EADD Theology Thread - Chapter III: Trinity

[NightsEpiphany]

EXODUS

Jesus said 'only God is good'.* I think its only by Grace that we get anywhere near righteousness...and we all fall short at times. John writes:

"If we confess our sins, He is faithful and righteous to forgive us our sins and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness. If we say that we have not sinned, we make Him a liar and His word is not in us.

Are they saying that Popes are infallible creatures or that their ecclesiastical decisions are?

*Mark 10:18

 

[Vurtual]

^Do you believe in the idea of original sin, via naughty old eve? Or the sins of the father? I personally can't see any evil/sin in babies and children (or anyone else for that matter; just suffering turned outwards)

What do you think about the gnostic/cathar idea that matter is evil and spirit is good? (and the connected idea that the creator of the world was an evil 'demiurge' who wanted to trap us in the world of matter, while the serpent was a representative of the true god of spirit, who wanted to set us free)

 

[Sammy G]

Lest we forget the Bulgars and the Manicheans.

 

[Vurtual]

Or descartes?

 

[NightsEpiphany]

Can't go wrong with Bob Dobbs. Subgenius.

just got the dobby thing. Give over perleeze.

 

[Vurtual]

Don't insult my faith please - that's some serious religion in there (a joke disguised as a religion, or a religion disguised as a joke?) (maybe you just don't have enough slack to get the message ). Ultimately no less silly than the bible taken literally (and a damn sight funnier)

 

[NightsEpiphany]

^Do you believe in the idea of original sin, via naughty old eve? Or the sins of the father? I personally can't see any evil/sin in babies and children (or anyone else for that matter; just suffering turned outwards)

What do you think about the gnostic/cathar idea that matter is evil and spirit is good? (and the connected idea that the creator of the world was an evil 'demiurge' who wanted to trap us in the world of matter, while the serpent was a representative of the true god of spirit, who wanted to set us free)

I think when we fell from Grace it must have been like falling from a different dimension. There wasn't a hint of death in the garden of Eden. God saw that ' it was good'.

He told them if they ate the fruit ( whatever that was) of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil they would die and we did. We brought both physical and spiritual death on our selves and yes I believe if you are under law, eg cause and effect (OT) there can be generational issues. Deuteronomy and Leviticus are clear on that.

Christ was the atoning sacrifice making a Way for Spirit and Matter to actually be reconciled. I always think of atonement as at-one-ment. He bought a Way back to life for a creation under the curse of death.

No I can't see how the perspective that matter is evil can stand. The bible says ' we are beautifully and wonderfully made' psalm 139:14

The God is an evil demiurge stance just sounds twisted frankly. In my personal experience and according to the bible. God is Love.

I really haven't read a lot of Gnostic texts so am not prepared or equipped to develop that argument.

Hope that's alright.

 

[Vurtual]

'Generational issues' means you agree with the 'sins of the father'? That's just nuts and was meant as a reductio ad absurdam. The specific idea that jesus died for our sins and before that all humans were fucked; or since jesus we can have all the love your neighbour/enemy stuff, but before he came along the eye for an eye stuff was correct? Sorry but that's just bonkers as far as i'm concerned - and no less of a stretch than that J.R. "Bob" Dobbs is the true prophet chosen by Jehova 1 in 1953.

You know how i agree with the heart of what jesus said in the gospels, but the exclusiveness, the 'jesus was a god/man' stuff and putting the crucifiction as some central point of the universe's existence is just superstitious literalism to me, and massive anthropomorphism of the universe. It's a sign of insecurity as a religion that christianity must insist that only their prophet was special and the others weren't the same - rather than just accepting that he was one in a long line of spiritual teachers throughout history (and probably on millions of other planets for that matter)

The gnostic stuff is symbolic and hints at a more grown up mystical religion at the heart of gnostic christianity; this symbolism overlaps with other similar mystical tradtions around the world (eg plato). (and they do say that god is love, but only the spirit is the true god - the matter/physicality/desire is the trap for the spirit, which must struggle for gnosis to escape the clutches of the wheel of life and reach the kingdom of heaven (basically buddhism))

 

[NightsEpiphany]

'more grown up'?


