"The Apochryphon of John" is pre-Christian. Nothing indicates Jesus gave it to anyone other than in the interlude and Jesus is not one of the personages. It is said to be a revelation given to John just after the death of the savior. It was one of the most important manuscripts found at Nag Hammadi, Egypt, and may well have been one of the more important rediscoveries ever. This allegedly was given to John by Jesus after the interpretation of most experts, but in reality it ties together the material of the early Gnostic thinkers with the Greek philosophers as well as ancient Egyptian priests and others such as the Babylonians. Until more material is found we may not discover what these people really knew. Someone who held all the truth destroyed practically all ancient knowledge.
The book called "The Nag Hammadi library" came out in 1987, edited by James M. Robinson, with the contribution of the translations of a Great many experts of the over 50 texts of Gnostic material. Unlike the "Dead Sea Scrolls" the material from Nag Hammadi was not under the control of the Catholic Church. (For a better picture on what happened to the Dead sea Scrolls read "The Dead Sea Scrolls Deception" by Michael Baigent and Richard Leigh.)
There were many forms of Gnostic beliefs. (Gnostic means knowledge, but knowledge of an esoteric nature.) The Christian Gnostic had as much claim to being Christian as anyone else, and as will be seen, the form of Christianity which we know today did not appear until long after Irenaeus (120/40-200/03 C.E.).
Gnostic material predates this by many years, yet when reading the material, such works as "The wisdom of Jesus Christ," and "Eugnostic the blessed" who were put beside each other in the text of "The Nag Hammadi Library," demonstrated an unmistakable dependency on the part of the "Sophia (wisdom) of Jesus Christ" on "Eugnostic the blessed." I did not come up with the idea that since "Eugnostic the blessed" was obviously pre-Christian dating to at least a hundred years before Jesus, other Gnostic material could also be pre-Christian. I just examined the documents to see if there was any sense in them when given a new dimension of thought. I have now waited a few years, anticipating some expert will come out with a comprehensive study on the depth and understanding of ancient thought, but to no avail.
I gave up on the idea of someone coming out with a thorough look at the subject and decided to take matters into my own hands. Since "Eugnostic the blessed" was based on pre-Christian material, why couldn't the rest of the main Gnostic thoughts come from before Christ? If the case was that the Christian Gnostic's added the name of Jesus to ancient manuscripts in order to validate their theories, why couldn't a fresh look at it discover some truths? "Eugnostic the blessed" was employed as the basis for the "Sophia of Jesus Christ." What other material was old? How many ancient philosophies were reworded to validate newer philosophies? What would the ancient manuscripts really have been if they were altered every time someone got a new "prophet," to validate the prophets viewpoints?
The first thing I did was to examine the ancient writings to see if they made any sense at all if given this new dimension of thought. It was in fact amazing that none of the experts in the field had come out with any literature showing what the connection was. I do not know if all the experts are sleeping, but like always it is useless to wait around for someone else to do the work. I buckled down to do some research and writing on my own. The debt and understanding of the ancients are amazing. Today's scientist can not explain the universe without adding a mysterious fourth dimension. The ancients had defined this dimension in their teachings thousands of years ago.
I should not negate the experts, they are probably too busy attempting to fit the information to the preconceived notions and accepted dogma to really take a look at it. I reworded the material without the holy and other divine epithets to see what concepts would come forth. The results I feel are quite remarkable. Gnostic material such as "The Apochryphon of John," clearly indicates the origin of the Soul and it's basic components. Then "The Paraphrase of Shem" placed immediately after it gives us a comprehensive document on the origin of the physical universe and its components. Together these documents show how the individual thinking beings came about.
From "The Paraphrase of Shem," it is also demonstrated how the spiritual entity and Soul was responsible for the survival of the physical Universe. Many questions were answered in my mind. An entirely new perspective on Man, creation and reality developed.
One big problem came about. I had no-one to talk to.
Sure, I could spout off about the connections I had found. The reality and wisdom of the ancient Gnostic, Greek, Sumerian, Babylonian, Assyrians, Egyptians ,Taoists and Canaanites to name a few, became fascinating for me. But having an entirely new concept of reality was no fun when there was not anyone else who was aware of the content of these documents. The Concept was not really all that new. In fairness I must admit the concept was one held partially or completely by many people in days gone by. Spouting off about these connections made me look as if I was saying I was wiser than others, which I am not. It became far too easy to confuse people. The subject is too encompassing to relate to others in a few minutes of conversation, hence this manuscript. I hope to have more people to talk to as a result.
