The spiritual journey of Gnostic Christians
-
-
- JanforGore
- added this
To some however, the ancient beliefs of Gnostics will sound like something out a science fiction novel, but when you put it into perspective of how society works, it does on some level make sense. Gnostics believe that this material world we live in is an evil diversion set upon us by the Demiurge, or false god. In this material world we live in there are Aeons, or 'angels' (Jesus /Christ and Sophia being the first) who were non material spirits sent to lead us to gnosis, or knowledge of the divine light within all of us. In other words, to enlighten us to the fact that we are not shaped by the material world, but transcend it. Archons are seen as the 'demons' who are the gatekeepers of the material world we live in that provide the distractions to us attaining the knowledge to ascend back to the Pleroma, or universal God and who do all in their power to make this world a place that is opposite of what it should be. As I stated, equate that to the actual way our society works, and it does make some sense, though I myself do not use those terms in my daily life. However, analogies can be made.
In some extreme sects of Gnostics it was even believed that the human body in and of itself was an evil distraction and trap to the light within us devised to enslave the soul and true light. That for me is still debatable as I believe humans are divine as was Christ. It is believed that the only way to reach ‘gnosis’ or knowing is through inner reflection and through looking beyond the material distractions of the Demiurge. Gnostics in some sects were also known to be ascetic, though there is mention of the "Bridal Chamber" in the joining of man and woman, though not much if anything is known specifically of the ritual. It is believed by some as well that spiritual transcendence and seeing the light are reached through the joining of man and woman spiritually through the physical. Personally, I am more in favor of that latter ritual myself ;-).
continued.
-
- groups:
- Green, Culture, Current Tonight, Earth and Science, 6 more
-
- tags:
- Culture, Green, Earth and Science, Religion, 31 more
-
- recommended by:
- ras_menelik
-
-
remanns
-
O! and JanforGore,.....what unimatrix0 said,...ditto!
- 2 years ago
-
remanns
-
-
remanns
-
"To some however, the ancient beliefs of Gnostics will sound like something out a science fiction novel, but when you put it into perspective of how society works, it does on some level make sense". -heh- The Mormons got sent a golden 3 ring binder,....go figure. Seriously,...Gnosticism is as interesting to interpret as it is to spell,....both in terms of spirituality/mysticism,...AND aa a wealthy mine of ideas for Science Fiction!
- 2 years ago
-
remanns
-
-
JanforGore
-
"Don't take what does not belong to you."
Who are any of us to say what does or does not belong to anyone in regards to what they believe? That type of exclusivity is what turns so many off to religion in the first place. I am a believer of the secret knowledge of life Christ imparted to those closest to him. The knowledge that we are all capable of finding through the words of the living Christ in taking the spiritual journey of Christ as revealed through the Gnostic Gospels found at Nag Hammadi. Bottomline, in using a term to describe that be it Gnostic Christian or any other label is not the point. The point is what we believe and how we go about applying that belief to our daily lives and actions.
- 3 years ago
-
JanforGore
-
-
georgeisaiah
-
Janforgore,
You are full of enthusiasm for this new belief, but be mindful of morirjedi's adivice. "Do not take what does not belong to you."
The name Christian has a specific meaning. Choose or create any religion you wish. You are free to do this. Call yourself by any name you wish, but do not take on names that have longstanding meanings and redefine them. This confuses the issue. I simply point out that the term gnostic Christian is neither accurate or appropriate. Others have made similar observations which you have not addressed.
As a gnostic you appeal to feelings for merit of truth. A Christian or Jew simply cannot do this, we are bound by the revelation as received and by our reason and logic which must be employed to interpret it.
A gnostic is bound by none of this, they can have secret knowledge and mystical experience that is entirely personal and contradiction with self, tradition, other gnostics will not bother them. So perhaps to you a person of integrity can be two opposite things at once. For a Christian this is not so.
I again ask you not to take what does not belong to you. - 3 years ago
-
georgeisaiah
-
-
morirjedi
-
Constantly searching for something greater. This is the plight of man/woman. Can we not find direction in trying to best the best person we can be? Can giving freedom to others to believe or not believe a sin? Why is so much of each sides argument about putting down the others?
