There is actually no such thing as Christian Gnosticism, because true Christianity and Gnosticism are mutually exclusive systems of belief. The principles of Gnosticism contradict what it means to be a Christian. Therefore, while some forms of Gnosticism may claim to be Christian, they are in fact decidedly non-Christian.
Gnosticism was perhaps the most dangerous heresy that threatened the early church during the first three centuries. Influenced by such philosophers as Plato, Gnosticism is based on two false premises. First, it espouses a dualism regarding spirit and matter. Gnostics assert that matter is inherently evil and spirit is good. As a result of this presupposition, Gnostics believe anything done in the body, even the grossest sin, has no meaning because real life exists in the spirit realm only.
Second, Gnostics claim to possess an elevated knowledge, a “higher truth” known only to a certain few. Gnosticism comes from the Greek word gnosis which means “to know.” Gnostics claim to possess a higher knowledge, not from the Bible, but acquired on some mystical higher plain of existence. Gnostics see themselves as a privileged class elevated above everybody else by their higher, deeper knowledge of God.
To discredit the idea of any compatibility between Christianity and Gnosticism, one has only to compare their teachings on the main doctrines of the faith. On the matter of salvation, Gnosticism teaches that salvation is gained through the acquisition of divine knowledge which frees one from the illusions of darkness. Although they claim to follow Jesus Christ and His original teachings, Gnostics contradict Him at every turn. Jesus said nothing about salvation through knowledge, but by faith in Him as Savior from sin. “For it is by grace you have been saved, through faith—and this not from yourselves, it is the gift of God—not by works, so that no one can boast” (Ephesians 2:8-9). Furthermore, the salvation Christ offers is free and available to everyone (John 3:16), not just a select few who have acquired a special revelation.
Christianity asserts that there is one source of Truth and that is the Bible, the inspired, inerrant Word of the living God, the only infallible rule of faith and practice (John 17:17; 2 Timothy 3:15-17; Hebrews 4:12). It is God’s written revelation to mankind and is never superseded by man’s thoughts, ideas, writings, or visions. The Gnostics, on the other hand, use a variety of early heretical writings known as the Gnostic gospels, a collection of forgeries claiming to be “lost books of the Bible.” Thankfully, the early church fathers were nearly unanimous in recognizing these Gnostic scrolls as fraudulent forgeries that espouse false doctrines about Jesus Christ, salvation, God, and every other crucial Christian truth. There are countless contradictions between the Gnostic “gospels” and the Bible. Even when the so-called Christian Gnostics quote from the Bible, they rewrite verses and parts of verses to harmonize with their philosophy, a practice that is strictly forbidden and warned against by Scripture (Deuteronomy 4:2; 12:32; Proverbs 30:6; Revelation 22:18-19).
The Person of Jesus Christ is another area where Christianity and Gnosticism drastically differ. The Gnostics believe that Jesus’ physical body was not real, but only “seemed” to be physical, and that His spirit descended upon Him at His baptism, but left Him just before His crucifixion. Such views destroy not only the true humanity of Jesus, but also the atonement, for Jesus must not only have been truly God, but also the truly human (and physically real) man who actually suffered and died upon the cross in order to be the acceptable substitutionary sacrifice for sin (Hebrews 2:14-17). The biblical view of Jesus affirms His complete humanity as well as His full deity.
Gnosticism is based on a mystical, intuitive, subjective, inward, emotional approach to truth which is not new at all. It is very old, going back in some form to the Garden of Eden, where Satan questioned God and the words He spoke and convinced Adam and Eve to reject them and accept a lie. He does the same thing today as he “prowls around like a roaring lion looking for someone to devour” (1 Peter 5:8). He still calls God and the Bible into question and catches in his web those who are either naïve and scripturally uninformed or who are seeking some personal revelation to make them feel special, unique, and superior to others. Let us follow the Apostle Paul who said to “test everything. Hold on to the good” (1 Thessalonians 5:21), and this we do by comparing everything to the Word of God, the only Truth.
http://www.gotquestions.org/Christian-gnosticism.html
Read more: http://www.gotquestions.org/Christian-gnosticism.html#ixzz3RwyMwHuy
The Gnostic gospels are writings by early "Christian" Gnostics. After the first century of Christianity, two primary divisions developed - the orthodox and the Gnostics. The orthodox Christians held to books we now have in the Bible and to what is today considered orthodox theology. The Gnostic Christians, if they can truly be described as Christians, held a distinctly different view of the Bible, of Jesus Christ, of salvation, and of virtually every other major Christian doctrine. However, they did not have any writings by the Apostles to give legitimacy to their beliefs.
