Tag Archives: Gnostics

10/5/21

Is the Enneagram Spiritually Neutral? Part 3

© robinatz | 123rf.com

Despite claims of having an ancient origin, the Enneagram as it is known today originated with George Gurdjieff, a Russian philosopher, mystic and spiritual teacher, who introduced it to the West in 1916. Gurdjieff thought it could be used to disclose all knowledge and reveal the secrets of the cosmos. As the Enneagram of personality, it has become a popular ‘tool’ for personality assessment and spiritual growth and even found its way into the Christian church. Unfortunately, it seems many Christians are unaware of, or explain away the evidence of its occult origins and nature.

Marsha Montenegro Critiques the Enneagram

Attempts to sanitize the Enneagram of personality by claiming it was stolen from Christianity and is based on biblical principles are false. Marsha Montenegro, a former astrologer who was involved with various New Age, occult and Eastern beliefs and practices before coming to Christ, said its theories of personality are based on esoteric teachings and an occult worldview. Its Gnostic initiation or awakening “is an occult counterfeit of the indwelling of the Holy Spirit and His regeneration of the believer upon faith in Christ.” See her website, Christian Answers for the New Age (CANA) for several articles on the Enneagram.

The clear origin and purpose of the Enneagram is to initiate a Gnostic spiritual awakening to one’s alleged true divine Self, which is in itself an occult initiation. This is the claim and goal of virtually all occult and New Age teachings. The purpose of such initiation is a shift in consciousness, a change in the way one views reality — God, the world, others, and self.

The kind of Christianity claimed by Gurdjieff is a Gnostic distortion of Christianity. “Gurdjieff, his predecessors in Theosophy, and those who followed the various offshoots of Theosophy and related groups usually referred to themselves as Christians and believed they had discovered the ‘true’ Christianity.” Many who follow New Age belief systems or use ‘tools’ like the Enneagram will claim to be mystical or esoteric Christians.

Alisa Childers has a 13-minute video interview on her YouTube channel with Montenegro on how the Enneagram became part of Christian culture. Montenegro reviewed how Gurdjieff taught about the Enneagram to his students, including P.D. Ouspensky. Gurdjieff never wrote about the Enneagram, but Ouspensky did. Oscar Ichazo came across the teachings of Gurdjieff and Ouspensky on the Enneagram and incorporated his own understanding of the Enneagram as a “picture of Ego fixation.” Each of the nine points of the Enneagram corresponded to an Ego fixation—something your Ego becomes fixated upon. Ichazo’s view was that your Ego, who you seemed to be outwardly, was a cover up for the true inner essential self.

“Your essence is actually pure and untouched by anything bad, or anything wrong.” This pure essence has been covered up by false ideas you’ve had about yourself via personal experiences, what other people have told you, how we have been conditioned by these things. This is the Ego, the false Self. “This in an idea that is very common in Jungian thinking and the New Age as well.” The belief is that there is this pure, untouched Self.

Ishazo taught that you should find your Ego fixation, and when you understand that it is not really you, “you can see this pure Self at the center of who you are.” The Enneagram still was not being taught as reflecting personality. Claudio Naranjo, a psychiatrist and spiritual seeker, was a student of Ichazo’s at Arica. He learned the Enneagram from Ichazo. Naranjo claimed that he received the Enneagram types that we now associate with the Enneagram from automatic writing. This is a form of spirit contact, where you open yourself up and let “whatever spirit or entity use your hand to write out things.” Naranjo said the types were partly from his observations, but mostly from automatic writing.

Catholic and Evangelical Critiques of the Enneagram

Montenegro is not the only person cautioning Christians to reject the Enneagram because of its occult, Gnostic origins and nature. In “The Enneagram—A History (Part 1)” Brandon Medina said while the Bible says nothing about the Enneagram by name, it has a lot to say about origins, practices, numerology and identity—“all of which make up the enneagram as a  whole.” The Bible instructs us to not do as the pagans or unbelievers do. Simply put, the Enneagram has no biblical foundation and is rooted in occult practices.

