Ask a Gnostic

[CleverUserName]

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.

Interesting that the Gnostic is not calling it inaccurate.

 

[gnosisofthomas]

Interesting that the Gnostic is not calling it inaccurate.

Sorry, the Gnostic has been on vacation and hasn’t had a chance to look at this thread in a while.

Well, I’m already 2.5 minutes into this video, and already I hear a lot of inaccuracies. First of all, nowhere in the Gnostic scriptures is the demiurge (whom Sophia emanated) ever refered to as Yahweh. His name is Ialdabaoth, although he’s also called Saklas and Samael. The similarities between him and Yahweh can be seen in the Gnostic creation myth, especially when the Apocryphon of John has Ialdabaoth declaring, “I am God, there is none other beside me.” But again, he’s never called Yahweh. I have more to say on this, but first I want to talk about the serpent in Eden.

The assertion that the serpent was the devil is an orthodox Christian belief. If you read closely in Genesis, the serpent is never identified with Satan – in fact, Jews have never made that connection. It’s strictly a Christian interpretation. Genesis says the serpent was the most cunning creature in the garden, but never identifies it as specifically good or evil, and certainly doesn’t identify it as any particular entity, other than a talking serpent.

Orthodox Christianity interpeted this creature to be the devil in disguise. Gnostics, on the other hand, interpreted it as God’s first act of redemption. When Sophia saw that She had created a monster who was enslaving man, She tried to save the lost sparks of divinity within him by sending the serpent to give them knowledge of God, and awaken them to their captivity so that they could return to their original state of existence in the Fullness of God.

So is Ialdabaoth the same as Yahweh? We have to remember that while orthodox and Gnostic scriptures contain a lot of the same general stories, they come from separate traditions. You can’t interpret one religion in light of another, you have to look at it in context. Ialdabaoth actually has more in common with your idea of Satan (although he’s more stupid than evil), yet the whole story is told in a slightly different way from what you’re used to. It’s a story of redemption, and you simply have to avoid identifying the characters with an orthodox spin, and consider them from the Gnostic viewpoint itself.

The other problem I had with this video, in just the first couple of minutes, was the idea that Gnostics think the world is evil. That’s simply not true. Nor is the demiurge (creator) inherently evil. But I’m going to address that topic in a separate response because someone else asked a question about that.

Now the one comment about the spark of the divine within you being the same as the God that exists outside of you is a pretty accurate statement. It’s simply the fact that we exist in this world right now that makes it difficult to remember this.

 

[Zulfiqar]

Where did Gnosticism come from?

For example, Catholics say that Jesus of Nazareth founded their church in 33 AD.

Protestants claim that the Catholic church is corrupted and they follow Sola Scriptura.

Muslims believe that their religion was founded by Muhammad, a prophet of god.

What is the origins of Gnosticism? Is it was not Jesus nor the Saints, who started this sect and why does it have credibility? (Other religions/sects have a variety of evidence for their credibility)

 

[gnosisofthomas]

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.

This is a common misconception, and the Gnostic scriptures are actually extremely world-affirming. It’s true that some Gnostic sects considered the world more evil than other sects, and advocated strict asceticism. There was even one sect that supposedly encouraged indulging in everything the world has to offer as a means of breaking free of the bonds of matter. Of course, that was recorded by a heresiologist, so it may or may not be accurate. We have no primary sources from that sect to confirm or deny that that’s what they believed.

But in general, the world is seen in a very positive light by most Gnostics, as the Divine permeates all of reality. The Gospel of Thomas says, “Cleave a piece of wood, and I am there. Lift up a stone, and you will find me there.” It also says, “The Kingdom of Heaven is spread out up on the earth, but men don’t see it.”

The Book of the Psalms of Light says, “I am in everything, I bear the skies, I am the foundation, I support the earths, I am the light that shines forth, that gives joy to the souls. I am the life of the world: I am the sap that is in all the trees: I am the sweet water beneath the sons of matter.”

The world is imperfect, but it’s not outright evil. Most Christians, I think, would agree with this… Why else would our bodies need to be perfected at the resurrection of the dead? It’s that imperfection that can lead certain people to do evil things, it’s the reason we have sickness and war and suffering. But even in an imperfect state, there can be absolutely beautiful things in the world. I think that’s because when you get right down to it, the world is yet another emanation of God.

God first emanated in order to learn about Himself, and everything we experience is all part of that process whereby God continues to learn. Of course that’s also a dichotomy because at the same time, God knows all and exists beyond time and space. But this gets into, as the Doctor would say, a “wibbly-wobbly timey-wimey” thing.

so my first question, do gnostics advocate reproduction or marriage? or not?

