From the gut as well as the head.

Mark

--- In gnosticism2@yahoogroups.com, "Will Brown" <wilbro99@...> wrote:
>
> So, how does one say hello in Gnostic? After that, we might get down to
> the creation of a Rosetta Stone of sorts...   ~~~~willy
>
> --- In gnosticism2@yahoogroups.com, "Will Brown" <wilbro99@> wrote:
> >
> > Absolutely, this time through the realm of Gnosticism, I shall learn
> to
> > speak your language.    ~~~~willy
> >
> >
> > --- In gnosticism2@yahoogroups.com, "Ben" brbenjaminassisi@ wrote:
> > >
> > > --- In gnosticism2@yahoogroups.com, "Gerry" gerryhsp@ wrote:
> > > >
> > >
> > > >
> > > > Just keep in mind that even though we walk over the troll, it's
> > > > really the bridge that we're walking on.
> > > >
> > > > Gerry
> > > >
> > >  heh , I find him overly simplistic bordering on innane myself...
> > >
> > > I was just pointing out we all start somewhere...
> > >
> > > but I agree for free flow of discussion, lest we wonder off into
> "ooh
> > look its a kitten" land... we do need structure...
> > >
> >
>

--- In gnosticism2@yahoogroups.com, "Will Brown" <wilbro99@...> wrote:
>
> Yep, been over six years, it has, since I wandered off into the sunset.
> So, the sun has again arisen and I wander back into the realm of Cari
> and her fellow Gnosticeers. Is the following site a good place for me to
> begin again?
>
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gnosticism
>
>

The Wikipedia summary has gone through revisions and isn't a bad place to start.
In general, the Wikipedia pages continue to be updated, and you can click on
"discussion" at the top of pages to view types of issues encountered.

Also, Willy, you can browse through our "Links" and "Files" sections on our
Gnosticism2 homepage.  There are many books and articles, of course that address
historical Gnosticism.  I would recommend actually reading original source
literature.  You can find some translations online, too. ~

http://www.gnosis.org/library.html
http://www.earlychristianwritings.com/index.html

We can offer more specific recommendations as required, Willy.

We look forward to comments and questions of yours.

Cari

--- In gnosticism2@yahoogroups.com, lady_caritas <no_reply@...> wrote:
>
> --- In gnosticism2@yahoogroups.com, "Will Brown" <wilbro99@> wrote:
> >
> > Yep, been over six years, it has, since I wandered off into the sunset.
> > So, the sun has again arisen and I wander back into the realm of Cari
> > and her fellow Gnosticeers. Is the following site a good place for me to
> > begin again?
> >
> > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gnosticism
> >
> >
>
> The Wikipedia summary has gone through revisions and isn't a bad place to
start.  In general, the Wikipedia pages continue to be updated, and you can
click on "discussion" at the top of pages to view types of issues encountered.
>
> Also, Willy, you can browse through our "Links" and "Files" sections on our
Gnosticism2 homepage.  There are many books and articles, of course that address
historical Gnosticism.  I would recommend actually reading original source
literature.  You can find some translations online, too. ~
>
> http://www.gnosis.org/library.html
> http://www.earlychristianwritings.com/index.html
>
> We can offer more specific recommendations as required, Willy.
>
> We look forward to comments and questions of yours.
>
> Cari
>

Ok, I'll root around and get back when I figure I have something cogent to say,
something different from last time...

Hi All…

Does anyone know anything about this Gnostic movement?  I haven't been able to
find very much on it and wondered if anyone has studied it.  It has a strong
Gnostic basis similar to Nag Hammadi, but seem much more modern and human based
in it's approach.  It focuses a lot on choice and self-empowerment in steps
towards transcendence and looks like it is shared in story/parable form
interweaving various forms of gnosis.

Here's the page that compares their Gnosis with other forms of gnosis. They have
a book they follow called the Song of God which was written by a man named
Azrael Ondi-Ahman over a 28 year period.  The site also has some interesting
videos on creating your own reality.

http://www.truegnosticchurch.org/basic_beliefs.html

I emailed the site, but have yet to get a response.  I'd like to get any advice
feedback before I purchase the book.

I'm pretty intrigued and any help would be greatly appreciated.

Thanks,

Hi
I call myself a Gnostic Christian but don't really know exactly if that is
correct.  I followed Sylvia Browne and still read her material with some
reservations.  Out of many, I have one Edgar Cayce book I love, "Story of
Jesus". I am a fan of Elaine Pagel's books and follow the works of Biblical
timelines and translations. I am a member of Truth or Traditions yahoo group as
well as their studies on their websites.

I have changed my lifelong Biblical beliefs as I age but I can never change how
much I love the Word of God and works of Jesus.  I never believed for a moment
that the God of the Old Testament was my God and after reading and studying
gnostic literature I was very happy that I was not alone when it comes to
sharing my belief that God is Love.

