‘‘With the discovery, about 80 years after King's book was published, of the Nag Hammadi manuscripts, it's become more clear that the Gnostics were not a coherent sect of Christians whose views varied from today's Church dogma, but that they were a diverse number of sects similar to how the Protestants are comprised of Episcopalians, Methodists, Baptists, and so forth. However, once the Church sorted through what would and would not be acceptable dogma, the Gnostics were branded heretics (as a side note, many scholars agree that both John and Paul were either Gnostics or supported some of the Gnostic beliefs).’’ Will Cadle
I’ve studied early Christian history for a decade. My work speaks for itself. There is a cottage industry of disinformation on early Christian diversity.
Gnostics were aesthetic who sought a peaceful parallel society separate from the Roman Empire. They were largely annihilated by the fifth century remnants remained in the Bogomils and Cathars , none of whom are anything like the “gnostic nights” you think they are. There’s been a bait and switch and another bait and switch and then another bait and switch and 99% of the people talking about “Gnosticism” -which never existed- don’t know what the hell they’re talking about.
I’m glad you found a book you like. Try looking at the gestalt in academia without an agenda.
Modern academia, not the centuries of ignorance and speculation from which conspiracy theorists and Woo Woo remixers and raving mad pastors get their sources.
Do you agree with the following definition of Gnostic--It is the very widespread and standard definiton for all the many and varied Gnostic sects for oh...about 2,000 years now. Is it you? Do you agree with it?
"Gnostics believe the earth is a prison constructed by an evil creator to trap human souls"
That’s pretty much my working definition. It’s sad because a lot of well-meaning people react to nihilistic materialism and go toward idealism but end up with this radically negative view of Creation nonetheless. Faithlessness is what it comes down to, imho, inability to subordinate the pride of the mind.
BTW the guy who’s giving you a hard time for being a “conspiracy theorist” who can’t see the “gestalt” in “modern academia” literally thinks Jesus is an alien, whom he has met, who— get this — doesn’t have a beard.
The definition of Gnostics I’m using is simple: Gnostics believe the earth is a prison constructed by an evil creator to trap human souls. Maybe you have a different definition. My definition is widely agreed upon, and means by and large that Gnostics, especially if antinomian, are insane. Gnostic Freemasonry and other modern scholars have attempted to rewrite that definition and create a hipster, cool, rebellious Gnosticism. Nah.
It is possible to be Gnostic and not insane I guess. But it ain’t easy. To see Creator as evil is madness.
Concepts of good & evil are not essential to that.
.
Fact you do not KNOW what other people think, your egomaniacal delusion on that is overt & ludicrous to witness.
.
Gnosticism is not a single religion. It’s a varied family of mythic systems.
Some sects saw the creator as ignorant, some as flawed, some as benevolent-but-limited, some as metaphor, some as cosmic necessity, some as a tragic craftsman, and some didn’t talk about any “creator” at all.
😂
Maybe you are only familiar with Sethians?
who frame the creator as hostile or deluded, yet even they did not use the modern moral category “evil.”
So, then, what about Valentinians
Basilideans
Thomasine / Syrian traditions —
Hermeticists —
Manichaeans —
Mandaeans —
Ophites / Naassenes ?
They would all prove you 'fact' is merely some intellectual flatulence from decomposing poorly digested ingredients.
.
The only universal thing across Gnostic thought currents is gnosis = knowledge, insight, direct apprehension.
However, everything else varies wildly.
.
FACT-I should point out that YOU JUST MADE A CATAGORY ERROR
Gnostics don’t “believe” in the way dogmatic religions believe.
They know, or claim to know; through revelation, vision, symbolic insight & mythic experience. 'DIRECTLY' so no BELIEF is required ! 😂😆😂
You make amusing oxymoronic jumble with your terminology that is revealing, yet sad.
.
If you are incapable of apologising for you bare faced lies ,& very feeble bluffing games, on this I am going to have to focus on your deceits & you will have to find a new vocation Robert,😏😉... because what you are doing is disgusting travesty of perennial wisdom & symbolic system awareness.
.
Fact you are an esoteric novice (in fact not even that yet) & bluffer as I have discovered from looking at your hilarious 'script machine output' propaganda on Masonry & Francis Bacon.
I am currently in conversation with Peter Dawkins of excellent & well known (among scholars) The Francis Bacon Research Trust (FBRT), about your work (& its cognitively constipated kin) , & looking forward to discussing what you are doing... especially how to balance your artificial framing, along with your bare faced lies.
The Valentinian system is embedded with a cosmic sympathy. See Valentinus poem Summer Harvest.
The Earth is not a prison, but a spiritual waystation, which is absolutely necessary for our spiritual development. The earliest Christian exegesis of Jewish scripture can be found in Ptolemy’s “ letter to flora”, in which the Yahweh of the Old Testament is described more like a middle management. Definitely not a Satan, but definitely not the heavenly father.
See John 8:44
You’re clearly just repeating misinformation, which is part of a large ongoing project obfuscating the diversity and origins of early Christianity.
Again we see a how cognitively castrated you have become maintaining this flimsy NuGuru persona Robert, it is not for you, give it up for your own well being.
😂😆😂
Fact.
GNOSTISM = KNOWING- ''relating to knowledge''
Concepts of good & evil are not essential to that.
.
Fact you do not KNOW what other people think, your egomaniacal delusion on that is overt & ludicrous to witness.
.
Gnosticism is not a single religion. It’s a varied family of mythic systems.
Some sects saw the creator as ignorant, some as flawed, some as benevolent-but-limited, some as metaphor, some as cosmic necessity, some as a tragic craftsman, and some didn’t talk about any “creator” at all.
😂
Maybe you are only familiar with Sethians?
who frame the creator as hostile or deluded, yet even they did not use the modern moral category “evil.”
So, then, what about Valentinians
Basilideans
Thomasine / Syrian traditions —
Hermeticists —
Manichaeans —
Mandaeans —
Ophites / Naassenes ?
They would all prove you 'fact' is merely some intellectual flatulence from decomposing poorly digested ingredients.
.
The only universal thing across Gnostic thought currents is gnosis = knowledge, insight, direct apprehension.
However, everything else varies wildly.
.
