Changes

Gnosticism (view source)

Revision as of 21:37, July 12, 2016

1 byte added , 21:37, July 12, 2016

clean up & uniformity

Line 1: Line 1:

'''Gnosticism''' (after ''gnôsis'', the [[Greek]] word for "knowledge" or "insight") is the name given to a loosely organized [[religious]] and [[philosophy|philosophical]] movement that flourished in the first and second centuries A.D. Though the exact origins of this school of thought cannot be traced with any certainty, it is possible to infer that certain non-canonical sources dating from the first and second centuries A.D. were used to develop it. It had been considered a [[heresy]] by [[church fathers]] and so is by most modern Christians. Most Gnostic writings are exceedingly obscure and tedious.<ref name="Smith"/>

−

Literary critic Harold Bloom distinguishes Gnosticism from Christianity and Judaism in his book Agon<ref>{{cite book |title=Agon: towards a theory of revisionism|author=Harold Bloom|publisher=Oxford University Press|year=1982|pages=24|length=336|isbn=978-0195029451|url=http://books.google.com/books?ei=oyVbUaGvKuWL4gSyp4GwCQ&id=1VlZAAAAMAAJ&dq=Harold+Bloom+Agon&q=decidedly&redir_esc=y#search_anchor}}</ref>:

+

Literary critic Harold Bloom distinguishes Gnosticism from Christianity and Judaism in his book Agon:<ref>{{cite book |title=Agon: towards a theory of revisionism|author=Harold Bloom|publisher=Oxford University Press|year=1982|pages=24|length=336|isbn=978-0195029451|url=http://books.google.com/books?ei=oyVbUaGvKuWL4gSyp4GwCQ&id=1VlZAAAAMAAJ&dq=Harold+Bloom+Agon&q=decidedly&redir_esc=y#search_anchor}}</ref>

<blockquote>''"Gnosticism polemically is decidedly not a faith, whether in the Christian sense, pistis, a believing that something was, is, and will be so; or in the Hebraic sense, emunah, a trusting in the Covenant. If religion is a binding, then Gnosticism is an unbinding, but not for the sake of things or persons merely as they are. Gnostic freedom is a freedom for knowledge, knowledge of what in the self, not in the psyche or soul, is Godlike, and knowledge of God beyond the cosmos. But also it is a freedom to be known, to be known by God, by what is alien to everything created, by what is alien to and beyond the stars and the cosmic system and our earth."''</blockquote>

Line 20: Line 20:

==Gnostic Manuscripts==

−

Until the 1945 discovery of the [[Nag hammadi|Nag Hammadi]] texts near [[Luxor]] in [[Egypt]], the only evidence about the existence of Gnostic groups and sects came from anti-Gnostic [[church fathers]]<ref name="Carson"/> who occasionally quoted large fragments of Gnostic writings or sometimes whole works in their rebuttals attacking and refuting the Gnostic [[heresy]] in defence of their [[Christian]] faith.~~<ref name="Skarsaune"/>~~<ref name="Smith">{{cite book

+

Until the 1945 discovery of the [[Nag hammadi|Nag Hammadi]] texts near [[Luxor]] in [[Egypt]], the only evidence about the existence of Gnostic groups and sects came from anti-Gnostic [[church fathers]]<ref name="Carson"/> who occasionally quoted large fragments of Gnostic writings or sometimes whole works in their rebuttals attacking and refuting the Gnostic [[heresy]] in defence of their [[Christian]] faith.<ref name="Smith">{{cite book

|title=From Christ to Constantine

|author=M.A.Smith

Line 29: Line 29:

|isbn=0-85110-570-X

|url=http://books.google.no/books?id=9coLOAAACAAJ&dq=0-85110-570-X&hl=en&sa=X&ei=1nKMUJWCPKPe4QS60oHAAQ&ved=0CCsQ6AEwAA

−

}}</ref> Those Gnostic heretical texts where [[Christ]] is conceived as a teacher and revealer of mysterious ''gnosis'', i.e. a secret knowledge aiming to save people from ignorance and material world rather than sin, exhibit following characteristics in contrast to [[canon~~|canonical~~]] [[Gospels]]<ref name="~~Skarsaune~~"/><ref name="~~Smith~~"/>:

+

}}</ref><ref name="Skarsaune"/> Those Gnostic heretical texts where [[Christ]] is conceived as a teacher and revealer of mysterious ''gnosis'', i.e. a secret knowledge aiming to save people from ignorance and material world rather than sin, exhibit following characteristics in contrast to [[canon]]ical [[Gospels]]:<ref name="Smith"/><ref name="Skarsaune"/>

*The texts contain only alleged sayings of Jesus often twisted so as to express the Gnostic theology

*Jesus transmits these isolated sayings without being placed in any role within Israel's history such as Roman occupation or without any relation to it