As I said above, some Gnostics were more ascetic than others, but generally reproduction and marriage are seen as good things. When you see that the world is in the process of salvation, reproduction is playing a part in that salvation by bringing more sparks of the divine into the world. Of course that’s not to say that you have to reproduce, but it’s not a bad thing if you do.

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?

I think matter and spirit work together. Obviously spirit is more glorified that matter, but they have to work together as long as we live in the world. It’s about finding a balance between the two. to quote the Gospel of Philip, “Fear not the flesh nor love it. If you fear it, it will gain mastery over you. If you love it, it will swallow and paralyze you.”

I’m not sure how well I answered these questions, but I didn’t want to get more wordy than I already tend to do, haha!

 

[RileyG]

Aren’t the Gnostics a Jewish offshoot that believe in Jesus but also many other gospels as well? (I hope that makes sense)…

God Bless +

 

[OrdinaryMelkite]

Blessings, Gnosis of Thomas!!!

I’m familiart with Gnostic teachings from my New Age days. In fact, I have a book containing most of the Gospels you mentioned…

Questions, if you don’t mind…

1. What is the Gnostic opinion on the Books of Enoch???
2. What is your church opnion on Marcion? He tried to remove any jewish “scriptures” from the thehn-traditional “Canon” and just confined himself to some books of the NT. For that, he was anathemized by the Orthodox Christian community at the time.

It is said that his reasons for doing this was not Anti-Semitism but because he recognized early the obvious “differences” inherent between the OT and the NT and he wanted to establish an “Authentic Christianity” based on the actual teachings of Christ without any “Non-Christ” writings. Do you think that is true?

1. Gnostic writer Richard Smolley has “admitted” that he can understand why Gnosticism is often seen as “eilitst”—mainly because of its seeming insitence that ONLY certain people can achieve “salvation/Gnosis” at a time. Example-------Gospel of Philip----“Philip” is the one who is the one chosen to carry on Christ’s message-----Gospel of Mary, Mary herself----Thomas------he’s the “chosen one.” Only certain people “achieve” this (at least at a time)-----------which contradicts the Biblical paraphrase “The Kingdom of God is open to all.”
   How do you explain this apparent contradiction?
2. What is your particular Church’s stance on Homosexuality/Lesbianism? Gay marriage?
3. Also on Abortion?

I have a ton of other questions. but I do not want to overload you like I apparently have already.

Anyway, awaiting whatever responses you have!!! Be in God!!!

 

[gnosisofthomas]

I’ve lost track of where I left off with my responses, so I’m going to start here and work backwards, haha!

1. What is the Gnostic opinion on the Books of Enoch???

We include readings from the Book of Enoch in our lectionary. We don’t have an official canon of scripture, but we do find it valuable in our liturgical readings. It’s one of the sources for us recognizing St. Uriel as an archangel.

1. What is your church opnion on Marcion? He tried to remove any jewish “scriptures” from the thehn-traditional “Canon” and just confined himself to some books of the NT. For that, he was anathemized by the Orthodox Christian community at the time.

It is said that his reasons for doing this was not Anti-Semitism but because he recognized early the obvious “differences” inherent between the OT and the NT and he wanted to establish an “Authentic Christianity” based on the actual teachings of Christ without any “Non-Christ” writings. Do you think that is true?

Marcion isn’t talked about much, but he is invoked in the Mass along with other saints of the Gnosis. Again, we don’t recognize an official canon of scripture, so his canon isn’t important to us. But we do recognize him as one of the Gnostic Fathers. I do think his theology emphasized that the God of the Old Testament was not the same God that Jesus called “Father.” So he wanted to divorce Christianity from Judaism and allow it to stand on its own.

1. Gnostic writer Richard Smolley has “admitted” that he can understand why Gnosticism is often seen as “eilitst”—mainly because of its seeming insitence that ONLY certain people can achieve “salvation/Gnosis” at a time. Example-------Gospel of Philip----“Philip” is the one who is the one chosen to carry on Christ’s message-----Gospel of Mary, Mary herself----Thomas------he’s the “chosen one.” Only certain people “achieve” this (at least at a time)-----------which contradicts the Biblical paraphrase “The Kingdom of God is open to all.”
   How do you explain this apparent contradiction?

That’s a common misconception when it comes to Gnosticism. It’s not that an “elite” few can attain Gnosis… It’s that few are willing to try. Most people are perfectly happy living their lives as they are, so they don’t bother to dig deeper. But Gnosis is available to everyone – and I believe that eventually everyone, possibly even the demiurge, will have Gnosis. I think I quoted this earlier, but the Gospel of Thomas says, “The kingdom of heaven is spread out upon the earth, but men don’t see it.” They simply have to allow themselves to see it, because it’s there right now!

