Ask a Gnostic

[gnosisofthomas]

What is a gnostic?

A Gnostic, strictly speaking, is someone who has Gnosis – experiential knowledge of the Divine. In a more general sense though, “Gnostic” applies to anyone on the path of Gnosis, using the tools of ancient Gnosticism to seek liberation and reunion with God who is our ultimate source. For me, the Gospel of Philip offers a summary of the path of Gnosis, expanding on the tradition Theological Virtues: “Farming in the world requires the cooperation of four essential elements. A harvest is gathered into the barn only as a result of the natural action of water, earth, wind and light. God’s farming likewise has four elements: faith, hope, love, and knowledge. Faith is our earth, that in which we take root. And hope is the water through which we are nourished. Love is the wind through which we grow. Knowledge, then, is the light through which we ripen.”

The way I interpret this is rather like a journey, where faith is the starting point – but where does that faith lead us? It gives us hope in salvation. It causes us to grow in love, knowing that every human being has his/her origin in God. When we know that we all contain a spark of the Divine Light within us, how can we help but love? Christ commanded us to love God above all things, and love our neighbors as ourselves, which are really truly connected to each other… Because like Christ said, “As long as you did it to one of these my least brethren, you did it to me.” My priest has often said that the reason St. Mary Magdalene has such an important position in the Gnostic scriptures, as the one who truly understood Christ, was because she “loved much,” as the scriptures say. That love led to her Gnosis (knowledge), which is the culmination of these Theological Virtues given in the Gospel of Philip.

Do you really think you are in the same vein as the early gnostics?

The Gnostic Revival of the 19th century was definitely a revival. So while modern Gnosticism is new, I think our church does a good job of being rooted in ancient Gnostic teaching – perhaps moreso than other groups that consider themselves Gnostic. Many modern “Gnostics” use the term to imply a sort of freeform New Age spirituality, that often has nothing to do with the teachings of the early Gnostics. We definitely don’t claim to descend from an unbroken line going back to the first Gnostics, but we do base our theology firmly on those teachings.

Do women need to become men inorder to achieve salvaiton as per the teaching of the Gospel of Thomas, verse 141.

Thomas 141 was most likely added to the original collection of sayings, at a later date. But like most of Thomas, it shouldn’t be taken literally. That verse is interesting, because normally in Thomas and in most of the Gnostic scriptures, the spirit is described as feminine, while the body is considered masculine. So uniting the lower and higher natures is a way of describing Gnosis, as in Thomas 22: “When you make the two into one, and when you make the inner like the outer and the outer like the inner, and the upper like the lower, and when you make male and female into a single one, so that the male will not be male nor the female be female, when you make eyes in place of an eye, a hand in place of a hand, a foot in place of a foot, an image in place of an image, then you will enter the Kingdom.”

I think one of the reasons v. 141 seems so out of place is that it seems to suggest bringing the higher nature down to the lower one. However, if it was added later, it could be rooted in the idea of the time that men were more suited to teach than women, and that they had a better understanding of spiritual things – kind of like when St. Paul says that women should remain silent in church. The Gospel of Thomas may or may not even be a specifically Gnostic scripture, although the Valentinians accepted it. One common theme in Gnostic scripture is that St. Peter and St. Mary Magdalene tend not to get along very well, and Peter often gets irritated when Mary tries to ask questions or interpret something Jesus has said. Then Jesus has to go and smooth things over between the two of them. So along those lines, this verse could be one of those situations where Jesus is trying to calm Peter down.

Are you a gnostic because it sounds spiritual or can’t stomach the reality of hell?

I’m a Gnostic because it gives me a deeper understanding and appreciation for the teachings of Christ. It answers a lot of questions about theology I had growing up that orthodoxy was never able to answer. Gnostics have a concept of the outer darkness as well, although whether that hell exists as a place some people will go to when they die, or whether we’re living in it right now remains to be seen. Perhaps it’s both! Jesus said, “The Kingdom is spread out upon the earth, but men don’t see it.” So it could be a matter of shifting one’s perception from looking at the world as a hell, or seeing that the kingdom really is spread out upon the earth right now. But that’s getting into a completely different question that has nothing to do with yours, haha!

Do I believe in hell as a place of fire and brimstone? No. Do I believe in an existence completely separate from God? Yes and no.

 

[Publisher]

GOT 141 could also be echoing to the primordial time when “primal man” was seen as complete…the female was seen as “less”, so for a woman to be “saved” she was to become as men…back to the primoridal nature of man.

