An intuitive knowlege of spiritual truths. There were many Gnostic “systems” of beliefs in early Christian times. There was Christian Gnosticism, which the Church declared to be heresy. Basically, people are allowed to be their own prophets-- personal revelation is public. Reason is not important, neither are commonly held truths, or any stable core of doctrine.

Cafeteria Mormonism in truth-- so long as you hold to the lifestyle, you can pick and choose among the theological statements and historical facts.
Here are some statements about ancient gnosticism-- see how it matches:
I beleive that the DaVinci Code is another example of neo-Gnosticism.

And, hey, you can syncrete as much as you want, borrow from other systems as much as you want (American Indian, Catholic, Masons, European occult, pseudo-Muslim, Jewish), and even claim you are following the founders of the LDS church in order to legitimize your desire for spiritual truths-- so long as you don’t get in trouble with the law.

well, according to the lds, the lds do not really hold to any truth as being a final truth, they can be led by “God” to change any truth or even reverse it, claiming it is God that did it and that it is for His purposes and knowledge of why He had them do it.

epi gnose=full experiential knowledge

gnose=knowledge, intillectual

I think the cheif difference between the mormon religion and that of the gnositc ones is that the mormons are expected to either lay aside their own revelation, or only seek a confirming revelation, to the revelation of the prophets in order to maintain the hierarchical standing of the church. The gnositcs had teachers, but each member was expected to have their own revelation for their personal development, not to enforce the ecclisiastical forms and declarations of the leaders for the entire membership.

LDS personal revelation is only considered valid when it applies to a downward heierarchical system; if Joe-Mormon had a revelation that he said was for the entire church, then he would propmtly be ignored, as he did not have the proper “authority” to make such a pronouncement. If he insisted, then he (or for a really radical situation, she) would be disciplined. The church sells personal revelation as a “right” or “benefit” of membership; for the gnostics, it was a requirement and proof of their true spiritual membership in God’s kingdom.

Fascinating analysis. :frowning: Gnostics, then, sought revelation as individuals, and achieved recognition as their revelations were accepted. Bottom-up. LDS require leaders, as anointed, to give revelations to their sheep, who await their instructions. Top-down. It is obvious which one is worse.

Not necessarily;

Afterall, when you don’t challenge their beliefs, mormons are far more consistant and organized than any of the old gnostic sects (Cathars and the modern Ecclesia Gnostica excepted) could ever manage to be :slight_smile:

Right, they have an excellent social support system, and are organized enough to be running a large business empire. The Catholic Church is both top-down and bottom-up.

Gnosis can be a very positive thing, when the people who are low on the ladder are permitted to contribute their own insights. Muslims are generally very much into avoiding leadership hierarchy. Moderate Mullahs apparently are spiritual guides rather than moral policemen. But they have no control over the radical terrorists, because they have no central authority. So there has to be balance.

The people who challenge the LDS leadership hierarchy on the historical and theological problems do tend to get into trouble, but I understand in some areas the need for reform is so desperate that they are letting voices be heard. Genuine, not cosmetic mainstreaming and decentralization has to be the answer for thier problems. If SLC protests too much, then I suppose they could decide to go to “Independence” as refugees. :smiley:

Individual freedom to problem solve and think on one’s own-- “free agency”, if you will, are essential to the human condition. We each determine our own destinies. We are not honeybees.

BJR, that little snip from the other thread belongs here for emphasis: We are–

each fully independant and, ultimately, self sufficient. We are not emanations from a single Soul, or even springing from the creative Mind of God, but billions of independant entities,

DISCLAIMER: The views and opinions expressed in these forums do not necessarily reflect those of Catholic Answers. For official apologetics resources please visit