A) What Gnostics mean by consciousness.
B) What they mean by reason.
C) The prevailing theory of nature and how it determines all judgmental standards and rules of logic. And how Jesus' new theory of nature justifies nonjudgmental standards and rules of logic, which, in turn, empower us to reason in nonjudgmental ways.

A) By "consciousness," Gnostics mean the "psychological context" in which all thoughts take place. The distinction between the context in which we think, and the subject matter or content of our thoughts, is important to understand. For even though we may experience new ideas or beliefs, unless the context/consciousness in which we think has reached its full potential, we could be conscious of those ideas and beliefs in imperfect ways.

We can liken the context or consciousness in which we think to a mold which shapes thoughts and ideas, alters consciousness, and hence our experience. Put any idea into an imperfect mold/consciousness, and it will come out distorted. Put those same ideas into a perfected consciousness and they will come out perfect.

Knowledge of Jesus' theory of nature expands the intellectual mind by adding to it a new process of nonjudgmental reason. This perfects our consciousness and empowers us to be conscious of all our ideas and beliefs in new ways.

The Greek word kosmos, traditionally translated 'world' in Rm 12:2 rsv, can also mean our consciousness of the world. When Paul says in 12:2 "do not be conformed to this world but be transformed by the renewal of your mind…" I suggest he is saying, do not be conformed to the limits of our present consciousness, but be transformed by the renewal of our reasoning mind.

B) By "reasoning," Gnostics mean the process of relating ideas to reach a conclusion. For example, we can relate two ideas as if either one or the other is correct. We can, however, reach a different conclusion by relating these same ideas as if both were correct. When we use the first method, we think of difference as a problem. Such thinking is at the core of conflict in all its forms. When we use the second method, we think of difference as simply difference. This kind of reasoning is the key to both personal and universal harmony.

Reasoning, then, defines the process of relating ideas, not the subject matter being related or the conclusions reached. From this we can conclude that even though humans are born with the capacity to relate ideas, how we learn to relate ideas plays a major role in the outcome of our reasoning process. Learning how to relate ideas/reason in more loving ways is the knowledge or gnosis that Jesus teaches.

Most theologians focus on spiritual approaches to nonjudgment, oneness, and unconditional love, which Jesus taught in public. Like Paul, I focus on what Jesus taught in private - namely, how to create a more loving method of reasoning that can integrate nonjudgmental or spiritual principles into our everyday lives. "See that ye love one another with a pure heart [mind] fervently: being born again* [anew] … by the word [logic] of God (1Pet 1:22-23 kjv)." I call this new method of reasoning nonjudgmental logic.

C) We know Jesus' public teachings. I propose that Jesus' private teachings bring to the light of reason two basic facts about the nature of reality, which I refer to as theories of nature. The first and prevailing theory justifies our current and inherently judgmental method of reasoning. The second theory justifies a new method of nonjudgmental/spiritual reasoning.

By judgmental reasoning, I mean relating ideas in terms of absolutes, either/or, and superior versus inferior.

By nonjudgmental or spiritual reasoning, I mean relating ideas in terms of inclusiveness, both/and, and equality.

Let us now explore the prevailing theory of nature and how it justifies our judgmental method of reasoning; and second, Jesus' theory of nature and how it provides us with the option of non-judgmental/spiritual reasoning.

The Prevailing Theory of Nature

Note: I use the word "class" in its philosophical sense of categories or classes of like objects or ideas-not social classes.

The prevailing theory of nature states that all classes have a single nature. In simple terms, this means that every category/class of things has one essence, form, or nature. In practice, this means that every class is limited to one idea, belief or standard that defines the nature or essence of the entire class. Plato's (427-347 BC) theory of forms is one of the first written examples of the prevailing theory.

The prevailing theory justifies judgmental reasoning for when we accept that only one standard exists for every class, we can be absolutely certain that this, and only this standard, characterizes the entire class. Second, either a standard correctly describes the nature of the entire class or it does not. And third, if there is but one correct standard that describes the nature of the class, that one standard is superior to all others. The point is that our acceptance of the prevailing theory justifies relating ideas in terms of absolutes, either/or, and superiority. This is judgmental reasoning. This kind of reasoning is what makes the concepts of limits, separation and hierarchies reasonable.

Furthermore, the prevailing theory can be considered the root of evil because our traditional rules for correct reasoning are based on that theory, making those rules inherently judgmental. Ingrained in culture, it is these rules that make judgmental reasoning acceptable throughout the world. Aristotle's (384-322 BC) laws of identity, noncontradiction and excluded middle in the West, and the similar Nayaya system in the East, exemplify our judgmental system of rules for correct reasoning. Some may argue that laws of logic do not justify judgmental reasoning, but they do not explain what does. I argue that uncivilized cultures reason in ways that are far different from our own. This indicates that how we process ideas is a product of culture, not an innate process. How we reason is learned, and therefore, can vary according to cultural influences, i.e., laws or norms of culture.

We can be sure that Jesus was aware of the global significance of judgmental rules of logic. In Gal 3:22 kjv, Paul says that we are "all under sin." Sin, from the Greek word hamartia, means an "intellectual error in judgment [reason]." (7) What Paul is telling us is that "sin" is global because our reasoning is determined by inappropriate rules of logic which are based on the prevailing theory of nature.

Rules of logic are intended to help us correctly relate ideas. Like rules of grammar that teach us how to communicate coherently, rules of logic should teach us how to relate ideas in reasonable and loving ways. Many have recognized, however, that our traditional and only rules for correct reasoning are judgmental in character. This kind of reasoning is incompatible with the nonjudgmental characteristics of spiritual values.

Paul confirms that judgmental rules of logic work against spiritual principles when he said in Romans 7:22-23 jbv, "in my innermost self I dearly love God's [nonjudgmental/spiritual] law, but I can see that my body follows a different law [judgmental law] that battles against the [nonjudgmental] law which my [innermost/spiritual] reason dictates." (Rm 7:25 jbv).

Like others, Jesus recognized that our present rules for correct reasoning are inherently judgmental. Unlike others, however, Jesus went the next step. He revealed why those rules are judgmental, namely because they are justified by our acceptance of the prevailing theory. He also recognized that this theory is not true for all classes-specifically, human nature. This calls into question the use of rules based on this theory in human affairs.

The point is that Jesus was the first to recognize that the prevailing theory of nature, and its rules for correct reasoning, is the source of judgmental characteristics in our method of reasoning. It is through our thoughts that these characteristics produce the judgmental nature of our reality. Without the prevailing theory and subsequent rules for correct reasoning, evil would disappear of its own accord-for judgment is behind every evil thought.

Rm 5:12 is one example of evidence that the prevailing theory of nature is at the root of sin. Here Paul explains that Jesus blamed the prevailing theory of nature for letting sin into the world by using the Greek term "henos anthropos"-which means one mankind or one human nature. When Paul uses these terms, he is referring to the prevailing theory of nature, which limits humanity, as a class, to one nature-henos anthropos. The term appears in 5:12, however, as "one man."

"sin entered the world through one man [henos anthropos]…"

Traditionally, henos anthropos is understood as the "one-man, Adam," who let sin into the world. I suggest that if Paul meant Adam, he would have said 'Adam', not henos anthropos. And, if Paul meant one man instead of mankind, he would have used the Greek word for a man, aner, not anthropos. And if Adam is the one man who let sin into the world, isn't it strange that Jesus doesn't mention this?

If we want a more loving and nonjudgmental world, we must free our minds from the limits of the prevailing theory of nature and its judgmental rules and learn to reason more lovingly. The theory of nature Jesus revealed is that some classes, specifically mankind, have more than one nature. This justifies the need for additional rules of logic, which support reasoning nonjudgmentally and lovingly.

Jesus' theory of nature is implicit in the plural form of the Greek word anthropos/mankind-namely anthropoi-which, for Paul, meant mankinds or many human natures (Rm 3:5, 2:16, 1Co 2:5). Simply stated, when Paul used the term anthropoi, he is challenging the use of the prevailing theory as the sole foundation for our rules of logic. The term anthropoi implies that there are many human natures, not one (henos anthropos), as the prevailing theory assumes.

The idea of many human natures can be found in the ancient Greek concept of four psychological natures - sanguine, phlegmatic, melancholic, and choleric. Social scientists like Carl Jung, William James, and Eric Fromm, all made references to four types of human beings. The Myers Briggs personality test, for example, divides us into types, or natures, A, B, C and D personalities.

The new sciences of relativity and quantum mechanics also confirm Jesus' theory that some classes have more than one nature. For example, light has the nature of both a particle and a wave and time is both relative and chronological.

The very important point is Jesus recognized that no one had ever proved or could prove that there is but one human nature. In fact he surly argued that there is much evidence that humanity consists of many human natures. Based on these facts Jesus argued that until some one could prove that humanity shared a common nature we are logically and by necessity competed to create a system of logical laws reflecting the idea that humanity has many natures.

This new system will be inherently nonjudgmental, for diversity within multiple nature classes would be natural and therefore logical. Simply said, when differences occur in multiple nature classes those differences will not be perceived as a problem but simply as difference.

Jesus's theory of nature that humanity has more than one nature is consistent today with the findings of science. The new sciences demonstrate that some classes like light time and mass have more than one nature at the same time. This makes Jesus's theory more creditable, if it is scientifically true that some classes have more than one nature there is all the more reason to recognize that humanity consists of more than one nature too.

Again, what is important is that Paul uses the term anthropoi to alert us to the fact that if there were more than one human nature/anthropoi, there would be many standards, not one, by which to characterize human beings. Jesus' theory of nature then, justifies that the diversity of human nature is natural, and therefore, reasonable. This establishes the need for nonjudgmental laws of logic, which in turn, create the foundation for a nonjudgmental method of reasoning. I propose the laws of diversity, complementarity and included middle. This is nonjudgmental logic and the door through which the concepts of oneness, unconditional love and equality can enter our thoughts. When these thoughts become spontaneous this is enlightenment.

Why the theory that some classes have more than one nature is fundamentally different from all other paths to enlightenment than is it conforms to logical and scientific evidence. What this means is that we can argue in court that we must create and teach a system of nonjudgmental laws of logic in every school just as Darwin's theory of evolution was demonstrated as scientifically true and therefore must be a natural part of all school curriculums.

Top

Copyright © February 2, 2001, William C. Kiefert