Knowledge: Gnosis and Epignosis in 2nd Peter 2:1-8

 

In 2 Peter 1:1-8, there there are two words translated into English as "knowledge".

The two words generally translated as 'knowledge' are 'gnosis' and 'epignosis'. Whereas 'gnosis' conveys the idea of just 'knowing', 'epignosis' is a knowledge that involves a 'full discernment', which is 'to become fully acquainted with' or to have a full understanding of something.

Here is the text:

"Simon Peter, a servant and an apostle of Jesus Christ, to them that have obtained like precious faith with us through the righteousness of God and our Saviour Jesus Christ: Grace and peace be multiplied unto you through the knowledge (epignosis/full discernment) of God, and of Jesus our Lord, According as his divine power has given unto us all things that pertain unto life and godliness, through the knowledge (epignosis/full discernment) of him that has called us to glory and virtue:

"Whereby are given unto us exceeding great and precious promises: that by these you might be partakers of the divine nature, having escaped the corruption that is in the world through lust.

"And beside this, giving all diligence, add to your faith virtue; and to virtue knowledge;(gnosis/knowing)

And to knowledge (gnosis/knowing) temperance; and to temperance patience; and to patience godliness; And to godliness brotherly kindness; and to brotherly kindness charity.

"For if these things be in you, and abound, they make you that ye shall neither be barren nor unfruitful in the knowledge (epignosis/full discernment) of our Lord Jesus Christ.(II Peter 1:1-8)

It seems that Peter is saying that we are called as disciples to do more than just know the gospel, or to know that it is real and good and accept it and follow "the commandments or the words of the prophets", but rather the message here is that it is essential that we continue, all our lives, to grow in  faith, virtue, further general knowledge, temperance, patience, godliness, brotherly kindness and charity/love in order to truly comprehend Christ and to comprehend and live His gospel.

(You can read more about that in this link: 

https://biblefocus.net/living-word/knowledge/index.html       )

Being able to say "I know the gospel is true", or "I know that [insert anything you think is true] is true', is not what we are called to aspire to be able to do. That is not the "requirement for an  acceptable level of sufficient belief or knowledge" that we must aspire to, or worry about if we cannot honestly declare it.

What is required? That we welcome the Lord into our life in a way that opens us to learning, from Him (how to become more like Him in faith, virtue, knowledge, temperance, patience, godliness, brotherly kindness, and charity towards others), and that as we engage in that communion with Him and in His work we, by his grace, increase our capacity to see as He sees, know as He knows, and show forth grace (a ready willingness to help) towards others as He does.

That's what we are called to when God speaks about "knowledge". It is not an "I have arrived, I know such and such" kind of thing. It is a lifelong communion with God and His grace in our discipleship.

Watching Interactions on the Day of the Passover, Matthew chapter 21 and Mark chapter 14

There are three interactions in these chapters that caught my attention, this time through.

The first occurred when the disciples were sent to find an ass for Jesus's entry into the city of Jerusalem. Jesus told them that, if the unknown owner of the ass and her colt ask why they were taking her, they should simply explain that the Lord needed her. And, sure enough, that was enough of a reason for the owner to let her go.

How often are we that generous, giving or lending our resources freely to those on the Lord's errand and doing so with trust in Him, rather than asking for all the details and being concerned until what we have lent is returned?

The second that caught my attention occurred when the woman brought a box of ointment of spikenard and poured it on Jesus's head. It was the response of some of those sitting with him: disapproval of her having spent a lot of money to express her love and respect rather than spending that money on the poor.  Jesus comes to her defense and counsels compassion and appreciation rather than fault finding.  It was a that point that Judas, who felt responsible for keeping track of the funds and how they were used, chose to leave.

How easy it is for us to find fault when someone uses funds in good ways that, to us, seem "less good than it could have been by a long shot".  How easy it is to get our dander up and become unhappy and divisive when we judge another's use of sacred funds or similar resources?

The third I considered was the man who was drawing water from the well.  Christ knew that the "goodman of the house" where that man lived, would be willing to let Jesus and his disciples share the passover meal in his upper room. 

 In those days drawing water was woman's work.  So why was this man doing that?   We don't know, but it's likely that the woman who usually did that was unable, due to injury, absence, illness, or whatever, and he (brother, son, servant, whatever) had undertaken the task.

So perhaps we learn that this is a household where, at least in this case, individuals were more interested in providing what was needful for others than they were interested in the comfort or discomfort of firm boundaries of responsibilities.  Less focus who gets to do or not do what.  More focus on helping to get things done so that all have what they need (which in this case was water) in a home which, it turns out, is a place where Jesus and his imperfect disciples are welcome.

