe
becomes disintegrated, its material dispersed ; and ‘ darkness ’ solitary and alone, broods once more over
the face of the ‘ deep.’ To use a Metaphor from the Secret Books, which will convey the idea still more
clearly, an out breathing of the ‘ unknown essence ’ produces the world ; and an inhalation causes it to
disappear. This process has been going on from all eternity, and our present universe is but one of an
infinite series, which had no beginning and will have no end.”47
The reason for these inaugurative periods is the same reason for which we as individuals generally
do not stay in a period of isolation or inactivity for long: to experience something outside of ourselves. The
author quotes Rust Cohle from True Detectives once more:
“In eternity where there is no time, nothing can grow. Nothing can become. Nothing changes.”
This is the entire summary of existence. We are here as the Divine to experience ourselves as
separate from others and all else, using the ego as our mechanism from which we hedge against
reunification with the ALL. And all things WILL be reconciled back to the ALL, for we read in II
Qorintiyim v.19:
“to wit, that God was in Christ, reconciling the world unto himself, not imputing their trespasses unto them;
and hath committed unto us the word (lahgoss) of reconciliation.”48
This desire of the Gnostic for entropy is not based in some ideological death cult fantasy, but
rather an evermore deeply rooted desire for the end of suffering. Paulos makes this point clear when he
writes in II Qorintiyim v.1-3 that:
“…we know that if the tent of our earthly house is destroyed, we have a building from God, a house not
made with hands, everlasting in the heavens. For indeed in this we groan, longing to put on our dwelling
which is from heaven so that, having put it on, we shall not be found naked. For indeed, we who are in this
tent groan, being burdened, not because we wish to put it off, but to put on the other, so that what is to die
might be swallowed up by life.”
Every individual will go through the personal process of self-development, awakening their
Kundalȋnȋ, and restoring themselves to the ALL once more. While the atheists parrot Simulation Theory or
posit consciousness may be nothing more than “brains in a vat experiencing hallucinatory experiences,” the
Gnostic has no more than to look to the Hindu understanding that we live beneath the Veil of Maya and
exist only as a thought in the mind of the Most High; a thought that, once reconciled to the Mind from
which it was formed, will cease to exist.
Hence, we have the excerpt from Valentinus:

“When the whole seed is perfected, then, they say, will the mother Achamoth leave the place of the Middle,
enter into the Pleroma, and receive her bridegroom, the Savior, who came into being from all [the æons],
with result that the Savior and Sophia, who is Achamoth, form a pair; that is, a syzygy. Those then are said
to be bridegroom and bride, but the bridal chamber is the entire Pleroma. The spiritual beings will divest
themselves of their souls and become intelligent spirits, and, without being hindered or seen, they will enter
into the Pleroma, and will be bestowed as brides on the angels around the Savior. The Demiurge passes into
the place of his mother Sophia, that is, into the Middle. The souls of the righteous will also repose in the
place of the Middle, for nothing psychic enters the Pleroma.”49
and from the Gospel of Philip:
“The Holy of Holies is the bridal chamber...It is from water and fire that the soul and the spirit came into
being. It is from water and fire and light that the son of the bridal chamber came into being. The human
being has intercourse with the human being...so spirit mingles with spirit, and thought consorts with
thought, and light shares with light. When this has taken place, the (they assert) the fire that is hidden in the
world will blaze forth and burn: when it has consumed all matter, it will be consumed [with it, as well] and
pass into non-existence. According to them, the Demiurge knew none of these things before the advent of
the Savior. Moreover, when Sophia [receives] her consort and Iêsous receives the Christōs and the seeds
and the angels, then [the] Pleroma will receive Sophia joyfully, and the All will come to be in unity and
reconciliation. For by this the æons have been increased, for they knew that should they change, they are
without change.”
With all sincerity and love, may the Everlasting Nous of the Most High shine in your heart, upon your
mind, and illuminate the paths you tread,
Victoria Elizabeth Bonnell

