Was Jesus a Gnostic ?

[A. Ben-Shema]

Was Jesus a Gnostic?

First we must define what a genuine Gnostic is. The word comes from ancient Greek (Gnosis), and means Divine (i.e. Mystical / Spiritual) 'experiential' KNOWLEDGE of God (i.e. the “Supreme Power”, or the “ALL”). Thus a genuine Gnostic is one who has such “first-hand” Divine KNOWLEDGE of God (N.B. NOT mere 'beliefs', traditions, dogmas, and 'theories'!).

The question is: was Jesus, Himself, a Gnostic? If what we are told in the Bible is actually true, then obviously Jesus must have been a Gnostic (i.e. having Divine 'Knowledge' of God), as must all the other great Prophets and Masters of the Hebrew Bible – not to mention the many other great Masters such as Buddha, Krishna, Mohammed, Zoroaster, Nanak, etc. etc. (if their scriptures are also true).

To believe that God would only reveal Himself to one ‘ethnic clan’ (or ‘race’) of people (i.e. the Hebrews / Jews) demonstrates the typical blindness and ignorance of religion! It is claimed that the “Israelites” are the “chosen people of God.” This claim is, indeed, true – but again we have to understand what this name or “title” actually means in the ancient Hebrew. The term ISRAEL comes from three Hebrew roots: ’ish (= a Spiritual 'being' / 'human'); ra’eh (= 'seeing' / 'vision'); and ’el (= 'God' / 'Supreme Spirit'). Thus, when put together, the word (Is-ra-el) means: “Spiritual one(s) who SEE God.” From this explanation it should be quite obvious that the term does not apply to any particular ‘race’ or ‘clan’ of people, but to ALL those who SEE, and thus KNOW God, i.e. all genuine Gnostics / Mystics! So certainly the true ‘Israelites’ (Seers / Gnostics) are indeed the "chosen people of God"!


Peace, Love, & Understanding

 

[bananabrain]

yes, everyone's a "true israelite" except the jews these days, i understand.

b'shalom

bananabrain

 

[iBrian]

The question is: was Jesus, Himself, a Gnostic? If what we are told in the Bible is actually true, then obviously Jesus must have been a Gnostic (i.e. having Divine 'Knowledge' of God), as must all the other great Prophets and Masters of the Hebrew Bible – not to mention the many other great Masters such as Buddha, Krishna, Mohammed, Zoroaster, Nanak, etc. etc. (if their scriptures are also true).

I think you're confusing the verb "gnosis" with the Gnostic movement. Or have I misunderstood?

Also, why are you using what looks like a Jewish name, yet decrying Jewishness? Curious.

 

[Thomas]

Was Jesus a Gnostic?

As Brian asks, one first needs to determine whether one means 'gnostic' in the sense of gnosis as understood in Greek philosophy, in the disparate cosmological teachings of 2nd century dualism, or in the sense that Christian philosophers understood the term, in light of the data of Revelation.

First we must define what a genuine Gnostic is. The word comes from ancient Greek (Gnosis), and means Divine (i.e. Mystical / Spiritual) 'experiential' KNOWLEDGE of God (i.e. the “Supreme Power”, or the “ALL”). Thus a genuine Gnostic is one who has such “first-hand” Divine KNOWLEDGE of God (N.B. NOT mere 'beliefs', traditions, dogmas, and 'theories'!).

Actually that's a post-Romance definition and not quite accurate — that's what the word came to mean, and that's how the Romance movements of the late nineteenth century expressed it, but it is an anachronism — that's not how the Greeks understood it.

The word 'gnosis' in Greek philosophy had no necessary spiritual nor mystical implication as we now view those terms. There's none in Plato, for example. The term had more to do with 'insight' and 'intuition' in the Greek philosophical sense, and inferred experiential rather than speculative knowledge.

The question is: was Jesus, Himself, a Gnostic? If what we are told in the Bible is actually true, then obviously Jesus must have been a Gnostic (i.e. having Divine 'Knowledge' of God)...

Not quite. If what we are told in the Bible is 'actually true', then Jesus is the incarnate Deity and so terms like gnosis (intuition), episteme (knowledge), pistis (faith), noesis (insight) apply only under very determinate conditions.

as must all the other great Prophets and Masters of the Hebrew Bible – not to mention the many other great Masters such as Buddha, Krishna, Mohammed, Zoroaster, Nanak, etc. etc. (if their scriptures are also true).

