It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Gnostic traditions and the illuminati

page: 1
0

log in

join
share:

posted on Dec, 28 2004 @ 09:37 AM
link   
Does anyone know if there is any connection between the Manichaen Gnostics and the illuminati? More importantly does anyone know about the Manichaen Gnostics?

[edit on 28-12-2004 by loveinvein]




posted on Dec, 28 2004 @ 12:19 PM
link   

Originally posted by loveinvein
Does anyone know if there is any connection between the Manichaen Gnostics and the illuminati?


There was not. The Illuminati would have considered Gnosticism to be "superstitious nonsense".



More importantly does anyone know about the Manichaen Gnostics?



Yes. It was actually the Gnostics that forced the Roman Catholic Church to concretize its doctrine by organizing its Canon, so they could combat "heresy". In this sense, ironically, the Gnostics are directly responsibility for the Bible's existence.



posted on Dec, 29 2004 @ 02:42 AM
link   
The most influential theologian in matters of 'gnostic' manicheism seems to be Manes, who influenced the catharians and the knight templars (both persecuted by the church). You can research him or the catharians on wikipedia or other web resources. I cannot provide a link directly, because wikipedia is out of order currently. I don't know if the term 'illuminati' still fits this line of religious thought today, since direct political influence of gnosticism is rather questionable. Illuminism (hidden political agendas) probably rather applies today to anti-gnostic tendencies like the churches or secretive religious-nationalist groups behind far-right policies.





[edit on 29-12-2004 by krotzkrotz]



posted on Dec, 29 2004 @ 03:43 AM
link   
Manichaens were/are not the only Gnostics - there are many different Types of Gnosticism!



posted on Dec, 29 2004 @ 05:23 AM
link   

Originally posted by Masonic Light


Yes. It was actually the Gnostics that forced the Roman Catholic Church to concretize its doctrine by organizing its Canon, so they could combat "heresy". In this sense, ironically, the Gnostics are directly responsibility for the Bible's existence.



ML. Are you referring to the Essenes? It was my understanding that they were the group responsible for deciding that the Bible should be finalised and that no more major editing should take place.



posted on Dec, 29 2004 @ 12:21 PM
link   

Originally posted by Leveller

ML. Are you referring to the Essenes? It was my understanding that they were the group responsible for deciding that the Bible should be finalised and that no more major editing should take place.


The Essenes were actually a Jewish sect, and seemed to have little influence on the organizational development of the Christian church. However, it is possible that the Essenes influenced the doctrine of the Gnostics. Many Gnostics claimed to be Johannites, and it's still a mystery if John the Baptist and Jesus were ever associated with the Essenes.

The Gnostics, unlike the Essenes, were Christians; but many of their doctrines directly contradicted those of the evolving Roman church. When the Roman Church began assembling the Christian Bible, many Gnostic texts were purposely ignored. It is claimed by some that the Gospel of John, as well as his Apocalypse, were Gnostic texts that somehow slipped by the censors.

An excellent essay on the Gnostics, and their symbolic relationship to Masonry, can be read in "Pillars of Wisdom" by Dr. Rex Hutchens, 33, G.C.
Bro. Hutchens also devotes a chapter to the Essenes. As an aside, Bro. Hutchens is by profession an anthropologist, and his writings are often far more historically accurate than other Masonic books on the subject, written by good men, but men with a tendency to succumb to their imagination.



posted on Dec, 29 2004 @ 08:07 PM
link   
ML. I'm referring to the Old Testament. I have read that there was documentation found that showed that the Essenes were the group that pressured the Jewish religion into accepting the book as a final form and discouraging any further major editing.

Could you also shed light on your statement that the first Gnostics were Christians? Weren't there Jewish Gnostics as well? As you state, the Essenes could well have influenced later Christian groups, and isn't it possible that amongst the Essene sects, there were gnostics? Certainly the texts discovered at Nag Hammadi seem to have a gnostic flavour to them. And the most likely originators of those texts were the Essenes.

So although the Essenes may not have directly influenced the Catholic Church, maybe indirectly they had far more input than you are giving them credit for? Basically they could have been the forerunners of Christianity before it was dogmatised by Rome. Evidence also seems to suggest that before Paul and Rome, gnosticism was roughly half of the early Christian belief.

As for the question of Jesus being an Essene. I believe that the corruption of "Jesus of Nazereth" which was almost certainly "Jesus the Nazorean" shows him to be an Essene.
Is it therefore possible that the Essenes were the first Christian gnostics?


There's an interesting website on the subject here:

essenes.net...

Although it does contain bias it also does have some interesting snippets of information regarding the Essenes and Gnosticism and their relationship with early Christianity.



