Originally Posted by angryllama
You are the one making the outrageous claim. I have not seen you produce one verse in the context of the rest of the NT and OT. Gnosticism is an entirely different thing. You are claiming that Jesus was at least in part Gnostic or creating Gnostic philosophy. It is your job to prove it as you are the one posing the oddball claim. I have seen no evidence that this is the case and you are throwing out baseless generalities from my vantage.
google "gnosticism gospel of john"
Two distinct thoughts, and I'm outta here. Gnosticism is subject to two distinct meanings. One the literal "secret teachings of Jesus." John doesn't include that, though he treats Thomas differently than the synoptics. the second notion of gnostic is the early church had to stamp out any notion that a human could, without the church, find God. Thus, the church wanted to deny the zenlike (-: qualities of Jesus, though some come through even the redactions of Trent and earlier.
the gnostics had to be eliminated because they denied the authority of the church. anyone could come to God without the priests and church, and then what would be the use of the Priests and church. Luther raised this later.
Then there's the other question, smaller imo, whether Jesus taught by secret teachings. That's so politically charged, I won't even go there, aside from noting that the gnostic gospels, like Thomas, are interesting and imo fill out some of the redactions that occurred after the Pauline Church became dominant.