This is an intellectual construct of the Romance movement again — that all religions are equal, except 'mine', which is more equal than the others, and thus the key by which all the others can be explained. It's a statement which is not supported by any ancient tradition.

To believe that God would only reveal Himself to one ‘ethnic clan’ (or ‘race’) of people (i.e. the Hebrews / Jews) demonstrates the typical blindness and ignorance of religion!

Or does it demonstrate the typical blindness and ignorance of those who assume they understand religion. Whatever philosophy you are about to espouse falls under the same criticism.

It is claimed that the “Israelites” are the “chosen people of God.” This claim is, indeed, true – but again we have to understand what this name or “title” actually means in the ancient Hebrew. The term ISRAEL comes from three Hebrew roots: ’ish (= a Spiritual 'being' / 'human'); ra’eh (= 'seeing' / 'vision'); and ’el (= 'God' / 'Supreme Spirit'). Thus, when put together, the word (Is-ra-el) means: “Spiritual one(s) who SEE God.” From this explanation it should be quite obvious that the term does not apply to any particular ‘race’ or ‘clan’ of people, but to ALL those who SEE, and thus KNOW God, i.e. all genuine Gnostics / Mystics! So certainly the true ‘Israelites’ (Seers / Gnostics) are indeed the "chosen people of God"!

You seem to be setting the agenda that determines under what conditions God can be seen — rather than allowing God to determine how and to whom He chooses to reveal Himself.

Such theses invariably assume an elite position, as does the above ...

From a purely Christian viewpoint, 'gnosis' was a term borrowed from the Greek philosophical lexionary and given a new definition within a Christian metaphysic. In this instance, the 'gnosis' of which the disciples speak transcends the objective and the realms of knowledge and talks of a subjective gnosis — a Divine Union between creature and creator. Knowledge, in the sense of epistemology, is second and subsequent. This Christian gnosis is an unmediated Union between Being and being, which can happen in a sage or the most simple person ... Christian saints are not recognised for knowledge, cleverness or intellectual acumen, but for their being and radiance.

The gnostics — those various 'New Age' populist cosmologies of their day — were wedded to a dualist vision and could not conceive of 'union' at such a profound level. The saw pistis (faith) and noesis (insight) as separate and unconnected ... whereas the Christian saw that noesis was a result of pistis, and pistis stood on a foundation of episteme and noesis ...

Hence the Christian philosophers had a far more fruitful dialogue with philosophy than the 'gnostics', who usually were criticised for their poor methodology and mixing of 'fact' and 'fiction' — the Stoics, for example, were scathing in their critique of the cults which were popping up all around them.

Today it's recognised that 'gnostic' applied to this movement is a loose and inaccurate definition, as no two schools professed the same doctrine, a sure sign of the speculative nature of gnosticism, as each doctrine emanated from the individual, and replied solely on his or her charisma rather than any cogent argument.

A study of cognitional theory, such as the 'General Empirical Method' (Lonergan), talks of a three step process, from episteme — pistis — noesis, this shows the 'error' of 2nd century gnostic sycretism, which fails to get to grips with the intellective and cognitional process.

Thomas

 

[Dream]

Hi Mr. Ben. It is encouraging to randomly meet people like yourself who seem to be discovering similar things. While I disagree on some things, it was pretty cool. I also appreciate the responses you got from Thomas and Bananabrain. Here's additional feedback:

I'm not totally familiar with all historical aspects of what 'Gnostic' meant at various times & places, however I have started to see 'the Son' as a representation of the spiritual distribution of 'The light' in John's gospel, letters, and in Revelation. I'd suggest that is the real gist that you're heading towards, however I'd say that both this and your use of the term 'Israel' is early Christian, not Gnostic. At the same time, I don't think it is historical Christian practice to go around calling Jews 'not Israel'. I agree with Mr. Bananabrain that its inappropriate to exclude Jews from being called 'Israel' in conversation. They are the descendants of Jacob as well as practitioners of Jesus theology for the last couple of millenniums. While they reject Paul's theology, Peter as an authority, and the NT as binding yet they have pretty much upheld the same things as valuable as Jesus.

