| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
Heideana
Guest
|
 Posted: Tue May 27, 2008 4:31 pm Post subject: Re: Re religion of Jesus was not Christianity |
 |
|
On May 27, 8:25 am, zen gnostic <borgersbr...@yahoo.com> wrote:
| Quote: | On May 23, 4:59 pm, Heideana <heide...@pacbell.net> wrote:
On May 23, 7:56 am, zen gnostic <borgersbr...@yahoo.com> wrote:
On May 22, 3:45 pm, Catawumpus <kimmer...@fastmail.fm> wrote:
zen gnostic <borgersbr...@yahoo.com>:
You claim me ignorant when
More: I've demonstrated your considerable ignorance three
times running in this discussion alone. I showed Jesus is
very often a heavenly being -- sometimes even an immaterial one
-- in the gnostic perspective, something you had totally
missed. I pointed out gnostics are adherents of gnosticism, by
definition, despite your notion they believe any old thing.
And I noted that when you excused the demiurge by saying he had
allowed you to treat your illness you were completely
forgetting that he made this disease-filled world to begin with.
you cannot or refuse to comprehend the duality of nature
Claiming that your body is a temple implies nature-worship
rather than duality.
....funny stuff. My ideas
Your ideas combine ignorance, misrepresentation, and plain
old stupidity.
are in line with and supported by the
teachings of Valentinus who is considered a "Gnostic"
because of the importance that mystical knowledge (gnosis) plays in
his thought.
Astonishing how many mistakes you've crammed into a single
sentence. Gnosis is the spiritual knowledge claimed by the
gnostics in particular (e.g. the Sethians, the Marcionites, the
the Naasenses, and the Valentinians), for example the
knowledge that the Creator of this world isn't the true God and
that his Creation is a prison, exile, or labyrinth.
Valentinus is a gnostic -- though not everyone agrees he should
be classed that way -- because the teachings of his school
share the basic features of gnosticism, including the rejection
of Creator and Creation.
Needless to say, that's the opposite of your idea the body
is the "temple of the soul." The Valentinians believe
reaching God means discarding the body and they look forward to
the complete destruction of the cosmos (Ptolemy in Irenaeus
Adv. Haer. 1.7.1), which they call a "total mountain of evil, a
deserted dwelling place of beasts" (that's Heraclitus in
Fragment 20) and compare to a nightmare (in the Gospel of Truth
29:1-30:15). Valentinus describes Jesus as a heavenly
emmanation (Irenaeus AH 1.11.1), not a mortal man, he considers
ordinary bodies corruption (Clement of Alexandria, Strom.
3.59.3), and advocates the nullification of this world. (Strom.
4.89:1-3). Etc.
It's worth adding that the Valentinians belong to the more
conservative side of gnosticism. But even here in this
relatively mild-manned instance of gnostic thinking the
Creator is lowered from god supreme to inferior demiurge, as in
other gnostic schools, the Creation is attacked in no
uncertain terms, and the world's end is a consummation devoutly
to be wished.
-- Catawumpus
My sentence on Valentinus is from countless articles I've found on
him. Why is it I have found none who see gnosticism as you do?
Here's some more for you. Four characteristics of gnosicism. The
demiurge is mentioned but not obsessed with as you have done.
The first essential characteristic of Gnosticism was introduced above:
Gnosticism asserts that "direct, personal and absolute knowledge of
the authentic truths of existence is accessible to human beings," and
that the attainment of such knowledge is the supreme achievement of
human life.
Gnosticism, says Bloom, "is a knowing, by and of an uncreated self, or
self-within-the self, and [this] knowledge leads to freedom...."9
Primary among all the revelatory perceptions a Gnostic might reach was
the profound awakening that came with knowledge that something within
him was uncreated. The Gnostics called this "uncreated self" the
divine seed, the pearl, the spark of knowing: consciousness,
intelligence, light. And this seed of intellect was the self-same
substance of God.
(The Gnostics) reverence for texts and scriptures unaccepted by the
orthodox fold
The image of God as a dyad or duality. While affirming the ultimate
unity and integrity of the Divine, Gnosticism noted in its
experiential encounter with the numinous, contrasting manifestations
and qualities.
http://www.webcom.com/gnosis/naghamm/nhlintro.html-Hidequoted text -
- Show quoted text -
I'm a bit confused....The url at the end of your message goes to a
gnostic page, replete with rejection of the demiurge(s) as part of
gnostic required beliefs.
I would hope you do not get obsessed with the demiurge as our friend
here. It was the gnostics attempt to explain the misery of this world.
I personaly have no problem with this concept but I, like Valentinus,
reject the argument. We've both posted on sacred foods and medicines
to relieve suffering and give us understanding of G-d. Why would a
demiurge allow such a thing? Valentinus believed in a monotheism with
a duality nature to which I might add shows up in many religious
thought such as yin and yang.
"In the Fullness, or in those things that are contained by the Father,
the whole creation which we know to have been formed, having been made
by the Craftsman or by the angels. It is contained by the ineffable
Greatness, as the center is in a circle, or as a spot is in a
garment." (Irenaeus Against Heresies 2:4:2). All things continue to be
a part of God despite their apparent separation from him.- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
|
I get the ying/yang/abraxas stuff, however I thought that the gnostics
believed in "true evil" which are manifestations of the demiurge(s).
Granted gnostic literature demonstrates that their wasn't specifically
a single "gnostic" position, but there are certain core beliefs like
belief in the existence of evil, hence demons and/or a dark force that
needed to be either defeated or shown the light of truth or something
like that... I've always been very uncomfortable with the old
testament "God" and the light went on when I came across gnostic myths
about the demiurge and the Archons. True to phenomenology, it seems
that you can't unify all Gnostic beliefs into a single cannon, but you
can learn about the faint outlines of gnostic beliefs that come into
relief as you read it's different accounts, stories, myths and
criticisms of it.... |
|
| |
|
 Back to top |
zen gnostic
Guest
|
| Posted: Tue May 27, 2008 4:44 pm Post subject: Re: Re religion of Jesus was not Christianity |
|
|
On May 23, 3:55 pm, Catawumpus <kimmer...@fastmail.fm> wrote:
| Quote: | zen gnostic <borgersbr...@yahoo.com>:
My sentence on Valentinus is from countless articles I've found on him.
Your claim that your ideas "are in line with and supported
by the teachings of Valentinus" is contradicted by the
evidence in the ancient sources, as I already demonstrated with
quotes and citations.