:D

I know I've said 'let me ponder and i'll get back to you with a response' several times on this thread and haven't got round to it but basically there are two people who have asked for my beliefs on a couple of right hot potato topics and i'd like to give a considered response. I'm out of practice in terms of writing essays. And that's basically what they amount to. They're also subjects that deserve a proper ponder and pray about.

May I just ask though? In that last paragraph you referred to the wheel of life and Gnostics believing in Karma. What would the Gnostics your referring to say about Grace?

You don't have to write an essay, a nut shell response will do.

 

[Vurtual]

By more grown up i mean more mystical: encouragement of individuals to have their own direct connection to the divine (gnosis), and specific practical methods to facilitate that, without needing an intermediary of a priest, church or an obscure book from a far away land. I think all the religions have esoteric core parts where the simplistic parables are given more nuanced, less literal meanings - you could say this a more 'grown up' version. These esoteric traditions seem to end up with similar ideas and symbols which often amount to practical/mystical methods of achieving 'gnosis' (or enlightenment).

The secret of the kingdom of God has been given to you. But to those on the outside everything is said in parables so that, 'they may be ever seeing but never perceiving, and ever hearing but never understanding' (Mark 4:11-12)

Some secondary sources on possible secret christian traditions:

Origen had this to say about the secret teachings of Jesus:

"[Jesus] conversed with His disciples in private, and especially in their sacred retreats, concerning the Gospel of God; but the words which He uttered have not been preserved, because it appeared to the evangelists that they could not be adequately conveyed to the multitude in writing or in speech and they saw what things were to be committed to writing, and how this was to be done, and what was by no means to be written to the multitude, and what was to be expressed in words, and what was not to be so conveyed." (Contra Celsus, Chap. VI. 18)

Concerning these secret teachings, Clement stated:

James the Righteous, John and Peter were entrusted by the Lord after his resurrection with the higher knowledge. They imparted it to the other apostles, to the seventy (Outlines Book VI)

I couldn't really tell you what gnostics think about grace specifically (it was probably in all that stuff about 'emanations'); and i was just riffing on various gnostic traditions in that paragraph - though there are definite suggestions of reincarnation in some gnostic beliefs, especially where they were influenced by neoplatonism or pythagoreanism. (sorry, i'm not really sure i can even do nutshells (coconuts maybe) - i'm just enjoying reading up on it again)

...

A nice quote about the kingdom from the gnostic gospel of thomas:

Jesus said, "If your leaders say to you, 'Behold, the kingdom is in the sky,' then the birds in the sky will get there before you. If they say to you, 'It is in the sea,' then the fish will get there before you. Rather, the kingdom is inside you and outside you. When you know yourselves, then you will be known, and will understand that you are children of the living Father. But if you do not know yourselves, then you live in poverty, and embody poverty."

More from thomas possibly on reincarnation (more in here):

The disciples said to Jesus, "Tell us about the end." Jesus said, "Have you already discovered the beginning, that now you can seek after the end? For where the beginning is, the end will be. Blessed is one who stands at the beginning: that one will know the end, and will not taste death."Jesus said, "Blessed is one who came to life before coming to life." [...]

His disciples said to him, "When will the final rest for the dead take place, and when will the new world come?" He said to them, "What you look for has already come, but you do not know it." [...]

Jesus said, "I disclose my mysteries to those who are worthy of my mysteries. Do not let your left hand know what your right hand is doing."

About the Secret Gospel of John:

In the Secret Book of John, written by 185 A.D. at the latest, reincarnation is placed at the center of the discussion concerning the salvation of souls. The following is a summary of the Secret Book of John's perspective on reincarnation.

Everyone has drunk from the water of forgetfulness and lives in a state of ignorance. Some people are able to overcome ignorance by having the life-giving Spirit descend upon them. These souls "will be saved and will become perfect," that is, escape the cycle of birth and rebirth. John asks Jesus what will happen to those who do not attain salvation. They are hurled down "into forgetfulness" and thrown into "prison," the Christian Gnostic symbol for a new body.