[edit on 29-12-2004 by Leveller]



posted on Dec, 29 2004 @ 08:20 PM
link   

Originally posted by Leveller
ML. I'm referring to the Old Testament.


Ah, ok, I was referring to the Christian Canon, i.e. the one organized by Rome.


Could you also shed light on your statement that the first Gnostics were Christians? Weren't there Jewish Gnostics as well?


To the best of my knowledge (which certainly isn't infallible; I'll have to do more research on the topic), the original Gnostics were Christians. There were several different splinter groups, which disagreed on doctrine. One group accepted the Old Testament, as well as the Gospel; another group did not, and sorely vexed the non-Gnostic Christians with their doctrines, viz., that the God of the Old Testament was actually an evil god or devil ("Ialdoboath"), and that Christ as the Logos was the embodiment of the principle Sofia.


As you state, the Essenes could well have influenced later Christian groups, and isn't it possible that amongst the Essene sects, there were gnostics? Certainly the texts discovered at Qumran seem to have a gnostic flavour to them. And the most likely originators of those texts were the Essenes.


I would concur that there were many similarities in ritual between the two. However, the Essenes were generally a pre-Christian movement, while the Gnostics were Johannites.


So although the Essenes may not have directly influenced the Catholic Church, maybe indirectly they had far more input than you are giving them credit for?


It is possible that their influence was immense, especially if the Baptist and Jesus were Essenes. However, most historians and anthropologists concur that the Canon itself began to be organized in reaction to Gnostic "heresy".


Evidence also seems to suggest that before Paul and Rome, gnosticism was roughly half of the early Christian belief.


Absolutely, if not more.


As for the question of Jesus being an Essene. I believe that the corruption of "Jesus of Nazereth" which was almost certainly "Jesus the Nazorean" shows him to be an Essene.
Is it therefore possible that the Essenes were the first Christian gnostics?


I would say that it is possible that some Essenes became Gnostics, and perhaps even that Gnosticism evolved from Essenianism. My only real distinction between the two sects is that the Essenes, like the Pharisees and Sadducees, was a strictly Jewish sect, while the Gnostics embraced at least some early form of Christianity.



posted on Dec, 29 2004 @ 08:41 PM
link   
Thanks for the reply.
As you've probably noticed, I've edited my post.
The texts that I was referring to were found at Nag Hamedi and not Qumran. I believe it was the "Gnostic Gospels that were found at the former and the Dead Sea Scrolls at the latter.

I guess I'm also gonna have to do some more reading up on the Essenes. It was my understanding that, although there were some strict Judaic believers within their folds, the whole was comprised of different groups, some of which were much more liberal in their outlook.

I'll get back to you on this one.



posted on Dec, 30 2004 @ 02:06 PM
link   
Quote: "As for the question of Jesus being an Essene. I believe that the corruption of "Jesus of Nazareth" which was almost certainly
"Jesus the Nazorean" shows him to be an Essene.
Is it therefore possible that the Essenes were the first Christian Gnostics?"

Hmm... I think that people don't realize that Hebrew & Greek are NOT the only languages featured in the "Bible" which is like a Never Ending Book. What about "Aramaic"? Jesus spoke Aramaic! In Addition Aramaic developed a WRITTEN Language! In Addition - what about Coptic? Coptic is a Hermeticized form of Greek - much more Compatible with Hebrew - it was used by GREEK Speaking JEWS in Alexandrian Egypt - WOW Imagine that! I just think that this goes to show that because of Political Power over the Ages Jesus' ORIGINAL message was Twisted, Distorted & Disfigured!

Leveller - Perhaps the Essenes were mostly Comprised of MESSIANIC JEWS Eagerly looking for Salvation - looking to Transition to the Next Level! The Question was - Will the Messiah be a Warrior King or a
Priestly King! I think the Jews looking for the Former were disappointed when in actuality they received the Latter & some Refused to Convert - Understandable really!

You see when the Jews & the Gentiles Fought WAR with each other - BOTH sides were Weakened - but when they Joined Forces & United - they became VERY STRONG! Don't you find it funny how a PAGAN Roman Emperor Constantine (the First Pope) was so EAGER to Convert to Christianity & make it the new Official Religion of the
Roman Empire? Maybe because he was trying to Use it as a TOOL to Unite the EMPIRE! Just prior to this the Romans PERSECUTED the original Christians - the Romans CRUCIFED JESUS CHRIST! Wow talk about a
180 Degree turn around!


[edit on 30-12-2004 by Seraphim_Serpente]



new topics

top topics



 
0

log in

join