Theurgy and Knowledge in the Chaldean Oracles, IAO and Hekate

First and foremost, what is theurgy? It is essentially a sacramental mystery rite that overlaps into the realm of magic and the occult. It is a ritual process in which the initiate’s mind and vision is purified so that they might behold and “see” the majesty of the gods, through consecrations, prayers, unintelligible incantations (like the Christian charisma of speaking in tongues), and various meditative practices. The aim of theurgy is fundamentally different than the other Greek differentiation of magic of “goetia”. Stephen Skinner in Techniques of Graeco-Egyptian Magic writes (p. 10):

The Greeks made a clear distinction between goetia (γοητεία) the magic of the goes (γόης), and that of theurgia (θεουργία). It is difficult to be sure of what was exactly meant by the ancient Greeks when they used the term γοητεία, as it was associated with rites for the dead. Goetia (γοητεία) and goes (γόης) were later used in the sense they acquired in the Latin grimoires of ‘dealing with spirits,’ rather than in the sense outlined in Johnston of ‘dealing with the dead.’

Theurgia is a quite separate category, and is a descendant, via Porphyry and Iamblichus of Chalcis, of the ancient Mysteries. This usage has persisted through to 13th century (and later) grimoires. It has been suggested that theurgia, meaning “divine work,” was a term that might even have been invented by the group of Neoplatonically inclined magicians, including luminaries like Iamblichus, probably based in Alexandria around the 2nd century CE. The theurgists were concerned with purifying and raising the consciousness of individual practitioners to the point where they could have direct communion with the gods. The theurgists were in a sense the inheritors of the ancient Greek Mysteries which aimed to introduce the candidate directly to the gods.

Iamblichus was one such Theurgist. He was a Syrian-born descendant (roughly around 250-330 in Chalcis, Coele-Syria) of a long of royal priest-kings and was known throughout his life as an incredibly wise and saintly man. However, the guy did not live a life of poverty and was actually quite wealthy, just as was many of his Gnostic predecessors (although there is no evidence that Iamblichus was a “Gnostic” in the purest sense). His wealth allowed him to be a full-time student of magic and philosophy, unrestrained by the worries of common folk and peasants. He had slaves that tended to his material needs (which were eventually set free after short intervals of service), while he dedicated his life to Neo-Platonic and Pythagorean mysteries at the best academies and schools that Syria had to offer.

Iamblichus’ teachers included Anatolius and the Neo-Platonic scholar, Porphyry of Tyre (a pun on the Phoenician royal colors of purple and gold). Iamblichus was an ardent supporter for theurgy, essentially teaching that it was the only way for the salvation of the soul, from its descent into the embodiment in matter. Porphyry was born in the same capital city of Phoenicia that Simon Magus was said to have found his prostitute wife, Helena and redeemed her. Porphyry once wrote a scathing treatise called Against the Christians, which was a rather aggravated text that explained certain logical flaws in the philosophies and behaviors of the contemporary Christians, much like his predecessor Celsus did in the True Doctrine. It is said that Porphyry was not criticizing Christ but criticizing the Christians, the same sect of believers that Celsus describes as a diabolical secret society working against the Roman Empire as well as Julian the Apostate, who declares them as simply “Galileans.” In his work on the Philosophy of Oracles, Porphyry says of Christ, as quoted by St. Augustine (“De Civitate Dei,” l. xix. cap. 23; comp. also Eusebius’ “Demonst. Evang.,” iii. 6):—

The oracle declared Christ to be a most pious man, and his soul, like the soul of other pious men after death, favored with immortality; and that the mistaken Christians worship him. And when we asked, Why, then, was he condemned? the goddess (Hecate) answered in the oracle: The body indeed is ever liable to debilitating torments; but the soul of the pious dwells in the heavenly mansion. But that soul has fatally been the occasion to many other souls to be involved in error, to whom it has not been given to acknowledge the immortal Jove. But himself is pious, and gone to heaven as other pious men do. Him, therefore, thou shalt not blaspheme; but pity the folly of men, because of the danger they are in.

Porphyry also decries Jesus’ doctrine of the Eucharist found in the Gospel of John, as this quote is found in Macarius, Apocriticus III: 15:

That saying of the Teacher is a far-famed one, which says, “Except ye eat my flesh and drink my blood, ye have no life in yourselves.” Truly this saying is not merely beast-like and absurd, but is more absurd than any absurdity, and more beast-like than any fashion of a beast, that a man should taste human flesh, and drink the blood of members of the same tribe and race, and that by doing this he should have eternal life. For, tell, me, if you do this, what excess of savagery do you introduce into life?

Porphyry of Tyre (ca. 232/300-305 AD) believed that a God beyond being and comprehension was accessible through the intellect and that philosophers could gain access to divinity through one’s own intellectual effort in order for the soul’s embodied awareness could be completely transformed by this exercise of philosophical contemplation or “theoria”. To Porphyry, this was indeed the most effective path that one can sojourn to the gods by beholding this purely intellectual vision. This tradition of the Divine Vision can be found in other sources, especially in Plato’s Phaedrus. “Theoria” or contemplation was an important part of philosophy espoused by Plato in order for the soul to ascend and gain knowledge of the “Form of the Good”. Porphyry’s teacher, Plotinus (they both studied in Rome, 263-269 A.D.) also believed contemplation to be a critical component into gaining “henosis” or a visionary union with the One or Monad. (See Sententiae 32 and Ennead I. 2, Ennead 6.9.xx, as examples of how both Porphyry and Plotinus used “theoria” to experience the non-being of the “One.”)

Zeke Mazur’s “Mystical Experience, Metaphysics and Ritual in Plotinus” also does a marvelous job in explaining Plotinus’ ascent experiences in which the “center-point of the self” is recognizable as transcendent, but still has yet to be “paradoxically be dissolved or annihilated to attain the ultimate union” with the One. While this approach to gaining the Divine Vision was well established in the Platonic tradition and of course by Plotinus as well, it nevertheless is especially denied in Gnostic texts such as the Apocryphon of John and Allogenes, since they both characterize God as completely inaccessible by the human intellect since it is completely transcendent and alien to the material world. Allogenes even goes so far as to say that the knowledge of God is “not-knowing knowledge” as well as being “ignorance that sees him”. And yet, the Gnostic theurgy contained in texts like Allogenes, has many striking parallels with their contemporaries and philosophical competitors of the time, namely Plotinus and other Neo-Platonic philosophers who were familiar with dualist groups such as the Sethians, Ophites or Archontics and argued much against them like the Church Fathers and the Orthodox Babylonian Rabbis.

Iamblichus, was actually a former student of Porphyry who likewise criticizes and attempts to refute this approach to transcendent experience by claiming it as being misguided and even delusional. To Iamblichus, the Greek philosophers of his time had lost touch with their roots of divining wisdom and disclosure from the gods—a tradition (featured in the text of the Chaldean Oracles) that has its roots even before the rise of the Greeks and prevalent in classical life. Iamblichus himself makes drives to a similar point that Allogenes in that enlightenment or divine self-realization through contemplation must be triggered by revelation:

For that element in us which is divine (theion), and intellectual (noeron) — is aroused, then, clearly in prayer, and when aroused, strives primarily towards what is like itself and joints itself to absolute perfection.

Plato, several hundred years earlier wrote in Phaedrus 250c something very similar in that the spiritual rapture of the initiate was emphasized while the human body was seen as a huge hindrance to the life of true philosophy:

[We] were ushered into the Mystery that we may rightly call the most blessed of all. And we who celebrated it were wholly perfect…and we gazed in rapture at sacred revealed objects… That was the ultimate Vision, and we saw it in pure light because we were pure ourselves, not buried in this thing we are carrying around now which we call a body…

Porphyry’s philosophy and metaphysics involved Plato’s “One” Being as having a counter negative existence “before the realm of Being or Intellect.” This is the same as Apophatic theology, which focuses on the knowledge of the Ineffable God, the Kether or “the One” attained through negation, or a negative existence beyond all comprehension, parallel to the Qabalistic negative veils and in various Gnostic texts. Porphyry likely derived this from the Pythagorean concept of Aion. The ultimate goal of any theurgist and mystic was the soul’s ascent and return to its stellar origin on the path of austerity. Iamblichus of Chalcis describes the theory and practice in his defense of theurgy in On the Mysteries of the Egyptians, Chaldaeans, and Assyrians:

…it is the complete fulfilling of the arcane performances, the carrying of them through in a manner worthy of the gods and surpassing all conception, and likewise the power of the voiceless symbols which are perceived by the gods alone, that establish the Theurgic Union.

Although Iamblichus’ sentiments of theurgy don’t necessarily reflect the attitudes of all Gnostic groups, but it can be a helpful tool in assessing their cosmologies in which are reflective of their theurgical practices and rituals. However, it is safe to assume that not every Gnostic group participated in theurgical ritual. Iamblichus also developed an interest in Plotinus’ philosophies through his Enneads. It was through this, along with the teachings of Pythagoras, along with the pagan spiritual practices of the Egyptians, Chaldeans/Babylonians, Assyrians, and even the Hebrews, all of which drew him into the realm of theurgy. This is where the Chaldaean Oracles come in, as the text was most instrumental to the development and advancing of his own philosophies. The text itself was said to be written down by Julianus the Chaldean and his son Julian the Theurgist.


Most instrumental to the development and advancement of his own philosophies and practices was his understanding of The Chaldean Oracles. The Chaldaean Oracles is a very, mystery long poem, is usually attributed to Julian the Theurgist, who is also credited by causing rain to pour as a miraculous event that saves Marcus Aurelius’ troops in their campaign against the Quadi in 173 CE. Julian was the personal magician of emperor Marcus of Rome and traveled with him on his conquests, apparently offering his services in the form of advanced weather manipulation for the strategic favor of the Roman armies. It is also attributed to Zoroaster or influenced by him as his name is often found in Gnostic and Hermetic literature, especially in the Zosimos and the Apocryphon of John. The term “Chaldean” is hardly used to refer to these writings during this time and always was referred to as the “Sacred Oracles.” Some believe that the term “Chaldean” is generally understood as a metaphorical spiritual affinity of Julian to the East, and even ancient Syria. The Oracles display a spiritual hierarchical system that has more in common with Neopythagorean, Neoplatonic and Kabbalistic traditions than they do Zoroastrian religion. In fact, the text bears striking resemblance to earlier sources within the Gnostics, specifically the Ophite Gnostics.

According to the Divine Science website, the legends behind the two Julians also mirror other great, divine magicians such as Apollonius, Simon Magus and Jesus Christ:

Most instrumental to the development and advancement of his own philosophies and practices was his understanding of The Chaldean Oracles, a divinely inspired text written down by Julianus the Chaldean and his son Julian the Theurgist sometime in the early 2nd century(during the reign of Marcus Aurellius) in the time of Apollonius of Tyana, who could be revered as one of the greatest magicians of that millennium.  So close did the feats of Apollonius come to those of Jesus Christ that he was hunted by early Christians who sought to discredit him, sometimes going as far as to proclaim him a false Messiah, much as they did with Simon.  Of note however is that legend holds that Julian the Theurgist once challenged Apollonius and two other famed mages of the time to a challenge, in which the winner would be the one who first lifted the plague of a particular town.  According to all accounts of this event, Julian came out the victor.

It also goes on to say that the Chaldean Oracles were written by both Julian’s as a means to initiate those compelled into the theurgical mysteries and even claims that they, along with Iamblichus, much like Marcion and Simon Magus according to the church father Hippolytus (they are not mentioned below), were all influenced by Empedocles, apparently an initiate of Hekate.

The Chaldean Oracles were a set of instructions laid down by both Julianus and Julian for the process of initiation into the Theurgic sciences. From this text we find many of the Theurgic principles blending with hermetic principles in a day and age where no one could rightly say which was older than the other. In essence, The Chaldean Oracles likely served as a merging point for the Egyptian and early Greek hermetic sciences with the Babylonian, Assyrian and Chaldean theurgic sciences. This may have something to do with the initiation of Julian the Theurgist into the hermetic mystery schools, particularly the School of Orpheus, wherein we see an analysis of the four elements in the form of prose. This was likely coupled by the influence of an early student of Pythagoras himself, a philosopher and magus by the name of Empedocles, who would be the first to put the Pythagorean understanding of the four elements into writing as governed by the Powers of Love and Strife, that is to say, duality. Empedocles was a well know mage of his time, and an initiate of the Mysteries of Heckate, a school which was outlived and eventually pushed into the shadows by the Pythagorean, Hermetic and Orphic Mystery Schools.

True to form, both Porphyry and Iamblichus were actually well acquainted with solar-worship. In Eusebius’ Praeparatio Evangelica (Preparation for the Gospel), Chapter XIV, he writes that Porphyry’s work from Philosophy from Oracles provide astrological ritual instructions, based on the correct time to undertake based on the idea that the gods issue these instructions for worship to mortals. These ritual instructions, as common as they were in the ancient world, was intended to enable humans to align themselves and the world of man with the divine realm through the astrological bodies.

‘IN many cases the gods, by giving signs of their statements beforehand, show by their knowledge of the arrangement of each man’s nativity that they are, if we may so say, excellent Magians and perfect astrologers. Again he said that in oracular responses Apollo spake thus:

“Invoke together Hermes and the Sun On the Sun’s day, the Moon when her day comes, Kronos and Aphrodite in due turn, With silent prayers, by chiefest Magian taught, Whom all men know lord of the seven-string’d lyre.”

In other words, Neoplatonic theurgists would align themselves with the cosmocrators or the planetary spheres. These beings were considered the same as the archons via Gnosticism, as we have already discussed at length in previous posts. In the second chapter of De Mysteriies (Theurgia or On the Mysteries of the Egyptians), Iamblichus quotes Porphyry and launches into an exhaustive discourse about various divine beings and even admits there being the conflated nature of the gods and the daemons:

In what does a dæmon differ from a hero or half-god or from a soul? It is it in essence, in power, or in energy?

What is the token (at the Sacred Rites) of the presence of a god or an angel, or an archangel, or a dæmon, or of some archon, or a soul?

For it is a common thing with the gods and dæmons alike, and with all the superior races, to speak boastfully and to project an unreal image into view. Hence the race of the gods is thus made to seem to be in no respect superior to that of the dæmons.

In a footnote, the translator writes about this interesting exchange:

Here Porphyry has given an ancient classification of spiritual beings into four orders, the gods, dæmons or guardians, the heroes or half-gods, and souls. There were other distinctions in the Eastern countries, and we find Abammon, the Teacher, adding to these the archangels, angels, and archons of both the higher and lower nature. These were named in several of the Gnostic categories that were extant at that period. “We have no conflict with blood and flesh,” says the Christian apostle, “but with archonates, authorities, the world-rulers of this dark region, and spiritual forces of evil in the upper heavens.”

Iamblichus’s archonology is quite interesting here. His cosmic archons, in contrast with the Gnostic cosmocrators, are not evil. Rather, it is they who govern the Personal Daimon of the initiate, and it is only through their intermediary nature that this being is to be evocated. Iamblichus’ hylic archons are described in less pleasant terms, but are still not malevolent. He also draws a careful distinction between archangels and archons as well. 

I will, therefore, in a single statement lay down the proposition that the apparitions are in accord with their essences, powers and energies. For such as they are as such do they manifest themselves to those who are making the invocations; and they not only exhibit energies and forms which are characteristic of themselves, but they likewise display their own particular tokens. In order, however, to draw the distinctions minutely, this is the explanation: The spectral forms of the gods are uniform; those of the dæmons are diversified; those of the angels are more simple in appearance than those belonging to the dæmons, but inferior to those of the gods; those of the archangels approach nearer to the divine Causes; those of the archons — if those that have charge of the sublunary elements seem to thee to be the lords of the world — will be diversified but arranged in proper order; but if they are princes of the region of Matter, they will not only be more diversified but much more imperfect than the others; and those of the souls will appear in every kind of style.

In the (Epoptic) Vision the figures of the gods shine brilliantly; those of the archangels are awe-inspiring and yet gentle; those of the angels are milder; those of the dæmons are alarming. Those of the half-gods, although these are left out in your question, yet there should be an answer for the sake of the truth because they are more gentle than those of the dæmons. Those of the archons are terrifying to the Beholders, if they are the archons of the universe; and hurtful and distressing, if they are of the realm of Matter. The figures of the souls are similar to those of the half-gods except that they are inferior to them.

The “Beholders” here are actually the initiates of theurgy. What exactly is Iamblichus trying to say? Since it is clear that he is a sun worshiper, like Porphyry, it becomes rather clear that he also exalts the Demiurge, although in an in-direct manner, when he discusses the “Egyptian Theosophers” in Chapter 8 of De Mysteriies:

For these men perceived that the things which were said respecting the Sun-God as the Demiurgos, or Creator of the Universe, and concerning Osiris and Isis, and all the Sacred Legends, may be interpreted as relating to the stars, their phases, occultations, and revolutions in their orbits, or else to the increase and decrease of the Moon, the course of the Sun, the vault of the sky as seen by night or by day, or the river Nile, and, in short, they explain everything as relating to natural objects, and nothing as having reference to incorporeal and living essences.

In the Chaldean Oracles, it also reveals a universe that seems to mirror a Gnostic and Hermetic one. Chrisopher Plaisance writes in Of Cosmocrators and Cosmic Gods: The Place of the Archons in De Mysteriis:

In typical Middle Platonic fashion, Hermetic theology presents an emanative hierarchy of God, a demiurge, and seven planetary powers—who, similar to the Gnostics, were generally described as ruling powers, διοικηταί (“governors, or administrators”) and ἄρχοντες, rather than gods. The Sun was identified with the demiurge, and the surrounding cosmic bodies were instruments with which he crafted the world. The planetary governors were depicted as administering mankind’s fate, and shaping man in their nature—as a microcosm—an act which is explicitly described as being done out of love. Other texts in the Hermetica describe the planetary beings as gods, but the identity between the seven rulers of the early chapters and the planets is clear.

The world of the Oracles was a series of concentric circles, composed of the intelligible empyrean, the ethereal realm of the fixed stars and planets, and the material sphere which contained the sublunar region and the Earth. This triadic structure was organised by three gods: the Monad, Demiurge, and Hekate. It was further administrated by three tiers of intermediary beings: the iynges (ἴυγξ), synoches (συνοχεῖς), and teletarchs (τελετάρχαι), the latter of whose origins are identical with the planetary archons and cosmocrators described previously. However, the teletarchs were not exclusively relegated to planetary roles; the material teletarchs, for instance, were associated with the moon and were thought to govern the sublunary realm. The Oracles further describe the world as populated by various species of terrestrial, atmospheric, and aquatic daimons. Regarding the teletarchs, Majercik notes that an important distinction must be made between the “Chaldean” and Gnostic systems in that the teletarchs are “benign, even helpful figures, who aid the ascent of the soul”, and that “the Chaldean system maintains a more positive, monistic view of creation”.

Indeed, it seems like Hekate seems to be a placeholder for Sophia from Ophite/Gnostic myth. (We will return to Hekate later.)


Pope Solar Disk

As fate would have it, a Syrian-Roman sun god, called Elegabalus (or Heliogabalus, which is often given the meaning of “Lord of the Mountain” from the Aramaic Llaha Gabal) was also worshiped in Syria as well as Phoenicia in the form of Baal and in El from the Canaanites. These gods were also generally considered to be “lords” of the earth and rulers of the universe who were bringers of fertility as well as death and warfare and often demanded child sacrifice at the fire altars of Molech. It is essentially the same god as the invincible sun, the patron god of the Sol Invictus cult. This is also essentially the same god of the cult of Mithra. Eventually, all of the sun-worshiping cults like Mithraism were absorbed into the Catholic church. Elegabalus is the true god of Rome and his worship continues on to this day. That’s why Jesus is often depicted with the sun, and why the host in the center of a cross with a sun. Over at Jesus888, the author writes:

The early Christian Church eagerly promoted Jesus-Helios-Sol sun symbolism to appease the Roman emperor Constantine who was the high priest of Sol Invictus all through his reign. The sun symbolism continues to the present day on robes, banners, icons, behind the cross in a ray of light, flames coming from the heart of Jesus, etc. Priests even bow and kiss a monstrance which is a gold statue of the sun on a pedestal during processions.

What is interesting about the meaning behind the name of Elegabalus is that it is the very same attribute given to the God of the Old Testament, Yahweh. In Genesis 22:14, we read:

Then Abraham raised his eyes and looked, and behold, behind him a ram caught in the thicket by his horns; and Abraham went and took the ram and offered him up for a burnt offering in the place of his son. And Abraham called the name of that place Jehovahjireh: as it is said to this day, In the mount of the LORD it shall be seen.

We also see Moses receive the Law from Yahweh in the form of a covenant between him and the nation of Israel on a mountain in Exodus 34. Earlier we see Yahweh descend his holy mountain Sinai in Exodus 19:18-22 in a very dramatic and manifest fashion:

Now Mount Sinai was all in smoke because the LORD descended upon it in fire; and its smoke ascended like the smoke of a furnace, and the whole mountain quaked violently. When the sound of the trumpet grew louder and louder, Moses spoke and God answered him with thunder. The LORD came down on Mount Sinai, to the top of the mountain; and the LORD called Moses to the top of the mountain, and Moses went up. Then the LORD spoke to Moses, “Go down, warn the people, so that they do not break through to the LORD to gaze, and many of them perish. “Also let the priests who come near to the LORD consecrate themselves, or else the LORD will break out against them.”

It is interesting to see how Yahweh tells Moses to warn the ancient Hebrews about not gazing directly onto him, lest that they perish. This sounds very similar to sun-gazers who look at the sun too long, who fall into danger of being blinded. In other words, Yahweh can be compared to the Roman Sol Invictus, or Heliogabalus. Amazingly, this is exactly what the Pauline author is saying 2 Corinthians 3! The angelic inspired laws of Yahweh is called the “ministry of death” as opposed to the glorious, righteous, spiritual gospel of Jesus Christ that condemns it to death.

 But if the ministry of death, written and engraved on stones, was glorious, so that the children of Israel could not look steadily at the face of Moses because of the glory of his countenance, which glory was passing away, how will the ministry of the Spirit not be more glorious? For if the ministry of condemnation had glory, the ministry of righteousness exceeds much more in glory. 10 For even what was made glorious had no glory in this respect, because of the glory that excels. 11 For if what is passing away was glorious, what remains is much more glorious.

12 Therefore, since we have such hope, we use great boldness of speech—13 unlike Moses, who put a veil over his face so that the children of Israel could not look steadily at the end of what was passing away. 14 But their minds were blinded. For until this day the same veil remains unlifted in the reading of the Old Testament, because the veil is taken away in Christ. 15 But even to this day, when Moses is read, a veil lies on their heart. 16 Nevertheless when one turns to the Lord, the veil is taken away. 17 Now the Lord is the Spirit; and where the Spirit of the Lord is, there is liberty. 18 But we all, with unveiled face, beholding as in a mirror the glory of the Lord, are being transformed into the same image from glory to glory, just as by the Spirit of the Lord.

In Mark S. Smith’s article on the worship of Yahweh, he writes how the ancient Israelites were likely polytheists, and that monotheistic devotion to Yahweh likely developed in later Judaism, Yahweh originally having been only one of many gods in the original Israelite pantheon. Could Yahweh not really have been the true creator God, as the Gnostics thought, but he wanted all the power and glory for himself, so he defied the original council of gods and whitewashed Judaism of all traces of other gods so that he alone would be worshiped? “I, the Lord, am a jealous god.” This would explain why all the other deities hate him and the Jews. It’s obvious from the first creation story that the Elohim was originally a pantheon of deities, not a singular entity, since Elohim is plural. Yahweh, then, would be some sort of rogue deity who wanted to usurp the divine hierarchy and steal the throne for himself, which would, ironically, equate him with Lucifer/Satan. This is exactly how the Gnostics saw it. Anyway…


In The Gnostics and Their Remains, by Charles William King, he writes how the name and utterance IAO, is the Hellenized form of the Hebrew Tetragrammaton.

Diodorus Siculus, when enumerating the different legislators of antiquity, says, “Amongst the Jews Moses pretended that the god surnamed Iao gave him his laws” (i. 94). And this is elucidated by the remark of Clemens Alexandrinus, that the Hebrew Tetragrammaton, or Mystic Name, is pronounced ΙΑΟϒ, and signifies “He that is and shall be.” Theodoret states that the same four letters were pronounced by the Samaritans as ΙΑΒΕ (Jave); by the Jews as ΙΑΩ. Jerome (upon Psalm viii. says, “The Name of the Lord” amongst the Hebrews is of four letters, Iod, He, Vau, He, which is properly the Name of God, and may be read as ΙΑΗΟ (Iaho) (that is in Latin characters), which is held by the Jews for unutterable.

IAO was also used by various Gnostic groups, including the Valentinians and the Ophites. Irenaeus reports that in Against Heresies (1:21) that the Gnostics invoked IAO in their rituals:

The name of restitution stands thus: Messia, Uphareg, Namempsœman, Chaldœaur, Mosomedœa, Acphranœ, Psaua, Jesus Nazaria. The interpretation of these words is as follows: I do not divide the Spirit of Christ, neither the heart nor the supercelestial power which is merciful; may I enjoy Your name, O Saviour of truth! Such are words of the initiators; but he who is initiated, replies, I am established, and I am redeemed; I redeem my soul from this age (world), and from all things connected with it in the name of Iao, who redeemed his own soul into redemption in Christ who lives. Then the bystanders add these words, Peace be to all on whom this name rests. After this they anoint the initiated person with balsam; for they assert that this ointment is a type of that sweet odour which is above all things.

Irenaeus also claimed that the Valentinians taught that the word IAO originated as an exclamation in the mouth of a power called “Horos” against the fallen Sophia in Against Heresies (1.4.1):

Having then obtained a form, along with intelligence, and being immediately deserted by that Logos who had been invisibly present with her— that is, by Christ — she strained herself to discover that light which had forsaken her, but could not effect her purpose, inasmuch as she was prevented by Horos. And as Horos thus obstructed her further progress, he exclaimed, Iao, whence, they say, this name Iao derived its origin. And when she could not pass by Horos on account of that passion in which she had been involved, and because she alone had been left without, she then resigned herself to every sort of that manifold and varied state of passion to which she was subject…

IAO is also one of the seven head-demons or archons in Ophite and Sethian cosmology. In the Apocryphon of John, it lists Iao as the fourth power of the seven cosmocrators: “…the fourth is Yao, he has a serpent’s face with seven heads…” And it is also a password and a name to command demons like how people may invoke Jesus Christ’s sacred name, in prayer or an exorcism rite, both of which were considered to be magical acts. Dr. M D Magee writes in Hellenistic Magic and Jesus—Jesus as Magician:

“In the name of Jesus” is a magical formula based on the magical power of names. Its use in Christian baptism is not merely symbolic of the power of God but is meant to confer magical power to the baptized person. It pervades the person with the power of the name that would drive out all rival powers, an example of the very name beliefs found in all parts of the ancient world when Christianity was being formed.

The seven vowels were considered magical and magical texts often have names consisting of strings of combinations of vowels. Yehouah is a string of vowels.

