Gnosticism

Gnosticism

In the following summary, we will attempt to encapsulate in prose what the Gnostic myths express in their distinctively poetic and imaginative language.

The Cosmos

All religious traditions acknowledge that the world is imperfect. Where they differ is in the explanations which they offer to account for this imperfection and in what they suggest might be done about it. Gnostics have their own -- perhaps quite startling -- view of these matters: they hold that the world is flawed because it was created in a flawed manner.

Like Buddhism, Gnosticism begins with the fundamental recognition that earthly life is filled with suffering. In order to nourish themselves, all forms of life consume each other, thereby visiting pain, fear, and death upon one another (even herbivorous animals live by destroying the life of plants). In addition, so-called natural catastrophes -- earthquakes, floods, fires, drought, volcanic eruptions -- bring further suffering and death in their wake. Human beings, with their complex physiology and psychology, are aware not only of these painful features of earthly existence. They also suffer from the frequent recognition that they are strangers living in a world that is flawed and absurd.

Many religions advocate that humans are to be blamed for the imperfections of the world. Supporting this view, they interpret the Genesis myth as declaring that transgressions committed by the first human pair brought about a “fall” of creation resulting in the present corrupt state of the world. Gnostics respond that this interpretation of the myth is false. The blame for the world’s failings lies not with humans, but with the creator. Since -- especially in the monotheistic religions -- the creator is God, this Gnostic position appears blasphemous, and is often viewed with dismay even by non-believers.

Ways of evading the recognition of the flawed creation and its flawed creator have been devised over and over, but none of these arguments have impressed Gnostics. The ancient Greeks, especially the Platonists, advised people to look to the harmony of the universe, so that by venerating its grandeur they might forget their immediate afflictions. But since this harmony still contains the cruel flaws, forlornness and alienation of existence, this advice is considered of little value by Gnostics. Nor is the Eastern idea of Karma regarded by Gnostics as an adequate explanation of creation’s imperfection and suffering. Karma at best can only explain how the chain of suffering and imperfection works. It does not inform us in the first place why such a sorrowful and malign system should exist.

Once the initial shock of the “unusual” or “blasphemous” nature of the Gnostic explanation for suffering and imperfection of the world wears off, one may begin to recognize that it is in fact the most sensible of all explanations. To appreciate it fully, however, a familiarity with the Gnostic conception of the Godhead is required, both in its original essence as the True God and in its debased manifestation as the false or creator God.

Deity

The Gnostic God concept is more subtle than that of most religions. In its way, it unites and reconciles the recognitions of Monotheism and Polytheism, as well as of Theism, Deism and Pantheism.

In the Gnostic view, there is a true, ultimate and transcendent God, who is beyond all created universes and who never created anything in the sense in which the word “create” is ordinarily understood. While this True God did not fashion or create anything, He (or, It) “emanated” or brought forth from within Himself the substance of all there is in all the worlds, visible and invisible. In a certain sense, it may therefore be true to say that all is God, for all consists of the substance of God. By the same token, it must also be recognized that many portions of the original divine essence have been projected so far from their source that they underwent unwholesome changes in the process. To worship the cosmos, or nature, or embodied creatures is thus tantamount to worshipping alienated and corrupt portions of the emanated divine essence.

The basic Gnostic myth has many variations, but all of these refer to Aeons, intermediate deific beings who exist between the ultimate, True God and ourselves. They, together with the True God, comprise the realm of Fullness (Pleroma) wherein the potency of divinity operates fully. The Fullness stands in contrast to our existential state, which in comparison may be called emptiness.

One of the aeonial beings who bears the name Sophia (“Wisdom”) is of great importance to the Gnostic world view. In the course of her journeyings, Sophia came to emanate from her own being a flawed consciousness, a being who became the creator of the material and psychic cosmos, all of which he created in the image of his own flaw. This being, unaware of his origins, imagined himself to be the ultimate and absolute God. Since he took the already existing divine essence and fashioned it into various forms, he is also called the Demiurgos or “half-maker” There is an authentic half, a true deific component within creation, but it is not recognized by the half-maker and by his cosmic minions, the Archons or “rulers”.

The Human Being

Human nature mirrors the duality found in the world: in part it was made by the false creator God and in part it consists of the light of the True God. Humankind contains a perishable physical and psychic component, as well as a spiritual component which is a fragment of the divine essence. This latter part is often symbolically referred to as the “divine spark”. The recognition of this dual nature of the world and of the human being has earned the Gnostic tradition the epithet of “dualist”.

Humans are generally ignorant of the divine spark resident within them. This ignorance is fostered in human nature by the influence of the false creator and his Archons, who together are intent upon keeping men and women ignorant of their true nature and destiny. Anything that causes us to remain attached to earthly things serves to keep us in enslavement to these lower cosmic rulers. Death releases the divine spark from its lowly prison, but if there has not been a substantial work of Gnosis undertaken by the soul prior to death, it becomes likely that the divine spark will be hurled back into, and then re-embodied within, the pangs and slavery of the physical world.

Not all humans are spiritual (pneumatics) and thus ready for Gnosis and liberation. Some are earthbound and materialistic beings (hyletics), who recognize only the physical reality. Others live largely in their psyche (psychics). Such people usually mistake the Demiurge for the True God and have little or no awareness of the spiritual world beyond matter and mind.

In the course of history, humans progress from materialistic sensate slavery, by way of ethical religiosity, to spiritual freedom and liberating Gnosis. As the scholar G. Quispel wrote: “The world-spirit in exile must go through the Inferno of matter and the Purgatory of morals to arrive at the spiritual Paradise.” This kind of evolution of consciousness was envisioned by the Gnostics, long before the concept of evolution was known.

Salvation

Evolutionary forces alone are insufficient, however, to bring about spiritual freedom. Humans are caught in a predicament consisting of physical existence combined with ignorance of their true origins, their essential nature and their ultimate destiny. To be liberated from this predicament, human beings require help, although they must also contribute their own efforts.

From earliest times Messengers of the Light have come forth from the True God in order to assist humans in their quest for Gnosis. Only a few of these salvific figures are mentioned in Gnostic scripture; some of the most important are Seth (the third Son of Adam), Jesus, and the Prophet Mani. The majority of Gnostics always looked to Jesus as the principal savior figure (the Soter).

Gnostics do not look to salvation from sin (original or other), but rather from the ignorance of which sin is a consequence. Ignorance -- whereby is meant ignorance of spiritual realities -- is dispelled only by Gnosis, and the decisive revelation of Gnosis is brought by the Messengers of Light, especially by Christ, the Logos of the True God. It is not by His suffering and death but by His life of teaching and His establishing of mysteries that Christ has performed His work of salvation.

The Gnostic concept of salvation, like other Gnostic concepts, is a subtle one. On the one hand, Gnostic salvation may easily be mistaken for an unmediated individual experience, a sort of spiritual do-it-yourself project. Gnostics hold that the potential for Gnosis, and thus, of salvation is present in every man and woman, and that salvation is not vicarious but individual. At the same time, they also acknowledge that Gnosis and salvation can be, indeed must be, stimulated and facilitated in order to effectively arise within consciousness. This stimulation is supplied by Messengers of Light who, in addition to their teachings, establish salvific mysteries (sacraments) which can be administered by apostles of the Messengers and their successors.

One needs also remember that knowledge of our true nature -- as well as other associated realizations -- are withheld from us by our very condition of earthly existence. The True God of transcendence is unknown in this world, in fact He is often called the Unknown Father. It is thus obvious that revelation from on High is needed to bring about salvation. The indwelling spark must be awakened from its terrestrial slumber by the saving knowledge that comes “from without”.

Conduct

If the words “ethics” or “morality” are taken to mean a system of rules, then Gnosticism is opposed to them both. Such systems usually originate with the Demiurge and are covertly designed to serve his purposes. If, on the other hand, morality is said to consist of an inner integrity arising from the illumination of the indwelling spark, then the Gnostic will embrace this spiritually informed existential ethic as ideal.

To the Gnostic, commandments and rules are not salvific; they are not substantially conducive to salvation. Rules of conduct may serve numerous ends, including the structuring of an ordered and peaceful society, and the maintenance of harmonious relations within social groups. Rules, however, are not relevant to salvation; that is brought about only by Gnosis. Morality therefore needs to be viewed primarily in temporal and secular terms; it is ever subject to changes and modifications in accordance with the spiritual development of the individual.

As noted in the discussion above, “hyletic materialists” usually have little interest in morality, while “psychic disciplinarians” often grant to it a great importance. In contrast, “Pneumatic spiritual” persons are generally more concerned with other, higher matters. Different historical periods also require variant attitudes regarding human conduct. Thus both the Manichaean and Cathar Gnostic movements, which functioned in times where purity of conduct was regarded as an issue of high import, responded in kind. The present period of Western culture perhaps resembles in more ways that of second and third century Alexandria. It seems therefore appropriate that Gnostics in our age adopt the attitudes of classical Alexandrian Gnosticism, wherein matters of conduct were largely left to the insight of the individual.

Gnosticism embraces numerous general attitudes toward life: it encourages non-attachment and non-conformity to the world, a “being in the world, but not of the world”; a lack of egotism; and a respect for the freedom and dignity of other beings. Nonetheless, it appertains to the intuition and wisdom of every individual “Gnostic” to distill from these principles individual guidelines for their personal application.

