Solving 100 Biblical Mysteries
How Gnostic Christianity Solves Biblical Mysteries

1. Who is Adam?
"The Hebrew word 'Adham' is properly a common noun denoting 'mankind' or 'human being'." (199)

Philo of Alexandria (30 BC to 50AD) adds to this "the statement that mankind [Adam] was made in the image of god, must not be understood in a material sense; it means that the mind in man corresponds to god." (199). In the book of the Secrets of Enoch, Adam is "like a second angel endowed with divine wisdom". (199)

Top

2. What is the answer to the "already not yet" problem. (See 2Tm 2:17-19 Int-P 910G, BB 170, GP 127 "All At Once" Jn 4:23)
What is known by biblical scholars as the "already not yet" problem reveals that some New Testament authors claim the kingdom of heaven is not yet here. Others claim that the kingdom has already begun.

"The double aspect of the Kingdom as present reality and future reality is apparent in the parables of the Kingdom." (205) For example, Jesus was asked by the Pharisees: (Luke 17:20-21)-"when is the Kingdom of God to come?" Jesus answered in the sense of "something already present and active, (note JBV) namely, that "the Kingdom of God is among you." In John 15:3 Jesus says that "you are already made clean by [understanding] the word [logos teachings] which I have spoken."

In Second Timothy 2:19, however, its author, not Paul, refutes both "Hymenaeus and Philetus [both Gnostic Christians who]…claim that the resurrection has already taken place. Have nothing to do with the pointless philosophic discussions and antagonistic beliefs of the 'knowledge' [of Hymenaeus and Philetus] which is not knowledge at all [1 Timothy 6:12]. (Explain)

Gnostic Christians believed that the Kingdom of God [Stage IV] had already begun in the person of Jesus and that the Kingdom of God, Stage IV, would expand globally through Jesus' knowledge teaching, one person at a time. When everyone internalized Jesus' knowledge teachings, a new age of consciousness, the glory, would begin-or State IV. On the other hand, orthodox Christians believed that the Kingdom of Heaven was not yet here, it would come through divine intervention upon Jesus' return.

Stage IV's form of consciousness can be thought of as the ground where those who have already reached Stage IV of consciousness through Jesus' knowledge teachings wait for those in lower stages to catch up. In other words the Kingdom of God on earth, the glory, begins with Jesus, but does not reach its fullest potentials until everyone reaches Stage IV. This is why the divinely inspired become teachers for, as mentioned above, they know no one is free until everyone is free.

"Theodotus [a Gnostic Christian] teaches that the elect [those in Stage IV] cannot enter into the pleroma [Stage V] until their physic counter parts [those of us in Stage III] are 'raised' to join in union with them so that they may receive access to God together. Until that time, he says, the elect themselves are constrained to 'wait' for the sake of the physics'. (206)

Hearing Jesus' theory of nature can be thought of as his Second Coming. For even though we are not hearing about Jesus' theory of nature from him in person, we might imagine that if we understand his thoughts and feel his love through his teachings, it is reasonable to think he is within us and therefore with us.

Top

3. What are angels?
Angel, from the Greek word angelos, as used in the Old Testament, meant "messenger". In the New Testament, Angel can mean "a heavenly* spirit*" (30). In view of the first century meanings of heavenly* and spirit*, we can understand that this phrase refers to a person in Stage IV of consciousness. "In the New Testament, as in the old, the Angel is sometimes no more than another word for a divine communication or divine operation personified." (125) (See Holy Spirit.)

Top

4. What is Baptism?
Traditionally Baptism symbolizes acceptance of God. For Gnostic Christians, Baptism means to be born "as children of choice and knowledge". (213) In early Gnosticism, Baptism represents that instant when an initiate first understands Jesus' knowledge teachings. This understanding surfaces in Jn 3:7, "unless one is born anew…or from above [preferred to born again]…he cannot see [comprehend] the kingdom of God."

In 1 Pt 3:21, Peter writes that Baptism "in Christ" is not a "mystical experience of conscious identification or absorption into Christ … but rather [an] 'objective' transference into a [new] domain of power [meaning growing psychologically/spiritually* into Stage IV]." (214)

Baptism "is called 'death' and an 'end of the old life'…but the power of transformation, and Baptism is not that of the body, but of the soul [mind in Greek]…they die to the cosmos, 'but live in God [Stage IV of consciousness].'" (215)

Paul teaches that in baptism "the believer dies, is buried, and is raised from the dead." (216) Gnostics claim "that psychic believers (Stage III) fail to see that Paul is not speaking here literally of a future bodily resurrection. [Life in the hereafter is taken for granted by Gnostic Christians.] Instead he is speaking symbolically of the process of receiving gnosis [knowledge of how to participate in the perfect reason Jesus teaches]…. Whoever receives this pneumatic baptism [Christ-consciousness] receives gnosis of who we were [in Stages II and III], what we have become [in Stage IV]…whence we come [living barren lives] from what we have been redeemed [judgmental reasoning]; what birth [meaning born anew into Christ-consciousness] is." (217) In other words, Baptism symbolically represents the transformation from judgmental to Christ-consciousness.

Top

5. What does the metaphor of the beast represent?
The 'beast' symbolizes the self-perpetuating, materialistic energy beneath the present world order. The Beast was originally a metaphor used by Plato to illustrate that we are blind to the fact that a judgmental and materialistic energy, that we think of as the system, controls us rather than we control it. In The Republic, Plato depicts us as blindly buying into the system as though it was a privilege when, in actuality, the underlying energy of the system is like an ill tempered beast which lacks real feelings even for those who serve it. Like the fable of the king with no clothes, Plato's metaphor of the beast illustrates that people are blind to the fact that the system they serve in Stages I through III is what causes their suffering.

Top

6. Is Belief Biblical?
'Belief' is a concept foreign to early New Testament authors. "Belief" is an unfortunate attempt to make the Greek noun, pistus/faith, into its verb. For example, we cannot say "she faiths" (218) so translators say, "she believes." "Believes", however, is a poor selection of a verb for faith because it misleads its user into thinking blind belief, rather than a solid understanding, as the Greek term pistus/faith implies, is all that is necessary to be Christian. (218)

Top

7. What does "born again" mean?
"Born Anew" (Jn 3:3 rsv) and "Born from above" (3:3 jbv) are closer to the first century Greek than "born again" (3:3 kjv). In Gnostic Christianity, Jesus' words "truly, truly, I say to you, unless one is born anew, he cannot see the Kingdom of God" (3:3 rsv) meant that unless one's reasoning mind/flesh is born anew in Christ consciousness (Stage IV), he cannot comprehend the possibility of a kingdom of God here on earth. If the jbv of 3:3, "born from above" is preferred, it, too, infers that the reasoning mind must be elevated to the same level as that of God. The kjv of 3:3, however, encourages us to understand that we must be reborn, in a mystical sense, through belief in Jesus. In effect, the kjv supports Orthodox Christianity's belief that Jesus is Lord and Savior, whereas the rsv and jbv support the idea that Jesus' logos/logic teachings renew our minds.

Top

8. What did celibacy mean in the first century?
'Celibacy', for Gnostic Christians, meant abstaining from participation in the judgmental enterprises of lower stages of consciousness, such as "rejecting Roman social life" (187), not abstaining from sexual intercourse. (188)

"The elect understands sexuality as a symbol of the 'mystery of syzygy' [meaning the allying or the yoking of the ego self with the god self]: to practice this mystery is to participate in the divine marriage [the union of the ego self with the god self in Stage IV];.." (189)

(Jn 1:41)

The point is that celibacy calls for Christians to abstain from Stages II and III reasoning, not to give up their sexuality.

Top

9. Christ

9A. Who is the anti-Christ?
Christ is the Greek translation of the Hebrew term Messiah. The anti-Christ does not mean a demonic character; it simply refers to those of us who do not agree with Jesus' Messianic or Christ (logos) teachings.

9B. What is the Blood of Christ?
The 'blood of Christ' refers to the essence, or life-giving properties, of Jesus' knowledge teachings.

9C. What is the Body of Christ?
For Gnostic Christians, the 'body of Christ' refers to the higher state of consciousness Jesus' Messianic/Christ message engenders. Jesus is the first fruits or prototype of this higher consciousness-Christ-consciousness. Jesus' Christ teachings put the body of Christ-consciousness in reach of us all.

The body of Christ can also refer to a large number/body of people who are in the consciousness or body of Christ, i.e. in Stage IV.

9D. What does Christ mean?
Most think of 'Christ' as Jesus' last name. Christ, however, is the Greek term for Messiah. Jesus, the Christ, is Jesus, the Messiah. "Since Christ means Messiah, the formation expresses a drastic transformation of Jewish expectation." (222) See Awakening, 193.)

In the Gnostic church, the term Christ refers to the Messianic or Christ message that Jesus of Nazareth taught; i.e. Jesus' logos teachings. When Paul called the "Christ, the 'wisdom of God' in 1Co 1:24, he assumes that the Corinthians know that the divine Sophia [wisdom] has been reinterpreted as Christ, but does not discuss the idea….Christ [for Justin and Paul was understood] as the divine logos (word), virtually interchangeable with Sophia [wisdom]." (222)

In 1Th 5:18, Paul said, "the saving will [logic] of God is in Christ Jesus…this use of the phrase emphasizes…the cooperation of the Father as initiator and prime cause with the Son as agent/instrument." (223) What can be assumed here is that Jesus brings the will (logic) of God to man in his Christ/Messianic teachings. (See Jn, Chapter 1)

"To be in Christ is to be a new creature [person] (2Co 5:17)…God has reconciled man with himself through Christ [i.e., through Jesus' Messianic/Christ teachings]…. Christ is not an external principle of law or doctrine, but a life and a state in which an only in which the fullness of Christian grace and virtue…[and] the love of God…is possible. Hence…this phrase 'in Christ' appears to designate the element or atmosphere in which the Christian lives and acts;… In Col 1:16f 'in Christ' designates Christ [the logos/logic of God in man] the instrument of the Father in creation and the preservation of the entire universe." (244)

In short, Gnostic Christians think of Christ not as Jesus, but rather as Jesus' wisdom, logos, Sophia, or simply, Messianic teachings.

9E. What is Christ Consciousness?
To be in 'Christ-consciousness' is to understand and live Jesus' Christ/logos teachings. To be in 'Christ-consciousness' is to be in Stage IV. (See Holy Spirit.)

9F. Is "Christ" the only way?
Experience teaches us that good intentions, religion, spirituality and meditation alone give us hope and can make us feel good. They have not, however, in the last three millenniums, fundamentally changed civilization. Sinfulness abounds today, just as it did three thousand years ago.

The logos teachings of Jesus have never been tested, and therefore, unlike anything else, could be the only way to overcome sin, globally.

Gnostic Christians believe that Jesus' logos teaching is the way to overcome the prerequisite of evil, judgmental reasoning, and therefore, is a practical path to a higher civilization in the new millennium.

The fact is that history teaches that religion and believing in Jesus is good, but not enough. We must also make religious principles and Jesus' logos teachings a global reality. Love is the answer and his logos teachings are the only untested way to a higher civilization based on reasoning lovingly.

Top

10. Is there common good over individuality.

(CC 537, AE 59, Lk 6:36, Rm 4:16, Rm 8:28)

11. What are the two meanings of the cross?
Cross, for Gnostics, had a twofold purpose. First, it represented Jesus' love, symbolizing his willingness to sacrifice his life for us; and second, it was a symbol or logo for Jesus' theory that humanity/anthropoi is a class that has four natures.

The rationale behind the double meaning of the term 'cross', for Gnostics rests on the evidence that in the oldest New Testament text, there were two distinctly different Greek words that were later translated into the one Latin term crux/cross. The first Greek term is "sklops". It refers to a "stake" or "pole" (115) criminals were crucified on. The second term is "stauros". It refers to an equilateral "cross" (+) (116).

"Among the Chinese, the equilateral cross inscribed within a square [+] stands for the earth. According to Samuel Real (Indian Antiquary, 1880, P 67) there is found in China even the dictum 'God fashioned the earth in the form of a cross'. It is courious to meet with an analogous symbolism in a Church Father. 'The aspect of the cross,' writes Jerome (com. In Marcum), 'what is it [the cross +] but the form of the world in its four directions..?'" (117)

In effect, given the historical fact that "the theological symbolism of the cross [stauros] appears in the New Testament only in the sayings of Jesus and the writings of Paul" (118), we can assume that Jesus and Paul meant something different by stauros than what they and others meant by sklops.

I propose that when the term "sklops", a stake or pole, is used, it refers to Jesus' crucifixion. When Jesus and Paul used the term "stauros", they were referring to the equilateral cross/stauros, which was a logo that symbolized classes with more than one nature, i.e. four human natures/anthropoi. See the four pillars of the church, the four corners of the world, and the four rivers (Rev 22:14).

Why does Paul withhold the wisdom of logos (1Co 1:17) from his public teachings?

