The Orthodox versus Gnostics

from:

The Orthodox versus Gnostics

This afternoon, we are going to discuss in a topical fashion, some of those ideas or spiritual Truths, God’s people were willing to kill over. This was serious business. What we now know, during the era between 150 and 350 AD, two hundred years, hundreds of different ideas about the nature of Jesus, the nature of Christ, the nature of God, the nature of man were actively debated and discussed throughout the then known world. At 150 AD, Orthodoxy did not exist. Yet, there would eventually be two polarizing ideologies, the good and the bad, the truth and the corrupt, the accepted and the non-accepted.

During the early years of Christianity, Orthodoxy was only a small part of the fertile mix of ideas circulating around all the churches of believers. Some would have us believe, the Orthodox were the dominant truth preservers of the early church. It is true, these early Christians were seriously trying to understand the mysterious events surrounding the life, death and resurrection of Jesus. Unfortunately, as the extreme wing of each viewpoint gained prominence, all the ideas in the middle were swept to the radical fringe. Between 100-200 AD, there became two prominent ideologies, the Orthodox and the Gnostics.

The Orthodox Christians

Who were the Orthodox? Well, any definition has fuzzy edges, but the Orthodox Christian has evolved bit by bit into what we now know as the Roman Catholic Orthodoxy. Modern Christianity, whether Catholic or Protestant, and all their many subdivisions and denominations are probably more Orthodox today, than most Christians in the first and second centuries. As such, the orthodox believe:
First, the Canon of the New Testament is recognized and accepted as divinely inspired.
Second, they profess to an apostolic creed, a system of authority within the church.
Thirdly, each one espouse or affirm a particular form of church institution. (Pagels, Elaine, The Gnostic Gospels, Vintage Books, New York, 1979, 1987 pg xxxiii)

It must be recognized that each one of these three elements, the New Testament canon, did not fully emerge until after the end of the second century, or 300 AD. By then Orthodox Christianity had become a three ranked hierarchy, which included bishops, priest, and deacon. Before suggesting any objecting or approving ideas, we must consider that Seventh-day Adventists are recognized as having the most complex hierarchy of all modern Christian religions, five levels of authoritative structure: General Conference, Union Conference, Local Conference, Pastor and Church Elder.

It’s a fact, the Roman Christian Church, controlled and preserved the Christian creeds and concepts of their choice, for over one thousand years, from 300 AD till the Protestant reformation in the 16th century. A large portion of modern Protestant Christian beliefs and church hierarchy is in debt to the Roman Catholic Church. So to be orthodox, one would be recognized as a ‘straight-thinking’ Christian. The guardians of orthodoxy claim there is one ‘true faith’. Any idea outside of true faith is heresy. To Bishop Irenaeus, Orthodoxy, there was only one true church and outside that church “there was no salvation” (Irenaeus, (AH, Against Heresies) Libros Quinque Adversus Haereses cited in Pagels, Elaine, The Gnostic Gospels, Vintage Books, New York, 1979, 1987 pg xxxiii)

The Gnostic Christians

Who were the Gnostics? There are two words in Greek for knowledge. Epistimi refers to the knowledge gathered by information gathering. On the other hand, the world Greek word, gnosis, is translated as knowledge with the sense of insight and understanding. . (Baring, Anne and Jules Cashfor, The Myst of the Goddess, Arkana, Penquin Books, 375 Hudson Street, New York, NY10014, 1991 p. 618)

Our first question, what was this knowledge about? Ultimate Reality. Those who claim to know nothing about ultimate reality are called agnostics. (ie. not knowing) Then we have scientific knowledge or didactic knowledge basically called rational knowledge. (I ‘know’ medicine.) This is knowledge by the use of the mind or the brain. Yet the Gnostic did not appeal to rational knowledge for ultimate truth. To them, truth comes through observation or experience. (I know you. I know Jesus) To some, this is insight, called the ‘eye of the heart’ which was directly received without any religious authorities such as pastors or priests. . (Baring, Anne and Jules Cashfor, Ibid,) To others this is intuition.

It was the teachings of the Gnostics that the individual must discover the divine consciousness within themselves, that brought them into direct conflict with the Orthodox Christians, who believed that salvation came from a belief as interpreted by the Apostolic Authorities and belonging to the Church.

