Gnosticism

[KatKanPlay]

Originally Posted by Dumpy Dooby

Yeah, you're right. When I made that post (and this thread), I hadn't read about all flavors of Gnosticism.

I should have said, "Not all Gnostics believed Jesus was a real person." In LAOT, I was talking to up|dn about it a bit. I'm trying to come up with a very inclusive way of describing Gnostics and Gnosticism as a whole. You're welcome to make a suggestion. I will agree that particular definition needs to be modified.

Currently I'm using "Individuals, generally believers in the God of Theology, that believe to have esoteric knowledge regarding the existence of a supernatural god." but I think that might be inaccurate as well.

Im not so sure about that, my research tells me that gnostics were among the very earliest of christians. The gnostic scriptures were completely rejected by the framers of christianity (the romans who built the catholic church) as the scriptures claimed that each person had the power within them to reach enlightenment as per the teachings of Jesus Christ. This left little need for the church. The Gnostic teachings were declared hersey by the then new Roman Catholic power and was literally stamped out. That is what my research has found.

[lew]

Originally Posted by KatKanPlay

Im not so sure about that, my research tells me that gnostics were among the very earliest of christians. The gnostic scriptures were completely rejected by the framers of christianity (the romans who built the catholic church) as the scriptures claimed that each person had the power within them to reach enlightenment as per the teachings of Jesus Christ. This left little need for the church. The Gnostic teachings were declared hersey by the then new Roman Catholic power and was literally stamped out. That is what my research has found.

Gnostics existed before Christ.

[KatKanPlay]

Originally Posted by lew

Gnostics existed before Christ.

Before Edit....

True. I was really referring to the rise of the Gnostic and organization of the Gnostic movement that considered Jesus Christ to further teach about and confirm their beliefs.

That post didnt quite work for me,,, how about u? I meant to say,,

Yes absolutely gnostics go back to the beginning. But a particular group of Gnostics heard the message of the man/prophet/brother, Jesus Christ much differently than other gnostics/religious/indiginous peoples?? This took, "what might be termed?" as gnostic christians in a different direction than the other apostolic christians were being led. The early gnostic "christians?" were a strong group, but, gnostic beliefs didnt quite work to the benefit the early framers of christianity, under the influence of the Roman Empire.?. Most of those termed gnostic christians believed Jesus to be more brother than saviour. ??

Am I close?

[up|dn]

Originally Posted by Dumpy Dooby

I would estimate that is fairly accurate. I'll see if I can convince up|dn to join this forum so he can join in on this discussion. I changed the definition again, along with a quote from up|dn.

Hmm, without reading the thread first, I'll give you my definition of "gnostic", although because gnosticism is so individualized, it by no means represents a universal definition.

To me, gnosticism begins with a "gnosis", or an intuitive awareness, of the Divine. Some interpret this gnosis within polytheistic religions, while others interpret it within monotheism. What links the gnostics is the realization that "all is One". In a sort of pantheistic view, God exists, and nothing exists that is not God. God cannot be defined, although God goes by different names: Truth, the Divine, Father, Atman, Mother, Monad, One, I am, etc. The Divine of Socrates is the same God as that of Marcus Aurelius. God is the monad of Pythagoras, and the Father of Jesus. Spinoza and Einstein's view of God is very much in line with gnostic view as well.

Christian gnosticism, which is one form of gnosticism, can be interpreted in various ways. It basically depends on whether you believe in a historical Jesus. Those gnostics that believe in a historical Jesus, see him as a person that taught the way for any person to become a Christ. The Divine Spark within was realized in Jesus at his baptism, and he was then "Christened" or "anointed". Jesus, in this view, is then a sort of avatara that preached a form of gnosis. Another gnostic view sees Jesus as a myth, and within the myth is the universal teaching that the Kingdom is within. In this gnostic view, Jesus Christ represents the embodiment of the Logos, which is that part of God that is present in all humanity as divine reason. The Holy Spirit is seen as the emanation of Sophia, the divine wisdom. The Father in the Trinity is the encompassing Divine from which all things emanate. Jesus Christ is an archetype of a human who has awakened to the gnosis that God dwells within.

