But the biblical "fact" has to be authenticated by the a priori "knowledge" (gnosis), otherwise it's not a biblical 'fact' is it?
Well, I really don't see any connection between "gnosis" and Biblical fact, unless you are saying that (only for us?) "gnosis" and faith itself are the same thing. Perhaps for you "gnosis" is any knowledge or interpretation that is different from your own personal interpretation. If you don't personally buy it, then it must be magical "gnosis" and therefore false? But there is a problem. While you will accede to any teaching of your Church as correct, you still disagree personally with some/many of their holdings. Why would your Church not also be guilty of gnosis? Or, is gnosis anything that disagrees with you OR your Church? :)
You see where I'm coming from? The argument I appear to be getting is that if one puts his trust on earth in a group of men, then he cannot be guilty of gnosis because those men cannot be guilty of gnosis, (proof unavailable at this time). However, if one puts his trust on earth in the word of God, THEN he must be a Gnostic and most everything he believes is wrong. This argument just doesn't hold water.
What you call faith is not hope but certainty of the (s)elect, which neither you nor anyone else can prove, so it is pointless to speak of it as a matter of fact. Claiming such knowledge as fact is at its root Gnostic.
Our proof that the elect exist is in the Bible. Our proof that an individual can know if he or she is of the elect is in the Bible. The FACT is that it is in the Bible. Now, whether it is true or not is another matter for many people. But for some people, if it is in the Bible, then it is a fact (in the context of the whole Bible). I know that for you there is no proof (that I am aware of) that will satisfy you of this. So, I am at a loss as to what to do about that.
But it is OK. In the same way there is nothing I can think of that you can do to prove to me that I should reject what I think the Bible clearly says, and instead follow what the men of your Church say it really means. For me that would be to throw away the rational in order to embrace the irrational. I'm just not in a position to do that. :) Therefore, I would think that by your own standards, we would have every bit as much right to accuse you of Gnosticism as you have to accuse us.
The way the term "Gnostic" is used around here I suspect the polar opposite would be "Empiricist."
An empiricist accepts as certain knowledge only that which is obtained by sensory perception, and to that he adds reason. He excludes Spiritual perception on principle.
Conversely, we Christians who have "ears to hear" accept only the words of God as certain knowledge. Sensory perception and reason are greatly subordinated. We walk by faith not by sight. (2 Cor 5:7)
Ye are of God, little children, and have overcome them: because greater is he that is in you, than he that is in the world. They are of the world: therefore speak they of the world, and the world heareth them. We are of God: he that knoweth God heareth us; he that is not of God heareth not us. Hereby know we the spirit of truth, and the spirit of error. - I John 4:4-6
Now we have received, not the spirit of the world, but the spirit which is of God; that we might know the things that are freely given to us of God. Which things also we speak, not in the words which man's wisdom teacheth, but which the Holy Ghost teacheth; comparing spiritual things with spiritual. But the natural man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God: for they are foolishness unto him: neither can he know [them], because they are spiritually discerned. - I Cor 2:12-14
For what the law could not do, in that it was weak through the flesh, God sending his own Son in the likeness of sinful flesh, and for sin, condemned sin in the flesh: That the righteousness of the law might be fulfilled in us, who walk not after the flesh, but after the Spirit.
For they that are after the flesh do mind the things of the flesh; but they that are after the Spirit the things of the Spirit. For to be carnally minded [is] death; but to be spiritually minded [is] life and peace. Because the carnal mind [is] enmity against God: for it is not subject to the law of God, neither indeed can be. So then they that are in the flesh cannot please God.
But ye are not in the flesh, but in the Spirit, if so be that the Spirit of God dwell in you. Now if any man have not the Spirit of Christ, he is none of his. – Romans 8:1-9
Christians who still have empiricist leanings - who are still living by sight instead of faith - accept or reject the words of God using mortal standards. For instance, an empiricist would exclude many Scriptures on the basis that, logically, every proposition must be true or false - it can't be both (the Law of the Excluded Middle.)