Some Angellousian Thoughts on Gnosticism (Earth, gospel, mysticism, beliefs)

[angellous_evangellous]

So I've been reading a lot of Gnostic texts and scholarly commentaries and articles for research on the Gospel of Philip.

I have some half-baked thoughts.

At first blush Christian Gnostic writings appear jumbled and confused, sophomorically mixing myth with history in a completely nonsensical manner. Being so, it has not received very high marks of intellectual value from many German thinkers (in my opinion).

I think that the Gnostics (as represented in the Nag Hammadi texts) had an ecclectic interpretative/myth making method, mixing a sort of free-stylish artistic approach to Christianity with the Pythagorean method of Plato's Timaeus in the construction of their cosmology. Gnostic thought therefore is intellectual in a very sophisticated way... I think that if we translate Gnostic texts mathematically, discovering the formulas represented by the words - if that is even possible - then we would have a better understanding of the text. At least, that is, for the Gospel of Philip and other complex Gnostic comologies.

The artistic side I think is for pleasure, but I'm not sure how to appropriate it just yet.

[Guitar's Cry]

Originally Posted by angellous_evangellous

The artistic side I think is for pleasure, but I'm not sure how to appropriate it just yet.

Interesting observations!

I've observed that a lot of mystical sects tend to add an artistic flair to the mainstream religion (if any) they come from. My first thought is of the Whirling Dervishes of the Sufis.

Art is really the expression of the personal and how it relates to the outside world. That it comes into play in mysticism--which focuses on connecting with the spirit/divine--seems natural to me.

[angellous_evangellous]

Yeah, I've often said that religion is more an art than a science, and it doesn't make sense to approach religion scientifically.

It may not be and art per se, but it definately does engage the person on a more aesthetic level. It's unique, and usually invites the person to interact with the divine on a plane that is existential and not experimental.

[Guitar's Cry]

Originally Posted by angellous_evangellous

Yeah, I've often said that religion is more an art than a science, and it doesn't make sense to approach religion scientifically.

It may not be and art per se, but it definately does engage the person on a more aesthetic level. It's unique, and usually invites the person to interact with the divine on a plane that is existential and not experimental.

I agree. One can approach the world logically or emotionally (which I see as directly related to imaginative things like art). Science is logical, religion is emotional/imaginative. Both are appropriate (if I can use that term) worldviews, though I think they should be balanced.

[yuvgotmel]

There are a lot of similarities between Kabbalism and Gnosticism; and the two groups get along really well, especially from the occult (and Hermetic) perspective, and less so from the Jewish perspective (of the Kabbalah). The reason being is that both have roots in Egypt and Egyptian beliefs.

For students of the Kabbalah (and Judaism in general), it is understood that the Nefesh is one of the levels of the soul—“The Nefesh is in the blood.” The Nefesh is an intrinsic part of the Earth—the material realm of matter on this plane of existence. It is similar to, and probably handed down from, the Egyptian belief concerning the levels of the soul (the Ka, Ba, and Akh).

All this to say: the realm of matter makes up a part of what we are, have been and the cyclic condition on this plane of existence. It is important to understand this when trying to comprehend that religion is the equivalent of magic/science from the ancient viewpoint.

Religion—in its current form and by itself—is quite meaningless, without the understanding that part of us is contained in this realm of matter: a cyclic condition, possibly spiraling towards union of the levels of the soul—all of our souls, en masse. A religious teaching that causes disjoining of the levels of the soul is destructive. It is destructive to part of the soul of the individual and the whole. This Earth and everything in it is a living entity—a homogenous thing; and we are a part of it—dirt, form, this planet and beyond.

Religion—at least as it was more commonly understood in the linear past—was the equivalent of science. And to really grasp that would require a total change of the manner of thinking by most Westerners (generally speaking).

[angellous_evangellous]

At this point I'm interested in detecting the Pythagorean method of the Valentinian Exposition and possibly the Gospel of Philip.

I think that the math is used to give beauty to the myth, sorta like really good poetry (like mixing hexameter with other types of meter to convey artistic and conceptual complexities).

[yuvgotmel]

Originally Posted by angellous_evangellous

At this point I'm interested in detecting the Pythagorean method of the Valentinian Exposition and possibly the Gospel of Philip.

I think that the math is used to give beauty to the myth, sorta like really good poetry (like mixing hexameter with other types of meter to convey artistic and conceptual complexities).

True...at least the last part. And the ideas of Pythagoras do express the way the ancient Greeks, in particular, viewed all things as integral--and "religion" as a science.

...not sure how the Gospel of Philip plays a part in that though...

[angellous_evangellous]

Originally Posted by yuvgotmel

True...at least the last part. And the ideas of Pythagoras do express the way the ancient Greeks, in particular, viewed all things as integral--and "religion" as a science.

...not sure how the Gospel of Philip plays a part in that though...

Because Philip's cosmology is based on Plato's Timaeus which uses a Pythagorean method.

It's possible that the author(s) of Philip internalized Plato's Pythagorean method in an independent construction of his own cosmology. I can't tell yet if Philip simply replaces variables in the formula or if he simply uses something similar.