Jesus says the only way for these souls to escape is to acquire knowledge after coming from forgetfulness. A soul can accomplish this by finding a teacher who can lead the soul in the right direction:

"This soul needs to follow another soul in whom the Spirit of life dwells, because she is saved through the Spirit. Then she will never be thrust into flesh again." (Secret Book of John 14:20)

 

[Shambles]

They've only been infallible since 1870 (at least formally). That was my point.

Infallible popes can't rightly accept the infallibility of their prepopes surely? That would be admittance of fallibility in the popish line which would suggest the entire system is fallible. It's almost like the entire concept is utterly ridiculous and thus any pope claiming infallibilily without immeditately elimintaing any trace of fallibility from all popish descisions - and indeed all Catholic (and indeed all religion full stop) issues - was... well... fallible. And what with said pope being Vicar of Christ on Earth that makes the entire history and concept of Catholicism irrelevant and/or fraudulent.

Unless the pope says it's not, obviously...

 

[Shambles]

What do you think about the gnostic/cathar idea that matter is evil and spirit is good? (and the connected idea that the creator of the world was an evil 'demiurge' who wanted to trap us in the world of matter, while the serpent was a representative of the true god of spirit, who wanted to set us free)

I've brought this up several times since the inception of this thread but so far only PTCH has been converted.

Snake God ftmfw

Pretty pix of badass snakes aside though, I don't follow that particular belief system any more than I do any other religion I know of. However, I would say it fits far, far better with Biblical interpretations than Christianity does. And not just with Bible stuff either. These mythologies have far deeper roots than "we" learn at school or church (other religious buildings are also available to tell variants on the same mythologies). I find this a far more interesting topic than the bogstandard relgion discussions as they are basically just back and forth between atheist/agnostic viewpoints and Xtian apologetics - this can all be found ad nauseum across the interwebz and is essentially pointless. That stuff simply boils down to:

Sceptic: "This is not factually accurate."
Believer: "I have faith that the interpretation I give it or was told to believe in is accurate."
Sceptic: "That is highly unlikely given how many interpretations there are and the fact the basic premise is factually inaccurate."
Believer: "Yeah, but you will burn in hell and I won't."

A far more interesting discussion is to be had on why particular tropes come up over and over, how they spread, how they relate to each other, and what all this may say for the human psyche. My opinion and all that.

 

[Vurtual]

Gnostic ideas are fascinating to me - seem so much more meat and depth than the normal gospels - though it's a garbled mixture, most of which we've only known about since those scrolls were found in 1945. Here's more from that site i was just reading about gnostic history (pretty speculative but on the money i reckon):

8. The Suppression of Christian Gnosticism

The Christian Gnostics believed in reincarnation and the preexistence of the soul. They refused to believe in a resurrection of corpses at the end of time. They emphasized meeting Jesus on a spiritual level to become liberated and attain permanent citizenship in heaven. The Church of Rome of the second century A.D., on the other hand, declared that those who deny a Last Day resurrection of corpses are heretics.

Many Christian Gnostics regarded themselves as part of the organized body of Christians of the early church. However, as the organized Church gained political control of the Roman Empire, the Christian Gnostics were persecuted by the organized Church and many were martyred. The Christian Gnostic tradition is one of many branches of early Christianity labeled as heretical by the early Church fathers. The Gnostic influences and writings were cut out of official Church doctrines as heresy. Because of their suspected Christian Gnostic origins, the Gospel of John and the Book of Revelation was almost rejected from the New Testament. Nevertheless, the organized Church succeeded in hiding its Christian Gnostic doctrines.

It is not surprising that the orthodox Church bishops edited out the practical spiritual knowledge which was once an integral part of Christianity and was known and practiced by the apostle Paul. For these fathers, it was far more convenient and gratifying for their egos to assert that spiritual grace could only be attained through them as Christ's representatives on Earth. To control the masses, the political organization of the church declared that salvation was attained only through the church rituals and through the priesthood. Salvation through a personal mystical experience with Christ apart from the organized church was cast away. In a move that is very likely to have met with the disapproval of Christ himself, the worldly political aspirations of a few priests won out over the spiritual enlightenment of the many.

