Koncrete,
Many of the objections you've made derive from the amalgam I have previously mentioned, namely between El (the demiurge) and YHWH (the fallen angel). These are the images of two conceptual dieties at odds with one another, each representing a part of the tripartite structure of the universe. The Demiurge was formed of soul substance. He can be interpreted as God without spirit / without gnosis / without Christ. When the demiurge is baptized / acquires gnosis / with Christ, he
becomes God. This is why gnostics sometimes referred to him as Father and God as well.
The Fallen Angel represents the material substance. He can be interpreted as the one who seeks to prevent the soul (and the demiurge) from becoming spiritual/ from acquiring gnosis, by binding souls to his dominion (the world), by making them believe he is God of all things, by having them perform material rituals and sacrifices in honour of him. When people fall in this trap and follow him, they are the Whore of Babylon, the Wife (body of believers) who gives her faith and affection to the wrong Husband (which should be Christ and Christ alone). Jerusalem was the Whore of Babylon for it was she who worshipped this fallen pretender-god, who imposed the most ridiculous material rituals and sacrificial laws in his name, under the banner of spirituality. Therefore Christ was sent by the Father in Heaven (above the demiurge) to retrieve the prostitute (mirrored in the story of Christ and Sophia, and Jesus and Mary Magdalene) and make her His Wife.
Therefore:
... that the Creator would send a "messiah" (or himself) through the devil's and/or the deceivers CHOSEN people ...
... is exactly what happened. The Son of God came to the lost sheep of Israel, the whore of Babylon, the adulterous, because once worshipping the Father (El, the demiurge, the Most High) of Jesus (
the man Jesus, not Christ) they gradually replaced him with the antichrist (Baal, the fallen angel, the rebellious son of El). It is obvious that the Father of Christ (not El, the demiurge, the Most High but the Father in Heaven) would light the fire where it is darkest; that the Logos, the Word that brings order, would be uttered where Chaos reigned most; that the true Christ would be sent to conquer the throne of the antichrist. He did: the temple of the whore (the Temple of Jerusalem) was destroyed, the majority of the adulterous people converted to Christ (ie. diaspora) and the body of Christ became the ruling force in the world.
This helps me see what you believe and why you believe it. So your belief in summary is that theres god(s), the devil, and the Creator (along with other fallen angels)?
I believe in the Valentinian tripartite structure of existence.
God, demiurge, devil.
Spirit, soul, matter.
Pneumatic soul, psychic soul, hylic soul.
Seth, Abel, Cain.
Good, just, evil.
Did whoever you say the Creator is, KNOW that evil would come to rise in existence? If so, why are you crediting someone else for evil's existence, when the Creator knew about it before it was even in existence?
Imagine you're a father (maybe you already are, I don't know). You've created a child. You love your child and your love is best expressed in allowing your child free will, to let it make its own choices. Even though you nurture it and teach it the ways of a good, moral life, to grow it in your likeness because you know you're a good man, you also know for certain that your child will go off-road from time to time and make mistakes. Your child will sin, but you've taught it to sincerely acknowledge its mistakes as a part of personal and spiritual development, to which it is granted forgiveness. But your child will continue to make mistakes as it grows up, for it keeps finding itself in new situations, new encounters, perhaps friendly, perhaps hostile, and, especially when alone / without its father, must improvise its reactions to these new experiences. In one of these experiences, your child slips up and makes another mistake (insert transgression). It is caught by the Sheriff, arrested, tried, found guilty and sent to a youth facility (this is the demiurge, imposing and applying the law to maintain order in chaos, but separating the child from its father nonetheless). In this facility, your child falls under the supervision of the Warden. The Warden knows of the child's origins, but keeping children locked in his facilitity will extend the Warden's purpose of being. The more children he gets under his supervision, and the longer they stay, the more the Warden grows in power. The Warden knows what it takes for the children to become free and reunited with their father, namely good behaviour, so he does what he can to prevent that. He tricks the children into wrongdoing. He tempts them with treats only to buy from them longer sentences. He conspires with some of the children, "his children", offering them privileged treatment, if they provoke and agitate the others and spur them on to committing sins that will prolong their stay at the facility. As time progresses and years go by, the children start getting used to the workings within the facility and begin to forget the life they had before, their origins, their father. They all start to see the Warden as their father and have stopped hoping to leave this prison. They've embraced it as their world, their home and they will know nothing else because they believe, as the Warden has convinced them of, that it's all there is.
Who is responsible for the evil in this tale? The Father who created the child knowing it would err? The Sheriff who applied the law? Or the Warden who knowingly kept the child away from its Father and and took the father's place?
I disagree that the Creator would then send words to the prophets of the devil and/or deceivers prophets, to prophesy about this Messiah.
This is not a claim I make. I do believe it possible that there were prophets, but they were prophets of El, the demiurge, the Most High, the Father of Jesus (the man), rebuking those who followed Baal (YHWH).
I also disagree that the Creator would send His son to QUOTE from what the devil/deceiver god said verbatim (without denouncing said devil/deceiver god openly and clearly) as he did in the NT.
There's no contradiction when Jesus quotes from the prophets of El, the Most High, the Father of Jesus. Also necessary to keep in mind is the accuracy of the statement. A truth statement is true when it's true regardless of the source.
Lastly, I disagree that the Creator sent His son to be SACRIFICED to these lower gods so that a "debt" (that was deceitful/wrong/in error/in ignorance according to you I assume)could be paid when He wouldnt even have to acknowledge the debt if He didnt want to.
