I have read many threads now that posts questions such as "If Jesus was an ordinary man, would you still follow Him?" and "Was Jesus just a great teacher?" Most responses are that He wasn't just a man or just a great teacher, etc....... But most agree that some of what he taught were some good moral values. I question the validity of this thought.
Gnosticism comes from the Greek word gnosis which means knowledge. Gnostics are "those in the know". What they historically claimed to know was the secrets that could bring salvation. For the gnostic, a person isn't saved by having faith in Christ or doing good deeds, rather a person is saved by knowing the truth-the truth about the world we live in, the true God, but most importantly about who we ourselves are.
According to them, the Ultimate Divine Being is completely removed from this world, He is absolute spirit with no material aspects or qualities. He has many offsprings known as "aeons who are spiritual beings. During a catrasophe one of these aeons somehow fell from the divine realm leading to lesser divine beings being created. These lesser divine beings created our material world.
I could go forever about what they think and why, but their overriding point is blatant: The god who made this world, the one of the OT, is a secondary and inferior deity. We won't gain freedom to eternity by worshipping him, but instead, we will be trapped here. We can only gain true eternity through knowledge and wisdom bestowed upon us by divine beings. In Christian gnostic religions, the one who bestows this knowledge was Christ. But Christ wasn't the son of God as the church would have you believe, which is why there are so many holes in the account of His life. Instead, he was an aeon temporarily housed in Jesus to impart the knowledge one needed if they could hear. Of his 12 disciples, only Judas could hear so after Jesus imparted his knowledge, and was on the cross, the aeon left (hence the final words "My God, my God, why have you abandoned me?").
Considering that gnostics actually use less elaborate miracles and supernatural events in their beliefs and rather than stifle man but forcing him to adhere to strict commandments, why is it that Christians find it so much easier to believe in Christianity and disbelieve gnosticism.
Why, if Christ was such a good teacher, did He not impart wisdom upon His flock and why did He not encourage them to seek truth and greater knowledge? Instead, he taught that one shouldn't seek outside Him. One shouldn't question why He does what He does, but just accept it and go on? This doesn't seem to be such a good teacher. Would not a great teacher encourage His students to search all avenues to find the truth.
Why do we accept Christ as the absolute truth when we know no truths associated with him as opposed to gnostics who at least attempt to seek out the truth?
Gnostics
Moderator: Moderators
-
Easyrider
Post #2
Gnosticism — 1st and 2nd Centuries The Gnostics promoted three basic teachings: 1) matter is evil, and thus Jesus only appeared as a man (instead of as God also); 2) because the Bible teaches that God created matter, the God of the Old Testament Jews is supposedly an evil deity who is distinct from the New Testament God, Jesus Christ; and 3) ultimate Truth is a mystery that is available only to those who are initiated into the secret teachings and practices of the Gnostic groups.
Gnosticism has become popular in the latter half of the 20th century with the 1945 Egyptian discovery of the Nag Hammadi library, a collection of Gnostic writings. One of the most influential books in modern Gnosticism has been Elaine Pagel’s The Gnostic Gospels, an analysis of the Nag Hammadi documents. Modern Gnosticism is commonly found in syncretistic groups, which teach that Truth can be found by combining the beliefs and practices of numerous religions.
Scriptural Refutation: Genesis 1:4, 10, 18, 21, 25, 27; John 10:30; 2 Timothy 3:16–17; 1 John 1:1.
The first attempt to mix the concepts of Greek philosophy with the teachings of God's Word came very early in the history of the Church. The attempt was called Gnosticism. The Gnostic heresy arose among the first Gentile converts because they tried to Hellenize the Scriptures; that is, they tried to make the Scriptures conform to the basic tenets of Greek philosophy.
The Greeks believed that the material universe, including the human body, was evil. This negative view of the creation was diametrically opposed to Hebrew thought, as revealed in the Bible. To the Hebrew mind, the world was created good (Genesis 1:31). And even though the goodness of the creation was corrupted by the sin of Man (Isaiah 24:5-6), the creation still reflects to some degree the glory of God (Psalms 19:1). Most important, the creation will someday be redeemed by God (Romans 8:18-23).
When the first Gentiles were converted to the Gospel, their Greek-mind set immediately collided with some of the fundamental teachings of Christianity. For example, they wondered, "How could Jesus have come in the flesh if He was God? God is holy. How can He who is holy be encased in a body which is evil?"
