Gnosticism vs. Christianity -
Christian Faith vs. Gnostic
Beliefs -
Origins of the Gnostic Movement
The best known movement –
considered heretical from the start – is known as the gnostic
movement. What did its adherents believe? What are the origins of
the gnostic movement? Unfortunately, there is no
simple answer. The term is derived from the Greek “gnosis” (gnōsis) which
simply means knowledge. Gnosticism rose in the Mediterranean
world and the
Near East
at the same time as primitive Christianity but independently of it,
reaching its zenith in the third century. In
its broadest sense Gnosticism is religious dogma based on a view of
special knowledge. Over time, the term has become a catchword for
any heresy as opposed to orthodox Christianity. A good illustration
of this confusion is the Nag Hammadi documents. They are considered
gnostic, but reveal significant differences among themselves.
One approach is to define
characteristics common to gnostic documents:
- Dualism:
The true and “good” God differs from the “evil” Creator
God in Genesis.
- Cosmogony:
The physical material world is evil. Light, soul, spirit,
and knowledge are good.
- Salvation:
Salvation and redemption are experienced only by knowledge.
The flesh (the physical) is not redeemable. Hence, there is no
resurrection of the body from the dead.
- Eschatology:
Understanding where existence is heading, namely, the
redemption of the soul and recovery of creation into the
“fullness,” being where good dwells (separated from the evil
physical world of matter and flesh).
- Cult
and community: The worship, sacraments, and the people who
nurtured such views.
Gnosticism began to influence the
widespread Christian community by the end of the first century.
There are some scriptures that refute Gnosticism. Look at 1 John 4:2-3 (emphasis added):
“This is how you can
recognize the Spirit of God: Every spirit that acknowledges that
Jesus Christ has come in the flesh is from God, but every spirit
that does not acknowledge Jesus is not from God. This is the spirit
of the antichrist, which you have heard is coming and even now is
already in the world.” Here John the apostle, writing 80-90
AD, denies gnostic claims that a Divine Jesus could not have been
human, or exist in flesh. They argued that all flesh, indeed the
whole physical world is evil.
The well known Apostles’
Creed, probably dated in
the third century was derived from the Old Roman Creed (likely written in the latter half of the second
century). The Roman Creed developed within the Christian community
to fight Gnosticism (underlined are anti-gnostic statements):
“I believe in God the Father Almighty. And in Jesus Christ his only
Son our Lord, who was born of the Holy Spirit and the Virgin
Mary; crucified under Pontius Pilate and buried; the third day he
rose from the dead; he ascended into heaven, and sits at the
right hand of the Father, from thence he shall come to judge the
living and the dead. And in the Holy Spirit; the holy church; the
forgiveness of sins; the resurrection of the flesh.”
An even earlier fragment of this creed – probably written as
early as the end of the first century simply states (showing again
an anti-gnostic emphasis):
"I believe in God the Father Almighty, and in Jesus Christ his
only Son, our Lord. And in the Holy Spirit, the holy church,
the resurrection of the flesh."
Many early church writers vigorously opposed gnostic influences
in their letters throughout the Christian community. Examples of
this are seen in two letters of Ignatius
(ca. 105-107 AD) and many writings of Justin Martyr (ca. 160 AD),
Hegesippus (ca. 170 AD), Irenaeus (ca. 170-180 AD), Clement of
Alexandria (ca. 195 AD), and Tertullian (ca. 210 AD).
“Gnostic Christianity” versus “Traditional Christianity”
- Definition of Gnostic Christianity
What is the definition of Gnostic
Christianity? A few of today’s liberal scholars
– referred to by some as The
New School – claim that at the time of the birth of the
Christian faith, modern-day Christianity was not the only
interpretation of Jesus’ teachings.
They assert that alternatives such as the gnostic interpretations
(“Gnostic Christianity”)
were also considered. After the struggle of the various concepts for
supremacy, the view of “Traditional
Christianity” “won” and other early forms of Christianity
were suppressed, reformed, or even forgotten. Recent finds, they
claim, of new gospels bring these alternative views to light. Many
promote a “make-over” of traditional beliefs, as a liberation
from current Christianity; said by some to be an old, tiresome,
constraining, and narrow faith.
As we have seen, the early church
actively fought gnostic claims and influences. However, anti-gnostic
statements are found only in the book of 1 John, likely one of the
last books, written near the end of the first century. If Gnosticism
had been a major concern to the apostles, we would expect many more
anti-gnostic statements in the Bible books. Therefore it logically
follows that gnostic influences started to interfere with the
Christian faith about 50-60 years after the birth of Christianity.
This implies that:
·
“Traditional
Christianity” and “Gnostic Christianity” did not
develop in parallel. Traditional Christianity was well established,
all (except for very few) books of the NT had been written well
before gnostic concepts began to influence the faith. Therefore,
Gnostic Christianity is not an alternative interpretation of the
teachings of Christ that could be considered in any way on par with
Biblical Christian theology. No, it is a cult, claiming additional
revelation to justify its changes to the original faith.
·
Gnostic Christian
“gospels” therefore could not have been written before the end
of the first century because Gnostic Christianity did not exist
earlier. Our discussion of the various “gospels” and the
evidence for their authenticity should verify this conclusion.
Read on
about: (3)
The Nag Hammadi Library