The Gnostic gospels do tend to place certain apostles higher than others. Mary always has a high place among the apostles, as does Thomas. The Gospel of Thomas also places James the Just above the other apostles. Jesus does show in it that Thomas understands the Mysteries, but He still gives James a leadership position by telling the apostles to go to James the Just when He is gone. The Gospel of Philip is interesting because his name is only mentioned once in the entire gospel, without any indication that he wrote it, other than the title.

1. What is your particular Church’s stance on Homosexuality/Lesbianism? Gay marriage?

We are open and affirming, and gay couples can have sacramental weddings in our church. We have several clergy and laity that are gay/lesbian. Our own parish even had someone who was transgendered in the clergy, but she has since left the church.

1. Also on Abortion?

There isn’t an official dogmatic statement about it because we don’t really have dogma in our church. Personally, I think abortion is murder… And I know several other people in the church who feel the same way. But there are also people in the church that are pro-choice. Most everyone there knows how I feel about it though!

 

[Bodhi303]

I’ve always found the mysticism of Gnostics interesting.
How does you religion define an intimate experience with God?
Do you have the gifts of the Holy Spirit? If so, which ones manifest themselves often?
Without an official Bible, what criteria do you use to discern if the spirit is friend of foe?
Without Satan, who is your adversary?

Be well…

 

[gnosisofthomas]

What is the origins of Gnosticism? Is it was not Jesus nor the Saints, who started this sect and why does it have credibility? (Other religions/sects have a variety of evidence for their credibility)

Gnosticism has been around in one shape or form since the beginnings of human history – humans having direct experiences with the Divine. Many Gnostics traced their origins mythically to Seth, the son of Adam and Eve. But historically, Gnostic religions seem to have arisen in the near east in the 2nd century BC, being influenced by Jewish, Greek, and Egyptian thought. It became fused with Christianity through the teachings of Jesus Christ.

Early Christianity had a diversity of expressions in the immediate centuries following the death of Jesus. Some groups chose to follow a more Judaic method of expression, however those were largely subsumed by the 2nd Century AD. Other groups, such as those who were reached by the Apostle Paul, were largely Hellenic and followed a fusion of Hellenic and Judaic teachings. Neoplatonism, a popular philosophical expression in the Hellenic world had a major influence on early Christian teachers and theologians. In Alexandria, especially, the fusion of Hellenism and Judaism along with Neoplatonic thought gave rise to what would eventually become disctincly Gnostic.

Gnostic teachings continued to be spread in the early centuries through the writings of the Gnostic Fathers, one of the most important being Holy Valentinus. Gnostic Christians didn’t consider themselves any different from other Christians, and only differed slightly in interpretation. Later, these Gnostic teachings were rejected or lost as orthodox Christianity became the norm. Really, Gnostics were just regular church-goers, perhaps of a more philosophical bent.

 

[Corki]

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

Still wondering about this one. Several of your posts seem to indicate the opposite.

 

[GaryTaylor]

Gnostic teachings have been around since the begining, however, I’m such a avid follower of St Irenaeus that I’ll have to follow this a bit.

Interesting your take on Catholicism and Gnostic, have you read St Irenaeus, Against Heresies 1-5?

 

[Denise1957]

It became fused with Christianity through the teachings of Jesus Christ.

Gnosticism did not become fused with Christianity. Gnosticism is an old heresy. Heresies don’t become fused with the teachings of the Catholic Church, and they never have been.

In Kenneth Whitehead’s Short Guide to Ancient Heresies, he describes Gnosticism:

GNOSTICISM

"The heretical theory that salvation comes through some special knowledge, usually knowledge claimed by a special elite group.

Gnostic theories existed before Christianity, and the Gnostics adapted the Gospels to their own views and for their own purposes, even composing pseudogospels, embodying their particular ideas and doctrines. Gnosticism held matter to be evil and hostile to the human spirit; it also essentially denied the truths of Christian revelation.

Jacob Burckhart descibed the Gnostics as “speculative enthusiasts” who embraced Christianity only as a platform for Platonic and oriental ideas. Gnosticism as an organized sect or body has been long extinct, but Gnostic ideas persist and surface in some form in nearly every major heretical version of the Christian faith."

 

[YeshuaOrHaOlam]

The heretical theory that salvation comes through some special knowledge, usually knowledge claimed by a special elite group.

Gnostic theories existed before Christianity, and the Gnostics adapted the Gospels to their own views and for their own purposes, even composing pseudogospels, embodying their particular ideas and doctrines. Gnosticism held matter to be evil and hostile to the human spirit; it also essentially denied the truths of Christian revelation.

Jacob Burckhart descibed the Gnostics as “speculative enthusiasts” who embraced Christianity only as a platform for Platonic and oriental ideas. Gnosticism as an organized sect or body has been long extinct, but Gnostic ideas persist and surface in some form in nearly every major heretical version of the Christian faith.

Shalom Denise;

Agreed.

