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

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

Expand Messages
  • 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 1 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 2 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 3 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 4 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.