On The Appeal Of Gnosticism

No one ever says that they are gnostic. Nonetheless, gnosticism has been a problem largely from the beginning of Christianity and has remained a problem throughout, largely because gnosticism is Satan’s classic tool for combating the (difficult) truths of Christianity. Today I would like to examine the appeal of gnosticism for different groups of people to see why it remains so enduringly popular and why the truth of Christianity, springing from the full biblical record, is so comparatively unpopular.

Even though no one claims to be a gnostic, gnosticism as a collection of belief systems is fairly recognizable. Some elements of gnosticism are very widespread—the substitution of the biblical Sabbath for the “eighth day,” while other aspects of gnosticism are less obvious (such as its denigration of the flesh and its hostility to the material creation). In this brief tour of the different appeals of gnosticism I will try to touch on as many as possible of the various ways in which gnosticism appeals to a great many people who would never, under any circumstances, consider themselves gnostics. We must remember that gnosticism appeals to many people who would consider themselves Christians and for whom the appeal of gnosticism is very different.

For example, gnosticism is extremely popular among a certain type of intellectual. This type of intellectual wants to harmonize Athens and Jerusalem, to cast aside the “tribal” rules and regulations of what seems like a jealous deity, and cast his lot with “universal” principles, especially those that appeal to human intellectualism, such as those found in the Greek philosophy of Plato and Aristotle. Such a person may even be passionately interested in God’s law, but not as a standard for his own behavior, but rather as an avenue for intellectual interests which include “legalism,” in the reasoning away of inconvenient laws and the (very strict) enforcement of laws that are convenient or that bolster his position as a student of jurisprudence, or the combination of political partisanship with a divine fire of self-righteousness. In this case there is often selective enforcement of biblical law—property rights might be defended, and the Bible might be assumed to be a document of lassiez-faire capitalism, but laws like the Jubilee that defend the interests of the poor will assumed to have been fulfilled (like the sacrificial law) in the death and resurrection of Jesus Christ.

Alternatively, a gnostic may be a person who genuinely feels a love of Christ, but who struggles with a particular sin, so much so that it frequently overwhelms her, and so she says that her own struggle with a sin (such as alcoholism or promiscuity) is unimportant compared to her own deeper personal spirituality. Her conscience becomes seared as she ceases to recognize that what she is doing is wrong, and she rationalizes her sins by pointing to her sincerity of feeling and the statement that as God is love, that there will be no judgment, because God understands our weaknesses and has freed us from the burden of obedience to His demanding law. The fact that such special pleading is fallacious does not keep it from being sincere. After all, Jesus Christ is a sympathetic advocate for us, but conversion allows us help from God to develop His righteous character within us, not a repudiation of those biblical standards which, when practiced, develop godly and true Christian spirituality within us in all walks of our life, even our weaknesses.

A different type of gnostic may be someone for whom the physical world is a burden, with unceasing physical (and perhaps mental and emotional) ailments. Such a person lives every day as a struggle, and is tempted to state that there is something defective and lacking in the physical creation itself. Such a belief is heretical. For the physical creation, before sin, was good (see Genesis 1:31), even though it was physical and not spiritual. There is nothing wrong with physical bodies or the physical creation for God—it was good enough for Jesus Christ to live His life in, and good enough for God to create in order to raise up His own offspring (see Acts 17:28). Nor is there anything defective about being created as human beings, for we are created in the image and likeness of God Himself (see Hebrews 1:1-4). If this world has been corrupted by sin, we deal with that corruption not by disparaging the image of God within us, but by overcoming the effects of sin in our own lives.

Additionally, gnosticism appeals to an entirely different audience. For this person, there are tremendous insecurities about salvation. Sensitive to sin, and struggling to live in a very legalistic and ritual-oriented belief system, there is the longing from freedom from guilt and anxiety over imperfections, combined with the realization that no one else, including those who are criticizing him, are perfect either. So, instead of doing the hard and necessary work on his own character, he lashes out at those who critique him for their hypocrisy, knowing their sins, rather than judging God’s standard as just. In the end, frustrated at what he sees as unfair punishment, he decides to be his own judge of what is right and wrong for himself, rejecting all authority that would seek to judge him, or anyone who might point out his own flaws, but rather he becomes a harsh judge of others for their imperfections while blinding himself to his own.

All of these people, and many others, even though they may not be aware of it, are gnostics. And so, probably, are many of us in our worse moments. Gnosticism consists of a variety of (sometimes contradictory) responses to the problem of Christian spirituality. Sometimes Gnosticism means the rejection of spiritual authority and the enshrining of one’s “inner light” of personal truth in its place. Sometimes it means the enshrining of hierarchies who sit in Moses’ seat and who have the authority to change God’s laws because they have the keys of the kingdom. Sometimes it means indulging in one’s personal vices—be they sexual or chemical or some other kind. Sometimes it means punishing or disparaging the flesh as worthless and useless, as an ascetic who believes that punishing the flesh is necessary to glorify the spirit. Sometimes gnosticism means supporting human standards of spirituality, and sometimes it means liscensing one’s own sinful behaviors by whatever means possible. Whatever form it takes, the Bible speaks consistently harshly about it.

