Get a life you fucking loser
Well, look at the link you posted earlier, even there, where you perceive a distancing between the DSS and the NHT, they too echo the idea that the Gospel of Thomas predated the synoptic gospels.
Further, I would just suggest not letting yourself get bogged down in what “the experts” or even what any other person labels as Gnostic or not - what I mean by that is, any “gnostic” would believe that their interpretation is (atleast an approximation of) the “original” “true” interpretation of / nature of existence - or in other words, “Adam was the first gnostic” or something along those lines, hence why Enoch could be called gnostic as well - hope I’m conveying my point here adequately
Have you read about the Essenes before? That’s a group I would call “gnostic” (jews), whereas groups like the Sethians or the Marcionites would probably more accurately be called Gnostic (Christians). My overarching point being there’s way too much nuance to accurately convey in (even a series of) comments lol. More important I think is the lowercase g “gnostic line of thought” which we can arguably trace back to the beginning (depending on how literally you want to take the gnostic cosmogonies)
Dawww did baby learn a new word with the recent news cycle? How cute
We know you by your fruit
Define apocryphal as you’re using it, because I don’t think those two words are mutually exclusive? Apocryphal just means “not included in the canon”, and considering who selected that canon, it seems logical that {they} would exclude the gnostic texts
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Book_of_Enoch
Specifically id point you towards:
The main peculiar aspects of this Enochic Judaism include:
the idea that evil and impurity on Earth originated as a result of angels that had intercourse with human women and were subsequently expelled from Heaven;[55]: 90
the absence of references to terms of the Mosaic covenant (such as the observance of Shabbat or the rite of circumcision), as found in the Torah;[58]: 50–51
the concept of "End of Days" as the time of final judgment that takes the place of promised earthly rewards;[55]: 92
the rejection of the Second Temple's sacrifices considered impure: according to Enoch 89:73, the Jews, when returned from the exile, "reared up that tower (the temple) and they began again to place a table before the tower, but all the bread on it was polluted and not pure"; the presentation of heaven in 1 Enoch 1–36, not in terms of the Jerusalem temple and its priests, but modelling God and his angels as a court, with its king and courtiers;[59]
a solar calendar in opposition to the lunar calendar used in the Second Temple (an important aspect for the determination of the dates of religious feasts);
an interest in the angelic world that involves life after death.[60]
Edit4edit:
it seems to predate
Yeah hence my use of “lowercase g, gnostic” - I don’t mean to link it to the neoplatonists or anything like that
My rationale for calling the DSS Gnostic is its prominent inclusion of the (lowercase g, “gnostic”) Book of Enoch, otherwise wiped from Church history, bar the Ethiopian Church
There is also the Essene hypothesis which further supports the claim of “gnosticism” wrt the DSS
In order to entertain such a thing I would have to disregard the New Testament in its entirety and give regard only to the gnostic texts - which I believe are much later than the canonical ones.
There’s good reason to think the opposite actually, that the Gnostic texts (some atleast - the label has been distorted into covering a huge swath of ideologies and groups at this point) predate and color the synoptic/NT texts
Firstly the two largest sources of Gnostic texts are the Dead Sea (Qumran) and Nag Hammadi troves, with the DS Scrolls being provably among the oldest extant manuscripts and secondly the Q Source hypothesis which posits that the 4 synoptic gospels are expansions and elaborations on the original “Sayings Gospel” or Q Source, which has as its most likely candidate the Gospel of Thomas
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dead_Sea_Scrolls
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Q_source
I don’t know if you quite need to toss out the NT, but you definitely need the ears to hear and the eyes to see from the suggested perspective, which is something Jesus says repeatedly
One thing I find quite interesting about Gnostic Jesus is what he said about making women into men in the gospel of Thomas I believe. This feels quite in tune with Jewish mysticism to me and what would go on to become Kabbalah.