Let's do it again. You say dividing God from the demiurge
is "pure arrogance and speculation." So happens the
Valentinians do exactly what you criticize, separating Proarche
or Bythos, who's found "in the invisible and ineffable
heights above," from the demiurge, the product of Sophia's fall
and the maker of this misbegotten world. (Ptolemy in
Irenaeus AH 1.1.1. and 1.5.2.) The _opposite_ of your thinking.
|
Jesus states where there are three or more there are G-ds, where there
is one or two you will find me. So while you dwell on the demiurge it
is Jesus and I who state that is not important. One with duality or
two separated it does not matter. But what the hell does Jesus know
right?
| Quote: |
You say that the body is the temple of the soul and you're
unhappy with negative opinions of the Creation (you even
rejected Jesus' relatively mild teaching "Be passers-by" in the
Gospel of Thomas). But the Valentinians look forward to
ascending to the pleroma leaving body and soul behind, and they
prophesy the complete destruction of the demiurge's work
(Ptolemy in Irenaeus AH 1.7.1). Valentinus labels the ordinary
body "corruption" (Clement of Alexandria Strom. 3.59.3) and
teaches the nullification of this world (Strom. 4.89:1-3). Etc.
You like to think about Jesus as a "mortal man with mortal
desires." But the Valentinians see him as a heavenly
emmanation (Irenaeus AH 1.11.1, AH 1.2.6): "perfect beauty and
star of the fullness."
|
Do you not understand the trinity? His is a "mortal man with mortal
desires" as well as the father and holy ghost.
| Quote: |
Why is it I have found none who see gnosticism as you do?
Probably for the same reason you couldn't find anywhere in
your reading that Jesus wasn't a "mortal man with mortal
desires." Either you don't get very far (you really don't seem
to have any notion what you're talking about) or else you
blind yourself to whatever you'd rather not see. Comes out the
same either way.
|
Talk about blind...At least I understand duality is at the heart of
gnosis and that Jesus is a trinity.
| Quote: |
Here's some more for you.
You can't possibly offer more when you ain't given none to
begin with. By contrast, I've supplied evidence from the
ancient sources showing exactly how the Valentinians' ideas are
contrary to yours.
Four characteristics of gnosicism. The
Cutting-and-pasting from random web-sites isn't quite like
supporting your claims -- especially when you're busily
ignoring the evidence in the sources, which plainly contradicts
you.
demiurge is mentioned but not obsessed with as you have done.
The demiurge isn't merely mentioned: he's called a "lying
demon and not God at all."
Gnosticism asserts that "direct, personal and absolute knowledge of
the authentic truths of existence is accessible to human beings," and
Even your chosen web-site makes plain that it's discussing
certain, particular truths -- frex that the demiurge is "a
lying demon" -- claimed by a specific religious outlook, namely
the gnostics.'
the profound awakening that came with knowledge that something within
him was uncreated. The Gnostics called this "uncreated self" the
"Uncreated" and thus not the work of the Creator-god: the
lying, demonic demiurge.
-- Catawumpus
|
Yes Kater the material world should be shunned and the only thing of
importance is to know thyself (gnosis) and understand that what is
important is not of this world. Disdain the world and it's creator to
your hearts desire. Not only do I agree but it's also scriptural. Does
that mean abuse your body because it's of this world? Of course
not...G-d gives on loan and one must treat it as such. |
|
| |
|
| Back to top |
zen gnostic
Guest
|
| Posted: Tue May 27, 2008 5:27 pm Post subject: Re: Re religion of Jesus was not Christianity |
|
|
On May 27, 11:31 am, Heideana <heide...@pacbell.net> wrote:
| Quote: | On May 27, 8:25 am, zen gnostic <borgersbr...@yahoo.com> wrote:
On May 23, 4:59 pm, Heideana <heide...@pacbell.net> wrote:
On May 23, 7:56 am, zen gnostic <borgersbr...@yahoo.com> wrote:
On May 22, 3:45 pm, Catawumpus <kimmer...@fastmail.fm> wrote:
zen gnostic <borgersbr...@yahoo.com>:
You claim me ignorant when
More: I've demonstrated your considerable ignorance three
times running in this discussion alone. I showed Jesus is
very often a heavenly being -- sometimes even an immaterial one
-- in the gnostic perspective, something you had totally
missed. I pointed out gnostics are adherents of gnosticism, by
definition, despite your notion they believe any old thing.
And I noted that when you excused the demiurge by saying he had
allowed you to treat your illness you were completely
forgetting that he made this disease-filled world to begin with.
you cannot or refuse to comprehend the duality of nature
Claiming that your body is a temple implies nature-worship
rather than duality.
....funny stuff. My ideas
Your ideas combine ignorance, misrepresentation, and plain
old stupidity.
are in line with and supported by the
teachings of Valentinus who is considered a "Gnostic"
because of the importance that mystical knowledge (gnosis) plays in
his thought.
Astonishing how many mistakes you've crammed into a single
sentence. Gnosis is the spiritual knowledge claimed by the
gnostics in particular (e.g. the Sethians, the Marcionites, the
the Naasenses, and the Valentinians), for example the
knowledge that the Creator of this world isn't the true God and
that his Creation is a prison, exile, or labyrinth.
Valentinus is a gnostic -- though not everyone agrees he should
be classed that way -- because the teachings of his school
share the basic features of gnosticism, including the rejection
of Creator and Creation.
Needless to say, that's the opposite of your idea the body
is the "temple of the soul." The Valentinians believe
reaching God means discarding the body and they look forward to
the complete destruction of the cosmos (Ptolemy in Irenaeus
Adv. Haer. 1.7.1), which they call a "total mountain of evil, a
deserted dwelling place of beasts" (that's Heraclitus in
Fragment 20) and compare to a nightmare (in the Gospel of Truth
29:1-30:15). Valentinus describes Jesus as a heavenly
emmanation (Irenaeus AH 1.11.1), not a mortal man, he considers
ordinary bodies corruption (Clement of Alexandria, Strom.
3.59.3), and advocates the nullification of this world. (Strom.
4.89:1-3). Etc.
It's worth adding that the Valentinians belong to the more
conservative side of gnosticism. But even here in this
relatively mild-manned instance of gnostic thinking the
Creator is lowered from god supreme to inferior demiurge, as in
other gnostic schools, the Creation is attacked in no
uncertain terms, and the world's end is a consummation devoutly
to be wished.
-- Catawumpus
My sentence on Valentinus is from countless articles I've found on
him. Why is it I have found none who see gnosticism as you do?
Here's some more for you. Four characteristics of gnosicism. The
demiurge is mentioned but not obsessed with as you have done.
The first essential characteristic of Gnosticism was introduced above:
Gnosticism asserts that "direct, personal and absolute knowledge of
the authentic truths of existence is accessible to human beings," and
that the attainment of such knowledge is the supreme achievement of
human life.
