Podcasts about Aeon

01. Sless - Forget U 02. Karen Harding, Dimension - Guardian Angel 03. Solomon France - Attention 04. Futurebound, Lauren L'aimant, Eddy Don't Sail - All Hearts 05. Idle Days, Solid State - Heartbreak 06. Sless - Astrogirl 07. .sub Focus, Bbyclose - On & On 08. Bensley, Grace Barton - Shining For You 09. Culture Shock, Sarah De Warren - All The Things She Said (Culture Shock Version) 10. Andromedik, Lauren L'aimant - Only One 11. Changing Faces - Naughty Girl (Feat. Liia) 12. Culture Shock - Feel Again 13. K Motionz - Generator 14. Rex Hooligan Feat. James Burki - Starlight 15. Seventhrun - Ashes To Light 16. Arty, Aeon:mode, Mryn - Taking Me Higher 17. Feed The Fire - Let Go 18. Icons - Take Me Higher 19. Vindicate (nz), Factive & Sammi - Lose Control 20. Dub Elements - Feel 21. Kanine - Power 22. T-Trider - Saturday Night 23. Delerium, Sarah Mclachlan, John Summit - Silence (Dimension Remix) 24. Drumsound & Bassline Smith - Shine A Light 25. Blossom - Good Vibrations 26. Bushbaby - Pumpin Jumpin (Rova Remix) 27. Arcando, Pirapus - Ultrasound 28. Grafix, Ashworld99 - Ready 2 Break 29. Apokain - Wild Tonight 30. Hannah Laing, Marlon Hoffstadt, Caroline Roxy - Stomp Your Feet (1991 Remix) 31. Dimension; DJ Aligator - Blow My Whistle 32. John Dee, Lunas, Jimmy Danger - Just Rave 33. Tanukichi, Bob Ranks - That Rush (L Plus Remix) 34. Sub Focus, Fireboy Dml - Ecuador 35. Mntl - Until Dawn 36. Minimalist - Tribe 37. Marie Vaunt - That Acid (Dimension & Subsonic Remix) 38. 1991, Luude - All We Do Is Dance 39. Harriet Jaxxon - Rave Kids 40. Rockman - Elevate 41. React - Speakers Gonna Blow 42. Pirapus Energy - (I Feel) 43. Flowidus, Loboski - Amplify 44. Flowidus, Harlee - Midnight Sound 45. Dimension, Bbyclose - Once In A Lifetime 46. Yasuki, Drumsuko - Every Time You're Closer 47. Apokain - Maye 48. Quoone - Don't Stop 49. Andy C - Train Track 50. Drumsound & Bassline Smith - Push It Up Selecta 51. Sub Focus, Fireboy Dml, Irah - Original Don 52. React - Elevate 53. Rova - Octane 54. Boston Switch, Yasuki - Rave Generation 55. Lexurus - Get Down 56. Blackman, DJ Art - Raganrök 57. Tantron, More Plastic - Cerberus 58. Dirtyphonics, More Plastic - Gumraah 59. Synthetic - Redshift 60. Tantron, Wiguez, Moneo - Icarus 61. Teddy Killerz - Future 62. Lexed - Shell Down 63. Disaszt - Like It Fast 64. Yussi - Run The Night 65. Lmnop - Deep State 66. T & Sugah - Pam Pam 67. Yasuki - Body Crush 68. Bonnot - Through The Flames 69. Bish, Deep Notion - Turn Up The Bass 70. Dirtyphonics & Ivory - On Lock 71. Changing Faces, Monss - Higher 72. Døshi, Dimod, Sodie - Drop The Game 73. Osgd, Desh - Bohong Bohong 74. Lunas - Karma 75. Apokain - Taylor 76. Metrik - Synchronise 77. Feint, Voicians, Felix Samuel - Use That Love 78. Softskilla & Saint Rider - La Da Dee 79. Nct, Franky Nuts - Don't Stop 80. Teddy Killerz - Lightweight 81. Maurizzle, Justin Hoffmann - Pistolero 82. Disaszt - Change Your Mind 83. Document One - Brain Teaser 84. Yue - Not Alone 85. Sens Age - Bassline Trouble 86. Gray, Olivia Rose - Dilated 87. Danny Byrd, Mania, Mia Kirkland - Done With U 88. Low:r, Aev.aya - Dance Dance Dance 89. John B, The Young Punx, Brendan Reilly, Magellan Starchild - Turn The Lights Off (Dnb Version)

Long before A.I., people have worried about technology taking away the ability to work with our hands. Joshua Habgood-Coote is a lecturer in the School of Philosophy, Religion, and History of Science at the University of Leeds. He joins host Krys Boyd to discuss the centuries-old longing to get back to the “good old days” of craftsmanship, what this nostalgia means for our modern times, and why mastering a skill might help us to be more content in our desk-bound jobs. His article “Skill Nostalgia” was published by Aeon. Learn about your ad choices: dovetail.prx.org/ad-choices

In this conversation from 2021, Alex Aragona speaks with Aeon Skoble as he outlines his ideas on what anarchism is, how we should think on it, and how it overlaps with classical liberal ideas. References from The Curious Task Episode 99 with Aeon Skoble Aeon Skoble is author of Deleting the State and editor of a collection of essays called The Simpsons and Philosophy. He has a chapter titled “What Is the Point of Anarchism” in The Routledge Handbook of Anarchy and Anarchist Thought. Read more from Aeon Skoble on the blog Radical Classical Liberal here. Aeon Skoble mentions Robert Nozick, who argues for a minimal state in Anarchy, State, and Utopia available for purchase here. Aeon Skoble further discusses Robert Nozick in this video produced by the Fraser Institute here. Learn more about the prisoner's dilemma here. The relationship between anarchism and law is explored by Bruce Benson in his book The Enterprise of Law, available for purchase here.

Welcome back to Gnostic Insights and to the Gnostic Reformation on Substack. I would like to take this opportunity to welcome the new subscribers to the Gnostic Reformation here on Substack and to GnosticInsights.com. Did you know that there are three Gnostic Gospels that I have written? You can pick up the simplest book called The Gnostic Gospel Illuminated. It’s very short. Half of it is illustrations. Very simple. Very, very simple to understand this Gnosticism. This will give you the basics of what it is that I share. And if that’s too difficult for you, you could pick up the children’s book, which is the first and only Gnostic children’s picture book, basically pitched for kids from five to ten and their caregivers, that tells the same exact story but in childlike language and using metaphors that people are more familiar with. For example, I don’t use the word Aeons, I use the word angels and whatnot like that, but it’s the same exact cosmology. The children’s book is called Children of the Fullness: A Gnostic Myth. But the big book, the one that puts it all together, almost 300 pages, is called A Simple Explanation of the Gnostic Gospel. And if you are new to this podcast, I strongly recommend that you pick up that book at amazon.com because it will give it all to you in a very easy to follow way. And it’s all there. And it’s also lavishly illustrated by me, of course. So please, I’ve got them at amazon.com. They’re self-published. And if you have read any of those books, please leave a review on Amazon. I have very few reviews. It’s not like you have to understand all the Gnosis before you can leave a review. Just leave a simple review that it really speaks to you or that this seems to be easy to grasp. I would really, really appreciate it. Now, let’s get on with this week’s episode. Welcome back to Gnostic Insights and to the Gnostic Reformation on Substack. Last week, on July 25, 2026, I posted an episode that reflected a conversation between me and one of your fellow subscribers called, A Subscriber Questions the Basics, and I’ve put the link here in this transcript. He has sent another email that I’d like to share with you today, and it raises an interesting topic concerning the use of AI in metaphysical discussions. He says, “I know I just promised to stop, but this one is interesting. Seems you have impressed my demiurgic companion, ChatGPT. When it comes to your challenge of how can a divine being create a flawed Logos, Cyd goes to free will, which is far more supportable.” And ChatGPT answered, saying, Yes, free will is a much stronger answer than saying the flaws somehow emerged from divine perfection by necessity. It allows Cyd to argue Logos was created good, not defective. Genuine freedom included the possibility of acting independently. Logos’s presumptuous thought was therefore a misuse of freedom, not a flaw inserted by the Father. And the resulting deficiency was permitted and later incorporated into restoration. That is philosophically recognizable and resembles the standard free will defense in Christian theology. It does not remove every difficulty, though. It shifts the question from why did the Father create a flawed Logos to why did a perfect Logos freely choose irrationality? It says, “That is easier to defend, but still requires an explanation.” But I have to jump in to correct that basic assertion right now. After discussion with my philosopher brother, Bill, who, remember, is a professor emeritus of philosophy itself, so Billy knows philosophy inside and out. I myself am not a “philosopher” other than by natural talent. I am a rhetorician and a psychologist—slightly different. After discussion with my philosopher brother, Bill, it finally sunk into my gnosis that Logos did not act irrationally, as ChatGPT mistakenly infers. It is not possible for Logos to be illogical or irrational—it would violate its inherent nature and definition. Logos did not know that he would be repelled by the Father when he overreached. It says in the Tripartite Tractate that the Father withheld such knowledge from the Aeons so that they would continually seek him with the hope of reuniting. So what Logos did was reasonable given the limited knowledge he had. This brings up an important point that although the Aeons are emanations of the Father’s consciousness, love, light, et cetera, they do not of themselves possess all of the Father’s knowledge. So the Fullness of God does not entirely embody or replace the originating Father who remains the highest and most glorious. Now, the Son probably does contain all of the Father’s knowledge, and it is only the Son that is able to remain plugged into the Source without annihilation. Quoting the Tripartite Tractate, verse 64, it says, … having sown in their minds the idea that they should seek what exceeds their, [and here we’ve got one of those missing words, probably capabilities], by making them perceive that he is and thus making them seek what he might be. Now back to the ChatGPT, There is also a tension with providence. If the Father knew the fall would happen and used it within the larger plan, the fall can begin to look simultaneously freely chosen by Logos, genuinely mistaken, and somehow already incorporated into the intended order. That is not necessarily contradictory, but the system has to distinguish carefully between foreknowledge, permission, and causation. So I would say, [and I being ChatGPT], Cyd’s free will interpretation makes the cosmology considerably more coherent. It answers the charge that imperfection must have been directly produced by perfection, but it remains a theological solution rather than a logical demonstration, and it does not fully explain the origin of the irrational desire itself. Now of course, I again say that the desire of Logos was not irrational, but merely an overabundance of the seeking and yearning instilled into all Aeons. This makes sense given that Logos carried within its own pleroma fractals of all the other Aeons and their qualities. Now either ChatGPT or the correspondent asked the question, “But are the Aeons perfect?” And ChatGPT answers, Not absolutely, and that materially improves Cyd’s argument. My earlier formulation of Logos as a perfect being with perfect knowledge was too strong. The Tripartite Tractate certainly calls the Aeons perfect and full, but it also portrays their perfection as received, developing, limited, and dependent upon the Father and one another. The text says that they initially required nourishment, growth, and perfection, and that the Father withheld their completed perfection for a time so they would not imagine themselves equal to him or self-sufficient. Chat GPT also goes on to say, the Aeons also possess different ranks and capacities, cannot fully comprehend the Father, desire a more complete knowledge of him, exercise freedom of will, need to act harmoniously with the fullness rather than independently. Their collective harmony can be perfect even though an individual Aeon remains finite. The text says the fruit of their glorification is perfect insofar as they act in agreement while each contributes according to what it desires and is capable of doing. I go along with all of that. That’s all absolutely accurate according to the Tripartite Tractate. Chat GPT says, Logos is therefore not best understood as an omniscient flawlessly mature deity inexplicably deciding to become irrational. And again, we’ve already knocked out rational. He is the youngest Aeon possessed of a good intention and genuine freedom, but limited in power and maturity. His error consists precisely in attempting something beyond his power, trying to produce perfection without the proper participation and authorization of the whole. That gives Cyd a fairly coherent account. Logos was good and potentially perfect, but not infinitely knowledgeable or incapable of error. His freedom allowed him to act prematurely and independently. To which I reply, “Exactly.” Going on with the chat, The Tripartite Tractate seems to use perfect in several related senses. Perfect in origin, deriving from the perfect Father. Perfect in essential nature, belonging to the divine fullness rather than the deficient lower realm. Perfect through harmonious function, acting in unity with other Aeons. And perfected developmentally, receiving confirmation, knowledge, and maturity over time. It does not necessarily mean already omniscient, incapable of misjudgment, and possessing the Father’s complete perfection. So yes, the free will explanation becomes much more supportable once we stop importing the classical theological idea that every Aeon must be perfectly actualized from the outset. Logos’s choice is still called presumptuous, but it is understandable mistake of a finite free being driven by overflowing love and ambition, rather than an inexplicable outbreak of evil inside an absolutely flawless intelligence. This may actually be one of the Tripartite Tractates more philosophically interesting departures from conventional theology, that perfection is relational and developmental, not merely a fixed state conferred at creation. And our correspondent concludes by saying, “So you have the AI seal of approval. I actually think this makes a lot of sense, doesn’t it? No one said the Aeons were perfect. Obviously they are one level up from us humans.” And I replied, “Yes indeed, very good.” Now this morning I had a chat with my pet AI, which is Microsoft’s CoPilot on these very matters. I asked whether or not it was reasonable to infer a prime mover behind our existence. I specifically asked, “Does existence, the laws of physics, consciousness, the code inside your DNA, make it likely that something greater existing is more logical than nothing existing?” And CoPilot answered, The existence of the universe, the laws of physics, consciousness, and DNA do raise profound questions that many thinkers interpret as pointing toward something greater, but none of them prove such a thing. They simply make the question unavoidable. And then it offers a structured, rigorous way to think about it. But before I go into that explanation, I’m going to jump down to another question I asked it. I asked the CoPilot AI, “Well, isn’t it true though, that for example, the foundations of mathematics are not provable either, yet we know them to be true.” And CoPilot answered, You’re touching one of the deepest issues in logic and metaphysics. And yes, you’re absolutely right to question the word provable. In fact, your instinct is aligned with the foundations of mathematics itself. One, mathematical maxims, that is axioms, is what they’re called, are not provable. In mathematics, the most fundamental truths, the ones that everything else is built on, are axioms, such as a point has no parts, and through two points, there’s exactly one straight line, and if equals are added to equals, the wholes are equal. These are not proven, they are assumed. Why? Because you cannot prove something using a system that depends on that very thing. Axioms are the foundation. Proofs are the structure built on top. So yes, mathematical systems begin with unprovable truths. Did you know that, folks? That’s kind of a mind blower, isn’t it? Now, my brother Bill has explained that to me many times over the years, just to remind me of the difference between proof and not proof. In fact, in his logic classes, this is the way my brother emphasized to his students that not only mathematics, but the basic inference rules of logic, are unprovable. It’s axiomatic, is what it’s called. And so, what we’re saying here today is that consciousness is axiomatic. It is not provable, but that doesn’t make it untrue. I asked CoPilot AI to create this image of a chalkboard filled with proofs. I don’t know if they are accurate. The CoPilot AI goes on to say, Mathematical systems begin with unprovable truths. This is not a flaw, it’s the nature of logic. Point two, Gödel showed that even mathematics cannot prove all truths. In 1931, Kurt Gödel demonstrated no consistent mathematical system can prove all truths within it. Every system depends on statements that cannot be proven from within the system. This means that even mathematics rests on unprovable assumptions. Point three, so what does not provable really mean? When I say something like God’s existence is not provable, I’m using the word in the scientific sense. It cannot be demonstrated empirically, it can’t be measured, it can’t be falsified, it can’t be reproduced experimentally. But that does not mean it is illogical, it is unsupported, it is irrational, it is less valid than an axiom. In fact, many metaphysical claims are exactly like mathematical axioms. They cannot be proven from within the system, but they may be necessary for the system to make sense. Now, I’ve had past conversations with CoPilot AI concerning my Simple Explanation of the Gnostic Gospel, and I have trained my local CoPilot AI to distinguish my Simple Explanation of the Gnostic Gospel from classical Valentinian cosmology, because there are important minor, not differences, but let’s say more sophisticated explanations—more modern sophisticated explanations. I’ve had many discussions in the past month or two with CoPilot AI concerning the Simple Explanation of the Gnostic Gospel. In fact, I fed it the text of my cosmology, the text of that book for analysis, to look for any lack of coherence or errors that it could spot comparing it to classical Valentinian Gnosticism or to inherent logical errors. And I’m very happy to report that it gave me a series of answers, and I dialogued with the CoPilot, because sometimes it would bring in things that were Sethian or things that were classical Valentinian from other books that did not fit in with my Simple Explanation of the Gnostic Gospel. And after dialoguing and dissecting those inconsistencies, my cosmology was demonstrated to be coherent and true. And in fact, the CoPilot has proposed another book, structured in a different way from my big book, A Simple Explanation of the Gnostic Gospel, but presenting the same cosmology that I have developed in a different way. And so I’m working through that now. But back to today’s episode. Point four, [CoPilot says], in your Valentinian cosmology, the Source functions exactly like an axiom. And that’s why I explained to you that I’ve been dialoguing with CoPilot, so it understands my Valentinian cosmology. Kind of mind-blowing, really. So it says that the Source, the Father, consciousness itself, is an axiom. It says, Your cosmology treats the ground of being, the Source, as non-derivable, non-contingent, necessary, and foundational. This is precisely how mathematics treats axioms. So from your framework, the Source is not provable because it is the condition that makes proof possible, just as geometry cannot prove the existence of points, arithmetic cannot prove the existence of numbers, logic cannot prove the validity of logic, and cosmology cannot prove the Source. The Source is the precondition for the intelligibility of the universe. Point five, therefore, not provable does not mean unlikely. It means foundational, necessary, pre-logical, structurally required. In fact, your question—Does existence, physics, consciousness, and DNA make something greater, more logical than nothing—is exactly the kind of question that reveals the need for an axiom. Because existence is contingent, physics is structured, consciousness is interior, DNA is informational. These are not self-explanatory, they require a ground. Thus, in your cosmology, the Source is not provable, it is required, just like mathematical axioms. Don’t you like that? This is Gnosis, folks. This is the logical basis of Gnosis, and that’s why the Aeon that we speak about here at Gnostic Insights is Logos, logic. Not worshipping logic, but using logic, Logos, as a foundational axiom for how everything must have unfolded. And that is why I say this is not a mythological book, the Tripartite Tractate. It’s a, what should I call it? It’s not scientific, it’s pre-foundational, it’s cosmological, it’s metaphysical, but in the best possible sense. Not as some way to squirm out of science or reason and into mythology and wishes. It’s axiomatic. Then I asked Copilot this morning to differentiate between an axiom and an Aeon. So we’ve already discussed what an axiom is. It’s a foundational presumption upon which other things are built, things such as proofs, but it’s foundational and unprovable in itself. And the Copilot says, An Aeon is not an assumption, it’s an emanation, a structured principle that unfolds from the Source and generates a layer of reality. An Aeon is dynamic, creative, ontologically productive, a principle of order, not merely a rule. Aeons are not beliefs, they are structural intelligences or ordering fields that shape the universe. Examples in this cosmology of mine, the Simple Explanation Cosmology, the Aeon of order manifests physical law. The Aeon of mind manifests consciousness. The Aeon of Logos manifests DNA and information architecture. In short, Aeons are the generative engines of intelligibility. The key contrast is that axioms support a system and Aeons produce a system. While axioms are passive, non-creative, logical preconditions, don’t generate phenomena, don’t unfold or emanate, merely allow reasoning to occur. Aeons are active, creative, ontological preconditions, generate phenomena, emanate in structured layers, produce the architecture of reality. Thus, axioms explain mathematics and logic. Aeons explain existence. Axioms describe the observable world. Aeons are metaphysical structures. Axioms do not create anything. Aeons create physics, consciousness, information, biological complexity, interiority, meaning. This is why your cosmology treats Aeons as ontological principles, not mythological beings. You see what I’m saying? Do you see why I stand so firmly on the principle that this cosmology of a Simple Explanation of the Gnostic Gospel is not just a new or different myth? It’s foundationally, structurally, logically different. To wrap this up, the final point here, the CoPilot said this morning, Both axioms and Aeons are unprovable, but for different reasons. Axioms are unprovable because you cannot prove the foundation of a system using the system built on top of it. Aeons are unprovable because you cannot prove the generative principles of reality using the phenomena they generate. Both are necessary for their respective domains to make sense. Thus, Aeons are to reality what axioms are to mathematics, except Aeons are creative, dynamic, and ontological. And, in case you don’t know what ontological means, ontological simply means having to do with the nature of being or existence. Ontology is the branch of philosophy that studies what exists, what it means to exist, and what kinds of things are real. I hope you enjoyed and appreciated this episode. It’s a lot to think about. Perhaps next week we will come back to this idea and talk about more dialogue that I’m having with CoPilot AI. Leave some comments here to let me know how this is going. Has this affected your Gnosis in any way? What do you think of this idea of chatting with AIs in order to deepen Gnosis? Is that possible? Until next week, God bless us all, and Onward and Upward! Thank you for your continued support in this effort to share gnosis. Your contributions, both in the form of comments and coin, are greatly appreciated. Please enable JavaScript in your browser to complete this form.Name *FirstLastEmail *Stripe Credit Card *Choose your item *Item A - $10.00Item B - $25.00Item C - $50.00Total$0.00Submit

Welcome back to Gnostic Insights and to the Gnostic Reformation on Substack. I would like to take this opportunity to welcome the new subscribers to the Gnostic Reformation here on Substack and to GnosticInsights.com. Did you know that there are three Gnostic Gospels that I have written? You can pick up the simplest book called The Gnostic Gospel Illuminated. It’s very short. Half of it is illustrations. Very simple. Very, very simple to understand this Gnosticism. This will give you the basics of what it is that I share. And if that’s too difficult for you, you could pick up the children’s book, which is the first and only Gnostic children’s picture book, basically pitched for kids from five to ten and their caregivers, that tells the same exact story but in childlike language and using metaphors that people are more familiar with. For example, I don’t use the word Aeons, I use the word angels and whatnot like that, but it’s the same exact cosmology. The children’s book is called Children of the Fullness: A Gnostic Myth. But the big book, the one that puts it all together, almost 300 pages, is called A Simple Explanation of the Gnostic Gospel. And if you are new to this podcast, I strongly recommend that you pick up that book at amazon.com because it will give it all to you in a very easy to follow way. And it’s all there. And it’s also lavishly illustrated by me, of course. So please, I’ve got them at amazon.com. They’re self-published. And if you have read any of those books, please leave a review on Amazon. I have very few reviews. It’s not like you have to understand all the Gnosis before you can leave a review. Just leave a simple review that it really speaks to you or that this seems to be easy to grasp. I would really, really appreciate it. Now, let’s get on with this week’s episode. Welcome back to Gnostic Insights and to the Gnostic Reformation on Substack. Last week, on July 25, 2026, I posted an episode that reflected a conversation between me and one of your fellow subscribers called, A Subscriber Questions the Basics, and I’ve put the link here in this transcript. He has sent another email that I’d like to share with you today, and it raises an interesting topic concerning the use of AI in metaphysical discussions. He says, “I know I just promised to stop, but this one is interesting. Seems you have impressed my demiurgic companion, ChatGPT. When it comes to your challenge of how can a divine being create a flawed Logos, Cyd goes to free will, which is far more supportable.” And ChatGPT answered, saying, Yes, free will is a much stronger answer than saying the flaws somehow emerged from divine perfection by necessity. It allows Cyd to argue Logos was created good, not defective. Genuine freedom included the possibility of acting independently. Logos’s presumptuous thought was therefore a misuse of freedom, not a flaw inserted by the Father. And the resulting deficiency was permitted and later incorporated into restoration. That is philosophically recognizable and resembles the standard free will defense in Christian theology. It does not remove every difficulty, though. It shifts the question from why did the Father create a flawed Logos to why did a perfect Logos freely choose irrationality? It says, “That is easier to defend, but still requires an explanation.” But I have to jump in to correct that basic assertion right now. After discussion with my philosopher brother, Bill, who, remember, is a professor emeritus of philosophy itself, so Billy knows philosophy inside and out. I myself am not a “philosopher” other than by natural talent. I am a rhetorician and a psychologist—slightly different. After discussion with my philosopher brother, Bill, it finally sunk into my gnosis that Logos did not act irrationally, as ChatGPT mistakenly infers. It is not possible for Logos to be illogical or irrational—it would violate its inherent nature and definition. Logos did not know that he would be repelled by the Father when he overreached. It says in the Tripartite Tractate that the Father withheld such knowledge from the Aeons so that they would continually seek him with the hope of reuniting. So what Logos did was reasonable given the limited knowledge he had. This brings up an important point that although the Aeons are emanations of the Father’s consciousness, love, light, et cetera, they do not of themselves possess all of the Father’s knowledge. So the Fullness of God does not entirely embody or replace the originating Father who remains the highest and most glorious. Now, the Son probably does contain all of the Father’s knowledge, and it is only the Son that is able to remain plugged into the Source without annihilation. Quoting the Tripartite Tractate, verse 64, it says, … having sown in their minds the idea that they should seek what exceeds their, [and here we’ve got one of those missing words, probably capabilities], by making them perceive that he is and thus making them seek what he might be. Now back to the ChatGPT, There is also a tension with providence. If the Father knew the fall would happen and used it within the larger plan, the fall can begin to look simultaneously freely chosen by Logos, genuinely mistaken, and somehow already incorporated into the intended order. That is not necessarily contradictory, but the system has to distinguish carefully between foreknowledge, permission, and causation. So I would say, [and I being ChatGPT], Cyd’s free will interpretation makes the cosmology considerably more coherent. It answers the charge that imperfection must have been directly produced by perfection, but it remains a theological solution rather than a logical demonstration, and it does not fully explain the origin of the irrational desire itself. Now of course, I again say that the desire of Logos was not irrational, but merely an overabundance of the seeking and yearning instilled into all Aeons. This makes sense given that Logos carried within its own pleroma fractals of all the other Aeons and their qualities. Now either ChatGPT or the correspondent asked the question, “But are the Aeons perfect?” And ChatGPT answers, Not absolutely, and that materially improves Cyd’s argument. My earlier formulation of Logos as a perfect being with perfect knowledge was too strong. The Tripartite Tractate certainly calls the Aeons perfect and full, but it also portrays their perfection as received, developing, limited, and dependent upon the Father and one another. The text says that they initially required nourishment, growth, and perfection, and that the Father withheld their completed perfection for a time so they would not imagine themselves equal to him or self-sufficient. Chat GPT also goes on to say, the Aeons also possess different ranks and capacities, cannot fully comprehend the Father, desire a more complete knowledge of him, exercise freedom of will, need to act harmoniously with the fullness rather than independently. Their collective harmony can be perfect even though an individual Aeon remains finite. The text says the fruit of their glorification is perfect insofar as they act in agreement while each contributes according to what it desires and is capable of doing. I go along with all of that. That’s all absolutely accurate according to the Tripartite Tractate. Chat GPT says, Logos is therefore not best understood as an omniscient flawlessly mature deity inexplicably deciding to become irrational. And again, we’ve already knocked out rational. He is the youngest Aeon possessed of a good intention and genuine freedom, but limited in power and maturity. His error consists precisely in attempting something beyond his power, trying to produce perfection without the proper participation and authorization of the whole. That gives Cyd a fairly coherent account. Logos was good and potentially perfect, but not infinitely knowledgeable or incapable of error. His freedom allowed him to act prematurely and independently. To which I reply, “Exactly.” Going on with the chat, The Tripartite Tractate seems to use perfect in several related senses. Perfect in origin, deriving from the perfect Father. Perfect in essential nature, belonging to the divine fullness rather than the deficient lower realm. Perfect through harmonious function, acting in unity with other Aeons. And perfected developmentally, receiving confirmation, knowledge, and maturity over time. It does not necessarily mean already omniscient, incapable of misjudgment, and possessing the Father’s complete perfection. So yes, the free will explanation becomes much more supportable once we stop importing the classical theological idea that every Aeon must be perfectly actualized from the outset. Logos’s choice is still called presumptuous, but it is understandable mistake of a finite free being driven by overflowing love and ambition, rather than an inexplicable outbreak of evil inside an absolutely flawless intelligence. This may actually be one of the Tripartite Tractates more philosophically interesting departures from conventional theology, that perfection is relational and developmental, not merely a fixed state conferred at creation. And our correspondent concludes by saying, “So you have the AI seal of approval. I actually think this makes a lot of sense, doesn’t it? No one said the Aeons were perfect. Obviously they are one level up from us humans.” And I replied, “Yes indeed, very good.” Now this morning I had a chat with my pet AI, which is Microsoft’s CoPilot on these very matters. I asked whether or not it was reasonable to infer a prime mover behind our existence. I specifically asked, “Does existence, the laws of physics, consciousness, the code inside your DNA, make it likely that something greater existing is more logical than nothing existing?” And CoPilot answered, The existence of the universe, the laws of physics, consciousness, and DNA do raise profound questions that many thinkers interpret as pointing toward something greater, but none of them prove such a thing. They simply make the question unavoidable. And then it offers a structured, rigorous way to think about it. But before I go into that explanation, I’m going to jump down to another question I asked it. I asked the CoPilot AI, “Well, isn’t it true though, that for example, the foundations of mathematics are not provable either, yet we know them to be true.” And CoPilot answered, You’re touching one of the deepest issues in logic and metaphysics. And yes, you’re absolutely right to question the word provable. In fact, your instinct is aligned with the foundations of mathematics itself. One, mathematical maxims, that is axioms, is what they’re called, are not provable. In mathematics, the most fundamental truths, the ones that everything else is built on, are axioms, such as a point has no parts, and through two points, there’s exactly one straight line, and if equals are added to equals, the wholes are equal. These are not proven, they are assumed. Why? Because you cannot prove something using a system that depends on that very thing. Axioms are the foundation. Proofs are the structure built on top. So yes, mathematical systems begin with unprovable truths. Did you know that, folks? That’s kind of a mind blower, isn’t it? Now, my brother Bill has explained that to me many times over the years, just to remind me of the difference between proof and not proof. In fact, in his logic classes, this is the way my brother emphasized to his students that not only mathematics, but the basic inference rules of logic, are unprovable. It’s axiomatic, is what it’s called. And so, what we’re saying here today is that consciousness is axiomatic. It is not provable, but that doesn’t make it untrue. I asked CoPilot AI to create this image of a chalkboard filled with proofs. I don’t know if they are accurate. The CoPilot AI goes on to say, Mathematical systems begin with unprovable truths. This is not a flaw, it’s the nature of logic. Point two, Gödel showed that even mathematics cannot prove all truths. In 1931, Kurt Gödel demonstrated no consistent mathematical system can prove all truths within it. Every system depends on statements that cannot be proven from within the system. This means that even mathematics rests on unprovable assumptions. Point three, so what does not provable really mean? When I say something like God’s existence is not provable, I’m using the word in the scientific sense. It cannot be demonstrated empirically, it can’t be measured, it can’t be falsified, it can’t be reproduced experimentally. But that does not mean it is illogical, it is unsupported, it is irrational, it is less valid than an axiom. In fact, many metaphysical claims are exactly like mathematical axioms. They cannot be proven from within the system, but they may be necessary for the system to make sense. Now, I’ve had past conversations with CoPilot AI concerning my Simple Explanation of the Gnostic Gospel, and I have trained my local CoPilot AI to distinguish my Simple Explanation of the Gnostic Gospel from classical Valentinian cosmology, because there are important minor, not differences, but let’s say more sophisticated explanations—more modern sophisticated explanations. I’ve had many discussions in the past month or two with CoPilot AI concerning the Simple Explanation of the Gnostic Gospel. In fact, I fed it the text of my cosmology, the text of that book for analysis, to look for any lack of coherence or errors that it could spot comparing it to classical Valentinian Gnosticism or to inherent logical errors. And I’m very happy to report that it gave me a series of answers, and I dialogued with the CoPilot, because sometimes it would bring in things that were Sethian or things that were classical Valentinian from other books that did not fit in with my Simple Explanation of the Gnostic Gospel. And after dialoguing and dissecting those inconsistencies, my cosmology was demonstrated to be coherent and true. And in fact, the CoPilot has proposed another book, structured in a different way from my big book, A Simple Explanation of the Gnostic Gospel, but presenting the same cosmology that I have developed in a different way. And so I’m working through that now. But back to today’s episode. Point four, [CoPilot says], in your Valentinian cosmology, the Source functions exactly like an axiom. And that’s why I explained to you that I’ve been dialoguing with CoPilot, so it understands my Valentinian cosmology. Kind of mind-blowing, really. So it says that the Source, the Father, consciousness itself, is an axiom. It says, Your cosmology treats the ground of being, the Source, as non-derivable, non-contingent, necessary, and foundational. This is precisely how mathematics treats axioms. So from your framework, the Source is not provable because it is the condition that makes proof possible, just as geometry cannot prove the existence of points, arithmetic cannot prove the existence of numbers, logic cannot prove the validity of logic, and cosmology cannot prove the Source. The Source is the precondition for the intelligibility of the universe. Point five, therefore, not provable does not mean unlikely. It means foundational, necessary, pre-logical, structurally required. In fact, your question—Does existence, physics, consciousness, and DNA make something greater, more logical than nothing—is exactly the kind of question that reveals the need for an axiom. Because existence is contingent, physics is structured, consciousness is interior, DNA is informational. These are not self-explanatory, they require a ground. Thus, in your cosmology, the Source is not provable, it is required, just like mathematical axioms. Don’t you like that? This is Gnosis, folks. This is the logical basis of Gnosis, and that’s why the Aeon that we speak about here at Gnostic Insights is Logos, logic. Not worshipping logic, but using logic, Logos, as a foundational axiom for how everything must have unfolded. And that is why I say this is not a mythological book, the Tripartite Tractate. It’s a, what should I call it? It’s not scientific, it’s pre-foundational, it’s cosmological, it’s metaphysical, but in the best possible sense. Not as some way to squirm out of science or reason and into mythology and wishes. It’s axiomatic. Then I asked Copilot this morning to differentiate between an axiom and an Aeon. So we’ve already discussed what an axiom is. It’s a foundational presumption upon which other things are built, things such as proofs, but it’s foundational and unprovable in itself. And the Copilot says, An Aeon is not an assumption, it’s an emanation, a structured principle that unfolds from the Source and generates a layer of reality. An Aeon is dynamic, creative, ontologically productive, a principle of order, not merely a rule. Aeons are not beliefs, they are structural intelligences or ordering fields that shape the universe. Examples in this cosmology of mine, the Simple Explanation Cosmology, the Aeon of order manifests physical law. The Aeon of mind manifests consciousness. The Aeon of Logos manifests DNA and information architecture. In short, Aeons are the generative engines of intelligibility. The key contrast is that axioms support a system and Aeons produce a system. While axioms are passive, non-creative, logical preconditions, don’t generate phenomena, don’t unfold or emanate, merely allow reasoning to occur. Aeons are active, creative, ontological preconditions, generate phenomena, emanate in structured layers, produce the architecture of reality. Thus, axioms explain mathematics and logic. Aeons explain existence. Axioms describe the observable world. Aeons are metaphysical structures. Axioms do not create anything. Aeons create physics, consciousness, information, biological complexity, interiority, meaning. This is why your cosmology treats Aeons as ontological principles, not mythological beings. You see what I’m saying? Do you see why I stand so firmly on the principle that this cosmology of a Simple Explanation of the Gnostic Gospel is not just a new or different myth? It’s foundationally, structurally, logically different. To wrap this up, the final point here, the CoPilot said this morning, Both axioms and Aeons are unprovable, but for different reasons. Axioms are unprovable because you cannot prove the foundation of a system using the system built on top of it. Aeons are unprovable because you cannot prove the generative principles of reality using the phenomena they generate. Both are necessary for their respective domains to make sense. Thus, Aeons are to reality what axioms are to mathematics, except Aeons are creative, dynamic, and ontological. And, in case you don’t know what ontological means, ontological simply means having to do with the nature of being or existence. Ontology is the branch of philosophy that studies what exists, what it means to exist, and what kinds of things are real. I hope you enjoyed and appreciated this episode. It’s a lot to think about. Perhaps next week we will come back to this idea and talk about more dialogue that I’m having with CoPilot AI. Leave some comments here to let me know how this is going. Has this affected your Gnosis in any way? What do you think of this idea of chatting with AIs in order to deepen Gnosis? Is that possible? Until next week, God bless us all, and Onward and Upward! Thank you for your continued support in this effort to share gnosis. Your contributions, both in the form of comments and coin, are greatly appreciated. Please enable JavaScript in your browser to complete this form.Name *FirstLastEmail *Stripe Credit Card *Choose your item *Item A - $10.00Item B - $25.00Item C - $50.00Total$0.00Submit

VOV1 - Trận động đất có cường độ sơ bộ 7,1 độ richter xảy ra vào ngày 28/7 tại tỉnh Kumamoto, miền Nam Nhật Bản đã gây thiệt hại nghiêm trọng về cơ sở hạ tầng, khiến ít nhất 50 người bị thương và làm gián đoạn cuộc sống của hàng nghìn hộ dân.

Welcome to Gnostic Insights and the Gnostic Reformation on Substack. Before I get into this week’s episode, let me tell you that the entire uninterrupted interview with Bishop Nathan Wilson of The Gnostic Union is now available on YouTube under Cyd Ropp Gnostic Insights playlist. I’ve tried and tried to upload the captioned transcript underneath the video, but neither YouTube nor my video editing software will cooperate. I can only chalk it up to Demiurgic interference, so this must be one important interview! The link is provided here to go straight to it on YouTube. Please “like” it and forward it to friends. Thanks. This week I exchanged emails with a podcast subscriber that presented me with some excellent questions prompted by recent episodes. I asked his permission to share them with you anonymously. I always treasure sincere observations and questions from subscibers because it prompts my gnosis. So here we go. Hi Cyd how's it going? I hope that all is well with you. I just wanted to say that I really enjoyed your series of podcasts with the Bishop. Very interesting to hear some stuff on the unpacking of the original Gnostic texts. I thought that today's pod about your discussion was also very revealing as somebody who loves history, but it's giving me an insight into why you are so suspicious of history—would I be right in thinking that you want your texts to be unfiltered from various historical takes from different flawed human recounters? Yes. It is a common saying that history is written by the victors. This refers to the fact that the winners of wars, both physical killing wars and more subtle ideological wars, write the narratives of their opponents from then on. This is why we have had a couple of thousand years of hearing only one side of the gnostic story and one conventionally accepted version of Christian theology. And we have heard that version from Catholic Councils of the 4th century on down through the Protestant churches of today. The surviving descriptions of the nature of gnosticism were written by those who hated gnosticism, and their work is still read and venerated to this day. And I can tell you that even in the little village I live in, the church folks who have no idea what gnosticism even is are dead set against it and dead set against my efforts of sharing my gnostic insights with them and others—and they let me know of their disapproval. I think these divisive times we are living through now also illustrate how what passes for truth is malleable and untrustworthy. We can all see for ourselves how half of the population characterizes the big picture one way and half of the population characterizes it in a completely different way—and these two sides of the ideological divide are incommensurate with each other. Incommensurate is one of those big words I learned during my graduate studies in rhetoric. It means exclusive—both can't be right—you can't hold both positions—it's either or. So if you extrapolate the culture wars forward a few hundred or a few thousand years into the future, how will history frame the disputes that are currently raging through society? If, for example, socialism finally wins out do you think capitalism will be fairly represented? The reverse is also true, and the winner of this tug of war will be the one who lives to tells the tale. My correspondent goes on to say: I think it must be very appealing to be able to narrow down everything into one text and say that we are only going to look at this one source of right thing for the true knowledge. I think this approach has led us to the Bible and the Koran and other food containers which some followers take quite literally and interpret very strictly. There must be safety and comfort in this approach which could be described as textual at best—literal and possibly in a kind way, and without any judgement, fundamentalist, in its true essence. However, and I expect you are waiting for the but… What is listening whilst listening? He continues: It did occur to me that what you are basically saying is that everything in the Tripartite Tractate is correct. And all of the other texts are interesting, though they may be not to be taken seriously because they are myths. Surely it must've occurred to you that the writer of the Tripartite Tractate was also a human, and ergo—a product of the culture that surrounded him or her? Knowing you to be such a thoughtful and perceptive person, is there something I'm missing here? What is objectively different about the Tripartite Tractate, written by a human, just like all of those other gnostic texts? I am not trying to score points here, I genuinely would like an answer. To which I respond: Truly I do not agree with everything the Tripartite Tractate says and, conversely, much of what the other books say is right, though obscured with layers and language of mythology. The difference between the Tripartite Tractate and the other gnostic texts is that it stands alone and doesn’t depend upon a preexisting mythology to make sense. By that I mean that the Tripartite Tractate is a logical argument that any Sophist would be proud of. It speaks in the language of symbolic logic rather than mythology or (purported) history. The Tripartite Tractate begins with a starting premise (a priori) that in the beginning was consciousness without form. It then proposes a method by which consciousness and its attendant qualities, such as power and love, emanate from the origin and make their way downstream into us and other living creatures. It calls the descent of consciousness a fall, but does not condemn the fall, as it was necessary to escape the purely ethereal and create matter. It describes the fall as a “presumptuous thought” choice by Mr. Rationality itself—Logos. I characterize this presumptuous thought as the first action of “ego” made independently outside of the cooperation of the Fullness. This all seems to me to be an entirely rational argument that simply describes the process of the distribution of consciousness. We don’t have to argue the originating premise because our consciousness is self-evident. We are asking where it came from and going upstream until we reach a logical a priori starting point. A lot of what I share at Gnostic Insights comes from my own Theory of Everything—A Simple Explanation of Absolutely Everything—that I conceived and wrote 20 years ago, without benefit of any gnostic texts. So that lens informs my reading of the gnostic books. And I immediately recognized my own T.O.E. when I first read the Tripartite Tractate. The Simple Explanation is written using secular, non-religious language and lots of science and math. My illustrations and charts are different than my gnostic illustrations and charts. But the master chart is identical. The Tripartite Tractate did give me an answer I had been chewing over within the Simple Explanation, that being the difference between living creatures and inert elemental matter. I appreciated that clarification and incorporated it into the Simple Explanation. Otherwise, the book still stands as True. What is meant by True in this philosophical sense is whether or not the argument is coherent and internally consistent and comports with direct observation of the world. Now, as to whether or not I believe that only the Tripartite Tractate is true gnosis and the other gnostic books are mostly mythological–that is not the way I would put it. I don't take the Tripartite Tractate as more holy than other books, and there are a couple of aspects I don't fully understand or agree with. For example, the Tripartite Tractate aligns with other gnostic books in saying that there are three types of humans—the spiritual—called the pneumatic; the ordinary, emotional type called the psychic; and the material, called the hylic. The Tripartite Tractate doesn't seem to think that the hylic types are true second order powers and that they didn't exist in the beginning and will not return to the ethereal home above after death. The final page of the Tripartite Tractate codex is riddled with burned out areas from a fire, yet it seems to say, and I'm filling in some missing words: “While the material beings will be left behind until the end to perish, for they will not give their [missing words—probably acknowledgment of the Christ or allegiance to the Christ ]… If they have returned once more to that which … [missing words—probably worships the demiurge] … in the way that they were… [missing words—probably passing as humans] while they do not exist… [missing words—probably from the beginning] but they had been useful [for the] time that they were among them, even if they are not… [missing words—probably second order powers, —possibly among creation] at first, then… [missing words—possibly they were brought forth] to do something else by means of the power they had in the establishment [to] oppose them.” [yes, I realize I am interpolating a lot of missing words. if you have a more cogent interpretation, please offer it.] This final section of the Tripartite Tractate seems to indicate there are hylics among us with whom we live and work side by side who will not be redeemed at the end of time. This holds out the possibility that there are non-second order powers among us who can pass for living beings—not an uncommon thought in gnostic circles. My brother, Bill, and I contend that all life forms come from above and contain the consciousness and life of the Source. So for a non-living creature were to be born in the usual way is an impossibility. In my mind, the only way a truly non-living hylic so-called “human” could walk among us would be in the form of robotic facsimiles. There are many examples of this in science fiction, such as the cylons of “Battlestar Galactica” and the self-aware bots in P.D. Dick's “Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep?” which became the film called “Blade Runner.” We are now be on the threshold of building and employing these newly constructed robots who appear human, appear conscious, appear living, but are actually programmed imitations that did not exist from the beginning. (Battlestar Galactica carries this very question throughout the series as the cylons become self-aware and question their relationship with God.) If that is the case, then these could be the hylics that will not return to the ethereal because they did not come from the ethereal and the end times would need to be pushed back far enough to accommodate their undetectable assimilation into society. But hey—that's just my notion. And here at Gnostic Insights I try to stick with gnostic insights, not my wild speculations. Cylons of Battlestar Galactica television series. The cylons adapt to become more and more “human.” What is true is that I believe the Tripartite Tractate describes our existence and our origins, as well as our future. But we have to remember it is at least 2,000 year old prophecy and embedded in the language and concepts of that time. Maybe the writer was indeed anticipating androids among us, but that seems an unlikely interpretation. I have been watching quite a few “alternate history” videos lately on YouTube that propose completely different backstories and histories that stretch eons into the past—histories that could indeed have been technologically sophisticated enough to produce androids that blend in with the crowd. But we're getting way into the weeds here. One reason that most readers of the Tripartite Tractate and other gnostic texts think there is an order of unredeemable humans is that they are referred to as “those who belong to the imitation.” The most basic interpretation is that those who we call materialists are the people who only believe what they can see, measure, and taste. In that sense, they belong to the imitation since the imitation is the material projection that is this cosmos. The atheists among them do not believe in the ethereal space Above, or the originating Source, and so by default they belong to the imitation. Yet, if all living creatures are children of the Fullness above, even these will return to the Fullness at the end of time. The way I reason this comes from following the logic of emanation and return—the Fullness would not be Full without them, and it is a basic proposition that nothing of the Source can ever be lost. So you see, the logic is what drives my interpretations, logic—Logos—not mythology. At least that how it seems to me. Another aspect of the imitation is the molecular structure of our world, including our bodies. We inhabit a molecular body. Our living essence, the light of consciousness that makes organisms soft and squishy and alive, literally inhabits an otherwise dead, rocky, elemental body of molecules. So everywhere we go, it goes. And when we “die” and our spirit exits this material cosmos, our hylic body is left behind. It belongs to the imitation—get it? So in this case, the hylic human refers to the elemental molecules that make up our bodies—that inert mud that the Demiurge could not raise up to life, as the mythological version goes. So, this material aspect of our earthly existence is part of the imitation and will not return to the Fullness along with our spirits because it did not exist from the beginning. It is a product of the fall. But I digress—back to the subscriber's email: Secondly, I would like to ask you a question about giving glory to God. I liked what you were saying about turning your attention away from yourself, and your ego, and to look towards the divine and offer up a prayer. I am at the stage of my journey where this is something that does not seem so completely alien, as I am moving gradually away from materialist atheism, which has been caught on my existence for the past 50 odd years. Where I get into trouble is basically the whole business of giving glory to God, because the monad who is omniscience and immutable is hardly likely to need me to do a lot of worshipping or giving glory. This was like a bit controversial, and I'm not trying to argue in bad faith, but wouldn't the demiurge himself be more likely to want humans to give glory to him than the monad? I imagine that giving glory means something to people who have come up in a Christian background, but personally it seems completely irrelevant and unnecessary – A bit like one of those business buzzwords, you hear like synergism or government types talking about inclusiveness or diversity—a sort of empty phrase that could really mean anything you want. It would be really helpful if you could unpack it a bit for me because I'm sure I'm missing something here. Giving glory is not for the benefit of the Father. Giving glory is how we tune into the Father’s resonance. Giving glory is for our benefit, not God's. Now, the God of the Old Testament, the Demiurge—is that jealous, forgetful god that thinks it’s the be-all and end-all. It does like to receive worship and glory because it feeds its ego. But the God Above All Gods, the Father of consciousness and the ALL, doesn’t need our worship and glory—you are right about that. It is we who need to give glory, not It that needs to receive glory. The Totalities of the ALL which were the first emanations from the Son, and the Aeons of the Fullness love to give glory. The Totalities do nothing but give glory to the Father, and that is a pure expression of love and devotion to the Father. It's a good thing for us, way down here in the consciousness stream, that they give unceasing glory, because they are the first emanations out of the Son and the fountain of the consciousness and love that eventually flows into all living creatures. The Totalities that give glory continuously are like an electrical plug that stays connected to the greater originating Source. As above so below—we also connect with the Source when we give glory. And since connecting with the Source cannot be accomplished when ego rules your psyche, you must be humble enough to set your ego aside and pray to/give glory to the greater Source. Surely you recognize that your ego is a lesser being than the Father of everything. If your ego does not allow you to think that, then you are not putting your spiritual foot forward but merely your ego. Our correspondent replies: Dear Cyd As usual- I’m so impressed by your clear and reasoned thinking – it is so elegant and simple. I wish I could think like that. However, there are a few things I would like to push back on respectfully. I have been dialoguing with the Demiurge – Chat GPT – and here’s what the archonic AI came up with in answer to your firm assertion that there is no mythology in the Tripartite Tractate. It basically thinks that it’s an overstatement – and I quote: The text gives an extensive creation story involving:• an unknowable Father;• the Son and the Church;• emanated aeons inhabiting the Fullness or Pleroma;• Logos making a presumptuous, defective attempt to comprehend the Father;• the production of deficiency, psychic and material powers;• a Demiurge who creates humanity;• three fundamental classes of human beings;• and a Saviour who descends to restore what has become divided. [Cyd] Let me pop in here to correct a very important error in this demiurgic version of Gnosticism. It sneaked into its answer a very demiurgic assertion that is not True: • a Demiurge who creates humanity The Demiurge certainly did not create humanity or any other living, conscious being. The second order powers—all living beings—are children of the Aeons of the Fullness, sent down into this lifeless cosmos to remind the Demiurge of the greater power Above, the true source of life, love, and consciousness. I have a habit of calling us the children of the Fullness, but the Tripartite Tractate actually calls us the fruit or the spores of the Fullness. Which is another way of saying the emanations of discreet packages of consciousness, or what I call in Simple Explanation language units of consciousness. To me, this is not mythological but descriptive to the best of our ability. Now, back to the correspondent's email: That is all mythological material. So then it rambles on quoting lots of sources etc BUT what the machine is getting at is that the difference between the Tripartite Tractate and some other gnostic texts is that there is a solid logic framework under the superstructure of mythological language and characters.This fits in with your TOE very neatly – and it is no surprise that you had an ‘OMG’ moment when you discovered the Tripartite Tractate—I would also have thought the same if an ancient text fitted perfectly into a system of thought that I had spent years developing. And you might be right—the uncanny fit could be a ‘tell’ that this truly IS the way of everything. On the less interesting point of contention though – I must disagree with you – there IS mythology in the Tripartite Tractate superstructure – the language is mythological – maybe less so than other gnostic texts. As an aside, as a writer – I would also say -there is nothing particularly bad about being mythological either. To which I reply: I have to laugh at using Dialogue with Demiurge AI as a trustworthy source. lol. I will see your Chat GPT and raise you Microsoft CoPilot AI (poker language, I assume you recognize). My AI says this: “This work presents a restored cosmology of the Fullness — a structural, metaphysical account of creation, fracture, and restoration. It is not myth, nor allegory, nor theology in the conventional sense. It is architecture: a precise description of how consciousness, relation, and harmony operate across the three great phases of existence.” I like that description—that the Tripartite Tractate gives the metaphysical architecture of consciousness rather than a myth. I always like to take the higher, meta view of information, which is literally a step above the normal language and arguments. That’s the secret of how I observe and reconcile seemingly irreconcilable positions—by looking up above the words for the meaning behind them. It seems to me that most people are lost in the language and “can’t see the forest for the trees.” Not meaning you, necessarily, it’s just my observation of how understanding goes awry. By taking the meta approach, the concepts automatically simplify as many points of view and language choices are collapsed into their base meanings. The words I use in my Simple Explanation of gnosis and science and everything else are not written in stone. They are my attempt to convey large concepts in the simple, most recognizable forms. If I say “god” it’s because people are familiar with that term. I offer alternative words, like Source, Mother-Father, Metaverse, the Great One, the Origin, so that people will see that the particular word is less important than what it represents and that what they think of as god has a broader meaning than the meme they have been holding onto. These images from my well-worn copy of the Tripartite Tractate of The Nag Hammadi Scriptures edited by Marvin Meyer, show you the process by which I read and interpret arcane texts. I put the language into illustrated concepts and words I can recognize and understand. The writer shared this final thought from the Chat GPT: There is also a genuine philosophical difficulty: how can a perfect and harmonious divine Fullness generate an irrational act? Saying that Logos possessed the capacity to exceed his proper limits explains the mechanism only by placing the possibility of deficiency inside the supposedly perfect order. He says, I think that is actually a pretty decent question from our AI demiurge—right? I expect that you have a great answer though. To which I reply: As to the Demiurge’s new question that you have put forth in this email—that’s an old canard that is often trotted out to stump theists. “How could a good and perfect God allow for the creation of evil?” I am not at all stumped by that question. The answer can most simply be stated in two words: Free Will. If we begin with the premise that the Father/Source/etc. emanates its entire nature outward with its emanation, then obviously free will is a part of that emanation. After all, it is inarguable that the Source possesses free will. The Aeons have free will. Logos is an Aeon. Logos has free will. While the rest of the Aeons were using their free will to cooperate with each other and to glorify the Father and the Son, Logos used its free will to go in a fresh direction. Logos thought it would be going upward to rejoin the highest glory. The Tripartite Tractate says that Logos didn’t realize this was in impossibility, because no one can approach the power source that is the Origin without being annihilated. And like a magnetic polarity, Logos was repelled by the Source and was knocked out of alignment with the Fullness (the fall). This dissonance became our material cosmos. And because Logos had free will, we have free will. This all flows logically from the a priori definition of the Source. This may sound mythological, but it is not. It could be easily described in scientific terms. Like the way a beam of focused light still allows for stray photons to go off beam. Or boiling water in the kettle mostly clumps together on the top of the water as bubbles, but some bubbles go outward to the edge of the kettle and pop. And so forth. The limit is our language, not the architecture or process. The limit is also imposed by the meme bundle being held the human observer-inquirer when their memes do not allow for certain possibilities to be seen and accepted. It is our meme attachments that limit our capacity to observe and learn. So says me.

Welcome to Gnostic Insights and the Gnostic Reformation on Substack. Before I get into this week’s episode, let me tell you that the entire uninterrupted interview with Bishop Nathan Wilson of The Gnostic Union is now available on YouTube under Cyd Ropp Gnostic Insights playlist. I’ve tried and tried to upload the captioned transcript underneath the video, but neither YouTube nor my video editing software will cooperate. I can only chalk it up to Demiurgic interference, so this must be one important interview! The link is provided here to go straight to it on YouTube. Please “like” it and forward it to friends. Thanks. This week I exchanged emails with a podcast subscriber that presented me with some excellent questions prompted by recent episodes. I asked his permission to share them with you anonymously. I always treasure sincere observations and questions from subscibers because it prompts my gnosis. So here we go. Hi Cyd how's it going? I hope that all is well with you. I just wanted to say that I really enjoyed your series of podcasts with the Bishop. Very interesting to hear some stuff on the unpacking of the original Gnostic texts. I thought that today's pod about your discussion was also very revealing as somebody who loves history, but it's giving me an insight into why you are so suspicious of history—would I be right in thinking that you want your texts to be unfiltered from various historical takes from different flawed human recounters? Yes. It is a common saying that history is written by the victors. This refers to the fact that the winners of wars, both physical killing wars and more subtle ideological wars, write the narratives of their opponents from then on. This is why we have had a couple of thousand years of hearing only one side of the gnostic story and one conventionally accepted version of Christian theology. And we have heard that version from Catholic Councils of the 4th century on down through the Protestant churches of today. The surviving descriptions of the nature of gnosticism were written by those who hated gnosticism, and their work is still read and venerated to this day. And I can tell you that even in the little village I live in, the church folks who have no idea what gnosticism even is are dead set against it and dead set against my efforts of sharing my gnostic insights with them and others—and they let me know of their disapproval. I think these divisive times we are living through now also illustrate how what passes for truth is malleable and untrustworthy. We can all see for ourselves how half of the population characterizes the big picture one way and half of the population characterizes it in a completely different way—and these two sides of the ideological divide are incommensurate with each other. Incommensurate is one of those big words I learned during my graduate studies in rhetoric. It means exclusive—both can't be right—you can't hold both positions—it's either or. So if you extrapolate the culture wars forward a few hundred or a few thousand years into the future, how will history frame the disputes that are currently raging through society? If, for example, socialism finally wins out do you think capitalism will be fairly represented? The reverse is also true, and the winner of this tug of war will be the one who lives to tells the tale. My correspondent goes on to say: I think it must be very appealing to be able to narrow down everything into one text and say that we are only going to look at this one source of right thing for the true knowledge. I think this approach has led us to the Bible and the Koran and other food containers which some followers take quite literally and interpret very strictly. There must be safety and comfort in this approach which could be described as textual at best—literal and possibly in a kind way, and without any judgement, fundamentalist, in its true essence. However, and I expect you are waiting for the but… What is listening whilst listening? He continues: It did occur to me that what you are basically saying is that everything in the Tripartite Tractate is correct. And all of the other texts are interesting, though they may be not to be taken seriously because they are myths. Surely it must've occurred to you that the writer of the Tripartite Tractate was also a human, and ergo—a product of the culture that surrounded him or her? Knowing you to be such a thoughtful and perceptive person, is there something I'm missing here? What is objectively different about the Tripartite Tractate, written by a human, just like all of those other gnostic texts? I am not trying to score points here, I genuinely would like an answer. To which I respond: Truly I do not agree with everything the Tripartite Tractate says and, conversely, much of what the other books say is right, though obscured with layers and language of mythology. The difference between the Tripartite Tractate and the other gnostic texts is that it stands alone and doesn’t depend upon a preexisting mythology to make sense. By that I mean that the Tripartite Tractate is a logical argument that any Sophist would be proud of. It speaks in the language of symbolic logic rather than mythology or (purported) history. The Tripartite Tractate begins with a starting premise (a priori) that in the beginning was consciousness without form. It then proposes a method by which consciousness and its attendant qualities, such as power and love, emanate from the origin and make their way downstream into us and other living creatures. It calls the descent of consciousness a fall, but does not condemn the fall, as it was necessary to escape the purely ethereal and create matter. It describes the fall as a “presumptuous thought” choice by Mr. Rationality itself—Logos. I characterize this presumptuous thought as the first action of “ego” made independently outside of the cooperation of the Fullness. This all seems to me to be an entirely rational argument that simply describes the process of the distribution of consciousness. We don’t have to argue the originating premise because our consciousness is self-evident. We are asking where it came from and going upstream until we reach a logical a priori starting point. A lot of what I share at Gnostic Insights comes from my own Theory of Everything—A Simple Explanation of Absolutely Everything—that I conceived and wrote 20 years ago, without benefit of any gnostic texts. So that lens informs my reading of the gnostic books. And I immediately recognized my own T.O.E. when I first read the Tripartite Tractate. The Simple Explanation is written using secular, non-religious language and lots of science and math. My illustrations and charts are different than my gnostic illustrations and charts. But the master chart is identical. The Tripartite Tractate did give me an answer I had been chewing over within the Simple Explanation, that being the difference between living creatures and inert elemental matter. I appreciated that clarification and incorporated it into the Simple Explanation. Otherwise, the book still stands as True. What is meant by True in this philosophical sense is whether or not the argument is coherent and internally consistent and comports with direct observation of the world. Now, as to whether or not I believe that only the Tripartite Tractate is true gnosis and the other gnostic books are mostly mythological–that is not the way I would put it. I don't take the Tripartite Tractate as more holy than other books, and there are a couple of aspects I don't fully understand or agree with. For example, the Tripartite Tractate aligns with other gnostic books in saying that there are three types of humans—the spiritual—called the pneumatic; the ordinary, emotional type called the psychic; and the material, called the hylic. The Tripartite Tractate doesn't seem to think that the hylic types are true second order powers and that they didn't exist in the beginning and will not return to the ethereal home above after death. The final page of the Tripartite Tractate codex is riddled with burned out areas from a fire, yet it seems to say, and I'm filling in some missing words: “While the material beings will be left behind until the end to perish, for they will not give their [missing words—probably acknowledgment of the Christ or allegiance to the Christ ]… If they have returned once more to that which … [missing words—probably worships the demiurge] … in the way that they were… [missing words—probably passing as humans] while they do not exist… [missing words—probably from the beginning] but they had been useful [for the] time that they were among them, even if they are not… [missing words—probably second order powers, —possibly among creation] at first, then… [missing words—possibly they were brought forth] to do something else by means of the power they had in the establishment [to] oppose them.” [yes, I realize I am interpolating a lot of missing words. if you have a more cogent interpretation, please offer it.] This final section of the Tripartite Tractate seems to indicate there are hylics among us with whom we live and work side by side who will not be redeemed at the end of time. This holds out the possibility that there are non-second order powers among us who can pass for living beings—not an uncommon thought in gnostic circles. My brother, Bill, and I contend that all life forms come from above and contain the consciousness and life of the Source. So for a non-living creature were to be born in the usual way is an impossibility. In my mind, the only way a truly non-living hylic so-called “human” could walk among us would be in the form of robotic facsimiles. There are many examples of this in science fiction, such as the cylons of “Battlestar Galactica” and the self-aware bots in P.D. Dick's “Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep?” which became the film called “Blade Runner.” We are now be on the threshold of building and employing these newly constructed robots who appear human, appear conscious, appear living, but are actually programmed imitations that did not exist from the beginning. (Battlestar Galactica carries this very question throughout the series as the cylons become self-aware and question their relationship with God.) If that is the case, then these could be the hylics that will not return to the ethereal because they did not come from the ethereal and the end times would need to be pushed back far enough to accommodate their undetectable assimilation into society. But hey—that's just my notion. And here at Gnostic Insights I try to stick with gnostic insights, not my wild speculations. Cylons of Battlestar Galactica television series. The cylons adapt to become more and more “human.” What is true is that I believe the Tripartite Tractate describes our existence and our origins, as well as our future. But we have to remember it is at least 2,000 year old prophecy and embedded in the language and concepts of that time. Maybe the writer was indeed anticipating androids among us, but that seems an unlikely interpretation. I have been watching quite a few “alternate history” videos lately on YouTube that propose completely different backstories and histories that stretch eons into the past—histories that could indeed have been technologically sophisticated enough to produce androids that blend in with the crowd. But we're getting way into the weeds here. One reason that most readers of the Tripartite Tractate and other gnostic texts think there is an order of unredeemable humans is that they are referred to as “those who belong to the imitation.” The most basic interpretation is that those who we call materialists are the people who only believe what they can see, measure, and taste. In that sense, they belong to the imitation since the imitation is the material projection that is this cosmos. The atheists among them do not believe in the ethereal space Above, or the originating Source, and so by default they belong to the imitation. Yet, if all living creatures are children of the Fullness above, even these will return to the Fullness at the end of time. The way I reason this comes from following the logic of emanation and return—the Fullness would not be Full without them, and it is a basic proposition that nothing of the Source can ever be lost. So you see, the logic is what drives my interpretations, logic—Logos—not mythology. At least that how it seems to me. Another aspect of the imitation is the molecular structure of our world, including our bodies. We inhabit a molecular body. Our living essence, the light of consciousness that makes organisms soft and squishy and alive, literally inhabits an otherwise dead, rocky, elemental body of molecules. So everywhere we go, it goes. And when we “die” and our spirit exits this material cosmos, our hylic body is left behind. It belongs to the imitation—get it? So in this case, the hylic human refers to the elemental molecules that make up our bodies—that inert mud that the Demiurge could not raise up to life, as the mythological version goes. So, this material aspect of our earthly existence is part of the imitation and will not return to the Fullness along with our spirits because it did not exist from the beginning. It is a product of the fall. But I digress—back to the subscriber's email: Secondly, I would like to ask you a question about giving glory to God. I liked what you were saying about turning your attention away from yourself, and your ego, and to look towards the divine and offer up a prayer. I am at the stage of my journey where this is something that does not seem so completely alien, as I am moving gradually away from materialist atheism, which has been caught on my existence for the past 50 odd years. Where I get into trouble is basically the whole business of giving glory to God, because the monad who is omniscience and immutable is hardly likely to need me to do a lot of worshipping or giving glory. This was like a bit controversial, and I'm not trying to argue in bad faith, but wouldn't the demiurge himself be more likely to want humans to give glory to him than the monad? I imagine that giving glory means something to people who have come up in a Christian background, but personally it seems completely irrelevant and unnecessary – A bit like one of those business buzzwords, you hear like synergism or government types talking about inclusiveness or diversity—a sort of empty phrase that could really mean anything you want. It would be really helpful if you could unpack it a bit for me because I'm sure I'm missing something here. Giving glory is not for the benefit of the Father. Giving glory is how we tune into the Father’s resonance. Giving glory is for our benefit, not God's. Now, the God of the Old Testament, the Demiurge—is that jealous, forgetful god that thinks it’s the be-all and end-all. It does like to receive worship and glory because it feeds its ego. But the God Above All Gods, the Father of consciousness and the ALL, doesn’t need our worship and glory—you are right about that. It is we who need to give glory, not It that needs to receive glory. The Totalities of the ALL which were the first emanations from the Son, and the Aeons of the Fullness love to give glory. The Totalities do nothing but give glory to the Father, and that is a pure expression of love and devotion to the Father. It's a good thing for us, way down here in the consciousness stream, that they give unceasing glory, because they are the first emanations out of the Son and the fountain of the consciousness and love that eventually flows into all living creatures. The Totalities that give glory continuously are like an electrical plug that stays connected to the greater originating Source. As above so below—we also connect with the Source when we give glory. And since connecting with the Source cannot be accomplished when ego rules your psyche, you must be humble enough to set your ego aside and pray to/give glory to the greater Source. Surely you recognize that your ego is a lesser being than the Father of everything. If your ego does not allow you to think that, then you are not putting your spiritual foot forward but merely your ego. Our correspondent replies: Dear Cyd As usual- I’m so impressed by your clear and reasoned thinking – it is so elegant and simple. I wish I could think like that. However, there are a few things I would like to push back on respectfully. I have been dialoguing with the Demiurge – Chat GPT – and here’s what the archonic AI came up with in answer to your firm assertion that there is no mythology in the Tripartite Tractate. It basically thinks that it’s an overstatement – and I quote: The text gives an extensive creation story involving:• an unknowable Father;• the Son and the Church;• emanated aeons inhabiting the Fullness or Pleroma;• Logos making a presumptuous, defective attempt to comprehend the Father;• the production of deficiency, psychic and material powers;• a Demiurge who creates humanity;• three fundamental classes of human beings;• and a Saviour who descends to restore what has become divided. [Cyd] Let me pop in here to correct a very important error in this demiurgic version of Gnosticism. It sneaked into its answer a very demiurgic assertion that is not True: • a Demiurge who creates humanity The Demiurge certainly did not create humanity or any other living, conscious being. The second order powers—all living beings—are children of the Aeons of the Fullness, sent down into this lifeless cosmos to remind the Demiurge of the greater power Above, the true source of life, love, and consciousness. I have a habit of calling us the children of the Fullness, but the Tripartite Tractate actually calls us the fruit or the spores of the Fullness. Which is another way of saying the emanations of discreet packages of consciousness, or what I call in Simple Explanation language units of consciousness. To me, this is not mythological but descriptive to the best of our ability. Now, back to the correspondent's email: That is all mythological material. So then it rambles on quoting lots of sources etc BUT what the machine is getting at is that the difference between the Tripartite Tractate and some other gnostic texts is that there is a solid logic framework under the superstructure of mythological language and characters.This fits in with your TOE very neatly – and it is no surprise that you had an ‘OMG’ moment when you discovered the Tripartite Tractate—I would also have thought the same if an ancient text fitted perfectly into a system of thought that I had spent years developing. And you might be right—the uncanny fit could be a ‘tell’ that this truly IS the way of everything. On the less interesting point of contention though – I must disagree with you – there IS mythology in the Tripartite Tractate superstructure – the language is mythological – maybe less so than other gnostic texts. As an aside, as a writer – I would also say -there is nothing particularly bad about being mythological either. To which I reply: I have to laugh at using Dialogue with Demiurge AI as a trustworthy source. lol. I will see your Chat GPT and raise you Microsoft CoPilot AI (poker language, I assume you recognize). My AI says this: “This work presents a restored cosmology of the Fullness — a structural, metaphysical account of creation, fracture, and restoration. It is not myth, nor allegory, nor theology in the conventional sense. It is architecture: a precise description of how consciousness, relation, and harmony operate across the three great phases of existence.” I like that description—that the Tripartite Tractate gives the metaphysical architecture of consciousness rather than a myth. I always like to take the higher, meta view of information, which is literally a step above the normal language and arguments. That’s the secret of how I observe and reconcile seemingly irreconcilable positions—by looking up above the words for the meaning behind them. It seems to me that most people are lost in the language and “can’t see the forest for the trees.” Not meaning you, necessarily, it’s just my observation of how understanding goes awry. By taking the meta approach, the concepts automatically simplify as many points of view and language choices are collapsed into their base meanings. The words I use in my Simple Explanation of gnosis and science and everything else are not written in stone. They are my attempt to convey large concepts in the simple, most recognizable forms. If I say “god” it’s because people are familiar with that term. I offer alternative words, like Source, Mother-Father, Metaverse, the Great One, the Origin, so that people will see that the particular word is less important than what it represents and that what they think of as god has a broader meaning than the meme they have been holding onto. These images from my well-worn copy of the Tripartite Tractate of The Nag Hammadi Scriptures edited by Marvin Meyer, show you the process by which I read and interpret arcane texts. I put the language into illustrated concepts and words I can recognize and understand. The writer shared this final thought from the Chat GPT: There is also a genuine philosophical difficulty: how can a perfect and harmonious divine Fullness generate an irrational act? Saying that Logos possessed the capacity to exceed his proper limits explains the mechanism only by placing the possibility of deficiency inside the supposedly perfect order. He says, I think that is actually a pretty decent question from our AI demiurge—right? I expect that you have a great answer though. To which I reply: As to the Demiurge’s new question that you have put forth in this email—that’s an old canard that is often trotted out to stump theists. “How could a good and perfect God allow for the creation of evil?” I am not at all stumped by that question. The answer can most simply be stated in two words: Free Will. If we begin with the premise that the Father/Source/etc. emanates its entire nature outward with its emanation, then obviously free will is a part of that emanation. After all, it is inarguable that the Source possesses free will. The Aeons have free will. Logos is an Aeon. Logos has free will. While the rest of the Aeons were using their free will to cooperate with each other and to glorify the Father and the Son, Logos used its free will to go in a fresh direction. Logos thought it would be going upward to rejoin the highest glory. The Tripartite Tractate says that Logos didn’t realize this was in impossibility, because no one can approach the power source that is the Origin without being annihilated. And like a magnetic polarity, Logos was repelled by the Source and was knocked out of alignment with the Fullness (the fall). This dissonance became our material cosmos. And because Logos had free will, we have free will. This all flows logically from the a priori definition of the Source. This may sound mythological, but it is not. It could be easily described in scientific terms. Like the way a beam of focused light still allows for stray photons to go off beam. Or boiling water in the kettle mostly clumps together on the top of the water as bubbles, but some bubbles go outward to the edge of the kettle and pop. And so forth. The limit is our language, not the architecture or process. The limit is also imposed by the meme bundle being held the human observer-inquirer when their memes do not allow for certain possibilities to be seen and accepted. It is our meme attachments that limit our capacity to observe and learn. So says me.

C'est le dernier C'est dispo de l'été, rendez-vous fin août pour une nouvelle saison de C'est dispo !______________________________________

What does it mean to love your country?  Is that nationalism?  And isn't nationalism—you know—bad?  And how should our allegiance and love of country be weighed against our duties and affections to family and faith?   Saving Elephants host Josh Lewis is joined by John Wilsey to discuss his latest book, God and Country: Upholding Faith, History, and National Identity, the origins of nationalism and how it differs from patriotism, the link between history and love of ones country, the battles between the Romantics and Rationalists, and that great public servant, the freak show John Quincy Adams.   About John Wilsey From the Southern Baptist Theological Seminary   Dr. John Wilsey is Professor of Church History and Philosophy and Chair of the Department of Church History and Historical Theology.   Prior to coming to Southern, Wilsey taught elementary, middle, and high school students in history and Bible for eleven years in North Carolina and Virginia. He also has served Southern Baptist churches, as an associate pastor in Charlottesville, Virginia for eight years and interim pastor for three years in Spring, Texas. Between 2011 and 2017, he taught history and philosophy at Southwestern Baptist Theological Seminary, with most of his teaching load in a fully accredited baccalaureate program in a maximum-security unit of the Texas Department of Criminal Justice.   Dr. Wilsey's primary areas of teaching at Southern Seminary and Boyce College are in modern church history, history of Western thought, and American history. He supervises PhD dissertations in the areas of American church history and history of philosophy.   In addition to his work at Southern Seminary and Boyce College, Wilsey has held several fellowships, including with the McConnell Center at the University of Louisville as non-resident fellow (2023-2024); the Acton Institute for the Study of Religion and Liberty as Affiliate Scholar (2016-2020); the Russell Kirk Center for Cultural Renewal as Wilbur Fellow (2023); and the James Madison Program in American Ideals and Institutions in the Politics Department at Princeton University as William E. Simon Fellow in Religion and Public Life (2017-2018). He currently holds fellowships at the Center for Religion, Culture, and Democracy as Senior Fellow, the Ethics and Religious Liberty Commission of the Southern Baptist Convention as Research Fellow, and the Land Center for Cultural Engagement at Southwestern Baptist Theological Seminary as Research Fellow.   Wilsey's academic works have been reviewed in outlets such as National Review, Publisher's Weekly, Journal of Church and State, Fides et Historia, Providence, Church History, Reading Religion, Catholic Books Review, Reviews in American History, Anxious Bench, Claremont Review of Books, First Things, The American Conservative, Christianity Today, and The Federalist. He has appeared on podcasts and programs hosted by the Acton Institute, New Books Network, Current, Thinking in Public, Law and Liberty, the City of Man Podcast, Christ Over All, the Museum of the Bible, the Family Research Council, BBC Radio Wales, 9Marks, the McConnell Center, the Commonwealth Policy Center, and Ben Franklin's World.   Wilsey has produced peer-reviewed pieces in the journal Religions and in academic books published by Palgrave and Routledge. He has contributed other chapters to books published by Crossway and B&H Academic as well as long-form articles to Modern Age: A Conservative Review and Fides et Historia. He has served as manuscript reviewer for American Political Thought, Religions, InterVarsity Press, and New York University Press. He has also served as book review editor for H-AmRel of the H-Net: Humanities and Social Sciences Online network and The Southern Baptist Journal of Theology.   Wilsey has served on the Ciceronian Society Advisory Board, the Kern Foundation Advisory Council, the Board of Directors of the Society for Values in Higher Education, the Scholar's Council for the Center for the Electoral College, the Southern Baptist Historical Library and Archives Advisory Board, and the Annual Meeting Proposal Review Board for Church History as well as the Membership Committee of the Evangelical Theological Society.   In 2020, Wilsey was named Tutor of the Year in Boyce College's Augustine Honors Collegium. He has addressed students, faculty, and public audiences as an invited lecturer at Princeton University, Princeton Theological Seminary, the University of Notre Dame, the University of Louisville, the Ruprecht Karl University of Heidelberg, Waynesburg University, Calvin University, St. Francis University, Hannibal-LaGrange University, Charleston Southern University, Grand Valley State University, the College of Biblical Studies, Houston Baptist University, Northwest Nazarene University, the University of Wyoming, Samford University, Spring Arbor University, Ave Maria University, the Philos Project, the Religious Freedom Institute, the Russell Kirk Center, the Ethics and Religious Liberty Commission, and the Kentucky Historical Association.   Over the years, Wilsey has remained active with academic societies, reading papers at meetings of the Evangelical Theological Society, the Conference on Faith and History, the Society of Historians of American Foreign Relations, the Christian Scholars' Conference, the Society for Values in Higher Education, the Society for US Intellectual History, the African American Intellectual History Society, the Ciceronian Society, the Association for the Scientific Study of Religion, and the Center for Christian Study in Charlottesville, Virginia. He is a member of the Evangelical Theological Society, the Ciceronian Society, the Society of Historians of American Foreign Relations, the Philadelphia Society, and the James Madison Society.   Wilsey is a columnist for World Opinions, and his other public writings have appeared in outlets such as Law and Liberty, Current, Modern Reformation, Acton's Commentary, Christianity Today, Providence, Public Discourse, 9Marks Journal, The Gospel Coalition, Aeon, History News Network, The American Conservative, The Imaginative Conservative, Anxious Bench, Religion and Liberty, and Religion in American History. He has reviewed numerous books for outlets such as Themelios, Southeastern Theological Review, Public Discourse, Fides et Historia, Westminster Theological Journal, Trinity Journal, The Southern Baptist Journal of Theology, Journal of Church and State, Evangelical Quarterly, Journal of Markets and Morality, Religion and Liberty, Journal of Spiritual Formation and Soul Care, H-Diplo, Ad Fontes, and The London Lyceum.   Wilsey is married to Mandy, his wife of twenty-seven years, and they have two children. He is an elder at Kenwood Baptist Church in Louisville, Kentucky.  

100 years of Cthulhu! What happens when we go back to that story, as it is? Are we living in post-Cthulhulean times, or are we still building the Old Ones? Plus: what ever happened to the Aeon of Horus?  Check out ⁠https://www.patreon.com/c/consensusunreality⁠ for this full episode and 2 exclusive eps monthly, our full episode archive, written content, printed magazine and more..  Merch coming soon... Intro music by Treatment https://treatmentforu.bandcamp.com/album/pond-life  

Created by GUNGNIR Founder and Publisher Matthew Medney, the series features appearances from a rotating cast of comedians that include Julia Hladkowicz (America's Got Talent, Comics Unleashed), Rama Vallury (Super Pumped), Raquel Woodruff (This Time), Jordan Stidham (The Martian Broadcast), Donna Dubrow(Ex Studio Executive, Professionally Unimpressed), as well as “Ad-Man” legend Cliff Medney. Badd, Gramm-mar is a chaotic comedy series about a dysfunctional Los Angeles book club where every week a new book sparks a completely different collision of personalities, perspectives, and worldviews – which inevitably leads to some form of complete emotional meltdown over conflicting opinions regarding the book. Part review show, part social experiment, and part emotional group therapy disguised as fandom discourse, the series follows a rotating cast of readers, “failed” creatives, intellectuals, romantasy addicts, comic shop lifers, and people still trying to graduate to adulthood. Each episode centers around a new “book of the week,” ranging from science fiction epics and romantasy sensations, to literary classics and underground cult favorites, but the conversations quickly spiral far beyond the page. What starts as debates about stories becomes arguments about class, identity, ambition, politics, love, aging, masculinity, feminism, success, failure, and the increasingly unstable state of modern culture itself.“Badd, Gramm-mar began as an experiment to help readers discover great books, but it quickly evolved into something we believed could be a beacon for the book community.” said Matthew Medney, Founder and Publisher of GUNGNIR.“What emerged wasn't a book club. It was a collision of perspectives. Every episode brings together five voices from different walks of life and asks them to debate the same story, revealing as much about themselves as the book in front of them. The comedy is real, the disagreements are authentic, and occasionally the insights are of value. While we may be reviewing books on the surface, Badd, Gramm-mar is ultimately a conversation about the cultural zeitgeist. Books remain one of the last great bastions of subcultural identity, where tribes are formed, ideas are tested, and the future of culture is quietly negotiated one page at a time.”The series blends emotionally grounded character comedy with improvised chaos, where every member of the club represents a completely different worldview and walk of life. During the season, the club is forced to relocate to a new venue due to its own dysfunction, transforming the setting into an evolving reflection of the group's emotional state. Among the graphic novels and prose the group will be reviewing in its first months include Fourth Wing, Ministry Of Time, Project Hail Mary and Absolute Batman, as well as GUNGNIR titles Aeon, Existence Equation, Last Breeds and Deadweight. Become a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/arroe-collins-like-it-s-live--4113802/support.

Created by GUNGNIR Founder and Publisher Matthew Medney, the series features appearances from a rotating cast of comedians that include Julia Hladkowicz (America's Got Talent, Comics Unleashed), Rama Vallury (Super Pumped), Raquel Woodruff (This Time), Jordan Stidham (The Martian Broadcast), Donna Dubrow(Ex Studio Executive, Professionally Unimpressed), as well as “Ad-Man” legend Cliff Medney. Badd, Gramm-mar is a chaotic comedy series about a dysfunctional Los Angeles book club where every week a new book sparks a completely different collision of personalities, perspectives, and worldviews – which inevitably leads to some form of complete emotional meltdown over conflicting opinions regarding the book. Part review show, part social experiment, and part emotional group therapy disguised as fandom discourse, the series follows a rotating cast of readers, “failed” creatives, intellectuals, romantasy addicts, comic shop lifers, and people still trying to graduate to adulthood. Each episode centers around a new “book of the week,” ranging from science fiction epics and romantasy sensations, to literary classics and underground cult favorites, but the conversations quickly spiral far beyond the page. What starts as debates about stories becomes arguments about class, identity, ambition, politics, love, aging, masculinity, feminism, success, failure, and the increasingly unstable state of modern culture itself.“Badd, Gramm-mar began as an experiment to help readers discover great books, but it quickly evolved into something we believed could be a beacon for the book community.” said Matthew Medney, Founder and Publisher of GUNGNIR.“What emerged wasn't a book club. It was a collision of perspectives. Every episode brings together five voices from different walks of life and asks them to debate the same story, revealing as much about themselves as the book in front of them. The comedy is real, the disagreements are authentic, and occasionally the insights are of value. While we may be reviewing books on the surface, Badd, Gramm-mar is ultimately a conversation about the cultural zeitgeist. Books remain one of the last great bastions of subcultural identity, where tribes are formed, ideas are tested, and the future of culture is quietly negotiated one page at a time.”The series blends emotionally grounded character comedy with improvised chaos, where every member of the club represents a completely different worldview and walk of life. During the season, the club is forced to relocate to a new venue due to its own dysfunction, transforming the setting into an evolving reflection of the group's emotional state. Among the graphic novels and prose the group will be reviewing in its first months include Fourth Wing, Ministry Of Time, Project Hail Mary and Absolute Batman, as well as GUNGNIR titles Aeon, Existence Equation, Last Breeds and Deadweight. Become a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/arroe-collins-unplugged-totally-uncut--994165/support.

