Gnostic Orthodoxy? Ogdoad and Sunday?

Gnostic Symbol — Words mean “Eternal Sun”
(Image public domain via Wikipedia)

COGwriter

Partially to explain church history, many Roman Catholic and Protestant scholars teach that there was a parting of the ways.

Academia.edu sent an email today with the link to a paper that contained the following from Abhimanyu Kalsotra:

Even though there was a conscious attempt to digress from Judaism, Christianity was dependent on Judaism. In fact, the first Christian missionaries were taking over the work of the Jewish diaspora by using the same contacts, buildings, helpers. Archaeological findings by Eric Meyers in Venosa show that the Jewish and Christian burials reflect the interdependence wherein there were no clear marks of demarcations in the burials. 6 The Jerusalem Church was growing hostile to the Pauline theology and finally, during the sixties, the Jerusalem Church lost its Christian significance and universal appeal because of its growing revolt against the Roman Empire. The revolt lasted for four years, 66-70 CE, after which no substantial Jewish Christian community returned to Jerusalem. 7 During this period of ‘religious terrorism’ Zealots roamed the countryside. Religious leaders were killed and most survivors fled to Asia Minor, Egypt, Alexandria.

This development gave impetus to shift the Christian gravitas to Rome from Jerusalem. The theological vacuum left by the Jerusalem Church was filled by the theological work of Paul. This was supported by the four Gospels of Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John. Mark presented Jesus as a deity in the first biographical account of Jesus. Luke presented a Pauline head to the decapitated trunk of Jerusalem Jesus. Matthew reflected the change of balance being accepted by the Christian communities as far as Africa and Asia. Finally, the gospel of John marked the triumph of the Pauline theology. 8 This initiated the process of consolidation of Christianity.

By the early second century CE, orthodox Christianity adopted the gnostic device. This was systematised by Hegesippus, an orthodox writer from the east, in hundred and eight CE. 9 Gnosticism itself originated in the late first, early second century CE among the Jewish and Christian sects and emphasised individual enlightenment while undermining the authority of the traditional orthodox bodies. Their teachings were put in writing as ‘Gospel of the Egyptians’ in Coptic but it was later declared heretical. Gnosticism was adopted by Christianity to give a multifocal vision of Jesus and his ideas and to broaden the appeal of his teachings. This development led to two major consequences, one that Christianity had to accept a large number of contradictory theology and historical facts; two that it preserved the universalist spirit of Christianity. (Abhimanyu Kalsotra. Rise of Christianity: Developments in 1st to 4th Century CE. Academia.edu received 11/24/25)

Well, what is CALLED orthodoxy adopted Gnostic philosophies, but the original true faith did not. The TRUE FAITH DID NOT END UP ACCEPTING A LARGE NUMBER OF CONTRADICTORY AND HISTORICAL FACTS. There was no “universalist spirit” in Christianity the way the above author seems to intend.

An interesting point of the above from Abhimanyu Kalsotra is that both Roman Catholic and Protestant scholars have denounced Gnosticism as false and pagan. Notice, for example, what The Catholic Encyclopedia has about Gnosticism:

The doctrine of salvation by knowledge. This definition, based on the etymology of the word (gnosis “knowledge”, gnostikos, “good at knowing”), is correct as far as it goes, but it gives only one, though perhaps the predominant, characteristic of Gnostic systems of thought. Whereas Judaism and Christianity, and almost all pagan systems, hold that the soul attains its proper end by obedience of mind and will to the Supreme Power, i.e. by faith and works, it is markedly peculiar to Gnosticism that it places the salvation of the soul merely in the possession of a quasi-intuitive knowledge of the mysteries of the universe and of magic formulae indicative of that knowledge. Gnostics were “people who knew”, and their knowledge at once constituted them a superior class of beings, whose present and future status was essentially different from that of those who, for whatever reason, did not know. A more complete and historical definition of Gnosticism would be:

A collective name for a large number of greatly-varying and pantheistic-idealistic sects, which flourished from some time before the Christian Era down to the fifth century, and which, while borrowing the phraseology and some of the tenets of the chief religions of the day, and especially of Christianity, held matter to be a deterioration of spirit, and the whole universe a depravation of the Deity, and taught the ultimate end of all being to be the overcoming of the grossness of matter and the return to the Parent-Spirit, which return they held to be inaugurated and facilitated by the appearance of some God-sent Saviour.

