10129Re: A question
- Sep 5, 2004Nice explanation, with a concrete example to boot.
You really should archive posts like this under an "FAQ" that people
can link to.
--- In email@example.com, pmcvflag <no_reply@y...> wrote:
> Hey IgnisApocryphon.
> In addition to Lady Cari's answer to you in post
> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/gnosticism2/message/10084 I wanted to
> bring tis together with the conversation between Mike and Annie.
> Mike states to Annie
> >>>"Thank-you Marcion (sorry, couldn't resist). :-) Good point,
> Whether or not Mike intended this (I assume he is aware of it) it
> does seem to be relavant to the post that Annie writes on a few
> levels. Annie wrote...
> >>>"Just my opinion, however. If you read the bible, next time you
> do, for an experiment, read it with the frame of mind that the OT
> YHVH and the NT "Father" are two different dieties."<<<
> You see, IgnisApocryphon, Marcion proposed a cosmological system
> is essentially identical to what we find in Gnosticism, with the
> Demiurge, etc.. In fact, it is common for people to come to the
> here and assume Marcion WAS Gnostic, based simply on the fact that
> his cosmology was the same. Care to guess why Marcion would not be
> considered "Gnostic"?
> It works like this; Marcion, unlike Gnostics, believed that
> was gained by faith in the actual literal validity of his system
> least that is how it looks in the things we read from the
> heresiologists). The Gnostic model is not dependant on a literal
> belief of the cosmology. SOme may have believed it literally,
> may not have.... but the Gnostic writings themselves make fairly
> clear that what is important is the underlying MEANING of the texts.
> We know this from many sources. First, as you can see from the
> passages that Cari gave you, Gnostics understood the problem of
> language in communicating these kinds of ideas... and is many
> passages they even tell us more specifically that the meanings are
> hidden. Two, the heresiologists tell us this about the Gnostics. Of
> course, we can't always believe this source but in this case it is
> held up by the evidence. Three, the very structure of many Gnostic
> sects, in which we know that part of the initiatory process was to
> learn the hidden meanings of the texts that other Christians took
> be literal, makes very clear that part of the very essence of
> Gnosis was about comming to understand these meanings.
> Now, let me be specific about something here. There has been a lot
> talk here lately that seems to place Gnosticism in some sort
> of "Spiritual Anarchist" camp of free interperatation without any
> church structure. Historically, this is simply not true. It DOES
> to be true that Gnostic sects sometimes participated in a sort of
> creative interperative session, but this was still done under
> guidance and was done with the intent of adding richness to the
> intended goal (maybe something like modern music teachers do with
> thier classes when trying to drive home a principle of a specific
> point in music theory... there is creativity but there is ALSO a
> point that is not so individual).
> Gnostics do have some specific beliefs that make the term "Gnostic"
> possible, and one set of those is the cosmology you mention, while
> the other is how that cosmology relates to an internal struggle.
> I hope that helps more than it confuses :)
> --- In firstname.lastname@example.org, "ignisapocryphon"
> > On the Demiurge...
> > Is the demiurge a construct of the human mind as "Jehovah", or is
> > a
> > real metaphysical transcendent being?
> > Also...
> > I'd like some feedback on archetypes and metaphysics... How is
> > viewed? As a transcendent, metaphysical being? Or an archetype?
> > both? I've always thought that the metaphysical realm and the
> > archetypal (sp?) realm coincide with each other to produce mystic
> > experiences. (Can there be more than one "gnosis"?) Thoughts and
> > comments are greatly appreciated.
> > I'm going for the Valentinian POV if anyone wants to know.
> > I know that's a mouthfull, but still.
> > Also, while I'm at it, I might as well say that the Gnostic
> > is one I plan to stay with. I've seen that it is very, VERY
> > and open to new-comers. I've also seen the oppression we face by
> > other
> > Christians and non-Christians. I'm very proud to say I'm a
> > Christian and I hope to learn much and maybe have a mystic
> > myself soon. It's been a great joy of mine to understand just
> > communication with and interaction with The Divine is all about...
> > The
> > Gnostics take it back to it's roots, when time with God was holy
> > unadulterated, no sound or anything... Wow, it's just
> > even talk about. Anywho, I'm sure you guys are tired of me being
> > postwhore...
> > Comments are appreciated. :D
> > Christ is holy,
> > IgnisApocryphOn
- << Previous post in topic