Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Re: Follow-up to an Earlier Post: Why I'm a Gnostic

Expand Messages
  • imdarkchylde
    Blessings and wingwhispers, Pi!! Just thought I d mention that two of the modern gnostic groups I mentioned hold services, and of course if you live in
    Message 1 of 8 , Sep 11, 2006
    • 0 Attachment
      Blessings and wingwhispers, Pi!!
      Just thought I'd mention that two of the 'modern' gnostic groups I
      mentioned hold services, and of course if you live in France you can
      visit the Cathars site and find many abiguious chapels that are
      actually of a Catharian origin. If you live in San Fransisco you can
      visit Holloer's Chapel (or has he rebuilt since the fire?) and these
      would be some examples of communities of 'modern' gnostics, but their
      likeness to the ancients would have to be for you to determine.
      I tend to think of the Internet as an Indra's Web of minds, since we
      aren't in physical contact it is like a meeting of the minds. But
      that is just me. It seems that few want to call an online group a
      community, but I have found groups who consider themselves just that,
      and the 6th definition of webster for 'community' says 'ownership or
      participation in common," and the 7th definition says "simsilarity,
      likeness, us, a community of spirit." So under those deifinitions
      an 'online community' could exist, argueably.
      But this is my opinion, just that.
      May the Light of the One shine on your path!!
      Love and inner peas,
      DarkChylde

      --- In gnosticism2@yahoogroups.com, "i_eat_pi_at_314"
      <i_eat_pi_at_314@...> wrote:
      >
      >
      > In a recent post I talked about the difficulties of modern
      > gnostics identifying with historical gnosticism. I drew a parallel
      > with those Jews who were expelled from the Iberian peninsula during
      > the 15th century. Upon trying to subsequently reintergrate with
      > mainstream Judaism, they faced the challenges of entering a
      religion
      > at once familiar and foreign. I face a similiar debacle with
      > gnosticism. I suggested using the experiences of those
      > "Christianized" Jews to inform us as to how we ought to approach
      the
      > ancient gnostics. The implicit assumption, of course is that we're
      > all basically "wayward" gnostics in need of instruction.
      > I need to make myself clear, though. I'm not drawing a one-to-
      > one comparison between the plethoria of ancient gnostic beliefs and
      > Judaism. Given the varieties of their teachings, a "wayward
      gnostic"
      > is almost a contradiction in terms. While different gnostic
      teachers
      > did sometimes promugate incompatable beliefs with acrimony,
      > gnosticism itself is inherently diffuse and user-friendly. Scholars
      > havn't yet defined a general rubic by which gnosticism can be
      > defined. To be a little facetious, we might all be gnostics without
      > even knowing it. So, am I creating a problem where there isn't one?
      > This is why I compared "returning" to gnosticism with the
      > experiences of those estranged Jews returning to Judaism. It's
      > because there's more to being a gnostic than what one believes;
      it's
      > also belonging to a community, as well. The Mandaeans, a gnostic
      sect
      > more-or-less surviving in present day Iraq are defined as much by
      > their community mores and rituals as by their theology. In fact,
      > they're so scrupulous about following those rituals that even an
      > accidental infraction is severly punished. Talismans are constantly
      > used to ward off bad luck. The tarmida, or priests are routinely
      > consulted for propitious dates to hold festivals. To abandon the
      > Mandaean community and forsake the rituals is to stop being one of
      > them. This is my claim: if the Mandaeans are gnostics, and if
      there's
      > more to being a Mandaean than merely believing their theology, then
      > there might just more to being a gnostic than subscribing to
      certain
      > religious tenets.
      > Are the Mandaeans typical gnostics? A better question is
      whether
      > there's such a thing as a typical gnostic, at all. Who the hell
      > knows. I'm simply making the modest point that gnosticism, like any
      > other human activity springs from a community and not from isolated
      > individuals. I want to go further, though and say that "community"
      is
      > more than just conversation and text-messaging. It's multifarious
      > social interaction. Therefore, no internet group can claim to be a
      > community. At best, it's an adjunct to a community. We're deceiving
      > ourselves if we say the various members of our group are in fact a
      > community of gnostics.
      > In a nutshell, I'm a gnostic because I yearn for a community
      of
      > like-minded believers. The dilemma, though is that no such
      community
      > really exists, anymore. Human relationships have to develope
      > organically and cannot be manufactured ad hoc. Our society is far
      too
      > fluid to allow anything that stable. Communities like, say the
      Amish
      > are anachanistic and cannot survive without being subsidized by the
      > larger society. I have no desire to see a band of gnostics become
      > such a museum piece. I'm a stranger in a strange land. Like those
      > "Christianized" Jews kicked out of Spain, I feel cut off from my
      > community. Again, like them I want to become what I truly was meant
      > to be. Unlike them, however, my community exists only in the past.
      > This means the past has to come alive in order for me to live
      in
      > that community which no longer exists. I can't share in the rituals
      > of those long dead gnostics; I can't celebrate or mourn with them.
      > What I can do, though is long to be with them. The angst of being
      > isolated is itself a kind of purification rite. I can infuse their
      > words with my meanings. In reading about the Jews who were forced
      to
      > renounce their religion and who subsequently sought out that
      > religion, I've taken away one very clear message. While I might
      > always be regarded as an outsider by my community, that's better
      than
      > being accepted where I don't belong. I often doubt the ancient
      > gnostics would recognize me as their brother. That's ok: I
      recognize
      > them and that's enough.
      >
      > pi
      >
    • Michael Leavitt
      ... Hoeller s Church is in Los Angeles, not San Francisco, see http://www.gnosis.org for the address. An online group is what you make of it, though it can
      Message 2 of 8 , Sep 11, 2006
      • 0 Attachment
        imdarkchylde wrote:
        > Blessings and wingwhispers, Pi!!
        > Just thought I'd mention that two of the 'modern' gnostic groups I
        > mentioned hold services, and of course if you live in France you can
        > visit the Cathars site and find many abiguious chapels that are
        > actually of a Catharian origin. If you live in San Fransisco you can
        > visit Holloer's Chapel (or has he rebuilt since the fire?) and these
        > would be some examples of communities of 'modern' gnostics, but their
        > likeness to the ancients would have to be for you to determine.
        > I tend to think of the Internet as an Indra's Web of minds, since we
        > aren't in physical contact it is like a meeting of the minds. But
        > that is just me. It seems that few want to call an online group a
        > community, but I have found groups who consider themselves just that,
        > and the 6th definition of webster for 'community' says 'ownership or
        > participation in common," and the 7th definition says "simsilarity,
        > likeness, us, a community of spirit." So under those deifinitions
        > an 'online community' could exist, argueably.
        > But this is my opinion, just that.
        > May the Light of the One shine on your path!!
        > Love and inner peas,
        > DarkChylde
        >
        Hoeller's Church is in Los Angeles, not San Francisco, see
        http://www.gnosis.org for the address.
        An online group is what you make of it, though it can never completely
        replace a face to face group.
      • imdarkchylde
        Oops! Sorry. I get those two mixed up. (Like when I lived in Texas I was always confusing Dallas and Fort Worth). Blessings!! DarkChylde ... I ... can ...
        Message 3 of 8 , Sep 12, 2006
        • 0 Attachment
          Oops! Sorry. I get those two mixed up. (Like when I lived in Texas
          I was always confusing Dallas and Fort Worth).
          Blessings!!