 

[gnosisofthomas]

I dialoged with a member of the Gnostica Ecclisia several years back…he was a priest, he stated that they used many different Gnostic writings…they saw the writings as ebodying mythic language about God…since the Infinte Pleroma of Depth and Silence are beyond finite words…the only way we can come to speak about God is thru myth and metaphore.

That’s a good way to put it. The Gospel of Philip says, “Truth did not come into the world naked, but it came in the types and images. It will not receive it in any other fashion.” In order to begin to understand something, we have to be able to discuss it somehow… even with the limitations of language.

People tend to think of myth as stories that aren’t true. But really, the things they express are often more true than, say, scientific facts. Just like the sacraments are mysteries that impart ineffable spiritual graces through common every-day outward things, myth also expresses ineffable truths in such a way that we can begin to understand those things that can’t easily be taught.

As a gnostic, what is your relationship with other sects, specifically Protestant, Catholic, and Orthodox Christianity? And/Or what do you think of the Creeds and the Ecumenical Councils (the first 7 or 8)

Gnosticism predates the establishment of orthodoxy, and all the denominations that have stemmed from it. My particular church is obviously not that old, but it’s rooted in ancient Gnostic teachings. So our religion differs quite a bit because it’s based on ideas that predate what most people consider to be basic Christian beliefs. An orthodox form of Christianity wasn’t officially established until the Council of Nicea. Before that, there were certainly Christians that could be considered proto-orthodox, and much of the writings of these early church fathers have survived to the present day. But early Christian communities often differed from one another, and many of the concepts that are today considered basic beliefs were still being hashed out in the early Church. I don’t have a problem with other forms of Christianity, but I do think something important was lost with the establishment of an official orthodoxy.

There’s nothing about the Nicene Creed and Apostles Creed that I specifically disagree with, although I may interpret them in a slightly different way. Some of the language that was used may have been designed to exclude certain Gnostic sects. For example, “By the power of the Holy Spirit, He was born of the Virgin Mary and became man.” Some Gnostics believed that Jesus was born a regular human being, and became the Christ at His baptism. The Gospel of Philip seems to question how the virgin birth happened when it says, “Some say Mary conceived by the Holy Spirit, but they are in error. They do not know what they are saying. When did a woman ever conceive by a woman?” (The Holy Spirit was always referred to by Gnostics as feminine.)

But all in all, if someone asked me I agreed with the Apostles Creed, I’d say yes.

 

[gnosisofthomas]

Also, if I could present evidence that the OT God is not evil, but is also Jesus would you consider looking at it?

I’d be interested to read it, but I don’t necessarily think the OT God is evil. I just question whether some of the things attributed to God in it are actually of the True God, or the demiurge.

Why continue deceiving yourself in believing in gnostic christianity when it was utterly crushed and refuted by the Early Church Fathers?

I thought forum rules indicated that we’re supposed to be charitable and respectful of other people’s religious beliefs?

Anyway, I believe in Gnostic Christianity because I can do no other. What the Early Church Fathers had to say about Gnosticism isn’t very relevant to me – it’s only relevant to Christians under their jurisdiction. I happen to disagree with their opinions.

 

[InJesusItrust]

What lead me out of my mistrust of dogma is actually seeing the continuity of the OT with the NT. Do you know what the todah, Passover and Eucharist are or how Jesus being called the Lamb of God relates to the OT and how the sacrifice was the center of His life on Earth? Please do research on this thing, the bible is quite amazing when you see that everything holds together. This means that Orthodox tradition is a more evident answer than esotericism.

 

[JRKH]

A most interesting thread…:compcoff:…

Peace
James

 

[someperson555]

thanks for answering my previous question. i have another one if you dont mind.

i never really understood or agreed with the gnostic’s dualistic philosophy of the world.
do the gnostics really think that all matter and flesh is evil? because from what ive read, the gnostics believe that all these things such as matter ad sex were created by a demiurge (which they allege is the God of the old testament) and that the material world and it’s pleasures are all meant to separate us from the heavenly father.
so my first question, do gnostics advocate reproduction or marriage? or not?
its interesting though, since in the bible there are a few gnostic passages which seem to confirm that the flesh is intrinsically evil, one example that comes to mind is John, where it compares all physical pleasures as having a root in the devil. there is no doubt that the early church fathers were influenced by gnosticism.

i used to dabble in new age philosophy and if theres anything i learned from it is that dualisms should be overcome. so my second question is do you think that matter and spirit are automatically opposed to eachother by their nature? or do you think its at all possible for the two natures to coexist in man?