In short, because they viewed the material universe as evil, they could not accept the Bible's teaching that God became incarnate in the flesh. Their response was to develop the Gnostic heresy that Jesus was a spirit being or phantom who never took on the flesh and therefore never experienced physical death.
This heresy is denounced strongly in Scripture. In 1 John 4:1-2 we are told to test those who seek our spiritual fellowship by asking them to confess "that Jesus Christ has come in the flesh."
http://www.flash.net/~carlton2/whenyou.htm
Gnosticism emphasizes that special knowledge is the way to salvation. John’s Gospel (John 14:6) states that Jesus, not knowledge, is the way to salvation.
Irenaeus of Lyons (b. 120/140 Asia Minor - d. 200/203 CE)
Irenaeus adopted a totally negative and unresponsive attitude, however, toward Marcion, a schismatic leader in Rome, and toward the Valentinians, a fashionable intellectual Gnostic movement in the rapidly expanding church that espoused dualism. Because Gnosticism was overcome by the Orthodox Church, Gnostic writings were largely obliterated. In reconstructing Gnostic doctrines, therefore, modern scholars relied to a great extent on the writings of Irenaeus, who summarized the Gnostic views before attacking them. After the discovery of the Gnostic library near Nag Hammadi in Egypt in the 1940s (see Robinson), respect for Irenaeus increased. He was proved to have been extremely precise in his report of the doctrines he rejected.
The oldest lists of bishops also were countermeasures against the Gnostics, who said that they possessed a secret oral tradition from Jesus himself. Against such statements Irenaeus maintains that the bishops in different cities are known as far back as the Apostles - and none of them was a Gnostic - and that the bishops provided the only safe guide to the interpretation of the Scriptures. With these lists of bishops the later doctrine of "the apostolic succession" of the bishops could be linked.
http://www.ntcanon.org/Irenaeus.shtml
Gnosticism, while it claimed to be Christian in that it had some similar teachings about the Christ, denied the Incarnation, the atoning death of Jesus and the relationship of Christ with the Father.
It avoided the truth of the fall of man and it opposed Spirit and Matter, whereas the truth of Scripture is that Spirit and Matter were both created by God and both are affected by the fall.
In combating heresies such as Gnosticism, the Apostle John taught the following:
 1 John 1:5 There is no duality in God.
 1 John 2:23 Whoever says Jesus is not the Christ is of antichrist.
 1 John 4:3 Whoever says Jesus did not come in the flesh is of antichrist.
 2 John 7,9-10 Do not welcome or allow into your house anyone who says Jesus did not come in the flesh.
Thus, Gnosticism is contrary to Biblical teachings and represents a deceptive theological paradigm.
Gnosticism has become popular in the latter half of the 20th century with the 1945 Egyptian discovery of the Nag Hammadi library, a collection of Gnostic writings. One of the most influential books in modern Gnosticism has been Elaine Pagel’s The Gnostic Gospels, an analysis of the Nag Hammadi documents. Modern Gnosticism is commonly found in syncretistic groups, which teach that Truth can be found by combining the beliefs and practices of numerous religions.
Scriptural Refutation: Genesis 1:4, 10, 18, 21, 25, 27; John 10:30; 2 Timothy 3:16–17; 1 John 1:1.
The first attempt to mix the concepts of Greek philosophy with the teachings of God's Word came very early in the history of the Church. The attempt was called Gnosticism. The Gnostic heresy arose among the first Gentile converts because they tried to Hellenize the Scriptures; that is, they tried to make the Scriptures conform to the basic tenets of Greek philosophy.
The Greeks believed that the material universe, including the human body, was evil. This negative view of the creation was diametrically opposed to Hebrew thought, as revealed in the Bible. To the Hebrew mind, the world was created good (Genesis 1:31). And even though the goodness of the creation was corrupted by the sin of Man (Isaiah 24:5-6), the creation still reflects to some degree the glory of God (Psalms 19:1). Most important, the creation will someday be redeemed by God (Romans 8:18-23).
When the first Gentiles were converted to the Gospel, their Greek-mind set immediately collided with some of the fundamental teachings of Christianity. For example, they wondered, "How could Jesus have come in the flesh if He was God? God is holy. How can He who is holy be encased in a body which is evil?"
In short, because they viewed the material universe as evil, they could not accept the Bible's teaching that God became incarnate in the flesh. Their response was to develop the Gnostic heresy that Jesus was a spirit being or phantom who never took on the flesh and therefore never experienced physical death.