John the apostle did not write the book in the new testament. The Gospel according to John was written about 100 C.E. and it is not known where. (B.C.E. stands for before common era, and C.E. stands for common era. This is used instead of Before and after Christ.) The text of the gospel according to John in the New Testament has been widely rearranged. The last chapter is an obvious addition to the original which was written in Greek. Those things allegedly spoken by Jesus in John will be looked at later in a different context, but where it came from is not necessarily to be discredited.
"The Apocryphon of John" could have been written earlier than the new testament gospel, but how much could only be a guess. The examination I did indicates John did not write it either. It demonstrates that the name John was added to a document which existed long before the birth of Jesus. The entire text was "Christianized," by which I mean there were things added to validate Christ as the savior as viewed by some of the Gnostic Christians.
It is of course difficult to see exactly what was added but I do not believe many changes were made in the basic text. To the Gnostic Christians, Jesus was the spiritual savior who had come from our natural world (Pleroma) in order to instruct mankind in how to regain Gnosis (knowledge) within the material world.
The Gnostics were of the belief that the things Jesus thought while he was in the body was of little or no significance. It was to them the revelations which he brought after the body died which were his teachings. One of the most salient points thought was that life was not over at the time the body died. But this was not something new. It may have been new to the Israelites, but was not new to the Greeks. Socrates who lived several hundred years before Jesus stated that the ancients had more knowledge than they usually were accredited with. How old those ancients were is anyone's guess. He talks of Homer who lived about the time of Solomon as nearly a contemporary. These ancients according to Socrates had stated that after the body died they, as Souls, went to the house of Hades where they were refreshed for so, afterwards to become trapped in new bodies again. We will see exactly what this house of Hades was and the refreshing which it did, and still is doing to the Souls.
After the death of Christ, John is feeling down because Jesus left too many questions unanswered. Who was the father Jesus talked about? Where was the eternal spiritual heaven he would go to after the death of the body? It did not help when a Pharisee had just previously asked him about Jesus, telling him not to be fooled by the Nazarene.
As he was contemplating the heavens opened up. All the creation below shone, and the earth trembled. This part may have been taken from Ezekiel who often witnessed the appearance of such luminous phenomenon. The Gnostics were adamantly opposed to the teachings of the Old Testament and their prophets of the evil Gods, such as they maintained the God of Ezekiel was. Here we could be witnessing an insertion to justify Jesus as the Messiah. Such luminous phenomenon could, on the other hand, have happened in the past. If they did, we must not exclude them because they do not fit our concepts of reality. The other point here is that if it is correct that John was not who wrote this, if it was added to validate Jesus and his disciples, the beginning of the document may have been entirely different. I feel that not much more than the name John and a few holy's were added.
John was afraid, and saw in the light a youth. Looking a bit more, the figure changed and became that of an old man, and finally he changed to that of a servant. He states the being in front of him was not a plurality but it was rather a likeness with multiple forms. The likeness tells John not to be afraid because he is the one who always has been with him and always will be. He tells John he is the Father, the Mother and the Son. That he is the undefiled incorruptible one. He tells John he has come to teach what was, what is, and will be in order that John might know those things which are not as yet revealed.
The reason is so John can tell this revelation to fellow spirits from the steadfast race of the perfect Man. This manuscript does contain the name of John, but it does not mention the name of Jesus anywhere, so to state that Jesus was the savior which is mentioned in this document is also but allegory. The message seems to be as it was originally and that is all that really matters. According to the Gnostic beliefs, there is not anyone in existence who desires or deserves to be worshipped: Not God or Man. Names were irrelevant to the Gnostics, there was no God(s) worshipped by the Gnostics so they had no fear of worshipping a wrong Deity.
The being in this Apochryphon tells John that the Monad is above everything. He tells John the Monad is the invisible God and father of everything from those who exist in incorruption in the pure light. We can leave Monad, as it is a word which describes the basic element of the physical universe, an impenetrable original unit, or atom. The only modification to this definition would be Monad as the original Spiritual constituentsize and shape are undefined and irrelevant. Monad was employed by the ancient Greeks as the designation of the first principle, and it could date back to the Egyptians and even further. The Monad or first principle is then not the material, but spiritual basis of all.