FACT-I should point out that YOU JUST MADE A CATAGORY ERROR
Gnostics don’t “believe” in the way dogmatic religions believe.
They know, or claim to know; through revelation, vision, symbolic insight & mythic experience. 'DIRECTLY' so no BELIEF is required ! 😂😆😂
You make amusing oxymoronic jumble with your terminology that is revealing, yet sad.
.
Fact you are an esoteric novice (in fact not even that yet) & bluffer as I have discovered from looking at your hilarious 'script machine output' propaganda on Masonry & Francis Bacon.
Well it certainly did exist , (& not termed simply Gnosticism by themselves often) but was varied & as you say not ‘enslavement theology’ originally but much later was re-furbished by ‘pseudo Gnostics ‘ & death cult infested thinking/symbolism '
“Gnosticism” never existed. This is the mainstream academic position. You are getting your information from polemicist who have disabuse themselves of doing actual research.
I’ve dedicated the last decade of my life to producing material, largely centered on gnostic Christianity of the early centuries. My work speaks for itself. I’m done here.
Catch up with all the recent unveiling of the Masonic lies and bullshit. Wandering Cathedral builders, dusty and leather handed whoses lodges are suddenly hobnobbing with aristocrats and kings! 🤣 Modern Freemasonry began in Scotland, case closed, and it was finalized in England by Bacon. and then it spread all over Europe and metastasized creating new degrees. Aspects of masonry are older, sure. But then again, everything has ancient roots.
You make that claim because to be honest & go back to its ROOTS undermines you entire career & performance ! 😂😆😂 This is hilarious to read, thank you for such amusement.
.
SO, then Robert, if FREEMASONARY began in times of Bacon, how come their is so many ANCIENT buildings - that had to be 'Masonic-ally' constructed, & contain their MARKS & proportions (signatures) ? IS this going to become some convoluted time travel concept you have to share with us?
.
Maybe your mode of thinking would also promote the idea that cooking was invented by Fanny Cradock because she wrote a big book about it ? Of course she wasn't the first , so I wonder do you think Apicius — De re coquinaria invented cooking because he is claimed to have compiled the first big book on it?
The Origins of Freemasonry: Scotland Century 1590-1710. This book is a new edition of David Stevenson's classic account of the origins of Freemasonry, a brotherhood of men bound together by secret initiatives, rituals and modes of identification with ideals of fraternity, equality, toleration and reason. Beginning in Britain, Freemasonry swept across Europe in the mid-eighteenth century in astonishing fashion--yet its origins are still hotly debated today. The prevailing assumption has been that it emerged in England around 1700, but David Stevenson demonstrates that the real origins of modern Freemasonry lie in Scotland around 1600, when the system of lodges was created by stonemasons with rituals and secrets blending medieval mythology with Renaissance and seventeenth-century history. This fascinating work of historical detection will be essential reading for anyone interested in Renaissance and seventeenth-century history, for freemasons themselves, and for those readers captivated by the secret societies at the heart of the bestselling The Da Vinci Code. David Stevenson is Emeritus Professor of Scottish History at the University of St. Andrews.
You will find that the back‑cover BLURB is aimed at modern speculative craft lore, not the origins of Freemasonry — and within the book Stevenson himself refutes every single one of your claims, Robert.
If you actually open the book (pp. 20–45), Stevenson explains that Scottish lodges grew out of existing medieval stonemason guilds — complete with marks, regulations, rituals, and symbolic geometry.
That means Masonry did not begin in Scotland, and certainly not with Bacon.
You keep citing the cover like a talisman instead of reading the content!🙄😄
If you were knowledgeable, had integrity & were serious you would address the points raised by quoting or referencing the book pages that justify your presumption, not a misleading cover blurb.
It is, Yet what is fascinating is that it is all driven by a persona maintenance dilemma for him.
.
He has inadvertently become perfect specimen for scrutiny because he appears to have no comprehension at all of what he keeps asserting !
Its is fabulous to perceive such masochist soul desperate for release. His psychodynamic is also as overt as his bare faced lies.
.
This cut & paste mania he went into is his reset attempt, next he will perform status reaffirmation. Yes, he is very much like a predictable machine, as the composition of his essays also confirms!
BSM wasn't discussing the modern masons everyone knows are a cess pit of corruption, she is discussing the more important & useful genuine origins of CRAFT GUILDS , that still navigate the Zodiac of Power.
You need to catch up with how control structures really work & influence our lives, it seems?
Explain all the Freemasonry in Shakespeare then, and Bacon’s obvious authorship, FMs love of the Dark Bard and the correlation of FM and empire. It’s Indisputable. FM is older than Bacon but he did the 3rd degree and made it empire-able. Along With Shakespeare and Science. Not all FMs are in on it. Cool guys like you are the veil. 😃
That is bare faced lie- there were originally 7 craft degrees. You keep proving you are not educated, informed or instructed in such universal principles.
Here I will instruct you, let us see how humble & sincere you are in your comprehension & interactions.
Also after reading your most prominent work I found no mention showing that you are even aware of the two main operative divisions in Freemasonry! 🙄🤔😂
.
this is taken from one of Freemasonries own more expert scholars, I have summarised for convenience-
''the first three were operative, tied to actual stone-craft.
the others were symbolic, tied to cosmology, geometry, and myth
the Master Mason degree existed in proto‑form long before speculative Masonry
the Hiramic legend is a late graft, not the origin''
“The Origins of Freemasonry: Scotland Century 1590-1710”. This book is a new edition of David Stevenson's classic account of the origins of Freemasonry, a brotherhood of men bound together by secret initiatives, rituals and modes of identification with ideals of fraternity, equality, toleration and reason. Beginning in Britain, Freemasonry swept across Europe in the mid-eighteenth century in astonishing fashion--yet its origins are still hotly debated today. The prevailing assumption has been that it emerged in England around 1700, but David Stevenson demonstrates that the real origins of modern Freemasonry lie in Scotland around 1600, when the system of lodges was created by stonemasons with rituals and secrets blending medieval mythology with Renaissance and seventeenth-century history. This fascinating work of historical detection will be essential reading for anyone interested in Renaissance and seventeenth-century history, for freemasons themselves, and for those readers captivated by the secret societies at the heart of the bestselling The Da Vinci Code. David Stevenson is Emeritus Professor of Scottish History at the University of St. Andrews.