Line 35: Line 35:

*The language of the [[New Testament]] survives, but the words used are merely connotation-words, having ascribed a totally different meaning

*If there are the [[New Testament]] allusions, there is never an actual quotation

−

*Tampering with the [[New Testament]], for example, the Jesus' cry from the cross was rewritten as "''My power, my power, why have you left me?''". In ''The Second Treatise of the Seth'', the Gnostic Christ, speaking in the first person, relates how he deceived the powers of this world by causing Simon the Cyrene to take on his appearance and to be crucified in his place, while he watched from above, laughing at the spectacle.<ref name="Hart">{{cite book |title=Atheist Delusions: The Christian Revolution and Its Fashionable Enemies|author=David Bentley Hart|publisher=YALE University Press|year=2010|pages=~~134-143~~|isbn=978-03-0016-4299|url=http://books.google.com/books?id=NtG5QQAACAAJ&dq=Ateist+delusions&hl=en&sa=X&ei=LWKgUezkCumF4ATem4DYCA&redir_esc=y}}</ref>

+

*Tampering with the [[New Testament]], for example, the Jesus' cry from the cross was rewritten as "''My power, my power, why have you left me?''". In ''The Second Treatise of the Seth'', the Gnostic Christ, speaking in the first person, relates how he deceived the powers of this world by causing Simon the Cyrene to take on his appearance and to be crucified in his place, while he watched from above, laughing at the spectacle.<ref name="Hart">{{cite book |title=Atheist Delusions: The Christian Revolution and Its Fashionable Enemies|author=David Bentley Hart|publisher=YALE University Press|year=2010|pages=134–143|isbn=978-03-0016-4299|url=http://books.google.com/books?id=NtG5QQAACAAJ&dq=Ateist+delusions&hl=en&sa=X&ei=LWKgUezkCumF4ATem4DYCA&redir_esc=y}}</ref>

*The whole system often appears to be a game of numerology, using the [[New Testament]] as the quarry for the numbers

*The overwhelming impression of most Gnostic works is vagueness, word-spinning and tedium. The "Hymn of Jesus" from ''The Acts of John'' is fetchingly cryptic.<ref name="Hart"/>

Line 54: Line 54:

|year=2002

|location=Downers Grove, IL

−

|pages=246, ~~251-253~~

+

|pages=246, 251–253

|chapter=12:Orthodoxy and Heresy

|isbn=978-0-8308-2844-9

Line 70: Line 70:

|location=Eugene, Oregon

|chapter=Nine: The Biblical Canon

−

|pages=~~331-333~~

+

|pages=331–333

|url=http://books.google.no/books?id=XHoFAQAACAAJ&dq=Carson+Hermeneutics,+Authority+and+Canon&hl=en&sa=X&ei=kuGLUJb3AouL4gSF0IGoDg&redir_esc=y

|isbn=1-59752-118-3

Line 94: Line 94:

|-

|}

−

*Rejection of Old Testament and manipulating (editing) the [[Scripture]] by [[Nazism|Nazists]] resulting in ''dejudaized'' version of the New Testament (NT), titled ''Die Botschaft Gottes'' (The Message of God)<ref name="Die Botschaft Gottes">{{cite web

+

*Rejection of Old Testament and manipulating (editing) the [[Scripture]] by [[Nazism|Nazists]] resulting in ''dejudaized'' version of the New Testament (NT), titled ''Die Botschaft Gottes'' (The Message of God).<ref name="Die Botschaft Gottes">{{cite web

|title=Did Hitler rewrite the Bible?

|author=Russell Grigg

|publisher=Creation Ministries International

|url=http://creation.com/hitler-bible

−

|accessdate=2012-10-27}}</ref>. Wilhelm Busch, pastor contemporary to era of Nazism in [[Germany]], witnessed:<ref>{{cite web

+

|accessdate=2012-10-27}}</ref> Wilhelm Busch, pastor contemporary to era of Nazism in [[Germany]], witnessed:<ref>{{cite web

|title=Kritik ohne Kenntnis? (Busch)

|publisher=Christlichen Medienverbreitungsmission

|date= 1. October 2009

|url=http://www.cmvm.de/9725-kritik-ohne-kenntnis-busch

−

|quote=Wilhelm Busch erzählt: Als Hitler um die Macht kämpfte, veröffentlichte er ein Parteiprogramm. In dem stand als Punkt 24: “Wir sind für positives Christentum.” Viele treue Christen sind darauf hereingefallen.

