A Fatal Epistemology
But when He, the Spirit of truth, comes, He will guide you into all the truth; for He will not speak on His own initiative, but whatever He hears, He will speak; and He will disclose to you what is to come. John 16:13 NASB
All the truth – Gnostic thought is alive and well in the world today. In fact, it’s not limited to New Age, crystal-gazing, horoscope sycophants. It’s also found in certain elements of Christian and Jewish believers. In order to understand just how insidious gnostic thought can be, we need to remind ourselves about some of its major tenets.
The emphasis on gnosis is not defined as explanation and understanding of scientific fact but rather as an attempt to achieve salvation from the domination of science. Today we would call this “faith” in opposition to “reason,” but that is the result of the influence of Greek logos. Gnosticism is rational, but it is interested in supernatural reasoning and revelatory experience. It replaces rational argument with supernatural illumination.
The point of this movement toward supernatural illumination is to make the follower a participant in divine existence, elevated out of this mundane world. In this sense, the divine is involved in “active self-divulgence” and the mind of the believer is “informed” so that the soul might be “transformed.”[1] Gnosticism involves the doctrine of the “sovereign ‘spirit’ as a source of direct knowledge and illumination.”[emphasis added][2]
Notice the parallels with certain exegetical claims today. Some religious worldviews espouse the idea that the Bible can only be understood if one is a believer. These people claim that the true meaning of the biblical text, that is, the spiritual component, is available only after a man’s soul has been regenerated by God. This is sometimes coupled with the claim that all that is necessary in order to understand biblical truth is “the leading of the Spirit.” Of course, this makes exegesis an entirely private affair. What God reveals to me from His word is not subject to your public criticism because the message came straight from God via the Spirit. There is no need to consult lexicons, histories, cultural studies or grammars. In fact, relying on such “non-spiritual” sources can only cause error. What is needed is prayer, meditation and spiritual sensitivity. All the rest is “human” effort.
This is essentially gnosticism disguised in acceptable religious language. It eschews the scientific approach to Scripture. It finds critical assessment of the text hopelessly arrogant and helplessly heretical. It believes that God wrote the words of the Bible with us in mind and therefore, it only takes God to reveal what it means for us. A verse like this one in John’s gospel can only mean one thing: truth comes only via divine apprehension.
Perhaps you’ve encountered this approach. Perhaps it was once your approach. What you must have discovered is how powerful such a paradigm is. Virtually every fact is converted into support of the position, including the dismissal of any contradictory evidence on the basis that contradictory evidence is merely Satan’s way of keeping us from the truth. The bottom line is this: this insulated way of knowing is impervious to real dialogue. And it is very, very old. So old that the apostolic authors spent a lot of effort warning followers against being seduced by its appeal. After all, with this approach if God told you something, then you can’t be mistaken—ever—can you? Certainty is yours, via the Spirit, of course. Trust is no longer needed.
Do you think that’s what God intended?
Topical Index: gnosticism, knowing, Spirit, John 16:13
[1] Hans Jonas, The Gnostic Religion, p. 25.
[2] Ibid., p. 42.
CORRECTION: Oh my gosh! How could I have missed this? Yesterday it was supposed to read: ” 4. Ekklesia does NOT mean ‘Church.'” I corrected it on the web site, but now you have to correct it in your thinking. So sorry.
Your right,it does say study to show thyself approved .It’s work! much effort and discipline is required .It’s not the osmosis approach. As I have stated before,one of my fellowships and community have mental disabilities. Unfortunately that standard is 70 or below IQ. They all read ,but grammer,lexicon,history ,reading and extensive knowledge they will never comprehend. I have no doubt the ruach dwells within them by what they say and do,sometimes in areas far better than myself. They have insights on scripture that can only come by inspired action from the ruach not just scientific approach.
Great testimony, Pam. May it rebuke all of us.