Supporters claim the Enneagram was stolen from Christianity, but history does not back this up; they propose the numbering system is ancient, but facts don’t back this up; and they teach your identity is found in your Enneagram number, but the Bible doesn’t back this up. In fact, the Bible says that our identity is found in Jesus and that He, not the Enneagram, began a work in us which He will complete.

Mitch Pacwa, a Jesuit priest who has studied the enneagram, said in “Enneagram: A Modern Myth,” that the Enneagram system is inherently pantheistic. The Enneagram itself is very symbolic, starting off with a circle that symbolizes the world or the cosmos; the oneness or wholeness of all beings. The circle also symbolizes the number one, for one cosmos. Inside the circle are two other drawings; one is a triangle that is used to signify “god.” Notice that “god” is contained inside the cosmos. God is contained by the universe, rather than the fundamental Creator-creation distinction of Christianity.

Some Enneagram proponents claim that the Enneagram is a 2,000-year-old Sufi system from Islamic mystics who lived before the time of Christ. Pawca pointed out how this was impossible because Sufism is a part of Islam, which is from the 7th century AD. He did state that Gurdjieff learned the Enneagram from the Sufis, who used it in Central Asia when he came across a group living in Central Asia during his travels. They used it for fortune telling through numerology.

The Sufis picked it up and used it as a symbol of the 9 stages of enlightenment: You move from your “ego” into your essence. What do they mean by essence? Your essence is that same being within you that has the same image as God. So your inner being has the same divine nature as God has. So it’s a very pantheistic and monist system. But it’s through very rigorous cleansing yourself of your ego and getting into your essence.

More Harmful than Helpful

Writing for The Gospel Coalition (TGC) in February of 2018, Kevin DeYoung wrote a critical review of The Road Back to You by Ian Cron and Suzanne Stabile, which was published by InterVarsity Press (IVP) in 2016. He thought on the whole, The Road Back to You would be more harmful than helpful for Christians who attempt to use it as a tool for spiritual growth. He observed that although the authors argued that the Enneagram does not smuggle the therapeutic under the guise of the theological, “The book is awash in therapeutic language.”

Every chapter talks about some combination of forgiving myself, finding my true self, becoming spiritually evolved, being healed from wounded messages, dealing with codependent behaviors, and pursuing personal wholeness. This is not the language of the Bible. We hear nothing about fear of man, the love of the praise of man, covenantal promises, covenantal threats, repentance, atonement, heaven or hell. When faith is mentioned it’s described as believing in something or someone bigger than you.

The spirituality of the Enneagram in The Road Back to You has little resemblance to biblical spirituality, according to DeYoung. In its discussion of the Fall, humanity’s sinful rebellion against God is said to be that “we’ve ‘lost connection’ with our God-given identity.” Their definition of sin, following that of Richard Rohr, is that “sins are fixations that prevent the energy of life, God’s love, from flowing freely.” There is nothing here about sin as lawlessness or spiritual adultery or “Sin as cosmic betrayal against a just and holy God.”

It has no doctrine of conversion, because the human condition described has no need for regeneration. Referring to their discussion of Enneagram personality type for “Fours,” DeYoung quoted the authors as saying “Fours arrived on life’s doorstep with the same equipment everyone else did. The kingdom is inside them too. Everything they need is here.”

This is not evangelical spirituality. It’s no wonder the book does not interact with Scripture (except for referencing the story of Mary and Martha) and quotes mainly from Catholic contemplatives like Thomas Merton, Richard Rohr, and Ronald Rolheiser, while also referencing “spiritual leaders” like the Dalai Lama, Lao-Tzu, and Thich Nhat Hahn. You don’t have to be a Christian to benefit from the Enneagram journey in this book, because there is nothing about the journey that is discernibly Christian.

In “The Enneagram—A History (Part 3),” Brandon Medina countered the claim of Beth McCord, the founder of Your Enneagram Coach, who says “[The Enneagram] is a tool to help bring transformation. The Gospel is the transformation.”  McCord views the Enneagram as a spiritually neutral tool with a significant appeal to Christians. If someone were to say to her that it’s not in the Bible, she’d respond: “Well, the Myers-Briggs isn’t in the Bible. You know, there’s lots of things that aren’t in the Bible but are still helpful.”