          DarkChylde

          --- In gnosticism2@yahoogroups.com, Michael Leavitt <ac998@...> wrote:
          >
          > imdarkchylde wrote:
          > > Blessings and wingwhispers, Pi!!
          > > Just thought I'd mention that two of the 'modern' gnostic groups
          I
          > > mentioned hold services, and of course if you live in France you
          can
          > > visit the Cathars site and find many abiguious chapels that are
          > > actually of a Catharian origin. If you live in San Fransisco you
          can
          > > visit Holloer's Chapel (or has he rebuilt since the fire?) and
          these
          > > would be some examples of communities of 'modern' gnostics, but
          their
          > > likeness to the ancients would have to be for you to determine.
          > > I tend to think of the Internet as an Indra's Web of minds, since
          we
          > > aren't in physical contact it is like a meeting of the minds.
          But
          > > that is just me. It seems that few want to call an online group
          a
          > > community, but I have found groups who consider themselves just
          that,
          > > and the 6th definition of webster for 'community' says 'ownership
          or
          > > participation in common," and the 7th definition
          says "simsilarity,
          > > likeness, us, a community of spirit." So under those
          deifinitions
          > > an 'online community' could exist, argueably.
          > > But this is my opinion, just that.
          > > May the Light of the One shine on your path!!
          > > Love and inner peas,
          > > DarkChylde
          > >
          > Hoeller's Church is in Los Angeles, not San Francisco, see
          > http://www.gnosis.org for the address.
          > An online group is what you make of it, though it can never
          completely
          > replace a face to face group.
          >
        • flowjack11
          Hello, DarkChild, Hoeller s chapel is in Los Angeles. And yes, he rebuilt it. http://gnosis.org/gnostsoc/gnostsoc.htm Best Wishes, Chuck PS: I was thinking
          Message 4 of 8 , Oct 4, 2006
          • 0 Attachment
            Hello, DarkChild,

            Hoeller's chapel is in Los Angeles. And yes, he rebuilt it.

            http://gnosis.org/gnostsoc/gnostsoc.htm

            Best Wishes,

            Chuck

            PS:

            I was thinking today during an English lit class that the condition
            of literature departments in America closely mirrors the condition
            of the Christian church before Iranaeus' campaign to unify beliefs
            and excise heresy. There is, however, a subtle difference: the will
            of those who wanted to unify came into power in Christianity, that
            is, choice and personal revelation were shunned -- but in the
            English department the opposite has happened -- the English
            department, in a sense, allowed the gnostic groups, ie, post-
            structuralists, that is, those who oppose uniformity and welcome
            opening up interpretation rather than closing it down (Catholicism
            and New Criticism), to take power. Thus the explosion of "theory
            before text" in modern literature departments.