Gnosticism, says Bloom, "is a knowing, by and of an uncreated self, or
self-within-the self, and [this] knowledge leads to freedom...."9
Primary among all the revelatory perceptions a Gnostic might reach was
the profound awakening that came with knowledge that something within
him was uncreated. The Gnostics called this "uncreated self" the
divine seed, the pearl, the spark of knowing: consciousness,
intelligence, light. And this seed of intellect was the self-same
substance of God.
(The Gnostics) reverence for texts and scriptures unaccepted by the
orthodox fold
The image of God as a dyad or duality. While affirming the ultimate
unity and integrity of the Divine, Gnosticism noted in its
experiential encounter with the numinous, contrasting manifestations
and qualities.
http://www.webcom.com/gnosis/naghamm/nhlintro.html-Hidequotedtext -
- Show quoted text -
I'm a bit confused....The url at the end of your message goes to a
gnostic page, replete with rejection of the demiurge(s) as part of
gnostic required beliefs.
I would hope you do not get obsessed with the demiurge as our friend
here. It was the gnostics attempt to explain the misery of this world.
I personaly have no problem with this concept but I, like Valentinus,
reject the argument. We've both posted on sacred foods and medicines
to relieve suffering and give us understanding of G-d. Why would a
demiurge allow such a thing? Valentinus believed in a monotheism with
a duality nature to which I might add shows up in many religious
thought such as yin and yang.
"In the Fullness, or in those things that are contained by the Father,
the whole creation which we know to have been formed, having been made
by the Craftsman or by the angels. It is contained by the ineffable
Greatness, as the center is in a circle, or as a spot is in a
garment." (Irenaeus Against Heresies 2:4:2). All things continue to be
a part of God despite their apparent separation from him.- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
I get the ying/yang/abraxas stuff, however I thought that the gnostics
believed in "true evil" which are manifestations of the demiurge(s).
|
If a Gnostic believes in the truth of Christos and duality, he/she
must also believe in it's opposite...A demiurge if you will.
| Quote: | Granted gnostic literature demonstrates that their wasn't specifically
a single "gnostic" position, but there are certain core beliefs like
belief in the existence of evil, hence demons and/or a dark force that
needed to be either defeated or shown the light of truth or something
like that...
|
If we talk about individuals ignorance is the evil and "gnosis" is the
redeemer. On a world view a demiurge of sorts does seam to be in
control. In any case the love of money tends to rule far too many of
us. To defeat this tyranny we may have to pick up the sword just as
Jesus foresaw.
| Quote: | I've always been very uncomfortable with the old
testament "God" and the light went on when I came across gnostic myths
about the demiurge and the Archons.
|
It was a tough existence back then so the fact Yahweh comes off as a
jerk isn't a surprise. The gnostic myths do a good job of describing
true gnosis. Namely that G-d is indeed a (fill in the blank) and this
is a hellish world. That is the beginning of gnosis and about as far
as Catawupus can take you.
| Quote: | True to phenomenology, it seems
that you can't unify all Gnostic beliefs into a single cannon, but you
can learn about the faint outlines of gnostic beliefs that come into
relief as you read it's different accounts, stories, myths and
criticisms of it....
|
yep...it split apart just like the orthodox churches. I like to get as
close to the source as possible which would be Jesus to St Paul to
Theodas to Valentinus. From there things tend to get scattered.
Beware of any teaching of gnosticism that does not point to Jesus as
the arbiter of truth. Whether you are ready for that truth is another
question. |
|
| |
|
| Back to top |
Catawumpus
Guest
|
| Posted: Wed May 28, 2008 7:32 am Post subject: Re: Re religion of Jesus was not Christianity |
|
|
zen gnostic <borgersbrent@yahoo.com>:
You hoped tbat gnosticism matched your own notions and you
tried to attach yourself to the Valentinians, but you're
opposed to the gnostic outlook on one thing after another: you
say the body is the temple of the soul while the gnostics
describe it as a prison, call it contemptible, and look forward
to leaving it behind in keeping with their highly critical
view of the material world. You say dividing the maker of this
world from God is "pure speculation and arrogance," but the
gnostics do just so, reducing the Creator from supreme being to
inferior demiurge. You dislike the idea of a "doomsday
message," but gnosticism predicts the destruction of the cosmos.
Etc.
| Quote: | you do not get obsessed with the demiurge as our friend here. It was
the gnostics attempt to explain the misery of this world. I personaly
have no problem with this concept
|
On the contrary: you've definitely got some problems with
the idea that the demiurge -- the Creator of this world --
isn't the true God. According to you, "To state there are more
than one god is arrogance. No one can know such a thing.
Pure speculation and arrogance." So that's your opinion of the
concept, and thus of the gnostics' theology: it's "pure
speculation and arrogance" to you. Wait, there's more! If you
_have_ to think about a demiurge, you choose the good one
found in Plato, claiming the gnostics' idea of an evil demiurge
is a corruption.
So you have two problems right away: you think the notion
of the demiurge is "pure speculation and arrogance" -- an
opinion you're entitled to, but which puts you in conflict with
gnostic thinking -- and you're even less happy with
gnosticism's idea that the demiurge is evil, incompetent or the
like.
You've gotten yourself into more trouble by pretending the
Valentinians agree with you: a claim which requires you to
lie about the evidence, since it clearly shows that they reduce
the maker of this world from supreme being to inferior
demiurge and divide him from the true God, the theology you say
is arrogant and corrupted.
| Quote: | but I, like Valentinus, reject the argument.
|
A bald-faced lie about Valentinus, judging by the evidence
in the sources, which shows that both Valentinus and his
followers divided the demiurge from God. To Valentinus, God is
"the uncreated Father," a dyad "inexpressible by any name"
composed of Arrhetus, the ineffable, and Sige, silence; but the
demiurge is someone else, a being produced by Sophia while
"deprived of her spiritual substance." See Irenaeus, AH 1.11.1.
Same with other Valentinians. To Ptolemy, God is Proarche
or Bythos, who's found "in the invisible and ineffable
heights above," not the demiurge, again the product of Sophia's
fall, maker of this misbegotten world, labelled "Father and
God of everything outside of the Pleroma," thus "creator of all
animal and material substances." (Ptolemy in Irenaeus
AH 1.1.1. and 1.5.2.) The very _opposite_ of what you claim is
true.
| Quote: | We've both posted on sacred foods and medicines
to relieve suffering and give us understanding of G-d. Why would a
demiurge allow such a thing?
|
Look at your case for one answer: you suffer from chronic
illness, but allowing you to treat your symptoms with some
leaves or pills makes you the demiurge's lap-dog: you denounce
the theologies in which he isn't the true God, you contend
that even if he's a demiurge, he's a good, Platonic one instead
of the crappy model the gnostics describe, you say the sick
body he burdened you with is a temple of the soul, and you even
lie about his critics for him. He bought you for next to
nothing, and he still gets to torment you, giving him even more
of a bargain. You came cheap.