We also see Jesus Christ himself invoke IAO in the Pistis Sophia (V. 142) and the Second Book of Jeu (45, 46, and 47) in a prayer ritual asking his heavenly father to forgive and blot out the sins of his disciples so that they may be worthy of the Kingdom of God and the “Treasury of Light.” Celsus in the True Doctrine as quoted and refuted by Origen in Contra Celsus states that this Iao is also an archon:

They next imagine that he who has passed through Ialdabaoth and arrived at Iao ought thus to speak: “Thou, O second Iao, who shinest by night, who art the ruler of the secret mysteries of son and father, first prince of death, and portion of the innocent, bearing now mine own beard as symbol, I am ready to pass through thy realm, having strengthened him who is born of thee by the living word. Grace be with me; father, let it be with me.”

Although Celsus does take plenty of pot-shots against the Christians (whom he equates with the Ophites without a second thought) as well as the Jews who “worship angels, and are addicted to sorcery, in which Moses was their instructor,” he surprisingly has great admiration for YHWH and condemns the Ophites for their blasphemy and cursing against him.

The ruler of those named ‘archontics’ is termed the ‘accursed’ god. Who would venture to use such language—as if there could be an “accursed” divinity! Yet the God of the Mosaic cosmogony is termed an accursed divinity, because such is his character, and worthy of execration in the opinion of those who so regard him, inasmuch as he pronounced a curse upon the serpent, who introduced the first human beings to the knowledge of good and evil.

What could be more foolish or insane than such senseless wisdom? For what blunder has the Jewish lawgiver committed? and why do you accept, by means, as you say, of a certain allegorical and typical method of interpretation, the cosmogony which he gives, and the law of the Jews, while it is with unwillingness, O most impious man, that you give praise to the Creator of the world, who promised to give them all things; who promised to multiply their race to the ends of the earth, and to raise them up from the dead with the same flesh and blood, and who gave inspiration to their prophets; and, again, you slander him! When you feel the force of such considerations, indeed, you acknowledge that you worship the same God; but when your teacher Jesus and the Jewish Moses give contradictory decisions, you seek another God, instead of him, and the Father!

Returning to Charles William King’s research on IAO, he writes how the Neoplatonists and various pagan mystery religions go to great lengths to lie about their sacred mysteries:

Macrobius (Sat. i. 18), whilst labouring to prove that the Sun-worship was in truth the sole religion of Paganism, under whatever name it was disguised, gives a notice very much to our purpose. The Apollo of Claros, when consulted as to the true nature of the god called Ἰαὸς, gave the following response:–

“The sacred things ye learn, to none disclose,
A little falsehood much discretion shows;
Regard Iaos as supreme above,
In winter Pluto, in spring’s opening Jove,
Phœbus through blazing summer rules the day,
Whilst autumn owns the mild Iaos sway.” Here we find Iao expressly recognised as the title of the Supreme God whose physical representative is the Sun. Again we have Dionysos or Bacchus added to the list by Orpheus, who sings

“Jove, Pluto, Phœbus, Bacchus, all are One.”

In other words, those who worship the sun, also worship Iao, and also worship the Demiurge, the true object of adoration in their mysteries. Many of the pagan mystery cults directed worship and sacrifice to this god. No Gnostic would ever be caught dead worshiping the sun because solar worship is ultimately worshiping the representation of the Demiurge. As we’ve seen many claimed that the sun is the son of god and that the sun to us is God in physical form. But isn’t this type of star/planet-worship the very thing that Paul and the Gnostics said was the great deception?

“How is it that you worship the elements of the world? You observe days, months, seasons, and years! I am afraid that I have labored for you in vain.” (Galatians 4).

Indeed, this is what the the ancients did by conflating Dionysus as merely one face of the solar Demiurge.

That Iaos was recognised by the Greeks as an epithet for the Sun in the autumnal quarter has been shown from Macrobius. The philosophical interpreters of the ancient mythology discovered in Dionysos also a mere type of the same luminary. “One is Zeus, Hades, Helios, and Dionysos.”

The Hymns to Orpheus also include one specific hymn to Helios as well. The Mithras Liturgy sings many praises to Helios  and specifically asks the initiate to alter their consciousness so that they may rise with Helios in solar rapture resembling the mysticism of meditative practices designed to create a vehicle/body of “light,” we see in Tantra and the Kabbalah, a tradition that made its way into 19th Century Western occultism in a diluted form, specifically in the Hermetic Order of the Golden Dawn.

I, _______ whose mother is _______ according to the immutable decree of god, EYE YIA EEI AO EIAY IYA IEO! Since it is impossible for me, born (530) mortal, to rise with the golden brightnesses of the immortal brilliance, OEY AEO EYA EOE YAE 5IAE, stand, O perishable nature of mortals, and at once me safe and sound after the inexorable and pressing (535) need. For I am the son PSYCHO[N] DEMOY PROCHO PROA, I am MACHARPH[.]N MOY PROPSYCHON PROE!”

Draw in breath from the rays, drawing up three times as much as you can, and you will see yourself being lifted up and (540) ascending to the height, so that you seem to be in mid-air. You will hear nothing either of man or of any other living thing, nor in that hour will you see anything of mortal affairs on earth, but rather you will see all immortal things. For in that day (545) and hour you will see the divine order of the skies: the presiding gods8 rising into heaven, and others setting.

“Hail, O Lord, Great Power, Great Might, (640) King, Greatest of gods, Helios, the Lord of heaven and earth, God of gods: mighty is your breath; mighty is your strength, O Lord. If it be your will, announce me to the supreme god, the one who has begotten and made you…

The late Acharya S/D.M. Murdock confirms all this in her book Did Moses Exist? when she points out that the god of the Hebrews may be the same as Bacchus and Iao:

As noted, “Sabaoth” may be related to “Sabeus,” which in turn is an epithet of Dionysus, who is also equated with Iao by Marcobius. Thus, Yahweh is Iao is Bacchus, and all are the sun.


When it comes to Hecate/Hekate, she too exhibits solar characteristics, in the form of the cthonic, black sun as the Queen of the underworld and hell. She also corresponds with the symbols of the moon, the World Soul and the waters of the abyss. Here is what Eusebius has to say about her in Praeparatio Evangelica:

‘The symbols of Hecate are wax of three colours, white and black and red combined, having a figure of Hecate bearing a scourge, and torch, and sword, with a serpent to be coiled round her; and the symbols of Uranus are the mariners’ stars nailed up before the doors. For these symbols the gods themselves have indicated in the following verses. The speaker is Pan:

“Evil spirits drive afar:
Then upon the fire set wax
Gleaming fair with colours three,
White and black must mingle there
With the glowing embers’ red,
Terror to the dogs of hell.
Then let Hecate’s dread form
Hold in her hand a blazing torch,
And the avenging sword of fate;
While closely round the goddess wrapp’d
A snake fast holds her in his coils,
And wreathes about her awful brow.
Let the shining key be there,
And the far-resounding scourge,
Symbol of the daemons’ power.”‘

In the Chaldean Oracles, it sets out a long, drawn out cosmology that begins with the Paternal Monad called the “Mind of the Eternal Father, that splits off into a duad, and eventually into a triad, similar to the idea of the Trinity. The triad projects the “first Course” as being sacred and even calls it “the Matrix containing all things. Thence abundantly springs forth the Generation of multivarious Matter. Thence extracted a prester the flower of glowing fire.” Hecate is also considered a projection of the Father and is called the “the Operatrix, because she is the Dispensatrix of Life-giving fire. Because also it fills the Life producing bosome of Hecate.” John Turner in The Setting of the Platonizing Treatises writes about Hecate’s role in the Chaldean Oracles and how it is very similar to that of Barbelo, the Sethian version of Sophia.

The Oracles feature a feminine principle of life named Hecate, said to be a sort of diaphragm or membrane, the “center between the two Fathers” (frg. 50 Majercik), which separates the “first and second fires” (frg. 6), i.e., the Father and the immediately subjacent paternal Intellect.39 Hecate has a dual position: On the one hand, she is the source of variegated matter, generated by the Father as the womb that receives his lightening (the ideas), “the girdling bloom of fire and the powerful breath beyond the fiery poles” (frg. 35). On the other hand, she is the lifeproducing fount (frgs. 30 and 32; cf. frgs. 96, 136 [zwvsh/ dunavmei]) from whose right side flows the World Soul (frg. 51), while her left side retains the source of virtue. Upon her back, the emblem of the moon (her traditional symbol) represents boundless Nature, and her serpentine hair represents the Father’s winding noetic fire (frgs. 50–55). In her alternate designation as Rhea, she is said to be the source of the intellectuals (novera), whose generation she has received in her ineffable womb and upon whom she pours forth the vivifying fire (frgs. 32, 56); as zw/ogovno” qeav, she is the source of life, a veritable mother of the all. Hecate is also conceived as the Womb within which all things are sown and contained, much like Plato’s Receptacle,40 and therefore seems to play a role similar to that of Plotinus’s intelligible matter or trace of unbounded Life emitted from One to become bounded Intellect, not to mention the Sethian Mother Barbelo, the “Womb of the All” (Ap. John II 5,5; Trim. Prot. XIII 38,15; 45,6) who pours forth “Living Water.”

So could it be that Hecate is merely a stand-in for Sophia or Barbelo? It sure seems that way. It also seems as though the authors of the Chaldean Oracles was deliberately rewriting the Gnostic cosmological myth for another audience in competition against the earlier Gnostic sects. Hecate is also a patron goddess that practitioners of the Greek Magical Papryi pay homage too. Chaldean theurgy greatly inspired Iamblichus in many ways, so in a way, he himself indirectly draws inspiration from the much earlier Gnostics, despite his not so apparent solar worship of the pagan mystery cults, including that of Jews. Ezekiel 8, however, seems to condemn secret sun worship but that is another story altogether. When one falls deep enough into the thuergical rabbit hole, who knows what interesting bread-trail of gnosis one may find and follow.

Hidden Knowledge in the Grail Temple


The Holy Grail story is familiar to many in the western world; to some it is an icon of literature and to others a source of comical amusement thanks to Monty Python and the Holy Grail. It is absolutely true that the Holy Grail represents the divine knowledge gained at the end of an inward spiritual journey—knowledge that is gradually lost through the cyclical ages that Hesiod, Vedic and even Hermetic traditions speak of.

Traditionally, it is a legend commencing in late 12th century, created by French and German poets like Wolfram von Eschenbach in Parzival. The Holy Grail takes various forms: a plate or bowl containing the bread of Holy Communion for the Fisher King. It is also portrayed as a stone cast down from heaven on which the abstaining angels stood for sanctuary when Lucifer rebelled against God as mentioned in texts like Isaiah and Ezekiel. The gem was given to Adam when he lived in the Garden of Eden after the rebellion of the angels. When he and Eve were cast out, the Grail was lost to him as well. Seth, Adam’s progeny, was said to have gained re-entry into Eden and to have recovered the sacred vessel. Significantly, Seth remained in paradise for 40 years. The number 40 is itself a mystical motif; Moses wandered for 40 years in the desert, with Noah on the ark 40 days and nights, for Jesus was tempted for 40 days.

It is also a cup in which Joseph of Arimathea collected Christ’s blood on the cross. More modern interpretations include Mary Magdalene as the receptacle of Jesus’ seed as the foundation for the “Merovingian bloodline,” as the authors of Holy Blood Holy Grail have theorized. The chalice is most popular today, doubling as the same cup used by Jesus in the Last Supper. Joseph of Arimathea is said to have brought the Grail to England, which then became an important part of the Arthurian myths.

The Holy Grail myth also links to ideas of gnosis in its relationship to humanity and the world, especially the world of nature and its elements. In our upcoming book Baphomet: The Mystery of the Temple Unveiled by Tracy Twyman and Alex Rivera, we go into great explanation that the Holy Grail cup wasn’t just the vessel for the holy blood of Christ but was actually connected to the Krater of Hermes and the Ophite/Orphic Bowl of the coiled dragon-like serpent (please see our book for more details on this). It is also connected to the idol head that the Templars supposedly worshiped, being Baphomet. Author authors like Julius Evola, have argued for a non-Christian and even Hyperborean origin for the Grail legend, in his book The Mystery of the Grail, a possibility in which we will explore later in the second part of this post at a future point in time.

Julius Evola writes in the same book that there are certainly repeating patterns and archetypes that any student of Carl Jung would identify with clarity. It also ties into the mono-myth cycles of Joseph Campbell as we will see later:

When we isolate the texts that make up the Grail cycle, we find that they repeat a few essential themes, which are expressed through the symbolism of knightly figures and deeds. What we are dealing with, then, are essentially the themes of a mysterious center; of a quest and a spiritual test; of a regal succession or restoration, which sometimes assumes the character of a healing or avenging action. Percival, Gawain, Galahad, Ogier, Lancelot, and Peredur are essentially various names portraying the same human type; likewise, King Arthur, Joseph of Arimathea, Prester John, and the Fisher King are equivalent figures and variations on another theme. Also equivalent are images of various mysterious castles, islands, kingdoms, and inaccessible and adventurous lands, which in the narratives are described in a series that, on the one hand, creates a strange, surrealistic atmosphere but, on the other, often ends up becoming monotonous.

Like the authors of Holy Blood Holy Grail have identified, the “divine blood” is an important concept and is one that repeats in the Bible, in both the Old and the New Testament as we will see. Evola further writes about all the objects associated the Grail, especially that of the blood:

In the various texts, the Grail is essentially portrayed under three forms:

“1. As an immaterial, self-moving object, of an indefinite and enigmatic nature (“it was not made of wood, nor of some metal, nor of stone, horn, or bone”).

  1. As a stone-a “heavenly stone” and a “stone of light.”
  2. As a cup, bowl or tray, often of gold and sometimes adorned with precious stones.

Both in this form and in the previous one, we almost always find women carrying the Grail (another element totally extraneous to any Christian ritual, since no priests appear in it). A mixed form is that of a cup carved out of a stone (sometimes of an emerald). The Grail is sometimes qualified as “holy;’ sometimes as “rich”; “this is the richest thing that any man hath living.”l This text, like many others of the same period, uses the expression “Sangreal;’ which is susceptible to three interpretations: Holy Grail, Royal Blood, and Regal Blood.”

Jack Curtis writes in The Quest for the Holy Grail, is essentially:

“… a system of self transformation that can be reconciled with other similar systems in the Western esoteric tradition. It is a cosmological scheme that is comparable with Tarot, Kabala and Astrology. There are also hints of a connection with Alchemy. All of these systems or schemes follow a unifying principle that points to one underlying reality. The Holy Grail in its 5 Transformations, is one approach to that reality. To achieve the Grail, is to understand reality. To understand reality, is to be transformed and to be saved.”

How does any of this tie into the blood of Jesus Christ? For that answer, we must look beyond the natural and the flesh. The blood is obviously symbolic in its spiritual meaning. It is the spiritual power behind the blood of Jesus in which the believer partakes in, and is eternally saved to be allowed to enter a place that is so radically different than the manifest world—being the “Kingdom of God.”

The Holy Blood

In Jesus’ death on the cross, we read that in John 19:32-38, especially verse 34:

32 So the soldiers came, and broke the legs of the first man and of the other who was crucified with Him; 33 but coming to Jesus, when they saw that He was already dead, they did not break His legs. 34 But one of the soldiers pierced His side with a spear, and immediately blood and water came out. 35 And he who has seen has testified, and his testimony is true; and he knows that he is telling the truth, so that you also may believe. 36 For these things came to pass to fulfill the Scripture, “Not a bone of Him shall be [a]broken.” 37 And again another Scripture says, “They shall look on Him whom they pierced.” 38 After these things Joseph of Arimathea, being a disciple of Jesus, but a secret one for fear of the Jews, asked Pilate that he might take away the body of Jesus; and Pilate granted permission. So he came and took away His body.

Note the extraordinary hiatus John introduces into the narrative at this point. Clearly he wants us to note something of supreme importance: the legend is that Joseph caught some of this blood and water in the chalice used for the last supper.

Eric Wargo in The Passion of Einstein: Light, Spacetime, and the Holy Grail, rightly points out:

I think we can really see the Grail as both objects simultaneously, and that its atemporal “absurdity” is essential to the salvific nature of Christ’s blood: How could the blood shed on the Cross have gotten into the cup of the Last Supper other than by having traveled back in time? Christ’s blood is either made of tachyons (hypothetical faster-than-light particles that most physicists currently reject) or is, in effect,outside of linear Time altogether. Only if Christ’s blood is outside of Time and Cause does it make sense that the cup that once ever held it must have always held it and will keep holding it eternally—and there is just one thing known to physics that has those properties: The blood of Christ is, in effect, light.

Blood symbolism is extremely important in the Grail mythos: In the Old Testament, it is the substance of life. Jewish temple worship revolved around outpouring of blood, and sprinkling of blood via animal sacrifice. It is taken into the Holy of Holies and sprinkled on the mercy seat on Day of Atonement (Leviticus 16). Blood atones for sin and makes everything holy again. It is the seat of the spirit within the body, but it is also the animated life-force, of the body. It that which contains, as it were, the soul of the body.


Jesus, as the Heavenly Priest of Melchizedek, also wearing the breastplate of Aaron. Also known as the “Urim and Thummim.” It is clear that Jesus is the “initiator” for the “Mysteries” of God in the Heavenly Temple.

Over at Temple Secrets, Tony Badillo explains that the animal sacrifice and its sacrificial blood represented a separation between the sins and a person’s spirit/soul:

On Ezekiel 44:6, 7 the Lord rebukes “rebellious” Israel for profaning his temple by offering him food in an unacceptable manner. What is his food? According to v. 7, “the fat and the blood;” similarly in  v. 15 where only the Zadok priests may ”offer me the fat and the blood, says the Lord God”. There you have it! His “food” is blood and fat! Should we accept this literally? Yes, in the sense that blood and fat were literally offered to him. But No because he did not consume either. Why does he say this, then? Because the blood, actually poured outside into a Temple drain, symbolizes the spirit’s separation/expiation from sin; while the fat, when turned into smoke, symbolizes the spirit’s ascension to him for acceptance. God’s “food,” then, is simply the language of symbol, and it means that separation/expiation from sin (by the blood) and ascension of purified souls (the rising smoke) are the things he desires from people.

In John 6:53-56, Jesus says to his disciples:

Most assuredly, I say to you, unless you eat the flesh of the Son of Man and drink His blood, you have no life in you. Whoever eats My flesh and drinks My blood has eternal life, and I will raise him up at the last day. For My flesh is food indeed, and My blood is drink indeed. He who eats My flesh and drinks My blood abides in Me, and I in him.

Jesus implores his followers to consume his divine flesh and blood made up of of spiritual light to regenerate their own fallen meat sacks degenerated as a result of Adam and Eve’s exile from Eden and from the consumption of the fruit of the knowledge of good and evil. Hence, the Holy Grail cup is said to contain the Christ’s saving blood of the Lamb—the remnant or leftover spiritual substance dripping from a primal trauma of a divine being, who is crucified by the rulers and authorities of the lower heavens, dies and resurrects so that his followers can follow his example, so that they might be salvaged from the sinfulness of the lower world/cosmos of the devil, which is destined to be overthrown, cast out and destroyed at the end of the apocalypse. The saved and elect are transferred into a new kingdom or reality of God while the rest who rejected the Gospel are destroyed. 

Many of the Cathars believed what the mythicist scholar Earl Doherty theorizes was the earliest form of docetic Christology: that Christ was never incarnate on earth. Most of the radical dualist Cathars believed that the whole Jesus narrative, from the beginning of his ministry to his crucifixion, occurred in heavenly world of the good god and in the astral realm of the demonic rulers.


In the Parzival romance, the impotency of the Fisher King being his maimed, never-healing state (all thanks to Klingsor’s Spear) reflects the sterility of his land. It also reflects the nature of matter itself. In the studies of pagan practices by such scholars as Sir James G. Frazer in The Golden Bough: A Study in Magic and Religion, the recurring themes of the killing of the previous high priest or king to be replaced by a new avatar (much like John the Baptist and Jesus) and the marriage of fruitfulness of this new avatar with a female deity/queen is essential to the vegetative and natural fertility and prosperity of the land. The mirroring effect between the human enactment of natural prosperity and vice versa is apparent enough in the Priest-king of the Grail, Anfortas or the Fisher King’s “Waste Land” is to appropriate this mythic pagan belief into a solid representation that the barrenness of the soul/mind and body reflects upon the surroundings/ environment and nature. This, one might say is the objective co-relative function where the emotions, experiences of the subject becomes objective reality, hence the idea that the imaginal/spirit/ideal realm controls the realm of matter and the manifest world.

It is said that the blood of Christ at Holy Communion in Catholic ritual gives new life and deifies. But that blood is wine transfigured by the descending Holy Spirit in the form of a dove. However, this ritual does seem to have strong vampiric, witchcraft cannibalistic undertones, if placed in a literal context as the Catholic Church has done for hundreds, if not thousands of years. The Cathars were infamous for being hard, uncompromising opponents of the Catholic Sacrament as well as its icons and its worship of the Virgin Mary as devilish trickery to commit idolatry. Various Gnostic groups like the Phibionites, Barbelites, Bororites, Simonians, etc. as well as the Jews (and their rituals as magic in the form of “blood libel”) were accused of human and infant sacrifice in the form of ritually consuming fetuses, in the case that women became pregnant in their infamous orgies. In these ritual orgies, semen and menses were said to be also ritually consumed as a Eucharistic sacrament to Christ as Epiphanius claims in the Panarion. All of this seems to originate in Pliney the Elder in Natural History 30.11, when he writes as a matter-of-fact, that certain magical rites of the Magi (and the Emperor Nero) involve ritually killing and eating men (e.g. cannibalism):

The Magi have certain means of evasion; for example that the gods neither obey those with freckles nor are seen by them. Was this perhaps their objection to Nero? But his body was without blemish; he was free to choose the fixed days, could easily obtain perfectly black sheep, and as for human sacrifice, he took the greatest delight in it. 

So, in other words, could the Catholic Eucharist be just a Christianized magical ritual? We certainly see Romans who viewed the Christians as simply a diabolical secret society addicted to sorcery and the conjuring of daimons, as seen in Celsus in the True Doctrine and Suetonius in Nero 16.2. All of this seems to be a precursor for the Medieval and modern gossip and rumors of witch covens and Satanic elite secret societies, like the “Illuminati” who engage in human sacrifice and Faustian pacts with demons. The drinking of wine in Dionysian rituals involved ritually imbibing the spirit of Dionysus, which is like drinking the Elixir of Life, or “being baptized in wisdom.” The wine is the blood of the earth, “fruit of the vine and work of human hands.” This wine is used as a commemoration of ritually consuming the blood of Jesus. The Gospel of John chapter 2, where Jesus transmutes water into wine certainly plays on this distinctly Dionysian idea. So the outpouring of Christ’s blood on the cross is the outpouring of his very life—the spirit of the Son of God.


The Book of Hebrews (9:22-24) tells us that the blood of Jesus (and all the Old Testament sacrifices) were necessary in order to cleanse things in the heavens–the same place in which the angelic rebellion was said to have occurred as recorded in Revelation.

“And almost all things are by the law purged with blood; and without shedding of blood is no remission. It was therefore necessary that the patterns of things in the heavens should be cleansed with these; but the heavenly things themselves with better sacrifices than these. For Christ is not entered into the holy places made with hands, which are the figures of the true; but into heaven itself, now to appear in the presence of God for us.”

Colossians 1:20 says something very similar:

“And, having made peace through the blood of his cross, by him to reconcile all things unto himself; by him, I say, whether they be things in earth, or things in heaven.

Notice how in Hebrews, it says that the tabernacle, and all its services, were “patterns of things in the heavens.” The physical objects associated with the earthly sanctuary were “figures of the true” — the “shadow of heavenly things” (Hebrews 8:5). As it follows, each physical item had its spiritual counterpart in heaven. So, as long as there was a tabernacle or temple on earth, there was a material reflection of God’s heavenly palace for mankind to see and take part in. This all sounds strangely reminiscent of certain Hermetic writings pertaining to “as above, so below.”


Also, in a way, when Jesus Christ was nailed to the Cross, he was essentially nailed to a circular “Leviathan” which is the same as the Ouroboros of the Gnostic alchemists like Mary the Jewess, Zosimos and the Ophites. The atheistic German philosopher Friedrich Nietzsche uses this symbolism to build his own theory of “eternal recurrence.” This is what the Gnostics called the “fall of spirit into matter.” Hence, we have various alchemical images of the crucified serpent, and perhaps even the same tempting serpent from Eden. According to the Apocryphon of John, there are a few archons which seem to have strong serpentine and dragon-like features, including Iao and Ialdabaoth, the chief archon and Gnostic parody of Jehovah. All of this seems to have a Pauline basis, in Colossians 2:13-15

…When you were dead in your transgressions and the uncircumcision of your flesh, He made you alive together with Him, having forgiven us all our transgressions, having canceled out the certificate of debt consisting of decrees against us, which was hostile to us; and He has taken it out of the way, having nailed it to the cross. When He had disarmed the rulers and authorities, He made a public display of them, having triumphed over them through Him.…

In the Gospel of Matthew (20:20-23), we read that a mother of Zebedee was asking Jesus to have her sons sit at his right and the other at his left hand in the Kingdom of God. Jesus asks her sons if they can drink what he is going to drink and they answer in the affirmative. Here is what Jesus says as a reply:

20 Then the mother of Zebedee’s sons came to Jesus with her sons and, kneeling down, asked a favor of him. 21 “What is it you want?” he asked. She said, “Grant that one of these two sons of mine may sit at your right and the other at your left in your kingdom.” 22 “You don’t know what you are asking,” Jesus said to them. “Can you drink the cup I am going to drink?” “We can,” they answered. 23 Jesus said to them, “You will indeed drink from my cup, but to sit at my right or left is not for me to grant. These places belong to those for whom they have been prepared by my Father.”

The Baptism of Blood and Water

In Genesis 1, the Spirit hovers over the face of the deep at the onset of creation. Water signifies the chaotic, untamed and unformed material of creation. It is the proto-element out of which all creation, the whole cosmos, including humanity, is ultimately made (Gen 1:2, 6; Ps 29:3) So crossing the waters of the great Flood, the waters of the Red Sea, the waters of the Jordan, and the waters of baptism are the recreating and renewing waters of creation. This water baptism acts like a conduit that transports the believer from one world (the old man of sin)  to another (the newness in Christ). Likewise priests must bathe in water before entering Holy of Holies of the Temple of Solomon on day of Atonement. 


Similarly with the Sea of Glass in Revelation 15:2, beside which those who have defeated the beast are standing, singing the song of Moses. This is a reflection of the “Molten Sea” which was a large basin in the Temple in Jerusalem made by Solomon for ablution of the priests. It is described in 1 Kings 7 and 2 Chronicles 4. It stood in the south-eastern corner of the inner court.

Water in essence is a unifying and yet all dissolving element of the earth and the cosmos. Blood and water together therefore signify the fullness of saved humanity: material body and animating soul and spirit as well as the sacrificed body and blood of the Lord Jesus Christ. In the Gospel of John 3:5, we have Jesus saying to Nicodemus “you must be born of water and the Spirit.” In 1 John 5:6, it says, “This is he who came by water and blood – Jesus Christ…there are three that testify: the Spirit and the water and the blood.”