 

[Denise1957]

You mention that you believe in Christ our Savior, so that you rightly believe that you are Christian, but I have a few of questions. What is your group’s particular belief regarding sin? Long ago, when I was a New-Ager, I seem to recall that Gnosticism teaches that there is no such thing a sin, except the sin of having a lack of knowledge. Does your group believe this, or something like it?

Also, does your group believe that the world is evil? I seem to recall that this was a typical Gnostic view as well.

One more question: do you believe that we are all called to become God? Or gods?

gnosisofthomas,

Perhaps you missed my post above. I’m hoping that you’ll answer my questions. Thanks.

 

[Taestron]

But early Christian communities often differed from one another, and many of the concepts that are today considered basic beliefs were still being hashed out in the early Church. I don’t have a problem with other forms of Christianity, but I do think something important was lost with the establishment of an official orthodoxy.

Thanks for the answer.

What do you think that "something important is? I used to think something like this, but then I realized I couldn’t define what that “something” would be or that my attempts to define it were lacking.

 

[gnosisofthomas]

Hi Denise, sorry for the delay in responding… I started writing up a response last night but had to get to bed before I could finish. I didn’t want you to think I’d forgotten about you!

What is your group’s particular belief regarding sin? Long ago, when I was a New-Ager, I seem to recall that Gnosticism teaches that there is no such thing a sin, except the sin of having a lack of knowledge. Does your group believe this, or something like it?

Sin is certainly a reality, and the scriptures talk about it a lot. Even at the beginning of every Mass we confess our faults and receive general absolution from the priest. But our understanding of sin is a bit different from the orthodox view. For us, humans suffer from a deficiency that we share with all of creation, as a result of being trapped in a physical body and deceived by archonic forces. Sin is an unfortunate result of this deficiency, but it’s not a result of any particular sin of human ancestors (Adam and Eve). Gnosis (the knowledge of who we are and where we came from) frees us from the control of the demiurge and his archons, thus freeing us from sin. This was Christ’s mission here on earth, to help us remember our origins in the Divine Pleroma, and free us from the bondage of ignorance and sin. A lack of knowledge itself isn’t sin – we sin *because *of that lack of knowledge.

Also, does your group believe that the world is evil? I seem to recall that this was a typical Gnostic view as well.

In short, no… The physical world is imperfect, but it’s not intrinsically evil. Someone else asked about this too, so I’ll try to answer both your questions in one response there, along with some scriptural passages about the world.

One more question: do you believe that we are all called to become God? Or gods?

That’s the interesting thing – we are already God, most of us just don’t remember that. Gnosticism is essentially panentheistic (which differs from pantheism in that God permeates all of creation, but isn’t limited to it in the way pantheists believe), and we have an emanationist cosmogony. The Unknown Father (God, the Source, the Light, the All, the First Mystery, etc.) emanates aspects of Himself that, in the Gnostic mythos, are expressed as having their own existence. So everything in the universe, including ourselves, is essentially an emanation of God. While embodied here on earth, we forget that we each contain a divine spark within us which longs to return to the Fullness of God. When you look at another human being, you’re looking upon the face of God. That’s why Christ emphasized that “whatsoever you do to the least of these, you do unto Me.” So no, we don’t believe that we will become gods – we believe that we are already part of God, if only we can wake up and remember that.

Emanation is all part of the process of God understanding and learning about Himself, but that gets into a whole new topic, and I don’t want to go off on a tangent here, haha!

 

[gnosisofthomas]

What lead me out of my mistrust of dogma is actually seeing the continuity of the OT with the NT. Do you know what the todah, Passover and Eucharist are or how Jesus being called the Lamb of God relates to the OT and how the sacrifice was the center of His life on Earth? Please do research on this thing, the bible is quite amazing when you see that everything holds together. This means that Orthodox tradition is a more evident answer than esotericism.

I do a *lot *of research, and I’ve studied the Biblical scriptures extensively. Of course I know the Holy Eucharist, I receive it at least once a week – usually more often than that!

I agree that Christ’s sacrifice was the center of His life on earth. But for us, His life on earth was the sacrifice. We don’t believe in substitutionary atonement, so Jesus’ death on the cross wasn’t a sacrifice for our sins. The true sacrifice of Christ was God descending into the limitations of matter for our sakes. The crucifixion was necessary for Christ to shed the limitations of the body in order to continue His mission of redemption. In the Gospel of Thomas, Jesus talks about the body and the spirit, and says He marvels at how such wealth made its home in such poverty. Yet, God took on that poverty by becoming man, so that He could save us from the bondage we experience here and return to our true home.

