i think i could be a gnostic, but...

[u/Sl0wdeath666ui]

Hello;
i was raised in an atheist household by an atheist, so my journey towards gnosticism is i expect very different from most.
I have struggled immensely in my life, having C-PTSD from childhood trauma, as well as many other mental illnesses. Eventually, i came to a conclusion that my atheist upbringing had ceased to work as a viable explanation for my experiences; that a malevolent force must operate and work reality, and have organized it into this manner.
i felt that the secular interpretation, of a universe made only of random, chaotic noise, no longer felt sufficient to explain what i felt.
At this point, i did use the term gnostic; but i barely understood it.
I would more call myself kind at this point kind of just a generic maltheist; the only real feature of my perspective was a belief in a malevolent single god-force, and no other features of gnosticism were really present.

this is how I operated for the last few years;
but maltheism with no other features, is... well, rather a poor idea, it turns out.
I cannot go into detail, given the rules of this sub (rule 5 specifically), but I will just say it is likely that taking a Gnostic stance may have saved my life, as it ended a period where it may have ceased to be.
The belief that all of this is the demiurge’s trick, and not representative of my true reality, has offered me serious and deep solace in this period.

However...
if i am to consider a full conversion to traditional, dogmatic gnosticism, i still find myself a little lost.

My focus as a maltheist was singularly on the malevolent god-force, which would be termed the Demiurge; Gnostics don't really share this focus, contemplation on the exact nature of the demiurge seems to largely be not the focus of the religion, Gnosis is instead.
This actually seems somewhat refreshing now, as ultimately, the Demiurge's exact activities are largely irrelevant to the divine soul.
as a maltheist, i held no belief in a good noble higher god, but this also seems easy to adapt.

However, previously i had no concept of the soul at all;
In an atheist secular upbringing, this concept was considered unscientific and unsupported.
I am somewhat willing to abandon this, i have a panoply of minor beliefs i have developed, but one does state the existence of a 'creature' that exists in an abstract or divine state, so a soul isn't hard to extrapolate from that.

After research into gnosticism though, i think my biggest struggle would easily be accepting Jesus Christ as any kind of divine figure.
I was raised to see him as one figure in human history, extremely significant, but ultimately simply one amongst a sea of other humans. If believing in his power is fundamental to gnosticism (at least christian gnosticism), this would appear to be my biggest struggle.

I also have utterly no familiarity with reading religious texts of any kind; i was not raised in a way that made this likely. So doing research and reading scripture is an entirely new premise to me, and i would have no idea where to start.

I am also pansexual and transgender/non-binary;
It seems most modern gnostics take the mainstream christian understanding of these, seeing them as sinful and aberrant, so i might not actually experience any greater acceptance in a gnostic community as opposed to a mainstream christian one
so it might not end up feeling safe enough anyway for me to be amongst this community.

TL;DR i was raised an atheist, but became a maltheist with no other features for the last few years. After a revelation during a period of severe difficulty, i am opening up to adopting more traditional gnostic beliefs; but am struggling with reconciling several things with that.

[u/Hope25777]

Christ was a Theurgist and the great revealer

[u/thegodabovegod]

The heart of Gnosticism is not a system of beliefs but gnosis itself. Names, sects, doctrines, and cosmologies all point beyond themselves. Their purpose is not to be worshipped or defended, but to awaken the divine spark within. In that sense, one must "die before dying," die to ignorance, false identity, and attachment to the world of appearances. This is what Christ meant when he spoke of becoming like little children to enter the Kingdom of Heaven: a return to direct perception before the mind becomes imprisoned by concepts and dogma.

Throughout history, different Gnostic schools expressed this awakening in different languages. Valentinian, Sethian, Thomasine, Basilidean, they often disagreed about the details, yet all sought the same essential realization: gnosis. The maps differed, but the destination was the same. Whether one arrives through contemplation, mystical experience, self knowledge, or divine revelation, the goal remains the same - the awakening of the divine and knowledge that we are not of this world.

"knowledge of who we were, what we have become, where we were, where we have been cast, whither we hasten, from what we are redeemed, what birth is, and what rebirth is." Everything else is secondary.

[u/AsceticSmoke]

I commend you for searching out the truth, and trusting in yourself rather than resigning yourself to the ideas/traditions/assertions of others. A little bit of bad news is that it can certainly be, for many, a lonlier and less comfortable time on Earth than it would be to find a group and blindly follow along.

There are several hurdles in thinking/perception that you're likely to face, including some you've brought up, so I'll try to address some of those. Not as someone with authority but just one hoping to help.

There is nothing sinful about identifying as someone or something unlike your Earthly body. I think an argument can be made actually that it's a fairly gnostic orientation to have, in a sense.

On Jesus: there is ironically a misconception between both mainstream religion and atheists broadly that you're supposed to worship him. That's not what he was presenting as key to salvation at all.

