The Gnostic Stance

You may also like...

5 Responses

  1. Bradley Bell says:

    Trust not that man who’s words fall down to die…

  2. Rafi Simonton says:

    As usual, Dr. Price challenges us to do our best work. The type of professor who would not let us left-wingers get away with an appeal to personal opinion as grounds for an argument. There is a big difference between opinion based on actual information and one based on personal preferences and how one feels. Experience should be tested by reflection and research.

    I did not know about the connection between Jonas and Bultmann, which gives the process of “demythologizing” a very different sensibility. So this isn’t to strip away the mystery beyond words, the realm respected by Carl Jung. Rather it is to refuse to accept a set of images as fully definitive givens and to recognize their roots in culture, whether ancient or post-modern. Which would do a lot to ameliorate the tendency among neo-Gnostics to reject the mainstream as the worship of inadequate myths while insisting on the Gnostic ones as alt. gospel Truth. Though the sheer perverse complexity and absurdity of the Sethian mythos, for example, should be a pretty good indication that literal does not quite apply.

    Nor do we have to resurrect the ancient polemics, asserting that the catholic Church or Judaism did not have revelations, only delusions. We can’t say we know exactly with whom God speaks, only that certain interpretations seem to serve social structures. But past as demiurge sure is a powerful image. Perhaps related to Jesus of Mt 23:9 “…call no one father on earth…” which breaks the conventions of clan and patriarchal legacy. Even in ancient times set aside, and then ignored by the emergent Roman Catholic and Eastern Orthodox churches.

    The next part raised my hackles. Defining Gnostics as superior is way too close to the smug self-assuredness of contemporary economic and intellectual elites, who seldom see their own dependence on their lessers nor recognize that some of us among the working classes can actually read, write, and think. The Manichaean system, where the best the psychics could hope for is to provide for the pneumatics, is just another unjust social stratification. In contrast, the Valentinian, where the pneumatics served the psychics. It is possible that someone not formally educated or socially connected or cleverly articulate may be spiritually gifted, the same way that someone with little scientific knowledge can be a great artist. I deeply appreciate the last paragraph of this article, where Dr. Price’s advice is to be patient and to apply the Socratic method. To act like a bit of leaven, a simile that recalls the one in Mt. 13:33.

  3. Robert Wahler says:

    But Bob, you need a mystic (gnostic) Master! The gnostic texts are replete with the dynamic of master/disciple. The entire OT is a metaphor for it. The NT, on the contrary, is a disinformation attempt at hiding mastership succession. Gospel of Judas, with Judas as successor sacrificing self –NOT MASTER– is a succession story, inverted in the NT “Betrayal. ” Dr. Robert Eisenman put his finger on it and showed James was the Righteous Teacher. Judas was James from comparing First and Second Apocalypses of James and Peter from Nag Hammadi to the canonical betrayal story, it’s inverse.

  4. Dizzy says:

    Miguel has to stop giving this hack space to plug his books and confused ideas…..

  5. Alex Rivera says:

    Price really knows how to tickle my Gnostic fancy.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Social media & sharing icons powered by UltimatelySocial

Enjoy this blog? Please spread the word :)