Firstly, props for actually reading a text before starting to make your mind up, that’s more than can be said for 98% of Christians
Regarding that specific logion/saying that you raise, I would just point you in two directions: firstly I would point to the fact that there is nothing {they} love more than the inversion of the holy to the unholy and secondly I would point you towards the notion that Yin(female) and Yang(male) combine and merge to form the undifferentiated Tao, and this was established reality long before the Kabbalists attempted to pervert it. So I think there is a valid spiritual reality underneath that saying, and I also think you’re right, that this notion has been used corruptly by some esoteric orders (like kabbalists and their offspring orders)
I would still disregard Gnosticism for upholding the fundamental premise of YHWHs plan for the world and of Jesus as the deceitful destroyer portrayed as hero.
What do you think of the possibility that you’ve got these things mixed up? I think a fair analysis of things points to the idea that Jesus works to undo the plans of the demiurge (aka YHWH, aka the “Lord of Hosts” aka the God of War of a tribe of desert hucksters) by bringing this knowledge (aka gnosis) to the masses
I’ll let you figure it out for yourself
What have you done to convince him that Jesus serves the true God? I don’t see anything done by you which accomplished or even began to work towards that. Whereas what I’ve provided does do that.
Why don’t you think about that before u/#vomit -ing on other people again?
Is that what you think you did? All you did was prove his point lmao
Don’t tell me that, tell that to your assistant pastor who asked hours before me, who I was merely humorously quoting
Interesting how you were so unable to address OP’s concerns
He’s a zionist shill
Yeah have you ever even met a shepherd you fucking moron?!?
Go back to your containment board, faggot.
No one asked
Some advice: find a new cult, your current one is full of faggots
Even if YHWH is as the gnostics believe then the ultimate god above him still appointed him over the earth and so is equally as uncaring/evil or equally as ignorant.
It’s an even better fix for the conventional story than that! I wouldn’t think of the True, Ultimate, God as somehow “appointing” the demiurge - nor does any school of Gnosticism teach something like this (because, I agree with you, obviously any “God” that “appointed” a demiurge would be no God at all, the problem of the demiurge would merely be pushed back one step).
The Gnostic God and the common view of the Christian God differ in several key theological and philosophical ways, particularly in their roles in creation, their nature, and how they interact with the world and humanity.
Nature of the Divine: The Gnostic God is often viewed as a more abstract, transcendent, and unknowable deity. In Gnostic thought, the highest god (often referred to as the "True God" or the "Source") is completely beyond the physical world and is often seen as a divine, spiritual being of pure thought and light. This god is not typically concerned with the material world, which is often considered inferior or even corrupt.
Creation of the World: In many Gnostic systems, the physical world is seen as the creation of a lower, inferior being known as the Demiurge, rather than the true God. The Demiurge is often depicted as ignorant, arrogant, or even malevolent, trapping souls in a flawed material existence. The True God is not responsible for the creation of the physical world and may be considered indifferent or even hostile to it.
Salvation: Gnosticism emphasizes knowledge (gnosis) as the path to salvation. Gnostic salvation involves awakening to the divine spark within the self and transcending the material world. The Gnostic god is typically seen as a source of hidden knowledge that, when discovered, allows the soul to escape the material realm and return to the divine.
The Role of Jesus: In some Gnostic traditions, Jesus is viewed as a divine messenger or revealer of hidden knowledge, rather than the incarnate God. In Gnostic texts, Jesus may be portrayed as a teacher who helps others to understand the true nature of the divine and escape the illusion of the material world.
View of the Material World: The material world is often viewed negatively in Gnosticism, seen as a prison for the soul. The Gnostic belief generally holds that the physical world is the result of a lower, imperfect divine being (the Demiurge) and that true salvation involves escaping or transcending the material world to reunite with the divine.
In summary, the Gnostic god tends to be more abstract and detached from the material world, with an emphasis on esoteric knowledge and spiritual liberation.
Forgive the use of ChatGPT but it’s hard for me to put this stuff into words and this is better than just linking you to long texts and wiki pages lol
Have you heard of yaldabaoth / “the demiurge”?
That’s what I thought
Anna Paulina Mayerhofer was born in 1989 to George Mayerhofer and Monica Todd, an elementary school teacher and stay-at-home mother, in Santa Ana, California.[2][3] She was raised as a Messianic Jew by her father.[4][5]
Two more weeks!
^What a weird account
Mhmm, that’s why you go around being a petty tyrant douchebag on a dead forum, truly a vivacious existence