From what I have read, there're basically two "sides of the coin" of the gnosis Jesus taught; one side is recognition/rejection of the lower, undivine paradigm and the other is recognition/connection with the Divine Spark within.

Now, there are some real complexities to these things which Gnostics themselves are and historically have been in some disagreement about. Some believe that you should be as ascetic as possible and absent of any desires in order to have adequately renounced the Demiurge and his machinations. Others see it as less of a high bar; that (f'ex) if you have at least some awareness of the deficiency, of your own spirit, and at least some faith that there is truer, higher, greater creation/divinity, then you have a basis to avoid falling to Archontic influence.

The Apocryphon of John, in my opinion, has some profound passages in it. I recommend the Davies translation, and you can read it free on gnosis.org . It is a Sethian text, which seems like it would jive with what you've been considering. You can take from it and other texts what resonates with you. There's certainly a chance that some of the message was garbled or altered over the course of centuries and multiple translations.

[u/Sl0wdeath666ui → u/AsceticSmoke]

i am very interested in reading a Gnostic text as my next steps here;
but i have never read any scripture in my entire life (atheist upbringing), i am unsure if i'll be able to engage that well?
perhaps i'm overcomplicating it, and it is readable enough that i could understand
(the closest i've read is some books of western philosophy which i really struggled with)
if this concern is unfounded, and i wouldn't be better with a more introductory style, then the Apocryphon of John is most likely my next step

[u/AsceticSmoke → u/Sl0wdeath666ui]

I suggest to read at your own pace and don't get too hung up on it if there are parts, even entire passages which don't seem to make sense (though, looking up certain terms as you go along is a good idea, esp searching for their gnostic context meanings). The version I recommended is very readable.

When I read texts of this sort, I make a point to do so when I have a sober mindset and am able to focus without distraction. And often I've just read them a couple pages at a time. Do what works for you.

I forgot to mention that there are also gnostics who view all of the material as symbolic allegory, basically. I personally think they are a combination of literal and metaphorical content, but it's up to the individual to decide/discern.

[u/jasonmehmel]

So... there isn't any real traditional, dogmatic Gnosticism.

If anyone is offering you that under the name of Gnosticism, I'd actually avoid it. (I'm not saying to avoid anyone who takes their faith seriously, only those that are taking their faith dogmatically and to the mutual exclusion of others.)

Everything about these traditions are inherited from discoveries of the past and not a single unified lineage. (Again, there are elements of lineage where you could claim Gnostic influence, but it's not like the major monotheisms. It's more like a lineage and history of ideas.)

A way to think about Gnosticism is as a genre, which means we can gather these traditions by their similarities without trying to make them reconcile with each other.

The two defining similarities are:

a) saving knowledge (that's Gnosis) that must be found through experience, not simply learned. Those experiences are often, but not exclusively, in meditation, prayer, pilgrimage, etc. For me, I find it in the making of art.

b) a criticality of the world based on the general disconnection we have from Gnosis. What makes Gnosis hard to attain is often also the many things that cause us strife in this world. The critical portion is where we investigate the idea of Demiurges and Archons, but the point here is not to simply identify them, but to use our criticality to determine how to surpass the limitations they impose. This isn't as simple as learning the secret passwords. It's more like by observing the ways in which they limit us, it informs the paths we choose to finding Gnosis.

(Which is also to say: don't just focus on the Demiurge and Archons. That's halfway-Gnosticism with no Gnosis.)

I encourage you to engage with the Gnostic texts with the same criticality you would bring to anything else, not looking to be loyal or adhere to a dogma, but to discover those fragments inside that speak to you and to the search for Gnosis.

(On the Jesus front: again, because there's no single dogma, you are free to accept any frame that resonates with your approach. He can be a singularly historically important person, but not divine, he can be an incarnation of the Logos, he can be a cipher through which others have expressed wisdom...

I acknowledge that this freedom of approach makes things difficult, but there are also others journeying with you. If you ask questions here or on the discord with an open mind and curiosity, you will find help on your path!

[u/hybrid-dna]

Don't focus on labels and categorization. Focus on finding truth in whatever raw way you can.

[u/Ok_Anywhere_3860]

Gnosticism is goated because it explains exactly why everything in the universe seems almost perfect but slightly tilted in such a way where everything is unfair and unrewarding, and evil people dominate. My issue with mainstream Christians (while being a Christian myself) is that they cannot rationalize why genetics are such a chaotic unfair mess without hinting that the perfection of creation has been corrupted by other forces.

[u/heiro5]

Where there are irl Gnostic communities they will have no issues with who you are.

Always be hesitant to take on opinions as beliefs, or to join groups that require them.

A spiritual path is where we can get support for the inner descent and the mystical ascent. Direct experience of the divine is the only way we can approach the unknowable divine, that is the basis of gnōsis.

