Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
6 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,815 Year: 3,072/9,624 Month: 917/1,588 Week: 100/223 Day: 11/17 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Is Calvinism a form of Gnostic Christianity?
JavaMan
Member (Idle past 2319 days)
Posts: 475
From: York, England
Joined: 08-05-2005


Message 1 of 405 (303132)
04-11-2006 8:14 AM


This question occurred to me while reading an article about the Celtic theologian, Pelagius. In the article it was stated that Pelagius objected to the doctrine of Original Sin as being 'unchristian' and 'influenced by Manicheanism'.
For those who don't know, Manicheanism is the belief that the material world is evil (having been created by an evil spirit such as Satan), but that human beings contain a spark of spirit that connects them to God.
In the early Christian era this was a common belief (so common that the Church fathers are constantly railing against it). Coupled with the belief that salvation could only be achieved by receiving some secret knowledge about Christ's teaching, this formed the basis of what we term 'Gnostic Christianity'.
Now, because Gnosticism was persecuted by the church, and because, in this century, we've had the astonishing good fortune to rediscover some of the early Gnostic gospels, there is a romantic glow attached to the term Gnosticism that seems to blind people to what Gnostics actually believed, i.e. that all flesh is evil, and that only an elect few can be saved.
In modern times, the form of Christianity that seems to come closest to these beliefs, particularly in the doctrines of Total Hereditary Depravity, Limited Atonement and Efficacious Grace, is Calvinism. For those unfamiliar with these doctrines, here's a quick précis:
Total Hereditary Depravity
Because of the fall, man is unable of himself to savingly believe the gospel. The sinner is dead, blind, and deaf to the things of God; his heart is deceitful and desperately corrupt. His will is not free, it is in bondage to his evil nature, therefore, he will not - indeed he cannot - choose good over evil in the spiritual realm.
Limited Atonement
Christ's redeeming work was intended to save the elect only and actually secured salvation for them.
Efficacious Grace
In addition to the outward general call to salvation which is made to everyone who hears the gospel, the Holy Spirit extends to the elect a special inward call that inevitably brings them to salvation. The internal call (which is made only to the elect) cannot be rejected; it always results in conversion.
(all quotations from Comparison of Calvinism and Arminianism)

Replies to this message:
 Message 3 by Faith, posted 04-11-2006 10:14 AM JavaMan has replied
 Message 400 by LamarkNewAge, posted 12-16-2017 12:46 AM JavaMan has not replied

  
JavaMan
Member (Idle past 2319 days)
Posts: 475
From: York, England
Joined: 08-05-2005


Message 5 of 405 (303189)
04-11-2006 11:44 AM
Reply to: Message 3 by Faith
04-11-2006 10:14 AM


Manicheanism and a Fallen world
I don't see the connection you are trying to make. There is no secret knowledge implied in Calvinism, and Calvinists are very anti-Gnostic. The gist of the three elements you list is that the Fall made us unable to recognize God, Christ died only for those who believe on Him (and nobody knows who those are except God), and it is God who saves -- that's the efficacious grace part. His imparting grace inwardly to those He chooses is nothing like some secret knowledge. The idea is that we can't save ourselves, He must do it. There is nothing gnostic about any of this that I can see.
My main argument (after Pelagius) is that the Calvinist doctrine of the Fall seems not entirely dissimilar to Manicheanism.
Can you explain the difference?
And for any Gnostics reading this, can you explain why your Manicheanism is different from the Calvinist doctrine of the Fall?

The true mystery of the world is the visible, not the invisible

This message is a reply to:
 Message 3 by Faith, posted 04-11-2006 10:14 AM Faith has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 7 by Faith, posted 04-11-2006 12:22 PM JavaMan has replied
 Message 8 by Faith, posted 04-11-2006 1:15 PM JavaMan has not replied

  
JavaMan
Member (Idle past 2319 days)
Posts: 475
From: York, England
Joined: 08-05-2005


Message 14 of 405 (303458)
04-12-2006 7:58 AM
Reply to: Message 7 by Faith
04-11-2006 12:22 PM


Re: Manicheanism and a Fallen world
But also, if your focus is on the Fall, why are you targeting Calvinism? The Fall was part of Christian theology from the earliest days. Luther certainly affirmed it. So did the Roman church.
I'm not really picking on Calvinism. It's just that, rightly or wrongly, the Calvinist doctrine is generally considered the most extreme interpretation of the Fall. When you read Calvinist writers you really do get the impression that they believe the whole material world is corrupt and evil.
Pelagius was condemned as a heretic for his man-centered understanding of salvation
Calvin is considered a heretic by the same church that condemns Pelagius. How do you justify accepting its judgement on Pelagius, but ignoring what it says about Calvin?
Maybe you didn't say enough in your OP to make the connection then, as I don't see anything similar to the Fall in gnosticism.
Gnostic groups did have a concept of a Fall, although it seems to have a more cosmic origin and effect than the orthodox concept. However, the result is effectively the same, i.e. the material world, including man, is in a fallen state. The similarity I see between Calvinism/Lutheranism (is that the correct word?) and Gnosticism is in the conception of the material world as utterly corrupt and evil. I concede the point that Gnostics and Calvinists have very different ideas of how to escape that state.
Now for some history (you may want to skip this bit ). Calvinists and Lutherans believe that their doctrine of Original Sin is the traditional Christian belief, but the Catholic Church doesn't agree, and for an outsider like myself one can't help noticing that nothing like the Calvinist doctrine appears in the writings of the Church fathers until Augustine in the 4th/5th century.
It's also striking that, whereas Judaism has no such notion as the Fall, a cosmic Fall does play a central role in contemporary Manichean religions. In these religions the material world is entirely corrupt and evil because of some cosmic Fall, and humans can only approach the Godhead by dying to this material world and to their fleshly selves. For someone approaching all this as history, it does seem plausible that this component of Christian belief originated with these Manichean religions, rather than arising completely independently. And surely it can't be a coincidence that the definitive doctrine of Original Sin originated with Augustine, who for 8-9 years prior to his conversion was a follower of Manicheanism?
Catholic doctrine, though it contains Augustine's doctrine of Original Sin, stops short of declaring that the world is entirely corrupt and evil (that would be Manichean heresy), and leaves some room open for human free will (which is why Calvin accused it of being semi-Pelagian). The problem with the notion that the material world is utterly evil and corrupt is that it suggest there are parts of the universe that are no-go areas for God, which in turn suggests a universe of Manichean dualism rather than a universe ruled by an all-powerful God.
After all this rambling through early Christian history, I realise I've been distracted slightly from my main point, which is that the Calvinist doctrine of the Fall, regardless of whether there's an actual historic link, is effectively Manichean, and that, conversely, modern Gnostics should find themselves more at home with Calvinist theology (or at least its cosmology) than with other orthodox Christian traditions.
(By the way, can you answer an off-topic question I've got about Calvinist theology? I'm quite impressed by the implacable logic of Calvinism, but one thing isn't clear to me. I can understand that logically God must know beforehand who is saved, and that therefore those who are going to be saved must receive the call to be saved, and can't avoid being saved. But does that mean that everyone who has faith is necessarily one of the saved, or is it possible for someone to hear the call, have faith, but not be saved, because they're not predestined to be saved?)

The true mystery of the world is the visible, not the invisible

This message is a reply to:
 Message 7 by Faith, posted 04-11-2006 12:22 PM Faith has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 17 by Faith, posted 04-12-2006 12:03 PM JavaMan has replied

  
JavaMan
Member (Idle past 2319 days)
Posts: 475
From: York, England
Joined: 08-05-2005


Message 21 of 405 (303740)
04-13-2006 3:50 AM
Reply to: Message 17 by Faith
04-12-2006 12:03 PM


Re: Manicheanism and a Fallen world
I have some questions for you Faith. The first one was at the end of my last post but you must have missed it (my fault for suggesting that you skip part of my post ).
quote:
(By the way, can you answer an off-topic question I've got about Calvinist theology? I'm quite impressed by the implacable logic of Calvinism, but one thing isn't clear to me. I can understand that logically God must know beforehand who is saved, and that therefore those who are going to be saved must receive the call to be saved, and can't avoid being saved. But does that mean that everyone who has faith is necessarily one of the saved, or is it possible for someone to hear the call, have faith, but not be saved, because they're not predestined to be saved?)
Now for my response to your post:
Calvin was one of the Reformers who returned the Church to its pure Biblical form after the Roman church had become apostate.
Is there a particular point in time when the Catholic church became apostate? (This isn't a trick question - I'm just showing my ignorance!).
Yes I gather the gnostics have some version of a fall but it is very far from the Biblical Christian idea. The Biblical idea has nothing whatever to do with a hatred of the material world. God made the material world and called it good.
Two questions:
1. So what does the notion of a Fallen world mean? I got the impression from the numerous threads on the subject here that evil and cruelty were intoduced into the world by the Fall. Why did man's trangression have this effect?
2. If the world is basically good despite the presence of evil in the world, then doesn't that mean that God is present in the material world? And if that's the case, then what stops us coming to God through recognition of his presence here? Is it a lack of something in ourselves?

The true mystery of the world is the visible, not the invisible

This message is a reply to:
 Message 17 by Faith, posted 04-12-2006 12:03 PM Faith has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 22 by Faith, posted 04-13-2006 11:51 AM JavaMan has replied

  
JavaMan
Member (Idle past 2319 days)
Posts: 475
From: York, England
Joined: 08-05-2005


Message 23 of 405 (304617)
04-16-2006 1:09 PM
Reply to: Message 22 by Faith
04-13-2006 11:51 AM


Re: Manicheanism and a Fallen world
I don't see how. If a person has genuine faith in Jesus Christ that is certainly a sign they are one of the elect.
So let me get this right. Human beings have no free will to do good before they're saved. Whatever we do, we're equally sinful creatures (in another thread iano explained that, in the eyes of God, there's no real difference between Mother Theresa and Hitler, if they're not saved).
Now at some point God calls those who are predestined to be saved, and these elect cannot resist God's call. From this point on the elect have no free will to do evil.
I don't think I've misrepresented Calvinist doctrine here, have I?
To non-Calvinists (Christian and otherwise) this doctrine seems strangely amoral. The state of sin doesn't seem to have anything to do with morality (how can we be said to be moral or immoral if we have no free will?), but instead seems to be a state of separation from God. And similarly, salvation is not a reward for any moral actions performed, but a state in which the saved are no longer separated from God. And how is this change of state achieved? By God intervening directly to change the person so that they're no longer separated from him.
Now you can use the terms sin and righteousness all you like, but this sounds to me like Gnostic enlightenment, a sudden change from ignorance to knowledge, changing the person permanently. And what makes the parallel with Gnosticism even more suggestive is the belief that, once changed in this way, the saved person can never be damned, whatever they do:
Whereas Judaism and Christianity, and almost all pagan systems, hold that the soul attains its proper end by obedience of mind and will to the Supreme Power, i.e. by faith and works, it is markedly peculiar to Gnosticism that it places the salvation of the soul merely in the possession of a quasi-intuitive knowledge of the mysteries of the universe and of magic formulae indicative of that knowledge. Gnostics were "people who knew", and their knowledge at once constituted them a superior class of beings, whose present and future status was essentially different from that of those who, for whatever reason, did not know.
(entry on Gnosticism in the online Catholic Encyclopedia: CATHOLIC ENCYCLOPEDIA: Gnosticism)

The true mystery of the world is the visible, not the invisible

This message is a reply to:
 Message 22 by Faith, posted 04-13-2006 11:51 AM Faith has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 26 by Faith, posted 04-16-2006 6:13 PM JavaMan has not replied

  
JavaMan
Member (Idle past 2319 days)
Posts: 475
From: York, England
Joined: 08-05-2005


Message 24 of 405 (304618)
04-16-2006 1:15 PM
Reply to: Message 22 by Faith
04-13-2006 11:51 AM


Re: Manicheanism and a Fallen world
HOw is the world "bascially good?"
I thought I was just paraphrasing what you said in the previous post:
Faith writes:
God made the material world and called it good
Did I misunderstand you?
...we're basically out of touch with God and His Law and that's being basically bad
...His presence ought to be apparent to us in nature but because of the Fall we have lost our spiritual senses and don't recognize Him
To me these two phrases sound very like you're saying our Fallen state is a state of ignorance and blindness. Not too dissimilar in fact to the Gnostic beliefs you described in other posts.

The true mystery of the world is the visible, not the invisible

This message is a reply to:
 Message 22 by Faith, posted 04-13-2006 11:51 AM Faith has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 27 by Faith, posted 04-16-2006 6:21 PM JavaMan has replied

  
JavaMan
Member (Idle past 2319 days)
Posts: 475
From: York, England
Joined: 08-05-2005


Message 25 of 405 (304620)
04-16-2006 1:33 PM
Reply to: Message 20 by Faith
04-12-2006 4:34 PM


Re: Fallenness vs Ignorance or Delusion
So from what you've said, the gnostic fall is not the same as the eastern religions but it is certainly not Christianity either. It has more in common with the eastern views overall, in seeking deliverance by meditative and other methods, and denying the need for sacrifice, which is the Christian view.
Buddhism has been going for about 500 years longer than Christianity and has developed almost as many varieties. In China and Japan one of the most popular forms is called 'Pure Land Buddhism' and I think you'd be surprised how similar to Protestantism it can seem.
Here's a short biography of Shinran (1173-1263 AD), founder of the Jodo Shinsu ('True Pure Land') sect, in Japan:
He drew from his master's teachings the conclusion ... [that] if salvation is by faith, then monastic rule avails a man nothing. He gave up the celibate life, and raised a family; he abandoned the monk's habit and refused to shave his head. There is a remarkable parallel between Shinran's decision, resulting from his inward apprehension of the grace of the Buddha, and that of Martin Luther. For both men, monasticism, being a form of works, appeared useless as a means of salvation. But Shinran's conclusions went further. For him salvation came only by faith and the favour of the Buddha; therefore even the evildoer could hope for it. As long as a person gives up estimating his own qualities and is simply dependent on the Buddha, he will gain paradise.
(from The Religious Experience of Mankind, Ninian Smart, Fount Paperbacks, 1982 (p. 268))

The true mystery of the world is the visible, not the invisible

This message is a reply to:
 Message 20 by Faith, posted 04-12-2006 4:34 PM Faith has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 28 by Faith, posted 04-16-2006 6:27 PM JavaMan has replied

  
JavaMan
Member (Idle past 2319 days)
Posts: 475
From: York, England
Joined: 08-05-2005


Message 29 of 405 (304972)
04-18-2006 11:39 AM
Reply to: Message 27 by Faith
04-16-2006 6:21 PM


Re: Manicheanism and a Fallen world
I've tried to acknowledge both the similarity and the differences between the Christian and the Gnostic Fall. Certainly ignorance and blindness occurred with the Fall, but to the Christian it was a Fall from obedience into sin, therefore primarily a moral transformation from good to bad. The Gnostic belief, on the other hand, seems to be completely about knowledge, ignorance being a loss of knowledge, gnostic enlightenment restoring it -- no wrathful God, no moral debt owed that needs paying etc., simple knowledge. Seems to me that's a very big difference.
I don't want to push my argument about the similarities too far, but I think it's a given in Gnostic thought that the Fall brought sin into the world. In fact they seem to go further than you do and insist that the whole material world is evil because of the Fall. But I concede 'no wrathful God, no moral debt owed that needs paying' - it seems to be a given that the good God is on their side, wanting and helping their spiritual essence to escape the evil material world.

The true mystery of the world is the visible, not the invisible

This message is a reply to:
 Message 27 by Faith, posted 04-16-2006 6:21 PM Faith has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 31 by Faith, posted 04-18-2006 1:02 PM JavaMan has not replied

  
JavaMan
Member (Idle past 2319 days)
Posts: 475
From: York, England
Joined: 08-05-2005


Message 30 of 405 (304979)
04-18-2006 12:03 PM
Reply to: Message 28 by Faith
04-16-2006 6:27 PM


Pure Land Buddhism
Yes, Buddha is transformed more or less into God, and faith is put in him somehow. But this seems an awfully odd idea since Buddha himself taught nothing of the sort.
Yes, I think the Buddha might have been a little horrified by this perversion of his message.
Seems to me to be an idea that probably developed out of some odd bits of knowledge of Christianity. Faith was never a factor in any pagan religion that I know of, but since Christ came it seems that almost all religions talk about faith.
I might have agreed if they were closer to obvious points of contact with Christians. But I think this is probably a case of convergent evolution, i.e. similar circumstances generating a similar reaction.
In a sense Buddhism (and Taoism) do stress the paradoxical notion that enlightenment can only be achieved by NOT striving towards enlightenment, so I can understand how they could have arrived at the notion of salvation by faith alone, faced with a contemporary Buddhist monasticism that was as rigid, formalised and corrupt as medieval Catholicism.
In Protestantism/Pure Land Buddhism this NOT striving is achieved by having faith in Christ/the Buddha (which is effectively letting go of human striving after salvation and waiting for God/the Buddha to come to you). In Zen Buddhism/Taoism satori or wisdom is achieved by the act of letting go (wu-wei) - any works performed, such as meditation, are paradoxically aimed at stopping striving.

The true mystery of the world is the visible, not the invisible

This message is a reply to:
 Message 28 by Faith, posted 04-16-2006 6:27 PM Faith has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 32 by Faith, posted 04-18-2006 1:36 PM JavaMan has not replied

  
JavaMan
Member (Idle past 2319 days)
Posts: 475
From: York, England
Joined: 08-05-2005


Message 36 of 405 (306492)
04-25-2006 11:30 AM
Reply to: Message 33 by ekhalom
04-21-2006 10:16 AM


Gnosticism and Calvinism
What do you think about the topic being debated here? Do you see any similarities between Gnosticism and Calvinism?
Take a look at the opening post and let us know what you think. So far the debate has only involved me (a materialist atheist), Faith (a Calvinist Christian, I think), and ReverendDG (a non-Calvinist Christian?).

The true mystery of the world is the visible, not the invisible

This message is a reply to:
 Message 33 by ekhalom, posted 04-21-2006 10:16 AM ekhalom has not replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024