Satanism/Luciferianism-- Gnosticism?!

On YouTube there is a documentary called Killuminati which has prompted this post. The documentary isn't even finished being produced in all it's parts but it deserves commentary from a gnostic.  There is a deep misunderstanding brought to the surface during the 9th section which directly shows just how gnosticism gets lumped in with the evil crowd. This is instructive as this is precisely the kind of garbage being perpetuated world wide. It is important that we clear up this grave misunderstanding because... you're reading a gnostic blog!

Let me state emphatically here, right now-- gnosticism is not Lucifer worship, Satan worship, or anything you can possibly contrive about that(those) entities. I do not and would never worship anything evil. I loathe evil. I recognize it for what it is: bad stuff! I do not worship chaos or power hungry entities.

The erroneous motif of Luciferian worship in concordance with gnosticism has a long history; it spans back at least as far as Irenaeus and his 'Against Heresies' work. (available on Amazon here)He codified what it meant to be a heretic against the almighty Church and being gnostic was the gravest sin of all why? Because to be gnostic was to tell the world(and the Pope) that you did not need clerics to tell you the nature of good and evil. You did not need anyone to 'save' your soul because we are 'born in sin.' Instead, you believed that you were born innocent; tabula rasa, and instinctively knew what is good is not to be feared, ie. life experiences. How can an experience which teaches you something be bad? The Church wants you to repent for things you haven't even done yet. You were born a sinful, dirty thing and you should be ashamed of yourself for it.

The Church has tried to shove those very notions down the throat of everyone within reach for nearly two thousand years, creating the most horrific spectacle of evil on Earth. When I speak of evil I am not only inferring the molestation from priests and nuns, I'm talking about things far more profoundly evil than I can mention in my blog. Do your own reading. I'd suggest starting with Sister Charlotte Keckler. That's not even the tip of the iceburg, folks. The deeper you go the darker it gets. Research masonic lodges. Continue. Do your own reading.

I digress. Ok, so the Catholic Church is evil. Have they been pointing the finger at us(gnostics) throughout the ages as a way to divert attention from themselves? Absolutely. The problem is that there are other organizations which are directly connected with the Catholic Church which advertize themselves as non-religious orders but they in fact are. The members might not know it, though. (Masonic orders and the like. Illuminati at the core)And because they have bought into the out-of-the-field fundamentalist belief system of the Serpent in the Garden of Eden they have taken the kernel of truth gnostics take for a metaphor and spun it so wildly out of control that they make Jeffrey Dahmer look like a cute little bunny. Countless millions of people have suffered for this doctrine of hate through the millennia as a result.

What is this core metaphor gnostics know about the Garden of Eden story which gets us into so much trouble with the Church? It is simply this: the "snake" did us a favor.  But it is the identity of the "snake" itself which is only part of the problem. Roman Catholics call him Satan or Lucifer. In some stories gnostics call him pleroma or the All , the Good God, or even Sophia. Ahhhhh, so now do you see where the misunderstanding has come about? It all goes back to the fundamental misunderstanding of what is good and evil, who 'God' really is, and what the purpose of life is. If you don't understand who or what 'God' is in the context the gnostics are using him then yeah, it all turns into a name calling party. But it's not even really about what names are used for which character. This isn't about names. It's about a misunderstanding of the characters themselves and where they reside in the hierarchy of Good and Evil. 

Think of a totem pole of power. But you've never even heard of the guy on top. Why not? This is what gnostics ask fundamentalists to justify every single day and they refuse. The fundamentalists are stuck on worshiping the middle man instead of the real power. And no wonder that middle man feels the need to make everyone feel bad, he's got an inferiority complex!

That's a load of tripe, most people say. Now get back to the snake. How can you call Lucifer good? Well, we don't. Satanists and Luciferians do. Catholics have gone batshit crazy through the centuries(that's obvious even to atheists) and their doctrine is so flawed that when atheists and gnostics can agree on some things you have to admit that something is amiss. The reason we can agree with atheists is because they only hone in on the Abrahamic God personality not considering other possibilities, when that is the God they're pissed off at. I've already written about this in other posts. 

