Adam Kadmon

[AdamAnderson21]

Jesus and Adam

"He is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn over all creation. For by him all things were created: things in heaven and on earth, visible and invisible, whether thrones or powers or rulers or authorities; all things were created by him and for him."

"Nevertheless, death reigned from the time of Adam to the time of Moses, even over those who did not sin by breaking a command, as did Adam, who was a pattern of the one to come."

"For if, by the trespass of the one man, death reigned through that one man, how much more will those who receive God's abundant provision of grace and of the gift of righteousness reign in life through the one man, Jesus Christ."

"For just as through the disobedience of the one man the many were made sinners, so also through the obedience of the one man the many will be made righteous."

There is alot of valuable information contained within these quotes. Before we begin, it is important to note that these were written by Paul, a recognized Gnostic. Gnosticism is based upon the Jewish tradition of the Kabbalah. The Gnostics are a valuable source of information regaurding this Jewish tradition, because until recently and except for a few major works, little is written about the Kabbalah, because it was passed down orally from generation to generation by those who were privledged to study it.

From this information and our general background knowledge we know that:

1) Adam is the pattern of the one to come
2) Adam was disobedient
3) Adam was the first man
4) Adam is the image of God

1) Jesus Christ is the one
2) The one was disobedient
3) Jesus was the first born
4) Jesus is the image of God

This seems to equate Adam and Jesus are the same. Or more accurtely, that Jesus is a continuation of the story of Adam. When we discover that Adam in Hebrew means mankind, it becomes even clearer. In the Kabbalah there is a divine Archetypal Man named Adam Kadmon. Both Adam and Jesus are the divine Archetypal Man. the story of Jesus is a continuation of the story of Adam.

Creation

"He is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn over all creation. For by him all things were created: things in heaven and on earth, visible and invisible, whether thrones or powers or rulers or authorities; all things were created by him and for him."

With this new understanding about the true nature of Adam and Jesus, this verse packs a powerfull punch. It's easy to miss the significance if you simply equate Jesus with God. But once we realize that Jesus and Adam are allegories to the same person, we can relate this verse to Adam. Now the story of creation takes a turn on its head.

For we learn that Adam created all things in the heaven and earth...What?! That means that he himself created the Garden of Eden, the animals, even...himself?!

Genesis

Genesis 1 and the book of Ezekiel contain the keys to understanding prophecy. by understanding these, you will better understand the Gnostic teachings.

"In the beginning, God created the Elohim, the language of the heaven and the language of the earth."

- Genesis 1:1

Eth is the Hebrew word used to indicate that what is to follow is a direct object and it appears before heaven and earth, but it also represents the entire Hebrew language because it is the first and last Hebrew letters. This is what Jesus is refering to when he states that he is the alpha and the omega.

God's name was never written or spoken, because He is completely beyond all human comprehension. This tradition is still visible today in the Jewish tradition of doing neither. Therefore God is never mentioned in the Bible but His presence is implied. In this sentence we have a plural subject and a singular verb. This indicates that it is God, who is not mentioned in this verse, that is doing the creating, and it is the Elohim, the word usually translated as God, that is the direct object. This is not the only way this verse can be understood, but it is essential to understanding what follows.

There are twelve total ways thus passage can be translated and each one is seen as important. The book of Genesis is also a guide to meditation.

I. "In the beginning, God created"
II. "In wisdom, God healed"
III. "With the beginning, God created"
IV. "With the beginning, God healed"
V. "In the head, God created"
VI. "Using His head, God created"
VII. "In the head, God healed"
VIII."With the head, God healed"
IX. "In wisdom, God created"
X. "With wisdom, God created"
XI. "In wisdom, God healed"
XII. "With wisdom, God healed"

This is because beth can either mean "with" or "in", reshit can mean either "beginning", "head", or "wisdom", and bara can mean either "created" or "healed". Meditating upon these XII different translation will make its meaning clearer.

From this compilation of information we see that God set the stage by creating the heven and the earth, and then Adam did the rest. All of this is an allegory to the psychological development of the human mind.

 

[tulc]

Before we begin, it is important to note that these were written by Paul, a recognized Gnostic. Gnosticism is based upon the Jewish tradition of the Kabbalah.

Uhmm no and no. Paul wrote against gnostics and Gnosticism is derived from the Greeks check here:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gnosticism
tulc(just a couple of points)

 

[Chrysalis Kat]

Humm....

Adam sure sounds a lot like Atom.