Gnosticism is diametrically opposed to the religion of Israel as revealed through Moshe and the Prophets.

There is a major division between the faith that affirmed the goodness of creation and G-d’s willingness to redeem it ( Israelite’s ) versus the faith that deems creation as something that needs escaping from ( Gnostics ).

Yeshua, as presented in the 4 gospels ( our most reliable portraits of The Master ), affirms the goodness of creation, and began the breaking in of the Kingdom of G-d, on earth as it is in Heaven.

Gnosticism is simply a corruption of the teachings of Yeshua. Since His birth and death, Yeshua has, to this day, remained a figure of whom countless groups re-brand, in their own image.

There is simply no evidence to suggest that Gnostic traditions have primacy over the Gospels, everything points to the assimilation of Gnostic ideas put on to the very Jewish figure of Yeshua; not the other way round.

Shalom Aleichem

 

[YeshuaOrHaOlam]

As an aside, to the OP;

Please forgive me for my post; I realize this is not supposed to be a thread debating whether Gnosticism is valid or not.

My apologies,

Shalom Aleichem

 

[Shiranui117]

In an attempt to put this thread back on topic. and to have (regrettably) the nagging curiosity of a small child, I’d like to switch things back to Q&A instead of making accusations against the Gnostics. So, I’ve reposted my questions below for the OP’s convenience.

Originally Posted by 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.

Originally Posted by gnosisofthomas
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?

Originally Posted by gnosisofthomas View Post
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?

Originally Posted by gnosisofthomas
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 terms.

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.

Originally Posted by gnosisofthomas
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]

Shalom Denise;

Agreed.

Gnosticism is diametrically opposed to the religion of Israel as revealed through Moshe and the Prophets.

There is a major division between the faith that affirmed the goodness of creation and G-d’s willingness to redeem it ( Israelite’s ) versus the faith that deems creation as something that needs escaping from ( Gnostics ).

Yeshua, as presented in the 4 gospels ( our most reliable portraits of The Master ), affirms the goodness of creation, and began the breaking in of the Kingdom of G-d, on earth as it is in Heaven.

Gnosticism is simply a corruption of the teachings of Yeshua. Since His birth and death, Yeshua has, to this day, remained a figure of whom countless groups re-brand, in their own image.

There is simply no evidence to suggest that Gnostic traditions have primacy over the Gospels, everything points to the assimilation of Gnostic ideas put on to the very Jewish figure of Yeshua; not the other way round.

Shalom Aleichem

Thanks, I appreciate a Judaic perspective on this issue. Regarding whether or not we should debate the topic, I think it’s okay, since the OP has now presented a heretical view as being compatible with the Catholic view (by saying that Gnosticism was fused with the teachings of Jesus) - which it is not, and never has been. If the OP is going to make false claims about the teachings of Our Lord, then I will have to defend the Church. If this is not okay with the moderators, I hope they will let me know.

 

[Shiranui117]

Thanks, I appreciate a Judaic perspective on this issue. Regarding whether or not we should debate the topic, I think it’s okay, since the OP has now presented a heretical view as being compatible with the Catholic view (by saying that Gnosticism was fused with the teachings of Jesus) - which it is not, and never has been. If the OP is going to make false claims about the teachings of Our Lord, then I will have to defend the Church. If this is not okay with the moderators, I hope they will let me know.

With all due respect, this is the “Ask a Gnostic” thread, not the “Let’s argue with Gnostics about why theyre heretics” thread. If you have a problem with Gnostic answers to questions about Gnosticism, I don’t think this thread is for you.

 

[YeshuaOrHaOlam]

With all due respect, this is the “Ask a Gnostic” thread, not the “Let’s argue with Gnostics about why theyre heretics” thread. If you have a problem with Gnostic answers to questions about Gnosticism, I don’t think this thread is for you.

Shalom Shiranui;

I agree. We should keep on topic.

 

[Denise1957]

With all due respect, this is the “Ask a Gnostic” thread, not the “Let’s argue with Gnostics about why theyre heretics” thread. If you have a problem with Gnostic answers to questions about Gnosticism, I don’t think this thread is for you.

If you had read the post properly, you would have seen that it’s not a case of “let’s argue with Gnostics about why they’re heretics;” but rather my response was a refutation of the claims made that Gnosticism was fused with the teachings of Jesus.

Hopefully gnosisofthomas won’t be going on another little vacation now.

 

[Corki]

With all due respect, this is the “Ask a Gnostic” thread, not the “Let’s argue with Gnostics about why theyre heretics” thread. If you have a problem with Gnostic answers to questions about Gnosticism, I don’t think this thread is for you.

This is the “Ask a Gnostic” thread on **Catholic Answers **Forums. Challenging the positions of gnosticism in light of Catholic teaching is very valid.