I have read about the Gnostics since getting out of the Org. After I deprogramed myself so that I wasn't paranoid about looking into these other religions,, I found them very interesting. I have since read alot about their beliefs. But I can not remember? Did the society have a opinion about this group? I have been out for so long my memory is fading on this . Does anyone know? What are their views on the gospels that the Gnostics use?
What is the Society's view and sayings on the Gnosticsand their beliefs??
by annalice 10 Replies latest jw friends
-
-
blondie
Here are some articles with the WTS view of Gnosticism:
***
w03 5/15 pp. 27-29 Tatian—Apologist or Heretic? ***Tatian—Apologist
or Heretic?TOWARD the end of his third missionary journey, the apostle Paul called a meeting of the older men of the congregation in Ephesus. He told them: "I know that after my going away oppressive wolves will enter in among you and will not treat the flock with tenderness, and from among you yourselves men will rise and speak twisted things to draw away the disciples after themselves."—Acts 20:29, 30.
True to Paul’s words, the second century C.E. proved to be a time both of change and of the foretold apostasy. Gnosticism, a widespread religious and philosophical movement that polluted the faith of some believers, was on the move. Gnostics believed that spiritual things are good and that all matter is evil. Reasoning that all flesh is evil, they rejected marriage and procreation, claiming that Satan originated these. Some of them believed that since only that which pertains to the spirit is good, it does not matter what a man does with his physical body. Such viewpoints resulted in extreme life-styles, either asceticism or fleshly indulgence. The Gnostic claim that salvation came only from mystical Gnosticism, or self-knowledge, left no room for the truth of God’s Word.
How did professed Christians respond to the threat of Gnosticism? Some learned men spoke out against its erroneous doctrine, while others succumbed to its influence. Irenaeus, for example, embarked on a lifelong struggle against heretical teachings. He had been educated by Polycarp, a man who was a living link to the apostles. Polycarp recommended strong adherence to the teachings of Jesus Christ and his apostles. Despite having learned under the same tutelage, however, Irenaeus’ friend Florinus lapsed into the teachings of Valentinus, the most prominent leader of the Gnostic movement. Those were turbulent times indeed.
Shedding light on the climate of that period are the works of Tatian, a notable writer of the second century. What kind of a man was Tatian? How did he become a professed Christian? And how did Tatian fare under the influence of Gnostic heresy? His intriguing rejoinders and his own example provide valuable lessons for truth-seekers of today.
Meeting
With "Certain Barbaric Writings"Tatian was a native of Syria. Extensive travels and prolific reading made him knowledgeable in the Greco-Roman culture of his day. Tatian came to Rome as an itinerant rhetorician. While he was in Rome, though, his attention was diverted to Christianity. He began to associate with Justin Martyr, perhaps becoming his pupil.
In a revealing account of his conversion to nominal Christianity, Tatian claims: "I sought how I might be able to discover the truth." Expounding on his personal experience when exposed to the Scriptures, he says: "I happened to meet with certain barbaric writings, too old to be compared with the opinions of the Greeks, and too divine to be compared with their errors; and I was led to put faith in these by the unpretending cast of the language, the inartificial character of the writers, the foreknowledge displayed of future events, the excellent quality of the precepts, and the declaration of the government of the universe as centered in one Being."
Tatian did not hesitate to invite his contemporaries to examine the Christianity of his day and to observe its simplicity and clarity in contrast with the darkness of heathenism. What can we learn from his writings?
What
Do His Writings Reveal?Tatian’s writings portray him as an apologist, a writer who speaks out in defense of his faith. He had a stern and antagonistic attitude toward pagan philosophy. In his work Address to the Greeks, Tatian accentuates the worthlessness of paganism and the reasonableness of nominal Christianity. His style is very harsh as he expresses contempt for Greek ways. For example, with reference to philosopher Heracleitus, he states: "Death, however, demonstrated the stupidity of this man; for, being attacked by dropsy, as he had studied the art of medicine as well as philosophy, he plastered himself with cow dung, which, as it hardened, contracted the flesh of his whole body, so that he was pulled in pieces, and thus died."