That is why and how the Gnostic gospels were created. The Gnostics fraudulently attached the names of famous Christians to their writings, such as the gospel of Thomas, the gospel of Philip, the gospel of Mary, etc. The discovery of theNag Hammadi libraryin northern Egypt in 1945 represented a major discovery of Gnostic gospels. These Gnostic gospels are often pointed to as supposed "lost books of the Bible."
So, what are we to make of the Gnostic gospels? Should some or all of them be in the Bible? No, they should not. First, as pointed out above, the Gnostic gospels are forgeries, fraudulently written in the names of the Apostles in order to give them a legitimacy in the early church. Thankfully, the early church fathers were nearly unanimous in recognizing the Gnostic gospels as promoting false teachings about virtually every key Christian doctrine. There are countless contradictions between the Gnostic gospels and the true Gospels of Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John. The Gnostic gospels can be a good source for the study of early Christian heresies, but they should be rejected outright as not belonging in the Bible and not representing the genuine Christian faith.
Read more:http://www.gotquestions.org/Gnostic-gospels.html#ixzz3Rx01qccR
http://www.gotquestions.org/Gnostic-gospels.html
The gospel of Thomas is a Coptic manuscript discovered in 1945 at Nag Hammadi in Egypt. This manuscript contains 114 sayings attributed to Jesus. Some of these sayings resemble sayings found in the Gospels of Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John. Other sayings were unknown until their discovery or even run counter to what is written in the four Gospels.
One December day in 1945, far up the Nile Valley, two Egyptian peasants were looking for a local variety of crumbly nitrate rock used as fertilizer. They came across a large jar, about a meter tall, hidden by a boulder. Inside they found a collection of ancient leather-bound books or codices. The spot where the books were found is within a few miles of the site of an early monastery, established by the founder of Christian "cenobitic" monasticism in Egypt, Pachomius. Nag Hammadi, a nearby village, has given this remarkable collection its name.
The Nag Hammadi Library consists of fifty-two texts or "tractates" written in Coptic on papyrus and gathered in thirteen volumes, twelve of which have separate leather bindings. Forty of the texts had previously been unknown to modern scholars. Most of the writings are of a Gnostic character. Scraps of paper found in the binding of eight codices bear dates indicating that the books were made in the mid-fourth century, and at least one of these clearly appears to have come from a monastery. Efforts to date the books more precisely continue. In general, it can be said the collection dates from about the middle of the fourth century. The Coptic texts could be many years earlier, and the originals (probably written in Greek or Aramaic) from which the Coptic translations were made could have been still earlier.
To understand how we got the Bible as we know it, please see the following two articles:What is the canon of Scripture?andHow was the Canon determined?
Should the gospel of Thomas be in the Canon?
The early church councils followed something similar to the following principles to determine whether a New Testament book was truly inspired by the Holy Spirit: 1) Was the author an apostle or have a close connection with an apostle? 2) Was the book being accepted by the Body of Christ at large? 3) Did the book contain consistency of doctrine and orthodox teaching? 4) Did the book bear evidence of high moral and spiritual values that would reflect a work of the Holy Spirit?
The gospel of Thomas fails all of these tests. The gospel of Thomas was not written by Jesus' disciple Thomas. The early Christian leaders universally recognized the gospel of Thomas as a forgery. The gospel of Thomas was rejected by the vast majority of early Christians. The gospel of Thomas contains many teachings that are in contradiction to the biblical Gospels and the rest of the New Testament. The gospel of Thomas does not bear the marks of a work of inspiration of the Holy Spirit.