Again: Gnostics believe the entire world -minus sparks of light that comprise the soul- is a prison designed and maintained by an evil creator.
Factz.
‘Gnosis’ is the knowledge needed to escape said prison And it’s available only to the really smart and exceptional humans who are not duped by false advertisements of God of love or any other type of God-creator besides the evil one
End of discussion because that above is the entire point! It is normally kept on the down low by the legions of hipster Gnostics clamoring on the entertainment highways. rebels without a cause
So we know where we both stand! Let’s move on shall we? 😃 Have a great day! 😃
Is that some oxymoronic tautology game you are now retreating into with your overt demiurge reflex?
GNOSTICS ''BELIEVED'''
🙄🤔😂😆😂
.
Again you are proving to be a bare faced simpleton with an agenda to misinform your readers Robert.
.
He we witness you amusing & quite incredible Category Collapse with your limp response:- flattening dozens of sects into one cartoon,
reducing a complex tradition to a single slogan, & then glaring Persona maintenance attempts we anticipated already, you are now acting like a limited machine pretending to be a limited human scholar & do both a disservice.
.
Actual Gnostic scholarship shows us that these GNOSTIC sects thought (facts! 🙄😂)
Valentinians — creator = ignorant, not evil
Sethians — creator = flawed, not omnipotent
Thomasine — world = illusory, not a prison
Hermetic‑Christian — cosmos = a school, not a trap
Basilideans — creation = multi‑layered emanation, not dualistic
.
You really have not got any substance to your assertion, but seem stuck in some feedback rut, is the price of the pose really worth it all?
.
& now it is probably best I leave you to repair yourself, because you are incapable of acting inner honest manner with any integrity.
The back‑cover BLURB is about modern speculative Masonry, not the ancient craft — and Stevenson directly contradicts your Bacon mythology.
In the section on the transition to speculative Masonry (pp. 180–210), Stevenson shows that the Third Degree and the Hiramic drama were created after 1717, decades after Bacon’s death.
He also makes clear that Bacon had no documented involvement with Scottish lodges or degree formation.
So your “Bacon finalised Masonry” claim is not in Stevenson — it’s only in your imagination.
This is more confused nonsense. FM starts “officially” in the 1400s, at least 100 years before Bacon is even born.
FM is a religious academic tradition not a political initiative.
You guys - always - confuse the fraternity for freemasonry and you need to do a lot more work on the subject. You dont know the difference between what FM is vs. what some guy once did who happened to be a FM.
Robert..when I read this excerpt from your post above...:
"This is the key point, and I slog thru history books in order to understand it: The Empire is now attempting their next-level growth phase, trying to establishing supra-national global, technocratic “science based” ruling bodies, creating forms of corporate feudalism strangely similar to the Tudor system where the corporation actually began. This attempt uses science-y threats of killer viruses and a looming climate catastrophe as pretext and justification for their complete control."..
The podcast linked below came to mind, about the crushing of speech(and ideas) thru "professional societies", during CV19, but also more broadly...
The interviewee also has a new book on the topic:
"World on Mute: How Workplace Speech Commitees are Destroying our Nations
and Eliminating our Civil Liberties" - by Lisa Miron
Interviewed by your investigative compatriot, William Ramsey...
This comment excerpt from Nick Bryant hints at what Lisa Miron goes into in depth...
ie "You can't talk about that":
"Though Mr. Frederick attributes the nascent reign of quantification to the Masons, he posits that Bacon was its turbo charge. Bacon coined the term “knowledge is power,” and he also helped to craft the Royal Society of London,
>>>which has been shown to have a.very. short.leash.
on freethinking with regards to science<<<."
I am enjoying my subscription to your excellent website and podcasts.
I encourage you to read Harland-Davidson's book to understand why the evidence is very very far from circumstantial. I am not making any claim that it's only Freemason's that run the world.
I hadn’t realised how important freemasonry was to the spread of the British Empire, but it makes sense as there are lodges everywhere.
To understand the influence of freemasonry it seems important to be able to name the most influential masons in the world through the centuries. Is this already done?
As you say “the hidden life is best” for high level masons so info may be scarce. But likely it is a fascinating gallery of names.
It's the higher levels that remain a mystery- yes. The elite have certainly developed beyond Masonry at present. But it set up the Empire and serves as the model of an initiation based organization. MK-Ultra is a Masonic endeavour. Allen Dulles was a Mason. Schnoebelen is very good. See video. He checks out, legit...he never made it into the inner rooms, thankfully (or not). He has some new videos on Masonry that I have not seen.
One of the most remarkable aspects of Freemasonry is in it's structure that allows a certain independence, flexibility and creativity in the lodges, probably just like "cells" in intelligence networks, and the realtionship is not an accident. Especially at the highest level.
Masonry is veiled by all the decent fellows that are members. Brilliant.
I’m reading through John Mitchel’s ‘Jail Journal’ written in 1848, when he was sent away from Ireland by British on a convict ship. This was during the height of the famine-genocide in Ireland. Mitchel was an educated, Irishman who wrote with searing intellectual honestly and integrity as well as ‘savage indignation’ at the Irish plight. I expect that English was his first language. He rallied often against Bacon and his influence. I will return again to these points in this book that I had previously glossed over.
Mitchel writes about things that I had guessed about but had not seen others mention, such as the fact that what we Irish consider the last great stand against the English, 1798, was actually fomented, to urge the settled colonisers to align with the idea of unification with Britain, 1801.
Hoping to attach a YouTube video of Ben McBrady, the last Irish Druid of the Gaelic Order.
I'm not surprised by the Scottish connection to freemasonry which I suspect has antediluvian roots connected to Druidism which also has clear historical connections to Egypt. This comes back to Plato and Atlantean mythology and I think the title and content of The New Atlantis is a big clue to this. Abraham may even have been a druid (Think oak groves) and there is a well documented connection between the Druids and the masons. This is staring back into the deepest mists of time I appreciate but this is where the occult esoteric knowledge held by the illuminati stems from.