Thanks,
Rose

PS
I forgot to mention that I was a convert Catholic for about 5 years but I missed
the mark and rejected Catholocism no matter how hard I tried.
Not sorry for changing to Gnostic beliefs at all, they fit my heart better.
Rose

--- In gnosticism2@yahoogroups.com, "chris_heading" <chris_heading@...> wrote:
>
> Hi All…
>
> Does anyone know anything about this Gnostic movement?  I haven't been able to
find very much on it and wondered if anyone has studied it.  It has a strong
Gnostic basis similar to Nag Hammadi, but seem much more modern and human based
in it's approach.  It focuses a lot on choice and self-empowerment in steps
towards transcendence and looks like it is shared in story/parable form
interweaving various forms of gnosis.
>
> Here's the page that compares their Gnosis with other forms of gnosis. They
have a book they follow called the Song of God which was written by a man named
Azrael Ondi-Ahman over a 28 year period.  The site also has some interesting
videos on creating your own reality.
>
> http://www.truegnosticchurch.org/basic_beliefs.html
>
> I emailed the site, but have yet to get a response.  I'd like to get any
advice feedback before I purchase the book.
>
> I'm pretty intrigued and any help would be greatly appreciated.
>
> Thanks,
>


Hi, Chris.  I'm not at all familiar with this group.  It seems to be one of many
modern groups that have decided to label themselves "Gnostic".  As you know, the
focus of our group is historical Gnosticism, and after reading a bit from the
link you left, it appears that there are many differences and also some
misconceptions regarding ancient Gnosticism.

For instance, the material world and the demiurge were not considered evil by
all historical Gnostic groups.  The Valentinians considered the material world
to be inferior, yet it contained a purpose in nurturing the spiritual seed.

The Basic Beliefs of this group that you linked show some major differences from
the ancients.  That is not to say that either approach is necessarily wrong or
right, so much as that they definitely do differ.

For example, the ancient Gnostics did not believe that God evolved from
humanity, nor was God a "glorified and exalted human being."  The ultimate
source for the historical Gnostics was not human, but rather infinite, ineffable
and unknown.

Perhaps others know more about this modern belief, but it does appear to involve
a very different worldview from the ancients we focus on here.

Cari

--- In gnosticism2@yahoogroups.com, "Rosalie Shelton" <rosashelton@...> wrote:
>
> Hi
> I call myself a Gnostic Christian but don't really know exactly if that is
correct.  I followed Sylvia Browne and still read her material with some
reservations.  Out of many, I have one Edgar Cayce book I love, "Story of
Jesus". I am a fan of Elaine Pagel's books and follow the works of Biblical
timelines and translations. I am a member of Truth or Traditions yahoo group as
well as their studies on their websites.
>
> I have changed my lifelong Biblical beliefs as I age but I can never change
how much I love the Word of God and works of Jesus.  I never believed for a
moment that the God of the Old Testament was my God and after reading and
studying gnostic literature I was very happy that I was not alone when it comes
to sharing my belief that God is Love.
>
> Thanks,
> Rose
>


Welcome, Rose, and thank you very much for your introduction.  It looks like you
have encountered a variety of experiences along your path.

For purposes of our group, would you like to share which Gnostic literature you
enjoy?  Also, from your readings, what do the Gnostics say about love in
relation to the Gnostic conception of the ultimate Source?

Cari

Hello roze! I understand where your coming from.I even have a dog named edgar!
He has helped me to interperate that inner voice that's leads,guides,and directs
me.
not the dog;)  --- In gnosticism2@yahoogroups.com, lady_caritas <no_reply@...>
wrote:
>
> --- In gnosticism2@yahoogroups.com, "Rosalie Shelton" <rosashelton@> wrote:
> >
> > Hi
> > I call myself a Gnostic Christian but don't really know exactly if that is
correct.  I followed Sylvia Browne and still read her material with some
reservations.  Out of many, I have one Edgar Cayce book I love, "Story of
Jesus". I am a fan of Elaine Pagel's books and follow the works of Biblical
timelines and translations. I am a member of Truth or Traditions yahoo group as
well as their studies on their websites.
> >
> > I have changed my lifelong Biblical beliefs as I age but I can never change
how much I love the Word of God and works of Jesus.  I never believed for a
moment that the God of the Old Testament was my God and after reading and
studying gnostic literature I was very happy that I was not alone when it comes
to sharing my belief that God is Love.
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Rose
> >
>
>
> Welcome, Rose, and thank you very much for your introduction.  It looks like
you have encountered a variety of experiences along your path.
>
> For purposes of our group, would you like to share which Gnostic literature
you enjoy?  Also, from your readings, what do the Gnostics say about love in
relation to the Gnostic conception of the ultimate Source?
>
> Cari
>

--- In gnosticism2@yahoogroups.com, Chris Heading <chris_heading@...> wrote:
>
> Hi Cari-
> Thanks for you indepth thoughts.  I agree with what you said in my limited
understanding of gnosticism.  There are some pretty interesting takes in the
message for me.  Particularly the concept of humanity being a religion.  I
tend to be a humanist with social justice views and this fits in very nicely
with them.  The video explain this a bit more in detail - particularly on how
to create peace.  It seems to make it a lot more practical than what I've
learned about gnosticism - do you know of any gnostic texts that give very
practical guidence like this?
> thanks



Chris, there are people I know who care about social justice, who have an
ethical philosophy that centers on the value of humanity, and who care about
peace.  Some of these people do follow various religions, although others are
agnostic and some are secular atheists.  Some humanists don't accept
transcendental or religious explanations.  IOW, my opinion is that religion or a
realized sense of spirituality is not necessary for a humanistic approach to
life.  There are many organizations and philosophies and religions and self-help
psychology books that have various noble goals such as peace, human justice,
self-awareness and self-improvement.  Those that include spiritual and/or
philosophical worldviews offer an added dimension, so to speak, in
contextualizing humanity.