Are there any other arguments that preclude the gospel of Thomas from being included in the Bible? If we examine the 114 sayings in this writing, then we find some that are similar to existing sayings, some that are slightly different, but the majority cannot be found anywhere in the entirety of Scripture itself. Scripture must always confirm itself, and the majority of sayings in the gospel of Thomas cannot be confirmed anywhere else in Scripture.
One argument for precluding the gospel of Thomas from the Bible is found in the overt "secretness" attributed to these 114 sayings by the work itself. Nowhere in Scripture is God's Word given “in secret" but is given for all to read and understand. The gospel of Thomas very clearly tries to maintain an air of secrecy in its words.
The gospel of Thomas is aGnostic gospel, espousing aGnostic viewpoint of Christianity. The gospel of Thomas is simply a heretical forgery, much the same as the gospel of Judas, the gospel of Mary, and the gospel of Philip. Perhaps the disciple Thomas' nickname of "doubting Thomas" is appropriate here. We should all be doubting the gospel of Thomas!
Recommended Resources:The Missing Gospels: Unearthing the Truth Behind Alternative Christianities by Darrell BockandLogos Bible Software.
Read more:http://www.gotquestions.org/gospel-of-Thomas.html#ixzz3Rx1Sy9xB
http://www.gotquestions.org/gospel-of-Thomas.html
The Gospel of Peter is apseudepigraphalwork that purports to be written by Peter but in fact relates a false view of Jesus Christ. The Gospel of Peter contains 60 verses and deals with events surrounding the end of Jesus’ life. The original is thought to have been written c. AD 150, although the earliest extant manuscript dates from the 8th or 9th century.
The first mention of the Gospel of Peter was made by Bishop Serapion of Antioch (c. AD 200) in a letter titled “Concerning what is known as the Gospel of Peter.” In this letter Serapion advised church leaders not to read the so-called Gospel to their congregations because of its Docetic content. He also condemned the Gospel of Peter as a forgery.
What isDocetism? One form of Docetism (Marcionism) maintained that Christ was so divine he could not have been human. He only appeared to be made of flesh and blood, His body being a phantasm. Other groups held that, while Jesus was a man in the flesh, Christ was a separate entity who entered Jesus’ body in the form of a dove at His baptism, empowering Him to perform miracles. The “Christ entity” then abandoned Jesus on the cross. Docetism was unequivocally rejected at the First Council of Nicaea in AD 325 and is regarded as heretical by Catholics and Protestants alike. Docetism largely died out during the first millennium.
The Gospel of Peter says that on the cross Jesus cried out, “My power, my power, thou hast forsaken me,” rather than “My God, my God, why has thou forsaken me?” (Mark 15:34). In the account of the crucifixion, the Gospel of Peter carefully avoids saying that Jesus died, asserting instead that He “was taken up.” This idea of escaping actual death is mirrored in the Qur’an, Sura 4:157–158: “But Allah took him up unto Himself.” The Gospel of Peter suggests that Christ was “taken up” to the Divine Presence at the moment His divine power left His bodily shell, which had only been a temporary residence. This teaching, together with the claim that Jesus “remained silent, as though he felt no pain” on the cross, highlights the error of Docetism.
Another way in which the Gospel of Peter differs from the Gospels of Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John is the description of events after Jesus’ body was laid in the tomb. The Gospel of Peter says that the guards “saw the heavens opened, and two men descend with a great light and approach the tomb. . . . Again they saw three men come forth from the tomb, and two of them supporting one, and a cross following them. And the heads of the two reached to heaven, but the head of him who was led by them overpassed the heavens. And they heard a voice from the heavens, saying, ‘You have preached to them that sleep.’ And a response was heard from the cross, ‘Yes.’” This passage has someGnosticleanings.
Here are some of the main problems with the Gospel of Peter:
The crucifixion takes place in Rome, not Jerusalem.
Joseph of Arimathea is said to be a personal friend of Pontius Pilate.
Pontius Pilate is exonerated from all responsibility. Herod Antipas takes over for him, assuming the responsibility which, in Luke’s Gospel, Herod declines to accept.
Jesus is “taken up” from the cross, and His death is not mentioned.
Two supernatural beings enter the tomb, and three emerge.
The cross is described as floating out of the tomb and saying “Yes” to a voice from heaven.
There is no mention of witnesses seeing Jesus alive after He was dragged out of the tomb.
And if that is not enough to shed doubt on the veracity of the Gospel of Peter, we also have the testimony of Eusebius. The historian made reference to the Gospel of Peter in his writings, claiming that Apollo was the god originally mentioned in the Gospel of Peter, not Jesus Christ. Eusebius said the name of Jesus Christ was written over the name of Apollo.
The Gospel of Peter disagrees with the four canonical Gospels in vitally important areas, including the physical death and bodily resurrection of our Lord and Savior.
Recommended Resources:The Missing Gospels: Unearthing the Truth Behind Alternative Christianities by Darrell BockandLogos Bible Software.
Read more:http://www.gotquestions.org/gospel-of-Peter.html#ixzz3Rx1z8LaN
http://www.gotquestions.org/gospel-of-Peter.html
Similar to thegospel of Thomas, the gospel of Philip is a collection of sayings, supposedly of Jesus. The gospel of Philip focuses a great deal on the “sacrament of marriage” as a “sacred mystery.” The gospel of Philip does not claim to have been written by Jesus’ disciple Philip. It is titled “the gospel according to Philip” due to Philip being the only disciple of Jesus who is named in the gospel (73:8).
The most complete manuscript of the gospel of Philip was discovered in the Nag Hammadi library in Egypt in 1945. It is written in the Coptic language and is dated to approximately the 4th century A.D. The gospel of Philip is a Gnostic gospel, presenting a Gnostic viewpoint of Jesus and His teachings. While there are a few verses in the gospel of Philip that resemble the four biblical Gospels, a reading of the gospel of Philip will reveal many irreconcilable differences and a completely different message regarding who Jesus was and what He came to do.
Of most interest in the gospel of Philip is what it has to say about Jesus’ relationship with Mary Magdalene. In his popular book The Da Vinci Code, author Dan Brown points to the gospel of Philip as evidence of Jesus’ marriage / relationship with Mary Magdalene. However, the gospel of Philip nowhere states that Jesus was married to Mary Magdalene. It does not even state that Jesus was romantically involved with Mary. The one section that deals with this issue is heavily damaged, with several portions unreadable. Here is what the gospel of Philip states, with “…” representing missing portions: “and the companion of the … Mary Magdalene … more than … the disciples … kiss her … on her … the rest of the disciples … they said to him … why do you love her more than all of us?” Even if we assume that Jesus was kissing Mary Magdalene, the text does not imply anything other than a friendly relationship. A single man kissing a single woman on the cheek, while rare in that culture, is by no means indicative of a romantic relationship.
Whatever the case, even if the gospel of Philip explicitly stated that Jesus was married to Mary Magdalene, that would not make the idea true. The gospel of Philip was not written by the Apostle Philip or anyone who had ever met Jesus. The original writing of the gospel of Philip is dated to the 3rd century A.D. at the earliest, at least 200 years after Jesus’ death. The only value in studying the gospel of Philip is in learning what heresies existed in the early centuries of the Christian church.
Recommended Resources:The Missing Gospels: Unearthing the Truth Behind Alternative Christianities by Darrell BockandLogos Bible Software.
Read more:http://www.gotquestions.org/gospel-of-Philip.html#ixzz3Rx2KwNGr
http://www.gotquestions.org/gospel-of-Philip.html
Sometime in the 1970s, in a cave in Egypt, a copy of the “Gospel of Judas” was discovered. The circumstances of the discovery have been described as shady, with those who possessed the copy asking for exorbitant amounts of money for the codex. For decades, no institution was willing to pay for the purchase due to its dubious origins. Eventually the codex of the Gospel of Judas was purchased by a foundation in Switzerland. The existence of the Gospel of Judas codex was made public in 2004, but the actual release of the content of the codex has been repeatedly delayed, finally being released in April 2006. The dating of the original writing of the Gospel of Judas is thought to be about AD 150, with the Egyptian codex dating from the late 3rd century. According to various accounts, up to one third of the codex is missing or illegible.
