📌  SUPERNATURAL IN GNOSTIC TEACHINGS  😎

[BigJohn]

A book of importance in trying to understand the Gnostic creation accounts is On The Origin Of The World. This book was probably written toward the end of the 3rd century to the beginning of the 4th century. When the book was found in the 1940's, it had no name. Considering the books material, the title On The Origin Of The World was assigned to the book.

This book is well written but is not in harmony with the Bible, which, considering its source, we would expect.  

The book, developed around an older type of philosophy that wanted to replace the creation account(s) mentioned in the Bible, so they came up with their own counter creation account that is heavily laden with the supernatural.

Instead of "In the beginning, God created the Heaven(s) and the Earth." a counter account, well written, emerged. Here is how the text initially presented doubt about the creation account(s).

The writing begins with "Seeing that everybody, gods of the world and mankind, says that nothing existed prior to chaos, I, in distinction to them, shall demonstrate that they are all mistaken, because they are not acquainted with the origin of chaos, nor with its root. Here is the demonstration."

In the first sentence, numerous postulates are put forth. The writer uses the word "I" but never reveals who he/she is. Toward the end of the document the 'author' uses "I" one more time and writes "I come, therefore, to the main points regarding the immortal man: I shall speak of all the beings that belong to him, explaining how they happen to be here."

The following sentences in the book prepare the reader for an alternate account of creation. It reads:

"How well it suits all men, on the subject of chaos, to say that it is a kind of darkness! But in fact it comes from a shadow, which has been called by the name 'darkness'. And the shadow comes from a product that has existed since the beginning. It is, moreover, clear that it existed before chaos came into being, and that the latter is posterior to the first product. Let us therefore concern ourselves with the facts of the matter; and furthermore, with the first product, from which chaos was projected. And in this way the truth will be clearly demonstrated."                                                      
the 'subject of chaos' is introduced into the vocabulary which in a sense gives the document an authority. The darkness mentioned in Genesis is 'watered down' as it comes from a shadow. "And the shadow comes from a product that has existed since the beginning." The expression "It is, moreover, clear that it existed before chaos came into being" leans the reader in to a false sense of confidence so as to imply all the information presented is factual when it is only speculative at the most.

The next two sentences further cement an image in to the reader's mind that the author must have hoped will replace the Genesis creation account. A cleaver, charming selection of words apparently whose main purpose was to persuade the 'believer' into believing something else.

The Gnostic Supernatural Creation Account claimed the immortals developed out of the infinite but with a twist. "After the natural structure of the immortal beings had completely developed out of the infinite, a likeness then emanated from Pistis (Faith); it is called Sophia (Wisdom)." From Pistis (Faith), emerged Sophia (Wisdom). Pistis is the Greek word for 'faith'. Likewise, Sophia is the Greek word for Wisdom.

And then more new concepts are introduced.

"It exercised volition and became a product resembling the primeval light. And immediately her will manifested itself as a likeness of heaven, having an unimaginable magnitude; it was between the immortal beings and those things that came into being after them, like [...]: she (Sophia) functioned as a veil dividing mankind from the things above."

[davidmartin]

i think to make any sense of this stuff
you have to try and put yourself back to ancient times
greek philosophy was the ultimate thought form and everyone was duking it out trying to have the best one
so author is saying mine is way more advanced
i dont think he's primarily interested in working within christian or jewish theology he's trying to impress philosophical crowd and spiritually curious
its what the new age looked like 1700 years ago
and this is relatively late text
an earlier one that does similar thing is eugnostos the blessed (likeable)
a later one is Zostrianos (even more 'out there' and unintelligable)
but gnostics were popular enough in philsophical circles the chief philosopher of the 3rd cent. wrote a book condemning them he was having none of it
its a fascinating look into what was going on back then
it doesnt really mean that these guys were only caring about attacking the orthodox church so much they wanted to be the top philosophers and attract folk to their school of thought

[BigJohn]

