Did Gnosticism try and Usurp Christianity or is it the Real Message of Christ. , page 10

This topic is in the Conspiracies in Religions discussion forum. (rss)

Did Gnosticism try and Usurp Christianity or is it the Real Message of Christ. << 7 8 9 10 >>

reply posted on 9-12-2008 @ 01:30 PM by Eleleth
Originally posted by ghaleon12 There are a lot of websites out there that are based around the teachings of Samael Aun Weor. He developed his own ideas around the 70's about gnosis. Some of his ideas make sense, but he has some strange ideas or interpriations of some of the gnostic myths/texts. Within the gnostic community, he isn't looked at very highly, that's the gist I get. For one, he believes that males can't do a certain activity and basically says that the way to "enlightenment" is white tantra. It is just sort of strange to tie gnosticism to certain sexual actions which is what he proposes. Everyone has to find their own truth of course, but just a warning about that lol. Most gnostics don't agree with that but unfortunatly, his teachings are some of the most popular when it comes to gnosticism; he sort of has developed a "brand". He has the right idea about sexuality playing a role, but it isn't a physical thing but a sort of metaphor perhaps about our attitude to everything in life, not just sex and it has nothing to do with sex. Both gnosticism and Kabbalah point in this direction. Yeah, Samael Aun Weor and his school has basically "usurped" Gnosticism. I would be a little bit peeved if it wasn't so wonderfully ironic. The Naassenes may have practiced a form of tantra, but if they did, it would have to have been flamingly gay, as they strictly forbade sex with women! So clearly that contradicts Weor's teachings about homosexuality. The Valentinians, at least, considered sex to be a sacred act. But the rest is necessarily left to the imagination. [edit on 9-12-2008 by Eleleth]
copyright & usage

reply posted on 9-12-2008 @ 01:46 PM by ghaleon12
reply to post by Eleleth I would say its more of a misrepresentation of gnosticism, but like I said, someone might say that it is exactly what gnosticism is. So it depends on the person. Early Christianity was very diverse so to say that gnosticism usurped Christianity isn't really the case. If anything, you could say early Christianity (and early Christians) usurped gnosticism. Gnostic Christianity was what the majority of Christians early on choose from what I've read. Then orthodoxy developed and they killed fellow christians and destroyed the gnostic texts. You wouldn't think that gnosticism could be so bad as to make the orthodox church violate one of its own commandments.. [edit on 9-12-2008 by ghaleon12]
copyright & usage

reply posted on 9-12-2008 @ 02:24 PM by Eleleth
Originally posted by ghaleon12 I would say its more of a misrepresentation of gnosticism, but like I said, someone might say that it is exactly what gnosticism is. So it depends on the person. Early Christianity was very diverse so to say that gnosticism usurped Christianity isn't really the case. If anything, you could say early Christianity (and early Christians) usurped gnosticism. Gnostic Christianity was what the majority of Christians early on choose from what I've read. Then orthodoxy developed and they killed fellow christians and destroyed the gnostic texts. You wouldn't think that gnosticism could be so bad as to make the orthodox church violate one of its own commandments. Haha, I wasn't saying that was the case. There is much evidence, however, that the Gnostic Ophites had an intimate knowledge of Kundalini of some sort or another, and I highly suspect that this is what much of the New Testament is actually about. Which might explain why they considered themselves the only true Christians! [edit on 9-12-2008 by Eleleth]
copyright & usage