And as it is with any religion or movement, the successors of its founder decided which things to keep and which to throw out. The organized Church discarded the spiritual knowledge of Christian Gnosticism as being too dangerous and kept the concept of blind acceptance of church doctrine.

 

[Shambles]

Highlighted part rather sums up the whole papal infallibility stuff and a fair proportion of all currently existing Christian denominations in general. Funny how it's always the grubbiest and most "human" (emphasis on the 'man' syllable) aspects of religions that tend to survive. Wonder if it has owt to do with generations of brutal extermination of less male power-centralising forms of what went before? Probably not. Cos surely an all-powerful god would would get rather miffed at such pathetic and obvious antics and get his smiting hat on again.

Alternatively, it's all human construction but some have deeper relationships to what may be considered transcendental truths - or at least genuine insight and all-round good eggery - but, sadly, most men are pathetic cowards and need to feel important and are either stupid, ignorant and/or corrupt enough to not notice the difference.

You decide, Theo Thread

 

[NightsEpiphany]

By more grown up i mean more mystical: encouragement of individuals to have their own direct connection to the divine (gnosis), and specific practical methods to facilitate that, without needing an intermediary of a priest, church or an obscure book from a far away land. I think all the religions have esoteric core parts where the simplistic parables are given more nuanced, less literal meanings - you could say this a more 'grown up' version. These esoteric traditions seem to end up with similar ideas and symbols which often amount to practical/mystical methods of achieving 'gnosis' (or enlightenment).

Practical mystical methods as in??? I just want to clarify a few of your points so I can ponder my proper response in a more informed way.

I'm not sure how, from a Christian perspective, one would somehow conjure up the Holy Spirit. Can we make Him somehow manifest Himself by using 'practical/mystical methods' to summon Him? This is the Sovereign Creator of the cosmos. King of Kings?

Does that not seem a little irreverent?

I couldn't really tell you what gnostics think about grace specifically (it was probably in all that stuff about 'emanations'); and i was just riffing on various gnostic traditions in that paragraph - though there are definite suggestions of reincarnation in some gnostic beliefs, especially where they were influenced by neoplatonism or pythagoreanism. (sorry, i'm not really sure i can even do nutshells (coconuts maybe) - i'm just enjoying reading up on it again)

I'm not sure what the gnostic perspective would be on Grace either. A less esoteric Sunday School way of understanding it is in this acronym...Gods Riches At Christs Expense. Eg: He wants to give us the Kingdom, unmerited favour, forgiveness of sin and adopt us into His family for believing in His Son.
...

That was a nice quote from The Gospel Of St Thomas. I really need to research Gnosticism at some point and also ponder that more considered response to your previous questions. :D

I couldn't requote the quotes on this either. Learning how to do that is also on my todo list lol

 

[Vurtual]

Practical mystical methods as in??? I just want to clarify a few of your points so I can ponder my proper response in a more informed way.

I'm not sure how, from a Christian perspective, one would somehow conjure up the Holy Spirit. Can we make Him somehow manifest Himself by using 'practical/mystical methods' to summon Him? This is the Sovereign Creator of the cosmos. King of Kings?

Does that not seem a little irreverent?

Gnostic christianity by definition is about personal gnosis (as is quakerism) the particular methods espoused by the gnostics are a bit unclear, but there are strong hints. There's any number of methods by which a person can get 'divine' experiences even in 'normal christianity - the traditional ones like ritual, prayer/chanting/mantras, meditiation/contemplation, fasting, doing good works/compassion - are all done in christianity as well as elsewhere - many christian saints experienced gnosis in this these ways and are well accepted by christians (they just don't like too many people to do it) - then there's the more esoteric stuff like sex magic (which there are strong hints of in the gnostic gospels), kundalini yoga, psychedelic drugs (for the quick in/out).

