hereticzero Posted June 4, 2009 Share Posted June 4, 2009 I've studied some doctrine of gnosticism and mystical Christianity and have come to the conclusion that whoever came up with them had bat shit for brains! If you ever thought mainstream xtianity was weird, try reading the crap from the other two. OMG! How anyone can gain anything of importance from them is beyond me. At least Gnosticism admits their doctrine is based on mythological stories from which they gain moral understanding. But, they ain't for me! I see a clearer understanding of Spiritual Alchemy, which is not changing lead into gold, but changing one's self into a better person. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest trekker Posted June 4, 2009 Share Posted June 4, 2009 My exposure to "mystical Christianity" has mainly been through what is called "Progressive Christianity." It is, IMO, a strange mix of liberal Christianity and Eastern religions. The "Progressive Christians" that I know, at least the most outspoken ones, either follow "the Spirit of God" inside them or they claim to channel Jesus. And this Jesus has very little to do with any kind of historical Jesus, it is more "the Spirit of Christ" or each person's own "divinity." What I find interesting is that they tend to get into the same kind of arguments and polarizations that the fundamental Christians get into. But whereas the fundies argue over the bible and the various interpretations thereof, the progressives argue about whose experience of the divine is the most authentic, the most "spiritual." So I'm turning off by the "spiritual one-up-manship" that goes on there as well as being very skeptical of the validity of experiences that cannot be verified. Fundies quote the bible as their authority. The progressives, from what I've seen, quote their experiences as their authority. But, to me, it is still the same old game of "Who Really Knows God?" Doesn't appeal to me whatsover. trekker Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mriana Posted June 8, 2009 Share Posted June 8, 2009 I don't know. I've always enjoyed studying Gnosticism. It's better than Xianity to me. However, the Gnosticism of yesterday was different from today's though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Super Moderator florduh Posted June 8, 2009 Super Moderator Share Posted June 8, 2009 Gnostics and Mystics don't bother anyone. Big plus, in my book. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mutate Posted June 11, 2009 Share Posted June 11, 2009 You ever noticed whenever Xians critisise gnostics, they always pounce on that "women need to be like men" verse on the gospel of Thomas? "omg, gnostics are sexist and hate women!" No consideration of its context or interpretation. If only they looked at the sexist verses in the bible with the same non-rose-tinting view. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mriana Posted June 14, 2009 Share Posted June 14, 2009 I don't think that verse was meant to be taken literally as stated by itself. I'll have to pull the text out again, but I'm pretty sure one can't pull that sentence out (like a cherry) and read it by itself in the literal sense. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts