I feel there are many things from each religion that claims it is 'FROM GOD' that shows a God that is not always loving. Even the Bible shows a God who can hate and kill with no hope for souls to seek Thee and find Thee.

Was Thee a loving God when the babes in Egypt were killed? What about the lands of people that were wiped off the face of the Earth so the Israelites could have their promised land? The idea of HELL period displays and idea that Gods love stops at some point. Does it not? Unless it is a cycle, we all get recycled and recycled, until we awake to our nature or else our soul will eventually become victim to the darkness (world of flesh) and cease to exists.

This is in response to Grandma but always love to hear all view points,
LV

Dearest Mother,

Yes, we have talked endlessly till blue in the face on such matters.

We must look at scriptures, for without them, we wouldn't even know Christ at all. I think we should all be careful of what we claim we believe and what we claim we 'know'.

Many followers of Christ will tell others that they believe in an all loving God. This does trouble me because then they will turn and say, 'well Im not God but he must of had a good reason to kill people and need the blood of animals to forgive us'. I say, lets not throw logic out the window...we are talking about THEE MOST HIGH ALMIGHTY above all things....I strongly believe there is no requirement of blood by God, never was and never will be. I also believe this is the masses falling into the trap of a deception that God needs these things. THEE IS GOD...GOD NEEDS NOTHING OF THIS MATERIAL WORLD. I believe this with all my heart and soul, I truly find this is a grace mistake, to place this blood on God, for God, even in his name. Christ came and we killed him...so why not just mark that on the marker of blood atonement as well...at least it takes the blame off of us, because then we can say, well it had to be, there was no other way, it was inevitable.

The gnostics resonates with me for this very reasons. They teach that the MOST HIGH is not, ever was, nor ever will be, capable of wrath, greed, jealousy or pride. Everyone wants to jump up and quote a scripture...but its not even logical to me. I find that man has fallen, just as always....in thinking God needed us to kill animals for our wrongs.

To think that a simple pure heart and awareness of ones actions wasn't enough for God, they had to go find animals so God could consume the blood. It makes me cringe to think so many follow this without using any logic....they follow it all because the Bible says it....along with God ordering man to kill man. This makes my heart ache. But if it works for you...then each to their own, just as you have allowed me to my own...I thank you for that.

Love me

I'm a gnostic Christian and being a gnostic is about having a more relationship with God and challenging yourself and Church leaders etc. We believe that everyone can be like Christ and not just Christ himself. Of course Christ is unique because of the obvious.

Originally posted by Lucid Lunacy
Keep in mind also, the middle ground: Not that the Canonized message of Christ is more or less true then the Gnostic message of Christ; they were both the messages of Christ. I am not saying this reflects my stance, but it may for some?

Keep in mind also, one could (as in personal interpretation) extrapolate that Christ was a gnostic based purely on the biblical interpretation of canonized scripture alone. Since to be a gnostic, means one has Gnosis, or at least, ones spiritual aim is Gnosis. *I am being very general*

Anyways, I look forward to participating as I feel I am one of the ATS members that knows a decent amount about Christian Gnosticism and Gnosticism in general. *not sure how many there are here? I have seen a few! *.

For now I am off to sleep. Tomorrow I will read my Gnostic Bible (hey that's literally the title ) for a refresher, then i'll contribute.

[edit on 21-11-2008 by Lucid Lunacy]

As a gnostic Christian I think you put it very well. I'm glad of this thread too because it's tough to find a place to talk about my religious beliefs.

Originally posted by pieman
okay, 'twas me making the claim. before we get bogged down in detail, my premise for making the claim is that gnosticism, being a disparate and fractured belief system, can be defined in a very broad way by saying it is a belief system who's proponents believe that we each contain a divine spark by nature and are capable of direct communion with the divine and becoming christ like, that is, free of sin. they tend to believe that the earth, and earthly goods, are the property and tools of evil and that to enter into heaven, the trapping of these things must be shed.

rather than claiming that christ was a follower of any particular gnostic belief system, this has been done and leads to confusion and ambiguous results, i would argue that christs preaching was of a nature that suggests a gnostic outlook rather than an orthodox outlook.

the orthodox view, without question, says that humans are born in sin and can never be free of sin. it says that no direct communication can be had with the divine and it says that we only receive the divine spark with baptism, which is the holy ghost. it says that the world is neutral and that worldly goods hold no real impediment to heaven in and of themselves.

i do not believe this is in line with christs teaching and i believe i can show this based solely on the four canonical gospels.

in my considered opinion, the various scholarly details aren't particularly worth discussing unless the basic nature of christs teachings can be shown to be either orthadox or gnostic.