My grandfather was a mason (but I’m guessing only at one of the lower levels) where he believed he was involved with a force for good (!!). My dad was inducted as a young man but immediately left and would never talk about it ever after.
My mum, in her youth, along with some friends, headed out to a local dance one night but having mistaken the venue (this was the early ‘50s), stumbled upon a Masonic meeting in full flight. Imagine the consternation. Four gals in their finery interrupting the aproned-ones!! She recalled them being unceremoniously bundled outside amid chaotic scenes and the door slammed in their faces. Presumably locked thereafter. Wonder if anyone’s head rolled for that. Not literally - but you never know with these dudes…
When Nietzsche initially declared that “God is dead” in The Gay Science, he was of the forlorn belief that the Enlightenment had slain God. Though religion has seemingly flourished since the Enlightenment, I believe that the Enlightenment has incrementally replaced it with the reign of quantification, which is Science with a capital “S.” Denizens of religion may disagree with my surmise, but simply ask them what they watched on Netflix last night or the make of their smart phone.
Mr. Frederick has chronicled an epic, historical narrative whose ultimate destination is the reign of quantification—through a glass darkly. The Knights Templar are the prime movers of his epic. And he, rightfully, concludes that the remnants of the Knights Templar took refuge in Scotland after Phillip the Fair, the King of France, put a contract out on them. Like a Mafia don, after a cost-benefit analysis, Phillip concluded that wiping the Templars from the face of the Earth would be much more cost effective than remuneration, and he coerced the Vatican into his treachery. Mavens of our esoteric history generally concede that many of the Knights morphed into the Masons once they fled to Scotland.
For Mr. Fredrick, the Masons ultimately became the prime mover in the reign of quantification and, for that matter, the sun never setting on the British empire. To borrow a spicy quote from Mr. Frederick: “Great Britain, without a birth certificate, conceived in coitus with modern Freemasonry.” He plumbs from Jessica Harland-Jacobs' Builders of Empire: Freemasons and British Imperialism 1717-1927 to demonstrate that various Masons did, indeed, play a role in the realization of the British Empire. (Builders of Empire: Freemasons and British Imperialism 1717-1927 was published by Princeton, which imbues it with suspicion, but I’ll infer that Mr. Frederick assiduously vetted it.) Moreover, the Masons definitely infiltrated the British gentry, so, as the British built their empire, it’s certainly conceivable that they were integral to its expansion.
But where Mr. Frederick’s diverges far from the madding crowd are his views on Francis Bacon, who enters the narrative figuratively and literally stage right. Many historical mavens who have looked at Bacon’s life with a minimal amount of scrutiny often conclude that he’s an ethical eunuch at best and perhaps an individual with sociopathic tendencies. Like a most notable sociopath, Aleister Crowley, Bacon was conscripted by the Crown’s spy network at an early age.
Though Mr. Frederick attributes the nascent reign of quantification to the Masons, he posits that Bacon was its turbo charge. Bacon coined the term “knowledge is power,” and he also helped to craft the Royal Society of London, which has been shown to have a very short leash on freethinking with regards to science. Bacon also wrote The New Atlantis, which portends a utopian society across the Atlantic where the alter of worship is the reign of quantification. And Bacon was certainly a causal agent in the British settling in the New World
In addition to anointing Bacon as the grand wizard of Science, Mr. Fredrick also postulates that he was Big Bill, the greatest of all bards. But I must admit, I’m out of my depth when attempting to reconcile Bacon as Shakespeare.
His research is certainly fascinating and glistening with pearls.
Would recommend listening to the podcasts on Spotify. All of what you’ve written is waiting for you there, and more. The case for Bacon-as-Shakespeare is overwhelming well-made, cleverly researched, and entertainingly presented. I’m convinced!
You lost me at “Gnostic Knights”
lol!
Read some history books 😃
https://www.amazon.com/Gnostics-Their-Remains-Charles-William-ebook/dp/B002BA5FIO?tag=ustxtadsp-20
Again you defeat your own limp argument!
this is hilarious what a poseur you are.
.
‘‘With the discovery, about 80 years after King's book was published, of the Nag Hammadi manuscripts, it's become more clear that the Gnostics were not a coherent sect of Christians whose views varied from today's Church dogma, but that they were a diverse number of sects similar to how the Protestants are comprised of Episcopalians, Methodists, Baptists, and so forth. However, once the Church sorted through what would and would not be acceptable dogma, the Gnostics were branded heretics (as a side note, many scholars agree that both John and Paul were either Gnostics or supported some of the Gnostic beliefs).’’ Will Cadle
I’ve studied early Christian history for a decade. My work speaks for itself. There is a cottage industry of disinformation on early Christian diversity.
Gnostics were aesthetic who sought a peaceful parallel society separate from the Roman Empire. They were largely annihilated by the fifth century remnants remained in the Bogomils and Cathars , none of whom are anything like the “gnostic nights” you think they are. There’s been a bait and switch and another bait and switch and then another bait and switch and 99% of the people talking about “Gnosticism” -which never existed- don’t know what the hell they’re talking about.
I’m glad you found a book you like. Try looking at the gestalt in academia without an agenda.
Modern academia, not the centuries of ignorance and speculation from which conspiracy theorists and Woo Woo remixers and raving mad pastors get their sources.
Do you agree with the following definition of Gnostic--It is the very widespread and standard definiton for all the many and varied Gnostic sects for oh...about 2,000 years now. Is it you? Do you agree with it?
"Gnostics believe the earth is a prison constructed by an evil creator to trap human souls"
AGREED? Yes? Or No? Thanks.
No, you throw out the bay with the BW. I notice Hichaeal Hoffman does the same, though I by his books andainly support his views.
I have no idea what the fuck you’re talking about. I don’t care. At all.
That’s pretty much my working definition. It’s sad because a lot of well-meaning people react to nihilistic materialism and go toward idealism but end up with this radically negative view of Creation nonetheless. Faithlessness is what it comes down to, imho, inability to subordinate the pride of the mind.
BTW the guy who’s giving you a hard time for being a “conspiracy theorist” who can’t see the “gestalt” in “modern academia” literally thinks Jesus is an alien, whom he has met, who— get this — doesn’t have a beard.
🤯🤯🤯😮😮😮🙊🙊😂😂😂😂
The definition of Gnostics I’m using is simple: Gnostics believe the earth is a prison constructed by an evil creator to trap human souls. Maybe you have a different definition. My definition is widely agreed upon, and means by and large that Gnostics, especially if antinomian, are insane. Gnostic Freemasonry and other modern scholars have attempted to rewrite that definition and create a hipster, cool, rebellious Gnosticism. Nah.
It is possible to be Gnostic and not insane I guess. But it ain’t easy. To see Creator as evil is madness.
That is the same as saying ALL Christians are of the same mind & vision, & is obviously a load of ignorant tripe pudding.
Gnosticism was varied & much of what you consider material beliefs was allegorical.
Nope. All Gnostic sects believe Creator is evil. Fact.
If not. then it ain’t Gnostic. Fact.
😂😆😂
Fact.
GNOSTISM = KNOWING- ''relating to knowledge''
Concepts of good & evil are not essential to that.
.
Fact you do not KNOW what other people think, your egomaniacal delusion on that is overt & ludicrous to witness.
.
Gnosticism is not a single religion. It’s a varied family of mythic systems.
Some sects saw the creator as ignorant, some as flawed, some as benevolent-but-limited, some as metaphor, some as cosmic necessity, some as a tragic craftsman, and some didn’t talk about any “creator” at all.
😂
Maybe you are only familiar with Sethians?
who frame the creator as hostile or deluded, yet even they did not use the modern moral category “evil.”
So, then, what about Valentinians
Basilideans
Thomasine / Syrian traditions —
Hermeticists —
Manichaeans —
Mandaeans —
Ophites / Naassenes ?
They would all prove you 'fact' is merely some intellectual flatulence from decomposing poorly digested ingredients.
.
The only universal thing across Gnostic thought currents is gnosis = knowledge, insight, direct apprehension.
However, everything else varies wildly.
.
FACT-I should point out that YOU JUST MADE A CATAGORY ERROR
Gnostics don’t “believe” in the way dogmatic religions believe.
They know, or claim to know; through revelation, vision, symbolic insight & mythic experience. 'DIRECTLY' so no BELIEF is required ! 😂😆😂
You make amusing oxymoronic jumble with your terminology that is revealing, yet sad.
.
If you are incapable of apologising for you bare faced lies ,& very feeble bluffing games, on this I am going to have to focus on your deceits & you will have to find a new vocation Robert,😏😉... because what you are doing is disgusting travesty of perennial wisdom & symbolic system awareness.
.
Fact you are an esoteric novice (in fact not even that yet) & bluffer as I have discovered from looking at your hilarious 'script machine output' propaganda on Masonry & Francis Bacon.
I am currently in conversation with Peter Dawkins of excellent & well known (among scholars) The Francis Bacon Research Trust (FBRT), about your work (& its cognitively constipated kin) , & looking forward to discussing what you are doing... especially how to balance your artificial framing, along with your bare faced lies.
The Valentinian system is embedded with a cosmic sympathy. See Valentinus poem Summer Harvest.
The Earth is not a prison, but a spiritual waystation, which is absolutely necessary for our spiritual development. The earliest Christian exegesis of Jewish scripture can be found in Ptolemy’s “ letter to flora”, in which the Yahweh of the Old Testament is described more like a middle management. Definitely not a Satan, but definitely not the heavenly father.
See John 8:44
You’re clearly just repeating misinformation, which is part of a large ongoing project obfuscating the diversity and origins of early Christianity.
You’re very ignorant. “Gnosticism” never existed.
Nope. All Gnostic sects believe Creator is evil. Factz
If not, then it ain’t Gnostic. Factz
Again we see a how cognitively castrated you have become maintaining this flimsy NuGuru persona Robert, it is not for you, give it up for your own well being.
😂😆😂
Fact.
GNOSTISM = KNOWING- ''relating to knowledge''
Concepts of good & evil are not essential to that.
.
Fact you do not KNOW what other people think, your egomaniacal delusion on that is overt & ludicrous to witness.
.
Gnosticism is not a single religion. It’s a varied family of mythic systems.
Some sects saw the creator as ignorant, some as flawed, some as benevolent-but-limited, some as metaphor, some as cosmic necessity, some as a tragic craftsman, and some didn’t talk about any “creator” at all.
😂
Maybe you are only familiar with Sethians?
who frame the creator as hostile or deluded, yet even they did not use the modern moral category “evil.”
So, then, what about Valentinians
Basilideans
Thomasine / Syrian traditions —
Hermeticists —
Manichaeans —
Mandaeans —
Ophites / Naassenes ?
They would all prove you 'fact' is merely some intellectual flatulence from decomposing poorly digested ingredients.
.
The only universal thing across Gnostic thought currents is gnosis = knowledge, insight, direct apprehension.
However, everything else varies wildly.
.
FACT-I should point out that YOU JUST MADE A CATAGORY ERROR
Gnostics don’t “believe” in the way dogmatic religions believe.
They know, or claim to know; through revelation, vision, symbolic insight & mythic experience. 'DIRECTLY' so no BELIEF is required ! 😂😆😂
You make amusing oxymoronic jumble with your terminology that is revealing, yet sad.
.
Fact you are an esoteric novice (in fact not even that yet) & bluffer as I have discovered from looking at your hilarious 'script machine output' propaganda on Masonry & Francis Bacon.
Well it certainly did exist , (& not termed simply Gnosticism by themselves often) but was varied & as you say not ‘enslavement theology’ originally but much later was re-furbished by ‘pseudo Gnostics ‘ & death cult infested thinking/symbolism '
“Gnosticism” never existed. This is the mainstream academic position. You are getting your information from polemicist who have disabuse themselves of doing actual research.
I’ve dedicated the last decade of my life to producing material, largely centered on gnostic Christianity of the early centuries. My work speaks for itself. I’m done here.
Is this a joke?
Are you taking the piss out of your readers or just another gullible right wing Christian swallowing the same old propaganda?
When Fereemasonary originated was before Scotland was even called that name.