Destiny

When Confucius was asked about death, he replied: “Why do you ask me about death when you do not know how to live?” This answer might easily have been given by a Gnostic. To a similar question posed in the Gnostic Gospel of Thomas, Jesus answered that human beings must come by Gnosis to know the ineffable, divine reality from whence they have originated, and whither they will return. This transcendental knowledge must come to them while they are still embodied on earth.

Death does not automatically bring about liberation from bondage in the realms of the Demiurge. Those who have not attained to a liberating Gnosis while they were in embodiment may become trapped in existence once more. It is quite likely that this might occur by way of the cycle of rebirths. Gnosticism does not emphasize the doctrine of reincarnation prominently, but it is implicitly understood in most Gnostic teachings that those who have not made effective contact with their transcendental origins while they were in embodiment would have to return into the sorrowful condition of earthly life.

In regard to salvation, or the fate of the spirit and soul after death, one needs to be aware that help is available. Valentinus, the greatest of Gnostic teachers, taught that Christ and Sophia await the spiritual man -- the pneumatic Gnostic -- at the entrance of the Pleroma, and help him to enter the bridechamber of final reunion. Ptolemaeus, disciple of Valentinus, taught that even those not of pneumatic status, the psychics, could be redeemed and live in a heavenworld at the entrance of the Pleroma. In the fullness of time, every spiritual being will receive Gnosis and will be united with its higher Self -- the angelic Twin -- thus becoming qualified to enter the Pleroma. None of this is possible, however, without earnest striving for Gnosis.

Gnosis and Psyche: The Depth Psychological Connection

Throughout the twentieth Century the new scientific discipline of depth psychology has gained much prominence. Among the depth psychologists who have shown a pronounced and informed interest in Gnosticism, a place of signal distinction belongs to C. G. Jung. Jung was instrumental in calling attention to the Nag Hammadi library of Gnostic writings in the 1950's because he perceived the outstanding psychological relevance of Gnostic insights.

The noted scholar of Gnosticism, G. Filoramo, wrote: "Jung's reflections had long been immersed in the thought of the ancient Gnostics to such an extent that he considered them the virtual discoverers of 'depth psychology' . . . ancient Gnosis, albeit in its form of universal religion, in a certain sense prefigured, and at the same time helped to clarify, the nature of Jungian spiritual therapy." In the light of such recognitions one may ask: "Is Gnosticism a religion or a psychology?" The answer is that it may very-well be both. Most mythologems found in Gnostic scriptures possess psychological relevance and applicability. For instance the blind and arrogant creator-demiurge bears a close resemblance to the alienated human ego that has lost contact with the ontological Self. Also, the myth of Sophia resembles closely the story of the human psyche that loses its connection with the collective unconscious and needs to be rescued by the Self. Analogies of this sort exist in great profusion.

Many esoteric teachings have proclaimed, "As it is above, so it is below." Our psychological nature (the microcosm) mirrors metaphysical nature (the macrocosm), thus Gnosticism may possess both a psychological and a religious authenticity. Gnostic psychology and Gnostic religion need not be exclusive of one another but may complement each other within an implicit order of wholeness. Gnostics have always held that divinity is immanent within the human spirit, although it is not limited to it. The convergence of Gnostic religious teaching with psychological insight is thus quite understandable in terms of time-honored Gnostic principles.

Conclusion

Some writers make a distinction between “Gnosis” and “Gnosticism”. Such distinctions are both helpful and misleading. Gnosis is undoubtedly an experience based not in concepts and precepts, but in the sensibility of the heart. Gnosticism, on the other hand, is the world-view based on the experience of Gnosis. For this reason, in languages other than English, the word Gnosis is often used to denote both the experience and the world view (die Gnosis in German, la Gnose in French).

In a sense, there is no Gnosis without Gnosticism, for the experience of Gnosis inevitably calls forth a world view wherein it finds its place. The Gnostic world view is experiential, it is based on a certain kind of spiritual experience of Gnosis. Therefore, it will not do to omit, or to dilute, various parts of the Gnostic world view, for were one to do this, the world view would no longer conform to experience.

Theology has been called an intellectual wrapping around the spiritual kernel of a religion. If this is true, then it is also true that most religions are being strangled and stifled by their wrappings. Gnosticism does not run this danger, because its world view is stated in myth rather than in theology. Myths, including the Gnostic myths, may be interpreted in diverse ways. Transcendence, numinosity, as well as psychological archetypes along with other elements, play a role in such interpretation. Still, such mythic statements tell of profound truths that will not be denied.

Gnosticism can bring us such truths with a high authority, for it speaks with the voice of the highest part of the human -- the spirit. Of this spirit, it has been said, “it bloweth where it listeth”. This then is the reason why the Gnostic world view could not be extirpated in spite of many centuries of persecution.

The Gnostic world view has always been timely, for it always responded best to the “knowledge of the heart” that is true Gnosis. Yet today, its timeliness is increasing, for the end of the second millennium has seen the radical deterioration of many ideologies which evaded the great questions and answers addressed by Gnosticism. The clarity, frankness, and authenticity of the Gnostic answer to the questions of the human predicament cannot fail to impress and (in time) to convince. If your reactions to this summary have been of a similarly positive order, then perhaps you are a Gnostic yourself!

Internet Source Reference:

www.religioustolerance.org/gnostic.htm

GNOSTICISM:ANCIENT AND MODERN

Summary:

Gnosticism is a philosophical and religious movement which started in pre-Christian times. The term is derived from the Greek word gnosis which means "knowledge". It is pronounced with a silent "G" (NO-sis). Gnostics claimed to have secret knowledge about God, humanity and the rest of the universe of which the general population was unaware. It became one of the three main belief systems within 1st century Christianity, and was noted for its:

novel beliefs about Gods, the Bible and the world which differed from those of other Christian groups

tolerance of different religious beliefs within and outside of Gnosticism

lack of discrimination against women

The movement and its literature were essentially wiped out by the end of the 5th century CE by heresy hunters from mainline Christianity. Its beliefs are currently experiencing a rebirth throughout the world. The counter-cult movement and some other Christian ministries disseminate a great deal of misinformation about the movement (10,11,12)

History

Gnosticism consisted of many syncretistic belief systems which combined elements taken from Asian, Babylonian, Egyptian, Greek and Syrian pagan religions, from astrology, and from Judaism and Christianity. They constituted one of the three main branches of early Christianity: the other two being:

the remnants of the Jewish Christian sect which was created by Jesus' disciples, and

the churches started by St. Paul, that were eventually to grow and develop into "mainline" Christianity by the end of the third century.

By the second century CE, many very different Christian-Gnostic sects had formed within the Roman Empire at the eastern end of the Mediterranean. Some Gnostics worked within Jewish Christian and mainline Christian groups, and greatly influenced their beliefs from within. Others formed separate communities. Still others were solitary practitioners.

As mainline Christianity grew in strength and organization, Gnostic sects came under increasing pressure and persecution. They almost disappeared by the 6th century. The only group to have survived into modern times is the Mandaean sect of Iraq and Iran. This group has about 15,000 members (one source says 1,500), and can trace their history continuously back to the original Gnostic movement.

Many new emerging religions in the West have adopted ancient Gnostic beliefs and practices.

Sources of Ancient Gnostic Information

Until recently, only a few pieces of Gnostic literature were known to exist. These included Shepherd of Men, Asclepius, Codex Askewianus, Codex Brucianus, Gospel of Mary, Secret Gospel of John, Odes of Solomon and the Hymn of the Pearl. Knowledge about this movement had been inferred mainly from extensive attacks that were made on Gnosticism by Christian heresiologists (writers against heresy) of the second and early third century. These included Irenaeus (130? - 200? CE), Clement of Alexandria (145? - 213?), Tertullian (160? - 225?) and Hippolytus (170? - 236). Unfortunately, the heresy hunters were not particularly accurate or objective in their analysis of Gnosticism

In 1945, Mohammed Ali es_Samman, a camel driver from El Qasr in Egypt, went with his brother to a cliff near Nag Hummadi, a village in Northern Egypt. They were digging for nitrate-rich earth that they could use for fertilizer. They came across a large clay jar buried in the ground. They were undecided whether to open it. They feared that it might contain an evil spirit; but they also suspected that it might contain gold or other material of great value. It turns out that their second guess was closer to the truth: the jar contained a library of Gnostic material of unmeasurable value. 13 volumes survive, comprising 51 different works on 1153 pages. 6 were copies of works that were already known; 6 others were duplicated within the library, and 41 were new, previously unknown works. Included were The Gospel of Thomas, Gospel of Truth, Treatise on the Resurrection, Gospel of Philip, Wisdom of Jesus Christ, Revelation of James, Letter of Peter to Philip, On the Origin of the World and other writings. Of these, the Gospel of Thomas is considered the most important. It was a collection of the sayings of Jesus which were recorded very early in the Christian era. A later Gnostic author edited the Gospel. Some liberal theologians rank it equal in importance to the 4 Gospels of the Christian Scriptures.

The works had originally been written in Greek during the second and third centuries CE. The Nag Hummadi copies had been translated into the Coptic language during the early 4th century CE, and apparently buried circa 365 CE. Some Gnostic texts were non-Christian; others were originally non-Christian but had Christian elements added; others were entirely Christian documents. Some recycled paper was used to reinforce the leather bindings of the books. They were found to contain dated letters and business documents from the middle of the 4th century. The books may have been hidden for save-keeping during a religious purge.

