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

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

Expand Messages
  • 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 1 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 2 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 3 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.