The ancient Gnostics obviously existed in a social context and lived by rules of
society.  Instead of outlining a practical set of rules or laws or a
prescription for moral living on an individual plane, as well as societal level,
they focused on self-knowledge and salvific Gnosis, thereby, acquaintance with a
spiritual seed or spark united with the ultimate ineffable, infinite Source. 
Unifying spirit realized on an individual and group level could not help but
influence an ethical sense, in my opinion.  Whether or not peace could ever
prevail in our world as long as ignorance exists, the ancients demonstrated in
practical ways an inner understanding.

From the Gospel of Philip:

"Speak concerning the truth to those who seek it and of knowledge to those who,
in their error, have committed sin. Make sure-footed those who stumble and
stretch forth your hands to the sick. Nourish the hungry and set at ease those
who are troubled. Foster men who love. Raise up and awaken those who sleep. For
you are this understanding which encourages. If the strong follow this course,
they are even stronger. Turn your attention to yourselves."
http://www.gnosis.org/naghamm/got.html

There are modern gnostics who relate to this Valentinian approach.

Perhaps other members have some insights.  Chris, I hope your path leads you to
fulfillment.

Cari

--- In gnosticism2@yahoogroups.com, lady_caritas <no_reply@...> wrote:
>
>
> From the Gospel of Philip:
>
> "Speak concerning the truth to those who seek it and of knowledge to those
who, in their error, have committed sin. Make sure-footed those who stumble and
stretch forth your hands to the sick. Nourish the hungry and set at ease those
who are troubled. Foster men who love. Raise up and awaken those who sleep. For
you are this understanding which encourages. If the strong follow this course,
they are even stronger. Turn your attention to yourselves."
> http://www.gnosis.org/naghamm/got.html


OOPS!  I meant, The Gospel of Truth.  ;-)


Cari

> There are modern gnostics who relate to this Valentinian approach.
>
> Perhaps other members have some insights.  Chris, I hope your path leads you
to fulfillment.
>
> Cari
>
there are arguably "commandments" to be found in Pistis sophia...

http://www.sacred-texts.com/chr/ps/ps107.htm

JESUS continued again in the discourse and said unto his disciples: "When I
shall have gone into the Light, then herald it unto the whole world and say unto
them: Cease not to seek day and night and remit not yourselves until ye find the
mysteries of the Light-kingdom, which will purify you and make you into refined
light and lead you into the Light-kingdom.

"Say unto them: Renounce the whole world and the whole matter therein and all
its care and all its sins, in a word all its associations which are in it, that
ye may be worthy of the mysteries of the Light and be saved from all the
chastisements which are in the judgments.

"Say unto them: Renounce murmuring, that ye may be worthy of the mysteries of
the Light and be saved from the fire of the dog-faced [one].

etc

Cari wrote to me:
> For purposes of our group, would you like to share which Gnostic literature
you enjoy?  Also, from your readings, what do the Gnostics say about love in
relation to the Gnostic conception of the ultimate Source?

  Sorry that I cannot comment on this.  I have never read anything on this at
all.  I'll look at your files and resources but would like an explanation or
some links for further reading on this issue.
>
> Cari
Hi Cari,
              Yes, I have
•  The Gnostic Gospels, Beyond Belief: The Secret Gospel of Thomas by Elaine
Pagels
• The Gnostic Bible by Willis Barnstone
• The Gospel of Mary Magdalene by Jean-Yves Leloup
• Jesus and the Lost Goddess: The Secret Teachings of the… by Timothy Freke
• If You Could See What I See: The Tenets of Novus Spiritus by Sylvia Browne
• The Dead Sea Scrolls and the Christian Myth by John Marco Allegro
• The Nature of Good and Evil (Journey of the Soul Series,… by Sylvia Browne
• Holy Blood Holy Grail by Michael beignet Richard Leigh & Henry Lincoln
• Illustrated Bloodline of the Holy Grail by Laurence Gardner
• The Gospel of Thomas: Annotated & Explained (Skylight Illuminations,) by
Steven L. Davies and Andrew Harvey
• If You Could See What I See: The Tenets of Novus Spiritus
• Complete set for teaching a Sylvia Brown study Group plus 10 or more of her
books and tapes of her sermons.
Thanks,
Rose

--- In gnosticism2@yahoogroups.com, "Ben" <brbenjaminassisi@...> wrote:
>
> http://www.sacred-texts.com/chr/ps/ps107.htm
>
> JESUS continued again in the discourse and said unto his disciples: "When I
shall have gone into the Light, then herald it unto the whole world and say unto
them: Cease not to seek day and night and remit not yourselves until ye find the
mysteries of the Light-kingdom, which will purify you and make you into refined
light and lead you into the Light-kingdom.
>
> "Say unto them: Renounce the whole world and the whole matter therein and all
its care and all its sins, in a word all its associations which are in it, that
ye may be worthy of the mysteries of the Light and be saved from all the
chastisements which are in the judgments.
>
> "Say unto them: Renounce murmuring, that ye may be worthy of the mysteries of
the Light and be saved from the fire of the dog-faced [one].
>
> etc
>


