15 minute read
Gnostics: The Spiritually Arrogant
Introduction
Years ago, someone told me a joke about those people who say they have “spirit-filled” worship at their church. And the joke goes like this… Question: What does it mean when someone says they attend a “spirit-filled” church. Answer: It means that you do not.
Now that joke is funny because there is a kernel of truth in it. Because the very expression of being in a church that is “spirit-filled” always seems to have the implication that the people in that church are a little bit better Christians than all the rest of us. “Oh, I see that you haven’t received the baptism of the Holy Spirit, that’s too bad.”
And this kind of spiritual arrogance was a hallmark of the early gnostic believers as well. They were simply better Christians than us average pew jockeys. Why? Well, they had received a secret knowledge that no one else had, of course. And without that kind of spiritual enlightenment, one is simply doomed to mystical mediocrity at best, and perhaps, much worse. Valentinus said it himself, "He who [remains] an a-Gnostic [that is, not a Gnostic] to the end…will perish…”1
The word γνῶσις
The word gnosis (γνῶσις) means knowledge, but Bentley Layton explains that it does not connotate a propositional knowing, that something is the case; but rather a personal knowing, that someone is acquainted with a person, place, or thing.2 So, the Gnostics thought that they had a personal knowledge of Jesus, God the Father, or other divine realities, that others didn’t. They had “met ” God in a special way, and therefore, had an intimate relationship with the divine that others lacked.3
Arrogance
This unique knowledge included believing unique creation myths; knowing special gnostic jargon; and having a separate gnostic baptism, unique scriptures, and a strong group dynamic which included a hostility toward non-gnostics.4 This kind of conceit among the Gnostics, both inside and outside of their community, was well known and, in fact, Irenaeus himself complained about the arrogance of the Valentinian Gnostics.
Ismo Dunderberg also notes that these attitudes among the Valentinians created two different classes of Christians. In the Valentinian work Interpretation of Knowledge, the author reveals the conflict and jealousy in the community between those “’who have made progress in the Word’ and those who were envious of the advanced ones.”5 The author presents a character called the “troublemaker,” who is an unenlightened beginner, and yet he has the impertinence to question those more advanced. The author’s goal is to chastise this agitator, “urg[ing [him] not to complain about his inferior position in the body,”6 and instead to “be grateful [he is] not outside the body.”7
Secrecy
Another feature of Gnosticism was the alleged transfer of secret knowledge from the apostles through a lineage of enlightened teachers. This legacy of “secret knowledge” was rejected by the orthodox Church. But does this necessarily mean that the existence of secret knowledge was incompatible with the gospel message itself? For instance, Valentinus taught that Jesus hid certain mysteries from the public at large, and a quick glance at the gospels shows numerous instances where Jesus did indeed tell his disciples not to tell anyone about his teachings (Matthew 16:20; Mark 8:29-30; Luke 9:20-21), etc.8 Using this gospel evidence, and his instruction by Theudas, one of Paul’s disciples, Valentinus claimed possession of a secret knowledge going back to the Church’s earliest days.9 It is interesting to think that perhaps a portion of the Christian community, now lost to history, may have taken Jesus’ instruction at face value and continued the practice of clandestine teachings inside their own faith communities.
Adolph von Harnack
Syncretism
But where did these gnostic beliefs originally come from? Scholars are unsure. Adolf von Harnack believed that the gnostics used Greek philosophy to interpret the faith, but in doing so they altered the core themes of the gospel.10 Other scholars, like Kurt Rudolph agree that gnosticism, at its core, was a “product of Hellenistic syncretism,”11 but Arthur Darby Nock goes even further, calling gnosticism a kind of “Platonism run wild.”12
Other sources of gnostic thought have also been posited. Edward Conze believes that Buddhists were in contact with Indian “ Thomas Christians,” who used the Gospel of Thomas, and may have influenced the gnostic theology found therein.13 Richard Reitzenstein has even proposed Zoroastrian influences in the gnostic texts, which resulted in their dualistic beliefs about the spiritual and material worlds.14
But How Can We Best Think of the Early Gnostics?