Its easy to get Gnosticism mixed up with Christianity and hope for a resulting all-inclusive world peace thingy, however that is a trail that leads to a cliff. Gnosticism and Christianity, despite common Jewish elements, are separate movements. Its important to make a distinction so that we can more accurately understand historical aspects of each. History serves us, so let us keep it.

St. Paul's mention of a 'Spiritual Israel': The languages involved in Paul's discourse are complicated. Don't take his figure of speech 'Spiritual Israel' and run with it without knowing what his readers already knew about it. The basic concept of G!d's spirit resting upon 'A people' originates in Jewish Torah so (as you seemed acknowledge in your post) its not like they don't get the concept of a spiritual nation. Jews already know that any given Jew may be circumcised 'in heart' or not, but they give each other the benefit of the doubt without judging. At least, I think they're supposed to, and I believe that was one of the things Jesus kept harping on and which Christians are supposed to have inherited. (Don't know about the Gnostics.) The NT writers are very hard on the generation of Jews who lived during Jesus death, however they still considered all future Jews to be Israel at least conversationally and without judging them. Somebody want to correct me on that?

 

[Nick_A]

Was Jesus a Gnostic?

First we must define what a genuine Gnostic is. The word comes from ancient Greek (Gnosis), and means Divine (i.e. Mystical / Spiritual) 'experiential' KNOWLEDGE of God (i.e. the “Supreme Power”, or the “ALL”). Thus a genuine Gnostic is one who has such “first-hand” Divine KNOWLEDGE of God (N.B. NOT mere 'beliefs', traditions, dogmas, and 'theories'!).

The question is: was Jesus, Himself, a Gnostic? If what we are told in the Bible is actually true, then obviously Jesus must have been a Gnostic (i.e. having Divine 'Knowledge' of God), as must all the other great Prophets and Masters of the Hebrew Bible – not to mention the many other great Masters such as Buddha, Krishna, Mohammed, Zoroaster, Nanak, etc. etc. (if their scriptures are also true).

To believe that God would only reveal Himself to one ‘ethnic clan’ (or ‘race’) of people (i.e. the Hebrews / Jews) demonstrates the typical blindness and ignorance of religion! It is claimed that the “Israelites” are the “chosen people of God.” This claim is, indeed, true – but again we have to understand what this name or “title” actually means in the ancient Hebrew. The term ISRAEL comes from three Hebrew roots: ’ish (= a Spiritual 'being' / 'human'); ra’eh (= 'seeing' / 'vision'); and ’el (= 'God' / 'Supreme Spirit'). Thus, when put together, the word (Is-ra-el) means: “Spiritual one(s) who SEE God.” From this explanation it should be quite obvious that the term does not apply to any particular ‘race’ or ‘clan’ of people, but to ALL those who SEE, and thus KNOW God, i.e. all genuine Gnostics / Mystics! So certainly the true ‘Israelites’ (Seers / Gnostics) are indeed the "chosen people of God"!


Peace, Love, & Understanding

Hi Ben

You raise the interesting question if Gnosticism is Gnostic? I don't believe so since IMO Gnosticism is heavily reliant on dualism. But I believe we live in a triune universe which is a manifestation of the initial Holy Trinity. If that is the case I cannot see how dualism could ever be considered Gnostic.

Since I believe the Bible to be a psychological rather than historical text, the idea of the "spiritual Israel" makes perfect sense since human understanding of the nature of "being" varies widely between conscious comprehension and the associative thought of secular devolution

 

[A. Ben-Shema]

Was Jesus a Gnostic?

First we must define what a genuine Gnostic is. The word comes from ancient Greek (Gnosis), and means Divine (i.e. Mystical / Spiritual) 'experiential' KNOWLEDGE of God (i.e. the “Supreme Power”, or the “ALL”). Thus a genuine Gnostic is one who has such “first-hand” Divine KNOWLEDGE of God (N.B. NOT mere 'beliefs', traditions, dogmas, and 'theories'!).

The question is: was Jesus, Himself, a Gnostic? If what we are told in the Bible is actually true, then obviously Jesus must have been a Gnostic (i.e. having Divine 'Knowledge' of God), as must all the other great Prophets and Masters of the Hebrew Bible – not to mention the many other great Masters such as Buddha, Krishna, Mohammed, Zoroaster, Nanak, etc. etc. (if their scriptures are also true).