But in recognizing the Bible’s harsh treatment of gnosticism, we must remember that gnosticism is enduringly popular because it touches sincere and genuine human needs and insecurities. Where enforcement of God’s laws seems (or is) arbitrary and unjust, the natural human response is to rebel, and when we rebel against injustice, we do not stop to think that our enemies (like ourselves) are partly right and partly wrong. Instead we overreact in the opposite direction. And so it happens that both we and our enemies are often gnostics, defending different (human) sources of authority, different ideas on the flesh, and spirituality, and security, and “love,” but similar in that they are human standards and not God’s standard. And to decide what is good and evil for ourselves is to take the fruit of the Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil, and to join Adam and Even in their sins. If we wish to take of the Tree of Life, we must follow God at His word. This is not easy to do by any means, but to do otherwise is to defy God and make ourselves rebels against His authority, and confederates with Satan and his host of rebellious demons. We know their fate—we ought to desire to avoid it. And if we see ourselves falling into it, we ought to immediately repent and seek God’s mercy, and strength and wisdom to avoid repeating the error in the future.

About nathanalbright

I'm a person with diverse interests who loves to read. If you want to know something about me, just ask.
This entry was posted in Bible, Christianity, Church of God, Musings, Satan's House Divided and tagged , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

11 Responses to On The Appeal Of Gnosticism

  1. altonwoods says:

    A very thought provoking blog, I wonder if you consider yourself to be a direct creation of God? My contention (attested to in John 1:12) is that we (you and I) are not, having been born from Adam and therefore not having the true right to be called “sons of God” from natural birth. To whom,in your estimation, does the title “sons of God” refer to in Genesis 6?

    “There is nothing wrong with physical bodies or the physical creation for God”

    Prior to the fall this was true…afterwards no. Why? Not His creation?

    I was confused by the wording here, is “for” a typo?

    You’re obviously a very intelligent and learned man, I am neither…and so please excuse my ignorance if I have in any way misunderstood your meanings or spoken foolishly.

    • No, the for is not a typo. The classic trap of gnosticism is to praise the spiritual at the expense of the physical. Sometimes this is done by asceticism, in punishing or denying the flesh in order to show one’s self as more spiritual. This is what monks do, for example. Sometimes it is also done through saying that the sins of the flesh are nothing so long as one loves Jesus Christ in your heart. But for God there is nothing wrong with the physical creation–it has an honorable (if temporary) part in His creation.

      I do not mean to imply that all human beings are special creations (though some are even after Adam–Jesus Christ to give the most obvious example, but also other examples such as Isaac), but we are all His offspring, created in the image and likeness of God (see Acts 17). But the fact that we are children of Adam does not mean that we have no right to call ourselves God. Did not Jesus Christ himself, quoting Psalm 82:6, say “You are gods,” referring to human beings like ourselves (see John 10:31-39). For when those of us who are fortunate enough to enter God’s kingdom do so, we will be fully recognized as the Sons of God (see Luke 20:35-36), possessing the gift of eternal life. This is not something any of us can deserve, or claim as our birthright, but it is the free gift of God as the reward to those who are faithful and just.

      If you wish to ask my speculation on the Sons of God in Genesis 6, I see two possibilities within the context of the text. One, I see it as possibly referring to interfaith marriages between the ‘godly’ line of Seth and the ‘ungodly’ line of Cain eventually leading to religious compromise on the part of the godly (which has been the traditional pattern throughout history–see also Ezra, Nehemiah, and Malachi). It is also possible that the sons of God are not godly at all, but was rather the idolatrous name given themselves by the tyrants of earth at the time, who then followed after Lamech in polygamous or rapine sexual exploits. Both are possible simultaneously. Either way, I think it refers to human beings as the “sons of God,” and not some kind of heretical procreation between men and angels, for the scripture says (and the scripture cannot be broken) that angels do not marry nor are given in marriage (see Luke 20:27-40).

  2. William E. Males says:

    good word brother.

  3. Yadalboath says:

    such piety ! the earliest christian writing could be the gospel of thomas and probably the most accurate description of historical the nag hammadi library, it is the Q gospel that currently
    founded your new testament.
    and this confused the church to this day, gnosticism was instrumental in forging the church doctrine
    to this day by example; its rituals. The current Church doctrine being a more hellenized and acceptable version derived from these writings which are noneless contrary to human nature..

    If gnosticism is a false religion, so does christianity which is based upon it, our current religions hate life.

    • First of all, the Q is a hypothetical text no more in existence than the P, J, Y, or D texts of the critical scholar of the Penteteuch. To conflate the bogus pseudographia of the Nag Hammadi library with genuine scriptures is immensely dishonest. You speak correctly, after a manner, in saying that Gnosticism forced the Church to defend true doctrine, but the Gnostics were merely one of the many groups preaching false Hellenistic heresies that true Christians had to counteract and condemn. They were foils and enemies for genuine Christianity to counteract. You speak rightly that current Christianity based on Gnosticism or later Hellenistic thought is similarly false religion, but this is not the apostolic Christianity which I personally practice.

  4. Pingback: Book Review: Christians, Remember Your Past Lives: Learn How | Edge Induced Cohesion

  5. Pingback: Book Review: The Passion Of The Western Mind | Edge Induced Cohesion

  6. Pingback: Heaven Can’t Help Me Now | Edge Induced Cohesion

  7. Pingback: Book Review: The State Of Play | Edge Induced Cohesion

  8. Pingback: Book Review: Original Christianity | Edge Induced Cohesion

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s