Podcasts about Simon Magus

The devotional examines Simon Magus's attempt to purchase spiritual power, highlighting Peter's rebuke of his twisted thinking and the necessity of repentance. It transitions to practical advice for discipling new believers through four key disciplines: reading the Bible, memorizing scripture, taking thoughts captive, and praying with specific promises. The speaker emphasizes that conversion does not instantly erase old mindsets, requiring intentional effort to replace carnal thoughts with God's truth. Personal testimony illustrates how these methods helped overcome learning disabilities and establish a lasting walk with Christ. Ultimately, the message urges believers to help others adopt divine thinking patterns to grow closer to God.

The devotional examines Simon Magus's attempt to purchase spiritual power, highlighting Peter's rebuke of his twisted thinking and the necessity of repentance. It transitions to practical advice for discipling new believers through four key disciplines: reading the Bible, memorizing scripture, taking thoughts captive, and praying with specific promises. The speaker emphasizes that conversion does not instantly erase old mindsets, requiring intentional effort to replace carnal thoughts with God's truth. Personal testimony illustrates how these methods helped overcome learning disabilities and establish a lasting walk with Christ. Ultimately, the message urges believers to help others adopt divine thinking patterns to grow closer to God.

What is simony? And where do you draw the line? Here at Remnant Radio, we do sell courses and conferences teaching people about the gifts of the spirit. We want to be honest and upfront about that, and it's exactly why we're discussing simony in this episode. We want to examine whether what we do holds up under Scripture. ABOUT THIS EPISODE:The word "simony" comes from Acts 8, when Simon Magus tried to purchase the power of the Holy Spirit and Peter answered him: "May your money perish with you, because you thought you could buy the gift of God with money" (Acts 8:20, ESV). That confrontation gave the body of Christ an important category for thinking about money and ministry that we're going to explore.What did Peter actually condemn, and what didn't he condemn? Scripture is more specific than most people realize, and the early church, as documented in the Didache, wrestled openly with where the line sits between legitimate support for ministry and exploiting the gifts of God for personal gain.This episode takes a hard look at that line. There are things that should never carry a price tag. Prayer ministry and deliverance ministry are on that list, and we'll walk through why Scripture draws that boundary so clearly. But the conversation doesn't stop there. What about seminary or Bible college? Christian books and music? The Bible itself? Join us for a biblical exploration of simony and where Scripture draws the line.0:00 – Introduction0:21 – Ethics of Charging for Ministry8:53 – Scripture on Giving Freely12:20 – Isaiah 55 and Matthew 10:817:47 – Payment for Healing Prayers?18:55 – Compensation for Itinerant Ministers23:12 – Honorariums and Speaking Fees27:18 – Bibles, Seminaries, and Simony32:03 – Simon the Sorcerer in Acts 837:37 – Suggested Donations for Deliverance?51:38 – Didache on Itinerant Prophets56:02 – Dangers of Full-Time ItinerancySubscribe to The Remnant Radio newsletter and receive our FREE introduction to spiritual gifts eBook. Plus, get access to: discounts, news about upcoming shows, courses and conferences - and more. Subscribe now at TheRemnantRadio.com. Support the showABOUT THE REMNANT RADIO: The Remnant Radio exists to equip believers who are hungry for the radical middle of both Word and Spirit. Subscribe for twice-weekly content on theology, church history and the gifts of the Spirit.

Send us Fan MailThe question sounds reasonable until you follow it to the end: if grace is real and God forgives freely, why not keep sinning? We open Romans 6 and take Paul's answer seriously, because he does not respond with a motivational speech or a threat. He responds with identity and union: if we belong to Christ, we have died to sin, and that changes what “continuing in sin” even means.From there, we slow down on a phrase many of us have heard but not fully weighed: “baptized into Christ.” We talk about why Romans 6 cannot be reduced to water baptism as a saving act, even while still honoring baptism as a commanded and beautiful ordinance. We lay out the biblical distinction between the outward sign and the inward grace, point to examples like Simon Magus, and explain why Paul's argument depends on a real spiritual union with Christ by the Holy Spirit through faith. Along the way we connect “in Christ” language across the New Testament, from no condemnation to new creation.We also get practical about sanctification. Yes, believers struggle with sin, but the fight is not you trying to earn a win that Jesus has not secured. It is the lived out fruit of a victory already won at the cross and confirmed in the resurrection. Finally, we move into Romans 6:4 and the burial imagery that seals the point: the old life is consigned to the grave, and we are raised to walk in newness of life. If this helped you, subscribe, share it with a friend who wrestles with baptism and assurance, and leave a review with your biggest takeaway.Support the showBE PROVOKED AND BE PERSUADED!

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.

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.

It's been too long, but it's always an honor when Dr. Robert Price arrives as the Virtual Alexandria. We'll have a fun and thorough chat on the origins of Gnosticism and its theology. Where did this heresy originate, and how did it evolve over the centuries? What is the Gnostic Jesus, and is Simon Magus the true font of all Gnostic thought? As always, we'll entertain modern Gnostic manifestations in movies and art. Grab your popcorn and Red Pill candy! More on Bob: https://www.robertmprice.mindvendor.com/ Get The Occult Elvis: https://amzn.to/4jnTjE4 Virtual Alexandria Academy: https://thegodabovegod.com/virtual-alexandria-academy/ Gnostic Tarot Readings: https://thegodabovegod.com/gnostic-tarot-reading/ The Gnostic Tarot: https://www.makeplayingcards.com/sell/synkrasis Homepage: https://thegodabovegod.com/ Patreon: https://www.patreon.com/aeonbyte AB Prime: https://thegodabovegod.com/members/subscription-levels/ Voice Over services: https://thegodabovegod.com/voice-talent/ Support with donation: https://buy.stripe.com/00g16Q8RK8D93mw288 Merch store: https://aeonbyte.creator-spring.com/ Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

A Greek artisan is commissioned by St. Luke and Joseph of Arimathea to make the Holy Grail, while fending off the the evil Simon Magus and the Emperor Nero. It's a very uneven film, sometimes boring, sometimes visually fascinating, and at least Jack Palance seems to be having fun. These days, it's best known as the movie Paul Newman apologized for making--which is a heck of a thing when it's your debut film. Starring Paul Newman, Jack Palance, Virginia Mayo, Pier Angeli, and Lorne Greene. Written by Lesser Samuels. Directed by Victor Saville. This is a preview of the latest episode of our series Hollywood Avalon. To hear the entire episode, join the Mary Versus the Movies patreon for $3/month to hear this and the entire series Hollywood Avalon: https://www.patreon.com/maryvsmovies. 

