• Military Menu                       

• Introduction
• Systems
• Facilities
• Agencies
• Industry
• Operations
• Countries
• Hot Documents
• News
• Reports
• Policy
• Budget
• Congress
• Links

• WMD
• Intelligence
• Homeland Security
• Space

70 - Gnostics

The germs of Gnosticism existed, doubtless, in the apostolic times. Paul speaks of knowledge as "puffing up," of "oppositions of knowledge falsely so called," etc. In the writings of John there is clearer evidences of Gnostic opposition to Christianity. In Revelation the Nicolaitans are spoken of as holding the doctrine of Baal, and eating things sacrificed to idols. These were probably Gnostics. Irenaeus testifies that the Gospel of John was written to oppose Gnosticism as represented by Cerinthus, an Ebionitic Gnostic. So, in the First Epistle of John, Gnostic tendencies are combated in the two-fold aspect of denial of the Divinity and denial of the humanity of Christ (Docetism). Simon Magus, who, according to the narrative in Acts, gave himself out as "the great power of God,"' became an arch-heretic (unless all of the accounts of him are legendary, like that of the Clementines), and the precursor, if not the founder, of Gnosticism. He is related to have gained many followers, and to have called himself the "Word," "Paraclete," "Omnipotent," etc.

The philosophical basis of gnosticism was the question as to the origin of evil. The answer was influenced by an idealized conception (Platonic and Pythagorean - seen also in the writings of Philo of Alexandria, etc.) of Absolute Being. The world was seen to be full of imperfection ; the Supreme Being could not, therefore, be its author. The Old Testament represents Jehovah (or Elohim) as the creator of the world. Hence Jehovah is an imperfect being, and the religion of the Jews antagonistic to true religion. The chief aim of Gnosticism was to account for the existence of the present order of things without compromising the character of the Supreme Being.

The most direct and most important source of Gnosticism was the Jewish-Alexandrian philosophy as represented by Philo. One can account for most of the phenomena of Gnosticism by the supposition of attempts to combine this mode of thought with Christian doctrines, especially with the prologue of John's Gospel. Many points of resemblance can be traced between the Gnostic systems and the Jewish Cabbala, the germs of which probably existed in the second century ; but it is impossible to tell whether Gnosticism borrowed from the Cabbala, or vice versa. Both were certainly dependent on Jewish-Alexandrian theosophy.

In addition to this chief element, the Gnostic systems (some to a greater, some to a less extent) were influenced by Buddhism and Zoroastrianism, which systems had long been well known in Alexandria. The esoteric theosophy of the old Egyptian religion must have contributed a not unimportant factor to Egyptian types of Gnosticism. The intensely dualistic systems are doubtless connected with the Zoroastrian and old Babylonian dualism. So also its emanation theories. With Buddhism may have been connected the Gnostic teachings respecting the antagonism of spirit and matter, the unreality of derived existence, and, to some extent, the origin of the world from successive emanations from the Absolute Being.

Yet it is not necessary to suppose a direct and conscious employment of all these sources. These had more or less influence on the Jewish-Alexandrian philosophy current at the time. Such ideas had become common property, and the special combinations in the hands of men of speculative minds who had cut loose from the historical, and sought only to devise plausible systems, is easily accounted for.

Philo, under the influence of Neo-Platonism, Neo-Pythagoreanism, and old Egyptian theosophy, had exalted the Supreme Being above contact with the visible world, and had explained all passages of the Old Testament that seemed inconsistent with such exaltation, as referring not to the Absolute Being, but to a derived being, the Logos. He had adopted an allegorical method of interpretation, according to which the literal meaning of the Old Testament was of no account, and a given passage could be made to mean anything whatsoever, according to the fancy of the interpreter.