Tatian held in high esteem the belief in one God, the Creator of all things. (Hebrews 3:4) In Address to the Greeks, he refers to God as "a Spirit" and says: "He alone is without beginning, and He Himself is the beginning of all things." (John 4:24; 1 Timothy 1:17) Rejecting the use of images in worship, Tatian writes: "How can I speak of stocks and stones as gods?" (1 Corinthians 10:14) He believed that the Word, or the Logos, came into existence as the firstborn of the heavenly Father’s works and thereafter was used in the creation of the material universe. (John 1:1-3; Colossians 1:13-17) Concerning the resurrection at the appointed time, Tatian states: "We believe that there will be a resurrection of bodies after the consummation of all things." As to why we die, Tatian writes: "We were not created to die, but we die by our own fault. Our free-will has destroyed us; we who were free have become slaves; we have been sold through sin."
The explanation Tatian gives of the soul is confusing. He says: "The soul is not in itself immortal, O Greeks, but mortal. Yet it is possible for it not to die. If, indeed, it knows not the truth, it dies, and is dissolved with the body, but rises again at last at the end of the world with the body, receiving death by punishment in immortality." Exactly what Tatian meant by these statements is unclear. Could it be that while sticking to certain Bible teachings, he also tried to keep in favor with his contemporaries and therefore tainted Scriptural truths with pagan philosophies?
Another notable work of Tatian’s is the Diatessaron, or Harmony of the Four Gospels. Tatian was the first to give the congregations in Syria the Gospels in their own tongue. This was a highly regarded work, weaving the four Gospels into a single narrative. It was used by the Syrian Church.
A
Christian or a Heretic?A careful examination of Tatian’s writings reveals that he was familiar with the Scriptures and had great respect for them. He writes regarding their influence on him: "I am not anxious to be rich; I decline military command; I detest fornication; I am not impelled by an insatiable love of gain to go to sea; . . . I am free from a mad thirst for fame . . . The same sun is for all, and one death for all, whether they live in pleasure or destitution." Tatian admonishes: "Die to the world, repudiating the madness that is in it. Live to God, and by apprehending Him lay aside your old nature."—Matthew 5:45; 1 Corinthians 6:18; 1 Timothy 6:10.
Consider, however, Tatian’s writing entitled On Perfection According to the Doctrine of the Savior. In this work he attributes matrimony to the Devil. Claiming that individuals would be tying their flesh to the perishable world through marriage, Tatian strongly condemns it.
It appears that about 166 C.E., after the death of Justin Martyr, Tatian either founded or associated with an ascetic sect called the Encratites. Its adherents emphasized strict self-control and mastery of one’s body. They practiced an asceticism requiring abstinence from wine, marriage, and possessions.
A
Lesson to Be LearnedWhy did Tatian deviate so far from the Scriptures? Did he become "a forgetful hearer"? (James 1:23-25) Did Tatian fail to turn down false stories and thereby fall prey to human philosophy? (Colossians 2:8; 1 Timothy 4:7) Since the errors he subscribed to were so great, could some mental aberration be suspected?
Whatever the case, Tatian’s writings and example provide a glimpse of the religious climate of his day. They demonstrate how damaging the influence of worldly philosophy can be. May we take to heart the apostle Paul’s warning to turn away "from the empty speeches that violate what is holy and from the contradictions of the falsely called ‘knowledge.’"—1 Timothy 6:20.
*** w90 7/15 pp. 21-23 ‘Against Knowledge—Falsely So Called’ ***‘Against Knowledge—Falsely So Called’HOW important is truth to you? Does it disturb you that falsehood has distorted, even concealed, the truth about the Creator of heaven and earth? This greatly disturbed Irenaeus, a professed Christian of the second century of our Common Era. He endeavored to expose the dangerous inaccuracies of Gnosticism, an apostate form of Christianity. Earlier, the apostle Paul warned Timothy to turn away from such ‘falsely called knowledge.’—1 Timothy 6:20, 21.
