Ask a Gnostic Anything

[GaryTaylor]

From my understanding of (Roman) Catholic theology, we would probably say that everything was not made perfect, since only God is perfect, in the sense that only God is complete. However, I think we would also say that we (humans) were created perfect in the sense that we were perfect in reference to our nature.

We (Roman) Catholics also believe that we were created with something called Original Grace, in which one of its effects was to have the spirit have complete freedom over the flesh. What we mean is that the spirit (which has free will) was able to freely choose the Good without influence of the passions of the flesh (Adam would not have “lusted” after Eve: his spirit would keep those irrational, uncontrollable impulses in check). However, after the Fall, this Grace was lost (Original Sin is the absence of Original Grace), including its effects, and so the flesh started to war against the spirit, which is called concupiscence (inclination to go evil - “evil-intention”). Another effect was physical mortality.

It seems to me that Gnostics have used concupiscence as evidence that the flesh (matter) is evil. However, Catholics believe that the flesh is not evil, but good (God created it, after all). Now, there are several theories from the Fathers as to why the flesh tries to be disordered. St. Athanasius seems to think that it is a sort of habit that has gotten worse over time. But some Greek Fathers (and theologians today) seem to think that it is because the flesh “realized” that it was subjected to death, and so started to indulge into excessive activities with the irrational intention of keeping alive as long as it can (too much food to keep the body intact, perverted sex to keep the species alive, too much stuff (greed) for emergencies, desire to control our environment to make it safer, etc.).

Anyone more confident: correct me if I made a mistake

Imho its a better way and perspective to understand original sin before the concept of sin is addressed alone. God conferred on man a supernatural destiny. Adam and Eve were endowed with sanctifying grace, immortality, free from suffering, and supernatural truth infused by God. Adam and Eve transgressed the Divine probationary commandment, fractured their state of grace thus their own nature held upright by sanctifying grace. Deprivation of grace was caused by an act of free will. They received sanctifying grace not merely for themselves, but for all his posterity. As a result they became subject to death and to the dominion of evil.

It seems to me that Gnostics have used concupiscence as evidence that the flesh (matter) is evil.

This is an interesting observation, I think it may be right also.

 

[GaryTaylor]

Belief in the Devil has increased since 2000.

7 in 10 profess belief in the Devil and in hell. These updates of Americans’ beliefs were measured in a May 10-13, 2007, Gallup poll survey

Further we would be talking belief as opposed to practical experience. Of what theological certainty does one have with no practical experience and in the “minority” of statistical probability? You have an opinion?

What else? My opinion is, you are deceived by yourself.

 

[meltzerboy]

Thanks!

When St. Paul writes about the “flesh” and “spirit”, it has always shocked me how similar they are to yetzer-hatov (good-intention) and yetzer-hara (evil-intention). The Rabbis seem to teach that the “evil-intention” is not evil in the sense that Modern English speakers use the term, but rather it can become evil when left unchecked by the “good-intention.” In fact, when ordered with the “good-intention”, the “evil-intention” gives fruit to good things (sex drive alone can become perverted, while sex drive ordered with chastity creates the family, a good thing). In the same way, when the flesh is ordered with the spirit, it creates good things. I guess St. Paul was a Jew after all

On the other hand, (Sophia Christ can correct me if I am wrong) it seems that Gnostics believe that the flesh can’t produce good fruit at all (and thus, groups like the Cathars thought that food, drink, and sex which creates children were nothing but evil). But, as I point out above, orthodox Christians think the flesh absolutely can be good (but also used wrongly), similar to the Jewish view, which I think is evidence that Christian interpretation of Scripture is more correct, since Jesus and His Apostles were Jews and would be expected to interpret Scripture in a more Jewish way.

IIRC, Rabbinical Judaism really doesn’t have a Christian concept of Grace (this is where I think we disagree), since Grace is something that only makes sense with the idea of the Incarnation, which our Jewish Brothers disagree with, of course

Christi pax,

Lucretius

Yes, the evil intention is actually necessary for survival but if it becomes abused, it can harm the self and create a destructive environment. The two inclinations work hand in hand and influence one another.

Right again. Grace is a foreign concept in Judaism.

 

[curtish1947]

In terms of what a human being is actually “doing” what is the difference between these three?