Medina concluded the Enneagram was not needed as a spiritual tool for Gospel transformation. He quoted Romans 8:13-14, “For if you live according to the sinful nature, you will die; but if by the Spirit you put to death the misdeeds of the body, you will live, because those who are led by the Spirit of God are sons of God.” And then he quoted 2 Corinthians 3:18, “And we all, with unveiled face, beholding the glory of the Lord, are being transformed into the same image from one degree of glory to another. For this come from the Lord who is the Spirit.”

But by far the gravest danger is the view held by Russ Hudson, co-founder and president of The Enneagram Institute and co-author of several bestselling enneagram books with Don Riso, “The Enneagram is less about nine types of people and more about nine paths to God.” This is anathema to what the Bible states: that there is only one way to God and that way being Jesus. Paul in his letter to the Ephesians writes, “But now in Christ Jesus you who once were far off have been brought near by the blood of Christ”; we read in Acts 4:12, “Salvation is found in no one else, for there is no other name under heaven given to men by which we must be saved”; and then Jesus in John 14:6 says, “I am the way, and the truth, and the life. No one comes to the Father except through Me.”

Not Spiritually Neutral

In his daily blog, Richard Rohr said the enneagram is used to discern spirits, to help recognize your False Self, and lead you to encounter your True Self in God. Once you see your True Self for what it is, you are no longer attached to it; and it no longer blocks you from realizing your inherent union with God. “The whole Enneagram diagram is called ‘the face of God.’ If you could look out at reality from nine pairs of eyes and honor all of them, you would look at reality through the eyes of God—eyes filled with compassion for yourself and everyone else!”

Medina commented that if no other evidence has convinced you to avoid the enneagram, hopefully the claim of it being about nine paths to God should demonstrate that the Enneagram is another gospel, based on the teaching of men “who seek to teach there is another path to God.” There is nothing that can redeem the Enneagram as a spiritually neutral tool that Christians can use to grow in their faith and relationship with God. I don’t agree with Joe Carter that the Enneagram is a harmless fad which will fade away in a few years. Nor is it something that can be left up to the conscience of the individual Christian.

Using the Enneagram simply as a diagnostic tool or for personal classification does not place the matter in league with eating food sacrificed to idols. Rather, its use is something the Bible warned us against in passages like Romans 16:17-18:I appeal to you, brothers, to watch out for those who cause divisions and create obstacles contrary to the doctrine that you have been taught; avoid them. For such persons do not serve our Lord Christ, but their own appetites, and by smooth talk and flattery they deceive the hearts of the naive.

“Is the Enneagram Spiritually Neutral?” is a three-part series, this being the third article. Part 1 and Part 2 can be found on this website. Part 1 concentrated on the origin of the Enneagram symbol with George Gurdjieff. Part 2 followed how the Enneagram became the Enneagram of personality under Oscar Ichazo and Claudio Naranjo. I am grateful for the research and thoughtful discussion by Brandon Medina in his own three-part series on the Enneagram, which I largely followed in what I wrote in my own articles. Links to his series of articles are: The Enneagram—A History (Part 1), (Part 2) and (Part 3). For more critique on the Enneagram from a Christian perspective, try the Enneagram page of article links on Monergism.

03/13/18

Heresy, Canon and the Early Church, Part 2

© Elena Ray | 123rf.com

By the close of the second century an outline of the New Testament had appeared. While there were some disputes about its fringes, the nucleus of the NT canon had formed. “By the end of the third century and the beginning of the fourth century, the great majority of the twenty seven books [of the New Testament] … were almost universally acknowledged to be authoritative,” according to Bruce Metzger. Ironically, this process seems to have been helped along by early heretics of Christian belief like the Gnostics, Marcion and Montanus.

Gnosticism was a syncretistic religion and philosophy that thrived for about four hundred years alongside Christianity. Gnostics stressed salvation through gnõsis (knowledge) that would free the divine spark within elect souls, allowing it to escape from the fallen physical world and return to the realm of light. The physical body was a prison that trapped this “divine spark.”