Read the book for free.This episode provides an overview of an anonymous work from 1700 called The Anatomy of Simon Magus. It's an examination of simony, defining it as the corrupt practice of buying or selling spiritual things or church offices. The author offers a "surgical exposure" of how corruption manifests through bribery, social favors, and self-interested service, warning that such actions invalidate the spiritual authority of the clergy. By dissecting both the historical context of the 1700s and modern analogs, the work serves as a moral autopsy intended to preserve the purity of the Church. It cautions that those who enter the ministry through financial or deceptive means are usurpers rather than true servants of Christ. Generated by NotebookLM, curated by Andrew Case.sellingjesus.org⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ | ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠thedoreanprinciple.org⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ | ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠copy.church

The Mission of the SpiritActs 8:1-25Teacher: Pastor Tommy BaileyDate: May 10, 2026Before Jesus ascended, He promised His disciples that the Holy Spirit would empower them to be His witnesses in Jerusalem, in Judea and Samaria, and to the ends of the earth. In Acts 8:1-25, we arrive at a turning point in that mission. After the martyrdom of Stephen, fierce persecution in Jerusalem scatters the church, and what should have ended the mission instead ignites it. The gospel breaks into Samaria, a region long held in spiritual darkness and separated from the rest of Israel by nearly a thousand years of ethnic and religious bigotry from both Jews and Samaritans. There Philip preaches Christ, demons flee, the broken are healed, and the city is filled with joy.Join Pastor Tommy as we walk through this turn in the story by considering four figures: Saul the persecutor, Philip the refugee evangelist, the Samaritans longing for hope, and Simon Magus, the magician who craved power. In each of them we see something of the Spirit's mission to point people to Jesus, to convict of sin, to comfort the weary, and to renew the most unlikely heart.To find more resources like these, follow us:Website: https://thevillagechapel.comYouTube: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCQVTzDbaiXVUAm_mUBDCTJAInstagram: https://www.instagram.com/tvcnashville/Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/tvcnashvilleX: https://twitter.com/tvcnashvilleTo support the ongoing mission of The Village Chapel go to https://thevillagechapel.com/give/. If you are a regular giver, thank you for your continued faithfulness and generosity!

An Interview with Dr. Benjamin DeVos This episode reexamines Simon Magus, a controversial figure from the book of Acts, and his evolving role in early Christian tradition. Moving beyond the familiar story, it explores how later texts—especially the Pseudo-Clementines—transform Simon into a complex philosophical rival to Peter. Along the way, the discussion uncovers themes of truth, rhetoric, power, and moral ambiguity, challenging simple labels of heresy and revealing a far more nuanced picture of early Christianity. Dr. Benjamin De Vos is a researcher and teacher within the Faculty of Arts and Philosophy at Ghent University in Belgium and is affiliated with the University of Regensburg and the Beyond Canon project. His particular research interest is in the figure of Simon Magus. This involves Neoplatonic philosophy, concepts of truth, and important forms of communication, such as myth and dialogue. He is the author of a volume with Cambridge University Press, as well as several articles and book chapters and edited volumes (with Mohr Siebeck en Groningen University/Barkhuis (on Truth-dynamics in Early Christianity)).

On the Sunday of the Paralytic, this homily explores Christ's piercing question: "Do you want to be made well?" It examines our tendency to respond not with repentance, but with explanation—justifying our condition rather than opening ourselves to healing. Grounded in the Church's therapeutic vision of salvation, it calls us to move beyond self-justification and into obedience, where Christ's command becomes the source of our transformation.  Enjoy the show!  --- Homily for the Sunday of the Paralytic John 5:1–15; Acts 9 Christ is risen! What effect do you have on others? Is it like St. Peter's? Do you walk in the midst of broken people, bringing them healing? Do others, recognizing the peace within you, go out of their way just to be near you? Have you attained even a small measure of the purity and goodness—the peaceful spirit—that, as St. Seraphim of Sarov teaches, becomes the salvation of thousands? These are important indicators—ways to examine how we are doing in this walk of salvation. Some of them are internal and relatively easy to observe: How do I react to praise? How do I respond to criticism? How quick am I to anger, to despondency, to lust? But here is another indicator—an external one: How do people react to us? Do they find peace when we enter the room, or when we leave it? We need to be honest about this. When it comes to the things that truly matter—in our lives, in our families, in this parish, and in the great story of our salvation—we are always moving in one of two directions: either we are cooperating with grace, with healing, or we are cooperating with corruption. St. Peter, glory to God, became a man who cooperated fully with healing. But that was not always the case. There was a time when he was driven by pride, fear, and the expectations of others. By the time we meet him in Acts, however, he is no longer just occasionally doing what is right. He has been transformed. He has become the kind of person through whom Christ works. In today's Gospel, we see the beginning of such a transformation. The paralytic had been suffering for thirty-eight years—thirty-eight years of waiting, hoping, and being unable to heal himself. We can hardly imagine the weight of that suffering. And what does Christ ask him? "Do you want to be made well?" It is a strange question. In some ways, it is obvious—he is lying by the pool, waiting for healing. And yet we must name the desire. Not everyone who is sick truly wants to be healed. Notice how the paralytic responds. He does not answer the question directly. Instead, he explains his situation. He explains why he has not been healed. "I have no man… When the water is stirred, someone else steps down before me…" We recognize this, don't we? This is how we often respond to God—not with repentance, not with surrender, but with explanation. We explain why we are the way we are. We explain why change is so difficult. We explain why our situation is unique. Much of what we say is not wrong. But it is not healing. It does not open us to grace. St. John Chrysostom, reflecting on this passage, notes that Christ does not wait for a perfect answer, nor does He require a full confession before acting. But neither does He accept the man's explanations as sufficient. Instead, He goes directly to what is needed—not explanation, but transformation. Christ commands the man to do what he cannot do, and in the command itself, He gives the power to obey. This is where we must be careful. When the soul is disordered, it does not remain neutral. It becomes a source of distortion—not only for ourselves, but for others. The problem is not simply "out there." The problem begins within. And the great difficulty of living in this world is that it teaches us to normalize this condition. It calls distortion authenticity. It calls self-justification wisdom. But the Church is not here to affirm our condition. The Church is here to heal it. The Church is a hospital. But what good is a hospital if those within it refuse to be healed? What kind of peace can we offer if we are at war within ourselves—and with one another? It is very easy to remain in this disordered state. Our instincts are not neutral; they are wounded. And our minds—brilliant as they are—often serve those instincts rather than correcting them. We use our intelligence to justify our condition instead of correcting it. The mind becomes a kind of spokesman, explaining why we are the way we are and why it is acceptable. We justify our anger. We excuse our selfishness. We baptize our pride. Scripture gives us clear examples. Ananias and Sapphira likely thought themselves generous. Simon Magus likely convinced himself that he wanted spiritual power for good reasons. But their self-justifications did not save them. The truth exposed them. The same danger exists for us. We are always moving—toward healing or toward corruption. And over time, we will become more of one than the other. I know you. I love you. You want to be part of the solution. That is why you are here. But wanting to be healed is not the same as being healed. Wanting to be good is not enough. The paralytic had desire—but he still could not heal himself. You were created good, and you are called to become more fully what you were created to be. But you are not there yet. Neither am I. So how are we healed? There is only One who heals. Christ does not argue with the man. He does not analyze his situation. He does not accept or refute his explanations. He commands: "Rise, take up your bed, and walk." And in that command, there is power. This is the heart of the matter: Healing does not come from explanation. Healing comes from obedience. So how do we learn from the living Christ? The answer is not new. We give our lives—our bodies, our minds, our souls—to Him and to His Church. We pray. We enter into the Liturgy. We love our neighbors sacrificially. We learn from the Fathers. We seek wise counsel. We quiet ourselves so that we can hear. Not because Orthodoxy is simply a system, but because this is where Christ is—healing, teaching, restoring. The paralytic could not heal himself. Neither can we. But Christ can. And He does. If we stop explaining, stop justifying, and begin obeying, then—and only then—will we become not part of the problem, but part of the healing. Christ is risen!

Today we're in Acts chapter 8, and we'll run into one named Simon Magus, and the Samaritans coming to the faith, just like Jesus promised!

Send a textWater baptism is beautiful, commanded, and worth obeying, but we keep running into one hard question: does it save you? We take that question seriously by going straight to the passages that get quoted most often and testing them against the wider story of Scripture. Starting with Noah's ark, we make a simple distinction that changes everything. The water is judgment, the ark is salvation. That becomes a clear way to read 1 Peter 3:21 without turning a physical act into the power source of the new birth. Then we slow down in John 3:5 where Jesus says we must be “born of water and of the Spirit.” We weigh the popular claims, including baptismal water and even “water” as natural birth, and we ask what fits Jesus' own logic that flesh produces flesh while Spirit produces spirit. Along the way we connect the dots to Titus 3:5, James 1:18, and John 15:3, where the Bible speaks plainly about cleansing, regeneration, and renewal through mercy, the Holy Ghost, and the Word of God. The repeated theme is that salvation is a spiritual work God does in us, not a ritual we do for God. We also look at Acts 8 and Simon Magus to show how someone can receive a sign without possessing what the sign points to, and we close with Romans 4 where Abraham is counted righteous by faith before circumcision, with the sign coming afterward as a seal. If you've ever felt pressured by “one more step” theology, or wondered how to honor baptism without turning it into a condition of justification, this conversation will help you build a biblical, gospel-centered answer. Subscribe for more Bible-driven conversations, share this with a friend who's wrestling with baptism and salvation, and leave a review telling us: what do you think “born of water” means?Support the showBE PROVOKED AND BE PERSUADED!

Complementary Old Testament Passage:Isaiah 55 Sermon Outline:A man whom the world says is greatThe Greatness of Philips GospelThe great gift of God confirmedThe great purchase price of the Spirit Family Discussion Questions:Why was Simon Magus popular?What did he call himself?What did Philip preach about?What was amazing to Simon Magus?Why did Peter and John come to visit from Jerusalem?What did Simon Magus offer them?What did Peter and John say to Simon Magus about this?What does a person need in order to be forgiven by God?What does a person need in order to receive the Holy Spirit?What is the importance of the presence of the Apostles in this text?Comparing this passage with Acts 2 and Acts 10 and Acts 19 - what is similar and what isdifferent?What does this passage say about those who focus on the miraculous?What is simony?What does this teach us about the danger of being overly cautious in evaluation people forbaptism?

Dr. Ray Taylor storms into the Virtual Alexandria. He'll argue the radical claim that Jesus was not a Jewish messiah but a Mandaean teacher of light and spirit whose authentic message was suppressed to serve the interests of the Roman Empire. You'll discover the hidden cosmology of the “World of Light” and the true significance of John the Baptist, whose ancient river baptisms were intended as a continuous path to liberation rather than a one-time church ritual. By exposing the “cleanup job” of the New Testament, we'll reveal a deep-seated conspiracy to replace the gnostic wisdom of Simon Magus with the fabricated theology of rising Abrahamic religions. More on Ray: https://bishopraytaylorphd.substack.com/ Get The Occult Elvis: https://amzn.to/4jnTjE4 Virtual Alexandria Academy: https://thegodabovegod.com/virtual-alexandria-academy/ Gnostic Tarot Readings: https://thegodabovegod.com/gnostic-tarot-reading/ The Gnostic Tarot: https://www.makeplayingcards.com/sell/synkrasis Homepage: https://thegodabovegod.com/ Patreon: https://www.patreon.com/aeonbyte AB Prime: https://thegodabovegod.com/members/subscription-levels/ Voice Over services: https://thegodabovegod.com/voice-talent/ Support with donation: https://buy.stripe.com/00g16Q8RK8D93mw288 Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

In the latest Black Iron Intercept, I take you on a bold, three-part exploration of one of history's most subversive spiritual traditions. Part One dismantles the mythological world the Gnostics inherited — exposing the Archons, soulless cosmic rulers who keep humanity trapped through materialism, ignorance, and manufactured desire. Part Two dives into the Book of Enoch, tracing how its fallen angels became Yaldabaoth's archons, and how figures like Norea and Simon Magus emerged as unlikely champions of divine resistance. Part Three turns the lens inward to examine the Gnostic view of sin, drawing on the Gnostic gospels and thinkers such as C.G. Jung. This is ancient wisdom with the gloves off. Get The Occult Elvis: https://amzn.to/4jnTjE4 Virtual Alexandria Academy: https://thegodabovegod.com/virtual-alexandria-academy/ Gnostic Tarot Readings: https://thegodabovegod.com/gnostic-tarot-reading/ The Gnostic Tarot: https://www.makeplayingcards.com/sell/synkrasis Homepage: https://thegodabovegod.com/ Patreon: https://www.patreon.com/aeonbyte AB Prime: https://thegodabovegod.com/members/subscription-levels/ Voice Over services: https://thegodabovegod.com/voice-talent/ Support with donation: https://buy.stripe.com/00g16Q8RK8D93mw288 Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

The Virtual Alexandria celebrates as we're graced again by Dr. David Litwa, this eon to discuss his new book, The Orthodox Corruption of Paul: An Argument for the Priority of the Marcionite Apostolos. Imagine discovering the earliest edition of Paul's letters, and it doesn't mirror the traditional view we've been given. Let's find out who Paul really was and what his theology detailed. Was he Gnostic? Was the heretic Marcion behind much of the letters? And you can count on us paralleling Paul to Simon Magus. Heresy shouldn't be this much fun, but it is, it just is! More on David: https://mdavidlitwa.com/ Get the book: https://amzn.to/3ZnncMY Get The Occult Elvis: https://amzn.to/4jnTjE4 Virtual Alexandria Academy: https://thegodabovegod.com/virtual-alexandria-academy/ Gnostic Tarot Readings: https://thegodabovegod.com/gnostic-tarot-reading/ The Gnostic Tarot: https://www.makeplayingcards.com/sell/synkrasis Homepage: https://thegodabovegod.com/ Patreon: https://www.patreon.com/aeonbyte AB Prime: https://thegodabovegod.com/members/subscription-levels/ Voice Over services: https://thegodabovegod.com/voice-talent/ Support with donation: https://buy.stripe.com/00g16Q8RK8D93mw288 Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

Have I mentioned lately that all roads lead to Simon Magus? I have, and it's truer than ever. Dr. Raymond Taylor joins me to discuss groundbreaking research that positions the “Father of all Heresies” as the font of Gnosticism, Christianity, and other ancient movements. He is Paul, and he is the true successor of John the Baptist. He is the savior hidden in the New Testament, and the figure the rising church feared the most and had to censor savagely. Most of all, Simon's teachings contain the true path to cosmic Gnosis and the liberation of humanity. Not too shabby, eh? More on Ray: https://bishopraytaylorphd.substack.com/ Get The Occult Elvis: https://amzn.to/4jnTjE4 Virtual Alexandria Academy: https://thegodabovegod.com/virtual-alexandria-academy/ Gnostic Tarot Readings: https://thegodabovegod.com/gnostic-tarot-reading/ The Gnostic Tarot: https://www.makeplayingcards.com/sell/synkrasis Homepage: https://thegodabovegod.com/ Patreon: https://www.patreon.com/aeonbyte AB Prime: https://thegodabovegod.com/members/subscription-levels/ Voice Over services: https://thegodabovegod.com/voice-talent/ Support with donation: https://buy.stripe.com/00g16Q8RK8D93mw288 Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

Show NotesIn this episode, I explore the tension between authenticity and effectiveness in reaching people with transformative work. Recorded on a rainy Friday evening in the UK, this long-form conversation unpacks how we can work within systems we aim to subvert without losing our mission.Key Topics:The Gnostic Caravan ProjectWorking through the Gnostic Tarot deck during AdventExploring characters like Sabaoth, Simon Magus, Mary Magdalene, and SophiaUsing the deck as a tool for spiritual development and self-knowledgeOne Brain, Many PathsHow different traditions (chaos magic, Christianity, Taoism, NLP, coaching) all use the same mental toolsThe Human Potential Movement and New Thought Movement as predecessors to today's self-help culturePattern interrupts, anchors, meditation, and mindfulness across all systemsThe Authenticity ParadoxThe Purity Trap: staying so authentic you reach only seven people who already agree with youThe Efficacy Trap: smoothing out all edges until you become indistinguishable from the systemFinding the middle path: speaking enough of the system's language to be heard while delivering actual transformationStrategic Identity & Chaos MagicIdentity as fluid and tactical, not fixedUsing belief as a tool rather than an anchorThe Saboth principle: waking up inside the corrupt system and breaking freeThe Real MissionReframing authenticity as tactic, not identityThe only question that matters: "Am I helping someone move closer to sovereignty?"Trojan horse strategy: get attention, then deliver liberation technologyBlogging as Subversive ActivityWhy tech platforms suppress external linksThe attention economy and algorithmic controlReclaiming your own digital space through bloggingRSS feeds vs. doom scrollingReferenced:William Burroughs on language as virusThe Matrix and Morpheus's red pill problemRage Against the Machine - "Wake Up"Martin Luther's 95 ThesesPaul Kurtz's conscious robot conceptRobert Anton Wilson and reality tunnelsNeil Postman's "Teaching as a Subversive Activity"Call to Action:Start your own blog. Create your own space. Free your mind from algorithmic control. Join the guerrilla blogging underground.

As I always say, all roads lead to Simon Magus, so let's find out how the essence of “The Father of all Heresies” can help us in our modern world. For this quest, I'm joined by Daniel Moler. Beyond Simon Magus, he'll prune Gnosis from his modern Gnostic epic, The Simon Myth Chronicles. We'll cover topics such as the Noosphere, simulation, entheogens, mind control, and more. Get ready to tap into your inner magician and shaman while still holding on to your rational mind. And why not check out the status of modern comics and other myth conduits? More on Daniel: https://www.danielmolerweb.com/ Get The Occult Elvis: https://amzn.to/4jnTjE4 Virtual Alexandria Academy: https://thegodabovegod.com/virtual-alexandria-academy/ Gnostic Tarot Readings: https://thegodabovegod.com/gnostic-tarot-reading/ The Gnostic Tarot: https://www.makeplayingcards.com/sell/synkrasis Homepage: https://thegodabovegod.com/ Patreon: https://www.patreon.com/aeonbyte AB Prime: https://thegodabovegod.com/members/subscription-levels/ Voice Over services: https://thegodabovegod.com/voice-talent/ Support with donation: https://buy.stripe.com/00g16Q8RK8D93mw288 Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

By Ken Loucks - Most people know the name Simon Magus, but few understand why God preserved his story in Acts 8—or why the Church still needs its lessons today. This message exposes the dramatic moment when a lifelong deceiver collided with the real power of God, and how that encounter revealed the difference

Episode 4 - Simon the Magician - "Villains of the Early Church: And How They Made Us Better Christians" In this episode, Mike Aquilina and Kris McGregor discuss Simon the Magician and learning pride and hubris. An excerpt from Villains of the Early Church: IF THERE had been supermarket tabloids in Rome of the first century, Simon Magus, or Simon the Magician, would have been on the front pages every week. His story gives us zombies, levitation, a talking dog, a jewel heist, and a prophesying baby, just to name a few of the highlights. But it all begins with a true story in the Acts of the Apostles. The post VEC4 – Simon the Magician – Villains of the Early Church with Mike Aquilina – Discerning Hearts Podcast appeared first on Discerning Hearts Catholic Podcasts.

Today we turn to Acts 8 in our study of the Key Chapters of the Bible. This passage records the expansion of the Gospel into Samaria and how Simon Magus had false faith. It's a helpful passage for many questions of theology and we hope you join us!

CrossRoads Church Making and maturing disciples together as a family

CrossRoads Church Making and maturing disciples together as a family

***ATTENTION***  We had a few audio quality/connection issues, particularly early on, but please stick with us - Phil This Sunday at 8PM UK time, we welcome back author and researcher Chris Tolworthy, returning to The Amish Inquisition for the first time since 2022!