AUSTRIAE EST IMPERARE ORBI UNIVERSO
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Footnotes:
1. Hypotheses here is used in its most scientific possibility. The scientific method follows six general
principles: 1. Observe and form a question, 2. Research the topic to see what other studies might
have been conducted regarding the observation, 3. Hypothesize or come up with an idea of what
will most likely occur based on the information available regarding the observation, 4. Test with
an experiment, 5. Analyze the data, and 6. Report conclusions. It is only after many scientific
methods have been attempted, all coming up with the same results, that something may be
considered a theory. This distinction the author feels is important.
2. All Scriptures, unless otherwise noted, are cited using The Scriptures ISR (2009 Edition)
translation of the Bible. All EMPHASES added are the author’s.
3. Pike, Albert. Morals & Dogma, p. 98. Washington, D. C., The Supreme Council (Mother Council
of the World) of the Inspectors General Knights Commanders of the House of the Temple of
Solomon of the Thirty-third Degree of the Ancient and Accepted Scottish Rite of Freemasonry of
the Southern Jurisdiction of the United States of America, 1871.
4. True Detective, season 1, episode 5, “The Secret Fate Of All Life” and the concept of “Eternal
Return.” The idea is put forth in Hindu cosmology as “The Days And Nights Of Brahma” wherein
a manvantara manifests an active period of creation and in a pralaya, a period of dissolution.
From Helena Blavatsky’s The Secret Doctrine, Vol. I, p. 4: “To use a Metaphor from the Secret
Books, which will convey the idea still more clearly, an out-breathing of the ‘ unknown essence ’
produces the world; and an inhalation causes it to disappear. This process has been going on from

all eternity, and our present universe is but one of an infinite series, which had no beginning and
will have no end.” The Stoics furthered this idea and labelled their manvantara a palingenesis and
their pralaya an ekpyrosis.
5. P. J. Steinhardt, N. Turak (2001). “A Cyclic Model of the Universe.” Science.
6. Midnight Mass, season 1, episode 7, “Revelation.”
7. Pryse, James Morgan. The Restored New Testament, p. 20.
8. Hall, Manly Palmer. 83-137. How To Understand Your Bible: A Philosopher’s Interpretation Of
Obscure And Puzzling Passages, White Crow Production, Ltd, Hove, United Kingdom, 1942.
9. Regardie, Israel. The Golden Dawn: The Original Account Of The Teachings, Rites, And
Ceremonies Of The Hermetic Order, p. 72
10. Amplified Version of the Bible, I Qorintiyim vi.12
11. Regardie, Israel. The Golden Dawn: The Original Account Of The Teachings, Rites, And
Ceremonies Of The Hermetic Order p. 69.
12. The Pillar of Severity corresponds to each Sephiroth beneath the title “NESCHAMAH” (i.e.
BINAH, GEBURAH, and HOD) while the Pillar of Mercy corresponds to each Sephiroth beneath
the title “CHIAH” (i.e. CHOKMAH, CHESED, and NETZACH). The Pillar of Severity is
masculine and corresponds to the left hemisphere of our brain, whereas the Pillar of Mercy is
feminine and corresponds to the right hemisphere of our brain.
13. Samael is also referred to as “Saklas” and named “Yaldabaoth,” or alternatively, “Yaltabaoth” in
many Gnostic texts. Because the words “Saklas” and “Samael” mean “blind” and “the blind one”
respectively, it might best be understood to serve as a surname or title. In Lord of the Rings, we
know of Gandalf the Wise and Samwise the Brave. Perhaps the best understood rendering of this
name would be “Yaldabaoth Samael” or “Yaldabaoth the Blind [One].”