Ok, so those who worship Lucifer tell everyone that the snake did everyone a favor. Gnostics also think the snake did everyone a favor. But gnostics aren't Luciferians? How is this so? I'm going to make this as simple as I can for all the fundamentalists who come here and read this post so you can understand once and for all that you can't browbeat gnostics about this issue ever again.  As a matter of fact, from now on I'm going to consistently link people who make this assumption directly to this post. Here's the definitive answer.

Satanists and Luciferians were initially inspired by gnostics but have run so far afoul of the concepts that they have gone insane. That's the whole problem right there. They're nuts. They're fundamentalists of Evil. Gnostics want nothing to do with Luciferians or Satanists. Then why do we get tarred with the same brush?? Let's break it down.

Luciferian/Satanist point of view:

1.  Luciferians/Satanists believe Lucifer/Satan was either cast out of Heaven unjustly and/or created this world.
2. Luciferians/Satanists believe the God of the Old and New Testament(Jehovah/Yahweh) is evil. He wants to enslave humanity. 
3. They believe the 'snake' is Lucifer/Satan and that he should be worshiped and/or revered because he opened Adam and Eve's eyes to what freedom they could have outside God's protective garden.
4. Wiki: "While Satanists are deeply involved in living for the moment, content to remain who or what they currently are, Luciferians seek ways to aid humanity’s progression to the next stage of social, physical or intellectual evolution. One religion deals with the self, while the other deals with humanity as a whole and the natural world in which we live. In spite of using similar archetypes, the Luciferian pursuit of knowledge and understanding has little in common with the Satanic goal of immediate gratification."
5. Wiki: "Rather than focusing on “what comes next,” Luciferians feel that humans should be focused on this life and how to make the most of it every single day. Enlightenment is the ultimate goal."
6. Wiki: "Luciferian principles highlight truth and freedom of will, worshipping the inner self and one’s ultimate potential as opposed to bowing to the rules of a supernatural entity. Traditional dogma is shunned as a basis for morality on the grounds that humans should not need deities or fear of eternal punishment to distinguish right from wrong and to do good."
7. Wiki: "Most theistic Luciferians, however, are solitary practitioners, connecting with others who share their beliefs but not forming or following a particular institution. A personal relationship with Lucifer is commonly achieved through meditation and the practice of Magick, either independently or in small groups, unaffiliated with a larger community. While this relationship is a deeply personal one and, as such, varies from one practitioner to another, it follows by default the Neo Pagan approach of seeking camaraderie and inspiration rather than the father/child or master/servant dynamic of monotheistic beliefs. The thought of a spiritual hierarchy or submission to a higher power is looked down upon on the grounds that being a god is not enough; even a deity must earn respect and admiration from those who follow him. In some cases, Lucifer is seen as a rebel angel or opposing god who sought to move humankind forward in defiance of Jehovah’s will to keep them ignorant and childlike. In other cases, Lucifer is believed to be the actual creator of Earth and the mortal realm, and was punished for bringing humans into existence. Exact beliefs and practices vary greatly, as they do within any religion, but in all cases Lucifer is considered to be a positive figure of both social and intellectual progress, with magick and ritual as potential tools to follow in his footsteps."
8. Wiki: "Most, but not all, atheistic Luciferians are involved with the occult and practice magick, ritual and meditation. They do not accept the idea of non-corporeal entities but do often follow the occult as a means of harnessing the natural powers and energies around them to achieve their goals. In this way, many embrace the concept of Lucifer as the inner self, and essentially deify themselves by striving to understand, change and recreate the world around them, becoming their own “gods.” Striving for apotheosis is a common theme among most Luciferians, but the approach runs particularly strong amongst atheistic practitioners."
9. Wiki says: "Luciferianism does not support violence or amoral practices. Luciferians strongly believe in equality, moral excellence, honesty and integrity. They support the moral and intellectual development of children in particular, and the protection of the natural world." 
10. Man is meant to overpower those who are weaker than they are. Might makes right!
11. Greed is good. Look to the robes, symbology, accoutrements, and palaces of the Pope to see a good example of this. Follow the money and the history. Catholicism is Luciferian at its root. Magic is practiced every single day for its parishioners in open view and they accept it as being holy and good. This magic is used to tether people to dogma and a perception of perpetual sin and redemption. Luciferians will not admit to their connection with Catholicism, though. An ex-Catholic is a completely different story. They tend to open right up and tell it all, quite fearfully.