They all say the exact same thing from different points of reference…



.

1. Reliance on self.
2. Reliance on self.
3. Reliance on God.

Is that right?

…Curt/K.

 

[simpleas]

Your welcome simpleas! Your post on our belief on imperfection is right on point. And yes to your question about the false and true self. It is very Jungian in nature.

As I stated in a previous post, in the Gnostic creation myth, God represents the true self, Jehovah represents the ego (or false self; material nature), and Sophia represents our creative energy which can be used either to create a false reality for ourselves or be united with God. It is the responsibility of man to transcend the ego (or material nature) and bring ourselves closer to the true self (true god). It is all analogous to the workings of the psyche.

Yes this is interesting, thank you. It’s refreshing to here from another point of view.

 

[simpleas]

Belief in the Devil has increased since 2000.

Further we would be talking belief as opposed to practical experience. Of what theological certainty does one have with no practical experience and in the “minority” of statistical probability? You have an opinion?

What else? My opinion is, you are deceived by yourself.

What worries me about some churches belief in the devil would be this :

theguardian.com/uk-news/2014/oct/08/child-witchcraft-claims-hidden-crime-met-police-under-reported

 

[gnosisofthomas]

Then as you know, Jesus told His disciples:

Matthew 28:19-20
19 Therefore go and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, 20 and teaching them to obey everything I have commanded you.

Could you please describe how Gnostic Christianity qualifies as the one Church that Jesus promised to build upon Peter the rock (cf. Mt. 16:18-19) in light of His command to that Church to make disciples of all nations?

He told all of the apostles to go make disciples of all nations, but as for building the “one Church” upon Peter… Well, in the Gospel of Thomas, He says that when he is gone the apostles should go to “James the Just, for whose sake heaven and earth came into being”. The Church is not centered around one apostle, but was continued by all of them.

 

[gnosisofthomas]

Sophia Christ (and gnosisofthomas):

What are your thoughts on Hermeticism? What about Astrology? Theurgy (I think Sophia might have mentioned distancing him/her self from it)?

Christi pax,

Lucretius

Hermeticism is an interesting philosophy, and while it isn’t really Christian, its ideas are similar to Christian Gnosticism. One could argue that by definition, the consecration of the Eucharist itself is an act of theurgy – a ritual to invoke the presence of God. I suppose any ritual prayer, such as the Divine Office, could even be described as theurgy in some way… Although it’s most obvious in the Eucharist, as it makes God physically and spiritually present on the altar.

As for astrology, the book Pistis Sophia says that when a Christian is baptised, the rulers of fate no longer have control over him, and that astrologers and diviners can no longer predict his future.

 

[GaryTaylor]

What worries me about some churches belief in the devil would be this :

theguardian.com/uk-news/2014/oct/08/child-witchcraft-claims-hidden-crime-met-police-under-reported

Sounds like the Salem Witch trials. Pope Francis has also been more direct and consistent when talking about evil.

google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=1&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=0CB4QFjAA&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.catholicnewsagency.com%2Fnews%2Fpope-francis-satan-seduces-by-disguising-evil-as-good-85265%2F&ei=h-SuVJLgNIOkNquEhLAH&usg=AFQjCNH5-Nf1vHG9zm2Ph2YRqNhd0DnRsA

He’s been pretty consistent with the point. Here’s another more relevant to your point.

google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=4&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=0CDMQFjAD&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.news.va%2Fen%2Fnews%2Fpope-francis-satan-exists-in-the-21st-century-and&ei=h-SuVJLgNIOkNquEhLAH&usg=AFQjCNFd7wjpH7JfeMhA94aEdAP4nIuiqw

 

[Randy_Carson]

He told all of the apostles to go make disciples of all nations, but as for building the “one Church” upon Peter… Well, in the Gospel of Thomas, He says that when he is gone the apostles should go to “James the Just, for whose sake heaven and earth came into being”. The Church is not centered around one apostle, but was continued by all of them.

You miss my point, and I apologize if I was unclear. Here is the passage:

Matthew 28:16-20
16 Then the eleven disciples went to Galilee, to the mountain where Jesus had told them to go. 17 When they saw him, they worshiped him; but some doubted. 18 Then Jesus came to them and said, “All authority in heaven and on earth has been given to me. 19 Therefore go and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, 20 and teaching them to obey everything I have commanded you. And surely I am with you always, to the very end of the age.”

