Posted: 8/14/2026 4:18:08 PM EDT
|
Let’s discuss the Gnostics and other early Christian sects I find the Gnostics to be interesting in their beliefs, it and many of the other early sects had many ideas that eventually solidified into the Christianity we know today |
Lately overheard in Mayfair
|
During the first few centuries CE, Christianity was remarkably diverse, featuring numerous competing sects and theological movements—such as Gnosticism, Ebionism, Marcionism, and Arianism—before proto-orthodox Christianity standardized official doctrines at ecumenical councils like Nicaea. |
Lately overheard in Mayfair
|
Originally Posted By doubleplusgood: During the first few centuries CE, Christianity was remarkably diverse, featuring numerous competing sects and theological movements—such as Gnosticism, Ebionism, Marcionism, and Arianism—before proto-orthodox Christianity standardized official doctrines at ecumenical councils like Nicaea. When someone uses the terms CE and BCE instead of AD and BC I know immediately where they stand. |
"Once Open AI is good enough we will ask it to find a way to become profitable."
- Sam Altman
- Sam Altman
|
Originally Posted By doubleplusgood: During the first few centuries CE, Christianity was remarkably diverse, featuring numerous competing sects and theological movements—such as Gnosticism, Ebionism, Marcionism, and Arianism—before proto-orthodox Christianity standardized official doctrines at ecumenical councils like Nicaea. lol. Someone’s been reading Ehrman’s blog and not investigating further. Just like every one of OPs threads, this one is predicated on a false premise. No, Gnosticism was not a sect of Christianity, it was a distinctly independent religion with its own cosmology, theology, and texts that co-opted and redefined Christian ideas to legitimize itself. Just like Mormonism, Jehovahs Witnesses, and Christian Science did during the 19th century new religions movement. |
|
Some of the core ideas of Gnosticism The High God and the Demiurge: Gnostics separated the supreme, completely transcendent God from the creator of the material universe. The material world was made by a lesser, flawed deity called the Demiurge.The Trap of Matter: The physical world is seen as evil or corrupt, and human bodies trap a divine spark of light or spirit within.Salvation Through Knowledge: Awakening to one's true divine origin via gnosis allows the soul to escape the material realm upon death. Origins and Relation to ChristianityDiversity: It was not a single unified church, but a collection of sects blending Jewish, Christian, Hellenistic, and Persian ideas.Proto-Orthodox Conflict: Early mainstream Christian leaders (such as Irenaeus) labeled these groups as heretical, which helped shape standard Christian creeds and canon.Texts: Key insights come from discoveries like the Nag Hammadi library, featuring texts such as the Gospel of Thomas and the Apocryphon of John. |
Lately overheard in Mayfair
Joined:
May 2026
Posts:
1456
EE: 0% (0)
FL, USA
|
Originally Posted By doubleplusgood: During the first few centuries CE, Christianity was remarkably diverse, featuring numerous competing sects and theological movements—such as Gnosticism, Ebionism, Marcionism, and Arianism—before proto-orthodox Christianity standardized official doctrines at ecumenical councils like Nicaea. It's not CE (christ's era), it's AD, anno domini. No, christianity was not remarkably diverse. You have the be able to know what you mean by that word before you can even say who is and who is not christian, otherwise your'e just being pulled along by a string tied to your nosering by the gaggle of idiot scholars. The gnostic attempt to leech on to Christianity (gnostics were around in, iirc, the bc era too) were knowably not christian even in their day, their texts are pseudepigraphal (lied about their authorship to try and gain authority), late (outside of the lifetime of anyone who was eyewitness, and gained traction ... away from anywhere that had the NT letters and eyewitness testimony. Plus the fact that they don't talk about the same topics, don't have the same tone, don't have the same genres, and contradict the NT letters (actual logical contradictions). Pick one of them up, read it, you have to be blind not to see this. They aren't christian, they're the ancient world's version of idiots trying to get into christianity to wear it like a skinsuit and use it. Marcion was a butthurt quasi gnostic jerk who hated the old testament and cut the text up trying to remove God from it. Arianism was palpably against the text of the bible and if you believed it and knew what it meant and still held to it, you were never a christian in the first place. Actual right-teaching Christianity existed before the NT letters got round (the church had a bible - the OT) and the NT letters, merely because they were and are God's words, were recognized as such, and had (and still do have) their own authority in them merely because of who their ultimate author was. They were God's word and the bible and knowable as such even if no human or group of humans had ever said they were. You can't even know what institution is christian without having a way to define who is and who is not, and the only way you're getting that is from God's word, and that's the bible. |
|
Originally Posted By doubleplusgood: Let’s discuss the Gnostics and other early Christian sects I find the Gnostics to be interesting in their beliefs, it and many of the other early sects had many ideas that eventually solidified into the Christianity we know today I would like to thank my parish priest for insulating me against this nonsense in catechism. |
|
Originally Posted By EamonnWright: I don't. I assume they're a lot younger than I am. What it means is they are on board with removing God's name (AD = Anno Domini, "Year of our Lord") from our dating nomenclature even though the birth of Christ is the very reason, and remains the reason for the division of the counting of time before and after this event. It's like atheist science sour grapes. |
"Once Open AI is good enough we will ask it to find a way to become profitable."