We need to pause for a moment to reflect on this: the incarnated Son of God took on the likeness of humanity upon himself, meaning that this was not his original nature: this humanity, united to the Second Person of the Trinity, is literally poured out from his side upon the cross. This body and blood is NOT the same as the body and blood of communion, although they are clearly related. The bread and wine of Holy Communion are the substance and blood of the earth, transfigured by the Spirit of God to become our spiritual food and drink as the Eucharist.

The chalice in itself is not the real Holy Grail—that is simply romantic myth. The real Holy Grail is the very ground onto which this blood and water is sprinkled upon. The earth itself received the body and soul of Christ in his death. This is the blood and water of his sacrifice, rather than the blood and body of communion, although again, clearly the two are related. The bread and wine of communion—Christ’s body and blood—rather than being consumed by us to become part of our body, performs a spiritual function, transforming us into the body of Christ. “Though we are many, we are one body because we all share in the one bread.” Thus consuming Christ’s body and blood transforms us into itself. Likewise with Christ’s blood and body out poured on the cross—it transforms the whole of creation into Christ’s body. Christ’s physical presence, although hidden, still abides throughout the very fabric of the universe. His humanity, which is our humanity, abides in creation, even today, transforming it and making it holy. In a sense, this relates to the infamous Baptism of Wisdom ritual of the Knights Templar in which we discuss in the book, at length. 

Christ’s crucifixion and the Harrowing of Hell, in effect, unseated and usurped the power and possession of the authorities, archons and their demonic possession of the world and perhaps even the “Wasteland” of the Fisher King, a reflection of the inner state of the sinner. The quest for the holy grail to heal the wounded king and to restore the land to its original, pristine, Edenic state. Many see this as related to Matthew 4:19 in which Christ said, “Follow me, and I will make you fishers of men.” This reference would later become crucial to the Christian version of the Fisher King of the Arthurian Grail romances. 

As one can see, the Parzival/Arthurian Grail stories, like the story of the Temple of Solomon is simply a retelling of Genesis (as well as a intricate visual depiction of the “Divine Man” or “Son of Man”), which in itself is a reflection of the war in heaven, and the fall of the angels. The Titanomachy of the Greeks as well as Hesiod’s Works (126) also speaks of similar tales of Olympian gods struggling against the titans and their terrible giant children, which no doubt mirror the infamous Nephilim of Genesis 6 and Enochian literature. Hesiod in the same text describes these Nephilim as being Heroes of the “Silver Race,” as a gigantic, brutal and ferocious giants:

Then, a second race, far inferior Was created, of Silver, by the gods…

Being reared by their mothers.

And when they reached adolescence,

They died a painful death,

On account of their stupidity,

For they could not contain their foolish pride and refused to worship the gods above and to sacrifice to them upon the altars.

Hesiod calls them “big children” (mega nepios) and tells how, disgusted with their impiety and arrogance, Zeus decided to wipe them off with a cataclysm, burying them in Tartarus, much like how Jehovah sends a flood to wipe the giant children of the Watchers and condemns the fallen angels in the abyss-like underworld in chains. Essentially all mythologies speak of similar wars between Blacks and Whites or between Angels and Devils, Devas and Asuras, Daevas and Ahuras, the Sons of Light and the Sons of Darkness, Gods and Titans, etc., etc. This all seems to influence the story of Klingsor who injures the Fisher King with a spear. Klingsor also happens to be directly related with Faustus as we will see in Part 2.

Once again, we cannot ignore Tony Badillo’s thoughtful explanation of Eden with those who are baptized in the Holy Spirit being the Spirit of God, which have strong Gnostic undertones:

…in Isaiah 58:11 and Jeremiah 31:12 the people themselves are a “well watered garden,”  implying that Paradise on earth consists of an ideal relationship between God and humans. This is a key reason why the Divine spirit is not given solely or primarily for uttering profound prophecies, performing marvelous miracles, or making doomsday declarations, but for subduing the Sinful Inclination and renewing God’s “image and likeness” within each of us, and in so doing we become like a well watered garden, Genesis 2:10,  bearing good fruit for the one who did the planting. This is the true Paradise, the true Garden of Eden while we are here on earth. And that which waters one’s personal garden is the Divine spirit.

The sprinkling of his blood on the earth, prefigured in the Old Testament by the sprinkling of the blood of the sacrificial bull and goat in the Holy of Holies, has made the world the Holy of Holies, the dwelling place of God, signified by the rending of the veil in the Temple. Yet it remains hidden, invisible and unknown, until the day that the new heaven and new earth are revealed when Christ return again in glory as discussed in Matthew and Revelation. Just like the hiddenness of the glory of God, momentarily revealed in the burning bush, or on the Mount of Transfiguration. In that day we will see that “in him we live and move and have our being.” The sacrificial bull concept, however is an ancient Rome and eventually later from Mithraic sacrificial rites. The Gospel of John tells us that after the death and resurrection of Jesus, the Baptism of the Holy Spirit is made manifest to the believer, and the Body of Christ.

According to the Excerpts of Theodotus, the Valentinian teacher Theodotus said that the baptism releases the believer from the clutches of passions, Fate, destiny and demonic powers that infest the lower world in which mankind finds himself exiled in.

76 As, therefore, the birth of the Saviour released us from “becoming” and from Fate, so also his baptism rescued us from fire, and his Passion rescued us from passion in order that we might in all things follow him. For he who was baptised unto God advanced toward God and has received “power to walk upon scorpions and snakes,” the evil powers. And he commands the disciples “When ye go about, preach and them that believe baptise in the name of the Father, and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit,” in whom we are born again, becoming higher than all the other powers.

77 Therefore baptism is called death and an end of the old life when we take leave of the evil principalities, but it is also called life according to Christ, of which he is sole Lord. But the power of the transformation of him who is baptised does not concern the body but the soul, for he who comes up [out of the water] is unchanged. From the moment when he comes up from baptism he is called a servant of God even by the unclean spirits and they now “tremble” at him whom shortly before they obsessed.

78 Until baptism, they say, Fate is real, but after it the astrologists are no longer right. But it is not only the washing that is liberating, but the knowledge of/who we were, and what we have become, where we were or where we were placed, whither we hasten, from what we are redeemed, what birth is and what rebirth.

The Foundation Stone of Fallen Angels

The holy grail also has a strong Hermetic ring to it as Tracy and I have explored in depth in our book. We point out that the word “grail” itself has been derived from crater, the Greco-Latin term for a vessel, meaning a shallow vessel or plate where sacrifices were offered to the gods in ancient Greece. We also explore in depth how the Holy Grail concept is directly tied with the Corpus Hermeticum, as well as Wolfram’s Parzival, which is in itself almost a paraphrase of the Hermetica- a collection of ancient Egyptian texts that also reflect the Gnosticizing tendencies of Alexandria, Egypt. Wolfram rewrote it to match it with thirteenth century German sensibility. The Holy Grail themes seem to greatly match with the Krater of the Hermetica which directly mirror with Parzival’s spiritual journey. In fact, as the above link quotes a book called The Krater and the Grail: Hermetic Sources of the Parzival by Henry and Renee Kahane as towards the end of Parzival, they compare a precision of knights in the Grail Castle to the universe and the Holy Grail itself to the Monad as I.M. Oderberg writes:

A procession comprising the knights and the twenty-four maidens attending the Grail entered the hall, only Repanse de Schoie being permitted by the sacred object to be its bearer. These attendants were grouped in numbers, first four, then eight, then twelve divided into two sixes. Each group carried corresponding numbers of lights. Last came the “princess” of the Grail carrying one. This sequence has baffled many commentators, but Kahane and Kahane point out the marked similarity with the Hermetica, where the groups in the same order “represent the twenty-four stations of the journey of the soul: 4 elements + 8 spheres + 12 signs of the zodiac + 1, the Monad. . . . The Grail procession, in other words, is a representation of the mystic journey of the soul towards the Monad, itself symbolized by the Grail” (op. cit., pp. 105-6).

The end of the Grail quest is the return to the source of life and rebirth into it as divinely self-conscious entities purified by involvement in earthly experiences and having also contributed to the ongoing process of cosmic evolution by refining the substance they have used. The great lesson for Parzival — for all of us because he is our prototype — was the interconnected relationship of all earth entities. The bonds of a universal brotherhood make us all kin. The suffering of one hurts all, and compassion in our heart obliges us to ask forever: What ails our brother?

What could be the most interesting aspect of this story, involves looking at the second clue of what the Holy Grail represents, provided by Wolfram in the form of “a precious stone, lapsit exillis (i.e. lapis or lapsi ex caelis) of special purity, possessing miraculous powers conferred upon it and sustained by a consecrated Host”, which is indeed the blood of Christ, with holy powers to act as the Elixir of Life. This precious stone fallen from heaven is both the emerald fallen from Lucifer’s crown.

Wolfram von Eschenbach identified the Holy Grail as a Stone of Heaven, he knew he was alluding to a Holy Grail tradition that had extended far back into the mists of time. Many traditions tell so primitive man, who experienced a physical and or emotional change just by being in the proximity to certain stones. Even the term “magic,” associated with the title of “Magus” or “magician” has its etymological roots in the force of magnets or magnetism, which plays into the idea of “greatness,” or “magnifying” one’s spirit or essential self under the light of God. Perhaps this is why Simon was called “Megas” Greek for “Great” which sounds virtually the same as “Magus.” The Persians thought of the their priests as “magos” as well.

Alchemists told of transforming a base metal into gold and a human into a god or goddess. Many texts were cataloged of the Muslim Empire by the Sufis, who added their own alchemical data before transmitting it to their students, the Knights Templar, who took the wisdom into Europe and supposedly carried in tradition through Freemasonry. Those indoctrinated were of the Holy grail Mysteries and eventually given the wisdom of the Alchemical or Philosophers Stone. Some tell of it being a platter or bowl full of precious stones. The Stone of Heaven is a Latin translation of the term Lapsit Exillus, closely related to Lapis Elixir, an appellation used by the Sufis that denoted, “Philosopher’s Stone.” Lapsit derived from “stone” and related to the Latin lapsus, meaning fallen, thus denoting “fallen stone.” Since the term Exillus is related to exillis stellis, meaning : “from the stars,” the entire moniker Lapsit Exillus literally translates as “The Stone of the Heavens” or “The Stone which came down from the Stars.”

The name Stone of Heaven can also be derived from the word Grail. The term Grail derived from the French gres or Persian gohr, both denoting a stone. Grail of Greal could also be related to the French grele, meaning hailstone, which is a “stone” from heaven. According to Arthur Edward Waite, the term Lapsit Exillus is “Exiles Stone.” This surprisingly affiliates the Stone of heaven with Heaven’s most notorious exile, Lucifer. A poem of a German heritage called, Wartburgkrieg, the “Wartburg War,” summarizes the heavenly battle between Lucifer and St. Michael, and identifies the Stone of Heaven as a large emerald that became dislodged from Lucifer’s crown and descended to Earth:

“Shall I then bring the crown

That was made by 60,000 angels?ill

Who wished to force GOD out of the Kingdom of Heaven.

See! Lucifer, there he is!

If there are master-priests,

Then you know well that I am singing the truth.

Saint Michael saw GOD’s anger, plagued by His insolence.

He took (Lucifer’s) crown from his head,

In such a way that a stone jumped out of it.

Which on Earth became Parsifal’s stone.

The stone which sprang out of it,

He found it, he who struggled for honor at such a high cost.”

Lucifer’s fall that is incorporated into this poem first popularized by the Prophet Isaiah during his harangue against the King of Babylon. When describing the decline and all of the King of Babylon, Isaiah used the metaphor of the Morning star’s “fall” or descent below the horizon at sunrise, an image subsequently became linked to Lucifer when translated into Latin was Luz-I-fer or Lucifer, the Light Bringer. Morning Star then became known as Shahar or Helel, which were the names of Venus’ dawn appearance. Thus, Lucifer is associated with both Venus and Helel, a name that evolved into Hell, Lucifer’s underworld home.

In the Book of Ezekiel, he expanded upon the meaning of Lucifer’s infamous fall. While comparing the King of Tyre with Lucifer, Ezekiel identifies Lucifer as the anointed cherub and forever-young boy who once walked in the Garden of Eden while covered in precious stones, including the emerald, and was perfect in his ways and from that day he was created until iniquity was found in him. Thus Ezekiel perpetuated the tradition of Isaiah by making  Lucifer’s fall the product of pride.

Ezekiel 28:13 tells us:

You were in Eden, the garden of God; every precious stone adorned you: carnelian, chrysolite and emerald, topaz, onyx and jasper, lapis lazuli, turquoise and beryl. Your settings and mountings were made of gold; on the day you were created they were prepared.

Lucifer then resolves to rule in Heaven and this culminated in his expulsion from Paradise. When St. Michael and his angels fought with Lucifer/Samael over his right to rule, states John the Revelator, “that old serpent, called the devil, and Satan which deceiveth the whole world…was cast out (of heaven) into the earth, and his angels were cast with him.”

The remainder of Lucifer’s legend in the poem states that during the battle with Michael an emerald became dislodged from Lucifer’s crown and fell to Earth. This is based on Ezekiel’s description of the gems-especially the emerald-that adorned Lucifer’s regalia in the Garden of Eden. It is also influenced by the Knights Templar. But of course this predates the Templar’s by many thousand of years. Before their time the emerald had been recognized as the esteemed Stone of Venus, the “fallen star” of Lucifer.

Strangely enough, however, Lucifer does seem to embody the twin archetype we see over and over in world mythologies. In a way, Michael the archangel could also very well be his angelic twin, just as Metatron is said to have an angelic twin soul in the form of Sandalphon. Both of these angels’ lower selves exist in the forms of both Enoch and Elijah, both of which are intimately connect with Hermes Trismegistus. In Roman myths, we have Romulus and Remus, in Genesis, Cain and Abel, Ariman and Angra Manyu in Persia, the Ashvin Twins, or Mitra and Varuna in India; Zeus and Poseidon, Castor and Pollux, Apollo and Dionysus and Hercules and Atlas in Greece; Set-Typhon and Horus in Egypt, etc. In a way, Lucifer is simply a reflection of the Supreme Heavenly Father, who is the spiritual sun of Heaven.

As the story goes, a number of angels having remained neutral and inactive during the battle of Lucifer and the rebel angels against God and the faithful heavenly hosts, after Lucifer’s fall they were condemned by God to support this stone, which had dropped from Lucifer’s crown, hovering between Heaven and Earth until the hour of redemption of sinful mankind and the “Day of Judgement” at the end of the apocalypse. Then they brought it to Earth, and, formed into a holy vessel, it served for the dish out of which the Jews ate the Paschal lamb in Exodus 12 on Passover, and in which Joseph of Arimathea received the Saviour’s blood, and perhaps even the receptacle for the severed head of John the Baptist.

By uniting the two objects, being the kraters and with meteoritic stones fallen from heaven, it becomes obvious. We see ancient worship of meteorites in the Kaaba Stone of Mecca in Saudia Arabia, which is associated with the worship of Venus/Lucifer and Saturn/Chronos, the pyramids of Mexico, the vajra thunderbolt of Hinduism, etc. So the Grail is indeed the meteorite crater opened up by a falling object from the heavens. It may also refer to volcanic activity and magma, associated with the conflagration spoken by the ancients that is said to have destroyed Atlantis-Eden.


Rudolf Steiner, the Austrian philosopher and esotericist famously reimagined the grail, foundation stone as a, “dodecahedron fashioned in copper in 1913 to consecrate the building called the first Goetheanum, with twelve, pentagonal (five-sided) facets and called the “dodecahedron of man.” (Bill Trusiewicz, The Foundation Stone as The Golden Triangle, The Mystic Hammer, and The Lost Word)

Bill Trusiewiscz further asks:

Firstly, we should ask: What is a foundation stone? Also called a “cornerstone,” a foundation stone is a stone ceremoniously set in place at the start of the construction of a building. This is done to initiate certain defining principles or ideas in connection with the proposed building with the intention of consecrating it for a specific purpose. It is, if you will, a “mental” building to use modern terminology, to correspond to a physical building proposed. Students of spiritual science would likely be comfortable with the idea that the “soul and spirit” foundations of the building were being laid alongside of the sense perceptible building itself.

Indeed, the Foundation Stone concept can be found all throughout the Old Testament and in the Jewish apocrypha, especially in 2 Enoch (see my paper “The Gods of Imagination: Alchemy, Magic, and the Quintessence” found in The Gnostic 6 by Andrew Phillip Smith). It is the starting point or even the “heart” in which the world and even the whole breadth of the cosmos is founded upon. It is also the Holy of Holies, in which it becomes the “cornerstone” of the Temple of Solomon, which is just another form of the Grail Temple of Parzival. Perhaps this is where the Theosophists would claim that Shamballah of Tibet would be the “heart of the earth” and the “King of the Earth” being “Sanat Kumara,” the so-called “Lord of the Flame” came from Venus! This is undoubtedly connected to Lucifer, the equivalent of Rex Mundi of the Cathars, Melek Taus of the Yezidis, Satan “the god of this world/cosmos” to St. Paul and Ialdabaoth and his legions of archons to the Gnostics. As it follows, the foundation stone is currently owned by Lucifer on his crown, since he is essentially the “prince of the world,” as the Fourth Gospel puts it, when he fell into the depths of the sub-lunar realm after the War in Heaven.


In The Creation and the Garden of Eden as Models for Temple Architecture by Jeffrey M. Bradshaw, he quotes from a not-so-easily identifiable source but it is worth quoting nonetheless:

The brightness of the Holy of Holies was the light of Day One, before the visible world had been created… Those who entered the Holy of Holies entered this place of light, beyond time and matter, which was the presence of “the King of kings and Lord of lords who alone has immortality and dwells in unapproachable light.” This was the place of glory to which Jesus knew he would return after the crucifixion, “the glory which I had with thee before the world was made.” In the Gospel of Thomas, Christians are described as the new high priesthood who enter the light, and Jesus instructed his disciples to say to the guardians (the cherub guardians of Eden?) “We came from the light, the place where the light came into being on its own accord and established [itself]…

Bradshaw rightly points out that the tabernacle of Moses is an earthly attempt to recapture the Edenic state that that man once held before the fall:

Carrying this idea forward to a later epoch, Exodus 40:33 describes how Moses completed the tabernacle. The Hebrew text exactly parallels the account of how God finished creation. Genesis Rabbah comments: “It is as if, on that day [i.e., the day the tabernacle was raised in the wilderness], I actually created the world.” With this idea in mind, Hugh Nibley has famously called the temple “a scale-model of the universe.” As a complement to the view of the Creation as a model for the temple, BYU Professor Donald W. Parry has argued that the Garden of Eden can be seen as a natural “temple,” where Adam and Eve lived in God’s presence for a time, and mirroring the configuration of the heavenly temple intended as their ultimate destination.

Bradshaw concludes that the temple symbolism of Revelation also carries on this Edenic/Solomonic tradition:

Fittingly, just as the first book of the Bible, Genesis, recounts the story of Adam and Eve being cast out from the Garden, its last book, Revelation, prophesies a permanent return to Eden for the sanctified.36 In that day, the veil that separates man and the rest of fallen creation from God will be swept away, and all shall be “done in earth, as it is in heaven.”37 In the original Garden of Eden, “there was no need for a temple—because Adam and Eve enjoyed the continual presence of God”—likewise, in John’s vision “there was no temple in the Holy City, ‘for its temple is the Lord God.’”38 To reenter the Garden at that happy day is to return to the original spiritual state of immortality and innocence through forgiveness of sin, and to know the oneness that existed at the dawn of Creation, before the creative processes of division and separation began. The premortal glory of the righteous shall then be “added upon” 39 as they receive a fullness of the blessings of sanctification, “coupled with eternal glory, which glory we do not now enjoy.”

What does any of this have to do with the lore and legends of Baphomet and the Knights Templar exactly? This is a very good question that is answered thoroughly in Baphomet: The Mystery of the Temple Unveiled. The Even ha’Shettiya, also known as the “Stone of Foundation,” which currently resides within the eight-sided Dome of the Rock in Jerusalem, the Holy City and center and heart of the earth as European mapmakers charted.

This is the same rock that supposedly was the same rocky site upon which Abraham was coerced into sacrificing his own son Isaac in the sight of Jehovah, to test his faith, as well as the place where Mohammed was lifted into Heaven by the archangel Gabriel. This is also the same site that the Knights Templar resided nearby when they founded modern day Jerusalem. So the Stone of Foundation for the Jews, Muslims, and the Catholic Crusaders was in fact, the Stone of Lucifer as part of the Axis Mundi or column that unites Heaven and Earth, and even the Underworld. King David, who purchased the rock of the Even ha’Shetityya from the Jebusites as the location of the Ark of the Covenant, was not overlooked by him. This sacred object primarily served as a vehicle for communication with Jehovah/Yahweh.


King Solomon holding the Grail Temple and Royal Scepter.

David’s son, King Solomon, a famous alchemist, similarly thought that the stone’s alchemical properties as a mediator between Heaven and Earth, used the rock as a cornerstone or foundation for his famous Temple, which would draw upon the power and spirit of YHWH. We see the Testament of Solomon depicting Sabaoth as the god of Solomon, who gives him a magical ring through the archangel Michael to build the temple through the forced help of 72 goetic demon helpers. This is Sabaoth is probably the same deity as Abraxas. (This connection is fully explored further in depth in the book.)

Perhaps the pyramids of Egypt and Mexico were constructed by similar means though the use of demonic, supernatural power. Furthermore, perhaps this is what the Knights Templar were so drawn towards—the supernatural power behind the Temple of Solomon—the same power that would one day make them so rich that they would become a threat to French and Catholic nobility. It is this power that manifest itself in the form of a head of a man or even of a cat, and eventually from the Dionysian and Azazel-like goat head.

What is most fascinating as that the Freemasonic pontif Albert Pike in Morals & Dogma seems to spur and condemn the idea that the Templars also worshiped Baphomet when he writes:

“[It is absurd to suppose that men of intellect adored a monstrous idol called Baphomet, or recognized Mahomet as an inspired prophet. Their symbolism, invented ages before, to conceal what it was dangerous to avow, was of course misunderstood by those who were not adepts, and to their enemies seemed to be pantheistic. The calf of gold, made by Aaron for the Israelites, was but one of the oxen under the laver of bronze, and the Karobim on the Propitiatory, misunderstood. The symbols of the wise always become the idols of the ignorant multitude. What the Chiefs of the Order really believed and taught, is indicated to the Adepts by the hints contained in the high Degrees of Free-Masonry, and by the symbols which only the Adepts understand.

Pike is claiming that the symbolism associated with the Templars and Freemasonry is veiled and misunderstood by the masses also reflects the idea that the alchemical Philosopher’s Stone was simply a ruse created by alchemists to confuse the masses and mask their true and secret methods and sciences to create gold or something else completely. However, this doesn’t answer the general claim that a certain Templar possessed a severed idol head and turned to it to form their own Faustian pact with the spirit of Baphomet. We can gain more clarity on this subject from Sean Martin in The Knights Templar (p. 139):

Misunderstanding is almost certainly at the root of the allegation that the Templars worshipped an idol called Baphomet. Descriptions of it varied, but it was usually described as being a life-sized head, which was said to make the land fertile (as is said of the Grail). That the Templars did possess heads is without doubt. They possessed the head of St Euphemia of Chalcedon at their preceptory in Nicosia on Cyprus, and, more curiously, a silver head shaped reliquary was found after the arrests at the Paris Temple. This bore the inscription CAPUT LVIII, and inside it were parts of a woman’s skull (who was believed to have been one of the 11,000 virgins martyred at Cologne with St Ursula). The heads may have indeed been worshiped, in the way that the Celts revered the head.

The Assassins, during their initiation ceremonies, buried the initiate up to his neck in sand, leaving only the head visible, before disinterring him. Given their simulation of Saracen torture, the Templars may also have carried out this practice. A further possibility is that Baphomet, long thought to be a mistranslation of ‘Mahomet’ (the Prophet Muhammad), could well be a corruption of the Arabic word abufihamat, which means ‘Father of Understanding’, a reference to a spiritual seeker after realization or enlightenment has taken place: ‘The Baphomet is none other than the symbol of the completed man.’44 It is therefore possible that the supposed head the Templars worshipped was actually a metaphorical head. That Hugues de Payen’s shield carried three black heads suggests that certain elements within the Order – the upper echelons perhaps – were involved with esoteric disciplines learned from the Sufis from the very beginning of the Temple’s existence.

Could these “alchemical heads” be code words for a secret knowledge held by the minds of the initiated as well as literal severed heads who supposedly “prophesied”? The Templars were also said to have in their possession, ritual skulls made out of precious metals and human bone covered in gold and silver. These skulls may have been their own deceased brethren. There are testimonies taken from the Catholic inquisitions that purport of the Templars alluding to possess metallic skulls used in Templar ceremonies, especially in the legend of The Necromantic Skull Of Sidon.

Skulls tend to be used in ancestor worship and also happen to be the premiere emblem of Mexican commemoration of the Dia de los Muertos (“Day of the Dead” being a pre-Colombian tradition of ancestor worship and colonial Catholicism) and demonic deity of the drug cartels, Santa Muerte, a mixture of the Virgin Mary (who, herself is the Catholic version of Astarte and Ishtar/Lilith) and the Aztec god of death Mictlantecuhtli. The Yale Masonic secret society of the “Skull & Bones,” a Satanic club of which a string of U.S. Presidents belong to (John Kerry, the Bush family, etc.) via secret oaths and initiation rites into diabolism similar to the ones found in Templar Baphometic rites. These “Bonesmen” have their origins in the so-called “Bavarian Illuminati” who themselves come from the Jesuits, whose saints are often depicted next to skulls or holding skulls. There are paintings depicting Mary Magdalene holding a skull as well.


The famous skull and crossbones motif normally associated with pirates is often said to have originated with this skull from Sidon, but it was probably much older. This haunting motif, which we today associate with poison, was most likely a symbol related to the earlier alchemical rites of the Templar Knights. During these early rites, skulls were used representing “Caput Mortumm” or “Dead Head,” which refers to a stage in alchemy preceding creation of the “Philosophers Stone,” which is the Great Work of the alchemists, equated with spiritualized gold. This is the stage of “Nigredo” or the “blackening” in Hades/Hell. The Gnostic-Hermetist Zosimos depicts this stage in the most extreme and gruesome imagery in his alchemical work Visions.

The most important skull or head used in the rites of the Knights Templar was known within the Order as Baphomet. This most sacred of heads, which many of the Knights alluded to during their depositions preceding their French trial, may have been that of John the Baptist, whose head was acquired by the Templar’s as part of treasure they looted from Constantinople during the Fourth Crusade in the 11th century. Even stranger is the fact that this Baphomet skull could also be related to the head of Simon Magus! Be sure to check out our book for more details on all of this.

However, the idea that the Templars revered Baphomet in its Gnosticized form, seems to be a later additional detail that emerges during the French Revolution and later emphasized with the likes of Purgstall, Eliphas Levi, Aleister Crowley, etc. Whatever the case may be, it seems as though the Templar treasure is somehow tied with the symbolism of the head, the mind, as well as the Holy Grail cup which is associated with drinking the wisdom of various Hermetic and Gnostic deities and alchemists like Zosimos, as we explain in the book. Indeed, even the Holy Grail/Fisher King legends themselves have strong associations with Gnosticism, and it is this heresy that the Orthodoxy greatly desired to have stamped out of existence and absorbed into their own “universal” collective religion.

