Gnostic Aeons and Kundalini Pythagorean Aion: Professor M. David Litwa on Early Christianity of the Naassenes

 Chronos was the Orphic name for, according to Pythagoras, the serpent psyche of the Universe, derived from "Time Unbounded" in Iranian Zurvan philosophy - Chronos Aion. Aion was the "procreative fluid with which psyche was identified, the spinal marrow believed to take serpent form." (Hamlet's Mill citing Onians). The classicist Richard Broxton Onians documents the Pythagoreans defining the heart as "the breath that was consciousness in the chest." The Orphic Cosmic-Egg Snake is, according to the amazing book The Origins of European Thought: About the Body, the Mind, the Soul, the World, Time, and Fate by Richard Broxton Onians, Cambridge University Press, 1951: pp. 118-122 - Pythagorean alchemy secrets of the consciousness conspirachi from 5th C. BCE! "begotten by a wind...a breath-soul...harmony...drawn from the whole body...gathers in the spinal marrow...most of it flows from the head...a Pythagorean quoted, 'that the seed....generative water of the marrow [aka cerebrospinal fluid].... that breathes through the reproductive organ.... is a drop of the brain containing in itself warm vapour....the union of the two serpents represent the life complete by the union of the male and female'.... (googlebook)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=okCTMLzLjAo 

 The Naassenes Exploring an Early Christian Identity. By M. David Litwa Copyright 2024.

 Litwa contends that some of the parallels between certain stories of Jesus do have strong connections to the matrix of the Mediterranean world. He makes a case-by-case base that different stories associated with Jesus share common ideas closely associated with other Greco-Roman Mediterranean stories about various gods (both lower and uppercase g gods). So, for example, in the first chapter, he convincingly argues that Luke’s infancy narrative employs a theological (or philosophical) discourse known among the platonic-minded intellectuals of his day. Most notably, Litwa analyses similarities between Luke’s account of Jesus’ birth (virgin birth of Jesus) and Plutarch’s account of Plato’s divine birth. However, Litwa emphasizes that these similarities don’t constitute genetic relations (Luke didn’t borrow elements from Plutarch). Rather, they both shared the same intellectual milieu and thus they used similar language (akin to Platonism) while constructing the story of divine conceptions.

The main thrust of Litwa’s arguments is that the process that led to the deification of Jesus was not solely influenced by Second-Temple Judaism (as so many have stressed for the past two decades), but rather contained features of Hellenistic influence as well. This is not to say (despite what popular writers and movies have suggested), that the emerging Christian faith simply sought, stole, and applied various aspects of Greco-Roman Pagan myths as they saw fit. Rather, they used common language, images, and symbols found throughout the Mediterranean as a means to crystallize their beliefs about Jesus. After all, early Christian authors were part of that world. They couldn’t escape it! Litwa selects his material carefully and applies them to the various stories about Jesus in an extremely scholarly fashion. One of the greatest strengths of Iesus Deus is that Litwa is just as quick to point out the differences within the stories of other Mediterranean stories in comparison to Jesus, just as much as the similarities. As he states (p. 33): to focus on pure similarity is parallelomania; to focus on pure difference is apologetics. His study is thus an attempt to restore balance in contemporary historical scholarship on the meaning and cultural context of Jesus’ divinity. Litwa brings incredible nuance to his work. His style of writing is amazing, and his philological analysis of key Greek terms such as ἐπισκιάζω, δύναμις, and πνεῦμα is meticulous. Throughout the book, it becomes evident that Litwa is well acquainted with both the Greco-Roman world and Second Temple Judaism. One of the strongest methodological features of his book is the fact that he does not grant Christianity or any other ancient faith tradition any sort of privilege and is extremely unbiased in his approach to the sources in question. I have often read studies in which scholars would lean either toward privileging Christianity or towards privileging non-Christian religions of the ancient world. Litwa successfully avoids that! Given its ambitious task, Litwa succeeds in convincing readers that Hellenism played some sort of influential role in the development and understanding of Jesus as the Christian deity. A book worth reading! 

https://tragoviproslosti.eu/2023/01/08/how-did-jesus-became-god-a-recent-book-that-changed-my-mind/ 

 Perhaps no declaration incites more theological and moral outrage than a human's claim to be divine. Those who make this claim in ancient Jewish and Christian mythology are typically represented as the most hubristic and dangerous tyrants. Their horrible punishments are predictable and still serve as morality tales in religious communities today.

But not all self-deifiers are saddled with pride and fated to fall. Some who claimed divinity stated a simple and direct truth. Though reviled on earth, misunderstood, and even killed, they received vindication and rose to the stars. This book tells the stories of six self-deifiers in their historical, social, and ideological contexts.

In the history of interpretation, the initial three figures have been demonized as cosmic rebels: the first human Adam, Lucifer (later identified with Satan), and Yaldabaoth in gnostic mythology. By contrast, the final three have served as positive models for deification and divine favor: Jesus in the gospel of John, Simon of Samaria, and Allogenes in the Nag Hammadi library. In the end, the line separating demonization from deification is dangerously thin, drawn as it is by the unsteady hand of human valuation. https://bc.academia.edu/DavidLitwa/CurriculumVitae