- Sam Altman
- Sam Altman
|
Originally Posted By lygxis: It's not CE (christ's era), it's AD, anno domini. No, christianity was not remarkably diverse. You have the be able to know what you mean by that word before you can even say who is and who is not christian, otherwise your'e just being pulled along by a string tied to your nosering by the gaggle of idiot scholars. The gnostic attempt to leech on to Christianity (gnostics were around in, iirc, the bc era too) were knowably not christian even in their day, their texts are pseudepigraphal (lied about their authorship to try and gain authority), late (outside of the lifetime of anyone who was eyewitness, and gained traction ... away from anywhere that had the NT letters and eyewitness testimony. Plus the fact that they don't talk about the same topics, don't have the same tone, don't have the same genres, and contradict the NT letters (actual logical contradictions). Pick one of them up, read it, you have to be blind not to see this. They aren't christian, they're the ancient world's version of idiots trying to get into christianity to wear it like a skinsuit and use it. Marcion was a butthurt quasi gnostic jerk who hated the old testament and cut the text up trying to remove God from it. Arianism was palpably against the text of the bible and if you believed it and knew what it meant and still held to it, you were never a christian in the first place. Actual right-teaching Christianity existed before the NT letters got round (the church had a bible - the OT) and the NT letters, merely because they were and are God's words, were recognized as such, and had (and still do have) their own authority in them merely because of who their ultimate author was. They were God's word and the bible and knowable as such even if no human or group of humans had ever said they were. You can't even know what institution is christian without having a way to define who is and who is not, and the only way you're getting that is from God's word, and that's the bible. Someone has read church history. Most of the early heresies were basically cults of personalities. Eusebius explains as much. Thank our wonderful God for our glorious Bishops at that time that kept the catholic and orthodox teaching of Christ and suppressed these attempts by our great adversary from infecting the Church. The idea that there was a ‘diverse’ gospel is frankly ridiculous. OP should be laughed at. |
|
Originally Posted By lygxis: It's not CE (christ's era), it's AD, anno domini. CE stands for Common Era, BCE, Before Common Era. Like I said, they could not stand having a reference to God in our dating system, even though is was based on his existence. |
"Once Open AI is good enough we will ask it to find a way to become profitable."
- Sam Altman
- Sam Altman
|
Originally Posted By doubleplusgood: Some of the core ideas of Gnosticism The High God and the Demiurge: Gnostics separated the supreme, completely transcendent God from the creator of the material universe. The material world was made by a lesser, flawed deity called the Demiurge.The Trap of Matter: The physical world is seen as evil or corrupt, and human bodies trap a divine spark of light or spirit within.Salvation Through Knowledge: Awakening to one's true divine origin via gnosis allows the soul to escape the material realm upon death. Origins and Relation to ChristianityDiversity: It was not a single unified church, but a collection of sects blending Jewish, Christian, Hellenistic, and Persian ideas.Proto-Orthodox Conflict: Early mainstream Christian leaders (such as Irenaeus) labeled these groups as heretical, which helped shape standard Christian creeds and canon.Texts: Key insights come from discoveries like the Nag Hammadi library, featuring texts such as the Gospel of Thomas and the Apocryphon of John. I have to believe Cthulhu is mentioned in there somewhere... |
|
Originally Posted By monadh: I have to believe Cthulhu is mentioned in there somewhere... Not far off. Gnostics, among some of their basic doctrines, were found to believe that the world was created by another god other than the Father of Christ. This inferior god was known as the Demiurge. |
"Once Open AI is good enough we will ask it to find a way to become profitable."
- Sam Altman
- Sam Altman
Joined:
May 2026
Posts:
1481
EE: 0% (0)
FL, USA
|
Originally Posted By _DR: CE stands for Common Era, BCE, Before Common Era. Like I said, they could not stand having a reference to God in our dating system, even though is was based on his existence. Originally Posted By _DR: Originally Posted By lygxis: It's not CE (christ's era), it's AD, anno domini. CE stands for Common Era, BCE, Before Common Era. Like I said, they could not stand having a reference to God in our dating system, even though is was based on his existence. Yes, I know, I was taking a jab at them for using an acronym that's hilariously easy to re-appropriate. bce = before christ's era, ce=christ's era. You'd think they'd have thought of this before choosing. |
|
Originally Posted By lygxis: Yes, I know, I was taking a jab at them for using an acronym that's hilariously easy to re-appropriate. bce = before christ's era, ce=christ's era. You'd think they'd have thought of this before choosing. Indeed. |
"Once Open AI is good enough we will ask it to find a way to become profitable."
- Sam Altman
- Sam Altman