"The Valentinians explain [1 Co 1:18] that the logos [logic] of the cross-the secret doctrine reveals how the cross symbolizes Sophia's (wisdom's) fall and restoration--seems only foolishness to those who are perishing…that is, to psychics [those of us in Stage III]." (119)

"Psychics believe only what they see with their own eyes: they need to witness 'works of power'. The Savior, recognizing this, says to them, 'unless you see signs and wonders, you will not believe (Jn 4:48), showing (as Heraleon explains) they 'must be persuaded to believe through sense perception, and not through logos [the logic of the cross/stauros]." (119)

In other words (Jn 4:48), psychics "must be persuaded through sense perception [miracles and rituals], and not through logos [logic]." (119)

"Strangely enough, the early Christians, in spite of the importance they attach to the cross, refrain from reproducing it in the riconography. During the first three centuries (with possibly a single exception, that of the equilateral cross (+)…assigned to the end of the second and at the beginning of the third century) the cross of Christ is invariably dissimulated under the form of…a trident (y), an anchor…a ship with rigging, or under forms already employed by other cults." (120)

· "As to the crucifix, i.e., a cross with the body of Christ nailed on it, this representation does not make its appearance until the seventh century." (121)

· The early Christians generally avoided representing the body of Christ on the cross, for the first evidence of such representation comes from the fifth century. In fact, until the fourth century, even the simply cross [stauros] rarely appeared in public." (122) "The official or public use of the cross as a symbol of our redemption begins with [Emperor] Constantine." (123) In the early Church, the cross [stauros] "symbolizes Sophia's [wisdom] fall and restoration." (124)

Top

12. What Does Death Mean?
In the early church, 'death' referred to living barren, or unfulfilled lives, not physical death. This interpretation is consistent with Jesus' own words in Mt 22:33, Mk 12:27, and Lk 20:38, when he says "God is not the god of the dead [in other words, those of us in Stages II and III who do not understand the Christ message], but of the living [those of us in Stage IV who are doers of the word and practice Jesus' Christ message]."

According to Gnostics, then, "resurrection of the dead is the recognition of the truth". (225) For Gnostics, 'death' and ignorance of participation in the logos of God are synonymous.

Top

13. Who is the great deceiver?

14. Who is the demiurge?
'Demiurge' literally refers to the intermediate God of those of us in Stages II and III of consciousness: Yahweh, Jehovah, Alla, and today, the father God of Christians. In 2 Co 4:4 Paul calls the demiurge "the god of this cosmos* [meaning the god of those of us in Stages II and III of consciousness]." (171)

In Stage IV, God is no longer considered separate from us, God is one within us. To keep from sounding too grandiose, Gnostics use phrases and terms like 'God is love', 'I am', 'creation', or 'the all'. In other words, the Demiurge in Stage III is a supernatural and extraordinary God. In Stage IV, all are the Spirit of God, and therefore, it is natural to live love everyday in, what then becomes, ordinary ways. This is what Paul means when he says, "'I thank my God' (Rm 1:8) for their [those of us in Stage IV] faith, He refers not to the Demiurge as 'his God', but to the God 'whom I worship in my spirit'." (172)

Top

15. What are Demons?
'Demons', daemons, in the original New Testament Greek, refer to ideas or natural principles that underly civilization, like gravity and magnetism. Daemons, spirits in Latin, were often personified as gods. Venus, for example, personified love; Sophia, "theoretical knowledge" (226); Apollo, intellect; and Neptune, the power in the oceans.

By the fifth century, the relationship of daemons and spirits was overshadowed by the belief that demons and spirits, in a supernatural sense, ruled the world. Medieval art, and especially poetry like Dante's Infernal, completed the change in definition of daemons, from ideas to supernatural imagery, depicting hell fires and demons.

Top

16. What is meant by the double-edged sword?

Top

17. What does Jesus mean by "a man's enemies will be those of his own household?" (Mat 10:34-39)
Jesus realized that those who teach his logos teachings will find rejection everywhere, even from within their own families. "His aim is not to provoke dissension, but this becomes inevitable as a result of the strict alternative he offers." (Mat 10:34 JBV, Note M) Namely, a true follower of Jesus, like him, will forgo the present to insure that enlightenment will be the inheritance of all future generations.

Top

18. What is Enlightenment?
'Enlightenment' means being a holy spirit* in Stage IV.

Top

19. What is "eternal life"?
Aiov, the Greek word translated as 'eternal life', means an age, especially a prevailing paradigm. To Gnostics, aiov refers to life in the age of the glory (Stage V), as well as eternal life in the sense of infinite time in a hereafter. "The philosophical concept of eternity is not clearly expressed in either the Old Testament or New Testament." (130)

Eternal life, in the sense of higher stages of consciousness, surfaces in Rm 6:22-23. "But now that you have been set free from sin, the return you get is sanctification [admittance into Stage IV] and its end, eternal life [participation in Stage V-the glory]. For the wages of sin is death [living a barren life], but the free gift of god is eternal life [Stage V of consciousness]. Therefore, brethren, be more zealous to confirm your call [Stage III] and election [Stage IV] for if you do this you will never fall [back slide into lower stages again]: so there will be richly provided for you an entrance into the eternal kingdom of our Lord [Stage V]." (2 Pt 1:11)

In 3:17-18, Peter uses the term Arov in reference to Stage V. "Beware least you be carried away with the error of lawless men [in Stage II] and lose your stability. But grow in grace and knowledge of our lord…to him be the glory both now [Stage IV] and to the day of eternity [Stage V]."

Top

20. Evil

20A. What is Evil?
'Evil' in the New Testament can denote three things-misleading standards (stoichiea) like henos anthropos; wrong disposition in the sense of a materialistic world-view; and dehumanizing acts. For Paul, evil is not associated with demons in the sense of supernatural beings. He clearly supports this in Gal 4:8-9 when he says, "stoichieas [daemons*] are not gods."

20B. How can there be evil in a world created by an all-loving God?

Top

21. What is the "Eye of the Soul"?
Eye, in the Old Testament, refers to "psychic functions"…the eye is also the organ of judgment and decision…. The eye which is the light* of the body* is the intention (Mt 6:22; Lk 11:34), which illuminates the entire body." (227)

The Eye can be thought of as a conveyor, upon which all thoughts and feelings we are conscious of, are transported to our God self. The key words here are "all" conscious thoughts. For unlike most psychological models, the eye, or what today may be referred to as the ego, is like a passive conduit which directs all thoughts we are conscious of to our true God self, the indwelling spirit of God. In Stages II and III of consciousness, as in other models, the eye/ego dominantly conveys judgmental thoughts. In Stages IV and V, unlike other models, the eye/ego conveys both judgmental and nonjudgmental thoughts to the God self.

Top

22. Faith

22A. What is Faith?
The Old Testament Hebrew terms, munaah and emet, are generally translated into the Greek term pistus/faith in English. None of these terms, however, means belief in the modern sense of faith, rather they mean "sure or true, trustworthy or dependable, to be firm or solid…the term [emet] nowhere signifies the subjective act of belief." (228)

In the New Testament, pistus refers to a rational understanding rather than belief. Paul's use of the word pistus/faith implies an intellectual awakening; "both the NEV's 'awakened by the message' and the RSV's 'faith comes from what is heard.' This accent on hearing, as an event, which awakens faith, is central to Paul. It is not reducible to hearing sermons, nor simple oral communications, though it embraces both…hearing [from the Greek word Akoe] implies that the gospel must be articulated [understood]." (229) See Jm 1:25, Titus 3:4.

Faith for Paul is more than believing in Jesus, it is comprehending and practicing what Jesus taught. However, because "we have no verbal form for 'faith' [we cannot, for example, say she faiths] but must shift to 'believe'. But 'believe' also creates difficulties, for its opposite is to disbelieve and sometimes doubt. Moreover, because 'belief is often associated with beliefs' it is easy to slip into understanding faith primarily as believing beliefs. While pistus has a specific object, the primary response Paul sought was not consent to trust [belief] of his statements [it was to an understanding of his knowledge teachings]…" (229)

Top

22B. What does "faith through faith" mean?
Having introduced himself and recognized his readers, Paul sets the stage for the purpose of his visit in 1:16-17. Specifically, Paul intends to justify his pride in the good news of Jesus' Christ message. "I am not ashamed [said Paul] of the good news; it is the power [logos/logic] of God serving all who have faith [in the logos of God]-Jews first, but Greeks [like yourself?] as well--. since this is what reveals the justice of God to us [meaning the fulfillment of God's promise to put his law within the minds of all humanity]: it shows how faith leads to faith [or by Gnostic translation, how reason points the way to the higher reasoning/logos of God], or as Scriptures says: 'the upright man finds life through faith'".

Top

23. What does flesh mean?
'Flesh' is the English translation of the Greek word, sarx, and the Hebrew word, nepes. When Paul uses the term, nepes or sarx, he means the reasoning mind. Scholars recognize that when Paul uses the term sarx, he is referring to "the conscious-self…self…person…seat of carnal appetites…the subject of mental and volitional processes…. " (230)

Since the Council of Nicaea, sarx/flesh became associated with mankind's lower or carnal nature. This meaning can be expected when sarx is understood in a supernatural context. Before the Council of Nicaea, however, sarx was understood by Gnostics as the reasoning mind in lower stages.

Rm 1:22, Paul refers to the flesh as a senseless mind. In Col 2:18, he speaks of "mind of the flesh [sarx]" which is a proud mind. On the other hand, when he speaks of the flesh/ego in higher stages, he does so in complimentary terms. In 1 Cor 6:18, for example, he speaks of flesh as "a noble thing." (231) In 1 Co 2:26, Paul goes on to say "we [meaning Gnostic Christians] have the mind [flesh] of Christ". In effect, to translate nepes or sarx into flesh in the sense of carnal depravity, does not always convey Paul's intentions.

For Paul, then, "the will of the flesh [meaning the reasoning mind] is a vacillating and indecisive will" (232) in lower stages of consciousness. In higher stages, Paul compares the flesh to the mind of God. We see this in 1Co 3:1-3 when Paul says he "was not able to speak to you as pneumatics [meaning spiritual persons in Stage IV] but as sarkics [meaning those in Stage III who reason judgmentally],..immature in Christ…. I feed you milk, not meat, for you were not yet able (to take it). Nor are you now-you are still sarkic. For where there is strife and envy among you, are you not sarkic…?" (233)

Top

24. What is the logical path to forgiveness?

25. What are the four pillars of the Church in Revelation?

26. Do we have free will?
"AvreEouoria", the moral freedom to rule oneself, is virtually synonymous with 'the Gospel'." (200) (AE 95-105-98-90)

The question of free will surfaces in Paul's letter to the Romans, 9:10-18. "Origen indicates that this passage has become the 'locus classicus of controversy between heterodox' [which refers to Gnostics], and 'the orthodox' [interpretation of Jesus' ministry]. He [Origen] considers the basic issue to be a question of free will. " (201)

In RM 9:10-18, Paul states "when Rebecca had conceived …though they were not yet born, and had not done anything, good or bad, thought that God's purpose in election might remain, not from works, but from him who calls, she was told 'the elder shall serve the younger.' As it is written 'Jacob I love, but Esau I hated.'…therefore, it does not depend upon human will or effort, but upon God who shows mercy …He has mercy on whom He wills, and He hardens the heart of whomever He wills."

To the casual reader, 9:10-18 would suggest that God alone determines our relationship to others. This negates free will. But to Origen, Esau refers to the "orthodox", meaning those in Stage II and III, that lack free will. But by "heterodox", Origen refers to those in Stage IV who understand Jesus' theory of nature which, in turn, empowers them with free will.

Paul explains in Rm 10:10, that by believing [understanding] from the heart [mind] you are made righteous, ." which means when you understand with your mind Jesus' theory of nature, you will be a right minded, someone who Paul considers capable of expressing his or her free will.

In 1Cor 2:16, for example, Paul says "we [meaning the Gnostics or heterodox Christians in Stage IV] are those who have the mind of Christ." This surely gives them the power of free will.

In effect, if there is only one logical way to be or think, we could choose freely, but at the same time, be unable to choose between rational alternatives because the use of Plato's theory of nature limits our choices to one best answer in each category of ideas, which is no choice at all. When our world-view is based solely on Plato's theory of nature, free will must be redefined as freely looking for a predetermined answer, which cannot be free will, which is freely choosing between rational alternatives. Being without free will is demeaning because free will is the hallmark of what being fully human is about. Jesus' Christ teachings, however, makes free will the right of those who understand his theory.

"The acorn becomes an oak by means of automatic growth; no commitment is necessary. The kitten similarly becomes a cat on the basis of instinct. Nature and being are identical in creatures like them. But a man or a woman becomes fully human only by his or her choices. And his, or her, commitment to them." (204)

("Be of good cheer, I have overcome the world." Jn 16:33)

Top

27. Is Gnostic Christianity a bridge between Islam and Christianity?

28. What does Gnosticism mean?
'Gnosticism', from the Greek term, Gnosis, infers a cognitive, as opposed to intuitive, way of understanding the world.