 

[AdamAnderson21]

tulc: Uhmm no and no. Paul wrote against gnostics and Gnosticism is derived from the Greeks check here:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gnosticism
tulc(just a couple of points)

I'm guessing that you are saying that Paul is not a Gnostic and that Gnosticism in not based upon the Kabbalah.

"For a long time gnostics have been viewed as opposed to "Pauline Christianity", Christianity as it is today. But now we know that the gnostics actually revered Paul and considered one of theirs."

"We also know that only seven of the 13 letters attributed to Paul are authentic and one can suspect that the other six were written to prove something that was not proven in the original seven. (Some of the letters appear for the first time with Irenaeus, in 190, the same man who codified the official gospels and must have been to be fakes because not even the Christian historian Eusebius included them in his version of the bible). If one removes the fakes, the originals are strikingly similar to gnostic literature and not a single attack against the gnostics remains. So much so that early Roman letters (such as Clement's and even Peter's) accuse Paul of being a heretic."

"Paul's authentic letters talk of allegories (Galatians, 4/24) and symbols (Corinthians 10/6) as if to warn against a literal interpretation of the old testament, and depict a philosophy not too different by the Platonism preached by Philo of Alexandria."

http://www.scaruffi.com/politics/jesus.html

I completely agree that Gnosticism evolved from Greece. But the Greeks derived their ideas largely from the Kabbalah. The article you posted even says so.

"The origins of Gnosticism are a subject of dispute amongst scholars: some think Gnosticism is fundamentally pagan in origin, but has adopted a Christian veneer; others trace its origin to Judaism; yet others think it derives from Jesus, and is a development of his teaching that is arguably as valid as the orthodox one."

"It seems clear that Gnosticism, at least in some of its theologically more developed formulations, was heavily influenced by Platonism, Neo-Platonism, Stoicism, old Semitic religions, Christianity and (at least in the case of Monoimus) Pythagoreanism."

*Semitic includes Judaism

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gnosticism

 

[tulc]

Hmm "some think" is a far cry from "Gnosticism is based upon the Jewish tradition of the Kabbalah." But we'll let that be. Sorry to interrupt!
tulc(sipping some good coffee!)

 

[Orbital SD]

Gnosticism is based upon the Jewish tradition of the Kabbalah.

While it's true that Gnosticism absorbed ideas from forms of Judaism that existed at that time, I don't see how Gnosticism could be based on the Kabbalah, which emerged in the medieval period, long after the suppression of the Gnostic sects.

Genesis 1 and the book of Ezekiel contain the keys to understanding prophecy. by understanding these, you will better understand the Gnostic teachings.

No, "Adam Kadmon" and the kind of esoteric interpretation of the Hebrew scriptures that you offer in support of your ideas are not Gnostic teachings.

But now we know that the gnostics actually revered Paul and considered one of theirs.

Some Gnostics did appeal to Paul's writing in defense of their ideas, but not all.

Anyway, I'm not arguing that the point of your original post is necessarily wrong. I just object to the way you're confusing Gnosticism and Kabbalah, and treating them as if they were the same thing, which they are not.

 

[AdamAnderson21]

tulc: Hmm "some think" is a far cry from "Gnosticism is based upon the Jewish tradition of the Kabbalah."

I agree. I was using your link as an example.

"Gnostic literature testifies to the antiquity of the Kabbalah. Gnosticism - systems of secret spiritual knowledge, or some sources say - — that is, the cabalistic Chochmah (חכמה "wisdom") - seems to have been the first attempt on the part of Jewish sages to give the empirical mystic lore, with the help of Platonic and Pythagorean or Stoic ideas, a speculative turn. This led to the danger of heresy from which the Jewish rabbinic figures Rabbi Akiva and Ben Zoma strove to extricate themselves.

Original teachings of gnosticism have much in common with Kabbalah:

1. Core terminology of classical gnostics was Jewish names of God.
2. Mainstream Gnostics accepted a "Jewish Messiah" as a key figure of gnosticism
3. A Key text of Gnosticism - Apocryphon of John - mentions 365 powers who created the World. The same is a number of dark powers among 613 powers of the soul in Judaism and Kabbalah.

Essene, Manichaean and Nasorean doctrines (of gnostic character) claim that before Kabbalah there existed a so-called Aramaic Quabalta."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kabbalah#Gnosticism_and_Kabbalah

What most people don't realize is that the first Christians were Jews. More specifically, as the above snip-it explains, Jewish mystics created the story of Jesus to expound upon the idea of the Messiah, and make the meanings more clear.

"They were a very ancient sect of Jews living in the desert removed from mainstream Jewish life."