Gnostic point of view, in no particular order:

1. The demiurge(Jehovah) created this universe and declared himself God because he didn't know he wasn't the only one. His mother, Sophia, created him and was so embarrassed by him that she put him in a vacuum-like area. So he himself was all he could see. He thought he was God. He thought he just sprang forth from nothing and was all-powerful. 
2. There is no Satan in gnosticism, only layers of ideas or realms of ideas and spirits which can influence human beings which are called Archons. They vary in philosophy and purpose. They are spirits.
3. All gnostics are theists. We believe in a deity and spirits, if not several levels of them. We do not need the God of this world(the demiurge/Jehovah/Yahweh) but we do need the All/pleroma/the Good God. Pleroma is in essence our spiritual grandfather. He is not in any of the Genesis stories fundamentalists will ever tell because to talk about him or even acknowledge his presence is an affront to them. He is a separate entity entirely from Satan. We do not have anything to do with Satan. The 'snake' in our 'Genesis' story is actually Sophia, which is an emmination of Pleroma whom he calls his 'wisdom.'
4. Gnostics understand personal metamorphosis and forgiveness. We've never tortured or killed someone because they don't convert. Gnosis can't be faked. Personal room to grow is a fundamental right of gnosis. Everyone has a place in this world, no matter how contrary their ideas may be from ours. 
5. Humans are already free by birth. Humanity didn't need a helpful 'nudge' from any snake; we were born perfect and whole and fully capable of understanding good and evil simply by listening to our innate common sense. That innate common sense is our soul, which is divinely connected to pleroma/the All. We derive our common sense and conscience from him, directly. Bad people tune him out, good people tune him in. It's that simple. You are accountable for your actions and expected to act in a mature fashion. If you don't act in a mature fashion then you'll simply make yourself miserable. You get what you give.
6. Jehovah/Yahweh is evil. He has a purpose(overseer of this material world) but he is evil at the core. He wants to separate us from Big Love(pleroma) because he wants us to worship him instead of the real Love above him. He wants to keep us in fear and suspicion over every little move we make and every thing we think, saying they're sins and that we're too stupid to learn from our own mistakes and we need to blindly trust in Him to think for us.  Instead of allowing free will, his apostles feel they have to threaten humanity with tales of brimstone and fire to keep us all under their thumb and giving tithes to churches which revel in sins themselves. We already know what's right and wrong! We have a conscience. We don't need man telling us right from wrong. We can teach and influence one another but ultimately we are very intelligent beings and can sort this out for ourselves.
7. We co-opted the Garden story to argue with fundamentalist Christians. (Our Genesis story is drastically different, see #1.) We don't even believe it really happened. It's a metaphorical story.  Humans didn't magically 'rise up' from any garden. When gnostics have talked about it historically it is to create a dialogue about the differences between Jehovah(demiurge) and the Good God(pleroma/fullness/totality/the All) for visual and demonstrative purposes. Like using puppets to get the point across as to the intent of the subjects. Sophia was the puppet for pleroma, saying to Adam and Eve, "Hey! This jackass is lying to you! You live in a much livelier world than he's telling you about. There are colors you've never even seen before and they're all available if you remove the choke collar from your neck. Choking something you love isn't good or loving."
8. The material world is bad. Greed is bad. The material world is a distraction from the Good God who waits one day to fully merge with us again after death. Our lives do have meaning and it is to experience all we can of in this world and this existence so we learn from it; so we can grow more steadfast in our knowledge that good is worth living for and worth searching for. People are good at the core and will acknowledge it if you give them half a chance. 
9. Our purpose is to propagate good in people and let them see that greed in the material world hinders them from true and lasting happiness, not just after death, but here and now.  
10. We don't worship the 'inner self.' We worship pleroma, which we are divinely connected two and have always had access to.  Everyone has access to pleroma. He is the Good God attached to us by a spiritual umbilical cord. 
11. Narcisism is looked down upon in gnosticism. There isn't really such a thing as a 'person' when I look at you and then a 'person' when I look back at myself in a mirror. There is only 'us.' We all make up the body of pleroma. We have joint causes, not individual one. We are all connected and we all affect the growth of one another. Personal ambition is perpetual spiritual failure when taken to the extreme and for the wrong cause.
12. Lower level gnostics(psychic) do sometimes perform magic acts until they grow out of that need to use props to focus their energy. Ascended gnostics(pneumatic) have no need for that ceremony to understand the divine. Once fully initiated they are able to connect to pleroma with no ceremony, thus making them ascended. This is known as entering the bridal chamber. Understandably, this diversity in the ranks causes confusion to outsiders.  Some neo-pagan groups like Wicca can be seen as lower level gnostics. Some pretend that they are capable of gnosis but are not; they may even use some of the same names for spirits. They hold the same snare and hooks as dogmatic religion and fully intend to keep their practitioners there at the same level. It depends on the intention and the path being taken.  The lower deities and imaginative emmanations from humanity's past are merely footstools to ultimately arrive at the truth of pleroma and once that truth is realized those lower spirits become trivial. The goal is to use the power of one's own soul and mind to connect to the Good God, not to use magical props as a spiritual crutch.
13. Gnostics believe in reincarnation but not in Hell as literalist Christians have written about it. No fire and brimstone await us. The closest we come to 'Hell' is when we have lived a bad life and made bad choices and when we die we are put in a place furthest out from the Good God while we await to be reborn. Distance from the Good God isn't pleasant, it is painful because we're so jealous of those closer to him, but it is of our own choosing. When we choose to get closer to him in life then we enter into a ring of afterlife closer to him in distance. This is more pleasant because we can see him and sense his warmth and love for us. The ultimate goal is to finally merge with him completely and stop being reborn in the material world. To get there, you have to do GOOD!