This heresy is denounced strongly in Scripture. In 1 John 4:1-2 we are told to test those who seek our spiritual fellowship by asking them to confess "that Jesus Christ has come in the flesh."
http://www.flash.net/~carlton2/whenyou.htm
Gnosticism emphasizes that special knowledge is the way to salvation. John’s Gospel (John 14:6) states that Jesus, not knowledge, is the way to salvation.
Irenaeus of Lyons (b. 120/140 Asia Minor - d. 200/203 CE)
Irenaeus adopted a totally negative and unresponsive attitude, however, toward Marcion, a schismatic leader in Rome, and toward the Valentinians, a fashionable intellectual Gnostic movement in the rapidly expanding church that espoused dualism. Because Gnosticism was overcome by the Orthodox Church, Gnostic writings were largely obliterated. In reconstructing Gnostic doctrines, therefore, modern scholars relied to a great extent on the writings of Irenaeus, who summarized the Gnostic views before attacking them. After the discovery of the Gnostic library near Nag Hammadi in Egypt in the 1940s (see Robinson), respect for Irenaeus increased. He was proved to have been extremely precise in his report of the doctrines he rejected.
The oldest lists of bishops also were countermeasures against the Gnostics, who said that they possessed a secret oral tradition from Jesus himself. Against such statements Irenaeus maintains that the bishops in different cities are known as far back as the Apostles - and none of them was a Gnostic - and that the bishops provided the only safe guide to the interpretation of the Scriptures. With these lists of bishops the later doctrine of "the apostolic succession" of the bishops could be linked.
http://www.ntcanon.org/Irenaeus.shtml
Gnosticism, while it claimed to be Christian in that it had some similar teachings about the Christ, denied the Incarnation, the atoning death of Jesus and the relationship of Christ with the Father.
It avoided the truth of the fall of man and it opposed Spirit and Matter, whereas the truth of Scripture is that Spirit and Matter were both created by God and both are affected by the fall.
In combating heresies such as Gnosticism, the Apostle John taught the following:
 1 John 1:5 There is no duality in God.
 1 John 2:23 Whoever says Jesus is not the Christ is of antichrist.
 1 John 4:3 Whoever says Jesus did not come in the flesh is of antichrist.
 2 John 7,9-10 Do not welcome or allow into your house anyone who says Jesus did not come in the flesh.
Thus, Gnosticism is contrary to Biblical teachings and represents a deceptive theological paradigm.
-
Goat
- Site Supporter
- Posts: 24999
- Joined: Fri Jul 21, 2006 6:09 pm
- Has thanked: 25 times
- Been thanked: 207 times
Re: Gnostics
Post #3It's 'evil' because the competing theology got the power, and tried to destroy it. The gnostic concepts were dangerous to the self respect and faith of the believers in the trinity. The Trinity believers got the power via Constintine, and destroyed the opposition.Confused wrote:I have read many threads now that posts questions such as "If Jesus was an ordinary man, would you still follow Him?" and "Was Jesus just a great teacher?" Most responses are that He wasn't just a man or just a great teacher, etc....... But most agree that some of what he taught were some good moral values. I question the validity of this thought.
Gnosticism comes from the Greek word gnosis which means knowledge. Gnostics are "those in the know". What they historically claimed to know was the secrets that could bring salvation. For the gnostic, a person isn't saved by having faith in Christ or doing good deeds, rather a person is saved by knowing the truth-the truth about the world we live in, the true God, but most importantly about who we ourselves are.
According to them, the Ultimate Divine Being is completely removed from this world, He is absolute spirit with no material aspects or qualities. He has many offsprings known as "aeons who are spiritual beings. During a catrasophe one of these aeons somehow fell from the divine realm leading to lesser divine beings being created. These lesser divine beings created our material world.
I could go forever about what they think and why, but their overriding point is blatant: The god who made this world, the one of the OT, is a secondary and inferior deity. We won't gain freedom to eternity by worshipping him, but instead, we will be trapped here. We can only gain true eternity through knowledge and wisdom bestowed upon us by divine beings. In Christian gnostic religions, the one who bestows this knowledge was Christ. But Christ wasn't the son of God as the church would have you believe, which is why there are so many holes in the account of His life. Instead, he was an aeon temporarily housed in Jesus to impart the knowledge one needed if they could hear. Of his 12 disciples, only Judas could hear so after Jesus imparted his knowledge, and was on the cross, the aeon left (hence the final words "My God, my God, why have you abandoned me?").