By the way, one interesting book that sheds light on the debate the early Christians had over the purpose of the crucifixion is the Apocalypse of Peter. In it, Peter is watching the crucifixion happen, and Jesus appears to him floating above the cross, while also hanging from the cross at the same time. Obviously Peter is confused by seeing Him in two places at once. Jesus tells him in that moment that future generations who accept His teaching will fall into the same error He came to rescue them from. Finally He says, “And they will cleave to the name of a dead man, thinking that they will become pure. But they will become greatly defiled and they will fall into a name of error, and into the hand of an evil, cunning man and a manifold dogma, and they will be ruled without law.”

 

[gnosisofthomas]

A most interesting thread…:compcoff:…

Peace
James

Thank you. Peace, brother!

 

[Shiranui117]

Sorry, I have a ton of questions after reading through two pages of replies. Feel free to tackle as many at a time as you want, at whatever speed you want; ever since the Buddhist thread, I’ve been curious about how other religions can help me understand my own faith as an Orthodox Christian better, or if another religion is even a good alternative to Orthodoxy.

There’s nothing about the Nicene Creed and Apostles Creed that I specifically disagree with, although I may interpret them in a slightly different way. Some of the language that was used may have been designed to exclude certain Gnostic sects. For example, “By the power of the Holy Spirit, He was born of the Virgin Mary and became man.” Some Gnostics believed that Jesus was born a regular human being, and became the Christ at His baptism. The Gospel of Philip seems to question how the virgin birth happened when it says, “Some say Mary conceived by the Holy Spirit, but they are in error. They do not know what they are saying. When did a woman ever conceive by a woman?” (The Holy Spirit was always referred to by Gnostics as feminine.)

But all in all, if someone asked me I agreed with the Apostles Creed, I’d say yes.

Would you say that there is room in Gnosticism for the Trinity, Jesus’ virgin birth, Jesus’ death and Resurrection opening up for us the gates of Paradise, etc?

I’d be interested to read it, but I don’t necessarily think the OT God is evil. I just question whether some of the things attributed to God in it are actually of the True God, or the demiurge.

Would you say the demiurge is the God who commands the Israelites to do seemingly evil things, such as commit genocide, whereas the true God is the one to be found, for example, in the Book of Psalms and Proverbs?

Anyway, I believe in Gnostic Christianity because I can do no other. What the Early Church Fathers had to say about Gnosticism isn’t very relevant to me – it’s only relevant to Christians under their jurisdiction. I happen to disagree with their opinions.

To what extent do you feel Gnosticism can be reconciled Orthodox Christianity, or give a different perspective that is palatable to Orthodox Christianity? What do you think we could learn from you to better understand our own faith?

For us, humans suffer from a deficiency that we share with all of creation, as a result of being trapped in a physical body and deceived by archonic forces. Sin is an unfortunate result of this deficiency, but it’s not a result of any particular sin of human ancestors (Adam and Eve). Gnosis (the knowledge of who we are and where we came from) frees us from the control of the demiurge and his archons, thus freeing us from sin. This was Christ’s mission here on earth, to help us remember our origins in the Divine Pleroma, and free us from the bondage of ignorance and sin.

Could you explain archons and the Divine Pleroma, please? I don’t think I’m familiar with the term.

The Unknown Father (God, the Source, the Light, the All, the First Mystery, etc.) emanates aspects of Himself that, in the Gnostic mythos, are expressed as having their own existence. So everything in the universe, including ourselves, is essentially an emanation of God. While embodied here on earth, we forget that we each contain a divine spark within us which longs to return to the Fullness of God. When you look at another human being, you’re looking upon the face of God. That’s why Christ emphasized that “whatsoever you do to the least of these, you do unto Me.” So no, we don’t believe that we will become gods – we believe that we are already part of God, if only we can wake up and remember that.

What happens when we reunite with God? Do we lose all our individuality, consciousness and personality?

Emanation is all part of the process of God understanding and learning about Himself, but that gets into a whole new topic, and I don’t want to go off on a tangent here, haha!

Would you mind humoring me and going off on this tangent? I’m curious to see what you’d say here.

The way I interpret this is rather like a journey, where faith is the starting point – but where does that faith lead us? It gives us hope in salvation. It causes us to grow in love, knowing that every human being has his/her origin in God. When we know that we all contain a spark of the Divine Light within us, how can we help but love? Christ commanded us to love God above all things, and love our neighbors as ourselves, which are really truly connected to each other… Because like Christ said, “As long as you did it to one of these my least brethren, you did it to me.” My priest has often said that the reason St. Mary Magdalene has such an important position in the Gnostic scriptures, as the one who truly understood Christ, was because she “loved much,” as the scriptures say. That love led to her Gnosis (knowledge), which is the culmination of these Theological Virtues given in the Gospel of Philip.