Because of the content of the document, Source is a better definition than God. No one exists prior to this Source to examine him. He is in everything and everything is in him. He is invisible to all physical perceptions. It is not right to refer to him as a god is stated by the Gnostics. The reason is because all Gods have to have a beginning. This pure light which no physical eye can perceive is only perceived by the mind. The mind, when pure, needs no physical sense organs to perceive. I can mention the fact that the Gnostics were not the only one's who thought the physical sense organs deterred from perception. Socrates makes it abundantly clear he has the same sentiments in "Phaedo."
The Monad does not exist in anything inferior to himself and everything is in him. This means that since we are a part of the Monad we are not inferior to him. We are his equals, for we are in him, and he is in us. This is also reflected in the Bible. We see in Paul's letter to the Ephesians (4:6), written in the second century C.E., "One God and Father of all, who is above all, and through all, and in you all." And also in John 14:20, "And that day ye shall know that I (Jesus speaking) am in my father, and ye in me, and I in you."
The difference between what the Bible really states and what the minister states is often like night and day.
The Monad is not blessed or divine, he is not large or small. So neither are we. He does not partake in time for everything which partakes in time has to have been prepared before hand. It is also clear that there is nothing which has been created which can think on its own or has any personality of its own. This all is factual to this point. This means we are not participating in time. Time goes by, we see our bodies age. Our children grow up, we grow old and die. But we do not partake in time!
That is right, we are not a part of time, we experience time through our association with the body, but we do not experience time. The "I" is what we are. The "I" is a viewpoint existing in "now" and now is not part of time/space. Now, is also the only thing which truly is real. The future is not real because it is not here yet. When it is here our environment will have changed, but "now" will not. The past happened, but it is not real because it is over. When the "I" perceived reality in the past it was real, and still is because the "I" has not changed. Sure we may have changed our opinions, but opinions are not a part of the physical universe. Our opinions have a profound bearing on the various realities of the physical universe. It will be made clear that it is our opinions which have a bearing on the physical universe. Our mind can totally alter the physical universe while the physical universe has little or no effect on our minds.
Source is a life force giving life force. Source is pure immeasurable mind, and pure immeasurable light. He is life giving life, he is source giving source, knowledge giving knowledge. Grace, mercy, goodness, etc., are all qualities of his immeasurable light. His source is indestructible, at rest, in silence, and forever prior to everything. He is the head of all existence, yet he partakes in none. This is who perceives it all, yet it is not a part of anything of what he perceives. We perceive, yet we are not a part of anything which we perceive. Should we infest a favorite chair with a part of our personality the chair will have this only as long as it is employed by us. Should a child who associated the chair with us see it in the attic, years later they would associate the chair with us, but the chair is no longer a part of who at one time sat in it. The picture the person gets is not a picture of the chair, it is a picture of the chair with it's occupant.
This is not confusing! It is another reality. Explaining it seems in some ways difficult. I can not explain one point before you understand another point which I have not explained yet because you would have to understand this point first. When we get to the next point, this point should become clear and enable you to understand the next point. To understand another reality one has to perceive the entire picture and the entire picture has to be written one word at a time.
We are dealing with a reality which does not belong to the physical universe. It has nothing to do with the physical universe and can not be perceived within the physical universe. To understand this reality we need to read it within the physical universe. Yet, when we understand it, what we understand is not a part of the physical universe. The difficulty lies only in the fact we have become indoctrinated into perceiving only things pertaining to the physical universe for so long that our spiritual abilities have deteriorated somewhat.
Dormant spiritual abilities are nonetheless as powerful as ever once awakened, and while some may need to read this more than once for the entire picture to emerge, it will. And the picture will be clear as a bell. Our source was not done developing, and neither are we. As a matter of fact, source, or the Monad, had not even started doing anything yet.
In the shine of the light which surrounds Source, in the waters of light which surrounds him, an image appeared. His mind conceived a deed and the image which had appeared came into being. She is the forethought of all, her light is like his light. This was the first thought, his image. Together this now was the source of the All. It is the unbegotten virginal power which is Source. What came into being in this water of life, was the power before all powers. She was called Barbelo. She is the invisible spirit who is indiscernible. She is the virgin who is perfect. The Pure womb who is the mother of all. This is the first, the holy spirit. This is the Mother/Father. The thrice androgynous (neither masculine nor feminine) one and the eternal source among the invisible ones, and the first to come forth.