Considering that gnostics actually use less elaborate miracles and supernatural events in their beliefs and rather than stifle man but forcing him to adhere to strict commandments, why is it that Christians find it so much easier to believe in Christianity and disbelieve gnosticism.
Why, if Christ was such a good teacher, did He not impart wisdom upon His flock and why did He not encourage them to seek truth and greater knowledge? Instead, he taught that one shouldn't seek outside Him. One shouldn't question why He does what He does, but just accept it and go on? This doesn't seem to be such a good teacher. Would not a great teacher encourage His students to search all avenues to find the truth.
Why do we accept Christ as the absolute truth when we know no truths associated with him as opposed to gnostics who at least attempt to seek out the truth?
Simple as that.
I think the Gnostics made more sense.. don't believe what they believed, but they made more sense.
-
Easyrider
Re: Gnostics
Post #4It doesn't make sense to me. But then you prefer largely 2nd century redacted Gnostic writings to 1st century Gospels that had much better historical pedigrees. Your lack of a credible criteria on what constitutes the more legitimate Gospels continues to amaze me. It just doesn't make any sense.goat wrote:
It's 'evil' because the competing theology got the power, and tried to destroy it. The gnostic concepts were dangerous to the self respect and faith of the believers in the trinity. The Trinity believers got the power via Constintine, and destroyed the opposition.
Simple as that.
I think the Gnostics made more sense.. don't believe what they believed, but they made more sense.
-
Goat
- Site Supporter
- Posts: 24999
- Joined: Fri Jul 21, 2006 6:09 pm
- Has thanked: 25 times
- Been thanked: 207 times
Re: Gnostics
Post #5There is no real evidence that the '1st century gospels' are actually written as early as tradition has it. There is also a number of Gnostic texts that are from the first century.. and developed around the same time.Easyrider wrote:It doesn't make sense to me. But then you prefer largely 2nd century redacted Gnostic writings to 1st century Gospels that had much better historical pedigrees. Your lack of a credible criteria on what constitutes the more legitimate Gospels continues to amaze me. It just doesn't make any sense.goat wrote:
It's 'evil' because the competing theology got the power, and tried to destroy it. The gnostic concepts were dangerous to the self respect and faith of the believers in the trinity. The Trinity believers got the power via Constintine, and destroyed the opposition.
Simple as that.
I think the Gnostic's made more sense.. don't believe what they believed, but they made more sense.
The Gnostic spiritual sense makes so much more sense from my perspective also. Not that I believe it, but it certainly wins hands down to this 'salvation' concept and of the deification of a man.
Re: Gnostics
Post #6He may very well have done. The only accounts we have of "Christ's Teachings" are those that have been transmitted through the gospels and the various interpretations over the millennia. What Christ actually taught may never be known.Confused wrote:Why, if Christ was such a good teacher, did He not impart wisdom upon His flock and why did He not encourage them to seek truth and greater knowledge?
That may be an hermeneutic error. Perhaps Christ was saying that one should not seek outside oneself (the kingdom of god is within). Self-knowledge, through self-enquiry.Confused wrote: Instead, he taught that one shouldn't seek outside Him.
Christ also said (according to John, I believe) - I and the father are one. Hermeneutics has lead to the belief that this is a claim of, or evidence of, Christ's divinity when all he may have been saying is exactly what a vedantist would say - Atman (individual consciousness) and Brahman (universal consciousness) are one.
Or as a 2nd century Arab Gnostic wrote:
Omitting to seek after God, and creation, and things similar to these, seek for Him from (out of) thyself, and learn who it is that absolutely appropriates (unto Himself) all things in thee, and says, "My God my mind, my understanding, my soul, my body." And learn from whence are sorrow, and joy, and love, and hatred, and involuntary wakefulness, and involuntary drowsiness, and involuntary anger, and involuntary affection; and if you accurately investigate these (points), you will discover (God) Himself, unity and plurality, in thyself, according to that tittle, and that He finds the outlet (for Deity) to be from thyself.
Elimination of the opposition and better marketing.Confused wrote: Why do we accept Christ as the absolute truth when we know no truths associated with him as opposed to gnostics who at least attempt to seek out the truth?
"Whatever you are totally ignorant of, assert to be the explanation of everything else"
William James quoting Dr. Hodgson
"When I see I am nothing, that is wisdom. When I see I am everything, that is love. My life is a movement between these two."