Perhaps a good analogy is that the Gnostics were the “woke” crowd of their day, a movement of progressives leading the way against the ignorance of the Christian unwashed.15 But it ’s more complicated than that, because they also considered themselves to be Christian. So maybe the aforementioned “spirit filled” Christian is a better option, or perhaps it ’s a little bit of both.
But to get a true handle on why gnostics thought their beliefs were so much better than those of orthodox Christians, let ’s take a look at the characteristics of gnostic thought plumbed from the original texts. This is not always an easy task, since reading these texts is often a tough slog - the reader feels as if he is watching one of the less imaginative episodes of the old, but deeply philosophical, TV show “Kung Fu.” But we can pick out a number of common themes.
Characteristics of Gnosticism
Self-Knowledge
Elaine Pagels notes that “gnosis involves an intuitive process of knowing oneself.”16 But it ’s even deeper than that, because this kind of self-knowledge removes the ontological disparity between God the Father and the believer. Thus, in gnostic thinking, “self-knowledge is knowledge of God; the self and the divine are identical.17
One example of this can be found in Book of Thomas (the Contender). Here Jesus tells Judas Thomas to “examine yourself and know who you are and how you were and or how you shall be…you have already come to knowledge, and you will be called ‘the one who knows himself,’ for he who has not known himself has known nothing. But he who has known himself has already come to knowledge concerning the depth of the All.”18 So the saving faith in Jesus of orthodox Christianity is replaced by a knowledge of self which then reunites the individual to the divine. To the gnostic, it is this kind of Wisdom that saves.
Valentinus
And even though this kind of “know thyself ” mantra may have been popularized by the Oracle at Delphi, it is also alive and well today in the twenty-first century.19 And it is manifest in the proliferation of self-help books available at the local bookstore and online. If one can only deal with one’s bogeymen, such as emotional baggage, a few extra pounds, or those crippling hang-ups, well then, a world of self-fulfillment and actualization awaits. Psychoanalysis also fits well into this kind of gnostic model. The psychologist C. X. Jung explains that Valentinus’ belief that everything emanates from the depth of the abyss, means, in psychological categories, that all things arise from the unconscious.20
Personal Rather Than Biblical Revelation
One of the biggest criticisms of Gnosticism by early Christians was that their beliefs were often dependent upon the personal visions and experiences encountered directly with God, rather than upon revelation through scripture.21 But how does this kind of personal revelation save? Well, it all starts with the belief that “man is a copy of the divine pattern.”22 Now this copy has been degraded through anti-Gnostic forces (such as the Gospel of Truth’s “ The Lack”),23 but a divine spark is allegedly still present in every human, which must be fanned into a flame through gnostic teaching. This newfound understanding, often personified in the figure of Sophia (whom some gnostics even offered prayers to), is the means by which the divine pattern, becomes, once again, fully recovered.24 Much of this secret teaching begins with the esoteric, and often bizarre, creation myths found in the gnostic texts.25
But how can one prove that this has happened: confirm that he is now “woke?” That is ― how can a person demonstrate to his gnostic teachers that he is now, in fact, spiritually mature? Well, it helps to be able to talk about one’s encounters with God that then have revealed new and deeper theologies. Irenaeus wrote that, “every one of them [the Gnostics] generates something new every day, according to his ability; for no one is considered initiated [or: “mature”] among them unless he develops some enormous fictions!”26 In other words, these alleged personal experiences with God allowed for an infinite number of doctrines, and at times, resulted in outlandish ones. But to the Gnostics, these revelations instead led to a kind of Nirvana, as the fallen self finds its home once again within the divine.