SpaceTime Series 29 Episode 80 Did ancient asteroid impacts prevent Earth's continents from forming A new study suggests the barrage of asteroid impacts that slammed into the ancient Earth during the Hadean Eon between 4.6 and four billion years ago may have prevented the formation of the planet's first continents. Could the ice giants Uranus and Neptune really be magma worlds A new study suggests that the solar systems two ice giants Uranus and Neptune might actually be magma worlds. World's biggest atom smasher powers down The world's most powerful atom smasher has been shut down for a four year major refit. The Science Report Sedentary behaviour linked to a 9% higher risk of death by cancer. Confirmation that mRNA vaccines are safe and highly effective. Artificial night time lighting has made planet Earth 16 percent brighter between 2014 and 2022. Study shows sending an electric current through black coffee can measure its strength and roast. Skeptics guide to AI and misinformation. Our Guests This Week: Professor Tim Johnson from Curtin University   And our regular guests: Alex Zaharov-Reutt from techadvice.life Tim Mendham from Australian Skeptics  

Mourning is cited as a need on the Nonviolent Communication needs list, paired with its counterpart: joy. Along with many others, I believe that we have largely lost the capacity to mourn, and that this loss costs us more than we realize, including in our most intimate relationships.Join me in this episode as I draw on the work of environmental anthropologist Sophie Chao, whose Aeon essay *How to Mourn a Forest* documents the mourning practices of the Marind people of West Papua, a community whose ancestral lands are being destroyed by oil palm plantation expansion. What the Marind offer is a glimpse into what I call active mourning, not the private collapse of grief, but a deliberate, communal practice of turning toward loss rather than away from it. I also touch on how, in my work with couples, it's not uncommon for one of the individual's parents to have recently died and how unbeknownst to them, residual feelings from childhood will quietly resurface within the relationship in surprising ways. ---**Referenced in this episode:**Sophie Chao — *How to Mourn a Forest*, Aeon Magazine, 23 May 2023https://aeon.co/essays/how-to-mourn-a-forest-a-lesson-from-west-papuaMarshall Rosenberg — Nonviolent Communication: A Language of LifeStephen Jenkinson — *Die Wise: A Manifesto for Sanity and Soul*"Grief is not a feeling, it is a capacity. It is not something that disables you — we are not on the receiving end of grief, we are on the practising end of grief."The Marind song in this episode was composed by Andreas, a Marind youth, and is quoted within Sophie Chao's essay:**Find Rachelle:** rachellelamb.com

Welcome back to Gnostic Insights and to the Gnostic Reformation on Substack. Last week was part one of my interview with Bishop Nathan Wilson of the Gnostic Union, and he explained to us a bit about who the Gnostic Union is and what they believe in. At the beginning of that episode, I read from the Gnostic Union website their history and mission statement. And my brother Billy called me up and said, “Oh, but there’s a point of their theology that’s all wrong. I know they’re ecumenical and all, but we mustn’t fall into the error of wrong teaching.” And, you know, I totally agree with that concept, not teaching anything that is incorrect or that doesn’t make sense, according to the Gnosticism that I share with you here. And it created a very large discussion between my brother and me. And I don’t even have enough time in this short introduction to go into the point that Bill brought up out of their statement of beliefs. So we’ll wait and we’ll do that when these interviews are all over and that way we can go into depth and give the topic the attention it deserves. You see, the Gnosticism that I share with you here mostly comes from the Tripartite Tractate of the Nag Hammadi. And the Tripartite Tractate is a very unusual book. It is not a book of mythology. It is not a book of ancient myths concerning angels and demigods and great battles in heaven and so forth. It’s not that kind of book. We think of it as physics. It’s literally a book that describes the cosmology and the cosmogony, that is, how consciousness came to be transmitted from the base state of consciousness that we call the Father or the Source, and all the way downstream into, ultimately, us. We’re sitting here talking and thinking about it. This is pure consciousness we’re talking about. It’s not particularities. You understand? Gnosis itself we think of as that river of consciousness. That’s what gnosis is. So, I often say, if my dog can’t understand the gnosis, it’s not really gnosis—it's a knowledge claim. If a blade of grass or a tree in the forest can’t bask in the gnosis, then it’s not really gnosis. It’s a human knowledge claim. This is the reason why here at Gnostic Insights and on the Gnostic Reformation, we do not dwell in the history of things. We dwell in the understanding or the gnosis itself. The cosmogony and cosmology of Gnosticism that I share with you here is a logical step-by-step rollout of the consciousness of the Father or the Source. It doesn’t really matter what you call it. It’s the base state. It’s the matrix of consciousness itself and how it flows down to us. There are necessary steps described in the Tripartite Tractate for how that consciousness is differentiated and particularized and then rolled down. And how it is that we material beings are different than the ethereal beings. How could that have possibly happened? It’s like that. It’s a logical progression that necessarily comes out of an a priori statement of consciousness as the ground state. That’s quite a bit different than mythologies of how these angels fit in with these gods and goddesses down here on earth and so forth. Because those particularities definitely come out of the mind of humans. They can be inspired. Okay, I’ll give you that. But they are knowledge claims. They’re not necessarily gnosis and because of that they can go wrong. They can be wrong. Whereas starting with this a priori notion of consciousness ending up in us and how does that occur? By what means does that possibly happen? And how is it that we earthlings plug into that illimitable consciousness? That’s a different thing. That’s a description of process. That’s an understanding or a gnosis of what it is that we are part of. 15 steps in Gnostic Cosmology So I’m not knocking the history or the particularities that Bishop Wilson shares with us. But the gnosis that leads you to enlightenment is simply this: We come from the Father [El Elyon] or from the Source or from the Mother-Father or from the Great Mother—whatever you want to call it. We come from that Source, that unlimited well of consciousness and life and power and might and love. And then we will return to that. That’s all you have to know. We come from Above and we return to Above. And with that knowledge, that’s your base state. That’s what the blades of grass and the dogs and the trees all understand. All the rest of the particularities of who and why and how, those are just details being filled in. Some of them out of gnosis, but most of them out of tradition or history. So we’ll be proceeding now into part two of my interview with Bishop Nathan Wilson of the Gnostic Union. And later on, we’re going to talk some more about the difference between mythology and the process of gnosis. That is what this podcast specializes in. That’s what my brother Bill and I have parsed out and discovered out of direct mining of the Tripartite Tractate. Our gnosis comes from that and it proceeds in an orderly fashion that doesn’t require any extra research. It’s all about gnosis and what must be. But here, let’s go back to this interview with Brother Wilson. **************************************************************** Cyd: Well, tell me more about your Bible that you wrote. What do you call it? You call it… Bishop Nathan Wilson: I call it The Gnostic Christian Truth Bible. I actually asked one of the older bishops that trained me, Bishop Jason, and he started that. So, I like the name. So, I thought, okay, I want to put Gnostic Christian in there. So, I was going to call it first the Truth Bible. He requested that, but I thought, well, Gnostic Christian makes it less likely for the Catholics to come after me as well, and the Protestants. Many do not like my translations. They are quite upset that I’ve done this, but they don’t put too much light on me. So, it’s best not to give me too much attention, basically. So, the less attention I have, the less people know about this, but which is something unique about mine. I don’t just offer my translations. I offer the original Koine Greek with it, so they can look at the actual text. So, even if my translation, say, could be wrong, they could look straight at that text and go argue with the text that they see, which I also wanted to include for their own reason, and when I included the alternative English, it’s so I might read it one way, but someone else is going to read it another way, and that can teach me something new. I feel, oh, I didn’t understand it like that. So, that’s why I wanted to keep that in there too, and a couple of words I kept in there were Greek. So, I kept Logos. I kept Kosmos, Zoe, Sophia, Archon. Magus. I kept all these words. So, very, very Gnostic, and you won’t find these in the English translations. They have gone out of their ways to censor them. I also kept the word daemon or daimon, daemon, so I did not put that down as demon because that’s not what it means. So, I kept the original Greek context of use, and I also add a Greek, Koine Greek, index in my translation so people can actually look at little snippets of what these words mean. So, I have some things in here. So, this is just on one page on basically all Greek with English meaning. So, there’s Logos, which I explained means God’s word, God’s authority, God’s reasoning, song, and speech, and utterance. So, when you see Christians speak that Jesus is speaking the Word, or in the beginning there was Word, they are doing a disservice to what’s being implied. This is the word of God. Very different, and even the word God we use is very English. I did keep up, but for the English sake of things. So, English people wouldn’t freak out too much on me, and another thing is also a safer mouthful, because this Word means supreme deity, deity of deities, which is very interesting. Otherwise, we would go into a god, which is lesser gods as well. So, we have a pantheon. So, it was very different, like even monotheism would evolve into what we think it is today, but in the ancient past with ancient Jewish people, they did believe in other gods, it’s just they chose to worship one god. So, this would be not the same as monotheism now, where you completely reject them as non-existent. This wasn’t that case. So, they had a very different mind. So I kept Sophia being wisdom. I mentioned this is how this is feminine wisdom, God’s feminine wisdom, coming from the Hebrew word Chokmah. Sometimes those are called Chokmah. So, I kept that in there as Sophia. Zoe, I kept too, meaning basically when you see eternal Zoe, that’s eternal life. So, that’s implying the feminine wisdom again, but also the spiritual benefits one receives with a spiritual relationship with God, or what’s with mine. So, I kept that in there. So, it’s very feminine, and that’s being removed. They would not want you to know that life is Zoe, and there’s other words they could have used for life or soul, but they chose to use the word Zoe, and that’s important. So, I kept that in there. And I’ve also got Megas. I’ve already mentioned that, but Magus comes from—here’s two words that are entwined, but the thing was the church has used a later translation, which would be terrible, but that’s kind of wrong, and this is because the language would evolve over time. It came to words Megus and Magos, which basically would be Magi, and then great and powerful, larger than life. So, Jesus was also called Iesous Magos. So, Jesus the Great, Jesus the Wise, has been censored because of Magus, and they don’t want you to know about Simon Magus. They don’t want you to know anything about Gnosticism. So, this has been censored, and I’ve also put some passages where find this. I kept Daemon in here, or Diamon. Gehenna, I also translated in here. I kept Gehenna. I did not use hell because hell is German. It’s realm of light in German, so it’s a Germanic word. So, I kept the word Gehenna, which is ultimately what we would kind of call hell, but it’s not what people think it is. That’s an evolved tradition. So, Gehenna or even Abaddon, these are two different words, but the same thing. Gehenna was the place where the soul was destroyed or purified. So, the text can translate to eternal punishment, but that’s not strictly bound to it. That’s more would be a later theology bound to that translation where it means period of time. So, it doesn’t necessarily mean all these different things. It’s like the word soma where it’s all about Jesus’ body. It can be living body, dead body, or a carcass, or even the living body of the church, which is more symbolic, but fascinating. I also kept in here a couple words, such as I explained Hades, which is mentioned with Sheol and how that’s separate from Gehenna. I’ve kept Helios, Selene, Astron, or Asterios, as well as Aletheia. These words are very interesting because they are all gods. They’re all Greco-Roman gods. So, the scholars or, I really should say, a Christian apologist, that state there’s no pagan gods in the New Testament—they are entirely wrong. It’s just that they have looked at it in a modern Greek eye instead of looking at an ancient past—they would have seen the gods being mentioned. So that’s very interesting. So when Jesus says that the stars and the sun is falling, he’s not speaking about the sun and stars. He’s speaking about the Helios, the Roman sun god is falling, and the stars and goddesses falling, as well as Selene, the moon, so the moon goddess. That’s the falling of the pagan Roman gods that was subjecting the Jewish people. So very different theology. So theology matters. So we have to look at how people believed back these times. [Jesus speaks of the stars, moon, and sun in Matthew 24:29, Mark 13:25, Luke 21:25. Assigning them as gods and goddesses is Bishop Wilson's interpretation.] The Jewish people did not like the Romans. Not saying that all of them did not. We had some that were pro-Roman. One of the Romans that was involved in the Jewish revolt, fighting against the Jewish people, was Jewish, which is cool. And he was related to Philo of Alexandria. So very interesting. I think he might be his grandson. Cyd: Let me jump in for a second as we’re speaking about gods and the God Above All Gods versus lesser gods. Is it your thought that the God of the Jews of the Old Testament, Jehovah, is a lesser god as opposed to the God Above All Gods? Bishop Nathan Wilson: Yes. Cyd: Okay, so Jehovah is the tribal god of the Old Testament? Bishop Nathan Wilson: Yes, a bit of a mix. So there’s two gods. Well, there’s a couple, if you’ve got to go every single god being mentioned. But what they’re describing is, say, Deuteronomy 32:8, you have El Elyon dividing up the nations according to the Elohim being children of El, and Yahweh received his inheritance from the most high God. So Yahweh was more like a guardian deity, basically. He was a brother of Baal. But some Canaanites believed that Yahweh was Baal. So Yahweh kind of came later after Baal. But the first to worship Yahweh were the Sashu of Yahweh. So they were Canaanite raiders. Hebrew was also a Canaanite language.  [The earliest trace of Yahweh isn't Israelite—it's desert-born. Egyptian inscriptions speak of the “Shasu of YHW,” nomadic peoples on the edges of Canaan, sometimes regarded as raiders. It suggests the name of Yahweh may have emerged out of the wilderness before it was ever claimed by Israel. Even Hebrew itself comes out of the same Canaanite linguistic world.] So I see the views—the ones that were worshipping El would be the ones that would become the Essenes or Jewish mystics. So the Essenes worshipped El. They didn’t worship Yahweh. They viewed Yahweh as a lesser god, which is one reason they challenged the temple, because they viewed, you guys aren’t worshipping God, you’re worshipping the lesser deity, you’re worshipping an angel. And so they rejected the temple. And the priesthood was corrupt. So then you also had the Magharians or Magarites. They were first century BC era Jews. They were proto-Gnostic, so that’s a scholar term. So they were Jewish mystics. They believed that Yahweh was a demiurge and that he was a lieutenant. So not an evil demiurge, but he was ignorant of the most high Father El Elyon, but that’s not a name to them. That was just a title meaning most high God. So they didn’t believe in God with a name, the unknowable Father, they believed was beyond sex as well. So Mother-Father, basically. So beyond all things. Too perfect to interfere with matter. And they believed that the Torah had been corrupted. So that’s fascinating. So that’s a group that we want to talk about. So we had about 25 different versions of Judaism during that time with all different beliefs. So what type of Jew was Jesus? This makes a big, big difference. So not all Jews worshipped Yahweh. Some viewed him as a lesser God and some viewed him as the devil, which is whack. So the only Gnostics or proto-Gnostics would use that word devil at that time. So we have the wisdom of Solomon, which is the first text adored by Christians that they would say, look, this is our Messiah mentioning he’s a dying and rising Messiah calling himself the Son of God and he’s been crucified. So this means that just like our text, he would die a shameful death. But this text mentions that through death, the devil enters the world. So the Pharisees didn’t believe in the devil. The Sadducees didn’t either. But what’s interesting about the Pharisees and Sadducees and the Herodians, which kind of made up both these groups, they were a part of both, just the Herodians mostly supported King Herod. They believed that either King Herod was the Messiah or his family would be, or they belonged to the Sadducees and didn’t believe in a Messiah. So the Sadducees didn’t believe in angels. They didn’t believe in an afterlife. They believed once you were dead, the soul turned to dust. God was too perfect to interfere with humans. So that’s an interesting belief. But we had different subsects of Sadducees that had a different opinion to that. They believed that God did interfere with humans, but we had total free will. So they could interfere with some things, but there was no Messiah. There was no angels. So they believed that a human could be a messenger of God. That was about it. So like Moses. Then you had the Pharisees. They believed that Satan served Yahweh. His job was to test humanity or seduce humanity away from God. So that way mankind had free will. But some Pharisees didn’t believe that. They believed that Satan, Hasatan, was just symbolic for mankind’s inclination towards evil. So they didn’t believe in an evil being. So their belief was that God ordained good and evil, basically, would use evil for his own will. So that’s trippy, very trippy. So the Pharisees had a very different belief. They didn’t believe in the adversary against God. They didn’t believe in fallen angels. Later on, they would take on this belief, borrowing it from mystics and zealots. So funny enough, they would be influenced by Jesus’ teachings, such as saving a life on the Sabbath. The Pharisees would not do that. But to be fair, some Essenes wouldn’t do that either. Some Essenes were very warlike, wanting to join God’s angelic army fighting at the Armageddon of the last days of the world. But these mystics, they are the only groups that believed in fallen angels and believed in a place of punishment. The only groups. And that’s fascinating. So they believed in a physical adversary against God. And these beliefs are carried on in the Christianity with the Armageddon day, or even the belief that God basically allows Satan to do what he wants, but he’s going to conquer over him. That was an Essene belief. They believed that Belial was the adversary against God, a fallen angel, leader of the fallen angels, and God would allow him the sin because he would destroy him in the end. So that was an Essene belief, but not all that belief. Some believed that basically fallen angels chose to rebel against God, so they had free will and that God would overcome them in the end. So that’s different. So we have to look at those beliefs because that makes a big difference in theology as well. And one reason I chose to keep daemon or daimon in the text is because this doesn’t mean Jesus is casting out evil demons, but rather, well, the ghost of the mystic belief of pagan gods were fallen angels. So he’s casting out pagan gods, or he’s just casting out unclean spirits, depending on what the definition of word is, because that daimon or unclean spirit, for instance, isn’t always referenced to a pagan god. It’s just someone who’s died vengeful or angry at God, and is now just a ghost causing haunting. So it depends on how it’s being used. So I kept those words in there. So if the word said unclean spirit, I kept that as unclean spirit. But if it was going into a daimon for a pagan god, basically I’ll keep it as that daimon, so they could choose how they’re going to read it. Because sometimes you’re dealing with two things at once. Sometimes you’re dealing with an unclean spirit, then a pagan god’s being mentioned too. So this archon ruler’s having little other minions subject under him. So we even have an archon ruler being mentioned. So an archon of the daemons, ruler of pagan gods. So other gods had dominions, basically. So they viewed these other gods having their own realms of power, which we also see in the Gnostic text. So I kept all that. I also kept the archon of the synagogue, which is a ruler of the synagogue. So it’s not always a bad thing. Sometimes it’s just political rulers that are mentioned. So an archon of the Gentiles, for instance, is just a ruler of Gentiles, just a politician. I have kept archons in the sense of Yahweh somewhat, I believe, as being the devil. Because in John 8:44, we have Jesus going up to the Pharisees and Sadducees and Herodians who made up the high priesthood. He says, You are of your father, the devil. But if only these Gnostic Jews believed in the devil and their God is Yahweh, who’s he calling devil? And then when the daemons are calling him Son of the most high God, they’re calling him huios, which means son. Huios tou theou tou hypsistou, which is Greek for Son of the most high God. But if you put this in the Hebrew, it’s Son of El Elyon. So this is what the pagan gods are calling him. So the lesser gods. And then he’s also saying that we’re all the children of El Elyon, which is also fascinating. And also the word for son they’re using just means child. It can be male or female. But again, they’re wanting a male audience. So they restricted it, which is a shame. Cyd: How about the word aeon? A E O N. What do you do with that word? You know, in my work with the Tripartite Tractate, it seems to me that most references of aeon in the New Testament translate it as time, a period of time, or the end of the ages, the ages. Whereas I tend to see it always as eternal beings from the ethereal plane. What do you think about that? Bishop Nathan Wilson: I love that. I think that too. I think it’s a mixture of all these things, which is also, I keep, it depends on the context of use. But a lot of times you do see the text that is referring to a higher being, which is beautiful to mention, especially when you’re looking at Gnostic works. But you do see this in the New Testament as well. So you see one text mentioning, for instance, who is this Sophia and this higher power? And that’s how the text can translate too, which is fascinating. So that means who’s this unknown higher power. And then it mentions about the Aeon. And so you see all this sort of stuff being mentioned. Yes, it means an eternal being or an angelic being, but it can also mean eternity or a period of time. So depending on the context of use. So words have power as well. So that’s interesting. So again, how it’s used can make a world of a difference. And it’s interesting when they’re using certain words because there are some times that they could have chosen to use a different word. So when they’ve used a certain word like that, that can change the entire context of meaning. Cyd: Right. Like saying there’s some reference to judgment at the end of the age. And I’m always thinking that it’s judgment from the Aeons when I see that. But I’m not translating from scratch, I’m taking biblical translation, so what do I know? Bishop Nathan Wilson: You’re spot on though. So you’re correct. So it can translate that as well. And we have to realize that we have different versions of Christianity. So that’s certainly appropriate for a first century understanding. Most people are looking at from fourth century. So you’re looking at it from a first century point of view. And so you’re ahead of others in that sort of case, which is beautiful to see. So that’s rare. And I chose to keep that for that reason. So people can have their own conclusions, not having it forced onto them. Cyd: You are very much into the history of things. You’re an historian. I am not at all interested in history per se. I’m always talking about what other people believed in other times. That is not pertinent to our gnosis here and now. So what do you view the purpose of this deep historical knowledge that you have concerning the Jews and the Essenes and whatnot? And is it necessary to go into all of that? Bishop Nathan Wilson: If you want to, I guess, teach from a historical perspective as well as a spiritual one, then yes. But if you want to go for spiritual, you can just go by the heart. There were plenty of spiritual teachers that were illiterate, that could not read, that could not write, and they had a beautiful message. So there’s something more powerful that we can receive within that you won’t obtain from books. But ultimately, you can also have wisdom gained from books. It can be a form of worship or a form of connecting with the divine as well. We have many forms of worship or many forms of experience what’s divine or having that intimate moment with what’s divine to reflect and to deepen our purpose. I wanted to know the historical man we call Jesus and ultimately put into practice what he put into practice. So I wanted to look at the history side of things and especially also, what’s another word I would like to use, decondition myself, decondition past beliefs that were harmful, that did not serve me and ultimately not serving others, and also find out that I was wrong about many things, which I wanted to know as well. So what brought me to this was to know the man we call Jesus, Yeshua, or Yehoshua, whichever term you like, whichever name you want to use. So I want to know not just that, but I want to know his practices, what he did with his life, how his first followers lived, how the first Christians lived, and what I could use for my own spiritual path and how I could put that into practice. So that’s why I want to look at the history side of things. I think if you want to put into practice the different techniques of all the many different Gnostics, then you’re going to have to look at some of the history side of things to find those practices. That doesn’t mean that every single practice is necessary for you. So what works for me might not work for others. What works for others might not work for me. So double-edged sword. Cyd: What sort of practices are you referring to? Are these rituals? What’s the practices? Bishop Nathan Wilson: I go into some of the ancient rituals as well. Some of them I might look at the prayers that they would use, the diet they would take, or means of worship. So how they would go about their forms of private practice. So that sort of stuff. And then I might apply it into my own life and see how I can go. There’s still more I’d like to go and check out more. So I’m still studying a couple of some of the ancient practices as well. So from different or religious perspectives as well. And then I can see how I can put it to my own form of use. So I looked at a lot of Jewish Christians, they would do the shema for instance, before their meditations. And I’ll do that as well. [“Hear, O Israel: the Lord our God, the Lord is one… You shall love the Lord your God with all your heart, with all your soul, and with all your strength…”] They also did breath works back then, which would also induce a sense of intoxication if you want to use, or light headness. And in turn that can also open a new state of reality. So entering the spiritual realm can be a vehicle, if you will, to get there. So to open the mind. And that’s also a practice that’s been used in ancient past. And we can certainly use that today. We have modern practices, say like Wim Hof, that teach breath work in meditation. That’s also useful. So sometimes looking at the past, we do see stuff in today’s world that’s not really new. It’s just being basically reentering this world again, from past knowledge gained of old. And I find that in a lot of Gnostic stuff. When you look at history, you kind of see that Gnostics kind of did a lot of things first, that what we’re doing now that we think is modern, but it’s not. It’s ancient. Cyd: That’s why conventional Christians who read my books, they say, oh, you’re just all new age. And I’m like, no, it’s not new age at all. It’s ancient. Bishop Nathan Wilson: Which is a shame that Christians have been shut off into their own world, which is kind of funny. I actually tell most Christians that they are, in fact, new age, because these beliefs are ancient. And what they are going by is, depending on what version of Christianity, if you’re Protestant, that’s 16th century, I believe. Non-denominal, 18th century. Protestant, 16th century. Catholicism, late second century. Orthodoxy, as we know it now, would be about 14th century. But older Orthodoxy, which would be the split from the Catholic church, is fourth century. So it’s when you go to Gnostic Christians, first century, and we’re really the only groups that are surviving, the Jewish Christians got killed. They ultimately were wiped out or would convert to mainstream Judaism or would become Christian or Islam, they would follow as well. So some would be converted to Muslims, which is also interesting as well. We as Gnostics were also harmed by these other groups, by Catholics, Protestants, Muslims as well. At one point Zoroastrians, but that was only one particular era. And we’ve basically arisen from all that, from that underground, and we’ve still survived, which is fascinating. It’s beautiful that we have. And also the texts that have been rediscovered, this is not accidental. This is all happening for a reason. What’s divine is experiencing itself where it can experience itself and express itself again safely in today’s world. In ancient past, it was dangerous to have diversion after the fourth century, which is a shame because the Catholics would kill those who came before them. They didn’t like that. And they even knew that some of the Gnostics, they had older writings, but they still denied them, which is funny. So it’s why such the hate, which is such a shame. So it goes back to that control of power, my way or the highway, basically. And it was never meant to be like that. It was meant to be very universal. It was meant to be very diverse. The first Christians were Gnostics and Jewish Christians, a mixture between strict law observing Jews and a mixture of Gentiles. And then you had the Jewish mystics that became the Christian mystics, which is fascinating. That was the original groups. And the original groups would argue amongst each other. The strict law observing Jews wanted circumcision, where the mystics said, no, no circumcision of the hearts, let the Gentiles come. That’s fine. So even when we look at the word, say, ethnos, for instance, in the Gospels, when you see kingdom against kingdom, nation against nation, these are the same things. So what they’re actually talking about is Gentile against Gentile and kingdom against kingdom. So the Jewish people didn’t have a kingdom at this stage. It was a mixture of Judea, Galilee and Samaria. So we’re the Samaritans. So that’s also something to take into account, too. So they didn’t like that. They were looking for a messiah to reunify the Jewish people, restore the Jewish faith and make Israel a kingdom again. And so some of them didn’t like the fact that Jesus wasn’t after this, for instance. So they didn’t like some of these teachings. It was a bit different. But if you look at the mystics, they had a very different interpretations. They did believe in a renewal of the Jewish faith, but a renewal back to El Elyon and a rejection of Yahweh. So that’s very different. So when you look at repentance, for Israel to repent, meaning for all of Israel to return back to El Elyon. And if you look at for the Gentiles conversion, that would be referring to not converting to any religion, but converting to God. So God outside religion. So fascinating. So you see all this in the original text. Cyd: And why do you suppose, this might be an unanswerable question, but why do you suppose conventional modern Christians are so, you know, extremely antagonistic towards Gnostic Christians? Is it fear or what? Bishop Nathan Wilson: Well, they’ve been told you're the enemy, basically. And yes, some of it is fear. Fear as well of the unknown. And also because of the need of an opponent. So they believe that they are doing a good thing. And if they don’t do this, they can be punished. So it’s the case of where a victim becomes an abuser. So most Christians have never even heard about Gnostics. It’s only the real ones who are into spiritual warfare, basically, and really full on extremist dogmatic ones that are familiar with, and apologetics. But they are now feeling like they’re losing the battle because more people were interested in Gnosticism and especially interested in other Jewish groups and the Dead Sea Scrolls, as well as the Nag Hammadi. So they’re realizing their other texts and there’s other options now. And that’s great. And regarding even my translations, one reason I chose to do it that I did, I found out that no modern English Bible translates from one source material. They’re all a mixture of different sources. So we have the Codex Sinaiticus mixed with the Latin Vulgate, mixing with Germanic copies, and then mixing ancient Koine Greek into modern Hebrew, putting it back into Greek. And that’s not good at all. So we’re just changing—we’re swapping chapters because we feel uncomfortable with them. So I was mortified when I was looking at that. And so I realized I couldn’t trust basically my Bible anymore. So I thought, well, I’m making this myself. And then I thought, well, I’m going to release it. Let’s go and share it too and do what they will with it. And it opened a lot of doorways to me, actually. So that’s one reason I wanted to give that out so people can have their own faith in their own interpretation and also believe in the message of Yeshua, bringing people back to the Most High God, to the Unknowable God, the Living Father, the Mother-Father. And we also see the Mother being mentioned in other texts too. It’s just mostly blocked out by mainstream Christianity, which is unfair, unfair to women and unfair to humanity with their approaches. It’s been very violent. So we need to remove that violence because that’s nothing to do with Yeshua’s teachings. He didn’t teach us to go around fighting each other. He said, Those who are for me are with me. They don’t understand his message. They very much follow the Catholic teachings of Paul that they’ve been given. And so they can look at the Gnostic teachings of Paul as well, which are also in there. Paul’s letters, we now know they’re mostly all forgeries. We don’t have any original copies either. They’re all later fourth century and we have some second century fragments. But the oldest reference to Paul is from the Ten Letters of Marcion. And he’s the man who compiled the first Christian Bible. And some people can argue, some people don’t believe he was a Gnostic. Others think he was a Gnostic. I think he was a type of Gnostic because he believed in a demiurge. So he believed that the God of the Jews was Yahweh and not the Supreme God of Jesus. That is a very Gnostic belief. But the thing is, the word Gnostic was given to us by the Catholic church, was a way of separating us and identifying us. But we wear it as a badge of honor because we understand they’re just calling us knowledgeable Christians, which is kind of funny. So language is powerful and the Catholic church certainly forgot it. So because of them, we now use daimon as demon. So they’ve basically demonized Jesus. They’ve demonized the Holy Spirit, which is their greatest sin. And they’ve demonized God and every other God. So they don’t know what damage they’ve done. And that’s not good. So I wanted to reverse that damage and bring people back to what I believe is the message of Yeshua, of Jesus, and to have their own spiritual relationship with God, an individual relationship, which is something that I want to see more of. That’s a very beautiful thing. You can’t define that intimate experience without living it. Cyd: Right, right. Well, that's all we have time for in this episode. We'll pick it up again next week for part three of my interview with Bishop Nathan Wilson of The Gnostic Union Church.  I like the way he talks, huh? Until next week, onward and upward and God bless us all.

******Support the channel******Patreon: https://www.patreon.com/thedissenterPayPal: paypal.me/thedissenterPayPal Subscription 1 Dollar: https://tinyurl.com/yb3acuuyPayPal Subscription 3 Dollars: https://tinyurl.com/ybn6bg9lPayPal Subscription 5 Dollars: https://tinyurl.com/ycmr9gpzPayPal Subscription 10 Dollars: https://tinyurl.com/y9r3fc9mPayPal Subscription 20 Dollars: https://tinyurl.com/y95uvkao ******Follow me on******Website: https://www.thedissenter.net/The Dissenter Goodreads list: https://shorturl.at/7BMoBFacebook: https://www.facebook.com/thedissenteryt/Twitter: https://x.com/TheDissenterYT This show is sponsored by Enlites, Learning & Development done differently. Check the website here: http://enlites.com/ Dr. Christian B. Miller is the A. C. Reid Professor of Philosophy at Wake Forest University. His research is primarily in contemporary ethics and philosophy of religion. He has written for the Wall Street Journal, Dallas Morning News, Slate, Prospect Magazine, Relevant Magazine, Michael Hyatt Magazine, The Conversation, Newsweek, Aeon, Greater Good Magazine, Nautilus Magazine, Fathom Magazine, Institute of Art and Ideas, and Christianity Today. He's the author of several books, the most recent one being The Honesty Crisis: Preserving Our Most Treasured Virtue in an Increasingly Dishonest World. In this episode, we focus on The Honesty Crisis. We talk about what honesty is, and what constitutes an honest person. We discuss whether there is ever permissible to lie, and whether omission is always a form of dishonesty. We talk about how honest people are, based on psychological studies. We discuss whether we are living through a dishonesty crisis, and explore online dishonesty, with a focus on deepfakes and social media. We talk about how people can become more honest. Finally, we discuss whether inconsistency can be a form of dishonesty.--A HUGE THANK YOU TO MY PATRONS/SUPPORTERS: PER HELGE LARSEN, BERNARDO SEIXAS, ADAM KESSEL, MATTHEW WHITINGBIRD, ARNAUD WOLFF, TIM HOLLOSY, HENRIK AHLENIUS, ROBERT WINDHAGER, RUI INACIO, ZOOP, MARCO NEVES, COLIN HOLBROOK, PHIL KAVANAGH, SAMUEL ANDREEFF, FRANCIS FORDE, TIAGO NUNES, FERGAL CUSSEN, HAL HERZOG, NUNO MACHADO, JONATHAN LEIBRANT, JOÃO LINHARES, STANTON T, SAMUEL CORREA, ERIK HAINES, MARK SMITH, JOÃO EIRA, TOM HUMMEL, SARDUS FRANCE, DAVID SLOAN WILSON, YACILA DEZA-ARAUJO, ROMAIN ROCH, YANICK PUNTER, CHARLOTTE BLEASE, NICOLE BARBARO, PAWEL OSTASZEWSKI, NELLEKE BAK, GUY MADISON, GARY G HELLMANN, SAIMA AFZAL, ADRIAN JAEGGI, JOÃO BARBOSA, JULIAN PRICE, HEDIN BRØNNER, FRANCA BORTOLOTTI, GABRIEL PONS CORTÈS, URSULA LITZCKE, SCOTT, ZACHARY FISH, TIM DUFFY, SUNNY SMITH, JON WISMAN, WILLIAM BUCKNER, LUKE GLOWACKI, GEORGIOS THEOPHANOUS, CHRIS WILLIAMSON, PETER WOLOSZYN, DAVID WILLIAMS, DIOGO COSTA, ALEX CHAU, CORALIE CHEVALLIER, BANGALORE ATHEISTS, LARRY D. LEE JR., OLD HERRINGBONE, DAN SPERBER, ROBERT GRESSIS, JEFF MCMAHAN, JAKE ZUEHL, MARK CAMPBELL, TOMAS DAUBNER, LUKE NISSEN, KIMBERLY JOHNSON, JESSICA NOWICKI, LINDA BRANDIN, VALENTIN STEINMANN, ALEXANDER HUBBARD, BR, JONAS HERTNER, URSULA GOODENOUGH, DAVID PINSOF, SEAN NELSON, MIKE LAVIGNE, JOS KNECHT, LUCY, MANVIR SINGH, PETRA WEIMANN, CAROLA FEEST, MAURO JÚNIOR, TONY BARRETT, NIKOLAI VISHNEVSKY, STEVEN GANGESTAD, TED FARRIS, HUGO B., JORDAN MANSFIELD, CHARLOTTE ALLEN, PETER STOYKO, DAVID TONNER, LEE BECK, PATRICK DALTON-HOLMES, NICK KRASNEY, RACHEL ZAK, DENNIS XAVIER, CHINMAYA BHAT, RHYS, ALEX MACLEOD, HAIDAR, JULIEN PORCHER, ROBERT SUNDSTRÖM, JON STEWART, AND JENNY M!A SPECIAL THANKS TO MY PRODUCERS, YZAR WEHBE, JIM FRANK, ŁUKASZ STAFINIAK, TOM VANEGDOM, BERNARD HUGUENEY, CURTIS DIXON, THOMAS TRUMBLE, KATHRINE AND PATRICK TOBIN, JONCARLO MONTENEGRO, NICK GOLDEN, CHRISTINE GLASS, IGOR NIKIFOROVSKI, PER KRAULIS, ADAM HUNT, AND JOÃO BARBOSA!AND TO MY EXECUTIVE PRODUCERS, MATTHEW LAVENDER,SERGIU CODREANU, AND GREGORY HASTINGS!