Plus i think the divine state/holy spirit/brahman(/cellular ground of awareness) is not some far off grand state that we're not worthy of - it permeates our very being - it's something we all recognise from our childhoods and momentary feelings of joy with the world/feelings of oneness/love etc (not to mention acid trips).

I'm irreverent to anything that i read or hear unless i have the direct experience myself - this is why i like the gnostic idea (and quakers) - the jesus i read in the gospels was irreverent, gnostic and mystical, not dogmatic.

 

[Shambles]

I'm not sure how, from a Christian perspective, one would somehow conjure up the Holy Spirit. Can we make Him somehow manifest Himself by using 'practical/mystical methods' to summon Him?

Firstly, bear in mind that Gnosticism is a form of Christianity which was popular in the immediate aftermath of the period and place where and whence Jesus is generally dated from. There is a far more direct connection with the time, place and events than exists in any current form of Christianity which it could be suggested suggests such beliefs and practices bear closer relation to the religion practiced by people alive at the time in that place than an essentially arbitray collection of books collated by a theocracy with deeply vested interests in consolidating power in their own hands centuries later.

Whether or not their beliefs sit well with your own I'd suggest this is something worth bearing in mind whilst using stock phrases like "from a Christian perspective..." cos Gnosticism is very much one of the original Christian perspectives - of which there have always been many. I can't quote chapter and verse but isn't there summat in the book in its current form about their being many paths to the truth?

Secondly, isn't what you are asking one of the primary reasons for prayer? Or, as could perhaps be argued, any form of meditation with a "spiritual" aim? To try to form some type of connection to the numinous - whatever form that takes to the individual. A direct and subjective connection to something deeper, broader and beyond oneself. Ask and you will receive and all that. As I (quite possibly wrongly but has always been my understanding) understand the Gnostic approach it is in large part prayer and meditation. And very much "Christian" - just not Catholic which is why it got called "herecy".

Catholicism (as it now is, the growing Roman School of Christianity as it was then) only works if there is a (male) figurehead who is basically in charge and leads by lack of information cos the only way to god is through The One True Church (pass the donation plate, pay for a pray and so on) which just doesn't work when folk believe they can read scripture in their own language, interpret, understand and act of their own volition. It's almost like the original Protestantism which I'd assume you'd broadly approve of. Unfortunately the Roman Church succeeded in more or less exterminating their fellow Christian souls and left permanent black clouds of heretic doubt (complete with completely unfounded vague whiffs, wafts and suggestions that Gnosticism was somehow related to witchcraft or magic and the like which simply is not true).

Gnosticism is genuinely interesting. If the Inquisition got hold of me and made me convert on the rack I'd definitely pick Gnosticism is I had to pick a form of Christian belief as it just seems to have a lot more authenticity and truly combines the very best aspects of Christian belief with a far more "spiritual" sense than is ever to be found in any modern interpretations of Abrahamic mythology that I've ever come across. As Vurtual says, it's kinda like Christianity for grown-ups.

 

[NightsEpiphany]

right that's going to have to be digested in bite size ponderous chunks tomorrow coz i'm off for a kip Sham. Hope that's alright.. but can I just respond to the 'there are many paths to God' part of your post. Jesus said to Thomas in John 14:6:

I am the Way, the Truth, and the Life. Nobody comes to the Father but through me.

You could argue that yes that's at least 3 ways but they are all Him fundamentally. He's the Way, Hes the Gate, Hes the destination.

 

[Shambles]

And I would respond to your response by pointing out that John is one of the later gospels well into the time where distortions and "convenient scripture" had come into play

 

[NightsEpiphany]

I don't want to assume that you are suggesting the early apostles/early church distorted the teachings of Jesus Sham?

That point aside, Matthew 7:14 has Jesus exhorting us to:


Enter through the narrow gate; for the gate is wide and the way is broad that leads to destruction, and there are many who enter through it. 14"For the gate is small and the way is narrow that leads to life, and there are few who find it.

One gate, one Way singular

Ed: one way to Life one way to death and destruction technically