What the fuck even is Gnosticism?

yeah, when described that way I kind of like the idea.

When 'the imagination' asserts its 'primacy' but mis-labels itself 'knowledge' in a fluid, historical context that ironically tends toward rigidification.

Christianity for the sexually frustrated

are there any christian's who aren't sexually frustrated?

>le anyone who isn't a filthy hedonist is sexually frustrated meme
Go to bed, Satan

damn

>le christianism has nothing to do with sexuality repression.

Literally living the in a bubble

You can shag all day long if you're married to the bird. Christianity is more enjoyable than Gnosticism, where everything material is literally made by Satan.

Rebellion against God, your loving Father. Basically a fanfic that makes Jesus a rebellious son who tried to fight God. The Holy Spirit is 404 not found. It's pretty retarded

So does KEK evidently with digits like these

Gnosticism (from Ancient Greek: γνωστιkός gnostikos, "having knowledge", from γνῶσις gnōsis, knowledge) is a modern name for a variety of ancient religious ideas and systems, originating in Jewish milieus in the first and second century AD. Based on their readings of the Torah and other Biblical writings, these systems induced that the material world is created by an ignorant emanation of the highest God, trapping the Divine spark within the human body. This Divine spark could be liberated by gnosis of this Divine spark.

The Gnostic ideas and systems flourished in the Mediterranean world in the second century AD, in conjunction with and influenced by the early Christian movements and Middle Platonism. After the second century a decline set in, but Gnosticism persisted throughout the centuries as an undercurrent of western culture, remanifesting with the Renaissance as Western esotericism, taking prominence with modern spirituality. In the Persian Empire, Gnosticism spread as far as China with Manicheism, while Mandeism is still alive in Iraq.

A major question in scholarly research is the qualification of Gnosticism, based on the study of its texts, as either an interreligious phenomenon or as an independent religion.

None of this is true. But most importantly, the Holy Spirit is the Subject.

This thread sucks. This explanation sucks.

Gnosis, if it can lend itself to definition, is roughly defined as putting all imagination (Mind) through absolute Moral judgement. In stark contrast to Faith, which asks for absolute suspension of Morality and the ignorance of all but a handful of books (Matter).

That comic always pisses me off because of the part where all the suffering of humanity is compared to twisting one's ankle.

This is usually what Cosmic cuckoldry (Stoicism/Christianity/NEETzscheanism) thinks of Human suffering - an almost amusing quirk of the world. Until it happens to them and the melodrama starts flowing.

Wrong. The 'morality' of the Gnostics is FIXED ab initio. It's negative valuation of 'faith' somehow blinds its practitioners into 'believing' that their own 'beliefs' prompt knowledge. Bait and motherfucking Switch: Gnosticism in a nut's hell....

...yes? Absolute Moral judgement and Morality being fixed ab initio are the same thing.

>n.b. OP's question..
'Gnosticism' is therefore a misnomer, cannot itself escape the clutches of its own faith-base, or highly wrought negative (obviously reactionary) 'view' in principle (as of course there were more than a few Gnosticisms). Which is precisely why it (((they))) proved so vulnerable.

>In stark contrast to Faith, which asks for absolute suspension of Morality
That's an interesting way to view ideological morality. I've felt for a long time that religion and all ideological authorities which claim moral supremacy are in fact merely substituting authoritarian ethic sets while, through circular logic, claiming those authoritarian ethics to be ontologically capital-M Moral, superceding the wider notion of morality as subjective.
Maybe I need to read more about the Gnostics.

>The popular view point is bad
>The view point that died out over 1000 years ago is correct.
I can't help but feel neognostics are a little bit contrarian

youtube.com/watch?v=XbvodmP0DI4

David Tibet explains it pretty well.

>sticks a black dildo up his butthole
>God is le dead and I am le free
what did he mean by this???

Newsflash faggot "sexuality repression" is how civilisation works. You have to work out compromises between your wants and needs and the tribes. If you want to live in a "fully liberated" free for all society someone like you is gonna find yourself even further down the pecking order

You would get better answers on /x/.

The central perception of Gnosticism is that we don't belong here.

>Newsflash faggot "sexuality repression" is how civilisation works
Oh, its retarded
Newsflash faggot, sex is not the core scarce element that must be rationed to secure a society, nor is it the source of authority that maintains that society. Stop being a nigger.

Maybe address the argument instead of attaching labels with little real value to it? Almost everything is 'contrarian'

Can you guys please carry out this discussion without all the name-calling and pent-up frustration?
It's embarrassing.

It's what you get when you try and shoe horn Zoroastrianism into Christianity.

Yikes.

the difference between gnosticism and faith is time preference. faith is immediate gratification, gnosticism is delayed

Sorry sweetie :) Can you post pictures of mammaries too by the way?

Christianity is Zoroarstrianism

>Newsflash faggot, sex is not the core scarce element that must be rationed to secure a society, nor is it the source of authority that maintains that society. Stop being a nigger.

You think cause we invented stuff more high tech than a hand axe that we're not monkeys? Literally everything that isn't beating a rival to death and rape is a social construct. Power is the source of authority and power is sexy = more potential mates. Men working out, getting better jobs etc etc whatever spin they put on it its always about sexual competitiveness. If you're not conscious of that in yourself its cause you're a stupid monkey. Again thats what you are.

if the dawkins brand of nu-atheism is the head gnosticism is the tail

>Enneads by Plotinus
Dude, Plotinus literally wrote a tract called "Against the Gnostics".

If you can get your hands on a copy, check out Rethinking Gnosticism by Williams. He argues that most of the definitions you'll read above are bogus.

press.princeton.edu/titles/5956.html

well, the "founders" of Christianity and Nietzscheanism certainly grappled with suffering with authenticity and gravity

His and Plato's only contention was that the Phenomenal world is good. It was not so much "Against the Gnostics" but "In Defense of the Warden".

>Dude, Plotinus literally wrote a tract called "Against the Gnostics".
Gnostics read the shit out of him and didn't give a fuck.