+

|quote=Wilhelm Busch erzählt: Als Hitler um die Macht kämpfte, veröffentlichte er ein Parteiprogramm. In dem stand als Punkt 24: “Wir sind für positives Christentum.” Viele treue Christen sind darauf hereingefallen. Als aber Hitler an der Macht war, erfuhr man, was viele vorausgesehen hatten: Positives Christentum ist dasselbe wie Nationalsozialismus. Zu gleicher Zeit begann der Kampf gegen die Bibel. Namentlich das Alte Testament wurde unter Trommelfeuer genommen. Überall konnte man hören und lesen: Nun ja, das Neue Testament könne man noch einige Zeit gelten lassen; denn da werde der Gott der Liebe gelehrt. Nur die Briefe des Juden Paulus müsse man ausmerzen. In denen sei der Geist des Alten Testaments zu spüren. Das Alte Testament aber – oh, das sei ein fürchterliches Buch, ein schmutziges Buch, ein grauenvolles Buch! Da rede der jüdisch-syrische Wüsten-Rache-Gott.

−

Als aber Hitler an der Macht war, erfuhr man, was viele vorausgesehen hatten: Positives Christentum ist dasselbe wie Nationalsozialismus.

−

Zu gleicher Zeit begann der Kampf gegen die Bibel. Namentlich das Alte Testament wurde unter Trommelfeuer genommen. Überall konnte man hören und lesen: Nun ja, das Neue Testament könne man noch einige Zeit gelten lassen; denn da werde der Gott der Liebe gelehrt. Nur die Briefe des Juden Paulus müsse man ausmerzen. In denen sei der Geist des Alten Testaments zu spüren. Das Alte Testament aber – oh, das sei ein fürchterliches Buch, ein schmutziges Buch, ein grauenvolles Buch! Da rede der jüdisch-syrische Wüsten-Rache-Gott.

|language=German

|acessdate=2012-10-27}}</ref>

Line 114: Line 112:

In 1936, ''[[Der Stürmer]]'', anti-Semitic Nazi newspaper published by [[Nuremberg War Crimes Tribunal|Julius Streicher]], brought up the following anti-Old-Testament propagandistic slogan:

−

{{quotebox|''Den Geist, der aus dem Buche spricht, Versteht die deutsche Jugend nicht.''{{#tag:ref|Translation from German: The Spirit that speaks out of Book cannot be grasped by German Youth (meaning: The German Youth cannot understand the Spirit of Old Testament)<ref>{{cite web |title=Katholische Schulen im NS-Staat:Unterdrückung bis zum Ende, Karikaturen aus dem FORUM - Sonderheft 31|publisher=Schulstiftung der Erzdiözese Freiburg (Educational Foundation of the Archdiocese of Freiburg)|date=March 2001|url=http://www.schulstiftung-freiburg.de/de/forum/pdf/pdf_140.pdf|accessdate=24-May-2013|language=German}}</ref>.|group=note}}}}

+

{{quotebox|''Den Geist, der aus dem Buche spricht, Versteht die deutsche Jugend nicht.''{{#tag:ref|Translation from German: The Spirit that speaks out of Book cannot be grasped by German Youth (meaning: The German Youth cannot understand the Spirit of Old Testament).<ref>{{cite web |title=Katholische Schulen im NS-Staat:Unterdrückung bis zum Ende, Karikaturen aus dem FORUM - Sonderheft 31|publisher=Schulstiftung der Erzdiözese Freiburg (Educational Foundation of the Archdiocese of Freiburg)|date=March 2001|url=http://www.schulstiftung-freiburg.de/de/forum/pdf/pdf_140.pdf|accessdate=24-May-2013|language=German}}</ref>|group=note}}}}

Later [[Nazism|Nazist]] forbade the study of "Jewish book" which was their reference to the [[Old Testament]] and its scholarship disappeared from German seminaries and journals. In 1940 [[Dietrich Bonhoeffer]] was fined for defiantly publishing a book on [[Psalms]].<ref>{{cite book |title=Bible Jesus Read |author= Philip Yancey |publisher=Zondervan |location=Michigan |year=2002 |pages=24 |isbn=978-0-310-245-667 |url=http://books.google.sk/books?id=KFSWSzyEZL4C&printsec=frontcover&dq=Bible+Jesus+Read&hl=en&sa=X&ei=HHWhUP555NnhBOTLgLAN&redir_esc=y#v=onepage&q=Bonhoeffer&f=false}}</ref>

===Gnostic traits in New Atheism===

−

*Objections to Old Testament by [[New Atheism]] on the grounds that it makes references to ''cruel God the Creator''; [[Richard Dawkins]] in his [[The God Delusion]] (2006) wrote (p.31):

+

*Objections to Old Testament by [[New Atheism]] on the grounds that it makes references to ''cruel God the Creator''; [[Richard Dawkins]] in his [[The God Delusion]] (2006) wrote (p. 31):