The whole point is really this: Satanists/and Luciferians are inspired by gnosticism but they have taken one kernel truth of gnosticism(Jehovah being bad) and run so far out into Candyland with it there's no turning back. They're evil because they want to be evil. Period. They can't see any possibility for the existence of the Good God because they're so hell bent on hating Jehovah.

Protect the natural world? This sounds like a PR line. What are they, Greenpeace for the Morning Star? Ritual animal and human sacrifice. Sex magic with unwilling minors. Yes, they're really humanitarian in nature.

Gnostics do not collude with the Devil. (We leave that to the very capable hands of the Catholic Church.) Gnostics are heretics by definition of the Roman Catholic Church but only because the Church is so jealous and greedy. There is no money to be made in gnosis. They can't control us, they've never been able to. They've only ever been able to kill us. There is only personal understanding to be had; no power even, in gnosis. The only power which exists in this world is that of the Evil One because he rules this world but not our spirits.

The most pure hearted gnostics have always been dirt poor and lived in the gutters of their community.  Or, they've created communities which revolved around gnostic concepts and then had them razed to the ground by the Church. Read about Pope Innocent III and his rationale for wiping out the south of France.

I hope this article has helped dispel the myths. If you can think of anything I can add to make this even better please leave me a comment.

PS. Please pardon me for using Wiki as a source. Concerning Satanism/Luciferianism, all the other sources I found were basically saying the exact same thing as Wiki. So we know who's editing Wiki, right? 

Another Discussion On Free Will

Engaging non-gnostics in discussion about what happened in the Garden of Eden is an eclectic show of either snide childish humor and dismissal or the non-gnostic asking(what they think) to be deep questions about why we, as gnostics, choose to believe something which is what atheists call "self justification." In other words: "You just don't want to believe what I do because you're egotistical." Oh and then they usually call us Satanists. Sorry, hate to burst everyone's bubble of delusion and ignorance but gnostics are not Satanists.

Ego has nothing to do with the truth when found in gnosis, contrary to what misinformation is spread through the world wide web and other means. We don't worship ourselves as god, we simply acknowledge our divine connection through spirit to the All; as being part of his body. Ego does, on the other hand, have quite a bit to do with the reason why people keep their eyes squeezed shut so tightly against the truth when it's staring them in the face. Let me further flesh out this argument by quoting a recent discussion. Red text are my own thoughts. Changer01 on YouTube is talking about how he thinks gnostic texts are contradictory and that gnostics are Satanists. I reply:

The gnostic concept of the universe is the only way to logically answer "if God is good then why is our world so effed up?"

