Tuesday, August 14, 2012

Three Basics of Gnosticism


Gnosticism gets its name from the Greek word gnosis (γνωσις), which means knowledge. Knowledge in this context refers not to the idea of propositional knowledge but something more akin to the Eastern concept of enlightenment. There are three basic premises of Gnosticism:

1. Dualism of Matter and Soul


Like Christianity, Gnosticism teaches that reality is both material and spiritual. Unlike Christianity, it teaches that spiritual reality is inherently good, while material things are inherently evil. Human souls are holy, but they are trapped inside a corrupt body. Through accessing secret knowledge, one can free oneself from the limitations of matter and bring out one’s own capacity for divinity.

2. A Transcendent God vs. an Ignorant Creator


The Gnostics believed in an unknowable, transcendent God who is the Father of Jesus, but they did not equate Him with the Old Testament Creator. They saw the creator-god of the Old Testament as inept and hateful, and they blamed him for creating a flawed physical universe. The Gospel of Phillip goes so far as to say, "the world came about through a mistake. For he who created it wanted to create it imperishable and immortal. He fell short of attaining his desire.” Certainly, this view of God is not just unorthodox, but blasphemous.

3. Christ as Immaterial Teacher


Since the Gnostics rejected the idea that God was knowable and that God could take physical form, their idea of who Jesus was and why He came was very different than that of the first Christians. Rather than being the incarnation of God who came to redeem mankind from sin and make the Father known, they believed He was an apparition who taught mystical secret knowledge to His followers to help them free themselves from ignorance. He did not actually suffer and die, but only appeared to do so. The Gospel of Thomas removes 114 sayings attributed to Jesus from any narrative or space-time context and includes vague, metaphysical statements not recorded in the canonical gospels.

Clearly, the fundamentals of Gnosticism are at odds with the basics of historical Christianity. The Gnostic gospels do not paint an accurate picture of God, Jesus’s nature and purpose, and the meaning of redemption. Next week, we’ll examine the Gnostic gospels themselves: are they gospels at all?

Works consulted/ For more information
Introduction to the History of Christianity, ed. Tim Dowley

Friday, August 3, 2012

Giving an Answer for Hope


When you first heard someone explain apologetics, you probably heard 1 Peter 3:15. It’s something of a theme verse for apologists:
“But in your hearts set apart Christ as Lord. Always be prepared to give an answer to everyone who asks you to give the reason for the hope that you have. But do this with gentleness and respect”. 
Giving an answer includes dozens of topics, from the historical accuracy of the Bible, to science manifesting design, to the nature of Christ. And not only are these many topics worth understanding and communicating, they all are part of giving an answer—not for why someone else is wrong or even just why faith in Jesus is logical, but why we have hope.

You see, the world outside the Way desperately wants hope. People search for it, and many even claim to have found it. Science will unlock the future. A political movement will finally bring prosperity and justice. An educated and enlightened human nature will overcome our baser instincts. Messiah will restore Israel. The Twelfth Imam will rule a peaceful Muslim empire. We will escape the painful cycle of birth, life, and death. The Overman will lead humanity to transcend itself.

Every worldview I’ve ever come into contact with believes that something is wrong, that things are not as they should be. And almost every worldview believes that there is a way for things to get better and wrongs to be rectified.

So why is the Christian explanation of the worlds’ problems and solution more worth buying into than the explanation anyone else offers? This is one of the best questions we can ask ourselves before sharing our faith.

Now, I could just offer an answer, but we’re all critical thinkers here, and every Christian should have the privilege of taking ownership of their belief system. I will tell you that I’ve found 1 Corinthians 15 an excellent place to start. It explains the gospel and its reality in space-time history, explains what exactly we’re hoping for, points out what life would be like if we didn’t have hope, and directs us in what to do when we know we have hope. 

Here are more questions to consider:

  • How is the Biblical explanation of the fall and sin a more reasonable explanation of reality than that of other world religions?
  • Some people believe that humans are basically good and that society will improve as we progress as a species. What evidence might they use as support? What evidence does not support this claim?
  • How would your life be different if tomorrow archaeologists discovered what they confirmed to be the body of Jesus? Would you try to find or create the meaning of your life?
  • What sins and grey-area activities would you indulge in if you knew there was no God? Do you think that lifestyle would make you happy, if you knew all guilt was fake?
  • Does having hope mean that you will always be optimistic about the future?  Is it sinful to feel hopeless, or is it an understandable human emotion even for a believer?
  • How do most people in your community regard death? Is this a reasonable attitude based upon the prevalent ideas?
  • What great things would you attempt for God if you knew you would succeed? Is this the same as “knowing in the Lord your labor is not in vain”?