Originally Posted by davidmartin

i think to make any sense of this stuff
you have to try and put yourself back to ancient times
greek philosophy was the ultimate thought form and everyone was duking it out trying to have the best one
so author is saying mine is way more advanced
i dont think he's primarily interested in working within christian or jewish theology he's trying to impress philosophical crowd and spiritually curious
its what the new age looked like 1700 years ago
and this is relatively late text
an earlier one that does similar thing is eugnostos the blessed (likeable)
a later one is Zostrianos (even more 'out there' and unintelligable)
but gnostics were popular enough in philsophical circles the chief philosopher of the 3rd cent. wrote a book condemning them he was having none of it
its a fascinating look into what was going on back then
it doesnt really mean that these guys were only caring about attacking the orthodox church so much they wanted to be the top philosophers and attract folk to their school of thought

In some circles, one 'hidden book' we are all familiar with is the Book of Mormon. If it wasn't written in 1611 King James English, it could have become one of the New Age's premier books. I like the plots in that book..... in many cases they are well developed.

But then, the Book of Mormon, doesn't hold up to scrutiny just as the Gnostic books don't hold up to scrutiny to be included in the Bible.

[BigJohn]

Originally Posted by BigJohn

A book of importance in trying to understand the Gnostic creation accounts is On The Origin Of The World. This book was probably written toward the end of the 3rd century to the beginning of the 4th century. When the book was found in the 1940's, it had no name. Considering the books material, the title On The Origin Of The World was assigned to the book.

This book is well written but is not in harmony with the Bible, which, considering its source, we would expect.  

The book, developed around an older type of philosophy that wanted to replace the creation account(s) mentioned in the Bible, so they came up with their own counter creation account that is heavily laden with the supernatural.

Instead of "In the beginning, God created the Heaven(s) and the Earth." a counter account, well written, emerged. Here is how the text initially presented doubt about the creation account(s).

The writing begins with "Seeing that everybody, gods of the world and mankind, says that nothing existed prior to chaos, I, in distinction to them, shall demonstrate that they are all mistaken, because they are not acquainted with the origin of chaos, nor with its root. Here is the demonstration."

In the first sentence, numerous postulates are put forth. The writer uses the word "I" but never reveals who he/she is. Toward the end of the document the 'author' uses "I" one more time and writes "I come, therefore, to the main points regarding the immortal man: I shall speak of all the beings that belong to him, explaining how they happen to be here."

The following sentences in the book prepare the reader for an alternate account of creation. It reads:

"How well it suits all men, on the subject of chaos, to say that it is a kind of darkness! But in fact it comes from a shadow, which has been called by the name 'darkness'. And the shadow comes from a product that has existed since the beginning. It is, moreover, clear that it existed before chaos came into being, and that the latter is posterior to the first product. Let us therefore concern ourselves with the facts of the matter; and furthermore, with the first product, from which chaos was projected. And in this way the truth will be clearly demonstrated."                                                      
the 'subject of chaos' is introduced into the vocabulary which in a sense gives the document an authority. The darkness mentioned in Genesis is 'watered down' as it comes from a shadow. "And the shadow comes from a product that has existed since the beginning." The expression "It is, moreover, clear that it existed before chaos came into being" leans the reader in to a false sense of confidence so as to imply all the information presented is factual when it is only speculative at the most.

The next two sentences further cement an image in to the reader's mind that the author must have hoped will replace the Genesis creation account. A cleaver, charming selection of words apparently whose main purpose was to persuade the 'believer' into believing something else.

The Gnostic Supernatural Creation Account claimed the immortals developed out of the infinite but with a twist. "After the natural structure of the immortal beings had completely developed out of the infinite, a likeness then emanated from Pistis (Faith); it is called Sophia (Wisdom)." From Pistis (Faith), emerged Sophia (Wisdom). Pistis is the Greek word for 'faith'. Likewise, Sophia is the Greek word for Wisdom.