Prior to this discovery, the only reference to the Gospel of Judas was in the writings of a 2nd-century Christian named Irenaeus. Irenaeus essentially wrote that the Gospel of Judas was the “invented history” of a long line of heretics and rebels against God. The essential message of the Gospel of Judas is that Jesus wanted Judas to betray Him because it was necessary to fulfill Jesus’ plan. If it was Jesus’ plan for Judas to betray Him, why would Jesus label Judas the “son of perdition” (John 17:12) and state that it would have been better if Judas had never been born (Matthew 26:24)? If Judas were simply following Jesus’ instructions, why would he commit suicide once he saw that Jesus was condemned (Matthew 27:5)?
The Gospel of Judas is aGnostic gospel, espousing aGnostic viewpoint of Christianity. The Gospel of Judas is simply a heretical forgery, much the same as the Gospel of Thomas, the Gospel of Mary, and the Gospel of Philip. Just as Judas Iscariot rejected Jesus and betrayed Him with a kiss, the Gospel of Judas rejects the true gospel and truth of God with a fraudulent appearance of validity.
Recommended Resources:The Missing Gospels: Unearthing the Truth Behind Alternative Christianities by Darrell BockandLogos Bible Software.
Read more:http://www.gotquestions.org/gospel-of-Judas.html#ixzz3Rx2nSfwr
http://www.gotquestions.org/gospel-of-Judas.html
Nag Hammadi is a town in northern Egypt where a collection of ancient writings was discovered in 1945. The collection of writings has since been titled the Nag Hammadi library, or the Nag Hammadi scrolls, or the Nag Hammadi codices. The vast majority of the scrolls in the Nag Hammadi library represent the writings of what was/is known asChristian Gnosticism.
The Nag Hammadi library is frequently pointed to as an example of "lost books of the Bible." According to the conspiracy theory, the early Christians tried to destroy these Gnostic writings because they contained secret teachings about Jesus and Christianity. The Nag Hammadi library was supposedly the result of faithful efforts of Gnostic monks to save the truth about Jesus Christ from the persecution of non-Gnostic Christians. The Nag Hammadi scrolls include works known as the gospel of Truth, thegospel of Philip, the apocryphon of John, the apocalypse of Adam, and the acts of Peter and the Twelve Apostles. The most famous Nag Hammadi scroll is the only known complete copy of the gospel of Thomas.
So, what are we to make of the Nag Hammadi library? Should some or all of the scrolls be in the Bible? Absolutely not. First, the Nag Hammadi scrolls are forgeries. The Apostle Philip did not write the gospel of Philip. The Apostle Peter did not write the acts of Peter. The gospel of Thomas was not written by the Apostle Thomas. These scrolls were fraudulently written in their names in order to give them legitimacy in the early church. Thankfully, the early church fathers were nearly unanimous in recognizing these Gnostic scrolls as fraudulent forgeries that espouse false doctrines about Jesus Christ, salvation, God, and every other crucial Christian truth. There are countless contradictions between the Nag Hammadi library and the Bible.
While the Nag Hammadi library was an exciting find, the only "value" in the Nag Hammadi library is that the scrolls give us insight into what early "heretics" taught and practiced. Recognizing the false doctrine that plagued the early church will help us better to understand it and refute it today.
Recommended Resources:The Missing Gospels: Unearthing the Truth Behind Alternative Christianities by Darrell BockandLogos Bible Software.
Read more:http://www.gotquestions.org/Nag-Hammadi.html#ixzz3Rx3STKvu
http://www.gotquestions.org/Nag-Hammadi.html
If the shoe doesn't fit don't where it, Trapper. There's no sense getting your blood pressure up over nothing. Not all Gnostics believe the same thing. There appears to be a number of people on curezone, some who read this board, caught up in this deception. Although the information I presented may not be useful to you because of where you're at, it may help others to see the deception. Do you believe in the Holy Spirit? I would suggest you seek Him for the truth before calling what other people believe "crap". You happen to be the one in the "crap" whether you see that or not.
