Re: Follow-up to an Earlier Post: Why I'm a Gnostic
- 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
>>>I have a problem to understand The Gospel of Judas, as a gnosticgosel. 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
>>>If Judas be the diligent disciple among other, the author of theGospel 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 wemight 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, theincarnation 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.