Right. As a gnostic I do my best to better my relationship with God and to be more Christ like. Of course I do have a potty mouth so that is a bit hard for me haha. I try not to be boggled down by the physical world as much as your individual.

Originally posted by Mr Anunnaki
Gnosticism also recognizes the sacred feminine. Something the church does not do. Remember every thing has it's opposite. Gnostics also do not categorize Mary Magdalen as a whore, but rather as Jesus' wife. Remember Jesus was a teacher and a devout Jew. He would have been married according to Rabbinic law. Peter and Paul were notorious women hater's, and have influenced the church towards this view as well. I think Jesus did not share their view on this. There are many more reasons why I think gnosticism deserves another look.IMHO

I can remember ever since I was in high school never liking Paul. I guess the gnostic in me eh? I do have a soft spot for Peter though. *shrug*

It's the real message...

The "holy church" drove the Gnostics, Cathars and a host of other truth tellers underground because the "holy church" wanted people to remain in spiritual darkness.

Originally posted by ben91069

Originally posted by Mr Anunnaki
Gnosticism also recognizes the sacred feminine. Something the church does not do.

I am gnostic, and I have been finding within myself more and more that at the last day when everything is complete that it is the woman or the 'outside/opposite' that plays the vital role in completing the man 'inside', just as Jesus predicted in his verse about the woman who washed his feet in oil and perfumes and dried them with her hair.

Symbolically the woman sanctifies the God son outwardly, showing him his errs and reconciling him back to his Father. In this way, she cleanses his lowest portions and reunites him to his position of authority.

The female aspect plays a crucial (if not irreplaceable) role in the sons of God mission while in the heart of the earth.

Right. Everything Jesus did had some sort of spiritual messages.

Originally posted by whiteraven

If Christ was Gnostic, and I believe he was in the purest sense, if my understanding is correct, was he not simply furthering the idea of "secret knowledge "...i.e. the Pearl of great Price ...with the idea of a balanced life...i.e. wine, wedding, celebration....and the idea of the Superman Spiritual guy......i.e. healings, raising the dead......bringing the whole human experience/trip both heavenly/spiritual as well as earthly/flesh to culmination...i.e. wine, woman and song???

edit for spelling and other stuff

[edit on 21-11-2008 by whiteraven]

I've never thought of it that way. But I sure have intuited it that way.

Wow, you just blew my mind.

Sometimes my most "religious" experiences, where my charisma and insight and instincts have been on high have been when I have a few drinks, don't worry about tomorrow, and just be real (without conditioning you could kinda say).

Originally posted by LeoVirgo
Antoher part of Gnostic text that resonates with me is the idea that it was NOT the MOST HIGH who brought the destruction of people by flood. The idea that there was a spirit below Thee Most High that only CLAIMED to be GOd....truly this spirit did believe thee was God because this spirit could not KNOW God because of the chaotic birth of this spirit by Sophia (the counterpart of Christ, the womb of God).This teaching would allow the Most High to ONLY BE OF LOVE AND GRACE with no capability to experience wrath, hate, anger, greed,or pride. This teaching resonates with me deeply.

Peace,
LV

I thought Sophia was supposed to be knowledge?

Originally posted by SpeakerofTruth
It's the real message...

The "holy church" drove the Gnostics, Cathars and a host of other truth tellers underground because the "holy church" wanted people to remain in spiritual darkness.

I am surprised by how positive the attitude is towards the Gnostics in this forum. I am neither a Christian nor a Gnostic, but I find them rather fascinating and admire them as perhaps history's first real truthseekers and spiritual anarchists.

Originally posted by ghaleon12
About gnosticism being "secret", a large part of that was probably because they'd get killed if they practiced in openly. I've heard that Kabbalah went sort of underground for a long time until society was ready for its wisdom, and I think by "ready" they mean "will not hit us with sticks" lol. Although, you still see that in some of the middle eastern countries but that's another topic.

The question of whether Jesus was "gnostic" or not really isn't that important. To most gnostics, he was gnostic and that's all that really matters.

Well if your average Christian was abused and beaten like Stephen was daily then imagine how it would've been for gnostics at the time.

[edit on 21-11-2008 by LittlePinky82]