There are many seemingly strange gnostic myths about how the divine spark of God came to be entrapped in the human body, and how the world was created by a demiurge, a false creator god. Some people choose to understand this literally, but in my opinion it is best understood figuratively. While it is true that some early Christian gnostics wanted Yahweh understood as this demiurge, and the God of Jesus seen as the "True God", this was simply one way for a group of gnostics to describe the world and explain suffering. This doesn't define gnosticism as a whole, in my opinion, but simply a group of gnostics within early Christianity.

Now I'll go back and read the thread.

[up|dn]

Originally Posted by KatKanPlay

Before Edit....

That post didnt quite work for me,,, how about u? I meant to say,,

Yes absolutely gnostics go back to the beginning. But a particular group of Gnostics heard the message of the man/prophet/brother, Jesus Christ much differently than other gnostics/religious/indiginous peoples?? This took, "what might be termed?" as gnostic christians in a different direction than the other apostolic christians were being led. The early gnostic "christians?" were a strong group, but, gnostic beliefs didnt quite work to the benefit the early framers of christianity, under the influence of the Roman Empire.?. Most of those termed gnostic christians believed Jesus to be more brother than saviour. ??

Am I close?

I've read a few books that argue Christianity actually began with a mythical gnosticism, but was then literalized. The literalists became the "orthodox" Christians, and the large variety of gnostics became heretics.

The Jesus Mysteries (Freke and Gandy) argues that the movement began with a myth, similar to that of the Mystery Religions of Dionysus and Osiris. In these myths, gods died and were resurrected as symbols of the death of the animal nature and the awakening of the spiritual one in its initiates. The authors argue that instead of a Greek or Egyptian god, the Jewish version used a Messianic figure to teach this message. They argue that the story of Jesus was a ritualistic drama meant to impart gnosis of God within.

The Dead Sea Scrolls and the Christian Myth (John Allegro) argues that the movement began with the leader of an apocalyptic Jewish sect, and as this movement broke up and moved into Egypt it merged with, or became, the Theraputae (Eusebius quotes Philo and suggests these are the original Christians). He basically posits that Christianity formed from a symbiosis between this Jewish messianic sect and Gnostic sects.

Orthodoxy and Heresy (Arthur Bauer) gives good geographical and historical evidence to suggest that the "heretical" views of Christianity might be closer to original Christianity than the "orthodox" view that was adopted.

Gnostics use myth to explain the Kingdom within, Christians use literalism to explain that the Kingdom will come in a historical context. I don't know which is more closely linked to the original belief, but it's safe to say the Kingdom didn't come as predicted when understood literally.

[KatKanPlay]

Originally Posted by up|dn

I've read a few books that argue Christianity actually began with a mythical gnosticism, but was then literalized. The literalists became the "orthodox" Christians, and the large variety of gnostics became heretics.

The Jesus Mysteries (Freke and Gandy) argues that the movement began with a myth, similar to that of the Mystery Religions of Dionysus and Osiris. In these myths, gods died and were resurrected as symbols of the death of the animal nature and the awakening of the spiritual one in its initiates. The authors argue that instead of a Greek or Egyptian god, the Jewish version used a Messianic figure to teach this message. They argue that the story of Jesus was a ritualistic drama meant to impart gnosis of God within.

The Dead Sea Scrolls and the Christian Myth (John Allegro) argues that the movement began with the leader of an apocalyptic Jewish sect, and as this movement broke up and moved into Egypt it merged with, or became, the Theraputae (Eusebius quotes Philo and suggests these are the original Christians). He basically posits that Christianity formed from a symbiosis between this Jewish messianic sect and Gnostic sects.

Orthodoxy and Heresy (Arthur Bauer) gives good geographical and historical evidence to suggest that the "heretical" views of Christianity might be closer to original Christianity than the "orthodox" view that was adopted.

Gnostics use myth to explain the Kingdom within, Christians use literalism to explain that the Kingdom will come in a historical context. I don't know which is more closely linked to the original belief, but it's safe to say the Kingdom didn't come as predicted when understood literally.

