Is this Gnosticism? (ritual, mysticism, churches, Revelation, scriptures)

[Chevalier Violet]

I think it's pretty self-evident that there are a lot of definitions of it floating around. If we'd like to define it as a useful category (rather than a "heresy"), I would define it, for my own purposes, as the belief that when my heart disagrees with how people read the Bible or any other holy text, I should follow my heart. I think the idea is that the truth, the true way to live is within us. We do not require masters and teachers so long as we seek and so long as we listen to others and to our hearts.

This definition is my own, but I would like to know if anyone else out there uses the term this way.

I would also point out that this definition seems more etymologically sound as a theological definition, because gnosis comes from the Greek for knowledge (agnosticism means "without knowledge", and means that we are inherently without knowledge.) Gnosis is therefore the notion that we do inherently have knowledge.

Thoughts? How do you define this differently?

I realize that my definition does not mesh with that of the "heritics" of two millenia ago. I am not concerned with historical correctness but usefulness of a term.

CV

[Halcyon]

Originally Posted by UnityNow101

I was at one time inclined to lean more towards Gnosticism, found out I was not smart enough to understand all of the concepts, and disagreed with their stance on an evil Creator being at fault for mankind's woes. Gnosticism really interested me, but I could not get around the fact that they believed in more than one God, an evil Creator of the Old Testament and the Perfect Creator that sent Jesus Christ to reveal the unknown.

It's not quite that black and white.

Gnostics did indeed believe in one almighty God, but this God is spread across a vast Pleroma (fullness) of God composed of the Monad itself, but also various emanations (these can be though of as aspects) such as divine Wisdom, Mind, Forethought, Word etc. It's easier to understand this concept than the orthodox Trinity IMO, but it is similar. Valentinians counted 30 such emanations.

The Demiurge, who is usually considered the "evil God", is the manifestation of Ignorance, he could also be thought of as False Wisdom. He was the product of Sophia (Wisdom) emanating independantly of the rest of the fullness of God (Pleroma).
But, he could still be considered part of the Pleroma, and in fact some Gnostics such as the Basilideans worshipped a combination God of the Father/Mother (Monad) and the Demiurge in a form called Abrasax.

The Demiuge in several Gnostic systems was not evil, but mearly ignorant and foolish, unaware of the Pleroma above him, one of his epithets being Samael which means "Blind God".
At his birth he was imbued with a portion of his mothers power. He created the world as best he could and included his mothers power in its construction giving it life, but because he was flawed he created the world flawed, so we have death and suffering.

Christ being part of the Pleroma called the Logos (Word/Reason) of God and the partner of Sophia, descended to the world of the Demiurge to reclaim the lost power of Sophia trapped in the world by the unwitting Demiurge. He did this by teaching Gnosis, knowledge of the Pleroma, to humans - the beings in which most of Sophia's power had become trapped and that we now call Spirit. On reaching Gnosis the Spirit is released and returns to the Pleroma. If Gnosis is not reached the Spirit is reincarnated.
Some texts even have the Demiurge reaching Gnosis at the end of the world, and returning in full to the Pleroma.

[Halcyon]

Originally Posted by Chevalier Violet

I think it's pretty self-evident that there are a lot of definitions of it floating around. If we'd like to define it as a useful category (rather than a "heresy"), I would define it, for my own purposes, as the belief that when my heart disagrees with how people read the Bible or any other holy text, I should follow my heart. I think the idea is that the truth, the true way to live is within us. We do not require masters and teachers so long as we seek and so long as we listen to others and to our hearts.

I think that definition is fine, for use in a modern sense.

Originally Posted by Chevalier Violet

I would also point out that this definition seems more etymologically sound as a theological definition, because gnosis comes from the Greek for knowledge (agnosticism means "without knowledge", and means that we are inherently without knowledge.) Gnosis is therefore the notion that we do inherently have knowledge

Gnosis as a word in Greek is more akin to todays enlightenment, awakening, even Nirvana. Knowledge in the typical, mundane sense was episteme.

[A. Ben-Shema]

Originally Posted by Chevalier Violet

I think it's pretty self-evident that there are a lot of definitions of it floating around. If we'd like to define it as a useful category (rather than a "heresy"), I would define it, for my own purposes, as the belief that when my heart disagrees with how people read the Bible or any other holy text, I should follow my heart. I think the idea is that the truth, the true way to live is within us. We do not require masters and teachers so long as we seek and so long as we listen to others and to our hearts.

This definition is my own, but I would like to know if anyone else out there uses the term this way.

I would also point out that this definition seems more etymologically sound as a theological definition, because gnosis comes from the Greek for knowledge (agnosticism means "without knowledge", and means that we are inherently without knowledge.) Gnosis is therefore the notion that we do inherently have knowledge.

Thoughts? How do you define this differently?

I realize that my definition does not mesh with that of the "heritics" of two millenia ago. I am not concerned with historical correctness but usefulness of a term.

CV

I would agree that Gnosis is inherently within all mankind. As with the word 'in-tuition', i.e. learning from within. However, there is only one true definition of Gnosis, and that, quite simply, is: Spiritual Knowledge, or Knowledge of God. How one achieves this inner Divine Knowledge is another story.

Love & Peace

[michel]

The more I find out about gnosticism, the more convinced I am already one. I think I will have to change my "religious title" to accurately descibe myself.

[Terrywoodenpic]

Originally Posted by Chevalier Violet

I think it's pretty self-evident that there are a lot of definitions of it floating around. If we'd like to define it as a useful category (rather than a "heresy"), I would define it, for my own purposes, as the belief that when my heart disagrees with how people read the Bible or any other holy text, I should follow my heart. I think the idea is that the truth, the true way to live is within us. We do not require masters and teachers so long as we seek and so long as we listen to others and to our hearts.

This definition is my own, but I would like to know if anyone else out there uses the term this way.

I would also point out that this definition seems more etymologically sound as a theological definition, because gnosis comes from the Greek for knowledge (agnosticism means "without knowledge", and means that we are inherently without knowledge.) Gnosis is therefore the notion that we do inherently have knowledge.

Thoughts? How do you define this differently?

I realize that my definition does not mesh with that of the "heritics" of two millenia ago. I am not concerned with historical correctness but usefulness of a term.

CV

I would not bother too much about the concept of Heresy...
Heresy only relates to a particular faith or belief you differ from.
It is never an absolute.

Gnosticism is to day equally ill defined, as we have been to long separated from the original practitioners.
The catholic Church did a very good job in suppressing it.
There are few direct links between the present thoughts and practices with those of ancient times.
It is not so much that we are wrong, as that we have lost the tradition, and continuous link of teaching.

[worshiper]

i dont know anything about gnosticism. any suggsestions on where to find a good resource?

[A. Ben-Shema]

Originally Posted by worshiper

i dont know anything about gnosticism. any suggsestions on where to find a good resource?

May I suggest my book site, which also includes a radio interview that explains much about genuine Gnosis. Just click HERE.

Peace & Love

[worshiper]

Originally Posted by A. Ben-Shema

May I suggest my book site, which also includes a radio interview that explains much about genuine Gnosis. Just click HERE.

Peace & Love

i've heard your interview. and i would say its interesting. but i noticed that you quote mostly in the bible.

1) you said that you have looked everywhere for the truth. i'd like to know your views on the Quran. since you said there is no bible in its original form which is aramaic (if i'm not mistaken). have you read the Quran? what do you think of it?

2) i still cant figure out what Gnosticism is all about. can someone tell me in layman's term?