Irenaeus boldly spoke out against erroneous doctrine. For instance, consider what he said in the introduction to his extensive literary work entitled "The Refutation and Overthrow of the Knowledge Falsely So Called." He wrote: "Certain men, rejecting the truth, are introducing among us false stories and vain genealogies, which serve rather to controversies, as the apostle said [1 Timothy 1:3, 4], than to God’s work of building up in the faith. By their craftily constructed rhetoric they lead astray the minds of the inexperienced, and take them captive, corrupting the oracles of the Lord, and being evil expounders of what was well spoken."
The Gnostics (from the Greek word gno´sis, meaning "knowledge") claimed superior knowledge through secret revelation and boasted that they were the "correctors of the apostles." Gnosticism intertwined philosophy, speculation, and pagan mysticism with apostate Christianity. Irenaeus refused to share in any of this. Rather, he embarked on a life-long struggle against heretical teachings. No doubt he was well aware of the need to apply the apostle Paul’s warning: "Look out: perhaps there may be someone who will carry you off as his prey through the philosophy and empty deception according to the tradition of men, according to the elementary things of the world and not according to Christ."—Colossians 2:8; 1 Timothy 4:7.
Early Life and MinistryLittle is known of the early life and personal history of Irenaeus. It is generally supposed that he was a native of Asia Minor, born between 120 C.E. and 140 C.E. in or near the city of Smyrna. Irenaeus personally testifies that in his early youth, he was acquainted with Polycarp, an overseer in the Smyrna congregation.
While learning under the tutelage of Polycarp, Irenaeus apparently befriended Florinus. Polycarp was a living link to the apostles. He expounded copiously on the Scriptures and strongly recommended adherence to the teachings of Jesus Christ and His apostles. In spite of this fine Scriptural training, however, Florinus later lapsed into the teachings of Valentinus, the most prominent leader of the Gnostic movement!
Irenaeus wanted his friend and former associate Florinus to be restored to sound Scriptural teaching and rescued from Valentinianism. Therefore, Irenaeus was moved to write a letter to Florinus, saying: "These doctrines, Florinus, . . . are not of sound understanding; these doctrines are not consistent with the church, and involve those who follow them in the greatest impiety; . . . these doctrines those presbyters who were before us, and who were conversant with the apostles, did not hand down to thee."
Endeavoring to remind Florinus of the fine training received at the feet of the distinguished Polycarp, Irenaeus continued: "I remember the events of those times . . . so that I am able to tell even the place in which the blessed Polycarp was accustomed to sit and discourse . . . Also how he would speak of his familiar intercourse with John, and with the rest of those who had seen the Lord; how also he used to recount their words."
Florinus was reminded that Polycarp taught what he had received "from the eye-witnesses of the Word of life, [and had] related all in harmony with the Scriptures. These things, through the mercy of God vouchsafed to me, I then heard, noting them down, not upon paper but in my heart; and continually by the grace of God I recall these things accurately to my mind. And [regarding Valentinianism] I am able to bear witness in the sight of God that if that blessed and apostolic presbyter [Polycarp] had heard such a thing, he would have cried out and stopped his ears . . . He would have fled from the place in which, sitting or standing, he had heard such words."
There is no record that Florinus ever responded to the touching and forceful letter of Irenaeus. But the words of Irenaeus reveal his genuine concern for a dear friend who had left the way of truth and succumbed to apostasy.—Compare 2 Thessalonians 2:3, 7-12.
It is not known when Irenaeus took up residence in Gaul (France). In the year 177 C.E., he was serving as an overseer in the congregation at Lyons. It is reported that his ministry there was very fruitful. In fact, historian Gregory of Tours reported that Irenaeus had in a short time succeeded in converting all Lyons to Christianity. Doubtless, this was an overstatement.
Against HeresiesIrenaeus’ principal work, "The Refutation and Overthrow of the Knowledge Falsely So Called," was commonly referred to by the name "Against Heresies." It is divided into five books. The first two contain a critical description of the beliefs of various heretical sects, particularly the Valentinian heresy. In the remaining three books, Irenaeus attempts to set forth "arguments from the Scriptures."
In the introduction to his third book "Against Heresies," Irenaeus writes: "Keep in mind therefore what I have said in the two previous books; and by adding this to them you will have from me a full reply against all heretics, and will be able to resist them faithfully and boldly on behalf of the one true and life-giving faith, which the Church has received from the apostles and imparts to her children. For the Lord of all gave to his apostles the power of the gospel, and by them we also have learned the truth, that is, the teaching of the Son of God—as the Lord said to them, ‘He who hears you hears me, and he who despises you despises me, and him who sent me.’"