            I wonder if we will see the same in Christianity in the coming
            ages. Perhaps the gnostics -- and by these I simply mean those who
            seek personal revelation and knowledge of God -- will grow
            increasingly powerful. For a while we should expect to see a great
            variety of disparite and perhaps idiotic beliefs, much like we see
            in current English departments. But eventually I believe a natural
            unity and harmony will take hold. This could be 5,000 years from
            now, though. The timeline would look something like this (grossly
            oversimplified):

            33 AD -- Christ's death
            70-150 AD -- Early Christian church, lacking unity, some groups
            studying different gospels than others.
            200-600 AD -- persecution of the Christians and a gradual
            progression towards a faith-based system as defined by the Nicine
            Creed.
            700-1600 -- Dark Ages. The church rules, no separation between
            church and state.
            1600-1850 -- Enlightenment period. More thinkers start doubting the
            simplicity and repressive nature of the orthodox church.
            1945-ish -- Discovery of Nag Hammadi texts.
            1950-Present -- Explosion of scholarly research on Gnostic texts --
            particularly the Gospel of Thomas -- reveals a set of beliefs that
            makes Iraeneus' "Against Heresies" seem unfair and even dishonest.
            2010-3000 -- Growing gnostic church movement. Leads to a great
            variety of disparite beliefs and an non-unity. Many people believe
            they have reached "gnosis" and teach utterly non-sensical and
            idiotic things.
            3000-6000 -- The Gnostic church progresses from non-unity to an
            admirable and somehow self-unifying, meditative practice -- very
            different from what we know today.
            6000-10000 -- Birth of the children of humanity. We become Christs.


            --- In gnosticism2@yahoogroups.com, "imdarkchylde"
            <imdarkchylde@...> wrote:
            >
            > Blessings and wingwhispers, Pi!!
            > Just thought I'd mention that two of the 'modern' gnostic groups I
            > mentioned hold services, and of course if you live in France you
            can
            > visit the Cathars site and find many abiguious chapels that are
            > actually of a Catharian origin. If you live in San Fransisco you
            can
            > visit Holloer's Chapel (or has he rebuilt since the fire?) and
            these
            > would be some examples of communities of 'modern' gnostics, but
            their
            > likeness to the ancients would have to be for you to determine.
            > I tend to think of the Internet as an Indra's Web of minds, since
            we
            > aren't in physical contact it is like a meeting of the minds. But
            > that is just me. It seems that few want to call an online group a
            > community, but I have found groups who consider themselves just
            that,
            > and the 6th definition of webster for 'community' says 'ownership
            or
            > participation in common," and the 7th definition
            says "simsilarity,
            > likeness, us, a community of spirit." So under those deifinitions
            > an 'online community' could exist, argueably.
            > But this is my opinion, just that.
            > May the Light of the One shine on your path!!
            > Love and inner peas,
            > DarkChylde
            >
            > --- In gnosticism2@yahoogroups.com, "i_eat_pi_at_314"
            > <i_eat_pi_at_314@> wrote:
            > >
            > >
            > > In a recent post I talked about the difficulties of modern
            > > gnostics identifying with historical gnosticism. I drew a
            parallel
            > > with those Jews who were expelled from the Iberian peninsula
            during
            > > the 15th century. Upon trying to subsequently reintergrate with
            > > mainstream Judaism, they faced the challenges of entering a
            > religion
            > > at once familiar and foreign. I face a similiar debacle with
            > > gnosticism. I suggested using the experiences of those
            > > "Christianized" Jews to inform us as to how we ought to approach
            > the
            > > ancient gnostics. The implicit assumption, of course is that
            we're
            > > all basically "wayward" gnostics in need of instruction.
            > > I need to make myself clear, though. I'm not drawing a one-
            to-
            > > one comparison between the plethoria of ancient gnostic beliefs
            and
            > > Judaism. Given the varieties of their teachings, a "wayward
            > gnostic"
            > > is almost a contradiction in terms. While different gnostic
            > teachers
            > > did sometimes promugate incompatable beliefs with acrimony,
            > > gnosticism itself is inherently diffuse and user-friendly.
            Scholars
            > > havn't yet defined a general rubic by which gnosticism can be
            > > defined. To be a little facetious, we might all be gnostics
            without
            > > even knowing it. So, am I creating a problem where there isn't
            one?
            > > This is why I compared "returning" to gnosticism with the
            > > experiences of those estranged Jews returning to Judaism. It's
            > > because there's more to being a gnostic than what one believes;
            > it's
            > > also belonging to a community, as well. The Mandaeans, a gnostic
            > sect
            > > more-or-less surviving in present day Iraq are defined as much
            by
            > > their community mores and rituals as by their theology. In fact,
            > > they're so scrupulous about following those rituals that even an
            > > accidental infraction is severly punished. Talismans are
            constantly
            > > used to ward off bad luck. The tarmida, or priests are routinely
            > > consulted for propitious dates to hold festivals. To abandon the
            > > Mandaean community and forsake the rituals is to stop being one
            of
            > > them. This is my claim: if the Mandaeans are gnostics, and if
            > there's
            > > more to being a Mandaean than merely believing their theology,
            then
            > > there might just more to being a gnostic than subscribing to
            > certain
            > > religious tenets.
            > > Are the Mandaeans typical gnostics? A better question is
            > whether
            > > there's such a thing as a typical gnostic, at all. Who the hell
            > > knows. I'm simply making the modest point that gnosticism, like
            any
            > > other human activity springs from a community and not from
            isolated
            > > individuals. I want to go further, though and say
            that "community"
            > is
            > > more than just conversation and text-messaging. It's
            multifarious
            > > social interaction. Therefore, no internet group can claim to be
            a
            > > community. At best, it's an adjunct to a community. We're
            deceiving
            > > ourselves if we say the various members of our group are in fact
            a
            > > community of gnostics.
            > > In a nutshell, I'm a gnostic because I yearn for a
            community
            > of
            > > like-minded believers. The dilemma, though is that no such
            > community
            > > really exists, anymore. Human relationships have to develope
            > > organically and cannot be manufactured ad hoc. Our society is
            far
            > too
            > > fluid to allow anything that stable. Communities like, say the
            > Amish
            > > are anachanistic and cannot survive without being subsidized by
            the
            > > larger society. I have no desire to see a band of gnostics
            become
            > > such a museum piece. I'm a stranger in a strange land. Like
            those
            > > "Christianized" Jews kicked out of Spain, I feel cut off from my
            > > community. Again, like them I want to become what I truly was
            meant
            > > to be. Unlike them, however, my community exists only in the
            past.
            > > This means the past has to come alive in order for me to
            live
            > in
            > > that community which no longer exists. I can't share in the
            rituals
            > > of those long dead gnostics; I can't celebrate or mourn with
            them.
            > > What I can do, though is long to be with them. The angst of
            being
            > > isolated is itself a kind of purification rite. I can infuse
            their
            > > words with my meanings. In reading about the Jews who were
            forced
            > to
            > > renounce their religion and who subsequently sought out that
            > > religion, I've taken away one very clear message. While I might
            > > always be regarded as an outsider by my community, that's better
            > than
            > > being accepted where I don't belong. I often doubt the ancient
            > > gnostics would recognize me as their brother. That's ok: I
            > recognize
            > > them and that's enough.
            > >
            > > pi
            > >
            >
          • imdarkchylde
            Good timeline! I hope we can all survive the upcoming growing pains with grace and goodness! Be Blessed!! Love and hope for whirled peas DarkChylde Gnothi
            Message 5 of 8 , Oct 5, 2006
            • 0 Attachment
              Good timeline! I hope we can all survive the upcoming growing pains
              with grace and goodness!
              Be Blessed!!
              Love and hope for whirled peas
              DarkChylde



