- Jul 12, 2004
- 26,337
- 1,595
- Faith
- Christian
- Marital Status
- Married
- Politics
- US-Others
This thread is inspired by the one on “heresy.” If we can avoid using names and making personal comments to any living individual in or outside of this forum, I would like to hear your views on the following article from my files, providing we can stick to the ideas and not people who hold them:
BTW, here’s an interesting Wikipedia article on secular and well as religious Neo-Gnosticism: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gnosticism_in_modern_times
~Jim
The term Gnosticism derives from the Greek word gnosis, meaning "knowledge." A person who is "Gnostic" is one who exalts knowledge (today called “revelation”
above any other form of comprehension. Such “revelation knowledge” can become a tool for controlling life, as it did during the first century. As a first century heresy, Gnosticism taught that there is "secret knowledge" or "gnosis" and that these cryptic secrets are obtainable only through an elite group of Gnostic priests/teachers.
That ancient form of Gnosticism has reappeared as a form of Neo-Gnosticism that has crept into the Pentecostal/Charismatic movement over the past century. An elite segment of P/C’s seem to have received "revelation knowledge" apart from, or adjunct to scripture. They are, of course, as were their ancient counterparts, "anointed." and impart these revelations to others who await their next revelation via TV, books, tapes, mass rallies, etc.
For example, the first to advance the doctrine of a “spiritual death of Christ” was Cerinthus, an early Gnostic, who attempted to fuse the Christian doctrine of Christ with more mystical concepts. He taught a distinction between the Man Jesus and the "Christ spirit" which descended upon Him at His baptism and later departed at His crucifixion. This information is well documented in Ireneaus' monumental work, "Against Heresies," in which Cerinthus’ teachings were soundly marked as heterodox. This doctrine is revived within the teaching that Christ died spiritually, gave up His divinity, and was then born again in His resurrection.
Another Neo-Gnostic doctrine that has been revived over the past century is the dualism of man, whose fleshly mind is inherently evil but whose divine spirit is pure (provided it has been properly “gnosticized” by revelation-knowledge imparted through certain teachers). The most common treatment of this says, “Man is a spirit who has a soul and lives in a body.” To those effected (some might say “infected” by this idea, the spiritual man is supposedly a spirit creature that exists in God's Class, a God-man, while the body is seen as merely the tabernacle in which the spirit-man temporarily resides, a philosophy that grew more out of 19th century mind cults (e.g., Christian Science) than from orthodox Christianity. N.T. Wright has refuted this dismissal of the body in his views on resurrection (see here and here).
Another view of this is that man is corrupted by “sense knowledge” and so is completely incapable of understanding spiritual matters. The only liberation from such “sense knowledge” is a renewed mind but only if that renewed mind accepts certain tenets of revelation-knowledge as taught by a particular P/C sub-group of teachers, one of whom has clearly stated, "One almost has to bypass the brain and operate from the inner man, which is our heart or spirit." But, of course, this inner man must accept the views advanced by this teacher to be truly “gnosticized”.
Another teacher has said publicly, "The man with an experience [revelation] is never at the mercy of a man with an argument." Of course, experience would include some sort of epiphany of truth and, therefore, would not be subject to objection/argument (including scripture, I suppose). Ergo, an experience/revelation trumps reason or scripture.
So, from this can you see an encroachment of Neo-Gnosticism, a revival of an old refuted teaching, into some of our modern P/C teachings? I know this sort of thinking has effected me and I am wondering how influenced I have become by these views.. above any other form of comprehension. Such “revelation knowledge” can become a tool for controlling life, as it did during the first century. As a first century heresy, Gnosticism taught that there is "secret knowledge" or "gnosis" and that these cryptic secrets are obtainable only through an elite group of Gnostic priests/teachers.That ancient form of Gnosticism has reappeared as a form of Neo-Gnosticism that has crept into the Pentecostal/Charismatic movement over the past century. An elite segment of P/C’s seem to have received "revelation knowledge" apart from, or adjunct to scripture. They are, of course, as were their ancient counterparts, "anointed." and impart these revelations to others who await their next revelation via TV, books, tapes, mass rallies, etc.
For example, the first to advance the doctrine of a “spiritual death of Christ” was Cerinthus, an early Gnostic, who attempted to fuse the Christian doctrine of Christ with more mystical concepts. He taught a distinction between the Man Jesus and the "Christ spirit" which descended upon Him at His baptism and later departed at His crucifixion. This information is well documented in Ireneaus' monumental work, "Against Heresies," in which Cerinthus’ teachings were soundly marked as heterodox. This doctrine is revived within the teaching that Christ died spiritually, gave up His divinity, and was then born again in His resurrection.
Another Neo-Gnostic doctrine that has been revived over the past century is the dualism of man, whose fleshly mind is inherently evil but whose divine spirit is pure (provided it has been properly “gnosticized” by revelation-knowledge imparted through certain teachers). The most common treatment of this says, “Man is a spirit who has a soul and lives in a body.” To those effected (some might say “infected”
by this idea, the spiritual man is supposedly a spirit creature that exists in God's Class, a God-man, while the body is seen as merely the tabernacle in which the spirit-man temporarily resides, a philosophy that grew more out of 19th century mind cults (e.g., Christian Science) than from orthodox Christianity. N.T. Wright has refuted this dismissal of the body in his views on resurrection (see here and here).Another view of this is that man is corrupted by “sense knowledge” and so is completely incapable of understanding spiritual matters. The only liberation from such “sense knowledge” is a renewed mind but only if that renewed mind accepts certain tenets of revelation-knowledge as taught by a particular P/C sub-group of teachers, one of whom has clearly stated, "One almost has to bypass the brain and operate from the inner man, which is our heart or spirit." But, of course, this inner man must accept the views advanced by this teacher to be truly “gnosticized”.
Another teacher has said publicly, "The man with an experience [revelation] is never at the mercy of a man with an argument." Of course, experience would include some sort of epiphany of truth and, therefore, would not be subject to objection/argument (including scripture, I suppose). Ergo, an experience/revelation trumps reason or scripture.
BTW, here’s an interesting Wikipedia article on secular and well as religious Neo-Gnosticism: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gnosticism_in_modern_times
~Jim
Beware of half-truths - you may get hold of the wrong half.
Last edited:
