Well they range from goofy and easily dismissed to dogmatic beliefs built on lies and enforced through the deaths of tens if not hundreds of thousands of innocents.
You have the “gay priests” and the “lesbian pastors”, which I won’t even bother finding links for, and which represent the worst of “Churchianity” or the notion that you can just “pick your favorite interpretations” such that the religion is one of your own making. Easily dismissible, these people are just part of random churches with no broader affiliations, ok whatever fair enough
Next you have issues like the fact that Joe Biden hasn’t been excommunicated from Roman Catholicism despite all the times he’s supported abortion. That’s just a hyper specific example, but I make it to show that even the “trad”, “based” strains have been subverted, not just these random no name churches with the gay trans pastor-of-color. One need look no further than the pope for confirmation of this point.
“Ok”, you might say, “so what, it’s been corrupted recently, all that means is we just need to look at the history of the Church with an analytical mind and determine the truth from that” - I mostly agree with this hypothetical I just made you say, but I want to show one example of just how far back this corruption went:
Basically, the exact specifics of Trinitarianism is one of the oldest topics of debate in Christianity. The Catholic Church has never liked this, because they are defined by their Trinitarian beliefs. The specifics are nuanced, but effectively, what was once perhaps a marginal note (the “comma”), a wise insight left by a reader, was transformed into Canon, which was enforced with murder most commonly. I can’t write a dissertation on the subject but I personally don’t see Trinitarianism as a dogma supported by scripture, you might find some interesting information on the subject in this loooong wiki page or related ones on specific sects who were slaughtered en masse. Newton for example was a Unitarian, what a different world we would live in had he been killed for his unorthodox thinking!
Whole sects of nontrinitarians have, for the last ~1800 years, been systematically murdered by the tens of thousand. And this wasn’t just in the brutal early days of the Roman church but continued basically up until the Protestant Reformation and for a while after.
So all that is to say, “Christianity” today already consists of so many (conflicting) interpretations and views and perspectives. How I understand “gnosticism” is basically just “use your wisdom and the knowledge you can glean from the world around you to determine the truth”, thus “Christian gnosticism” is basically just “use your wisdom to interpret scripture, never thinking you already have ‘all the answers’, but instead humbly seeking His wisdom in His word”. Which is probably effectively what most real Christians these days are already doing, I’m just willing to look beyond the bounds of these books selected and edited and selectively edited by the liars and murders discussed above. Hence I’ll look at something like the Gospel of Thomas with an open mind, and see the beauty of the New Testament in the lean form of 114 sayings by the wisest teacher men have known, Jesus
Thanks for the explanation. I only have time to briefly discus this gospel of thomas today, I need to be off, it's a day of obligation after all.
Hence I’ll look at something like the Gospel of Thomas with an open mind, and see the beauty of the New Testament in the lean form of 114 sayings by the wisest teacher men have known, Jesus
That's a big assumption. That it even is. You seem to object to verse 114 in particular being included. But the issue is that that verse is in alignment with so many other gnostic beliefs on gender, change, transformation and alchemy. It is consistent with all the other gnostic stuff.
is basically just “use your wisdom to interpret scripture, never thinking you already have ‘all the answers’, but instead humbly seeking His wisdom in His word”.
That's a milquetoast motte definition of gnosticism, as is gospel of Thomas itself. That definition isn't all that objectionable on its face, and nor is this one example text. It is not nearly overtly objectionable as their other gnostic materials (that it was found amongst!). It does nevertheless have lines that should raise an eyebrow in the observant and cause deep unease.
The whole thing about damning the flesh that depends on the body, and the body dependant on the flesh, prayer and fasting leading to sin and condemnation, secret knowledge for Thomas, destroying heaven and heavens above (other books refer to the destruction of the heavens meaning sky, but heaven and the heaven above? Should be a bit worrying) And just all through it a load of contradictions. Contradictions internally and with the true gospels, like with James vs Peter leading the church. It's set it opposition. One or the other must be rejected, and I think it's clear which.
I need to be off, it's a day of obligation after all.
Ah, if you’re Catholic know that I have no qualms with the individuals, just the system that controls them
That's a milquetoast motte definition of gnosticism, as is gospel of Thomas itself. That definition isn't all that objectionable on its face, and nor is this one example text.
What’s your definition?
That's a big assumption. That it even is. You seem to object to verse 114 in particular being included.
Well, most of the quotes are in the Bible too. And no, I personally have no issue with verse 114, that text is included in the source I copied and pasted…
One or the other must be rejected, and I think it's clear which.
The one currently controlled by pedophiles, who have used lies to cook up additions to canon and then used those additions to justify killing hundreds of thousands? Or you mean the one which says “think for yourself”?
The one currently controlled by pedophiles, who have used lies to cook up additions to canon and then used those additions to justify killing hundreds of thousands? Or you mean the one which says “think for yourself”?
The one which discourages the degeneracy, rather than like in 114, encouraging it.
The devil encourages you to open your mind too you know.
What’s your definition?
Ask 10 gnostics get 100 answers, but a focus on secret knowledge, loyalty to some other gods (usually thoth/hermes, sophia, some higher god of knowledge/wisdom above the demiurge...), a strong body-spirit duality with the flesh being corrupt, syncretic mishmashes of various other belief systems, and emphasis on alchemy and transformation and attaining the spiritual heaven or godliness through knowledge... It's more a set of beliefs which they'll share some commonalities on.