Although Irenaeus admitted that he was not a good writer, he was determined to expose all aspects of the "evil teachings" of Gnosticism. He quotes and comments on many scriptures and argues masterfully against the "false teachers" of the "destructive sects." (2 Peter 2:1-3) It appears that Irenaeus had difficulty compiling his work into a satisfactory form. Why? Because he had amassed material of enormous proportions.
Irenaeus’ exposé was manifestly brought to birth after great pains and much study. His lengthy arguments supply a wealth of information on the sources and phenomena of Gnosticism. The writings of Irenaeus are also an invaluable index of at least some of the Scriptural views still held by professed adherents to God’s Word at the end of the second century C.E.
Irenaeus repeatedly reaffirms belief in "one God, the Father Almighty, who made the heaven, and the earth, and the seas, and all that is in them, and in one Christ Jesus, the son of God, who was made flesh for our salvation." These facts the Gnostics denied!
Speaking against Gnostic Docetism (the teaching that Christ never came in human form), Irenaeus wrote: "Christ must be a man, like us, if he would redeem us from corruption and make us perfect. As sin and death came into the world by a man, so they could be blotted out legitimately and to our advantage only by a man; though, of course, not by one who should be a mere descendant of Adam, and thus himself stand in need of redemption, but by a second Adam, supernaturally begotten, a new progenitor of our race." (1 Corinthians 15:45) On the other hand, the Gnostics were Dualists, believing that spiritual things were good but that all matter and flesh were evil. Consequently, they rejected the man Jesus Christ.
Reasoning that all flesh is evil, the Gnostics also rejected marriage and procreation, claiming that Satan originated these. They even ascribed divine wisdom to the serpent in Eden! This viewpoint resulted in extreme life-styles, either asceticism or fleshly indulgence. Claiming that salvation came only through mystical Gnosticism, or self-knowledge, they left no room for the truth of God’s Word.
In contrast, Irenaeus’ arguments included belief in the Millennium and indicated some comprehension of the prospect of peaceful future life on earth. He endeavored to unite the growing factions of his time by wielding the powerful Word of God. And he is generally remembered for his clear thinking, acute perception, and sound judgment.
Although some credit Irenaeus (who died about 200 C.E.) with fostering the true doctrines of the Christian faith, it must be remembered that his was a time of change and foretold apostasy. At times, his arguments are somewhat vague, even contradictory. Nevertheless, we highly value the testimony of men who boldly spoke out in favor of the inspired written Word of God rather than the traditions of men.
*** g89 6/22 pp. 24-27 Part 12: 100-476 C.E.—Snuffing Out the Gospel Light ***Religion’s Future in View of Its PastPart 12: 100-476 C.E.—Snuffing Out the Gospel Light"Men have discovered that it is far more convenient to adulterate the truth than to refine themselves."—Charles Caleb Colton, 19th-century English clergyman
BEGINNING in 33 C.E., when Rome put Christianity’s Founder to death, that sixth world power of Bible history was at constant loggerheads with the Christians. It imprisoned them and threw some of them to the lions. But even when threatened with the martyrdom of serving as human torches to light Nero’s gardens, Roman Christians of the first century continued to let their spiritual light shine. (Matthew 5:14) In time, however, the situation changed.
"In the early part of the third century," says the book From Christ to Constantine, "the church was beginning to become respectable." But respectability had its price, "a lowering of standards." Accordingly, "Christian living was no longer seen to be a requirement of Christian faith."
The gospel light had waned to a glimmer. And "by the fourth century," says the book Imperial Rome, "Christian writers were claiming not only that it was possible to be both Christian and Roman, but that the long history of Rome was in fact the beginning of the Christian epic. . . . The implication was that Rome had been divinely ordained."
Sharing this view was the Roman emperor Constantine the Great. In 313 C.E., Constantine made Christianity a lawful religion. By combining Church and State, putting religious leaders into the service of the State, and allowing State control of religious affairs, Constantine did a real disservice.