God’s knowledge never did depend upon the mere firing of neuronal order in the brain: He says that He writes the entirety of His Law upon our hearts; not our heads. BUT, the head will organize itself according to the signals it receives (via theta waves) from that heart. “Out of the heart are the issues of life” (Prov. 4:23). This verse drives a wooden stake into the very heart (sic) of gnosticism.
Thanks Laurita, just saying heart and head can’t be separated will help my group understand its simplicity. Now me that’s a whole nother matter ,I’m such a mess ha ha couldn’t resist saying it Laurita.
“For since the creation of the world His invisible attributes, His eternal power and devine nature have been clearly seen, being understood through what has been made so that they are without excuse” Sayes Paul (Shaul) in Romans 1;20. This proported secret knowledge sounds like a lie or a trap to me….
I agree Mark. It’s what keeps us from being open to really “hearing” what the text means to those whom it was written.
Hi Skip, I understand what you are saying and that other verses of the Bible speak against Gnosticism, but this verse IS the one many use to say that “the Spirit led them.. and so they have the truth” – how is this verse in John to be properly understood? When it stands alone it looks like it supports that view. How do you tell someone it does not mean that?
Most excellent question, Jennifer!
Skip says we bring our paradigm with us; we interpret according to that paradigm. Seems to me the paradigm that assumes that “spirit” and “matter” CAN be separated at all in the first place IS the (gnostic) paradigm we struggle with. In other words, it is not a matter of which is the ‘right’ one: spirit OR matter; revelation OR study; “supernatural illumination” OR reason, but a matter of the problem we have when we think that they are separate in the first place.
I think gnosticism seeks to “put asunder what God has joined together”; specifically, the nephesh. As our thoughts are not separate from our bodily interaction with those thoughts, so our spirits are completely enmeshed with our physical experience in the real world in real time. We were given God’s Word in study form, and we were given a structure of order: the “body of Christ” in which to disseminate it, too. Gnosticism threatens the very order of our bodily/spiritual existence by fracturing the vital connections we must have with our interior and exterior reality.
We will stand on the sea of glass one day and sing in harmony because we learned it here first. There will be no solos. We must learn to harmonize the little bit of truth we have with all the other bits, too,. as we must learn to bring our bodies along for the ride whenever we take a spiritual journey. If it is true, then it will manifest itself in reality at the same rate it manifests in our inmost hearts. ‘My’ truth – to the extent that it is actually true – will never be inharmonious with anybody else’s. The fun IS the harmony.
Thanks sister. The unity, the oneness that is the nephesh is lost in the Christian understanding of the soul separated into mind, will and emotions. Interestingly Van Morrison sings ” If my heart could do the thinking and my head begin to feel, would I begin to see the world anew and know what’s truly real?” I think from a Hebraic view of the nephesh we can say “Yes Van you can and you will, if you want it enough to set aside your old ways of using your heart and mind. As can we….
Love Van; particularly the younger Van; most particularly anything he did with the Chieftains. That album of his, way back when, gave me about the only comfort I had in those days. Love that song.
Wow, Mark and Laurita. Van ,Chieftains, love it this may be off pt.but sure do like Joe Bonamassa.
Is being led by the Spirit of God as well as He will make abode in you literally implied or figurative speech. For these terms can also then be viewed as gnostic based or misleading. A comforting phrase that means nothing…
I was thinking back on the way faith is based on past experience and accepting historical reminders. Then the fact be saved through faith or faithfulness then all I find is faith means nothing but the faithfulness of Christ or God means everything and we are to learn to accept this.
And that faith today cannot be formed without first experiencing first hand some form of calling. When I had my gnostic view I was more comfortable with proclaiming steadfast faith. Now I find it difficult to even think I have any faith…
Seeker, I feel your theological pain. I often have the same questions myself. There seems to be much overlap with the natural/spiritual iterations of Biblical concepts and gnosticism. I think they often use the same language, but have altogether different meanings. One thing to remember is that the word for spirit also means breath, a much more earthy and tangible expression of the voice/movement of God. Yes, mysterious, but altogether directional–in line with his Word! That connection is made over and over again in Scripture.