To believe that God would only reveal Himself to one ‘ethnic clan’ (or ‘race’) of people (i.e. the Hebrews / Jews) demonstrates the typical blindness and ignorance of religion! It is claimed that the “Israelites” are the “chosen people of God.” This claim is, indeed, true – but again we have to understand what this name or “title” actually means in the ancient Hebrew. The term ISRAEL comes from three Hebrew roots: ’ish (= a Spiritual 'being' / 'human'); ra’eh (= 'seeing' / 'vision'); and ’el (= 'God' / 'Supreme Spirit'). Thus, when put together, the word (Is-ra-el) means: “Spiritual one(s) who SEE God.” From this explanation it should be quite obvious that the term does not apply to any particular ‘race’ or ‘clan’ of people, but to ALL those who SEE, and thus KNOW God, i.e. all genuine Gnostics / Mystics! So certainly the true ‘Israelites’ (Seers / Gnostics) are indeed the "chosen people of God"!


Peace, Love, & Understanding

Has anyone actually read my post with any level of Spiritual Understanding or even simple comprehension?

 

[Nick_A]

Has anyone actually read my post with any level of Spiritual Understanding or even simple comprehension?

I've discovered that it is only a minority that appreciate the Bible as a psychological rather than historical text. You express the psychological meaning of Israel very well. Don't expect it to be agreed with by any caught up in historical and political interpretations.

 

[Quahom1]

Has anyone actually read my post with any level of Spiritual Understanding or even simple comprehension?

I did. I'm still thinking about it. There was only one person actually called by the name Israel, and that was Jacob. His sons were called Bnai Israel, or "Children of Israel". No other people can lay claim to that name or that family lineage, but for those who descend from the original twelve sons of Jacob. Now, Jacob was a unique individual in his own right.

Afraid of man, but not so of God (how's that for irony), he struggled all night with the angel of the Lord, and refused to let go, even upon having his hip dislocated. In the morning this was said of Jacob:

"...Your name will no longer be Jacob, but Israel (Yisra'el). [Because] you have become great (sar [a lord]) before God and man. You have won." (Genesis 32:29)

Therefore, the name "Israel" denotes "one who has struggled with [the challenges of] God" and triumphed.

Bnai Israel, means children of the "great sar" before God and man. Now unless, one has the blood of one of the twelve sons of Jacob in their veins, it seems there are only a limited number of peoples on earth that can be called true "Israelites".

And since the tribe of Judah is the only tribe that apparently kept it cohesively together these past 2000 years, they are the only collective group that can claim ownership to the name Israelite under the original terms and conditions, the name was given.

v/r

Q

 

[Dream]

So you really want us to read it? Ok, but you're really squeezing me. Actually I read it the first time, but here is a fuller response.

Was Jesus a Gnostic?

No, but somebody definitely was. I think you have thought really hard about this but have come up with results that are much more specific than you can really support. I cannot support my theory, either.

First we must define what a genuine Gnostic is. The word comes from ancient Greek (Gnosis), and means Divine (i.e. Mystical / Spiritual) 'experiential' KNOWLEDGE of God (i.e. the “Supreme Power”, or the “ALL”). Thus a genuine Gnostic is one who has such “first-hand” Divine KNOWLEDGE of God (N.B. NOT mere 'beliefs', traditions, dogmas, and 'theories'!).

This is a lot of information about the word 'Gnosticism', but it still may not relate to any groups in the time periods surrounding the Temple's destruction. It is way too strict about direct revelation. Even Quakers are slightly un-gnostic by this definition. A looser definition might fit Christians a little better, because Christianity believes in group revelation, group wisdom, mass empathy for the individual, etc. These all are part of the teaching of the 'Body of Christ', which is also one reason to suspect Jesus as a metaphor.

The question is: was Jesus, Himself, a Gnostic? If what we are told in the Bible is actually true, then obviously Jesus must have been a Gnostic (i.e. having Divine 'Knowledge' of God), as must all the other great Prophets and Masters of the Hebrew Bible – not to mention the many other great Masters such as Buddha, Krishna, Mohammed, Zoroaster, Nanak, etc. etc. (if their scriptures are also true).