However unsatisfactory this definition may be, the obscurity, multiplicity, and wild confusion of Gnostic systems will hardly allow of another. …

Whereas formerly Gnosticism was considered mostly a corruption of Christianity, it now seems clear that the first traces of Gnostic systems can be discerned some centuries before the Christian Era. …

Wilhelm Anz pointed out the close similarity between Babylonian astrology and the Gnostic theories of the Hebdomad and Ogdoad. Though in many instances speculations on the Babylonian Astrallehre have gone beyond all sober scholarship, yet in this particular instance the inferences made by Anz seem sound and reliable. (Arendzen, John. “Gnosticism.” The Catholic Encyclopedia. Vol. 6. New York: Robert Appleton Company, 1909)

Although condemned by the Church of Rome, aspects of Gnosticism have long affected it.

For just one example, the Roman Catholic priest and scholar John Arendzen mentioned the ogdoad–a term signifyng eight.

The alleged Epistle of Barnabas (c. 135 A.D.) from Alexandria is sometimes also cited by Sunday supporters, but scholars do not believe that Barnabas wrote it, and it essentially claims God wanted the ‘eighth day’ instead of the seventh-day Sabbath in the Book of Isaiah (even though terms for eight or eighth are never mentioned in Isaiah).  It should be understood that the “eighth day” was popular with those involved with Greek philosophy at that time (which included most of the “educated” classes).

The idea of Christianity being tied to an “eighth” comes from a concept held by Gnostic heretics that the Logos (Jesus) was related to the Ogdoad (a word signifying eight). Irenaeus condemned that as a heresy in the second century and noted the following:

By the conjunction of Logos and Zoo were brought forth Anthropos and Ecclesia; and thus was formed the first-begotten Ogdoad, the root and substance of all things, called among them by four names, viz., Bythus, and Nous, and Logos, and Anthropos. For each of these is masculo-feminine, as follows: Propator was united by a conjunction with his Ennoea; then Monogenes, that is Nous, with Aletheia; Logos with Zoe, and Anthropos with Ecclesia.

These Aeons having been produced for the glory of the Father, and wishing, by their own efforts, to effect this object, sent forth emanations by means of conjunction…Moreover, they declare that this invisible and spiritual Pleroma of theirs is tripartite, being divided into an Ogdoad, a Decad, and a Duodecad. And for this reason they affirm it was that the “Saviour” — for they do not please to call Him “Lord” — did no work in public during the space of thirty years, thus setting forth the mystery of these Aeons (Irenaeus. Adversus Haeres. Book 1, Chapter 1, Verses 1-3).

1…Valentinus, who adapted the principles of the heresy called “Gnostic” to the peculiar character of his own school, taught as follows: He maintained that there is a certain Dyad (twofold being), who is inexpressible by any name, of whom one part should be called Arrhetus (unspeakable), and the other Sige (silence). But of this Dyad a second was produced, one part of whom he names Pater, and the other Aletheia. From this Tetrad, again, arose Logos and Zoe, Anthropos and Ecclesia. These constitute the primary Ogdoad. He next states that from Logos and Zoe ten powers were produced (Irenaeus. Against Heresies, Book 1, Chapter 11, Verse 1).

There are several important concepts above. The first is that this is clearly not biblical. The second involves the Ogdoad, that is, the eighth–this eighth quickly develops into an eighth day of the week belief, which is now the day we call Sunday (Sunday is considered to be both the first and eighth day of the week by Roman heretics such as Justin Martyr). The third is that Irenaeus was condemning people such as Valentinus and his followers for holding such views. And while Valentinus was condemned by Polycarp around 155 A.D., the Roman Catholics allowed him and his people to fellowship with them for another two decades before finally putting them out forever. However, by tolerating these heretical ideas, the Romans and their followers sadly adopted these unbiblical practices.

WCG/GCI writer Michael Morrison (prior to 2006) wrote:

Ignatius used kuriake alone, and textual variants cause the meaning to be debatable…

Clement of Alexandria (c. 190) also gives clear evidence that kuriake meant the eighth day, Sunday, and he spoke of “keeping” the Lord’s day. He quoted a Valentinian Gnostic who equated the kuriake with the ogdoad, the eighth heaven. “The same identification of kuriake, the eighth day, with the ogdoad, the eighth heaven, is found in the antignostic Epistula Apostolorum [also second century].”

In summary, evidence for the use of “Lord’s day” is clear for the latter half of the second century, but it is less clear for the first half.

