How would you do it?

[LittlePinky82]

Okay so many times I have people online ask me what a gnostic Christian is. How do you tell people what you believe in? Also if you were to recommend a gnostic Christian book to someone which one would it be and why? I would the Gospel of Thomas because from what I understand it's so close to the other gospel books.

[Halcyon]

You might not get too many replies, so I will since I used to be Gnostic.

The Gospel of Thomas is a good one, but I reckon to really give someone a flavour of Gnosticism the Apocryphon of John is the best IMO.

The way I used to try and explain Gnosticism was that it is like a fusion of Christianity and Buddhism.

[3.14]

i don't care what religion you are as long as you keep it to yourself. but if someone asked for it point them to google or wikipedia

[gnostic]

The sayings in Thomas' gospel would be one of the places I would start, but it doesn't make clear what (Christian) Gnosticism is all about. So I would have to agree with Halcyon, in regarding to the Apocryphon of John.

The Gospel of Thomas makes no mentions of the demiurge Ialdabaoth and Sophia, which is central to understanding Gnosticism. No mentions of why human was created, and why we are trapped in this plane of existence. And no mention of how to achieve ascension to Pleroma (heaven) through gnosis.

[LittlePinky82]

Originally Posted by Halcyon

You might not get too many replies, so I will since I used to be Gnostic.

The Gospel of Thomas is a good one, but I reckon to really give someone a flavour of Gnosticism the Apocryphon of John is the best IMO.

The way I used to try and explain Gnosticism was that it is like a fusion of Christianity and Buddhism.

Ah that's a good idea. I haven't read John yet so I'll have to do that. I mostly use Thomas because it's so close to the four gospels in the Bible we have today.

[LittlePinky82]

Originally Posted by 3.14

i don't care what religion you are as long as you keep it to yourself. but if someone asked for it point them to google or wikipedia

Right I believe the same but I'm talking about trying to explain it to other people. I've tried that but they don't want to do that generally. They want it from me.

[LittlePinky82]

Originally Posted by gnostic

The sayings in Thomas' gospel would be one of the places I would start, but it doesn't make clear what (Christian) Gnosticism is all about. So I would have to agree with Halcyon, in regarding to the Apocryphon of John.

The Gospel of Thomas makes no mentions of the demiurge Ialdabaoth and Sophia, which is central to understanding Gnosticism. No mentions of why human was created, and why we are trapped in this plane of existence. And no mention of how to achieve ascension to Pleroma (heaven) through gnosis.

I guess if you slowly want to get someone into it would be a good idea. I'll hae to keep in mind the Apocryphon of John. Thanks all to have applied.

[Halcyon]

Originally Posted by LittlePinky82

Ah that's a good idea. I haven't read John yet so I'll have to do that. I mostly use Thomas because it's so close to the four gospels in the Bible we have today.

I can see why you'd use it as a good starting point.

But I also think it's important to remember that the Biblical books were collected to represent the beliefs of a particular group, their beliefs didn't originate from the Bible, and that they (the books) were made "official" largely in response to the Gnostic threat. Some were even written in response to the Gnostic sects the orthodox competed with.
Comparing Gnostic Christianity with orthodox Christianity and it's Bible will ultimately become unworkable, which is when you'd need to move onto the more esoteric texts like the Apocryphon, Gospel of Mary, Pistis Sophia etc.

[LittlePinky82]

Originally Posted by Halcyon

I can see why you'd use it as a good starting point.

But I also think it's important to remember that the Biblical books were collected to represent the beliefs of a particular group, their beliefs didn't originate from the Bible, and that they (the books) were made "official" largely in response to the Gnostic threat. Some were even written in response to the Gnostic sects the orthodox competed with.
Comparing Gnostic Christianity with orthodox Christianity and it's Bible will ultimately become unworkable, which is when you'd need to move onto the more esoteric texts like the Apocryphon, Gospel of Mary, Pistis Sophia etc.

Right. But if I'm talking to someone who is a orthodox Christian or something like that the gospel of Thomas isn't far off from the other gospel books so it would be a good start and is very close to the other four. Personally I think the other books are just as a part of the Bible as the others are. But right I will remember to include the others but encourage them to still read the gospel of Thomas to start off with so it's not too deep at first. You want to do it slowly I think.

[Halcyon]

Originally Posted by LittlePinky82

Right. But if I'm talking to someone who is a orthodox Christian or something like that the gospel of Thomas isn't far off from the other gospel books so it would be a good start and is very close to the other four.

Yep indeedily.

Originally Posted by LittlePinky82

Personally I think the other books are just as a part of the Bible as the others are.

I don't really want to annoy you with this, but I do think it's quite important to recognise the Bible for what it is and what it isn't. The Bible isn't the book of Christianity, its the book of a very specific form of Christianity that has become dominant.
Back in the 2nd through 4th centuries the orthodox and Gnostic Christians were in quite a fiece competition for believers, the orthodox collected all the books that agreed with their theology and Christology, or wrote their own, and put them all together into what today we call the Bible. If it isn't in the Bible it's because it doesn't agree with the orthodox viewpoint completely, and so shouldn't be in their Bible.

The books of Nag Hammadi, of Jeu and the Pistis Sophia reflect Gnostic theology and Christology and so belong next to, but outside of the orthodox canon because they reflect a very different yet linked set of beliefs.