Dive into the mysterious life of Simon Magus—a man who dared to rival the apostles and tried to fly over Rome!

Why were these books removed from the Bible? Dr. Nathanael Andrade, Greek and Roman historian, joins us once again to talk about some interesting religious topics. Did Jesus have a twin? Why were the Acts of Thomas & Acts of Peter removed from the Bible? WELCOME TO CAMP!

Today we turn to Acts 8 in our study of the Key Chapters of the Bible. This passage records the expansion of the Gospel into Samaria and how Simon Magus had false faith. It's a helpful passage for many questions of theology and we hope you join us! Check out our Bible Study Guide on the Key Chapters of Genesis! Available on Amazon! To see our dedicated podcast website with access to all our episodes and other resources, visit us at: www.keychapters.org. Find us on all major platforms, or use these direct links: Spotify: https://open.spotify.com/show/6OqbnDRrfuyHRmkpUSyoHv Itunes: https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/366-key-chapters-in-the-bible/id1493571819 YouTube: Key Chapters of the Bible on YouTube. As always, we are grateful to be included in the "Top 100 Bible Podcasts to Follow" from Feedspot.com. Also for regularly being awarded "Podcast of the Day" from PlayerFM. Special thanks to Joseph McDade for providing our theme music.   

In this episode of "Way of the Hermit," David and Gene dive down the rabbit hole, into the world of Gnosticism and its connection to Freemasonry. They explore how Gnostic teachings, once considered heretical, were driven underground and lay buried for centuries until their rediscovery in the 20th century. They discuss the core principles of Gnosticism, emphasizing its focus on direct inner knowledge of the divine (gnosis) rather than adherence to dogma or external rules.The episode traces the historical suppression of Gnostic ideas by early Christian literalists and examines key figures in Gnostic thought, including Simon Magus, Philo of Alexandria, and G.R.S. Mead. David and Gene highlight the significance of the Nag Hammadi texts discovered in 1945, which provided unprecedented insights into Gnostic Christianity. They also explore the symbolic interpretations of religious and Masonic stories, arguing that these allegories contain deeper truths about human consciousness and spiritual awakening.The discussion draws intriguing parallels between Gnostic concepts and Masonic symbolism, suggesting that Freemasonry is perhaps a form of Gnosticism. They propose that the three degrees of the Masonic Blue Lodge, as well as the Masonic quest for the “Lost Word”, the three names of God and three temples in the Scottish Rite, correspond to the three stages of Gnostic awakening.Deep Dive:Nag Hammadi's Gnostic RevelationsChapters:01:15 Introduction01:36 Gnosticism04:02 Masonry is Gnosticism06:33 The Key to the Mysteries09:56 Church of the Antichrist13:19 Simon Magus15:49 Philo of Alexandria18:05 G.R.S. Mead21:21 Nag Hammadi24:45 ConclusionsResources:The Gnostics: The First Christian Heretics by Sean MartinJesus and the Lost Goddess: The Secret Teachings of the Original Christians by Tim Freke & Peter GandyNovo Clavis Esoterika by Timothy HoganGnostic Religion in Antiquity by Roelof van den BroekPistis Sophia: The Gnostic Tradition of Mary Magdalene, Jesus, and His Disciples by G.R.S. MeadFragments Of A Faith Forgotten by G.R.S. MeadCorpus Hermeticum by G.R.S. MeadSimon Magus: The Gnostic Magician by G.R.S. MeadGnostic John the Baptizer by G.R.S. MeadGnosticism: New Light on the Ancient Tradition of Inner Knowing by Stephan A. HoellerThe American Religion: The Emergence of the Post-Christian Nation by Harold BloomThe Gnostic Gospels by Elaine PagelsGod is a Verb by David Cooper

Today's episode takes a look into the character and life of the Apostle Peter. Much is made of his ministry that has no home in either Scripture or authentic history, but we will dive into what can be known regarding him and his ministry God gave him. While he is clearly NOT the bishop of Rome or the first pope, what we learn of him is even more impressive: a humble man who has learned through his own fallibility to depend on the Lord all the more. Title: The Real Peter - the Apostle to the Jews Date: AD 30-65 Place: Jerusalem, Judea, Samaria, Asia minor, and Rome Key Figures and Events: Peter, Simon Magus, Justin Martyr Documents of Significance: Acts, Galatians, 1st and 2nd Peter, Justin Martyr's 1st Apology Contact: churchhistoryandtheology@proton.me Want to Support the Show? If you'd like to help cover hosting costs, development, and general support of the show, you can do so here: https://www.buymeacoffee.com/churchhistory License: Church History and Theology is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License. For full license details, please visit https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/ Under this license, you are free to download, copy, share, remix, and translate episodes. You must credit Church History and Theology, link to the license, and indicate if changes were made. These materials may not be used for commercial purposes.

Today's episode takes a look into the character and life of the Apostle Peter. Much is made of his ministry that has no home in either Scripture or authentic history, but we will dive into what can be known regarding him and his ministry God gave him. While he is clearly NOT the bishop of Rome or the first pope, what we learn of him is even more impressive: a humble man who has learned through his own fallibility to depend on the Lord all the more. Title: The Real Peter - the Apostle to the Jews Date: AD 30-65 Place: Jerusalem, Judea, Samaria, Asia minor, and Rome Key Figures and Events: Peter, Simon Magus, Justin Martyr Documents of Significance: Acts, Galatians, 1st and 2nd Peter, Justin Martyr's 1st Apology Contact: churchhistoryandtheology@proton.me Want to Support the Show? If you'd like to help cover hosting costs, development, and general support of the show, you can do so here: https://www.buymeacoffee.com/churchhistory License: Church History and Theology is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License. For full license details, please visit https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/ Under this license, you are free to download, copy, share, remix, and translate episodes. You must credit Church History and Theology, link to the license, and indicate if changes were made. These materials may not be used for commercial purposes.