Thank you, Ben.  Yes, again here we see some esoteric, initiatory instruction
with the eye on the prize, so to speak, the mysteries of the Light-kingdom. 
There are lists of virtues to uphold and vices of the world to overcome.  There
is a rising above the chaos vs. working only within a perception of the division
within the world.  In effect, though, we don't see an escape from the world so
much as a different perspective.  Perhaps Chris can find some practical guidance
in our examples and others.

Also, Ben, are you or anyone else here aware of any very recent scholarship
about Pistis Sophia?  With the Nag Hammadi findings and development of scholarly
categories of Sethian and Valentinian literature, I'm not sure how to categorize
Pistis Sophia.  The dating alone is difficult.  I've seen ranges from second
century to fourth century CE.  April DeConick during past discussion on her blog
called it a fourth century text and described it as a collection of random
esoteric lore from numerous geographies and traditions.

Cari

--- In gnosticism2@yahoogroups.com, "Rosalie Shelton" <rosashelton@...> wrote:
>
> Cari wrote to me:
> > For purposes of our group, would you like to share which Gnostic literature
you enjoy?  Also, from your readings, what do the Gnostics say about love in
relation to the Gnostic conception of the ultimate Source?
>
>  Sorry that I cannot comment on this.  I have never read anything on this at
all.  I'll look at your files and resources but would like an explanation or
some links for further reading on this issue.
> >
> > Cari
> Hi Cari,
>              Yes, I have
> •  The Gnostic Gospels, Beyond Belief: The Secret Gospel of Thomas by Elaine
Pagels
> • The Gnostic Bible by Willis Barnstone
> • The Gospel of Mary Magdalene by Jean-Yves Leloup
> • Jesus and the Lost Goddess: The Secret Teachings of the… by Timothy Freke
> • If You Could See What I See: The Tenets of Novus Spiritus by Sylvia Browne
> • The Dead Sea Scrolls and the Christian Myth by John Marco Allegro
> • The Nature of Good and Evil (Journey of the Soul Series,… by Sylvia Browne
> • Holy Blood Holy Grail by Michael beignet Richard Leigh & Henry Lincoln
> • Illustrated Bloodline of the Holy Grail by Laurence Gardner
> • The Gospel of Thomas: Annotated & Explained (Skylight Illuminations,) by
Steven L. Davies and Andrew Harvey
> • If You Could See What I See: The Tenets of Novus Spiritus
> • Complete set for teaching a Sylvia Brown study Group plus 10 or more of her
books and tapes of her sermons.
> Thanks,
> Rose
>


Rose, thank you for the list.  It is very helpful.  You have a range of
approaches reflected in your reading list.  Of course, for the purposes of our
group, we focus on historical Gnosticism, rather than modern interpretations
such as those espoused by Sylvia Brown or Holy Blood, Holy Grail speculations.

I asked about the conception of God you mentioned, that being "God is Love,"
mainly because there are many different understandings of the ultimate source or
god prevalent today, even though using the same label of "gnostic".  It's not
that love is not important, so much as the ancient Gnostics did not equate god
or source solely with love.  The ultimate source basically was an unknown, and
ineffable, and infinite.  I'm not sure if that was your meaning or not.

As example, in the Gnostic Bible, which you own, you can find an attempt to
describe this indescribable One, starting on page 139 (The Secret Book of John).
For comparison and more literature there are other compendiums of Gnostic
writings, such as those by Bentley Layton and James Robinson.  You can also find
more texts online, too:
http://www.gnosis.org/library.html
http://www.earlychristianwritings.com/index.html

Now, as far as "love" specifically, that can be seen as one aspect of the source
or "Father", such as described in A Valentinian Exposition:
http://www.gnosis.org/naghamm/valex.html

Love is an emanation from the source in The Secret Book of John.

In Eugnostos the Blessed, "Love Sophia" is the fifth name given to the feminine
aspect of one of six revealed androgynous spiritual beings.

Also, as example, there is mention of "love" throughout The Gospel of Truth.

Rose, I'll stop here and let you and others contribute more examples and ideas
to this discussion.