''"The God of the Old Testament is arguably the most unpleasant character in all fiction: jealous and proud of it; a petty, unjust, unforgiving control-freak; a vindictive, bloodthirsty ethnic cleanser; a misogynistic, homophobic, racist, infanticidal, genocidal, filicidal, pestilential, megalomaniacal, sadomasochistic, capriciously malevolent bully."''{{#tag:ref|cf."''To the faithful you show yourself faithful, to the blameless you show yourself blameless, to the pure you show yourself pure, but to the devious you show yourself shrewd.''" [http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=%202%20Samuel%2022:26-27&version=NIV Bible, 2 Samuel 22: 26-27 (NIV)]|group=note}}

Line 135: Line 133:

! scope="col" | The QJV reinterprets several biblical verses in an effort to impose and advocate a foreign [[homosexual agenda]] on the original indigenous biblical data{{#tag:ref| cf. [[False appropriation]]|group=note}}:

|-

−

| In Leviticus 18:22 and Leviticus 20:13, there is the superfluous sentence "in the temple of Molech" read into the levitical texts.<ref>{{cite web|title=Queen James Bible Claims To Be First-Ever 'Gay Bible,' But Some Say It Rewrites Scripture|author=Meredith Bennett-Smith|publisher=msnNOW.com|date=12/18/2012|accessdate=24/02/2013|url=http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/12/18/queen-james-bible-claims-first-ever-gay-bible_n_2324962.html|quote=This new version updates several passages from the original version that address homosexuality, including this passage from Leviticus 18:22:

+

| In Leviticus 18:22 and Leviticus 20:13, there is the superfluous sentence "in the temple of Molech" read into the levitical texts.<ref>{{cite web|title=Queen James Bible Claims To Be First-Ever 'Gay Bible,' But Some Say It Rewrites Scripture|author=Meredith Bennett-Smith|publisher=msnNOW.com|date=12/18/2012|accessdate=24/02/2013|url=http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/12/18/queen-james-bible-claims-first-ever-gay-bible_n_2324962.html|quote=This new version updates several passages from the original version that address homosexuality, including this passage from Leviticus 18:22: KJV: Thou shalt not lie with mankind, as with womankind: it is an abomination. QJV: Thou shalt not lie with mankind as with womankind in the temple of Molech: it is an abomination. (Page 75)}}</ref> These texts originally did not mention the temple of Molech at all. The revisionism tries to make impression that the only reason why the text condemned homosexual behaviour was that it was practised in pagan temple. Authors of the QJV translation are trying to remove the condemnation of homosexuality out of Scripture entirely.<ref name="Queen James"/>

−

KJV: Thou shalt not lie with mankind, as with womankind: it is an abomination.

−

QJV: Thou shalt not lie with mankind as with womankind in the temple of Molech: it is an abomination. (Page 75)}}</ref> These texts originally did not mention the temple of Molech at all. The revisionism tries to make impression that the only reason why the text condemned homosexual behaviour was that it was practised in pagan temple. Authors of the QJV translation are trying to remove the condemnation of homosexuality out of Scripture entirely.<ref name="Queen James"/>

|-

| Tampering with Romans 1:26-27 in the New Testament where the QJV changes the sense of original meaning referring to homosexual behaviour in general to pagan worship; also a new add-on expression ''“ritual lust”'' was introduced to eliminate the obvious ''universal condemnation'' of lesbian behaviour.

Line 148: Line 144:

===Gnostic traits in Liberal Media===

−

*The contemporary yellow journalism and [[liberal media]] often misuse the Gnostic texts or even add uncritically accepted related discoveries or speculations, doubted and criticized by mainstream scholars, in their obsession with sensational. In 1996 the ''[[Time magazine]]'', known for liberal bias, reported on the group of self-described 'experts and scholars' known as ''Jesus Seminar'' who declared to have special ''‘knowledge‘'' on origin of Gospels thus presented their own ''edited'' version of Bible with addition of Gnostic ''[[Gospel of Thomas]]'' as what they called ''‘The Scholars Version‘''. A. Boyd wrote a devastating critique of such liberal perspectives in his ''Cynic Sage or Son of God? - Recovering the Real Jesus in an Age of Revisionist Replies''.<ref>{{cite web |author=David Van Biema |title=The Gospel of Truth? |date= Apr. 08, 1996 |publisher=Time Magazine |url=http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,984367,00.html |acessdate=2012-11-08}}</ref><ref name="Case4Christ">{{cite book |title=The Case for Christ: A Journalist's Personal Investigation of the Evidence for Jesus |author= Lee Strobel |publisher=Zondervan |year=1998, 2008 |chapter=6. section: Jesus and the "Mystery religions"|pages=~~120-125~~ |isbn=0-310-29604-8 |url=http://books.google.com/books?id=ydVw3pbYZbgC&printsec=frontcover&dq=sTROBEL+CASE+cHRIST&hl=en&sa=X&ei=-ImbUNiSBsjusgaR84GIDA&redir_esc=y#v=onepage&q=gnosticism&f=false}}</ref><ref>{{cite book |title=Cynic Sage or Son of God? - Recovering the Real Jesus in an Age of Revisionist Replies |author= Gregory A. Boyd|publisher=Wipf & Stock Pub. |year=1996, 2010|isbn=978-1-6089-9953-8|url=http://books.google.com/books?id=T5NUtwAACAAJ&dq=Boyd+Cynic+Sage+or+Son+of+God%3F+-+Recovering+the+Real+Jesus+in+an+Age+of+Revisionist+Replies&hl=en&sa=X&ei=5qSbUPXIOIfssgbNlIC4Cw&redir_esc=y}}</ref>