(In Part 2, we will re-examine the infamous Medieval legends of Faustus and Simon the Magician and his consort, Helena/Sophia and how it all relates to the Holy Grail legends.)

Preorders Available for Baphomet: The Temple Mystery Unveiled


Hey folks. Our book Baphomet: The Temple Mystery Unveiled by Tracy R. Twyman and Alexander Rivera is set to be published very shortly. Preorders are currently available, with a personalized autograph by me. If you want an autograph from Tracy R. Twyman, then go ahead and pre-order through her site. It is also a hardcover, 628 pages, and the price is currently set at $29.95 + shipping ($10 domestic, $15 int’l).

Just as Tracy said over at her site, all orders made by Dec. 7th should be received by Christmas. We will send you an email when your order is shipped. Domestic shipping will be done via Priority Mail. We will assume you want the book autographed unless you indicate otherwise. If you have a special request regarding the autograph, just let us know.

It is a beautiful 8 x 5 hardcover book with thoroughly done research on various subjects (you will find a description of all of this below), a lovely jacket and tons of fascinating illustrations. Please expect some delays in shipping. Your book will come in no later than Christmas. Also, be sure to visit our Kickstarter if you feel so inclined to help us out there as well. There are many cool prizes and rewards for all participants.

In the next few days expect a big in-depth post about the Holy Grail and how it all fits with the creepy lore of Baphomet and his inner circle of worshipers, being the Knights Templar. Send me a message if you have any questions in my contact box. The book will likely come out sometime before Black Friday. The order options for both domestic and international pre-orders are available below. Cheers!

Domestic (US)

btn_buynowCC_LG (1)

International Orders

btn_buynowCC_LG (2)

“Can ye drink of the cup that I drink of? And be baptized with the baptism that I am baptized with?”

For seven centuries, the enigma of Baphomet has mystified both scholars and the general public. Did the Knights Templar really worship a demonic idol of that name? If so, what does the word mean? What is the origin of this figure? What was the nature of the rituals that the Templars performed in secret? What were their covert beliefs? And why, if the Templars initially described their idol as a mummified severed head, is this figure now represented as a hermaphrodite human with the head of a goat?

Authors Tracy R. Twyman and Alexander Rivera have dived head-first into the bottomless abyss of mystery and returned with some astounding wisdom to share. Here for the first time they reveal the genesis of these symbols, showing how they relate to the Witches’ Sabbath, traditions of Sufi Islam, alchemy, Gnosticism, cabalism, the teachings of Hermes Trismegistus, and so much more.

Learn why the Templars and their beloved severed head are frequently associated with John the Baptist, and how this connects to his student, Simon Magus. Discover the known facts about things like the Chinon Parchment, the Book of the Baptism of Fire, the Templar Abraxas seals, and newly-found documents which claim that the Templars discovered the real Temple of Solomon during a secret trip to Mecca.

Join Twyman and Rivera on this exciting adventure into the unknown. Immerse yourself in this knowledge, if your heart has the strength. It is certain that your mind will never be the same.


New Book: Baphomet: The Mystery of the Temple Unveiled

I realize it’s been a long while since I’ve posted an article on this blog. But be of good cheer! A new book I co-wrote with Tracy Twyman is set to come out either late October or early November as the date is currently tentative at the moment. The book is called Baphomet: The Temple Mystery Unveiled. I’ve been working on this book very intently for the last 6-7 months and all my hard work (along with Tracy’s) will finally be revealed for the public to read and carefully consider. Here is the press release for the book over on Tracy’s site. Be on the look out for a Kickstarter with some pertinent details for you beloved truth seekers, to consider supporting us while giving you lot’s of cool goodies, e-books and hardcover books in return. And finally, here is the cover that will be used for the book. I will be posting more details about the book as the weeks pass on. Spread the news far and wide!

Here is the blurb from the inside cover of the book jacket:

Can ye drink of the cup that I drink of? And be baptized with the baptism that I am baptized with?

For seven centuries, the enigma of Baphomet has mystified both scholars and the general public. Did the Knights Templar really worship a demonic idol of that name? If so, what does the word mean? What is the origin of this figure? What was the nature of the rituals that the Templars performed in secret? What were their covert beliefs? And why, if the Templars initially described their idol as a mummified severed head, is this figure now represented as a hermaphrodite human with the head of a goat?

Authors Tracy R. Twyman and Alexander Rivera have dived head-first into the bottomless abyss of mystery and returned with some astounding wisdom to share. Learn the genesis of these symbols and how they relate to the Witches’ Sabbath, traditions of Sufi Islam, alchemy, Gnosticism, cabalism, the teachings of Hermes Trismegistus, and so much more.

Learn why the Templars and their beloved severed head are frequently associated with John the Baptist, and how this connects to his student, Simon Magus. Discover the known facts about things like the Chinon Parchment, the Book of the Baptism of Fire, the Templar Abraxas seals, and newly-found documents which claim that the Templars discovered the real Temple of Solomon during a secret trip to Mecca.

Join Twyman and Rivera on this exciting adventure into the unknown. Immerse yourself in this knowledge, if your heart has the strength. It is certain that your mind will never be the same.

LVX and God Bless,




Marcion and Empedocles: The Gnosis of Love and Discord

The Church Father and Pope Hippolytus in Refutations of All Heresies (1.3) writes about the pre-Socratic and Orphic philosopher Empedocles:

But Empedocles, born after these, advanced likewise many statements respecting the nature of demons, to the effect that, being very numerous, they pass their time in managing earthly concerns. This person affirmed the originating principle of the universe to be discord and friendship, and that the intelligible fire of the monad is the Deity, and that all things consist of fire, and will be resolved into fire; with which opinion the Stoics likewise almost agree, expecting a conflagration. But most of all does he concur with the tenet of transition of souls from body to body, expressing himself thus:–“For surely both youth and maid I was, And shrub, and bird, and fish, from ocean stray’d.”

This (philosopher) maintained the transmutation of all souls into any description of animal. For Pythagoras, the instructor of these (sages), asserted that himself had been Euphorbus, who sewed in the expedition against Ilium, alleging that he recognised his shield. The foregoing are the tenets of Empedocles.

Hippolytus makes it clear that it is his mission to expose many Gnostic heresies is fueled by also explaining the doctrines and ideas of the philosophers and the pagan mysteries, including Empedocles and his master Pythagoras, which he connects to Marcion. In a nutshell, Hippolytus was trying very hard to say that all the Gnostic mystery schools were nothing more than clever rip-offs of the pagan myths, legends and philosophy. According to some mythicists, the same can be said for Christianity in general. Hippolytus also makes it clear that his main argument in Refutation (V11. 29-31) is that Marcion is a parasite of Empedocles’s mysteries, who is also treated as a follower of Pythagoras. While much has written about Marcion and his heresy and doctrines, there isn’t much written in regards to how and why Hippolytus compares him to the pre socratic philosopher.


Bust of Empedocles

Hippolytus writes about Marcion’s heresy and apparent plagiarism from Empedocles:

This (heretic) having thought that the multitude would forget that he did not happen to be a disciple of Christ, but of Empedocles, who was far anterior to himself, framed and formed the same opinions, — namely, that there are two causes of the universe, discord and friendship. For what does Empedocles say respecting the plan of the world? Even though we have previously spoken (on this subject), yet even now also, for the purpose, at all events, of comparing the heresy of this plagiarist (with its source), we shall not be silent.

According to the Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy, it writes how Empedocles went astray from sticking to his Pythagorean roots when he was suddenly exiled from a “blessed life” since he spilled animal blood and ate animal flesh as part of a ritual sacrifice:

In the opening lines, the narrator of the poem, who is presumably Empedocles, describes himself as a god, received as such by the cities to which he travels. To them he dispenses advice, prophecies, and cures (B 112). This god is actually a spirit—a daimôn—who has been exiled from the blessed life of the other spirits by breaking an oath and shedding blood (by killing and eating animals: see below). He wanders throughout the natural world, rejected by the very elements, because he put his trust in raving Strife (B 115). Exiled daemons are reincarnated into all sorts of living forms, finally coming to be as prophets, poets, physicians, and leaders among men.

So the ultimate aim of a daimonic philosopher is to journey back to a state of purity by siding with Love instead of Strife. This applies to the shedding of blood and to live a conscious life. Marcion was also known to tell his fellowship to abstain from meat and wine as well and forbade his followers from sexual intercourse and marriage. Love or Friendship leads the punished souls inside the realm of Strife and Discord (compared with the Demiurge) out from the world and into a realm of unity as Hippolytus says.

The souls, then, thus detested, and tormented, and punished in this world, are, according to Empedocles, collected by Friendship as being a certain good (power), and (one) that pities the groaning of these, and the disorderly and wicked device of furious Discord. And (likewise Friendship is) eager, and toils to lead forth little by little the souls from the world, and to domesticate them with unity, in order that all things, being conducted by herself, may attain unto unification. Therefore on account of such an arrangement on the part of destructive Discord of this divided world, Empedocles admonishes his disciples to abstain from all sorts of animal food. For he asserts that the bodies of animals are such as feed on the habitations of punished souls.

Not only is there similarities between Marcion and Empedocles, but also the later and the Prophet Manes. For Manes or Mani, the Two Roots or universal principles (Do Bun in Persian) are Light and Dark. The Tree of Life and the Tree of Death. It is said that the teachings of the Greek scholars, Empedocles and Pythagoras were passed down to Mani by the teacher Scythianus, whom it is said, lived at the time of the Apostles (although there is no evidence that Scythianus even existed). Empedocles is a source for the doctrine of the four elements (fire, water, air, earth), even as it manifests itself in Hippocrates and Galen’s teaching of the four humours. This is a very practical doctrine which is used widely even today. Empedocles also taught that the universe is composed of the forces of Neikos: Strife/Discord and Philia: Love/Friendship. Here is another source for the Manichean Two Roots in the Roman Emperor Septimius Severus who is quoting probably from the Kephalaia:

The difference between these two Principles is like that between a King and a pig: Light dwells in a royal abode in places suitable to its nature, while Dark like a pig wallows in mud and is nourished by filth and delights in it.

To be sure, preoccupation with the problem of evil did not originate with Manichaean dualism or its predecessor in Gnosticism. The Greek philosophers had long devoted considerable attention to the nature and source, of evil. In the Platonic Academy, in particular, the close links between evil and matter were emphasized as the Hellenistic world emphasized the transient and hostile nature of the natural world despite what some consider to be simply “marginal” beliefs of the world’s first “chaos magicians” (being the Gnostics) who hate and reject matter (as if any person can reject matter in the first place!). This simplistic view however, when one researches the subject in depth can easily be dispelled since many Gnostic groups were actually involved in the great medical schools of the first and second century and had much more nuanced views on matter when one reads Gnostic texts from the Nag Hammadi Library.

Returning back to Marcion, he was a well known Gnostic in whom the Church Fathers dedicated the most vehement hatred and disgust, out of all the heretics of the ancient world. The Apostle Paul was the figurehead for his church, who during the second century was a fierce Hellenistic competitor with the Apostolic Orthodox church. Marcion once had a principle text called Antitheses.  

In Adolf Harnack’s sympathetic study on Marcion in Marcion: The Gospel of the Alien God (more than Bart Ehrman’s Lost Christianities), he writes that Antitheses, was intended to be a bedrock for the Marcionite faith, indeed as a “creedal book.” A reconstruction of Antitheses is not possible, Harnack informs us, in part because “not even the arrangement of the work is clear,” but a number of things can nonetheless be determined or gleaned based upon quotes from it found in the works of the church fathers. The purpose for this book was to“demonstrate the irreconcilability of the Old Testament with the gospel,” along with the latter’s origin from a different God (p. 17).

We also know its opening lines: “O wonder upon wonder! Rapture, power, amazement! We can say nothing about the gospel message, not even compare it with anything else.” Here, Christ was saying that Christ came from another realm altogether with a wondrous message of deliverance in ecstatic terms. Moreover there seems to have been a special emphasis on one word in particular—“new.” We can find references to “new God,” “new deity,” “the new kingdom,” “new and unheard of kingdom,” “new master and proprietor of the elements,” “novel doctrines of the new Christ,” “new works of Christ,” “new miracle,” etc, etc, as opposed to the old wine skin of the Old Testament.

It looks like Marcion was struck with astonishment, bowed down in awe before a revelation so utterly prodigious of the Gospel. Clement of Alexandria felt equally exalted:

Christ shines. He shines more brightly than the sun. Night flees before him, fire is afraid, death departs. He presents the believing soul to the Father to keep in heaven for all eternity. O true sacred mystery! O clear, pure light!”

Marcion referred to this “new,” supreme God as “the Stranger.” The Marcionites also could call themselves “strangers,” much like other Gnostics did as not a pejorative term but an endearing one, as they proclaimed a strange or foreign gnosis or knowledge, a term that reveals some of their philosophy of existence.

The Latin Church Father Tertullian accused Marcion of deism (then called Epicureanism, since Epicurus the philosopher was technically a deist) in Against Marcion 1.24.

If (Marcion) chose to take any one of the school of Epicurus, and entitle him God in the name of Christ, on the ground that what is happy and incorruptible can bring no trouble either on itself or anything else (for Marcion, while poring over this opinion of the divine indifference, has removed from him all the severity and energy of the judicial character), it was his duty to have developed his conceptions into some imperturbable and listless god…

But (once for all) let Marcion know that the principle term of his creed comes from the school of Epicurus, implying that the Lord is stupid and indifferent; wherefore he refuses to say that He is an object to be feared.

Tertullian also makes fun of the idea of there being a “new God,” exposing his hopeless rhetoric and red-hot Catholic love for the Old Testament (1.8).

In the first place, how arrogantly do the Marcionites build up their stupid system, bringing forward a new god, as if we were ashamed of the old one! So schoolboys are proud of their new shoes, but their old master beats their strutting vanity out of them.

Tertullian was comparing Marcion’s conception of god to Epicurus. Tertullian says Marcion’s metaphysical beliefs are closer to Stoicism and Platonism. The reason he accuses him of Epicureanism is because Epicurus was a deist who denied that the gods had any involvement or concern with the affairs of man. Marcion’s supreme god was similar in that he had no involvement with creation and was entirely complacent, although he did eventually intervene as Jesus Christ. Irenaeus writes in Against Heresies (V.26):

Let those persons, therefore, who blaspheme the Creator, either by openly expressed words, such as the disciples of Marcion, or by a perversion of the sense [of Scripture], as those of Valentinus and all the Gnostics falsely so called, be recognised as agents of Satan by all those who worship God; through whose agency Satan now, and not before, has been seen to speak against God, even Him who has prepared eternal fire for every kind of apostasy.

Tertullian also says something very interesting in Against Marcion (3.12):

You will find that among the Hebrews there are Christians, even Marcionites, who use the name Emmanuel when they wish to say God-with-us…

Tertullian is saying that there were Jewish Marcionites. Isn’t that kind of important, since Marcion is constantly being accused of anti-Semitism? So, let us sort this mess out. Marcion, as far as we know, had nothing against Jews. His Romans retained most of the verses sympathetic to Jews. He even felt pity for the ancient Israelites, always going so far as to blame their god, and not them, for the atrocities of the Old Testament. And he even inspired Jews themselves to convert to his religion. Yet he is accused of being an anti-Semite.

Irenaeus also posed this question to Marcion (Against Heresies 4.33.2):

…how can he be good who draws away men that do not belong to him from him who made them, and calls them into his own kingdom?

Plotinus likewise objected to the Gnostic propensity to find fault with the universe and its cause (the creator). Porphyry’s title for Plotinus’ tractate against the Gnostics is: Against those who say that the demiurge of the universe and the universe are evil. Simon Magus in the Clementine literature accuses the God of the Old Testament of creating evils, being unmerciful, not being good, and being subject to harsh passions.


Earth at the center of the Spheres. in Gossuin de Metz, L’Image du monde. 13th-century Copy.

The Gnostics and other similar groups believed and based their cosmological systems on the idea that various powers identified with numerous figures from Greco-Roman, Egyptian and Biblical traditions do feature in some astrological content—especially with the notion of astrological fate which early Christians and Gnostics regarded as demonic. They taught that the antithesis of belief in astrological fate was freedom of the will. Therefore, since astrological fate as a demonic power, non-Gnostic humanity was seen as being completely subservient to fate, having lost their freedom under the bondage of the law, flesh and the counterfeit spirit all orchestrated by the wicked goddess Heimarmane.


These beings were often tied with the “the authorities of the universe and the spirits of wickedness” of St. Paul’s Ephesians 6:12, which directly corresponded with the Archons of Gnosticism. These beings were also said to be the astral lords of fate and were assigned many other terms in both the Nag Hammadi Corpus and the New Testament, such as the “governors”, “guardians”, “gate keepers”, “robbers” , “toll collectors”, “judges”, “pitiless ones”, “adulterers”, “man-eaters”, etc.

These beings will that every “star” or soul would “go astray on the way” as the Gospel of Philip puts it. Each Archon could have also been associated with a planet (no Gnostic text makes this association explicit). And each Archon, according to the Apocryphon of John, has an adjunct or ‘power’ with the head of a beast or predatory animal. Thus, the seven rulers also corresponded to the planetary spheres, the same powers that helped the Demiurge create the world and humanity. As mentioned earlier, zealous church fathers like Hippolytus confirm these accounts in the discussion of Empedocles, in which Hippolytus claimed that the much reviled arch-heretic Marcion had derived his system of dualism from in Book VII, Chapter 17 of Refutation of All Heresies. Hippolytus quotes Empedocles of saying:

Of these I also am from God a wandering exile.

Hippolytus also wrote that Empedocles taught that the first principle, being God or the ineffable Monad existed in a sublime unity before the eventual and furious “Discord” that is a chief characteristic of the Demiurge, the creator of the world and it is this “Discord” that “forcibly severs from unity, and (which it) fashions and operates upon”. Plotinus (or really Porphyry, since he is more likely the author the Enneads), the father of Neo-Platonism grumbled that the Gnostics took a pessimistic view on the world, with continual complaints against providence and the design of the world (Enneads 2.9.8). They cite how there is a constant inequality in wealth and that passions dominate humanity rather than reason (2.9.9). Above all, the material world and all its faults are considered a consequence of the World-Soul’s fall (2.9.4).

Much like the Cynics and the Epicurians, the Gnostics disparaged the glorious celestial lights of the Planets and taught they produced “tragic dramas” and tyranny over the lives of humanity because of the cosmic spheres’ influence. This is much like the “tormentors” of the Zodiac in the Corpus Hermeticum. Their radical critique of the cosmos conflicts with the Stoic idea of the “all-pervading Logos” pan-present throughout the cosmos, the optimism of Plato’s Timaeus with the Demiurge doing his best to emulate the ideal forms, and expression of God’s glory within creation on the account in Genesis. According to Eugnostos the Blessed, the world is conceived as a cavern of chaos and oblivion because of the general lack of knowledge:

Let us, then, consider (it) this way: Everything that came from the perishable will perish, since it came from the perishable. Whatever came from imperishableness will not perish but will become imperishable, since it came from imperishableness. So, many men went astray because they had not known this difference; that is, they died.

The Gnostic perspective on the gods was very similar to Epicurus who refused to accept that the gods had anything to do with the universe, even its creation, because since the world is so evil, anything that produced it would have to be evil, too, according to him. He devised a famous argument on theodicy which goes like this: If god is wants to prevent evil, but can’t, then god is impotent. If god can prevent evil, but doesn’t, then he, too, is evil. If god doesn’t want to prevent evil and can’t prevent evil, then he is evil and impotent. But if god can prevent evil and wants to prevent evil, why does evil exist?


Plotinus, while accepted the three-fold nature (nous, psyche, matter) like any good Platonist would have; he went to great lengths to refute the Gnostic idea that the soul’s fall into matter was seen as a punishment for its audacity and sin, expiated by metempsychosis and demonic chastisement. Plotinus instead believed, much like Irenaeus, that it was good for the soul to descend into matter, to experience good and evil while the unfolding and goodness of the hierarchy of being included the physical realm. Despite Plotinus’ complaints directed against the Gnostics for their infiltration in their lecture-room, he also shared their denial for the corruptible flesh (that it could be saved) which can be traced back to Plato’s body-soul dualism: the body entombs the soul, and upon death our souls rise to the higher spirit realm of truth and perfection which also mirrors the spirit-matter dichotomy of the physical universe, by contrast, as an inferior realm that poorly copies the Forms. The Pistis Sophia explicitly compares the cosmic rulers with the planets, where the Demiurge:

…set five other great Rulers in every Aeon as lords over the 360 (Rulers), and over all the bound Rulers who are called in the whole world of mankind these names: Saturn, Mars, Mercury, Venus, Jupiter.

From these examples list above, it is easy to see that Gnosticism was a critical response to planet worship and the Fates that the planets charge. Now, what about the claim that the Gnostics beheld Jesus to be the sun? In a way, Jesus could very well be seen as the incarnation of the Sun God. However, the Apostle Paul, to which the Gnostics revered, also condemned planet worship in Galatians 4:

So also, when we were underage, we were in slavery under the elemental spiritual forces of the world. … Formerly, when you did not know God, you were slaves to those who by nature are not gods. But now that you know God—or rather are known by God —how is it that you are turning back to those weak and miserable forces? Do you wish to be enslaved by them all over again? You are observing special days and months and seasons and years! I fear for you, that somehow I have wasted my efforts on you.

Colossians 2:16-17 also says:

Therefore do not let anyone judge you by what you eat or drink, or with regard to a religious festival, a New Moon celebration or a Sabbath day. These are a shadow of the things that were to come; the reality, however, is found in Christ. Do not let anyone who delights in false humility and the worship of angels disqualify you.

Paul repeatedly condemns other religions, specifically Judaism and pagan religions, for worshiping lesser beings and planets. Christianity, like Gnosticism was a critical reaction to planetary worship, rather than a continuation thereof. By examining his letters, Marcion’s Paul was a mystic who has visions of a disincarnate, spiritual being, who he identified with Jesus Christ. Paul was actually awaiting a docetic savior to transform his mortal body into a spiritual body and whisk him away to an immaterial heaven as indicated in 1 Corinthians 15. Paul’s Christ was a being he encountered in visions.


While there are certain varieties of doceticism and have many meanings and ideas attached to them, it is essentially the view that Jesus was in nature supremely divine, eliminating his humanity and substituting it for a seemingly one. The term Docetism (Greek, dokein = “to seem” or “to appear” and sometimes “to think” or “imagine”) indicated the distinctive thesis of it that Christ’s incarnation, hence his sufferings, were unreal, phantasmal, appearing only to be human. The Gnostics offered a vision of a non-material Christ who did not suffer and die on the cross. In fact, he was laughing at the trick he had played on all of those who thought he was dying as the Apocalypse of Peter suggests:

I saw him seemingly being seized by them. And I said “What do I see, O Lord? That it is you yourself whom they take, and that you are grasping me? Or who is this one, glad and laughing on the tree? And is it another one whose feet and hands they are striking?”

In other words: Jesus was different from what he seemed to be. Doceticism claimed that Christ only appeared or seemed to be a man. This view clearly shows the Hellenistic assumption the divine impassability and the inherent corruptible nature of matter, although there are other variations of this doctrine. The first to mention expressly “Docetists” or “Illusionists” is Serapion of Antioch (c. 200 A.D.) in his letter to the Church at Rhossos. It was not a simple heresy on its own, but was an attitude that many of its proponents held in their own nuanced and varied ways, including Marcion, Simon Magus, Saturninus, Basilides, Cerinthus, Valentinus, Bardesanes, the authors of many Sethian texts such as the Second Treatise of the Great Seth, the Gospel of Judas, etc. This was firmly countered and opposed by the church fathers, including Irenaeus, Justin Martyr, Ignatius, Clement, Origen and especially Tertullian.


Doubting-Thomas.-1500 Dionysii School (Russian)

This heresy is combated by the pastorals in the New Testament, such as some parts in 2 John, some parts of the Gospel of John (which some suspect as Orthodox interpolations since its fundamental theology resembles something that is much more Hellenistic and even Gnostic), and 2 Timothy. Anti-Gnostic authorities and heresiologists such as Irenaeus would write against this docetic heresy:

“Vain indeed are those who allege that He appeared in mere seeming. For these things were not done in appearance only, but in actual reality. But if He did appear as a man, when He was not a man,” there was no “degree of truth in Him, for He was not that which He seemed to be” (AH 5.1.2; 1:527)

According to Irenaeus’ logic, when he charged the Gnostics with teaching this heresy, he claimed it was damnable error because it left man with no hope of union with God through Jesus’ sacrifice on the Cross, or so as the Orthodox narrative goes. Irenaeus is as vigorously anti-docetic as he is anti-Gnostic. Mankind’s true salvation in the flesh was at stake through the doctrine that resurrected carnal fleshly bodies would literally fly into the sky in the clouds. Polycarp, Irenaeus’ alleged teacher and sword enemy of Marcion, made the strongest possible charge against the Docetists by saying that “everyone who does not confess that Jesus Christ has come in the flesh is an anti-Christ,” echoing 1 John 4:2-3. However, this apparently “demonic” docetic heresy can actually be traced to the Apostle Paul, as he writes in Romans 8:3:

Christ came in the likeness [i.e. appearance] of sinful flesh and condemned sin in the flesh so that the just requirement of the law might be fulfilled in us.

The logic in that passage follows a consistent theme: Flesh forces man to sin. Man cannot save himself because he has flesh. Therefore, Christ comes in the LIKENESS (Gk: homoioma, literally “appearance”) of flesh and condemns sin so that man might be relieved from the guilt of the law that he was unable to fulfill himself. If the author of that passage (Paul) had said that Christ came in actual flesh, it would destroy the entire context of the passage. Homoioma literally means “likeness” or “appearance” as a statue of a man would resemble an actual man. In other words, something that appears similar to, but not actually is, the thing that it appears to be.

Have this attitude in yourselves which was also in Christ Jesus, who, although He existed in the form of God, did not regard equality with God a thing to be grasped, but emptied Himself, taking the form of a bond-servant, and being made in the likeness of men. Being found in appearance as a man, He humbled Himself by becoming obedient to the point of death, even death on a cross. Philippians 2:5-8.

Further on, in the hymn of Philippians 2:6-11, Christ descends, “bearing human likeness and the fashion of a man.” Why this oblique phraseology? The author of that passage clearly did not believe that Christ had an actual body. “Being found IN APPEARANCE AS a man.” If Paul believed that Christ was indeed a man, wouldn’t he just say so? Why would he say that Christ APPEARED to be a man? The passage presents Christ which is the Savior and Logos as being flesh. He took on flesh, he put flesh on. He wore flesh. He never BECAME or transformed into flesh. We also wear flesh. You cannot possibly be your flesh in Gnostic thought. Furthermore, in Colossians 2:9, Paul posited that Christ Jesus was the Godhead bodily who appeared in the “body” (Somatikos). A body does not automatically imply human flesh. The docetic heresy unanimously condemned by the church fathers is right in the New Testament as Paul preached the docetic Jesus, who never came to earth, and the Jewish apostles preached the human Jesus depicted in the gospels, who was a different Jesus altogether, since Paul’s Jesus is so radically different from the Jesus of the gospels. Paul himself acknowledges different Jesuses in 2 Corinthians:

For if he that cometh preacheth another Jesus, whom we have not preached, or if ye receive another spirit, which ye have not received, or another gospel, which ye have not accepted, ye might well bear with him.