Cari

Hello chris! In my opinion,I would read everything I could find the time to
read. There is a good chance that ten years from now you won't be as interested
in this text as you are today,but who's to say that one small piece of it will
stick with you to later open a door that you couldn't have done so without it?
(In my opinion) you've got to dig deep,especially at first. You may disregaurd
half of what you come across, but you may find that one thing that relates to
you and opens the next door. I think that would be more important than wondering
how it relates to nag hammadi. How it relates to you and your path seems to be
your goal,in my opinion! --- In gnosticism2@yahoogroups.com, "chris_heading"
<chris_heading@...> wrote:
>
> Hi All…
>
> Does anyone know anything about this Gnostic movement?  I haven't been able to
find very much on it and wondered if anyone has studied it.  It has a strong
Gnostic basis similar to Nag Hammadi, but seem much more modern and human based
in it's approach.  It focuses a lot on choice and self-empowerment in steps
towards transcendence and looks like it is shared in story/parable form
interweaving various forms of gnosis.
>
> Here's the page that compares their Gnosis with other forms of gnosis. They
have a book they follow called the Song of God which was written by a man named
Azrael Ondi-Ahman over a 28 year period.  The site also has some interesting
videos on creating your own reality.
>
> http://www.truegnosticchurch.org/basic_beliefs.html
>
> I emailed the site, but have yet to get a response.  I'd like to get any
advice feedback before I purchase the book.
>
> I'm pretty intrigued and any help would be greatly appreciated.
>
> Thanks,
>

Hi Cari,
Thanks for the info and references.  I copied it and I will be interested to
follow those readings.
I just watched a video at
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=5783057043188740843

Alan Steinfeld of New Realities interviews author JJ Hurtak about his book
Pistis Sophia. He also wrote the Keys of Enoch.
He explains Gnosticism as "A pathway seeking Divine experience to knowledge".

        "New Realities host Alan Steinfeld interviews the legendary   J.J.
Hurtak, bestselling author of "The Book of Knowledge: The Keys of Enoch®",
doctor, and president of The Academy For Future Science. In this interview,
James J. Hurtak discusses his book The Pistis Sophia, Text and Commentary
(co-authored with his wife, Desiree), which is a translation and commentary of a
special collection of 2,000 year old Gnostic Coptic manuscripts, derived from
ancient Egyptian-Coptic Christian Codexes."

Here is another helpful link to the Pistis Sophia I found on Nag Hammadi Library
website: http://www.gnosis.org/library/pistis-sophia/ps005.htm
Gnostic Scriptures and Fragments

Pistis Sophia
Translated by G. R. S. Mead

  Thanks,
  Rose

Thank you, Rose.  I'll check out that interview.

Cari

--- In gnosticism2@yahoogroups.com, "Rosalie Shelton" <rosashelton@...> wrote:
>
> Hi Cari,
> Thanks for the info and references.  I copied it and I will be interested to
follow those readings.
> I just watched a video at
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=5783057043188740843
>
> Alan Steinfeld of New Realities interviews author JJ Hurtak about his book
Pistis Sophia. He also wrote the Keys of Enoch.
> He explains Gnosticism as "A pathway seeking Divine experience to knowledge".
>
>        "New Realities host Alan Steinfeld interviews the legendary   J.J.
Hurtak, bestselling author of "The Book of Knowledge: The Keys of Enoch®",
doctor, and president of The Academy For Future Science. In this interview,
James J. Hurtak discusses his book The Pistis Sophia, Text and Commentary
(co-authored with his wife, Desiree), which is a translation and commentary of a
special collection of 2,000 year old Gnostic Coptic manuscripts, derived from
ancient Egyptian-Coptic Christian Codexes."
>
> Here is another helpful link to the Pistis Sophia I found on Nag Hammadi
Library website: http://www.gnosis.org/library/pistis-sophia/ps005.htm
> Gnostic Scriptures and Fragments
>
> Pistis Sophia
> Translated by G. R. S. Mead
>
>  Thanks,
>  Rose
>

I am not sure this idea is fully formed, but it has been playing in my mind for
a while and writing it out sometimes helps and I am curious what others think.

One of the tenets of higher criticism, as applied to scripture in particular, is
that a text reflects the culture of the time in which it is written. This
includes cultural biases, mores, assumptions, agendas, etc. Thus, the Hebrew
Bible (Tanach, OT) is a product of the ancient Near Eastern culture in which it
is written.  The "God" of this text is not so much revealed, but revealing of
the cultural milieu in which it was written.  This is the view of modern higher
criticism.

Now, the twist: Is historical Gnosticism an early form of higher criticism, but
couched in the language of its day?  In other words, in reading the Jewish
Scripture they saw a "God" who did not fit their "modern" sensibilities (ex, "I
am a jealous God").  Instead of recognizing this view of God as a product of a
past historical period with its own agendas and concerns (as in current higher
criticism), they called this "God" the Demiurge (a divine being less than the
Source, and in some cases even evil).

In short (and likely not to help), the hermeneutic is the same (they are trying
to interpret the same dissonance in the text), but a different epistemology (the
language of myth [the ancient language of criticism] as opposed to the language
of modern textual criticism).

Any thoughts?