Notice that it is admitted that Sunday was not shown to be the “Lord’s day” until a century or so AFTER Jesus was resurrected. Also, notice that Clement of Alexander tied his eighth day in with the Gnostic ogdoad.

The Catholic Encyclopedia teaches:

Clement of Alexandria, himself infected with Gnosticism, actually uses Marcus number system though without acknowledgement (Strom, VI, xvi) (Arendzen JP. Transcribed by Joseph P. Thomas. Marcus. The Catholic Encyclopedia, Volume IX. Published 1910. New York: Robert Appleton Company. Nihil Obstat, October 1, 1910. Remy Lafort, Censor. Imprimatur. +John M. Farley, Archbishop of New York).

This Marcus was a heretic, who followed the Gnostic heretic Valentinus who was denounced by COG leader Polycarp of Smyrna, but tolerated for decades afterwards by the Church of Rome. He also taught the ogdoad as well–the sun and the zodiac circle were important to the Marcosians:

They maintain, then, that first of all the four elements, fire, water, earth, and air, were produced after the image of the primary Tetrad above, and that then, we add their operations, viz., heat, cold, dryness, and humidity, an exact likeness of the Ogdoad is presented. They next reckon up ten powers in the following manner:— There are seven globular bodies, which they also call heavens; then that globular body which contains these, which also they name the eighth heaven ; and, in addition to these, the sun and moon. These, being ten in number, they declare to be types of the invisible Decad , which proceeded from Logos and Zoe . As to the Duodecad , it is indicated by the zodiacal circle, as it is called; for they affirm that the twelve signs do most manifestly shadow forth the Duodecad , the daughter of Anthropos and Ecclesia…The sun also, who runs through his orbit in twelve months, and then returns to the same point in the circle… Also the circumference of the zodiacal circle itself contains three hundred and sixty degrees (for each of its signs comprises thirty); and thus also they affirm, that by means of this circle an image is preserved of that connection which exists between the twelve and the thirty. Still further, asserting that the earth is divided into twelve zones, and that in each zone it receives power from the heavens, according to the perpendicular [position of the sun above it], bringing forth productions corresponding to that power which sends down its influence upon it, they maintain that this is a most evident type of the Duodecad and its offspring. (Irenaeus. Adversus Haereses, Book I, Chapter 17, Verse 1).

Roman Catholic scholar and priest Bagatti wrote:

The application of these principles, of Platonic or Pythagorean origin, to Christianity introduced a great diversity of views…In this system were admitted as personified the tetrad (= 4), namely, the four fundamental elements of the cosmos, become through application synonymous with the cross…the ogdoad was referred to Christ-Day for which reason the eighth day was called the ‘Lord’s Day’… (Bagatti, Bellarmino. Translated by Eugene Hoade. The Church from the Circumcision. Nihil obstat: Marcus Adinolfi, 13 Maii 1970. Imprimi potest: Herminius Roncari, 14 Junii 1970. Imprimatur: +Albertus Gori, die 26 Junii 1970. Franciscan Printing Press, Jerusalem, 1971, p. 149)

So, pagan Greek concepts, that the Gnostics adopted, apparently combined some information from Mithraism, ended up in the Lord’s Day.

In the fourth century, Marcellus of Ancyra wrote of Simon Magus and other Gnostics:

Again those of Simon’s school, called ‘gnostics,’ Menander and Saturninius, Basiledes, Marcus and Colorbasus and the rest, invented newer ideas than each other and passed them on to those taken in by them. This is why they call themselve ‘gnostics’. … Nichoaus, or Marcion and Lucian from Cerdo. From these the Manichees took their starting points and transmitted new ideas. Now all of these derived the starting points of their impiety from the philosophers Hermes, Plato and Aristotle. Now with the heresy of the Ariomaniacs, which has corrupted the Church of God…These then teach three hypostases, just as Valentinus the heresiarch first invented in the book entitled by him ‘On the Three Natures’.  For he was the first to invent three hypostases and three persons of the Father, Son and Holy Spirit, and he is discovered to have filched this from Hermes and Plato. (Logan A. Marcellus of Ancyra (Pseudo-Anthimus), ‘On the Holy Church’: Text, Translation and Commentary. Verses 8-9.  Journal of Theological Studies, NS, Volume 51, Pt. 1, April 2000, pp.94-95).