Everything I have looked at also indicates that the original christians were gnostics and had they not been extinquished, christianity, if that in fact is what it would be called, would be completely different than we know it today. In fact there would be no real similarities at all. The ghnostics traveled a completely different path, and aimed for a completely different kingdom than what was created through organized christianity (Roman Empire). My own thoughts lead be to believe that any form of gnosticism would have to be very personal, as there is no real physical/human leadership although there is shared wisdom. Christian gnostics of today might tend to run into some real contradictions if gnosticism is truly practiced. What do you think?

[up|dn]

Originally Posted by KatKanPlay

Everything I have looked at also indicates that the original christians were gnostics and had they not been extinquished, christianity, if that in fact is what it would be called, would be completely different than we know it today. In fact there would be no real similarities at all. The ghnostics traveled a completely different path, and aimed for a completely different kingdom than what was created through organized christianity (Roman Empire). My own thoughts lead be to believe that any form of gnosticism would have to be very personal, as there is no real physical/human leadership although there is shared wisdom. Christian gnostics of today might tend to run into some real contradictions if gnosticism is truly practiced. What do you think?

Well, I think part of the problem is that there were various "Christianities" in the early Churches. Since there were no scriptures, no creeds, and no doctrine, Christianity developed in very different ways. The path that the Church took is based largely on the view of the Roman Church, which then used its clout to establish its views as orthodoxy. The Christian scriptures were chosen partly because of "orthodox" views, and so it's easy to understand why some texts (usually the ones seen by scholars as pseudonymous, ie: not written by the apostles, but in their name) are so vehemently anti-gnostic.

There are some Gnostic Churches in North America. Specifically I'm thinking of the Apostolic Johannite Church and the Ecclesia Gnostica. You might find it interesting to look at their websites and see how they run a church:
Ecclesia Gnostica
Apostolic Johannite Church :: An Esoteric Gnostic Christian Communion with Valid Apostolic Succession

I think the challenge is to keep it from becoming a doctrinal dogmatic religion. I think the best thing about gnosticism can be seen from this attack on it by Iranaeus: “Every day one of them invents something new (i.e., myths and scriptures), and none of them is considered perfect unless he is productive in this way.”

[KatKanPlay]

Originally Posted by up|dn

Well, I think part of the problem is that there were various "Christianities" in the early Churches. Since there were no scriptures, no creeds, and no doctrine, Christianity developed in very different ways. The path that the Church took is based largely on the view of the Roman Church, which then used its clout to establish its views as orthodoxy. The Christian scriptures were chosen partly because of "orthodox" views, and so it's easy to understand why some texts (usually the ones seen by scholars as pseudonymous, ie: not written by the apostles, but in their name) are so vehemently anti-gnostic.

There are some Gnostic Churches in North America. Specifically I'm thinking of the Apostolic Johannite Church and the Ecclesia Gnostica. You might find it interesting to look at their websites and see how they run a church:
Ecclesia Gnostica
Apostolic Johannite Church :: An Esoteric Gnostic Christian Communion with Valid Apostolic Succession

I think the challenge is to keep it from becoming a doctrinal dogmatic religion. I think the best thing about gnosticism can be seen from this attack on it by Iranaeus: “Every day one of them invents something new (i.e., myths and scriptures), and none of them is considered perfect unless he is productive in this way.”

Thanks for the links, very interesting. I will have to give each a more serious and lengthy look when I get home and have faster service. (stuck in a hotel room in Austin) I have taken a different gnostic route myself as I have had difficulty with the whole term "gnostic christian", basically because I have a strong distaste for christianity in general and find their teachings to rely to much on faith thereby discouraging a truly personal path to spiritual enlightenment and growth. I have to say that the discovery of the Judas Gospel and that gospel's story, almost brought tears to my eyes and the sense of reverence I felt amazed me. Do you believe that Jesus Christ actually set out to establish christianity as it has evolved over the centuries? Does christianity actually follow his teachings?

I wonder at this point if this should be its own thread?