Mark

Hello mark, is gnosticism a form of higher criticism? Imo it very well could be
seen that way.
As far as being couched in the language of its day, well I wouldn't say that. I
believe this "mythological" or esoteric language we see in gnostic scriptures
(and others) serve a different purpose.
No offense,but your thought that you have been pondering sounds a lot like some
things I've read in theological textbooks. I used to study theology and this
kind of goes in synce with there explanation of gnostic thought and reason.
Are you a student? Anyways,back to why they wrote in these symbolic forms, imo I
believe these creative forms of truth telling were meant to withstand the test
of the powers that be.   --- In gnosticism2@yahoogroups.com, "Mark"
<larockpitts@...> wrote:
>
> I am not sure this idea is fully formed, but it has been playing in my mind
for a while and writing it out sometimes helps and I am curious what others
think.
>
> One of the tenets of higher criticism, as applied to scripture in particular,
is that a text reflects the culture of the time in which it is written. This
includes cultural biases, mores, assumptions, agendas, etc. Thus, the Hebrew
Bible (Tanach, OT) is a product of the ancient Near Eastern culture in which it
is written.  The "God" of this text is not so much revealed, but revealing of
the cultural milieu in which it was written.  This is the view of modern higher
criticism.
>
> Now, the twist: Is historical Gnosticism an early form of higher criticism,
but couched in the language of its day?  In other words, in reading the Jewish
Scripture they saw a "God" who did not fit their "modern" sensibilities (ex, "I
am a jealous God").  Instead of recognizing this view of God as a product of a
past historical period with its own agendas and concerns (as in current higher
criticism), they called this "God" the Demiurge (a divine being less than the
Source, and in some cases even evil).
>
> In short (and likely not to help), the hermeneutic is the same (they are
trying to interpret the same dissonance in the text), but a different
epistemology (the language of myth [the ancient language of criticism] as
opposed to the language of modern textual criticism).
>
> Any thoughts?
>
> Mark
>

Brian,

No offense taken. I am always delighted to hear that my questions are in synch
with other people who may know more than me on a given subject. It means I may
be getting a grasp of some sort on the material. Can you point me to others who
have articulated my question better? But I am not a student and have not been
for some time. You?

I find your remarks interesting.  You appear to allow for the insights that
higher criticism brings to the Jewish scriptures (and possibly later NT
writings), but tend to veer from allowing these insights to play themselves out
on the Gnostic texts.  That is, where as the Jewish and Christian scripitures
are a product of their time, Gnostic scriptures are not.  Is that what you mean
by "withstand the test of the powers that be"?  What is the "different purpose"
that you believe the mythological/esoteric language of the Gnostic texts serve? 
Is this a "different purpose" than the language that other scripture serves?

Mark

--- In gnosticism2@yahoogroups.com, "Brian" <humbleservant1god@...> wrote:
>
> Hello mark, is gnosticism a form of higher criticism? Imo it very well could
be seen that way.
> As far as being couched in the language of its day, well I wouldn't say that.
I believe this "mythological" or esoteric language we see in gnostic scriptures
(and others) serve a different purpose.
> No offense,but your thought that you have been pondering sounds a lot like
some things I've read in theological textbooks. I used to study theology and
this kind of goes in synce with there explanation of gnostic thought and reason.
> Are you a student? Anyways,back to why they wrote in these symbolic forms, imo
I believe these creative forms of truth telling were meant to withstand the test
of the powers that be.   --- In gnosticism2@yahoogroups.com, "Mark"
<larockpitts@> wrote:
> >
> > I am not sure this idea is fully formed, but it has been playing in my mind
for a while and writing it out sometimes helps and I am curious what others
think.
> >
> > One of the tenets of higher criticism, as applied to scripture in
particular, is that a text reflects the culture of the time in which it is
written. This includes cultural biases, mores, assumptions, agendas, etc. Thus,
the Hebrew Bible (Tanach, OT) is a product of the ancient Near Eastern culture
in which it is written.  The "God" of this text is not so much revealed, but
revealing of the cultural milieu in which it was written.  This is the view of
modern higher criticism.
> >
> > Now, the twist: Is historical Gnosticism an early form of higher criticism,
but couched in the language of its day?  In other words, in reading the Jewish
Scripture they saw a "God" who did not fit their "modern" sensibilities (ex, "I
am a jealous God").  Instead of recognizing this view of God as a product of a
past historical period with its own agendas and concerns (as in current higher
criticism), they called this "God" the Demiurge (a divine being less than the
Source, and in some cases even evil).
> >
> > In short (and likely not to help), the hermeneutic is the same (they are
trying to interpret the same dissonance in the text), but a different
epistemology (the language of myth [the ancient language of criticism] as
opposed to the language of modern textual criticism).
> >
> > Any thoughts?
> >
> > Mark
> >
>

--- In gnosticism2@yahoogroups.com, "Brian" <humbleservant1god@...> wrote:
>
> Hello roze! I understand where your coming from.I even have a dog named edgar!
> He has helped me to interperate that inner voice that's leads,guides,and
directs me.
> not the dog;)

Yes, Cayce's book about Jesus gave me a few answers I needed in my life.  I and
some of my family members can see either ghosts or spirits without trances.  And
we have not been diagnosed as nuts either.  I guess we all have inner intuition
that can be scary at times.  My father always talked about Cayce, the Aztecs and
ET's.  That may have led me to read Cayce and then to discover that Sylvia
Browne had similar philosophies.  I even took a course in college called History
of God, taught by an atheist who tried to show that most of the OT was based on
Mythology.  To me anytime we look at a concept to expand or mind it usually
leads to a better understanding of how so many got dragged into the dogmatic
rituals of religion.  Ignorance is never bliss from what I have learned.  To me
Gnosticism leads us closer to God if we can see beyond the so called hellfire
and damnation.  Those things are only in our minds or situations we create when
we make our own hell by living in fear or the fear of really living a life of
love and understanding.