+

*The contemporary yellow journalism and [[liberal media]] often misuse the Gnostic texts or even add uncritically accepted related discoveries or speculations, doubted and criticized by mainstream scholars, in their obsession with sensational. In 1996 the ''[[Time magazine]]'', known for liberal bias, reported on the group of self-described 'experts and scholars' known as ''Jesus Seminar'' who declared to have special ''‘knowledge‘'' on origin of Gospels thus presented their own ''edited'' version of Bible with addition of Gnostic ''[[Gospel of Thomas]]'' as what they called ''‘The Scholars Version‘''. A. Boyd wrote a devastating critique of such liberal perspectives in his ''Cynic Sage or Son of God? - Recovering the Real Jesus in an Age of Revisionist Replies''.<ref>{{cite web |author=David Van Biema |title=The Gospel of Truth? |date= Apr. 08, 1996 |publisher=Time Magazine |url=http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,984367,00.html |acessdate=2012-11-08}}</ref><ref name="Case4Christ">{{cite book |title=The Case for Christ: A Journalist's Personal Investigation of the Evidence for Jesus |author= Lee Strobel |publisher=Zondervan |year=1998, 2008 |chapter=6. section: Jesus and the "Mystery religions"|pages=120–125 |isbn=0-310-29604-8 |url=http://books.google.com/books?id=ydVw3pbYZbgC&printsec=frontcover&dq=sTROBEL+CASE+cHRIST&hl=en&sa=X&ei=-ImbUNiSBsjusgaR84GIDA&redir_esc=y#v=onepage&q=gnosticism&f=false}}</ref><ref>{{cite book |title=Cynic Sage or Son of God? - Recovering the Real Jesus in an Age of Revisionist Replies |author= Gregory A. Boyd|publisher=Wipf & Stock Pub. |year=1996, 2010|isbn=978-1-6089-9953-8|url=http://books.google.com/books?id=T5NUtwAACAAJ&dq=Boyd+Cynic+Sage+or+Son+of+God%3F+-+Recovering+the+Real+Jesus+in+an+Age+of+Revisionist+Replies&hl=en&sa=X&ei=5qSbUPXIOIfssgbNlIC4Cw&redir_esc=y}}</ref>

===Gnostic traits in [[Liberal Theology]]===

* The typical example can be Karen L. King at Harvard Divinity School who claimed that a scrap of papyrus she dubiously obtained{{#tag:ref|cf. "Nothing is known about the circumstances of its original discovery or early ownership, but there are some clues about its modern history"|group=note}} and that she refers to as ''"Gospel of Jesus's Wife"'' is "A New Coptic Gospel Papyrus". The following Gnostic traits and fallacies could be recognized in her attitude:

**Vagueness, word-spinning:

−

"Thus, on the basis of the age of the papyrus, the placement and absorption of the ink on the page, the type of the handwriting, and the Coptic grammar and spelling, it was concluded that it is highly probable{{#tag:ref|cf. [[Logic of possibility]]|group=note}} that the fragment is an ancient text. Although a final conclusion about the parchment's authenticity remains open to further examination by colleagues and to further testing, especially of the chemical composition of the ink, these assurances were sufficient for work on the analysis and interpretation of the fragment to begin in earnest."<ref>{{cite web |title=The Gospel of Jesus's Wife: A New Coptic Gospel Papyru|author=Karen L. King |publisher=Harvard Divinity School |url=http://www.hds.harvard.edu/faculty-research/research-projects/the-gospel-of-jesuss-wife|accessdate=July 26, 2013 }}</ref> One cannot establish the age of papyrus and base on it anything if the scientific test has not been performed first. [[Damning the Alternatives|Damning alternatives]] such as opinions of Coptologists who pointed out serious problems with the paleography, the syntax, and the very troubling fact that almost all of the text has been extracted from the Gospel of Thomas (principally from logia 30, 101, and 114)<ref>{{cite web |title=Harvard Theological Review Rejects ~~“Jesus’ Wife”~~ |author=Leroy Huizenga |publisher=First Things |date=September 26, 2012 |url=http://www.firstthings.com/blogs/firstthoughts/2012/09/26/harvard-theological-review-rejects-jesus-wife/|accessdate=June 26, 2013}}</ref>. Trying to make sensational declarations but then fail to make proper follow up and present the papers with scientific results{{#tag:ref|cf. "The chemical composition of the manuscript's ink will be tested at Harvard in mid-October [2012]" ... "As of late October, the results of a radiocarbon dating test and ink analysis were still pending."|group=note}} after these claims served its purpose to promote the Gnostic agenda leading to devastating consequence of heretical teaching to the genuine Christian belief.<ref name="smithsonian">{{cite web |title=UPDATE: The Reaction to Karen King’s Gospel Discovery |author=Ariel Sabar|publisher=smithsonian|date=November 2012|url=http://www.smithsonianmag.com/history-archaeology/Update-The-Reaction-to-Karen-Kings-Gospel-Discovery-174981701.html#ixzz2XLPbhy3L|accessdate=June 26, 2013}}</ref>