Demiurge
The early church struggled with the apparent dichotomy of an Old Testament God with his laws and punishments, as opposed to the New Testament God, who forgives our sins through Jesus Christ. Marcion “solved” this problem by adopting a malevolent creator God called the demiurge, who is supported by his demons, the archons. 27 This new character allowed for the separation of the New Testament God of love from the Old Testament lawgiver and punisher. But in doing so, Marcion, and the Gnostics who would follow, devalued the role of God the Father into a kind of malevolent creator being who fashioned a cosmos which was evil from its very beginnings.
Resurrection, Virgin Birth, and Baptism Denial
Gnosticism was also known for ditching those pesky doctrines that were so hard to believe in the first place. Most Gnostics didn’t believe in the physical resurrection of Jesus, instead they encountered the crucified Christ spiritually “in dreams, in ecstatic trance, in visions, or in moments of spiritual illumination.”28
The miraculous nature of the virgin birth was also rejected by the Gnostics. The author of the Gospel of Philip offers that, “ They [that is, orthodox Christians] do not know what they are saying. When did a woman ever conceive by a woman?”29 He also doubted the work of the Holy Spirit in the sacrament of baptism. He opined that the believer “go[es] down into the water and come[s] up without having received anything.”30
Gnostics also belittled the martyrdom that was suffered by so many orthodox believers. They considered these personal sacrifices as misguided and downright dangerous since their example convinced others to give up their lives needlessly in defense of false beliefs.31 One can, however, see the convenience in all these rejections of the miraculous, which then allowed the Gnostic to justify his cowardice. Indeed, when one surrenders a belief in the miraculous, one can also safely lose the troubling intimate God who holds individuals accountable for their own actions.
Today, we see the same rejection of the supernatural outside the church, in the materialism and scientism of contemporary society, but within the church walls as well, in liberal Christianity theology which attempts to appeal to the modern empirical mind. Another example of this materialism within the church is the growing popularity of denominations holding to believers’ baptism, which is a public statement of faith with no belief necessary in the action of the Holy Spirit within the sacrament.
Authority
As Dr. Granquist has noted above, many feminist theologians hold that much of early Christianity’s opposition to the heretical nature of the gnostic theology can be chocked up to church politics. They believed that the bodily resurrection of Jesus was used in this effort, since only those who witnessed the resurrection, usually male apostles, could then control the lineage of bishops, assuring a male-dominated power structure.32 Gnosticism, on the other hand, provided leadership opportunities for women and the male laity, which was deemed a threat to orthodox authority.33
And while it might be easy to dismiss the idea that politics motivated the early church’s anti-gnostic campaign, one is reminded of the career of Catholic theologian Hans Kung, who was simply ignored by the curia when he suggested lifting the prohibitions on contraception and abortion. And yet, when he publicly refuted the doctrine of infallibility (a direct threat to church authority) that was when the inquisitor finally came to call. So here is a modern-day example on how authority is, and always has been, one of the Church’s top priorities.
Conclusion
But how do we become the Irenaeuses of today? How do we combat gnostic thought both in society and within the Church itself? Well, perhaps we need to concentrate on four goals: Humility, openness, an outward focus, and an adherence to biblical orthodoxy.
Humility
This is a tough one since we are all naturally concerned about ourselves. But perhaps we can begin by asking ourselves a single question: Is what I am doing in ministry about serving God or other people, or is it really about puffing myself up or inflating my foolish pride?
Openness
Gnosticism thrived on secrets, but orthodoxy has nothing to hide. Is everything we do in church open and accessible for everyone to see? Are our services always open to the public, and are we willing to post them on the internet? And are our pastors willing to allow the laity to lead in most areas of ministry, or are they bent on controlling everything?
Outward Focus
Jesus gave us the example of engaging strangers in conversations on faith. But often churches today are all about the members or potential members. These parishes focus on programs that will serve seekers to “bring them in.” But can that kind of self-centeredness be turned outward into evangelization in the community and in service to the less fortunate?