**********************************************************
"What is meant by "the day of the Lord is near at hand"? (A) That as has been
promised through the prophets and the sages of old, the time – and half time –
has been and is being fulfilled in this day and generation, and that soon there
will again appear in the earth that one through whom many will be called to meet
those that are preparing the way for His day in the earth. The Lord, then, will
come, `even as ye have seen him go.'" Edgar Cayce reading (262-49) July 9, 1933

"Let that light be within me in such measures that I, as a child of God, may
realize His love for man. May I live that, then, in my life day by day."
--262-129

"Our Father, through the love that Thou hast manifested in the world through Thy
son, the Christ, make us more aware of 'God is Love.'" --262-43

http://www.are-cayce.org/readings/5753/002.html

In Christ,
Rose

Hello mark, if I may use the bible as an example, comparing gnostic reasoning to
the reasoning of higher criticism would kind of be like comparing the wisdom
texts(ecclesiastes,psalms,etc) to the literal text (books of moses,the
gospels,letters of peter and paul,etc).
One is designed to appeal to the soul,spirit,heart,etc. And the other designed
to appeal to the mind,the crowd,to the who what when and where.
Higher criticism (to me) as always been more scientific in nature, where as
gnostic thought would be more poetic in nature.
To me its like saying knowledge and wisdom serve the same purpose. Well, this
could be true in a sense, it takes both to reach the ultimate goal being
(understanding)imo, but in nature they are two seperate pieces of the puzzle. As
for withstanding the powers that be, well I always saw symbolic language as
trying to stay out of the center of the stage to avoid persecution from those
they did not agree with(the powers that be:religious and political institutions
of the given periods).
I see gnostic lit. As trying to rebuke impositions placed on individuals by the
powers that be. To not appear heritical but poetic so there version of the truth
would not be destroyed,just overlooked. Of coarse, people caught on and gnostic
thought was forced into hiding anyways,but this form of truth telling has seemed
to withstand the test. This hidden reasoning can be found in everything from the
bible to shakespeare,poetry,sci fi,etc.
As for pointing out others who could articulate it better than you, well you do
a darn good job imo! I havnt been a student since 2000, but reading your
thoughts just reminded me of some thesis material I used to come across! Brian 
--- In gnosticism2@yahoogroups.com, "Mark" <larockpitts@...> wrote:
>
> Brian,
>
> No offense taken. I am always delighted to hear that my questions are in synch
with other people who may know more than me on a given subject. It means I may
be getting a grasp of some sort on the material. Can you point me to others who
have articulated my question better? But I am not a student and have not been
for some time. You?
>
> I find your remarks interesting.  You appear to allow for the insights that
higher criticism brings to the Jewish scriptures (and possibly later NT
writings), but tend to veer from allowing these insights to play themselves out
on the Gnostic texts.  That is, where as the Jewish and Christian scripitures
are a product of their time, Gnostic scriptures are not.  Is that what you mean
by "withstand the test of the powers that be"?  What is the "different purpose"
that you believe the mythological/esoteric language of the Gnostic texts serve? 
Is this a "different purpose" than the language that other scripture serves?
>
> Mark
>
> --- In gnosticism2@yahoogroups.com, "Brian" <humbleservant1god@> wrote:
> >
> > Hello mark, is gnosticism a form of higher criticism? Imo it very well could
be seen that way.
> > As far as being couched in the language of its day, well I wouldn't say
that. I believe this "mythological" or esoteric language we see in gnostic
scriptures (and others) serve a different purpose.
> > No offense,but your thought that you have been pondering sounds a lot like
some things I've read in theological textbooks. I used to study theology and
this kind of goes in synce with there explanation of gnostic thought and reason.
> > Are you a student? Anyways,back to why they wrote in these symbolic forms,
imo I believe these creative forms of truth telling were meant to withstand the
test of the powers that be.   --- In gnosticism2@yahoogroups.com, "Mark"
<larockpitts@> wrote:
> > >
> > > I am not sure this idea is fully formed, but it has been playing in my
mind for a while and writing it out sometimes helps and I am curious what others
think.
> > >
> > > One of the tenets of higher criticism, as applied to scripture in
particular, is that a text reflects the culture of the time in which it is
written. This includes cultural biases, mores, assumptions, agendas, etc. Thus,
the Hebrew Bible (Tanach, OT) is a product of the ancient Near Eastern culture
in which it is written.  The "God" of this text is not so much revealed, but
revealing of the cultural milieu in which it was written.  This is the view of
modern higher criticism.
> > >
> > > Now, the twist: Is historical Gnosticism an early form of higher
criticism, but couched in the language of its day?  In other words, in reading
the Jewish Scripture they saw a "God" who did not fit their "modern"
sensibilities (ex, "I am a jealous God").  Instead of recognizing this view of
God as a product of a past historical period with its own agendas and concerns
(as in current higher criticism), they called this "God" the Demiurge (a divine
being less than the Source, and in some cases even evil).
> > >
> > > In short (and likely not to help), the hermeneutic is the same (they are
trying to interpret the same dissonance in the text), but a different
epistemology (the language of myth [the ancient language of criticism] as
opposed to the language of modern textual criticism).
> > >
> > > Any thoughts?
> > >
> > > Mark
> > >
> >
>

