>>17214677
Man I would absolutely SHIT myself, literally, to one day, just once, come onto /x/ and see anyone talking about gnosticism that had the slightest fucking clue what the word meant.

>>17214677

Bumping with some interesting stuff:

The author of this book says that nasty spirits / demons are, in fact, the "good guys", but they can't enter into this hellish reality without being disfigured.

So basically everything "nice" are just wolves in sheep's clothing.
And that's why goetic demons are ugly or simply weird, too.

>>17214688

I said it's an unorthodox book, family.
It's not a real gnostic gospel or something.

File: tmp_6868-demiurge-437493137.png (342 KB, 750x1064) Image search: [Google]

342 KB, 750x1064

When in doubt, Hail Eris.

When not in doubt, get in doubt.

>>17214696
I'm not talking about the book, I'm talking about the endless fixation on the "demiurge." You do realize that in a good number of Gnostic belief systems, the demiurge isn't anything to overcome directly, it's just a part of the history of existence. It's the material world, not its creator, one has to overcome. Or that in some systems, neither the material nor the demiurge are even a problem or flawed, but are merely a misinterpretation of the divine, and that it's merely overcoming this misinterpretation one needs to strive for?

OF COURSE NOT. No one on this blighted pit of a board does! Instead it's all just demiurge slash fiction.

>>17214718

I do, actually.
But if OP is about the Demiurge, then OP is about the Demiurge.

Although one might enlighten us about other Gnostic traditions and beliefs, just like you did.

Also be the change that you want to see in the world!