'Gnosticism' "the Alexandrian [Egypt] theologians [like Orgen and Clement] were not independent philosophers, but members of the Christian Church. Therefore, they participated in a state of faith which is presupposed by all knowledge. However, the state of faith is insufficient since it is understood only as assent and obedience. A real participation demands something more, a drive toward knowledge or gnosis. The Christian is the perfect 'Gnostic'. Gnosis is a cognitive faith, a faith which develops its contents cognitively. It is a scientific explanation of the tradition of faith. 'Scientific' here is not used in the sense of the natural sciences, but in the methodological sense. Everybody is on the way of this development, only a few reach its aim." (234)

The author of the above quote seems to soften on his definition of Gnosticism in later statements. This may be because, at times, he seems to be applying the same terms to what he considers to be "two classes of Christianity." (234A) For example, "the highest good for those perfect Gnostics is the knowledge of God. This knowledge is not a theoretical knowledge in terms of arguments and analysis, but a participating in God." (234B)

"There are two classes of Christians: (1) The many simple ones, who accept on authority the biblical message and the teachings of the church without understanding them fully. They take the myths literally. As Origen said, they prefer the healing miracles to the story of Jesus going with his three apostles to the mount of transfiguration, which is an allegorical or metaphorical expression for those who go beyond the literal meaning to a transformed interpretation of it. Origen referred to the attitude of the primitive believers as "mere faith". This represents a lower degree of Christian perfection. All Christians begin at this level. (2) There are those to whom the charisma of gnosis, the grace of knowledge, is given. In this way the converted, educated Greek becomes the perfect Christian, but he always does it on the basis of faith. This concept of faith is different from the meaning of faith in Protestantism. Here, faith means the acceptance of doctrines, whereas in Protestantism faith is acceptance of the reuniting grace of God. For Origen the first step is the acceptance of authority; the second is the autonomous rational understanding of the biblical message. The second step does not do away with the first step, but is possible only on the basis of it." (234)

Top

29. What does Gospel mean?
The Greek word evangelion designates "good news". It is interesting to note that Paul often speaks of "our [meaning the Gnostic] gospel" or "my gospel" (Rm 2:16; 1 Co 15:1). Unlike others, Paul's gospel emphasized the cross* (stauros), meaning Jesus' knowledge/Gnostic teachings. Others, such as Mathew, Mark and Peter, emphasized Jesus' role as the Jewish Messiah, and his crucifixion on the cross (skelops).

"Paul's gospel [as opposed to the synoptic gospel] was not presented simply as an answer to a religious quest of his hearers, but as a God-given announcement of an event whose meaning challenges those quests, at least the terms in which they were pursued. Paul characterized his gospel of the cross [stauros] a 'folly to those who are perishing' [those of us in lower stages of consciousness]…. The gospel challenged the prevailing understandings of God, the human condition, and the means of dealing with it; the gospel called for a reconstruction [total re-evaluation] of prevailing ideas." (235)

Top

30. What is Grace?
'Grace', from the Greek word charis literally means "highly favored" (236), not an act of benevolence of God toward man. When Paul uses the word 'grace', he uses it in appreciation of God for allowing Jesus to teach us the principles of his/God's logos/mind. In effect, grace implies God giving us the right to comprehend and participate in his will (logos/logic). "Wisdom can also be considered grace." (237)

Top

31. How do Greek and Christian philosophy correspond? (Cave analogy - Kech 127, The Good of Plato-The Beast-Jn 12:2)
Many scholars have brought to our attention an ancient debate (300 BC to 300 AD) about how to reconcile Greek philosophy with Jewish and Christian philosophy. Few, however, clearly explain the details of this debate.

I propose that those debates centered on the limits of using only Aristotelian (judgmental) logic. The logos/logic of God, which is both judgmental and nonjudgmental, is true wisdom/logic.

You will notice many references to human nature in Greek philosophy. This can be expected because the credibility of judgmental logic, then, like now, rested on the theory of nature that all classes, including humanity, have one nature. Nonjudgmental logic rests on the theory of nature that some classes, like human nature, have more than one nature. The difference between the two divided philosophers into two factions-one that believed there is one human nature and one that believed there is more than one human nature. This same division exists today.

Let me now demonstrate my proposal by beginning with references to the author of the OT book, The Wisdom of Solomon, who tries to reconcile the Jewish idea of wisdom with its Greek counterpart, Sophia, through Gnostic Christians who argued that Jesus' logos teachings agreed with, but improved upon, Greek philosophy.

The author of The Wisdom of Solomon, "became the first to achieve some kind of rapprochement [meaning the renewal of friendly relations] between those two great cultures…the Greek and the Hebrew. Philo Judaeus would later follow in his footsteps, and so would the Alexandrian [Egypt] church fathers, Clement and Origen, and to a greater or lesser degree, most of the great thinkers of the Christian church…. In the NT itself, one can see the movement taking place, particularly in the letters of Paul…." (181)

What is this great movement? It is attempts at the reconciliation of the Jewish concept of wisdom/logos with that of Greek philosophy. "The remarkable description of wisdom in [Ws ch 7] vss, 22-23, is made up of terms borrowed in large part from Greek, especially Stoic, philosophy. Obviously, the author wishes to show that whatever word might be used to describe such Greek philosophical concepts as the logos, or world soul, might also be used to characterize the biblical concept of wisdom." (182)

Jesus' Christ/logos teachings bring a new element to the debate between Jewish and Greek philosophy. For all the reasons given above, Jesus' contribution of nonjudgmental logic, when added to Aristotle's judgmental system of logic, will expand our consciousness. And we will, because of our renewed thought process, process ideas with the same wisdom/logos as does God.

Justin Martyr, for example, maintained that Christianity "is the true philosophy better than anything the Greeks produced. He used the Greek term logos (word) for Christ and explained that this meant both the word [logic] of [Jesus'] revelation and true reason in philosophy. Thus he sought to bring together the truth of Christian revelation [meaning Jesus' logic teachings] and the wisdom of Greek philosophy [meaning Aristotelian logic]." (183)

It seems obvious that many did not agree that adding nonjudgmental logic to Aristotle's system of logic was essential to practicing true wisdom. Arguments against the foundations of Jesus' logos teachings-the theory of nature that humanity consists of more than one human nature-demonstrated their disagreement with Jesus' teachings.

For example, "Philos' denunciation of the dissension and strife produced by those [Gnostic Christians] who advocate the souls multiple origin [anthropoi] rather than agreeing in harmony to a single origin [henos anthropos]…" (184)

Another example, Celsus, a Greek intellectual, criticized Christianity (180 AD) by denying the "process of conversion with the proposition that human nature cannot be changed,.." (185) This criticism suggests Celsus believed that there is one human nature, not multiple human natures, as proposed in Jesus' logos teachings.

Also, the author of the Gnostic Gospel, The Sophia of Jesus Christ, presumably Jesus, argued the opposite of Philo and Celsus. The "passage's intension in the [Gnostic Gospel] Soph. Jes. Chr. is to refute those who would think that their origins are from a single being [henos anthropos]." (186)

Top

32. How do Greek and Gnostic terms correspond?

32A. Anthropoi: Anthropoi or mankinds is the plural form of Anthropos or mankind. Biblically, Anthropoi refers to Jesus' theory of nature that humanity, or mankinds (Anthropoi), has many natures. Typically, however, Anthropoi is translated "many men."

32B. Aroma: The aroma, or "fragrance of gnosis" (2Cor. 2:14) to Gnostics implies the sweetness of participation in the kingdom of heaven (Stage IV) that knowledge/gnosis of Jesus' teachings bring. In effect, the term aroma in the New Testament refers to Jesus' knowledge teaching and how sweet it is.

32C. Awakening: "Awakening," to Gnostics, means remembering what we always knew, but somehow forgot. Specifically, remembering we are meant to think like God and being able to do so again because we understand the Christ message. (173)

32D. Hylic: The Greek word 'hylic' refers to those of us in Stage II of consciousness, a stage of "immersion in materiality." (174) See GP 19-21

32E. Henos Anthropos: For Gnostic Christians, the Greek phrase 'henos anthropos' means one mankind and when used in Rm 5:12, refers to Plato's theory of nature that each class, specifically mankind, has a single nature.

This meaning was taught privately by Jesus to those who were ready to hear it. By the fourth century, however, Orthodox Church Fathers thought of henos anthropos as mysterious Gnostic teachings about the "secrets of mankind." How can anything be a secret if all mankind knows it? To this day, however, this meaningless interpretation is perpetuated and even encouraged.

32F. Light: 'Light' refers to moral reasoning in Stage IV and V, which leads to a higher experience of reality.

"Light is the element of moral good (Jn 3:20)…gift of understanding…vision…because the Christian has received the divine light [nonjudgmental reasoning] through Christ, the Christian himself becomes the light of the world." (175) "If you see rightly, then your whole life is illuminated thereby [by nonjudgmental reasoning]; if not, you remain in the dark [a practitioner of judgmental reasoning]". (176)

Light can be understood as the "eyes* of your understanding" (Eph 1:18).

32G. Pneumatic: Generally translated 'spiritual', 'pneumatic' originally referred to those of us who have reached the psychological perfection of Stage IV. See Holy Spirit.

Top

33. What does Glory mean?
'Glory', from the Hebrew word kaboud, in the Old Testament sense, is the manifestation of Yahweh's promise to Israel. Glory represents "success" and "esteem" (238). In the New Testament, Glory receives new and original elaborations. "Christians have the hope of sharing in the glory [Stage V] of God (Rm 5:2). The glory confirms perfect freedom for the Christian (8:21), and a transition of the Christian into glory terminates the process of foreknowledge, predestination, and justification (Rm 8:30)." (239) Actually, the glory represents Stage V in which ones' success is measured in brotherly love and personal high self-esteem.

Top

34. What does "to Hear" mean?
'Hear', from the Greek word, akoe, means to comprehend and internalize what is being said, rather than just believing or hearing what is said. For Paul, to hear is to be able to rationally articulate what is being said.

Top

35. What does heart mean?
"If any single organ is to be conceived as the seed of consciousness, it is the heart, which is most frequently mentioned as the agent of thought and decision." (241). "Biblical idiom differs from modern idiom in considering the heart as the seat of intelligence…and decision…heart is used in the Bible where in English we should use mind or will." (Dic 343). "To say heart, means simply to think (Rm 10:6). To reckon in the heart (Gn 6:5; PR 6:18; 16:9) is to reason. Wisdom, discernment, and knowledge are seeded in the heart…when Yahweh gives Solomon breath of heart (1 Co 5:9) this signifies not magnanimity but intelligence; so also one who is lacking in heart is not cowardly but short of wit…to steal one's heart is not to win his affections, but to deceive him…to be stubborn is to be heavy or hard of heart…thus a man is what his heart [reasoning/ego mind] is, and heart is used to designate the character…" (242) Understanding and heart are synonymous. In Hebrew "the heart means the center of thought, not as in Western tradition, of the feelings". (243)

Jeremiah, for example, prophesized that the new covenant will not be written on tablets of stone (externally recorded) but rather on the heart, meaning within the mind. See Eph 1:18 Note S. "Jeremiah sees the terms of the new covenant written not on tables of stone, i.e., promulgated externally, but written upon the heart, i.e., understood by the mind of each member of the restored Israel (31:22f)." (244)

Top

36. What is heaven?
In the Old and New Testament, "the phrase 'heavens and earth' signifies, as a rule, simply the visible universe." (131) The heavens can be considered "a natural phenomena and not [always] as the dwelling of the deity." (131) (See Mat 10:29)

For Paul "the heavens, which in the Old Testament are invisible and unattainable by man (with the exception of the Elijah episode) become in the New Testament the place of dwelling and reward for the Christian [the glory of Stage V]." (131)

Top

37. What is hell?
'Hell' is our separation from God's word/logos, which leads us to reason judgmentally, and, in turn, live barren lives. "Hell is the fire that burns in our conscience, the fire of despair because of our separation from God." (132) "Fire symbolizes ignorance of God." (133) In effect, for Paul, hell is living in Stages II and III of consciousness, for here our judgmental reasoning separates us from God and the understanding that we can reason like him/her.

The concept of spending eternity in a fiery pit (hell) can be considered a scare tactic to keep those of us in lower stages of consciousness out of harm's way until we reach Stage IV.

The biblical term sheol is generally translated 'hell'. I believe sheol was an area in which prehistoric Stage I beings still lived when the oldest books of the Bible were written. This caveman-like culture epitomized total ignorance of God because they were not yet rational, and therefore, unable to conceive of God. In effect, sheol was the home of surviving remnants of our non-rational ancestors.

Top

38. Why are so many founding fathers of the church considered heretics in the modern church?
The reason why so many founding fathers of the church, like Valentinus, Origen, and Marcion, were later considered heretics is simple. Until the Council of Nicaea, (325 AD), Gnosticism was considered Christianity. After that Council, Gnosticism, and therefore its advocates, were considered heretics.

Top

39. Does the Bible condemn homosexuality?
The condemnation of homosexuality is not authentic to early Christianity for two reasons. First, I will show that the supposed denunciation of homosexuality in Rm 1:26 is not valid because this interpretation does not fit the biblical context in which it appears (Rm 1:1 thru 2:11). Second, I will demonstrate that what Paul is denouncing is the unnatural separation of pneumatics (Gnostic Christians in Stage IV who emphasize Jesus' logos/logic teaching) and psychics (Jewish Christians in Stages II and III who emphasize Jesus' role as the Jewish Messiah). My point is that what Paul meant by pneumatics and psychics is lost after the Council of Nicaea. From that time on, the unnatural separation of pneumatics (Gnostic Christians) and psychics (Jewish Christians) is thought of as males, separating themselves from females, and vise versa-i.e., that homosexuality is unnatural. To document my argument, let us first review 1:1 thru 2:11 to see how 1:26-27 does not fit the context about which Paul is speaking.

Paul begins Chapter 1:1-8 by introducing himself as a servant of Jesus' Christ message, who is specially "chosen to preach the Good News that God promised long ago through his prophets. In Jer 31:33, for example, Yahweh (God) promised Jeremiah that "deep within them I will put my law, writing it on their hearts [minds]." In other words, Paul links Jesus' logos teachings to God's promise to Jeremiah that he will write his law within the minds and hearts of mankind.

