(9 votes, average: 4.89 out of 5)
Loading...I am in the midst of a thread describing different views of Christ found among early Christian groups of the second century: some Christians thought Jesus was human but not divine; others that he was divine but not human; others (the side that ended up winning the debates) that he was somehow both (that may seem common sense today, but it did not to many of Jesus’ followers in the second century!).
I haven’t begun yet to describe how that final view came about, and before doing so I need to explain a view different from all of these, one that maintained that Jesus Christ was actually *two* beings: one human and the other divine — distinct from one another, but temporarily united for Jesus’ ministry. It’s unusual, and not a view you find in a lot of pews these days.
To make sense of how the view worked and why people held it, I have to put it in a broader context. There were a number of Christian groups who held the view, most of whom could be labeled Christian “Gnostics.” Most modern Christians would (do) consider the Gnostic perspective very weird indeed. But they claimed they held to the teachings of Jesus himself. Wanna see how, well, unusual they were? I did my best to explain it all in a lecture I gave a while ago, which is not otherwise publicly available. But for you blog members: it is! Here:
*********************************
It’s simple to get access to this video: just join the blog! Once you do you’ll see just how much is on offer here, with archives going back nine years. All that for a very small fee, all of which goes to charity. Click here for membership options
If I want to look into the groups that believed Jesus was only a man, who do I search? Is it just the Christian jews or what names do they go under?
Do you have a source list of these groups of people and what scriptures they used?
The only other very famous group were called the Theodotians. (They were gentiles) I posted on them a few weeks ago (March 13).
Very interesting. Thank you. If one wanted to begin reading gnostic primary texts, which would you recommend he start with? Which of the Nag Hammadi texts, other than Thomas, is the most accessible and illuminating?
One of my favorites and not crazy mind-blowingly inaccessible is the Gospel of Truth. Want a hard-core GNostic text? Try Apocryphon of John. Or a particulrly intriguing one that seems easy until you actually want to know what it means/ Gospel of Phillip.
I would suggest the wonderful poem / hymn found in the Act of Thomas, called “The hymn of the pearl” (Hymn of the soul) which also could be called the story of the soul,to be a good start.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JbYET8XeVHQ
In my mind this hymn could be a good start before going into more complicated schriptures about the soul descend (for example the Apocryphon of John) and soul ascend/return (for example Gospel of Phillip).
I was particularly intrigued by the counting of apples:
“how do you know that if you have two apple and add another apple,
you have three apples?”…
Do the gnostics consider arithmetic to be part of the material world?
Is there a material feature to the number 2?
I think Plato would not agree, and place arithmetic in the highest of all heavens.
1. I don’t know 2. Only when it involves apples. 3. Are you saying Plato was very interested in mathematical “truth”? I agree with that.
Plato has a passage about that somewhere… he puts geometry (which was much more advanced than arithmetics at the time) just below the ultimate knowledge-gaining method, because geometry still requires the axioms. Whereas as this ultimate method (dialectics?) should not even need axioms.
By “gnosis” the Gnostics appear to have meant something other than simply intellectual knowledge, right? Mystical intuitive insight? Judging by their literary output would you say they tended to be charismatics and ecstatics?
Using a modern comparison would you say they tended to the Pentecostal/Shaker side of religious practice?
thanks
Something like true insight into reality. I’m not sure there are good analogies.
Gnosticism drives me crazy. How could anyone think they knew that stuff? Not just how could they know the unknowable god, but how could they think they knew any of it? Did they read about Sophia’s escapades in the Pleroma Inquirer? Did they watch Pleroma News Network? (These are rhetorical questions.)
Gnosticism is rather appealing. It explains why the world is as it is without putting the blame on a set of first parents– on “us”. Hey, it ain’t my fault. This sinful nature stuff cuts no mustard when you look at it closely. And then you don’t have to square a seemingly indifferent natural world, with diseases and human defects, and natural disasters with a perfect and loving God. It just doesn’t square up. More and more, as a personal myth, I lean to the view that the world of matter and energy is something apart from any higher realm, not created and with an order that is completely amoral and self-contained. No god or gods responsible. This world is the mud and primal ooze from which self-aware beings arise, bubbling up through the muck, eventually ascending, via “death”, to the pleroma, to become part of the pleroma, by slow degrees, one step at a time, in a process that really has no end. I mean, is that picture any more or less likely than any other myth?
It seemed like the ancients had a love/hate relationship with matter including the human body. Many Jews and Jesus believed in a bodily resurrection so matter was good. Gnostics saw matter as evil. Any thoughts on why the difference of opinion?
There’s a ton written on that and it can’t be summarized quickly. Some people think this world is inherently awful and matter is the *problem*; others think that it is all God’s creation and he will redeem it. Several major religions fall out on those two lines of thought.
It sounds like the difference between a liberal and a Marxist radical. The former wants to reform capitalism and the latter wants to replace it.
I’m not one of those people who thinks it’s weird. This religious narrative is found in many ancient religions, such as our Eastern worldview where you have the history of descent and the history of ascension. This is found, for example, in Hinduism (at least over 1000 BC) and the much later Buddhism (about 500 BC) where we come from a transcendental world ,,, and after some reincarnated life it develops again into a unit . This concept is not so far from any major view called Gnosticism.
