Most of the books the Church disagreed with were destroyed by the Church, so we mostly know what the Church says the Gnostics believed.
This is not true. Anybody can read the Gnostic Nag Hammadi writings, I have the book, “The Nag Hammadi Library” myself, moreover, I haven’t tried, but I suspect it is available on the net somewhere.
I have read them and they are bizarre occult-like drivel.
I have read them and they are bizarre occult-like drivel.
I might add, I have also read Ireneaus’ rebuttal of Gnostism. Irenaeus was spot on, reading the Nag Hammadi writings, only recently discovered, validates Irenaeus. In his writings against Gnosticism, he was making an accurate representation of what Gnostics believed.
Nag Hammadi scrolls were hidden lest they be destroyed like the rest. That they survived is a miracle, which is what makes them that much more valuable.
The Nag Hamamdi collection represents only one of the many heterodox Gnostic groups and only some of the Gnostic many beliefs.
From the Christian point of view, Gnostic as well as any other belief is "drivel," so that's hardly an objective assessment.
To outsiders, the idea that one eats the flesh of a dead man and drinks his blood may seem occult-like drivel too. Obviously, such an assessment would be a superficial and inaccurate characterization of the theology behind it.
Awareness that condmenations are often based on ignorance should be a guiding principle when approaching any belief on a superficial level, such as thisd article.