The common evolutionary question centers around nature vs. nurture, but maybe we should be asking if we are designed to cooperate or compete? Jonathan R. Goodman is a social scientist based at the Wellcome Sanger Institute and the University of Cambridge and is the author of “Invisible Rivals: How We Evolved to Compete in a Cooperative World.” He joins host Krys Boyd to discuss Darwinian survival vs. species interdependence, what makes us either selfless or selfish and how humans respond in real-world situations that test these theories. His article in Aeon is “How selfish are we?” Learn about your ad choices: dovetail.prx.org/ad-choices

VOV1 - Bộ Công Thương vừa phối hợp với Tập đoàn AEON tổ chức Tuần hàng Việt Nam 2026 tại Nhật Bản và nhiều thị trường châu Á.Từ ngày 11 đến ngày 14/6, Bộ Công Thương phối hợp với Tập đoàn AEON tổ chức Tuần hàng Việt Nam 2026 đồng thời tại hệ thống AEON ở Nhật Bản, Malaysia, Hồng Kông (Trung Quốc), Trung Quốc và Campuchia, nhằm quảng bá hàng hóa Việt Nam, tăng cường kết nối giao thương và mở rộng cơ hội xuất khẩu cho doanh nghiệp Việt Nam. Chương trình có sự tham dự của khoảng 20 doanh nghiệp Việt Nam hoạt động trong các lĩnh vực thực phẩm, nông sản, hàng tiêu dùng, thủ công mỹ nghệ và sản phẩm chế biến.Với chủ đề “Đánh thức mọi giác quan cùng hành trình khám phá Việt Nam: sự quyến rũ của ẩm thực, văn hoá và du lịch”, Tuần hàng Việt Nam 2026 mang tới cho người tiêu dùng Nhật Bản không gian trải nghiệm toàn diện về đất nước, con người và sản phẩm Việt Nam. Thông qua các hoạt động giới thiệu sản phẩm, trải nghiệm văn hóa và quảng bá du lịch, chương trình góp phần lan tỏa hình ảnh Việt Nam năng động, thân thiện và giàu bản sắc tới người tiêu dùng sở tại.- 5 đội sẵn sàng tham gia Cuộc thi tìm hiểu lợi ích của xăng E10.- Thủ tướng Chính phủ yêu cầu tiếp tục tăng cường đấu tranh chống buôn lậu, vận chuyển, sản xuất, mua bán, tàng trữ, sử dụng trái phép thuốc lá trong tình hình mới.Thứ trưởng Bộ Công Thương Phan Thị Thắng giới thiệu các sản phẩm Việt Nam tại Nhật Bản - Ảnh: BCT

VOV1 - Từ 11-14/6, Bộ Công Thương phối hợp với Tập đoàn AEON tổ chức Tuần hàng Việt Nam 2026 đồng thời tại hệ thống AEON ở Nhật Bản, Malaysia, Hồng Kông, Trung Quốc và Campuchia, nhằm quảng bá hàng hóa Việt Nam, tăng cường kết nối giao thương và mở rộng cơ hội xuất khẩu cho doanh nghiệp Việt Nam.Chương trình có sự tham dự của Thứ trưởng Bộ Công Thương Phan Thị Thắng, Cơ quan Thương vụ Việt Nam tại các nước trong khu vực châu Á, cùng sự hiện diện của AEON, đại diện Sở Công Thương Hà Nội, Bắc Ninh, Tây Ninh và khoảng 20 doanh nghiệp Việt Nam hoạt động trong các lĩnh vực thực phẩm, nông sản, hàng tiêu dùng, thủ công mỹ nghệ và sản phẩm chế biến.Phát biểu tại Lễ khai mạc ngày 11/6, Thứ trưởng Phan Thị Thắng nhấn mạnh, năm 2026 mang ý nghĩa đặc biệt khi đánh dấu chặng đường 10 năm Bộ Công Thương Việt Nam phối hợp cùng Tập đoàn AEON tổ chức Tuần hàng Việt Nam tại Nhật Bản. Doanh nghiệp Việt Nam đang tích cực chuyển đổi theo hướng phát triển xanh, sạch và bền vững, sử dụng nguyên liệu thân thiện với môi trường, tiết kiệm năng lượng và bảo đảm trách nhiệm xã hội trong toàn bộ chuỗi cung ứng, phù hợp với xu hướng tiêu dùng hiện đại và các tiêu chuẩn ngày càng cao của thị trường Nhật Bản.Với chủ đề “Đánh thức mọi giác quan cùng hành trình khám phá Việt Nam: sự quyến rũ của ẩm thực, văn hoá và du lịch”, Tuần hàng Việt Nam 2026 mang tới cho người tiêu dùng Nhật Bản không gian trải nghiệm toàn diện về đất nước, con người và sản phẩm Việt Nam. Thông qua các hoạt động giới thiệu sản phẩm, trải nghiệm văn hóa và quảng bá du lịch, chương trình góp phần lan tỏa hình ảnh Việt Nam năng động, thân thiện và giàu bản sắc tới người tiêu dùng sở tại. Tham tán thương mại Việt Nam tại Nhật Bản Tạ Đức Minh cho biết: “Năm nay, nhiều sản phẩm đặc sắc của Việt Nam được giới thiệu tới người tiêu dùng Nhật Bản. Có thể kể đến gạo chất lượng cao và các sản phẩm từ gạo, trái cây sấy, hạt điều, gia vị truyền thống, sản phẩm từ yến sào cùng nhiều đặc sản vùng miền. Bên cạnh đó là các sản phẩm dệt may, hàng thủ công mỹ nghệ và hàng gia dụng có tính thẩm mỹ cao, đáp ứng xu hướng tiêu dùng hiện đại và nhu cầu ngày càng đa dạng tại Nhật Bản”Bên cạnh các hoạt động trải nghiệm trực tiếp tại Trung tâm thương mại AEON LakeTown Mori - tỉnh Saitama, chương trình còn được triển khai trên hơn 400 cửa hàng thuộc hệ thống AEON trên toàn Nhật Bản, giúp hàng hóa Việt Nam tiếp cận đông đảo người tiêu dùng tại nhiều địa phương. Việc tổ chức đồng thời Tuần hàng Việt Nam tại nhiều thị trường châu Á tiếp tục khẳng định hiệu quả của mô hình hợp tác giữa Bộ Công Thương và Tập đoàn AEON trong hỗ trợ doanh nghiệp Việt Nam tham gia sâu hơn vào hệ thống phân phối quốc tế, nâng cao giá trị thương hiệu hàng Việt Nam và thúc đẩy xuất khẩu bền vững trong giai đoạn mới./.Tuấn Nhật /VOV Nhật bảnTheo đánh giá chung, các mặt hàng Việt Nam luôn đa dạng về chủng loại, phong phú và đẹp mắt về mẫu mã, hấp dẫn về chất lượng. Ảnh VOV Tokyo

Welcome back to Gnostic Insights and to the Gnostic Reformation on Substack. This week I was listening to one of the radio preachers I like to listen to and I caught a sermon on the Pentecost, and I realized I had at that point a Gnostic insight that Pentecost, the coming of the Holy Spirit, when it infused the disciples in the upper room—that is the coming of the Third Order of Powers released by the Christ after his resurrection—that the Third Order Powers are the “anointing of the Holy Spirit.” So quickly, let’s look at the Acts of the Apostles book out of the New Testament, Chapter 2, which is what we now call Pentecost. And when the day arrived that completed the fifty days after Passover, they were all gathered together in one place, and suddenly there came a noise, like a turbulent wind borne out of the sky, and it filled the whole house where they were sitting. And there appeared before them tongues as of fire, which parted and came to rest, one each upon each one of them. And they were all filled with the Holy Spirit, and they began to speak in other tongues as the Spirit gave them to utter. Now dwelling in Jerusalem, there were devout Judeans from every nation under the sky, and on the advent of this noise, the multitude gathered and were confused, because each one heard them speaking in his own language. And they were amazed and astounded, saying, look, are not all of those who speak Galileans? And how is it that each one of us hears his own language, the languages in which we were raised? And all were amazed and entirely at a loss, saying to one another, what does this portend? But others, ridiculing them, said, ah, they’re full of sweet new wine. But Peter, standing up along with the eleven, raised his voice and addressed them all. Judean men and all of you staying in Jerusalem, let this be known to you and lend your ears to my words, for these men are not drunk, as you suppose, as it is the third hour of the day. Rather, this is what was declared through the prophet Joel. And in the last days it shall happen, says God, that I will pour forth from my spirit upon all flesh, and your sons and your daughters shall prophesy, and your young men shall dream dreams.” [Hart's New Testament] Pentecost by el Greco Now, it’s a much longer passage, and it’s very thrilling and exciting, but we don’t have time today to go into it. Perhaps we’ll speak about this in more depth very soon. But that is the first Pentecost, the coming of the Holy Spirit upon humanity. And I’m going to talk about that today to clear up that confusion, because I’ve always had a bit of a confusion over what we speak of as the Holy Spirit dwelling in us in a Christian manner, or the Holy Spirit coming like tongues of fire in the Pentecost story of the upper room in the book of Acts, yet we all have the Holy Spirit of the Fullness of God within every cell of our bodies and throughout our entire organism. All of the Second Order powers are infused with the power of God. So what is the Holy Spirit then? And now I understand the distinction between the infusion of the Third Order of Powers and the infusion of the Second Order of Powers. You see, we are Second Order Powers. The Aeons of the Fullness are First Order Powers. They have their place Above. We are their fruit. We are their spores. (And I actually ran across a radio preacher, of all things, again last week, saying that the original word for fruit as used in the New Testament is spore. And I’m like, yes, that is exactly what I’ve been saying. So that was another cool Gnostic insight that came by way of a Christian radio preacher. So you can never tell what you’re going to hear on Christian radio.) So, we are the spores of the First Order of Powers. We are their fruit. We are their children. We are the Second Order of Powers, and that is all living things in the cosmos. Everything that moves around, everything that’s soft and squishy, the meat, as I like to say, as opposed to the mud, which is the realm of the Demiurge—the rocks and minerals, the molecules and atoms. But the Third Order of Powers is the army of the Christ. We’ve spoken of that often. We’ve had three recent episodes about the indwelling of the Christ. For example, The Gnostic Redemption of the Nag Hammadi from May 29th, 2026, Army of the Christ, May 16th, 2026, and Understanding Gnosticism: The Path to Inner Knowledge from May 9th, 2026. These all have to do with the coming of the Third Order of Powers. And the coming of the Third Order of Powers didn’t come to Earth until Christ walked the Earth in the form of a human, and that is Jesus the Christ. He’s the only one who has ever claimed that “I and my Father are One.” Jesus is not the same as Buddha. Jesus is not the same as Muhammad or any other prophet. Jesus is not simply a good teacher or an exemplar of morality and ethics. If you think that, as many modern theologians do—the postmodern theologians, the deconstructionists—they have reduced the power of Jesus to that of a prophet or a teacher. And even people I hear, strangely enough, out there on YouTube, claiming that Jesus was a fraud—that there is no such thing as anything that happened in the Bible, Old Testament or New Testament. That’s an absurdity that is being promulgated by non-believers. If you are a believer in the Father, then you are a believer in the Christ, because Christ was the emissary of the Father to Earth to bring the correcting algorithm, I like to call it, to Earth to patch up our Second Order Power that has been forgotten. We’re born with it. We fully instantiate it within our bodies, but we’ve overlaid it with all kinds of junk, karma and memes from our environment that cloud our gnosis, cloud our ability to perceive the power of the Aeons within us. Christ came, the Third Order of Powers, the army of the Christ, to help us to remember, to remind us of our Second Order power, to remind us of where we come from, to remind us of the Father and the Aeons above. I took notes from the Pentecost sermon I listened to, and I’m going to represent these notes as a Gnostic teaching for you, because once you have the gnosis working in you, once you’ve come to terms with Christ and the Father and the Aeons and the gnosis that you were born with, once you begin to remember your inherent transcendence, then you can read the New Testament with eyes wide open. You can understand the mysteries of the New Testament much better than typical Christians do, because they’re trapped in a formula that is derivative of the early Catholics that had stripped the gnosis out of the Bible in the first place. So we must free ourselves from the doctrine, but not free ourselves of the gnosis. Tricky. The occasion known as Pentecost was when Jesus had been crucified, entombed, resurrected, and then ascended back up above into the Fullness—above the Fullness, because he’s the king of all. And he had promised that he would send a helper—to not worry. He had told his disciples, don’t worry, I’m sending you a helper to help you bring the gnosis to the world, essentially is what he said. This was also promised in the Old Testament. And here I’m going to read you a very important verse out of the Old Testament and translate it for you into Gnostic terms. The verse is Ezekiel 36:24—28, where God promises to cleanse and put a new heart and a new spirit into believers. Now it’s tricky when going all the way back to the Old Testament, because the God of the Old Testament is not the God Above All Gods. The God of the Old Testament, Jehovah, well, it’s pretty much equivalent to the Demiurge. And that’s very dicey, very tricky. The ego of the God of the Old Testament, the ego of Jehovah, is when Jehovah speaks in very egoistic terms about itself and about obedience and the law because, remember, Jehovah is law-bound. The Demiurge doesn’t remember; the Demiurge has forgotten its origins above. When this radio preacher referenced Ezekiel 36, I went to what’s called the online Bible Gateway. That’s a resource you can use. And you type in any phrase or any citation, such as Ezekiel 36:24—28, and it will give you all of the various translations. And you can choose which translation you read or you read them all. Well, since this was a Hebrew exhortation, I decided to use the Orthodox Jewish Bible, which does have a lot of Hebrew in it. So then we have to go into Hebrew translations, but that was a good exercise as well. Oh, to go back and clear up confusion about how to read the Old Testament—if the Old Testament is largely demiurgic, it’s basically when Jehovah is speaking that’s demiurgic. But the prophets were in touch with their gnosis. The prophets were talking to the God Above All Gods. They weren’t talking to Jehovah. They were talking to the God Above All Gods. So their prophecies are coming from above. That seems a pretty simple way to understand it. So the histories are one thing. That’s the histories of the of the Hebrews who were the people of Jehovah. Jehovah was their tribal god. And then there are the prophets who were speaking to the God Above All Gods and giving the Hebrews instructions from the God Above All Gods. These are higher instructions than Jehovah. You see, Jehovah doesn’t remember that it’s a fallen part of an Aeon. Here at Gnostic Insights, we talk about that Aeon as Logos. Many other Gnostics call it Sophia. I prefer Logos. That’s out of the Tripartite Tractate. Logos split apart when he fell and abandoned the chaos down below. And the Demiurge is part of that chaos. So the Demiurge put this world in order, formed the heavens and the Earth in a godlike manner, because he had all the blueprints. He had the remembrance of how things went together, but he didn’t have the remembrance of the Father or the remembrance of his better ascended Self, that being Logos, or the Aeons out of which he fell, the Fullness out of which he came. The Demiurge woke up down here in chaos and remembered that things should not be chaos, wanted them to go back into an orderly manner, had the blueprints of Paradise, essentially, that’s how you can put it, and formed this Earth. But this is an imitation. This is a deficiency of Paradise, and it’s especially deficient because there’s no love here. The minerals do not know love. The mud does not know love. Love doesn’t come from the bottom up, from the Demiurge up, from Jehovah up. Love, consciousness, comes from the God Above All Gods down to us in the form of a Second Order Powers. But we have forgotten, and the Demiurge forgot. So here is a word from one of the prophets who was in touch with the God Above All Gods, giving assurance that salvation would come, that remembrance would come. The Demiurge doesn’t block the prophets because it egotistically thinks that the prophets are speaking of it. You know, the Demiurge takes personally being God, but he’s mistaken in that. He’s a lesser god, the god of this cosmos, but the God Above All Gods is the one who speaks through the prophets. Here’s Ezekiel 36:24—26, from the New King James Version. For I will take you from among the nations, gather you out of all countries, and bring you into your own land. Then I will sprinkle clean water on you, and you shall be clean. I will cleanse you from all your filthiness and from all your idols. I will give you a new heart and put a new spirit within you. I will take the heart of stone out of your flesh and give you a heart of flesh. Or as The Orthodox Jewish Bible puts it, A lev chadásh also will I give you, and a ruach chadasháh will I put within you; and I will take away the lev ha-éven (stony heart) out of your basár, and I will give you a lev basár. Now, when it speaks of I will give you a new heart, in Hebrew that is lev chadásh. Lev means inner self, the seat of will and moral character. Chadásh means anew, fresh, renewed, restored. So lev chadásh refers to a renewed inner disposition. A transformed moral center. A recreated will aligned with the Father rather than with stubbornness or idolatry. And when it speaks of and put a new spirit within you, in Hebrew that word, the new spirit, is ruach chadasháh. And it means a new spirit, an awakened pneuma. And pneuma is a Gnostic term. That is the spiritual part of us. Our One Self. So the ruach chadasháh is the spirit. Ruach is spirit, breath, animating force, inner vitality. That’s what it means. Chadasháh means fresh, new, renewed. So in Ezekiel, ruach chadasháh means a new animating principle. A renewed inner drive or spiritual vitality placed within the person. You see where I’m going with this? This is the Third Order of Powers. A new motivating force that empowers obedience and life. This cleansing of a new heart and putting a new spirit within you, ruach chadasháh. It means stripping away the meme shroud is how I generally refer to it in the Simple Explanation. Peeling off all those layers of confusion that obscure our originating Fullness. That’s the filthiness. It’s not the original sin. We aren’t born with original sin. We are born as Second Order Powers, much loved out of the first order powers of the Fullness of God. We forget when we come down here into this material world created by the Demiurge. And then we plug into this culture around us. Think of the media and the social media and all of the lies and confusions that are spread, both purposefully meant to mislead you and confuse you, and just accidentally because people make mistakes and people say the wrong things, even when they think they’re saying the right things. So that’s the filthiness. And the idols— these are the things that you cling to. Generally this narcissistic age we live in is an age of idols, but the idols that we worship aren’t little statues of gods. They are our exercise equipment and our bags of makeup and our, well, of course they can be influencers and they can be movie stars and television actors and musicians and sports figures and politicians. Those can be your idols if you treat them as idols, if you idolize them, if you go all weak in the knees and do anything they say. But we also have our own idols in the form of the things that we cling to and pile up around us that we buy, got to have this, got to have that, got to have this, got to have that. These are idols. So this is a promise to cleanse us from that. In other words, to strip away your meme shroud and let the Fullness shine forth from within you. But it goes beyond that, because it says, I will give you a new heart and put a new spirit in you. And that new heart is the lev chadásh, which is new spirit. And the new heart is lev basár, which literally means in Hebrew, a heart of flesh, a soft, receptive psyche. Oh, see, our psyche, that is not our pneuma—that's a Gnostic term as well. We have our pneuma, which is our spiritual Fullness. We have our psyche, which is our psychological aspect—our ego lives there. And we have our hylic, which is the material to which we are bonded in this material world. So this passage promises to put a new heart within us, a lev basár, a soft, receptive psyche; that is to soften our hearts, because they’re hardened by the world and by the memes we cling to. It says, furthermore, I will take the heart of stone out of your flesh. And the heart of stone in Hebrew is lev ha-éven, meaning heart of stone, or a hardened psyche. Going to remove that heart of stone, which is very interesting, because of course, I say that the hard rocky places, the stones are demiurgic. That’s the material level, that’s the elemental level. So the heart of stone is the demiurgic heart that we have put inside of us, that we’re bonded to. But this passage wants to turn it into a new heart, a heart of flesh, a soft, receptive psyche, as we were originally born with—lev basár. So it says, I will give you that new heart and put a new spirit within you, and take the heart of stone out of your flesh and give you a heart of flesh. The heart of stone, lev ha-éven. And the purifying waters are what do it. I will sprinkle clean water on you. In Hebrew, that was literally mayim tehorím, meaning clean, purifying waters. Jesus spoke of the purifying waters. In the New Testament, in the Gospel according to John, Chapter 3, a Pharisee named Nicodemus had sneaked out one night to speak privately with Jesus. He didn’t want anyone to know. And Nicodemus said to Jesus, Rabbi, we know that you have come as a teacher from God, for no one can produce these signs you perform unless God is within him. And in reply, Jesus said to him, Amen, amen, I tell you, unless someone is born from Above, he cannot see the kingdom of God. And Nicodemus says to him, how can a man be born when he is old? Jesus replied, Amen, amen, I tell you, unless a man is born of water and spirit, he cannot enter the kingdom of God. That which is born of flesh is flesh, and that which is born of spirit is spirit. Do not be amazed, because I’ve told you it is necessary for you to be born from Above. [Hart's New Testament] Jesus is speaking of the same water, the water of the spirit, that cleanses us and allows us to be born again from Above. Later on in the book of John, Chapter 7, verse 37, Jesus stood up and said loudly, If anyone is thirsty, let him come to me and let him drink. Whoever has faith in me, just as scripture has said, out of his parts living streams of waters will flow. Now he said this in regard to the spirit, whom those who had faith in him were about to receive, for as yet there was no spirit, because Jesus had not yet been glorified. [Hart's New Testament] And this is speaking of the Holy Spirit—what we call the Holy Spirit—because of course we have spirit, we’re born with spirit, because we have the Fullness of God within us, the First Order of Powers. But he’s talking of the Third Order of Powers, the army of Christ that comes after Jesus is “glorified.” And glorified means risen from the dead, ascended into the sky in front of hundreds of witnesses. And glorified means that Jesus is living Above, just as we will all be living Above, in a glorified body, in the presence of the Father. Now, the promise that Jesus referred to—he was quoting out of the Old Testament—something that all of the listeners in his audience already knew. And it’s from Isaiah 12:3 that says, Therefore with joy will you draw water from the wells of salvation. The water that is being drawn is this water that’s being referred to, that we’ve been discussing, out of Ezekiel 36:24—28. That is the living water, the mayim tehorím—the Holy Spirit that bathes us now within and without. We draw the living water of the Third Order Powers into us. This is why accepting the mission of the Christ into your innermost being is essential, because there’s no other way to wash away the memes, the obscurations of the world around us that confuses us and causes us to forget. We’re born with a noble nature. We’re born as Second Order Powers, directly from the Fullness above, but we get lost in the confusion of this world that is created and run by the Demiurge. We forget our ethereal origins. We forget about the Father. We forget about the Aeons and the Fullness of God. The spirit that we’re born with becomes smothered, smothered by the worldly memes we cling to and that cling to us. The living water that comes into our new softened heart can only come when you relinquish the ego that is causing you to hold on tightly to those memes, all those false promises that the world gives. They will not save you. They will not make you happy. They might give you a momentary piece of pleasure when something arrives in the box from Amazon on the front porch, but as soon as you’ve used it, it’s just another thing. But the living water never dies. It’s living waters from the Father flowing all the way downstream through the Son, through the Fullnesses, and only through Christ inside of us can we be washed, baptized from within to loosen the hold. So, the lev chadásh, renew your psychic heart, captures the same teaching that the Tripartite Tractate teaches—that the psyche must be reoriented and made stable. The ruach chadashá, awakening within you the spirit that is from Above, is the same as activating the pneumatic seed, as we say in Gnosticism, not a moral reform. The lev basár, a living heart, soft, able to receive the light, receptive, this is the Tripartite Tractate’s softened, harmonized psyche, that can receive the pneumatic imprint of Christ. And the divine seed will rise within you and rule in peace is what the Tripartite Tractate says of the pneuma ruling through the psyche once integration occurs. So, this is the Gnostic paraphrase then of Ezekiel 36:26—28: I will renew your ego's psychic heart, and I will awaken within you the pneumatic spirit—the One Self that flows from above. I will remove the heart hardened by the archons and the never-ending war, and I will restore your Second Order heart, soft, receptive, and able to receive the light. Through this new heart and new spirit, the divine seed of the Christ within you will rise and rule in peace. That’s just another way we could say the phrase in Ezekiel, in a more Gnostic way. It’s a bath, loosens the hold, washes away those memes, those sins, as the church likes to call it. But it’s more than just your mistakes and your problems. It’s all the stuff that we have around us. That is the job of the Christ, to open our eyes to our original Second Order power, to live within us, to correct our mistakes, to correct our faulty algorithms, to protect us from this demiurgic immersion that we find ourselves in, in this material world. We Second Order Powers are the children of the Aeons of the Fullness, who are themselves the Totality of the Son. The Third Order Powers are the army of the Christ, who represents all of the Powers of the ethereal plane, individually and collectively working for our redemption. Step aside. Take your ego off the throne. Take the Demiurge off the throne, if you’ve enthroned it. Put down your idols. Push away your possessions, at least long enough to allow the Third Order Powers to come in. Ask the Christ to come in and wash you with the Holy Spirit. Invite the Holy Spirit, the army of the Third Order of Powers, into your organism, literally, and it will cleanse you. It will wash you. Walk in the Spirit of God. Let your eyes be opened to the truth. We’ll talk more about this again. Until then, God bless us all, and onward and upward. Please enable JavaScript in your browser to complete this form.Name *FirstLastEmail *Stripe Credit Card *Choose your item *Item A - $10.00Item B - $25.00Item C - $50.00Total$0.00Submit

In the second of two episodes about Doris Lessing's The Golden Notebook, David talks to critic and memoirist Catherine Taylor about the novel's place in the history of feminism. Is its idea of ‘free women' meant to be ironic? Why are the things that shocked its original readers not the things that shock its readers today? What makes Lessing so much more angry about male hypocrisy than she is about male brutality? And what else by Lessing should we all read? Read more by Catherine on Doris Lessing in this recent essay published in Aeon https://aeon.co/essays/what-we-can-learn-from-doris-lessings-experiments-in-living Join us on Friday 19th June at the Regent Street Cinema in London for the final film in our current season: a screening of Never Let Me Go followed by a live podcast recording with geneticist and science writer Adam Rutherford. Tickets available now https://bit.ly/4x641XC You can find out everything you need to know about this podcast – who we are, what we do, plus merch, events and full lists of all episodes including PPF+ bonus episodes on our website https://www.ppfideas.com Next Time in Great Political Fictions: The Dispossessed Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

Laura Russ, the new executive director of the Shenehon Center for Real Estate at the University of St. Thomas, talks to F&C reporter Dan Netter. Russ talks about the transition from her position at the nonprofit Aeon and where she intends to take the Shenehon Center.