Nisargadatta Maharaj
William James quoting Dr. Hodgson
"When I see I am nothing, that is wisdom. When I see I am everything, that is love. My life is a movement between these two."
Nisargadatta Maharaj
-
Cogitoergosum
- Sage
- Posts: 801
- Joined: Thu Dec 28, 2006 10:00 pm
Post #7
two competing fairy tales, gnostics having slightly more common sense denied jesus as divine, other christians who believed he was. The latter supported by the roman empire under constantine crushed the opposition and demonised it.
Et voila, mainstream christianity with divine jesus and multiple personalities god.
Et voila, mainstream christianity with divine jesus and multiple personalities god.
Beati paupere spiritu
Post #8
Easyrider:
Wonder how many people died because of this central thought? Anything that contradicted the church back then was considered deceptive. The church used their position for power and wealth. You can deny it if you wish, but you know as well as does any historian that this is true.
Yes gnostics claim the God of the OT and the God of the NT are two different Gods. So does Judaism, which predates Christianity. What is your point? Yes, gnostics deny the ressurection. Not hard to do if you weren't so lucky as to see it yourself. They claim Jesus was man wanting to return to his divine realm. Is this not true? The events surrounding the ressurection seem to be somewhat of a mystery. The world went dark, yet no non-religious authority recalls this,the earth shook, yet no non-secular historian records this earthquake, all these prophets were resurrected to go into the city, yet no-one, even secular historians recall any testimony that these men were ever seen. Credibility is?
Quote:
Thus, Gnosticism is contrary to Biblical teachings and represents a deceptive theological paradigm.
Wonder how many people died because of this central thought? Anything that contradicted the church back then was considered deceptive. The church used their position for power and wealth. You can deny it if you wish, but you know as well as does any historian that this is true.
Yes gnostics claim the God of the OT and the God of the NT are two different Gods. So does Judaism, which predates Christianity. What is your point? Yes, gnostics deny the ressurection. Not hard to do if you weren't so lucky as to see it yourself. They claim Jesus was man wanting to return to his divine realm. Is this not true? The events surrounding the ressurection seem to be somewhat of a mystery. The world went dark, yet no non-religious authority recalls this,the earth shook, yet no non-secular historian records this earthquake, all these prophets were resurrected to go into the city, yet no-one, even secular historians recall any testimony that these men were ever seen. Credibility is?
What we do for ourselves dies with us,
What we do for others and the world remains
and is immortal.
-Albert Pine
Never be bullied into silence.
Never allow yourself to be made a victim.
Accept no one persons definition of your life; define yourself.
-Harvey Fierstein
What we do for others and the world remains
and is immortal.
-Albert Pine
Never be bullied into silence.
Never allow yourself to be made a victim.
Accept no one persons definition of your life; define yourself.
-Harvey Fierstein
-
Furrowed Brow
- Site Supporter
- Posts: 3720
- Joined: Mon Nov 20, 2006 9:29 am
- Location: Here
- Been thanked: 1 time
- Contact:
-
Easyrider
Post #10
The true church has always sought after the redemption of man, vs. seeking power and money. Others, masquerading as Christians, sought after power and money.Confused wrote: Easyrider:Wonder how many people died because of this central thought? Anything that contradicted the church back then was considered deceptive. The church used their position for power and wealth. You can deny it if you wish, but you know as well as does any historian that this is true.Quote:
Thus, Gnosticism is contrary to Biblical teachings and represents a deceptive theological paradigm.
No, Jesus and the New Covenant are the true fulfillments of OT Judaism. The Gospels present that with many evidences.Confused wrote:Yes gnostics claim the God of the OT and the God of the NT are two different Gods. So does Judaism, which predates Christianity.
Jesus' mission on earth was, as God incarnated, to provide eternal salvation for man, his creation (note Genesis 13:8). Once that was accomplished then and only then could he return to heaven.Confused wrote: Yes, gnostics deny the ressurection. Not hard to do if you weren't so lucky as to see it yourself. They claim Jesus was man wanting to return to his divine realm. Is this not true?
That's not true. Thallus, Phlegon, Juius Africanus, and Tertullian all wrote about it.Confused wrote: The events surrounding the ressurection seem to be somewhat of a mystery. The world went dark, yet no non-religious authority recalls this....
It was all recorded in the Gospels. Do you have a bias about that?Confused wrote:the earth shook, yet no non-secular historian records this earthquake, all these prophets were resurrected to go into the city, yet no-one, even secular historians recall any testimony that these men were ever seen. Credibility is?