🙄😂😆😂
Read it from someone who KNOWS-
https://substack.com/@theblueskymaiden1/p-161227829
Catch up with all the recent unveiling of the Masonic lies and bullshit. Wandering Cathedral builders, dusty and leather handed whoses lodges are suddenly hobnobbing with aristocrats and kings! 🤣 Modern Freemasonry began in Scotland, case closed, and it was finalized in England by Bacon. and then it spread all over Europe and metastasized creating new degrees. Aspects of masonry are older, sure. But then again, everything has ancient roots.
You make that claim because to be honest & go back to its ROOTS undermines you entire career & performance ! 😂😆😂 This is hilarious to read, thank you for such amusement.
.
SO, then Robert, if FREEMASONARY began in times of Bacon, how come their is so many ANCIENT buildings - that had to be 'Masonic-ally' constructed, & contain their MARKS & proportions (signatures) ? IS this going to become some convoluted time travel concept you have to share with us?
.
Maybe your mode of thinking would also promote the idea that cooking was invented by Fanny Cradock because she wrote a big book about it ? Of course she wasn't the first , so I wonder do you think Apicius — De re coquinaria invented cooking because he is claimed to have compiled the first big book on it?
The Origins of Freemasonry: Scotland Century 1590-1710. This book is a new edition of David Stevenson's classic account of the origins of Freemasonry, a brotherhood of men bound together by secret initiatives, rituals and modes of identification with ideals of fraternity, equality, toleration and reason. Beginning in Britain, Freemasonry swept across Europe in the mid-eighteenth century in astonishing fashion--yet its origins are still hotly debated today. The prevailing assumption has been that it emerged in England around 1700, but David Stevenson demonstrates that the real origins of modern Freemasonry lie in Scotland around 1600, when the system of lodges was created by stonemasons with rituals and secrets blending medieval mythology with Renaissance and seventeenth-century history. This fascinating work of historical detection will be essential reading for anyone interested in Renaissance and seventeenth-century history, for freemasons themselves, and for those readers captivated by the secret societies at the heart of the bestselling The Da Vinci Code. David Stevenson is Emeritus Professor of Scottish History at the University of St. Andrews.
🙄🤔🤨😃😂😆😂🤣😂
You have never read that book though have you !!!
You will find that the back‑cover BLURB is aimed at modern speculative craft lore, not the origins of Freemasonry — and within the book Stevenson himself refutes every single one of your claims, Robert.
If you actually open the book (pp. 20–45), Stevenson explains that Scottish lodges grew out of existing medieval stonemason guilds — complete with marks, regulations, rituals, and symbolic geometry.
That means Masonry did not begin in Scotland, and certainly not with Bacon.
You keep citing the cover like a talisman instead of reading the content!🙄😄
If you were knowledgeable, had integrity & were serious you would address the points raised by quoting or referencing the book pages that justify your presumption, not a misleading cover blurb.
He's so devious about this.But hes busy digging his own pit about it like some panicking lemming. Mental.
It is, Yet what is fascinating is that it is all driven by a persona maintenance dilemma for him.
.
He has inadvertently become perfect specimen for scrutiny because he appears to have no comprehension at all of what he keeps asserting !
Its is fabulous to perceive such masochist soul desperate for release. His psychodynamic is also as overt as his bare faced lies.
.
This cut & paste mania he went into is his reset attempt, next he will perform status reaffirmation. Yes, he is very much like a predictable machine, as the composition of his essays also confirms!
What a find, thank you FAWR😃😄
What are the ancient roots of CPU's please?
BSM wasn't discussing the modern masons everyone knows are a cess pit of corruption, she is discussing the more important & useful genuine origins of CRAFT GUILDS , that still navigate the Zodiac of Power.
You need to catch up with how control structures really work & influence our lives, it seems?
CPUs? BSM?
Craft Guilds? Really?
Catch me up!
🙄😂😆😂.....
You really are funniest creature I have found this week talking utter feltch dribble Robert! Do you do stand up comedy in clubs also?!
.
To evade Craft Guilds from Masonry is like ignoring food & ingredients for cooking… what do you have left — water & a pot on fire?”
You didnt read the link did you, & now you look like a smug controlled op tosser instead. Your lazy ass ways will be your unfolding no doubt! 😂
you did not include a link. but never mind. go get some manners
WTF is that this then you sanctimonious useless arrogant hypocritical prick? 😂😂😂 You get some manners & you'll be treated likewise in return.
https://substack.com/@theblueskymaiden1/p-161227829
Explain all the Freemasonry in Shakespeare then, and Bacon’s obvious authorship, FMs love of the Dark Bard and the correlation of FM and empire. It’s Indisputable. FM is older than Bacon but he did the 3rd degree and made it empire-able. Along With Shakespeare and Science. Not all FMs are in on it. Cool guys like you are the veil. 😃
That is bare faced lie- there were originally 7 craft degrees. You keep proving you are not educated, informed or instructed in such universal principles.
Here I will instruct you, let us see how humble & sincere you are in your comprehension & interactions.
Also after reading your most prominent work I found no mention showing that you are even aware of the two main operative divisions in Freemasonry! 🙄🤔😂
.
this is taken from one of Freemasonries own more expert scholars, I have summarised for convenience-
''the first three were operative, tied to actual stone-craft.
the others were symbolic, tied to cosmology, geometry, and myth
the Master Mason degree existed in proto‑form long before speculative Masonry
the Hiramic legend is a late graft, not the origin''
“The Origins of Freemasonry: Scotland Century 1590-1710”. This book is a new edition of David Stevenson's classic account of the origins of Freemasonry, a brotherhood of men bound together by secret initiatives, rituals and modes of identification with ideals of fraternity, equality, toleration and reason. Beginning in Britain, Freemasonry swept across Europe in the mid-eighteenth century in astonishing fashion--yet its origins are still hotly debated today. The prevailing assumption has been that it emerged in England around 1700, but David Stevenson demonstrates that the real origins of modern Freemasonry lie in Scotland around 1600, when the system of lodges was created by stonemasons with rituals and secrets blending medieval mythology with Renaissance and seventeenth-century history. This fascinating work of historical detection will be essential reading for anyone interested in Renaissance and seventeenth-century history, for freemasons themselves, and for those readers captivated by the secret societies at the heart of the bestselling The Da Vinci Code. David Stevenson is Emeritus Professor of Scottish History at the University of St. Andrews.