His parables are built of ideas about thinking independently of what other humans tell you to think, being ready at all times, and being personally productive. Consider the parables of his walking out on the water, the 10 sleeping virgins, and the withered fig tree. In my opinion these are related to Hanuka's theme. The lamp keeps burning without oil, just as the light shines even before the sun is created. The Son comes in place of the temple and makes everyone of equal stature.

To believe that God would only reveal Himself to one ‘ethnic clan’ (or ‘race’) of people (i.e. the Hebrews / Jews) demonstrates the typical blindness and ignorance of religion! It is claimed that the “Israelites” are the “chosen people of God.” This claim is, indeed, true – but again we have to understand what this name or “title” actually means in the ancient Hebrew. The term ISRAEL comes from three Hebrew roots: ’ish (= a Spiritual 'being' / 'human'); ra’eh (= 'seeing' / 'vision'); and ’el (= 'God' / 'Supreme Spirit'). Thus, when put together, the word (Is-ra-el) means: “Spiritual one(s) who SEE God.” From this explanation it should be quite obvious that the term does not apply to any particular ‘race’ or ‘clan’ of people, but to ALL those who SEE, and thus KNOW God, i.e. all genuine Gnostics / Mystics! So certainly the true ‘Israelites’ (Seers / Gnostics) are indeed the "chosen people of God"!

From what I can see, the Jews preserved their writings as a reminder to themselves of exactly what you are talking about. Their temple was destroyed, despite the fact that they themselves had been his chosen people. They carefully recorded everything, so that their own children would not make the same stupid mistakes. Now those same painful lessons are available to you so that you may benefit. Rather than snubbing you, they're openly telling you what happened so you can avoid the same pitfall.

As for me...

Personally, I think Jesus is and was a Jewish mythical representation of the 30,000 Jews that the Romans crucified. Remember the Romans desecrated and burned the temple, which was really an unthinkable event. Naturally, there must have been pandemonium among Jews and inner turmoil to match, and the Jewish survivors under Roman authority had to come to terms with reality -- in much the same way that Japan did after Nagasaki and Hiroshima. Voila, Jesus, the new high priest in heaven, without any geneology.

How could the temple have been destroyed? The hope of a better tomorrow was paramount, so how after everything that had happened could these Jews rest in peace? They had to kiss their children, believing things would get better; but in their own lifetimes things had only gotten worse. How could they hope for a better world than what they had known? Voila, Hanuka. Above all, they invested their hopes in the next generation, with a hope that was to be passed on indefinitely. That hope continues today.

I think Jews persisted in the grip of Rome's iron fist, until they began to have positive influence over its people. A troubled empire with the attitude 'Truth is not real!' began to wander if, maybe, truth was important after all. Along with lost territory, it had begun to lose faith in its own ideology. Perhaps it seized upon a new religion partly stolen from Jewish myth. A combination of Jewish and Roman warrior theology unified the country again, along with a new belief in absolute truth, instead of no truth at all. Jews would have been both repulsed and curious about this development, but once the ball was rolling. It kept rolling.

No, I can't prove anything, but I believe this accounts for the various pieces in NT that appear to be gnostic. Its very difficult to make Jesus be gnostic, especially by your definition; but it is very easy to say he represents many people. In fact, the Christian motto is "I have been crucified with Christ, nevertheless I live, yet not I but Christ lives in me" which makes the most sense if he is representative.

 

[Thomas]

Has anyone actually read my post with any level of Spiritual Understanding or even simple comprehension?

Yes — and saw that you made the fundamental error of assuming the Hellenic meaning of the term 'gnosis' received no further development in Christianity.

So — was Jesus a gnostic in the sense that you define gnostic — no.

You might want to look at "Guenonian Esoterism and Christian Mystery" (Sophiaperennis):

René Guénon was one of the great metaphysical minds of the last few centuries, and it was a great loss to the Catholic Church when he converted to Islam. Prof. Borella shows in this landmark study exactly where Guenon's work remains of perennial value for Christians, but also demonstrates limitations that led Guénon to distort some important elements of Catholic and Orthodox doctrine. This work may well stimulate the recovery of authentic metaphysics within the Church for which Guénon longed, but which he despaired of seeing in his lifetime.

Stratford Caldecott, editor, Second Spring

Exhaustively documented and brilliantly conceived, this monumental treatise refutes a Guénonian thesis regarding the limits of Christianity and reaffirms the Patristic doctrine of theosis as the consummation of the Christian Way.