| Quote: | Valentinus believed in a monotheism with
a duality nature to which I might add shows up in many religious
thought such as yin and yang.
|
Wrong again. Yin and yang form a harmonious whole, but by
contrast, Valentinian thinking opposes the true God to the
demiurge -- the arrogant, ignorant creator of this world -- and
similarly contrasts the world above -- the divine realm --
with the world below, a place made from suffering and due to be
destroyed.
| Quote: | "In the Fullness, or in those things that are contained by the Father,
the whole creation which we know to have been formed, having been made
by the Craftsman or by the angels. It is contained by the ineffable
Greatness, as the center is in a circle, or as a spot is in a
garment." (Irenaeus Against Heresies 2:4:2).
|
Therefore this world, the demiurge's work, is a stain upon
the true heavens.
| Quote: | All things continue to be a part of God despite their apparent separation
from him.
|
So you say. But the Valentinians say the demiurge and his
kind will be eternally separated from God. "Nothing of an
animal nature shall find admittance to the Pleroma." (Irenaeus
AH 1.7.1.)
-- Catawumpus |
|
| |
|
| Back to top |
Catawumpus
Guest
|
| Posted: Wed May 28, 2008 7:56 am Post subject: Re: Re religion of Jesus was not Christianity |
|
|
zen gnostic <borgersbrent@yahoo.com>:
You stated that dividing God from the demiurge, one of the
main themes in gnostic theology, is "pure speculation and
arrogance," putting yourself in plain conflict with the gnostic
perspective.
Of course you're entitled to your opinion -- but your idea
that it's in agreement with the gnostics is completely
ridiculous. Your thinking isn't "in line with and supported by
the teachings of Valentinus," for example. The opposite:
Valentinus and his followers lower the maker of this world from
supreme being to inferior demiurge and separate him from the
true God, as I already showed. Instead of supporting you, they
do exactly what you criticize.
| Quote: | Jesus states where there are three or more there are G-ds, where there
is one or two you will find me.
|
Or "Where there are three, they are without God. And where
there is only one, I say, I am with him." Not bright to
assume the version of the saying you happened to see accurately
represents Jesus' words.
| Quote: | So while you dwell on the demiurge it
is Jesus and I who state that is not important.
|
The separation of God and the demiurge is important enough
for you to reject it as "pure speculation and arrogance."
That opinion puts you in obvious conflict with gnostic theology
and makes your claim to agree with the Valentinians a
bare-faced lie, since they take precisely the position that you
condemn.
You're now trying to weasel away -- your standard response
when caught in a falsehood -- by changing the topic to the
Gospel of Thomas. But the saying you quoted doesn't so much as
mention the demiurge. You confused your own inference with
the statement it makes, which may or then again may not be from
Jesus.
And you've already showed exactly how long your "Jesus and
I" routine lasts. It comes to a stop the second Jesus says
something that disturbs you: in this case, "Be passers-by," an
idea from the Gospel of Thomas you object to. Likewise
salvation by faith -- Jesus' reported teaching in Galatians and
elsewhere -- and his end-times prophesies, frex the ones in
the synoptic apocalypse. All cases where you quickly throw him
out the window.
| Quote: | One with duality or two separated it does not matter.
|
You're dodging. You reject gnostic theology by insisting
the division of the demiurge from God is arrogance and
speculation: an opinion you're welcome to, but one which makes
nonsense of your claim to be in agreement with the
Valentinians, since they share the basic gnostic perspective in
which the maker of this world is lowered all the way from
supreme being to inferior demiurge and of course separated from
the true God.
| Quote: | But what the hell does Jesus know right?
|
You don't know what Jesus knows -- you have yet to realize
the saying you quoted differs from place to place -- and
you're willing to toss out his knowledge when he says stuff you
dislike, frex "Be passers-by."
| Quote: | Do you not understand the trinity?
|
I understand that you're dodging again. You said Jesus is
"a mortal man with mortal desires" in the gnostic texts you
had read. But as I showed, the gnostics typically think of him
as a heavenly being.
The trinity belongs to Christian orthodoxy. Since it says
Jesus is both God and man, it's in contradiction with the
gnostics' idea he was a spiritual, immaterial being rather than
a fleshly one.
| Quote: | At least I understand duality is at the heart of gnosis
|
You misunderstand gnostic dualism by comparing it with the
harmonious whole symbolized by yin and yang. Not the way
things go in gnosticism. To the gnostics the existence of this
world is a tragedy. Gnostic thinking is structured by
dichotomies, for instance between the demiurge and the true God.
| Quote: | Yes Kater the material world should be shunned and the only thing of
importance is to know thyself (gnosis)
|
No, Brent, gnosis isn't merely knowing yourself: it's the
spiritual knowledge claimed by the gnostics -- the
Valentinians, Marcionites, Sethians, Naasenes, and so on -- e.g.
the knowledge that the Creator of this world is a crappy
demiurge rather than the true God and that the world he made is
a prison, exile, or labyrinth.
| Quote: | and understand that what is
important is not of this world. Disdain the world and it's creator to
your hearts desire. Not only do I agree but it's also scriptural.
|
No, you don't agree: you denounced the distinction of the
Creator of this world from God by labeling it "pure
speculation and arrogance," in keeping with Christian orthodoxy.
You also insisted the deeply inferior demiurge who the
gnostics describe is a corruption -- your word -- of the one in
Plato.
| Quote: | Does that mean abuse your body because it's of this world?
|
Means that your idea the body is the temple of the soul is
at odds with the gnostic view.
| Quote: | Of course not...G-d gives on loan and one must treat it as such.
|
See, there you go again, referring to the body as a divine
creation: the orthodox Christian opinion rather than the
gnostic view that the body is a prison -- the ApJohn 27:7-8 and
31:3-4 -- or otherwise contemptible thing (Gospel of Philip
56:24), like the rest of the material world, which is scheduled
for destruction (see Ptolemy in Irenaeus AH 1.71, On the
Origin of the World 125:33-126:14). As always, you're entitled
to your notions, but they stand in stark contrast to the
gnostics' way of seeing, which you neither share nor comprehend.
-- Catawumpus |
|
| |
|
| Back to top |
Catawumpus
Guest
|
| Posted: Wed May 28, 2008 8:05 am Post subject: Re: Re religion of Jesus was not Christianity |
|
|
Heideana <heideana@pacbell.net>:
| Quote: | I get the ying/yang/abraxas stuff, however I thought that the gnostics
believed in "true evil" which are manifestations of the demiurge(s).