Simon Magus affected many, and others added their own false teachings, often based upon pagan philosophy. Let me add that although Polycarp of Smyrna denounced Marcion (see Marcion: The First Protestant?) and Valentinus (see Valentinus: The Gnostic Trinitarian Heretic), the Church of Rome tolerated them FOR DECADES AFTER THE FAITHFUL POLYCARP DENOUNCED THEM! Hence, the Church of Rome was affected.

Here is something published at the old Ambassador College about Gnosticism:

The Gnostics

A study of Gnosticism becomes a study of many different branches and philosophies. …

Although there are many Gnostic sects, there are numerous features they all have in common. Here are the main principles of Gnosticism even though divided among many groups:
1. All sects attempted to explain the origin of the universe and the origin of evil. All viewed the universe in some way as DUAL — full of good and evil. Dualism also has to do with the pagan doctrine of the immortality of the soul and the mortal body.
2. All were blends of Oriental theosophy with Hellenic philosophy, with blends of many other religions added in.
3. All reasoned that since God is good, and the world is evil, God did not create the world, but rather some inferior power.
4. They all believed they had all knowledge (gnosis) which others did not have. They believed Christians only had faith; Gnostics had faith AND “revealed” knowledge.
5. They all separated themselves from Church authority, although Gnostics first met with Christians whenever possible.
6. All had the same form of the Oriental “Great Mother” worship — a parallel with Mariolatry today. “In almost all systems an important part is played by the Great Mother…”³⁶
7. Most Gnostic philosophies had a system of sacraments. The Encyclopaedia Britannica states, “The Gnostic religion…is above all things A RELIGION OF SACRAMENTS and mysteries…Gnosticism introduced for the first time into Christianity a whole mass of sacramental, mystical ideas…”³⁷
To classify these different Gnostic philosophies and sects is not important. Gnosticism, obviously, is a religion of demons and is in chaos. What we need to understand is the true origin of Gnosticism and what, if any, bearing it might have had on Christianity.

The Origin in Clear

There can be no doubt there was a PRE–CHRISTIAN GNOSTICISM. And secondly, there can be no doubt that Gnosticism was not Jewish, BUT SAMARITAN! …
Gnosticism finally approached the teachings of the Catholic Church. Notice it from M’Clintock and Strong: “…finally, under the Marcionites, the Gnostic speculation approximates very nearly that of the more liberal CATHOLIC TEACHERS.”⁴⁴
So, although Gnosticism was a combination of religions and philosophy in background, it soon formed a religion of its own. What Gnosticism became was a DEVIATION from the truth. When the Gnostics came in contact with true Christians — beginning with Simon Magus — they found similarities to their own system. Remember, we have already seen how Satan the Devil organized this counterfeit system long prior to Christianity. Gnostic teachers recognized this similarity. Notice it:

   When these Gnostics, WITH THEIR SYSTEM READY MADE, looked into the New Testament they could easily find it all there, since they only sought for points to which they might attach it.⁴⁵

They wormed their false system into the Church. The apostle Paul warned the Church to be aware of this when he mentioned the system of iniquity which we have already read of in II Thessalonians, chapter two. Paul warned the Ephesian elders to watch out for the same system in the twentieth chapter of Acts. And by the time of the epistles of John and Jude in the late first century, they both warned true Christians to beware of the conspiracy which had already risen to great power in some areas. Masquerading under the name of “Christian,” Simon Magus and his Gnostic religion had gained an immoveable foothold. (Kelly R. Now Revealed: The True History of the Early Christian Church. Ambassador College thesis, 1967)

Gnostic concepts were part of the ways the faithful and others separated.

Getting back to the eighth day, notice what the following Calvinist Protestant catechism states:

Q. 11. Under what name or designation is the Christian Sabbath foretold in the Old Testament?

Under the name of the EIGHTH DAY, Ezek. 43:27 — “And when these days are expired, it shall be that upon the EIGHTH DAY, and so forward, the priests shall make your burnt offerings upon the altar, and your peace offerings: and I will accept you, Saith the Lord.”

Q. 12. Why called the eighth day?

Because the first day of the week now, is the eighth in order from the creation. (THE SHORTER CATECHISM EXPLAINED. The Center for Reformed Theology and Apologetics. http://www.reformed.org/master/index.html?mainframe=/documents/fisher/q059.html 06/07/20 also Erskine E, Fisher J. The Westminster Assembly’s Shorter Catechism Explained. William S. Young publisher, 1840, p. 81).