Don't take what does not belong to you
Treat others as you wish to be treated
All are equals
Keep you hands to yourself
Clean up after yourself
Religion? Not really sure, but if so let me know where to sign up. - 3 years ago
-
morirjedi
-
-
JanforGore
-
I did describe myself in accurate terms. Sure hope you aren't implying that I am not a person of integrity or intellectual honesty for doing so.
- 3 years ago
-
JanforGore
-
-
georgeisaiah
-
In matters of faith, we can create our own beliefs, or we can accept a tradition, or we can accept a revelation old or new. We can mix tenets of all three, but we then must take care to describe ourselves in accurate terms in order to remain persons of integrity.
I could say I agree with Buddhism in many things (not all, and not some main points) , but I would be in serious error to call myself a Christian Buddhist or Bhuddist Christian.
Intellectual honesty is called for. If one simply wants to create a new religion from parts of old ones that are agreeable to you-- please call it by a new name. It obfuscates discussion of theological and philosophical ideas to do otherwise.
Syncreticism (mixture of beliefs) has occurred throughout the history of the Church. Celibacy and the Crusades are resultant of admixture. The truth is syncreticism is a misnomer. The new belief, in actual practice, more often than not, DISPLACES the old.
Example- TV preachers such as Jan and Paul and Jim and Tammy syncreticized American materialism with Christianity. But in fact, they rarely, if EVER discussed the atoning sacrifice of Jesus. (The fundamental belief of Christianity.) An analysis of these shows proved this. Jesus was a mere magic word repeated incessantly.
Judaism and Christianity are "revealed religions" meaning they hold to a "revelation as truth." One is forbidden from adding or subtracting from that divine revelation. They are both founded upon upholding the law of God and turning to God's method of atonement for receiving forgiveness and mercy after breaking it.
Scholars and theologians had many reasons for leaving out the "gnostic gospels" of the cannon-- A good seminary would offer courses on this. It is not JUST because they didn't agree with doctrine of the accepted cannon. Many are obviously written many years after the period, and quite obviously not by persons they are attributed to. Submit them to careful, linguistic and historical analysis and you will also find out why scholars disregarded them as divine revelation.
- 3 years ago
-
georgeisaiah
-
-
JanforGore
-
While your history of the Gnostics is accurate, there are many sects, and Gnostic Christians have emerged as a part of that in following the spiritual journey of Christ.
- 3 years ago
-
JanforGore
-
-
Vierotchka
-
Personally, I find Agnosticism the most honest and least hypocritical approach.
- 3 years ago
-
Vierotchka
-
-
RCS
-
One has to be very careful in referring to Gnostics as Christians. They were inspired by earlier religious ideals from the Middle East, Egypt and Persia, and only adopted the outward trappings of Christianity later. They were not really Christian.
Christianity is an open religion with clearly spelled-out texts. Gnosticism and its descendants focused on secret knowledge limited to elites within the groups. It was very different in practice and outlook from Christianity.
Also, many, if not most, Gnostics believed in a dual creation. An imperfect God, or Creator, created the physical world, and a perfect God, either created the spiritual world, or was the ever-existing spiritual world. This clearly marks it out from the Jewish and Christian idea of God creating the world and the concept that, that creation was a good one.
In Gnostic eyes, if there were a creation of the world, it was bad. That's why it's a terrible mistake to think, as many modern people do, that Gnostics and their successors would value the natural world at all. In their eyes, the natural world was a physical world that was flawed, imperfect and evil.
The Gnostics gave rise to the Manichaeans and the Cathari. They, also, heavily influenced the modern Yezidi and Mandeans in Iraq.
The author Zoe Oldenbourg wrote two interesting books about the last stand of the Gnostics in their Cathari form in the West. The first is a novel entitled "Destiny of Fire," and the second is a non-fiction account of the last days of the Cathari called "Massacre at Montsegur." These two books give some insight into the Cathari mind and belief system.
- 3 years ago
-
RCS
-
-
JanforGore
-
You're welcome. When you (used in general) find you are at a crossroads in your life when what you see before you in this material world is not enough and you feel and know that you need more, that is then the moment you must seize to search for it. It is there. And that is hopeful as well as enlightening.