She became the mother of all since she is prior to all. This is the mother/father, the first to come forth and the holy spirit.
Now what was this Source? This describes a "Monad" or Source which became aware. Awareness is perception, and this perception postulated something should come about. This perception is called Barbelo. Barbelo is not separate from the original Monad, it is the Monad with another attribute. This all occurred in a non-time/space dimension. The document does not state the monad did not exist in space, it states he did not exist in time. Time is necessary in order for space to exist.
Harder to understand may be creation within a dimension where time does not exist. This was the part Irenaeus had absolutely no clue about. He kept harping about how the sequence of events had to be adjusted in the creation we are about to witness. It must be understood, that should forethought come about in a non time dimension, it would not mean forethought was ever absent from this dimension. In the document, foreknowledge is created next. This would be the way it would come within the physical universe where time exists. If forethought came about in a dimension where time does not exist and if then foreknowledge comes about, the one does not precede the other. If they are created within this dimension without time, they would also always have been present within this same dimension. Not because they existed before they were created. Because, when something comes about within a dimension without time, it was always there. Nothing new can come into existence within a dimension without time because once it exists, it was always there, it's as easy as that.
So, it was not only Irenaeus and I who had difficulties grasping the significance of this? It may at first be a little difficult to follow. It would perhaps seem as if nothing new can come about in a non time dimension, but that is not how it works. For every Soul which comes about anywhere, this means the Soul or spiritual entity must exist within the spiritual universe which we are now talking about.
When you thus are within the spiritual universe, while perceiving events in the physical, it also means you were always in the spiritual dimension.
For those who understand this concept it is easy, for those who are still grappling with it, the concept seems insurmountable and they could be ready to side with Irenaeus. Time is the recording of change. Where there is no change there is no time. When something comes about in such a place it always was. Which brings up the next part: It is not a place! But it is, and it always was and it always will be.
A complete understanding of this concept brings about a complete freedom from all of the physical universe. You are a part of the world I here describe as the spiritual universe. You do not have to understand it, but for your own sake it is best to grasp it. It is of course impossible to describe it with words. Words impose limitations and restrictions. Words can be tied together to form concepts, and we can get a little closer.
To get the wrong impression of this complete existence is not the end. You will know when you got it; it is not just a complete understanding, it is a new reality.
Picture if you will a one dimensional universe. It would be a real meager existence if we were to find ourselves there, we would only have forward, or one direction. There would be no sides and no back. Time is one dimensional. If you were time, there would not be any recollection because it would be the opposite direction. Picture now that you are in a two dimensional universe. Here we add breath to length, and we immediately have a new environment. In a two dimensional universe there is sideways and backwards and forward. Now picture yourself in a two dimensional universe! You may call this universe space. Here you are able to do a lot more than a one dimensional being, but you would for example not be capable of turning around. A perfect example of two dimensional existence is the shadow. The image looking back at you from the mirror is such a two dimensional existence, and possibly the example I will employ because most would feel more comfortable with the mirror image than the shadow.
Picture yourself looking in a mirror. The image you see in the mirror is not you, it is a reflection of you on a two dimensional surface. This reflection gives you an idea of what your physical body looks like, your face or your hair. Some people have been known to sit in front of a mirror so long it was almost like they were the mirror. They sit there combing the hair, putting on make up, squeezing pimples and other essential functions.
Now picture yourself being in the mind of the image in the mirror. Your mind could as easily operate a two dimensional figure, and your world may well become a two dimensional world unless a few basics are learned. Picture yourself being in your head in the mirror looking back at your real body. Sorry, the two dimensional image in the mirror can not employ the eyes as they are three dimensional. Remove sight. Then remove the ears. Then remove the color. In the end all you have left in the two dimensional world is the shadow.