The extensive literature developed by the Gnostics had a twofold purpose. First, it was to instruct believers about their origins and the structure of the visible world and the worlds above. Second, and most importantly, it was the means by which one could conquer the powers of darkness and return to the realm of the highest God. There were Gnostic “gospels” and other documents such as: the Gospel of Thomas, the Gospel of Philip, the Apocryphon of John, and the Hypostasis of the Archons. These and other Gnostic codices are from the Nag Hammadi library, found near the Upper Egyptian town of Nag Hammadi in 1945. The library is estimated to be from around 400 AD.

There are three features that appear to be characteristic of several Gnostic systems. First, there was a philosophical dualism that rejected the visible world, seeing it as alien to the supreme God. Second, there was a belief in a subordinate deity, the Demiurge, who was responsible for the creation of the world. And third, there was a radical distinction between Jesus and the Christ, leading to the Docetic belief that Christ the Redeemer only appeared to be a real human being.

The church countered Gnostic beliefs by stating nothing from their systems was found in the four Gospels, the Acts of the Apostles and the Epistles of Paul. The Gnostics acknowledged this, but claimed their teachings were communicated “only to his most trusted disciples” and not to the general public. For proof, they appealed to a number of their ‘gospels.’ These gospels often dealt with the period between the resurrection and the ascension of Christ, a time that the canonical Gospels say very little. There were also other Gnostic texts in which they claimed the apostles reported what the Lord said to them in secret.

The primary role played by Gnosticism in developing the NT canon was to motivate the true followers of Christ “to ascertain more clearly which books and epistles conveyed the true teaching of the Gospel.” Bruce Metzger said:

It was not easy for the Church to defend herself against Gnosticism. Certain elements in the gospel tradition itself seemed to give verisimilitude to the Gnostics’ claim. . . . One can understand that in defending itself against Gnosticism, a most important problem for the church was to determine what really constituted a true gospel and a genuine apostolic writing. In order to prevent the exploitation of secret traditions, which were practically uncontrollable, the Church had to be careful to accept nothing without the stamp of apostolic guarantee.

But before the Gnostic problem was resolved, there was Marcion, a wealthy Christian ship-owner who arrived in Rome around 140 AD. He became a member of one of the Roman churches and made a few large financial contributions to the Church. At the end of July in 144 he was invited to expound his teachings before the clergy of the Christian congregations in Rome, hoping to win others to his point of view. “The hearing ended in a harsh rejection of Marcion’s views.” He was formally excommunicated and his money returned. But he persisted in attempting to win others to his views and although he died in 160, by the end of the second century his teachings had become a serious threat to the mainstream Christian church.

Marcion believed in two gods—the Supreme God of goodness and the God of justice, who was the Creator and God of the Jews. The deficiencies of the creation point to a deficient god. He rejected the entire Old Testament, refusing to admit it was part of the authoritative Christian Scriptures at all. Jesus was sent as a messenger of the supreme God to offer humanity an escape from the creator-god and his deficient world. Since Jesus was sent by the creator-God, he was not part of creation. He was a divine being who only seemed to be human. What followed from his Christology was that Marcion rejected the virgin birth and taught that Jesus did not suffer and die on the cross; he only appeared to do so.

Marcion believed that Paul alone of the New Testament writers understood the significance of Jesus as the messenger of the Supreme God. He only accepted the authority of the nine Pauline epistles written to the churches and Philemon. He rejected the authority of Paul’s pastoral epistles to Timothy and Titus. He also freely removed passages where Paul had commented favorably on the Law or quoted the OT. For example, he deleted Galatians 3:16-4:6 because of its reference to Abraham and his descendents. Marcion only trusted the Gospel of Luke, but again heavily edited it, removing most of the first four chapters, because of his belief Jesus could not have been born of a woman since he was divine.

In addition to making the deletions of all that involved approval of the Old Testament and the creator god of the Jews, Marcion modified the text through transpositions and occasional additions in order to restore what he considered must have been the original sense.

The authority of the four Gospels had reached a consensus and confidence in which documents were the true apostolic writings had placed them alongside the Gospels during the first half of the second century. Marcion’s canon accelerated this crystallization of the church’s canon by forcing orthodox Christians to state more clearly what they already believed. “It was in opposition of to Marcion’s criticism that the Church first became fully conscious of its inheritance of apostolic writings.”