Granted gnostic literature demonstrates that their wasn't specifically
a single "gnostic" position, but there are certain core beliefs like
belief in the existence of evil, hence demons and/or a dark force that
needed to be either defeated or shown the light of truth or something
like that...
|
Precisely. There are differences in the radicalism of the
gnostics' critique of the demiurge, the archons, and the
cosmos (sometimes they attack sharply, in other cases they have
a duller edge), so as usual with gnosticism it's tricky to
make generalizations across the various texts and schools (they
even vary within themselves). But with that said, the
gnostics agree that this dark world stands in opposition to the
world of light and that its reigning powers have to be
escaped, defeated, or overcome in some way: a rejection of the
Creator and the Creation.
| Quote: | I've always been very uncomfortable with the old
testament "God" and the light went on when I came across gnostic myths
about the demiurge and the Archons. True to phenomenology, it seems
that you can't unify all Gnostic beliefs into a single cannon, but you
can learn about the faint outlines of gnostic beliefs that come into
relief as you read it's different accounts, stories, myths and
criticisms of it....
|
Agreed, though I wouldn't underestimate the OT. It can be
far more honest and insightful about the Creator and his
dominion than his worshippers often are. Not to say that makes
him any more comfy.
-- Catawumpus |
|
| |
|
| Back to top |
Catawumpus
Guest
|
| Posted: Wed May 28, 2008 8:11 am Post subject: Re: Re religion of Jesus was not Christianity |
|
|
zen gnostic <borgersbrent@yahoo.com>:
| Quote: | If a Gnostic believes in the truth of Christos and duality, he/she
must also believe in it's opposite...A demiurge if you will.
|
You're confused. Gnostic dualism typically opposes God to
the demiurge, the realm above to the one below, spirit to
matter, etc., rejecting this world and prophesying its eventual
destruction.
| Quote: | The gnostic myths do a good job of describing true gnosis.
|
Gnosis is by definition the spiritual knowledge claimed by
the gnostics, so gnostic myth and exegesis are its
description to the degree that it can be put in words. But you
reject the gnostics' thinking by saying it's "pure
speculation and arrogance" to divide the demiurge from God; you
also side with Plato's idea of a good demiurge over and
against the evil one in gnosticism. Ergo gnosis is a falsehood
from your point of view.
| Quote: | I like to get as
close to the source as possible which would be Jesus to St Paul to
Theodas to Valentinus.
|
Not so. The evidence in the sources contradicts you again
and again. You contend that the body is the temple of the
soul, but the Valentinians, by contrast, disparage the material
world, and the same is often true even in the canonical
scriptures. You denounce the separation of the Creator of this
world from God, but the Valentinians do exactly what you
reject, thereby placing your theology at odds with theirs. You
deny a "doomsday message," but that's just what Jesus is
preaching in the synoptics, where he prophesies the end of this
world, and the Valentinians do the same, looking forward to
the destruction of the cosmos. You're at a large distance from
all those ideas.
| Quote: | Beware of any teaching of gnosticism that does not point to Jesus as
the arbiter of truth.
|
Heh. You _ignore_ Jesus' reported teachings whenever they
don't fit your tastes. Even his relatively mild saying
"Become passers-by" in the Gospel of Thomas is enough to offend
you.
You're also unhappy with the concept of salvation by faith
-- Jesus' teaching in Galations and elsewhere -- and his
echatological prophesies, which appear in gnosticism as well as
in the canon.
Gnosticism isn't restricted to its Christian varieties (to
insist on Christian gnosticism alone is nothing more than
prejudice), and your notion of truth differs basically from the
gnostics.'
-- Catawumpus |
|
| |
|
| Back to top |
Catawumpus
Guest
|
| Posted: Wed May 28, 2008 8:24 am Post subject: Re: Re religion of Jesus was not Christianity |
|
|
Catawumpus <kimmerian@fastmail.fm>:
| Quote: | The gnosis.org library -- their on-line archive of gnostic
scripture and other source materials -- is handy, but the
remainder of the cite is alot less than reliable. Most of it's
advertising for Stephen Hoeller, a kooky Californian who
enjoys going by the same "Tau Stephanus I." He's installed
himself as bishop in his own church, which Leper once described
as "Roman Catholicism with a Gnostic overlay." Not saying
he's always wrong (I agree with him about some stuff), but it's
hard to take him seriously, and some of the claims on the
gnosis.org website, for example the assertion that the
Valentinian demiurge "could not be considered evil," are simply
false.
On the other hand, our pal "zen gnostic" seem to think the
gnosis.org site is authoritative -- and just like you're
saying, the page he linked to refers to the demiurge as a lying
demon who isn't really God: exactly the theology that ZG
rejects. Elsewhere on the web-site Hoeller mocks the idea "all
things and their opposite are equally gnostic," denies
"gnosis" is separate from "gnosticism," contends that "although
Gnosticism...rests on personal religious experience, it is a
mistake to assume all such experience results in Gnostic
recognitions" and places "the universe is a vast prison" on his
list of basic gnostic beliefs. So ZG's chosen authority
argues directly against him on most of the questions that we've
discussed.
|
Heideana <heideana@pacbell.net>:
| Quote: | Is there a Gnostic church or congregation other then Stephen
Hoeller's?
|
I think there's some around. Maybe somebody else can give
details.
-- Catawumpus |
|
| |
|
| Back to top |
zen gnostic
Guest
|
| Posted: Wed May 28, 2008 6:00 pm Post subject: Re: Re religion of Jesus was not Christianity |
|
|
On May 27, 9:32 pm, Catawumpus <kimmer...@fastmail.fm> wrote:
| Quote: | zen gnostic <borgersbr...@yahoo.com>:
So you say. But the Valentinians say the demiurge and his
kind will be eternally separated from God. "Nothing of an
animal nature shall find admittance to the Pleroma." (Irenaeus
AH 1.7.1.)
-- Catawumpus
|
"what is without and what within (the Pleroma is) in reference to
knowledge and ignorance, and not with respect to local
distance" (Anonymous Valentinian quoted in Irenaeus Against Heresies
2:4:2) |
|
| |
|
| Back to top |
Heideana
Guest
|
| Posted: Wed May 28, 2008 7:17 pm Post subject: Re: Re religion of Jesus was not Christianity |
|
|
On May 28, 11:00 am, zen gnostic <borgersbr...@yahoo.com> wrote:
| Quote: | On May 27, 9:32 pm, Catawumpus <kimmer...@fastmail.fm> wrote:
zen gnostic <borgersbr...@yahoo.com>:
So you say. But the Valentinians say the demiurge and his
kind will be eternally separated from God. "Nothing of an
animal nature shall find admittance to the Pleroma." (Irenaeus
AH 1.7.1.)
