Against Gnosticism: Why the Gnostic Christians were not ChristianWritten by Kathy Simcox
In early Christianity there were many alternative views that claimed to have authority over one another. Hundreds of rival teachers all claimed to teach “true doctrine of Christ” and denounced all others as frauds. All claimed to represent “the authentic tradition”. Jesus himself was only authority they all recognized.1 One of these alternative views was Gnostic Christianity, which gained popularity in second century. The term Gnosticism comes from Greek word gnosis, meaning ‘knowledge’. This knowledge is knowledge of participation, knowledge of union and salvation. It is existential knowledge in contrast to scientific knowledge.2 Gnosticism was influenced by Oriental dualism and Greek philosophies. In this dualism Gnostics believed that creation of world was bad and that its creator, Yahweh, Old Testament God of Jews, was an evil being. The God of Gnostic Christianity was a benevolent and loving being, superior over Yahweh.3 This God was God Father, Jesus’ Father, “real” God. Paul Tillich said that Gnosis is used in three ways: as knowledge in general terms; as mystical communion; as sexual intercourse.4 This article will be concerned with second as it applies to Resurrection. The theory that Jesus rose from dead is fundamental element of Christian faith. The idea that this event occurred in one unique historical moment is a central theme to orthodox position. What makes this so ordinary is not claim that Jesus’ friends had seen him after his death, but that they saw a human being. The orthodox position states that as Christ rose bodily from grave, so every believer should anticipate resurrection of flesh. 4 Some New Testament accounts insist on this literal view of resurrection and orthodoxy of second century insisted on it as well, rejecting all others as heretical. Luke 24:34 states that “the Lord has risen indeed, and has appeared to Simon Peter!” Whatever truth of this claim, in all honesty we can’t verify or disprove it on simply historical grounds – we were not there to see it happen. All we can say is that Peter claimed that resurrection happened and generations after him continued to believe him, and still do. For Gnostic Christian, however, person who experiences resurrection does not meet Jesus raised back to life in physical form. He encounters Christ on a spiritual level, such as dreams, ecstatic trances, visions, and spiritual illumination. 5 The Gnostic Christian rejected Luke’s theory. According to them, literal view of resurrection was argued to have occurred in past and because of this it was called “faith of fools”. 6 The Gnostics insisted that resurrection symbolized how Christ’s presence could be experienced in present. To them, it was not literal seeing that mattered; rather, it was spiritual vision. This spiritual vision of resurrection, in whatever form it took, was moment of enlightenment – a person could be “resurrected from dead” right now. Christians could “receive resurrection while they live”. 7 Gnostics believed that taking literal view was ignorant.
| | The Point of the PassionWritten by Kathy Simcox
I’ve been thinking a lot about The Passion of Christ past few weeks and have heard mixed reviews and comments regarding much of information presented in film. I’ve heard how film is “anti-Semitic” and how it presents Jewish people in a bad light, blaming them for Christ’s death. I’ve heard how horribly violent it is; during a prescreening in my hometown there were countless theatergoers who left film early because they couldn’t take brutality portrayed on screen. I’ve viewed historical programs analyzing film and how academia has tried, like they always do, to refute everything Jesus did in his all-too-brief lifetime. I’ve seen interviews with Mel Gibson and how interviewer, and editor, has tried to paint a negative image of director. What point are all these scholars, journalists, and even theatergoers trying to make? In my opinion, they are missing point altogether.This film is not anti-Semitic. It’s true that a small number of Jewish High Priests were partly responsible for Jesus’ sentencing, as are Roman authorities. But that small number of Jewish High Priests was alive 2,000 years ago and has nothing, I repeat, nothing to do with Jews of today, or even Jews of 1,000 years ago or even 50 years ago. Humanity and its sinful nature is responsible for Christ’s suffering and death. We have no one to blame but ourselves.
|