And the ideas were not foreign for long lost ancient Egyptian, Babylonian, including more familiar concepts in Judaism and Hellenism.
Even the much later beginnings of Islam supported a much more philosophical view of their religion, very much based on Hellenistic philosophy. Looking at some brilliant philosophers (like non-Muslims ,,, yes, these are great ancient things, like ideas in Sufism, and Islamic philosophers like Ibn Arabi, Ibn Rushd to name a few ,,, and the idea of ”Unity about being “is very similar to the Gnostic ideas, but as in Christianity they also lost in favor of” traditionalism “and” the literalists “. The interesting thing is that” Gnosticism “in Islam lasted much longer than in Christianity.
Well, the Hindi, Buddhist, Hellenistic esoteric Jewish ideas, Gnostic and even Islamic ideas of descent and ascension seem to be the same ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, but Judo Christian ascend the idea is much more fun !, ,, almost like “Ring of Lord” by Tolkien.
The Judeo-Christian narrative with the soul ascend narrative in, for example, the Gospel of Philip, the Dialogue of Salvation and the book of IEOU, and not least in the Book of Revelation!!!!!!, we have much of the same ,,,,, ,,,,,, spiritualization of the 7 soul garments ,, , just like the 7 chakras, or the 7 churches in Revelation ,,,,, and then the perfect (12) man on his way to the state of New Jerusalem, and of course this bridal chamber. This journey is not easy ,,,,,,,,,, full of dragons ,,,,,, many heads ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, star falling to the ear, ,,,, ,, ,,, and what not. The story (perhaps a multi-layered story) gives a more exciting and “rock and roll” story about the story of the soul ascend ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, back to unity
No, I think it’s not strange, I’m fascinated by this Gnostic view,,I see it many other places,, and think it’s not strange at all!
Algerian?
Seriously?
??
The slide fonts?
Sorry — you’ll need to explain your questions or comments: I don’t have the thread that you’re responding to.
I think he means the font used for the ellipses used in the comment: those multiple small slashes vs the commonly used “…”.
Interesting. So if aeons are produced in pairs, how come one gnostic movement come up with 265 of them? That’s an odd number and can’t be achieved by adding even numbers together. Or is it the number of all entities, i e the aeons plus the unknowable god? Then all groups should have an odd number of beings in the pleroma.
It’s 365. There is one ultimate divine being and the others emanate in pairs, so it’s an odd number.
Thank you for this fascinating lecture Dr. Ehrman. Even though gnosticism was eventually stamped out, did Gnostics leave any lasting impact on Christian thought as we know it? I.e. did later Christians sometimes unwittingly have conceptions that trace their way back to gnosticism?
I suppose over history lots of Christians thought they had a spark of the divine within. ANd many people think this world must be some kind of cosmic mistake. Other than that…
> I did my best to explain it all in a lecture I gave a while ago, which is not otherwise publicly available.
*Gasp* Are these the secret teachings of Dr. Ehrman, revealed only to his favorite students? 🙂
No, only to those destined to ultimate glory.
I believe Gnosticism allows and expects growth in what one learns about life, on a personal level. Most established religions I have looked at expect me to stop sinning, stop whining and suck it up. God will fix it in the end. Long on institutions, short on understanding.
It refers to the video in THIS thread and the slide presentation.
Never mind.
It seems to me that Gnosticism has as many different permutations as orthodox Christianity. It leaves me somewhat confused.
Was the material world created by an evil lesser god or by the wisdom (Sofia) of God?
Was the feminine Sofia replaced by the masculine Logos (Word) of God? If so, why was the Byzantine cathedral, Hagia Sofia, so named considering that Constantinople was close to the Johannine community?
Yup, lots of Gnostic religions. In most gnostic myths it’s not sofia who creates the world but her ill-formed offspring conceived outside the pleroma. I’d say that views of Sophia and views of Logos grew up at about the same time and probably interacted with each other. Wisdom (= Sophia) is the Creator of all in Proverbs 8. The church was certainly not named from Gnostic influence and came along centuries after the Johannine community.
Thank you for explaining such a complicated subject so clearly. Except for the Fall of Sophia concept to explain the trapped spiritual ‘sparks’, there are within Gnosticism quite a few similarities with the path of Knowledge (Jnana) as described in the Bhagavad Gita and other ancient Vedic texts, eg the Upanishads. If one is at all familiar with these texts, it makes understanding Gnostic beliefs much easier. However in the Vedic tradition all living beings (including insects, plants etc) have a spiritual spark and this spark, or soul, comes from God.
‘You will be able to obtain knowledge by satisfying the divine master with submission, relevant inquiry, and sincere service. The enlightened souls who are learned in scriptural knowledge and endowed with direct realisation of the Absolute Truth will impart divine knowledge to you.
O Pandava, when you are enlightened by this knowledge of the reality, you will no longer be subject to your present illusion. You will see the one spiritual nature in all species of life, from highest to lowest, and that all are situated within Me.’
Bhagavad Gita chapter 4 verses 34, 35