‘‘for those readers captivated by the secret societies at the heart of the bestselling The Da Vinci Code.’’
is that meant to be a endorsement or warning?
😂😆😂
He may have posted with no irony, or genuine attempt at hype there !
Again: Gnostics believe the entire world -minus sparks of light that comprise the soul- is a prison designed and maintained by an evil creator.
Factz.
‘Gnosis’ is the knowledge needed to escape said prison And it’s available only to the really smart and exceptional humans who are not duped by false advertisements of God of love or any other type of God-creator besides the evil one
End of discussion because that above is the entire point! It is normally kept on the down low by the legions of hipster Gnostics clamoring on the entertainment highways. rebels without a cause
So we know where we both stand! Let’s move on shall we? 😃 Have a great day! 😃
Is that some oxymoronic tautology game you are now retreating into with your overt demiurge reflex?
GNOSTICS ''BELIEVED'''
🙄🤔😂😆😂
.
Again you are proving to be a bare faced simpleton with an agenda to misinform your readers Robert.
.
He we witness you amusing & quite incredible Category Collapse with your limp response:- flattening dozens of sects into one cartoon,
reducing a complex tradition to a single slogan, & then glaring Persona maintenance attempts we anticipated already, you are now acting like a limited machine pretending to be a limited human scholar & do both a disservice.
.
Actual Gnostic scholarship shows us that these GNOSTIC sects thought (facts! 🙄😂)
Valentinians — creator = ignorant, not evil
Sethians — creator = flawed, not omnipotent
Thomasine — world = illusory, not a prison
Hermetic‑Christian — cosmos = a school, not a trap
Basilideans — creation = multi‑layered emanation, not dualistic
.
You really have not got any substance to your assertion, but seem stuck in some feedback rut, is the price of the pose really worth it all?
.
& now it is probably best I leave you to repair yourself, because you are incapable of acting inner honest manner with any integrity.
You have never read that book though have you !!!
😂😆😂
The back‑cover BLURB is about modern speculative Masonry, not the ancient craft — and Stevenson directly contradicts your Bacon mythology.
In the section on the transition to speculative Masonry (pp. 180–210), Stevenson shows that the Third Degree and the Hiramic drama were created after 1717, decades after Bacon’s death.
He also makes clear that Bacon had no documented involvement with Scottish lodges or degree formation.
So your “Bacon finalised Masonry” claim is not in Stevenson — it’s only in your imagination.
No surprises there then 😂😂😂
Nice one BSM.Ta.
This is more confused nonsense. FM starts “officially” in the 1400s, at least 100 years before Bacon is even born.
FM is a religious academic tradition not a political initiative.
You guys - always - confuse the fraternity for freemasonry and you need to do a lot more work on the subject. You dont know the difference between what FM is vs. what some guy once did who happened to be a FM.
Robert..when I read this excerpt from your post above...:
"This is the key point, and I slog thru history books in order to understand it: The Empire is now attempting their next-level growth phase, trying to establishing supra-national global, technocratic “science based” ruling bodies, creating forms of corporate feudalism strangely similar to the Tudor system where the corporation actually began. This attempt uses science-y threats of killer viruses and a looming climate catastrophe as pretext and justification for their complete control."..
The podcast linked below came to mind, about the crushing of speech(and ideas) thru "professional societies", during CV19, but also more broadly...
The interviewee also has a new book on the topic:
"World on Mute: How Workplace Speech Commitees are Destroying our Nations
and Eliminating our Civil Liberties" - by Lisa Miron
Interviewed by your investigative compatriot, William Ramsey...
03NOV2025 Podcast here:
https://podcasts.apple.com/gb/podcast/world-on-mute-how-workplace-speech-committees-are-destroying/id1388815042?i=1000735098586
This comment excerpt from Nick Bryant hints at what Lisa Miron goes into in depth...
ie "You can't talk about that":
"Though Mr. Frederick attributes the nascent reign of quantification to the Masons, he posits that Bacon was its turbo charge. Bacon coined the term “knowledge is power,” and he also helped to craft the Royal Society of London,
>>>which has been shown to have a.very. short.leash.
on freethinking with regards to science<<<."
I am enjoying my subscription to your excellent website and podcasts.
Cheers.
re “knowledge is power,”
.
The phrase wasn't BACONs 😂😆😃
it appears in Bacon’s Meditationes Sacrae (1597) as:
“Nam et ipsa scientia potestas est.”
(“For knowledge itself is power.”)
.
Yet he knew very well-
“Knowledge is power” is a universal human insight, not some Baconian invention.
Solon — knowledge as civic strength
Plato — knowledge as the highest form of power
Aristotle — knowledge as the cause of mastery
Hermetic texts — knowledge as divine agency
Egyptian wisdom literature — knowledge as magical potency
correct
Thank you BT.
Great piece! Bailey said the Masons would execute the one world religion:
https://substack.com/@courtenayturner/note/c-114439071?r=lphy5&utm_medium=ios&utm_source=notes-share-action
The Robinson book is great. Marlowe died in 1594. How could he have written the plays? Kind of a. Stretch. No one ever saw him again.
I encourage you to read Harland-Davidson's book to understand why the evidence is very very far from circumstantial. I am not making any claim that it's only Freemason's that run the world.
John J Robinson found a connection to the Templars and the English Peasants Revolt of 1381: https://www.amazon.com/Born-Blood-Lost-Secrets-Freemasonry/dp/1590771486/ref=mp_s_a_1_1?sr=8-1
Historian Marty Sieff makes a strong argument for Marlow being Shakespeare: https://youtu.be/cqO4dsICS3Q
I'm a huge fan of the Robinson book. He makes a couple mistakes (imagine that!) and has no footnotes...but it's awesome. https://robertfrederick.substack.com/p/how-and-why-the-knights-templar-became?r=1iqqju
"How (And Why) The Knights Templar Became The Freemasons"
I'll check that Marlowe piece out thanks.
I hadn’t realised how important freemasonry was to the spread of the British Empire, but it makes sense as there are lodges everywhere.
To understand the influence of freemasonry it seems important to be able to name the most influential masons in the world through the centuries. Is this already done?
As you say “the hidden life is best” for high level masons so info may be scarce. But likely it is a fascinating gallery of names.