+

"Thus, on the basis of the age of the papyrus, the placement and absorption of the ink on the page, the type of the handwriting, and the Coptic grammar and spelling, it was concluded that it is highly probable{{#tag:ref|cf. [[Logic of possibility]]|group=note}} that the fragment is an ancient text. Although a final conclusion about the parchment's authenticity remains open to further examination by colleagues and to further testing, especially of the chemical composition of the ink, these assurances were sufficient for work on the analysis and interpretation of the fragment to begin in earnest."<ref>{{cite web |title=The Gospel of Jesus's Wife: A New Coptic Gospel Papyru|author=Karen L. King |publisher=Harvard Divinity School |url=http://www.hds.harvard.edu/faculty-research/research-projects/the-gospel-of-jesuss-wife|accessdate=July 26, 2013 }}</ref> One cannot establish the age of papyrus and base on it anything if the scientific test has not been performed first. [[Damning the Alternatives|Damning alternatives]] such as opinions of Coptologists who pointed out serious problems with the paleography, the syntax, and the very troubling fact that almost all of the text has been extracted from the Gospel of Thomas (principally from logia 30, 101, and 114).<ref>{{cite web |title=Harvard Theological Review Rejects "Jesus’ Wife" |author=Leroy Huizenga |publisher=First Things |date=September 26, 2012 |url=http://www.firstthings.com/blogs/firstthoughts/2012/09/26/harvard-theological-review-rejects-jesus-wife/|accessdate=June 26, 2013}}</ref> Trying to make sensational declarations but then fail to make proper follow up and present the papers with scientific results{{#tag:ref|cf. "The chemical composition of the manuscript's ink will be tested at Harvard in mid-October [2012]" ... "As of late October, the results of a radiocarbon dating test and ink analysis were still pending."|group=note}} after these claims served its purpose to promote the Gnostic agenda leading to devastating consequence of heretical teaching to the genuine Christian belief.<ref name="smithsonian">{{cite web |title=UPDATE: The Reaction to Karen King’s Gospel Discovery |author=Ariel Sabar|publisher=smithsonian|date=November 2012|url=http://www.smithsonianmag.com/history-archaeology/Update-The-Reaction-to-Karen-Kings-Gospel-Discovery-174981701.html#ixzz2XLPbhy3L|accessdate=June 26, 2013}}</ref>

−

**Faulty Logic: "It would be very difficult to reproduce the kind the damage from insects or moisture that the fragment indicates, but it could have been penned on a blank piece of ancient papyrus, which are available for purchase on the antiquities market. Such a papyrus would pass a Carbon 14 dating test."<ref>{{cite web |title=~~“Jesus~~ said to them, ‘My ~~wife…’”~~ A New Coptic Gospel Papyrus |author=Karen L. King |url=http://www.hds.harvard.edu/sites/hds.harvard.edu/files/attachments/faculty-research/research-projects/the-gospel-of-jesuss-wife/29865/King_JesusSaidToThem_draft_0920.pdf |accessdate=June 26, 2013}}</ref> Still, it is of great interest to find out whether the papyrus passes the Carbon 14 dating test, if not, the claim about ancient status can be falsified right away before further investigation of ink. Furthermore, the first media coverage relayed King claiming, without any peer-review from Carbon dating specialist, that the Carbon 14 method of dating cannot be performed at all: ''"Dr. King did not have the ink dated using carbon testing. She said it would require scraping off too much, destroying the relic. She still plans to have the ink tested by spectroscopy, which could roughly determine its age by its chemical composition."''<ref>{{cite web |title=A Faded Piece of Papyrus Refers to Jesus’ Wife|author=Laurie Goodstein|publisher=NYTimes|date=September 18, 2012|url=http://www.nytimes.com/2012/09/19/us/historian-says-piece-of-papyrus-refers-to-jesus-wife.html?pagewanted=2&_r=0|accessdate=June 26, 2013}}</ref>