"If one reads the Revelation of Saint John the Divine, it becomes apparent that the Jewish Christians of the late 1st century also held to similar beliefs about the end of the age"

http://www.crosstalk.org/articles/deadsea.shtml

Christianity was born out of Jewish mysticism. Jewish mysticism is the Kabbalah.

 

[Orbital SD]

Original teachings of gnosticism have much in common with Kabbalah:
1. Core terminology of classical gnostics was Jewish names of God.
2. Mainstream Gnostics accepted a "Jewish Messiah" as a key figure of gnosticism
3. A Key text of Gnosticism - Apocryphon of John - mentions 365 powers who created the World. The same is a number of dark powers among 613 powers of the soul in Judaism and Kabbalah.

This is a great example of why Wikipedia articles should be taken with a grain of salt. The "core terminology" of Gnosticism is the "Jewish names of God" — Gnosis, Pneuma, Pleroma, Bythos, etc. = Jewish names of God? "Mainstream Gnostics" accept a "Jewish Messiah" — they accept the guy whom Jews expect will help establish the worldwide worship of YHWH?

Essene, Manichaean and Nasorean doctrines (of gnostic character) claim that before Kabbalah there existed a so-called Aramaic Quabalta.

Is there any evidence to support this claim? Anyway, while those three groups may have some similarities to Gnosticism, they are not technically Gnostic.

But the funny thing is that in offering this baloney (not to mention ignoring important differences between the two), the author of that article skips over the significant similarities between Gnosticism and Kabbalah, such as the fact that they have similar doctrines of emanation, and the similarity between the Kabbalistic concept of the "breaking of the vessels" and the Gnostic concept of "Sophia's fall."

 

[tulc]

What most people don't realize is that the first Christians were Jews. More specifically, as the above snip-it explains,

Uhmm I assumed anyone who read the New Testament knew the first Christians were Jewish. No big surprise there.

Jewish mystics created the story of Jesus to expound upon the idea of the Messiah, and make the meanings more clear.

Ahhh! So there is no actual Jesus? (in your opinion) Then who did I invite into my heart?

Christianity was born out of Jewish mysticism. Jewish mysticism is the Kabbalah.

I thought it was born out of Christ's sacrifice and resurrection?
tulc(good morning all!)

 

[Abbadon]

Hmmm, interesting. Well, I'll throw in my two cents worth.

Kabbalah is a form of Jewish Gnosticism, not the other way around. Please note, AdamAnderson21, I am not criticising your doctrines, but your history.

The term "Gnostic" isn't fair to say that Paul defended or criticised. A fair amount of modern liberal protestants would have been called Gnostics (I did consider joining the Ecclesia Gnostica at one time, but decided to stay with the "make up your own bloody mind" type of Baptist church I go to). What with a belief that we should find Christ within ourselves instead of listening to a central authority, acceptance of those that don't follow the exact same doctrines, and all that stuff.

The term "Gnosticism" covers a variety of sects like "Protestantism". So it's not really fair to say that Paul criticised or defended Gnosticism as a whole. Many different groups held completely opposite ideas about things (using sex as an example, some were celebate, some got married and got down, and some were tri-sexuals). Some of Paul's writtings can be interpretted according to some Gnostic beliefs (the bits about "Powers and Principalities" compares with the Archons for me), and some would be opposite of Paul's writings.

 

[Orbital SD]

I agree with almost everything you said, Abbadon. The only point I disagree with is the remark about "tri-sexuals." Many scholars of Gnosticism are now very skeptical that any Gnostics engaged in libertinistic practices. The fact is that none of the surviving original writings of the Gnostics support unrestrained sexual indulgence; the only support for that notion are the allegations of the orthodox heresiologists, who of course had the job of portraying the Gnostics as satanic villains... they're not really credible witnesses.

 

[Abbadon]

Well, I didn't say they were a majority. I'd say there are more protestant groups that advocate "tri-sexuality" than gnostic groups (there actually have been groups that went for the free-love train of thought, before the '60s)

 

[Orbital SD]

there actually have been groups that went for the free-love train of thought, before the '60s

Yes, undeniably. I just doubt that any Gnostics were among them.

 

[Abbadon]

Yes, undeniably. I just doubt that any Gnostics were among them.

Well, I meant protestant groups that did (unbelievably) do that sort of thing, after learning about those groups I don't discount the idea of other groups doing so.

Darn shame I only learned about it in a 10th grade class. Can't remember the exact names now. Sorry I don't have proof about either Protestant or Gnostic free-love groups, just the statement that I've read about them some time ago. If those groups did happen and I'm not losing my marbles, then they were one in a million, Gnostic or Protestant, and debatable about whether or not they really were Gnostic or Protestant.