1. Dualism, in some systems absolute, in others not. Matter being regarded as evil could not have been created by the Supreme Being,
2. Docetism, according to which the Messiah's body was only an appearance ; or, according to others, a mere human body temporarily made use of by the Messiah. This docetism was the result of a theory of the inherent evil of matter,
3. Emanations. Most of the Gnostic systems are characterized by a series of aeons or emanations from the Supreme Being; the more remote, in general, the more degraded. One of the most degraded of the emanations figures as the Demiurge or world-framer.
4. Hostility to Judaism, with some, absolute, Jehovah being regarded as positively malignant and actively hostile to the true God, and hence the Jewish religion, as entirely diabolical; with others, more moder*ate, Jehovah being regarded as an ignorant and imperfect being, and Judaism being regarded as a preparation for the revelation of the Supreme being in Christ,
5. As the Ebionites rejected the writings of Paul and regarded Paul as an impostor, so the Gnostics rejected not only the Jewish religion and Scriptures, but all of the New Testament except the Pauline Epistles and parts of the Gospels, Peter and James being regarded as servants of the Demiurge, who tried to keep tlu people whom Christ had come to free in the slavery of the Demiurge.
6. Gnosticism was essentially a striving after system. Unsatisfied with detached truths, men felt impelled to bring all truth into absolute harmony. It was speculative and not practical, conduct being regarded as entirely subordinate to comprehension of the mysteries of the universe.
7. Gnosticism was an aristocratic system. A man was regarded as exalted in the scale of being in proportion to his knowledge, not of facts, however, but of supposed mysteries. The great mass of mankind were sarkical (fleshly, animal); a part psychical (capable of reasoning about earthly matters) ; the Gnostics themselves were spiritual (capable of apprehending the divine mysteries).
8. The Gnostic systems were all fatalistic: Man is in his present condition, not from his own choosing, but from the method of his creation; from this state he can do nothing toward freeing himself; he is absolutely dependent upon the aid that comes from without.
9. As matter was regarded as evil, the Gnostics had great contempt for the flesh. Some of them practised the most rigid asceticism, in order to overcome the flesh; others held that everything depended upon the spirit and that the indulgence of the flesh was a matter of indifference, and gave the utmost license to their fleshly inclinations; while others held that the flesh ought to be destroyed by vice.
10. Some of the Gnostics, regarding all the characters that are reprobated in the Old Testament (as Cain, the inhabitants of Sodom, etc.) as really servants of the true God, thought that the vices of these ought to be imitated.
11. Gnosticism is distinguished from other theosophical systems - and hence demands consideration in the study of church history - from the fact that it embraces the idea of redemption through Christ, a Divine interposition in the world, in connection with the origin of Christianity, to deliver the world from the dominion of evil.

The opposition of the two principles, with the Dualism resting thereon, and the Gnostic repugnance toward anything material. the succession of sons, through which the relation of God with the world is sought to be mediated, but in the place of the Jewish-Christian idea of a free creation of the world the doctrine of the emanation of the world from God is posited; the separation of the Creator of the world from the one Supreme God; the putting of Christ in the same category with other divine beings whose sameness of nature can only be looked upon as an infringement upon the absolute dignity of Christ; the whole process of cosmic development in which Christianity is so completely entangled that the facts of redemption achieved through Christ must lose not only their ethical-religious meaning, but even their historical character-all this formed a very decided opposition to the fundamental intuition of the Christian consciousness.

Gnosticism had so much that was related to Christianity and in agreement with it, and as soon as Christianity had once come to be more widely disseminated among the higher classes, every educated man initiated in the dominant ideas of his time felt so keenly the need of himself answering the same questions with whose solution the Gnostics were occupied, that the relation of Christianity to Gnosticism could be, by no means, a merely hostile and repellent one.

Gnosticism was so speculative in its nature, that each important leader, even when adopting with little or no change the conceptions of his predecessors, was likely to invent a new terminology. This fact resulted in the almost endless multiplication of Gnostic parties, each of which is known by the name of its founder or by some peculiarity of the terminology or the imagery employed to set forth its ontological and cosmological scheme. Egypt and Syria were the great seminaries of Gnosticism, but Rome, Asia Minor, Mesopotamia, Armenia, and Eastern Persia furnished fruitful soil for its propagation.

During most of the second century and part of the third Gnosticism was highly aggressive and became widely diffused throughout the Christian churches. In some cases Gnostic teachers carried forward their propaganda as members of regular Christian churches, and were able to win many of the most intelligent members before their withdrawal became necessary. Few churches, it may be supposed, were wholly free from the presence and personal influence of parties imbued with Gnostic teaching.