The texts passed through the hands of a number of mysterious middlemen, and finally were consolidated and stored in the Coptic Museum of Cairo. Publication was delayed by the Suez Crisis, the Arab-Israeli war of 1967, and petty debates among scholars. The most important book, the Gospel of Thomas, was finally translated into English during the late 1960's; the remaining books were translated during the following ten years. In many ways, this find reveals more about the early history of Christianity than do the Dead Sea Scrolls.

Beliefs

The Nag Hummadi find revealed that there was a broad range of beliefs among the various independent Gnostic systems or schools. The However, the following points are believed to be generally accurate throughout the movement:

Their Role: They believed that they alone truly understood Christ's message, and that other streams of thought within Christianity had misinterpreted Jesus' mission and sayings.

Gnosis: Knowledge to them was not an intellectual exercise; it was not a passive understanding of some aspect of spirituality. Rather, knowledge had a redeeming and liberating function that helped the individual break free of bondage to the world.

Deity: The Supreme Father God or Supreme God of Truth is remote from human affairs; he is unknowable and undetectable by human senses. She/he created a series of supernatural but finite beings called Aeons. One of these was Sophia, a virgin, who in turn gave birth to an defective, inferior Creator-God, also known as the Demiurge. (Demiurge means "public craftsman" in Greek.) This lower God created the earth and its life forms. This is the God of the Hebrew Scriptures (Old Testament), a deity who was viewed as fundamentally evil, jealous, rigid, lacking in compassion and prone to genocide. The Demiurge "thinks that he is supreme. His pride and incompetence have resulted in the sorry state of the world as we know it, and in the blind and ignorant condition of most of mankind."

Duality of spirit and body: Spirit is of divine origin and good; the body is inherently earthly and evil. Gnostics were hostile to the physical world, to matter and the human body. But they believed that trapped within some people's bodies were the sparks of divinity or seeds of light that were supplied to humanity by Sophia.

Salvation: A person attains salvation by learning secret knowledge of their spiritual essence: a divine spark of light or spirit. They then have the opportunity to escape from the prison of their bodies at death. Their soul can ascend to be reunited with the Supreme God at the time of their death. Gnostics divided humanity into three groups:

the spiritual, who would be saved irrespective of their behavior while on earth

the Soulish, who could be saved if they followed the Gnostic path

the carnal who are hopelessly lost

Evil: They did not look upon the world as having been created perfectly and then having degenerated as a result of the sin of Adam and Eve. Rather the world was seen as being evil at the time of its origin, having been created by an inferior God.

Snake Symbol: Some Gnostic sects honored the snake. They did not view the snake as a seducer who led the first couple into sinful behavior. Rather, they saw him as a liberator who brought knowledge to Adam and Eve by convincing them to eat of the Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil and thus to become fully human.

Christ: The role of the redeemer in Gnostic belief is heavily debated at this time. Gnostics seem to have looked upon Christ as a revealer or liberator, rather than a savior or judge. His purpose was to spread knowledge which would free individuals from the Demiurge's control and allow them to return to their spiritual home with the Supreme God at death. Some Gnostic groups promoted Docetism, the belief that Christ was pure spirit and only had a phantom body; Jesus just appeared to be human to his followers. They reasoned that a true emissary from the Supreme God could not have been overcome by the evil of the world, and to have suffered and died. These beliefs were considered heresy by mainline Christians. Some Gnostics believed that Christ's resurrection occurred at or before Jesus' death on the cross. They defined his resurrection as occurring when his spirit was liberated from his body. Many Gnostics believed that Jesus had both male and female disciples.

The Universe: This is divided into three kingdoms:

The "Earthly Cosmos": The earth is the center of the universe, and is composed of the world that we know of and an underworld. It is surrounded by air and by 7 concentric heavenly spheres: one for each of the Moon, Venus, Mercury, Sun, Mars, Jupiter, and Saturn. (Although the planet Uranus is visible to the naked eye, it was not recognized as a planet in ancient times.) Beyond Saturn resides Leviathan, a snake coiled in a single circle, devouring its own tail. Within these spheres live demonic, tyrannical entities called Archons. Beyond them lies Paradise which contains the "Tree of Life", the "Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil", and the flaming, turning sword of Genesis 3:24. Beyond Paradise was the sphere of the fixed stars, divided into the 12 signs of the zodiac.

The "Intermediate Kingdom is composed of an inner blue circle of darkness and an outer yellow ring of light. Within these rings is a sphere which is the realm of Sophia.

The "Kingdom of God" consists of two spheres: an outer one of the unknowable Supreme God, and inner ring of the Son.

Practices

Little is known about the rituals, organizational structure and practices of the ancient Gnostics. Almost all Gnostic texts were destroyed during various campaigns to suppress the movement. Although some of their religious writings survive, there is little information about how the groups actually functioned. Religious historians believe that:

Many Gnostics were probably solitary practitioners. Others were members of mainline Christian congregations, probably forming a clique within each church.

There was no consensus on a "canon of Gnostic scripture." Many books were circulated in different versions; various schools within the movement had their own preferred rendition.

Many Gnostic texts were written by (or attributed to) women. Mary Magdelene played an important role in many Gnostic writings, often being second only to Jesus in status. They used both female and male images for the Supreme God. Theologians speculate that they probably treated women members as equal (or of almost equal status) to men in their communities.

Some groups poured a substance over the head of a member when they were dead or dying, and recited certain ritual phrases. This was intended to help the individual's soul ascend through the dangerous heavens of the Archons towards the Supreme God.

Some Gnostic groups had a ritual in which new members were baptized saying: "In the name of the Father unknown to all, in the Truth, Mother of All, in the One who came down upon Jesus, in the union, redemption and communion of powers."

Sexual expression seems to have been suppressed in some Gnostic groups; members were expected to remain celibate. In others, ritual sex magic appears to have been practiced.

Ancient Gnostic Leaders

Simon Magus: He was one of the earliest Gnostics He was skilled in the arts of magic. He interpreted the Garden of Eden, exodus from Egypt and the crossing of the Red Sea as allegories.

Marcion: (85-160 CE) He organized a series of Gnostic congregations in the eastern Mediterranean which survived into the 3rd century CE. He wrote a book called Antitheses which earned him excommunication by the Christian leaders of Rome. He rejected the institution of marriage. He believed that the Demiurge arranged Jesus' persecution and crucifixion. But the death of Christ on the cross was only a hallucination, since Jesus did not have a physical body.

Valentinus: He was born in Egypt, traveled to Rome about 140 CE and then moved to Cyprus. He was the founder of perhaps the largest and most influential school of Gnosticism which lasted until it was suppressed in the 4th century CE. He taught that groups of Aeons made up the "pleroma (fullness) of the High God. One group, the Ogoad are called: Depth, Silence, Mind, Truth, Word, Life, Man and Church. Another group was the Decad (10) and Dodecad (12). The last of the Docecad was Wisdom, also called Sophia.

Carpocrates: (circa 140 CE); He taught reincarnation. An individual had to live many lives and adsorb a full range of experiences before being able to return to God. They practiced free sexuality. They believed that Jesus was the son of Joseph.

Interaction of Gnosticism and Early Mainline Christianity

Some Gnostic beliefs and leaders may have infiltrated mainline Christianity and influenced the authors of the Christian Scriptures (New Testament)

Some theologians believe that the Carpocratian Gnostics were the target of Jude's attack about "...certain men" who " have secretly slipped in among you,". The book of Jude, Verses 4 to 19, deals mainly with these infiltrators.

Simon Magus, an early Gnostic, may have been the Simon mentioned in Acts 8:9-24. Simon believed in Jesus and was baptized with a group of other believers. But none had received the Holy Spirit until Peter and John placed their hands on the new converts. Simon asked for the laying on of the apostles' hands and even offered money. Peter refused, because Simon's heart was not right with God.

Matthew 4:8-9 describes how Satan took Jesus to a very high mountain and offered him all of the kingdoms of the world if Jesus would only bow down and worship him. This passage has always been difficult to understand, because it implies that the world belonged to the Devil and was his to give away to Christ. But the passage matches Gnostic belief very closely.

DEISM VS. REVEALED RELIGION

Revelation, or revealed religion, is defined in Webster's New World Dictionary as: "God's disclosure to man of Himself." This should read, "God's alleged disclosure to man of himself." For unless God reveals to each of us individually that a particular religion is truly His disclosure to us of Himself, then, by believing that religion, we are not taking His word for it, but we are instead putting our belief in the person or institution telling us it is so. This is what we are doing when we believe in any revealed religion, and that's all Christianity is. It's a revealed religion like many others such as Islam and Judaism. Revealed religion gets dangerous however, when it crosses over the line into politics. This is the admitted goal of the Christian Coalition. God allegedly revealed to Pat Robertson and his Coalition, that He wants them to take over America and eventually the world with "His Word," so the laws of the nations will mirror the laws in the Bible, which, if you know what's in the Bible, is terrifying. This, too, is what the Ayatollah's goal was, only his "revealed word of God" was the Koran, an other revelation. Are we to believe Pat when he says the Bible is revelation of God's Word?

As THINK! has already offered several examples in the above article, YANKING THE TEETH FROM THE RELIGIOUS RIGHT, taken directly from the Bible itself to prove itself false and NOT the Word of God, reason alone will now be used to demonstrate Christianity is NOT revelation from God.