Try this:
"One of the earliest heresies to arise in the Christian church was Gnosticism, and Irenaeus was one of its chief early opponents. Not all Gnostics believed exactly the same thing, but the general outlines of the belief are fairly clear.
Gnostics were dualists, teaching that there are two great opposing forces: good versus evil, light versus darkness, knowledge versus ignorance, spirit versus matter. Since the world is material, and leaves much room for improvement, they denied that God had made it. "How can the perfect produce the imperfect, the infinite produce the finite, the spiritual produce the material?" they asked. One solution was to say that there were thirty beings called AEons, and that God had made the first AEon, which made the second AEon, which made the third, and so on to the thirtieth AEon, which made the world. (This, Gnostics pointed out to the initiate, was the true inward spiritual meaning of the statement that Jesus was thirty years old when he began to preach.) As Irenaeus pointed out, this did not help at all. Assuming the Gnostic view of the matter, each of the thirty must be either finite or infinite, material or non-material, and somewhere along the line you would have an infinite being producing a finite one, a spiritual being producing a material one.
The Gnostics were Docetists (pronounced do-SEE-tists). This word comes from the Greek word meaning "to seem." They taught that Christ did not really have a material body, but only seemed to have one. It was an appearance, so that he could communicate with men, but was not really there. (If holograms had been known then, they would certainly have said that the supposed body of Jesus was a hologram.) They went on to say that Jesus was not really born, and did not really suffer or die, but merely appeared to do so. It was in opposition to early Gnostic teachers that the Apostle John wrote (1 John 4:1-3) that anyone who denies that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh is of antiChrist.
Gnostics claimed to be Christians, but Christians with a difference. They said that Jesus had had two doctrines: one a doctrine fit for the common man, and preached to everyone, and the other an advanced teaching, kept secret from the multitudes, fit only for the chosen few, the spiritually elite. They, the Gnostics, were the spiritually elite, and although the doctrines taught in the churches were not exactly wrong, and were in fact as close to the truth as the common man could hope to come, it was to the Gnostics that one must turn for the real truth.
[...]
In opposition to this idea, Irenaeus maintained that the Gospel message is for everyone. He was perhaps the first to speak of the Church as "Catholic" (universal). In using this term, he made three contrasts:
(1) He contrasted the over-all church with the single local congregation, so that one spoke of the Church in Ephesus, but also of the Catholic Church, of which the Churches in Ephesus, Corinth, Rome, Antioch, etc. were local branches or chapters.
(2) He contrasted Christianity with Judaism, in that the task of Judaism was to preserve the knowledge of the one God by establishing a solid national base for it among a single people, but the task of Christianity was to set out from that base to preach the Truth to all nations.
(3) He contrasted Christianity with Gnosticism, in that the Gnostics claimed to have a message only for the few with the right aptitudes and temperaments, whereas the Christian Gospel was to be proclaimed to all men everywhere.
Irenaeus then went on to say: If Jesus did have a special secret teaching, to whom would He entrust it? Clearly, to His disciples, to the Twelve, who were with Him constantly, and to whom he spoke without reservation (Mark 4:34). And was the teaching of the Twelve different from that of Paul? Here the Gnostics, and others since, have tried to drive a wedge between Paul and the original Apostles, but Peter writes of Paul in the highest terms (2 Peter 3:15), as one whose teaching is authentic. Again, we find Paul saying to the elders of the church at Ephesus (Acts 20:27), that he has declared to them the whole counsel of God. Where, then, do we look for Christ's authentic teaching? In the congregations that were founded by the apostles, who set trustworthy men in charge of them, and charged them to pass on the teaching unchanged to future generations through carefully chosen successors."
- Source: Biography of Irenaeus, Bishop of Lyons, theologian By James Kiefer
http://www.apologeticsindex.org/186-gnosticism