The earliest known Christian work, the Gospel of Thomas, was Gnostic.

The Nazarenes, the judeo-christians of the first century, were believed to be Gnostic.

And a similar (possibly equivalent) sect, the Ebionites, were stated as Gnostics by the Gentile Church.

Gnosticism has existed since at least a couple centuries before Christianity, I'm not sure where exactly you could say they started to be a distinct group.

But what's your point?

I'm trying to refute your point of changing religious doctrine to what sells.

But...changing religious doctrine to sell it better to western audiences is your point.

But who is changing?

I think Dvir is getting more to Gnosticism doesn't hold the view that God is an individual and a direct giver of laws.

I'm pretty sure that's true.

Gnosticism takes from Neoplatonic philosophy in many ways, and in itself is a merger of the Hellenistic values of the ancient world and the new Christian values.

And at certain points it was possible that Gnostic doctrine would become dominant in the Christian world. Valentinus, the founder of the Valentinian sect, was inline to become the Pope. It was only after failing to do so that he went his own ways.

And Valentinianism spread throughout the whole Roman Empire, admittedly being primarily practiced by the educated and academics rather than the commoners.

Okay. I'm pretty sure that's all accurate.

I'm sorry, I think it's because it's late for me, I'm just not following.

Can we pick this up later?

I've been trying to follow the conversation and from what I get it's more that melding Gnostism with Christianity would help shore up those parts of Christianty that turn people away from 'religion' and towards more materialistic and nihilistic thinking.

Okay. I understand the utilitarian viewpoint, but I'm afraid I can't agree.

Beliefs should be based around what is correct, not what is useful.

How come no one is debating in the voice chat?

But religion is subjective

Text is good for posterity, helps go over things later.

Just like any other form of the humanities

Hmm? Most religions have concrete statements about objective reality that are true or false.

The Gnostic view of the material world is largely disconnected.

Since it isn't the realm of God

Especially Abrahamic religions.

My microphone is broken. I can't speak for other people though.

I'm on my laptop, and its noisy.

Bookworm, when it comes to religion on what basis would you regard a religion as correct?

When their statements and beliefs align correctly with reality.

Would you concede that the material world is intrinsically flawed?

What religion or faith do you follow? What do you believe aligns the closest with reality?

Alright, I think I'm going to hit the hay. Feel free to send me any questions directly and I'll do my best to respond tomorrow. Good night, guys, it was nice talking to you.

Me, personally? Roman Catholicism.

Would I concede that the material world is intrinsically flawed? ...Intrinsically is the key word there. I think...no.

But there is entropy

Energy is slowly drained

There is division of forces

Have a good night, Bookworm. If you're available tomorrow it would be nice to continue this chat.

Id like to go to,church, problem is the churches here are sketchy as hell and are full off upper middle class chinese. I day this as one.