+

**Faulty Logic: "It would be very difficult to reproduce the kind the damage from insects or moisture that the fragment indicates, but it could have been penned on a blank piece of ancient papyrus, which are available for purchase on the antiquities market. Such a papyrus would pass a Carbon 14 dating test."<ref>{{cite web |title="Jesus said to them, ‘My wife…’" A New Coptic Gospel Papyrus |author=Karen L. King |url=http://www.hds.harvard.edu/sites/hds.harvard.edu/files/attachments/faculty-research/research-projects/the-gospel-of-jesuss-wife/29865/King_JesusSaidToThem_draft_0920.pdf |accessdate=June 26, 2013}}</ref> Still, it is of great interest to find out whether the papyrus passes the Carbon 14 dating test, if not, the claim about ancient status can be falsified right away before further investigation of ink. Furthermore, the first media coverage relayed King claiming, without any peer-review from Carbon dating specialist, that the Carbon 14 method of dating cannot be performed at all: ''"Dr. King did not have the ink dated using carbon testing. She said it would require scraping off too much, destroying the relic. She still plans to have the ink tested by spectroscopy, which could roughly determine its age by its chemical composition."''<ref>{{cite web |title=A Faded Piece of Papyrus Refers to Jesus’ Wife|author=Laurie Goodstein|publisher=NYTimes|date=September 18, 2012|url=http://www.nytimes.com/2012/09/19/us/historian-says-piece-of-papyrus-refers-to-jesus-wife.html?pagewanted=2&_r=0|accessdate=June 26, 2013}}</ref>

**Taking position contrary to church fathers who opposed Gnostic heresy strongly, trying to make Gnostic positions attacking the genuine tenets of the biblical creed acceptable:

−

"Karen King says, we must first disentangle modern historiography from the Christian discourse of orthodoxy and heresy that has pervaded--and distorted--the story. King shows how historians have been misled by ancient Christian polemicists who attacked Gnostic beliefs as a "dark double" against which the new faith could define itself. to offer a new and clarifying definition of Gnosticism"<ref>{{cite ~~web~~ |author=Karen L. King|title=What Is Gnosticism?|publisher=Harvard University Press |year=2005|isbn=9780674017627 |url=http://books.google.com/books?id=df1Tz5Cn8BQC&dq=Karen+L.+King&source=gbs_navlinks_s |accessdate=June 26, 2013 |quote=Quote from the cover of the book}}</ref>

+

"Karen King says, we must first disentangle modern historiography from the Christian discourse of orthodoxy and heresy that has pervaded--and distorted--the story. King shows how historians have been misled by ancient Christian polemicists who attacked Gnostic beliefs as a "dark double" against which the new faith could define itself. to offer a new and clarifying definition of Gnosticism"<ref>{{cite book |author=Karen L. King|title=What Is Gnosticism?|publisher=Harvard University Press |year=2005|isbn=9780674017627 |url=http://books.google.com/books?id=df1Tz5Cn8BQC&dq=Karen+L.+King&source=gbs_navlinks_s |accessdate=June 26, 2013 |quote=Quote from the cover of the book}}</ref>

**Obsessive interest in non-canonical scripts such as the ''Gospel of Thomas'', the ''Gospel of Mary'', and the ''Gospel of the Egyptians'', contrarian approach to Christian history and trial “to integrate a whole set of [this] ‘heretical’ literature into the standard history”<ref name="smithsonian"/>

** Replacing basic tenets of Christianity such as on personal God with word spinning around 'religion' and introducing terms like "religious identity": ''“Religion is absolutely central to who I am in every way,”'' she said. ''“I spend most of my time on it. It’s how I structure my interior life. I use its materials when I think about ethics and politics.”''<ref name="smithsonian"/>{{#tag:ref|cf.''"In fact, it is only through the New Testament that we can learn just what Christian faith is. ... Open your Bible at any page you like, there is nothing about solving religious problems. Bible testifies that God exists and that he revealed himself through Jesus Christ. It shows too that the man who lives without God is not living right. ... All religions are human attempts to find God. But they all have this in common: they have all gone astray in the fog and have not been able to discover God."'' Wilhelm Busch, member of Confessing Church in the era of [[Nazism]]<ref name="Busch">{{cite book |author=Wilhelm Busch |title=Jesus Our Destiny |publisher=Inter Publishing Services |year=2001 |pages=11 |isbn=0-86347-024-6 |url=https://www.google.no/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=2&ved=0CC8QFjAB&url=http%3A%2F%2Fbitflow.dyndns.org%2Fenglish%2FWilhelmBusch%2FJesus_Our_Destiny_2007.doc&ei=AczOUezLLojP4QSZkYGQAg&usg=AFQjCNGu3EdGXCR8hsXtIWCQsj67rOpAfQ&sig2=u58IaWql_UFf55QGto68CA}}</ref>|group=note}}