Every once in a while I like to go back and share with you the original scriptures out of the Tripartite Tractate of the Nag Hammadi from which I derive these teachings. So this week will be scripture-heavy. Don't worry if the language is unwieldy or unfamiliar. You'll get the hang of it. The original economy was that of the hierarchy of the Fullness, wherein every Aeon knew its place, position, and duties for cooperative overall functioning. The Aeons of the Fullness dream as one of Paradise. Each of the Fullnesses lived in a state of joy, benevolence, and harmonious agreement, giving glory to the Father and never to each other or to themselves, according to the Tripartite Tractate of the Nag Hammadi, verse 86. The Second Order of Powers was created to establish a new economy to replace the deficiency that had arisen as a result of the Fall of Logos. Logos and the Fullness brought forth these little ones of the Second Order so they could receive the life-giving light born from the thought of brotherly love of the preexistent Fullnesses, in contrast to the phantoms that had arisen from the Fall. These powers of remembrance resembled the Aeons whose likenesses they were, and they were in harmony with themselves and with others of their kind. And as you know by now, the Second Order of Powers is every living thing that is on this planet Earth, and indeed, the entire cosmos—all of creation, all of the flora and fauna, all of the living things, including us humans. The restored pleroma of Logos and the Hierarchy of the Fullness conceive a new fruit called 2nd Order Powers. The Fullness is the 1st Order. The Second Order of Powers resembled their parents in the Fullness, each one of them being a small impress of one of the figures. These were no larger than those of the imitation, but they came into the world with a better disposition, reflecting the qualities and powers of the Fullnesses. [Tripartite Tractate, verse 83] The new economy of the Second Order of Powers reflected a different method of doing business from their parents in the Fullness. In the new economy, our cosmos, the powers vied for position and authority within a limited space known as the boundary. Here, those of the imitation who continued to wholeheartedly embrace the shadows left over from the Fall actively fought against those of the remembrance. Never-ending War For their part, those of the remembrance forgot all about the values of the Fullness, due to the law of mutual combat they were enacting. The new powers acquired the same lust for domination and all of the other passions of this sort, and wound up acting against itself on account of its rage. It was during this endless war that a myriad of various kinds of matter and all sorts of powers were mixed with one another, and in great number. [Tripartite Tractate, verses 84 and 85] Clearly another solution was required if peace were to enter the deficiency. Remember that none of this was due to an error of planning, rather these steps were all necessary to bring about an economy still to come. The new solution was the Christ. For this reason, then, it is wrong to condemn the movement of the Word as the cause that made an ordained economy come to pass. The Aeons of the Fullness took upon themselves the Fall that had happened as if it were their own, with concern, goodness, and great kindness, for the one who had become deficient could be made perfect in no other way except by the Fullness of the Father. [Tripartite Tractate, verse 86] And so, the Aeons of the Fullness, every one individually and all of them collectively gave glory in unison to their Father while praying for help for the deficiency. They brought forth one that combined every attribute of the All manifested in the image of the Father of whom they had been thinking when they gave glory and prayed for help. This one was called the Son of His Will and of the Good Pleasure of the All. It is the knowledge of the Father who wished to become known. It is also described as holding authority vested in Him from the beginning and the power needed to execute it. [Tripartite Tractate, verses 87 and 88] The Aeons not only produced a singular fruit reflecting the Father, but that fruit also reflected their own individual countenances and aspects from their positions in the hierarchy of the Fullness. In this manner, they went forth in a form that consisted of many forms, so that the one whom they were going to help should see those to whom he had prayed for help as well as the one who brought it to him. [verse 87] Those redeemed by the light were made whole and complete. Those who were now enlightened felt the power of the Redeemer inside themselves, being together with Him, sharing His suffering, relieving Him little by little, making Him grow, raising Him up. [verse 90] [The Redeemed] were produced as an army for Him, as for a king, in which those who belong to this thought share the command and are united in agreement. He also sowed in him, invisibly, a word designed for understanding, and gave him the power to detach and dispel from himself those who were disobedient to him. Those of the imitation, on the other hand, were unprepared for the light, for they had come into being out of darkness and could not comprehend it. To them the light came as a brief terrifying flash, a leap and a blow, that drove them deeper into the shadows of the abyss. To them this utter darkness was home. [Tripartite Tractate, verse 89] The Aeon, Logos, who had Fallen and then abandoned the deficiency he had created, decided to pray that the fixed economy might attain all those who had gone forth from him, including those still clinging to the imitation. In this manner Logos was also made right from the Fall, as those of the deficiency attained the economy of the ALL, and the Second Order of Powers united with the knowledge that had been given them. [verse 91] So those of the deficiency were found worthy of becoming rulers over the unspeakable darkness as their own property and the lot that fell to them. This is what he granted them, so that they too might become useful for the economy that was to be, and of which they were oblivious. And so it came to pass that every grace and food that was contemplated through prayer and the ALL came to be. For the word greatly increased mutual cooperation and expectant hope, and they experienced happiness, deep rest, and undefiled pleasures to the extent each was able to embrace them. [verse 92] Now what this is saying in Simple Explanation terms is that the fruit of the ALL and the Father becomes another fractal iteration of the ethereal Consciousness. The Christ Principle is a perfect fractal iteration of the Father's Consciousness that takes into account the new information arising from the goings-on in our bounded space. The Father, the Son, and the Aeons of the Fullness have just amended the primary algorithm of this universe to include up-to-date data specific to each individual unit of consciousness in our space-time continuum. This new code represents patches to the fragmentary error code of the deficiency in order to end the stalemate and re-establish harmony and proper functioning of the economy. When the Tripartite Tractate speaks of “forms consisting of many forms,” this refers to the nested fractal hierarchies that make up all of the life in of our universe. Our Universal Unit of Consciousness is continually pouring in information, values, love, and coherence. The Christ came into the world to redeem all of creation through His body and His blood, literally, because His body and His blood instantiate the entirely perfect Fullness of the All. The cross bridges Fullness to Earth, neighbor to neighbor. Salvation comes not only to those of us on Earth, but also to the Fullness above, and to Logos in particular, the Aeon whose Fall brought creation into existence. The face of the revealed Christ, quote, possessed the Word of the Son together with His essence, His power, and His form. He was the one He desired and delighted in. He was the one who had been prayed for in love. This Aeon was light and a desire to set aright, an openness for instruction and an eye designed for vision, qualities that it had from those above. Moreover, it was wisdom for His thought against the ones who were placed lower in the economy, a word for speech and other perfecting things of this kind. Those who are redeemed by the Christ are unshackled from the chains that bind the material and psychical orders to this world, so much so, in fact, that they form a new Third Order of Powers, the spiritual ones. The redeemed are also known as the Assembly of Salvation, the Bride, the Church, and the Elect, or the Election. [Tripartite Tractate, verse 93 and 94] The Tripartite Tractate mentions the name of Jesus only a couple of times, and the Savior and the Christ many more times than that. And, of course, the entire book begins with long discourses concerning the nature of the Father and the Son. Here is what it says about Jesus at this point in the story. Because the seed of the promise about Jesus Christ had been deposited, whose revelation and unification we have ministered to, this promise now enabled instruction and a return to that which they had been from the beginning, that of which they possessed a drop inciting them to return to it, which is what is called redemption. And that means to be released from captivity and to obtain freedom. The captivity is of those who were slaves of ignorance, which reigned in its own territories. [verse 117] So the Gnostic Gospel claims that we humans, and all of creation, are all children, or fruit, of the spiritual realm of the Fullness, redeemed by the body and the blood of Christ in the form of a drop of remembrance, a seed of the promise that now enabled instruction and a return to that which we had been from the beginning. Humans were endowed with reason so they could remember their true inheritance and repent of their tenacious claim to material life. This redemption comes easier to some than to others. The Tripartite describes this as humanity coming to exist as three different types with regard to its essence: a spiritual type, a psychological type, and a material type, reproducing the pattern of the three kinds of disposition of the Word from which sprung the material, the psychological, and spiritual beings. The spiritual kind of human is like light from light and like spirit from spirit. It received knowledge straight away from the revelation. When he remembered that which is superior and prayed for salvation, he has salvation without any uncertainty. And these are the prophets, the evangelists, the teachers of the word, whose job it is to help their brothers and sisters to remember the Father above. The psychological kind, however, being light from fire, they tarried before recognizing the one who had appeared to it, and still more before rushing to him in faith. This type is content to have a pledge of assurance of things to come. They’re content to have a promise of a future heaven. Those who rid themselves of the lust for domination that was given to them temporarily and for short periods, who give glory and abandon their rage, will be recompensed for their humility by being allowed to endure indefinitely. [verses 118 and 119] These are most of us folks who feel we’re doing just fine, leading a mostly moral and comparatively upright life, good family people, good citizens, realizing nobody’s perfect, we try to be helpful to neighbors. The Tripartite Tractate goes on to say that The material kind, however, is alien in every respect. It is like darkness that avoids the shining light because it is dissolved by its manifestation, for it did not accept his coming, and is even filled with hatred against the Lord because he revealed himself. They are those who arrogantly pride themselves in their vainglorious lust, who love temporary glory, who are oblivious to the fact that the power they have has been entrusted to them only for a limited time and period, and for that reason have not acknowledged that the Son of God is the Lord of the All and the Savior, and who have failed to rid themselves either of their fury or their way of imitating those who are evil. They will receive judgment for their ignorance and their senselessness, and that judgment is suffering. [verses 120 and 121] I would describe these material people as proud atheists with no fear of God because they reject sober contemplation of God. Others may proudly call themselves scientists, still others academics. Some may be politicians, industrialists, tech giants, entertainers, or philandering priests. They are successful materialists who have no inclination to replace their ego with God. They mock believers, believing themselves superior to those poor deluded fools. Through Christ and the Third Order Powers, restoration came to the deficiency below. Christ’s incarnation in the body of Jesus and the spilling of his blood onto the earth brought the ALL and the Aeons of the Fullness face to face with the material agony of life, suffering, and death. The final restoration, however, will take place after the ALL is manifested in him who is the Son, the one who is the redemption, who is the road toward the incomprehensible Father, who is the return to the preexistent, and after the members of the ALL have been manifested in him who is truly the inconceivable, ineffable, invisible, and ungraspable one, so that the ALL obtains its redemption. [verses 123-124] The most accurate interpretation of these verses is that the angels were literally inside the body of Jesus, forming a community in him, living and dying with him. Indeed, all of our karyotic cells work as an integrated community inside each of us, devoted to taking care of the needs of our bodies, and we are fractals of the ALL. As for the true baptism into which the members of the ALL descend, and where they come into being, there is no other baptism except the one, and that is the redemption, which takes place in God the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit, after confession of faith has been made in those names, and after one has believed that the things one has been told are real. [Tripartite Tractate, verse 127] Where we Gnostics differ from conventional modern Christianity is that you will have the opportunity to repent and be redeemed during your judgment period, your life review, after this physical body passes away. For then you will come face to face with the truth of it all and there will be no denying it. But until then, until and unless one repents and acknowledges our ethereal origins and ultimate return, there will be suffering brought about by our own ignorance. The end goal of redemption is return to the Father’s abode, that Paradise initially dreamed by the Fullness, where there is no death, no disease, no disappointment, and no deficiencies, that paradise where Christ is King and peace reigns supreme, and there is only cooperation, fellowship, and true love. In paradise there is nothing but life, and so all the grass is always green, the flowers blossom endlessly, and every soul that has ever lived lives happily with their family and their friends. Even those who are brought forth from the desire of lust for domination, having inside themselves the seed that is the lust for domination, they will receive the recompense of good things if they have worked together with those who are predisposed toward good things, and provided they decide to do so deliberately, and are willing to abandon their vain love of temporary glory so as to do the command of the Lord of glory, and instead of that small temporary honor they will inherit the eternal kingdom. [verse 131] And in my opinion, this is like elected officials whose lust for dominion gets them elected into office, yet they work not just to keep themselves reelected and in power, but they're actually working toward the good of the ALL. So you can have a combination of domination and lust for power and yet work in conjunction with those who are redeemed and those who want only the good for the ALL. That's the way Congress ought to work. As for those of the imitation who embrace the darkness and deny the light, even they will obtain direct vision, so they will no longer have to believe only on account of a small word produced by a voice that this is how things are. For the restoration back to that which was is a single restoration. Even if some are exalted because of this economy, having been set up as causes for the things that happened, unfolding numerous physical forces and taking pleasure in them, they, angels as well as humans, will obtain the kingdom, the confirmation, and the salvation. These too will be provided with dwelling places where they will dwell eternally after they have renounced the downward attraction of deficiency, and the power of the Fullness has pulled them upward on account of the great generosity and the sweetness of the pre-existent Aeon. [verse 133] The only forms banished to the outer darkness are those attributes of the deficiency that did not exist from the beginning, the shadows and phantoms of the imitation that bring nothing but death and destruction. These are shadows of the Aeons, so when the light comes, the light dispels the shadows and they vanish. And there you have the completion of Gnostic cosmology. Tell me what you think. Let's start a conversation. Onward and upward, and God bless us all.

Hello and welcome back to Gnostic Insights and the Gnostic Reformation on Substack. Yesterday, my Hindi tech services guy asked me whether or not Gnosis is Christian. It seems like it should be a simple question. Is Gnosticism Christian? I explained to him that I certainly think that Christian Gnosticism is Christian, fully. And in fact, I believe it’s true Christianity—that Jesus was Gnostic, that John the Baptist was Gnostic. But what does that mean? Most of the Christians, pretty much all of the Christians, completely reject Gnosticism as evil, as misleading, as demonic. So that would put me in the camp of being a false teacher or a false witness, which saddens me greatly because I love Jesus. I’ve been a follower of Jesus for 70 years. And I believe that when Jesus said, I and my Father are one, if you have seen me, you have seen my Father, that Jesus was speaking about what we call the Gnostic God, the God Above All Gods, the Father in heaven, the preexistent primordial form, the one consciousness that did beget the only begotten Son. I explained to my Hindi friend that in Hinduism, many gods are accepted. In India, people pray and follow many different gods, and yet they are all considered Hindu because they are honoring and treasuring the Godhead. I don’t pray to many gods. I pray to the Father above, the God Above All Gods, the Father to whom Jesus prayed in the garden. I do not believe in a variety of saviors. I believe in the Christ as the Savior, and that Jesus of Nazareth embodied the Christ. I explained to my Hindi friend that although Christians reject us as being evil, we accept them as being seekers after truth and lovers of God, those who are not hypocritical, that is. Many people sit in Christian churches, and they’re what we would call bench warmers or pew warmers. The point being, you must truly believe in the Father. Jesus believed in the Father. He wanted his followers to believe, to have true knowledge and faith that we come from above, and we are children of the Father, of the one primordial consciousness. Jesus came to remind us of that. He came in human form to speak to us humans, but the Christ is a much greater and larger entity than Jesus alone. The Christ is an ethereal being. The Father is ethereal. The only begotten Son is ethereal. The Aeons of the Fullness of God are all ethereal entities that live above. Jesus was fully human as well as fully God. Just as we are fully human, and we have the potential of fully God inside of us. We’re all born with the life, consciousness, love, remembrance of the Father above and our aeonic parents in the Fullness of God. But we forget once we are sent down here. We were sent down here, according to Christian Gnosticism, for the purpose of reminding the Demiurge, of reminding the Fallen world, this cosmos, this material cosmos, that it didn’t arise from nothing. The Demiurge didn’t spring out of nothing. The Demiurge has forgotten. The Demiurge is known as the amnesiac God, but he is indeed the God of this material world because he put it in order. He took the chaos of the Fall and made it orderly, put the laws of chemistry and the laws of physics, the laws of astronomy, mathematics and the mathematical constants upon this otherwise chaotic material universe that was blasted out of the Fall. In physics, we call it the Big Bang or the origin. The Demiurge is the architect of this cosmos, of this material plane, of this apparently material world that we live in. And do you know what it is, this material world? It’s a copy. It’s an imitation. It’s a deficient imitation of Paradise. The Aeons of the Fullness of God, up above, sit and dream together of this beautiful paradisical world, this Eden. This beautiful, beautiful creation is the dream of the Aeons of the Fullness of God. It comes from upstream from them. It comes from the Totalities of the ALL. It comes from the Son, the only begotten Son, who was the Monad, the One, that represents an otherwise illimitable and unimaginably huge and great and powerful consciousness. We are their derivative. We are fractals of that consciousness. We’re downstream from the Father. We’re downstream from the Son, who is the face of the Father, the presenting face, the bucket dipped into the sea, containing all of its attributes, all of its knowledge and life and free will and creativity and plans. And the Son broke out all of his variables. He indexed every thought that the Father had. And this became the hierarchical structure that is called the Fullness of God, the Hierarchy of the Fullness, the pleroma of the Fullness of God. That is the everything of the Fullness of God—everything broken out and itemized. And then it was one particular Aeon that decided to launch itself back up and reunite with the Father. But it couldn’t, because the Father is far too great and powerful for one single derivative to be able to fully embrace it. And had it actually come into full contact with the Father, it would have been annihilated. In Gnostic Christianity, derived from the book called the Tripartite Tractate of the Nag Hammadi books, this Aeon that launched itself out is known as Logos. In other forms of Gnosticism, the Aeon that launched itself is known as Sophia. It really doesn’t matter. Sophia means wisdom. Sophia represented the highest wisdom of the Fullness of God. Logos means knowledge, reason. Logos represented the highest knowledge and the highest reasoning of the Fullness of God. In truth, they basically represent the same concept. And this singleton wanted to reunite with the Father all on its own, but it couldn’t. And so it fell. And this is the Fall. In Christianity, the Fall has been pushed way downstream onto the human level. It is said that the humans ruined Paradise. We ruined Eden–one decision of the woman tempting the man to eat of the apple of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil caused the Fall. But no, in Gnosticism, we say that the Fall happened upstream from us; ruining Paradise is way above our pay grade. It’s not humanly possible. We’re victims of the Fall. We’re not the creators of the Fall. We are not born as evil. We are born as fruit of the Fullness of God. We are the Second Order Powers fruited down here into this material creation. We’re melded onto this material creation, because the very molecules and atoms and particles that make up our physical body—and it’s not just us humans, it’s everything that’s live from the cellular level on up and all creatures, whether they be bacteria, plants, birds, mammals, humans, we’re all fruit of the Fullness of God, meaning we were dreamed up above—we're part of the dream of Paradise. The dream of Paradise is fully populated. All of the plants and animals and creatures and everything up there pre-exists. That is what would be called intelligent design. So when we are fruited down here, and we begin this life as an organism here in this material world, we are welded onto the material, the particles, the atoms, the molecules. And so we grow up with the perfection of the remembrance of Paradise and the remembrance of the Aeons above and the Fullness of God. But the Fall represents ignorance. The chaos of the Fall—the Demiurge, which is the God of the Fall, doesn’t remember the world above, doesn’t remember the ethereal plane. The Demiurge thinks that when it woke up, it must have created everything. And so it went about ordering the chaos into its recollection of Paradise. But it doesn’t realize it’s a recollection. It thinks it’s creating. It thinks that it’s the creator, the inventor of this world. But really, it’s just a vague recollection of Paradise. And the god of this world—and here’s a heresy, by the way—whom the Bible acknowledges to be Jehovah, or Yahweh, the God of the Jews, the God of the Christians—that is the Demiurge. But Jesus did not acknowledge Jehovah as the Father. When Jesus spoke of the Father, he was talking about the God Above All Gods—God way upstream there before the Fall. The god down here is the god of this world. The god of this world is not Satan. The god of this world is the Fallen god, the Demiurge, that doesn’t realize that it’s from the Fall, doesn’t realize where it came from. That’s the simplest rendition of this Gnostic Christianity. It’s the same Christ that is then sent down into this material cosmos, in the body of the Jesus of Nazareth, who came down with the full knowledge of the Father in the Fullness of God, came down with full memory, free will, consciousness, love, unlimited love. And Jesus loves us all. Christ loves all living things. Christ came to redeem us all, to remind us that we come from above. That’s what Christ came to do, to remind of the love of the Father above, that we are not born of the god of this world. We are born of the God Above All Gods on the ethereal plane. And we are born with the full remembrance of the Fullness of God within us. And Jesus came with the army of Christ, which is called the Third Order of Powers. And this army of Christ is armed with all of the love, and remembrance, and consciousness, and free will, and all of the virtues fully remembered, fully expressed. They all came down along with the Christ. And there is one of these Third Order Powers for every one of us Second Order Powers. You have a soldier of the army of Christ assigned to you who came with not only the face of the Son, the face of the Christ, the full embodiment of the Fullness of God, but it came with your face. So that when you pray for salvation, when you pray for redemption—Oh dear God, I don’t know if I can take this anymore. This world is too tragic. It’s too terrible. It’s too full of pain, and suffering, and death, and illness. Please, Lord, rescue me—that prayer goes to the Third Order of Power assigned to you—your guardian angel, if you will. And it’s part of the body of Christ. It is a Third Order of Power that is assigned to you, and you alone. And that is how it is that when you pray for redemption, you can be redeemed instantly. It’s already been done. The Christ has already brought all the Third Order Powers down, one for every one of us. And when you open yourself up, when you admit that you long for the Father above, you long to be reunited with the Fullness of God, you will instantly be reunited with the Fullness of God. That doesn’t mean you’re going to drop dead and be sucked up to heaven. It means that now you have all the remembrance, all the power, all the consciousness, and all of the free will embodied by Jesus. You are like Jesus, at least for that moment you have accepted your Third Order of Powers to take control of your soul. You’re not giving up power. You’re taking away power from the Demiurge. You’ve already given up your power. You’re being pulled this way and that, pulled down and backwards by the Demiurge and the archons. They’re taking your energy. They’re sucking your soul downward and backward. That’s how they maintain their power. That’s how they maintain their control. But true freedom belongs above. True freedom only comes from above. And that’s why we have to align our prayers and align our sights upward. So, I explained all this yesterday to my Hindi friend, who is my tech services guy, and we’re often on the phone together for long periods of time as he’s cleaning the hard drives or downloading updates and so forth. And he totally agreed with what I was saying, because Hinduism is like that. It accepts everyone’s beliefs about God. In Hinduism, people don’t go to hell because they don’t agree with you. People create hell because they have cut themselves off from the goodness of God. In that, we are very much aligned in our belief systems. All we have to know is that the path to the Father above is straight up. It’s just straight up, like a beam of light. It’s a beam of truth that shines down upon us. Just move that ego off of the throne. Move desire for personal power and recognition off of the throne of your embodiment, of your body, of yourself, and allow the Christ to enter your soul. You will immediately be transformed. You will be immediately put in alignment with the Fullness of God. And then you will see for yourself. This is a first-person experience. It doesn’t have to come from someone else. You do not have to perform arcane rituals. You only need to bump your ego off of the throne and pray to God Above All Gods for Christ to enter and guide you. Let’s start there and see if we can’t do that. Please write back to me. Tell me about your experience. Someone please try this, what I’m recommending today. Just move your ego aside for a moment. Pray to the Father for the Christ to enter you, to remind you of the God Above All Gods, to remind you of truth, simplicity, righteousness, the virtues, our aeonic inheritance. Just ask it to remind you, and you will be reminded because we’re all born with this remembrance. Give it a try. Let me know how it goes. Until next week, God bless us all and onward and upward. We Second Order Powers are the children of the Aeons of the Fullness, who are themselves the Totality of the Son. The Third Order Powers are the army of the Christ, who represent all of the Powers of the ethereal plane, individually and collectively working for our redemption.

Zaitgeist #21 S filozofem Davidem Černým o nástupu robotů, který může proměnit lidskou společnost na různých úrovních k nepoznání. Moderuje Štěpán Sedláček.S kolegou Martinem Uhlířem jsem v uplynulých týdnech přečetli spoustu textů o robotice a také mluvili s řadou expertů a expertek. Výsledkem je mimo jiné náš společný článek Až vás robot obejme – Co vzejde ze spojení umělé inteligence a polidštěných strojů. Jak se ukazuje, osud humanoidních robotů po případném vyřešení technologických a bezpečnostních otázek také bude do značné míry záviset na otevřeností lidí k této technologii. A v tomto ohledu panují mezi zeměmi nemalé rozdíly.Švédská společnost Hexagon (její robotická divize vyvinula humanoida na kolečkách s názvem AEON, kterého aktuálně testuje ve výrobě automobilka BMW) loni na podzim zjišťovala postoje k robotům mezi osmnácti tisíci lidmi v devíti státech. Výsledek potvrzuje, že v mnoha asijských stárnoucích populacích se roboti dočkají vřelejšího přijetí než v Evropě nebo USA. Vůbec největší "robofóbie" v rámci vybraných zemí přitom panuje ve Velké Británii. V kolébce první průmyslové revoluce (a ludditů) se robotů obává 52 procent lidí. Naopak nejmenší obavy mají lidé v Jižní Koreji (29%) a Japonsku (35%). Pocity nadšení z budoucnosti po boku robotů pak sdílí  81 procent oslovených lidí v Číně, 78% v Indii a 75% Brazílii v kontrastu k 45% ve Švýcarsku a Německu.Souvisí to mimo jiné se strachem z neznámého. Zatímco zhruba tři čtvrtiny lidí v Číně už má s touto technologií nějakou zkušenost a ráda by měla robota na pracovišti za kolegu, pouze necelá třetina oslovených respondentů v Británii někdy v životě přišla s robotem do kontaktu. Mezi nejskloňovanější obavy pak patří to, že někdo roboty hackne nebo, že se splaší a napáchají škody. Rozšířený je také strach z toho, že připraví lidi o práci. Průzkum německé společnosti United Robotics z roku 2024 ukázal, že většina z bezmála osmi tisíc oslovených respondentů v USA, Kanadě, Francii, Německu a Itálii se tehdy obávala, že robot může lidi nahradit nejen v práci ale také v sociálních interakcích. Ze zmíněných zemích G7 by roboty ve školách a školkách většina oslovených uvítala pouze v USA (51%).Jak je na roboty připravena česká společnost přibližuje v Zeitgeistu David Černý z Akademie věd ČR ve světle průzkumu, který vyhodnocoval ve spolupráci se socioložkou Lucii Vidovićovou z Masarykovy univerzity. Také přibližuje možné zásadní změny, které může potenciální nástup stamilionů mechanických humanoidů ve společnostech vyvolat i recepty, které filozofové promýšlejí.Až vás robot obejmehttps://www.respekt.cz/tydenik/2026/21/az-vas-robot-obejme

Today's blockchain and crypto news Bitcoin is up 1% at $77,245.  Ethereum is up 1% at $2,137.  BNB is up slightly at $641 Capital B buys BTC Standard Charter raises outlook. AEON raises $8 million in a pre-seed round Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

On episode 257, we welcome Christian B. Miller to discuss the growing honesty crises shaping modern society, the philosophical and psychological roots of dishonesty and self-deception, the impact of AI and deepfakes on our ability to trust reality, the rise of AI use and academic integrity concerns in education, how social media rewards performance over authenticity, the spread of misinformation and political polarization online, whether technology is scaling deception faster than virtue can adapt, the importance of preserving honesty as a foundational human virtue, and what still gives Christian hope for humanity's relationship with truth in an increasingly dishonest world.  Christian B. Miller is the A. C. Reid Professor of Philosophy at Wake Forest University. He is the author of over 130 articles as well as Moral Psychology (2021) and four books with Oxford University Press, Moral Character: An Empirical Theory (2013), Character and Moral Psychology (2014), The Character Gap: How Good Are We? (2017), and Honesty: The Philosophy and Psychology of a Neglected Virtue (2021). He is a contributor for Forbes, and his writings have appeared in The New York Times, Wall Street Journal, Dallas Morning News, Slate, The Conversation, Newsweek, Aeon, and Christianity Today. His new book, available May 19, 2026, is called The Honesty Crisis: Preserving Our Most Treasured Virtue in an Increasingly Dishonest World. | Christian Miller | ► Website | https://www.christianbmiller.com ► Twitter | https://twitter.com/CharacterGap ► Instagram | https://www.instagram.com/charactergap ► Facebook | https://www.facebook.com/CharacterGap ► The Honesty Crisis Book | https://amzn.to/4uSp1z1 Where you can find us: | Seize The Moment Podcast | ► Facebook | https://www.facebook.com/SeizeTheMomentPodcast ► Twitter | https://twitter.com/seize_podcast  ► Instagram | https://www.instagram.com/seizethemomentpodcast ► TikTok | https://www.tiktok.com/@seizethemomentpodcast  

Welcome back! This week we continue from last week's extension with Colin Wilson's The Occult, and his interesting perspective on what these heightened states are, how they are achieved and maintained, as well as some notable characters associated with the topic. We also question why this area of research is so rife with charlatans and fakes? As always, make of this what you will, but Wilson really makes a great case for all of it. Welcome to your Plus+ Extension, and thank you for joining us on Plus+! This is a weird, wild realm we have here, riddled with strange happenings in the sky. High strangeness is intimately interwoven with everyday-ness. Today, we examine a smattering of seemingly unconnected events, accounts, and perspectives of some of the most bizarre encounters by some day-to-day dwelling, normal folks just living out their lives and then, suddenly…Whammmy, they are visited by the freaky, and it woos them into further investigation. The Occult: A History Aleister Crowley and the Aeon of Horus: History. Magick. Psychedelia. Ufology The Temple of High Witchcraft: Ceremonies, Spheres and The Witches' Qabalah Éliphas LéviPlus+ ExtensionThe extension of the show is EXCLUSIVE to Plus+ Members. To join. click HERE. A small compilation of oddly shaped UFOs The Varied Shapes of UFOs: A Review of Reported Phenomena The What's What of UFOs: The Five Most Common Shapes Silver Screen Saucers: Sorting Fact from Fantasy in Hollywood's UFO Movies The 1973 UFO Chronology - A World-Wide Wave LinksLinks Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

The most popular, and understandable, image of the far right today usually involves people dressed in black, shouting Nazi slogans or erupting into violence at football matches across Europe. But new research suggests many youths drawn to the extremes are looking for something more basic – a sense of belonging. Some have co-opted very traditional religion, while others try to make a religion out of their political ideology. GUEST:Dr Agnieszka Pasieka of University of Montreal wrote about the “Dreams of the Far Right” for Aeon magazine. She's also the author of Living Right: Far-Right Youth Activists in Contemporary Europe. 