Paul then explains that because of "the spirit of holiness that was in him [meaning Jesus' psychological perfection], he was proclaimed son of God…Through him we [Gnostic Christians] received grace and our apostolic mission to preach the faith [meaning a rational way to internalize God's law] to all Pagan nations…you are one of these nations, and by his call belong to Jesus Christ."

What is important to notice in 1:7 is that Paul considers himself a servant of Jesus' Christ or Messianic message which God promised in the OT. He is not teaching his readers to believe in Jesus, but rather to believe Jesus' messianic/logos teachings.

It is also important to notice that Paul recognizes his readers are not Jewish Christians, but Pagans/Greeks, who by their own path, discovered Gnosticism. This seems clear because Paul refers to his readers as "one of these [pagan] nations, and [by God's Call rather than by Jewish birth]" mirror Jesus' Christ/logos teachings. These Greeks, or Gnostics, were not, however, accepted by Christians.

The rift between Paul, his followers, and Jewish Christians, like Peter, is well known. In 1 Co 1:10-16, for example, Paul appeals to factions in the Church to "make up the differences between you, and instead of disagreeing among yourselves, be united again in your belief and practice. From what Chloe's people have been telling me,..it is clear that there are serious differences among you. What I mean are all those slogans that you have like: I am for Paul'; I am for Apollos'; I am for Cephas' [Petros in Greek, Peter in English],.."

In 1:9-15, Paul recognizes the good works of his readers and hopes his meeting with them will be mutually rewarding. For even though they have a common understanding of Jesus' Christ/logos teachings, Paul hopes his understanding of those teachings will expand theirs and vise versa. Paul finishes by saying that he feels obligated to bring his message to "Greeks", "barbarians", "the educated and just as much the uneducated" and that is what makes him "want to bring the good news to you in Rome."

Having introduced himself and recognized his readers, Paul restates the purpose of his visit in 1:16-17. Specifically, he intends to justify his pride in the good news of Jesus' Christ message. "I am not ashamed [said Paul] of the good news; it is the power [logos/logic] of God serving all who have faith [in the logos of God]-Jews first, but Greeks [like yourself] as well--. since this is what reveals the justice of God to us [meaning the fulfillment of Yahweh's promise to Jeremiah to put his law within the minds of all humanity]: it shows how faith leads to faith [meaning, how reason points the way to higher reasoning/logos of God]."

In 1:18-25, Paul explains that human suffering comes from "men who keep truth imprisoned in their wickedness." Paul is saying that suffering in the world, including Jewish Christians in Rome, is a consequence of their lack of virtue and depraved ways. And that they should know better, for God's "power and deity-however invisible-have been there for the mind to see in things he has made. That is why such people are without excuse:. they [even] made nonsense out of [using reason] logic [to reach the higher reasoning logic/logos of God] and their empty minds were darkened-the more they called themselves philosophers, the more stupid they grew, until 'they exchanged the glory' of the immortal God [meaning the perfection of the logos of God within man]…'for the image' of mortal man [i.e. the demiurge, meaning the fatherly image of the God of the OT], …"

In 1:24-25 rsv, Paul explains that the consequence of not having the logos of God within them, meaning exchanging Christ-consciousness for error-consciousness, "divine truth for a lie", not only allows them to rationalize "lusts of their hearts [minds, and]…the dishonoring of their bodies* (meaning being disrespectful of their psychological well-being) among themselves", and even worshiping a God they created (the demiurge), instead of the creator (the logos/will of God).

Evidence that my argument, that the condemnation of homosexuality is not biblical, rests on the fact that 1:26-27 does not fit the context of what comes before it.

In 1:18-25, for example, Paul is explaining his mission-to exchange ideas about Jesus' logic teachings with Greek/Christian Gnostics. He also explains that those who should know better (Jewish Christians in Rome-the Judaizers) have been abandoned by God because they continue to reason judgmentally. This leads them to rationalize their greed (lusts of the mind) and dishonor their bodies* by trying to convince one another that Jesus' ministry was that of Lord* and Jewish Messiah, not that of a teacher of a nonjudgmental system of logic, the logos of God. All this has nothing to do with homosexuality, the supposed theme of 1:26-27. Perhaps these verses were added because 1:28-32 better follows 1:1-25 then 1:26-27.

In reference to 1:18-25, Paul says, in 1:28-32, "In other words, since they [Jewish Christians] refuse to see it was rational to acknowledge God [let reason lead us to the higher reason/logos of God], God left them to their own irrational ideas and to their monstrous behavior. And so they are all steeped in all sorts of depravity, rottenness, greed and malice, and addicted to envy, murder, wrangling, treachery and spite. Libelers, slanderers, enemies of God, rude, arrogant, and boastful, enterprising in sin, rebellious to parents, without brains, honor, love or pity. They know what God's verdict is: that those who behave like this deserve to die [live meaningless lives], and yet they do it; and worse, encourage others to do the same.

It is clear in 1:1-25 that Paul is concerned with the greed and hypocrisy of those who should know better (the Judaizers) and their rejection of Paul's readers-Greek/Gnostic Christians who agreed with Jesus' logos teachings. As the Jerusalem Bible notes, Paul is concerned with "religious error,..[which] results in moral and social ills…. Though Paul rejects and condemns [greed and hypocrisy in Jewish and] pagan society, he does not condemn individuals…" (1:24 note P jbv)

From this I conclude that the condemnation of homosexuality in 1:26-27 does not fit the context. I will next argue, Paul's concern in these verses is for the unnatural separation of Jewish and Gnostic Christians, not homosexuality.

My second argument that the condemnation of homosexuality is not biblical, relies on demonstrating that 1:12 thru 2:11 is concerned with the separation of Gnostic Christians (pneumatics, later misinterpreted as males) and Jewish Christians (psychics, later misinterpreted as females).

Changing the theme of 1:26-27 from Paul's condemnation of homosexuality to his condemnation of the Gnostic and Jewish Christians restores the textual integrity of these verses.

Paul's references to those "who keep the truth imprisoned" (1:19), those "who knew God…made nonsense out of [God's logos] logic" (1:21)….refuse to see it was rational to acknowledge God (1:28)….and what is worse, encourage others to do the same" (1:32) suggest a schism between Paul's readers and Jewish Christians, like Cephas, who knew about Jesus' logos teachings, but favored Jesus' role as Lord and Jewish Messiah. (See GP 17)

Paul's concern for the ongoing animosity between Gnostic and Jewish Christians surfaces in 2:1-11. Here he reminds his readers that "no matter who you are, if you pass judgment you have no excuse. In judging others you condemn yourself, since you behave no differently."

The point is that, in 1:18-32, Paul is acknowledging the separation of Jewish and Gnostic Christians. In 2:1-11, Paul is reprimanding Gnostic Christians for their resistance to Jewish Christians. In effect, in these verses, Paul is arguing that it is as unnatural for Gnostic Christians (pneumatics) to separate themselves from Jewish Christians (psychics) as the vise versa.

Let me now reinterpret 1:26-27 from the perspective that Jewish Christians (psychics) are without full understanding of Jesus' logos teachings. This is why they reject Gnostic Christians (pneumatics). If they truly understood, they would not so unreceptive to us. It is as unnatural for Jewish Christians (psychics/later translated females) to socialize (have intercourse) only with Jewish Christians as it is for Gnostic Christians (pneumatics/later translated males) to socialize only with other Gnostic Christians. In doing so, everyone loses.

Gnostic scholar, Elaine Pagels, offers a similar interpretation of 1:26-27. She suggests that Paul "reveals that the Father has yielded his creation into 'sufferings'…which forms the elements of cosmic existence. In the process, those who become psychic having fallen victim to 'error'…were separated from the pneumatics, who, being divinely chosen, remain secretly related to the Father. Originally, these two were part of the same being: they belong together, but now they have been separated, their natural relationship disrupted, and both suffer from this alienation. According to Theodotus, this is the mystery hidden in the story of Adam and Eve. Although originally, they were one being (cf. Gen 1:26), Eve's separation from Adam typifies the psychic's separation from the pneumatic elect (as 'females' separated from the 'males')." (196)

"Reading Romans 1 as Paul's symbolic description of the present situation of the Christian community, the Valentinians [Gnostic Christians] could account for their own relationship-as allegedly pneumatic Christians-to those they consider the psychic majority [Jewish, and later, Orthodox Christains]. Irenaeus [an Orthodox Church Father] describes their dilemma: why, they [Gnostic Christians] ask, do psychic Christians accuse us of malice, lies, arrogance, and heresy? Why do they attempt to exclude us from common worship, and their [Orthodox] Bishops urge others to shun us as "offspring of Satan"-when we ourselves confess the same creed and hold the same doctrines they do?" (197) (See GP 54, 1Cor1:10-12)

"Paul's letters-pneumatically interpreted-could offer them great insight onto the situation. By means of allegorical exegesis, they read in Romans 1 how the psychics, misled by error (plane, 1:27), having rejected the truth of God (1:25-26), have become blinded to the truth (1:20-25), and now worship the demiurge instead of the Father (1:25). In the process they have forced an unnatural separation between psychics and pneumatics (females/males; 1:26-27) within the [Christian] community." (198)

Top

40. What is kerygma?
The Greek word 'kerygma' is traditionally taken to mean the message of Jesus. To Gnostics, however, the kerygma refers to Paul's teachings to the psychic Christians of Stages, II and III, whereas his logos teachings are what he teaches to pneumatics-those in Stage IV. 1 Co 1:10-12 exemplifies the schism that Gnostics saw "between pneumatic Christians who followed the secret teachings of Paul [Jesus' Gnostic/knowledge teachings]…and the psychic Christians who followed Peter, the founder of the psychic church." (246)

Top

41. What is the Kingdom of God?
The meaning of the phrase, the 'kingdom of God', is biblically obscure. Understanding Jesus' teachings in the context of the five stages of consciousness removes the cloud that obscures what he meant by the 'kingdom of God'. The kingdom of God is the fifth stage-the glory-a time when all will have reached Stage IV of consciousness.

Top

42. What does the Law mean?
The term 'law' can be used in two ways: one, in reference to Mosaic law, and two, in the sense of the Greek word Nons, meaning the principles behind order in the universe, namely the logos, or divine will/word, of god.

Much of the discord between early Christians and Jews can be linked to the Jewish misunderstanding that Christians believed they were exempt from the law. What Christians really believed was that Mosaic law represents an external standard necessary to constrain the passions of those of us in the first three stages of consciousness. But Gnostic Christians in Stage IV were inwardly motivated to follow the law because their process of reason mirrored that of the divine mind which is behind Mosaic law. In other words, those in the higher consciousness of Stage IV no longer need the laws of Moses because they reason from within their own minds according to the principles behind the moral laws.

Paul argues this in Rm 2:13, 2:15, when he says "it's not listening to the law, but keeping it, that will make people holy in the sight of God. For instance, pagans who never heard of the law, but are led by reason to do what the law commands, may not actually 'possess' the law, but they can be said to 'be' the law. They can point to the substance of the law engraved on their hearts* [meaning in their minds]".

Top

43. Who are the "Lawless Men"?
'Lawless men' refers to those who lived in the lawless era between the first rational man, Adam, and the introduction of the principles of law of Moses.

Lawless men in the New Testament, also refers to the immoral and conscienceless attitude we have when in Stage II in the development of our consciousness. It does not refer to people who defy laws, although these two are likely to overlap.

Top

44. What is the "Logos of God"?
Logos is the Greek word for the logical or reasoning mind of god. Interchangeable translations of logos are spirit, will, word, wisdom, and Sophia. Sophia is the functional equivalent of logos/word. "In Hellenized Judiasm…Sophia, wisdom….was understood to be virtually interchangeable with God's will and word [logos/logic]." (247)

"If one thinks in OT terms, one would prefer to translate logos by word; if one thinks in the Greek terms, as the apologists [Gnostics] did on the whole, then one would translate logos into 'reason'." (248) "The logos stood for more than spoken words. The extent of the concept was that behind spoken words were thoughts. Thoughts were mind. Mind had affinity with reason. Reason was the structure of orderly action…that ultimate reality was reasonable, was in fact reason itself." (249) And because human beings have the capacity to reason, it was believed by Jesus and Gnostic Christians that our destiny is to "make contact with divine reason and, like God, discern ultimate truths," (249) See Inter 547A.

"Logos also means man's ability to recognize reality; we would call it 'theoretical reason'. It is man's ability to reason." (250)

Top

45. Why does Paul mean by Lord?
"Paul uses the term 'Lord' to designate Yahweh, as 'God' designates the father." (251) This explains why in Rm 1:5-7, Paul uses two phrases for blessing "first the pneumatics [Stage IV]…with 'grace' from 'God our father' and then the psychics [Stage III] with 'peace' from 'the Lord'." (251) In effect, Paul uses the term Lord/Demiurge to indicate the Old Testament vindictive image of God held by those of us in Stages II and III, and God the father to indicate the Gnostic idea of an all loving God.

Top

46. What is Love?
'Love' is defined by three Greek words-eros, philia, and agape'. "Eros signifies the passion of sexual desire and does not appear in the New Testament. Philein and philia designate primarily the love of friendship. Agape' and agapan, less frequent in the profane Greek, are possibly chosen for that reason to designate the unique and original Christian idea of love in the New Testament. The Christian is rooted and grounded in [agape] love [this] love is his diet of conduct [in Stage IV]…it is the bond which unites all virtues". (252)

Agape' (1Co 13A) "has no possessiveness and is not for a desire for satisfaction; it wants to satisfy the other. [Christians]…become not only God's chosen ones…but God's sons…this love is attributed to God…it is identical with God's nature." (252) In effect, agape' love identifies the new relationship we feel toward others and the world when we reach the consciousness of oneness in Stage IV. This consciousness mirrors the nature of God's logos/love.