The answer is so obvious that it shocks people.

The gnostic gospels are "contradictory" because they're NOT meant to be understood literally but metaphorically. This is a huge step away from the literalist religions which saturate the world today.

Changer01 replies:

@GnosticUnrest That's just to justify your hatred against god. If you would really look at human behaviour then you would notice how true the bible really is. (And this guy is supposedly an atheist?!) But I guess you don't want to meet god because you think that god is in yourself, so you build a story around it that pulls itself out of the swamp to justify how you are living instead of seeking the truth. That's a poor anti-religion. (This is the self justification I'm talking about.)

I replied back:

I look at the Bible and I DO see how true it is... in regard to the people who read it literally. That is why our world is the way it is. I don't hate god. I hate the contradictory role he's created for himself in our world. I think that by attacking gnosis you're simply doing what the Vatican wants you to-- look for a scapegoat. Good job!!! *pat on the back*

I seek truth every single day. And I find it every single day. I don't run from it. And I live a very moral life.

Afterward I challenged him:

If you can give me one valid reason(not an excuse!) for why Jehovah/Yahweh put the Tree of Good and Evil in Eden then I'll concede that you understand God. And none of this "he meant it as a lesson" or any of that mess. Why would a loving parent put something "dangerous" within easy reach of their child only to condemn and DAMN them afterward for being curious? Having free will means having a sense of curiosity. But it is that very curiosity which God forbids. Why?

Why would further knowledge about god be wrong? Eating the fruit opened their eyes, made them see what WAS instead of what god wanted them to see.

He wrote back:

Since they had no sin and thus no necessity of acknowledging evil, they didn't need to eat from that tree. But they could eat from the tree of life whenever they wanted. Now because they didn't have any sin their inner being was not even curious for that forbidden tree so they would probably never have touched it. But then the snake came and brought them to doubt: "Should god have told you not to eat it?"

He continued on:

Why should they have had to know this? They had abundant life, knew only the good and not the evil (which was not ruling this world yet), plus they were like god in the world (god has set them to reign) and the snake lied at them and said the WOULD be like god if they ate from the tree! Gnosticism is like trying to wake up the died soul of adam, declared to a holy divine spark. Actually it's exactly that.

That's the spiritual principle of the old adam. Want rather something fresh?

I replied:

@Changer01, "Want something fresh?" ......No thank you. I prefer to keep my head up ABOVE the sand instead of sticking my head in it and my mind clear of that euphoric drug called "the illusion of free will" that the demiurge gave us upon creation. I prefer exercising that free will instead of merely saying I have it. It's like saying, "gay people can have rights but they just can't have THOSE rights." Hypocritical. Human is human and free will is free will. Accept it or enjoy those blinders.

Earthcentrism- Look How Far We've Come

Young Earth Creationists state that our universe is only 6,000 years old. Oh wait. They changed their mind a few years back and added four thousand to that. So make that ten millenia. This number is based on some sort of pseudo science and literalist interpretation of the book of Genesis. Their data changes every few years to keep up with the twists and turns real science.

According to YEC's dinosaurs were friendly and played with Adam and Eve. Carnivorous dinosaurs only became meat eaters after The Fall. Sharp horns and teeth were previously only used for play or mating displays. Another theory is that God miraculously changed all the newly damned carnivore's teeth to go from being flat to suddenly fitting the carnivorous profile(sharp canines and sharper front teeth for tearing) we now recognize.

Since the Big Bang theory was proposed, examined, and had entire new branches of science(stellar radiation, etc) submit information concerning the age of galaxies and stars farther away from us as well as the MOVEMENT of these formations, we've come a long way. Scientists now believe the earth is around 4.6 billion years old and have fossil records to support this claim. Not that YEC's care much. Their method of 'debunking' geological science is pointing at the Bible and then plugging their ears. You could try discussing archeological finds with a Young Earther but you'd get nowhere fast.

Scientists start by looking at what IS instead of what is written about the past. They go from zero and build their case based on what they see right in front of them. If what they find happens to coincide with historical writings then that's great! It's an amazing piece of history which was written about by humans in the past and celebrated as such. But if what they find in a laboratory contradicts what is found in an archeological record then the facts as they found them are published and that's that. The lab scientists let the other historians fight it out.