In the Dialogues of Adamantius, Chapter XXVII, the author hints at the “alien” or spiritual nature of Christ, sent by the Stranger God to rescue humanity from the clutches of the creator god or Demiurge, the author of the Law and the Flesh:

To such a degree was Christ an alien, to those whom he appeared, and again, Christ to the creator god, that Paul said (Gal .3:13): “Christ purchased us”. It is obvious that he was an alien, for nobody at any time purchases what is their own. But it says that those who were purchased by the alien, he desired to have as his own.

Of course, Empedocle’s doctrine of Strife and Discord can also be found in Genesis, in the fruit of knowledge of good and evil, where the primal parents Adam and Eve partook of a certain dualistic knowledge from their previous pristine, higher existence when they communed with God. From this, the fall occurred which severed the link between man and God. We can also see this dualism in Genesis, where God formed man from earth and then breathed into him the spirit of life. In other variations of this story, the Ophites claimed that Sophia was the one that really blew the spirit of life into Adam, through YHWH/Elohim. So, man is a combination of profane matter and Divine Spirit. Moreover man is the arena of an internal strife between the evil instinct (in Hebrew: Yetzer-hara) and the good instinct (Yetzer-hatov) which reflects this knowledge of good and evil. It also reflects the Platonic idea that the body is the tomb for the soul was adopted by many groups, and not just the Gnostics. In the Kabbalah, the Tikkunei Hazohar states: “A king’s [God’s] spirit is imprisoned in the tresses of the mind.”

Paul in Romans, also claimed a kind of patent dualism that the later Gnostic figure-heads and schools would subscribe too and build upon in that the spirit of Truth was the prisoner of history, space and time belonging to the reality of the rulers:

I find that a law, when I would do good, evil is present with me. For I delight in the law of God after the inward man;  But I see another law in my members, warring against the law of my mind, and bringing me into captivity to the law of sin, which is in my members. O wretched man that I am! Who shall deliver me from this body of death? I thank God through Jesus Christ our Lord. So then with the mind I myself serve the law of God; but with the flesh the law of sin.

This dualism is reflected in both man and the cosmos like the radical stripe of Marcion, Manes and Empedocles. Man is mortal in his body, but immortal in his divine spirit. Man is the battleground in which angels and demons duke it out. Man is the microcosm reflecting the macro-cosmos of creation. In Gnosticism, dualism was only used to emphasize the transcendental nature of God rather than the traditional Zoroastrian view that there two equal, separate forces in a constant state of struggle and warfare. And so, the Gnostics attempted to explain that evil was a consequence of this spiritual descent into matter and the mundane.

As Ray Embry writes in Marcion: Possible Progenitor of Three Famous Christian Communities: Baptists, Catholics, Gnostics, this Gnostic conception of the spiritual fall from the One still reflects a sort of Mosaic monotheism as opposed to the simple dualism of Marcion, in which he thought that there was an Unknown God superior to the inferior creator god.

All Gnostic theologies seemingly spring forth as ideological children born from the ancient Mosaic idea about an inviolable monotheism. This form of theism sees everything (no matter what) as ultimately deriving from a single Creator. Working within this rigid model of monism, the Judaistic or Mosaic theoreticians could only think in a linear or vertical fashion, where our world lies on one end, while an independent Father of Light stands on the other.

Much like how the Old Testament records this primeval struggle between the upper-light and the lower-darkness, theological tenants were also hotly debated and meted out between many Christian sects—both being of an Orthodox persuasion and a heretical one. Further evidence indicates that the original Christians were Gnostics, not literalists or fundamentalists. The Gnostics preached the Good News of Gnosis which advocated the liberation of every soul. The Orthodox Church Fathers, however, taught that the scriptures were historical and literal. “True knowledge” for Irenaeus (an attack on the Gnostic idea of salvation through knowledge) comes in the Apostolic Tradition, which comes through the succession of Bishops, which is Catholic and not sectarian:

True knowledge is [that which consists in] the doctrine of the apostles, and the ancient constitution of the Church throughout all the world, and the distinctive manifestation of the body of Christ according to the successions of the bishops, by which they have handed down that Church which exists in every place, and has come even unto us, being guarded and preserved without any forging of Scriptures, by a very complete system of doctrine...(4.33.1-9)

To Irenaeus, salvation was a more or less an ecclesiastical matter rather than an individual’s sovereign right to achieve the Great Work outside of demiurgical iron manacles of organized religion. To theologans like Irenaeus, the Gnostics were simply false prophets and schismatics. The Church Fathers along with the newly created Roman Church eventually took religious intolerance to undreamed of levels, eventually destroying all forms of religion (other than their very narrow version) that they could get there hands on as recorded in Eusebius’ Life of Constantine, 3:64, 65.

The Gnostics rivaled the emerging Catholic groups among other groups like the Jewish Christians and the Marcionites and were just as determined as their Catholic opponents to legitimize their views in any way possible. It became of utmost importance for Catholic apologists to demonstrate that Gnosticism was an erroneous doctrine of Christian heresy, and is founded or inspired by those who opposed the apostles themselves. Irenaeus taught that Simon Magus was the father of all Gnostic heresy and the Simonians of his own day claimed him as founder, just as St. Paul was the “apostle of the heretics”, as per Tertullian.

The aim of Gnosis is simple: the extraction or resurrection of the spiritual man–the spark of the “alien” Divinity imprisoned in the jail cell of spiritual death and ignorance. Any means to reach liberation and freedom from the temporal fetters of matter, from the vicissitudes of history, the turpitude of daily routines, the pain and suffering that is experienced by the less fortunate (which has always been the vast majority of the human race) to the pure transcendental good father was acceptable. Asceticism or libertinism, and every variation in between was practiced. For a savior figure like Simon Magus to redeem his consort Helen, fallen into whoredom, he must roll with her in the mires of depravity. He, like Jesus had to put on the appearance of a man, although humanity wasn’t his original nature. The Savior or Gnostic must also practice sacred deceit: He must disguise himself as an adherent to the Demiurge and the powers that rule the world, to be admitted to his domain, in order to save the souls, the sparks of Divinity, exiled and stranded as ship-wrecked sailors of ascension.


The 33° Freemasonic author Albert Pike has many fascinating things to say in his massive tome, On Morals and Dogma, especially in the following excerpt from Morals and Dogma, XXX. Knight Kodash. Pike basically admits that the Masonic lozenges or “checker board” symbolism so prominent in Masonic temples actually symbolizes the radical dualism proposed by Zoroaster and Mani (or Manes).

For the Johannism of the Adepts was the Kabalah of the earlier Gnostics, degenerating afterward into those heretical forms which Gnosticism developed, so that even Manes had his followers among them. Many adopted his doctrines of the two Principles, the recollection of which is perpetuated by the handle of the dagger and the tesserated pavement or floor of the Lodge, stupidly called “the Indented Tessel,” and represented by great hanging tassels, when it really means a tesserated floor (from the Latin tessera) of white and black lozenges, with a necessarily denticulated or indented border or edging. And wherever, in the higher Degrees, the two colors white and black, are in juxtaposition, the two Principles of Zoroaster and Manes are alluded to. With others the doctrine became a mystic Pantheism, descended from that of the Brahmins, and even pushed to an idolatry of Nature and hatred of every revealed dogma.


Now I am going to speaking on a personal level from here on out. I was inspired by a conversation with a friend of mine and this is what I think. Basically, what the old Hermetic alchemists were saying is that God is the only thing that’s truly real, and He’s present everywhere, or at least fragments or evidence of his existence. Under the rock and in the wood, like the Gospel of Thomas says. What we see with our senses is basically a shadow. It’s not real, in an ontological sense. This is what Benjamin Walker is getting at when he writes in Gnosticism: It’s Influence and History (p. 37):

The exercise of free will requires an area for its operation, and this resulted in certain catastrophic consequences. Where the will of the Father was withdrawn, the will of the opposing archons prevailed. Where the writ of his goodness did not run, evil emerged. Where his spirit was removed, matter came forth. Where his light was withdrawn, darkness supervened. Instead of love and providence, there was now law and fatality. And where there had been life, there was now death.

Yet it must be remembered that nothing can have existence without God, and even when God is apparently absent, his erstwhile presence has left its permanent impress. The Gospel of Truth speaks of this residual presence of God even after his withdrawal, as the footprint-trace ([ichnos) of the Father’s will. Basilides too emphasized the essential presence of God in all circumstances and situations, when he said that the empty place resulting from God’s withdrawal did not ever cease to show traces of the divine brightness. The vacated place retained the ‘flavour’ of the Father, just as a bowl containing sweet smelling unguent retains the fragrance even after the bowl has been completely emptied.

Giordarno Bruno once said that the since God is infinite, the universe must also be infinite, as God’s manifest form. I also read a recent article that some scientists now question the big bang, and think that the universe may have always been here, which if the case, Bruno was right all along. But from a theurgical perspective, which is more holistic in the view that everything is compromised of some sort of spiritual nature, and that everything in existence exists for some grand purpose. Even evil has some sort of necessary function or reason for being. I guess I’ve been influenced by Hermetic monism.

I’m choosing to look at it this way because radical dualism has become highly disturbing to me as of late. The thought that evil exists as some counter deity and functions independently with no intended purpose from the good is a very grim prospect. I have to believe there is a reason for everything now. The science fiction author Philip K. Dick had the same issue. At times, he would be a radical dualist, but then it would become so disturbing to him that he would adopt a more monistic worldview. The Hypostasis of the Archons sort of reflects this more monistic (in its own contradictory pluralistic sense) way of looking at things.

The rulers laid plans and said, “Come, let us create a man that will be soil from the earth.” They modeled their creature as one wholly of the earth. Now the rulers […] body […] they have […] female […] is […] with the face of a beast. They had taken some soil from the earth and modeled their man after their body and after the image of God that had appeared to them in the waters. They said, “Come, let us lay hold of it by means of the form that we have modeled, so that it may see its male counterpart […], and we may seize it with the form that we have modeled” – not understanding the force of God, because of their powerlessness. And he breathed into his face; and the man came to have a soul (and remained) upon the ground many days. But they could not make him arise because of their powerlessness. Like storm winds they persisted (in blowing), that they might try to capture that image, which had appeared to them in the waters. And they did not know the identity of its power. Now all these things came to pass by the will of the father of the entirety.

And again it says:

Now when Yaldabaoth saw him (Sabaoth) in this great splendor and at this height, he envied him; and the envy became an androgynous product, and this was the origin of envy. And envy engendered death; and death engendered his offspring and gave each of them charge of its heaven; and all the heavens of chaos became full of their multitudes. But it was by the will of the father of the entirety that they all came into being – after the pattern of all the things above – so that the sum of chaos might be attained.

So from the Sethian perspective, even the demiurge and the archons were created for a reason which accounts for a more nuanced Hermetic view that isn’t as dualistic as many consider Gnosticism to be. Both radical dualism and radical monism can be taken to extreme conclusions. The more moderate approach of the Sethians and the Hermetists is the most rational, out of these perspectives. And yet, radical and moderate dualism are just two different ways of looking at the same thing. Both are true and compatible with one another. It just depends on whether you’re going to focus on the light or the dark. New Agers represent the radical monism worldview. They’re so hyper-focused on the positive that they totally reject the influence of evil in the world and are thus totally exposed to demonic influence and deception. It’s like these New Agers who channel random spirits and believe all the wacky BS that comes along with their messages about our beloved space brothers, aliens, ascension into the fourth dimension and such.


There is a good part in the novel, A Scanner Darkly where Philip K Dick muses on radical and moderate dualism. He writes as Bob Arctor about how he suspects that radical dualism may be true, but he hopes that it isn’t.

“What does a scanner see? Into the head? Down into the heart? Does it see into me? Into us? Clearly or darkly? I hope it sees clearly because I can’t any longer see into myself. I see only murk. I hope for everyone’s sake the scanners do better, because if the scanner sees only darkly the way I do, then I’m cursed and cursed again.”

I see the devil as a sort of tool of God. He’s evil and in rebellion, but God secretly uses him to do his will. Kind of how the Valentinians saw the demiurge as well as the Ophites with Sophia and Ialdabaoth. Holism is inherent to natural and sympathetic magic. Tantra also encompasses holism as well. Everything in nature exists for some specific purpose and is imbued with a spiritual nature that can be tapped into through occult knowledge. The Gospel of Philip tells us this exactly:

“The saints are served by evil powers, for they are blinded by the Holy Spirit into thinking that they are serving an (ordinary) man whenever they do so for the saints. Because of this, a disciple asked the Lord one day for something of this world. He said to him, ‘Ask your mother, and she will give you of the things which are another’s.'”

So what we call the Devil and his legions of demons from hell would be the anarchists of the cosmic hierarchy. They’re chaotic and in rebellion to God’s will, but God’s providential scheme already accounted for the faults of free will before it was even enacted. Or maybe Empedocles and Marcion were right along to say that there were two opposing principles from the beginning of creation or that this dualism is somehow an aberration or deviation from an original unity of existence. At this point, I am open to any of these possibilities. 

Addendum – As it turns out, Hippolytus in Refutation (Book VI. 6), also claims that Simon Magus is heavily inspired by Empedocles. Marcion is simply continuing in Simon’s tradition through the guise of Paul:

Simon denominates in the Great Announcement a perfect intelligible (entity), after such a mode, that each of those things which, existing indefinitely, may be infinitely comprehended, both speaks, and understands, and acts in such a manner as Empedocles speaks of:—

For earth, indeed, by earth we see, and water by water,
And air divine by air, and fire fierce by fire,
And love by love, and also strife by gloomy strife.

Saint Catherine, Norea and the Mother of Dragons

The Youtube clip posted above is taken from Game of Thrones by George R.R. Martin and HBO. It is probably one of my personal favorite shows and book series. It features one of the principal characters, Daenerys Targaryen speaking with another popular character, Tyrion Lannister. The conversation between the two takes dips into a Gnostic flavor when Daenerys starts talking about “breaking the wheel,” a metaphor for all of the “Houses” in Westeros all vying for the throne forged of the swords of defeated enemies. Game of Thrones is packed with with a rich lore found in the history and many religions of Westeros and they all carry their own smidgen of gnosis as well, including that of Melisandre, who spreads the faith of the “Lord of Light,” or the “Red God,” being R’hllor, who uses various deceptive and violent methods to spread “the one true faith” across the continent of Westeros, including blood magic, sex rituals, and human sacrifice. It seems as though this religious worldview is a strange mix of Zoroastrian and Manichaean/Cathar beliefs. And yet there is reason to believe this “Lord of Light” is in reality a fiery demon who is in opposition with an even worse demon…

The idea that there can be multiple sources of evil is an interesting one. Some exorcists, such as Malachi Martin and Gabriele Amorth, have said that Lucifer and Satan are separate entities. In this view, Lucifer is the original fallen angel, the light-bringer, whose nature fell through pride and envy, and Satan is considered among the third of the angels in heaven who followed Lucifer and embodies death and destruction, the dragon of Revelation who fought Michael and his angels. Perhaps this is why the Bible makes a distinction between the “spirits of wickedness in the heavenly places” (Ephesians 6:12) and the “beast, that ascendeth out of the abyss” (Revelation 11:17). Following this categorization, R’hllor could be considered a Luciferian being, giving the false appearance of light and divinity, while the Great Other embodies a satanic nature of chaos and annihilation. In Westeros, this false dualism attracts followers to one demon, out of fear for the other.

But, this won’t be an in-depth analysis of the larger metaphysical scheme we see in Game of Thrones, but rather an analysis of some of the archetypes that a very popular character, Daenerys Targaryen, touches on. Her character starts off as a timid and submissive to her brother Viserys, who is a bit of a violent sociopath, prone to mood swings and jealousy. Ever since she got shacked up with Khal Drogo, something changed, and become a strong, independent and courageous chick who would adopt 3 baby dragons as she stands naked and triumphant in the morning light, when she emerges out of the ashes of a funeral pyre. And all of this would serve as a precedent for where she is now in the books and in the show. Also notice that the dragons in the show and the books aren’t depicted as any force for evil but as a force of nature and intelligent “fire made flesh.” They just are.

Her character has a strong resemblance to three different figures in Christian and Gnostic lore. These include Saint Catherine of Alexandria, Hypatia, and Norea from Sethian Gnostic literature. Now let’s get started shall we?


Saint Catherine of Alexandria, virgin and martyr of the third and fourth century is said to be a patroness (or goddess) of philosophers and evangelists. The Orthodox Church celebrates her feast day on November 25th. It is said that Catherine was born to a noble family of Alexandria but was converted to the faith. The oldest reference to this fourth century martyr comes from a seventh century Syrian liturgical text from the Byzantine Emperor Basil II who died in 886. In this she is called Aikaterine, and the report runs as follows:

“The martyr Aikaterine was the daughter of a rich and noble prince of Alexandria. She was very beautiful, and being at the same time highly talented, she devoted herself to Greek literature as well as to the study of the languages of all nations, and so she became wise and learned. And it happened that the Greeks held a festival in honor of their idols; and seeing the slaughter of animals, she was so greatly moved that she went to the King Maximinus and expostulated with him in these words: ‘Why hast thou left the living God to worship lifeless idols?’ But the Emperor caused her to be thrown into prison, and to be punished severely. He then ordered fifty orators to be brought, and bade them to reason with Aikaterine, and confute her, threatening to burn them all if they should fail to overpower her. The orators, however, when they saw themselves vanquished, received baptism, and were burnt forthwith, while she was beheaded.”

Because of the long gap between the time of her martyrdom and the first written testimony, many scholars and authorities have concluded that St. Catherine never existed, such as the Vatican did in 1969 (though she was restored in 2002). Some have even postulated that her story is an allegory, like many scenes from the lives of various saints, such as the story of St. Christopher (Christ-bearer) who is said to have carried the infant Jesus on his shoulder, or the story of St. George who is said to have slain a dragon to save a princess. And it all stands with good reason.

Interestingly, the original Greek form of the name Αικατερινη (Aikaterine) or Εκατερινη (Ekaterine) is etymologically very obscure and much argued over. The name does not seem to be rooted in any Greek word, although it has been said to derive from the words αει (aei) which means “ever” and καθαρος (katharos) which means “pure”. What we do know is that this name never appears before it is associated with Saint Catherine of Alexandria.


One of the more interesting theories is that the story of St. Catherine is based on the life of Hypatia, a Neoplatonist philosopher from Alexandria who was admired by both pagans and Christians for her virtue and learning. She also was a woman who dedicated her life to virginity in Alexandria for the sake of her learning, and was brutally murdered in 415 by a group of Christian monks primarily for political reasons. It is not difficult to see the parallels between the lives of St. Catherine and Hypatia, for the little we know of both, they may be the same figure. However, a case can be made that they are indeed two different persons.


We can also see that also St. Catherine represents an aspect of the Divine Mother, who both in the Western and in the Eastern Gnosis has two modes, called by the Indians Avidyâ Mâyâ (Mâyâ of ignorance) and Vidyâ Mâyâ (Mâyâ of Knowledge, that is Gnosis or Jnâna) respectively. The first one (Mary) carries the divine Spark down to the natural world; the second one (St. Catherine) takes the Spark, made free from the schêma (samsâra), upwards to God. This schema is symbolized as the wheel that Saint Catherine and Daenerys Targaryen seek to break. That is why “Mary” finds herself on the left side, on the descending arc, while “St. Catherine” (Greek katharà, “pure”, wherefore the white garment next to her) is on the ascending arc. Her sword is the one that cuts the bonds keeping the Soul chained to the wheel of the samsâra. In fact, according to the legend, St. Catherine freed herself from the wheel to which she had been bound. And we know that, Gnostically viewed, the Resurrection is the liberation from that wheel. It is therefore clear that the circular movement in the picture represents the whole cycle of the Soul’s history, from the “fall” into the deadly (coffin) samsâra to the final liberation therefrom.

The sacrificial blood of the Savior descends from the Ecce Homo (Anthropos) in parallel with the Pneumatic Seed plunging into the Psychic Waters. This means that the divine compassion accompanies the soul in her descent. Projecting Himself into the temporal order the Savior (the Antaryâmin, the “Inner Ruler” of the Hindu Gnosis) remains united with the Soul in all her vicissitudes, suffering with her, saving her, again with her ascending to God. It is this Presence of the Inner Savior in the Soul that promises, makes possible, and ensures the actuation in the Soul of the eternal Plan of Salvation.

The “blood” of the divine Sacrifice descends to impart eternal Life (Aiônios Zöê), while the burden of all kind of suffering is taken up by the Crucified One, and here is the spunge full of a bitter liquid carried upward by the reed which not by chance leaves the wheel of the samsâra to reach the Cross. But the reed, situated on the right side, parallel to St. Catherine, means also that the redeemed ones, the liberated Souls, are at one with the Christ also in the work of salvation: they too take upon themselves the suffering of all those that still wander in the world of Death.

This brings us to the letter H, as the number of H in the Jewish and Simple Gematria equals 8. According to John 20:26, Jesus showed His wounds to Thomas after eight days. The number 8 means the Ogdoad (the eight Aeons from the Father-Mother to the Anthröpos-Ekklësìa), and here two quotations from the Excerpta ex Theodoto are highly relevant:

Whoever is generated by the Mother (the Child in Mary’s arms) is lead to Death (the coffin)and the world; but whoever is regenerated by the Christ is transferred to Life, within the Ogdoad (80,1);

The Rest (“repose”) of the Pneumatics takes place in the Lord’s Day, in the Ogdoad (63,1).

This is the “Place of Rest” (888). The days of the week are seven, and the seventh is popularly the Lord’s Day or the Sabbath. The eighth day does not belong to the temporal series of the common days: it is beyond time, and being the sum of  7+1  has a meaning well discerned in the passage see in The Gospel of Truth, which describes salvation of the hundredth (99+1) sheep, the lost one. This unity is identified with the Sabbath, which signifies the new life both of the Christian revelation and the pnuematic rebirth:

He is the shepherd who left behind the ninety-nine sheep which had not strayed and went in search of that one which was lost. He rejoiced when he had found it. For ninety-nine is a number of the left hand, which holds it. The moment he finds the one, however, the whole number is transferred to the right hand. Thus it is with him who lacks the one, that is, the entire right hand which attracts that in which it is deficient, seizes it from the left side and transfers it to the right. In this way, then, the number becomes one hundred. This number signifies the Father.

He labored even on the Sabbath for the sheep which he found fallen into the pit. He saved the life of that sheep, bringing it up from the pit in order that you may understand fully what that Sabbath is, you who possess full understanding. It is a day in which it is not fitting that salvation be idle, so that you may speak of that heavenly day which has no night and of the sun which does not set because it is perfect. Say then in your heart that you are this perfect day and that in you the light which does not fail dwells.

We also find some numbers tied with 8 in the Epistle of Barnabas, (XV, 7-8), when it states thusly:

… the beginning of the eighth day, that is the beginning of a new world. Therefore we celebrate with joy the eighth day, when also Jesus rose from the dead…”.

When one looks at the banner for the House Targaryen, one finds three red dragon heads.


This likely invokes imagery of the dragon one finds in Revelation. But, there is deeper symbolism embedded in the banner as some think that the three heads represent the “Prince that was Promised,” or the “Lightbringer” that many characters in Game of Thrones of mentioned here and there. Fire and Blood is also symbolic for the baptism of fire mentioned in Luke by Jesus 12:489. This is certainly not arbitrary, for the three heads represent the three souls enveloping the divine Spark or Spirit in the Valentinian Gnosis: the Hylic or earthy (the dark color), the Psychic (red), and the Pneumatic soul (white). In the Excerpta we read in fact that the Pneumatics wear their Souls as garments until the Completion” (63,1) and that “after laying them down … enter the Bridal Chamber within the Limit” (64).

The three colours of the garments have an interesting Vedic parallel. The Divine Mother, who provides the Spirit with its various psychical bodies or souls, is thus described in the Shvetâshvatara Upanishad, IV, 5:

“There is one Woman with three colors–red, white and black–from Whom a numerous progeny issues, having Her same nature.”

The three colors represent here the three modes of the “Woman” in Her manifestations: inertia-reaction-materiality (tamas, black), action-energy-passion (rajas, red), and harmony-equilibrium-spirituality (sattva, white). No wonder therefore that the Indian Gnosis is perfectly parallel with the Western one in the Bible and in the arch-heretics, in grouping the human beings in three classes: the Tamasic (Hylic), the Rajasic (Psychic) and the Sattvic (Pneumatic) ones.


Please notice that in the picture the three colors follow the right order: materiality (raja) on the left, after the descent, and spirituality at the top, as the premise to the ascension. On a smaller scale, this is also the cycle of each individual life: the taking a body (black) at birth on the left, then the lifespan as the raja (red) and finally the death (white) on the top.

Fire Woman

Finally, there is also Norea. Norea appears in a few texts found in the Nag Hammadi Codices. Norea in Aramaic means “fiery.” Some think that Norea is related to Naamah as the wife of Noah and sometimes the sister of Tubal-Cain. In Jewish Kabbalistic legends, we see that Naamah is a bit of a naughty girl since she walks about stark naked all over the place and this inflames the lusts of the angels. Because of her striking beauty, Naamah was able to seduce the angels Shemyaza and Azazel. She also produced a demon Asmodeus from her sexual liaisons with the angel Shamdan. Namaah was simply living up to her lineage being descended from Cain, which after all was the son of the Devil, Samael, according to the Palestinian Targam, the Talmud and the Midrash. The Gospel of Philip and the Apocryphon of John make similar claims as well.

First, she appears in the Hypostasis of the Archons, in which she is depicted as the virgin daughter of Eve and also plays a large role in Noah’s Flood. When Noah builds the ark, she attempts to board it, and when she is refused by Noah, she blows against the ark and destroys it with fire! When the wicked creator god, Ialdabaoth and his archons attempt to seduce her, as they attempted to seduce Eve, Norea cries out for help. Eleleth, one of the heavenly Illuminators, appears to her. Norea represent incorruptibility in this world, a being not created by the archons and a woman of heavenly origin. She defies the archons and calls to the God of the entirety to protect her from their advances. An angel comes down–Eleleth, sagacity–and begins to explain the allegory.

A veil exists between the world above and the realms that are below; and shadow came into being beneath the veil; and that shadow became matter; and that shadow was projected apart.

The Thought of Norea acts more like a liturgical prayer with Norea crying out to heaven and receiving aid from the “four heavenly helpers,” who are the Gnostic Illuminators sent from the Pleroma, which matches the Hypostasis of the Archons account. Both Irenaeus and Epiphanius mention Norea in the Ophite and Sethian accounts of creation in their long treatises against the heretics. Irenaeus calls Norea Seth’s sister and in Epiphanius, Norea is Seth’s wife.


We are introduced to another character, by the name of Zoe, who appears to be a stern female power of judgement and sends an angel of fire against Ialdabaoth:

And Zoe (Life), the daughter of Pistis Sophia, cried out and said to him, “You are mistaken, Sakla!” – for which the alternative name is Yaltabaoth. She breathed into his face, and her breath became a fiery angel for her; and that angel bound Yaldabaoth and cast him down into Tartaros below the abyss.

