Understanding The Heresy Called Gnosticism

3-Sources

1. Understanding Gnosticism

The circumstance which prompted the writing of Colossians seemed to be the special heresy that arose there. This false teaching seemed to be the beginning of what later (in the second century) developed into Gnosticism. It contained several characteristics. 

(1) It was Jewish, stressing the need for observing Old Testament laws and ceremonies. 

(2) It was philosophical, laying emphasis on some special or deeper knowledge (gnōsis). 

(3) It involved the worship of angels as mediators to God (2:18). 

(4) It was exclusivistic, stressing the special privilege and “perfection” of those select few who belonged to this philosophical elite. 

(5) It was also Christological. But this seminal Gnosticism denied the deity of Christ, thus calling forth one of the greatest declarations of Christ’s deity found anywhere in Scripture (Col. 1:15–16; 2:9).

Norman L. Geisler, The Bible Knowledge Commentary: An Exposition of the Scriptures, 1985, 2, 668.

2. Gnosticism

Religious thought distinguished by claims to obscure and mystical knowledge, and emphasizing knowledge rather than faith. Until the mid-20th century Gnosticism was regarded as a Christian heresy which developed through the interweaving of Christian experience and thought with Greek philosophy. More recently, many scholars define the Gnostics more broadly as devotees of a religious view which borrowed ideas from many religious traditions. The meanings of these borrowed terms and practices were shaped into mythological expressions of experiential salvation.

Gnosticism as a Heresy

Prior to the 20th century most of the information available concerning the Gnostics came from early Christian writers (heresiologs) who penned treatises against heretics, and in the process described some of their beliefs and practices. These heresiologs, such as Irenaeus, Tertullian, and Hippolytus, viewed the Gnostics as distorters of Christianity. The Gnostics developed many misinterpretations of the Bible, especially of the creation account and the Gospel of John, Indeed, the Gnostic writers Heracleon and Ptolemaeus are the first known commentators on the fourth Gospel. The anger of the Christian apologists is well summarized by Irenaeus when he likens the Gnostic interpreter to one who tears apart a beautiful picture of a king and then restructures it into a picture of a fox.

Apparently a number of Gnostics continued as members of local churches and some served in high offices. Indeed, there is speculation that Valentinus may have been considered as a possible candidate for bishop at Rome. Moreover, Marcion, the fabled Christian heretic, reinterpreted Paul in such a way that the OT God became the god of evil and Christ became the messenger of the good god of grace. Many Gnostic heretical tendencies have been associated with Marcion, who developed his own censored canon of the NT and thereby forced the Christians to counter by clarifying their own canon. The early Christian historian, Eusebius (d. AD 339), who excerpted some of the early lost works of heresiologs like Hegesippus, also provides insight into the hostility of Christians against various Gnostics like Marcion, Basilides, Tatian, Satornil, Dositheus, and the so-called father of all heresy, Simon the sorcerer.

The wide variety of sects mentioned by heresiologs like the Samaritans, Essenes, and perhaps the Encratities, Nazarenes, Ebionites, and Osseans may suggest the question, Who are the Gnostics? Nevertheless, the view of the heresiologs was so well accepted up to the close of the 19th century that, despite some broadening and generalizing by scholars of the meaning, Adolph von Harnack could still define Gnosticism as the “acute secularizing or hellenizing of Christianity.”

During the first third of the 20th century, however, scholars began the task of translating Mandean materials which appeared to be related to Gnosticism. Even though these documents are late—some as late as the 19th century—a number of speculations were made at that time concerning the pre-Christian nature of Mandean literature, primarily by scholars associated with Bultmann.

From this turmoil of “Mandean fever,” Hans Jonas, a student of Bultmann, arose to challenge the heresiolog’s view of Gnosticism. For Jonas, Gnosticism had emerged because of the mixing of Oriental religions (not merely Christianity) with Greek culture. While Greek culture was superior to the cultures of the Orient, the Hellenistic world experienced a failure of nerve. Because of the religious and philosophic upheaval in the Greek culture, at least three religious traditions made an impact on the Hellenistic world: (1) Jewish monotheism, (2) Babylonian astrology with its view of fate, and (3) Iranian dualism with its basis for understanding evil. The ability of the Greek mind to fuse these ideas into mythological expressions which sought to answer the deep problems of mankind provided for Jonas the context of Gnosticism. While this broader understanding is still debated, Jonas has provided a foundation for distinguishing the two basic types of Gnostic systems as well as for categorizing the library of documents recently discovered in Nag Hammadi, Egypt.

Gerald L. Borchert, Baker encyclopedia of the Bible, 1988, 1, 873–874.

3. GNOSTICISM 

A variety of second-century ad religions whose participants believed that people could only be saved through revealed knowledge, or γνῶσις (gnōsis). Gnostics also held a negative view of the physical or material world. Early church fathers, such as Irenaeus, deemed Gnosticism heretical.

Introduction

Gnosticism shared some characteristics with Judaism and Christianity, but remained markedly distinct from either. Traditionally, Gnosticism was thought to have emerged from within Christianity (Smith, No Longer Jews, 18–25). Recent scholarship, however, has acknowledged that Gnosticism may have been an existing belief that only later came into contact with Christianity (Pearson, Ancient Gnosticism, 11; Smalley, 1, 2, 3 John, 44).

Origins of the Term

The earliest example of a group being described as “gnostic” comes from the work of Irenaeus, a second-century Greek church father (Pearson, Ancient Gnosticism, 9), who described certain groups of heretics as the gnostic heresy. Henry More coined the modern term “Gnosticism” in the 17th century to describe the heresy of the church in Thyatira (Rev 2:18–29; Pearson, Ancient Gnosticism, 9).

Definition of the Term

The term “Gnosticism” may be an inadequate description of “the great variety of phenomena attributed to it” (Logan, The Gnostics, 1) because it elicits “misleading generalizations and unwarranted stereotypes” (Smith, No Longer Jews, 8). Williams has argued that the term reflects a “dubious category” which should be dismantled and abandoned (Williams, Rethinking “Gnosticism”). Pearson has likewise acknowledged that there is a “bewildering degree of variety” in the historical expressions of Gnosticism (Pearson, “Gnosticism as a Religion,” 89).

Pearson argues that Gnosticism is purely a historical term used to classify religious features that are “clearly distinguishable from anything that is found in Christianity, Judaism, or other religions of antiquity” (Pearson, “Gnosticism as a Religion,” 95–96). Therefore, Gnosticism should be defined as a descriptive category arising from historical observations rather than a prescriptive system of unilateral belief.

Zachary G. Smith, The Lexham Bible Dictionary, 2016.