Jesus was not speaking to a huge crowd of “followers” on a hillside. He was not speaking to the 120 or so who would later gather in the Upper Room on the day of Pentecost. He was not speaking to the seventy he had sent out in pairs. He was speaking to the Eleven remaining Apostles. These he commanded to “make disciples of all nations.”

Please describe how your faith community qualifies as a possible candidate to be the one Church that Jesus promised to build as a result of your success in fulfilling the Great Commission by “making disciples of all nations.”

Thanks.

 

[gnosisofthomas]

Hi,
I did mean that according to Sophia, to get close to “God” you have to get to the real you. The real you was referred to as the “Divine Spark” it seems to me. To escape our prison the earth and the universe, one had to meditate on the “Divine Spark” within us.
All of Gnosticism seems to progress out of one person or the other, getting in touch. SophiaChrist says Jesus did that, but still somehow stayed in touch with the material world.

The real you is God Himself… The Divine Spark within you isn’t separate from other Divine Sparks. In the Gnostic worldview, we are all the One God have a human experience – when you look at the face of someone else, you are looking upon the face of God. But when we’re incarnated, we tend to forget that fact, and imagine that we are all separate individuals. The goal of the Gnostic is to help that spark remember its divine origin, so that it can be saved. Of course we still have to live in the world, but the key is to not be *of *the world. Even with Gnosis, you still have to continue to live in the world until your body dies, but, as Jesus said, we should “be passers-by” and not be attached to the physical.

So in context, as it seems when connecting the two ideas Biblically and Gnosticism, but deferring to Gnosticism here. God The Father Biblically is a false god, who made us, begot Jesus, and then sent Him to come to earth to repair what was made wrong. But the God who made us is flawed, jealousy is one of those flaws, Gnostically speaking. He this flawed God, sent his only begotten son (Christian thoughts) to make up for what had gone wrong, with us, and did not in fact curse therefore make creation that was perfect bad, but it was always bad. And it was always bad because those who can communicate with the “Divine Spark” within themselves have told us so.

In the Gnostic mythos, God the Father is not the false god who made us. God the Father is the Father of the alone-begotten Son, Christ, who was sent to earth to repair the error of the world. The demiurge, the false god, along with his archons, fashioned the physical universe and everything in it. Creation was never “bad”, it was just imperfect – which has led to evil existing, sin, sickness, etc. Despite being imperfect, though, Gnostics still recognize beauty and goodness in the world – it’s just not as perfect as the eternal Fullness of God from which we all come.

The Gnostic creation myth is pretty complex and hard to summarize in a brief post… A better idea might be to look up either The Apocryphon of John or The Hypostasis of the Archons to get the full story. The Apocryphon describes the Father and the emanations of the Aeons, as well as the emanation of the demiurge, creation of the world, and the story of Adam, Eve, and the serpent; the Hypostasis focuses more on just the demiurge and archons, and the Adam and Eve story.

 

[Lucretius]

As for astrology, the book Pistis Sophia says that when a Christian is baptised, the rulers of fate no longer have control over him, and that astrologers and diviners can no longer predict his future.

Would this mean that matter is the source of fate, it binding a person to its rule, while spirit is free? That view would be compatible to modern day determinism.

Christi pax,

Lucretius

 

[gnosisofthomas]

You miss my point, and I apologize if I was unclear. Here is the passage:

Matthew 28:16-20
16 Then the eleven disciples went to Galilee, to the mountain where Jesus had told them to go. 17 When they saw him, they worshiped him; but some doubted. 18 Then Jesus came to them and said, “All authority in heaven and on earth has been given to me. 19 Therefore go and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, 20 and teaching them to obey everything I have commanded you. And surely I am with you always, to the very end of the age.”

Jesus was not speaking to a huge crowd of “followers” on a hillside. He was not speaking to the 120 or so who would later gather in the Upper Room on the day of Pentecost. He was not speaking to the seventy he had sent out in pairs. He was speaking to the Eleven remaining Apostles. These he commanded to “make disciples of all nations.”

I understood that perfectly… Maybe we’re misunderstanding each other?

Please describe how your faith community qualifies as a possible candidate to be the one Church that Jesus promised to build as a result of your success in fulfilling the Great Commission by “making disciples of all nations.”

