I've recently been researching the history of Gnosticism and I am struck by the number of Gnostic tendencies that the modern church has imbibed without realizing it. This post assumes readers will know what Gnosticism is, but if you do not and would like a good overview of it, see the following articles:
Following are eight Gnostic myths that much of the contemporary evangelical church has adopted (and obviously I am generalizing, a practice I defend here).
Gnostic Myth # 1: Christianity isn’t a Religion, it’s a Relationship
By relocating the nexus of religion in the private experience of each individual and self-consciously downplaying the public and corporate aspects connoted by the word “religion”, much of contemporary evangelicalism has unknowingly drunk deeply from the wells of Gnosticism. In the process, much of the modern church has lost the categories with which to think about Christendom, viewing the faith primarily through an individualistic lens.
Those interested in exploring this aspect further should consult the following resources
- the first essay in Stephen Perks’ Common-Law Wives and Concubines
- James McDonald's article Religion: Does it Deserve a Bad Rap
Gnostic Myth # 2: Salvation Means Going to Heaven When You Die
For much of the contemporary evangelical community, the doctrine of bodily resurrection of believers has been eclipsed by the innovation that salvation means living in heaven for eternity. It is revealing that many evangelicals find nothing amiss with the idea that the immortality of the soul, not the resurrection of the body, is the goal of personal salvation. Moreover, recent surveys have shown that many Christians no longer believe that their bodies will be resurrected at all.
Those interested in exploring this further should continue reading this paper or consult the following resources:
- N.T. Wright’s book Surprised by Hope
- my blog post "Resurrection or Disembodiment? Gnosticism in Evangelical Theology."
Gnostic Myth # 3: The Material World isn’t Important
Under the influence of Gnostic myth # 2, as well as various eschatologies which teach a lack of organic continuity between what happens during this age and the future renewal, many Christians have colluded with the Gnostic notion that what happens in this world is unimportant to God.
Those interested in exploring this aspect further would do well to consult the following resources:
- Os Guinness’ book Fit Bodies Fat Minds
- my article "Recovering the Protestant Affirmation of Life."
Gnostic Myth # 4: Institutional Religion is Bad
Having been suckered into embracing a number of Gnostic dualisms, many modern Christians automatically think that institutional religion is at odds with genuine heart-felt faith, and that whatever we give to the former is less we have for the latter.
Those interested in exploring this aspect further should consult
- DeYoung and Kluck's Why We Love the Church: In Praise of Institutions and Organized Religion
- my article ‘Institutional Religion.'
Gnostic Myth # 5: It isn’t Going to Last Forever
Agreeing with the Gnostics that the physical world is destined for the cosmic rubbish heap, many evangelicals have assumed that the only work which lasts forever is the work of saving souls. Raising families, building cathedrals, reading novels and trimming hedges are only of temporal importance. This is often motivated by an unconscious dualism between creation and redemption, as if God’s purposes for the latter had nothing to do with His original intensions in the former.
Those interested in exploring this further should consult the following resources:
- David Hegeman’s Ploughing in Hope
- David Field’s excellent online source ‘Not the Least Lash Lost'
- my article 'Recovering The Protestant Affirmation of Life.'
Gnostic Myth # 6: Jesus’ Kingdom is not of this World
Having misinterpreted the Greek of Jesus’ words in John 18:36, many evangelicals have been given the perfect excuse for rushing like lemmings off the cliff of Orthodoxy into the swirling currents of Gnosticism, where they have been drowned in the idea that God’s Kingdom is anything but the rule of Christ on the earth.
Those interested in exploring this further should consult
- Peter Leithart’s Against Christianity
- THIS list of resources I put together
Gnostic Myth # 7: Knowledge saves
An assumption among much popular Protestantism (although it is not to be found in the Protestant creeds) is that in order to be saved by the gospel one must understand the gospel. The idea that genuine faith must be self-conscious faith has unconsciously oriented many evangelicals to locate the soteriological nexus in a cognitive state, whether faith, doctrinal exactitude or personal assurance. John Wesley, for example, came close to suggesting that salvation was impossible outside the cognitive state of ‘assurance.’ “I never yet knew,” he told an enquirer in 1740, “one soul thus saved, without what you call ‘the faith of assurance’: I mean a sure confidence, that by the merits of Christ he was reconciled to the favour of God.” The Journal of the Rev. John Wesley, A.M. , ed. N. Curnock, Vol. 2 (London, 1911), pp. 333 f.
Equally one finds that the ability to articulate justification in broadly sola fide categories becomes the litmus test for whether a person is truly saved. Ironically these external tokens of salvation are often held up as the alternative to the legalistic superstition that is allegedly operative whenever external rituals like circumcision, baptism or works are viewed as proof of salvation.
Those interested in reading more about this should consult
- Step 3 of my article, 'Sola Fide: The Great Ecumenical Doctrine.'
- From Eucharist to Pulpit.'
Gnostic Myth # 8: God Doesn’t Work Through Means
Echoing the anti-creational orientation of classical Gnosticism, much of the modern evangelical community is uncomfortable acknowledging that God’s grace can be mediated through physical means and instruments. The sacraments are thus reduced to mere symbols for the much more important work which is invisible and non-physical.
This mentality has led some evangelicals to making anti-sacramentalism a central pillar in defining their movement For example, the ministers of the London Baptist Association defined Evangelicalism as being “in opposition to Sacramentarianism; the simplicity of the communion of the Lord’s Supper, in opposition to the doctrine of the Real Presence” From The Christian, 5 October 1888, p. 5, cited by by D.W. Bebbington in Evangelicalism in Modern Britain: A History from the 1730s to the 1980s , Unwin Hyman Ltd, 1989, p. 4.
Those interested in understanding some of the historical factors that has led to this situation (at least as far as American Christianity is concerned), should check out the following resources:
- The Problem of Mediation in the First Great Awakening
- American P.I.E.
- A Critical Absence of the Divine: How a ‘Zero-Sum’ Theology Destroys Sacred Space
- The Mercersburg Theology and the Quest for Reformed Catholicity
These and other Gnostic tendencies within Protestantism may well be one of the reasons so many evangelicals have been turning to Roman Catholicism and Eastern Orthodoxy for spiritual consolation, although it is certain that both these traditions are not without their own unique manifestations of crypto Gnosticism.
Further Reading
- A Critical Absence of the Divine: How a ‘Zero-Sum’ Theology Destroys Sacred Space
- Are Calvinists Also Among the Gnostics?
- Was Jonathan Edwards a Gnostic?
- The Strange Outbreak of Canadian Gnosticism
- Dorothy Sayers Against the Gnostics
- Review of Against the Protestant Gnostics
- Resurrection or Disembodiment?
- The Glory of Institutional Religion
- Tom Wright on Gnosticism
- Aids or Idols? The Place of Images in Worship
- Salvation as Escape from the Body (Evangelicalism & Gnosticism Part 1)
------------------------------
Read my columns at the Charles Colson Center
Read my writings at Alfred the Great Society
To join my mailing list, send a blank email to robin (at sign) atgsociety.com with “Blog Me” in the subject heading.
Click Here to friend-request me on Facebook and get news feeds every time new articles are added to this blog.
Click Here to follow me on Twitter.

15 comments:
Great post! I so much appreciated the paragraph about the true hope of the Christian; that being the resurrection from the dead. I so often feel like an outsider with my hope not resting in the so-called immortality of the soul, but rather the resurrection from the grave. This being a belief that few hold where pastors constantly rail against it and deride any who hold such a belief.
I truly hope this doctrine will be "resurrected" as it were from the Scriptures and embraced by believers regardless of how they may be mocked by most in the church.
Blessings!
Thanks Michael. I have expanded on this at http://robinphillips.blogspot.com/2010/06/resurrection-or-disembodiment.html
Michael, there's been some comments over on my latest post on Gnosticism and resurrection that I'd love to get your response to.
It's interesting how we can so easily accept ideas and concepts as being part of historic Christian belief without even being familiar with historic Christian belief. Your list and so many other things today are readily accepted as "truth". The Reformation concept of the right of private interpretation has done much to foster this idea in fragmenting Christianity.
Robin, very interesting. I wrote my doctoral thesis on the Gnostic trends in local congregations (Trinity Episcopal School for Ministry-2007). It is a raging problem & is causing all kinds of damage. I believe Hans Jonas' shorthand definition of Gnosticism helps as well: anti-cosmic dualism.
I really gained a lot from Philip Lee's book which you mention; "Against the Protestant Gnostics". I believe he has hit almost all the nails firmly on their "spiritual" heads...so to speak.
Brilliant! Lee's book (and T. Howard's Evangelical Is Not Enough) opened my eyes to the fullness of the catholic faith.
I find your observations relevant and to the point. You are obviously a person of research and thinking. I ask you to consider something that is of my opinion essential to do accurate research. You focus a lot on the differences between a christian vs gnostic standpoint in scriptural materials and ideas. My heartfelt thought is that you would do more good by focusing on the "validity" of such matters of the church, be they christian gnostics,or protestants, or what have you. Seeking the truth of what is, cannot offend God. God IS truth and can only be glorified in it.
You may choose to not repost this but I hope you shall. There needs to be a fair discussion among God's children. I welcome a response with no ill will.
May Christ be with you.
Alex.
Thanks Alex. I agree completely. I have been discussing some of these issues with the people at Orthodox bridge at http://orthodoxbridge.com/
Robin,
I've only recently stumbled across your internet writings and have had time only for a cursory glance at them. My initial impression (perhaps mistaken?) is that most folks would put you in the Reformed camp, maybe in the truly Reformed camp. Except ...
Point 7: Knowledge saves. I concur with what you've written here. But, I wonder -- would this render Sproul "gnostic" when he insists that the "the gospel" is reduceable "believe that salvation is by faith alone apart from works?" And, then, there's ...
Point 8: God doesn't work through means. Interesting, each week when the men of our parish meet for Evening Prayer, that liturgy concludes with a prayer that includes thanksgiving to God "for the means of grace," intending by that phrase to point (minimally) to the cardinal sacraments. Moreoever, we join our Lutheran, Roman, and Orthodox friends in believing in the Real Presence, and that baptism does something more than make someone wet.
The point: why not ex opere operato where it is warranted, instead of repudiating it because the pre-Reformation Romans corrupted and abused the doctrine?
Again, I ask, because some of my Very Truly Reformed brothers gag at the sacramental theology I've embraced in my dotage.
Finally, have you yet written anything about the power of regular participation in liturgy as a sort of innoculation against all the gnostic errors you've surveyed above? If you haven't, give some thought in that direction. I know I've been thinking along these lines for several years now.
I agree with most of your points, but not totally sure I agree with #7. I do agree that knowledge alone doesn't save, but isn't knowledge of the gospel necessary for one to come to Christ? Can you clarify your point there?
I don't agree with Wesley in his quote either by the way.
Clarification of what I meant on point 7 can be found by going to step 3 at http://liturgicalinstitute.wordpress.com/?p=646&preview=true
Have you any developed thoughts about Gnosticism among Catholics and Orthodox?
Robin, I came to this post (and followed it to several other of your writings) from http://crossed-the-tiber.blogspot.com/. I am adding you to my blogroll. This is good stuff, very well thought out and researched. I am a mid-40s, lifelong non-denominational Christian. My wife and I, along with our two young children attend a large evangelical church. Yet I have been thinking, praying, writing, and reading much for the past several years about some of the serious flaws in Protestant thinking. This is hugely helpful. Thanks!
Brother in Christ,
I am a Lutheran pastor who has taught against many of the same errors, yet not as clearly identified with obvious Gnostic heresy alive and well in Christianity today. Very well done. God bless and keep you and yours.
Post a Comment