Top

47. What does mature mean?
The term 'mature' is the translation of the Greek word telieos. Mature, however, is a misdirected interpretation of telieos. Telieos means more than mature; it means having reached perfection. The rsv of Eph 4:14, for example, translates telieos as "mature manhood", whereas the same translation of telieos in the jbv reads "until we become the perfect man". The distinction between 'mature' and 'perfect' is important. Mature merely infers adulthood. Perfect/telieos means we have learned to reason perfectly like God. Actually, telieos symbolizes those who have reached Stage IV of consciousness.

Top

48. Why is King Melchizedek important to Paul?
For Paul and Gnostic Christians, King Melchizedek represents an intellectual path to righteousness, (right-mindedness) that Abraham recognized as more effective than the ritualistic path he represented. Paul mentions this because he teaches that Jesus is the Messiah, for he brings to humanity the missing link to right-mindedness, the counterpart of ritualistic religion, the logos/logic of God.

"About this [relationship between Jesus and the Melchizedek priesthood in GEN 14:17-20] we have much to say which is hard to explain, since you have become dull of hearing. For though by this time you ought to be teachers, you need someone to teach you again the first principles [stoichiea] of God's word [logos]. You need milk, not solid food; for everyone who lives on milk is unskilled in the word [logic] of righteousness, for he is a child [in Stages II and III]. But solid food is for the mature [the perfect in Stage IV], for those who have their faculties [mind] trained by practice to distinguish good from evil."

Most commentaries agree that in Hebrews 5:11-13, stoichiea refers to basic teachings of the church; the "ABC's of Christian Doctrine." (207), "elementary principles which form the basis of Christian faith and practice in the 1st century," (208) "The first principles of the oracles of God" (KDV); "or a deep and sublime mystery." (209) In effect, most commentaries view 5:11-13 as an example of Paul's frustration with the Hebrews' lack of understanding of even his most basic teachings about stoichiea. Commentaries, however, seem uncertain as to what exactly Paul means by basic teachings; what he means when he calls King Melchizedek the "king of righteousness"/right-mindedness (RM 2:7); and, finally, when he relates the priesthood of King Melchizedek to Jesus' priesthood.

Not many commentaries expand on what basic teachings/stoichiea Paul is speaking of in 5:11-13. Only a few commentaries mention the priesthood, but admit their confusion about Paul's references to it. For example "the order of Melchizedek,…[is] one of perplexity to us." It apparently perplexes people in the 1st century too, for the author [Paul] acknowledges that he "has 'much to say' on the subject and great difficulty in making it clear." (210)

The Gnostic interpretation of 5:11-13 is the same as our RSV translation. The difference between the two is that Gnostics understand that Paul means exactly what stoichiea meant in the 1st century, specifically, the first principles. In this case, it is the principles of henos anthropros/anthroipoi.

Gnostics understand that Paul relates Jesus' teachings to the priesthood of King Melechidizak because both represent righteousness/right-mindedness. Gnostics add that Paul considers Melechidizak's, and therefore Jesus'', intellectual path to righteousness superior to the ritualistic path represented by the Levitical priesthood of Abraham. For "Melechidizak blessed Abraham and received tithes from him. Since the greater blesses the lesser [Paul argues] Abraham concurred in the superiority of Melechidizak. Levi, whose decedents extract tithes from the people of Israel in accordance with the Mosaic law, actually offered tithes to Melechidizak in the person of his great grandfather, Abraham." (211) Gen 14:7-20. See GP 150-151.

Jesus confirms this in Jn 4:22 and Note F by teaching that, "you [meaning those who use rituals and teach mysteries] worship what you do not know; we [Gnostic Christians] worship what we do know [gnosis]…. True worshipers will worship the father in spirit [intuitively] and in truth [rationally] …. Because it [both the reasoning mind and spiritual mind] is the only worship that meets the conditions revealed by God through Jesus [God's helper or paraclete]."

Paul bolsters his argument that intellectual knowledge is the most effective path to reasoning like God, through three illustrations. In Heb 7:15-28, Jesus became a priest, not because of his acceptance into "the priestly [Levitican] tribe, but by virtue of a life which has overcome death [meaning overcoming unfulfilled life]. Jesus' high priesthood is established by his fulfillment of a priestly mission and confirmed by the prophetic word in psalms 110:4. Thus, the career of Jesus and the testimony of the scripture converge, on the conclusion that he is God's high priest, not in the order of Levi, but in that of Melechidizak….The second illustration is an appeal to experience. The law [of Moses] was weak and useless and failed to bring about perfection. Therefore, it has been set aside [argues Paul]. In its place, a better hope is introduced [through the stoichiea of henos anthropoi that Jesus teaches] which enables man to come into divine presence [come to emulate the logos of God]." (212)

Third, Paul illustrates that an oath of God stands behind Jesus' priesthood. "Another distinctive mark of the new covenant is that an oath (of God) accompanied its establishment. Priests in the Levitican order took their office without an oath. The high priest of the new covenant was addressed with an oath. Through the prophetic scriptures PS 110:4, God assured him [Jesus] that his appointment was firm and unchangeable. God is not going to change his mind [Paul concluded]. Jesus is, therefore, the surety of a better covenant because behind him and his mission stands the determination of God himself, who has bound himself with an oath and thereby firmly established his promise to men" GEN 7:20-22

Top

49. Does mercy infer pity?
The Greek word eleos is generally thought to mean pity. In the first century, however, eleos meant an increased sense of commitment to others, due to a new capacity for deeper love (agape) for all others. This deeper love is the result of internalizing Jesus' knowledge teachings.

"The proof of the love of one's neighborhood is the demonstration of eleos (Lk 10:1-37) and in this parable eleos is the rendering of assistance to one in need…eleos is a component of the wisdom from above; in contrast to worldly wisdom it shows itself in good deeds (Jm 3:17)…it [eleos/mercy] is chiefly manifested in the readiness to do good and to forgive, and 'mercy' appears to be too narrow a rendition. The New Testament eleos between men is transformed by the New Testament conception of love which is a revolutionary development in the New Testament and places a deeper motivation behind eleos than we find in the Old Testament." (253)

Top

50. Is Jesus the true Jewish Messiah?
'Messiah' is a Jewish title given to one who would restore Israel to her previous glory under David and Solomon. Gnostics consider Jesus the Messiah (Christ in Greek) because his teachings can elevate the entire world, including Israel, to glory (Stage V). This exceeds the glory of even David and Solomon. Simply said, Israel expected the Messiah to be a powerful Priest King-Jesus taught we could all be Kings. (Ps 82:2)

How one interprets the purpose of the Messiah determines if one can or cannot think of Jesus as the true Messiah. In the broadest sense, I divide Messianism into two categories-"Royal Messianism" (136) and Universal Messianism.

"Royal Messianism" Messianism, or what some may refer to as "royal Messianism" (Dict 570), looks for a Messiah in the sense of a politically powerful and charismatic Priest King who will bring independence, peace, stability and prosperity to Israel. In Royal Messianism, the Messiah is the medium through which Yahweh saves Israel.

"With the establishment of the Monarchy (CF King) the Messianic tradition takes on the form of the Israelite Monarchy, and the King himself, David and his dynasty, become the dominant element in [Royal] Messianism… David is the one 'to whom tribute is due'… the King also appears as the agent of prosperity… [successive Kings are] theoretically a new David and is the charismatic leader of Israel, the man through whom Yahweh saves Israel." (136) Contemporary Zionism may be the beneficiary of Royal Messianism.

It should be clear that Royal Messianism could not accept a crucified Jesus or his politically ineffectual following as their Messiah-he failed to restore the independence and prosperity to Israel. As Paul says in 1Co 1:24, "here we are preaching a crucified Christ [Messiah]; to the Jews an obstacle they cannot get over,.." It should be no wonder that, to this day, Royal Messianism, the most popular form of Messianism, rejects Jesus as the true Messiah.

Universal Messianism or Jewish Gnosticism, my terms, and later, Gnostic Christianity, refers to Jews who understood and followed Jesus' Christ or Gnostic teachings. In Universal Messianism, Jesus is considered the true Messiah of Israel. Jesus, like Jeremiah, taught that Yahweh, the God of fatherly love, was the one, and therefore, universal God of all. "The destiny of Israel is to attain perfect union with Yahweh through unqualified submission to his will [logos]; only then will it attain peace and salvation, and the reign of Yahweh, thus established in Israel will be extended to all men…. In Is1:1ff; Mi 4:1ff, Zion is the center from which the word [logos] of Yahweh will reach all men and inaugurate [not just in Israel but globally] universal peace. The second part of Is describes the restoration of Israel (40-48) and of Zion (49-52; 54:55; 60-62) as the center to which the nation shall come in submission to Yahweh. In Je. 30-31, the restoration of Israel and Jerusalem is dominated by the idea of moral regeneration of the people and by the new covenant which is written on the heart [on the mind] not on tablets." (137) The point is that, in Royal Messianism, God chooses to give Israel preferential treatment. In Universal Messianism, God honors Israel by using it to reveal his logos/logic to all mankind. God in the book of Jeremiah, does not bestow special privileges on Israel but rather a call to do a special service.

To paraphrase Jesus in Matt 5:17, "I have not come to abolish the law [meaning existing religious, spiritual and philosophical systems] I have come to perfect them. "Jesus is speaking not of carrying into effect every single injunction of the old law, but of bestowing on that law a new and definitive form of raising it to a higher place …. In the unfolding of the divine plan [for the perfection of man]." (Matt 5:17 Note F JBV)

Universal Messianism embraces the concept that the Messiah resolves the "conflict between man and evil, looking at humanity at large and not merely at Israel." (138) …. It is faith in the power and will [logos] of Yahweh to save and takes form as Israel learns more clearly what that power [logos] is and how it is exercised, how it is the moving force of history, and what it is to be saved." (139)

Jewish Gnostics like Valentinus "disclose to the initiate the hidden "logos" of Paul's teaching, separating it from the metaphors that serve to conceal it from uninitiated readers / For as Paul indicates in Rm 2:28, those called "Jews inwardly," "Jews in secret," the "true Israel" are (Theodotus says) the pneumatic elect [of Stage IV]. They alone worship the "one God" (Rm 3:29), the unengendered Father. But because their affinity with the Father is hidden, a secret from those who are "Jews outwardly" (the psychics [in Stage III]) and from the demiurgic god ("the god of the Jews," Rm 3:29), Paul more often calls the elect [meaning Jews in Stage IV] in his parable the "uncircumcised," the "Gentiles," or "the Greeks." (140)

Jesus was accepted as the true Messiah by his many Jewish and early Christian followers. For them his teachings fulfill the Messianic requirement of peace and prosperity that was guaranteed when the love of God is in all men-beginning with Israel and then the rest of the world.

"Paul's gospel was not presented simply as the answer to the religious quest of his hearers, but as the God-given announcement of an event whose meanings challenges those quests, at least in the terms in which they were pursued…the gospel challenged the prevailing understandings of God, the human condition, and the means of dealing with it; the gospel called for a reconstruction of those understandings." (141).

Note: Jesus' theory of nature casts a new role for religion. Remembering that Jesus' knowledge teachings were disseminated throughout the world through the religious institutions of his day we can hope for the same now. Religious institutions cross political borders and are, therefore, still the best qualified of institutions to convey Jesus' teaching on a worldwide scale. Hopefully, religious leaders will agree that teaching both Aristotle's and some form of nonjudgmental logic in their schools is to their benefit. Together, both systems teach our children how to reason in loving ways, which are supportive of our highest religious goals.

When Jesus said "let the little children come to me…for it is to such as these that the Kingdom of Heaven belongs," (Mark 10:14) he was stating the obvious-if we taught our children to reason lovingly from kindergarten on, in but a few generations "doing on earth as it is in heaven" could become our children's reality, just as Jesus promised.

We can continue teaching religious values from only a mystical perspective or we can intellectually support those values by teaching our children to reason lovingly. A truly better future for our children depends upon what we teach them now. Hopefully, religious leaders will consider Jesus' knowledge teachings as an intellectual instrument that can ally reason and religion to the benefit of both.

"Without the exercise and development of intellect man would still be in the Stone Age but unless homo sapiens develop a greater humility concerning both the imperfect nature of his knowledge and the need for transcendental moral guidance, he could easily return to the Stone Age." (142)

Is Jesus the Jewish Messiah? Yes, if you are in accord with Universal Messianism. No, if you think in terms of Zionist Messianism.

I believe love is the answer and that Universal Messianism could be an ecumenical bridge of love between Judaism, Christianity, Islam and the world.

Top

51. Why does most New Testament Literature date back only to the third century only?

Top

52. What does obedience mean?
The traditional translation of the Hebrew word "shama" is obedience, in the sense of blind obedience. Shama, however, means to be persuaded, to be open to new knowledge, not simply to obey orders. For example, being open to God comes before being open to man is a more authentic translation of Acts 5:29 than "obedience to God comes before obedience to man."