Wolfgang Smith, author of Cosmos & Transcendence

Thomas

 

[holysmoke]

Jesus was filled with gnosis, knowledge of God, but did not seem to subscribe to classical Gnostic doctrines such as the blind Demiurge or the angelic emanations as even the Gospel of Thomas shows. A prophet without gnosis of God has nothing to offer so knowledge of God is an essential part of prophesy bearing. Especially so for the Son of Man prophets of which Jesus was the greatest example.

I agree with the poster who believes as I do that Jesus Christ represents the Jewish reaction to seeing so many Jews put to crucifixion death by the Romans. Since "Yeshua" was a common name in Palestine there had to be many Yeshuas in the hundreds, perhaps thousands of crucified Jews. Gnosis has informed this Christian that Mark and fellow Jews familiar with Egyptian religious lore, (Mark being claimed by the Coptics as the original founder of the first Christian church in Egypt) might very well have seen a perversion of the Egyptian ankh cross (which represented knowledge of resurrection to eternal life for Egyptians) in the Roman Tau crucifixion crosses used for executing Jews--the T-bar with the human head in place of a short top bar.

Jesus emphasized that his followers if they wished to follow him they must carry their crosses which would be mighty hard lugging a 200+ lb. crucifixion cross around but was Jesus referring to the ankh crosses which Egyptian hieroglyphs depict only Egyptian gods and goddesses and pharaohs carrying?

"Out of Egypt I have called My Son" may contain more spiritual knowledge of God than Christians (or Jews) know..

 

[Raksha]

This is an intellectual construct of the Romance movement again — that all religions are equal, except 'mine', which is more equal than the others, and thus the key by which all the others can be explained. It's a statement which is not supported by any ancient tradition.

Thomas,

And yet that's the position you take on this board, over and over again and in as many different ways as you can think of. Your position has always been that TRUE gnosis can be found only in the Catholic Church and nowhere else, if only everyone understood Catholic teachings "the right way," which you are always more than willing to explain to them whether they are interested in your explanations or not!

Of course you could have changed in the time I've been away from this board, but somehow I don't think so.

--Linda

 

[Quahom1]

Would a gnostic been "unaware" of the worry he caused his mother and father by disappearing for three days?...

 

[Will be]

Jesus wasn't, isn't superman. More grass-like, universally available, and basically elemental. Even the rocks can worship! On Sunny days.

 

[wil]

This is an intellectual construct of the Romance movement again — that all religions are equal, except 'mine', which is more equal than the others, and thus the key by which all the others can be explained. It's a statement which is not supported by any ancient tradition.

Thomas,

And yet that's the position you take on this board, over and over again and in as many different ways as you can think of. Your position has always been that TRUE gnosis can be found only in the Catholic Church and nowhere else, if only everyone understood Catholic teachings "the right way,"

Namaste Linda,

Not quite, Thomas does not believe all religions are equal.

 

[Quahom1]

Jesus wasn't, isn't superman. More grass-like, universally available, and basically elemental. Even the rocks can worship! On Sunny days.

or perhaps...as the Bible clearly states, he put aside his "divinity", to feel as us, learn as us, hope as us...but he had to be one of us to understand us, as us...

 

[nativeastral]

g#d did not have to become to understand us! JC was gnostic in that he believed in the reality of wickedness and righteousness and pointed to the resolution thereof. the soil was already tilled by the jewish diaspora throughout hellenism for a 'messiah' hope in a slave ridden world and syncretised with the multivarious beliefs mingling in the mediterrean millieux. christianity suceeded by its early rational and philosophical stoical borrowings, coupled with judaic ethics. Everything else was burned evidence of other competing ideologies [particularly anything to do with the feminine].
A divinised 'hero' was required and JC fitted the bill, who came after many a wandering prophet. the time was ripe and here we are arguing over the truth of it all.

 

[Will be]

or perhaps...as the Bible clearly states, he put aside his "divinity", to feel as us, learn as us, hope as us...but he had to be one of us to understand us, as us...

He is us, by a lot less opposite. I am just amazed by his constancy everywhere, like a broom that whisks off a dusty stair, or a hand that reached out to build a chair. One sits is full amazement without a word left to fill the cup, I am emptied out, as He is filling up.

 

[Will be]

Gnostic! Gazundheit!