I think there’s something to be said for the beauty there. So faith for Gnostics is simply a starting point on our journey while we search for knowledge through experience?

I’m a Gnostic because it gives me a deeper understanding and appreciation for the teachings of Christ. It answers a lot of questions about theology I had growing up that orthodoxy was never able to answer.

If you don’t mind my asking, what sorts of questions were these?

Gnostics have a concept of the outer darkness as well, although whether that hell exists as a place some people will go to when they die, or whether we’re living in it right now remains to be seen. Perhaps it’s both! Jesus said, “The Kingdom is spread out upon the earth, but men don’t see it.” So it could be a matter of shifting one’s perception from looking at the world as a hell, or seeing that the kingdom really is spread out upon the earth right now. But that’s getting into a completely different question that has nothing to do with yours, haha!

Do I believe in hell as a place of fire and brimstone? No. Do I believe in an existence completely separate from God? Yes and no.

Do Gnostics believe in reincarnation? Also, can you elaborate on the bolded part?

 

[Denise1957]

Sin is certainly a reality, and the scriptures talk about it a lot. Even at the beginning of every Mass we confess our faults and receive general absolution from the priest. But our understanding of sin is a bit different from the orthodox view. For us, humans suffer from a deficiency that we share with all of creation, as a result of being trapped in a physical body and deceived by archonic forces. Sin is an unfortunate result of this deficiency, but it’s not a result of any particular sin of human ancestors (Adam and Eve). Gnosis (the knowledge of who we are and where we came from) frees us from the control of the demiurge and his archons, thus freeing us from sin. This was Christ’s mission here on earth, to help us remember our origins in the Divine Pleroma, and free us from the bondage of ignorance and sin. A lack of knowledge itself isn’t sin – we sin *because *of that lack of knowledge.

---

Thanks for your reply. I messed up the quote thing a bit, sorry.

 

[Denise1957]

That’s the interesting thing – we are already God, most of us just don’t remember that. Gnosticism is essentially panentheistic (which differs from pantheism in that God permeates all of creation, but isn’t limited to it in the way pantheists believe), and we have an emanationist cosmogony. The Unknown Father (God, the Source, the Light, the All, the First Mystery, etc.) emanates aspects of Himself that, in the Gnostic mythos, are expressed as having their own existence. So everything in the universe, including ourselves, is essentially an emanation of God. While embodied here on earth, we forget that we each contain a divine spark within us which longs to return to the Fullness of God. When you look at another human being, you’re looking upon the face of God. That’s why Christ emphasized that “whatsoever you do to the least of these, you do unto Me.” So no, we don’t believe that we will become gods – we believe that we are already part of God, if only we can wake up and remember that.

Emanation is all part of the process of God understanding and learning about Himself, but that gets into a whole new topic, and I don’t want to go off on a tangent here, haha!

You wrote in the first sentence that you believe that we are already God, but that we don’t remember it. But then you later wrote in the post that you believe that we are already a part of God. But the two don’t seem to mesh. Do you believe that we are already God, or a part of God?

 

[Corki]

And our church is part of the greater catholic (universal) ecclesia, having apostolic succession and the sacraments – it’s just considered ‘valid but’ illicit by the Roman Catholic Church. I’ve tried participating on other Christian websites, but I find I still have a lot more in common with Catholics than I do with Evangelicals.

Do you have any sources for the claim that the Catholic Church considers the Gnostic sacraments as valid but illicit?

 

[sw85]

Are you familiar with Eric Voegelin’s treatments of gnosticism?

 

[Candescent]

. He was consecrated a bishop in the church in 1967, and when +Duc de Palatine passed away in the early 1970s, +Stephan Hoeller became the regionary bishop in America.

I attended a mass where Stephan Hoeller presided, in a tiny church in LA, many years ago. It was a very moving ceremony, and I remember being very impressed with him.

 

[CleverUserName]

youtu.be/7i7RB2QNuKE

 

[Candescent]

youtu.be/7i7RB2QNuKE

After listening to this, and I’m not sure how accurately it portrays the Gnostic viewpoint, I am reminded of how often Nuns have told me that it is dangerous to interpret the bible on your own. As one who was raised to question everything and think for myself- this was disconcerting at first. But after reading many threads here,including this one, I understand what they really meant.