[ / / / / / / / / / / / / / ] [ dir / random / 93 / biohzrd / hkacade / hkpnd / tct / utd / uy / yebalnia ]

/christian/ - Christian Discussion and Fellowship

For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life.
Name
Email
Subject
REC
STOP
Comment *
File
Password (Randomized for file and post deletion; you may also set your own.)
Archive
* = required field[▶Show post options & limits]
Confused? See the FAQ.
Flag
Embed
(replaces files and can be used instead)
Options

Allowed file types:jpg, jpeg, gif, png, webp,webm, mp4, mov, pdf
Max filesize is16 MB.
Max image dimensions are15000 x15000.
You may upload5 per post.


| Rules | Log | Tor | Bunker |

File: 2e4890f9642c35a⋯.jpg (86.39 KB,315x475,63:95,107273_SY475_.jpg)

935500 No.855008

Is there an orthodox (surface) level interpretation of doctrine and morals, as opposed to the esoteric (secret) interpretation? Neither of these necessarily being in conflict or mutually exclusive, but complementary. It seems that orthodoxy and gnosticism can coexist. Afterall, early Christianity was quite diverse, gnosticisim is really just an umbrella term for a diversity of movements within nascent Judeo-Christian-Samaritanism. Everybody was gnostic. Proto-orthodox Christianity was just one form of this, and due to complex historical circumstances it won out and became the dominate form of Christianity. The concept of the Trinity itself is quite gnostic. The Gospel of John is has gnostic overtones to it. All these ideas evolved out of apocalyptism and wisdom speculations mixed with stoicism and middle Platonism. Just read Colossians, it's cosmology is deeply rooted in middle Platonism. Everyone was a mystic. The complementary nature of orthodoxy and mysticism/gnosticism was recognized in Judaism, with it's development of the hermenuitc reading of scripture called Pardes. Jesus himself was a mystic, he was an apocalyptic itinerant magician (I do not say magician in a derogatory way, I use this anthropologically).

____________________________
Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.

bd2850 No.855009

I think you're trying to recover a term which is inextricably linked with heretical theology. There are certainly deeper obscure meanings of things in Christianity, (see the parables of Jesus for an obvious example), but gnosticism and other esoterica assert that there is hidden knowledge revealed only to a special few, like a tacky young adult fantasy novel. There is no place for hidden knowledge in orthodox Christianity.

There is an appropriate use of mystic, speculative, and even "magic" that doesn't carry the same baggage.

The gospel of John was written with platonism in mind but let's remember it's only because platonism arrived at some valid truth claims, the theology of the Bible was not based on it. I would argue that neoplatonism has been a pervasive negative assumption on the church since Augustine. (I know neoplatonism and platonism are discrete)

Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.

bd2850 No.855010

One more comment from me, the rational/mystical dynamic you're referring to in Judaism is not anything to emulate since this development and Judaism itself are AD reactions to Christianity

Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.

490a62 No.855011

>>855008

if mysticism is synonymous with gnosticism then orthodoxy is gnosticism

preeminent 'orthodox' christian mystics:

Meister Eckhart (catholic church) he was condemned but has been vindicated

gregory palamas (eastern church)

jakob boehme (protestant church)

Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.

490a62 No.855012

>>855008>>855011

i should add, that even though eckhart isnt canonised his disciples are considered saints, and the pope who condemned him wavered on the doctrine of the beatific vision so evidently wasnt the most qualified judge

Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.

36df32 No.855014

>>855008

I'm trying to understand how you are using these terms, and certainly they are quite different from how I or most people would use them.

Gnosticism was a specific cult which had certain concrete beliefs that militate squarely against Scripture, relying on the corruption of Scripture itself as well as the assertion that the surface meaning was false and a mere front designed purely as a vehicle to communicate the hidden knowledge supposedly contained within, the knowledge of which was limited to a select few in the inner circles of the cult organization.

We see gnosticism in its primitive state with the rise of the Marcionite cult, which stated, that Scripture had been corrupted by 140 AD and had to be restored by a new "Joseph Smith"-like figure, namely Marcion himself. This new revelation was taught by them, to have occurred 115 and a half years after Christ. So we see that without even getting into the specific teachings involved here (like dualism; an inner spark being broken off pieces of a god; reincarnation or purgatory), that it really has nothing to do with the inherent doctrine of Christ contained in the original 1st Century Scripture.

What you are probably thinking of is mysticism. But this is very broadly defined. It may or may not refer to truths comporting with what God's word says. For instance, the apostle Paul speaks of mysteries, such as that of the Triune God in Colossians 2:2, and also of the hypostatic union in Colossians 2:9 and 1 Timothy 3:16 (KJV). These are said to be taught by revelation of Jesus Christ (Galatians 1:11-12), so that they are no longer hidden but now revealed (Colossians 1:26, 1 Corinthians 2:7-8). This is in contrast with the claims of ancient and modern gnosticism (including modern Judaism, btw), which insist that in Scripture some hidden meaning trumps all surface level and immediate meanings which are merely a cheap covering for the supposed hidden teaching encoded within. This "hidden meaning" is supposedly only accessible by the dragon masters or ultra super rabbis of the selected cult who then teach it to their followers rather than have them read the Gospel for themselves.

>middle Platonism.

Neoplatonism was largely founded by Porphyry. And we read of Porphyry this:

>“To Porphyry (q.v.) belongs the credit of having recast and popularized the system of his master Plotinus. He was not an original thinker, but a diligent student, distinguished by great learning, by a turn for historical and philological criticism, and by an earnest purpose to uproot false teaching, especially Christianity…

>“As he advanced in life, Porphyry protested more and more earnestly against the rude faith of the common people and their immoral worships. His work Against the Christians was directed, not against Christ, nor against what he believed to be Christ’s teaching, but against the Christians of his own day and their sacred books… [I]n his trenchant criticism of the origin of what passed for Christianity in his time, he spoke bitter and severe truths, which have gained for him the reputation of the most rabid and wicked of all the enemies of Christianity…

>“Porphyry marks the transition to a new phase of Neoplatonism, in which it becomes completely subservient to polytheism, and seeks before everything else to protect the Greek and Oriental religions from the formidable assault of Christianity…”

See: “Neoplatonism,” Encyclopædia Britannica 14th ed. (1929), Vol 16, p. 219-220

Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.

85c4a5 No.855019

File: 973140c8bb4c98f⋯.jpg (2.09 MB,2600x1352,25:13,Colossians.jpg)

>>855008

Gnosticism isn't the same thing as mysticism. Gnosticism is a school of thought linked with Dualism, Docetism, Marcionism, and similar theological ideas. When most people hear "Gnosticism", they tend to imagine 2nd-3rd century Esoteric Docetist Dualism. Thats what most people mean by "Gnosticism".

With that in mind, the ideas of the Trinity, along with the Gospel of John in general, are flat out opposed to Gnosticism. John goes out of his way to say that the Word became Flesh (Jn. 1:14), and depicts Jesus as eating, interacting with matter, etc. - flat out opposed to Docetism. The concept of the Incarnation, which is inherently linked to the Trinity, is one of the core elements of Christianity that Gnosticism denies.

When we look at the Epistle to the Colossians, we see that it's actually rebuking Gnostic Dualism. It warns against imposing unessecary ascetic regulations (Col. 2:20-23), and establishes Christ as superior to all angelic forces (Col. 1:16). It even says that Christ has the fullness - literally, pleroma - of Godhead in him (Col. 2:9). This is a direct rebuke to Gnostics. The fact that Colossians references socmic things doesn't make it Gnostic - it does so in order to answer Gnostic Dualism.

Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.

85c4a5 No.855039

>>855023

What's wrong with trying to better understand church history, theology, etc?

Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.



[Return][Go to top][Catalog][Nerve Center][Random][Post a Reply]
Delete Post [ ]
[]
[ / / / / / / / / / / / / / ] [ dir / random / 93 / biohzrd / hkacade / hkpnd / tct / utd / uy / yebalnia ]