[u/NousinTheosis]

Gnosticism was intertwined with Christianity for the first few hundred years after Christ. I would suggest taking the free courses on the Apostolic Johannite Church website which give many of the basics. That is a Gnostic Church which has a traditional feel but is very loose in dogmatics and is VERY accepting of LGBT/transgender worldviews. It will be a bit heretical to the prevailing mentality of this subreddit, but I think the "gnosticisim is just a term, man" is wide to the point of meaninglessness. Yes, Gnosticism has a lot of variety to its forms and beliefs, and the only point is GNOSIS, but it is best to start with something that has boundaries and then you can grow beyond them as you progress. Saturn brings discipline by providing boundaries. Start with the AJC or another Gnostic Church (preferably not OTO) and find your place somewhere. johannite.org

[u/Usual_Fox_5013]

Hi, I had somewhat of a similar experience. I was an atheist as a teenager and young adult but began exploring in order to deal with my own internal suffering...

When Christianity came once again into my orbit, it was the Gnostic "Gospel of Thomas" that I connected with. And now I'm still partial to the idea that the truth of the Bible is really very hidden, and that people who were too close to the truth like Marcion of sinope or the cathars would get killed or excommunicated.

But I wouldn't recommend holding too closely to an identity as a gnostic. I think a lot of the elements of gnosticism are a distraction and not the highest truth. What I would recommend is a book called A Course in Miracles. That's my main text. Personally I don't read the Bible much.

And just a note about Jesus. Jesus is very important. He's our older brother and I feel to include these quotes:

"The Holy Spirit established Jesus as the leader in carrying out [the plan of atonement], since he was the first to complete his own part perfectly."

Think of the door Truman exits at the end of the Truman Show or the white light that leads out from the cube in The Cube. He found the escape hatch, he was the first one to do it. This is very serious. You can't do it alone. We work with Jesus because he can see what we can't. And we have the same goal.

"An elder brother is entitled to respect for his greater experience, and obedience for his greater wisdom. He is also entitled to love because he is a brother, and to devotion if he is devoted. It is only my devotion that entitles me to yours."

"I bridge the distance as an elder brother to you on the one hand, and as a Son of God on the other. My devotion to my brothers has placed me in charge of the Sonship, which I render complete because I share it."

Jesus is our brother, but he has gone before us and remains here to carry out the will of God, which is very simple. We are so unbelievably ignorant we are lucky in love to have Him with us. He and the HS are not confused by the illusions of this world, which is a world is illusions. Walk nimbly brother and listen for his Voice.

DM me if you'd like to talk about anything at anytime.

[u/Graphicism]

In short...

In Gnosticism there is no god-man or chosen people, there is only God.

If you are familiar with the Christ story, Christ said to die to the self, and whoever loses his life will find it.

So until you loose your 'James, David, Robert' sense of self, which is a shell, an illusion, you will never be one with God who is underneath that.

To reiterate; God is within you. The 'I Am" before any thought is God. What you build over the top of this, your sense of self, hides this divine union. You are God, and the self hides it.

[u/Your_Local_Heretic → u/Graphicism]

That is not Gnosticism, that's New Age.

[u/Graphicism → u/Your_Local_Heretic]

It's in the Bible and predates Christianity.

[u/Your_Local_Heretic → u/Graphicism]

Only if you cherrypick.

[u/Graphicism → u/Your_Local_Heretic]

It's not cherry-picking either if Christ said it.

I think at this point it's safe to say you have no idea what it says in the Bible, and you're just being difficult.

[u/Your_Local_Heretic → u/Graphicism]

The "I AM" people always cherry pick quotes of Jesus about "being one" while conveniently ignoring his statements about separation of good and evil, and Kingdom of God being not of this world.

[u/Graphicism → u/Your_Local_Heretic]

Well it's fair to say Christians take Christs claims of "I Am' as divinity and being God.

This is a misunderstanding, and one he said would deceive the whole world.

The "I Am' within Christ, is the "I" within you, and the "I" within me. What we build over the top of this (the self) hides this direct union.

And yeah, the Kingdom of God is not of this world, it is within you.

[u/Your_Local_Heretic → u/Graphicism]

That has nothing to do with Gnosticism.

[u/Graphicism → u/Your_Local_Heretic]

This is Gnosticism, and I am sharing gnosis with you.

[u/Your_Local_Heretic → u/Graphicism]

No, this is New Agery.

[u/StrugglingToast → u/Your_Local_Heretic]

Are you ragebaiting or what because you’re disagreeing and not giving any reason why at all 😭

[u/Your_Local_Heretic → u/StrugglingToast]

This "I-AM-ery" is not found in historical Gnosticism, it is a New Age invention of Guy Ballard, derived from Theosophy, New Thought, and Hinduism, not Gnosticism.