14. Mirdad, Michal. The True Story of the Divine Feminine. Grail Productions. Michael Mirdad.
03/03. 2018, https://michaelmirdad.com/the-true-story-of-the-divine-feminine/.
15. Hall, Manly Palmer. LXXIX. An Encyclopedic Outline of Masonic, Hermetic, Qabbalistic and
Rosicrucian Symbolical Philosophy: Being an Interpretation of the Secret Teachings Concealed
within the Rituals, Allegories, and Mysteries of All Ages, Philosophical Research Society, Los
Angeles, 1945.
16. Pryse, James Morgan. 22-23. The Apocalypse Unsealed: Being an Esoteric Interpretation of the
initiation of Iôannês commonly called The Revelation of St. John, Kessinger Publishing Company,
Montana, 1910.
17. Jonas, Hans. 49-51. The Gnostic Religion: The Message of the alien God and the beginnings of
Christianity. Bacon Press, Boston, 1963.
18. Rudolph, Kurt. 255-263. Gnosis. Harper and Row, Publishers Inc., New York, 1983.
19. See Gloria K. Muday and Heather Browin-Harding. 14 September 2018. Nervous system-like
signaling in plant defense. Science, Volume 361, Issue 6407, pp. 1068-1069. DOI:
10.1126/science.aau9813.
20. Pennisi, Elizabeth. Plants communicate distress using their own kind of nervous system. Science.
13/09. 2018, https://www.science.org/content/article/plants-communicate-distress-using-their-
own-kind-nervous-system.
21. See Qōheleṯ iv.9
22. Hall, Manly Palmer. 44-45. How To Understand Your Bible: A philosopher’s interpretation of
obscure and puzzling passages. White Crow Production, Ltd, Hove, United Kingdom, 1942.
23. King James Version, Galatiyim iii.28 and Qolasim iii.11
24. King James Version, Eph’siym vi.9
25. The Prince of Egypt. Directed by Brenda Chapman, Steve Hickner, and Simon Wells. 1998;
DreamWorks Pictures and DreamWorks Animation, film.
26. Pike, Albert. Morals & Dogma, p. 97-98. Washington, D. C., The Supreme Council (Mother
Council of the World) of the Inspectors General Knights Commanders of the House of the Temple
of Solomon of the Thirty-third Degree of the Ancient and Accepted Scottish Rite of Freemasonry
of the Southern Jurisdiction of the United States of America, 1871.
27. “Kabbalah Revealed with Tony Kosinec.”

YouTube, uploaded by Kabbalahinfo, 2019, https://youtu.be/NkvlTHLbNhw.
28. Alford, Henry. 522, I Timothy II. 14, 15. The New Testament for English Readers: The Gospel of
St. John, and the Acts of the Apostles. Cambridge [Eng.]: Deighton, Bell and Co. 1868
29. Dake, Finis Jennnings. 139, note e. Dake’s Annotated Reference Bible. Dake Bible Sales, Inc.,
Georgia, 1963. According to Madame Helena Blavatsky:
“During that period which is absent from the Mosaic books-from the exile of Eden to the
allegorical Flood-the Jews worshipped with the rest of the Semites Dayanisi
‫“ י ס י נ ז י ך‬the Ruler of Men,” the Judge,” or the SUN. Though the Jewish canon and
Christianism have made the sun become the Lord God” and Jehovah in the Bible, yet the latter is

