Gnosticism
- Thread starter ShintoMale
- Start date
explain why the gnostic gospel of Thomas says women are not worthy of Heaven? why do you keep dodging that question?
Gospel of Thomas Saying 114
118 [114]. Simon Peter says to them: "Let Mary go out from our midst, for women are not worthy of life!" Jesus says: "See, I will draw her so as to make her male so that she also may become a living spirit like you males. For every woman who has become male will enter the Kingdom of heaven."
hypocrite devil worshipping gnostic won't address this misogyny in his gnostic writings he claimed he believe in
However, the award-winning author Michèle Roberts, who has also written about the Gnostic Cathars (in her novel The Wild Girl), sounds a note of caution about this latest renaissance. "I'm glad to say I thought myself out of Gnosticism about 20 years ago. Back then I could see its attraction - feeling free of any institutional constraints on being spiritual, a way for ordinary people to seek divine enlightenment. But if the new adherents get beyond the desire to look groovy and radical and really start looking at what Gnosticism was all about, they are in for a nasty shock. The Gnostics split spirit and matter, and saw matter as evil. They believed that men were spirit and women were matter. So, yes, there may have been some Cathars who allowed women a role - usually only after they had had sex with an enlightened man - but at heart Gnosticism was profoundly anti-woman and one of its greatest influences on Christianity was to make it the same."
https://www.independent.co.uk/arts-...e-secret-world-of-the-new-gnostics-64767.html
Gnosicism view sex as evil
So beyond the initial thrill for The Da Vinci Code readers or Matrix Reloaded viewers of discovering this skeleton in Christianity's closet there lie some unpleasant choices if they want to take on board Gnosticism with the traditional zeal of a convert. The bottom line is its demand that you reject everything to do this world as flawed and evil - homes, cars, money, all that is matter, not spirit.
It is quite a challenge. There was always a pessimistic, bleak, almost manic, streak in Gnosticism. That is why the early church fathers tried to bury it because they realised it had nothing invested in continuing this world. And potential new converts might also like to ponder the example of the Bogomils, a Bulgarian Gnostic cult in the 9th century. It insisted, in line with Gnostic beliefs, that sex for procreation was the work of the Devil, as it only served to prolong a world that was a vale of tears. So all its adherents, if they wanted to make love, were only allowed to bugger each other.
Given such strictures, it is perhaps unsurprising that, despite the numbers of those expressing a fashionable interest in Gnosticism or the history of the Gnostic gospels, there are few actually signing up. Not that this anti-institutional philosophy has ever been much given to organisation. The handful of UK-based Gnostic movements is apparently so otherworldly that they don't answer their phones, if indeed they have such evil contraptions. And those with a presence on the web seem more concerned with using Gnosticism to bash the church. The Gnostic Friends Network is a virulent anti-Christian outpouring, headlined "Jesus Says Love Your Enemies". It takes the Gnostic belief that this world was the work of the Devil and turns it into a charter for Devil-worshipping that has the shrill sensation seeking of a latter-day Aleister Crowley.
https://www.independent.co.uk/arts-...e-secret-world-of-the-new-gnostics-64767.html
So beyond the initial thrill for The Da Vinci Code readers or Matrix Reloaded viewers of discovering this skeleton in Christianity's closet there lie some unpleasant choices if they want to take on board Gnosticism with the traditional zeal of a convert. The bottom line is its demand that you reject everything to do this world as flawed and evil - homes, cars, money, all that is matter, not spirit.
It is quite a challenge. There was always a pessimistic, bleak, almost manic, streak in Gnosticism. That is why the early church fathers tried to bury it because they realised it had nothing invested in continuing this world. And potential new converts might also like to ponder the example of the Bogomils, a Bulgarian Gnostic cult in the 9th century. It insisted, in line with Gnostic beliefs, that sex for procreation was the work of the Devil, as it only served to prolong a world that was a vale of tears. So all its adherents, if they wanted to make love, were only allowed to bugger each other.
Given such strictures, it is perhaps unsurprising that, despite the numbers of those expressing a fashionable interest in Gnosticism or the history of the Gnostic gospels, there are few actually signing up. Not that this anti-institutional philosophy has ever been much given to organisation. The handful of UK-based Gnostic movements is apparently so otherworldly that they don't answer their phones, if indeed they have such evil contraptions. And those with a presence on the web seem more concerned with using Gnosticism to bash the church. The Gnostic Friends Network is a virulent anti-Christian outpouring, headlined "Jesus Says Love Your Enemies". It takes the Gnostic belief that this world was the work of the Devil and turns it into a charter for Devil-worshipping that has the shrill sensation seeking of a latter-day Aleister Crowley.
https://www.independent.co.uk/arts-...e-secret-world-of-the-new-gnostics-64767.html
Because it does not and you are not asking the right question, since it seems that you have not read the story.
What did Jesus answer?
Regards
DL
Easily refuted garbage.
All you have to do is look at our view of heaven.
I think I gave you this before but I guess it did not register.