While this shadow you now are in a two dimensional world is restricted, we will imagine it still has some mental abilities left. A real mental feat in a two dimensional world would be to discover that there possibly existed a three dimensional world. Here one could postulate the ability to turn the other cheek so to speak. The shadow may be wondering if there would be any life after death. This would then come about when the body went outside in the sunshine, or turned on the light. When standing on an uneven surface the shadow may experience psychosomatic pains of all sorts, and imagine all sorts of remedies. When the body moved on to an even surface these would disappear, and the shadow would have an idea of what it had done to cause this to come about. The shadow would have real problems when the body was sitting at a table for example, and only a part of it was apparent.
So now you can come back from the two dimensional world to the three dimensional. The three dimensional world we can call matter. While there are vast differences between the two dimensional world and the three dimensional world, these are not as great as the differences between the three dimensional world and our home dimension. When we experience psychosomatic pains they are real to us, but no more significant than the pains of the shadow. When we perceive with our eyes, ears and other organs of the physical universe this too is a vast improvement of the two dimensional world. But the difference between the perceptions in the two dimensional world and three dimensional world are not as great as the differences in perception between the three dimensional world and our home universe.
Thus, a complete comprehension of what is to follow is not merely a knowledge, or Gnosis, as the ancients called it. It is life of a dimension some only know must exist. The grasp of reality we have while perceiving reality through the sense organs provided us by the physical universe are no closer to reality than the perceptions received by the shadow in the two dimensional universe. How could something come into being from nothing? It could not. But it did! From the doctrine in "The Apochryphon of John," it was not the physical universe which came into being from nothing, it was a perception outside the physical universe dimension. When did this occur? It did not! It did not happen in time/space, so it did not happen in the past, or in the future. Define "now?" It happens when you think. It happens when all of us think. Define now? That was when it happened. It was no different when the Greek philosophers' thought. The past and future has only to do with the physical universe. It has no bearing on you, me, or the Greek philosopher.
"Now" is the only thing that is real. Yet there is not anything of the physical universe which exist in now. The future is not real because it is not here yet and the past is not real because it does not exist now. This does not mean that the events of the past did not happen. But they are not happening "now."
Barbelo is that thought, that postulate, that something will happen in the future. Since a non-time dimension has no future and no past, the reason Barbelo came into being was because something else had come into being of a different dimension.
We are all the "Monad" which came into being because of the postulate called "Barbelo." This does not mean that the average man by any stretch of the imagination has the abilities to cause the necessary changes to come about. Man lives as if under a cloak of darkness. We must remove the cloak of darkness, and then each and every one of us have the abilities of Barbelo and the Monad.
In a three dimensional world, we are handicapped in the same fashion as the two dimensional shadow. The cloak of darkness is what keeps us perceiving ourselves as three dimensional beings. The idea we are three dimensional is as valid as the shadow who believes he is the real thing.
Unlike the Bible which starts creation with an event in the physical universe, the creation of the material bodies, the Gnostics started off their creation with the creation of the perceiving entity which creates the future, and reflects on the past.
These perception components are androgynous, male/female, the eternal invisible fountains. But instead of androgynous as male and female, it should be as neither male or female. That which perceives may perceive such things as sexual pleasure as experienced by bodies, but the pleasure felt by the awareness unit is not its own. It is a borrowed pleasure, and the real source of guilt pertaining to sex. There is far more to physical pleasure than most have as yet realized. We will get back to the physical later. For now, we are dealing with the spiritual origin.
This was the beginning, but it was not within the physical universe. This is a universe of a dimension which the physical universe is but a poor imitation of. The sensations and pleasures we can receive here are but imitations of the real thing. Should we become dependent on the sensations and pleasures of the physical universe, we will have become trapped within the physical universe, and that is what the Gnostics maintained was supposed to have been the lot the evil Hebrew Deity had in store for us.
The Mother/Father desired foreknowledge and foreknowledge next to forethought was that which came about.
Forethought would be necessary in order to have foreknowledge because one would have to be able to perceive that something is there before one could perceive what is there. On a more esoteric plane it could be speculated there is nothing in existence in the "now." That "nothing" which does not exist, yet is, is us.
All that exist in the "now" is the point which views the future, or recollects the past, and that point is the "I" which perceives. Yet forethought would be the "I" theorizing something of the future, and the foreknowledge would be the identification of what is being perceived or envisioned. Before anything really esoteric can be perceived in the future, more personality traits are required than these.