Already in the early second century, Ignatius, bishop of Antioch, had introduced a new method of congregational government. Instead of a group of elders, the monarchical episcopate provided for a single churchman to be in charge of each congregation. About a century later, Cyprian, bishop of Carthage, expanded this hierarchical clergy system into a monarchical seven-grade hierarchy, the supreme position being occupied by the bishop. Under him were priests, deacons, subdeacons, and other grades. The Western church subsequently added an eighth grade, while the Eastern church settled for a five-grade hierarchy.
Where did this form of church leadership, combined with State approval, lead? The book Imperial Rome explains: "Only 80 years after the last great wave of persecution of Christians, the Church itself was beginning to execute heretics, and its clerics were wielding power almost equivalent to that of the emperors." Surely this is not what Christ had in mind when he said that his disciples were to be "no part of the world" and that they should conquer it, not by force, but by their faith.—John 16:33; 17:14; compare 1 John 5:4.
"Saints" and Greek GodsLong before Constantine’s time, pagan ideas had already adulterated the Christian religion. The mythical gods of Greece that had once strongly influenced Rome’s religion had also already influenced the Christian religion. "By the time Rome had become an imperial power," says the book Roman Mythology, "Jupiter had become assimilated to the Greek Zeus . . . Later on Jupiter was worshipped as Optimus Maximus, the Best and Greatest, a designation which was to be carried over into Christianity and appears on many a monumental inscription." The New Encyclopædia Britannica adds: "Under Christianity, Greek heroes and even deities survived as saints."
Author M. A. Smith explains that this meant that "the many sets of gods were becoming intermixed, and the regional differences were getting blurred. . . . There was a tendency for people to think that the various deities were really only different names for one great power. . . . The Egyptian Isis, Artemis of the Ephesians and the Syrian Astarte could be equated. The Greek Zeus, the Roman Jupiter, the Egyptian Amon-Re and even the Jewish Yahweh could be invoked as the names of the one great Power."
While being fused with Greek and Roman thinking in Rome, Christianity was also undergoing changes in other places. Alexandria, Antioch, Carthage, and Edessa, all centers of theological activity, developed distinctive schools of religious thought. Herbert Waddams, a former Anglican Canon of Canterbury, says the Alexandrian school, for example, was "particularly influenced by Platonic ideas," assigning allegorical meanings to most "Old Testament" statements. The Antioch school adopted a more literal, more critical attitude toward the Bible.
Distance, lack of communication, and language misunderstandings served to intensify the differences. Chiefly responsible for the situation, however, was the independent spirit and selfish ambition of religious leaders willing to adulterate the truth for personal advantage, thereby snuffing out the gospel light.
"Falsely Called ‘Knowledge’"As early as the first century, Christianity was influenced by false religious teachings, causing Paul to warn Timothy to turn away "from the contradictions of the falsely called ‘knowledge.’" (1 Timothy 6:20, 21) This may have been a reference to a movement called Gnosticism that gained prominence early in the second century but that evidently got started in the first century, possibly with a certain Simon Magus. Some authorities claim that this may be the Simon mentioned in the Bible at Acts 8:9.
Gnosticism got its name from the Greek word gno´sis, meaning "knowledge." Gnostic groups contended that salvation is dependent upon special mystical knowledge of deep things unknown to ordinary Christians. They felt that possessing this knowledge enabled them to teach, as The Encyclopedia of Religion says, "the inner truth revealed by Jesus."
The origins of Gnostic thought were many. From Babylon, Gnostics took the practice of attributing hidden meanings to Bible numbers, which supposedly revealed mystical truths. Gnostics also taught that whereas the spirit is good, all matter is inherently evil. "This is the same chain of reasoning," says German author Karl Frick, "that was already found in Persian dualism and in the Far East in China’s ‘yin’ and ‘yang.’" The "Christianity" presented by Gnostic writings is definitely based on non-Christian sources. So how could it be "the inner truth revealed by Jesus"?
Scholar R. E. O. White calls Gnosticism a combination of "philosophic speculation, superstition, semi-magical rites, and sometimes a fanatical and even obscene cultus." Andrew M. Greeley of the University of Arizona says: "The Jesus of the Gnostics is sometimes incoherent, sometimes unintelligible, and sometimes more than a little creepy."
