Gnosticism: Esoteric Insight and/or Christian Heresy?

Let me explain and rephrase. I was trying to make a point similar to one made by Lon Fuller in his exchange with H.L.A. Hart over positivism versus minimal natural law.
Lon Fuller, The Morality of Law
H.L.A. Hart, The Concept of Law
https://scholar.princeton.edu/sites.../files/fuller-hart_debate_critical_review.pdf
https://www.quora.com/Legal-Theory-What-is-the-substance-of-the-Hart-Fuller-debate
Hart Fuller Debate - Jurisprudence Notes - Notes For Free
Nature Of Law Debate Between Hart And Fuller Law Essay
Fuller argued that, while Hitler was free to call whatever he wanted "law", and print it on the right forms with the right seal and signature, he couldn't do this consistently with the rule of law, and indeed undermined the rule of law by his arbitrary, capricious actions, just as Trump is doing now. I think human ethics, morals, and religion are rooted in the objective requirements for human survival and social functioning-including psychological and biological needs. There is considerable, but not infinite, room for variation as to how humans go about those tasks, and also room for spandrels-- side effects that may not serve a purpose and may even be dysfunctional. But reality imposes limits on the what a society can accept in the way of ethics and morals and still get by. Humans aren't free to pick and choose their ethics and morals according to taste--at least if they want to survive and prosper. Reality bites! For example, every functioning society has to have a system for ordering human behavior according to rules. To the extent its rules are unclear, inconsistent, arbitrary, etc., its system of law will be deficient, and there is a point at which the system becomes so disorderly it can be said by an outside observer to be essentially lawless. A fully postmodern society in the sense of total subjectivism, relativism, and skepticism, is unlikely to be around long, or to be one people want to live in--especially if there are others that have not succumbed to such decadence. In any case, it's clear the Cathars weren't subjectivists, relativists and/or skeptics. They believed the Truth was something that could be directly apprehended by the Perfecti initiates.

 

Nature is a good place to start considering that 'man' is only a small part of a much larger system. Extending into supernature of course, which is merely that part of nature which is hidden from humans in their basic state of ignorance.

 

The Cathars certainly believed in absolute moral values., and they saw these values as coming from God, either directly revealed to the Perfects, or revealed by Christ in his teachings. Any way of thinking resembling moral relativism would have been alien to them, and they would perhaps have thought such ideas were the work of the Devil, another snare for the spirit.

 

Seeker of God, esoteric ecumenists, cannot have absolute moral values, as far as I know. They are anathemas to esoteric ecumenism as having such values would be seen as idol worship.

Can you name a few of these so called absolute moral values?

Regards
DL

 

I think it is the supernatural thinkers who are in a state of ignorance, and denial of reality.

Gnostic Christians are naturalists and so I agree that nature is a good teacher.

Tell us, who is the God, or ideal example of any species?

I think it is one of their own and that humans are looking for God above us when he is inside us.

Regards
DL

 

??

Who invented those terms if not humans?

If we did not name those concepts or invent them, who did?

Regards
DL

 

Moral truths can change. You seem to think that morals are objective. I think they are subjective.

Can you show a couple of moral tenets you think are always moral truths?

Regards
DL

 

I feel it's pointless to try to say anything to a person who is so far away from reality.

As we know from the redorded facts of history rather than your fantasies, the Cathars used the Gospel of John, so one would assume they followed the values presented by Christ in that text. The fact that hundreds were ready to die rather then recant is a kind of indicator that they believed in sayings such as 'resist not evil'.

I'm sure I don't need to list what the Gospel values are. If you don't know read the text.

 

So you cannot back up your notion and would rather win some stupid point instead of learning something new.

Pathetic.

Regards
DL

 

The Gnostics had an anti-world and anti-nature philosophy. They belived in a complex set of metaphysical ideas which included the supernatural.

Your ignorance of Gnosticism and of history is quite profound.

 

I answered your question - the Cathars got their basic values from the Gospel of John.

Provide evidence to the contrary from 13th century sources if you disagree.

 

That is a long gospel and I doubt that we would accept it all. In fact, it is not likely as we would reject anything of his supernatural inferences.

Regards
DL

 

I already refuted this with a longish post our hating matter that you did not argue against.

Regards
DL

 

Obviously your 'refutation' was inadequate then. Inadequate because based on falsehood and nonsense.

 

The issue has nothing to do with what the mysterious 'we' would accept or reject. It's about what the 13th century Cathars thought. And it is recorded that they used the Gospel of John.
Provide evidence to the contrary if you can.

 

That or you could not refute it.

You do not even remember reading it. Right?

Get a life.

Regards
DL

 

I myself quote John as well as some of the other gospels.

You are indicating that The Cathars accept all of John and that is not true as far as I know. Provide evidence to the contrary if you can.

Regards
DL

 

I read your posts. I found them to be tiresome and fantastical. Nothing you have said has convinced me of anything but your ignorance and attempts to evade, twist and falsify.

No such evidence exists. So what you say is pure speculation.

You quote the Bible in one post and denounce it as a 'vile book' in another. You can't expect to be taken seriously.

 

Then ignore me. You sure are not reading what I give you with the right mind set.

Regards
DL

 

You give nothing but a lot of confused self contradictory nonsense.