Top

53. What do Jesus' parables mean?

Top

54. Who is the paraclete?
Parakleloes means "a person called to the side of one in need of assistance, particularly in legal processes, but it does not signify a professional advocate (which Lt Advocatus does mean). Hence the generally accepted meaning of Paraclete is helper …. One who speaks on behalf of another, or intercessor…. Jesus Himself is called the Paraclete before the Father (1Jn 2:1) …. Jn 14:16, 2:6; 15:26; 16:7." (112)

Paul also can be considered a Paraclete of Jesus' Christ teachings. "Theodotus [a Gnostic Christian in the early Church] explains that Paul 'became the Apostle of the resurrection in the image of the Paraclete…. He preached the saviour in each of two ways.' For the sake of psychics [Stage III] 'according to the flesh' [for the sake of pneumatics, or the spiritual, in Stage IV]… 'according to the spirit'…, Theodotus explains, the Apostle knew that each knows the Lord in his own way; all do not know him alike." (113)

Jn 14:27 implies that Jesus himself is the primary or first Paraclete (helper) who teaches the logos of God the Father-but there will be "another" who can be described only by his mission, to teach the spirit of truth. "He will teach the disciples all truth and bring their minds what Jesus has told them (14:26; 16:13); he [the Paraclete] will bare witness to Jesus (15:26); he will demonstrate the error of the world concerning sin, righteousness and judgment (16:6-11); He will give glory to Jesus (16:14)." (114)

Jesus knew that because truth is unchanging, others will discover the truth of his logic teachings, and will, like him, teach it anew to those who have forgotten or never had the chance to hear it. For like Jesus, anyone who truly understands his logos teachings knows that he is one with all, and free to unconditionally love, only when everyone is free. I believe John was the first to comprehend fully the depths of Jesus' logos teachings-then Paul, Valentinus, Marcion, Orgin, Gnostic Christians, Mohammad, now me, and hopefully, you.

Top

55. Why are the priests and scribes antagonists of Jesus?
We can attribute the animosity Priests (meaning theologians and clergy) and scribes (meaning intellectuals and academics) afforded Jesus to close-mindedness, educational conditioning, and even economic self-interest. But the better explanation is that, then, like now, Stages II and III of consciousness dominated society. Priests and scribes, and everyone else in Stage II, would have judged that Jesus' logos teachings were contradictory to accepted ideas, and therefore, threatening.

Most in Stage III would listen to Jesus' logos teaching, find it interesting, but in the end, it would be too revolutionary to actually follow. Those III's closest to being IV's would see the truth of Jesus' logos teachings and become, like him, members of Stage IV. Nevertheless, because most Priests and scribes were in Stage II and III of consciousness, they would focus on minuscule errors in context at the expense of the beauty and truth of the content of Jesus' logos teachings. The anti-Christ is good people in Stages II and III that oppose Jesus' logos teachings.

Jesus' parable of the sower is a metaphor for how individuals in Stages II, III, and IV of consciousness would react to Jesus' sowing the seeds of his logos teachings. (Insert Parable to demonstrate how each of the three individuals who came upon the robbed man understood their responsibility to him.)

Top

56. Who is psyche?
'Psyche' refers to "the seat of desire" (254), meaning the ego self of those of us in Stage III. Paul, for example, uses the term 'psychics' to represent those of us in Stage III who use worldly, or human reasoning, as opposed to the enlightened reasoning of Stage IV.

The judgmental character of the ego self in Stage III is symbolized by the Greek and Roman mythological maiden, Psyche. In the myth, the hope of the god self (Venus) is excited by Psyche's (the ego self in lower stages) great potentials. Determined to elevate the ego to its own level, Venus moves Cupid (our intuitive self) to inspire Psyche to see that its love for a contemptible being (henos anthropos/one mankind) is unnatural. Venus' determination is rewarded when Psyche finds its error through Cupid's help. After which, Psyche, like Cupid, becomes incorruptible, meaning godlike or perfect (255), because the ego self/psyche now reasons at the same level as Venus, the god self and Cupid, the intuitive self.

What this myth tells us is that our ego mind is flawed in our psychic/Stage III consciousness. But Stage III is only a temporary stage in the development of consciousness. For when we grow from Stage III to Stage IV, the ego/psyche becomes psychologically perfect and godlike, like Venus.

Top

57. What is resurrection?
Resurrection implies intellectual renewal made possible by understanding Jesus' Christ message. "The 'old anthropos' [henos anthropos] must be 'put off' (Col 3:9-10) in order to 'put on' the new pneumatic anthropos [anthropoi]." In this light, resurrection means the transition of our judgmental ego-self in Stage III, to our nonjudgmental ego-self of Stage IV. This transition is made possible by understanding Jesus' knowledge teachings.

"In answering the question, 'how are the dead raised?' and 'with what kind of body do they come?' Paul makes clear that he understands resurrection to be transformation, not resuscitation. (This is true of the NT as a whole) The heart of Paul's contention is 'we shall all be changed [1Co 15] (VV 51-52)." (155)

In 1 Co 15:35-40 Paul castigates "as 'fools' those who ask 'how the dead are rising' or 'what body they come'. Such literal-minded questions betray the naive belief in bodily resurrection…" (156) Resurrection, according to Paul in Rm 8:10-11, is when the logos/mind of God "dwells in you". Simply said, resurrection is reaching Stage IV because here you awaken to your true perfect god-self.

"Gnostics claimed that it was the psychic [Stage III] Christians whose understanding [of resurrection] was merely 'literalistic'…Paul alone, they claim, as 'apostle of the resurrection' taught the pneumatic [Gnostic/knowledge] doctrine of resurrection." (157)

Resurrection, in the above sense, does not rule out life after death, only that we can do the same thing in the here and now that is done in heaven.

Top

58. What is righteousness?
The term 'righteousness' means 'right-mindedness', as well as 'walking in perfection" (256) Right-minded implies understanding rightly, and reasoning in the same nonjudgmental way that God reasons.

Righteousness and Stage IV are synonymous. "Righteousness is rightness" (257) Right-mindedness may sound elitist. It is, however, exactly the opposite. Righteousness/right-minded is nonjudgmental thinking and, therefore, when we reach Stage IV, we never judge ourselves as better than anyone else. As Jesus says in Jn 8:15, "I judge no one".

Top

59. Salvation

59A. Is faith or works the path to salvation?
The biblical term 'works' can be divided into two categories. 1) Human endeavors viewed as useless, materialistic acts of false pride (Stages I, II, and III); and 2) works which are motivated by universal love (Stages IV and V). The useless works of pride, "the works of darkness (Rm 13:12; Afh 5:11), works of the flesh (Gal 5:19), wicked works (Jn 3:19), and so on., infer the ineffectiveness of attempts by worldly man, those of us in lower stages, to truly affect the fundamental quality of their lives. The works of the righteous, those of us in Stage IV, however, is effective because it emanates from a higher form of consciousness. (Titus 3:4)

The controversy of either faith or works as the road to salvation boils (?) because of the misunderstanding of pistus/faith and ignorance of the five stages of consciousness in the New Testament.

Some reason that belief in Jesus is the road to salvation because the Bible says that salvation comes only through faith/pistus in him (Rm 10:10). But when pistus is understood as a solid, rational understanding, we can recognize that what Paul means here is that we are reconciled with God's logos when we understand what Jesus alone teaches. In effect, the controversy between faith and works is the consequence of not realizing that when Paul talks about works in a derogatory sense, he is referring to our works in lower stages of consciousness. Once we reach Stage IV, faith/understanding of Jesus' knowledge teachings changes the nature of our work, for now it is based on love. Realizing that understanding/faith is the key to Stage IV, and subsequently its good works, reveals that no controversy exists between faith and works. Rather, what Paul is saying, is that only faith/understanding of Jesus' knowledge teachings leads to Stage IV where we do God's work.

"On the antithesis of faith and works…it is a principle of New Testament theology that the works of man are totally ineffective to achieve righteousness…once one has received faith [understanding], however, the works of our faith are demanded (Gal ?; 1 Tm 1:3; 2 Tm 1:11; Jm 1:25; 2:47); these are deeds done in accordance with the Christian standards of righteousness and from the motive of faith and love." (166)

"It is idle to call him Lord, without doing the things he says (Lk 6:46); indeed to answer His call may involve the sacrifice of all that we processes (Lk 14:33)." (167)

"In Pauline writings, work is accepted as a necessary part of human responsibility (Eph 4:20; 1 Tm 4:11; 2 Tm 3:10-12)…" (166) "Be ye doers of the word and not hearers only." (Jm 1:22) For Gnostics, good works from the heart, then, is the point of New Testament theology.

"For Jesus, the purpose of God is not found in the creation of planets or galaxy of stars, not in building of great cities or empires, nor in organization of vast institutions, but rather in the steady growth of human character, in the development of those inner spiritual qualities which are expressed in fair dealings, unselfish love, devotion to truth, kindness, mercy, and good will…I tell you truly [said Jesus], so as you do to one of my brothers, even the least of them, you did it to me." (168)

In actuality, we become true Christians when we understand Jesus' knowledge teaching and act in accordance with it. Simply believing in something accomplishes nothing. If a thousand Monks, for example, could believe hard enough to levitate, what good would it do for even one child who has nothing to eat?

Top

59B. What is salvation?
Salvation is the translation of the Greek word 'soteria'. This word has its roots in the concept of coming to a new understanding of God through mental effort, not through God's benevolence.

In the first century, soteria is synonymous with "coming to the knowledge of the truth" (1 Tm 2:4), not being saved. The term 'rectification' better encompasses the meaning of soteria than does salvation, for the word soteria, traditionally translated savior, is a first century title that refers to a healer who rectifies a problem, rather than a transcendental being who saves the world.

In effect, soteria authentically meant rectification in the sense of getting things right, rather than being saved from something we have no control over.

Traditionally, salvation is associated with a cataclysmic ending of the world. Gnostics, however, view the end time as an end of the materialistic world order, Stage III, and a beginning of the glory, Stage IV.

Top

60. Who is Satan?
'Satan' is a personification of what early Church fathers considered evil: like judgmentalness, materialism, lust, greed, relentlessness, usury, and the merchandising of Jesus' teachings. Satan is "the power of materiality." (158)

The relationship of Satan with sin appears late in the Old Testament, "he [Satan] is an accuser, a heavenly officer [of God], whose function it is to question and to test the genuinity of human virtue." (159) The appearance of Satan as a tempter (the devil is like God's prosecuting attorney in the book of Job), however, does not affect the Old Testament belief that man is, himself, the responsible agent of his sin.

Satan, in the sense of a demonic personification of evil, can be seen as scare tactics to keep those in lower stages of consciousness out of harm's way until they understood the Christ message. We can liken parents using stories of the bogyman to scare children into obeying rules when they are too young to understand the purpose of the rules, to those who would use Satan to scare themselves and others into doing good until they wanted to do it on their own accord.

It is apparent in 2Co 11:13 that Paul is having trouble with those who claim to be Christian Apostles, but to Paul they were anti-Christs, who would use Jesus for their own personal gain, i.e. "ministers of Satan." (160)

"The scriptural doctrine of Satan is nowhere systematically developed [in the New Testament]...the source of evil is found in the flesh* and its passions, in self-love and ignorance, rather than supernatural personalities." (161) In short, Satan is a personification of evil, not a real character.

Exorcism can be seen as a concentrated effort to purge the consciousness of false standards, not to extract demons. See Elaine Pagels, The Origin of Satin, Pgs. 34 and 38, Vantage Books.

Fallen angels are those who have reached Stage IV, but are too weak in their commitment and understanding of Jesus' Christ teachings. They do not carry it into their daily lives. The term 'backsliders' is synonymous with fallen angels.

Top

61. What is the second coming?
The 'second coming', from the Greek word parousia, refers to reaching Stage IV. Tradition teaches that when the resurrection comes, the world will be destroyed. This belief, however, rests on the mistranslation of the Greek word allasso to mean destroyed when, in the first century, it meant to alter or change. In this light, the world will not come to an end. Only the world as we now know it will end. We can be assured of this interpretation by several passages in the Bible that refer to the "world to come", Stage V (Mt 12:32 and Mk 10:30). The glory is the renewed earth that Peter talks about in 2 Pt 13:3 when he says "according to his promise for new heavens and a new earth wherein dwell righteousness." (A110, Matt 24, Lk 17:22-37, 21:33, 24:30; 1Thes 4:17, rev 1:7, 4:14)

"Some [American] Indians believe there will be what Christians call the Armageddon, and in time, he [Sunny Smart, 36 year old member of the Bad River Band of Chippewa Indians] says, 'not an end in the physical sense, but an end in the way of thinking. It will be a transformation from abuse and domination of nature and people, to a way of harmony, kindness, sharing-a natural way, an Indian way'." (127)

The American Indian understanding of the Armageddon is the Gnostic understanding of the Second Coming. Gnostics refer to that Second Coming as the glory of Stage V, in which the Christ consciousness [enlightenment] is manifested in all people, not the physical return of Christ. (Note: The 1988 Jesus Seminar).

Jesus talks about the Second Coming of his Gnostic teachings in Jn 14:15-26; 15:26; and 16:7-15 jbv. Here Jesus tells his disciples not to be concerned after he leaves them. For he will ask the Father to send an advocate of his/Jesus' teachings to insure that his teachings survive his person. Therefore, the Second Coming that Jesus talks about in John is that of an advocate who, like himself, will teach the world how to create the Kingdom of God here on Earth.