And then more new concepts are introduced.

"It exercised volition and became a product resembling the primeval light. And immediately her will manifested itself as a likeness of heaven, having an unimaginable magnitude; it was between the immortal beings and those things that came into being after them, like [...]: she (Sophia) functioned as a veil dividing mankind from the things above."

Another Gnostic creation book is The Secret Revelation of John.

This book has a strange entry. It reads:

"This is the number of the angels: together they are 365. They all worked on it until, limb for limb, the natural and the material body was completed by them. Now there are other ones in charge over the remaining passions whom I did not mention to you. But if you wish to know them, it is written in the [/b]book of Zoroaster[b]. And all the angels and demons worked until they had constructed the natural body."

The mention of the book of Zoroaster puts new light on the origins of Gnosticism. Gnosticism apparently did not spring from Christianity but from Zoroastrianism. This revelation does make sense.

As for the The Secret Revelation of John, the book is much in line with On The Origin Of The World.

For example:
The creation accounts are not identical but do have some similarities as expressed in the following:

"And the Sophia of the Epinoia, being an aeon, conceived a thought from herself and the conception of the invisible Spirit and foreknowledge. She wanted to bring forth a likeness out of herself without the consent of the Spirit, - he had not approved - and without her consort, and without his consideration. And though the person of her maleness had not approved, and she had not found her agreement, and she had thought without the consent of the Spirit and the knowledge of her agreement, (yet) she brought forth. And because of the invincible power which is in her, her thought did not remain idle, and something came out of her which was imperfect and different from her appearance, because she had created it without her consort. And it was dissimilar to the likeness of its mother, for it has another form.

"And when she saw (the consequences of) her desire, it changed into a form of a lion-faced serpent. And its eyes were like lightning fires which flash. She cast it away from her, outside that place, that no one of the immortal ones might see it, for she had created it in ignorance. And she surrounded it with a luminous cloud, and she placed a throne in the middle of the cloud that no one might see it except the holy Spirit who is called the mother of the living. And she called his name Yaltabaoth."

Notice that Yaltabaoth and Sophia are in both accounts.

[GlitterRose]

I think you'd be hard-pressed to find a Gnostic today who views this in the literal sense.

[GlitterRose]

I've found that Stephan Hoeller is a good source.

[BigJohn]

Originally Posted by GlitterRose

I think you'd be hard-pressed to find a Gnostic today who views this in the literal sense.

I just relate what the Gnostic scriptures say.

I find it interesting that Gnosticism may have came from Zoroastrianism. They also have compound creation accounts and are deeply entrenched in the supernatural, very similar to Judaism and Christianity.

Originally Posted by GlitterRose

I think you'd be hard-pressed to find a Gnostic today who views this in the literal sense.

I thought this thread was really designed just to talk against Soul Seeker's points (as SS talks a lot about the supernatural in Christianity), and possibly to discredit gnosticism in general, if I read it right (consistent with other posts scattered on this forum)

I didn't even realize there was a thing against Gnosticism until I encountered this particular forum.

Gnosis is always the most highly regarded in spiritual circles - except I guess for some modern Churches/traditions.

JL

[BigJohn]

Originally Posted by GlitterRose

I've found that Stephan Hoeller is a good source.

He seems like he has some really nice information.

As for me, I like sticking with source material.

[davidmartin]

Originally Posted by janielee

I thought this thread was really designed just to talk against Soul Seeker's points (as SS talks a lot about the supernatural in Christianity), and possibly to discredit gnosticism in general, if I read it right (consistent with other posts scattered on this forum)

I didn't even realize there was a thing against Gnosticism until I encountered this particular forum.

Gnosis is always the most highly regarded in spiritual circles - except I guess for some modern Churches/traditions.

JL

haha there's been a thing against Gnosticism for 2000 years :)
the church father Irenaeus in 180ad wrote a whole book against it called "On the Detection and Overthrow of the So-Called Gnosis"
where have you been?