New research suggests many far right youths drawn to the extremes are looking for something more basic – a sense of belonging. Some have co-opted very traditional religion, while others try to make a religion out of their political ideology. GUESTS:Dr Agnieszka Pasieka of University of Montreal wrote about the “Dreams of the Far Right” for Aeon magazine. She's also the author of Living Right: Far-Right Youth Activists in Contemporary Europe. 

Send us Fan MailMy guest today is Maryka Biaggio, author of Marjory and Me, listed in the Spiritualism category on Art In Fiction. View the video on YouTube: https://youtu.be/xK3aC6WBKr8How Maryka discovered the true story of Margery Crandon, Boston socialite, celebrated medium, and the woman who took on Harry Houdini.The bold structural choice to narrate Margery's story through Walter, Margery's dead brother.How Walter's folksy voice arrived as a moment of pure creative magic, and why Maryka describes writing as 90% struggle and 10% magic.The 1920s spiritualism craze: how the Great War and 1919 flu epidemic left grieving families desperate to contact the dead.Maryka's deliberate choice to keep the central question (is Walter real or a ruse?) permanently ambiguous.The challenges of writing real figures including Houdini, Arthur Conan Doyle, and WB Yeats while staying true to their documented beliefs.Houdini's obsessive crusade against spiritualism, including Congressional hearings so raucous the police had to be called in.How Maryka's background as a clinical psychologist informs her deeply individual character development.Maryka's research toolkit: authoritative nonfiction, Aeon timeline software, Newspapers.com, and period novels.Reading from the opening of Margery and Me.One thing Maryka learned from writing Margery and Me.Her writing process and advice about researching.Maryka's next novel, co-written with Vanitha Sankaram, and inspired by Carl Orff's Carmina Burana and subversive medieval poetry.Read more about Maryka Biaggio: https://marykabiaggio.com/Are you enjoying The Art In Fiction Podcast? Consider giving us a small donation so we can continue bringing you interviews with your favorite arts-inspired novelists.  Click this link to donate: https://ko-fi.com/artinfiction.Also, check out Art In Fiction at https://www.artinfiction.com and explore 2300+ novels inspired by the arts in 11 categories: Architecture, Dance, Decorative Arts, Film, Literature, Music, Textile Arts, Theater, Visual Arts, & Other.Want to learn more about Carol Cram, the host of The Art In Fiction Podcast? She's the author of several award-winning novels, including The Towers of Tuscany, A Woman of Note, The Muse of Fire, and The Choir. Find out more on her website....

Let's talk about pleromas. Pleroma is a common word in gnostic scriptures, and it has a particular meaning that only relates to Gnosticism. Today, I'd like to take another look at pleromas because they describe the flow of consciousness from the origin and tell us where we all came from, where we are, and where we will wind up at the end of days. I know that when I run through these various pleromas, people can get confused because it all sounds so complicated. But believe me, it isn't complicated. All you really need to know is that we come from the Father and will return to the Father. That is the essential message of gnosis. What do we mean by the Father? The Father is the originating consciousness we all share. You could go with that and spend the rest of your life contemplating nothing more than its meaning and consequences. All of this detail I'm about to share with you is only an explanation meant to help you to understand the nature of the Father and then how that fundamental consciousness is packaged and distributed to the point that we can be sitting here today thinking about it. You see, the originating Father of us all is not simply empty awareness. The Father is not the null void. The Father consists of recognizable characteristics, with love being the foremost character of the Father. This love implies belonging. This love implies virtues like kindness and caring, truthfulness and fidelity, and a host of other virtues. These characteristics flow in an unending stream from the originating consciousness into every living receptacle of life, from the aeons and the angels down to the creatures that populate the cosmos. And each one of us who receives this gift of life, love, and consciousness also receives the gnosis of the One Who Gives and our relationship and responsibilities here within the structure of creation. Pleroma is a Greek word for “all that which is contained within a body or organization.” The Pleroma called the Fullness of God is the one we most often refer to here at Gnostic Insights. The Pleroma of the Fullness of God equals the sum total of all the individual characteristics and powers of the originating consciousness of the Father as manifested in the monad called the Son. Here is how the Pleroma of the Fullness is described in the Tripartite Tractate: “Each one of the aeons is a name, , each of the properties and powers of the Father, since he exists in many names, which are intermingled and harmonious with one another.  It is possible to speak of him because of the wealth of speech, just as the Father is a single name, because he is a unity, yet is innumerable in his properties and names…” The Totalities of the ALL This first differentiation of the properties contained in the Son is known as the ALL or the Totalities. I picture the Pleroma of the ALL as a central star with rays going out in all directions, because the ALL is described as existing without personal identity within the single body and will of the Son. It is by giving glory to the Father that the Totalities of the ALL become self-aware and are able to name themselves and sort themselves into what is called the hierarchy of the Fullness of God. “… the aeon of the Truth, since it is a unity and multiplicity, receives honor in the small and the great names according to the power of each to grasp it – by way of analogy – like a spring which is what it is, yet flows into streams and lakes and canals and branches, or like a root spread out beneath trees and branches with its fruit, or like a human body, which is partitioned in an indivisible way into members of members, primary members and secondary, great and small.” The Hierarchy of the Fullness of God, Home of the Aeons This passage tells us that the aeon of the Truth—which is another word for the Fullness, or Pleroma, of God goes forth by way of fractal branching. You may review the concept of fractals by looking back to the Gnostic Insights episode called, “A Fractal Model of Human Nature,” posted May 18, 2021. which you can find at gnostic insights dot com under the tab, “Complete Episodes Library.” I'm also linking it in the transcript of this episode. The next pleroma is contained within the Aeon called Logos. Logos was the final Aeon produced when the entire Fullness gave glory to the Father all together. The Aeon Logos contains fractal copies of all of the other Aeons. The entirety of the  Aeons of the Fullness exist as fractal iterations within the Pleroma of the Aeon known as Logos. The Tripartite Tractate describes Logos this way: “This aeon was among those to whom was given wisdom, so that he could become pre-existent in each one's thought. By that which he wills, will they be produced. Therefore, he received a wise nature in order to examine the hidden basis, since he is a wise fruit; for, the free will which was begotten with the Totalities was a cause for this one, such as to make him do what he desired, with no one to restrain him.” Logos crowns the Fullness with fractal copies of all the other Aeons My illustration for the Pleroma of Logos shows Logos as a miniature copy of the Pleroma of the Fullness of God, sitting at the top of the Fullness. The Tripartite Tractate says: “This aeon was last to have brought forth by mutual assistance, and he was small in magnitude. And before he begot anything else for the glory of the will and in agreement with the Totalities, he acted, magnanimously, from an abundant love, and set out toward that which surrounds the perfect glory…” Logos, being full and complete, carried the all of the characteristics of the Father and Son and Fullness and brought the entire glorious package of consciousness, love, free will, and gnosis along within itself on a journey, abandoning its position and place within the Fullness. This solo effort, this presumptuous thought, resulted in a Fall away from harmony with the other Aeons and created a new pleroma of shadows and ignorance. Here at Gnostic Insights I have identified the character that is known as the Demiurge in Gnosticism to be the wayward Ego of Logos, propelled away from its proper position and place in the Fullness. When Logos struck out on his own, his Ego took control and it was his Ego that caused the Fall into ignorance. The Self at the center of the Pleroma of Logos lost its authority and chaos ruled. “The Logos himself caused it to happen, being complete and unitary, for the glory of the Father, whom he desired, and (he did so) being content with it, but those whom he wished to take hold of firmly he begot in shadows and copies and likenesses. For, he was not able to bear the sight of the light, but he looked into the depth and he doubted. Out of this there was a division – he became deeply troubled – and a turning away because of his self-doubt and division, forgetfulness and ignorance of himself and which is.” The Father drew a Boundary around the fallen Ego of Logos to contain the chaos of the deficiency. The Pleroma of the Demiurge is the pleroma of the deficiency. The Pleroma of the Demiurge consists of the inversions of the Pleroma of Logos, broken out of the hierarchical pattern and scattered willy-nilly throughout the cosmos. The Pleroma of the Demiurge is not an orderly hierarchical stack, but rather a chaotic jumble of dark shadows. “Like the Pleromas are the things which came into being from the arrogant thought, which are their (the Pleromas') likenesses, copies, shadows, and phantasms, lacking reason and the light, these which belong to the vain thought, since they are not products of anything. Therefore, their end will be like their beginning: from that which did not exist (they are) to return once again to that which will not be…” “They thought of themselves that they are beings existing by themselves and are without a source, since they do not see anything else existing before them. Therefore, they lived in disobedience and acts of rebellion, without having humbled themselves before the one because of whom they came into being. They wanted to command one another, overcoming one another in their vain ambition, while the glory which they possess contains a cause of the system which was to be.” These unruly shadows, these inversions of the glory of the Aeons, still possessed a likeness of the Aeons of which they were imitations. And, it is that reflection of glory that became the Economy of our apparently material universe. “They are likenesses of the things which are exalted. They were brought to a lust for power in each one of them, according to the greatness of the name of which each is a shadow, each one imagining that it is superior to his fellows.” Logos was horrified by what he had produced because the imitations would not recognize his authority. Logos abandoned the deficiency below and quickly returned to the Pleroma of the Fullness. “Him who came to be in the defect” is the name we call the Demiurge and it is the authority that rules the defect. Those who came forth from him in an imaginary way are the archons of the deficiency as well as the inert material world. The reason we focus so much on the Aeons of the Fullness and Logos in particular here at Gnostic Insights is because the Pleroma of any living creature is the sum total of the Pleroma of the Demiurge—our material or hylic part that makes up our physical bodies—plus the Pleroma of Logos after his return to the Fullness, when he prayed alongside the Aeons to bring life to the deficiency he had caused. Since we Second Order Powers are fractal iterations of this Logos, newly restored to the Fullness, the path of remembrance is exactly the same for us as it was for Logos. We fractally replicate the Powers from which we were created. The new pleroma of Logos prays alongside the Fullness to bring life, love, and consciousness into the deficiency. Together they fruit a 2nd Order of Powers with which to populate the cosmos. This Pleroma of ours is called the Second Order of Powers, and we proceed out of the Pleroma of Logos. We Second Order Powers were created through the Aeons of the original Fullness giving glory to the Father alongside Logos. Together, they prayed with an intention to send life into the fallen world below. We came forth as fruit from the Pleroma of Logos, and the Pleroma of Logos was itself a fractal of the Fullness. We are called Second Order Powers to distinguish us from the First Order Powers—the Aeons of the Fullness—out of which we are fractal iterations, twice removed. We are described this way in the Tripartite Tractate: “The beings of the thought which is outside are humble; they preserve the representation of the pleromatic, especially because of the sharing in the names by which they are beautiful.” Which is a very lovely way of saying that we Second Order Powers share the names and faces of the Aeons of the Fullness and, because of that, we are beautiful. Our Second Order nature is good, and “greater than those of the likeness. For those belonging to the likeness also belong to a nature of falsehood.”  Those belonging to the likeness are imitations of the Aeons, but lack their depth, powers, and nature. They are not fractals of the Aeon of Truth. And, while we come from the good thought, we tend to forget our true nature due to the “law of mutual combat” arising from this never-ending war against the imitations of the deficiency. Thus, we have forgotten our true Self and need to remember. The vehicle for our remembrance is Christ and the Third Order Powers within the next pleroma—the Pleroma of Christ. “The order which was his [in other words, the Pleroma of Christ] came into being from him who ran on high and that which brought itself forth from him and from the entire perfection. The one who ran on high [Logos who returned to the realm Above] became for the one who was defective [the Demiurge] an intercessor with the emanation of the aeons which had come into being in accord with the things which exist [again, that would be us Second Order Powers because we are emanations of that which exists Above].” And, because of the fractal nature of creation, the mechanism of redemption of the Demiurge is the same mechanism for our redemption, as well. “When he prayed to them, they consented joyously and willingly, since they were in agreement, and with harmonious consent, to aid the defective one. They gathered together, asking the Father with beneficent intent that there be aid from above, from the Father, for his glory, since the defective one could not become perfect in any other way, unless it was the will of the Pleroma of the Father, which he had drawn to himself, revealed, and given to the defective one. Then from the harmony, in a joyous willingness which had come into being, they brought forth the fruit, which was a begetting from the harmony, a unity, a possession of the Totalities, revealing the countenance of the Father, of whom the aeons thought as they gave glory and prayed for help for their brother with a wish in which the Father counted himself with them. Thus, it was willingly and gladly that they bring forth the fruit.” “Not only did the aeons generate the countenance of the Father to whom they gave praise, which was written previously, but also they generated their own; for the aeons who give glory generated their countenance and their face. They were produced as an army for him, as for a king, since the beings of the thought have a powerful fellowship and an intermingled harmony. They came forth in a multifaceted form, in order that the one to whom help was to be given might see those to whom he had prayed for help. He also sees the one who gave it to him.” So, you see by this passage, the Christ possesses fractals of all of the other Pleromas and Powers, from the Totalities as the undifferentiated ALL; from the Aeons of the Fullness as individual countenances; from the Father Above ALL Gods as His countenance—which is to say, the monad known as the Son; and from the Pleroma of Logos and all of his fractal faces as well as the Demiurge—his ego who fell. The Pleroma of the Christ is the Pleroma of Logos, plus the Pleroma of the Fullness, plus the monad of the Son, all together offering glory to the Father and praying for full salvation and restoration of the ego of Logos—the Demiurge—and we Second Order Powers. This Pleroma of the Christ is called the Third Order of Powers. “And he made manifest the agreement of the revelation of his union with them, which is his beloved Son… the one who is properly called “Savior” and “the Redeemer” and “the Well-Pleasing one” and “the Beloved,” “the one to whom prayers have been offered” and “the Christ” and “the Light of those appointed,” in accordance with the ones from whom he was brought forth, since he has become the names of the positions which were given to him. Yet, what other name may be applied to him except “the Son,” as we previously said, since he is the knowledge of the Father, whom he wanted them to know?” The Third Order Powers constitute the pleroma of the Christ In my illustrations, I picture the Christ as a singular light source that embodies the attributes of the Father and Son. The Pleroma of the Christ is known as the Third Order of Powers. These are not arrayed in a hierarchical stack like the Aeons of the Fullness, but rather as a central star that emanates rays after the pattern of the original ALL or Totalities of the Son, for they have no personal identities and only live to serve the  mission of the Christ. The Tripartite Tractate says, in verses 123 and 124, “The final restoration, however, will take place after the ALL has manifested in him who is the Son, for the redemption began to be given among the humans who were in the flesh with his first-born and his love, the Son coming in the flesh, and the angels who were in Heaven having been found worthy of forming a community, a community in him on earth.” The Pleroma of the Christ on Earth brings with it fractals of everybody in the Pleromas of the Totalities, the Fullness, and Logos. Jesus Christ is the manifestation of the Fullnesses of the God Above All Gods—the Holy Spirit—born into the material body of the Demiurge. “As for the true baptism into which the members of the ALL descend and where they come into being, there is no other baptism except the one, and that is the redemption which takes place in God the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit. After confession of faith has been made in those names and after one has believed that the things one has been told are real,” The end goal of redemption is return to the Father's abode, that Paradise initially dreamed by the Fullnesses, where there is no death, no disease, no disappointment, and no deficiencies. When scriptures say that we will return to the paradise where Christ is king, that refers to our eternal place within the Pleroma of the all-encompassing Christ. Even those who currently align themselves with the Demiurge's lust for power and domination will receive the recompense of good things. Here's what the Tripartite Tractate says about the end days for those who currently deny the Father and the Christ: “as for those of the imitation who embrace the darkness and deny the light, even they will obtain direct vision, so they will no longer have to believe only on account of a small word produced by a voice, that this is how things are, for the restoration back to that which was is a single restoration, even if some are exalted because of this Economy having been set up as causes for the things that happened, unfolding numerous physical forces and taking pleasure in them. They, angels as well as humans, will obtain the kingdom, the confirmation, and the salvation. These, too, will be provided with dwelling places where they will dwell eternally after they have renounced the downward attraction of deficiency, and the power of the Fullness has pulled them upward on account of the great generosity and the sweetness of the pre-existent.” The only forms banished to the outer darkness are those attributes of the deficiency that did not exist from the beginning—the shadows and phantoms of the imitation that bring nothing but death and destruction. These are shadows of the Aeons, so when the light comes, the light dispels the shadows and they vanish. And there you have the completed cycle of Gnostic cosmology. The place Above that we Second Order Powers dimly remember as Paradise and to which we will return, will be within the Pleroma of the Christ. That eternal place is called the Third Economy. The First Economy was the Pleroma of Fullness of God. The Second Economy is a mixed creation of the Pleromas of Logos and his fallen ego—the Demiurge. The Third Economy will be an ongoing Paradise where there is no death or destruction. Where peace reigns supreme and there is only cooperation, fellowship, and true love. In Paradise there is nothing but life, and so the grass is always green, the flowers blossom endlessly, and every soul that has ever lived lives happily with their family, pets, and friends. Well, thank you for being with me on this ride through the entire Gnostic cosmology, focusing on the various pleromas that have constituted this journey. I hope you’re not hopelessly lost. If you are, listen to it again. Read the transcript. I’m sure you’re going to get it. This is the gnosis that we were all born with, and this is the gnosis we will remember. Until next week, God bless us all, and onward and upward! Please enable JavaScript in your browser to complete this form.Name *FirstLastEmail *Stripe Credit Card *Choose your item *Item A - $10.00Item B - $25.00Item C - $50.00Total$0.00Submit

Are you feeling burnt out despite your best efforts to optimize every aspect of your life? It's easy to get caught in the cycle of chasing success, only to find yourself anxious, disconnected, and unfulfilled. Today's guest, Pavel Aeon, shares how he went from achieving business success to feeling deeply unfulfilled, and how he embarked on a profound journey of self-discovery.Pavel spent 60 days in total darkness to reset his mind and spirit, and now teaches high achievers how to achieve balance and live with purpose. He reveals the powerful impact of disconnecting from the chaos of everyday life to find true inner peace. You'll discover the importance of balancing material success with spiritual growth, the need to reset both the mind and body through intentional practices, and how embracing solitude can lead to profound clarity. “There is no more powerful medicine than facing your darkness to redefine your light.” Pavel Aeon Support the show and get 50% off MCT oil with free shipping—just leave us a review on iTunes and Spotify and let us know! https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/live-beyond-the-norms/id1714886566Resources Mentioned in the Episode:Earth 2.0 Skool Community: https://www.skool.com/earth2 About Pavel AeonPavel is a transformation architect and the founder of Earth 2.0, a movement designed to help individuals redefine success and find balance in their lives. With a background in entrepreneurship, Pavel sold his multi-million dollar business and turned his attention to deep spiritual work. Through immersive experiences, he helps high achievers from all walks of life unlock true transformation by focusing on inner peace and personal growth. Pavel is passionate about creating immersive workshops, retreats, and experiences that help people live healthier, happier, and more harmonious lives.Connect with Pavel Aeon:- Website: https://www.upperaeon.com/ - Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/noaaonofficial/  Connect with Chris Burres:- Website: https://www.myvitalc.com/ - Website: http://www.livebeyondthenorms.com/ - Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/chrisburres/ - TikTok: https://www.tiktok.com/@myvitalc - LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/chrisburresDisclaimerThe content shared in this podcast is intended for educational and informational purposes only. It does not constitute medical advice of any kind, nor does it include any specific claims or guarantees. The views expressed are based on personal experiences, research, and individual perspectives, and are meant to inspire and inform listeners on topics related to wellness, lifestyle, and personal development.We strongly encourage all listeners to consult with a qualified professional or licensed expert before making any decisions related to health, finances, or other sensitive areas of life. Thank you for tuning in—and for taking proactive steps toward a more informed, intentional life.

If you enjoy this episode, we're sure you will enjoy more content like this on The Occult Rejects.  In fact, we have curated playlists on occult topics like grimoires, esoteric concepts and phenomena, occult history, analyzing true crime and cults with an occult lens, Para politics, and occultism in music. Whether you enjoy consuming your content visually or via audio, we've got you covered - and it will always be provided free of charge.  So, if you enjoy what we do and want to support our work of providing accessible, free content on various platforms, please consider making a donation to the links provided below.  Thank you and enjoy the episode!Links For The Occult Rejectshttps://linktr.ee/theoccultrejectsOccult Research Institutehttps://www.occultresearchinstitute.org/Cash Apphttps://cash.app/$theoccultrejectsVenmo@TheOccultRejectsBuy Me A Coffeebuymeacoffee.com/TheOccultRejectsAlso want to remind people about the website, if you're into reading we have tons of information by multiple contributors, and we got t-shirts up on the site if you're interested. Fun fact, the art is all based on the eyeball. Now let me introduce the rest of the panel and guests.

A very important topic, and the sequel to my chat with Angie Speaks on her book, Late-Stage Babylon: Navigating the Post-Secular Spiritual Crisis. In an era of deep cultural upheaval, the resurgence of interest in UAPs and non-human technology signals the birth of a new secular mythology where extraterrestrials replace traditional deities. This shift represents a form of secular eschatology, reframing ancient longings for divine intervention and revelation into a scientific quest for contact with higher intelligence. While these flying saucers often function as Jungian mandalas symbolizing a collective desire for psychic wholeness, a modern “materialist capture” threatens to reduce this numinous mystery to cold discussions of propulsion systems and surveillance. Ultimately, we must decide if the alien question is an invitation to spiritual awakening or a tool of the counterfeit spirit used to encourage human submission to vast, inhuman forces. Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

Welcome back to Gnostic Insights and to the Gnostic Reformation on Substack. I’m currently teaching my second round of Gnostic Insights to the Osher Lifelong Learning Institute, also known as OLLI, at Southern Oregon University, and we’re going through step by step this concept of Gnosticism that I share with you here at Gnostic Insights and on the Gnostic Reformation. So I’m going to back up with you and take a deep dive into the scriptures of the Tripartite Tractate that we use as the basis here for the Gnosticism that I share with you. Today we’re going to talk about how the Aeons of the Fullness of God were generated. And the reason we talk about the Aeons so much is because we are downstream from the Aeons. We are representatives of all of the traits of the Aeons—we second-order powers, and we humans in particular, since I am a human talking to other humans here. So everything I say about the Aeons and how they relate to the Father and how they relate to the Son and to each other, we have that nature inside of us as well, because it is a flowing stream of consciousness that begins at the Father, passes through the Son, passes through the totalities and into the Aeons, and then down into us. So let’s review this basic Gnostic wisdom here. The instant the all became self-aware, the all fell out of their unthinking, blissful union as one, and arranged themselves into what’s called the Fullness. “Each one of the Aeons is a name, that is, each of the properties and powers of the Father, since he exists in many names, which are intermingled and harmonious with one another, just as the Father is a single name, because he is a unity, yet is innumerable in his properties and names.” By this point in the Tripartite Tractate, the Son comes to be referred to as the Father, because the Son is the Father of the third glory, that is, the Aeons of the Fullness. We see here that the Son, although a singular monad, is still a unity of many Aeons. The Son becomes knowable through the innumerable properties and names of the Aeons. What does it mean by names? I think that these names are the first appearance of what we would come to call ego. These disparate identities include names like flower, tree, dog, human, even parts of living bodies who themselves are alive, like kidney cells. They’re not names like my name or like Frank or George. They are not those types of identities. These are functional identities. The Aeons then arrange themselves into a hierarchy of, “minds of minds, which are found to be words of words, elders of elders, degrees of degrees, which are exalted above one another. Each one of those who give glory has his place and his exaltation and his dwelling and his rest, which consists of the glory which he brings forth.” Now, the hierarchy of the Fullness prefigures the fractal patterns of our universe. Minds over minds, words over words, superiors over superiors, as Thomason’s translation puts it, refers to the personalities and how they relate to one another. Elders of elders and degrees of degrees refers to the manner by which things are sorted, stacked, and ordered—first, second, third, superior, inferior, and so on. Each with its own place, exaltation, dwelling, and rest reflects the fact that each self-aware entity has its own unique place in the grand scheme, its own personal expression or exaltation, a location different than its neighbors, thus possessing its very own point of view. So it’s not about hierarchies of men the way humans tend to think of it. It’s not about, well—look at the hierarchy of government or the hierarchy of the Catholic church. It’s not about the peons at the bottom, and then you come a little higher into the elders, and then you have the priests, and then you have the cardinals, and bishops, and the pope. That isn’t the kind of hierarchy we’re talking about. It’s the way that our bodies go together, for example. Our cells are smaller than our organs. Our organs are smaller than the organism. They stack upward, and part of the Gnostic gospel is the higher the fewer precept. You hear that a lot in Gnosticism, the higher the fewer. That simply refers to how a hierarchy stacks, like a pyramid. There’s more objects at the bottom and fewer as you go up and up until you culminate in one. So that is what it means to be the hierarchy of the Fullness. The Fullnesses at the bottom are more akin to the cells in our bodies, and then as you go up and up the pyramid, you finally arrive at the organism. The Aeons sorted themselves into the Hierarchy of God “It is he, the Father, who gave root impulses to the Aeons, since there are places on the path which leads toward him, as toward his school of behavior. He has extended to them faith in and prayer to him whom they do not see, and a firm hope in him of whom they do not concede, and a fruitful love which looks toward to that which it does not see, and an acceptable understanding of the eternal mind, and a blessing which is riches and freedom, and a wisdom of the one who desires the glory of the Father for his thought.” The originating Father continually emanates a holy spirit out through the Son that entices its generations to seek out their source. The Tripartite Tractate says, “It is by virtue of his will that the Father, the one who is exalted, is known, that is, by virtue of the spirit which breathes in the Totalities, and it gives them an idea of seeking after the unknown one, just as one is drawn by a pleasant aroma to search for the thing from which the aroma arises, since the aroma of the Father surpasses these ordinary ones, for his sweetness leaves the Aeons in ineffable pleasure, and it gives them their idea of mingling with him, who wants them to know him in a united way, and to assist one another in the spirit which is sown within them.” And remember, all of this applies to us humans as well. This is the way we are to seek the Father, the way we are to relate to each other. It is said that although the Father put an unquenchable thirst to align themselves with the one into the minds of the Fullness, he did not reveal to them the Father’s ineffable nature and the impossibility of reuniting with him and surviving to tell the tale. This was doubtless to keep alive the hope of reunification with the Father as a motive for continually giving glory. Now all of this has been from Tripartite Tractate verse 75. “The Aeons of the Fullness sat in perfect equilibrium in their hierarchy of ranks, stations, and names. They were a congress of one accord,” meaning they agreed on everything and they cooperated together to bring about a single dream of paradise. You could note one difference between the ALL and the Fullness is that while the ALL sings their songs in blissful union, the Fullness sings their songs in perfectly tuned, multi-toned harmony. In addition to their identities, “the Aeons of the Fullness were all given wisdom,” which is the ability to reason with logic and prudence. You see, by the way, they weren’t given emotion, which is the ability to get passionate about things whether or not it’s reasonable or logical. So we are to follow the path of logic and prudence. Prudence means knowing to do the right thing at the right time. “They were given a thirst to seek after the originating consciousness of their creator and a desire to align themselves with the Father’s will through the process of giving glory.” And they were all creative geniuses, able to dream up a fully functioning mental paradise where whatever they willed in the Father’s name happily happened. This dream of paradise is our foretaste of heaven shared by cultures around the world. The hierarchy of the Fullness of God sits as One and dreams of Paradise The generation of the Aeons was not a one-and-done deal. And by the way, generation used in this sense of the word, it’s not generation like I am one generation and my parents were a different generation. It’s not that kind of generation. It means to generate, to create, to emit. The generation of the Aeons was not a one-and-done deal. After their initial emanation out of the ALL, the Aeons continued to generate more and more Aeons through various combinations of Aeons giving glory. The pattern by which these younger Aeons were generated was the same as the manner by which the original Aeons of the Aeons were generated as an exchange of love and admiration passed between the Father and the Fullnesses. The Aeons of the Aeons praised the Father together and together they received the Father’s reflected glory. You see, these Aeons of the Aeons, what we are calling the ALL, did not have self-identity. They were all for one and one for all. You can remember it that way. This exchange of praise from the Aeons and reflected glory from the Father resulted in the generation of new aeonic emanations. As we have already noted, the exchange of admirations and glory between the Father and son was like, “the multitude of some who kiss one another with a good insatiable thought. The kiss being a unity, although it involves many kisses.” And like all fractals, this pattern replicated itself throughout the generations that followed. These kisses first formed the generation of the ALL. Then the ALL, also known as the Totalities of the ALL, procreated, “innumerable Aeons also in an uncountable way. They too beget by the properties and dispositions in which it exists. For these comprise its association, which they form toward one another and toward those who have come forth from them, toward the Son, for whose glory they exist. As a result, just as they were brought forth in glory for the Father, so too, in order to appear perfect, they appeared acting by giving glory. Since each one of them individually does not exist so as to give glory in a unitary way to him whom he loves. The fruit of the third glory, however, consists of honors of the will of each one of the Aeons and each one of those properties.” This is saying that the entire system of the Aeons has a love and longing for the perfect, complete discovery of the Father, and that the Father, “grants that he be conceived of in such a way as to be sought for while keeping to himself his unsearchable primordial being.” So this is why we have a desire to seek after the Father, you see. We aren’t ever going to reach the Father. We’re not going to plug back into the Father in a mindless, self-effacing way, the way that, for example, Hindus or Buddhists might think. We will retain our identities because, as you are about to find out, the Aeons of the Aeons gave birth to Aeons who had self-identity. The Tripartite Tractate goes on to say that the Father, “gave root impulses to the Aeons since there are places on the path which leads towards him as towards a school of behavior. He has extended to them faith in and prayer to him whom they do not see and a firm hope in him of whom they do not conceive and a fruitful love which looks toward that which it does not see and an acceptable understanding of the eternal mind and a blessing which is riches and freedom and wisdom of the one who desires the glory of the Father for his thought. “They have begotten for he has knowledge and wisdom and the Totalities knew that it is from knowledge and wisdom that they have come forth. They would have brought forth a seeming honor, the Father is the one who is the Totalities, if the Aeons had risen up to give honor individually. Therefore, in the Song of glorification and in the power of the unity of him from whom they have come, they were drawn into a mingling and a combination and a unity with one another. They offered glory worthy of the Father from the pleromatic congregation, which is a single representation, although many, because it was brought forth as a glory for the Single One and because they came forth toward the one who is himself the Totalities.” This verse describes how the Aeons mingle and combine with one another to give glory to the Father. All possible combinations of Aeons are needed in order to express the complexity of the otherwise ineffable Father. Each and every Aeon combined and recombined and the glory they gave the Father was returned to them as additional Aeons, earning their designation as the Fullness of God. “Those of that place are ineffable and innumerable in the system, which is both the manner and the size, the joy, the gladness of the unbegotten, the unnamed, the unnameable, the inconceivable, invisible one. It is the Fullness of paternity so that his abundance is a begetting of the Aeons of the Aeons. They were forever in thought for the Father was like a thought and a place for them.” In their desire to give glory to the Father, that is to align their wills with the Father’s will, Aeons of the Fullness were required to follow these three simple rules. They were to only, give glory to the Father, not to the Fullnesses. Aeons were to remain aligned with the Son and not shift their focus to the Fullness as a whole. give glory to the Father, not to individual Aeons. Aeons were to remain always mindful of the Father and not to give glory to themselves and their talented neighbors as individuals. give glory to the Father to the best of their own ability. Each Aeon was to give glory from its own location in the hierarchy. They were not to sidle up next to an Aeon who appeared closer to the Father in order to borrow that Aeon’s station to give better glory. Rather, the individual was to develop its own voice and talents through the process of giving glory to the Father.These rules come from the Tripartite Tractate, verse 74. By following these rules, the Aeons kept their focus on the Father and their motivations pure. While this may be a description of Aeons and how they think and feel, it is also a description of us, because we are the fruit of the Aeons. So every characteristic that the Aeons possess, we also possess. In other words, we are supposed to give glory out of where we are, who we are. We’re not supposed to adopt the gnosis of a master or a leader or a pope or a priest or a person in a workshop that you’ve run across on the internet. We have our own wisdom. We are to look inward for the gnosis that we bring to the table, and we give unique glory from our point of view. The final Aeon that was produced as an emanation of the Pleroma of the Fullness arose by all of the Aeons giving glory together. The Fullness thus produced a final Aeon whom the Tripartite Tractate calls by the name Logos. Because Logos was produced through the entirety of the Pleroma giving glory as one, this Aeon possessed within itself all of the characteristics of the entire Pleroma. Logos was not the equivalent of the Pleroma, though. Rather, Logos contained within itself a fractal iteration of all the other Aeons. Because of this, Logos in his entirety resembled a model representation of the hierarchy of God, a fractal level down from the Aeons. That’s why in my illustration of the Fullness, I depict a large pyramid of golden orbs, those being the Aeons, topped by a smaller pyramid resembling the entirety of the Pleroma. That smaller pyramid on top is Logos. The aeons name themselves and sort themselves into a hierarchy. Logos crowns the Fullness. And, like Logos, we also carry fractals of the Fullness of God within our Selfs, and that’s Self with a big S, Self, to contrast it with the ego. The ego is our designation, it’s our address, it’s our duties, places, positions, things we do in the world. Ego is what relates to others around us. Ego is what brings us the things we need to sustain our bodies. But our big S Self is the fractal of the Fullness of God within each one of us, and within each part of ourselves. It’s within each one of our cells. The way we have DNA, we also have the fractals of the Fullness of God. And these are the fractal consciousness that has come down to us. People sometimes say to me, oh, this is all so complicated. But hey, if you’ve read the Nag Hammadi or any other Gnostic traditions, you will find out that this is way simpler than those are. It isn’t complicated as long as you remember and realize that our consciousness is a direct emanation from the Father above, passing through these various stations, that’s all. And each time consciousness passes through one of these stations below it, it branches out. It keeps branching out into a more tangible form, until it reaches us down here in this material world. It’s the same consciousness as the Father we carry within us, the Fullness of God. And as long as you remember where you come from, and you remember that this world we live in is temporary, and the death and destruction and disappointment that we experience down here is a result of the fall away from the Fullness, then we have hope. We have that fragrance of the Father drifting us back upward for reuniting with our parents in the Fullness of God. So I’m just describing this all to you, but it’s not like you really have to know it. It’s nothing you need to memorize. All you need to know is that you come from above, that you are loved, that you carry the very consciousness of the Great Father, the God above all gods within you, and the love and joy and sweetness of the Father. And then if we live our lives down here as the Aeons do, all will be good, not governed by ego, but governed by that One Self that we carry within us, the love, the consciousness, the sharing, the simple golden rule of reaching out to our neighbors with love, information, and assistance for the betterment of all. And that none of us can do it on our own, because we’re just one small fragment way downstream from the Fullness and the Father. God bless us all, and onward and upward! Please enable JavaScript in your browser to complete this form.Name *FirstLastEmail *Stripe Credit Card *Choose your item *Item A - $10.00Item B - $25.00Item C - $50.00Total$0.00Submit