Some confuse the Paraclete with the second coming of Christ. "The word paraclete (parakletos in Greek) meant 'comforter' or 'advocate'. In [the gospel of] John, Paraclete was the synonym for Holy Spirit. John placed emphasis on the Paraclete rather than on the parousia (the Second Coming of Christ)". (128) We must not assume, however, that the word Holy Spirit refers to God. "The holiness of God is rarely mentioned in the NT…it is to the church and its members that the term is more frequently applied…" (129) In John, then, the Holy Spirit can refer to someone who Jesus said "the Father will send in my name [and he, meaning the advocate, will],.. teach you everything; and remind you of all I have said…he will show the world how wrong it was, about sin, and about who was right, and about judgment [reason]:.."

In effect, Jesus was the first to reveal the logos/logic of God to the world. Paul and others who advocate Jesus' logos teachings are also paracletes. For John, there is no second coming of Jesus in the person. The second coming of Jesus is when his Paraclete (helper) reminds the world of Jesus' Christ/logos teachings.

Top

62. Is sex discrimination Biblical?
The belief in the inferiority of women in the Christian church is rooted in the early Orthodox church father's misunderstanding of the role of the Greek Goddess of wisdom/logos, Sophia.

To Gnostic Christians, the Greek goddess, Sophia, personifies "theoretical as distinguished from practical wisdom; specifically, in Aristotle, knowledge of first [or natural] principles,.." (190). Wisdom, personified by Sophia, is referred to in Hebrew philosophy by Ecclesiastes (7:25-26); as the woman who makes the sinner "her captive." Sophia/wisdom, in her lower Stages, II and III, is called the "whore of Babylon" by John in Revelation. And in the Gnostic Gospel, The Sophia of Jesus Christ, Jesus refers to Sophia/wisdom in lower stages, as a "deficiency of the female [and that through him, she, meaning wisdom, might] ..be perfected [meaning awakened to her potentials for divine reason through Jesus' Gnostic teachings]." (191)

In the 3rd century, however, the influential church father, Tertullian, mistakes the personification of the defective and fallen wisdom of the "female goddess Sophia" for women. He and others since him interpret this as a "defect of femaleness" and apply this mistake by addressing "women…as the gate by which demons enter." (192)

Tertullian's mistake, thereafter, plays a major role in the justification for male supremacy over women in the Church. For Tertullian is credited with translating Christian literature into Latin, which prior to him was written in Greek. The consequence was that "Christian literature in the West became Latin and Latin literature [Tertullian's] became Christian." (193)

The lower status of women in the Christian societies is blamed on Paul, but this is not the view of the true Paul, but rather that of those who wrote in Paul's name. The Pastoral Epistles, not authentic to Paul, establishes the supremacy of males over females. Another example of plagiarism appears in "1Cor 14:33b-36, which forbids women to speak in church worship. Not only does this contradict 1Cor 11:5, which assumes women do pray in church, but also with post-Pauline, author of Tim 2:11-12. So Paul has been blamed for a view he did not have." (194)

Subtle contradicting viewpoints about the value of women surface in the King James and Jerusalem Bible translations of Rm 16:1-2. In the kjv, phoebe, a woman, is considered a "servant of the church." In the jbv, she is recognized as "a deaconess of the church at Cenchreae." We can assume that the kjv reflects the orthodox view of Paul whereas the jbv reflects the Gnostic point of view. I would add, because the point of Christianity is nonjudgment, anything that is judgmental, like the ranking of men over women, is not Christian, and therefore, not Paul.

Top

63. What is sin?
'Sin', from the Greek word hamatia, refers to an "intellectual error" that causes us to miss the mark of understanding God's will, the logos/logic of God. (143)

In the Old Testament, sin is "straying" away from the right path…a lie…folly…sin is, indeed, a breakdown of society…nonaction…sin is the denial of life…these narratives affirm clearly the freedom and responsibility of the individual." (143)

No word in the Old Testament means precisely theological sin [in the modern sense]." (143) Perhaps the Jewish notion of an "impulse to evil" (144) is the closest the Old Testament comes to the modern idea of sin.

In the early New Testament, sin itself, as distinct from sinfulness, was designated by the Greek words "hamartia and hamartoma." Traditionally, these terms become theological terms; "the Christian concept of sin [however] does not appear in the classical Greek use of these words." (143) In the classical Greek, harmartia means to "miss the mark". "This signifies not merely an intellectual error in judgment [reasoning], but a failure to obtain a goal [rightmindedness]." (143)

New Testament authors took the Old Testament definitions of sin for granted, but were not explicit about them. They do, however, expand on the Old Testament and classical Greek understanding of sin.

In the first century, for example:

· "Sin [is considered] a single act." (143)

· "Sin [is]…a state or condition…" (143)

· "Sin is lawlessness"

· Paul "does not mean, and explicitly rejects, the idea that men share in some way a personal act of the ancestor…" (143)

· Paul argues that "the seed of sin is a power in the flesh. Sin is a kind of pseudo-law [Plato's theory] in opposition to the law of Moses. It enslaves man so that he is unable to do what is right even when he wishes to do so;…" (143)

· "Sin is not indeed inevitable if man can resist it." Paul does not affirm failure so much as he affirms perpetual conflict between law of reason [in Stage IV] and the law of the flesh [which distorts reasoning in Stages II and III]. In this conflict, man need not be defeated, but neither can he achieve victory except through Jesus Christ [Jesus' knowledge teaching]";… (143)

· "The novel element of the New Testament concept of sin is the presentation of Jesus as the conqueror of sin. In the Old Testament, only God can deliver man from sin; in the New Testament, God does deliver man from sin." (143) In the "new age" [Stage IV]…Christians are not made incapable of sinning (Gal 6:1); rather sin no longer is the determinative domain." (145)

St. Augustine can be considered to be the first church father to discover the concept of original sin in Christian literature, i.e., the idea that human nature is, by nature, depraved. Before Augustine's discovery (419 AD), however, most church fathers, such as Gregoy of Mussa, St. John of Crystostom, Bishop Julien of Eclanum, and Pelagius, saw human beings as the living image of God and believed we acted sinfully only if we were deprived of Jesus' knowledge teachings.

"Augustine [however] would eventually transform traditional Christian teachings on freedom, on sexuality, and on sin and redemption for all future generations of Christians. Where earlier generations had once found Genesis 1-3 the affirmation of human freedom to choose good or evil, Augustine found in the same text a story of human bondage…. This cataclysmic transformation in Christian thought from an ideology of moral freedom to one of universal corruption coincided… [with] the evolution of the Christian movement from a persecuted sect to the religion of the Emperor himself." (146)

Augustine saw man as depraved pawns of Satan. "Lust is an usurper, defying the power of the will, and tyrannizing the human sexual organs." (147) A definition of mankind is consistent with his own acknowledged experiences of sexuality as being, in his own words and from his own experience, "illicit," "guilt provoking," and "insatiable." (148)

"Who can control this [libido] when its appetite is aroused? No one! In the next movement of this appetite, then, it has no 'mode' that responds to the decisions of the will. What married man chooses that the appetite be aroused, except when needed? What honest celibate choose that the appetite ever be aroused? Yet, what he wishes, [to be sexually aroused], he cannot accomplish…In the very moment of the appetite, it has not mode corresponding to the decision of the will." (148)

Augustine, in his own words, admitted he was at a loss to understand the Christian teaching of free will. Later he would claim, of course, that in denying the power of the will he was only repeating what Paul had said long before: "I do not do what I will, but do the very thing I hate…I can will what is right, but I cannot do it." Augustine had no idea that Paul was talking about the ego in lower stages of consciousness. (149)

Augustine does not accept full responsibility for his own actions; he projects his failures onto Adam. "Augustine insists that, since he has suffered much of this 'against his own will'…I was not, therefore the cause of it, but the sin that dwells in me; from the punishment of that more voluntary sin, because I was the son of Adam." (150) To Augustine, "if Adam once had free will, he himself had never received it…what other apologists [church fathers] had celebrated as God's greatest gift to human kind - free will, liberty, autonomy, self-government - Augustine characterizes in surprisingly negative terms. Adam had received freedom as his birth right, but nonetheless, as Augustine tells it, the first man "conceived a desire for freedom" and his desire became, in Augustine's eyes, the root of sin, betraying nothing less than contempt for God." (150) This negativity manifests itself in Christian services when they repeat after the minister, "we are by nature sinful and unclean... We justly deserve your [meaning God's] present and eternal punishment." (Lutheran Worshiped Concordia Publishing House, pg 158.)

"For most Christians, the story of Adam and Eve was to warn everyone who heard it not to misuse their divinely given capacity for free choice." (151)

St. John of Crysostom "indeed warns the faint-hearted not to blame Adam for their own transgressions." (151)

Christians from Julian to Origen, plus modern scholarship such as Peter Gorday's "confirm the impression that Augustine effectively invented this interpretation of Paul's words, by daring to apply them to baptized Christians." (152) Many contemporaries of Augustine argue that Christians recovered from sin through baptism, i.e., understanding Jesus' knowledge teachings. "Augustine's argument [that Adam introduced sin, Rm 5:12] has persuaded the majority of Western Catholic and Protestant theologians to agree with him; and many Western Christians have taken his interpretation of this passage for granted. But as Peter Gorday has shown, when we actually compare Augustine's interpretation with those of theologians as diverse as Origin, John Chrysotom, and Pelagius, we can see that Augustine found in Rm 7 what others had not seen there-a sexualized interpretation of sin and a revolution from 'the flesh' based on his own idiosyncratic belief that we contact the disease of sin through the process of conception (153) …. Julian accused him [Augustine] of having invented this view of original sin…." (154)

Top

64. Are we all sinners by birth?

Top

65. What does 666 represent?
"More usually the number [666] is regarded as an example of germatria, i.e., the practice of giving letters of a word or name the numerical equivalent-possible in either Hebrew or Greek, since both use the letters of their alphabets as numbers. The most attractive of many solutions put forward is that the name of the Greek form Neron Caesar, which when transliterated in Hebrew characters adds up to 666. If the Latin spelling Nero is used, the sum of the Hebrew transliteration is 616, which might account for variant in some Greek Mss…" (170) (See Rev 13:18 rsv footnote)

Top

66. What does soma/body mean?
'Body', from the Greek term soma, was used by Gnostic Christians to define the whole of human consciousness, meaning the psychological self. Body/consciousness, as a whole, consists of the reasoning mind (sarx/flesh), the intuitive mind (spirit), and the indwelling Spirit of God, and the eye, or in today's term, the ego. The eye/ego is an abstraction of the indwelling spirit of God that empowers us with self-consciousness.

"Paul can use the word 'body' in the sense of 'personality' or 'self'". (219) "In Paul the term 'body' is nearly synonymous with the self (Rm 6:12; 8:10; 1 Co 6:18), but body and soul [spirit] both used for self have different emphasis. The body is the totality [of the psychological self] rather than the conscious self [the eye or ego]." (220)

The Greek term, soul, and its Latin equivalent, spirit, can also refer to consciousness as a whole.

Defining the body as the whole psychological self is important to understanding that Jesus' logos/logic teachings empowers the body/consciousness with Godlike reasoning. "Paul's conviction that unless man rises as a body [the whole psychological self] he does not live at all; for the body is the totality of concrete human existence, and it must experience what appears impossible, a transformation [from Stage III to Stage IV] which without destroying it, gives it the qualities of the heavenly man [of Stage IV]." (221)

The concept of bodily resurrection leads us to think of Paul's use of the term 'body' in a physical sense. But here, like above, when Paul uses the term 'body' along with his concept of resurrection, his intentions have to do with reaching psychological perfection through Jesus' knowledge teachings, not being physically reborn.

Top

67. Who are the sons of God?
'Sons of God' refers to those of us in Stage IV. Jesus was the first to be considered a 'Son of God', since he was the first to discover how to emulate God's will. For this reason, he was considered the prototype of the perfect human being in Stage IV. Those after him, who accepted his newfound knowledge, were also considered Sons/Daughters of God. In truth, Jesus discovered the way to his, and our, highest potentials. For this reason, Jesus can be considered the first "truly normal, that is to say standard [perfected] human being. To become like him, to belong…to his family rather than that of Adam, the First is not to become freakish and abnormal; it is to discover what being human really is." (258)

Top

68. Who are the sons of man?
'Sons of man' refer to those of us in Stages II and III who have not yet internalized Jesus' knowledge teachings and, therefore, live at the consciousness level of Stages II and III.

Top

69. Who is Sophia?
'Sophia' is the Greek goddess who originally personified "theoretical as distinguished from practical wisdom; specifically in Aristotle, knowledge of first principals [like henos anthropos and anthropoi]." (162) In everyday conversation, however, Sophia is considered wisdom as we would define it in Stages I through III. Gnostics refer to Sophia in these lower stages as the "drop" (163), "whore" (164), and in the Gnostic gospel, the Sophia of Jesus Christ, as a "deficiency of the female" (163). In Stage IV, Sophia is defined by Gnostics as "divine Sophia" and "perfected".

"Paul speaks of 'Sophia among the perfect [the higher form of reasoning of pneumatics in Stage IV], not a Sophia of this age [the lower form of reasoning in psychic and hylic Stages II and III, but rather],' 'a Sophia [wisdom /reasoning] of God [formally] hidden in mystery'. (1 Co 2:6-7) Thus, there is a present Sophia [reasoning in Stages II and III] and a divine Sophia [reasoning in Stage IV]. The rulers of this age, Paul argues, knew Sophia [of Stages II and III] but not Christ-Sophia (2-8) [higher reasoning of Stage IV]". (165)

Top

70. What is the Soul?
In first century Greek, the term 'soul' meant the totality of mind, which, in Plato's book, The Republic, consists of three elements: the visible, the intelligible, and the good that mediated between the first two. We can equate the three elements of the Greek model of the soul to the reasoning mind, intuitive mind, and indwelling Spirit in the Gnostic Mind Model, Page X. Paul used the term 'body' in place of 'soul'. (See Spirit, the Greek translation of Soul)

Top

71. What is the Spirit?
'Spirit' is the Latin translation of the Greek word 'soul'. In the original Greek text of the New Testament, none of which survived, both 'spirit' and 'soul' were thought of in their classical Greek sense of the totality of man's psychological self. The term 'soma'/body is often used in place of spirit and soul in surviving NT texts.