I wrote thisto refute the false notion that Gnostic Christians do not like matter andreality that the inquisitors propagated to justify their many murders of myreligions originators
TheChristian reality.
1 John2:15Love not the world, neither the things that are in the world. If any manlove the world, the love of the Father is not in him. 16For all that is in the world, the lust ofthe flesh, and the lust of the eyes, and the pride of life, is not of theFather, but is of the world.
Gen 3; 17 Thoushalt not eat of it; cursed is the ground for thy sake; in toil shalt thou eatof it all the days of thy life.
-----------
The GnosticChristian reality.
GnosticChristian Jesus said, "Those whoseek should not stop seeking until they find. When they find, they will bedisturbed. When they are disturbed, they will marvel, and will reign over all.[And after they have reigned they will rest.]"
"Ifthose who attract you say, 'See, the Kingdom is in the sky,' then the birds ofthe sky will precede you.
If they sayto you, 'It is under the earth,' then the fish of the sea will precede you.
Rather, theKingdom of God is inside of you, and it is outside of you.
[Those who]become acquainted with [themselves] will find it; [and when you] becomeacquainted with yourselves, [you will understand that] it is you who are thesons of the living Father.
But if youwill not know yourselves, you dwell in poverty and it is you who are thatpoverty."
As you cansee from that quote, if we see God's kingdom all around us and inside of us, wecannot think that the world is anything but evolving perfection. Most justdon't see it and live in poverty. Let me try to make you see the world the wayI do.
Here is amind exercise. Tell me what you see when you look around. The best that canpossibly be, given our past history, or an ugly and imperfect world?
Candide.
"It isdemonstrable that things cannot be otherwise than as they are; for as allthings have been created for some end, they must necessarily be created for thebest end.”
That meansthat we live in the best of all possible worlds, given all the conditions athand and the history that got us here. That is an irrefutable statement givenentropy and the anthropic principle.
Regards
DL
the devil worshipper still refuse to answer why the gnostic gospel of Thomas say women are not worthy of life and yes the gnostic view this physical world and matter evil and I would even bother address his quoting of the bible because he does not understand it in the first place
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/re...ries-the-Gnostic-idea-that-matter-is-bad.html
What did the Gnostics believe? Someone asked me that, after I mentioned their intellectual opponent, Irenaeus, who lived in Lyon in the second century.
The answer is that we don’t quite know, for two reasons. One is that their beliefs varied greatly from group to group. More importantly, they enforced a system of secret teaching, the esoteric gnosis or “knowledge” that gave their sect its name.
Why this should matter centuries later is that, in exposing their beliefs, St Irenaeus (pictured) gave an account of early Christianity that is still freshly impressive. The key teaching of Gnosticism that Irenaeus opposes is that material things are bad. Some Christian writers even now unthinkingly say that our being material is a falling away from God, as if it were equivalent to sin.
Reading Irenaeus’s refutation of Gnosticism is no easy task. His treatise Adversus Haereses (“Against the heresies”) argues in the manner of the late classical world, which is foreign to our tastes, and he has no section “New readers start here”.
So it was a pleasure to catch up with a presentation of Irenaeus’s book by the theologian Hans Urs von Balthasar, first published in English in 1990 under the title The Scandal of the Incarnation (Ignatius Press, £9.42). Fortunately, the translator, John Saward, is a theologian in his own right and writes very clearly.
Balthasar arranges passages from Irenaeus thematically. He brings out the Gnostics’ belief that the maker of the world, the Demiurge, is not the highest God. They declare there is a god beyond the Christian God, and he does not communicate with humans nor rule the world. This, Irenaeus argues, is the god of the Greek philosopher Epicurus – a god without the power of providence.
Because the Gnostics’ highest God is unknowable, his followers do not have faith in him, do not believe what he tells them as Christians do. Christians believe Jesus’s revelation, handed down by the Apostles. Gnostics claimed instead a secret mystical knowledge. Irenaeus points out mildly that, while the Gnostics place their secret knowledge above that of the maker of the world (as if they were superior to him), “they cannot make so much as a gnat, nor have they power over their own bodies, which often suffer pain against their will”.
Irenaeus is outraged by the Gnostic teaching that Jesus did not want his followers to seek the Father (since he is not to be found). Christians who seek the Father, he says, do find him.
The Word (who became flesh at an historical date) had, Irenaeus argues, already begun to reveal God through the created cosmos itself. The Incarnation – God becoming a man – is the nub of the question about whether matter is good or bad.
Jesus is God: “He becomes what we are in order to make us what he is.” Jesus’s body was real, not an appearance. He is the second Adam, who was made from the earth, just as Jesus was born from creation, being the true son of a woman. “The soul on its own is not a man,” insists Irenaeus, foreshadowing a famous statement by Thomas Aquinas 1,100 years later: “My soul is not me.”
The actions of Jesus as man are a “recapitulation”, rerunning the development of mankind and putting him back on course by means of a companionship of love, into which love, moreover, mankind is taken.
Speaking paradoxically of God’s eternity, Irenaeus says that “since the Saviour existed already [as the Word, from the beginning], the one to be saved [Adam] had to be brought into existence, so that the Saviour should not be in vain”.
God used his own creation, the world, for the salvation of man. Even the elements that go to make up the Eucharist, the central act of Christianity, are bread and wine, material things from the earth. Irenaeus looks forward to the resurrection of the body, which is no more difficult to God than making mankind from dust in the first place.
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/re...ries-the-Gnostic-idea-that-matter-is-bad.html
What did the Gnostics believe? Someone asked me that, after I mentioned their intellectual opponent, Irenaeus, who lived in Lyon in the second century.
The answer is that we don’t quite know, for two reasons. One is that their beliefs varied greatly from group to group. More importantly, they enforced a system of secret teaching, the esoteric gnosis or “knowledge” that gave their sect its name.
Why this should matter centuries later is that, in exposing their beliefs, St Irenaeus (pictured) gave an account of early Christianity that is still freshly impressive. The key teaching of Gnosticism that Irenaeus opposes is that material things are bad. Some Christian writers even now unthinkingly say that our being material is a falling away from God, as if it were equivalent to sin.
Reading Irenaeus’s refutation of Gnosticism is no easy task. His treatise Adversus Haereses (“Against the heresies”) argues in the manner of the late classical world, which is foreign to our tastes, and he has no section “New readers start here”.
So it was a pleasure to catch up with a presentation of Irenaeus’s book by the theologian Hans Urs von Balthasar, first published in English in 1990 under the title The Scandal of the Incarnation (Ignatius Press, £9.42). Fortunately, the translator, John Saward, is a theologian in his own right and writes very clearly.
Balthasar arranges passages from Irenaeus thematically. He brings out the Gnostics’ belief that the maker of the world, the Demiurge, is not the highest God. They declare there is a god beyond the Christian God, and he does not communicate with humans nor rule the world. This, Irenaeus argues, is the god of the Greek philosopher Epicurus – a god without the power of providence.
Because the Gnostics’ highest God is unknowable, his followers do not have faith in him, do not believe what he tells them as Christians do. Christians believe Jesus’s revelation, handed down by the Apostles. Gnostics claimed instead a secret mystical knowledge. Irenaeus points out mildly that, while the Gnostics place their secret knowledge above that of the maker of the world (as if they were superior to him), “they cannot make so much as a gnat, nor have they power over their own bodies, which often suffer pain against their will”.
Irenaeus is outraged by the Gnostic teaching that Jesus did not want his followers to seek the Father (since he is not to be found). Christians who seek the Father, he says, do find him.
The Word (who became flesh at an historical date) had, Irenaeus argues, already begun to reveal God through the created cosmos itself. The Incarnation – God becoming a man – is the nub of the question about whether matter is good or bad.
Jesus is God: “He becomes what we are in order to make us what he is.” Jesus’s body was real, not an appearance. He is the second Adam, who was made from the earth, just as Jesus was born from creation, being the true son of a woman. “The soul on its own is not a man,” insists Irenaeus, foreshadowing a famous statement by Thomas Aquinas 1,100 years later: “My soul is not me.”
The actions of Jesus as man are a “recapitulation”, rerunning the development of mankind and putting him back on course by means of a companionship of love, into which love, moreover, mankind is taken.
Speaking paradoxically of God’s eternity, Irenaeus says that “since the Saviour existed already [as the Word, from the beginning], the one to be saved [Adam] had to be brought into existence, so that the Saviour should not be in vain”.
God used his own creation, the world, for the salvation of man. Even the elements that go to make up the Eucharist, the central act of Christianity, are bread and wine, material things from the earth. Irenaeus looks forward to the resurrection of the body, which is no more difficult to God than making mankind from dust in the first place.
I did. I don't care what the garlic crop of Patagonia is either. The Gnostics are of supreme indifference to me.
As long as some dipsh*t makes ridiculous and childish accusations at me because I am not interested in any aspect of Gnosticism I do not feel constrained to be delicate in my replies.
answer the question show credible citations proving Judaism copied other pagan religions.
You are lying and misrepresenting Gnostic Christian ideas, even when corrected, and show your intent to deceive.
Fear.
Cowards can never be moral.
Regards
DL
i am quoting credible sources from people who study Gnosticism you on the other hand only use insults and put-downs and refuse to answer why the gnostic gospels say women are not worthy of life and not worthy to enter to kingdom of heaven
answer the question show citations proving Judaism copy paganism/animism you made the claim the burden of proof is on you
While ignoring my asking you what Jesus said and just continuing to spout your garbage.
You do my work of discrediting you for me.
Regards
DL
you are discrediting yourself by constantly starting threads attacking Christians
God cursed the Serpent for deceiving Adam and eve
God cursed the Serpent for deceiving Adam and eve
More power and control of earth.
A profitable and rewarding curse.
Seems you think your own bunch of virgins in heaven would also be a curse.
You could be right.
Regards
DL
In 2018, only a primitive uneducated fool would still believe in an actual,literal Adam & Eve.
ROFL even that fairy story predates the Judaic story.