-
Daniel posted an update 6 years, 7 months ago
In listening to Dr. Farrell I hear him use the term “Gnostic” in what appears to be a negative or critical term. I am not sure what Dr. Farrell means when he uses the word “Gnostic” in this fashion. So I would like to know what is Dr. Farrell’s definition of “Gnostic” as he uses that word in his commentaries.
The Giza Forum (Legacy)
Closed Archive of The Old Forum
Generally, the tongue lashing that the ole Gnostics receive is usually due to the gnostic manipulation of language. Also, Gnostics are heavily steeped in dualism, which never goes over well here at Giza. Just my observation over the past few years.
I agree with you that some or maybe most Gnostics were heavily steeped in dualism. How did the Gnostics manipulate language? That seems to me like an accusation you could make of most systems of belief.
“How did the Gnostics manipulate language?” In short, the Gnostics (generally) came out of Hellenistic Judaism and early Christianity, their manipulation of interpretation was just that, a manipulation of language. Their interpretation of Scripture did in fact manipulate centuries of oral and written tradition. This, generally, is what cemented them as Heretics. Whenever I hear Dr. Farrell refer to the Gnostic in the negative sense, I tend to receive it as an Archetypical description of the very movement that attempts to change the definitions of established words to manipulate Mankind.
One may argue that the harmonic resonance of the Sublime, or the Word, or better yet, the very Idea, is the foundation that the Cosmos itself is laid upon. If you manipulate the Word, or the language, you manipulate not only the Cosmos, but the very fulcrum of the Cosmos: Man. With that, and honestly speaking, I may still have yet to grasp the fullness of Dr. Farrell’s terminology thus, this is just my two cents on the matter. Good question though, VIDCHAT worthy, for sure.
…”I tend to receive it as an Archetypical description of the very movement that attempts to change the definitions of established words to manipulate Mankind”…
I’ll add a little extra to this statement. Not only does this movement work to change the definitions of established words, but works to destroy the deeper meaning that exists throughout the nuances of (spiritual) language.
Now, it must be fairly stated, not all Gnostics are working to subvert language intentionally, or even knowingly. Though, one may say that such is guilty of the same sort of offense as the End Times Evangelical, or the politically driven Zionist, or those in the Lodge which has been infiltrated by the “illumined”. Having a different take on things is certainly no crime, but that’s not exactly what’s happening here in the broader context.
Thank you for your thoughtful responses ML Light.
Gnosticism is openly hostile to tradition and culture, as are all occult systems, although systems like Kabbalah, Masonry, etc. contain profound truths, their application, specifically in the fallen world has lead to nothing short of the demonic, human sacrifice, closed system usury, and all manner of inhumane practice.
Where do you get the idea that Gnosticism is openly hostile to tradition and culture. That is certainly not my understanding of Gnosticism. I don’t think of Gnosticism as an occult system, but I suppose Gnosticism can be looked at that way. How do you come to the conclusion that all occult systems through their application lead to nothing short of the demonic, human sacrifice, closed system usury and all manner of inhumane practice. It seems to me you are making jumps in logic that don’t necessarily exist in reality.
Why don’t you ask a vidchat question?
Gnosticism is a Nominalism. Nominalism allows us to make up reality as WE please. A dangerous doctrine when one is in pursuit of the truth
How do you come to the conclusion that Gnosticism is a Nominalism?
Gnosticism as a occulted “Will to Power” doctrine is metaphysics 101. Perhaps you simply need to read more deeply into the subject.