Twisting the Truth About ChristThe Gnostics were not alone in twisting the truth about Christ. Nestorius, an early 5th-century patriarch of Constantinople, apparently taught that Christ was actually two persons in one, the human Jesus and the divine Son of God. In giving birth to Christ, Mary gave birth to the man but not to the divine Son. This view did not agree with Monophysitism ("one nature"), which held that the union between God and the Son was inseparable, and that although of two natures, Jesus was in reality only one, wholly God and at the same time wholly man. Accordingly, Mary would indeed have given birth to God, not just to the human Jesus.
Both theories were outgrowths of a controversy that had arisen during the previous century. Arius, an Alexandrian priest, argued that Christ is inferior to the Father. So he refused to use the term homoousios (being of one substance) in describing Christ’s relationship to God. The Council of Nicaea rejected his view in 325 C.E., ruling that Jesus is indeed ‘of the same substance as the Father.’ In 451 C.E. the Council of Chalcedon stated that Christ is God incarnate. The Babylonian-Egyptian-Grecian concept of a triune God had now crowded out Christ’s teaching that he and his Father are two separate individuals, in no way equal.—Mark 13:32; John 14:28.
Actually, Tertullian (c. 160-c. 230 C.E.), a member of the North African church, introduced the word "trinitas," which found its way into Christian usage sometime before Arius was born. Tertullian, who was the first theologian to write extensively in Latin instead of Greek, helped lay the foundation for Western theology. So did "Saint" Augustine, another North African theologian of some two centuries later. "[Augustine] is generally recognized as having been the greatest thinker of Christian antiquity," says The New Encyclopædia Britannica. But its next words are cause for concern for every sincere Catholic or Protestant: "His mind was the crucible in which the religion of the New Testament was most completely fused with the Platonic tradition of Greek philosophy; and it was also the means by which the product of this fusion was transmitted to the Christendoms of medieval Roman Catholicism and Renaissance Protestantism."
Catholicism in CrisisToward the end of the fourth century, Emperor Theodosius I finished what Constantine had started by making Catholicism the State religion. Soon thereafter the Roman Empire split, as Constantine had feared it might. Rome was captured in 410 C.E. by the Visigoths, a Germanic people who had long harassed the empire, and in 476 C.E., German general Odoacer deposed the Western emperor and proclaimed himself king, thus ending the Western Roman Empire.
Under these new circumstances, how would Catholicism fare? As of 500 C.E., it claimed as members some 22 percent of the world population. But of these estimated 43 million persons, the bulk had been victimized by religious leaders who had found it to be more convenient to adulterate the truth than to refine themselves. The gospel light of true Christianity had been snuffed out. But "Out of Darkness, Something ‘Holy’" would soon be born, as our next issue will discuss.
[Box on page 26]Samples of Gnostic BeliefMarcion (second century) differentiated between an imperfect "Old Testament" God inferior to Jesus and Jesus’ Father, the unknown "New Testament" God of love. The idea of an "unknown god is a fundamental theme of gnosticism," explains The Encyclopedia of Religion. This unknown god is identified as "the supreme Intellect, inaccessible to the human intellect." The creator of the material world, on the other hand, is inferior and not absolutely intelligent and is known as the Demiurge.
Montanus (second century) preached the imminent return of Christ and the setting up of the New Jerusalem in what is today Turkey. More concerned about conduct than doctrine, he evidently tried to restore the original values of Christianity, but given to extremes, the movement finally fell victim to the very situation of laxity it condemned.
Valentinus (second century), a Greek poet and the most prominent Gnostic of all time, claimed that although Jesus’ ethereal body passed through Mary, it was not actually born of her. This was because Gnostics viewed all matter as evil. Thus, Jesus could not have had a material body or it too would have been evil. Gnostics known as Docetists taught that everything about Jesus’ humanity was mere appearance and illusion. This included his death and resurrection.
Manes (third century) was dubbed al-Babiliyu, Arabic for "the Babylonian," since he called himself "the messenger of God come to Babylon." He strove to form a universal religion fusing elements of Christianity, Buddhism, and Zoroastrianism.