- 3 years ago
-
JanforGore
-
-
unimatrix0
-
Hey this is very cool, I appreciate hearing your perspective Jan. Thank you for sharing.
There is no doubt that Jesus was a great teacher, as was Socrates and Buddha.
- 3 years ago
-
unimatrix0
-
-
JanforGore
-
Chubbo: This video absolutely spoke exactly how I feel about nature and man's destructiveness towards it. It is that destruction and a lack of essence that keeps us from realizing the divine within us. He is so correct. Once people are conscious of that essence and how necessary nature and the environment are to brigning us to that higher consciousness and that we do have it within us all to save it, then we want to save it and fight for it. He is also correct that there is a lack of love in humanity (war) that is causing this destruction of nature and stopping that essence from bringing peace. And going by the terms used in Gnosticism, those who seek to profit off of destruction of this beautiful and amazing world are the archons of today. I would definitely list Monsanto as one of the greatest archons in history along with many other corporations on behalf of politicians and the media that do nothing but defile our world for profit and work to keep people in the dark.Those who rip down our forests, pollute our water with toxic sludge, and those who have a total disregard for the indigenous peoples of this planet who have that essence within them. Thank you for posting this video.
- 3 years ago
-
JanforGore
-
-
Chubbo
-
-
Hi JanforGore, I like those videos too, they are good summaries of the history of the gnostics and point out that the same practices used in ancient times are still taught today for people interested to try and see for themselves the power of them.
Belzebuub is the best modern gnostic teacher I think. - 3 years ago
-
Chubbo
-
-
DeanWB
-
Chubbo:
I like how straightforward he comes across. He doesn't look like he's trying to impress anyone or sound really intellectual or something.
- 3 years ago
-
DeanWB
-
-
JanforGore
-
-
There are two parts before this that tell of Gnosticism from pre Christian times all the way through the Knights Templar, Middle Ages, and the Cathars of France. This video relays information regarding modern Gnosis and how to travel the path to spiritual enlightenment through the living words of Jesus Christ. It is absolutely appalling to see what the Church did to hide and desecrate the teachings of Christ, using torture and murder throughout history. For me, it says that they were truly threatened by the truth: that they knew gnosis could never be truly vanquished as there will always be those who strive for spiritual truth.
- 3 years ago
-
JanforGore
-
-
JanforGore
-
-
This is even more intriguing to me, because evidence seems to prove that Mary Magdalene was the one Jesus entrusted his church to, and not Peter as is taught by the Roman Catholic Church. There is also evidence to show that women did indeed hold much more influence in the church than is presented in what we learn. Many have decried the Da Vinci Code as dealing in fiction regarding the role of Mary Magdalene in the early days of his following and in Jesus's life. I for one believe she was his closest confidante, his friend, his most loyal follower, and perhaps even his wife/lover. It is this humanity however, and his acceptance of all that the early church sought to hide in order to gain control over the church and the people by stating he was only divine and that we as humans could only attain salvation by believing what they taught us. This is not the way of Gnostics who believe that the divinity of Christ was his humanness and it is the divinity in all of us, and is equal regardless of gender.
- 3 years ago
-
JanforGore
-
-
current89
-
JanforGore:
Well I agree with you there for lack of a better phrase I think there's ample evidence that the Catholic Church and other Christan groups threw Mary Magdalen under the bus, and don't give her the credit she probably deserves.
- 3 years ago
-
current89
-
-
JanforGore
-
JanforGore:
Absolutely. Depicting her as a prostitute was one way to discredit her, but the Church eventually had to recant it. Just taking a look at the Catholic Church and how their hierarchy is set up even today shows the blatant sexism of it.
- 3 years ago
-
JanforGore
-
-
JanforGore
-
-
To study these early gospels you will find that they are intriguing, compelling, and controversial. They are heads on at odds with the teachings of the church today regarding how salvation is attained. In these Gnostic Gospels it is not just about believing in a resurrection (which is not even mentioned in the Gospel of Thomas) that gives you salvation, but understanding and decoding the teachings of the living Christ in the gospels that were excluded from the BIble by those who felt threatened by having Jesus seen as a man, and not just the divine son of God.