So, what am I exactly saying? Did George R.R. Martin purposefully place in these Gnostic characters and concepts in his books to help shape his own? I doubt it. But one can’t escape the parallels between these modern fantasy fiction and ancient religious texts of the Sethians, not to mention what I’ve explained with St. Catherine and Hypatia. I am certain that Martin gleaned a lot of inspiration from the Cathars for the foreign religion of the “Lord of Light,” however. I guess it’s true what they say; one can’t escape the pervasive influence of the collective unconscious and this is the place where one may forge their own destiny and reality through a refined and calm mind but yet it ready to take what is his with “fire and blood.”


Forbidden Gnosis In Prometheus, Lucifer and Icarus

Myth has always presented a problem of meaning and interpretation, and a history of controversy exits over its value that can be approached from a number of viewpoints. In general, it is a narrative that describes and portrays in symbolic language the origin of the basic elements and assumptions of a culture. However, because of its all-encompassing nature, myth can illuminate many aspects of individual and cultural life. While many have written on the subjects I am about to explore, I have yet to find anyone that has crossed referenced this points, in the way I will construct here.


The same can be said for the Greek myth concerning the famous Athenian Icarus and his father Daedalus, the famous architect, inventor, and craftsman. This story is found in Ovid’s Metamorphoses VIII:183-235. Because he murdered his sister’s son Perdix in fear that the boy’s talent might surpass his own, he had to flee to Crete. He began to work at the court of King Minos and Queen Pasiphae, in the magnificent palace of Knosos. There he constructed a wooden cow for the queen to satisfy her amorous longings for a beautiful white bull and by which she became pregnant with the Minotaur. When the Minotaur was born, Daedalus built the Labyrinth to contain the blood-thirsty, monstrous half-man, half-bull. Later, Minos shut Daedalus and his son Icarus into the Labyrinth. To escape, Daedalus built wings for himself and Icarus.

Icarus and his father Daedalus escape from the tower of their island prison in Crete with wings fashioned of wax. Despite his father’s warning, Icarus becomes enamored of his new found power and of the beauty of the Sun, he flies up to the light (and heat), his wing melt, and he falls to his death and drowns in the sea. The wiser and more restrained Daedalus keeps his flight balanced between heaven and earth, thus succeeding in escape from bondage. The Greeks were very aware of the temptation of Lucifer–in most of their tales of tragedy, “hubris” or overweening pride was the source of a hero’s downfall.

Like Icarus, the archangel Lucifer is said to have fallen because of his pride and vanity over his own beauty and power, much like the myth of Narcissus. This supreme spirit of evil who was once radiant, but who because of his sin of pride fell from heaven into darkness and became Satan, saying: “Non serviam: I will not serve,” and thus brought upon himself the everlasting wrath of God. There is also a Gnostic sensibility in this story. To fall from spirit to matter, to bring radiance to dull earth, is a creative act.

The name Lucifer is Latin for “bearer of the Light”. The typical depiction of Lucifer as a slithering manifestation of evil is hard to reconcile with the meaning of the name. Lucifer represents a force that can combine beauty and its logical conclusion if gone too far to extreme decadence, hence to evil. Like in the Apocalypse of Moses, Lucifer, in the form of a serpent, offered the gift of knowledge to Adam and Eve. By their eating of the fruit of the Tree of Knowledge, Lucifer promised that they would “be like God, knowing good and evil”. Like Icarus, they were not yet prepared for such a gift and ignoring warnings to the contrary by God, they accepted it and fell from Paradise. In this example it should be noted that the gift of knowledge, in and of itself is not evil, as many Orthodox theologians have claimed in their authoritarian interpretation.

Satan in his Original Glory: 'Thou wast Perfect till Iniquity was Found in Thee' circa 1805 William Blake 1757-1827 Presented by the executors of W. Graham Robertson through the Art Fund 1949

Satan in his Original Glory: ‘Thou wast Perfect till Iniquity was Found in Thee’ circa 1805 William Blake 1757-1827 Presented by the executors of W. Graham Robertson through the Art Fund 1949

In Isaiah 14:12-17 (NJKV), we find the story of Lucifer’s fall from grace. Many theologians however stresses Lucifer isn’t a name of a rebellious angel, but rather a rebellious king of Babylon. However, it is a wonder how a mere mortal king can exalt himself “above the stars of God”.

12 “How you are fallen from heaven,
O Lucifer, son of the morning!
How you are cut down to the ground,
You who weakened the nations!
13 For you have said in your heart:
‘I will ascend into heaven,
I will exalt my throne above the stars of God;
I will also sit on the mount of the congregation
On the farthest sides of the north;
14 I will ascend above the heights of the clouds,
I will be like the Most High.’
15 Yet you shall be brought down to Sheol,
To the lowest depths of the Pit.

16 “Those who see you will gaze at you,
And consider you, saying:
Is this the man who made the earth tremble,
Who shook kingdoms,
17 Who made the world as a wilderness
And destroyed its cities,
Who did not open the house of his prisoners?’

The King of Babylon called himself the “Day-Star,” a name for the planet Venus, the first planet or star seen in the morning just before the sun rises, hence the King was also called “son of the morning.” Venus is the Roman name for the Greek goddess of love, Aphrodite. She has also has many similarities with the Gnostic Sophia, Eve, and Helena of the Illiad as well but we will have to address this further in a future post.

King Louis XIV of France was called the “Sun King,” carrying on this tradition of kings associating themselves with solar and stellar titles. So the fall of the King of Babylon was Isaiah’s way of putting him in his place by sarcastically observing in effect: “OK, so you think you are the Day Star of Heaven and can go beyond the stars of God, you think you’re so high and mighty, well you got another thing coming bitch!”

The Church Father Origen in De Principiis (Book 1, Chapter 5, verse 5), makes an interesting commentary on this passage.

Most evidently by these words is he shown to have fallen from heaven, who formerly was Lucifer, and who used to arise in the morning. For if, as some think, he was a nature of darkness, how is Lucifer said to have existed before? Or how could he arise in the morning, who had in himself nothing of the light? Nay, even the Saviour Himself teaches us, saying of the devil, Behold, I see Satan fallen from heaven like lightning. For at one time he was light. Moreover our Lord, who is the truth, compared the power of His own glorious advent to lightning, in the words, For as the lightning shines from the height of heaven even to its height again, so will the coming of the Son of man be. And notwithstanding He compares him to lightning, and says that he fell from heaven, that He might show by this that he had been at one time in heaven, and had had a place among the saints, and had enjoyed a share in that light in which all the saints participate, by which they are made angels of light, and by which the apostles are termed by the Lord the light of the world.

Many of pointed out that in the Book of Revelation of St. John, Christ refers to himself as “the bright and morning star,” that is, Lucifer. And in the Gospel of John (8:12) it reads:

When Jesus spoke again to the people, he said, “I am the light of the world. Whoever follows me will never walk in darkness, but will have the light of life.”

The infamous Theosophist Helena Blavatsky often identified Christ with Prometheus and Lucifer, who brought fire, light and knowledge to humanity and were all considered savior figures. In The Pillars of Tubal-Cain by Nigel Jackson and Michael Howard, they too also compare Lucifer with that of Jesus Christ’s sacrifice on the Cross with a Gnostic sensibility and Grail mythos thrown in for good measure.

Esoteric tradition teaches us that until we find the Grail, and it should be clearly understood that it is not a physical object in this time-space continuum, Lucifer must play out his role as the sacrificial king. He is doomed to incarnate in a ‘cloak of flesh’ as an avatar for the human race and pay the ultimate price as a scapegoat on their behalf. This is the ultimate sacrifice for being the light-bearer who brought down from Heaven the illumination of Gnostic wisdom and the primal fire of creativity. Lucifer eternally dies and is reborn to save humanity of itself. As the human race progresses spiritually so he can slowly ascend the Ladder of Lights back to the realm of the Gods beyond the Pole Star. He is the Lord of the Morning Star and the Lux Mundi (Light of the World) whose rebirth from darkness we celebrate every year at the winter solstice. (pg. 68-69)

In Greek mythology, Prometheus, one of the Titans, is known as the friend and benefactor of humanity. He and his brother Epimetheus were given the task of creating humanity and providing humans and all the animals on earth with the endowments they would need to survive. When it came time to create a being who was to be superior to all living creatures, Prometheus (whose name means “afterthought”) took over the task of creation. To make humans superior to animals, he fashioned them in nobler form and enabled them to walk upright. He went up to heaven and lit a torch with fire from the sun.


The gift of fire (symbolic of wisdom or knowledge) that he gave to humanity was more valuable than the gods intended and because of his actions Prometheus incurred the wrath of Zeus. For this transgression, Zeus had him chained to a rock in the Caucasus mountains, where he was constantly preyed upon by an eagle. Finally he was freed by the hero Hercules, who slew the eagle. John Milton’s depiction of Satan in Paradise Lost seems to combine both Lucifer and Prometheus into one figure as a tragic hero.


We can also see similar ideas expressed in the Book of Enoch, which explains what was no doubt the popular understanding of the fall of the angels and its disastrous results, being the Deluge. Two hundred angels took wives of the daughters of men, and their offspring were giants three thousand yards in height. These giants having consumed the food of mankind, began to devour men and each other, whose cries were brought to the attention of YHWH by his angels, including Michael, Gabriel, Raphael and Uriel. The Rape of the Sabine Women accounts found in Livy, Plutarch and Dionysius of Halicarnassus, also seem to echo the Enochian tales of angels and their sexual escapades with their human female concubines.


In Roman legend, Romulus forcibly carries off the Sabine or Latin women to be provided as wives to his men at the new settlement of Rome. The city had just been founded by Romulus (Cain), and the Romans wish to ensure the future prosperity of their young nation. Because of the lack of women to provide the necessary offspring, they plan a mass abduction, which is actually synonymous with the term “rape”. With this in mind, they invite the neighboring Sabines to a feast during which they seize the women for themselves and drive off the men. These same men return to attack Rome for revenge, but the conflict is resolved thanks to their Sabine women, who stand between their brothers and their husbands in reconciliation to create peace.

And on another level, it is basically the symbolic reenactment of Zeus and the pantheon of Olympian gods descending to the earth to have licentious sex and copulation with a variety of women as well as goddesses like Aphrodite, Demeter, Gaia, etc. The story of the Sabine women describes the capture of women from neighboring cities in order to secure Rome’s future. In any case, these Enochian texts fill in the bare bone details of Genesis 6, with fantastic detail, and in particular giving long lists of the fallen angels and their ministrations and gifts of knowledge to men. Chapter 8 tells us that:

1 And Azazel taught men to make swords, and knives, and shields, and breastplates, and made known to them the metals of the earth and the art of working them, and bracelets, and ornaments, and the use of antimony, and the beautifying of the eyelids, and all kinds of costly stones, and all 2 colouring tinctures. And there arose much godlessness, and they committed fornication, and they 3 were led astray, and became corrupt in all their ways. Semjaza taught enchantments, and root-cuttings, ‘Armaros the resolving of enchantments, Baraqijal (taught) astrology, Kokabel the constellations, Ezeqeel the knowledge of the clouds, Araqiel the signs of the earth, Shamsiel the signs of the sun, and Sariel the course of the moon. And as men perished, they cried, and their cry went up to heaven . . .

The same thing happens in Chapter 69, when it says:

4 The name of the first Jeqon: that is, the one who led astray [all] the sons of God, and brought them 5 down to the earth, and led them astray through the daughters of men. And the second was named Asbeel: he imparted to the holy sons of God evil counsel, and led them astray so that they defiled 6 their bodies with the daughters of men. And the third was named Gadreel: he it is who showed the children of men all the blows of death, and he led astray Eve, and showed [the weapons of death to the sons of men] the shield and the coat of mail, and the sword for battle, and all the weapons 7 of death to the children of men.

And from his hand they have proceeded against those who dwell 8 on the earth from that day and for evermore. And the fourth was named Penemue: he taught the9 children of men the bitter and the sweet, and he taught them all the secrets of their wisdom. And he instructed mankind in writing with ink and paper, and thereby many sinned from eternity to10 eternity and until this day. For men were not created for such a purpose, to give confirmation 11 to their good faith with pen and ink. For men were created exactly like the angels, to the intent that they should continue pure and righteous, and death, which destroys everything, could not have taken hold of them, but through this their knowledge they are perishing, and through this power12 it is consuming me.

This list is practically identical with that which Prometheus gives his services to humanity, as explained in Aeschylus’ ancient play, Prometheus Bound:

They lived deep within dark caves, and swarmed the earth like throngs of ants. They could not recognize the signs of winter, nor spring with its flowers, nor fruit-laden summer, so they did everything without any rational plan, until I taught them to read the risings of stars and their settings, which up to now they ignored. I gave them numbers, that knowledge most to be prized, and the art of writing words to help memory, the mother of all the muses. I first yoked beasts and made them work so they could relieve Man’s back of his heaviest burdens. I harnessed horses to the chariot and made them respond to reins, a delight for the wealthy. It was me who invented the ship with sails that wanders the sea, a chariot for sailors. All this, to my own misery, I dared to invent and pass on to Man, but for all my cleverness I could devise no escape from my present suffering.

Hear the rest and you will be even more amazed at the arts and inventions I devised. The greatest was this: before, 44 if a man fell sick, there was no remedy— nothing, no pill, ointment, nor drink—and without 480 drugs they wasted away. I showed them how to mix healing medicines that could ward off all diseases. I also gave them skills so that they could predict the future: I showed them which dreams were true; how to interpret strange voices and sayings, and how to understand chance meetings during travel. I taught Man to understand the flight of the taloned bird, what was beneficial, and what meant harm, their daily lives, loves and hates, 490 and how they mate.

Then I taught about the smoothness of entrails, the right color of gall so that it please the gods, and how to read the liver’s lovely mottled lobe. I showed Man thighbones wrapped in fat, and how to burn the long backbone, and thus I taught Man the obscure art of prophecy, sacrifice, and the language of fire, which had not yet been understood. But so much for that. Who could claim before me that he discovered the hidden 500 treasures that lay buried under earth: bronze, iron, silver and gold? No one. That’s clear, unless some fool babbles nonsense. I’ll make a long story short: all the arts and crafts that Man possesses came from me, Prometheus, the god you see suffering before you now.

The Watcher Shemyaza of Enoch (another mask of the fallen angel Azazel and Tubal-Cain and Cain himself), also seems to embody a Luciferian and Promethean power in the way he falls in love with Esterah or Ishtar and reveals to her the forbidden knowledge of the secret name of God being the TetragrammatonMidrash Shemhazai and Azael 3-5, tells us:

They said before Him: “Give us Thy sanction and let us descend (and dwell) among the creatures and then Thou shalt see how we shall sanctify Thy name.” He said to them: “Descend and dwell ye among them.” … Forthwith Semhazai beheld a girl whose name was Esterah; fixing his eyes at her he said: “Listen to my (request).” But she said to him: “I will not listen to thee until thou teachest me the Name by which thou art enabled to ascend to the firmament, as soon as thou dost mention it.” He taught her the Ineffable Name….”


When Shemyaza told her, Esterah used this forbidden knowledge to ascend to the stars much like how Lucifer desperately desired to do so. While the other fallen angels or Watchers were rounded up by the loyal angels like Michael, and punished by God, Shemyaza voluntarily repented his error and sentenced himself to hang upside down, much like the Hanged Man archetype of the Major Arcana of the Tarot and even the apostle Peter who was said to have been crucified upside down in Rome under Emperor Nero Augustus Caesar. Some have equated the Yezidi angelic patron, Melek Taus with Shemyaza.

They have said about him; i.e., Shemhazai, that he repented and suspended himself upside-down between heaven and earth because he had no excuse for his behavior before the Holy One, blessed be He, and to this very day he remains suspended between heaven and earth in repentance.

The Church Father Justin Martyr had many things to say about Enochian literature, fallen angels and the pagan gods. For example, Justin claims that the children of the Watchers, being the demons, masquerade as the pagan deities and trick the pagans into persecuting Christians. All throughout his Apologies, he claims that the forbidden teachings and occult sciences of the fallen angels given to women serve to explain the origins and continued practice of the Greco-Roman religions and witchcraft since they were polytheistic and idolatrous in nature, to him.


Instead of placing blame on Adam and Eve for human sin, he instead places the blame on the sins of the angels. Justin Martyr is the first one to equate the Enochian angels with the pagan gods and pagan culture and he certainly wasn’t the last as many other Christian thinkers after him used the angelic descent myth to denounce the Greco-Roman world as demonic. This is the type of thing that probably pissed off Julian the Apostate to no end! This includes, Tatian, Irenaeus, Clement of Alexandria, Tertullian, Cyprian, Commodian, etc. In 2 Apology 5.5, Justin identifies the pagan gods with both “the angels and those demons who had been begotten by them,” and the same chapter claims that the angels gave the names of pagan gods to both themselves and their children.

Whence also the poets and mythologists, not knowing that it was the angels and those demons who had been begotten by them that did these things to men, and women, and cities, and nations, which they related, ascribed them to god himself, and to those who were accounted to be his very offspring, and to the offspring of those who were called his brothers, Neptune and Pluto, and to the children again of these their offspring. For whatever name each of the angels had given to himself and his children, by that name they called them.

The Gnostic-Hermetic alchemist, Zosimos, also had a very unusual take on Prometheus and also had much to say about the fallen angels and the Nephilim. On the later, Zosimos mentions a mythical figure named Chêmes (a pun on the Egyptian art of Alchemy), who is evidently one of the gigantic spawn of the fallen angels and their human wives. This giant, he tells us, he recorded the revelations of the angels in the Book of Chêmes, in which form they were transmitted to the earliest alchemical initiates. And so Zosimos takes the Enochian tale and uses it to explain the sacred art of Chemeia or ancient alchemy.

However, Zosimos in the Book of Chêmes condemns those involved in ritual sacrifices to the powers who run the world and Fate, as well as their own passions. “Al Chemia,” as a name for the Egyptian “the black land,” which refers to the darkness of the unconsciousness or the “Prima Materia,” being the building blocks of creation. Zosimus’ “Chemes” may also refer to the “Black One,” being Osiris’ original title of Khenti-Amenti being the “Lord of Western Darkness.”

In On the Letter Omega, the short text appeals to a number of Hermetic and Gnostic writings which are now lost to us, while having a very unusual and even irreverent and even blasphemous take on the gods that Plato would have balked at. Zosimos draws on the existing Gnostic myth of describing the imprisonment of the divine man in matter in order to show he held Gnostic views on Fate and the cosmos. Zosimos writes:

But Hermes and Zoroaster say that philosophers as a class are superior to Fate because they neither rejoice in her good fortune, for they are master over pleasures, nor are they thrown by the evils she sends, as they always lead an inner life, nor do they accept the fair gifts she offers, since they look to an end of ills.

This is also why Hesiod introduces Prometheus offering h this advice to Epimetheus “What do men consider a god fortune greater than all others?” “A shapely wife,” he replies, “along with great wealth.” And he says “not to accept a gift from Olympian Zeus, but to send it back again,” teaching his bother through philosophy to reject the gifts of Zeus, that is, of Fate.

In essence, Zosimos is saying that one should reject all the gifts of Fate, including good fortune. Later on in the same text, Zosimos depreciates Zeus as a lowly Demiurge and Prometheus as symbolic of the spirit fallen in the tomb of the flesh. No longer is Zeus the lofty and fiery Logos of the Stoics and is relegated to the same fate he meted out against the Titans for their dismemberment and murder of Dionysus-Zagreus as explained in Orphic texts as well as Hesiod.

Hesiod called the outer man “fetter,” with which Zeus bound Prometheus. Then, after this fetter, Zeus set yet another fetter upon him – Pandora, whom the Hebrews call Eve. For Prometheus and Epimetheus are, by the allegorical method a single man, that is, soul and body; and so Prometheus sometimes takes the form of soul, sometimes that of mind, and sometimes that of flesh because of Epimetheus’ disregard when he disregarded the advice of Prometheus, his own foresight. For our Mind says: “The Son of God, being capable of everything and becoming everything, when he wills, as he wills, appears to each.”

According to Hesiod, Pandora all the Olympian gods helped created her by giving her unique gifts. She was the first human woman created by the gods, specifically by Hephaestus and Athena on the instructions of Zeus. Moreover, Pandora was modeled out of the earth as part of the punishment of humanity for Prometheus’ theft of the secret of fire. Elsewhere in the same text, Zosimos surprisingly advocates one to reject even magical rites or how he calls it, the “Magian science” as advocated by Hermes, in a now lost book called On the Inner Life, condemns magical rituals,

“….saying that the spiritual man, one who has come to know himself, need not rectifying anything through the use of magic, not even if it is considered a good thing, nor must he use force upon Necessity, but rather allow Necessity to work in accordance with her own nature and decree. He must proceed through that one search to understand himself, and, when he has come to know God, he must hold fast to the ineffable Triad, and leave Fate to work what she will upon the clay that belongs to her, that is, the body. And with this way of thinking and of regulating one’s life, he says, you will the see the Son of God becoming everything for the sake of holy souls, to draw her up out of the realm of Fate into the realm of the incorporeal.

In essence, Zosimos is saying that the true alchemical work of the adept was spiritual purification in nature and can only be achieved internally rather than through external means. One can compare this to  Irenaeus in Against Heresies 1.21.4, rendered in Hans Jonas’ The Gnostic Religion, where Irenaeus claims certain Gnostics rejected the idea of magical rituals to attain spiritual salvation.

“One must not perform the mystery of the ineffable and invisible power through visible and corruptible things of creation, nor that of the unthinkable and immaterial beings through sensible and corporeal things. Perfect salvation is the cognition itself of the ineffable greatness: for since through “Ignorance” came about “Defect” and “Passion,” the whole system springing from the Ignorance is dissolved by knowledge. Therefore knowledge is salvation of the inner man; and it is not corporeal, for the body is corruptible; nor is it psychical, for even the soul is a product of the defect and is as a lodging to the spirit; spiritual therefore must also be [the form of] salvation. Through knowledge, then, is saved the inner, spiritual man; so that to us suffices the knowledge of universal being: this is the true salvation.”

We can also see this in the Pistis Sophia (1.15), which is a highly developed anti-astrological Gnostic polemic, also attacks magic on similar grounds. The same fallen angels we find in Enoch, are said to have given man, Mageia, or magical techniques that call upon the evil archons in the twelve aeons or the Zodiac. When Jesus Christ confuses the archons by interfering with the regular revolution of Fate and the sphere over which the archons rule over, and magic ceases to work.

In the Derveni Papryi, associated with Orpheus, it takes on the opposite stance, advocating magical rites to be performed by “magoi,” being the Orphic magicians. These magi offer many things such as:

… prayers and sacrifices to appease the souls, and the enchanting song of the magi is able to remove the daimones when they impede. Impeding daimones are avenging souls. This is why the magi perform the sacrifice, as if they were paying a penalty. On the offerings they pour water and milk, from which they make the libations, too. They sacrifice innumerable and many-knobbed cakes, because the souls, too, are innumerable. Initiates make the preliminary sacrifice to the Eumenides, in the same way as the magi. For the Eumenides are souls.

These daimones function much like the Archons, except for the fact that they are subservient to them, as well as to the gods, in which Zosimos seems to equate with the Archons (Zeus as the Demiurge, much like how YHWH is depicted as Ialdaboath in Gnostic-Ophite writings). The Neoplatonist Proclus in his commentary, On the Timaeus of Plato (1, 77) he mentions different views about how the fall of Atlantis was interpreted as an allegory of the daemons dragging the souls of human beings into matter. Different gods like Osiris, Baccus, the Titans and Typhon were interpreted as evil daemons, much like the Archons of Gnosticism.

Others interpret [Atlantis] as a conflict of daemons, with some being better and  others worse, the one side superior in numbers, the other in power, with the one being victorious and the other vanquished, as Origenes supposed. Others interpret it as a dispute between the finer souls – the foster-children of Athena – and others who work at generation and who belong to the god presiding over generation. Others combine (or so they believe) the views of Origenes and of Numenius and say that is is a a conflict between souls and daemons, with the daemons being a down-dragging force and the souls tying to come upwards. Their view is that there are three kinds of daemons, a divine type of daemon, a type now in that that condition which is made up of individual souls who have received a daemonic lot, and the other corrupt kind – the soul polluters.

So daemons of the final type strike up this war with souls on their descent into generation. And they claim that, just as the ancient theologians refer this to Osiris and Typhon or to Dionysus and the Titans, Plato attributes it to Athenians and Atlantines out of reverence. For he hands down the tradition, that before they came into three-dimensional bodies, there is rivalry between the souls and the enmattered daemons that he assigned to the west, for the west is the Egyptians say, is the region of harmful sous. The philosopher Porphyry is of this view, and one would be surprised if he is saying anything different from the view authorized by Numenius.

Proclus often refers to the gods as theo ephoroi, as they preside over different aspects of the world and human existence. These theoi ephoroi include gods such as Neptune and Athena, who are guardians of generation and philosophical life. He uses the term the most frequently to planetary gods, who are understood in astrological terms to preside over lower being, such as divine and demonic souls, animals, plants, stones, etc. He states that demons are actually the assistants of the planetary guardians, much like how Gnostic writings claim that demons are the lackeys of the Archons, who are portrayed as governors or administrators. On the Origin of the World tells us exactly this.

Now, when the seven rulers were cast down from their heavens onto the earth, they made for themselves angels, numerous, demonic, to serve them. And the latter instructed mankind in many kinds of error and magic and potions and worship of idols and spilling of blood and altars and temples and sacrifices and libations to all the spirits of the earth, having their coworker fate, who came into existence by the concord between the gods of injustice and justice.

The Neoplatonist Iamblichus also claimed the same thing in De Mysteriis. Plotinus also claimed that the stars and planets were visible gods, beneath them being in the sublunary sphere were hosts of aerial daimons who served as a bridge between man and the gods. Plotinus, like the Middle Platonists, the Chaldaean Oracles and his enemies within the Gnostics, thought that the physical universe belonged to the domain under Hades. Zosimos also considers these daimones as hungry, elemental spirits that are “not only hungry for sacrifices but for your soul.”


In the Corpus Hermeticum 16. 5-6the Sun is identified with the Demiurge, and the surrounding cosmic bodies were instruments with which he crafted the world. The planetary governors are depicted as administering mankind’s fate, and shaping man in their nature—as a microcosm—an act which is explicitly described as being done out of love.

 5. Even so the Creator, that is to say the Sun, ever links heaven to earth, sending his substance down from above, and raising up matter from below. He draws everything around himself and into himself, and from himself gives all to all, bestowing his light in abundance. For it is he whose beneficent powers not only pervade the heavens and the air, but reach down to the lowest depth in the earth and abyss of the sea.

6. If there is a spiritual substance, then it is the body of the Sun, which his light contains. The Sun alone being near to himself in place and nature knows of what his substance is made and whence it flows. We cannot see him, but by systematic efforts we can understand him.