Thomas Paine, the man who elucidated Deism for the masses and who is the primary personal impetus for THINK! and the World Union of Deists, wrote:

"The Calvinist, who damns children of a span long to hell to burn forever for the glory of God (and this is called Christianity), and the Universalist who preaches that all shall be saved and none shall be damned (and this also is called Christianity), boasts alike of their holy [reveled] religion and their Christian faith.

"Something more therefore is necessary than mere cry and wholesale assertion, and that something is TRUTH; and as inquiry is the road to truth, he that is opposed to inquiry is not a friend to truth. "The God of truth is not the God of fable; when, therefore, any book is introduced into the world as the Word of God, and made a groundwork for religion, it ought to be scrutinized more than other books to see if it bear evidence of being what it is called. Our reverence to God demands that we do this, lest we ascribe to God what is not His, and our duty to ourselves demands it lest we take fable for fact, and rest our hope of salvation on a false foundation.

"It is not our calling a book holy that makes it so, any more than our calling a religion holy that entitles it to the name. Inquiry therefore is necessary in order to arrive at truth. But inquiry must have some principle to proceed on, some standard to judge by, superior to human authority.

"When we survey the works of creation, the revolutions of the planetary system, and the whole economy of what is called nature, which is no other than the laws the Creator has prescribed to matter, we see unerring order and universal harmony reigning throughout the whole. No one part contradicts another. The sun does not run against the moon, nor the moon against the sun, nor the planets against each other. Everything keeps its appointed time and place.

"This harmony in the works of God is so obvious, that the farmer of the field, though he cannot calculate eclipses, is as sensible of it as the philosophical astronomer. He sees the God of order in every part of the visible universe."

"Here, then, is the standard to which everything must be brought that pretends to be the work or Word of God, and by this standard it must be judged, independently of anything and everything that man can say or do. His opinion is like a feather in the scale compared with the standard that God Himself has set up."

Since we know we did not create the creation or ourselves, yet we and the creation do exist, it is logical to believe that God, or an Eternal Cause or Creator created us. This belief has absolutely nothing to do with revealed religion. In fact, all the absurdities of revealed religion are responsible for many sincere thinking people to reject and close their minds to natural religion/Deism. The priests, ministers, and rabbis need to suppress, or at least complicate, the pure and simple belief and realization of Deism for their own job security. And the power elites have no use for Deism because they can't use Deism to "inspire" mankind to wage war against itself for the elitists' own selfish purposes. In fact, Deism, by focusing on the first creed of all religions, belief in God, could frustrate the war/money machine permanently.

The following quote from Thomas Jefferson points us in a direction free of the confusion of priest-craft and revealed religion:

"I hold (without appeal to revelation) that when we take a view of the universe, in its parts, general or particular, it is impossible for the human mind not to perceive and feel a conviction of design, consummate skill, and indefinite power in every atom of its composition. The movements of the heavenly bodies, so exactly held in their course by the balance of centrifugal and centripetal forces; the structure of the Earth itself, with its distribution of lands, waters and atmosphere; animal and vegetable bodies, examined in all their minutest particles; insects, mere atoms of life, yet as perfectly organized as man or mammoth; the mineral substances, their generation and uses, it is impossible, I say, for the human mind not to believe, that there is in all this, design, cause and effect, up to an ultimate cause, a Fabricator of all things from matter and motion, their Preserver and Regulator, while permitted to exist in their present forms, and their regeneration into new and other forms. We see, too, evident proofs of the necessity of a superintending power, to maintain the universe in its course and order."

Because Deism is based on nature, the laws of nature, and the creation, it is a natural religion as opposed to revealed or man-made artificial religion.

DEISM VS. ATHEISM

In George H. Smith's book ATHEISM - THE CASE AGAINST GOD, it is stated that rationality will not lead to God. That instead, God can only be brought about by rationalization. The book describes rationality as first finding evidence, then arriving at the idea, like Newton seeing the apple fall to the ground and then discovering the law of gravity. It then describes rationalization as first accepting an idea and then searching for evidence to support it, like someone inventing the idea of God and then saying God created the universe. Deism says it is rationality and reason that leads to God. To the Deist, the evidence is the creation and the idea of what brought about the evidence is the Creator. There is absolutely nothing known to man that created itself. For example, if someone shows us a computer, and tells us that all the individual parts that make up the computer just came about by chance, that they somehow just formed into a perfectly working computer system all by themselves, we would be foolish to believe that person. Reason, if we use it, won't let us believe a statement like that. Likewise, if someone tells us the ever growing creation and its perfect order "happened" by pure chance, we are under no obligation to believe them. From our own experience we know everything created has a creator. Why then should the creation itself be different? There is, however, one quality the creation has that makes leaving its existence to chance even more remote. That quality is motion.

Turning again to Thomas Paine we find the following pertinent observation he made regarding atheism in a speech to the Society of Theophilanthropists in Paris, France, shortly after the French Revolution:

"In the first place, admitting matter to have properties, as we see it has, the question still remains, how came matter by those properties? To this they will answer, that matter possessed those properties eternally. This is not solution, but assertion; and to deny it is as impossible of proof as to assert it.

"It is then necessary to go further; and therefore I say - if there exist a circumstance that is not a property of matter, and without which the universe, or to speak in a limited degree, the solar system composed of planets and a sun, could not exist a moment, all the arguments of atheism, drawn from properties of matter, and applied to account for the universe, will be overthrown, and the existence of a superior cause, or that which man calls God, becomes discoverable, as is before said, by natural philosophy.

"I go now to show that such a circumstance exists, and what it is.

"The universe is composed of matter, and, as a system, is sustained by motion. Motion is not a property of matter, and without this motion, the solar system could not exist. Were motion a property of matter, that undiscovered and undiscoverable thing called perpetual motion would establish itself.

"It is because motion is not a property of matter, that perpetual motion is an impossibility in the hand of every being but that of the Creator of motion. When the pretenders to atheism can produce perpetual motion, and not till then, they may expect to be credited.

"The natural state of matter, as to place, is a state of rest. Motion, or change of place, is the effect of an external cause acting upon matter. As to that faculty of matter that is called gravitation, it is the influence which two or more bodies have reciprocally on each other to unite and be at rest. Everything which has hitherto been discovered, with respect to the motion of the planets in the system, relates only to the laws by which motion acts, and not to the cause of motion.

"Gravitation, so far from being the cause of motion to the planets that compose the solar system, would be the destruction of the solar system, were revolutionary motion to cease; for as the action of spinning upholds a top, the revolutionary motion upholds the planets in their orbits, and prevents them from gravitating and forming one mass with the sun. In one sense of the word, philosophy knows, and atheism says, that matter is in perpetual motion.

"But the motion here meant refers to the state of matter, and that only on the surface of the Earth. It is either decomposition, which is continually destroying the form of bodies of matter, or recomposition, which renews that matter in the same or another form, as the decomposition of animal or vegetable substances enters into the composition of other bodies.

"But the motion that upholds the solar system, is of an entirely different kind, and is not a property of matter. It operates also to an entirely different effect. It operates to perpetual preservation, and to prevent any change in the state of the system.

"Giving then to matter all the properties which philosophy knows it has, or all that atheism ascribes to it, and can prove, and even supposing matter to be eternal, it will not account for the system of the universe, or of the solar system, because it will not account for motion, and it is motion that preserves it.

"When, therefore, we discover a circumstance of such immense importance, that without it the universe could not exist, and for which neither matter, nor any nor all the properties can account, we are by necessity forced into the rational conformable belief of the existence of a cause superior to matter, and that cause man calls GOD.

"As to that which is called nature, it is no other than the laws by which motion and action of every kind, with respect to unintelligible matter, are regulated. And when we speak of looking through nature up to nature's God, we speak philosophically the same rational language as when we speak of looking through human laws up to the power that ordained them.

"God is the power of first cause, nature is the law, and matter is the subject acted upon."

In addition to motion acting as a perpetual preserver, it also acts as a continual source for the universe's constant expansion. Every second the universe is expanding at the speed of light (186,282 miles per second). According to Astronomy Magazine, 2/14/92, page 49, "Astronomers presently believe there isn't enough mass in the universe, even with dark matter, to stop its expansion." This exciting realization should fill everyone with unlimited appreciation when we realize we are a part of this amazing and spectacular universe! The Creator is immeasurably generous!

In ATHEISM - THE CASE AGAINST GOD, the author writes, " . . .when I claim not to believe in a god, I mean that I do not believe in anything "above" or "beyond" the natural, knowable universe." Deism teaches that the Creator is knowable and discoverable through the creation itself. It is very understandable how people could be turned off by man-made religions and superstitions with their bombings and financial beg-a-thons, and confuse artificial or revealed religion with God. However, the atheist attitude of accepting things simply as not knowable is dangerous to the progress of humanity. Many things were not knowable in the past that are knowable today. At one time Europeans believed it was impossible to know what was on the other side of the Atlantic Ocean: but they were wrong. As we learn more about the sciences, we are learning more about the Power that put those principles in place. An eternal Being, as Thomas Paine said, "whose power is equal to His will."

DEISM AND DEATH

Revealed religions all teach different opinions on death. Even the different denominations of the same umbrella religion preach different dogmas. A good example is Christianity. Some of the Christian denominations say an essential qualification to get into heaven (of course they all agree dying is a key requirement) is that you have to be baptized "by submersion," while others say just a "sprinkling" is fine. Which is it? Sprinkling or submersion??