              Gnothi Seauton

              --- In gnosticism2@yahoogroups.com, flowjack11 <no_reply@...> wrote:
              >
              > Hello, DarkChild,
              >
              > Hoeller's chapel is in Los Angeles. And yes, he rebuilt it.
              >
              > http://gnosis.org/gnostsoc/gnostsoc.htm
              >
              > Best Wishes,
              >
              > Chuck
              >
              > PS:
              >
              > I was thinking today during an English lit class that the condition
              > of literature departments in America closely mirrors the condition
              > of the Christian church before Iranaeus' campaign to unify beliefs
              > and excise heresy. There is, however, a subtle difference: the
              will
              > of those who wanted to unify came into power in Christianity, that
              > is, choice and personal revelation were shunned -- but in the
              > English department the opposite has happened -- the English
              > department, in a sense, allowed the gnostic groups, ie, post-
              > structuralists, that is, those who oppose uniformity and welcome
              > opening up interpretation rather than closing it down (Catholicism
              > and New Criticism), to take power. Thus the explosion of "theory
              > before text" in modern literature departments.
              >
              > I wonder if we will see the same in Christianity in the coming
              > ages. Perhaps the gnostics -- and by these I simply mean those who
              > seek personal revelation and knowledge of God -- will grow
              > increasingly powerful. For a while we should expect to see a great
              > variety of disparite and perhaps idiotic beliefs, much like we see
              > in current English departments. But eventually I believe a natural
              > unity and harmony will take hold. This could be 5,000 years from
              > now, though. The timeline would look something like this (grossly
              > oversimplified):
              >
              > 33 AD -- Christ's death
              > 70-150 AD -- Early Christian church, lacking unity, some groups
              > studying different gospels than others.
              > 200-600 AD -- persecution of the Christians and a gradual
              > progression towards a faith-based system as defined by the Nicine
              > Creed.
              > 700-1600 -- Dark Ages. The church rules, no separation between
              > church and state.
              > 1600-1850 -- Enlightenment period. More thinkers start doubting
              the
              > simplicity and repressive nature of the orthodox church.
              > 1945-ish -- Discovery of Nag Hammadi texts.
              > 1950-Present -- Explosion of scholarly research on Gnostic texts --
              > particularly the Gospel of Thomas -- reveals a set of beliefs that
              > makes Iraeneus' "Against Heresies" seem unfair and even dishonest.
              > 2010-3000 -- Growing gnostic church movement. Leads to a great
              > variety of disparite beliefs and an non-unity. Many people believe
              > they have reached "gnosis" and teach utterly non-sensical and
              > idiotic things.
              > 3000-6000 -- The Gnostic church progresses from non-unity to an
              > admirable and somehow self-unifying, meditative practice -- very
              > different from what we know today.
              > 6000-10000 -- Birth of the children of humanity. We become Christs.
              >
              >
              > --- In gnosticism2@yahoogroups.com, "imdarkchylde"
              > <imdarkchylde@> wrote:
              > >
              > > Blessings and wingwhispers, Pi!!
              > > Just thought I'd mention that two of the 'modern' gnostic groups
              I
              > > mentioned hold services, and of course if you live in France you
              > can
              > > visit the Cathars site and find many abiguious chapels that are
              > > actually of a Catharian origin. If you live in San Fransisco you
              > can
              > > visit Holloer's Chapel (or has he rebuilt since the fire?) and
              > these
              > > would be some examples of communities of 'modern' gnostics, but
              > their
              > > likeness to the ancients would have to be for you to determine.
              > > I tend to think of the Internet as an Indra's Web of minds, since
              > we
              > > aren't in physical contact it is like a meeting of the minds.
              But
              > > that is just me. It seems that few want to call an online group
              a
              > > community, but I have found groups who consider themselves just
              > that,
              > > and the 6th definition of webster for 'community' says 'ownership
              > or
              > > participation in common," and the 7th definition
              > says "simsilarity,
              > > likeness, us, a community of spirit." So under those
              deifinitions
              > > an 'online community' could exist, argueably.
              > > But this is my opinion, just that.
              > > May the Light of the One shine on your path!!
              > > Love and inner peas,
              > > DarkChylde
              > >
              > > --- In gnosticism2@yahoogroups.com, "i_eat_pi_at_314"
              > > <i_eat_pi_at_314@> wrote:
              > > >
              > > >
              > > > In a recent post I talked about the difficulties of modern
              > > > gnostics identifying with historical gnosticism. I drew a
              > parallel
              > > > with those Jews who were expelled from the Iberian peninsula
              > during
              > > > the 15th century. Upon trying to subsequently reintergrate with
              > > > mainstream Judaism, they faced the challenges of entering a
              > > religion
              > > > at once familiar and foreign. I face a similiar debacle with
              > > > gnosticism. I suggested using the experiences of those