[Picture on page 25]Constantine helped snuff out the gospel light by fusing Christianity with pagan worship
-
minimus
They just LOVE the gospel of Judas!
-
Leolaia
What is particularly hilarious is that the Society (in the 15 July 1990 Watchtower) praised Irenaeus for his efforts in fighting gnosticism, even called his writings "an invaluable index of at least some of the Scriptural views still held by professed adherents to God’s Word at the end of the second century C.E.", yet the Society actually sides with the gnostics in denying that Jesus was literally resurrected but appeared as a spirit person. This docetic view is exactly the kind of teaching that Irenaeus was vehemently against.
It is also interesting how the Society uses gnosticism to support its myth of an early Christian "great apostasy". In reality, the Society wants to attribute this apostasy to the orthodox church (as part of its anti-Catholicism), yet sides with early Catholicism in identifying gnosticism as "apostate" and praises the apologists for their defense of apostolic faith. And yet, the Society will condemn just the same church fathers for their role in developing Catholic teachings or its ecclesiastical structure. In the case of Irenaeus, the Society actually minimizes his role in the latter, setting aside his status as "bishop," his belief that Jesus is God, etc.
-
Narkissos
Particularly hilarious:
Gnostic Docetism (the teaching that Christ never came in human form)
-
AK - Jeff
Reasoning that all flesh is evil, they rejected marriage and procreation, claiming that Satan originated these. Some of them believed that since only that which pertains to the spirit is good, it does not matter what a man does with his physical body. Such viewpoints resulted in extreme life-styles, either asceticism or fleshly indulgence. The Gnostic claim that salvation came only from mystical Gnosticism, or self-knowledge, left no room for the truth of God’s Word.
Thanx Blondie for these quotes.
How, in reality, does the witness faith differ much from this discription of Gnostics? The society has a whole bethel home full of GB and others who have never raised children, many of whom never married waiting on the 'kingdom'. Many of them and others have ruined thier health and future by putting off serious health concerns waiting on the same 'kingdom'. And who wound not objectively call the witness lifestyle excessive?
True, the reasoning behind the course of action is different - but the result is the same. What sheer hypocricy to condemn the Gnostics based on results that they themselves support and live.
Jeff
-
AK - Jeff
BTW annalice, have you read "Jehovah Unmasked" by Nate Merit. ?
He is a former witness, turned preacher, turned to eastern religion, turned to gnostic thinking. Interesting read.
Jeff
-
Leolaia
Gnostic Docetism (the teaching that Christ never came in human form)
Compare with the following:
***
g73 7/22 p. 3 Christ’s Return—Will You See It? ***By and large, those who expect Jesus personally to come again expect to see him literally, in his human form. Many even believe that they will see him in the very same body he had when on earth and in which he was put to death...But someone may object: ‘Did not the apostles see Jesus in human form after his resurrection?’ True, but he had not yet ascended to heaven and assumed his place at the right hand of God, thereafter dwelling in "unapproachable light." Therefore he was in position to assume a human form, even as angels had materialized on other occasions. For example, an angel appeared in human form to the parents of Samson and, after accomplishing his mission, ascended in a flame out of their sight. (Judg. 13:3-21) The fact that Jesus simply materialized bodies explains why on various occasions after his resurrection he was not always immediately recognized. Also, Jesus was able to appear suddenly in the midst of his apostles even though they were in a room with the door bolted due to their fear of the Jews. That there might be no doubt that he had truly been resurrected, Jesus appeared in human form, yes, even assuming a body with visible wounds so as to convince doubting Thomas.—John 20:19-29.
They claim here that Jesus' human form was an appearance, assuming and materializing a "human form" so that he only seemed to have the body in which he was put to death. This is exactly docetism (from a root meaning "to seem").
-
Narkissos
If I remember correctly (and in spite of the very unfortunate wording in the 1990 article) the WT kind of docetism is actually limited to the post-Paschal apparitions, which was not the case of early Christian docetism. They claim that Jesus from birth to death was a man (although the unbiblical notion of "perfect man" complicates the issue: angel + imperfect woman --> perfect man?) (Sorry for the double post.)
-