Gnosticism
    The message of Christianity is considered easy to hear & easy to understand by some (but of course that is not to mean completely comprehend) in its basic tenets & overall scheme.  That is for those who are willing to seek beyond themselves.  By this, I do not have in mind only a sense of salvation which is only for those who have been chosen, allowing all others to perish.  Rather I mean not only a volitional surrender but also an epistemological comprehension.  Christianity has often been considered too simplistic that it must really hold some profoundly deep messages behind the obvious words or to be too simple to be true.  The former 'knowledge' is only comprehendable to the elect.  Gnosticism arose out of the desire to understand  the mysteries of God.  Toward the latter 1st century, as the epistles of the NT were being penned, Gnosticism grew in popularity, in which it held that below the obvious lay a deeper meaning.  This thought was later to infect hermeneutics and homiletics, being known as the allegorical method.  It offered detailed answers to questions that were left silent by the Bible.  Gnosticism often presents a Christian front while embracing alien thought.  It divides humanity into classes- the spiritually elite who understood such deep 'truths,' from the 'mere' Christians who were saved 'only' by grace.  Gnosticism was highly appealing to those who found this epistemological elitism a justification for their present arrogance.  It also appealed to those who hoped such knowledge would 'rub' off on them, thus elevating them from the status that they previously belonged.
    
    
Gnosticism is generally dualistic. That is, it maintains that reality is found in the interplay of opposites, such as good & evil, spirit & matter, soul & body.  For this reason, it often denies the doctrine of creation as that event considers reality to have been created by a totally good God apart from Himself.  Gnosticism prefers a more Pantheistic explanation in which reality is the result (synthesis) of the interaction of good & evil. Though much of the Bible may sound dualistic, it is not necessarily so in order to speak of the relationship of spirit & flesh, good & evil.  A reaction against this dualism is monism. Monism holds that seeming distinctions are really different faces, perspectives, angles of the One.  Here a person sees the "distinctions" in life are really different perceptions of the Unity.  (This is a forerunner of Christian Science as symptoms, illness, evil, suffering are illusory & it is only the One of reality which truly exists). Monism is no more right than is gnosticism.  Monism, by its overreaction, denies the separateness of distinctions.  Evil is denied if God is affirmed.  By its denial of creation, thereby ruling out of existence a deistic God, monism thus declares reality illusory.  How can it rule out God if it rules out evil by affirming God?  Quite simple.  God is affirmed formally (subjectively) but not materially (objectively).  The being of God is exchanged for the idea of God.  The school of Process Theology can be understood in light of Hegel's dialectic here.  Man & God are only separated by degrees of realization

                  
  GOD  ------------------------------  HUMANITY

     As Joseph Smith, the founder of Mormonism once said, "God is what man may be, man is what God once was."  The Bible teaches that while God is the author of all reality, it differs significantly from monism in that it holds that this author is personal & has created reality separate from Himself, from nothing,  rather than an
emination.  It agrees with gnostic dualism when it sees the basic dualism within reality, however, it declares that such dualism is not an eternal one, but temporal one. 
    
     Gnosticism was one of the earliest heresies faced by the young church in the days that it faced relentless persecutions, before finally being recognized as a valid religion by
Constantine in A.D. 313 (that is, in the Western empire, A. D. 329; The Eastern empire wouldn't enjoy that freedom until after the death of the traitorous co-emperor, Licinius in A.D. 323).  Gnosticism was preceded by Ebionism which had in turn decended from the Judaizers.  The epistles to the Galatians was written to counter such groups.  It is often held that the first theologian was Irenaeus (125-202) who penned the 5-volume work, Against Heresies (180-89)  or more properly, The Unmasking & Refutation of Falsly So-called Gnosis.  Another often considered the 1st theologian was the philosopher turned Christian, Justin Martyr (100-165) whose First Apology dealt with pagan arguments regarding Christianity, as wellas his Dialogue with Trypho the Jew with deals with Jewish ones.  However, though Martyr's works were more apologetic in tone, the title of the 1st theologian often falls to Irenaeus.  This designation, in no way, infers that his spiritual predecessors were any less instrumental in the journey toward orthodoxy.  It will become evident.  Just as various pagan theologies threatened to kill the church from without, many heresies threatening to undermine orthodox biblical teachings from within.   Thus, just as Solomon declared in Pr. 27:17 "As iron sharpens iron, so one man sharpens another,"  the early church formed its understanding of orthodox Christian theology by interacting with contemporary heresies,only accepting that which stands up to the scrutiny of scripture (1 Jn. 4:1) since "all scripture is God-breathed & is useful for teaching, rebuking, correcting & training in righteousness." (2 Tim.3:16)

     Though many of the
se Heresies of the Month are contemporaries of the early church, let us not think that they are dead.  Certain heresies were condemned only to come before another synod 200 years later to be re-condemned in another form.  These heresies can and do re-surface today.  The package maybe different but as Solomon wrote in Ecclesiastes "There is nothing new under the sun."      
   
               
Hosted by www.Geocities.ws

1