- 3 years ago
-
JanforGore
-
-
JanforGore
-
If you wish to know more about gnosticism and the Nag Hammadi Gnostic Gospels (gospels excluded at the Council of Nicea) discovered in Egypt in 1945, Elaine Pagel's works are worth taking a look at. The Gospels of Philip, Thomas, and Mary Magdalene (who I believe was indeed Jesus's companion, or wife) give great insight into the teachings of Christ.
- 3 years ago
-
JanforGore
-
-
DeliaTheArtist
-
""Gnostics believe that this material world we live in is an evil diversion set upon us by the Demiurge, or false god." You believe this in a literal or conceptual way?
"That for me is still debatable as I believe humans are divine as was Christ." Christ was divine as in, Gnostics do believe he was the son of God and God as in the God described in the bible?
"It would be illogical to have creation without a creator." Why?
- 3 years ago
-
DeliaTheArtist
-
-
JanforGore
-
DeliaTheArtist:
No, not the God we know of in the Old Testament in the Bible who was described as vengeful. I don't espouse to the old testament of the Bible. Jesus was divine more in terms of possessing the gnossis as I believe we all do. He did not say he was the one, he was one of us who came to impart to us that we were him as well. And I believe in a conceptual way the terms I described. As I stated in the post, I don't use those terms in my daily life, though I absolutely can see the analogy between "archon" types who use distractions like greed and war to distract us from seeking gnosis, and "aeon" types who work to move us to that higher consciousness in our world. As to your last question, if there is no creator for a creation, how did it get there?
- 3 years ago
-
JanforGore
-
-
DeliaTheArtist
-
DeliaTheArtist:
"if there is no creator for a creation, how did it get there?" I don't know, isn't that like, the ultimate question? I posted an article about that today actually: http://current.com/items/90015414_life-what-are-the-odds.htm
I don't necessarily think that just because we create things that the universe needs a "creator" in the way of a being who created it. As you said, we can't take our perception of the material world and think it applies across the vastness of the universe. While I don't know how the universe was created, I don't think it's really "logical" to assume a creator in the absence of another explanation.
- 3 years ago
-
DeliaTheArtist
-
-
JanforGore
-
DeliaTheArtist:
I simply cannot comprehend of anything being created without a creator. All things to me logically must flow from some other force or being. However, if you find the answer to that question, I will certainly be all ears to hear it.
- 3 years ago
-
JanforGore
-
-
current89
-
DeliaTheArtist:
"It would be illogical to have creation without a creator." Why?
Well Jan is using the age old "Cosmological Argument For God" that was developed by Saint Thomas Aquinas. Of course, though respectable, it has been placed into question, and proven as contradictory.
If we are to negatively evaluate this argument for god. We'll have to consider this
"The c. argument as we'll call it begins with the claim that the universe could not exist without a cause and then concludes that an uncasuesd being(God) is the explanation. But as the 19th-century philosopher Arthur Schopenhauer said, the law of universal causation "is not so accommodating as to let itself be used like a hired cab, which we dismissed when we've reached our destination." The proponent of the c. argument is being inconsistent. Why is the notion of god as an uncaused cause accepted when the notion of an uncaused universe is rejected?
In addition the c argument commits the fallacy of composition. But this is all besides the point.
- 3 years ago
-
current89
-
-
DeliaTheArtist
-
DeliaTheArtist:
Well Current89, you've summed up what I've always felt about that conclusion. I don't understand how we can fill a gap of knowledge with something even more unknowable.
If the argument is that the world is so complex it must have be created, how can the logical conclusion be an even more complex concept (god)? If all things must "flow from some other force or being", how is it logical to assume that force is god- or, is that just what we'd call any force from which life would be flowing?
If god has so many definitions that span across cultures and personal belief systems, what is the true function of using the word at all? These are things I ponder.
- 3 years ago
-
DeliaTheArtist
-
-
JanforGore
-
DeliaTheArtist:
I don't concentrate so much on the semantics behind the use of the word "god". It simply is a term I use to describe the universal force from which I believe all else was created. Of course that then brings into question, who or what then created the god who created everything else?... and on and on it goes. My philosophy tends to be that there really is no definitive answer for all, it is what you believe that matters.