Honored to have researcher and Gnostic priestess Billie Steigerwald at the Virtual Alexandria. We'll go deep into the Orphic underworld to procure the treasure guarded by the dragon-headed snake. This quest will entail understanding the Gnostic idea of evil, the cosmologies of luminaries like Simon Magus, and the influence of the Orphic/Elusynean mysteries on Gnosticism. And how Gnostic thought might be the originator of modern erotic and romantic love (despite or because of their alleged world-hating).Get Astro Gnosis 3 tickets: https://thegodabovegod.com/astro-gnosis-3/The Gnostic Tarot: https://www.makeplayingcards.com/sell/synkrasisHomepage: https://thegodabovegod.com/ Patreon: https://www.patreon.com/aeonbyteAB Prime: https://thegodabovegod.com/members/subscription-levels/ Virtual Alexandria Academy: https://thegodabovegod.com/virtual-alexandria-academy/Voice Over services: https://thegodabovegod.com/voice-talent/ Astro Gnosis (Meet the Archons): https://thegodabovegod.com/meet-archon-replay/Support this podcast at — https://redcircle.com/aeon-byte-gnostic-radio/donationsAdvertising Inquiries: https://redcircle.com/brandsPrivacy & Opt-Out: https://redcircle.com/privacy

Me and⁠ Ben Kellog⁠ speak with writer/director Ben Hopkins (Inside (2023) w/ Willem Dafoe, Simon Magus, Lost in Karastan) on dialogue-free scripts, armageddon, and more For full episodes, resources, and more support the project on ⁠Patreon⁠

Join me for a reading and discussion of the second century text, The Acts of Peter

It is great to have Darren Lorente-Bull at the Virtual Alexandria to discuss his new work, Searching For The Divine Spark: A Brief History Of Gnosticism. Get ready for a rewarding primer on the Gnostics that brings the latest academic research and expertly explains the relevance of Gnosticism in modern times. From the Nag Hammadi library to Braudillard, from Simon Magus to Neo in the Matrix, you'll be nearer to understanding your Divine Spark in this tired, glitchy simulation.  Get the book: https://amzn.to/4cSweqEGet Astro Gnosis 3 tickets: https://thegodabovegod.com/astro-gnosis-3/The Gnostic Tarot: https://www.makeplayingcards.com/sell/synkrasisHomepage: https://thegodabovegod.com/ Patreon: https://www.patreon.com/aeonbyteAB Prime: https://thegodabovegod.com/members/subscription-levels/ Virtual Alexandria Academy: https://thegodabovegod.com/virtual-alexandria-academy/Voice Over services: https://thegodabovegod.com/voice-talent/ Astro Gnosis (Meet the Archons): https://thegodabovegod.com/meet-archon-replay/Support this podcast at — https://redcircle.com/aeon-byte-gnostic-radio/donationsAdvertising Inquiries: https://redcircle.com/brandsPrivacy & Opt-Out: https://redcircle.com/privacy

Acts Timeline https://www.2belikechrist.com/articles/timeline-of-the-book-of-acts  Philip's unmarried daughters Acts 21:8-9 Philip the Deacon reflection w/Same As Apostle Arguments http://justus.anglican.org/resources/bio/264.html  Hermione, Eutychis, Irais, and Chariline https://www.markcarlson-ghost.com/index.php/2016/09/17/philips-daughters-prophets-names/  Hermione https://www.oca.org/saints/lives/2022/09/04/102492-martyr-hermione-daughter-of-saint-philip-the-deacon Welcome to Popeular History, a library of Catholic knowledge and insights. As promised, this episode is going to be a bit of a roundup of extra stories and tidbits we have on some of our recent characters from outside the Bible. Let's start with our main man of late, a guy I really didn't think I'd be talking about this much but we are deacon oriented so I'm rolling with it, Philip the Deacon. The best extrabiblical tie-in point for Philip is actually in the canonical bible, where in an aside, Paul says the following, quote: "We reached Caesarea and stayed at the house of Philip the evangelist, one of the Seven. He had four unmarried daughters who prophesied." (Acts 21:9) End quote. And that's it. Here we have four women with holy powers and no additional info apart from they're the unmarried daughters of one of the first deacons. You aren't going to find many prompts more ripe for fan fiction than that, and the early Christian community ran with it, naming the daughters Hermione, Eutychis, Irais, and Chariline, or some other set of names, it's inconsistent, but definitely they got names outside the bible and went off on adventures. They may have went on to be a source for a source for Eusebius, who can be described as the dominant early Church historian so we'll definitely be revisiting him in time. Philip himself is cited as the Protodeacon among the seven original deacons, the proto- part meaning first, kind of like how his colleague Stephen is referred to as the Protomartyr, though I suppose that application is more in terms of chronology than dignity. The title of Protodeacon does have a specific application in the College of Cardinals today, namely it's the Cardinal who has held the title of Cardinal-Deacon the longest. The protodeacon is normally the one who gives the announcement- Habemus Papam- "we have a Pope" when a new Pontiff is elected. I didn't come across any death tradition for Philip the Deacon, but I did find a site making an unexpectedly compelling case for identifying him with Philip the Apostle. Sure, the Apostles set up the deacons to allow themselves to get on with their apostling, but what if he was, like, an embedded supervisor? It would be fairly recognizable organizational move today and would match with the extra emphasis he receives, not to mention his extrabiblical protodeacon status. The lack of any apparent tradition regarding the deacon's death is to me the most compelling argument, usually there's *something* floating around about that. The biggest wrinkle is what we talked about yesterday, with the apostles kind of being needed to sign off on the baptisms of the Samaritans, you know, that discussion of confirmation. Anyways, when a saint dies–and pretty much everyone who believes in saints accepts Philip the Deacon as a saint–well, when a saint dies it's typical for the day of their death to go down as their feast day. I'm going to be talking a LOT about all sorts of things over the course of this podcast, but I won't be going into feast days much. They're easy to look up and can be tricky to explain accurately considering they can vary across traditions, or even within traditions as practices vary over time, and they can get bumped in certain years by other more significant dates, and I'd want to call out of they're based on something other than their date of death, all of which would be interesting if you were interested in feast days but extremely dry if you weren't. Really, there's plenty of material in feast days for their own podcast, and if anyone wants to take that on or has one to recommend I'll be happy to edit this to include a plug for that show, but in the meantime, no, I will not be focusing on feast days. Too easily findable elsewhere, and too derailing for our already very fragilly railed narrative. I'll simply be doing darn near everything else. Now, we've talked a lot about two out of the seven deacons; can extrabiblical tradition tell us more about the others? Yes, of course! But I'm not going to go into every detail various traditions have about everyone. Believe it or not, I didn't even do that for Philip. The high level takeaways are that four out of five of the remaining deacons were martyred, and the fifth, Nicolas, well he was actually suspected of being a heretic by two early big names in the Church, Saints Iranaeus and Hippolytus, both of whom we'll get to in time. You see, in Revelations 2, God, or uh, well, probably god? Revelations is a trip. Anyways, in Revelations 2 God makes it clear he really doesn't like the "Nicolateans", whoever that is. It does seem that they were a heretical Christian sect early enough to make it into the actual Bible, but that and the apparent name of their founder is basically all we have on them from the Bible. Outside the Bible, like I mentioned, Nicholas the Deacon is very much a suspect, and it probably doesn't help his case that his name not only matches the perp, but he was named last among the Seven, the same place of dubious honor Judas Iscariot once held among the Twelve. That's all for today. We're going to talk more about two characters we've discussed recently multiple times in due course, and we'll save them for those times. After all, Simeon Bachos the Eunuch traditionally founded a national church whose impact on Christian history is as extensive as it is unique, and Saint Paul is, well, Saint Paul. Similarly, I'll find other appropriate occasions to discuss the later lives and deaths of the Apostles we haven't already covered, in addition to letting Pontifacts take the lead on that, they have a series coming up, it will be exiting in a few months. And Cornelius, for his part, actually has surprisingly little to review, he traditionally wound up as a bishop, and that's about it. Which I make sound like nothing,  but it would have been a sign of his new life in Christ, just as it was for everyone else who wound up in leadership in the new Christian church. It certainly isn't nothing. Anyways, I believe that basically leaves us with Simon Magus, which is perfect. In our next narrative episode, we'll follow him to Rome, and as you might have guessed Rome is going to be our home base for the next two thousand or so years of narrative. Thank you for listening, God bless you all!

Acts Timeline https://www.2belikechrist.com/articles/timeline-of-the-book-of-acts  Acts 8:9-25 Good evening everyone, Just a quick update, the next couple episodes will be the next few promised installments in the big timeline project, episodes of which are now marked with a latin cross at the beginning of the episode name to make them easily identifiable, now including all such episodes released so far. For those episodes, remember they were originally put together for the daily format, so words like “yesterday” and “tomorrow” should be taken with a grain of salt, as the last such episode was in early October, and the next after these will be in 2025 at the earliest. Next month, which I guess is technically this month, I'm officially recording in March now, uh anyways later in March we've got some birthday interviews, and I'm going to let those carry the show until April, when the next worldbuilding Episode on the Gospel of Mark should be ready, followed by Luke in May and John in June. If I fall behind on that plan, don't be alarmed, that's life and there's a lot of life right now. No matter what, I'll have another update for you on June 29th, everyone's favorite feast day, and don't worry, I haven't forgotten about Cardinal Numbers. Anyways, for today, here's past me, going into a little more detail about the adventures of Saint Philip, the Evangelist! Welcome to Popeular History! My name is Gregg, and yeah, there are show notes these days. They have transcripts, and links! Lovely stuff. Anyways… Last episode we concluded our discussion of who can claim the status of the First Gentile Convert. If the Samaritans Philip had converted shortly after Stephen's stoning count- and to be clear as I previously argued I don't think they actually should, since Samaritans aren't normally considered gentiles, but if they do manage to count, then Simon Magus has a decent claim to be the first Gentile convert, as he was among those first recorded Samaritan baptisms.   Let's dive in, quote   "for some time a man named Simon had practiced sorcery in the city and amazed all the people of Samaria. He boasted that he was someone great, and all the people, both high and low, gave him their attention and exclaimed, “This man is rightly called the Great Power of God.” They followed him because he had amazed them for a long time with his sorcery. But when they believed Philip as he proclaimed the good news of the kingdom of God and the name of Jesus Christ, they were baptized, both men and women Simon himself believed and was baptized. And he followed Philip everywhere, astonished by the great signs and miracles he saw." End quote   Now that's basically the part we covered last episode, but with the addition of Simon as a sorcerer. But wait, there's more! Quote:   When the apostles in Jerusalem heard that Samaria had accepted the word of God, they sent Peter and John to Samaria. When they arrived, they prayed for the new believers there that they might receive the Holy Spirit, because the Holy Spirit had not yet come on any of them; they had simply been baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus. Then Peter and John placed their hands on them, and they received the Holy Spirit."   End quote   This is one of the key texts for the practice of the Sacrament of Confirmation, as it shows a separate reception of the Holy Spirit after baptism. It's also interesting to observe how the baptism was carried out by Deacon Philip, but the confirmation part seems to have required the presence of the apostles, the predecessors of the bishops. This matches current practice, where deacons- or really anyone in a pinch- can baptize, but confirmation is generally reserved to the bishop. In modern practice it might also be delegated to the priests, so maybe some of those priests who joined the Jerusalem Jesus club after Peter's Pentecost homily could have done in a pinch.   I also want to note that I saw some commentary suggesting Philip the Deacon was the same as Philip the Apostle, sort of an embedded agent among the deacons, but I think the way that all played out just now is an effective counterargument to that theory. There's a million Johns, why not multiple Philips?   Anyways, the next section is what Simon is most famous for and is where the practice of Simony- the selling of Church offices, blessings, and or pardons gets its name.   Quote   "When Simon saw that the Spirit was given at the laying on of the apostles' hands, he offered them money and said, “Give me also this ability so that everyone on whom I lay my hands may receive the Holy Spirit.”   Peter answered: “May your money perish with you, because you thought you could buy the gift of God with money! You have no part or share in this ministry, because your heart is not right before God. Repent of this wickedness and pray to the Lord in the hope that he may forgive you for having such a thought in your heart. For I see that you are full of bitterness and captive to sin.”   Then Simon answered, “Pray to the Lord for me so that nothing you have said may happen to me.”   End quote   Alright, so Peter condemns, and Simon Magus repents, and therefore the practice of Simony is ended for all time. Just kidding. Simony is one of the most popular pieces of corruption in the Church, and while being pretty consistently condemned it just keeps popping up. We'll even get to the point where the Papacy is effectively sold, and yeah, that's considered a low point, not to mention the way the apparent selling of forgiveness in the form of indulgences helped spark the Protestant Reformation. There was some fancy mental and theological footwork being done to argue that the whole indulgences thing wasn't *really* Simony, but the whole situation reeked of corruption and Europe exploded. Now look, it wasn't the only cause and I'm being needlessly dramatic here, but let me have this one because that was fun to say.   Speaking of things we can have fun with but should probably feel academically guilty about, I want to turn to some less generally reliable sources tomorrow. You know, the 3s, 4s, and 5s on our credibility scale. They've got more info on Deacon Philip, more info on Simeon Bachos- remember that's the Ethiopian Eunuch, a lot more info on Simon Magus, and heck, more info on Peter too, while we're at it. Of course I think the word "info" might be a stretch. Words. These sources have more words on those folks.   I'm sure tomorrow will be a banger as we dive onto the New Testament Apocrypha- and as we make our way to Rome!

An interview with Dr. David Litwa The strange story of Simon in the Bible illustrates the uncomfortable truth that Christianity seems to reinvent itself when it defines itself in opposition to its perceived enemies. In this biblical account, Simon (later called Simon Magus) appears to have been repenting properly from his mistake of offering to pay for the spiritual instructions, when Peter lashed out at him harshly. Litwa thinks the Acts of the Apostles was written many decades after the struggle between Simon of Samaria and Peter, and the author of Acts appears to have used a document known as “Simon and the Great Declaration,” for a source. This earlier Simonian document, written by Simon's followers, refers to him as Simon Christ, concurring with Simon's own declaration of his equality with Christ. Such a move would have put him in direct competition with Peter and in opposition to the objectives of the author of Acts to position Peter as the head of the Christian movement.