In the same chapter, the CH claims that these daimons control the cycles of reincarnation and fate: “When each of us has been born and ensouled the daimons that are responsible for the administration of birth at that moment take charge of us—the daimons which are ordered under each of the planets….” Although Proclus does not mention Prometheus, Lucifer or Icarus in any of his writings, it should be worth nothing that these daemons are the very forces that causes the fall of souls into the world of matter, and this seems to be a common theme in many religions and myths as we’ve seen here. 2 Peter 1:19 makes a startling statement about Lucifer: “And so we have the prophetic word confirmed, which you do well to heed as a light that shines in a dark place, until the day dawns and the morning star rises in your hearts.”

2 Peter compares heading a message of prophecy as Lucifer ascending in the heart of man, as the fallen spirit or genius enmeshed in flesh. Helena Blavatsky in the Secret Doctrine 2.XX, seems to agree with this sentiment.

It is not denied that the moral idea in the myth, as presented in the Theogony of Hesiod, plays a certain part in the primitive Greek conception. The Titan is more than a thief of the celestial fire. He is the representation of humanity — active, industrious, intelligent, but at the same time ambitious, which aims at equaling divine powers. Therefore it is humanity punished in the person of Prometheus, but it is only so with the Greeks. With the latter, Prometheus is not a criminal, save in the eyes of the gods. In is relation with the Earth, he is, on the contrary, a god himself, a friend of mankind ([[philanthropos]]), which he has raised to civilization and initiated into the knowledge of all the arts; a conception which found its most poetical expounder in AEschylus (pg. 519).

So if Venus is a name of a planet, than by extension and logical conclusion, Lucifer was one of these Archontic administrators in the highest of the seven heavens. And yet, even Jesus Christ in Revelation bares this title as the Morning-Star. I would like to end this article with a telling quote from the Latin Church Father, Tertullian. In his polemical Against Marcion (1.1), he equates God and the Christian gospel with that of Prometheus! He also claims that the arch-heretic Marcion corrupted the Christian message and Church, and is equated to a beast, like the one found in Revelation.

Nay more, the true Prometheus, Almighty God, is mangled by Marcion’s blasphemies. Marcion is more savage than even the beasts of that barbarous region. For what beaver was ever a greater emasculator than he who has abolished the nuptial bond?

Clement of Alexandria does the same thing in the Stromata (1.17), where he equates the light of philosophy with Prometheus. However, he claims that the Greek philosophers were “thieves and robbers” for ripping off the Hebrew prophets. In reality, both the Hebrew prophets and the Greeks ripped off the Egyptians and the historical record is very clear about this. Judaism is largely a bastardization of Egyptian religion and philosophy, if one digs deep enough.

There is then in philosophy, though stolen as the fire by Prometheus, a slender spark, capable of being fanned into flame, a trace of wisdom and an impulse from God. Well, be it so that the thieves and robbers are the philosophers among the Greeks, who from the Hebrew prophets before the coming of the Lord received fragments of the truth, not with full knowledge, and claimed these as their own teachings, disguising some points, treating others sophistically by their ingenuity, and discovering other things, for perchance they had the spirit of perception. Exodus 28:3

Hell, if you compare Livy’s History of Rome with the Old Testament, it seems like the later is basically a rip-off from the former! But that, my beloved truth seekers, is for another story. So much for Christian Orthodoxy, right? 


Gnostic Exegesis in Revelation 12

For anyone who is familiar with the multicolored panorama of ancient Gnostic doctrines from different schools and mystery cults, Revelation 12 seems to stand out the most from the Revelation (or Apocalypse) of St. John the Divine. It has the tell-tail signs of being inserted into the main text, since chapter 13 appears to follow chapter 11 without any need for the 12th. Revelation itself follows from a vast tradition of apocalyptic literature. One website goes on to summarize this form of literature, succinctly:

“The Book of Revelation is really an interpretation of earlier apocalyptic prophesies, specifically the Book of Daniel. It was most likely written within a few years after the death of Nero in 68 C.E. The author therefore is not believed to be the author of the Book of John, written three decades later. John speaks of a loving God which is in stark contrast to the vengeful God of Revelation. The author of Revelation was not fluent in Greek and is believed to have been an Aramaic speaking resident of Palestine, possibly a wandering prophet.”

Whoever wrote the rest of Revelation had a very favorable interpretation of the Old Testament and Jewish Christianity and had a lot of ax-grinding against the heretics and the Roman political state. And the author appears to have rejected Paul entirely. The letter to the seven churches that prefaces the actual apocalypse chastises those “who claim to be apostles but are not” and those “who claim to be Jews and are not.” Those were two contested issues about Paul during that era, that is, whether or not he should be considered an apostle and where or not he was actually Jewish. This is some what ironic because the letters of Paul and an apocalypse written by someone who despised him wound up in the same canon of scripture. Even the saying of “the deep things of Satan” of Revelation 2:24 seem to be a direct parody of Paul’s “the deep things of God” per 1 Corinthians 2:10.

The first part of Revelation also condemns eating meat sacrificed to idols and fornication, both practices which the author attributes to a sect call the Nicolaitans, which had a very Gnostic-influenced theology, although the details on their theology differ greatly when comparing the different accounts of the Church Fathers and more shady sources like Psuedo-Tertullian. According to the Church Father, Irenaeus (Against Heresies 1.26.3; 3.10.6), the first “successor” of Simon Magus, was indeed Nicolas of Antioch. The antinomian doctrines taught by the Nicolaitians are in Revelation’s (2:12,15) letter to the church in Pergamos in which Jesus apparently hates with a passion:

“And to the angel of the church in Pergamos write, ‘These things says He who has the sharp two-edged sword . . . Thus you also have those who hold the doctrine of the Nicolaitans, which thing I hate.’

Of course, Paul was originally the one who taught it was acceptable for Christians to eat meat that had been sacrificed to idols so long as it didn’t offend another Christian. Paul obviously never condoned fornication, but what the author of Revelation may imply by fornication is Gentile influence upon Jewish Christianity, which would again point to Paul, who also may also be referenced as the “false prophet” per Revelation 13. This corruption or “fornication” can also be paralleled with how the Church Father Epiphanius claimed Marcion seduced a young orthodox virgin, which could be read as a metaphor of Marcion’s corruption of the young Christian Church as claimed by Bart Erhman in Lost Christianities.

The author of Revelation understood Jesus in light of Jewish Messianism. That is, he believed that Jesus, upon his second coming, would fulfill all of the messianic prophecies that he failed to fulfill during his ministry, which included declaring war against the entire world, establish a messianic kingdom and fortify Jewish Christian preeminence over the whole world. Revelation, however, echoes many Gnostic sentiments as well as Egyptian, Babylonian and Zoroastrian concepts and mythology as we will see. While this is in no way a comprehensive review of Revelation, it is a result of drawing some certain parallels I’ve noticed to other Biblical and non-Biblical mythologies, when going through certain parts of the text. the-great-red-dragon-and-the-woman-clothed-with-the-sun-1810

A great sign appeared in heaven: a woman clothed with the sun, with the moon under her feet and a crown of twelve stars on her head.was about to give birth. Then another sign appeared in heaven: an enormous red dragon with seven heads and ten horns and seven crowns on its heads. Its tail swept a third of the stars out of the sky and flung them to the earth. The dragon stood in front of the woman who was about to give birth, so that it might devour her child the moment he was born. The gave birth to a son, a male child, who “will rule all the nations with an iron scepter.” And her child was snatched up to God and to his throne. The woman fled into the wilderness to a place prepared for her by God, where she might be taken care of for 1,260 days.

Revelation 12 begins with the Mother archetype characteristic of Wisdom or Sophia so prominent in Gnostic theology who is also pregnant. She is the celestial prototype or counterpart of the Virgin Mary, mother of the son of God. Naturally, the divine Mother can be traced back to the Egyptian Isis and appears many times in Jewish Wisdom literature such as Proverbs and in the the apocrypha such as the Book of Wisdom and the 1 Enoch. In the context of this text, the Woman may very well represent the moon which reflects the light of the sun while ruling the tides that guide the woman’s menstrual cycles. There is also a reference to the Virgo constellation of the Zodiac because of the obvious astrological language used in the divine Mother’s description. guadalupe2 In Greek mythology, the pregnant goddess Leto is pursed by the dragon Python. She escapes to an island where she gives birth to Apollo, who later kills the dragon. Nearly every Mediterranean culture had some variant of this type of combat myth, pitting monster against champion. However, from a Gnostic perspective, there is an even deeper significance to this chapter. In the following passage, the element connects with the apocalyptic passage with Gnosticism, specifically the Sethian and Ophite branches is the enthronement of the son, who escapes the monstrous dragon. Another great beast also appears in the next chapter in 13:1 stating:

“And I stood upon the sand of the sea, and saw a beast rise up out of the sea, having seven heads and ten horns, and upon his horns ten crowns, and upon his heads the name of blasphemy.”

What is striking about this passage is the similarity of the beast’s description with the snake-faced seven-headed dragon archon and anguipede mentioned in the Apocryphon of John, Iao. The term Iao is also on many magical amulets, especially with the Basilidean astral god, Abrasax from the the Greco-Roman and the Renaissance periods. slide163 James M. Robinson in On the Genre of Mark and John, compares Revelation 12 with the various Kingdoms featured in the Sethian Apocalypse of Adam of the Nag Hammadi Library. In particular, he compared the fourth Kingdom passage with the great dragon pursuing the child of the Mother.

The fourth kingdom says of him that he came from a virgin. […] Solomon sought her, he and Phersalo and Sauel and his armies, which had been sent out. Solomon himself sent his army of demons to seek out the virgin. And they did not find the one whom they sought, but the virgin who was given them. It was she whom they fetched. Solomon took her. The virgin became pregnant and gave birth to the child there. She nourished him on a border of the desert. When he had been nourished, he received glory and power from the seed from which he was begotten. And thus he came to the water.

Here, the virgin is pursued by the vilified magician, King Solomon and his army of demonic spirits but the virgin barely escapes their clutches and gives birth to her male child who receives power and glory when he “came to the water” which could be a possible reference to Jesus who receives the power of the Holy Spirit when he is baptized and anointed with the Christ spirit, as an “adopted” (hence the doctrine of Adoptionism) Son of God, as mentioned in Mark 1:9-10. In the Gnostic terminology, “male” is the synonym with “pneumatic” or spiritual, as “female” is synonym with “psychic”. The male child in the Apocalypse of Adam is an obvious reference to the Illuminator, the same great spiritual power that the “the god of the powers” or the Demiurge, asks, “What is the power of this man who is higher than we?” In Revelation 12: 7-9, the defeating and casting down of the dragon, Satan, to earth by the archangel Michael, has a possible parallel in the struggle between the armies of angels and the armies of Solomon over the virgin in the fourth kingdom of Apoc. Adam, and in the battle between Jesus and the beasts in Mark 1:13 and Satan/Devil in the temptation stories. Isis_suckling_Horus The story of the divine child, who, together with his divine mother, is threatened by an evil power, yet is rescued and finds safety in the wilderness until the evil power is destroyed can very much be interpreted with a Gnostic lens. And naturally, the divine mother and child archetype is one that repeats in almost every ancient culture around the world, beginning with Isis and her son Horus, and possibly before that. The divine Mother, being Sophia, who also gives birth also suggests a connection to Eve, and the divine male child, being Seth, who (with his seed) is caught up to the aeon or put in a holy dwelling place and stays up there for a time, thus overthrowing the powers, i.e. the dragon archon who brought the great flood as mentioned in the Gospel of the Egyptians. And at the end, a voice or Logos, i.e. Seth, announces the arrival of final salvation much like the divine call of Revelation 12: 10-12.

Revelation 12 could also reflect the activity of Sophia who becomes pregnant with her passions, from which appears the Archon, i.e. the dragon/lion-headed hybrid mutant Ialdabaoth. As seen in On the Origin of the World, the dragon, Ialdaboath and his fellow archons pursue Epinoia or Eve-Zoe, but she becomes an eagle on the tree of Gnosis (like the Savior Jesus in the Apocryphon of John) and in another account, Eve-Zoe transforms into a tree, thus eluding the pursing lustful Archons. The primeval couple is kicked out of paradise, but produces Seth and his seed where they are taken to the ethereal wilderness, after which the Archons bring the flood, a belligerent act of war against the Gnostic offspring of Eve, which parallels Revelation 12:15-16, where it states:

Then from his mouth the serpent spewed water like a river, to overtake the woman and sweep her away with the torrent. But the earth helped the woman by opening its mouth and swallowing the river that the dragon had spewed out of his mouth.

The woman who is pursued by the dragon, sprouts eagle’s wings, which has parallels in the bird of Kingdom 2:

And a bird came, took the child who was born, and brought him onto a high mountain. And he was nourished by the bird of heaven. An angel came forth there. He said to him “Arise! God has given glory to you.” He received glory and strength. And thus he came to the water.

Another parallel is with the descending dove featured in Mark 1:10 and the apocryphal Gospel of the Hebrews where the child is lifted to Mount Tabor. This entire basic mythological structure between Revelation 12 and the Apocalypse of Adam, can also be applied to the Gospel account in Matthew of Jesus’ birth to Mary and their flight to Egypt from Herod. This pattern can also be seen in certain aspects of the Isis-Osiris-Horus cycle as well as stories of Zeus and his mother Rhea Silvia hiding him from his blood-thirsty father Titan Kronos, Perseus and Danae, and Jason and Diomede. Ancient Greek harpies were also said to be the winged female agents (sometimes depicted with talons) of Zeus that snatched away people who would dare reveal the secrets of the Olympian gods.

The idea of a woman with eagle wings also appears in Native American and Aztec legends as the Bird Goddesses, Ix Chel and Itzpapalotl. The symbol of the Eagle was also associated with the soaring spirit over the mundane and base material concerns. It also represented a state of grace achieved through a series of initiations to receive personal, spiritual power through the essence of Shamanic Eagle medicine. There are also strong parallels with Revelation 12 and even the rest of Revelation with the final segment of the Gnostic On the Origin of the World. The woman clothed with the sun is no longer the victimized divine Mother in distress, trying to elude the wrath of the evil powers but is now the one engaged in the pursing against them!

The stars of the sky will cancel their circuits. And a great clap of thunder will come out of a great force that is above all the forces of chaos, where the firmament of the woman is situated. Having created the first product, she will put away the wise fire of intelligence and clothe herself with witless wrath. Then she will pursue the gods of chaos, whom she created along with the prime parent. She will cast them down into the abyss. They will be obliterated because of their wickedness. For they will come to be like volcanoes and consume one another until they perish at the hand of the prime parent. When he has destroyed them, he will turn against himself and destroy himself until he ceases to exist.

The Simonian text, Concept of Our Great Power also has many strong apocalyptic undertones spread throughout. It even has an Anti-Christ/Beast figure.

Then when the times were completed, then wickedness arose mightily even until the final end of the Logos. Then the archon of the western regions arose, and from the East he will perform a work, and he will instruct men in his wickedness. And he wants to nullify all teaching, the words of true wisdom, while loving the lying wisdom. For he attacked the old, wishing to introduce wickedness and to put on dignity. He was incapable, because the defilement of his garments is great. Then he became angry. He appeared and desired to go up and to pass up to that place. Then the appointed time came and drew near. And he changed the commands.

Then the time came until the child had grown up. When he had come to his maturity, then the archons sent the imitator to that man in order that they might know our great Power. And they were expecting from him that he would perform for them a sign. And he bore great signs. And he reigned over the whole earth and all those who are under heaven. He placed his throne upon the end of the earth, for “I shall make you god of the world”. He will perform signs and wonders. Then they will turn from me, and they will go astray.

So, the archons finally go to war at the end of the “Logos” – “… when the times were completed, then wickedness arose mightily even until the final end of the Logos.” Compare this to Revelation 12:7, when again, Michael wages a war against Satan, who is depicted as a chaos dragon, much like Tiamat of the Mesopotamian religions.

And there was war in heaven, Michael and his angels waging war with the dragon. The dragon and his angels waged war, 8 and they were not strong enough, and there was no longer a place found for them in heaven. 9 And the great dragon was thrown down, the serpent of old who is called the devil and Satan, who deceives the whole world; he was thrown down to the earth, and his angels were thrown down with him.

It is also interesting to note the same dragon beast that pursues the divine mother is also rode upon the Whore of Babylon of Revelation 17 and 18 or the “Babylon the Great, the Mother of Prostitutes and Abominations of the Earth”, which could be interpreted as the the barbarous “Achamoth”, the name of the “fallen” form of Sophia. Sophia who fled to the “wilderness” (which could also be interpreted as the primeval fall from the Pleroma into the material chaos and the subsequent abortion of her monstrous “child of chaos”) is also called “Echamoth” according to the Gospel of Philip:

Echamoth is one thing and Echmoth, another. Echamoth is Wisdom simply, but Echmoth is the Wisdom of death, which is the one who knows death, which is called “the little Wisdom”.

Another curious passage from Revelation 17: 9 tells us that Whore of Babylon sat on seven heads, which could be a reference to the seven rulers who rule over the seven heavens that is listed in the Apocryphon of John.

And here is the mind which hath wisdom. The seven heads are seven mountains, on which the woman sat.

It also shares ideas of Proverbs 9:1, where it states Wisdom was said to have built a house for herself, and to have set up “seven pillars” a possible reference to the Hebdomad, or the Hellenistic seven heavens or the seven celestial planets or powers of the Apoc. John. This might be a stretch but one can easily see how the “seven heads” and “mountains” could connect to Gnostic cosmology. The fate of the wanton prostitute isn’t a pretty one as she falls prey to her own wiles and is ultimately destroyed by divine fire by the God of judgement and wrath per Revelation. 18:4-8:

‘Come out of her, my people,’ so that you will not share in her sins, so that you will not receive any of her plagues; for her sins are piled up to heaven, and God has remembered her crimes. Give back to her as she has given; pay her back double for what she has done. Pour her a double portion from her own cup. Give her as much torment and grief as the glory and luxury she gave herself. In her heart she boasts, ‘I sit enthroned as queen. I am not a widow; I will never mourn.’ Therefore in one day her plagues will overtake her: death, mourning and famine. She will be consumed by fire, for mighty is the Lord God who judges her.

William_Blake_whore_babylon The Freemasonic scholar Manly P. Hall in the Secret Teachings of All Ages, claims the whore of Babylon is basically a degenerated and vilified version of the “divine mother” archetype when he writes (p. 188):

Here also is introduced a symbolic figure, termed “the harlot of Babylon, “which is described as a woman seated upon a scarlet-colored beast having seven heads and ten horns. The woman was arrayed in purple and scarlet and bedecked with gold, precious st Here also is introduced a symbolic figure, termed “the harlot of Babylon, “which is described as a woman seated upon a scarlet-colored beast having seven heads and ten horns. The woman was arrayed in purple and scones, and pearls, having in her hand a golden cup full of abominations. This figure may be an effort (probably interpolated) to vilify Cybele, or Artemis, the Great Mother goddess of antiquity. Because the pagans venerated the Mater Deorum through symbols appropriate to the feminine generative principle they were accused by the early Christians of worshiping a courtesan. As nearly all the ancient Mysteries included a test of the neophyte’s moral character, the temptress (the animal soul) is here portrayed as a pagan goddess.

The Whore of Babylon also fits very well with the dark crone mother figure of Lilith of Kabbalistic lore as well. The Greek Titan Saturn-Kronos (in the guise of the “Son of Man,”) also makes an appearance in the Revelation 14: 14-16, when it states:

14 Then I looked, and behold, a white cloud, and on the cloud sat One like the Son of Man, having on His head a golden crown, and in His hand a sharp sickle.15 And another angel came out of the temple, crying with a loud voice to Him who sat on the cloud, “Thrust in Your sickle and reap, for the time has come for You to reap, for the harvest of the earth is ripe.” 16 So He who sat on the cloud thrust in His sickle on the earth, and the earth was reaped.

reaping_the_harvest-p9875698 Behind the Roman Saturn is the Greek Kronos, naturally. And behind those two is the Phoenician El, a name familiar with and associated with YHWH, the god of Israel. The “Son of Man” or Jesus Christ takes on this role of the reaper of souls at the apocalypse. This Son of Man figure also appears much earlier in the Book of 1 Enoch as well. The rest of Revelation also owes a lot of its inspiration from Enochian literature as well. An entire dissertation could be done on this subject alone!

“And they shall be terrified, and they shall be downcast of countenance, and pain shall seize them, when they see that Son of Man Sitting on the throne of his glory. And the kings and the mighty and all who possess the earth shall bless and glorify and extol him who rules over all, who was hidden…”  – 1 Enoch 62:5-6 “And all the kings and the mighty and the exalted and those who rule the earth shall fall down before him on their faces, and worship and set their hope upon that Son of Man, and petition him and supplicate for mercy at his hands… And He will deliver them to the angels for punishment, To execute vengeance on them because they have oppressed His children and His elect. And they shall be a spectacle for the righteous and for His elect: They shall rejoice over them, Because the wrath of the Lord of Spirits resteth upon them, And His sword is drunk with their blood.” – 1 Enoch 62:9-12

So here, we have Enoch refer to the sword of wrath that the Son of Man will wield on His Father’s behalf. Among the many times that Jesus spoke of the Son of Man, He was likely using this term to identify Himself or with another celestial figure in the Son of Man spoken of in 1 Enoch and Daniel. This is especially evident in the following Scriptures:

“For the Son of Man will come in the glory of His Father with His angels, and then He will reward each according to his works.” – Matthew 16:27 “When the Son of Man comes in His glory, and all the holy angels with Him, then He will sit on the throne of His glory.” – Matthew 25:31

Kronos isn’t the only Greek deity to appear in Revelation. We also see the solar deity Apollo appear as an inverted archetype of the Angel of Destruction, Apollyon who is the chief ruler of an army of locust demons in Revelation 9:8-11:

The appearance of the locusts was like horses prepared for battle; and on their heads appeared to be crowns like gold, and their faces were like the faces of men. They had hair like the hair of women, and their teeth were like the teeth of lions. They had breastplates like breastplates of iron; and the sound of their wings was like the sound of chariots, of many horses rushing to battle. They have tails like scorpions, and stings; and in their tails is their power to hurt men for five months. They have as king over them, the angel of the abyss; his name in Hebrew is Abaddon, and in the Greek he has the name Apollyon.

It’s rather interesting that the Revelation author would choose to make Kronos be the good guy (through the Son of Man) while invert the beauty, order and goodness of Apollo into an angel of the bottomless pit. Though Apollo was known as a god of prophecy, law and purification, in his earliest accounts, he could place plagues on mankind as well as cure them. This occurs in Homer’s IIliad, when Apollo creates a nine-day deadly plague on the Achaean army and their cattle.

The description given to Apolloyon’s army of locust demons sounds eerily similar to that of the legendary creature of Persia, the Manticore (the “maneater”). This predatory monster is said to be mutated mixture of a man’s face with a lion’s face and body, along with a scorpion’s tail and bat wings. 127285_-Elder_Manticore-final2 James Davila in Melchizedek, Michael, and the War in Heaven, writes about the YHWH’s connection with the Archangel Michael from Revelation:

The origins of this reflex of the myth are extremely ancient. An Ugaritic text (CTA 5.1.1-5) alludes to a battle in which the god Baal defeated LTN, clearly the same creature as the monster Leviathan in the Hebrew Bible and later literature. In the restoration period or later, the apocalyptic section of the book of Isaiah (chs. 24-27) refers to the same myth–in almost the same words, but the battle is projected into the eschatological Endzeit and has Yahweh as the protagonist (Isa 27:1). This eschatological form of the tradition is developed further in Revelation, first by the replacement of Yahweh by Michael, and second by the use of the more generic term “dragon” (DRA/KWN) instead of the name Leviathan. As Richard Bauckham has noted, the picture of the dragon is significantly developed by its identification (perhaps by way of Isa 27:1) with the serpent of Genesis 3 and then, by extension, with the devil or Satan.

This Satan dragon serpent archetype can actually be traced back to the Egyptian “Lord of Chaos” Apep, who is depicted as a serpent, the embodiment of chaos and the enemy of the light and order of Ra, Ma’at and Thoth. Thoth or Tautus was nothing more then the title of an educated linguist and secret society member, who claimed himself to be the embodiment of the Egyptian Logos. Ra, as well as Horus, are also portrayed as often struggling against the darkness and chaos of this serpent, much like how Michael struggles against the Serpent and Dragon, Satan. One can see how this chaos myth repeats itself over and over again, traced back to the Egyptian religion which precedes Christianity and Judaism by thousands of years! apep-papyrus-of-hunefer

The war in heaven motif can also be traced to the Titanomacy which can be found in Homer’s Illiad where Hephaestus was cast down from the heavenly threshold by Zeus. Hesiod’s Theogony also recounts that the gods, after defeating the Titans, hurled them down to Tartarus, beneath Hades for their rebellion. Finally, according to Patristic literature, the arch-heretic Cerinthus is often associated with Revelation. The Latin Church Father Tertullian in Against Marcion 3.13, understands Babylon as the city of Rome:

…Egypt is sometimes understood, in His sense, the whole world as being marked out by superstition and a curse. By a similar usage Babylon also in our (St.) John is a figure of the city of Rome, as being like (Babylon) great and proud in royal power, and warring down the saints of God. Now it was in accordance with this style that He called the magi by the name of Samaritans, because (as we have said) they had practised idolatry as did the Samaritans. Moreover, by the phrase before or against the king of Assyria, understand against Herod against whom the magi then opposed themselves, when they refrained from carrying him back word concerning Christ, whom he was seeking to destroy.

Eusebius quotes from a work by Dionysus of Alexandria, bishop of Alexandria, saying that there were many who rejected the Johannine (John) authorship and authority of Revelation, and actually hated the book in Church History (7.25.1-2).

Some indeed of those before our time rejected and altogether impugned the book, examining it chapter by chapter and declaring it to be unintelligible and illogical, and its title false. For they say that it is not John’s, no, nor yet an apocalypse (i.e., an unveiling), since it is veiled by its heavy, thick curtain of its unintelligibility, and that the author of the book was not only not one of the apostles, nor even one of the saints or those belonging to the Church, but Cerinthus, the same who created the sect called ‘Cerinthian’ after him, since he desired to affix to his own forgery a name worthy of credit.

It is worth noting that, according to the good bishop, Dionysius (yes, there were many bishops named after the Greek god of wine), a certain heretic Cerinthus believed in an earthly kingdom of Christ was filled with material pleasures including fornication and great marriage feasts. Here we have only scratched the surface with all the inner workings of Revelation and I suspect there is much more hidden and coded Gnostic parallels and Gemetria (the Assyrian art of assigning numerical values to words) contained in this seemingly “illogical, unintelligible and false” text, like in the city of New Jerusalem that shows up at the end of the apocalypse, which has strong alchemical and Hermetic traits. Gemetria is something I’ve been toying with for a while now and I may pursue it further in my research.


Forbidden Fruit in the Midst of the Garden (Part 5)

{So, I decided to return to this series after a very long hiatus and conclude my thoughts and research into the Eden creation story. Excuse the lateness.}

In Part 4, we explored the Gnostic understandings of the flood myths and how it correlates to the Fall of Sophia and the Descent into Chaotic Matter. Eden and Atlantis were also compared to each other and it seems both places might have been one and the same. We also looked at the Persian prophet Mani’s insights into the Tree of Life, the creation of Adam and how it related to his soteriology. There are other matters that I’ve addressed but will re-examine them under a different lens. When you research this kind of stuff, you are often confronted with new information that adds to what you’ve written or forces you to reconsider.

