"Christ and the Soul" in Gospel of Philip

I believe gnosis is universal, timeless, and didn't only begin in the Christian era of when Christ lived and died. How could it be that Plato and all the dozens of other proto-gnostics wrote allegories using symbolism Christians and other Mystery religion sects did centuries later? One followed the other, yes, but there are such gaps in time and space that it almost seems impossible to reconcile. 

It doesn't make sense because they were so removed from one another, despite the evidence that a few of them maintained a correspondence and became on again/off again teachers. These schools were wiped out time and time again. Gnosis can't be learned or felt with only a few letters exchanged. Momentum needs to be built, forward thinking and actions are needed to propel a thing like gnosis into a community affair or even be accepted as a 'muse' which one can count on for truth and comfort.

The best theory about how gnosis has traveled through time is that these themes are universal to the human psyche and within pleroma these thoughts are a constant. Time is not linear within him and I think this is the most difficult concept to accept. Daydreams and nightdreams are used as vehicles for communication. With us being so interconnected, if you consider that as a possibility then it all comes into focus quite sharply that there is no true original thought or idea. No one has a patent on anything! We're just very good at recycling and re-finding/re-imagining and refurbishing what has already been imagined countless times before. 

Think of the many 'renaissances' which have existed before now.  Count the many monuments left behind by civilizations which have flourished and then fallen- too many to count, really. We have all the evidence we need to say definitively: human beings are endlessly creative and tirelessly spiritual in nature. We are not atheist in nature! We are creative beings who want to connect to the divine in every way. It's what we long for when we are awake and when we dream. Why else would we go to such extremes, swinging madly between dark chaos and filth all the way over to courtly love and saccharine sweet paintings of rather naughty flying dresses?

Enchantingly beautiful, isn't she? Flirty and living in the moment on that swing. And the shoe! Do you see it? She's so happy and carefree that she is smiling even as her left shoe goes flying off her foot. Of course the paramour she's teasing in front of her is enjoying the spectacle of her happiness. Pleroma is like that handsome lover, grinning at us saying, "There you go! Live and love and laugh. I wants to see it and experience it with you!"

Is there gnosis in paint? What about in a bottle of Smirnoff? .... I have to say 'yes' to both of those. I tend to get a little more lyrical with my own paintbrush when I combine it with a good stiff drink or five. And you know what? There's nothing wrong with that!! It's the experience which matters; the internal dialogue which takes place and in which we find answers. It's the experience of life itself which drives us higher and higher, like the lady on that swing, to reach toward the gentle light of love which we feel deeply within us. A lot of times it difficult to see pleroma around us but when we center ourselves once more we can branch out from there and learn to truly live again.

When you have a run in with a person or even a group of people and you think: "Man, they really need to retract that stick up their @#$%. They'd be happier."  You are on the path of gnosis. Seeing unhappiness and gnowing(<-- My fingers slipped on the keyboard but it's funny so I'm keeping it) the solution to it is gnosis demystified. Truly, it is that simple. What brings you peace? To be exclusive or to be inclusive? Are you happy hating other people? Don't you think the divine wants us to be One or to be many and fight endless wars with one another?

And those riddle-like verses in the gnostic gospels aren't always built with a hundred layers like a french Opera cake. Some, like the  Gospel of Philip can be read quite literally- but only if you know the players. 

Christ as the Savior of humanity:

"Christ came to buy. He rescued and redeemed,
redeeming aliens. He made strangers his own.
He brought his own and made promises,
construing a strategy, and gave his life
when he appeared and when the world began.
Then he came and took back what he promised,
which fell into the hands of thieves. They captured it,
but he rescued it back. Then he redeemed
both the good and evil people of the world."

Could Philip be talking about literalists overtaking the gnostic sects with the line 'came and took back what he promised which fell into the hands of thieves'? Or maybe he's speaking of Judas 'stealing' what belonged to the world and which left the world(at least in the flesh) because of his deeds?

Either way you want to interpret this passage, the crucifixion story is not original only to Christian tradition. Nearly every religion has a holy person which is sacrificed in some way for knowledge or need of a group of people for what their death can offer. Why is that? Why this need for sacrifice?