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.

 

Question for theology/religion experts

page: 1
0

log in

join
share:

posted on Oct, 27 2009 @ 09:54 PM
link   
(I don't know if this is in the right forum; if not, please move it. Thank you.)


There was a line of thought - even a sect, maybe - in early Christianity, that the revelations and true gnosis conveyed by the Scriptures are supposedly "reserved" for initiates only.
Can anyone tell me what the exact name of that sect/line of thought was?
I heard about it many years ago, but can't remember its name.
And I tried to find this information online, but had no luck.




posted on Oct, 27 2009 @ 10:13 PM
link   
Are you referring to Mithraism perhaps?



posted on Oct, 27 2009 @ 10:22 PM
link   
reply to post by recycled
 


No, no, I am familiar with Mithraism. This one was a small current, I believe.
What I remember is that the name was reflective of the content. I am almost sure it was Greek; but I can't remember any word in Greek that would cover this *particular* notion.

You know.... on second thoughts, I am not so 100% sure the name was directly expressive of the contents. It may have been; or it may have been a derivation of its founder's name. But I am not sure of this either.


Thanks for replying anyway!








[edit on 27-10-2009 by Ethereal Gargoyle]

[edit on 27-10-2009 by Ethereal Gargoyle]



posted on Oct, 27 2009 @ 10:24 PM
link   
Are you talking about Gnostics? You said gnosis, but Gnostics were declared heretical early on as far as I know. I think the book of st thomas was considered gnostic, and that's why it's not in the bible. There are a lot of books of the Bible that were not included. Is that what you're talking about?



posted on Oct, 27 2009 @ 10:25 PM
link   
reply to post by bettermakings
 


No, no, I am well familiar with gnosticism myself.

As I was just saying, this was a small current of thought. I think.
Well, it is obscure today, that's for sure.

PS When I say I am familiar with gnosticism, well, obviously I am not familiar well *enough* to remember this....
What I meant was, I am well acquainted with the notion of gnosticism.





[edit on 27-10-2009 by Ethereal Gargoyle]

[edit on 27-10-2009 by Ethereal Gargoyle]



posted on Oct, 27 2009 @ 10:29 PM
link   
My brain is really diggin now...Could it be the Cathars you are referring to?



posted on Oct, 27 2009 @ 10:31 PM
link   
reply to post by bettermakings
 


BTW, I think this current or sect was also declared heretical.

(I am replying to this separately only because I have edited my previous posts so many times I am afraid you may miss this addendum.
)



posted on Oct, 27 2009 @ 10:32 PM
link   
Or the Essenes?....There were so many different sects of the time....Most of which required initiation of some sort...Is there anything else you can remember...?



posted on Oct, 27 2009 @ 10:33 PM
link   
reply to post by recycled
 


No, no, not the Cathars either.

This was a really obscure current - well, *now* it is obscure.
(A person who is really well versed in theology told me this, but he is not around anymore.)
What I am saying is, it was not any of these very famous sects that we know now, like the Cathars.


P.S. Not the Essens, either.
(Only saw the other reply now.
)







[edit on 27-10-2009 by Ethereal Gargoyle]



posted on Oct, 27 2009 @ 10:35 PM
link   
reply to post by recycled
 


Well, I *think* he told me it was reserved for the menfolk.
But I am really not sure!



posted on Oct, 27 2009 @ 10:39 PM
link   
What led you to "re-summoning", if you will, the name of the sect...What were you reading that triggered the memory of the name?
Do you remember?

The Adamites?

I tried to i.m. you on this as to not blow up the message board, but it won't let me...I am too new a member.



posted on Oct, 27 2009 @ 10:39 PM
link   
Important correction: I *think* what that person told me is that the revelations& gnosis were "accessible" only to the "chosen".
But I am not sure if this means people who are "chosen" by nature, i.e. who just have the right insight, or those who underwent an initiation proper.



posted on Oct, 27 2009 @ 10:41 PM
link   
webspace.ship.edu...

Check out this page.
Is it on this list?



posted on Oct, 27 2009 @ 10:43 PM
link   
reply to post by recycled
 


That is a *very* good question!

But I don't remember what exactly it was (I was reading a book about mystical thought) - but will try to remember.

I'll go now and research the Adamites.

Thanks!

Will let you know how it goes.



posted on Oct, 27 2009 @ 11:06 PM
link   
reply to post by recycled
 



Haven't found "them" yet. But thanks for the great pointers!


You know.... I am starting to fear that what I actually remember is my *thoughts* in reaction to his information when I first heard it.
But back then I was very ignorant of such things, except in name (some).
Maybe I later corrected my perception of what he had told me. So that may be the reason why I forgot the name, if you know what I mean.....

Anyway I'll come back and let you people know.



posted on Oct, 27 2009 @ 11:27 PM
link   
reply to post by Ethereal Gargoyle
 
Could you be thinking of "the elect"?


ELECT

e-lekt': That is, "chosen," "selected." In the Old Testament the word represents derivatives of bachar, elegit; in the New Testament eklektos. It means properly an object or objects of selection. This primary meaning sometimes passes into that of "eminent," "valuable," "choice"; often thus as a fact, in places where the King James Version uses "chosen" (or "elect") to translate the original (e.g. Isa 42:1; 1 Pet 2:6). In the King James Version "elect" (or "chosen") is used of Israel as the race selected for special favor and to be the special vehicle of Divine purposes (so 4 times in Apocrypha, Tobit and Ecclus); of the great Servant of Yahweh (compare Lk 23:35; the "Christ of God, his chosen"); compare eminent saints as Jacob, Moses, Rufus (Rom 16:13); "the lady," and her "sister" of 2 Jn; of the holy angels (1 Tim 5:21); with a possible suggestion of the lapse of other angels.

Otherwise, and prevalently in the New Testament, it denotes a human community, also described as believers, saints, the Israel of God; regarded as in some sense selected by Him from among men, objects of His special favor, and correspondingly called to special holiness and service. See further under ELECTION. In the English versions "elect" is not used as a verb: "to choose" is preferred; e.g. Mk 13:20; Eph 1:4.
Handley Dunelm

Bibliography Information
Orr, James, M.A., D.D. General Editor. "Definition for 'ELECT'". "International Standard Bible Encyclopedia". bible-history.com - ISBE; 1915.

Copyright Information
© International Standard Bible Encyclopedia (ISBE)


Source: www.bible-history.com...



posted on Oct, 28 2009 @ 03:46 PM
link   
reply to post by seentoomuch
 



I think they had a different name.... But thank you!

Any pointers are very welcome!

(But, as I was saying in my last post, I am afraid that maybe what I remember now is my thoughts in reaction to that information, back when I was very ignorant about this....)




top topics



 
0

log in

join