Gnosticism The so called first Christian heresy

[mitchellmckain 0]

I was talking to my father the other day when he tried to tell me that the first heresy called gnosticism taught (in the Gospel of Thomas) that it is what you do rather than what you know that counts. I was rather surprised since I thought gnosticism was about a belief in being saved by a secret knowledge. The word "gnosis", in fact, means knowledge. Anyway I decided that I should study the matter and find out the whole story, and here is what I found out.Gnosticism was a label for a whole group of new syncretistic religions that came into being around the same time that Christianity began. Syncretistic means that these religions drew their ideas from many sources combining ideas from Greek philosophy, Roman paganism, Judaism, Christianity, Zoastrianism and even Buddhism. To the tell the truth, Christianity can be considered one of these new syncretistic religions for you can see many shared elements between these other syncretistic religions and Christianity. Now in condemning these other groups as a heresy called gnosticism, certain common beliefs among these groups were pointed out as incompatable with Christian belief. Unfortunately, however, it seems quite possible that some of the groups that were condemned as Gnostic shared none of these condemned beliefs but were variations of Christianity not much different than the differences between denominations today.The condemned Gnostic beliefs include the belief in a supreme deity called the One (or Monad) from whom emanated progressively different aspects of his being (called Aeons). There is the idea that this progression of emanations produced things less perfect than the monad. There is the belief that one of the emanations, called the demiurge (from Plato), created the universe from pre-existing matter, and that the imperfections of this world are a result of the imperfections of this creator. The demiurge also created helpers or companions called Archons to rule over the material world. There is the idea that a divine element or emanation of the monad have become trapped and imprisoned in the material world within certain human beings, with the Archons of the demiurge as the jailors. But with the proper knowledge from a redeemer (Christ, Seth, or Sophia) these divine elements can escape their material prison to return to the divine realm.However these beliefs really only describe the ideas of only a portion of the groups condemned as Gnostic, called the Syrian-Egyptian school who drew much of their ideas from the Greek philosophers of Plato and Pythagoras. In Persia, there were other groups including the Mandaeans and Manichaeins who drew some of their ideas from the religions of the east. The Mandaeans revered John the Baptist rather than Jesus. The Mandaeans naturally practice frequent baptisms and public worship on Sundays. There seems to be some influence of Zoastrianism in their ideas of a Cosmic Dualism between father and mother and between light and darkness. There also seems to be some influence of the ideas of astrology, that the planets and stars influence the fate of human beings.Manichaeism was founded by the prophet Mani, who wrote seven holy writings and who claimed to be the Paraclete (Holy Spirit) promised in the New Testament. (Some people in Islam make the same claim for Mohammed). The teachings of Mani seem to be heavily influenced by Zoastrianism, speaking of a realm of light and peace and a realm of darkness and conflict which existed from the beginning, ruled by two equal and opposite powers. They believe that the physical universe came into being as a mixture of light and darkness resulting from a conflict between these two realms. The idea of the the transmigration of souls (reincarnation) was adopted from Buddhism. And Mani was even called a Buddha, claiming him to have achieve the a state of enlightenment (Parinirvana). Perhaps, Manichaeism has had some impact on the later theological developments of Christianity through Saint Augustine who converted from Manichaeism, for although he condemned the teachings of Manichaeism, others have found some influence of it in his writings.But included in the writings that are condemned as Gnostic is at least one which seems out of place, the Gospel of Thomas. This is a collection of sayings of Jesus, most of which are easily recognized from the four gospels in the canon. Others are difficult to understand, what Jesus could have meant by them if He truly said them. Reading through them I experience puzzlement more than anything else. However scholars have found a philosophy represented in the Gospel of Thomas which emphasizes the need for us to seek the truth ourselves and make our own decisions rather than simply following orders. The appeal of this message to those find fault with the authoritarian dictatorship of the church is obvious. Therefore it is possible that this gospel of Thomas represents a Christian group with a less authoritarian approach to the truth. However, I certainly do not see anything in it like the message which my father claimed.In my opinion the gospel of Thomas is simply one of the apocryphal texts that never made it into any cannon or even into the apocrypha books included in some Bibles. This may be partially because some of the church fathers found objectionable ideas (like gnosticism) in it, but I believe that others went along with this judgement only because they found the book as a whole to be too confusing to be particularly helpful in understanding anything about the Christian faith.

[iGuest 3]

Replying to mitchellmckainYou say the following statement:Gnosticism was a label for a whole group of new syncretistic religions that came into being around the same time that Christianity began. Syncretistic means that these religions drew their ideas from many sources combining ideas from Greek philosophy, Roman paganism, Judaism, Christianity, How can you state that gnosticsim and Christianity came into being around the same time and then claim that Gnosticism "drew their ideas" from Christianity. How do you know it wasn't the other way around? For example, there are many verses in the Bible that warn against the flesh. This is one example that reflects Gnostic thinking. -reply by Steve

[mitchellmckain 0]

<a href=http://forums.xisto.com/topic/90709-topic/?findpost=1064351667 to mitchellmckain</a>
You say the following statement:

Gnosticism was a label for a whole group of new syncretistic religions that came into being around the same time that Christianity began. Syncretistic means that these religions drew their ideas from many sources combining ideas from Greek philosophy, Roman paganism, Judaism, Christianity,

How can you state that gnosticsim and Christianity came into being around the same time and then claim that Gnosticism "drew their ideas" from Christianity. How do you know it wasn't the other way around? For example, there are many verses in the Bible that warn against the flesh. This is one example that reflects Gnostic thinking.

-reply by Steve

Nothing I said contradicts the idea that their was a two way exchange of ideas. In fact, did I not also say, "To the tell the truth, Christianity can be considered one of these new syncretistic religions for you can see many shared elements between these other syncretistic religions and Christianity.

What I said was nothing like your paraphrase, for these two statements are utterly different:

"Gnosticism drew their ideas from many sources combining ideas from Greek philosophy, Roman paganism, Judaism, Christianity."

"Gnosticism drew their ideas from Christianity."

Therefore your "other way around" comment is based on your straw man and doesn't even make any sense in regards to my actual statement.

IN FACT since I DO suggest that Christianity was also one of these syncretistic religions, I have basically also said:

"Christianity drew their ideas from many sources combining ideas from Greek philosophy, Roman paganism, Judaism, Gnosticism."

This is as close to a "other way around" as you can get, but in this case, there is no reason to think that it must be one way or the other.

I will however say that it is pretty absurd to suggest that Christianity took its historical elements (events involving specific persons) from Gnosticism. I think it is going to pretty clear when Gnostic groups adopted from Christianity if it includes such historical elements. For example, if the gospel of Thomas is truly a "Gnostic gospel" then it is pretty obvious that this is from a Gnostic group that has adopted much Christianity. I think it is also pretty clear that the Gnostic groups have stronger ties to the eastern and Greek philosophies than does orthodox Christianity, and we know the source of these ideas and it was NOT the historical persons of Christianity.