Is Ezekiel prophesying Sunday like the Calvinists are stating, or is he talking about something else? Notice the context of what Ezekiel wrote:

18 And He said to me, “Son of man, thus says the Lord GOD: ‘These are the ordinances for the altar on the day when it is made, for sacrificing burnt offerings on it, and for sprinkling blood on it. 19 You shall give a young bull for a sin offering to the priests, the Levites, who are of the seed of Zadok, who approach Me to minister to Me,’ says the Lord GOD. 20 You shall take some of its blood and put it on the four horns of the altar, on the four corners of the ledge, and on the rim around it; thus you shall cleanse it and make atonement for it. 21 Then you shall also take the bull of the sin offering, and burn it in the appointed place of the temple, outside the sanctuary. 22 On the second day you shall offer a kid of the goats without blemish for a sin offering; and they shall cleanse the altar, as they cleansed it with the bull. 23 When you have finished cleansing it, you shall offer a young bull without blemish, and a ram from the flock without blemish. 24 When you offer them before the LORD, the priests shall throw salt on them, and they will offer them up as a burnt offering to the LORD. 25 Every day for seven days you shall prepare a goat for a sin offering; they shall also prepare a young bull and a ram from the flock, both without blemish. 26 Seven days they shall make atonement for the altar and purify it, and so consecrate it. 27 When these days are over it shall be, on the eighth day and thereafter, that the priests shall offer your burnt offerings and your peace offerings on the altar; and I will accept you,’ says the Lord GOD.” (Ezekiel 43:18-27).

Even a cursory reading of the above should make it clear to normal people that Ezekiel was not prophesying that the Seventh-day Sabbath would be changed to Sunday. But this is the type of argument that Sunday is actually based upon.

Consider further that God inspired the prophet Ezekiel to write:

26 Her priests have violated My law and profaned My holy things; they have not distinguished between the holy and unholy, nor have they made known the difference between the unclean and the clean; and they have hidden their eyes from My Sabbaths, so that I am profaned among them. (Ezekiel 22:26)

So, yes, religious leaders like many Protestant ministers, do not distinguish between the clean and unclean and have hidden their eyes to the truth about the Sabbaths (which includes the Holy Days). They are helping to fulfil Ezekiel’s prophecy, and not the one in in Ezekiel 43:27.

There were factors in the separation between those who held the original beliefs and the others who parted from the way. There were those who contended for the original faith (Jude 3) and those who chose a different way.

The Continuing Church of God recently out out the following sermon on its ContinuingCOG channel:

1:21:14

Parting from THE WAY

Related to early Christian church history, many Protestant scholars teach what is known as ‘the parting of the ways.’ Basically, this is the view that they refer to as ‘Jewish Christianity’ separated from ‘Gentile Christianity’ and that that ‘Jewish’ version died out. In his book, The Parting of the Ways: Between Christianity and Judaism and Their Significance for the Character of Christianity, Dr. James Dunn points to a parting in the second century, then mentions other partings. After admitting what original Christianity was, Dr. Dunn wrote, “Whether Jewish Christianity could or should have been retained within the spectrum of catholic Christianity is an important question which it may now be impossible to answer.” Dr. Thiel says that is NOT impossible to answer if you believe the Bible and will look at often overlooked aspects of early Christian church history. After quoting scriptures, Dr. Thiel pointed out that people parted from the Apostles, like Paul and John, rejected hierarchical church governance, preferred their own opinions, and were influenced by pagan philosophies. Quotes about what happened in Jerusalem related to the Bar Kochba revolt that ended c. 135 and a split between the faithful and the cowardly compromisers were provided. Faithful heresy fighters like Polycarp of Smyrna, Polycrates of Ephesus, and Serapion of Antioch were mentioned, as well as the unfaithful such as Simon Magus, Thebuthis, Marcus of Jerusalem, Justin Martyr, Marcion, and Valentinus. Gregory the Wonder Worker, Emperor Constantine, and Emperor Theodosius were discussed and denounced. The original date of Passover and the Council of Nicea’s date change to Easter Sunday was mentioned. The fact of supposedly ‘Christian’ emperors, like Constantine decreeing the death penalty for the faithful who would not eat unclean animals and Theodosius decreeing the death penalty for those willing to be faithful to the date of Passover was mentioned. Dr. Thiel cited Protestant as well as Roman Catholic scholars who agree that the bulk of those who profess Christianity post third century do not hold to the teachings and practices of the original Christians. Numerous scriptures pointing to THE WAY, including Jesus’ warnings about those who will not follow the narrow way were also quoted.