The next thing to be conceived of our essence was Indestructibility. This might at first seem selfish, but had this not happened nothing else would have come about. We would have had instantaneous creation which would have vaporized. Dreams would be a good example. Indestructibility would be necessary in order for something perceived to come about. Our dreams might be an example of foreknowledge without indestructibility. But this would only apply to some of the dreams, for all dreams are not vaporized upon awakening. Some dreams are based on real forethought with indestructibility.
Next she perceived eternal life, and eternal life came into being. Eternal life would go with indestructibility. It would not however be an existence in an unending series of now, stacked one upon the other. It would be life outside the dimensions of time/space. Eternal life in a continuous now dimension of time/space would at best be boring. A better description of existence in an unending time/space continuum with time stacked as in a chain with no end would be hell. A time/space continuum of an endless series of "Now" stacked one after the other where one is not cognizant of his own abilities and origin is more than just possible. This would then temporarily remove the boredom. Fear and trepidation would take its place.
Such an existence would be what the ancients referred to as Hell, or the Greeks as Tartaros. It should be understood that the Hades which the ancient Greeks perceived was close to the third heaven where the Christians saw us go after we left our bodies if we were good little boys and girls. The house of Hades was where the Greek judges were judging the Souls of the departed.
The last of the five original perceptions were truth. Truth would be the perception of what is real. Truth is a perception of fact, and not the dreamed reality of what we would like things to be. On the other hand truth is not what we fear reality might be. Truth is not conformity with the reality of others. Others are not the valid judges of what our truths are unless it also agrees with our perceptions. A real truth never leaves open the question of other interpretations.
An ambiguous answer, or a vague statement of what someone believes is, just as often is not. Such truth might just as well be a statement of confusion. Doubt vanishes in front of truth like fog in the heat of the sun. When one knows real truth, it always brings about a feeling of well being. Truth is never scary or mysterious. Fear is often the basic feeling we have when we realize things may not be known. When what we fear is known the fear disappears. This is true whether it is a loud noise in a dark forest, or the most evil of Demons.
These are the first perceptions which came into being in the universe of the Spirit where we all belong. It is forethought, called Barbelo, and the foreknowledge and the indestructibility. Eternal life and truth. The forethought which is Barbelo is the perception Source had of himself in the spring of the water of life. Barbelo is then the name of Source.
A few things become clear at this point in the document. First of all, the document describes these things as if the one had happened before the next. Since this exists in the document, the document would have had to be a copy. The writing that someone was in a non-time dimension could only have come from someone who understood a non-time dimension. We can come up with various ideas pertaining to the physical. We can deduce and speculate regarding ramifications. The gravity of a perception we originated apart from a time dimension could not have come about by someone who saw the physical and speculated regarding it. When one understands the ramifications of a non/time dimension, he is already in a non/time dimension. This again but validates Plato's idea that we do not really learn anything new in the physical universe, we are but capable of relearning what was our knowledge prior to our entering the physical universe.
Someone who writes of a sequence of events in a non-time dimension does not understand the dimension he is writing about. He has to have been copying material and in so doing attempted to put it within a framework he could understand.
Another thing which is clear is that another dimension already existed at the time these five basic characteristics were formulated. If there was no other dimension which necessitated the coming about of these spiritual attributes, they would never have come about. The one dimension which we do know quite a bit about is the physical universe. The physical universe is very likely what caused these things to come about.
Since we know the physical universe is trillions of years old, someone might say these attributes have then existed for trillions of years. They would be right and yet they would be wrong. You can not measure a non time dimension in relation to a physical dimension. If something came about yesterday at the level of the physical dimension, if this was spiritual, it would always have existed on the spiritual plane. To further clarify, it should be added that you are a Soul. As such, you are a part of this spiritual universe where no time exists. Thus should your existence be measured within the physical universe as of yesterday, you will always have been a part of the spiritual universe.
One more point here is that since I had some problems at first, trying to comprehending a non-time/space dimension, I assume others will have similar difficulties. I may be wrong. It is quite possible a lot of people, you included, may have no difficulty whatever. This is something I seldom attempt to discuss verbally because I feel others may have difficulties with it. Yet I could be the only one who experiences difficulty pertaining to the perception of a non-time dimension. In my own case, I can see that my ability to perceive the other dimensional universe we came from had been retarded. This was because of my association with the physical universe.