[KatKanPlay]

Okay, I have a question for those who consider themselve Christian Gnostics. Gnostics at the most fundamental level believe that life is a journey with many levels of learning. Each level is to achieve greater understanding and enlightenment than the one before. Many gnostics speak in terms of life paths or life journey's with a very strong emphasis on the subconsious mind.

My question for the Christian Gnostics: Is your ultimate goal heaven? What are your requirements for getting there?

[up|dn]

Originally Posted by KatKanPlay

Okay, I have a question for those who consider themselve Christian Gnostics. Gnostics at the most fundamental level believe that life is a journey with many levels of learning. Each level is to achieve greater understanding and enlightenment than the one before. Many gnostics speak in terms of life paths or life journey's with a very strong emphasis on the subconsious mind.

My question for the Christian Gnostics: Is your ultimate goal heaven? What are your requirements for getting there?

Many gnostics probably believe in a form of heaven, or maybe something similar to the idea of nirvana. Personally, I only believe in a heaven that is both a goal both within the heart, and here on earth. I don't worry about what happens after death.

Jesus said: If those who lead you say unto you: Behold, the Kingdom is in heaven, then the birds of the heaven will be before you. If they say unto you: It is in the sea, then the fish will be before you. But the Kingdom is within you, and it is outside of you. When you know yourselves, then shall you be known, and you shall know that you are the sons of the living Father. But if ye do not know yourselves, then you are in poverty, and you are poverty. - Gospel of Thomas, 3

A heart directed to the ultimate source, or the Truth, or God (it's all semantics to me) and a heart that has the gnosis of "the living Father" is in heaven, because heaven is a state of closeness with God.

Even in Christianity, I think the idea of heaven is heavily influenced by Platonic thought. To Plato, heaven is a place where eternal, perfect forms exist. In his allegory of the cave, he alludes to people being able to see clearly when they are enlightened. When they become aware of their true perfected selves, they awaken the heavenly glory within. I understand the resurrection to heaven in much the same way. Christ is the archetype of the resurrected glory in heaven, and we must all strive to be resurrected to that 'mind of Christ'. Plato also believed that when we die, if we behaved justly, we return to the eternal existence in heavenly forms, and this is an idea that plays more strongly in Christianity than in gnosticism.

[Rover]

I need a document about that gnosticism existed before christ....can you help me?

[up|dn]

Originally Posted by Rover

I need a document about that gnosticism existed before christ....can you help me?

Offhand, this article comes to mind, it argues that gnostic ideas can already be found in Judaism: Jewish Origins of Gnosticism

Most of the ideas of gnosticism can be found in neo-platonism, hermeticism, and really almost all of the mystical traditions. The idea about a demiurge, a creator god, comes out of Plato's Timaeus.

It's my contention that "gnosticism" is really just an influence of Greek religious ideas, and that it affected Christianity's early years and shaped some of its doctrines, but that extreme forms of it (especially ones that rejected the Jewish God as a lesser creator god) became heretical.

[Rover]

Originally Posted by up|dn

Offhand, this article comes to mind, it argues that gnostic ideas can already be found in Judaism: Jewish Origins of Gnosticism

Most of the ideas of gnosticism can be found in neo-platonism, hermeticism, and really almost all of the mystical traditions. The idea about a demiurge, a creator god, comes out of Plato's Timaeus.

It's my contention that "gnosticism" is really just an influence of Greek religious ideas, and that it affected Christianity's early years and shaped some of its doctrines, but that extreme forms of it (especially ones that rejected the Jewish God as a lesser creator god) became heretical.

thanx very much

[Rover]

Originally Posted by up|dn

Offhand, this article comes to mind, it argues that gnostic ideas can already be found in Judaism: Jewish Origins of Gnosticism

Most of the ideas of gnosticism can be found in neo-platonism, hermeticism, and really almost all of the mystical traditions. The idea about a demiurge, a creator god, comes out of Plato's Timaeus.

It's my contention that "gnosticism" is really just an influence of Greek religious ideas, and that it affected Christianity's early years and shaped some of its doctrines, but that extreme forms of it (especially ones that rejected the Jewish God as a lesser creator god) became heretical.

thank you!

[up|dn]

you're welcome