Biblical Orthodoxy
Many pastors try to water down the healing, demonic, or miracle stories that are questionable to the modern mind. This often includes core doctrines such as the virgin birth and the resurrection. The challenge for pastors is to keep an open mind about the honest questions that seekers have, while at the same time assuring that we don’t abandon the scriptures, which can only leave us with a rudderless faith.
Rev. Dr. Dennis R. Di Mauro is Pastor of Trinity Lutheran Church Warrenton, VA. He teaches at St. Paul Lutheran Seminary and is the editor of SIMUL.
(This essay, since revised for publication, was first delivered at the Younger Theologians Colloquium, Corpus Christi Texas, August 3rd, 2021)
Endnotes:
1Kendrick Grobel, The Gospel of Truth: A Valentinian Meditation on the Gospel Translation from the Coptic and Commentary (New York: Abington Press, 1960), 74.
2Bentley Layton, The Gnostic Scriptures (New York: Doubleday, 1987), 9.
3For a comprehensive discussion on the gnostic view on salvation, see Simone Pétrement, A Separate God: The Christian Origins of Gnosticism (New York: Harper and Row, 1990), 129-139.
4Layton, 9-21.
5Ismo Dunderberg, Beyond Gnosticism: Myth, Lifestyle, and Society in the School of Valentinus (New York: Columbia University Press, 2008), 147.
6Dunderberg, 150.
7Interpretation of Knowledge, quoted in Dunderberg, 150.
8Elaine Pagels, The Gnostic Gospels (New York: Vintage Books, 1979), 14.
9Ibid.,15.
10Ibid., xxix.
11Kurt Rudolph, Gnosis: The Nature and History of Gnosticism (New York: Harper One, 1984), 54.
12Pagels, xxx.
13Ibid., xxi.
14Ibid., xxx.
15Aaron Kheriaty, “ The Great Awokening: Neo-Marxism, Critical Race Theory, and Other Contemporary Gnostic Religions.” Lecture at Napa Institute Conference, Napa California, July 24 , 2021.
16Pagels, xix.
17Ibid., xx.
18Book of Thomas (The Contender), quoted in Rudolph, 113; The first half of this work “concerns acquaintance or self-knowledge (gnosis) and the valuelessness of the flesh,” See Layton, p. 400
19Rudolph, 113.
20Pagels, 133.
21Ibid., 18.
22Rudolph, 92.
23Grobel, 97.
24Rudolph, 54.
25Geoffrey Smith notes that the Gospel of Truth, “opens with a cosmic myth of Error that sets the stage for the coming of the Savior, who will bring humanity back to the Father. Finding the Entirety adrift and searching in vain for the Father, Error creates a molded form and traps the Entirety within it. In this way, Error, partitions the Entirety off from the Father and ensures that it will live in ignorance and darkness. Salvation arrives when the Savior comes into the world to put an end to the reign of Error.” See Geoffrey Smith, Valentinian Christianity: Texts and Translation (Oakland, California: University of California Press 2020), 128.
26Irenaeus quoted in Pagels, 19.
27Pagels, 101.
28Pagels, 5.
29Gospel of Philip, quoted in Pagels, 53; The compiler of the Gospel of Philip “was especially concerned with the theology of the sacraments (possibly baptism most of all).” He mentions five Valentinian gnostic sacraments (baptism, chrism, Eucharist, ransom [a salvific release], and bridal chamber [perhaps a restoration of the soul]) with elements that distinguish them from those of orthodox Christianity, see Layton, 326; Smith, 128. On bridal chamber, see Don Merkur, Gnosis: An Esoteric Tradition of Mystical Visions and Unions (Albany, NY: State University of New York Press, 1993), 5.
30Pagels, 104.
31Ibid., 92-97.
32Ibid., 6.
33Ibid., 41-42.
This issue’s cover photo is Master of Boucicaut’s “Expulsion of the Inhabitants from Carcassone [Cathars] in 1209” (c. 1415)
