In Reply to: Re: A question for Lydia posted by Coordinator on June 12, 2004 at 12:18:47:
(it's important to understand what it is, before you proclaim your belief it or leaning to it. As you can see from the list below, it isn't really in line with 'traditional' Christianity at all. In the Family we were sucked in by the tickle of our ears, thinking we knew what we were getting into. I'm sure most of us wouldn't fall into that same trap again, believing in something we don't know ))
To understand Gnosticism, said Hans Jonas, one needs something very much like a musical ear. Such a Gnostic "musical ear" is not come by easily. One person who seemingly possesses it is Professor Clark Emery of the University of Miami. In a small work on William Blake, Emery summarizes twelve points on which Gnostics tended to agree.
Nowhere in the current literature have I found anything else so concise and accurate in describing the normative characteristics of the Gnostic mythos.
Hence I shall present it here as a suggested collection of criteria that one might apply in determining what Gnosticism is. The following characteristics may be considered normative for all Gnostic teachers and groups in the era of classical Gnosticism; thus one who adheres to some or all of them today might properly be called a Gnostic:
The Gnostics posited an original spiritual unity that came to be split into a plurality.
As a result of the precosmic division the universe was created.
This was done by a leader possessing inferior spiritual powers and who often resembled the Old Testament Jehovah.
A female emanation of God was involved in the cosmic creation (albeit in a much more positive role than the leader).
In the cosmos, space and time have a malevolent character and may be personified as demonic beings separating man from God.
For man, the universe is a vast prison. He is enslaved both by the physical laws of nature and by such moral laws as the Mosaic code.
Mankind may be personified as Adam, who lies in the deep sleep of ignorance, his powers of spiritual self-awareness stupefied by materiality.
Within each natural man is an "inner man," a fallen spark of the divine substance. Since this exists in each man, we have the possibility of awakening from our stupefaction.
What effects the awakening is not obedience, faith, or good works, but knowledge.
Before the awakening, men undergo troubled dreams.
Man does not attain the knowledge that awakens him from these dreams by cognition but through revelatory experience, and this knowledge is not information but a modification of the sensate being.
The awakening (i.e., the salvation) of any individual is a cosmic event.
Since the effort is to restore the wholeness and unity of the Godhead, active rebellion against the moral law of the Old Testament is enjoined upon every man.6
The noted sociologist Max Weber wrote in his book The Protestant Ethic and the Spirit of Capitalism that "the perfect conceptual definition cannot stand at the beginning, but must be left until the end of the inquiry." That is what we have done in the present inquiry also. Emery's twelve points are in every consistent with the proposal set out by the colloquium at Messina. Second-century Gnosticism is taken as the principal model for all of these definitions, a practice that appears to be sensible. Nor is any separate recognition given to any so-called "orthodox gnosis" that is occasionally alluded to, more as a figure of speech than as any discernible historical phenomenon, in the writings of some of the Church Fathers who were contemporaneous with the Gnostics. It would seem that whatever is excluded by Emery's definitions and the protocol of Messina may be more profitably considered from doctrinal perspectives other than Gnostic.
http://www.gnosis.org/whatisgnostic.htm