are there any Gnostics today

[dave6]

is there a movement of neo modern day gnostics?

 

[Breathe]

Yeah, there are a few.
I did a quick search for a Neo-Gnostic church I once knew, but it's no longer active. Sorry.

 

[dave6]

Yeah, there are a few.
I did a quick search for a Neo-Gnostic church I once knew, but it's no longer active. Sorry.

thank you for checking. have read some books about the old Gnostics linked to christianity and i found them to be very interesting. its so hard to know much about them with all of the biased against them in history and records being destroyed.

 

[Breathe]

thank you for checking. have read some books about the old Gnostics linked to christianity and i found them to be very interesting. its so hard to know much about them with all of the biased against them in history and records being destroyed.

Indeed it is. We do have some ancient texts, however, which give an insight into at least some of the Gnostic movement's beliefs.

 

[dave6]

Indeed it is. We do have some ancient texts, however, which give an insight into at least some of the Gnostic movement's beliefs.

i think i came across a few i will try to look them up sometime.

 

[prognosticator]

is there a movement of neo modern day gnostics?

Yes, I believe there are many Gnostic groups. I've found a lot of groups on the internet. I consider myself as a Gnostic-leaning believer. I love Tau Malachi and his books. I've been reading his book on the Gospel of Thomas as a day by day devotional. He combines Christian Kabbalah (which has some Gnostic roots) with Gnosticism. I just wish there were a Gnostic group near me now with which I could fellowship. Most groups seem to be on the west coast. Steven A. Hoeller, Tau Malachi and the famed psychic, Sylvia Browne, have all founded Gnostic churches. When I lived on Long Island, I participated in a group in New York City, but it was such a long trip. Hopefully, as the movement spreads, there will be more groups springing up.

Actually, there have always been Gnostic groups of some form since the first century. The Cathars, who flourished during the Middle Ages, had elements of Gnosticism. There have been many independent bishops who have ordained others through Apostolic succession, some of whom had Gnostic beliefs. The group I participated in had a leader who was ordained by one of these.

 

[Sha'irullah]

Indeed there are. I heavily study into it along with Brahmoism, Sufi metaphysics and especially Deism.
Gnosticism is in most regards responsible for Deism which is why it is most important to me

 

[biased]

Indeed there are. I heavily study into it along with Brahmoism, Sufi metaphysics and especially Deism.
Gnosticism is in most regards responsible for Deism which is why it is most important to me

How does one "study" deism? I thought that philosophy/viewpoint essentially states that God created the universe/world and then let it take it's course without intervening. What more is there to study? I could understand if you said the cosmology that you can extrapolate from that initial jump start but deism itself confuses me.

 

[Sha'irullah]

How does one "study" deism? I thought that philosophy/viewpoint essentially states that God created the universe/world and then let it take it's course without intervening. What more is there to study? I could understand if you said the cosmology that you can extrapolate from that initial jump start but deism itself confuses me.

All Deistic knowledge comes from science and materialism. If you study science, you study Deism, period. All conclusions about the Deistic god come form philosophy and science.

Deism is the only theological standpoint in which one MUST study and learn in order to understand god and the amount of study is perpetual in amount and existence.

So you just thought Deist sit back and think there is nothing to know about god? This is very unheard of in the Deistic community. Only a theist would make such an assertion as they have holy books and scriptures which give them their "answers"

 

[biased]

All Deistic knowledge comes from science and materialism. If you study science, you study Deism, period. All conclusions about the Deistic god come form philosophy and science.

Deism is the only theological standpoint in which one MUST study and learn in order to understand god and the amount of study is perpetual in amount and existence.

So you just thought Deist sit back and think there is nothing to know about god? This is very unheard of in the Deistic community. Only a theist would make such an assertion as they have holy books and scriptures which give them their "answers"

Yeah because that is what classical deism.

Classical deism held that a human's relationship with God was impersonal: God created the world and set it in motion but does not actively intervene in individual human affairs but rather through Divine Providence. What this means is that God will give humanity such things as reason and compassion but this applies to all and not individual intervention.

source: Deism - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

I don't necessarily equate science with reason. For example, reason can be logical but not scientific hence why I didn't associate deism = science. I guess I prefer the classical definitions but people are free to reinvent whatever they want regardless or not if it matches the initial premises.

So would you say deism is elitist in the sense that only intellectual are allowed to believe it because it requires an rigorous study of science and philosophy (according to you)?

 

[Sha'irullah]

Yeah because that is what classical deism.

Incorrect, classical Deism asserted that God was intervening. You do not know Deism then. This started with Herbert of Cherbury.

You can make a separate thread for this debate so as to not ruin this thread.

I don't necessarily equate science with reason. For example, reason can be logical but not scientific hence why I didn't associate deism = science. I guess I prefer the classical definitions but people are free to reinvent whatever they want regardless or not if it matches the initial premises.

Science is not reason. A Deist needs both.

The classical definitions you use are rebuttal by Christians and people who are clueless about Deism. I am not reinventing Deism at all just continuing it by actually learning it. You cannot use a dictionary to learn what a Deist is.

You have to learn from a Deist.