--- In gnosticism2@yahoogroups.com, "Mark" <larockpitts@...> wrote:
>
> I am not sure this idea is fully formed, but it has been playing in my mind
for a while and writing it out sometimes helps and I am curious what others
think.
>
> One of the tenets of higher criticism, as applied to scripture in particular,
is that a text reflects the culture of the time in which it is written. This
includes cultural biases, mores, assumptions, agendas, etc. Thus, the Hebrew
Bible (Tanach, OT) is a product of the ancient Near Eastern culture in which it
is written.  The "God" of this text is not so much revealed, but revealing of
the cultural milieu in which it was written.  This is the view of modern higher
criticism.
>
> Now, the twist: Is historical Gnosticism an early form of higher criticism,
but couched in the language of its day?  In other words, in reading the Jewish
Scripture they saw a "God" who did not fit their "modern" sensibilities (ex, "I
am a jealous God").  Instead of recognizing this view of God as a product of a
past historical period with its own agendas and concerns (as in current higher
criticism), they called this "God" the Demiurge (a divine being less than the
Source, and in some cases even evil).
>
> In short (and likely not to help), the hermeneutic is the same (they are
trying to interpret the same dissonance in the text), but a different
epistemology (the language of myth [the ancient language of criticism] as
opposed to the language of modern textual criticism).
>
> Any thoughts?
>
> Mark
>


Mark, you bring up a very interesting comparison that I hadn't consciously
considered before.

When I think of modern higher textual criticism, I tend to think of a modern
need to look at texts with a rational, objective, scientific, historical
approach.  This can meet with opposition from those who consider the Bible or
other scriptures as literal, inerrant word of god.  But in essence (at least
theoretically), one type of academic textual criticism does not intend to judge
one way or another about god or miracles or revelation, etc.  It's just that it
recognizes that humans have given varied meaning to events and that an objective
investigation into identification of events, scriptural authorship, form, and
tradition could be helpful as a tool to offer a balanced approach.  I do wonder
if this need is partly perceived because of a modern dichotomy between religious
and secular life.  Is modern religion or at least some modern religion perceived
to be too irrational without enough rational basis or critical self-analysis or
valid historical perspective (especially for those religions relying on
historical "truths")?

I don't see such mutually exclusive approaches with the Gnostics analyzing and
interpreting or reinterpreting ancient texts.  Although throughout history there
have been those who read scripture more literally and those who interpret
symbolically,... allegory and myth, of course, didn't begin with the Gnostics
and were quite commonplace.  Gnostics, however, did use esoteric language and
meaning designed to be gradually understood by the initiate.  And they did have
a different spin on many of the same writings used by other religious sects,
including those now found in the modern Bible.  The Gnostics were highly
philosophical; they acknowledged Reason, Intellect, and rational thought, at the
same time recognizing spiritually revelatory understanding.  In other words, the
Gnostic criticism going on seems to center on interpretation of philosophy,
scripture and what is really being spiritually revealed, not only historical
concerns.

Anyway, these are just some nascent thoughts, certainly subject to revision. 
*lol*

Cari

Perhaps the most debated and intriguing topic in Gnosticism is where it began. 
Was it a Christian side effect?  Did it originate from Persian or other pagan
Mysteries?  Was it just another Jewish heresy?  Is Gnosticism truly a religion--
a bona fide esoteric school--or just a syncretic movement that attaches itself
to different faiths like a parasite?  We probe deep into history, theology and
the Nag Hammadi Library to find out where and when exactly the Gnostics sprouted
out of in mankind's imagination and how it evolved throughout the centuries.

Topics Discussed:

--Yet more evidence that Gnosticism not only predates Christianity but is more
than likely the first Christianity.
--Understanding that the root of all Gnostic philosophy is what is called
Classic or Sethian Gnosticism.
--How and why the writings of Plato are the bedrock of all Gnostic thought.
--The real possibility that the early Gnostics believed that only a small
percentage of humans had the Divine Spark (soul).
--How Gnosticism peaked when Valentinus reconciled Gnostic theology with the
theology of the Catholic Church.
--Trying to quell the tide of many scholars not only trying to redefine
Gnosticism but erase the term all together.
--Birger's story on how he became involved with James Robinson and the Nag
Hammadi Project, including his struggles and victories in translating the
ancient Coptic manuscripts.
--Touching on one of the first and last remaining Gnostics of history—The
Mandeans.

And much more!  It's very hard to speak to someone closer to the Gnostic ground
zero than Birger.

Just go to http://www.thegodabovegod.com/.  The program is broadcast all weekend
long.  Listen to it at your convenience.

All past shows of Aeon Byte are available at
http://www.thegodabovegod.com/shop/.  Digital or CD copies in bulk can also be
purchased through our homepage.

Abraxas

Astral Guest-- Birger A. Pearson,  author of 'Ancient Gnosticism:  Tradition &
Literature', 'Gnosticism, Judaism & Ancient Christianity' and one of the
original translators of the Nag Hammadi Library.