As I have recounted in this series, the serpent to the Gnostics was a symbol of duality. Since the expulsion from paradise was ordained by the Old Testament God, the Gnostics demanded that the snake be re-installed in paradise. This wise messenger of the good “Alien” God who was sent to “open the eyes” of the first couple through gnosis was naturally cursed and punished by the Demiurge. At the same time, texts like the Apocryphon of John seem to condemn the serpent as being a part of the same order as the chief archon, Ialdabaoth. Why is there such a differences of opinions on this point of the Genesis myth that reappears later in Gnostic texts? We will see exactly why soon enough.

Cursing the Gods.

Returning to the idea of the “fall of man”, there seems to be a cognitive dissonance in how many people read the Genesis account as well as how many throughout Church History has come to interpret the story as a source of shame for the human race. For example, we read that Jehovah, or the “LORD God” told Adam, “The day you eat of the tree you will surely die” (Genesis.3:4). And yet Adam ate of the tree and he did not die or even “fall”. It can hardly be called a “fall” when his intelligence was elevated to that of the gods! (Genesis 3:22) And so, we see Jehovah say to His council of gods, “Behold man has become as one of Us, knowing good and evil.” The serpent (the most crafty creature on earth) told the truth when he told Eve Jehovah would not carry out his threat. Let’s allow the Bible speak for itself when we see Adam, live to be 930 years old and begat many sons and daughters. No mention of the fall in Genesis. And we see Jehovah who lies to Adam but the God of the New Testament cannot lie (Hebrews 6:18). It’s not until Augustine does Adam truly “fall” and produced the “Original Sin” of disobeying Jehovah.

This doctrine of “Original Sin” or the “Sin Nature,” indeed, was the invention of St. Augustine, who believed that the great multitudes of the human race belong to eternal damnation along with a very hostile attitude towards sexuality–even extending this misanthropy to unbaptized children. This seems to be a strange mixture of Manichaean doctrine along with the Orthodox influence of Ambrose who converted him from the Manichaean faith to Catholic Neo-Platonism along with Tertullian sanctioned doctrine. The Latin Church father (and later heretical Montanist convert, in a twist of irony) Tertullian would also express similar sentiments in stating that man was not merely weakened, but depraved as a consequence of Adam’s disobedience to the Creator God in the form of his “consupiscence” (to covet) for the forbidden fruit of Knowledge. This idea repeats itself in what John Calvin espoused heartily in the sixteenth century as the heinous doctrine of “Total Depravity.” Tertullian in On the Apparel of Women, Book 1, also makes clear the scorn and prejudice of early Church fathers towards Eve, sexuality and her descendants:

And do you not know that you are [each] an Eve? The sentence of God on this sex of yours lives in this age: the guilt must of necessity live too. You are the devil’s gateway: you are the unsealer of that [forbidden] tree: you are the first deserter of the divine law: you are she who persuaded him whom the devil was not valiant enough to attack. You destroyed so easily God’s image, man. On account of your desert – that is, death – even the Son of God had to die.

And so here we have a clear example of the Orthodox loathing of the female and the feminine in the form of Eve. While spending the rest of this post to researching doctrinal matters concerning Original Sin, etc. is tempting, looking back at the Genesis account and other works that fill in the blanks, will prove to be far more fruitful, pun intended… In the Clementine Homilies (3.9.1), the heresiarch and place holder for Paul the Apostle and Marcionite/Gnostic Christianity, Simon Magus, claimed that Adam was born blind. Many Jewish Rabbis also asked if Adam and Eve were blind as well. Even Saint Augustine said that most people thought Adam was blind as well (City of God 14.17). All throughout the Clementine literature, Simon and Peter goes head to head in a debate of whits of how they interpreted the Genesis tale. This idea of Adam being born blind comes from Simon when he tells Peter (CH. Homily 3. XXXIX):

Therefore also Adam, being made at first after his likeness, is created blind, and is said not to have knowledge of good or evil, and is found a transgressor, and is driven out of paradise, and is punished with death. In like manner also, he who made him, because he sees not in all places, says with reference to the overthrow of Sodom, ‘Come, and let us go down, and see whether they do according to their cry which comes to me; or if not, that I may know.’ Thus he shows himself ignorant. And in his saying respecting Adam, ‘Let us drive him out, lest he put forth his hand and touch the tree of life, and eat, and live for ever;’ in saying Lest he is ignorant; and in driving him out lest he should eat and live for ever, he is also envious. And whereas it is written that ‘God repented that he had made man,’ this implies both repentance and ignorance.

Later on in the same text, Simon and Peter go back and forth in their debates over whether Adam was indeed born blind and ignorant:

Whatever sayings of the Scriptures are in harmony with the creation that was made by Him are true, but whatever are contrary to it are false. Then Simon said: How can you show that the Scriptures contradict themselves? And Peter said: You say that Adam was created blind, which was not so; for He would not have pointed out the tree of the knowledge of good and evil to a blind man, and commanded him not to taste of it. Then said Simon: He meant that his mind was blind. Then Peter: How could he be blind in respect of his mind, who, before tasting of the tree, in harmony with Him who made him, imposed appropriate names on all the animals? Then Simon: If Adam had foreknowledge, how did he not foreknow that the serpent would deceive his wife? Then Peter: If Adam had not foreknowledge, how did he give names to the sons of men as they were born with reference to their future doings, calling the first Cain (which is interpreted ‘envy’), who through envy killed his brother Abel (which is interpreted ‘grief’), for his parents grieved over him, the first slain?

Scholarship generally posits that Gnosticism is a late, post-Christian development. In other words, it is simply a dualistic Christian heresy that posited a mythological system of emanations of aeons, a redeemer figure, the disparagement of matter, and a “Stranger” God. These elements are indeed post-Christian, and exist in the NT as well. Yet, the core element of Gnosticism is seeking salvation through gnosis or hidden wisdom, rather than through simple belief or justification through faith, sacrifices to God, a vicarious redeemer, etc. This type of gnosis precedes Christianity and can be found in Orphic, Egyptian, Indian and Buddhist mystery religions as well. Also, many of the Christian gospels contain various Gnostic elements in which I detail here. They are all about seeking and finding hidden gnosis, hinted in the parables of hidden treasure in Matthew, as well as other parables like the found pearl, the captured fish of the great price, the parable of the sower, etc. The Gospel of Thomas is the epitome of this type of gnosis. This is the core teaching of Gnosticism and an even more “authentic” Christianity. Unfortunately, few researchers look at Gnosticism in this broader way.

There are scholars like Gershom Scholem, who have linked pre-Christian Gnosticism with Jewish mysticism – particularly that with the Merkabah type, and other ascent texts that belong to heterodox Jews of the Second Temple Period. Texts like these are those that belong to the Enochian tradition, some of the Dead Sea Scrolls, and perhaps texts like the Ascension of Isaiah (although the last seems more likely a Simonian text). All of these texts deal with the Gnostic ascent to God and the writers of these texts, perhaps saw themselves as possessors of this secret knowledge to ascend the stars like angels and would eventually become divine themselves, which was an anathema to Orthodox Judaism. This is probably where the later Gnostic writers took their inspirations from, along with Pauline crucifixion mysticism. Scholars like C. Fletcher-Lewis also noticed some of these Gnostic elements in the Dead Sea Scrolls, like the Songs of the Sabbath Sacrifice, in which he writes in Heavenly Ascent and Incarnational Presence: A Revisionist Reading of the Songs of the Sabbath Sacrifice:

“….much of the language within the Songs, though not all, refers to the Qumran community members who now have a heavenly, angelic and divine identity.”

Looking at the Nag Hammadi writings, there seems to be some Christianization or “sanitation” of older non-Christian writings, which shows that the Gnostic vision preceded Christianity. So, Gnosticism wasn’t a late aberration of Christianity as it is commonly maintained. R. van den Broek writes in The Present State of Gnostic Studies:

[T]he Nag Hammadi Library contains several gnostic tractates which are certainly non-Christian. These writings show that Gnosticism did not arise as a Christian heresy.

In a way, heterodox Judaism and even Samaritan mysticism gave rise to heterodox Christianity (Gnosticism). We see a competition of theologies begin in Genesis, or a dual tradition of normative and heterodox theologies develop at the same time, together. It can be argued that the Yahweh tradition developed was a reaction to this type of hidden knowledge already in existence back then, in a religion of those who would “ascend to heaven” (Isaiah 14:13).

In Isaiah, the fall of Lucifer is mirrored in Greek tales of Icarus and even that of Simon Magus who falls from his flights to impress Nero thanks to Peter’s meddling and prayer that God ruin the whole show even though apparently Peter didn’t have these same crazy cool powers himself. Adam’s fall is blamed on him because he dared to reach out and consume the fruit from the tree of knowledge of good and evil. The Tower of Babel story also has misguided Babylonians attempting to build a very tall tower that reaches the heavens but is foiled by Yahweh and his angels. And so, the Gnostic initiative is always “out of bounds.” And this is exactly the focal point of contention between Simon Magus and Peter in their debates in that there is a higher power above the creator.


We also see Jesus of the Gospels constantly oppose the Pharisees and their rites and customs and even denies them that they are the chosen people and claim they “belong to your father, the devil…” (John 8:44)! Jesus also commanded his followers to seek sincerely without outside aide or approval from any external “authority” or divine agent (the denial of blood atonement and a vicarious redeemer). Jesus’ original teachings are clearly rebellious and esoteric, in the sense that they are private, hidden and not seen by outsiders. This all conforms to a secret knowledge that comes from within where the hidden Christ manifests. Perhaps this is the real reason why Gnostic writers were critical of the biblical God and even critical of the serpent as well as being part of the same team with Yahweh like the Ophites did. And this is also the reason why some scholars view Gnosticism as a gentile betrayal and corruption of Judaism.

And yet, they weren’t exactly the only ones to take offense to aspects of the Paradise story, along with other Jewish texts. First, many philosophers like Philo, Plutarch, Celsus, Julian the Apostate had all thought that the anthropomorphous appearance of the biblical Creator didn’t really jive well with the more refined, philosophical idea of God that we see in Middle Platonic thought. This God was purely transcendental and above human reasoning and matter. He was an Ineffable God of the Gnostics and above the demiurgical God, the creator and rule of the physical and perishable world.

The Church Father Origen charges Celsus in Contra Celsus with spreading nasty rumors about how Christians are nothing more than feeble minded impious magicians and makes no distinction between the Christians and the Ophites because there was no such distinction to be made in the second century apparently. They also held Yahweh “accursed” just like how he cursed Adam, Eve and the serpent. According to Origen, these Ophites wouldn’t let anyone into their meetings unless they first curse Jesus, or at least the Judean version of Jesus that we can see in Ebionite/Jewish Christianity. This also reflects the kind of misotheism that was prevalent around that time period in which the Epicurean philosophers also were engaged in in their constant questioning of the gods and their subjects’ piousness and religiosity of their subjects.

The ruler of those named ‘archontics’ is termed the ‘accursed’ god. Who would venture to use such language—as if there could be an “accursed” divinity! Yet the God of the Mosaic cosmogony is termed an accursed divinity, because such is his character, and worthy of execration in the opinion of those who so regard him, inasmuch as he pronounced a curse upon the serpent, who introduced the first human beings to the knowledge of good and evil.

What could be more foolish or insane than such senseless wisdom? For what blunder has the Jewish lawgiver committed? and why do you accept, by means, as you say, of a certain allegorical and typical method of interpretation, the cosmogony which he gives, and the law of the Jews, while it is with unwillingness, O most impious man, that you give praise to the Creator of the world, who promised to give them all things; who promised to multiply their race to the ends of the earth, and to raise them up from the dead with the same flesh and blood, and who gave inspiration to their prophets; and, again, you slander him!

The Apostle Paul himself claimed that those who followed the Mosaic Law was cursed in Galatians 3:10, “For all who rely on the works of the law are under a curse, as it is written: “Cursed is everyone who does not continue to do everything written in the Book of the Law.” Paul also said that Christ redeemed his Church from the “curse of the law” and also said, “Cursed is everyone who is hung on a tree.”

Heretics like Marcion and Simon Magus do not hesitate to highlight the supposed ignorant, and vicious character of the wrongdoings of the demiurgical God by referencing Genesis, along with other biblical texts. The sacrifices to God in the Old Testament also match with other pagan deities in which their followers worshiped and offered libations and sacrifices to appease them and in exchange to material favors. The old tribal gods of pagan and Mesopotamian cultures always operated by making pacts and covenants. Jehovah made a covenant/pact with Abraham, Issac, Jacob, and Moses. They worshiped him and burned offerings to him, and in turn, they received his protection and material blessings. But everything with the Hebrew god was centered around law, not mercy. Kircher-Diagram_of_the_names_of_God The Israelites had to observe specific days and provide specific offerings as payment for the things that they gave him, and they were never in permanent security with him. If they slipped up, they were punished, and had pay back what was owed in more severe ways. And this is exactly how many Faustian pacts with demons also operate under as seen in Goetic texts that belong to the Solomonic tradition. In fact, names ascribed to the Hebrew god are used invoke both angels and demons!

They are names that are ascribed to various archons that are listed in Gnostic texts and in refutations of them by the Church Fathers. These various archons also have serpentine and dragon-like like shapes, much like Ialdabaoth and perhaps this is why the serpent is condemned in the Apocryphon of John. We also see this in the conceptions of the Seraphim as indicated by various biblical, apocalyptic Enochian literature as well. We also see serpentine and even dragon like features in Yahweh himself! Here are some supporting verses.

Zechariah 10:8: I (Yahweh) will hiss for them (Jews), and gather them; for I have redeemed them: and they shall increase as they have increased.

Isaiah 5:26: And he (Yahweh) will lift up an ensign to the nations from far, and will hiss unto them from the end of the earth: and, behold, they shall come with speed swiftly.

Smoke coming out of Yahweh’s nostrils (sounds very dragon like):

Psalm 18:8, 2 Samuel 22:9: There went up a smoke out of his [Yahweh] nostrils, and fire out of his mouth devoured: coals were kindled by it.

Yahweh spews fire from his mouth!

2 Samuel 22:9 (ESV): Smoke went up from his nostrils, and devouring fire from his mouth; glowing coals flamed forth from him.

And look, Yahweh has wings:

Psalm 17:8 (ESV) Keep me as the apple of your eye; hide me in the shadow of your wings.

So, Yahweh has wings, spews fire from his mouth and can breath fire and hisses. Doesn’t that sound exactly like a dragon and the Gnostic’s description of Ialdaboath as a lion-faced dragon? And according to Revelation 12:9, Satan is also depicted as a dragon. John 8:44, also hints at this reality, that the Devil is fathered by the Jewish god. The idea of the Devil indeed had a father was pretty hard to overcome by the part of the Church Fathers and in large part, they failed to address the pressures and difficulties made by the heretics. For example, we see Jerome who claimed that the father of the devil was the dragon Leviathan, also named as an archon by Celsus in his description of the Ophite diagram. Revelation-Chapter-12-The-Woman-and-Dragon The devil could not be a creation of God, or is a son because that would be supremely blasphemous and also contradictory because he is the son of a father who is a liar, and God is truth. Celsus also thought that the Christian concept of Satan was blasphemous. The Clementine Homilies (19:9) also explores the idea of the Devil being a creation of God:

But, as you said, if the evil one is created either he has been begotten as an animal, or he has been sent forth substantially by Him, or he has been compounded externally, or his will has arisen through composition; or it happened that he came into existence from things non-existent, without composition and the will of God; or he has been made by God from that which in no manner and nowhere exists; or the matter, being lifeless or living, from which he has arisen was outside of God; or he fashioned himself, or he was made by God, or he is a relative thing, or he ever existed: for we cannot say that he does not exist, since we have agreed in thinking that he does exist.

And Simon said: Well have you distinguished all the methods of accounting for his existence in a summary manner. Now it is my part to examine these various ideas, and to show that the Creator is blameable. But it is your business to prove, as you promised, that he is free from all blame. But I wonder if you will be able. For, first, if the devil has been begotten from God as an animal, the vice which is his is accordingly the same as that of him who sends him forth.

We see Simon asking all kinds of tough questions to Peter. This series of dilemmas embarrasses the chief of the Apostles in no small degree. He struggles to find any meaningful answers and gives what is probably the most half-assed, asinine answer in the history of all apologetics and it all starts with Peter.

I agree with you in believing that there is a prince of evil, of whose origin the Scripture has ventured to say nothing either true or false. But let us follow out the inquiry in many ways, as to how he has come into existence, if it is the fact that he has come into existence; and of the opinions which present themselves, let us select that which is most reverential, since in the case of probable opinions, that one is assumed with confidence which is based on the principle that we ought to attribute to God that which is more reverential…

In other words, Peter struggles to show that the true God cannot be the cause of evil, and that the scriptures has not chosen to explain the origin of the Devil. Simon isn’t satisfied with this evasive answer and ends by informing Peter that “If matter is equal to God both in duration and in power, and is also hostile to God, it produces of itself powers which are hostile to the will of God.” The Testimony of Truth also noticed this supreme contention between Simon and Peter as per the origins of the devil.

And in one place, Moses writes, “He made the devil a serpent those whom he has in his generation.” Also, in the book which is called “Exodus,” it is written thus: “He contended against the magicians, when the place was full of serpents according to their wickedness; and the rod which was in the hand of Moses became a serpent, (and) it swallowed the serpents of the magicians.”

Job 1 is all about measuring piety of Job in efforts to see if Job will indeed curse Yahweh. In this text, Yahweh and Satan seem to be virtually indistinguishable. They are openly in league with each other and Yahweh takes on Satan’s advice to test Job to see if he really is pious when all of his blessings are taken away and replaced with curses. Yes, Yahweh listens to the advice of Satan! Carl Jung in his book, Answer to Job, suggests that God is completely devoid in understanding of the human condition and therefore needs to incarnate in order to complete himself. In a sense this is a perfect metaphor for the process of gnosis. At times this God acts loving and merciful, so long as his edicts are obeyed. If they’re not, well, hell is to pay. 

The troubling thing for the writer of Job and for us is that Job is extremely pious and is blessed because of this. He is the quintessential icon of righteousness. He is man of justice. Job is the defender of the widow and the orphan. Job feeds the hungry and lends of his resources to those in need. When Job wrongs another man he pays restitution willingly and then some. Job is kind, generous and compassionate. And then God takes a big shit all over him. Job demands an accounting from God and rightly so. Except that God never does that. We can paraphrase the voice from the whirlwind quite simply. “I am God…shut the fuck up.” This is the voice of the Demiurge, the god of the whirlwind. Yahweh is on par with other pagan gods, like Zeus as well. So Yahweh punishes both the rebellious and the innocent without mercy. With stories like this, it really is amazing that a text like Job even made it into the cannon at all!

Returning to Simon and Peter’s discussion on the origins of the Devil and matter, both points of contention are equally fascinating and well worth the read, much like all of the Clementine literature. The discussion seems to mirror the points of contention between the Orthodox and the heretical, one insisting that God is blameless and perfect, while the other insisting that the Creator is completely at fault for producing evil and the Devil. Isaiah 45:7, indeed does support this view when it states, “I form the light and create darkness, I bring prosperity and create disaster; I, the LORD, do all these things.” At one point, Peter goes so far as to say that Simon is even worse then the Devil (CH 19.6)!

Peter said: But you, as being wicked, and hating God whom you have not known, utter blasphemous words. And Simon said: Remember that you have likened me to the author of evil. And Peter said: I confess it, I was wrong in comparing you to the evil one; for I was compelled to do so, because I have not found one who is your equal, or worse than you. For this reason I likened you to the evil one; for you happen to be much more wicked than the author of evil. For no one can prove that the evil one spoke against God; but all of us who are present see you speaking daringly against Him. And Simon said: He who seeks the truth ought not to gratify any one in any respect contrary to what is really true. For why does he make the inquiry at all? Why, I ask? For I am not also able, laying aside the accurate investigation of things, to spend all my time in the praise of that God whom I do not know.

This is also the view in which the Ophites held in how Ialdabaoth created calamity through his serpent, according to Irenaeus (Against Heresies 1.30.5).

This son is Nous himself, twisted into the form of a serpent; and hence were derived the spirit, the soul, and all mundane things: from this too were generated all oblivion, wickedness, emulation, envy, and death.

Later on, Sophia decides to take things into her own hands to counter Ialdaboath’s “crooked” serpent with a serpent of her own!

But their mother (Sophia) cunningly devised a scheme to seduce Eve and Adam, by means of the serpent, to transgress the command of Ialdabaoth. Eve listened to this as if it had proceeded from a son of God and yielded an easy belief. She also persuaded Adam to eat of the tree regarding which God had said that they should not eat of it. They then declare that, on their thus eating, they attained to the knowledge of that power which is above all, and departed from those who had created them.

As I said earlier in the series, this seems to match up with the Hypostasis of the Archons‘ account.

Then the female spiritual principle came in the snake, the instructor; and it taught them, saying, “What did he say to you? Was it, ‘From every tree in the garden shall you eat; yet – from the tree of recognizing good and evil do not eat’?” The carnal woman said, “Not only did he say ‘Do not eat’, but even ‘Do not touch it; for the day you eat from it, with death you are going to die.'”

And the snake, the instructor, said, “With death you shall not die; for it was out of jealousy that he said this to you. Rather your eyes shall open and you shall come to be like gods, recognizing evil and good.” And the female instructing principle was taken away from the snake, and she left it behind, merely a thing of the earth.

More interesting is that Eve seems not to be all that surprised that a snake is chatting it up with her about eating forbidden fruit that would eventually open her eyes, and be “like God, knowing good and evil” (Genesis 3:4). Another author makes a good case that the serpent was in actuality, an angelic being, forced to help Adam and Eve tend to the garden.

Actually, there is a great deal of other ancient evidence which suggests this serpent was a serpentine, or serpent-like, angel who previously fell from grace.(1) As mentioned in Giants of Scripture, there were angels fashioned around the same time as the creation of Adam, in order to help him out. We get a hint to this in the Bible: And again, when He (God) bringeth in the first begotten into the world, He saith, And let all the angels of God worship him. Hebrews 1:6 (KJV)

When they discovered how much preferential treatment God had given the man, these angels complained to God.(2) We also get a hint to the conversation of these angels to the Almighty, in regards to their dissatisfaction of Adam: Psalms (KJV) 8:4 What is man, that thou art mindful of him? and the son of man, that thou visitest him? 8:5 For thou hast made him a little lower than the angels, and has crowned him with glory and honor. 8:6 Thou madest him to have dominion of the works of thy hands…

God would not put up with their dissension, and caused them to fall – they lost their positions as heavenly angels and were condemned to serve Adam.

This would also support the Ophite view in how there were angels in the garden and they had sexual intercourse with Eve, and she begat half-angelic/half-human offspring much like what we see with the angels descending to earth to have intercourse with the daughters of men around Noah’s time.

…the others coming and admiring her beauty, named her Eve, and falling in love with her, begot sons by her, whom they also declare to be the angels.

Not all extra-biblical texts seem to have a positive view on the serpent either. The Apocalypse of Moses, for example, describes in some detail in how Satan persuaded the serpent to serve as a vessel though which he could speak to Eve and tempt her. This meant that Satan possessed the serpent! In the Hypostasis of the Archons, the spiritual woman, or Sophia enters to speak with Eve instead. For the Gnostics it was a good thing for Eve to eat the fruit of Gnosis. On the Origin of the World states that Eve, being the “female instructor of life” was found to be the wisest out of all the beings in Eden and was subsequently called “Beast” by the authorities, being the archons.

The Apocalypse of Moses is more orthodox in its view that eating the fruit was a death sentence for man. The world became defiled with this knowledge, in which many authors in the ancient world seem to think was also a sexual knowledge and fornication as a means to tempt and “beguile” Eve, which meant seduce. The fall of man was a result of this unholy sexual union with satanic children born as a result. It is interesting to note that most of Eve’s punishments and judgments revolve around sex and childbirth. Could all of this be related to this angelic/human seduction and fornication?CollierLilith8x6 This meant that Satan or what in Medieval Kabbalistic texts call “Samael,” had sexual intercourse with Eve and begat children like Cain and Abel. There is also a strong Kabbalistic tradition of Samael and Lilith always longing to have sexual intercourse. Tracy Twyman writes about this:

Because Samael and Lilith (a.k.a Leviathan and Behemoth) are constantly longing for each other, they found a way to mate via an “intermediary” called “Tanin’iver” (“Blind Dragon”) or “the Groomsman.”

She goes onto quote the Treatise of the Left Emanation and also writes:

This “Tanin’iver” is a “slithering serpent” without eyes who somehow enables the castrated Samael to have sex with Lilith. But if he were to “manifest fully,” then the destruction of the universe, which happens whenever these two “truly” mate, would come about anyway. So whatever Tanin’iver does for them, it has the capability of being just as good as the real thing. But mercifully, right now, it is not, or else we would all be dead.

In other words, the serpent is both a symbol of liberation from ignorance and at the same time, a symbol of sexual union, seduction and even destruction as I have demonstrated earlier in the series. The serpent is also strongly associated with being symbolic of Christ himself and the Gospel of John (3:14-15) certainly thinks so.

As Moses lifted up the serpent in the wilderness, even so must the Son of Man be lifted up; so that whoever believes will in Him have eternal life.

Christ is also depicted in terms of being a vegatative image, like the Holy Rood, the Tree of Life and the fruit of the tree of knowledge. Jesus is the fruit of eternal life, which was on the second forbidden tree in the Garden of Eden. Many other pagan gods of the ancient world were depicted as nature deities as well. When man ate of the fruit of the first tree, the tree of knowledge of good and evil, he was expelled from the Garden. The Garden is the place of unity, and non-duality like how the Pleroma is depicted in texts such as the Gospel of Truth. You eat of the fruit of duality, and you are on the way out into the wastelands of material reality.

The tree of returning to the Garden is the tree of immoral life, where the I and the Father are one. When Yawheh threw man out of the Garden, he put two cherubim at the gate, with a flaming sword between. At many Buddhist shrines, the Buddha is often depicted sitting under the Boddhi tree of immortal life, there are also at the gate, two guardians–similar to the guardian Cherubim that guard the Tree of Life. In these vegetation traditions there is the notion of identity behind the surface display of duality. Behind all these manifestations it the one radiance, which shines through all things.


Part 6 coming soon which wraps up all my thoughts on this series, including revisiting and exploring this idea of consuming the knowledge of good and evil and what it all really means…

Alex Rivera on the Gnostic Warrior Podcast


So, I was recently on the Gnostic Warrior podcast with Moe Bedard. Here I discuss material related to Gnosticism, Church History, Simon Magus, Marcion, and all kinds of heretical blasphemy. It looks like this blog writing thing of mine is taking off, right?

I’ll be back with some more posts in the near future but in the meantime I will be busy with school, work, and putting the final edits and touches of my post-apocalyptic/supernatural vampire fiction book, Crimson Dusk, which will (hopefully) come out in May. And no, it’s not YA or NA. It’s definitely geared towards a mature audience and if it were a movie, it would carry a very hard R rating but nothing too gratuitous. An article I wrote exclusively for a certain Gnostic journal will be out soon, as well. I am also working on a project as a co-writer with another occult researcher and I am also in the early stages on a book based on some of my theories you will find in this site. More information to come…