              > > > "Christianized" Jews to inform us as to how we ought to
              approach
              > > the
              > > > ancient gnostics. The implicit assumption, of course is that
              > we're
              > > > all basically "wayward" gnostics in need of instruction.
              > > > I need to make myself clear, though. I'm not drawing a one-
              > to-
              > > > one comparison between the plethoria of ancient gnostic beliefs
              > and
              > > > Judaism. Given the varieties of their teachings, a "wayward
              > > gnostic"
              > > > is almost a contradiction in terms. While different gnostic
              > > teachers
              > > > did sometimes promugate incompatable beliefs with acrimony,
              > > > gnosticism itself is inherently diffuse and user-friendly.
              > Scholars
              > > > havn't yet defined a general rubic by which gnosticism can be
              > > > defined. To be a little facetious, we might all be gnostics
              > without
              > > > even knowing it. So, am I creating a problem where there isn't
              > one?
              > > > This is why I compared "returning" to gnosticism with the
              > > > experiences of those estranged Jews returning to Judaism. It's
              > > > because there's more to being a gnostic than what one believes;
              > > it's
              > > > also belonging to a community, as well. The Mandaeans, a
              gnostic
              > > sect
              > > > more-or-less surviving in present day Iraq are defined as much
              > by
              > > > their community mores and rituals as by their theology. In
              fact,
              > > > they're so scrupulous about following those rituals that even
              an
              > > > accidental infraction is severly punished. Talismans are
              > constantly
              > > > used to ward off bad luck. The tarmida, or priests are
              routinely
              > > > consulted for propitious dates to hold festivals. To abandon
              the
              > > > Mandaean community and forsake the rituals is to stop being one
              > of
              > > > them. This is my claim: if the Mandaeans are gnostics, and if
              > > there's
              > > > more to being a Mandaean than merely believing their theology,
              > then
              > > > there might just more to being a gnostic than subscribing to
              > > certain
              > > > religious tenets.
              > > > Are the Mandaeans typical gnostics? A better question is
              > > whether
              > > > there's such a thing as a typical gnostic, at all. Who the hell
              > > > knows. I'm simply making the modest point that gnosticism, like
              > any
              > > > other human activity springs from a community and not from
              > isolated
              > > > individuals. I want to go further, though and say
              > that "community"
              > > is
              > > > more than just conversation and text-messaging. It's
              > multifarious
              > > > social interaction. Therefore, no internet group can claim to
              be
              > a
              > > > community. At best, it's an adjunct to a community. We're
              > deceiving
              > > > ourselves if we say the various members of our group are in
              fact
              > a
              > > > community of gnostics.
              > > > In a nutshell, I'm a gnostic because I yearn for a
              > community
              > > of
              > > > like-minded believers. The dilemma, though is that no such
              > > community
              > > > really exists, anymore. Human relationships have to develope
              > > > organically and cannot be manufactured ad hoc. Our society is
              > far
              > > too
              > > > fluid to allow anything that stable. Communities like, say the
              > > Amish
              > > > are anachanistic and cannot survive without being subsidized by
              > the
              > > > larger society. I have no desire to see a band of gnostics
              > become
              > > > such a museum piece. I'm a stranger in a strange land. Like
              > those
              > > > "Christianized" Jews kicked out of Spain, I feel cut off from
              my
              > > > community. Again, like them I want to become what I truly was
              > meant
              > > > to be. Unlike them, however, my community exists only in the
              > past.
              > > > This means the past has to come alive in order for me to
              > live
              > > in
              > > > that community which no longer exists. I can't share in the
              > rituals
              > > > of those long dead gnostics; I can't celebrate or mourn with
              > them.
              > > > What I can do, though is long to be with them. The angst of
              > being
              > > > isolated is itself a kind of purification rite. I can infuse
              > their
              > > > words with my meanings. In reading about the Jews who were
              > forced
              > > to
              > > > renounce their religion and who subsequently sought out that
              > > > religion, I've taken away one very clear message. While I might
              > > > always be regarded as an outsider by my community, that's
              better
              > > than
              > > > being accepted where I don't belong. I often doubt the ancient
              > > > gnostics would recognize me as their brother. That's ok: I
              > > recognize
              > > > them and that's enough.
              > > >
              > > > pi
              > > >
              > >
              >
            • colona_141099
              Good time to touch you all I have a problem to understand The Gospel of Judas, as a gnostic gosel. What I think, why church was to harmonize with helenistic
              Message 6 of 8 , Oct 6, 2006
              • 0 Attachment
                Good time to touch you all