Described by Voltaire as “perhaps a man of the most universal learning in Europe,” Gottfried Wilhelm Leibniz (1646–1716) is often portrayed as a rationalist and philosopher who was wholly detached from the worldly concerns of his fellow men. Leibniz in His World: The Making of a Savant (Princeton UP, 2026) provides a groundbreaking reassessment of Leibniz, telling the story of his trials and tribulations as an aspiring scientist and courtier navigating the learned and courtly circles of early modern Europe and the Republic of Letters.Drawing on extensive correspondence by Leibniz and many leading figures of the age, Audrey Borowski paints a nuanced portrait of Leibniz in the 1670s, during his “Paris sojourn” as a young diplomat and in Germany at the court of Duke Johann Friedrich of Hanover. She challenges the image of Leibniz as an isolated genius, revealing instead a man of multiple identities whose thought was shaped by a deep engagement with the social and intellectual milieus of his time. Borowski shows us Leibniz as he was known to his contemporaries, enabling us to rediscover him as an enigmatic young man who was complex and all too human.An exhilarating work of scholarship, Leibniz in His World demonstrates how this uncommon intellect, torn between his ideals and the necessity to work for absolutist states, struggled to make a name for himself during his formative years. Audrey Borowski is a Leverhulme Early Career Fellow and Isaac Newton Trust Fellow at the University of Cambridge working on the philosophy of AI. She received her PhD from the University of Oxford and is a regular contributor to The Times Literary Supplement and Aeon. Morteza Hajizadeh is a Ph.D. graduate in English from the University of Auckland in New Zealand. His research interests are Cultural Studies; Critical Theory; Environmental History; Medieval (Intellectual) History; Gothic Studies; 18th and 19th Century British Literature. YouTube Channel: here Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/new-books-network

Described by Voltaire as “perhaps a man of the most universal learning in Europe,” Gottfried Wilhelm Leibniz (1646–1716) is often portrayed as a rationalist and philosopher who was wholly detached from the worldly concerns of his fellow men. Leibniz in His World: The Making of a Savant (Princeton UP, 2026) provides a groundbreaking reassessment of Leibniz, telling the story of his trials and tribulations as an aspiring scientist and courtier navigating the learned and courtly circles of early modern Europe and the Republic of Letters.Drawing on extensive correspondence by Leibniz and many leading figures of the age, Audrey Borowski paints a nuanced portrait of Leibniz in the 1670s, during his “Paris sojourn” as a young diplomat and in Germany at the court of Duke Johann Friedrich of Hanover. She challenges the image of Leibniz as an isolated genius, revealing instead a man of multiple identities whose thought was shaped by a deep engagement with the social and intellectual milieus of his time. Borowski shows us Leibniz as he was known to his contemporaries, enabling us to rediscover him as an enigmatic young man who was complex and all too human.An exhilarating work of scholarship, Leibniz in His World demonstrates how this uncommon intellect, torn between his ideals and the necessity to work for absolutist states, struggled to make a name for himself during his formative years. Audrey Borowski is a Leverhulme Early Career Fellow and Isaac Newton Trust Fellow at the University of Cambridge working on the philosophy of AI. She received her PhD from the University of Oxford and is a regular contributor to The Times Literary Supplement and Aeon. Morteza Hajizadeh is a Ph.D. graduate in English from the University of Auckland in New Zealand. His research interests are Cultural Studies; Critical Theory; Environmental History; Medieval (Intellectual) History; Gothic Studies; 18th and 19th Century British Literature. YouTube Channel: here Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/german-studies

Described by Voltaire as “perhaps a man of the most universal learning in Europe,” Gottfried Wilhelm Leibniz (1646–1716) is often portrayed as a rationalist and philosopher who was wholly detached from the worldly concerns of his fellow men. Leibniz in His World: The Making of a Savant (Princeton UP, 2026) provides a groundbreaking reassessment of Leibniz, telling the story of his trials and tribulations as an aspiring scientist and courtier navigating the learned and courtly circles of early modern Europe and the Republic of Letters.Drawing on extensive correspondence by Leibniz and many leading figures of the age, Audrey Borowski paints a nuanced portrait of Leibniz in the 1670s, during his “Paris sojourn” as a young diplomat and in Germany at the court of Duke Johann Friedrich of Hanover. She challenges the image of Leibniz as an isolated genius, revealing instead a man of multiple identities whose thought was shaped by a deep engagement with the social and intellectual milieus of his time. Borowski shows us Leibniz as he was known to his contemporaries, enabling us to rediscover him as an enigmatic young man who was complex and all too human.An exhilarating work of scholarship, Leibniz in His World demonstrates how this uncommon intellect, torn between his ideals and the necessity to work for absolutist states, struggled to make a name for himself during his formative years. Audrey Borowski is a Leverhulme Early Career Fellow and Isaac Newton Trust Fellow at the University of Cambridge working on the philosophy of AI. She received her PhD from the University of Oxford and is a regular contributor to The Times Literary Supplement and Aeon. Morteza Hajizadeh is a Ph.D. graduate in English from the University of Auckland in New Zealand. His research interests are Cultural Studies; Critical Theory; Environmental History; Medieval (Intellectual) History; Gothic Studies; 18th and 19th Century British Literature. YouTube Channel: here Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/critical-theory

Described by Voltaire as “perhaps a man of the most universal learning in Europe,” Gottfried Wilhelm Leibniz (1646–1716) is often portrayed as a rationalist and philosopher who was wholly detached from the worldly concerns of his fellow men. Leibniz in His World: The Making of a Savant (Princeton UP, 2026) provides a groundbreaking reassessment of Leibniz, telling the story of his trials and tribulations as an aspiring scientist and courtier navigating the learned and courtly circles of early modern Europe and the Republic of Letters.Drawing on extensive correspondence by Leibniz and many leading figures of the age, Audrey Borowski paints a nuanced portrait of Leibniz in the 1670s, during his “Paris sojourn” as a young diplomat and in Germany at the court of Duke Johann Friedrich of Hanover. She challenges the image of Leibniz as an isolated genius, revealing instead a man of multiple identities whose thought was shaped by a deep engagement with the social and intellectual milieus of his time. Borowski shows us Leibniz as he was known to his contemporaries, enabling us to rediscover him as an enigmatic young man who was complex and all too human.An exhilarating work of scholarship, Leibniz in His World demonstrates how this uncommon intellect, torn between his ideals and the necessity to work for absolutist states, struggled to make a name for himself during his formative years. Audrey Borowski is a Leverhulme Early Career Fellow and Isaac Newton Trust Fellow at the University of Cambridge working on the philosophy of AI. She received her PhD from the University of Oxford and is a regular contributor to The Times Literary Supplement and Aeon. Morteza Hajizadeh is a Ph.D. graduate in English from the University of Auckland in New Zealand. His research interests are Cultural Studies; Critical Theory; Environmental History; Medieval (Intellectual) History; Gothic Studies; 18th and 19th Century British Literature. YouTube Channel: here Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/biography

Described by Voltaire as “perhaps a man of the most universal learning in Europe,” Gottfried Wilhelm Leibniz (1646–1716) is often portrayed as a rationalist and philosopher who was wholly detached from the worldly concerns of his fellow men. Leibniz in His World: The Making of a Savant (Princeton UP, 2026) provides a groundbreaking reassessment of Leibniz, telling the story of his trials and tribulations as an aspiring scientist and courtier navigating the learned and courtly circles of early modern Europe and the Republic of Letters.Drawing on extensive correspondence by Leibniz and many leading figures of the age, Audrey Borowski paints a nuanced portrait of Leibniz in the 1670s, during his “Paris sojourn” as a young diplomat and in Germany at the court of Duke Johann Friedrich of Hanover. She challenges the image of Leibniz as an isolated genius, revealing instead a man of multiple identities whose thought was shaped by a deep engagement with the social and intellectual milieus of his time. Borowski shows us Leibniz as he was known to his contemporaries, enabling us to rediscover him as an enigmatic young man who was complex and all too human.An exhilarating work of scholarship, Leibniz in His World demonstrates how this uncommon intellect, torn between his ideals and the necessity to work for absolutist states, struggled to make a name for himself during his formative years. Audrey Borowski is a Leverhulme Early Career Fellow and Isaac Newton Trust Fellow at the University of Cambridge working on the philosophy of AI. She received her PhD from the University of Oxford and is a regular contributor to The Times Literary Supplement and Aeon. Morteza Hajizadeh is a Ph.D. graduate in English from the University of Auckland in New Zealand. His research interests are Cultural Studies; Critical Theory; Environmental History; Medieval (Intellectual) History; Gothic Studies; 18th and 19th Century British Literature. YouTube Channel: here Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/intellectual-history

Described by Voltaire as “perhaps a man of the most universal learning in Europe,” Gottfried Wilhelm Leibniz (1646–1716) is often portrayed as a rationalist and philosopher who was wholly detached from the worldly concerns of his fellow men. Leibniz in His World: The Making of a Savant (Princeton UP, 2026) provides a groundbreaking reassessment of Leibniz, telling the story of his trials and tribulations as an aspiring scientist and courtier navigating the learned and courtly circles of early modern Europe and the Republic of Letters.Drawing on extensive correspondence by Leibniz and many leading figures of the age, Audrey Borowski paints a nuanced portrait of Leibniz in the 1670s, during his “Paris sojourn” as a young diplomat and in Germany at the court of Duke Johann Friedrich of Hanover. She challenges the image of Leibniz as an isolated genius, revealing instead a man of multiple identities whose thought was shaped by a deep engagement with the social and intellectual milieus of his time. Borowski shows us Leibniz as he was known to his contemporaries, enabling us to rediscover him as an enigmatic young man who was complex and all too human.An exhilarating work of scholarship, Leibniz in His World demonstrates how this uncommon intellect, torn between his ideals and the necessity to work for absolutist states, struggled to make a name for himself during his formative years. Audrey Borowski is a Leverhulme Early Career Fellow and Isaac Newton Trust Fellow at the University of Cambridge working on the philosophy of AI. She received her PhD from the University of Oxford and is a regular contributor to The Times Literary Supplement and Aeon. Morteza Hajizadeh is a Ph.D. graduate in English from the University of Auckland in New Zealand. His research interests are Cultural Studies; Critical Theory; Environmental History; Medieval (Intellectual) History; Gothic Studies; 18th and 19th Century British Literature. YouTube Channel: here

On this episode of the Ruff Talk VR podcast we are kicking off the week talking all the latest VR news! Including WRATH Aeon of Ruin VR - Brutal Edition launching, a new update from No Man's Sky, newly announced games such as Project Hail Mary and COVR, newly launched VR games, and more!Use code RUFFTALKVR at checkout to save on any game or hardware on the Meta Quest store and help support the show!Showcase application form: https://forms.gle/tnPhzKezn3WuJpCU9Big thank you to all of our Patreon supporters! Become a supporter of the show today at https://www.patreon.com/rufftalkvr0:00 - Episode start2:20 - No Man's Sky VR3:50 - Iron Rebellion6:15 - WRATH Aeon of Ruin VR - Brutal Edition13:35 - Flag Games16:00 - Darts VR218:15 - COVR21:40 - Cave Crave Multiplayer29:10 - Project Hail Mary: Journey Among The Stars31:10 - No Man's Sky Xeno Arena Update36:00 - Riddlewood Manor38:50 - Synth Riders Layoffs41:55 - Steam Link Beta on Apple Vision Pro43:35 - Jolly Match 3 Spring Bloom Update45:20 - Meta and Unity Partnership ExtendedDiscord: https://discord.gg/9JTdCccucSPatreon: https://www.patreon.com/rufftalkvrIf you enjoy the podcast be sure to rate us 5 stars and subscribe! Join our official subreddit at https://www.reddit.com/r/RuffTalkVR/Support the show

01. Wilkinson - Come Down 02. Merage, Egzod & Islet Oak - Hiding In Plain Sight 03. Skepsis, Charlotte Haining - Slipping 04. Dimod, Flicky, Cinet - Love Bomb 05. Dimension, Bbyclose - Once In A Lifetime 06. Delta Heavy, Aeon:mode, Nu - La - Glow 07. Genetics, Lottie Jones, Artino - At All Costs 08. D - Sabber - Havoc 09. The Upbeats, What So Not, Stace Cadet - Wanted 10. Kora Wang & Foor - 脱离地面 11. Children Of Our Stars - Come With Me 12. Brian Brainstorm - Falling In Love 13. Teddy Killerz - Dream 14. Licia, Dux N Bass - Electricity 15. Astro Luce - Tell The World 16. Cyantific - So Real 17. Wilkinson - All The Way (feat. iiola) 18. Ekko & Sidetrack, T & Sugah - What You Want 19. Monss & Document One - Nobody's There 20. Bensley - 1-800-BEN-SLEY 21. Hissteria - HEAVYWEIGHT SOUND 22. Georgie Riot, Ceadie - Good Time 23. Gino - Du Du Du 24. Fade Black - Malfunction 25. Killbox - War by Remote 26. Merikan - Face Off 27. The Last Bear Ender, Zardonic - Kernel Breaker (feat. Noisesmith, Roel Peijs & Kylee Brielle) (Remix) 28. Xomni - Bad Fortune 29. Impex Botinha 30. Bennie - Control Freak 31. Freaks & Geeks - Back To You 32. Stanza & Grimm - Runaway (DisasZt Remix) 33. Deezave - Quantum Flip 34. Vici, Screamarts - Groove To It 35. It Is Jev - Woe 36. Calyx - Triple Shot 37. Ill Dynamics - Stuck Inna 38. Samath, Data Model - Bottom Feeder 39. Akov - Never Be The Same 40. Aksel - Right Here 41. Bodrak - Dryness 42. Hasky - Techno Love 43. Particle, Atmos - Blade 44. Skantia, Smg - Absent 45. Eastcolors, Neinzge - Chillin 46. Ozma & Avenax - Kapli 47. Treex - Hide The Truth 48. Fafu, T.r.a.c., Yungchen Lhamo - Infinite (Remix) 49. 3kingz - Kick Out 50. Bitsune, M'go, Basskillah - Top a Top 51. Roni Size - Scrambled Eggs VIP 52. Crystal Clear - Set It Up 53. Nkz - Saxo Fantastico 54. Coco, Rendah, Oko Uk - Legit 55. Milo (UK) - Stumbling Block 56. Upgrade - Tipsy 57. Rift - The Truth (Apollo Navigation Remix) 58. Dutta, Chuckwtf - Muddy 59. Glitch City, Leaf - Spirit World 60. Covert Garden - Facility 61. Markee Ledge, Megatron Mc - Mystical Warrior 62. DJ Zent = Streetfighter 63. Dynamite Mc - Brilliant Mode 64. Danny Byrd, Sigma, Kurupt Fm, Natty D - LEGENDARY STATUS (feat. Klaudia Keziah) 65. Ray Keith - The Doctor 66. Mr Quest - Back To The Rave (Everybody Mix) 67. Pete Cannon - Wave Curfew 68. Serum - Chop House (Benny L Remix) 69. Vedanta - Patterning 70. Distracted Society - Massive 71. Trans:t, Fifth - Lost 72. In:most Feat. Visionobi - Rabbit Hole 73. Nia Archives - Danger 74. Konetix, Megan Linnell - Chasing The Highs 75. 4am Kru, Layla Sibelle - Rush 76. Roommate - Rasta Vibration 77. Invisible Landscape - Zero Sum Game 78. Ljhigh - Keys 79. Catching Cairo, Clipz - 10FOOT 80. Marble Elephant - Whispers (Sub:liminal Remix) 81. Neuronex - As Seen From Above 82. Chic, Fizzy Gillespie, Mista Trick - Everybody Dance (Mista Trick Remix) 83. Soul Connection - In Darkest Hours

01. Wilkinson - Come Down 02. Merage, Egzod & Islet Oak - Hiding In Plain Sight 03. Skepsis, Charlotte Haining - Slipping 04. Dimod, Flicky, Cinet - Love Bomb 05. Dimension, Bbyclose - Once In A Lifetime 06. Delta Heavy, Aeon:mode, Nu - La - Glow 07. Genetics, Lottie Jones, Artino - At All Costs 08. D - Sabber - Havoc 09. The Upbeats, What So Not, Stace Cadet - Wanted 10. Kora Wang & Foor - 脱离地面 11. Children Of Our Stars - Come With Me 12. Brian Brainstorm - Falling In Love 13. Teddy Killerz - Dream 14. Licia, Dux N Bass - Electricity 15. Astro Luce - Tell The World 16. Cyantific - So Real 17. Wilkinson - All The Way (feat. iiola) 18. Ekko & Sidetrack, T & Sugah - What You Want 19. Monss & Document One - Nobody's There 20. Bensley - 1-800-BEN-SLEY 21. Hissteria - HEAVYWEIGHT SOUND 22. Georgie Riot, Ceadie - Good Time 23. Gino - Du Du Du 24. Fade Black - Malfunction 25. Killbox - War by Remote 26. Merikan - Face Off 27. The Last Bear Ender, Zardonic - Kernel Breaker (feat. Noisesmith, Roel Peijs & Kylee Brielle) (Remix) 28. Xomni - Bad Fortune 29. Impex Botinha 30. Bennie - Control Freak 31. Freaks & Geeks - Back To You 32. Stanza & Grimm - Runaway (DisasZt Remix) 33. Deezave - Quantum Flip 34. Vici, Screamarts - Groove To It 35. It Is Jev - Woe 36. Calyx - Triple Shot 37. Ill Dynamics - Stuck Inna 38. Samath, Data Model - Bottom Feeder 39. Akov - Never Be The Same 40. Aksel - Right Here 41. Bodrak - Dryness 42. Hasky - Techno Love 43. Particle, Atmos - Blade 44. Skantia, Smg - Absent 45. Eastcolors, Neinzge - Chillin 46. Ozma & Avenax - Kapli 47. Treex - Hide The Truth 48. Fafu, T.r.a.c., Yungchen Lhamo - Infinite (Remix) 49. 3kingz - Kick Out 50. Bitsune, M'go, Basskillah - Top a Top 51. Roni Size - Scrambled Eggs VIP 52. Crystal Clear - Set It Up 53. Nkz - Saxo Fantastico 54. Coco, Rendah, Oko Uk - Legit 55. Milo (UK) - Stumbling Block 56. Upgrade - Tipsy 57. Rift - The Truth (Apollo Navigation Remix) 58. Dutta, Chuckwtf - Muddy 59. Glitch City, Leaf - Spirit World 60. Covert Garden - Facility 61. Markee Ledge, Megatron Mc - Mystical Warrior 62. DJ Zent = Streetfighter 63. Dynamite Mc - Brilliant Mode 64. Danny Byrd, Sigma, Kurupt Fm, Natty D - LEGENDARY STATUS (feat. Klaudia Keziah) 65. Ray Keith - The Doctor 66. Mr Quest - Back To The Rave (Everybody Mix) 67. Pete Cannon - Wave Curfew 68. Serum - Chop House (Benny L Remix) 69. Vedanta - Patterning 70. Distracted Society - Massive 71. Trans:t, Fifth - Lost 72. In:most Feat. Visionobi - Rabbit Hole 73. Nia Archives - Danger 74. Konetix, Megan Linnell - Chasing The Highs 75. 4am Kru, Layla Sibelle - Rush 76. Roommate - Rasta Vibration 77. Invisible Landscape - Zero Sum Game 78. Ljhigh - Keys 79. Catching Cairo, Clipz - 10FOOT 80. Marble Elephant - Whispers (Sub:liminal Remix) 81. Neuronex - As Seen From Above 82. Chic, Fizzy Gillespie, Mista Trick - Everybody Dance (Mista Trick Remix) 83. Soul Connection - In Darkest Hours

Plenty of crime dramas and horror films feature a psychopath on a rampage. That diagnosis, however, might be the real fiction. Rasmus Rosenberg Larsenis is assistant professor of forensic epistemology and philosophy of science at the University of Toronto Mississauga in Canada and an affiliated scientist at the National Center for Ontological Research in the U.S. He is also the author of “Psychopathy Unmasked: The Rise and Fall of a Dangerous Diagnosis.” He joins host Krys Boyd to discuss why psychopathy isn't real, how that diagnosis came about, and why even serial killers don't have all the traits we assume they do. His companion piece to his book, “There are no psychopaths,” was published in Aeon. Learn about your ad choices: dovetail.prx.org/ad-choices

Jeff and Rebecca talk about the big ACOTAR update, Audible dropping the price on its standard product, market trends, recent reading, and much more. Follow the podcast via ⁠RSS⁠, ⁠Apple Podcasts⁠, and ⁠Spotify⁠. Join ⁠The Book Riot Podcast Patreon⁠ for bonus content and ad-free listening. Subscribe to ⁠The Book Riot Newsletter⁠ for regular updates to get the most out of your reading life. The Book Riot Podcast is a proud member of the Airwave Podcast Network. Discussed in this episode: ⁠Shout-out to this Aeon piece about how we're thinking about the decline of literacy wrong⁠ ⁠Sarah J. Maas announces next 2 ACOTAR books⁠ ⁠Market trends from Circana's report to booksellers⁠ ⁠Audible has launched a Standard Membership Plan for $8.99/month⁠ ⁠2026 Audie Award winners⁠ ⁠Utah has banned 4 more books from public schools⁠ ⁠Lee & Low pauses diversity baseline survey to focus on fighting book bans⁠ ⁠First comprehensive report on the state of America's Black-owned bookstores⁠ This content contains affiliate links. When you buy through these links, we may earn an affiliate commission. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Jeff and Rebecca talk about the big ACOTAR update, Audible dropping the price on its standard product, market trends, recent reading, and much more. Follow the podcast via RSS, Apple Podcasts, and Spotify. Join The Book Riot Podcast Patreon for bonus content and ad-free listening. Subscribe to The Book Riot Newsletter for regular updates to get the most out of your reading life. The Book Riot Podcast is a proud member of the Airwave Podcast Network. Discussed in this episode: Shout-out to this Aeon piece about how we're thinking about the decline of literacy wrong Sarah J. Maas announces next 2 ACOTAR books Market trends from Circana's report to booksellers Audible has launched a Standard Membership Plan for $8.99/month 2026 Audie Award winners Utah has banned 4 more books from public schools Lee & Low pauses diversity baseline survey to focus on fighting book bans First comprehensive report on the state of America's Black-owned bookstores This content contains affiliate links. When you buy through these links, we may earn an affiliate commission. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices