Interesting...
Apr. 12th, 2004 12:08 am![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
conuly
Now that my interest in Gnosticism has been piqued (not peaked), I went to ReligiousTolerance to see what they have to say.
Deity: The Supreme Father God or Supreme God of Truth is remote from human affairs; he is unknowable and undetectable by human senses. She/he created a series of supernatural but finite beings called Aeons. One of these was Sophia, a virgin, who in turn gave birth to an defective, inferior Creator-God, also known as the Demiurge. (Demiurge means "public craftsman" in Greek.) This lower God created the earth and its life forms. This is Jehovah, the God of the Hebrew Scriptures (Old Testament). He is viewed by Gnostics as fundamentally evil, jealous, rigid, lacking in compassion and prone to genocide. The Demiurge "thinks that he is supreme. His pride and incompetence have resulted in the sorry state of the world as we know it, and in the blind and ignorant condition of most of mankind."
Hm. Wait. Haven't I heard this before (and not in my previous visits to this site)? It's almost exactly the theme of The Golden Compass trilogy! Unfortunately, nobody else seems to have realized this. It's not mentioned on the few linked sites (though the Matrix is), and on Amazon...
Agnosticism under the cover of children's fantasy
What started out as an excellent fantasy yarn became more and more darker as it progressed. Although Pullman's narrative style is good and he paints a realistic fantasy world, what should be worrying for all parents (never mind of what relegious leanings) is his indirect attack on relegion.
Agnostic? No, since there is clearly a God, and other supernatural entities.
To begin with we wouldn't have a problem with his atheistic perspective, if it was nicely set, and the philosophical questions expressed in the book were not so completely naive.
Atheist? No, atheists don't hate God, they don't believe in the existence of any deity.
I say this is not a good book for christains,Jews, or anybody who follows a religon dealing with God. I also don't recomend this for people who are lost without a religon or un sure about it...This may just waver you in the wrong direction.
If your faith is so weak, you really need to discuss that with your religious leader. You may not *like* to read this book if you follow one of those religions, and that is your choice, but it's not inherantly wrong to do so.
I loved Harry Potter, but this book is not in the same area. Readers beware
Okay, not related, but STOP COMPARING EVERYTHING TO HARRY POTTER!!!!
Sorry to disturb your atheist fantasies, but Catholicism has ALWAYS been anti-Christian
1. Not atheist. 2. Um, what? They follow Christ too, don't they?
Pullman is openly aetheist, but taking his cause to kids is a pretty cheap shot.
He may be atheist, but this book is NOT about atheism. Were it, there wouldn't be the need to have a battle in the first place. Aside from that, I might as easily (and with more justification) ask religious folks to stop taking their cause to kids.
If I were an athiest, I'd undoubtedly love this series.
Why? What about it do you think appeals to the atheist mind more than the religious mind?
Well, I could go on, but nobody seems to have caught onto the obvious. So I'll search google. I'm typing this BEFORE I search, so Google might just prove me wrong....
I've been vindicated! Kinda. Well, at least I'm not the only one who realizes that it isn't an atheistic book.
Oh, and before you ask, I didn't like the third one very much, it got slow.
Deity: The Supreme Father God or Supreme God of Truth is remote from human affairs; he is unknowable and undetectable by human senses. She/he created a series of supernatural but finite beings called Aeons. One of these was Sophia, a virgin, who in turn gave birth to an defective, inferior Creator-God, also known as the Demiurge. (Demiurge means "public craftsman" in Greek.) This lower God created the earth and its life forms. This is Jehovah, the God of the Hebrew Scriptures (Old Testament). He is viewed by Gnostics as fundamentally evil, jealous, rigid, lacking in compassion and prone to genocide. The Demiurge "thinks that he is supreme. His pride and incompetence have resulted in the sorry state of the world as we know it, and in the blind and ignorant condition of most of mankind."
Hm. Wait. Haven't I heard this before (and not in my previous visits to this site)? It's almost exactly the theme of The Golden Compass trilogy! Unfortunately, nobody else seems to have realized this. It's not mentioned on the few linked sites (though the Matrix is), and on Amazon...
Agnosticism under the cover of children's fantasy
What started out as an excellent fantasy yarn became more and more darker as it progressed. Although Pullman's narrative style is good and he paints a realistic fantasy world, what should be worrying for all parents (never mind of what relegious leanings) is his indirect attack on relegion.
Agnostic? No, since there is clearly a God, and other supernatural entities.
To begin with we wouldn't have a problem with his atheistic perspective, if it was nicely set, and the philosophical questions expressed in the book were not so completely naive.
Atheist? No, atheists don't hate God, they don't believe in the existence of any deity.
I say this is not a good book for christains,Jews, or anybody who follows a religon dealing with God. I also don't recomend this for people who are lost without a religon or un sure about it...This may just waver you in the wrong direction.
If your faith is so weak, you really need to discuss that with your religious leader. You may not *like* to read this book if you follow one of those religions, and that is your choice, but it's not inherantly wrong to do so.
I loved Harry Potter, but this book is not in the same area. Readers beware
Okay, not related, but STOP COMPARING EVERYTHING TO HARRY POTTER!!!!
Sorry to disturb your atheist fantasies, but Catholicism has ALWAYS been anti-Christian
1. Not atheist. 2. Um, what? They follow Christ too, don't they?
Pullman is openly aetheist, but taking his cause to kids is a pretty cheap shot.
He may be atheist, but this book is NOT about atheism. Were it, there wouldn't be the need to have a battle in the first place. Aside from that, I might as easily (and with more justification) ask religious folks to stop taking their cause to kids.
If I were an athiest, I'd undoubtedly love this series.
Why? What about it do you think appeals to the atheist mind more than the religious mind?
Well, I could go on, but nobody seems to have caught onto the obvious. So I'll search google. I'm typing this BEFORE I search, so Google might just prove me wrong....
I've been vindicated! Kinda. Well, at least I'm not the only one who realizes that it isn't an atheistic book.
Oh, and before you ask, I didn't like the third one very much, it got slow.
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
So many things wrong with those...
Date: 2004-04-11 09:55 pm (UTC)2. It's a FREAKING FANTASY. If an agnostic like yours truly can enjoy a blatant Christian allegory purely on its merits as a story, then surely you tetchy Troo Believers can cope with the fact that this GASP heretical book is also a /good read/. Shock horror. News at eleven.
3. Catholics were Christian before your piddly American sect was even thought of. You may think you're /better/ Christians, but that doesn't mean you are and they /aren't/. Dumbfuck.
(I wasn't even raised Catholic, and I bloody hate that. If you must be prejudiced at least be /remotely accurate/.)
Re: So many things wrong with those...
Date: 2004-04-11 09:57 pm (UTC)Re: So many things wrong with those...
Date: 2004-04-11 09:59 pm (UTC)Re: So many things wrong with those...
Date: 2004-04-11 10:00 pm (UTC)But I was upset, I actually pondered whether or not I still enjoyed them now that I knew they were preaching. Then I realized that was stupid and went back to reading.
Re: So many things wrong with those...
Date: 2004-04-11 10:05 pm (UTC)Ahahaha, that's about my reaction. "Hm. Should I mind that he's sneakily expressing his beliefs-- fuck that, they're still the same books. *rereads*"
Granted, my parents were big churchgoers when I was wee and they kinda clued me in early on (also the whole sacrifice dealie? really hard to miss if you're paying attention).
But still. Dude. If you like them, you like them. I can't figure out why people get all OMG I WUZ BETRAYED. *shrug* :)
Re: So many things wrong with those...
Date: 2004-04-11 10:12 pm (UTC)Strangely, though, I can name quite a few Catholic saints and what they do and why they're saints and how you recognize them in paintings. I'm not sure how I acquired this knowledge.
So, um, yeah, I missed out on the religious hints until high school.
Re: So many things wrong with those...
Date: 2004-04-12 07:50 am (UTC)I've avoided His Dark Materials, but I've been thinking I should read them sometime, because they're supposed to be good anyway, and after all I can hardly argue about them if I've never read them. I think the main reason I avoided them is because I worry that I'll be so busy disagreeing with the philosophy behind it that I won't enjoy it. Which is probably silly.
no subject
Date: 2004-04-11 11:53 pm (UTC)I'm getting all my Xian sects confused, and my books are packed up in boxes right now. Le sad.
no subject
Date: 2004-04-12 12:19 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2004-04-12 07:34 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2004-04-14 11:16 am (UTC)Having just the His Dark Materials trilogy, and really liking most of it except for the infuriating ending (pointless, artificial sadness without any point or sacrifice), I do agree that it's Gnostic-influenced.
If you want another excellent summary of gnostic beliefs, read A Voyage to Arcturus (http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0803280041/zagidulinnet-20) by David Lindsay (not to be confused with Hal Lindsey ;).
The writing is terrible, the setting and characters are feverishly imaginative, original, insane and unforgettable, and it also has the privilege of being one of the books I despise the most.
As far as Gnosticism in most of its guises, goes, my feelings for it went from admiration and curiosity, to disgust and disdain, for the simple reason that most of the Gnostic sects (and there are as many as in Christianity) tend to be Despisers of the Body (and, by exension, misogynistic).
The Divine is best experienced through gnosis (direct personal knowledge)? Sure, right on!
Jehova-1 of the Jews is actually a false god, a Demiurge, and the real god is distant? Eh, whatever.
Creation is flawed and evil, pleasure is evil, the body is a corrupt prison for divine sparks of spirit that are just begging to be released? Give me a fucking break!
no subject
Date: 2004-04-14 04:58 pm (UTC)I am certainly capable of adding whatever I like about gnostic beliefs into my cult and losing the rest, anyway. God knows they don't have the monopoly on misogynistic, repressed attitudes. Unfortunately.
So many things wrong with those...
Date: 2004-04-11 09:55 pm (UTC)2. It's a FREAKING FANTASY. If an agnostic like yours truly can enjoy a blatant Christian allegory purely on its merits as a story, then surely you tetchy Troo Believers can cope with the fact that this GASP heretical book is also a /good read/. Shock horror. News at eleven.
3. Catholics were Christian before your piddly American sect was even thought of. You may think you're /better/ Christians, but that doesn't mean you are and they /aren't/. Dumbfuck.
(I wasn't even raised Catholic, and I bloody hate that. If you must be prejudiced at least be /remotely accurate/.)
Re: So many things wrong with those...
Date: 2004-04-11 09:57 pm (UTC)Re: So many things wrong with those...
Date: 2004-04-11 09:59 pm (UTC)Re: So many things wrong with those...
Date: 2004-04-11 10:00 pm (UTC)But I was upset, I actually pondered whether or not I still enjoyed them now that I knew they were preaching. Then I realized that was stupid and went back to reading.
Re: So many things wrong with those...
Date: 2004-04-11 10:05 pm (UTC)Ahahaha, that's about my reaction. "Hm. Should I mind that he's sneakily expressing his beliefs-- fuck that, they're still the same books. *rereads*"
Granted, my parents were big churchgoers when I was wee and they kinda clued me in early on (also the whole sacrifice dealie? really hard to miss if you're paying attention).
But still. Dude. If you like them, you like them. I can't figure out why people get all OMG I WUZ BETRAYED. *shrug* :)
Re: So many things wrong with those...
Date: 2004-04-11 10:12 pm (UTC)Strangely, though, I can name quite a few Catholic saints and what they do and why they're saints and how you recognize them in paintings. I'm not sure how I acquired this knowledge.
So, um, yeah, I missed out on the religious hints until high school.
Re: So many things wrong with those...
Date: 2004-04-12 07:50 am (UTC)I've avoided His Dark Materials, but I've been thinking I should read them sometime, because they're supposed to be good anyway, and after all I can hardly argue about them if I've never read them. I think the main reason I avoided them is because I worry that I'll be so busy disagreeing with the philosophy behind it that I won't enjoy it. Which is probably silly.
no subject
Date: 2004-04-11 11:53 pm (UTC)I'm getting all my Xian sects confused, and my books are packed up in boxes right now. Le sad.
no subject
Date: 2004-04-12 12:19 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2004-04-12 07:34 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2004-04-14 11:16 am (UTC)Having just the His Dark Materials trilogy, and really liking most of it except for the infuriating ending (pointless, artificial sadness without any point or sacrifice), I do agree that it's Gnostic-influenced.
If you want another excellent summary of gnostic beliefs, read A Voyage to Arcturus (http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0803280041/zagidulinnet-20) by David Lindsay (not to be confused with Hal Lindsey ;).
The writing is terrible, the setting and characters are feverishly imaginative, original, insane and unforgettable, and it also has the privilege of being one of the books I despise the most.
As far as Gnosticism in most of its guises, goes, my feelings for it went from admiration and curiosity, to disgust and disdain, for the simple reason that most of the Gnostic sects (and there are as many as in Christianity) tend to be Despisers of the Body (and, by exension, misogynistic).
The Divine is best experienced through gnosis (direct personal knowledge)? Sure, right on!
Jehova-1 of the Jews is actually a false god, a Demiurge, and the real god is distant? Eh, whatever.
Creation is flawed and evil, pleasure is evil, the body is a corrupt prison for divine sparks of spirit that are just begging to be released? Give me a fucking break!
no subject
Date: 2004-04-14 04:58 pm (UTC)I am certainly capable of adding whatever I like about gnostic beliefs into my cult and losing the rest, anyway. God knows they don't have the monopoly on misogynistic, repressed attitudes. Unfortunately.