                I have a problem to understand The Gospel of Judas, as a gnostic
                gosel. What I think, why church was to harmonize with helenistic and
                not with gnosticism.

                If Judas be the diligent disciple among other, the author of the
                Gospel of Judas might show his argumentation, that the Sethian never
                explain their Christology in the Gospel of Judas. They try to
                promote Jesus as a humanbeing (as Arius, contrary with Athanasius).

                The humanbeing of Jesus make the new sense in the church. Why we
                might to believe Him as God, if the real God is not like bible says.
                Jesus, acording to The Gospel of Judas, was looking of the real God,
                and he didn't find Him.

                If Jesus want to realize his human body to the spiritual body, the
                incarnation is the "deity method" to present Jesus in the earth.
                Wherever, I don't find the story of Who is the real Jesus in The
                Gospel of Judas.
                --- In gnosticism2@yahoogroups.com, "imdarkchylde"
                <imdarkchylde@...> wrote:
                >
                > Good timeline! I hope we can all survive the upcoming growing
                pains
                > with grace and goodness!
                > Be Blessed!!
                > Love and hope for whirled peas
                > DarkChylde
                >
                >
                >
                > Gnothi Seauton
                >
                > --- In gnosticism2@yahoogroups.com, flowjack11 <no_reply@> wrote:
                > >
                > > Hello, DarkChild,
                > >
                > > Hoeller's chapel is in Los Angeles. And yes, he rebuilt it.
                > >
                > > http://gnosis.org/gnostsoc/gnostsoc.htm
                > >
                > > Best Wishes,
                > >
                > > Chuck
                > >
                > > PS:
                > >
                > > I was thinking today during an English lit class that the
                condition
                > > of literature departments in America closely mirrors the
                condition
                > > of the Christian church before Iranaeus' campaign to unify
                beliefs
                > > and excise heresy. There is, however, a subtle difference: the
                > will
                > > of those who wanted to unify came into power in Christianity,
                that
                > > is, choice and personal revelation were shunned -- but in the
                > > English department the opposite has happened -- the English
                > > department, in a sense, allowed the gnostic groups, ie, post-
                > > structuralists, that is, those who oppose uniformity and welcome
                > > opening up interpretation rather than closing it down
                (Catholicism
                > > and New Criticism), to take power. Thus the explosion
                of "theory
                > > before text" in modern literature departments.
                > >
                > > I wonder if we will see the same in Christianity in the coming
                > > ages. Perhaps the gnostics -- and by these I simply mean those
                who
                > > seek personal revelation and knowledge of God -- will grow
                > > increasingly powerful. For a while we should expect to see a
                great
                > > variety of disparite and perhaps idiotic beliefs, much like we
                see
                > > in current English departments. But eventually I believe a
                natural
                > > unity and harmony will take hold. This could be 5,000 years
                from
                > > now, though. The timeline would look something like this
                (grossly
                > > oversimplified):
                > >
                > > 33 AD -- Christ's death
                > > 70-150 AD -- Early Christian church, lacking unity, some groups
                > > studying different gospels than others.
                > > 200-600 AD -- persecution of the Christians and a gradual
                > > progression towards a faith-based system as defined by the
                Nicine
                > > Creed.
                > > 700-1600 -- Dark Ages. The church rules, no separation between
                > > church and state.
                > > 1600-1850 -- Enlightenment period. More thinkers start doubting
                > the
                > > simplicity and repressive nature of the orthodox church.
                > > 1945-ish -- Discovery of Nag Hammadi texts.
                > > 1950-Present -- Explosion of scholarly research on Gnostic
                texts --
                > > particularly the Gospel of Thomas -- reveals a set of beliefs
                that
                > > makes Iraeneus' "Against Heresies" seem unfair and even
                dishonest.
                > > 2010-3000 -- Growing gnostic church movement. Leads to a great
                > > variety of disparite beliefs and an non-unity. Many people
                believe
                > > they have reached "gnosis" and teach utterly non-sensical and
                > > idiotic things.
                > > 3000-6000 -- The Gnostic church progresses from non-unity to an
                > > admirable and somehow self-unifying, meditative practice -- very
                > > different from what we know today.
                > > 6000-10000 -- Birth of the children of humanity. We become
                Christs.
                > >
                > >
                > > --- In gnosticism2@yahoogroups.com, "imdarkchylde"
                > > <imdarkchylde@> wrote:
                > > >
                > > > Blessings and wingwhispers, Pi!!
                > > > Just thought I'd mention that two of the 'modern' gnostic
                groups
                > I
                > > > mentioned hold services, and of course if you live in France
                you
                > > can
                > > > visit the Cathars site and find many abiguious chapels that
                are
                > > > actually of a Catharian origin. If you live in San Fransisco
                you
                > > can
                > > > visit Holloer's Chapel (or has he rebuilt since the fire?) and
                > > these
                > > > would be some examples of communities of 'modern' gnostics,
                but
                > > their
                > > > likeness to the ancients would have to be for you to
                determine.
                > > > I tend to think of the Internet as an Indra's Web of minds,
                since
                > > we
                > > > aren't in physical contact it is like a meeting of the minds.
                > But
                > > > that is just me. It seems that few want to call an online
                group
                > a
                > > > community, but I have found groups who consider themselves
                just
                > > that,
                > > > and the 6th definition of webster for 'community'
                says 'ownership
                > > or
                > > > participation in common," and the 7th definition
                > > says "simsilarity,
                > > > likeness, us, a community of spirit." So under those
                > deifinitions
                > > > an 'online community' could exist, argueably.
                > > > But this is my opinion, just that.
                > > > May the Light of the One shine on your path!!
                > > > Love and inner peas,
                > > > DarkChylde
                > > >
                > > > --- In gnosticism2@yahoogroups.com, "i_eat_pi_at_314"
                > > > <i_eat_pi_at_314@> wrote:
                > > > >
                > > > >
                > > > > In a recent post I talked about the difficulties of
                modern
                > > > > gnostics identifying with historical gnosticism. I drew a
                > > parallel
                > > > > with those Jews who were expelled from the Iberian peninsula
                > > during
                > > > > the 15th century. Upon trying to subsequently reintergrate
                with
                > > > > mainstream Judaism, they faced the challenges of entering a
                > > > religion
                > > > > at once familiar and foreign. I face a similiar debacle with
                > > > > gnosticism. I suggested using the experiences of those
                > > > > "Christianized" Jews to inform us as to how we ought to
                > approach
                > > > the
                > > > > ancient gnostics. The implicit assumption, of course is that
                > > we're
                > > > > all basically "wayward" gnostics in need of instruction.
                > > > > I need to make myself clear, though. I'm not drawing a
                one-
                > > to-
                > > > > one comparison between the plethoria of ancient gnostic
                beliefs
                > > and
                > > > > Judaism. Given the varieties of their teachings, a "wayward
                > > > gnostic"
                > > > > is almost a contradiction in terms. While different gnostic
                > > > teachers
                > > > > did sometimes promugate incompatable beliefs with acrimony,
                > > > > gnosticism itself is inherently diffuse and user-friendly.
                > > Scholars
                > > > > havn't yet defined a general rubic by which gnosticism can
                be
                > > > > defined. To be a little facetious, we might all be gnostics
                > > without
                > > > > even knowing it. So, am I creating a problem where there
                isn't
                > > one?
                > > > > This is why I compared "returning" to gnosticism with
                the
                > > > > experiences of those estranged Jews returning to Judaism.
                It's
                > > > > because there's more to being a gnostic than what one
                believes;
                > > > it's
                > > > > also belonging to a community, as well. The Mandaeans, a
                > gnostic
                > > > sect
                > > > > more-or-less surviving in present day Iraq are defined as
                much
                > > by
                > > > > their community mores and rituals as by their theology. In
                > fact,
                > > > > they're so scrupulous about following those rituals that
                even
                > an
                > > > > accidental infraction is severly punished. Talismans are
                > > constantly
                > > > > used to ward off bad luck. The tarmida, or priests are
                > routinely
                > > > > consulted for propitious dates to hold festivals. To abandon
                > the
                > > > > Mandaean community and forsake the rituals is to stop being
                one
                > > of
                > > > > them. This is my claim: if the Mandaeans are gnostics, and
                if
                > > > there's
                > > > > more to being a Mandaean than merely believing their
                theology,
                > > then
                > > > > there might just more to being a gnostic than subscribing to
                > > > certain
                > > > > religious tenets.
                > > > > Are the Mandaeans typical gnostics? A better question
                is
                > > > whether
                > > > > there's such a thing as a typical gnostic, at all. Who the
                hell
                > > > > knows. I'm simply making the modest point that gnosticism,
                like
                > > any
                > > > > other human activity springs from a community and not from
                > > isolated
                > > > > individuals. I want to go further, though and say
                > > that "community"
                > > > is
                > > > > more than just conversation and text-messaging. It's
                > > multifarious
                > > > > social interaction. Therefore, no internet group can claim
                to
                > be
                > > a
                > > > > community. At best, it's an adjunct to a community. We're
                > > deceiving
                > > > > ourselves if we say the various members of our group are in
                > fact
                > > a
                > > > > community of gnostics.
                > > > > In a nutshell, I'm a gnostic because I yearn for a
                > > community
                > > > of
                > > > > like-minded believers. The dilemma, though is that no such
                > > > community
                > > > > really exists, anymore. Human relationships have to develope
                > > > > organically and cannot be manufactured ad hoc. Our society
                is
                > > far
                > > > too
                > > > > fluid to allow anything that stable. Communities like, say
                the
                > > > Amish
                > > > > are anachanistic and cannot survive without being subsidized
                by
                > > the
                > > > > larger society. I have no desire to see a band of gnostics
                > > become
                > > > > such a museum piece. I'm a stranger in a strange land. Like
                > > those
                > > > > "Christianized" Jews kicked out of Spain, I feel cut off
                from
                > my
                > > > > community. Again, like them I want to become what I truly
                was
                > > meant
                > > > > to be. Unlike them, however, my community exists only in the
                > > past.
                > > > > This means the past has to come alive in order for me
                to
                > > live
                > > > in
                > > > > that community which no longer exists. I can't share in the
                > > rituals
                > > > > of those long dead gnostics; I can't celebrate or mourn with
                > > them.
                > > > > What I can do, though is long to be with them. The angst of
                > > being
                > > > > isolated is itself a kind of purification rite. I can infuse
                > > their
                > > > > words with my meanings. In reading about the Jews who were
                > > forced
                > > > to
                > > > > renounce their religion and who subsequently sought out that
                > > > > religion, I've taken away one very clear message. While I
                might
                > > > > always be regarded as an outsider by my community, that's
                > better
                > > > than
                > > > > being accepted where I don't belong. I often doubt the
                ancient
                > > > > gnostics would recognize me as their brother. That's ok: I
                > > > recognize
                > > > > them and that's enough.
                > > > >
                > > > > pi
                > > > >
                > > >
                > >
                >
              • pmcvflag
                Hello Colona I am going to try to see if I can talk about the issues you raise, but I have to admit that your English is a bit difficult to follow so please be
                Message 7 of 8 , Oct 12, 2006
                • 0 Attachment
                  Hello Colona

