10589Re: Gnostics and Templars
- Jan 31, 2005Hey Mychael, I actually had completely misunderstood. When you
mentioned the truths in a fiction I thought you meant allegorical
truths of some nature. I thought it could be fun and interesting to
explore what those ideas that you saw within the book might have in
connection with Gnosticism.
I see what you mean now, other than the allegory of the divine
feminine you seem to be talking about sort of historical semi-
conections. Well, that is of course interesting as well.
I am with you in drawing a destinction between the original
Rosicrucians as invented by J. V. Andrea and C. Besold vs the modern
groups. And, of course no one would deny that this original group is
influenced by hermeticism (as are the modern groups)... which is in
turn very closely related to Gnosticism.
I am a bit more skeptical when it comes to the Templars though. I
can't even go so far as to say there is even any good conjecture
that I have seen connecting them to any Gnostic system at all.
However, you may have some ideas to share on that. I mean, sometimes
I may say "there is no good evidence for _____", but I may still
think a theory is well thought and very possible. In the case of the
Templar/Gnosticism connection, what I tend to see is in fact more
about a pretty explicit opposition in systems.
While the Cathars are not technically Gnostic, they are one of the
groups we list as "on topic" here. One fact that may be of interest
in dealing with the Templars then is that Barnard created much of
their rule and helped them institute the order.... and he was also a
violent anti-Cathar proslytizer.
We maybe should also mention in this conversation the fact that one
of the movements that is also similar to Gnosticism found it's
primary early solidification here in the same area.... Kabbalah.
AND, there were Platonic Academies here as well. Maybe not
coincidence that various esoteric movements came into existance in
this time, they do tend to follow the Academies.
--- In firstname.lastname@example.org, nakedalchemy@a... wrote:
> In a message dated 1/30/2005 11:13:42 PM Eastern Standard Time,
> email@example.com writes:
> Interesting point, Mychael, concerning the differentiation
> truth and falsehood in fiction. Of course, to some extent it is
> preaching to the preachers here, and I know that George is also
> who is very aware of the principle you are talking about.
> However, I am wondering if you could point out for the sake of
> conversation exactly where you feel the truth is (specifically
> concerning Gnosticism) in these particular works of entertaining
> fiction. Many people do wonder about the Da Vinci Codes, and the
> Holy Blood Holy Grail, and how they are related to Gnostic
> so perhaps it is a good subject to talk about here.
> BTW, welcome to the group, C.A.S., I would also like to deal with
> the point you bring up from the historical perspective. In this
> what Dan Brown talks about in the Da Vinci codes is really not
> related to historical Gnosticism. Some of the things he says about
> the Nag Hammadi texts and what they contain are actually
> untrue. He is wrong that Gnostics believed that Jesus and Mary
> children, they didn't. There is also nothing in the Nag Hammadi
> about Jesus being married, or even anything about sexual rituals
> like the ones he outlines.
> I have read the Da Vinci Code and also saw a documentary of
Cracking the Da
> Vinci Code, neither persuaded me of much to do with Gnosticism
except that Da
> Vinci pretty much despised the Christian attitude, his works were
done as a
> livelihood and he did poke some blasphemies into the his paintings
> being readily seen...The only real connection is that Da Vinci
himself may have
> been influenced by some Gnostic thought.
> The only profound thing the book did for me, was enlighten the
> the Divine Feminine aspect of God.
> I read Holy Blood, Holy Grail a long time ago when it came out,
> fascinating, there was little evidence to back up much of their
> was very much into Grail lore at the time and the title intrigued
> connections between the church locations in or around the Pyrenees
seemed to have
> some insight...Otherwise, they pulled rabbits out of the hat with
> sources. But, also what both books did do is to get people
> alternatives, and this is a good thing, not to settle for what's
in the feedbag
> I suppose the biggest clue is of the Knights Templars, but it is
> conjecture if they followed a secret Gnostic plan of their own,
> elitism might fall into that category somewhere, but, then their
> into their fold over time would discount that...if anything their
> the story of the Three Musketeers is much more close in my mind,
and they were
> part of the Crusades. So, who knows, many of the Crusaders
> things both materialistically and intellectually as the overtook
> While I would consider elements of both books to have truths,
overall one is
> a work of fiction, and the other strictly conjecture.
> If either got some people to explore and investigate and research
> more...this is a start, but as one does research more, one finds
many dead ends, and
> people just love to read into things, and I am of the guilty
there, too. To me,
> the invisible and perhaps nonexistent Rosicrucianism(not counting
> more closely akin to the Gnostic as well as The Hermeticists, and
I am to
> understand The Priory of Scion is a complete fabrication
perpetrated by a few who
> made its history up, just as Rosicrucianism, or else the
> that they were a "true to the letter" secret society.
> But, imagination sparks many things, without it humanity would be
> the dark ages, and as fanciful as much of it is, one need only
look at science
> fiction and what it predicted and is now come to be made fact.
> However, I am one of those who believes that adage that truth is
> stranger than fiction.
- << Previous post in topic Next post in topic >>