Sin binds souls to this world. This world is ruled by the prince / rebellious son of the Most High / the devil and souls' bondage to this world extend his rule. In order to free man from this bondage, sin must be redeemed, the debt must be paid. Of course the devil doesn't want the debt to be paid in full lest he'd lose his dominion, so instead, like a proper usurer, creates interest rates that endlessly perpetuate payment. Man could never repay this debt, but Man
has to repay the debt in order for Man to be free. So the perfect man came, Jesus, the perfect man, born from a Virgin (opposite of the Whore, the faithful Mother untainted by the lower powers) and perfect soul (of soul substance because he is the Son of the Most High, El, the demiurge). During his baptism, Christ, the Heavenly Jesus, the Son of the Father in Heaven, descended and the two (soul and spirit) became one. Jesus Christ's ministry started to teach mankind how to be free and achieve eternal life in union with God.
The demiurge has no authority to remit the debt because if he had it would mean the debt satan collects is for the demiurge. This is not Satan's role. Satan is the antichrist, the ultimate adversary who sabotages Man's reunion with God and he will do everything in his power to prevent that from happening. I've come to believe that there are forces at work that transcend us, battles being fought in the realms above, battles fought over dominion / freedom, battles that are mirrored down here below. The event of Jesus Christ's crucifixion was the event where Satan lost the battle. Thinking he was winning all along by having the Son of God killed, he played right into God's hand. Because while Satan tricked his people into sin by the law, making them shed blood of others (in this case, the blood of the Son of God) to give himself eternal life, the perfect man shed his blood to pardon all sin, gave eternal life to mankind and ended Satan's reign. Powerful symbolism.
Then you get to the gnostic gospels that have Jesus speaking with a forked tongue. Where he'll say one thing to the public, then take ONE disciple in private to say another. And he does this with VARIOUS "followers" according to the gnostic gospels from Peter, to Thomas, to John, to Mary Magdalene. All the same story of Jesus saying things in public and saying different things in private. Fork tongued like a serpent.
This is a non-sequitur. You assume evil intent when evil intent can't be inferred from the private nature of these sayings alone. If all he said publicly is true, then what he says privately will most likely also be true. The problem lies not with the messages that Jesus gives privately, the problem lies with the reception of the message given publicly. Jesus came to reinterpret things, to render things good. In order to achieve a successful conversion of evil, it is possible that some hard truths are better not expressed publicly (which is probably a fault of mine).
Thomas said to him, "Teacher, my mouth is utterly unable to say what you are like."
Jesus said, "I am not your teacher. Because you have drunk, you have become intoxicated from the bubbling spring that I have tended."
And he took him, and withdrew, and spoke three sayings to him. When Thomas came back to his friends they asked him, "What did Jesus say to you?"
Thomas said to them, "If I tell you one of the sayings he spoke to me, you will pick up rocks and stone me, and fire will come from the rocks and devour you."
If the elite was actually cool with the Creator described in the old testament, then whats there to show for it? I can bring up companies named after pagan gods whether Egyptian, Greek, Roman, or Babylonian. Where are the companies named after the biblical Creator? Right now they're in power and the world is promoting transexuality and homosexuality. Why was the bible against that? The world is saying that the father and mother dont have specified roles. They're cool with the Creator in the old testament, then wheres the land they set up that tries to follow His laws? Wheres the month named after Him like they name them after the pagan gods? Where are His holy days followed and celebrated like the holidays of the pagans are (Christmas, Easter, Valentines etc...)? In all actuality the elite are gnostic. They too tell the public one thing in public while saying another in private amongst the "chosen" or "elect". Biblically Jesus even did this to an extent. Its all of this that stands in the way of me ever believing gnosticism (again)
- The biblical creator is El, the Most High. The elite you have in mind does not worship El, the Most High, but most likely Baal.
- That no companies are named after the biblical creator (I assume you mean the deity identified as YHWH here) is further evidence that the elites consist of those people who deem it blasphemous to mention his name or use it in such a way. If you would ever reach the highest echelons of Masonic or other occult esotericism you would come to know that YHWH is Baal. And then you would see that my theory stands.
- It is El, the Most High, the demiurge who is against the degenerate acts now promoted in the West, not Baal. In fact, during Baal's reign, prostitution and homosexuality were considered normal, even up for sale in his temples.
- The names of our months are Roman dating from the 1st century
BC under Julius Caesar. All the names are of Roman deities. Why would one be named after "the" biblical god when Judaism, and subsequently Christianity, was seen as pagan by the Romans for more than 300 years after the Julian Calendar came to be?
- Easter is the celebration of Jesus' Resurrection. Forgotten in the (post-Catholic) West, but still heavily celebrated in the (Orthodox) East. Same for Christmas. The Orthodox still celebrate it as the birth of Jesus. In large parts of the West it's been converted to a consumerist holiday.
- The dissolvement of the traditional male-female roles is an attack on the male-female union essential to Christian theology. It's an attack against Logos, against the family, against Life itself.
I think all your questions in this last quote are easily answered when you take into account the ideals of Zionism (what's bad for Israel is good for the rest of the world) and Judaism (the Jew is he who rejected Christ, who rebels against Logos) and if you accurately distinguish between the demiurge El and the rebellious son YHWH (Israel = he who rebelled against god). None of your conundrums are even remotely confusing to me, so all I can say to you is to give this perspective a try and see for yourself. If not, no harm done.