===Gnostic traits in [[Evolutionism]] and [[scientism]]===

−

The partisans of evolutionsim and scientism, respectively, keep trying to attack the [[biblical chronology]] in effort to replace the dating of [[historical science|historical]] world events - which has been always in the [[Judeo-Christian]] tradition expressed in terms of [[B.C.]]<ref name="YECBritannica">{{cite web |title=Encyclopaedia Britannica: supporting a young earth! |publisher=creation.com |url=http://creation.com/encyclopedia-britannica-supporting-a-young-earth |quote=Under the heading ‘Astronomy’ on page 493, the 1771 Encyclopædia Britannica has a table of world events that begins with the creation of the world in the year 0, i.e. at the beginning of creation, which they dated at 4007 years before Christ...The concept of billions of years for the age of the earth was unknown to science (or to the church[4]) before the rise of uniformitarianism in the 19th century. This is strong evidence that modern long-age views of creation do not originate in Genesis, but are a misguided attempt by some Christian leaders to try to reconcile what God has said with the atheistic pronouncements of evolutionary ‘science’.|accessdate=November 8, 2014}}</ref> and [[A.D.]] - with reference to gnostic ''aeons''{{#tag:ref|cf. “time itself performs miracles” in [[~~Age_of_the_earth~~#~~cite_note~~-19|Age of the Earth]]|group=note}} as representants of their own belief system on [[origin science|origin]] of the world. For example, they introduced the abbreviation AE for naming the time of billion of years<ref>{{cite book |title=David Roger Oldroyd |author=David Roger Oldroyd |publisher=Geological Society of London|pages=43 |url=http://books.google.com/books?id=PFc_SE4dqVMC |quote=Time: Ae 10<p>9</p> years BP}}</ref> and accertain that the [[~~Age_of_the_earth~~#~~The_Scientific_Dogma_of_4~~.~~5_billion_years~~|Earth is "4.55 AE" old]].

+

The partisans of evolutionsim and scientism, respectively, keep trying to attack the [[biblical chronology]] in effort to replace the dating of [[historical science|historical]] world events - which has been always in the [[Judeo-Christian]] tradition expressed in terms of [[B.C.]]<ref name="YECBritannica">{{cite web |title=Encyclopaedia Britannica: supporting a young earth! |publisher=creation.com |url=http://creation.com/encyclopedia-britannica-supporting-a-young-earth |quote=Under the heading ‘Astronomy’ on page 493, the 1771 Encyclopædia Britannica has a table of world events that begins with the creation of the world in the year 0, i.e. at the beginning of creation, which they dated at 4007 years before Christ...The concept of billions of years for the age of the earth was unknown to science (or to the church[4]) before the rise of uniformitarianism in the 19th century. This is strong evidence that modern long-age views of creation do not originate in Genesis, but are a misguided attempt by some Christian leaders to try to reconcile what God has said with the atheistic pronouncements of evolutionary ‘science’.|accessdate=November 8, 2014}}</ref> and [[A.D.]] - with reference to gnostic ''aeons''{{#tag:ref|cf. “time itself performs miracles” in [[Age of the earth#cite note-19|Age of the Earth]]|group=note}} as representants of their own belief system on [[origin science|origin]] of the world. For example, they introduced the abbreviation AE for naming the time of billion of years<ref>{{cite book |title=David Roger Oldroyd |author=David Roger Oldroyd |publisher=Geological Society of London|pages=43 |url=http://books.google.com/books?id=PFc_SE4dqVMC |quote=Time: Ae 10<p>9</p> years BP}}</ref> and accertain that the [[Age of the earth#The Scientific Dogma of 4.5 billion years|Earth is "4.55 AE" old]].

===Gnostic traits in [[Feminism]]===

Line 174: Line 170:

|url=http://books.google.com/books?id=xzLRvxlJhzkC}}</ref> Invoking [[Darwin]], Stanton also proposed that the serpent in the [[Garden of Eden]] may have, in fact, be an ape.<ref>{{cite book |title=Mrs. Stanton's Bible |author=Kathi Kern |publisher=Cornell University Press |year=2001 |pages=158 |isbn=9780801482885 |url=http://books.google.com/books?id=nxdT-5mY4UAC}}</ref>

−

==See ~~Also~~==

+

==See also==

*[[Docetism]]

*[[Kabbalah]]

DavidB4-bot

Block, SkipCaptcha, apieditor, Automoderated users, Bots, edit, ratelimit-exempt

58,183

edits

Changes

Gnosticism (view source)

Revision as of 21:37, July 12, 2016

Navigation menu

Search