Their literature appears to be very early. According to Professor Gilles Quispel, whom we talked about earlier, claims that the Gospel of Philip, which he discovered, came directly from the Jerusalem Church under the leadership of James the Just, the brother of Jesus. This was part of the original Aramaic sayings of Jesus, written soon after 50 AD. (Baring, Anne and Jules Cashfor, Ibid, 624)

To the Gnostic, the essence of the ministry and the teachings of Jesus was how to awaken the soul to the Divine, the God in us and its ability to perceive things that are spiritual. The spiritual being was the person awakened out of a slumber to the real life in the Kingdom of God. This was to be a transformation of consciousness in which they had to face the inner world of their own soul with the act of metanoia, or ‘turning around’. (Baring, Anne and Jules Cashfor, Ibid, 618-619)

How I came to consider myself Gnostic

I was raised as a Christian, albeit loosely. For most of my adult life I have waged an internal struggle regarding my faith. I have never been able to turn away from Christianity - as I have always had an awe and belief in Jesus. But I have never fully been able to reconcile that with so many of the teachings of the Christian church.

As I have gotten older (and wiser, although some might disagree lol) I have steadily grown both closer and farther from the church. Closer in seeking to reach the Christian ideals of peace, humility, charity and self awareness. Farther from the Church's viewpoints in particular as they relate to modern social and political viewpoints. How can a "Christian" be in favor of war? Doesn't this violate the teachings of the "Prince of Peace"? How can you be a "Christian" and shop at proudly shop at Walmart, knowing that doing so allows you more material possessions while your neighbors are impoverished by the loss of their small businesses and lack of medical care and benefits? Is it not Christian to care for your neighbor and fellow man? "Christians" [defined here as followers of the Christian Church NOT followers of the teachings of Jesus]. In the Bush-era of politics I found myself no longer steadily growing apart from the church, but actually vehemently opposed to it. Although this may anger many, I honestly find President Bush's use of the label "Christian" for himself to be a blasphemy of the teachings of Jesus. With the opposition of gay marriage, the war in Iraq, and the fiscal policies of the Bush Administration, it seems the term "Christian" has come to mean something that even Jesus himself could not possibly recognize.

Although this all comes off sounding like a ferocious attack on Christians, I do not mean it as such - I recognize and applaud the wonderful and amazing things that Christian people do every day. I am often deeply touched by acts of kindness and generosity and moved to tears by the stories of the sacrifices that people make for others every day. And I could and would never want to dismiss the incredible good works done by Churches around the world. It is in these moments that I have been most proud to be a Christian. It's just that it is not enough. As Christians, we don't make enough personal sacrifices. It is my belief that we have fallen away from the teachings of Christ. Many of us are taking the "easy way". Do you believe in Christ as you Lord and Savior? Great! Now we can do what we want here on earch because we're all going to heaven. This is obviously a vast oversimplification, but my point is that we are failing to closely examine the details of the life and teachings of Jesus. We are not living up to His example - more than that, we are not even striving to live up to that example. It is my belief that to ignore this is to ignore the most basic fundamentals of what makes someone a Christian. There is so much more to Jesus than miracles and mystical power. Underneath that lies a humble servant of a man whose kindness, charity, acceptance and love for his fellow man serves as a powerful example of how great we can become even as mere mortals if we wash ourselves free of our prejudices, pursuit of material wealth, anger, intolerance, and selfishness.

After years of feeling this way, I read an article that talked about Thomas Jefferson's "The Life and Morals of Jesus of Nazareth Extracted Textually from the Gospels in Greek, Latin, French and English". I did not feel ready to completely renounce the divinity of Jesus and, which I find Jefferson's writings to be very important for refocusing on the important ideals of what I call True Christianity. But from Jefferson's writings I found the Gospel of Thomas which struck a chord within me. It was as if all the pieces fit into place and I had finally come home. Or at least that I have found the correct path home. From there I read about the very early Christians and the split between the Gnostic and Apostolic schools of Christian faith and how they split. It was an amazing thing to know that I am not the only one who feels the way that I do.

This blog will chronicle various aspects of my faith and path. I will at times cross the line between intellectual viewpoints and emotional ones. I will strive to point these out so that anyone who might be reading this will know that I acknowledge the difference. I will strive to make peace with my own faith and with the faith of other Christians whose viewpoints differ from mine. I will strive to let go of my anger at the social injustice and find peace and love for my fellow man.

I will edit my posts as time permits as I generally write and post with little editorial work.

I welcome thoughtful comments on this topic.

[I will enclose after this post a description from another web site of the early struggles between Gnostic Christians who believed in the teachings of Jesus and the Apostolic Christians who focused on the miracles, the Trinity, and the Resurrection. That is a simplification and by including the text from this web site the explanation will be more complete.]