Into the heretical mix of the second century came Montanism, which began in Phrygia around 156. The movement was named after Montanus, who is sometimes said to have been a priest of Cybele, a pagan cult whose activity was also centered in Phyrgia (located in the Western part of modern Turkey). Montanus fell into a trance soon after his conversion and began to speak in tongues. He announced that he was the ‘Paraclete’ Jesus had promised to send in John’s Gospel (14:15-17; 17:7-15). He is reported to have said: “ I am God almighty dwelling in man.” A core belief of this New Prophecy in its earliest form was that the Heavenly Jerusalem would shortly descend from heaven and be located at the little Phyrgian town of Pepuza, about twenty miles northeast of Hieropolis.

Along with its two prophetesses, Prisca and Maximilla, Montanism was distinctive in having ecstatic outbursts, speaking in tongues and prophetic utterances. They believed their prophetic ‘oracles’ were revelations of the Holy Spirit and should be regarded as supplementing ‘the ancient scriptures.’ Members of the Montanist sect gathered together and wrote down their pronouncements.

They thought their mission was in the final phase of revelation. Maximilla said: “After me … there will be no more prophecy, but the End.” Montanus’ followers developed ascetic practices and disciplines in the face of what they saw as the growing worldliness of the Church and the impending approach of the end of the world. Their movement spread quickly and was soon found in Rome and North Africa.

At first, the Church didn’t quite know what to do with the Montanists. Eventually the bishops and synods of Asia Minor began to declare the new prophecy of Montanism was the work of demons and they were cut off from the fellowship of the Church. The bishops of Rome, Carthage and the remaining African bishops declared them to be a heretical sect. Hippolytus (170-235), in The Refutation of All Heresies, said the following about the Montanists:

But there are others who themselves are even more heretical in nature (than the foregoing), and are Phrygians by birth. These have been rendered victims of error from being previously captivated by (two) wretched women, called a certain Priscilla and Maximilla, whom they supposed (to be) prophetesses. And they assert that into these the Paraclete Spirit had departed; and antecedently to them, they in like manner consider Montanus as a prophet. And being in possession of an infinite number of their books, (the Phrygians) are overrun with delusion; and they do not judge whatever statements are made by them, according to (the criterion of) reason; nor do they give heed unto those who are competent to decide; but they are heedlessly swept onwards, by the reliance which they place on these (impostors). And they allege that they have learned something more through these, than from law, and prophets, and the Gospels. But they magnify these wretched women above the Apostles and every gift of Grace, so that some of them presume to assert that there is in them a something superior to Christ.

The influence of Montanism on the development of the New Testament was the opposite of that from Marcion’s teaching. Where Marcion motivated the Church to recognize the breadth of its written authoritative writings, the insistence of Montanus on the continuous gift of inspiration and prophecy led the Church to emphasize the final authority of apostolic writings as their rule of faith. See the following map for where to find the founders of early church heresies.

credit: Andre S. Jacobs Scripps College

Despite the clever syncretism of heresies like Gnosticism, Montanism and Marcion, the rule of faith embodied in the Scriptures was not lost. In spite of Marcion, the early Church affirmed the 66 Old Testament books of the Palestinian canon as the Word of God. The claims by Gnostics and Montanists for additional revelation equal to those of the Gospels and the Epistles faded and died as the New Testament canon crystallized. By 100 AD, all 27 books of the NT were already in circulation and the majority of the writings were in existence twenty to forty years before this. All but Hebrews, 2 Peter, James, 2 John, 3 John, Jude and Revelation were universally accepted, according to NT Scholar F. F. Bruce by that time.

Information on the creeds and heresies discussed here was taken primarily from Early Christian Creeds and Early Christian Doctrines by J. N. D. Kelly; A History of Heresy by David Christie-Murray; and The Canon of the New Testament by Bruce Metzger. For more on the early creeds and heresies of the Christian church, see the link: “Early Creeds.” Part 1 of “Heresy, Canon and the Early Church” is linked here.