The fear of death is a big motivator for many people to support a particular religion. We all know, without the possibility of doubt, that a day will come for absolutely all of us when we will die. This realization brings fear to many people. It also brings money to religious charlatans who aren't ashamed to prey on this fear. In fact, it can be truthfully said that the revealed religions of the world all use the fear of death to put cash in their own pockets.

Contrary to this self-serving attitude of the revealed religions, Deism teaches that no one knows for certain what happens after death, if anything at all. It teaches that, based on the creation we are all a part of, we shouldn't worry about it. That instead, we should be concerned for the present and future of planet Earth and humanity. That we should work hard to improve life and also enjoy it here and now. Why should we worry about death when we have so much to do in life? And do we think so little of Nature's God that we don't trust Him with our future? Ethan Allen, a Deist from America's Revolutionary War era, wrote, "Ungrateful and foolish it must be for rational beings in the possession of existence, and surrounded with a kind and almighty Providence, to distrust the author thereof concerning their futurity, because they cannot comprehend the mode or manner of their succeeding and progressive existence."

Another Deist that had interesting thoughts on death was Benjamin Franklin. One quote of Franklin's was, "Take courage mortal, death cannot banish you from the universe."

Ben Franklin's epitaph on himself provides a look at his belief that our life on earth is not the beginning and end of a personality. He, like Ethan Allen above, seems to have believed that the state of our spirits or souls is of an evolutionary nature. Franklin's epitaph reads, "The body of Benjamin Franklin, printer, like the cover of an old book, its contents torn out and stripped of its lettering and gilding, lies here, food for worms. But the work shall not be lost; for it will, as he believed, appear once more in a new and more elegant edition, revised and corrected by the Author."

In Thomas Paine's the AGE OF REASON, we read on pages 177 and 178 the following: "But all other arguments apart, the consciousness of existence is the only conceivable idea we have of another life, and the continuance of that consciousness is immortality. The consciousness of existence, of the knowing that we exist, is not necessarily confined to the same form, nor to the same matter, even in this life.

"We have not in all cases the same form, nor in any case the same matter that composed our bodies twenty or thirty years ago; and yet we are conscious of being the same persons. . .

"That the consciousness of existence is not dependent on the same form or the same matter is demonstrated to our senses in the works of the creation, as far as our senses are capable of receiving that demonstration. A very numerous part of the animal creation preaches to us, far better than Paul, the belief of a life hereafter. Their little life resembles an Earth and a heaven - a present and a future state, and comprises, if it may be so expressed, immortality in miniature.

"The most beautiful parts of the creation to our eye are the winged insects, and they are not so originally. They acquire that form and that inimitable brilliancy by progressive changes. The slow and creeping caterpillar-worm of today passes in a few days to a torpid figure and a state resembling death; and in the next change comes forth in all the miniature magnificence of life, a splendid butterfly."

In an essay Mr. Paine wrote the following short and to the point passage:

"I consider myself in the hands of my Creator, and that he will dispose of me after this life consistently with His justice and goodness. I leave all these matters to Him, as my Creator and friend, and I hold it to be presumption in man to make an article of faith as to what the Creator will do with us hereafter."

MASONIC SYMBOLISM

SOURCE: THE DEADLY DECEPTION

James Shaw & Tom McKenney, Huntington House Inc., Lafayette, LA, 1988, Appendix B, pp. 142-144.

1. THE ULTIMATE DECEPTION

Masonry is, according to its own philosophers, a system of pure religion expressed in symbols, one which cannot be understood without a knowledge of the true meaning of them. This makes a proper understanding of those symbols terribly important. For the Christian Mason, accepting and guarding those symbols and their "secrets" with his physical life at stake, he must understand them to know that he is doing right.

For the many zealous Masons, trusting their obedience to their obligations to gain them entrance into that "Celestial Lodge Above," those for whom "the Lodge is a good enough religion," the correct understanding of these symbols is the key (they believe) to their eternal destiny. They are trusting in the teachings of the Lodge concerning these symbols with their eternal redemption, or damnation, at stake.

Herein lies the most terrible manifestation of Masonic morality, that philosophy of the elite, which makes whatever they do "right" because it is they (the elite) who do it. Having established and taught the sincere but deceived masses of Masons (the Blue Lodge Masons) that everything depends upon their proper understanding of the symbols of Masonry, they have then deliberately deceived them as to the true meaning of those symbols. Hear the arrogant words of Albert Pike, Supreme Pontiff of Universal Freemasonry, that preeminent Masonic authority:

"The Blue Degrees are but the court or portico (porch) of the Temple. Part of the symbols are displayed there to the initiate, but he is intentionally misled by false interpretations. It is not intended that he shall understand them; but it is intended that he shall imagine that he understands them… their true explication (explanation and understanding) is reserved for the Adepts, the Princes of Masonry (those of the 32nd and 33rd Degrees)." (Morals and Dogma, page 819).

2. THE FOUNDATION OF MASONIC SYMBOLISM: PHALLIC WORSHIP

Since the true meaning of Masonic symbols (and thus, the true meaning of Masonry itself) is to be known only by the Prince Adepts of Masonry, we must hear what they say concerning them. They (Albert Pike, Albert Mackey, J. D. Buck, Daniel Sickles and others) teach that Masonry is a revival of the Ancient Mysteries (the mystery religions of Babylon, Egypt, Persia, Rome and Greece).

These Ancient religions had two meanings, or interpretations. One was the apparent (exoteric) meaning, known to the uninitiated, ignorant masses; the other (esoteric) meaning was the true meaning, entirely different, known only to a small, elite group, initiated into their secrets and secret rituals of worship. These mystery religions were forms of nature-worship, more specifically and most commonly the worship of the Sun as source and giver of life to the Earth. Since Ancient times, this worship of the Sun (and of the Moon, stars and of nature in general) has been sexual in its outworkings and rituals. Since the Sun’s rays, penetrating the Earth and bringing about new life, have been central to such worship, the phallus, the male ‘generative principle,’ has been worshipped and the rituals climaxed with sexual union in the mystery religions of Isis and Osiris, Tammuz, Baal, etc. (1) In summary, then, since the Ancient Mysteries (especially those of Egypt) are in fact the Old Religion of which Freemasonry is a revival, the symbols of Masonry should be expected to be phallic in true meaning. This, in very fact, is the case. A thorough treatment of this unpleasant reality is beyond the scope of this brief summary; however, some examples, with references to the Masonic authorities, will suffice to illustrate this astonishing fact.

a. The Square and Compass

Blue Lodge Masons are taught that the Square is to remind them that they must be "square" in their dealings with all men, i.e., to be honest. The Compass, they are taught, is to teach them to "circumscribe their passions," i.e. to control their desires and to be temperate. The real meaning of these "great lights," however, is sexual. The Square represents the female (passive) generative principle, the earth, and the baser, sensual nature; and the Compass represents the male (active) generative principle, the sun/heavens, and the higher, spiritual nature. The Compass, arranged above the Square, symbolizes the (male) Sun, impregnating the passive (female) Earth with its life-producing rays. The true meanings, then are two-fold: the earthly (human) representations are of the man and his phallus, and the woman with her receptive cteis (vagina). The cosmic meaning is that of the active Sun (deity, the Sun-god) from above, imparting life into the passive Earth, (deity, the earth/fertility goddess) below and producing new life (2)

b. The Letter "G"

The Blue Lodge Mason is taught that the "G" in the Masonic symbol represents God. Later on, he is told that it also represents "deity." Later still, he is told that it represents "geometry." In reality, this letter represents the "generative principle," the Sun-god and, thus, the worshipped phallus, the male "generative principle…" In its position (along with the Square and Compass) on the east wall over the chair (throne) of the Worshipful Master, it is the representation of the Sun, thus of the Sun-god, Osiris. Its earthly meaning, then, is of the sacred phallus; its cosmic meaning is of the Sun, worshipped since antiquity by pagans while facing the East. (See c, below).

c. The "G" and the "YOD"

The English letter "G" in Masonic symbolism is inseparable from, and identical with, the Hebrew letter "YOD." This "YOD" is the symbol on the Scottish Rite ring. "YOD" represents deity in general (its cosmic meaning), and the worshipped phallus in particular (its earthly meaning). Albert Pike wrote that the "G" displayed in English speaking lodges is merely a corruption of the "YOD" (with which it should be replaced), and that "the mysterious YOD of the Kabala" is the "image of the Kabalistic Phallus." (3) The "Kabalah" he refers to here is a medieval book of the occult, a highly mystical and magical interpretation of the Bible, (4) and important sourcebook for sorcerers and magicians. (5)

d. The Point Within a Circle

The Masons of the Blue Lodge are taught that the Point within a Circle represents the individual Mason (the Point), contained and restricted by the boundary line of his duty (the Circle). Its real meaning, however, is that of the phallus, positioned within the female generative principle (sex organ), the climactic act of Sun-god worship. (6)

Dr. Albert Mackey, already quoted herein, also writes in his classic work "Symbolism of Freemasonry," page 352, "Phallus, a representation of the virile member which was venerated as a religious symbol… It was one of the modifications of sun worship, and was a symbol of the fecundating power of that luminary. The Masonic point within a circle is undoubtedly of phallic origin."

e. The Vertical Lines

The two vertical lines touching the sides of the circle are represented to the Blue Lodge Mason as "the Holy Saints John." By this is meant John the Baptist and John the Apostle. In reality, the two vertical lines represent the Summer and Winter Solstices, the shortest and longest nights of the year, respectively. These nights are, and have been since antiquity, important periods for pagan worship.