Wikipedia is actually pretty good: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Freemasons
It's the higher levels that remain a mystery- yes. The elite have certainly developed beyond Masonry at present. But it set up the Empire and serves as the model of an initiation based organization. MK-Ultra is a Masonic endeavour. Allen Dulles was a Mason. Schnoebelen is very good. See video. He checks out, legit...he never made it into the inner rooms, thankfully (or not). He has some new videos on Masonry that I have not seen.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7DY_FKVSjyM
One of the most remarkable aspects of Freemasonry is in it's structure that allows a certain independence, flexibility and creativity in the lodges, probably just like "cells" in intelligence networks, and the realtionship is not an accident. Especially at the highest level.
Masonry is veiled by all the decent fellows that are members. Brilliant.
Famous freemasons:-
https://masoniccollection.co.uk/articles/an-introduction-into-freemasonry/famous-freemasons
Outstanding!
"Templars originated in France. Just sayin’."
Look forward to more 😁👍
Cheers
Thanks Mick!
I’m reading through John Mitchel’s ‘Jail Journal’ written in 1848, when he was sent away from Ireland by British on a convict ship. This was during the height of the famine-genocide in Ireland. Mitchel was an educated, Irishman who wrote with searing intellectual honestly and integrity as well as ‘savage indignation’ at the Irish plight. I expect that English was his first language. He rallied often against Bacon and his influence. I will return again to these points in this book that I had previously glossed over.
Mitchel writes about things that I had guessed about but had not seen others mention, such as the fact that what we Irish consider the last great stand against the English, 1798, was actually fomented, to urge the settled colonisers to align with the idea of unification with Britain, 1801.
Hoping to attach a YouTube video of Ben McBrady, the last Irish Druid of the Gaelic Order.
https://youtu.be/FIrYD7djFH8?feature=shared
I'm not surprised by the Scottish connection to freemasonry which I suspect has antediluvian roots connected to Druidism which also has clear historical connections to Egypt. This comes back to Plato and Atlantean mythology and I think the title and content of The New Atlantis is a big clue to this. Abraham may even have been a druid (Think oak groves) and there is a well documented connection between the Druids and the masons. This is staring back into the deepest mists of time I appreciate but this is where the occult esoteric knowledge held by the illuminati stems from.
My grandfather was a mason (but I’m guessing only at one of the lower levels) where he believed he was involved with a force for good (!!). My dad was inducted as a young man but immediately left and would never talk about it ever after.
My mum, in her youth, along with some friends, headed out to a local dance one night but having mistaken the venue (this was the early ‘50s), stumbled upon a Masonic meeting in full flight. Imagine the consternation. Four gals in their finery interrupting the aproned-ones!! She recalled them being unceremoniously bundled outside amid chaotic scenes and the door slammed in their faces. Presumably locked thereafter. Wonder if anyone’s head rolled for that. Not literally - but you never know with these dudes…
Great to see you here! Have loved your podcasts since I discovered them last year via The Delingpod (thanks James!) and recommended them to others.
Great detective work - and thanks for the laughs along the way too! Much-needed in a dark world.
Bacon for Breakfast
When Nietzsche initially declared that “God is dead” in The Gay Science, he was of the forlorn belief that the Enlightenment had slain God. Though religion has seemingly flourished since the Enlightenment, I believe that the Enlightenment has incrementally replaced it with the reign of quantification, which is Science with a capital “S.” Denizens of religion may disagree with my surmise, but simply ask them what they watched on Netflix last night or the make of their smart phone.
Mr. Frederick has chronicled an epic, historical narrative whose ultimate destination is the reign of quantification—through a glass darkly. The Knights Templar are the prime movers of his epic. And he, rightfully, concludes that the remnants of the Knights Templar took refuge in Scotland after Phillip the Fair, the King of France, put a contract out on them. Like a Mafia don, after a cost-benefit analysis, Phillip concluded that wiping the Templars from the face of the Earth would be much more cost effective than remuneration, and he coerced the Vatican into his treachery. Mavens of our esoteric history generally concede that many of the Knights morphed into the Masons once they fled to Scotland.
For Mr. Fredrick, the Masons ultimately became the prime mover in the reign of quantification and, for that matter, the sun never setting on the British empire. To borrow a spicy quote from Mr. Frederick: “Great Britain, without a birth certificate, conceived in coitus with modern Freemasonry.” He plumbs from Jessica Harland-Jacobs' Builders of Empire: Freemasons and British Imperialism 1717-1927 to demonstrate that various Masons did, indeed, play a role in the realization of the British Empire. (Builders of Empire: Freemasons and British Imperialism 1717-1927 was published by Princeton, which imbues it with suspicion, but I’ll infer that Mr. Frederick assiduously vetted it.) Moreover, the Masons definitely infiltrated the British gentry, so, as the British built their empire, it’s certainly conceivable that they were integral to its expansion.
But where Mr. Frederick’s diverges far from the madding crowd are his views on Francis Bacon, who enters the narrative figuratively and literally stage right. Many historical mavens who have looked at Bacon’s life with a minimal amount of scrutiny often conclude that he’s an ethical eunuch at best and perhaps an individual with sociopathic tendencies. Like a most notable sociopath, Aleister Crowley, Bacon was conscripted by the Crown’s spy network at an early age.
Though Mr. Frederick attributes the nascent reign of quantification to the Masons, he posits that Bacon was its turbo charge. Bacon coined the term “knowledge is power,” and he also helped to craft the Royal Society of London, which has been shown to have a very short leash on freethinking with regards to science. Bacon also wrote The New Atlantis, which portends a utopian society across the Atlantic where the alter of worship is the reign of quantification. And Bacon was certainly a causal agent in the British settling in the New World
In addition to anointing Bacon as the grand wizard of Science, Mr. Fredrick also postulates that he was Big Bill, the greatest of all bards. But I must admit, I’m out of my depth when attempting to reconcile Bacon as Shakespeare.
His research is certainly fascinating and glistening with pearls.
Would recommend listening to the podcasts on Spotify. All of what you’ve written is waiting for you there, and more. The case for Bacon-as-Shakespeare is overwhelming well-made, cleverly researched, and entertainingly presented. I’m convinced!