full of indiscreet traces of the androgyne Deity, which was Jehovah the sun, and Astoreth the
moon in its female aspect, and quite free from the present metaphorical element given to it. God is
a “consuming fire,” appears in, and is encompassed by fire.” It was not only in vision that Ezekiel
(viii.,16) saw the Jews “worshipping the sun. The Baal of the Israelites (the Shemesh of the
Moabites and the Moloch of the Ammonites) was the identical “Sun-Jehovah,” and he is till now
“the King of the Host of Heaven,” the Sun, as much as Astoreth was the “Queen of Heaven”- or
the moon. The “Sun of Righteousness” has become a metaphorical expression only now.” (The
Secret Doctrine, Vol. I, p. 397)
“As gods of Fire, Air, Water, they were celestial gods ; as gods of the lower region, they were
infernal deities : the latter adjective applying simply to the Earth. They were “ Spirits of the
Earth ” under their respective names of Yama, Pluto, Osiris, the “ Lord of the lower kingdom,
etc., etc.,” and their tellurial character proves it sufficiently.* The ancients knew of no worse
abode after death than the Kâmaloka, the limbus on this Earth. If it is argued that the Dodonean
Jupiter was identified with Aidoneus, the king of the subterranean world, and Dis, or the Roman
Pluto and the Dionysius Chthonios, the subterranean, wherein, according to Creuzer (I, vi., ch.
1), oracles were rendered, then it will become the pleasure of the Occultists to prove that both
Aidoneus and Dionysius are the bases of Adonai, or “ Jurbo Adonai,” as Jehovah is called in
Codex Nazaraus. “ Thou shalt not worship the Sun, who is named Adonai, whose name is also
Kadush and El-El ” (Cod. Naz., i, 47; see also Psalm lxxxix., 18), and also “ Lord Bacchus.”
Baal-Adonis of the Sods or Mysteries of the pre-Babylonian Jews became the Adonai by the
Massorah, the later-vowelled Jehovah. Hence the Roman Catholics are right. All these Jupiters
are of the same family; but Jehovah has to be included therein to make it complete. Jupiter-Aerios
or Pan, the Jupiter Ammon, and the Jupiter-Bel-Moloch, are all correlations and one with Yurbo-
Adonai, because they are all one cosmic nature. It is that nature and power which create the
specific terrestrial symbol, and the physical and material fabric of the latter, which proves the
Energy manifesting through it as extrinsic.” (The Secret Doctrine, Vol. I, p. 463)
That Baal and Moloch are identical with Bacchus is significant when considering passages such as
Yirmeyahu xxxii.35, which reads “And they built the high places of Ba’al which are in the Valley of the
Son of Hinnom, to offer up their sons and their daughters to Molek, which I did not command them, nor did
it come into My heart that they should do this abomination [toevah], to make Yehudah sin,” and comparing
such passages to the Bacchic orgies
According to Albert Pike:
“Men were figuratively said to forget the name of God, when they lost that knowledge, and
worshipped the heathen deities, and burned incense to them on the high places, and passed their
children through the fire to Moloch.” (Morals & Dogma, p. 205)
30. Nicomachean Ethics, Loeb vol 73, VII vii 7; p. 417
31. All usages of the word arsenokoites are listed below:
a.) Paul uses arsenokoites in I Qorintiyim vi.9. This is the first historical use of the word. Paul
does not define the meaning of arsenokoites.
b). Paul uses arsenokoites in I Timotiyos i.10. This is the second historical use of the word. Paul
does not define the meaning of arsenokoites.
c.) The Sibylline Oracle ii.70-78 uses arsenokoites. The context is stealing, falsely accusing and
murder and the meaning is not defined.
d.) Epistle of Ignatius to the Tarsians. Ignatius quotes I Qorintiyim vi.9 without providing a
definition.