Concerning these two lines, Albert Mackey has written ("Symbolism of Freemasonry," page 352), "The lines touching the circle in the symbol of the point within a circle are said to represent St. John the Baptist and St. John the Evangelist, but they really refer to the solstitial points, Cancer and Capricorn, in the Zodiac."

f. The Bible

The Bible, only one of the "Three Great Lights" of Masonry (along with the Square and Compass), is represented to Blue Lodge Masons as symbolizing truth. In reality, the Bible may be replaced with the Koran, the Book of the Law, The Hindu scriptures or any other "holy book," depending on the preferences of the men in the Lodge. In most American Lodges, the members are told that all the Masonic system and its rituals are "based on the Bible." Such, however is not the case. In Chase's "Digest of Masonic Law," pages 207-209, it is clearly written that "Masonry has nothing whatever to do with the Bible," and that "it is not founded upon the Bible, for if it were it would not be Masonry, it would be something else."

Albert Pike, in writing on the subject of Masonry's source-book said, "Masonry is a search after light. That search leads us directly back, as you see, to the Kabalah." (Morals and Dogma, page 741). The Kabalah, then, seems to be the actual sourcebook of Masonry and the Bible merely (as it is spoken of in the ritual) a piece of the "furniture" of the Lodge.

NOTE: For more information concerning Masonic symbols and their true meanings, see McQuaig, C.F., "The Masonic Report," Answer Books and Tapes, Norcross, GA, 1976; Storms, E.M., "Should a Christian Be a Mason?," New Puritan Library, Fletcher NC 1980; and Mackey, Albert G., "Symbolism of Freemasonry," Charles T. Powner Co., Chicago 1975.

Footnotes:

"Phallus: a representation of the virile member (male sex organ) which was venerated as a religious symbol very universally… by the ancients. It was one of the modifications of Sun-worship, and was a symbol of the fecundating (impregnating) power of that luminary. The Masonic point within a circle is undoubtedly of phallic origin." (Mackey, Albert G., "Symbolism of Freemasonry," p. 352)

Pike, Albert, "Morals and Dogma," pp. 11, 839, 850, 851.

Pike, Albert, "Morals and Dogma," pp. 5, 757, 758, 771, 772.

Cabala (Kabalah) is a medieval and modern system of theosophy, mysticism and thaumatology (magic), "Webster's New Collegiate Dictionary." P. 53.

Baskin, Wade, "The Sorcerer's Handbook," New York, Philosophical Library, 1974.

"These two divinities… were commonly symbolized by the generative parts of man and woman… The Phallus and Cteis (vagina), emblems of generation and production, and which, as such, appeared in the Mysteries. The Indian Lingam was the union of both, as were the Boat and Mast, and the Point within the Circle… Pike Albert, "Morals and Dogma," p. 401.

THE MASCULINE JOURNEY

by Robert Hicks

WATCH UNTO PRAYER DISCLAIMER:

We apologize for the offensive content of this material, the inclusion of which was sorely debated; however Masculine Journey is still published and sold as a Christian book and therefore requires examination by Christians.

Chapter 3 ~

The Phallic Male - Zakar: The Mysterious Taskmaster

The Phallus as the Organ of Gender Discrimination

The second word used for man or male is the Hebrew word zakar, which is usually translated as "male" in opposition to woman. (1) This word is used eighty-two times in the Old Testament, but when the Semitic roots for the word are examined, the primary verbal idea is "to be sharp, or pointed." (2) Now, the connotation is not that of being a "sharp" dresser or such. The meaning has to do with the male protrusion, hence the male penis or phallus. When Arabic (also a Semitic language using the same three consonantal bases for words) is consulted, the word for male (dakar) and the word for penis is the same word. (3) In other words, the Scriptures root male identity and sexuality firmly in anatomy, rather than psychology or sociology. Male identity, as determined by modern psychology, says, "You are a male if you feel like one." Sociology might say, "You are a male if you do the kinds of things that the given culture says you should do to be considered male." Obviously, in this rapidly changing culture mixed with the garden variety of pop psychologies, male identity can mean virtually anything.

The Bible simply defines manhood by the phallus, the very way the doctor did when my son was born. I am a male, whether I feel like it or not, or whether I ever do anything considered masculine by the culture in which I am living. This is the fixed point on the male journey that roots my identity as a man in something that will never change. Yes, sex-change operations take place, but they only illustrate the complete rebellion and perversion of the concept. The entirety of the Scriptures reflect the simple twofold division of the entire human and animal kingdom into male (zakar) and female (neqevah). The female term likewise has anatomical overtones in meaning, namely having the ideas of being "bored through, and pierced." (4) This roots the essential identity of both sexes in the equipment they show up with at birth. Such equipment we know has been developing differently from the time of conception.

On the day my son, Graham, was born, he did not know what it meant to be phallic. This awareness, with all its associated ideas and problems, came later with puberty. But for now let me continue to address how the Scriptures use this word zakar.

The Phallus as Determiner of Religious Service

The feminist era has made all gender differentiation into political discrimination. Therefore, when some feminists read the Bible all they see is the sexual discrimination that they believe dominated the biblical writers' instruction. However, the Bible says only what it says, and often what we see in it is what we want to see. It is very easy to view the Bible through the cultural or political glasses that we have already embraced as correct. Therefore, we go to the Bible to justify our own political or theological correctness. And we make our modern agendas lord, rather than going to the Bible and seeking to understand its message in a radically different time and place. There are many things in the Bible that seem unfair, but the reason they seem unfair is because modern standards of fairness differ radically from what we read in the Bible. The real question I need to ask myself as a Bible reader is, "Where did I get my current standards for fairness?" We get them through the agency of our modern cultural perspectives and influences. Therefore, the fact that spiritual service in the Old Testament was regulated by gender seems offensive to modern readers. I can't answer why this is so or what it really means to the church today, but I do know there are differences. So what are the differences?

First, the celebrative animal offerings made during Israel's feasts were made on the basis of gender. Heads of households on Passover were to bring a male lamb (Exodus 12:5). For a guilt offering only a female sheep or goat was allowed (Leviticus 5:6). Peace offerings could be either male or female (3:1,6), while all freewill offerings had to be male (22:19). Why? I have no idea! No reason is given in the text for the differences. But what it does reveal is that each individual was required to worship God in specific ways. I don't believe there was any preference toward maleness or femaleness in this system. However, some feminists have noted that only the male was required to bring a sacrifice (Exodus 23:17, 34:23; Deut 16:16). This is true. It was also true that only males could be priests (Exodus 28:1; Lev. 8:1-3). Furthermore, only males could be killed in mass murder and used as cannon fodder in war, while women and children were often allowed to live (Deut. 20:13-14). (5) Men also got to pay far more money than women for making the same vows (Lev. 27:3,5-6).

These differences seem just as unfair to me as a man when I view them through the lens of my modern "enlightened" society. Why should I as a man have to pay more money than a woman for making the same religious vow? Or why should I have to risk my own life in warfare, when at least women have the option of being servants of the winning army and staying alive? These stipulations do not seem fair. One can view these differences as one would examine the bark of trees while missing what is going on in the forest. Even though I don't know exactly why these differences exist -- since no explanation is given -- it is my generalization that what it says about the phallic male is that there is no conflict between sexuality and spirituality. We are called and addressed by God in terminology that describes who and what we are -- zakar, phallic males.

Possessing a penis places unique requirements upon men before God in how they are to worship Him. We are called to worship God as phallic kinds of guys, not as some sort of androgynous, neutered nonmales, or the feminized males so popular in many feminist-enlightened churches. We are told by God to worship Him in accordance with what we are, phallic men.

The Phallus as the Symbol of Dedication and Connection

Years ago we moved our family to the beautiful isle of Hawaii. Like all newcomers we toured the outer islands and took in the ancient Hawaiian culture. On one occasion I remember staring at various ancient artifacts. As my wife noticed the same statue I was looking at, she questioned, "Why is it so large?" Her question was not related to the size of the statue but the size of its protruding phallus. I laughed and answered, "Nothing ever changes." Feminine puzzlement appeared on her face as she quickly moved to the next display. I could tell she really didn’t understand what I was getting at. To me there was very little difference between this Hawaiian idol/image and the artifacts that are sold regularly in "adult" bookstores. I'm sure some day archaeologists will dig up the adult toys from our current society and view them as elements of our religious worship. They will be right, because that's precisely what they are and always have been. The phallus has always been the symbol of religious devotion and dedication. Professor George Elder notes,

"Phallus, like all great religious symbols, points to a mysterious divine reality that cannot be apprehended otherwise. In this case, however, the mystery seems to surround the symbol itself. . . . It is not as a flaccid member that this symbol is important to religion, but as an erect organ." (6)

The Hawaiian phallus was, of course, as described!