Walter Veith is available at ⁠Amazing Discoveries⁠ This is from Walter's ⁠Total Onslaught⁠ Series. Published Sep 29, 2011 This is episode 2 of 35. ~~~ Follow Christ's footsteps through ancient Israel and get an insight into the life of Jesus in this remarkable remake of Christ's journey. This episode takes a visual journey through ancient Palestine retracing the steps of the Master and highlighting His great teachings such as the Sermon on the Mount. The life and ministry of Christ, His birth, and death on the cross are portrayed in multimedia format in a thought-provoking study. You will enjoy this look into the life of Christ. ~~~ Intro [00:00] Church of Nativity [5:30] Milk Grotto [13:00] Mary & Joseph Journey to Egypt [15:26] The Dump City [19:49] Jerusalem [26:20] Temptations of Jesus [31:15] Peter or Simon Magus? [38:43] Where Jesus Preached [42:50] Seven Trails of Jesus [1:03:07] Pilate's stone [1:09:45] The Suffering of Jesus [1:10:21] Via Dolorosa (Golgotha) Catholic vs Jewish [1:11:53] Inside Catholic Golgotha [1:13:18] Why it can't be the real Golgotha? [1:15:36] Golgotha [1:16:12] God is love [1:17:30] Garden Tomb [1:17:45] Mount of Olives [1:21:00] Golden Gate [1:21:25] Pictures of Historical Places [1:23:09] ~~~ Watch more: https://adtv.watch/ Subscribe to our YouTube channel: https://www.youtube.com/user/Official... Visit our website: https://new.amazingdiscoveries.org/ ~~~~~~~ From ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Me⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠: ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Be Good Broadcast⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ I just rebroadcast publicly available content of those spreading The Word Propagate it. Share it. ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Contact⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ Me My ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Twitter⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ Please Rate or Review on ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Spotify⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ or ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Apple --- Send in a voice message: https://podcasters.spotify.com/pod/show/begoodbroadcast/message Support this podcast: https://podcasters.spotify.com/pod/show/begoodbroadcast/support

Gnosticism has manifested in American culture in disturbing and amazing ways. And it's more predominant than you can imagine. Get ready to savor some gringo Gnosis, whether in the literature of Herman Melville, Cormac McCarthy, Philip K. Dick, and other literary giants; or in socio-political movements, alternative Christian factions, and the Western/Noir genres. From the founding of the USA to The Matrix, Simon Magus and Helen secretly rule North America.Astral Guest – Dr. Arthur Versluis, author of American Gnosis: Political Religion and Transcendence and Professor and Department Chair of Religious Studies in the College of Arts & Letters at Michigan State University.Homepage: https://thegodabovegod.com/Patreon: https://www.patreon.com/aeonbyteAB Prime: https://thegodabovegod.com/members/subscription-levels/Virtual Alexandria Academy: https://thegodabovegod.com/virtual-alexandria-academy/Voice Over services: https://thegodabovegod.com/voice-talent/Astro Gnosis (Meet the Archons): https://thegodabovegod.com/meet-archon-replay/Support this podcast at — https://redcircle.com/aeon-byte-gnostic-radio/donationsAdvertising Inquiries: https://redcircle.com/brandsPrivacy & Opt-Out: https://redcircle.com/privacy

Today we turn to Acts 8 in our study of the Key Chapters of the Bible. This passage records the expansion of the Gospel into Samaria and how Simon Magus had false faith. It's a helpful passage for many questions of theology and we hope you join us! Check out our Bible Study Guide on the Key Chapters of Genesis! Available on Amazon! To see our dedicated podcast website with access to all our episodes and other resources, visit us at: www.keychapters.org. Find us on all major platforms, or use these direct links: Spotify: https://open.spotify.com/show/6OqbnDRrfuyHRmkpUSyoHv Itunes: https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/366-key-chapters-in-the-bible/id1493571819 YouTube: Key Chapters of the Bible on YouTube. As always, we are grateful to be included in the "Top 100 Bible Podcasts to Follow" from Feedspot.com. Also for regularly being awarded "Podcast of the Day" from PlayerFM. Special thanks to Joseph McDade for providing our theme music.   

Elliott Saxton returned to the Virtual Alexandria with a heretical blast. He presented on the Father of Gnosticism and All Heresies: Simon Magus. Beyond little-known but critical facts about the magician, we explored his symbiotic relationship with Simon Peter, the Rock. We discovered an elegant theology of fire magic and cosmic liberation. But you know that happens when we cover one of the show's patron saints. And yes – that's a rendition of the Starman in the promo graphic.Join the Virtual Alexandria AcademyThis is a partial show. For the interview's second half, please become a member or patron at Patreon.Get the simple, effective, and affordable Red Circle Private RSS Feed for all full showsSupport this podcast at — https://redcircle.com/aeon-byte-gnostic-radio/donationsAdvertising Inquiries: https://redcircle.com/brandsPrivacy & Opt-Out: https://redcircle.com/privacy

Do you think there are any passages in the "Pauline" epistles that look like they might be written by Simon Magus? What do you make of Valentinus's claim that he was in the apostolic line of “Paul” and had secret teachings through Paul's disciple Theudas? If this is true, and Paul is Simon, can any Valentinian-like doctrine be found in any passages in Paul that might, therefore, be likely candidates for an original scrap of Simon's writing? Isn't it suspicious that a Savioe should actually be named "Savior" (Yehoshua)? Wasn't Jesus really, by "holy spirit," intending a dynamic and fresh experience of life in the present moment? I suffer from OCD (scrupulosity) and have an intense fear of going to hell for losing my belief which is totally irrational I know, but certain sensational claims by exorcists have made me wonder if it's all real after all. How can claims like this be rationalized? It seems it is impossible to hold in mind all facades of the jewel that is Jesus, when contemplating him, or having a personal relationship with him in one's mind. In their contemplation of him, are Christians really relating to one character or a cast of characters? Matthew 28:9-10 seem superfluous. Why does the risen Jesus simply repeat what the angel said only a moment before? Could it be that some of the supposed “appearances” can be explained by Jesus' early followers noticing people that reminded them of Jesus and they managed to convince themselves it really was Jesus? Because as odd as that sounds it seems to be what the two men in Lk. 24 did. I doubt that the Flavians invented Christianity. They were so pragmatic and hard-nosed that their strategy would have been simply to crush their enemies.