Asking gnostics regarding Islam.

V

Vivandall

Member
Messages
21
Reaction score
0
Points
1
So do you think Allah could be Yaldabaoth? For those who don't know much about Islam, I think Islam is very likely to be real.
 
Vivandall said:
So do you think Allah could be Yaldabaoth?
Click to expand...
Not really. This gnostic doctrine is a product of Hellenic dualism. The Abrahamic traditions are holistic.

You then have to separate the Greek Pythagorean/Platonic idea of Yaldabaoth away from the notch-potch of syncretic notions that were the bastard offspring of people trying to cash in on Hebrew ideas – everyone knows the Christian philosophers were vitriolic in their ridicule of these 'gnostic nostrums' , but then so were Greek Platonists and Stoics! It was just cod philosophy, and notably peddled by a number of 'masters' who claimed that they alone held the 'keys of knowledge'.

Authentic gnosis – knowing – is common to all religious traditions. If you want gnosis in Islam, look to the Sufis.
 
There are no divine polarities in Islam. Allah is the highest, supreme entity, without any counterpart or opponent. By definition, highest good.

Satan, in Islam is not an opponent of God, but an opponent of man.

From Sufi POV, human whim is the only false God in the universe.

Mahabrahma(buddhist), Rahu(Hindu) and Prometheus are to varying extant similar concepts from different traditions.
 
Vivandall said:
How about gnostic christianity? Are there any evidence of yaldabaoth?
Click to expand...
Yes, because 'gnostic christianity' was basically an attempt to make Scripture fit certain Greek dualist concepts. They only way they could do it was spin a story that had the main divine players all suffering from the worst sorts of human vices ... the whole founders on its lack of metaphysical logic.

Christian Gnosticism was popular in its day because it appealed to the superstitious. Its more recent popularity is largely due to the fact that it was condemned by the Church, rather than any insight into gnostic doctrines.

But to reiterate, gnosis as such is inherently part of all spiritual traditions. There is authentic Christian gnosis, which is entirely orthodox, and there is 'gnostic Christianity', which sets itself apart from the tradition and regards itself as superior to ... it's largely made up by whoever the self-declared gnostic master happens to be. In the same way there is Christian esoterism, which again is orthodox, and 'esoteric Christianity' which again is elitist and regards itself as 'special'. The gnostic movements of the 2nd century reappeared in the esoteric schools of the Middle Ages, and again in the various schools of theosophy and anthroposophy in the 18th-19th centuries, then again in the New Age cults in the 70s ... they fade away and pop up periodically.
 
Vivandall said:
So do you think Allah could be Yaldabaoth? For those who don't know much about Islam, I think Islam is very likely to be real.
Click to expand...

Since majority of the Muslims believe that the God of the Jews, Jehovah is none other than Allah there is no doubt that Allah or Jehovah is the Demiurge also known as Yaldabaoth or Saklas (the foolish One) or Samael (the blind God). Yaldabaoth was the son of Achamoth, the lower Sophia.
 
Thomas said:
As I've said, Christian commentaries against gnosticism are unfashionable and assumed to be pejorative before they're read and contemplated, so I post this, which is from Plotinus, a MiddlePlatonist, and is his critique of gnosticism:
http://thriceholy.net/Texts/Enneads.html
Click to expand...

Its inappropriate to stub all forms of gnostic thought into one single whole. Plotinus seems to be criticizing the Sethians for their view of vilifying the creator of the universe but not all Gnostics believed that the creator of the universe was an evil God.

Gnostic thought is in no way indebted to Hellenistic philosophy and as such it remains as an unique thought of late antiquity independently developed by 2nd century Gnostic Christians who really deserve the credit for this radical view. Gnostics had the courage to say a simple truth which Plato and other Neoplatonists were too afraid to speak it in open. The truth that the creator of the universe is a lesser being and not the real God of the Cosmos. Platonists were basically afraid that if this truth was made public then the very fabric of the world would collapse but for the Gnostics their gnosis of the Father was way too powerful than any power compared to the secular ecclesiastic of the world.

The main problem for the Gnostics was to explain the existence of evil in this world. 'The Problem of Evil'. Sethians got away with this problem by vilifying the creator of the universe and there by explaining that this world is full of evil because it was created by the devil. The stoics got away with this problem by seeing good in evil things. Others completely evaded this problem and remained mum especially the Platonists and the Hindus. Catholics got away with this problem by introducing the anit-Christ, the Devil or Lucifer, the fallen angel and put all the blame on human beings with their demoralizing concept of the Original Sin.

But the real solution to the problem was given by the Valentinians who said that 'Evil' was inherent with in the system and placed all the blame on the spiritual realm rather than treating human beings as born sinners by birth. Their answer to the problem of Evil was the 'Fall of Sophia'. It was the fall of Sophia inside the Pleroma which gave rise to evil in this world. Evil exists as long as the ignorance of the Father exists. Gnostics and gnosticism will continue to strive no matter how much psychic orthodox Christians try hard to suppress it.

"Gnostic teachings speak of the reality and power of evil and its fundamental presence throughout manifest existence. They declare that while we may not be able to rid the world or ourselves of evil, we may, and indeed will, rise above it through gnosis."

- Stephan A. Hoeller, Gnosticism: New Light on the Ancient Tradition of Inner Knowing.
 
Is the gospel of john authentic enough to begin with though? Are there any other sources about the 2 god theory?
 
Sadly the text of Deconick makes too much of too little – her translation of the Greek is dubious – and referring to the Christian community as Catholic is a dreadful anachronism.

There is no reference to support her translation of the text, she refers to an argument made in greater detail in footnote 2, which simply says 'DeConick (2013)', so not really very useful. She then makes a reference (3) to Origen, which I can't find, so can only regard with more suspicion ... and by this time this essay, had I authored it, would have been tossed back in my lap ... so I am of the opinion that the author is spinning a tale out of nothing.

As the whole argument depends on her reading of 8:44, and there's no support for such a reading, I am of the opinion she's probably got it wrong.
 
Vivandall said:
So do you think Allah could be Yaldabaoth? For those who don't know much about Islam, I think Islam is very likely to be real.
Click to expand...

I am a Muslim who considers himself a Gnostic also, which I think you misunderstand as applying to ante Nicene "heresies" so called by the Church Fathers.

I do see how Yaltabaoth resembles Yahweh and they are technically the same God. Islam didn't exist yet but also believes in the crucifixion swap with Jesus as the Sethian Christians did, although it was not Judas but Simon (of Cyrene?).

Allah is more like Great Invisible Spirit, The Most High, El Elyon, whatever, but Islam has its own Gnostics called Sufis, Jews have Kabbalists.
 
Al-Ghazali said:
Islam didn't exist yet but also believes in the crucifixion swap with Jesus as the Sethian Christians did, although it was not Judas but Simon (of Cyrene?).
Click to expand...

Well, we can't say Islam "believes in the crucifixion swap with Jesus as the Sethian Christians did" because that would ignore the diverse interpretations within Islam--and one Muslim interpretation of the Qur'an affirms the crucifixion of Christ.
 
Ahanu said:
Well, we can't say Islam "believes in the crucifixion swap with Jesus as the Sethian Christians did" because that would ignore the diverse interpretations within Islam--and one Muslim interpretation of the Qur'an affirms the crucifixion of Christ.
Click to expand...

No, Judas was crucified and the Qur'an ABSOLUTELY states beyond doubt that Jesus PBUH was NOT.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top