We'll never know about the early gnostics for sure, in that the
surviving documents were written by the educated and not necessarily
indicative of what the average adherent may have believed or how they
interacted on a moment to moment basis. The big question being did they
attribute all the didn't understand to "God". It's the same today when
folks live without wonder and answer every mystery with, "God made it."
Case closed.
The attraction for me is that they place their supreme being as
unknowable (much like the lesson in the Old Testament book of Job) and
look to wisdom (Sophia) as the incarnate path to spirituality. Sounds
like a step in the right direction...
Also, the Judas Iscariot Gospel mentions the absurdity of formalized
prayer or chanting as a way of controlling their god. Jesus complains
of his followers being monkeys who just don't get it about prayer and
keep thinking if they get the words right, they can make their god
respond in a certain manner favorable to them - they want to be
magicians and live in an imaginary world of unseen forces that they can
control. Much like today's fundamentalists, in my opinion.
So, Gnosticism does seem like it was a step in the right direction.
There was still the social evolution of treating others better, of
recognizing their distictiveness ("the divine within each"); and of
using learning-science-wisdom as a path to development. The rest of
their society and how it actually worked, I don't know.
|
