EverChanging
Well-Known Member
I just had an interesting conversation with a friend about the nature of the fall and redemption in which he claimed that I am a Gnostic. I have not considered myself a Gnostic because generally speaking I am world-affirming. Matter is not merely something to be liberated from. It has a sacred significance and function because of both the nature of Creation and the Incarnation.
The views I explained in the conversation went something like this:
The Holy Trinity -- The Father is unknown. The Son was always both transcendent and immanent. The Son was within Adam and he also personally lived and incarnated as Jesus of Nazareth. The Holy Spirit is the love of the Father and Son for each other, and that love is the third person of the Holy Trinity.
The Fall -- When sentience developed we evolved a sense of being separate from the rest of creation and God in an absolute sense. This was inevitable, but it has also led us to choose actions that are harmful, that miss the mark (sin). Sin serves to increase our sense of alienation. Suffering exists in the world because of how we perceive reality as well as due to our choices. Both the sense of separation and sin (missing the mark) are intertwined and involved in the Fall.
The Incarnation -- The Son incarnated. He was God and man. He lived, died, was resurrected, and ascended into Heaven, to fulfill what Adam did not. I am not concerned with whether this is historical. It may not be in the modern conception of history, but if not, there are other ways in which this is true. I do not dwell on whether some aspects of these stories are literal -- I cannot know. I look for their significance to me within myself. I am very skeptical of supernatural miracles.
Redemption -- The cosmos is liberated and redeemed by the life, death, resurrection, and ascension of Jesus, but that means nothing to us if it is only an external reality. We must experience these things within ourselves. The experience may break through in fleeting moments or perhaps some people manage to maintain it for the rest of the lifespan. But when we partake of eternal life within ourselves consciously we are resurrected and the cosmos is transformed and liberated through us in that we realize there is really nothing flawed about it to begin with -- the apparent suffering and horror it is filled with is but our own limited perspective. We are separate from the rest of creation in a relative sense. In an absolute sense, everything is one -- separation is a perception.
This leads to my basic view of the creation:
In the beginning energy had no form. Energy always existed, being eternally derived from God. When energy was formed into the cosmos and matter, this is what I call the creation. Creation is on-going because everything is in a state of flux. God performed this creation because God is always involved in everything that happens in some way. Because matter derives its being directly from God, it partakes of God's goodness. The material creation is basically good for this reason.
Therefore when we come to experience and know our salvation consciously, we know there is nothing wrong with the creation -- as it is, even with apparent death. The difference between living and non-living matter is not an absolute even in scientific ways of thinking -- the definitions differ. All things are alive in God because they exist through God. Death is only an illusion because our ego, our soul, is merely a fluctuation, a temporary coming together in a certain way of a part of the cosmos. (Nevertheless our souls/egos, our individual lives, are imprinted forever in space-time/the mind of God -- there is a sense in which even the temporal reality is eternal.) The spirit within us is eternal, beyond time, decay, and death because at our core there is Nothing At All, there is God, from which all things are derived.
Salvation is always here, always now. From our perspective there is a Fall, from our perspective the salvation drama occurs in and through history and in and through ourselves personally within time. But when we see as God sees, when we know as we are known, then we are able to perceive that the cosmos is liberated as it is. God is within all things and all things are within God.
***
Generally speaking I simply consider the Bible my scriptures. I have read gnostic scriptures but they are not a primary source of inspiration for me. I have waffled between Catholicism and Anglicanism (leaning more towards Anglicanism again) but generally speaking I practice my faith within the mainstream church and recite the Nicene Creed. I do have other devotions and rituals of my own creation that I perform on my own (or with one or two others) but they do not replace the seven sacraments or prayers of the Church for me. Those rituals do however draw on private experiences and beliefs that inform my interpretation of Christianity. In many ways outwardly I am a more traditional Christian. My spirituality is still heavily Anglo-Catholic. I avoid modern liturgies for the older more somber liturgies. Everything in my devotional practices centers around the Eucharist, partaking of Christ sacramentally in bread and wine. Most of my prayers are traditional, most of them heavily involve invocation of the saints. But I also honor the life in plants, animals, and rocks. Generally speaking I don't have dealings with non-Christian gods, but I believe they exist in some way, the council of gods spoken of in the Hebrew Scriptures. But the Trinity is the Absolute God. I do sometimes pray to a popular unofficial folk saint as well as the Guardian Angel(s) that I have seen.
These beliefs and practices I have cultivated for some years and they have not substantially changed whether I was involved in the Catholic or Anglican churches. I could flesh out some more details such as my views of the Church and other religions -- which are less than "orthodox" by most standards -- but this should be sufficient.