- 3 years ago
-
JanforGore
-
-
hoboninja54
-
DeliaTheArtist:
Perhaps, the answer you seek is the question. In order for there to be a created there must be a creator. In order for there to be a creator there must be a created. Perhaps there was never nothing. Perhaps it has always been everything. Everything is made up of all the things. There is nothing outside of everything. So nothing is also part of everything.
- 3 years ago
-
hoboninja54
-
-
current89
-
I've always wondered about Gnostics. They're such a small sect (no offense meant) that it's hard to actually find one and learn about their religion personally.
"We have always possessed within us the divine spark and power to make the divine on Earth, and as Jesus Christ preached, it is through pure love and acknowledgement that the power to do so lies within us all."
How would you, as a Gnostic, define "divine." In other words what would the "divine" world be like?
"In this material world we live in there are Aeons, or 'angels' (Jesus /Christ and Sophia being the first) who were non material spirits sent to lead us to gnosis, or knowledge of the divine light within all of us"
Reminds me of Buddhism to a certain extent, which pre-dates regular Christianity by 800 years. The trying to achieve enlightenment part that is(or in this case the "divine light."
It sounds very interesting, not my cup o' tea, but interesting (and sounds like a peaceful religion/sect) nonetheless.
- 3 years ago
-
current89
-
-
JanforGore
-
current89:
A divine world would be peaceful and sustainable, with freedom of heart, mind, and soul. A place where a higher consciousness prevailed over the material world that seeks to hold us back from realizing our full potential as divine beings.
Also to add, though we have had disagreements here, I do thank you for the tone of your questions here and the respect you showed for my beliefs.
- 3 years ago
-
JanforGore
-
-
current89
-
current89:
Np(no problem) Jan, though I don't like most religions I still find enjoyment about learning about them.
- 3 years ago
-
current89
-
-
JanforGore
-
current89:
And in regard to your comment about being a small sect, i would dare say that there may even be more atheists than gnostics in the US ;-). Though I don't have any data on that.
- 3 years ago
-
JanforGore
-
-
JanforGore
-
The Gnosis Archive
- 3 years ago
-
JanforGore
-
-
JanforGore
-
cont.
This is what I know of Gnosticism, which is really just the basics as volumes of writings have been discovered that even predate Christianity that are all not known yet. The Nag Hammadi Gnostic Gospels discovered in Egypt in 1945 however, give us a compelling and controversial look at the gospels that record the words of Christ. These gospels were excluded from the Bible at the Council of Nicea when church dogma was being voted on and the divinity and humaness of Christ was being debated.
And while I do not espouse to all of it, I do believe that there are archon types that are on Earth deliberately here to in essence stop us from ascending to a higher consciousness in order to have freedom of mind and spiritual equality and the transcendence necessary to bring that divine world Christ spoke of to Earth in order to maintain power for themselves. Obviously, because to allow us to reach that transcendence would then bring us not only individual freedom of mind but individual power they could not control. I also do believe that there is a divine light in all of us and that we are all capable of divine actions on Earth in our daily lives and do not need to be given instruction by human intermediaries who deign to tell us they possess powers we do not have until we accept that they are more powerful than we are.
We have always possessed within us the divine spark and power to make the divine on Earth, and as Jesus Christ preached, it is through pure love and acknowledgement that the power to do so lies within us all. Therefore, I do not believe in hierarchal organized religion that seeks to suppress that knowledge, nor do I believe that we are here simply by chance or that this is all there is. It would be illogical to have creation without a creator.
So, there you have it. These are my beliefs and my public proclamation that I believe in, love, and revere the words and deeds of Jesus Christ the divine who sought to bring the key to true enlightenment to humans in order that we might one day free ourselves of mind and soul to reach a higher consciousness that reveals the true meaning of life beyond this material world made by those with the intent of keeping us from making it truly a divine place. And that includes making a peaceful sustainble world for those to come.
Feel free to discuss your own beliefs now, or question mine. I welcome it.
Thanks.
- 3 years ago
-
JanforGore
