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

Re: [Gnosticism2] Re: Follow-up to an Earlier Post: Why I'm a Gnostic

Expand Messages
  • 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 1 of 8 , Sep 11 6:03 PM
    • 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 2 of 8 , Sep 12 4:31 AM
      • 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 3 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 4 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 5 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 6 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.