Earthcentrism(our planet being the center of the universe or at least the beginning of anything worthwhile) is an egotistical idea which has been molded over time, though not by much. Literalists have taken to flouting interpretations of the book of Genesis without anything at all to back them up, making for some pretty messed up rhetoric to feed to the common masses. Let's examine a few arguments:

Philo Judaeus(Philon the Jew) wrote, initially quoting Genesis in his tract On the Account of the World's Creation given by Moses(De Opificio Mundi), "In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth." "Beginning should not be conceived in a chronological sense for time cannot be before there was a world. Time began either simultaneously with the world or after it. For time is a measured space determined of the world's movement, and since movement could not be prior to the object moving ... it follows of necessity that time also is coeval with or later born than the world."

That is the earthcentrism I am speaking of. Everything good or worthwhile revolving around what's going on with Earth. All the other planets and stars are trivial. Right? Why can't time be before our planet existed? As you can see Philo created some weak rhetoric. All you have to do is ask the very opposite questions he is proposing and his argument falls apart like a house of cards.

We're essentially talking about Schrodinger's cat; "An observation being made can only then be measured." But humans and the mighty microscope are not the end all. Just because we didn't witness it doesn't mean that it doesn't hold value. The cat is both alive and dead based on WITNESS to the box opening. God being the one who crammed the cat in the box and opened it afterward gives us the story. Or is it a prophet writing down the words of God? And how do we stretch God's "days" out through 4.6 billion years or even a mere thousand years? We don't have a witness. Not one. Because we were not in existence yet. That is the paradox.

Augustine of Hippo, for all his wishy-washy and confused religious leanings, had at least enough sense to ask the right questions. "If God made heaven and earth in some beginning of time, what was he doing before he made heaven and earth? And why did he suddenly decide to make what he had not previously made through eternal time?"

In other words, why did God suddenly decide to create our cosmos? Augustine asks why while Einstein asks how. Religion and science meet.

Though Augustine couldn't have known it at the time this is what science proves thus far-

Big Bang's proposed explosion date: average of 13.5 billion years ago.
Geology's date for the Earth's "birth": 4.6 billion years ago
= BIG DARN GAP!

By the time of Thomas Aquinas in the thirteenth century, the issue was once again up in the air and this time moderation prevailed. In Aquinas tract De aeternitate mundi which summarized the 'beginninglessness' of the world he declared, "We hold by faith alone, and it cannot be proved by demonstration, that the world did not always exist... the reason being that the newness of the world cannot be demonstrated by the world itself."

At least the word 'faith' was used in its proper context. Science was in no position to sway anyone at that time. Too many questions and not enough technology to run with ideas. And poor Galileo learned the hard way through house arrest that even leaps in scientific achievements with the telescope were not allowed. The Church was too egotistical to allow reason to prevail.

If you only have science to give age to something in a local region then how do you compare it to anything else outside your region if you don't have the tools to study this farther region? What is your solid point of reference? Until we began dating our own sun and closest stars within our own galaxy and then began reaching beyond, we really had no hope of being objective on the matter of age at all. Our point of reference(Earth) was too close. Too young. And far too changeable with its layers and weather and erosion.

Einstein, at least, was remembered fondly by the Church. Even with as much as the man was dragged into dialogues about religion he managed to stay true to himself. Pope John Paul II said in November of 1979 at the Pontifical Academy meeting held in honor of the centenary birth of Einstein,

"On the occasion of this solemn commemoration of Einstein, I would like to confirm again the Council's declaration on the autonomy of science in its function of searching for the truth inscribed during the creation by the finger of God. Filled with admiration for the genius of the great scientist, in whom is revealed the imprint of the creative spirit, without intervening in any way with a judgment on the doctrines concerning the great systems of the universe, which is not in her power to make, the Church nevertheless recommends these doctrines for consideration by the theologians in order to discover the harmony that exists between scientific truth and revealed truth."

By dousing a good fifty percent of the Church's arrogant attitude much was gained. Science flourished.

Einstein relegated his personal religion to being defined as "awe." And honestly, isn't that a safer path to take when we are still such a young species?