Be wary of gnostic thinking.
(media.greatawakening.win)
You're viewing a single comment thread. View all comments, or full comment thread.
Comments (37)
sorted by:
I never really thought of that as having a spiritual reason (other than people having been indoctrinated and deceived), I considered it more a product of political indoctrination. Marxism (cultural Marxism), intersectionality etc. But I suppose, yes, if you want to see it in that context. But you're opening up a can of worms. Who was it exactly that was operating the Frankfurt School? And what exactly do these people actually believe? Might it have something to do with Kabbalah or Qliphoth? Probably. Interesting point.
I see why people prefer the simpler framework of other Christian traditions where it's all very black and white and well defined as to what is what. It's easier just to put faith in Jesus and label anything against it simply as Satanic in nature. You don't have to ask awkward questions about certain groups of people and examine a bunch of different things and go down a heap of rabbit holes. You stick to a simple truth and reject everything else.
Correction, you didn't open that can of worms I did so if that gets me in trouble so be it.
I see what you mean about the Marxism. I don't mind cans of worms, I have a very curious nature. However sometimes I find myself slipping into a superior mindset (gnosis) where my confidence in a particular stance I hold is much too high. Talking to you has illustrated I have a long way to go to humble myself. I was talking to my sister the other day about Margaret Sanger and she pointed out that a lot of quotes are misattributed to her that I had believed came from her, but hadn't double checked (who the hell lies about quotes, right? They can just be checked). Then again a lot of the things said about Sanger were said long before the internet existed to fact check things like that instantly. Don't get me wrong, I'm still against abortion but I learned that I shouldn't be so certain about many things I was. I'm usually pretty skeptical (otherwise I wouldn't be hanging out here) but clearly I'm not thorough enough.
I wouldn't call confidence in your convictions gnosis, that's more a kind of arrogance and everyone suffers from that. However, I see how one could convince themselves of the other. Being so self convinced of a position that you feel it is absolute divine truth revealed through Gnosis. That is something everyone suffers from.
When it comes to spiritual stuff, that is why I don't subscribe to any particular cosmology or doctrine and only hold one simple thing to be the truth. God exists and is the totality of everything and everything is a part of it. I don't even like to call it God most of the time because words cannot do it justice. I've experienced that directly and that is all I know. The rest is all just theories and speculation that has been built upon, it's interesting to think about but isn't usually helpful beyond mental masturbation.
Now, is that self delusion and arrogance posing as Gnosis? Some might say yes but it's the one thing I'm 110% firm on, an experienced changed my life and I cannot feel differently about it. Nothing that I have seen or experienced since has led me to feel any differently, things have only solidified this 'faith'.
As to the details of this stuff, I believe that is why the Buddha rejected speculating about cosmology, even though Buddhists have cooked up complicated cosmologies and doctrines. It kind of is a 'cleaner' way to look at it for people that are bogged down in complex cosmologies and theologies, in my opinion, at least it was for me initially, but as I say, Buddhist doctrine becomes self defeating and full of crap that wasn't supposed to be part of the teaching. Buddhism and Taoism are not incompatible with certain Gnostic thought, either, but that's another subject.
Actually I will say this. Mainstream Christianity is pretty far removed from say Buddhism, and you would wonder how they could be compatible. In that sense, no they are not, they are completely different world views. Jesus is the only way to God and non believers will not be saved, they get purgatory at best (made up by the Catholic church) or hell at worse. It is the Gnostic side of Christianity that allows one to see the parallels in the Eastern traditions. To a mainstream Christian, this is blasphemy or worse, satanic. I personally find that ridiculous.
Also, I'm not trying to shit on anyone's personal beliefs here, because I do recognise people experience this differently and I've learned to see the common denominator and metaphor.
If you haven't already, learn about the the Nag Hammadi library and the dead sea scrolls, where some of the gnostic scriptures were found. The Gospel of Thomas is a short and interesting read. Hopefully you know how the Roman Catholic Church was created and why, and how they came to choose the 4 books to represent the new testament. The Gnostic scriptures were left out and they are of varying ages and legitimacy as far as authorship goes.
https://www.biblicalarchaeology.org/daily/biblical-topics/bible-versions-and-translations/the-gospel-of-thomas-114-sayings-of-jesus/
I prefer Source. Imo it is as unambiguous, descriptive, and succinct as it is possible to be in this scope. No one mistakes the word Source, no matter what your dogma. Even if you believe Source is as dumb as a box of rocks, you intuitively understand what It Is. "God" on the other hand carries different connotations for just about everyone.
Showing links to the Codex Theodosianus helps in exposing this. Most people have no idea how the "Christian Church" started (as we understand the term today). Even those (especially those) that recite the Nicene Creed have no clue where it comes from, or what debates were shut down by those Empire wide laws.
good post, fren.
My best friend and I have an in joke where we refer to it as the grand and holy neegus. We used to crack up at this video, the irony and humour about it sort of stuck https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=of6a394_Owg