I feel very much lost between two worlds right now. Mostly because I was so thoroughly raised in the neo-Platonist/Gnostic Christian worldview. Yes, it’s kind of like walking on water. We can do it, but not without getting our eyes on the storm and we start sinking (and get wet). Not much security there. However, the strength and security is in God and his reigning King. Peter found that out first hand. Reminds me also of Yeshua healing the blind man in two stages. Our view of reality is a little skewed right now because we are in transition. Change is hard and oftentimes disorienting. But every day is a new step of trust (faith) and devotion to a PERSONAL God who seeks intimacy with us. I catch myself thinking “Christian” concepts and using Christian code words that seem to give a sense of stability. But it is an illusion. Just tonight I heard someone who is a strong KJV inerrantist state that “church” is “an extremely Biblical term.” He believes sooo strongly that the KJV is THE inspired word of God, above every other English translation. He is dogmatic and feels very confident about his view of the inspiration of the translation. But he is completely ignorant. He is completely oblivious to the humanity and bias of the Anglican translators. He would say his faith is strong and bold but in all reality, it is so small.
Peter Ruckman, Sr. was a zealous fundamentalist (independent Baptist) for the inerrancy of the KJV. His son, an attorney, (Peter Ruckman, Jr.) recently and tragically killed himself and his two boys. While I don’t want to pin this tragedy on the Ruckman, Sr., situations like this bring Proverbs 20:7 to life. If our understanding of “righteousness” is defined by modern theology or gnosticism, it may bring a measure of controllable security on the surface, but the inside is rotten to the core.
I sat in a “good” “evangelical” “church” for the last three weeks and heard message after message trashing Torah observance, the HRM, Sabbath-keeping, etc, and elevating the doctrine of the Church as transmitted through church history. “The Law is DEAD!” was loudly proclaimed to a crowd of about 750 people. The pressure to conform and label the non-conformist as a heretic and outsider is palpable. The pastor was soooo confident in his assertions. But confidently wrong! The sheople in the pew just sat there and lapped it up. At the end of the sermon he led in communion while we sang praise and worship. After the song, everyone got up and went home. To what? The illusion that they’ve been fed from God’s word by someone claiming to be a preacher of righteousness. I’m sure it all FELT very good, very Christian, very normal, very faithful to the “truth.” I went home feeling nauseated. Were there elements of truth? Sure. The preacher said a lot of good things. But his worldview is completely off base. It forces him to read the Bible with a certain bias and teach people false teaching. It isn’t faith. It’s blind ignorance. To them it feels right. To me it feels all wrong. Five years ago, I would have been one of the sheople. PRAISE YHVH he has led me step by step out of a system that is no different than that of the Pharisees of Jesus’ day. Does it feel unnatural at times, especially when I’m pressured to conform? Yep. Do I have it all figured out? Nope. That’s why I read Skip Moen and Laurita Hayes. Do they have it all figured out? Nope. That’s why they keep their ears to the ground. They are one step ahead of me. But I can’t go back to Jew-hating “Christ”-ology. Never. Even the shifting sands of “faithfulness” are moving me in a direction I would have never imagined. God is faithful! He is proving Himself faithful and true, in spite of my often reckless fecklessness. Shalom!
Paul B
Thank you for your testimony which I resonate with.
Different from you I grew up in a spiritual doctrine often claiming some portions of scripture are literal while others are allegorical.
Not withstanding this dualistic scriptural approach I was taught to participate in church activities on a daily base to remain part of the body… All with very good intent. I questioned the allegorical views as I understood spiritual as being taught and understanding the will of God.
I worked through the laws of Moses and found a lot taught in the NT I also found rituals proclaimed introduced in the NT that I did not find in the Laws. Baptism for one was claimed to be the introduction of the new born to the congregation the only difference was 8 days was promoted as the 1st Sunday of the month. Then other rituals that were apparently deducted from scripture as being added to souls in the dead region etc. A very apostolic correct application.