                  I am going to try to see if I can talk about the issues you raise,
                  but I have to admit that your English is a bit difficult to follow so
                  please be patient if I misunderstand the points you are trying to
                  raise.

                  You start...

                  >>>I have a problem to understand The Gospel of Judas, as a gnostic
                  gosel. What I think, why church was to harmonize with helenistic and
                  not with gnosticism.<<<

                  The historical movement known as "Gnosticism" was within the larger
                  movement of "Hellenism". That is to say, Gnosticism was a Hellenized
                  system.

                  >>>If Judas be the diligent disciple among other, the author of the
                  Gospel of Judas might show his argumentation, that the Sethian never
                  explain their Christology in the Gospel of Judas. They try to
                  promote Jesus as a humanbeing (as Arius, contrary with Athanasius).<<<

                  There is quite a bit of range in the literary category
                  of "Sethianism". Remember, the Sethain form is not the same as the
                  Sethian sect. The most obvious attributes that generally cause a text
                  to be placed in the literary group of "Sethian" are listed in our
                  links section. In Judas we see the essential Sethian cosmology, such
                  as figures like Barbelo.

                  >>>The humanbeing of Jesus make the new sense in the church. Why we
                  might to believe Him as God, if the real God is not like bible says.
                  Jesus, acording to The Gospel of Judas, was looking of the real God,
                  and he didn't find Him.<<<

                  What we may personally feel about the "truth" of Jesus and God is
                  basically meaningless for the focus of this forum. We are not here to
                  discover if the Gospel of Judas is true or valid, but instead we are
                  here to talk about what it means and who used it so that you can make
                  up your own mind in an informed way.

                  >>>If Jesus want to realize his human body to the spiritual body, the
                  incarnation is the "deity method" to present Jesus in the earth.
                  Wherever, I don't find the story of Who is the real Jesus in The
                  Gospel of Judas.<<<

                  To some extent this is because Judas most likely assumes a prior
                  understanding of the context it was written in. For those who already
                  have the introduction to Sethian thought these aspects stand out a
                  bit more fully. Still, talking about who Jesus is simply isn't the
                  fuction of this text. Rather it is meant to be a polemic pointing out
                  what the Gnostic author felt to be grave mistakes in the
                  understanding of the newly growing "orthodox" movement.

                  We have to be careful not to understand this text only as it would be
                  compared to the Gospels we are familiar with. Instead it needs to be
                  understood in the function for which it was intended to be used.

                  PMCV
                Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.