Well they range from goofy and easily dismissed to dogmatic beliefs built on lies and enforced through the deaths of tens if not hundreds of thousands of innocents.
You have the “gay priests” and the “lesbian pastors”, which I won’t even bother finding links for, and which represent the worst of “Churchianity” or the notion that you can just “pick your favorite interpretations” such that the religion is one of your own making. Easily dismissible, these people are just part of random churches with no broader affiliations, ok whatever fair enough
Next you have issues like the fact that Joe Biden hasn’t been excommunicated from Roman Catholicism despite all the times he’s supported abortion. That’s just a hyper specific example, but I make it to show that even the “trad”, “based” strains have been subverted, not just these random no name churches with the gay trans pastor-of-color. One need look no further than the pope for confirmation of this point.
“Ok”, you might say, “so what, it’s been corrupted recently, all that means is we just need to look at the history of the Church with an analytical mind and determine the truth from that” - I mostly agree with this hypothetical I just made you say, but I want to show one example of just how far back this corruption went:
The Johannine Comma:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Johannine_Comma
Basically, the exact specifics of Trinitarianism is one of the oldest topics of debate in Christianity. The Catholic Church has never liked this, because they are defined by their Trinitarian beliefs. The specifics are nuanced, but effectively, what was once perhaps a marginal note (the “comma”), a wise insight left by a reader, was transformed into Canon, which was enforced with murder most commonly. I can’t write a dissertation on the subject but I personally don’t see Trinitarianism as a dogma supported by scripture, you might find some interesting information on the subject in this loooong wiki page or related ones on specific sects who were slaughtered en masse. Newton for example was a Unitarian, what a different world we would live in had he been killed for his unorthodox thinking!
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nontrinitarianism
Whole sects of nontrinitarians have, for the last ~1800 years, been systematically murdered by the tens of thousand. And this wasn’t just in the brutal early days of the Roman church but continued basically up until the Protestant Reformation and for a while after.
So all that is to say, “Christianity” today already consists of so many (conflicting) interpretations and views and perspectives. How I understand “gnosticism” is basically just “use your wisdom and the knowledge you can glean from the world around you to determine the truth”, thus “Christian gnosticism” is basically just “use your wisdom to interpret scripture, never thinking you already have ‘all the answers’, but instead humbly seeking His wisdom in His word”. Which is probably effectively what most real Christians these days are already doing, I’m just willing to look beyond the bounds of these books selected and edited and selectively edited by the liars and murders discussed above. Hence I’ll look at something like the Gospel of Thomas with an open mind, and see the beauty of the New Testament in the lean form of 114 sayings by the wisest teacher men have known, Jesus
Thanks for the explanation. I only have time to briefly discus this gospel of thomas today, I need to be off, it's a day of obligation after all.
That's a big assumption. That it even is. You seem to object to verse 114 in particular being included. But the issue is that that verse is in alignment with so many other gnostic beliefs on gender, change, transformation and alchemy. It is consistent with all the other gnostic stuff.
That's a milquetoast motte definition of gnosticism, as is gospel of Thomas itself. That definition isn't all that objectionable on its face, and nor is this one example text. It is not nearly overtly objectionable as their other gnostic materials (that it was found amongst!). It does nevertheless have lines that should raise an eyebrow in the observant and cause deep unease.
The whole thing about damning the flesh that depends on the body, and the body dependant on the flesh, prayer and fasting leading to sin and condemnation, secret knowledge for Thomas, destroying heaven and heavens above (other books refer to the destruction of the heavens meaning sky, but heaven and the heaven above? Should be a bit worrying) And just all through it a load of contradictions. Contradictions internally and with the true gospels, like with James vs Peter leading the church. It's set it opposition. One or the other must be rejected, and I think it's clear which.
Ah, if you’re Catholic know that I have no qualms with the individuals, just the system that controls them
What’s your definition?
Well, most of the quotes are in the Bible too. And no, I personally have no issue with verse 114, that text is included in the source I copied and pasted…
The one currently controlled by pedophiles, who have used lies to cook up additions to canon and then used those additions to justify killing hundreds of thousands? Or you mean the one which says “think for yourself”?
I'm glad we agree there can only be one.
The one which discourages the degeneracy, rather than like in 114, encouraging it.
The devil encourages you to open your mind too you know.
Ask 10 gnostics get 100 answers, but a focus on secret knowledge, loyalty to some other gods (usually thoth/hermes, sophia, some higher god of knowledge/wisdom above the demiurge...), a strong body-spirit duality with the flesh being corrupt, syncretic mishmashes of various other belief systems, and emphasis on alchemy and transformation and attaining the spiritual heaven or godliness through knowledge... It's more a set of beliefs which they'll share some commonalities on.
Verse 114 is about the union of the spiritual and the material, yin and yang - not some weird tranny shit or however you’re interpreting it
Aka loyalty to God above satan (the god of this world, need I remind you, the Bible states)
You realize Genesis is sourced from the Sumerians right? Almost word-for-word
What’s inherently wrong with this? What you’ve just described is “learning and improving oneself” in flowery (spiritual) language