-- Catawumpus
"what is without and what within (the Pleroma is) in reference to
knowledge and ignorance, and not with respect to local
distance" (Anonymous Valentinian quoted in Irenaeus Against Heresies
2:4:2)
|
So, in the concrete and practical, how does the gnostic idea of the
"body" play out in terms of someone like me with chronic pain and
depend on opioids to marginally function in the world? I was "given"
a flawed body...on the other hand, technology has given me the means
to deal with pain. I seem to have the means from man's ability to
manipulate this flawed world we live in...even to the point that
without pain meds I wouldn't be able to sit here for a few minutes and
converse with you about spiritual matters.
Somehow I think I see the spark of "God" in each of us as part of our
ability to "fix" or "subvert" the flawed body/world given to us by the
creator in a variety of ways for a variety of purposes, one of which
would be the ability to worship God and have fellowship with my
community...other purposes may not be so beneficent. Its' kinda like
the risk involved in being brought back into the light by Sophia/Jesus
and the question of freewill I suppose, but I think its' deeper then
what I'm capable of understanding at this time. Which is why I was
wondering what "organized" christian gnostic church are out there, if
any. Stephen Hoeller is the only one in the US that I think I've
found... |
|
| |
|
| Back to top |
Catawumpus
Guest
|
| Posted: Thu May 29, 2008 2:37 am Post subject: Re: Re religion of Jesus was not Christianity |
|
|
zen gnostic <borgersbrent@yahoo.com>:
Good question. What happened to the discussion here? You
erased nearly the whole thing.
Summary: your viewpoint repeatedly puts you in opposition
to the gnostic outlook. You denounce the idea that the
Creator of this world isn't the true God, contending it's "pure
speculation and arrogance." If required to consider a
demiurge, you opt for the flattering portrait in Plato over the
critical one in gnosticism, claiming the gnostics have a
corrupted understanding. You say the body is a temple, but the
gnostics compare it to a prison, call it contemptible, and
hope to leave it behind, in keeping with their negative opinion
of the material world. You don't like the notion of a
"doomsday message," while gnosticism looks forward to the final
destruction of this world. Etc.
Faced with the basic difference between your views and the
gnostics' perspective, you simply lie by insisting the
Valentinians are in agreement with you, e.g. falsely contending
that Valentinus rejects the concept of the demiurge.
According to the evidence in the sources, you're wrong as wrong
can be. Valentinus divides "the uncreated Father" from the
demiurge, made by Sophia while she's "deprived of her spiritual
substance." Irenaeus AH 1.11.1. Same for Valentinus'
followers like Ptolemy, who separates Bythos, "in the invisible
and ineffable heights above," from the demiurge, the
"creator of all animal and material substances," once again the
product of Sophia's fall (AH 1.1.1. and 1.5.2). The very
opposite of what you claimed is true about Valentinian theology.
You also misrepresented gnostic dualism by comparing it to
yin and yang. Not close. Yin and yang are part of a
harmonious whole, but in gnosticism the existence of this world
is a tragedy. Gnostic dualities oppose the true god to the
false one, contrast the divine realm with the demiurge's deeply
defective Creation, and so on.
| Quote: | "what is without and what within (the Pleroma is) in reference to
knowledge and ignorance, and not with respect to local
distance" (Anonymous Valentinian quoted in Irenaeus Against Heresies
2:4:2)
|
False. Irenaeus isn't quoting any Valentinian in AH 2.4.2.
In fact he isn't quoting anybody there. He's replying in
advance to what he imagines a Valentinian might say in response
to the argument he's just given. Over in AH 1.7.1 he
describes the outlook of a particular Valentinian, Ptolemy, who
teaches that those with an "animal nature" -- i.e., the
demiurge and others like him -- will never be able to enter the
pleroma.
-- Catawumpus |
|
| |
|
| Back to top |
zen gnostic
Guest
|
| Posted: Thu May 29, 2008 3:56 pm Post subject: Re: Re religion of Jesus was not Christianity |
|
|
On May 28, 2:17 pm, Heideana <heide...@pacbell.net> wrote:
| Quote: | On May 28, 11:00 am, zen gnostic <borgersbr...@yahoo.com> wrote:
On May 27, 9:32 pm, Catawumpus <kimmer...@fastmail.fm> wrote:
zen gnostic <borgersbr...@yahoo.com>:
So you say. But the Valentinians say the demiurge and his
kind will be eternally separated from God. "Nothing of an
animal nature shall find admittance to the Pleroma." (Irenaeus
AH 1.7.1.)
-- Catawumpus
"what is without and what within (the Pleroma is) in reference to
knowledge and ignorance, and not with respect to local
distance" (Anonymous Valentinian quoted in Irenaeus Against Heresies
2:4:2)
So, in the concrete and practical, how does the gnostic idea of the
"body" play out in terms of someone like me with chronic pain and
depend on opioids to marginally function in the world?
I was "given"
a flawed body...on the other hand, technology has given me the means
to deal with pain. I seem to have the means from man's ability to
manipulate this flawed world we live in...even to the point that
without pain meds I wouldn't be able to sit here for a few minutes and
converse with you about spiritual matters.
|
We seam to be in the same boat. My body is beat up and I'm about ready
to get rid of the thing but G-ds will is G-ds will and I'll see how
this plays out. That said...Most diseases are in reality long slow
chronic infections. Borrelia seams to be the king of this type of
infection. The symptoms can be nothing to MS,ALS,Parkinson,etc. You
can either continue down the path you are going or try some
alternatives. Try sites like curezone and doctors that know
naturopathy. My treatment involves Chloride dioxide (Clo2) also known
as MMS which has very effective antimicrobial properties. If given to
a healthy individual nothing happens as it is a nontoxic substance.
Given to myself or probably yourself and a herxheimer(sp?) reaction
occurs. This means the dead pathogens are being detoxed out of your
system. It gets worse before it gets better but it does (at least for
me and countless others) get better.
| Quote: |
Somehow I think I see the spark of "God" in each of us as part of our
ability to "fix" or "subvert" the flawed body/world given to us by the
creator in a variety of ways for a variety of purposes, one of which
would be the ability to worship God and have fellowship with my
community...other purposes may not be so beneficent.
|
Ahhh...the holy ghost. It is not your broken down body which
fellowships with others. It is the holy ghost which entwines us all.
It is also the enemy of the "demiurge".
| Quote: | Its' kinda like
the risk involved in being brought back into the light by Sophia/Jesus
and the question of freewill I suppose, but I think its' deeper then
what I'm capable of understanding at this time.
|
Do you want freewill? A gnostic lives a life of "thy will be done". It
is not an easy thing to give up.
| Quote: | Which is why I was
wondering what "organized" christian gnostic church are out there, if
any. Stephen Hoeller is the only one in the US that I think I've
found...
|
There's really not much difference between orthodox and gnostic in
terms of churches. The gnostic teachings are for those "mature" enough
to comprehend the gnostic texts. My pastor through time became gnostic
at my presbyterian church.
BrentB |
|
| |
|
| Back to top |
zen gnostic
Guest
|
| Posted: Thu May 29, 2008 5:21 pm Post subject: Re: Re religion of Jesus was not Christianity |
|
|
On May 28, 4:37 pm, Catawumpus <kimmer...@fastmail.fm> wrote:
| Quote: | zen gnostic <borgersbr...@yahoo.com>:
"what
Good question. What happened to the discussion here? You
erased nearly the whole thing.
|
Being unable to even clarify myself so you can continue to twist my
words became tiresome....plus just not enough time. (I do like a good
debate)
| Quote: |
Summary: your viewpoint repeatedly puts you in opposition
to the gnostic outlook. You denounce the idea that the
Creator of this world isn't the true God, contending it's "pure
speculation and arrogance."
|
in regards to one G-d with duality or two separate G-ds a mortal man
cannot answer such a question. I suppose you have special astral
powers that can prove one way or the other which is correct...
| Quote: | If required to consider a
demiurge, you opt for the flattering portrait in Plato over the
critical one in gnosticism, claiming the gnostics have a
corrupted understanding.
|
No...I've empathized with the theory of a demiurge. I do not mean to
flatter...in fact just the opposite. It is him who must be killed. In
a world of opposites both cannot harmoniously live together.
| Quote: | You say the body is a temple, but the
gnostics compare it to a prison, call it contemptible, and
hope to leave it behind, in keeping with their negative opinion
of the material world.
|
See my earlier post to Heideana. I look forward to ridding myself of
this shell.
| Quote: | You don't like the notion of a
"doomsday message," while gnosticism looks forward to the final
destruction of this world. Etc.
|
Quite the opposite. I see the doomsday "end days" approaching. People
are being forced to decide just where their loyalties lie.
| Quote: |
Faced with the basic difference between your views and the
gnostics' perspective, you simply lie by insisting the
Valentinians are in agreement with you, e.g. falsely contending
that Valentinus rejects the concept of the demiurge.
|
Valentinus believed in duality although in monistic terms. If he
believed in an all powerful loving G-d he must also believe in the
"concept of the demiurge".
| Quote: | According to the evidence in the sources, you're wrong as wrong
can be.
|
Not according to my sources which I can easily google.
| Quote: | Valentinus divides "the uncreated Father" from the
demiurge, made by Sophia while she's "deprived of her spiritual
substance." Irenaeus AH 1.11.1. Same for Valentinus'
followers like Ptolemy, who separates Bythos, "in the invisible
and ineffable heights above," from the demiurge, the
"creator of all animal and material substances,"
|
and it is gnosis which delivers us from the demiurge is it not?
Knowledge allows us to escape from a spiritual place not a physical
place.
| Quote: | once again the
product of Sophia's fall (AH 1.1.1. and 1.5.2). The very
opposite of what you claimed is true about Valentinian theology.
You also misrepresented gnostic dualism by comparing it to
yin and yang. Not close. Yin and yang are part of a
harmonious whole,
but in gnosticism the existence of this world
is a tragedy. Gnostic dualities oppose the true god to the
false one, contrast the divine realm with the demiurge's deeply
defective Creation, and so on.
|
Correct...and this divine realm in heaven can be found on earth. Jesus
found it.
| Quote: |
"what is without and what within (the Pleroma is) in reference to
knowledge and ignorance, and not with respect to local
distance" (Anonymous Valentinian quoted in Irenaeus Against Heresies
2:4:2)
False. Irenaeus isn't quoting any Valentinian in AH 2.4.2.
In fact he isn't quoting anybody there. He's replying in
advance to what he imagines a Valentinian might say in response
to the argument he's just given. Over in AH 1.7.1 he
describes the outlook of a particular Valentinian, Ptolemy, who
teaches that those with an "animal nature" -- i.e., the
demiurge and others like him -- will never be able to enter the
pleroma.
-- Catawumpus
|
Ptolemy is correct. To enter the pleroma is to become human. Those
with "animal natures" cannot enter. |
|
| |
|
| Back to top |
Heideana
Guest
|
| Posted: Thu May 29, 2008 5:23 pm Post subject: Re: Re religion of Jesus was not Christianity |
|
|
On May 29, 8:56 am, zen gnostic <borgersbr...@yahoo.com> wrote:
| Quote: | On May 28, 2:17 pm, Heideana <heide...@pacbell.net> wrote:
On May 28, 11:00 am, zen gnostic <borgersbr...@yahoo.com> wrote:
On May 27, 9:32 pm, Catawumpus <kimmer...@fastmail.fm> wrote:
zen gnostic <borgersbr...@yahoo.com>:
So you say. But the Valentinians say the demiurge and his
kind will be eternally separated from God. "Nothing of an
animal nature shall find admittance to the Pleroma." (Irenaeus
AH 1.7.1.)
-- Catawumpus
"what is without and what within (the Pleroma is) in reference to
knowledge and ignorance, and not with respect to local
distance" (Anonymous Valentinian quoted in Irenaeus Against Heresies
2:4:2)
So, in the concrete and practical, how does the gnostic idea of the
"body" play out in terms of someone like me with chronic pain and
depend on opioids to marginally function in the world?
I was "given"
a flawed body...on the other hand, technology has given me the means
to deal with pain. I seem to have the means from man's ability to
manipulate this flawed world we live in...even to the point that
without pain meds I wouldn't be able to sit here for a few minutes and
converse with you about spiritual matters.
We seam to be in the same boat. My body is beat up and I'm about ready
to get rid of the thing but G-ds will is G-ds will and I'll see how
this plays out. That said...Most diseases are in reality long slow
chronic infections. Borrelia seams to be the king of this type of
infection. The symptoms can be nothing to MS,ALS,Parkinson,etc. You
can either continue down the path you are going or try some
alternatives. Try sites like curezone and doctors that know
naturopathy. My treatment involves Chloride dioxide (Clo2) also known
as MMS which has very effective antimicrobial properties. If given to
a healthy individual nothing happens as it is a nontoxic substance.
Given to myself or probably yourself and a herxheimer(sp?) reaction
occurs. This means the dead pathogens are being detoxed out of your
system. It gets worse before it gets better but it does (at least for
me and countless others) get better.
Somehow I think I see the spark of "God" in each of us as part of our
ability to "fix" or "subvert" the flawed body/world given to us by the
creator in a variety of ways for a variety of purposes, one of which
would be the ability to worship God and have fellowship with my
community...other purposes may not be so beneficent.
Ahhh...the holy ghost. It is not your broken down body which
fellowships with others. It is the holy ghost which entwines us all.
It is also the enemy of the "demiurge".
Its' kinda like
the risk involved in being brought back into the light by Sophia/Jesus
and the question of freewill I suppose, but I think its' deeper then
what I'm capable of understanding at this time.