Does this kind of belief structure fit anywhere on the spectrum of modern gnosticism? I have never considered identifying as a Gnostic because much of it takes too dim a view of the material cosmos which doesn't jive with my worldview.
The views I explained in the conversation went something like this:
The Holy Trinity -- The Father is unknown. The Son was always both transcendent and immanent. The Son was within Adam and he also personally lived and incarnated as Jesus of Nazareth. The Holy Spirit is the love of the Father and Son for each other, and that love is the third person of the Holy Trinity.
The Fall -- When sentience developed we evolved a sense of being separate from the rest of creation and God in an absolute sense. This was inevitable, but it has also led us to choose actions that are harmful, that miss the mark (sin). Sin serves to increase our sense of alienation. Suffering exists in the world because of how we perceive reality as well as due to our choices. Both the sense of separation and sin (missing the mark) are intertwined and involved in the Fall.
The Incarnation -- The Son incarnated. He was God and man. He lived, died, was resurrected, and ascended into Heaven, to fulfill what Adam did not. I am not concerned with whether this is historical. It may not be in the modern conception of history, but if not, there are other ways in which this is true. I do not dwell on whether some aspects of these stories are literal -- I cannot know. I look for their significance to me within myself. I am very skeptical of supernatural miracles.
Redemption -- The cosmos is liberated and redeemed by the life, death, resurrection, and ascension of Jesus, but that means nothing to us if it is only an external reality. We must experience these things within ourselves. The experience may break through in fleeting moments or perhaps some people manage to maintain it for the rest of the lifespan. But when we partake of eternal life within ourselves consciously we are resurrected and the cosmos is transformed and liberated through us in that we realize there is really nothing flawed about it to begin with -- the apparent suffering and horror it is filled with is but our own limited perspective. We are separate from the rest of creation in a relative sense. In an absolute sense, everything is one -- separation is a perception.
This leads to my basic view of the creation:
In the beginning energy had no form. Energy always existed, being eternally derived from God. When energy was formed into the cosmos and matter, this is what I call the creation. Creation is on-going because everything is in a state of flux. God performed this creation because God is always involved in everything that happens in some way. Because matter derives its being directly from God, it partakes of God's goodness. The material creation is basically good for this reason.
Therefore when we come to experience and know our salvation consciously, we know there is nothing wrong with the creation -- as it is, even with apparent death. The difference between living and non-living matter is not an absolute even in scientific ways of thinking -- the definitions differ. All things are alive in God because they exist through God. Death is only an illusion because our ego, our soul, is merely a fluctuation, a temporary coming together in a certain way of a part of the cosmos. (Nevertheless our souls/egos, our individual lives, are imprinted forever in space-time/the mind of God -- there is a sense in which even the temporal reality is eternal.) The spirit within us is eternal, beyond time, decay, and death because at our core there is Nothing At All, there is God, from which all things are derived.
Salvation is always here, always now. From our perspective there is a Fall, from our perspective the salvation drama occurs in and through history and in and through ourselves personally within time. But when we see as God sees, when we know as we are known, then we are able to perceive that the cosmos is liberated as it is. God is within all things and all things are within God.
***
Generally speaking I simply consider the Bible my scriptures. I have read gnostic scriptures but they are not a primary source of inspiration for me. I have waffled between Catholicism and Anglicanism (leaning more towards Anglicanism again) but generally speaking I practice my faith within the mainstream church and recite the Nicene Creed. I do have other devotions and rituals of my own creation that I perform on my own (or with one or two others) but they do not replace the seven sacraments or prayers of the Church for me. Those rituals do however draw on private experiences and beliefs that inform my interpretation of Christianity. In many ways outwardly I am a more traditional Christian. My spirituality is still heavily Anglo-Catholic. I avoid modern liturgies for the older more somber liturgies. Everything in my devotional practices centers around the Eucharist, partaking of Christ sacramentally in bread and wine. Most of my prayers are traditional, most of them heavily involve invocation of the saints. But I also honor the life in plants, animals, and rocks. Generally speaking I don't have dealings with non-Christian gods, but I believe they exist in some way, the council of gods spoken of in the Hebrew Scriptures. But the Trinity is the Absolute God. I do sometimes pray to a popular unofficial folk saint as well as the Guardian Angel(s) that I have seen.
These beliefs and practices I have cultivated for some years and they have not substantially changed whether I was involved in the Catholic or Anglican churches. I could flesh out some more details such as my views of the Church and other religions -- which are less than "orthodox" by most standards -- but this should be sufficient.
Does this kind of belief structure fit anywhere on the spectrum of modern gnosticism? I have never considered identifying as a Gnostic because much of it takes too dim a view of the material cosmos which doesn't jive with my worldview.