The first thing we learn about the phallus in the bible is that it is the male organ that is singled out as the unique sit for the first would and bloodletting a man will face -- circumcision (Gen. 17:10, 14). Some have debated whether this first circumcision was nothing more than a bloodletting done by Zipporah, Moses' wife, on her own son, in order to appease God's wrath against Moses (Exodus 4:25). Whatever the origin, the ceremony became a male marker for both the child's dedication to God and his being linked to the community of Israel. It was also a symbolic recognition of God's faithfulness in the provision of male offspring who could, in turn, produce more offspring to continue the covenant. Circumcision, placed upon the organ of regeneration, created both a symbolic and physical wound that was a daily reminder to the boy and man of who he was. Every Israelite, when looking at himself naked, was reminded of how different he was from the Gentiles and for what purpose. In this sense, his sexuality took on spiritual significance. Every time he used his penis, he was making a spiritual statement about who he was and who he worshiped and why. It has always been this way, for every Jew in every culture!

In modern culture the phallus has been separated from spiritual categories. In some of the religious circles I have traveled in, men and women view the phallus as a spiritual liability. Women sort of tolerate or joke about the phallus functions in men, and in the church it is a rare cleric who gives any clarification to men on how the phallus should be understood and used. The silence says as much as the overt messages. The phallus is not a spiritual subject to be discussed alongside God, the Church and more "spiritual" doctrines.

This division of sexuality and spirituality is rather recent in the history of religious experience. In most pagan societies, sexuality is seen as an important aspect of uniting the spiritual with the physical and with the worship of gods and goddesses. In may cities, sacred prostitutes "served" at the temples in order to be the mediatrix between the gods and humans. One writer notes,

"The 'heiros gamos,' the sacred prostitute was the votary chosen to embody the goddess. She was the goddess' fertile womb, her passion and her erotic nature. In the union with the god, embodied by the reigning monarch, she assured the fertility and well-being of the land and the people. . . she did not make love in order to obtain admiration or devotion from the man who came to her, for often she remained veiled and anonymous; her raison d'être was to worship the goddess in lovemaking, thereby bringing the goddess love into the human sphere. In this union -- the union of masculine and feminine, spiritual and physical -- the personal as transcended and the divine entered in. As the embodiment of the goddess in the mystical union of the sacred marriage, the sacred prostitute aroused the male and was the receptacle for his passion . . . . The sacred prostitute was the holy vessel wherein chthonic and spiritual forces united." (7)

Now certainly I am not suggesting that true sexuality and spirituality should be untied in this way. After all, this was what the Apostle Paul was trying to straighten out in the Corinthian church because some of the believers were apparently still having intercourse with sacred prostitutes (I Cor. 6:15-20). In order to correct this perversion, he encourages the cultivation of a sexual relationship in marriage as a prevention from this abundant "sacred sex." Apparently, even the married couples had become abstinent as an overreaction to the Corinthian extremes and had thrown the sexual relationship totally out of marriage. To this problem, Paul tells them to "stop depriving themselves," and to recultivate the sexual area of their marriage lest they be severely tempted by the culture (or Satan). In similar fashion the Church has been reacting and overreacting on the relation of sexuality to spirituality ever since.

Current Christianity cannot openly deal with or talk about the male phallus in its full sexuality or fantasy. Much of the original manuscript for my book Uneasy Manhood, on the subject of men's sexuality, was edited out because it was too frank and honest, even about a Christian man's sexuality. On the other hand, modern psychology has become so sexually oriented that if a client is holding back anything of a sexual nature, he is viewed as one who has not fully disclosed, or is not being clinically honest, or must be manifesting psychological denial about his sexuality. At the same time, most secular therapists have not given much attention tot he adjacent spiritual issues that surround a full understanding of the phallus. Thus, they deal with sexual addictions and dysfunctions without considering the larger and deeper connections that might relate to issues of worship, spiritual bondage, or demonic activity. Monick observes this oversight by both psychology and the Church. He writes,

"People are uneasy with the correlation of sexuality and religion. Christianity, especially has separated the two in a way that would make them appear to be irreconcilable. Psychiatry continues the disjuncture, emphasizing it with pathological labels. The church elevates religion, devaluing sexuality. Psychiatry does the opposite -- elevating sexuality and devaluing religion. The union of sexuality and religion is like and electrical connection. Wrong joining leads to disaster. No joining produces no energy. Proper joining holds promise." (8)

A scriptural theology of sexuality joins them properly. I believe until the church sees men for what they are, phallic males with all their inherent spiritual tensions, it will not begin to reach men where they are living. Without proper teaching on the phallus, men will carry around in the psyches a spiritual god-hunger so mysterious and powerful that when driven underground, it will seek spiritual fulfillment only in the secrecy of motel rooms, adult videos, and in the bragging and joking about sexual exploits in athletic locker rooms. For many men in our culture, the secrecy has driven them to gay bars, topless nightclubs, and endless affairs. This sexual energy, which is essentially spiritual, takes place under the cover of darkness, perhaps because the Church has not shed enough light on the spiritual nature of our sexuality. Therefore, our sexual compulsions, addictions, and aberrations have become our expressions of worship -- worship of a false god.

Chapter 8 - A New Male Journey

Seeing Jesus as the Voice of God

The second most often-asked question I get at men's retreats is, "Where does Jesus fit into all this?' Well, He fits very nicely as the One who moves us on from one stage to the next. He is the only One who can genuinely empathize with where we are because He also has experienced the same stages on the masculine journey (Heb. 4:15). Jesus, of course, was the second Adam (Rom. 5:14), and as the second Adam was very much human, He experienced the full range of human emotional and physical life, yet did not sin. But the Hebrews passage affirms for us that He was sincerely tempted to sin. I believe He was truly tempted without compromising His deity.

Jesus was very much zakar, phallic. As much as the feminists try to ignore this issue, Jesus was very much masculine, and masculine means being male, and being male means having a penis. There's no way around it. some in church history could not tolerate the exposure of the Son of God's genitalia. Therefore, you will never find a portrait of the crucifixion of Jesus with penis exposed, even though it was a common Roman custom to crucify criminals naked. Even the gospel writers tell us that Jesus outward garment was torn into four pieces, leaving the inner tunic, which was then gambled for intact (John 19:23-24). That left nothing. No underpants. Nothing. And I seriously doubt that the soldiers would have wrapped a towel around Him for the sake of the portrait!

I believe Jesus was phallic with all the inherent phallic passions we experience as men. But it was never recorded that Jesus had sexual relations with a woman. He may have thought about it as the movie Last Temptation of Christ portrays, but even in this movie He did not give in to the temptation and remained true to his messianic course. If temptation means anything, it means Christ was tempted in every way as we are. That would mean not only heterosexual temptation but also homosexual temptation! I have found this insight to be very helpful for gay men struggling with their sexuality.

THE MASCULINE JOURNEY, Robert Hicks, NavPress, 1993

Pp. pp. 47-55; 180-181.

Footnotes

William L. Holladay, ed., A Concise Hebrew and Aramaic Lexicon of the Old Testament (Grand Rapids:Eerdmans, 1971), p. 89.

See Brown, Driver and Briggs, A Hebrew and English Lexicon of the Old Testament; and G. Johannes Botterwick and Helmer Ringgren, ed., Theological Dictionary of the Old Testament, vol. 4 (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1974), pp. 82-87.

Botterwick and Ringgren, p. 83.

Ibid.

Women were killed in the conquest of Canaan, but it seems this was not the intent of what was declared in Deuteronomy.

Quoted in Eugene Monick, "Phallos and Religious Experience," in Keith Thompson, ed., To Be a Man: in Search of the Deep Masculine (Los Angeles: Jeremy P. Tarcher, 1991), p. 127.

Nancy Qualls-Corbett, The Sacred Prostitute: Eternal Aspect of the Feminine (Toronto: Inner City Books, 1988), pp. 39-40.

Monick, p. 127.

THE LEGEND OF HIRAM ABIFF

(The Egyptian Connection)

THE DEADLY DECEPTION

Jim Shaw & Tom McKenney

Appendix D

The heart of Freemasonry is the Blue Lodge with its three degrees. The climactic degree (and the final one for most Masons) in the Blue Lodge is the Third, or Master Mason Degree. The heart of the Master Mason Degree, the thing that gives it both meaning and substance, is without any doubt the reenactment of the Legend of Hiram Abiff. It is this central figure in the legend, this Hiram the "Widow's Son," the "Tyrian Architect," this 'First Grand Master' who is impersonated by every man who is initiated as a Master Mason. It is Hiram who is at the very heart of the foundation of all of Masonry. His true identity and nature become, then, matters of extreme significance. Just who -- and what -- was this man, Hiram Abiff?

1. The Masonic Tradition

According to the Masonic legend, Hiram Abiff was a man of Tyre, the son of a widow, and the chief architect of the Temple built by King Solomon. He was the central character in the building of the Temple and one of three leading characters along with King Solomon and Hiram, King of Tyre. Hiram Abiff, Masonry teaches, was the only one on Earth who knew "the secrets of a Master Mason," including the most important secret of all, the "Grand Masonic Word," the name of God (the "ineffable name"). Since, in occult lore, knowing the name of a spirit is a key to having its power, there was a very great power in knowing this word. Knowing the other "secrets of a Master Mason" would enable the masons/workmen working on the Temple project to go out on their own, working as Master Masons and earning Master Mason's wages."