Do you want freewill? A gnostic lives a life of "thy will be done". It
is not an easy thing to give up.
Which is why I was
wondering what "organized" christian gnostic church are out there, if
any. Stephen Hoeller is the only one in the US that I think I've
found...
There's really not much difference between orthodox and gnostic in
terms of churches. The gnostic teachings are for those "mature" enough
to comprehend the gnostic texts. My pastor through time became gnostic
at my presbyterian church.
BrentB- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
|
I didn't realize the gnostic was fatalistic? I'm not a subscriber to
"radical freedom" in the Sartean sense, however I do subscribe to the
notion of situational freedom where I have the choice to act on what I
know and don't know within the context/bounds of my situation...Its'
not very Platonic, but I think its' rooted in certain readings of
Artistotle...practically speaking, I have the choice to take
medication or be in pain. I have choice to respond to the resonating
call to me from Gnosticism. On the other hand I couldn't respond to
the call of say Gnosticism if I couldn't hear it because something in
the situation blocking the call...perhaps its' all interwoven with how
the "holy spirit" flows thru me and the situation...
If I'm recalling correctly, the argument against "radical freedom"
hinges on the argument of being completely divorced from the situation
so it has no effect on your choices...you can never be free of your
situation, as it's inherent that your body is always already situated
in a situation by the very language you think and feel about things.
I can see this being amplified even further if we were given flawed
bodies by the creator and we are always having to "fix" them...
My other question is how can you have christian gnosticism if you
don't honor Jesus...it would seem that he's name is embedded in the
language of what it refers to??? Apologies if I'm missing
something...thanks for both of your thoughts/fellowship... |
|
| |
|
| Back to top |
zen gnostic
Guest
|
| Posted: Thu May 29, 2008 8:06 pm Post subject: Re: Re religion of Jesus was not Christianity |
|
|
On May 29, 12:23 pm, Heideana <heide...@pacbell.net> wrote:
| Quote: | On May 29, 8:56 am, zen gnostic <borgersbr...@yahoo.com> wrote:
On May 28, 2:17 pm, Heideana <heide...@pacbell.net> wrote:
On May 28, 11:00 am, zen gnostic <borgersbr...@yahoo.com> wrote:
On May 27, 9:32 pm, Catawumpus <kimmer...@fastmail.fm> wrote:
zen gnostic <borgersbr...@yahoo.com>:
So you say. But the Valentinians say the demiurge and his
kind will be eternally separated from God. "Nothing of an
animal nature shall find admittance to the Pleroma." (Irenaeus
AH 1.7.1.)
-- Catawumpus
"what is without and what within (the Pleroma is) in reference to
knowledge and ignorance, and not with respect to local
distance" (Anonymous Valentinian quoted in Irenaeus Against Heresies
2:4:2)
So, in the concrete and practical, how does the gnostic idea of the
"body" play out in terms of someone like me with chronic pain and
depend on opioids to marginally function in the world?
I was "given"
a flawed body...on the other hand, technology has given me the means
to deal with pain. I seem to have the means from man's ability to
manipulate this flawed world we live in...even to the point that
without pain meds I wouldn't be able to sit here for a few minutes and
converse with you about spiritual matters.
We seam to be in the same boat. My body is beat up and I'm about ready
to get rid of the thing but G-ds will is G-ds will and I'll see how
this plays out. That said...Most diseases are in reality long slow
chronic infections. Borrelia seams to be the king of this type of
infection. The symptoms can be nothing to MS,ALS,Parkinson,etc. You
can either continue down the path you are going or try some
alternatives. Try sites like curezone and doctors that know
naturopathy. My treatment involves Chloride dioxide (Clo2) also known
as MMS which has very effective antimicrobial properties. If given to
a healthy individual nothing happens as it is a nontoxic substance.
Given to myself or probably yourself and a herxheimer(sp?) reaction
occurs. This means the dead pathogens are being detoxed out of your
system. It gets worse before it gets better but it does (at least for
me and countless others) get better.
Somehow I think I see the spark of "God" in each of us as part of our
ability to "fix" or "subvert" the flawed body/world given to us by the
creator in a variety of ways for a variety of purposes, one of which
would be the ability to worship God and have fellowship with my
community...other purposes may not be so beneficent.
Ahhh...the holy ghost. It is not your broken down body which
fellowships with others. It is the holy ghost which entwines us all.
It is also the enemy of the "demiurge".
Its' kinda like
the risk involved in being brought back into the light by Sophia/Jesus
and the question of freewill I suppose, but I think its' deeper then
what I'm capable of understanding at this time.
Do you want freewill? A gnostic lives a life of "thy will be done". It
is not an easy thing to give up.
Which is why I was
wondering what "organized" christian gnostic church are out there, if
any. Stephen Hoeller is the only one in the US that I think I've
found...
There's really not much difference between orthodox and gnostic in
terms of churches. The gnostic teachings are for those "mature" enough
to comprehend the gnostic texts. My pastor through time became gnostic
at my presbyterian church.
BrentB- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
I didn't realize the gnostic was fatalistic?
|
To negative...more like a believer in things such as destiny.
| Quote: | I'm not a subscriber to
"radical freedom" in the Sartean sense, however I do subscribe to the
notion of situational freedom where I have the choice to act on what I
know and don't know within the context/bounds of my situation...Its'
not very Platonic, but I think its' rooted in certain readings of
Artistotle...practically speaking, I have the choice to take
medication or be in pain.
|
Through the actions of Jesus we know G-d does not want anyone to
suffer. Take the meds. btw...Have you tried G-ds best pain reliever
maryjane?
| Quote: | I have choice to respond to the resonating
call to me from Gnosticism. On the other hand I couldn't respond to
the call of say Gnosticism if I couldn't hear it because something in
the situation blocking the call...perhaps its' all interwoven with how
the "holy spirit" flows thru me and the situation...
|
Not everyone can hear the call. It is easier for a rope to enter the
eye of a needle than a rich man to enter the kingdom of G-d. With that
said...seek and ye shall find. Patience and persistence are key.
| Quote: |
If I'm recalling correctly, the argument against "radical freedom"
hinges on the argument of being completely divorced from the situation
so it has no effect on your choices...you can never be free of your
situation, as it's inherent that your body is always already situated
in a situation by the very language you think and feel about things.
I can see this being amplified even further if we were given flawed
bodies by the creator and we are always having to "fix" them...
|
If I read right "radical freedom" is all about what's in it for me.
The opposite of gnostic thinking.
| Quote: |
My other question is how can you have christian gnosticism if you
don't honor Jesus...it would seem that he's name is embedded in the
language of what it refers to??? Apologies if I'm missing
something...thanks for both of your thoughts/fellowship...
|
Good question for Catawumpus. You can't. |
|
| |
|
| Back to top |
|