Then I asked as I am asking now. Is of not God doing the calling baptism and anointing in the post NT era. No more human mediators just humans sharing ideas concepts and understanding while God will task when we have studied long enough to show ourselves approved. As for passover, holy communion, Pentecost or gathering in tents the four major everlasting covenants I understand as being united during specific periods so that when we stay in the discussing of our understanding of God’s will God will direct and task individuals for their next task if there be one… Now this is where I seem to differ from Jews and my gnostic apostolic indoctrination. And it is this understanding that keeps me seeking and asking questions making my faith waiver not in God but in my confidence that I am getting closer to doing His will…
I as you listen and engage with many on this topic stay true to my conviction not doctrine or discussion on how others understand, but how I become enlightened.
As Skip so often reminds community is that keeps us focused I hear of communities with my view but on closer inspection only find principles based on repeating activities month after month, year after year as most Jews believe true. I have not yet formed such understanding as we are here only for today. Last year, month, week and even yesterday means nothing and has no justification to salvation or being saved. It is the small examples we do today that give us hope and purpose. That is how I understand Yeshua doctrine or teaching not Christian or Rabbinical. It may also be why I tread on very unstable convectional faith ground….
Bingo! No wonder I run into such vitriolic opposition to “truth.” Truth for a Gnostic does not exist outside one’s private (although almost universally accepted by the group) interpretation. Forget the facts. Forget what history says. Forget what culture says. Forget what church history says. Forget what God himself actually said. Forget the fact that modern man’s psyche is shaped by Existentialism par excellence. So let’s talk about who is really in a cult! [No Skip, you wouldn’t make a very good cult leader. You would have to drop your affinity for the ezer kenegdo.]
I’m very familiar with this type of (neo)Gnosticism, as this was the primary apologetic focus on my blog. This sort of thing is found in what I call the hyper-charismatic wing of Christianity—an ever growing aberration. My contention is that this is rooted in modern New Age-ism, which, of course, is itself rooted in 2nd century Gnosticism. Though not many teachers are explicit, underlying this is the New Age “manifest sons of God” doctrine, in which the goal is, in essence, to shed the earthly shell in order to fully actualize/manifest as “sons of God” on earth, thereby possessing various supernatural abilities.
[Side note to Mark Parry: I see you are fond of quoting Art Katz, but are you aware that he wrote the forward to a biography on Bill Britton, a blatant “manifest sons of God” teacher?]
Craig that is interesting…
Are some not called to represent the teaching and helping of others to manifest the will of God on earth through examples and reminding discussions. And are these not those John referred to in 1:12-14 to be known as sons and daughters of God as we read of in Job when the sons of God assembled etc.
Or are you referring to the individuals that claim to have manifested all the spiritual gifts that Paul referred too as the full embodiment of Christ on earth?
Both these groups seem to be the implied result of being called and sent.
Or are you referring to a more non biblical view?
I’m referring to an extra-biblical view. If you’re not familiar with “manifest sons of God” (MSoG) teaching, then it may take a bit to wrap your head around the theology behind it. Perhaps it will be easier to just direct you to one of my older blog posts, one that talks about the most extreme elements, that of “Joel’s Army”:
notunlikelee(dot)wordpress(dot)com/2012/09/16/chuck-pierce-hosts-conference-referencing-one-new-man/
[In re-reading some of these old posts I cringe a bit at my writing.]
Thank you Craig. A thorough researched discussion on your referenced blog. And clearly as you say extra-biblical view. Not the NT implied message.
May I ask what is your view on the abode within and guided by the spirit of God Biblical teachings.
Can someone give me a simple comment on how this verse is to be understood.
Chris,
Here I read that when you find the truth, the truth will overwhelm you and you will make it part of your way of doing things.
Thankyou for that.