Modern Gnosticism and Ancient Gnosticism

[Quiddity]

What are the main differences? I know there is much diversity in Gnosticism but what are some of the major differences between Gnostics now and Gnostics of the ancients?

 

[Buttons*]

i dont see a difference.... probably that gnostics now are a little less concerned with rituals....

 

[Bishka]

i dont see a difference.... probably that gnostics now are a little less concerned with rituals....

Why do you suppose that its? Is it possibly because rituals aren't necessary, or that they see beyond the rituals?

 

[Quiddity]

i dont see a difference.... probably that gnostics now are a little less concerned with rituals....

I was thinking that too. It seems to me that although Christianity and Gnosticism grabbed similar sources and pretty much grew alongside each other, that the same things that seperated them also united them at times.

I could be wrong, but modern day Gnosticism seems much more relativistic in nature. I often read ancient text of Gnostics that new where they stood on issues and weren't as relativistic. Anyone else get that perception?

 

[doppelganger]

What are the main differences? I know there is much diversity in Gnosticism but what are some of the major differences between Gnostics now and Gnostics of the ancients?

There's really no accepted "Gnosticism" either then or now. They are all over the place. It's probably not very productive to talk about "Gnostics" as though they were a denomination. The word is used these days to cover a lot of different approaches in early Christianity, most of which we know almost nothing about except via their detractors.

 

[Quiddity]

There's really no accepted "Gnosticism" either then or now. They are all over the place. It's probably not very productive to talk about "Gnostics" as though they were a denomination. The word is used these days to cover a lot of different approaches in early Christianity, most of which we know almost nothing about except via their detractors.

Yeah, I know. But like most other religions, there is something that unites them.

 

[doppelganger]

Yeah, I know. But like most other religions, there is something that unites them.

Arbitary line drawing maybe. We know so little about most of what gets thrown under that name that I doubt one could demonstrate anything that unites all those various groups. We assume that the translations in Coptic found at Nag Hammadi are accurate and "Gnostic" but we don't really know. I've read about a dozen scholarly works on the subject and there really isn't much consensus as to what unified Valentinians, Montanans, Marcionites, Cerinthians, etc.

Modern "Gnostics" ideas are filtered through modern authors trying to find similarities, like the writings of Elaine Pagels or Timothy Freke. There's a little more uniformity there because we actually have someone to ask and reliable source document to use as a reference.

I recommend Karen King's What is Gnosticism? for an overview of what little we do know and the origin of the trend of grouping these disparate groups together under the term "gnostic."

 

[Quiddity]

Arbitary line drawing maybe. We know so little about most of what gets thrown under that name that I doubt one could demonstrate anything that unites all those various groups. We assume that the translations in Coptic found at Nag Hammadi are accurate and "Gnostic" but we don't really know. I've read about a dozen scholarly works on the subject and there really isn't much consensus as to what unified Valentinians, Montanans, Marcionites, Cerinthians, etc.

Modern "Gnostics" ideas are filtered through modern authors trying to find similarities, like the writings of Elaine Pagels or Timothy Freke. There's a little more uniformity there because we actually have someone to ask and reliable source document to use as a reference.

I recommend Karen King's What is Gnosticism? for an overview of what little we do know and the origin of the trend of grouping these disparate groups together under the term "gnostic."

Interesting. Well, they certainly shared an objection to authorities of the time... .

If you were to draw this Arbitary line, how would it look?

 

[doppelganger]

Wiki says pretty much the same thing as I read in King, that's it's a difficult term to work with:

In essence, it had been decided that 'Gnosticism' would become a historically-specific term, restricted to mean the Gnostic movements prevalent in the 3rd century, while 'gnosis' would be an universal term, denoting a system of knowledge retained 'for a privileged élite.' However, this effort towards providing clarity in fact created more conceptual confusion, as the historical term 'Gnosticism' was an entirely modern construction, while the new universal term 'gnosis' was a historical term: 'something was being called "gnosticism" that the ancient theologians had called "gnosis" ... [A] concept of gnosis had been created by Messina that was almost unusable in a historical sense' (Markschies, Gnosis: An Introduction, 14-15). In antiquity, all agreed that knowledge was centrally important to life, but few were agreed as to what exactly constituted knowledge; the unitary conception that the Messina proposal presupposed did not exist.
These flaws have meant that the problems concerning an exact definition of Gnosticism persist. It remains current convention to use 'Gnosticism' in a historical sense, and 'gnosis' universally. Leaving aside the issues with the latter noted above, the usage of 'Gnosticism' to designate a category of religions in the 3rd century has recently been questioned as well. Of note is the work of Michael Allen Williams in Rethinking Gnosticism: An Argument for the Dismantling of a Dubious Category, in which the author examines the terms by which gnosticism as a category is defined, and then closely compares these suppositions with the contents of actual Gnostic texts (the newly-recovered Nag Hammadi library was of central importance to his thesis).
Williams argues that the conceptual foundations on which the category of Gnosticism rests are the remains of the agenda of the heresiologists. Too much emphasis has been laid on perceptions of dualism, body-and-matter hatred, and anticosmism, without these suppositions being properly tested. In essence, the interpretive definition of Gnosticism that was created by the antagonistic efforts of the heresiologists has been taken up by modern scholarship and reflected in a categorical definition, even though the means now exist to verify its accuracy. Attempting to do so, Williams contests, reveals the dubious nature of categorical 'Gnosticism', and he concludes that the term needs replacing in order to more accurately reflect those movements it comprises. Williams' observations have provoked debate; however, to date his suggested replacement term 'the Biblical demiurgical tradition' has not become widely used.

 

[Halcyon]

Yeah, I know. But like most other religions, there is something that unites them.

I agree with a lot of doppelganger's reply.

But from my personal understanding of what makes a group Gnostic, it boils down a combination of two concepts;

A group that identifies with a concept of an alien God (i.e. a God that lies beyond the scope of this world with its suffering) and human ignorance of that God combined with a concept of Gnosis (enlightened knowledge) of that God, which in someway leads to reunion with said alien God.

Marcion was not Gnostic, as he only had the concept of an alien God, while in most other ways following orthodox Christian belief and practice.

However saying that, the line that distinguishes Gnostic from non-Gnostic and Gnostic-like is blurry in the ancient world. Many systems shared similar beliefs, and for modern scholars it can be confusing to place a group in relation to its level of Gnostic similarity.
Like i said though, a guarenteed Gnostic sect would have a concept like demiurge with a higher alien God, plus a concept of freeing, awakening knowledge (gnosis).

Modern Gnostics are a completely different kettle of fish. In fact, there is probably more variation in Gnostic belief today than there was in ancient times. Today there are no traditions or authorities of ancient descent binding people together into cohesive groups. So instead people make a myriad of different belief systems based on the same texts, in a much higher frequency than occured in ancient times.

Today there is variation between two extremes of Gnostic thought -from the almost Buddhist, eclectic Gnostics of people like Reverend Father Troy W. Pierce http://gnoscast.blogspot.com/ to the conservative, quite orthodox Gnostics of the Apostolic Johannite Gnostic Church http://www.johannite.org/.
With moderate groups like the Thomasine Church in between http://www.thomasinechurch.org/homepage2.html.

Beyond that there are people who take an even more modern Jungian/Dickian approach like Jesse Folks here - http://homoplasmate.blogspot.com/.

 

[Quiddity]

Wiki says pretty much the same thing as I read in King, that's it's a difficult term to work with:

That jives quite nicely with what I've read thus far. The heresiologists could identify the different schools of self-realization.

Gracias....dp...

 

[Quiddity]

Modern Gnostics are a completely different kettle of fish. In fact, there is probably more variation in Gnostic belief today than there was in ancient times. Today there are no traditions or authorities of ancient descent binding people together into cohesive groups. So instead people make a myriad of different belief systems based on the same texts, in a much higher frequency than occured in ancient times.

That's kinda what I meant by modern Gnosticism being more relative.

 

[Buttons*]

Why do you suppose that its? Is it possibly because rituals aren't necessary, or that they see beyond the rituals?

the rituals are there to "point you in the right direction" not to become the end all of its understanding. If rituals WERE the important thing, (to try and draw a parallel) it would be like assuming going to Church is all there is to being Christian!! This is not the case as everyone is aware. But the point of rituals was just to get everyone to see a common thing. Gnosis itself is much deeper than any ritual.