Talk:Paul and Gnosticism

Clementine homilies

I deleted the following two paragraphs from near the end of the article because they are factually in error.

Clement of Rome, who lived at the end of the first century, and is considered by the early Christian church a saint, vigourously attacked Paul's teachings, going so far as to state that the vision Paul is alleged to have had, on the way to Damascus, originated from a demon. Clement was the 3rd/4th pope, and was strongly anti-gnostic, in his homilies even asserting his opinion that Paul is a dangerous heretic who should be expelled from the church. Other early christians, such as Justin Martyr, chose not to mention Paul at all.

Some scholars, such as Elaine Pagels, take this as evidence that Paul, and consequently early Christianity, was originally gnostic, rather than literalist. Clement himself demonstrates such a view of Paul, corroborating the claim by Valentinus, a gnostic, that Paul had initiated his teacher, Theudas into the Deeper Mysteries of Christianity, which revealed a secret gnostic doctrine of God.

These homilies are generally thought to have been written in the early third century, possibly based on earlier material that may have been written in the late second century. Second, they discuss Simon Magus by name, not Paul, although some scholars speculate that Simon was an encoded reference to Paul. Based on the dating alone, they could not have been written by Clement of Rome. Wesley 17:22, 22 Dec 2004 (UTC)

"Through a glass, darkly"

I find it ironic that this is in here. In it's full context, this verse is actually having a go at Gnosticism! Read verse 1 Corinthians 8-10 in its entirity: "Love never fails. But where there are prophecies, they will cease; where there are tongues, they will be stilled; where there is knowledge, it will pass away. For we know in part and we prophesy in part, 10but when perfection comes, the imperfect disappears." That seems to be refuting Gnosticism! the clue here is that he is saying that where there is knowledge, it will pass away. Considering that Gnosticism was based on "knowledge" I think it would be strange for a Gnostic Paul to say that knowledge would pass away, don't you think?

Another thing is, Plato didn't necessarily hold the view that he knew nothing. Socrates did, and Plato wrote about it. To say that about Plato shows a deep misunderstanding of the man and his writing. - Ta bu shi da yu 10:59, 2 Feb 2005 (UTC)

You really should use an accurate translation, TBSDY. The phrase concerning "gnosis" i.e. "knowledge" is more accurately translated "knowledge puffeth up" (which modern evangelical translators have ASSUMED is an attack, but the gnostics said it meant that it improved oneself, and lead to a fealing of fulfillment).

Which translation are you using? You never say. I use the NIV, a well respected translation. And also, if this is CheeseDreams, you're blocked from editing, . - Ta bu shi da yu 02:13, 3 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Incidently, you might like to note that if Evangelicals dispute this (which you know about, clearly) then it is highly POV of you not have noted this in your text! Oh, and incidently, see Special:Contributions/81.156.182.159. I notice that you have attempted to say that I am POV pushing. How exactly? I have just removed unsourced material. Maybe when you get back from your one week block (about to be extended, incidently) you can add this material back, but this time say what your sources are in the text either as an inline reference or as a footnote? It's not much to ask, surely? - Ta bu shi da yu 02:32, 3 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Disputed

In not translating words which have meaning as concepts, it appears that Paul states to Christians (in Romans) I long to see you, so that I may share with you a certain pneumatic charisma (Romans 1:11-12). Charisma is derived (etymologically) from makarismos, which means the manner in which those who had witnessed the mysteries of mystery religions were considered blessed, and pneumatic is the gnostic term for the class of people who were governed by their spiritual side and thus saved.

I looked this up and asked some people who speak Greek, the work pneumatikon, which is an adjective. Pneuma is a generic Greek word for spirit, not exclusively Gnostic. The other word is Charisma, which is a general Greek word for "gift". So basically that's dubious. - Ta bu shi da yu 05:30, 4 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Oh, I also suggest that we check out the Charisma bit from Strong's encyclopedia! See [1]. Till then, I'm removing this. If CheeseDreams wants to put it back, she's going to have to source her claims and prove that this is not just her own conclusions (original research)! - Ta bu shi da yu 05:43, 4 Feb 2005 (UTC)

It is absolutely, definitely, incorrect to say that pneumatikos (anglicized above as "pneumatic") is "a Gnostic term". It's an adjective meaning (basically) spiritual. The Gnostics certainly used it with this specialized meaning, but that doesn't mean that they were the only ones who used it or that it always had the meaning they assigned to it. Charisma, in the New Testament, generally refers to a gift of God. -Aranel ("Sarah") 17:07, 4 Feb 2005 (UTC)

This means that the next stuff needs to be removed (not least because this is unsourced and thus is original research!):

The fact that, although Paul does long to share the knowledge with those he writes to in Romans he does not write the knowledge into the letter, was explained by gnostics as Paul's respecting the principle common to mystery religions of having secret teachings, which must not be shared openly (for example, if the letter was intercepted). However, Paul also indicated that he expected his letters to be read in public, not only in the church to which they were addressed but in other churches as well. Elsewhere, Paul makes use of a phrase which is also the vow of secrecy common to many gnostic groups, such use by gnostics being attested by Hippolytus in his criticism of the gnostic Justinus, as well as in the gnostic Gospel of Thomas, and by Clement of Rome, for example, in 1 Corinthians Paul states

Eye hath not seen, nor ear heard, neither have entered into the heart of man, the things which God hath prepared for them that love him

Unless CheeseDreams can source it, I'm disputing this and taking it out. - Ta bu shi da yu 05:50, 4 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Mystery religion initiation

Paul also can be construed as referring to the initiation system of the mystery religions. In 2 Corinthians, Paul refers to those who are novices in the religion as having veils over their face as their mind was blinded, a principle that mystery religions considered true and as such some made their novices wear veils and referred to them as mystae (i.e. having closed eyes).

What?! Clearly, CheeseDreams is talking about 2 Corinthians 3:7-18. Here's the translation of the NIV:

But if the ministry of death, written and engraved on stones, was glorious, so that the children of Israel could not look steadily at the face of Moses because of the glory of his countenance, which glory was passing away, 8how will the ministry of the Spirit not be more glorious? For if the ministry of condemnation had glory, the ministry of righteousness exceeds much more in glory. For even what was made glorious had no glory in this respect, because of the glory that excels. For if what is passing away was glorious, what remains is much more glorious.

Therefore, since we have such hope, we use great boldness of speech-- unlike Moses, who put a veil over his face so that the children of Israel could not look steadily at the end of what was passing away. But their minds were blinded. For until this day the same veil remains unlifted in the reading of the Old Testament, because the veil is taken away in Christ. But even to this day, when Moses is read, a veil lies on their heart. Nevertheless when one turns to the Lord, the veil is taken away. Now the Lord is the Spirit; and where the Spirit of the Lord is, there is liberty. But we all, with unveiled face, beholding as in a mirror the glory of the Lord, are being transformed into the same image from glory to glory, just as by the Spirit of the Lord.

Sorry, but that is not in any way, shape, or form referring to novices! Paul is saying that the "children of Israel could not look steadily at the end of what was passing away. But their minds were blinded. For until this day the same veil remains unlifted in the reading of the Old Testament because the veil is taken away in Christ." What was written here is highly dubious, so I'm taking it out until we can get a source for this opinion. - Ta bu shi da yu 06:00, 4 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Jewish practices

The article states: "Paul cut his hair at Cenchreae, waiting for a ship to Ephesus, despite the Jewish prohibition on doing so outside of Jerusalem." That's the first I've heard of this. What source states this? Would someone be able to clarify it? If not, I'm going to take it out. - Ta bu shi da yu 05:52, 7 Feb 2005 (UTC)

I think the haircut is mentioned in the NT, but I've never heard of that prohibition, and it seems unlikely. I'll remove them both, as the haircut by itself isn't worth mentioning. Wesley 05:50, 16 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Overarching problem

Coming back to look at this article again, the whole thing reads like an essay arguing for a point, rather than an encyclopedia article. It cites almost no sources, but rather puts forth arguments for a POV. With this in mind, I think it should be majorly overhauled, or possibly even considered for deletion. Wesley 17:18, 4 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Don't agree with deleting it. I do agree with a major overhaul! - Ta bu shi da yu 23:51, 4 Feb 2005 (UTC)

From the reference desk: Romans question

I would like to confirm something. According to Paul and Gnosticism

In not translating words which have meaning as concepts, it appears that Paul states to Christians (in Romans) I long to see you, so that I may share with you a certain pneumatic charisma (Romans 1:11-12). Charisma is derived (etymologically) from makarismos, which means the manner in which those who had witnessed the mysteries of mystery religions were considered blessed, and pneumatic is the gnostic term for the class of people who were governed by their spiritual side and thus saved.

However, I talked to a friend who studied Greek and he tells me that the word is actually pneumatikon, which is an adjective. Pneuma is a generic Greek word for spirit, not exclusively Gnostic. The other word is Charisma, which is a general Greek word for "gift". Thus it does not make it a confirmation of Gnosticism.

Can some clarify this for me? - Ta bu shi da yu 05:37, 4 Feb 2005 (UTC)

The NIV says: "¹¹I long to see you so that I may impart to you some spiritual gift to make you strong". I think linking to Talk:Paul and Gnosticism may be useful at this point. Alphax (t) (c) (e) 13:15, Feb 4, 2005 (UTC)

The actual Greek expression is charisma pneumatikon, "a spiritual gift". (Personally, I think anyone who claims that Paul was a Gnostic is mistaken, but the Gnostics certainly loved some of his writigns.) Charisma in the New Testament generally refers to gifts given by God. (Paul also likes to use related charis, grace.) I think the Christians used this word more than it was used elsewhere. See [2].

Pneuma is definitely not an exclusively Gnostic word. (It appears frequently in the Septuagint.) Pneumatikos is the adjective you would use to refer to anything spiritual and is not exclusive to the Gnostics. (Anglicizing it as pneumatic is perfectly acceptable, but it does tend to call to mind the Gnostic "pneumatics", which is not what the word actually means.) Pneumatikos is absolutely not "a Gnostic term". (If I spoke of a charismatic leader, would you automatically assume that I was referring to a Charismatic Christian leader?) -Aranel ("Sarah") 17:03, 4 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Where to start the article?

Without addressing the issue whether or not Paul was a Gnostic (disclosure: I doubt that he was), shouldn't this article address the fact that the overwhelming majority of Biblical scholars hold that not only wasn't Paul a Gnostic, but far too often their arguments over who were Gnostic in their outlook or belief were defined by how they disagreed with Paul & his teachings? I remember one Christian historian assuming that the wayward Christians of Corinth Paul wrote to were embracing Gnostic ideals, although his 2 surviving letters to that congregation do not clearly substantiate whether the Corinthians were Gnostics.

Failing to state that Biblical scholars for centuries have assumed that Paul was not a Gnostic is tantamount to asking whether Ronald Reagan was a socialist & ignoring the fact that tens of millions of US citizens have assumed for decades that he was not. This failure to explain the historiography of the issue only allows certain miscontents to slip Gnosticism into the mainstream thru the backdoor -- instead of properly arguing for it. -- llywrch 01:53, 7 Feb 2005 (UTC)

And there you have the problem of this article. It's not a descriptive article. It's an article holding one particular (and dodgy) viewpoint is correct to the exclusion of all other (and more widely held) beliefs. Thus, to put it crudely but succinctly, it is a stinking pile of POV. - Ta bu shi da yu 05:49, 7 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Keep in mind that this is the first time I've read this article. If the thesis of this article is being developed in good faith -- that there is evidence suggesting Paul either was or influenced Gnosticism -- then it should acknowledge that this POV is at odds with the consensus viewpoint of Christian history. And it should offer a clear definition of Gnosticism beyond the broad label that it was a "mystery religion".

Beyond that, I don't know what to say about this contribution. Yes, the words of Paul can be twisted to support a Gnostic interpretation -- but was this done in Antiquity? Otherwise, this would be better considered as a freshman-level paper in cultural history -- & not suitable for WP. -- llywrch 19:25, 7 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Yes, I think it's safe to say that some Gnostics quotes selected passages from Paul's letters to support their positions. Marcion of Sinope certainly did, elsewhere the article suggests the Valentinians did, and I'm sure they're not the only ones. I also think you're right in saying that historically, the bulk of Christian scholarship has not considered Paul to be a Gnostic, and this ought to be made clear in the article. Wesley 05:57, 8 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Which 1 Corinthians verse?

The following:

The terms Paul uses for perfected Christianity, such as (in the standard translation) Mature and to the level of maturity and the perfect man, actually use the greek word Teleioi, which means initiated, a principle also used in the hellenic mystery religions. In particular, in 1 Corinthians, we speak wisdom amongst the perfected also translates we speak of Sophia amongst the initiated (Sophia being a spiritual entity to the gnostics, as well as the Greek word for "wisdom"), something which the gnostic Valentinians quoted as proof that Paul initiated Christians into the gnostic ideas of Sophia.

does not give the verse in 1 Corinthians, so I am unable to verify this information. Until this is clarified, it's going. - Ta bu shi da yu 06:14, 7 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Chapter 2. It's a few verses. In verse 2:6 specifically Paul says: "We speak of Sophia among the intiated. Yet not the sophia of this world or the sophia of the archons of this world who come to naught." Much of the impact is lost in english. Sophia is the proper name of the goddess of wisdom as well as common name for wisdom in general. The "archons of this world" also multiple meanings referring to Roman rulers as well as the demiurge. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 96.33.153.28 (talk) 06:38, 7 April 2011 (UTC)

Further material removed

I have removed:

For example, Lilitu (mentioned in Isaiah) is usually translated screech owl, which has very little significance in a wider picture, rather than Lilith, a reference to a child snatching demon, that some ancient Jewish legends held to have been Adam's first wife.

until I can get some info on what part of Isaiah is being referred to, and to see where this source of information is coming from. - Ta bu shi da yu 06:30, 7 Feb 2005 (UTC)

I have also removed:

As for himself, in 1 Corinthians, Paul considers he is a Steward of the mysteries of God, which was also the technical term for a priest in the Egyptian version of the mystery religions where the central figure is the god Serapis.

because it is unclear where exactly this info is from! Please provide the chapter and verse before we put this back again. - Ta bu shi da yu 01:57, 8 Feb 2005 (UTC)