I’m not entirely sure how to answer that, as I think we have different definitions of what the word “Church” means. The Greek word for Church (Ekklesia) means “called forth”. It is the entire body of followers of Christ throughout history and the entire world. There’s no indication that it must be only the body of followers under the pope (which I’m assuming is what you were getting at when you mentioned St. Peter as the rock – I apologize if I’m reading too much into that). Roman Catholicism, Eastern Orthodoxy, Oriental Orthodoxy, Ethiopian Orthodoxy, and really all those within the apostolic succession are part of the Church (my own Church has apostolic succession as well). The logistics of hierarchy may differ amongst the different sects, but they can all trace themselves back to the apostles. The differences, I would say, came from human beings – but they are all striving to bring the nations to Christ.

 

[Randy_Carson]

I’m not entirely sure how to answer that, as I think we have different definitions of what the word “Church” means. The Greek word for Church (Ekklesia) means “called forth”. It is the entire body of followers of Christ throughout history and the entire world. There’s no indication that it must be only the body of followers under the pope (which I’m assuming is what you were getting at when you mentioned St. Peter as the rock – I apologize if I’m reading too much into that). Roman Catholicism, Eastern Orthodoxy, Oriental Orthodoxy, Ethiopian Orthodoxy, and really all those within the apostolic succession are part of the Church (my own Church has apostolic succession as well). The logistics of hierarchy may differ amongst the different sects, but they can all trace themselves back to the apostles. The differences, I would say, came from human beings – but they are all striving to bring the nations to Christ.

Would you agree that the Church is the Body of Christ, then?

 

[clem456]

The school that I subscribe to sees the question of whether Jesus was purely spirit, purely human, or both as irrelevant.

I am scared.
If the flesh is irrelevant, then it can’t be very important to feed the hungry or care for the sick and helpless.

 

[gnosisofthomas]

Would you agree that the Church is the Body of Christ, then?

I’d agree with that, yes.

 

[Randy_Carson]

Your definition of Gnostic is correct. Different Gnostic schools have different interpretations on of Jesus depending on their orthodoxy. The school that I subscribe to sees the question of whether Jesus was purely spirit, purely human, or both as irrelevant. The Gnostics interpret scripture as myth; not in the sense that they are not true but that they are symbolic stories with a purpose.

I am scared.
If the flesh is irrelevant, then it can’t be very important to feed the hungry or care for the sick and helpless.

Troubling, isn’t it?

1 John 4:1
Dear friends, do not believe every spirit, but test the spirits to see whether they are from God, because many false prophets have gone out into the world. 2 This is how you can recognize the Spirit of God: Every spirit that acknowledges that Jesus Christ has come in the flesh is from God, 3 but every spirit that does not acknowledge Jesus is not from God.

2 John 1:7
7 I say this because many deceivers, who do not acknowledge Jesus Christ as coming in the flesh, have gone out into the world. Any such person is the deceiver and the antichrist.

 

[gnosisofthomas]

Would this mean that matter is the source of fate, it binding a person to its rule, while spirit is free? That view would be compatible to modern day determinism.

Christi pax,

Lucretius

I think it’s a little more symbolic than that. The rulers of fate would basically be the archons that control physical matter – in modern terms we could them of them as all the different systems we exist under that control our lives, and not specifically the signs of the zodiac or planets. But yes, the spirit is free insofar as Gnosis breaks us free of the bondage we experience while incarnated on earth.

 

[gnosisofthomas]

I am scared.
If the flesh is irrelevant, then it can’t be very important to feed the hungry or care for the sick and helpless.

On an eternal scale, physical existence is just a little blip in the grand scheme of things, so that does make the flesh pretty irrelevant. But while we live on earth, knowing that we’re all of the same divine origin, we have an obligation to care for those in need – if you can’t see Christ in your neighbor and extend your hand to help them, how could you possibly see Christ in yourself? We’re all going through a similar experience, and have to make the best of our situation – which would include helping others ahead of oneself.

The Gospel of Thomas says, “The Kingdom [of heaven] is spread out upon the earth, but men don’t see it.” If this is true, how can we help but to act like it?

 

[Randy_Carson]

I’d agree with that, yes.

And how many bodies does Christ have?