This Hiram had promised to reveal the "secrets of a Master Mason," including the name of God ("Grand Masonic Word"), upon completion of the Temple, and to make the workmen Master Masons, able then to go out on their own as masters (they were, as yet, only "fellowcraft" Masons). One day Hiram went, as was his custom, into the unfinished Holy of Holies at noon ("High Twelve") to worship and to draw up the work plans (on his "trestleboard") for the workmen to follow the next day. The workmen were outside the Temple for their lunch break ("…the craft were called from labor to refreshment…")

As Hiram was leaving the Temple he was accosted by three "ruffians," in succession, who demanded that they be given the secrets immediately (without waiting for the Temple to be completed). He was handled roughly by the first ruffian (Jubela), but escaped. Accosted and handled roughly by the second ruffian (Jubelo), he again refused to divulge the secrets and again escaped. The third ruffian (Jubelum) then accosted him and, when Hiram again refused to divulge the secrets, killed him with a blow to the forehead with a setting maul. The body was hastily concealed under some rubbish in the Temple until midnight ("low twelve") when it was taken out to the brow of a hill and buried. The grave was marked by a branch of Acacia (an evergreen tree common in the Middle East), and the three ruffians attempted to escape the country. Denied passage on a ship out of the country, they retreated into the hills to hide. Meanwhile, back at the Temple, it was noticed that Hiram was missing and King Solomon was notified. Solomon immediately ordered a search in and about the Temple with no success. At this point 12 "fellowcrafts" reported to the King that they and three others (the three "ruffians") had conspired to extort the secrets of Hiram Abiff but they had repented and refused to go through with the murderous plan. They reported that it was those other three who had murdered Grand Master Hiram and King Solomon then sent them out in groups of three to search in all directions.

After questioning the sea captain who had refused the murderers passage, three of the searchers then followed the murderers' path and discovered the grave with its Acacia at the head. Digging down and recognizing the body, they reported back to Solomon. Solomon sent them back to locate the grave, positively identify the body as Hiram and to attempt to raise it from the grave with the grip of an Entered Apprentice. They relocated the grave but were unable to raise the body because decomposition had caused the flesh to cleave to the bone.

Reporting back to Solomon, they were told to return to the grave and attempt to raise the body with the grip of a Fellowcraft. When this failed because the skin slipped away, they reported back to Solomon who, himself, went to the grave and raised the body up with the grip of a Master Mason, the "Strong Grip of a Lion's Paw." Hiram was not only brought up out of the grave, but restored to life. The first word he spoke was the replacement for the "Grand Masonic Word" lost at his death and that word is the one passed down to Master Masons to this day. (1) This, then, is the Masonic legend of Hiram Abiff, and most Blue Lodge Masons believe that it is a factual, scriptural and historical account. It is generally believed, in spite of the fact that the Masonic authorities and writers of doctrine agree that it is not only a myth, unsupported by facts, but acknowledge that it is but a retelling of Isis and Osiris.

2. The Bible Record

Does the Bible record such as person as Hiram Abiff? Definitely not, although part of his identity is taken from the Bible. The Scriptures record two men named Hiram concerning the building of the Temple by King Solomon; one is Hiram, King of Tyre, who was supportive of Solomon and who provided materials and workmen for the project. The other Hiram, called "a widow's son of the tribe of Naphtali," was a worker in brass, not the architect of the entire Temple. He made the brass pillars, the brass lavers, shovels and basins. The Scriptures record that this Hiram, the widows son, completed all the work that he had come to do on the Temple. Presumably, he then returned to his home in Tyre, safe and sound (there is no indication in the Bible of anything to the contrary). (2) Concerning the Masonic claim that Hiram, the widow's son, was chief architect of the Temple, the Bible is clear in establishing that he was no such thing. The Bible reveals that God, Himself, was the designer and architect of the Temple, that He gave the plans in minute detail to David and that David gave them to Solomon, (3) along with most of the materials. To claim that anyone but God was the Chief Architect of the Temple is unfounded and, I believe, blasphemous.

3. The Egyptian Connection

It is the consensus of opinion among Masonic authorities, philosophers and writers of doctrine that the legend of Hiram Abiff is merely the Masonic version of a much older legend, that of Isis and Osiris, basis of the Egyptian Mysteries. The following is a brief summary of that legend, and a comparison with the Masonic legend of Hiram Abiff. This comparison is supported, beyond doubt, by the conclusions of the Masonic authorities.

a. The legend of Isis and Osiris

Osiris, both King of the Egyptians and their god, went on a long journey to bless neighboring nations with his knowledge of arts and sciences. His jealous brother, Typhon (god of Winter) conspired to murder him, steal his kingdom and did so. Isis, sister and wife of Osiris and his queen (as well as Egypt's Moon-goddess) set out on a search for the body, making inquiries of all she met.

After certain adventures, she found the body with an Acacia tree at the head of the coffin. Returning home, she secretly buried the body, intending to give it proper burial as soon as arrangements were made. Typhon, by treachery, stole the body, cut it up into 14 pieces and hid them in as many places. Isis then made a second search and located all the pieces but one; the one missing and lost part was the phallus.

She made a substitute phallus, consecrated it, and it became a sacred substitute, and object of worship.

This, in extremely abbreviated form, is the Egyptian legend of Isis and Osiris. It is without doubt, the basis for the Masonic legend of Hiram Abiff. To support this "Egyptian connection," let's consider two things: a brief comparison of key elements in both stories and the conclusions of the Masonic authorities in Masonic source-writings.

b. A Brief Comparison of the Legends of Hiram Abiff and Osiris

The fundamental similarity between the two stories may be seen in many respects; the following are some of the most important:

(1) Both men went to foreign lands to share their knowledge of arts and sciences.

(2) In both legends there is a precious thing possessed: Hiram has the secret word; Osiris has the kingdom.

(3) In both legends there is a wicked conspiracy by evil men to seize the precious thing.

(4) In both legends there is a struggle and a murder of the virtuous leader.

(5) Both are murdered by their brothers (Osiris by Typhon; Hiram by Jubelum, his brother Mason).

(6) Both bodies are buried hastily, with the intention of a later, deliberate burial.

(7) Locations of the bodies are both marked by Acacia at the head.

(8) In both legends, there are two separate searches for the bodies.

(9) In both legends there is a loss of something precious: in Hiram's death, the secret word is lost; in Osiris' death, the phallus is lost.

(10) In both there is a substitution for the precious thing that has been lost; concerning Hiram it is the substitute for the secret word; concerning Osiris it is the substitute phallus.

c. Conclusions of the Masonic Authorities

A few statements from the most authoritative Masonic writers will suffice to express the doctrinal consensus:

(1) "The legend and traditions of Hiram Abiff form the consummation of the connecting link between Freemasonry and the Ancient Mysteries." (Pierson, "Traditions of Freemasonry," p. 159)

(2) "We readily recognize in Hiram Abiff the Osiris of the Egyptians…" (Pierson, p. 240)

(3) "Osiris and the Tyrian Architect (Hiram Abiff) are one and the same." (Sickles, Daniel, "Freemason's Guide." p. 236)

(4) "That part of the rite (Master Mason initiation) which is connected with the legend of the Tyrian Artist (Hiram Abiff)…should be studied as a myth and not as a fact…outside of Masonic tradition there is no proof that an event such as is related in connection with the "Temple Builder" ever transpired and, besides, the ceremony is older by more than a thousand years than the age of Solomon… It is thoroughly Egyptian." (Sickles, Daniel, "The Ahiman Rezon," p. 195)

(5) It (the Legend of Hiram Abiff) is thoroughly Egyptian, and is closely allied to the Supreme Rite (highest degree) of the Isianic Mysteries (Mystery religion of Isis and Osiris)." (Mackey, Albert, "Lexicon of Freemasonry," p. 195)

CONCLUSION

Thus, it seems clear, the Hiram Abiff of Freemasonry is not an historical character and certainly not a biblical one. Rather, he actually represents Osiris, the Egyptian Sun-god, and the reenactment of the Legend of Hiram Abiff is actually the reenactment of the legend of Isis and Osiris.

Thus, each sincere man who is initiated into the Third (Master Mason) Degree of Masonry impersonates Osiris, the Sun-god of Egypt, and enters into his life of good deeds, his death, his burial and is "raised" in his resurrection from the dead. With this understood, it is then easy to understand the statement in the Kentucky Monitor (handbook for all Blue Lodge Masonry in the Grand Lodge of Kentucky) that, while the Christian's Messiah is called Jesus, the Mason's Messiah is called Hiram (Kentucky Monitor, "the Spirit of Masonry," xv).

(1) It puzzles me that no one has questioned the necessity for a "substitute" for the lost Grand Masonic Word. If it was lost at the death of Hiram because only he knew it, then why, when Hiram was raised back to life, didn't Solomon just ask him what the real, original one was? All Solomon needed to do was say something like, "Hiram…praise the Lord that you are no longer dead! Now what was that word all this fuss has been about?"

(2) I Kings 7:13-47

(3) I Chronicles 17;1-15; 22:11-29:9 (especially 28:19)

GNOSTICISM IS THE TEACHING based on Gnosis, the knowledge of transcendence arrived at by way of interior, intuitive means. Although Gnosticism thus rests on personal religious experience, it is a mistake to assume all such experience results in Gnostic recognitions. It is nearer the truth to say that Gnosticism expresses a specific religious experience, an experience that does not lend itself to the language of theology or philosophy, but which is instead closely affinitized to, and expresses itself through, the medium of myth. Indeed, one finds that most Gnostic scriptures take the forms of myths. The term “myth” should not here be taken to mean “stories that are not true”, but rather, that the truths embodied in these myths are of a different order from the dogmas of theology or the statements of philosophy.

Gnosticism *** Deism *** Masonic Symbolism