e.) Epistle of Polycarp to the Philippians. Polycarp quotes I Qorintiyim vi.9 without providing a
definition.
f.) Defining arsenokoites, Acts of John 36. The context is robber, defrauder, thief but no definition
is provided. Arsenokoithj is translated sodomite here, which indicates a shrine prostitute. “36 Thou
that rejoicest in gold and delightest thyself with ivory and jewels, when night falleth, canst thou
behold what thou lovest? thou that art vanquished by soft raiment, and then leavest life, will those
things profit thee in the place whither thou goest? And let the murderer know that the condign
punishment is laid up for him twofold after his departure hence. Likewise also thou poisoner,
sorcerer, robber, defrauder, sodomite [shrine prostitute], thief...” Acts of John, 36.
g.) Defining arsenokoites, Clement of Alexandria, The Instructor 3.11. Clement twice quotes I
Qorintiyim vi.9, without providing a definition.
h.) Defining arsenokoites, Aristides, Apology, 13. Aristides, a Christian preacher, delivered his
Apology around AD 125. The context was interspecies rape and Greek gods committing adultery,
murder and arsenokoitia with humans.
Aristides was not describing homosexuality. He described interspecies sex, rape and adultery. The
preeminent story of a Greek god lying with a male is the myth of Zeus raping Ganymede. The
Gnostic version of this myth substitutes Naas, the serpent, for Zeus, and Adam, in the garden of
Eden, for Ganymede. The myth of Zeus and Ganymede originated on the island of Crete, where
the Cretans believed King Minos raped Ganymede. The Greeks adopted the myth from the Cretans
and attempted to justify pederasty by exalting the rape of the boy Ganymede by the god Zeus.
“VIII. The Greeks, then, because they are more subtle than the Barbarians, have gone further
astray than the Barbarians; inasmuch as they have introduced many fictitious gods...and some
transformed themselves into the likeness of animals to seduce the race of mortal women, and some
polluted themselves by lying with males. And some, they say, were wedded to their mothers and
their sisters and their daughters [incest among the gods]. And they say of their gods that they
committed adultery with the daughters of men [inter-species sex]; and of these there was born a
certain race which also was mortal....their gods are unrighteous, since they transgressed the
law...in lying with males [inter-species sex], and by their other practices as well...they bring
forward another god Zeus...he changed himself into the likeness of an eagle through his passion
for Ganymedos (Ganymede) the shepherd...much evil has arisen among men, who to this day are
imitators of their gods, and practice adultery and defile themselves with their mothers and their
sisters, and by lying with males [rape, shrine prostitution and perhaps pederasty], and some make
bold to slay even their parents. For if he [Zeus] who is said to be the chief and king of their gods
do these things how much more should his worshipers imitate him?” - Aristides Apology, VIII &
IX.
i.) Defining arsenokoites, Origin, Dialogue With Heraclides 10.1-12 & On Jeremiah 20.3.33.
Origin quotes I Qorintiyim vi.9 and comments on the verse without providing a definition.
j.) Defining arsenokoites, Origin, Commentary on the Gospel of Mattithyahu xiv.10. Origin uses
the word without providing a definition.
k.) Defining arsenokoites, Origin, Commentary on I Corinthians 27.58. Origin mentions

arsenokoitai, without providing a definition.
l.) Defining arsenokoites, Origin, Exposition on Proverbs 7.74. The context is lusts contrary to
nature, which indicates nonprocreative heterosexual sex. Historically, the phrase contrary to nature
refers to nonprocreative sexual activity between men and women, not homosexuality.
m.) Defining arsenokoites, Porphyrius Phil. Against the Christians, 88.13. The context is adultery,
drunkenness, theft, witchcraft but the arsenokoit stem is not defined.
n.) Defining arsenokoites, Hippolytus, AD 170-236, Refutation of All Heresies. The context is the
serpent in the garden of Eden, sodomizing-raping Eve and Adam. This usage gives no basis for
concluding that arsenokoites refers to homosexuality. Naas is the serpent, from the word Naas,
referring to the Naasseni, the people who call themselves Gnostics. “Naas, however, has
committed sin, for he went in unto Eve, deceiving her, and debauched her; and (such an act as) this
is a violation of law. He, however, likewise went in unto Adam, and had unnatural [meaning
nonprocreative or interspecies] intercourse with him; and this is itself also a piece of turpitude,
whence have arisen adultery and sodomy.” Hippolytus, Refutation of All Heresies, Book V,
Chapter 21.
o.) Defining arsenokoites, Flavius Claudius Julianus, Against the Galilaeans. Claudius quotes I
Qorintiyim vi.9 without providing a definition of the word.
p.) Defining arsenokoites, Eusebius - Preparation of the Gospel, 6:10. Eusebius uses the word in
reference to pederasty or rape. The text does not indicate homosexuality as we understand it today
- a faithful, noncultic partnership between two men of equal status.
q.) Defining arsenokoites, Eusebius, Demonstration of the Gospel, Book I, 6.23. Eusebius uses the
word in a warning against adultery, followed by the phrase, against nature (indicating
nonprocreative sex). Eusebius provides no definition of the word.
r.) Defining arsenokoites, Epiphanius, AD 310-403. Two references, both of which quote I
Qorintiyim vi.9 without providing a definition.
s.) Defining arsenokoites, Athanasius, AD 296-373. Athanasius quotes I Qorintiyim vi.9 without
providing a definition.
t.) Defining arsenokoites, Basilius, AD 329-379. Five times Basil quotes Paul’s use of the
arsenokoit stem without providing a definition.
u.) Defining arsenokoites, John Chrysostom, AD 347-407. Twenty times Chrysostom quotes I
Qorintiyim vi.9 or I Timotiyos i.10 or makes allusion to those verses without providing a
definition.
v.) Defining arsenokoites, Pseudo-Macarius, mid-fourth-early fifth century, Sermon 49:5-6. As

used by Pseudo-Macarius, the word refers to interspecies sex, the attempted rape of angels in
Sodom, not homosexuality.
w.) Defining arsenokoites, Theodoretus, AD 393-457. Theodoretus uses the word four times, once
in a vice list and in quotations from I Qorintiyim vi.9, without providing a definition.
x.) Defining arsenokoites, Joannes Malalas, AD 491-578, in Chronographia 436.5, uses

arsenokoitountes.
y.) Defining arsenokoites, Acta Conciliorum Oecumenicorum, Chalcedon, AD 451, uses

arsenokoitia.
z.) Defining arsenokoites, Aristophanes. Two marginal notes in his writings, a passage from Nubes
and a passage from Plutus, mention arsenokoitai and arrenokoitai.
Dr. Ann Nyland, an Australian scholar whose research field is Greek Biblical lexicography, holds a
Ph.D. in New Testament lexicography, graduate degree (double major) in Classical Greek
language, Honors Degree in the Ionic dialect of Greek, is on faculty in Ancient Greek language
and Ancient History in the Department of Classics and Ancient History, the University of New
England in Australia, Translator of The Source New Testament and The Gay and Lesbian Study
Bible, says about arsenokoites:
"The word arsenokoites in I Qor. vi.9 and I Tim. i.10 has been assumed to mean “homosexual.”
However the word does not mean “homosexual,” and its range of meaning includes one who
anally penetrates another (female or male), a rapist, a murderer, or an extortionist. When used in
the meaning “anal penetrator,” it does not apply exclusively to males as the receptors, as it was
also used for women receptors. The word does not appear in any Greek literary source until the
poets of the Imperial period. This late occurrence is most significant as the Greeks wrote at length
on male-male sexual relationships. The cognate verb [arsenokoitein] appears in the Sibylline
Oracles ii.73 me arsenokoitein, me sukophantein, mete phoneuein, where it is in company with
committing extortion and committing murder. Pseudo-Macarius Aegyptius, Homiliae spirituales
IV 4.22, stated that the people of Sodom sinned greatly and did not repent, and “created the
ultimate offense in their evil purpose against the angels, wishing to work arsenokoitia upon them.”
Aristides said that the Greek gods commit murders and poisonings, adulteries, thefts and
arsenokoites in the context of rape. The 6th c. astrologer Rhetorius Aegyptius used the term as
women with the receptors: “arsenokoites (of women) and rapists of women.”
For further reading regarding the interesting history between homosexuality and the church, please
see John Boswell, Same-Sex Unions in Pre-Modern Europe. Villard Books (US), HarperCollins
(UK), 1994.
32. Blavatsky, Helena P. 619. The Secret Doctrine, Vol. I., Theosophical Publishing Company, New
York, 1888.
33. These include: X or Turner Syndrome, X Mosaicism, XY Mosaicism, XXX Triple X Syndrome,
or Trisomy X, which occurs in 1 out of 900 live births, XXY or Klinefelter Syndrome, which
occurs in 1 out of 650 live births, XYY or Jacob’s Syndrome, which occurs in 1 out of 1,000 live
births, XXXX Tetrasomy X, of which 100 cases total have been reported, XXXY which occurs in
1 out of 18,000 to 1 out of 40,000 live male births, XXYY, which occurs in 1 out of 18,000 live
male births, XXXXY, which occurs in 1 out of 85,000 to 1 out of 100,000 live male births,
XXXXX Pentasomy X, 40 cases total have been reported, XX Gonadal Dysgenesis, XY Gonadal
Dysgenesis, XX Male, and XY Female, or Swyer Syndrome.
34. See Miroslav Dumic, Karen Lin-Su, Natasha I. Leibel, Srecko Ciglar, Giovanna Vinci, Ruzica
Lasan, Saroj Nimkarn, Jean D. Wilson, Ken McElreavey, and Maria I. New. 13 November 2007.
Report of Fertility in a Woman with a Predominantly 46, XY Karyotype in a Family with Multiple
Disorders of Sexual Development. Journal of Clinical Endocrinology & Metabolism. J Clin
Endocrinol Metab. 2008 Jan; 93(1):182-189. Published online 2007 Nov 13. DOI:
10.1210/jc.2007-2155.
35. The author is unable to find the study that reinforces this statement at the time of publishing this
thesis. In short, the idea of the study is that a very intense shame and anxiety accompanies a
person who is forced to present and act according to the gender opposite of how they perceive
themselves. Hobbies and interests that would normally be perceived as cathartic for a woman,
such as knitting, crocheting, painting nails, sharing feelings, and decorating cause great emotional
distress for a man having to “endure,” and the reverse is also true; that hobbies and interests
normally perceived as cathartic for a man, such as mechanical work, general interactions with
machinery (including watching car races), “fixing” things, intense competitional sports, etc. cause
at best, boredom, and at worst, emotional distress in women. These are, of course, general
statements, and should not be understood as absolutes. There are women who enjoy masculine
oriented tasks and men who enjoy feminine oriented tasks. This enjoyment, or lack thereof, does
not always indicate homosexuality or transexuality, simply that the interests in such a person are
broader than most of their peers. The author will continue searching for the study and update the
thesis once it has been found.
36. See Jack L. Turban, Dana King, Julia Kobe, Sari L. Reisner, Alex S. Keuroghlian. January 12,
2022. Access to gender-affirming hormones during adolescence and mental health outcomes
among transgender adults. PLoS ONE 17(1): e0261039. Doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0261039 and
HRC Staff. Family Acceptance Saves Lives. The Human Rights Campaign. 14/09. 2017,
https://www.hrc.org/news/family-acceptance-saves-lives.
37. See Sula Benet. Early Diffusion and Folk Uses of Hemp. Cannabis and Culture, Rubin, Vera &
Comitis, Lambros, (eds.) 1975. 39-49.
38. A paraphrase of Ya’aqob i.27
39. Hall, Manly Palmer. 14. The Secret Destiny of America, Philosophical Research Society, Los
Angeles, 1944.
40. Lo Boièr. In Wikipedia. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lo_Boièr. The author understands

Wikipedia to be a generally unreliable source, but as of 15th September, 2022, the author has read
and checked the citations listed in the article and feels this page to be the most replete regarding
the history of this hymn.
41. Hall, Manly Palmer. XLIX. An Encyclopedic Outline of Masonic, Hermetic, Qabbalistic and
Rosicrucian Symbolical Philosophy: Being an Interpretation of the Secret Teachings Concealed
within the Rituals, Allegories, and Mysteries of All Ages, Philosophical Research Society, Los
Angeles, 1945.
42. Bailey, Alice. 392. Esoteric Astrology, Lucis Publishing Co., 1974.
43. See The Book of the 24 Philosophers, attributed to Hermes Trismegistus.
44. Amplified Version of the Bible, Qolasim i. 16-20
45. Amplified Version of the Bible, Yohanon i.1-3
46.

47. Blavatsky, Helena P. 4. The Secret Doctrine, Vol. I., Theosophical Publishing Company, New
York, 1888.
48. King James Version of the Bible, II Qorintiyim v.19
49. Valentinus. Against Heresies, Book I, Chapter 7

THESIS

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

THESIS

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

A Defense of the Gnostic Cosmos, or The Gnostic Doctrine of

A THESIS FOR THE DEGREE OF INTERFAITH MINISTER

A DEFENSE OF THE GNOSTIC COSMOS VICTORIA BONNELL

II. God As Consciousness

III. The Three Types of Consciousness

IV. The Nature of The Demiurge And His Archons

A DEFENSE OF THE GNOSTIC COSMOS VICTORIA BONNELL

V. The Myth of Sophia and the Kundalînî Serpent

(a) THE "ALIEN”

(b) "BEYOND," "WITHOUT," "THIS WORLD,” AND "THE OTHER WORLD”

A DEFENSE OF THE GNOSTIC COSMOS VICTORIA BONNELL

VI. The Structures of Asceticism vs. Hedonism In Gnosticism

Slavery & Racism

Now, examine the following cross-references:

Təhillîm xviii.1 opens with Dāwid claiming to be a slave of ‫יהוה‬.

A DEFENSE OF THE GNOSTIC COSMOS VICTORIA BONNELL

#582 ‫‘( ;אנוש‬ĕnôwsh) mortal (man)

Abraham, a'-brå-ham (Heb.)--father (source, founder) of a multitude… Metaphysical. The power of

A DEFENSE OF THE GNOSTIC COSMOS VICTORIA BONNELL

A DEFENSE OF THE GNOSTIC COSMOS VICTORIA BONNELL

“Wives, submit yourselves unto your own husbands…”

“And ‘Ǎdam called his wife’s name Ḥaȗȃ…”

Cannabis & Other Recreational Substances

Euthanasia & Suicide

AH, AY, E, OH, OOH A, E, I, O, U

Plantas son agulhada He plants his cattle prod

AH, AY, E, OH, OOH A, E, I, O, U

Tota desconsolada Completely inconsolable

AH, AY, E, OH, OOH A, E, I, O, U

Te farai un potatge I’ll make you a stew

AH, AY, E, OH, OOH A, E, I, O, U

Una lauseta magra And a skinny lark

AH, AY, E, OH, OOH A, E, I, O, U

Al pus prigond de la cava In the deepest part of the cave

AH, AY, E, OH, OOH A, E, I, O, U

Lo cap jos la canela My head in the path of the water

AH, AY, E, OH, OOH A, E, I, O, U

Prendràn d’aiga senhada Will take from the holy water

AH, AY, E, OH, OOH A, E, I, O, U

Aquò es la paura Joana Here lies the poor Joanne

AH, AY, E, OH, OOH A, E, I, O, U

Aquò es la paura Joana Here lies the poor Joanne

Se n’es anada al paradís She went to paradise

AH, AY, E, OH, OOH A, E, I, O, U

A DEFENSE OF THE GNOSTIC COSMOS VICTORIA BONNELL

And Alison Bailey writes:

This is the celebration the Eucharist praises.

Servants, Obey Your Master

Yəšha‘yāhū lxi.1a, i.17, lxi.1b-4

VII. The Reconciliation Of All Things

and Yohanon i.1-3, which says:

A DEFENSE OF THE GNOSTIC COSMOS VICTORIA BONNELL

Victoria Elizabeth Bonnell

A DEFENSE OF THE GNOSTIC COSMOS VICTORIA BONNELL

5. P. J. Steinhardt, N. Turak (2001). “A Cyclic Model of the Universe.” Science.

6. Midnight Mass, season 1, episode 7, “Revelation.”

7. Pryse, James Morgan. The Restored New Testament, p. 20.

10. Amplified Version of the Bible, I Qorintiyim vi.12

A DEFENSE OF THE GNOSTIC COSMOS VICTORIA BONNELL

21. See Qōheleṯ iv.9

23. King James Version, Galatiyim iii.28 and Qolasim iii.11

24. King James Version, Eph’siym vi.9

27. “Kabbalah Revealed with Tony Kosinec.”