"The spirit is not obviously or explicitly concerned with a divine personal being in Paul…at times Paul seems nearly to identify the spirit as the conscious self and [at the same time] the spirit as the heavenly level of being into which the Christian is transformed." (259)

Gnostic Christians realize that when Paul uses the term 'spirit' in the personal sense, he is referring to the intuitive mind. When he speaks of the Spirit in a heavenly sense, he is referring to our God self, meaning the indwelling spirit of God. "By spirit (pneuma) Paul sometimes means the highest element in a human being…. This he distinguishes from the flesh, the lower element…. The NT can suggest a deep affinity between the human spirit and the Spirit of God…there are many texts where it is hard to tell whether it is the natural or supernatural spirit that is referred to, the personal or the indwelling spirit…" (Rm 1:9 Note G). The difficulty in distinguishing between Paul's use of spirit in the natural and supernatural sense is that in Stage IV, he makes no distinction. The supernatural/extraordinary is the natural/ordinary because both are one.

Today, soul and spirit are no longer thought of in the classical Greek sense that Paul wrote in, but in the sense of a divine energy within us, which Gnostics would call the god-self.

The change in meaning of spirit/soul from the totality of our psychological nature to our god-self leads to grave misunderstandings of Paul's intentions, when he contrasts the spirit and the flesh (sarx). When Paul is contrasting the spirit and flesh, he is pointing out that our ego/reasoning mind (sarx or flesh) in Stages II and III often opposes the spirit/intuitive mind. He is not indicating that the flesh/man's reasoning mind is inherently opposed to the spirit of God.

Recently discovered Gnostic gospels teach that ordinary consciousness/ego can be perfected and harmonized with the god-self.

"When one's psyche, or ordinary consciousness, becomes integrated with one's spiritual nature…when the Adam [the ego self] becomes complete again [harmonized with the intuitive self/,god-self], one can achieve internal harmony and wholeness." (260)

Top

72. Spiritual

72A. What does holy mean?
"'Holy' is a term derived from the Hebrew Kds." (245) Kds describes someone or something that stands out. Holy also implies perfection. We know that that the term Holy is not reserved for transcendent beings and realms because Holy often refers to Holy Ground, Holy Churches, and so on.

Top

72B. What does Holy Spirit mean?
The term 'holy spirit' applies not only to the divine, but also to those of us whose reasoning has reached the perfection of the logos of God (Stage IV). Angels, sons of God, saints, the chosen, the elect, and pneumatics can be spiritual individuals. Gnostic Christians use the term holy spirits to refer to those in the Christ-consciousness of Stage IV.

"The indwelling of the spirit in the Christian makes him a holy temple…[holy also] indicates the sacred character of persons or objects belonging to God;.." (245)

Top

72C. What is Oneness?
'Oneness' is more than acceptance-it is total absorption into others. It is complete empathy, compassion, respect, and pride in others. (Eph 4:26)

Top

72D. What is being spiritual?
"Becoming a Christian meant discerning one's spiritual nature-discovering, as one teacher put it, 'who we are, and what we have become, where we were … whither we are hastening; from what we are being released; what birth is, and what is rebirth'." (195)

Gnostics know these answers. They are the indwelling spirit of God. What "we" have become are holy spirits in Stage IV. "We" were judgmental thinkers in Stages II and III. "We" are hastening towards the glory of Stage V. "We" are released from judgment, desire and fear. Birth is recognizing the truth of Jesus' logos teachings, and rebirth is living Jesus' logos teachings daily.

The Greek word, pneumatic/spiritual, refers to being in Stage IV, or Christ- consciousness. Being spiritual means more than teaching, talking, or singing about oneness with others. It means living as if the well-being of others is as important to you as is your own. This means using all we have to the best advantage of all. Or as Jesus said, "he who has two coats, let him share with him who has none; and he who has food, let him do likewise." (Lk 3:11.) In principle, this means that the truly spiritual person owns and consumes only what he needs. He willingly invests his over-abundance in ways that will elevate the well-being of others to his own level.

"If a man was rich enough in this world's goods saw one of his brothers was in need, but closed his heart to him, how could the love of God be living in him? My children [meaning Gnostic Christians] our love is not to be just words or mere talk, but something real and active; only by this can we be certain that we are children of the truth and be able to quieten our conscience in his [God's] presence." (1Jn 3:17-20.) This applies to Kings, Queens, Popes, Priests, teachers, lawyers, businessmen, bankers, entertainers, land owners, athletes, tradesmen, laborers, and everyone else. Gnostics are not against money or wealth, only against its misuse in the presence of need. (Matt 6:22)

A truly spiritual person will not squander his money on life styles that exceed his needs and be in good conscience doing so. He will live in harmony with the spirit of nature, not in accord with the selfish life styles we accept as moral. Simply said, when we are truly spiritual, we see ourselves in others, and therefore, want the same for others as we want for ourselves.

Top

73. What is syzygy?
The term 'syzygy' is rooted in the Greek concept of yoking or pulling together of mind and heart. Gnostics use this word in relation to the reasoning/ego mind in Stage IV working in accord with the Godself. Unfortunately, syzygy is often interpreted in terms of endogenous gods. See Elaine Pagels, Gnostic Paul, P 124-127.

Top

74. What does Paul mean by "thorn in the flesh?" (2Cor 12:7)
The thorn in the flesh that Paul speaks of in 2Cor, refers to his ongoing sense of heavy-heartedness, brought on by insults and persecutions from the very people he is trying to help. He accepts this persecution and rejection as a small price to pay compared to the honor he feels that God selected him to spread the word/logic of Jesus' Christ/logos teachings. He jokes that if everyone loved what he said, his pride would become so inflated it would hinder his ability to effectively spread the word.

Top

75. What is the trinity?
"The Trinity of Father, Son, and Holy Spirit, as understood in the traditional sense, was reached only in the fourth and fifth centuries AD and hence not explicitly and formally a biblical belief." (177) In Gnostic terms, the trinity defines how God interacts with mankind in the various stages in the developmental of our consciousness. Specifically:

· In Stage I, II, and III, God the Father acts as a benevolent parent who protects his children against their own immaturity by subjecting them to external laws.

· God interacts a second time with man by sending his son, Jesus, to teach us of a way to renew our reasoning/ego minds so we might become perfect, i.e., progress from Stage III to Stage IV.

· God interacts a third time with mankind when we internalize the logos/the Holy Spirit of God within us. In other words, our ego/reasoning mind is elevated by our knowledge of Jesus' teaching to the same level as the logos/reasoning mind of God, which makes us a 'holy spirit'/perfected soul.

"The Trinitarian implications…of Father, Son, and Holy Ghost in accompanying man's salvation is mentioned in order [Eph 1:3-14]." (178)

"The notions of Father, Son, and Spirit are revealed that we may know God better; and theologians should explore their ideas." (179)

The notion of the trinity fits well with the Gnostic's concept of three stages in the development of consciousness. "There are three classes of human beings. The pneumatikoi [Stage IV in which we are considered holy spirits]; the psychikoi [Stage III which the son/Jesus calls us through his knowledge teachings]; and the sarkikoi [Stage II where the fatherly image of God protects us]. The sarkikoi are lost; pheumatikoi are saved; but the middle group, the psychikoi, can go either way." (180)

Top

76. What is truth?
'Truth', in the New Testament, can mean three things:

· First, truth, from the Greek word alethes, means "reality as intellectually apprehended." (261) In other words, truth can mean our perception of reality as we understand it.

· Second, truth can refer to "heavenly archetypes", (261) which here means natural principle, such as henos anthropos and anthropoi. For example, the "truth which Jesus presents is something which can be known (in the Heb sense of knowledge) and it liberates [grows us from Stages III to IV] (Jn 8:32)." "Jesus prays that his disciples may be sanctified in truth, which is the word [logos/logic]…(Jn 17:17)." (261) This means Jesus prays that his disciples will understand the principles of his knowledge teachings, and therefore, reason in the same way as does God.

· Third, the truth can mean "the real and genuine." (261)

Top

77. Is usury (the lending of money for interest) Christian?
Lending monies for interest/usury is forbidden by Jesus in Lk 6:35. "Lend without any hope of return", said Jesus, and "you will have a great reward". "Luke's presentation of a love which reaches out to those who do not love you…has no parallel; it declares that the disciple [followers of Jesus] must lend without expecting to be repaid. That no bank could operate on such principals is obvious, but the demand of love conforms to no ordinary standards." (134). In effect, Jesus expands God's Old Testament law of not to "lend on interest to your brother [which excludes Gentiles], whether the loan be of money, food, or anything else that may earn interest" (Lev 25-37, Deut 23-21, and Ex 22,24,25) to include all lending for interest. We can assume from the above, and from the economic crisis of AD 33, that Jesus believed that usury, in the end, bankrupts whole nations, which makes paupers out of willing workers. Paul, like Jesus, is opposed to lending money for interest for in Rm 13:8, he says "owe no one anything, except to love one another; for he who loves his neighbor has fulfilled the law." (1Co 15:51-53, 6:10)

As far back as classical Greece, usury was considered ruinous to countries and individuals.

"The famous 'panic' of AD 33 illustrates the development and complex interdependence of banks and commerce in the [Roman] empire. [Caesar] Augustus had coined and spends money lavishly, on the theory that its increased circulation, low interest rates, and raising prices would stimulate business. They did; but as the process could not go on forever, a reaction set in… that created a 'run' on the banks, the economy collapsed, and a depression set in." (135)

Top

78. Who is the whore of Babylon in Revelations?

Top

79. What does wisdom mean?
'Wisdom' can be understood in two ways:

· First, the wisdom of the world, meaning our wisdom in Stages I through III. Paul rejects such wisdom as carnal wisdom in 2 Co 1:12.

"The wisdom [reasoning] of this world [Stages II and III] makes its possessors think themselves wise when they are foolish". See Rm 1:22. (263)

· Second, the wisdom of God (1Co 1:24) means the nonjudgmental reasoning exemplified in Stages of IV and V of consciousness. For Paul, Christ represents the "wisdom of God" (1Co 1:24) for the Christ refers to Jesus' messianic teachings which leads to nonjudgmental/godlike wisdom. In 1Co 1:24, Paul "calls Christ [Jesus' Gnostic teachings] the wisdom of God." (264)

Top

80. What is the "wisdom of the wise"?

Top

81. What is the Word?
'Word' is the English translation of the Greek word logos. Like will, word refers to the creative and reasoning mind of God. As Paul says in 1 Th 2:13, what Jesus teaches "is not the word [logos/judgmental reasoning] of man, but the word [logos/nonjudgmental reasoning] of God." (262) See Logos.

In the 1st Century Greek philosophy, Word, the English translation of logos, is "A term denoting either reason or one of the expressions of reason or order in words and things; such as word, discourse, definition, formula, principle, mathematical ratio. In its most important sense in philosophy, it refers to cosmic reason which gives order and intelligibility to the world. In this sense, the doctrine first appears in Heraclitus [536-437BC] who affirms the reality of a logos [orderliness/reason] analogous to the reason in man that regulates all psychological processes and is a source of all human law. The conception is developed more fully by the Stoics [philosophers], who conceive of the world as a living unity, perfect in the adaptation of its parts to one another and to the whole, and animated by an immanent and purposive reason. As the creative source of this cosmic unity and perfection the world-reason is called the seminal reason (logos spermatikos),..In Philo of Alexandria [30 BC- 50 AD], in whom Hebrew models of thought mingle with Greek concepts, the logos [word/will] becomes the immaterial instrument, and even at times the personal agency, through which the creative activity of the transcendent God is exerted upon the world." (262)

In Gnostic Christianity, Jesus was the first to discover what the word/reasoning of God was and how to personally use it. His free gift was teaching anyone, who would listen, how to activate their own immanent potentials for god-like reasoning, i.e., awaken the word/logos of reasoning of God within us.

Top

82. What does world mean?
'World', from the Greek word cosmos, can mean three things:

· First, the universe as a whole.
· Second, the world around us.
· Third, our consciousness of the world.

For example, when Paul talks about the heavens and this world, he is describing places and planets. But when we understand that Paul uses the term cosmos to mean consciousness, our perception of what Paul teaches changes immensely. For when he uses phrases like 'the wisdom of this world', we can then understand that he means the wisdom of our present consciousness-not worldly wisdom.

Top

83. What is the true meaning of wrath?
The New Testament term 'wrath' refers to judgmental reasoning. Unfortunately, many interpretations of Rm 5:8, in which 'wrath' appears, improperly add the phrase "of God", which, in turn, leads us to believe that God's wrath is some sort of punishment rather than the judgmental reasoning of Stages II and III. For example, terms like 'children of wrath' refer to those of us in Stages II and III-not those being punished by God.

"The problem is not the disposition of God, but the condition of humanity." (169)

Top

Copyright © February 2, 2001, William C. Kiefert