 

"Authority" in church

 I recently read a piece written by a woman who struggles with the notion of priesthood authority, deeply concerned about who is or is not currently authorized to hold certain callings in church and advocating making changes to both expand that and to free organizations in the ward from excessive oversight by men (giving examples of that excessiveness) which intrinsically gives leaders of those organizations less power and authority.

Below are some of my ruminations in regards to that. Always in a stage of progress, I hope.

In regards to your three examples, for what it's worth, that's not the way it works in our ward. 

Our Relief Society presidency organizes classes independently.

The Primary presidency considers who to call them the president counsels with the bishop and others to see if they have insights that would be helpful and then asks that the bishopric issue the call, not because priesthood means you have authority to issue calls or to nix them, but because it helps immensely if calls all come from one place, rather than each president independently issuing calls to members of the congregation whenever they feel inspired to do so. In my ward, that would be chaotic and divisive, rather than uniting.

It is true that a Sunday School president currently is a calling designated for men. As a woman I have no problem with that. All our Sunday School teachers work independently. He mostly just serves to help them get  substitutes when teachers aren't there and does the same process of choosing teachers that the Primary president does. I appreciate his humble service

The fact that seems to be missing in this conversation is that the world defines the one who has authority as the one who has the power of administration: the power to approve or reject, to declare what is or is not allowed, to instigate change or require the status quo, to not only add input but to independently make final decisions.  And it assumes that that involves ignoring, discounting, and/or disrespecting opinions other than one's own. It creates tiers of perceived value of individuals.

That kind of authority is one that we all, you, me, and everyone else falls into doing during our lifetimes. And though we usually don't recognize it in ourselves, we get angry when we see it in others.

And we get even more angry when we feel like we are prevented from changing or influencing the exercise of that kind of authority.

And we get more angry when we sense that our thoughts on really, really important issues are being ignored by people exercising that kind of authority. (Current national political situation is a classic example of this.)

As long as we believe that church authority is like world authority and administration, and that those who don't have it are powerless or being treated as second-class (like the way the world feels right now) we will continue to believe that changing who has the power will change the dynamics. 

But that's not true. What is most important in the discussion of priesthood authority is for all men and women (whether currently "having authority" or not) to perceive it as it really is when it is in play, and to live it the way Jesus teaches it.

The problems which we see are not due to men having "authority" at church. They are due to way too many of us are either seeing authority being exercised in the world's way, or exercising it in the world's way ourselves.

Scriptures define the exercise of priesthood authority, (the kind that Jesus has and that he showed forth in everything His did or does and which we all may receive) in words that make it not only clear that it is completely different from the world's exercise of authority, but also that when exercised as it is designed to be exercised, involves all of us, both men and women, equals in the sight of God, and fully invested in creating mutual trust, charity, humility, listening, patience, courage and mercy in whatever He call us, officially or unofficially, to do. 

It is not about who does what. It's not about what office, position or set of to-do lists we have. It's not about being the director or having the final say. It's about how we understand Him and how His love transforms His work, and the  specific, loving, individual work He does hand in hand with us as we serve,  as individuals and as a group, and which has the power to create further trust and love among us.

The problem is that too many of us, both men and women, are stuck in the world 's definition of authority and carry that into our callings at church. Our ways are not His ways.

The solution to the situations you see is not to expand the parameters of who gets to do what. (I am not opposed to that happening, I just know that doing so would not change the root cause of the challenge you see). Rather the solution is to help us all, both men and women, to comprehend the immense difference between the way the world exercises authority and the way God calls us, his children, both women and men, to exercise any authority we receive from Him.

That's a huge, unending task. But that comprehension is the only thing that will truly level the playing field.

“And after they had loosed me…” 1Ne 10:21-22

“ …after they had loosed me, behold, I took the compass, and it did work whither I desired it.  And it came to pass that I prayed unto the Lord; and after I prayed, the winds did cease, and the storm did cease, and there was a great calm…[And] I…did guide the ship, that we sailed again towards the promised land.”

Considering…In his experience it wasn’t simply liberation from imposed affliction that engendered calmness and the circumstances and power he needed to move forward. It was liberation from imposed affliction and prayer/connection/communication with the Lord that made that possible.

Learning with paper, rather than with screens. Not at all surprised.

 You can read the article quoted below here: https://www.theguardian.com/lifeandstyle/2024/jan/17/kids-reading-better-paper-vs-screen

there’s been curiously little discussion in this debate about the physical object most children use to read, which, starting long before the arrival of Covid, has increasingly been an illuminated screen displaying pixelated type instead of a printed or photocopied text. What if the principal culprit behind the fall of middle-school literacy is neither a virus, nor a union leader, nor “remote learning”?

Fourth grade is when a crucial shift occurs from what another researcher describes as ‘learning to read’ to ‘reading to learn’

Until recently there has been no scientific answer to this urgent question, but a soon-to-be published, groundbreaking study from neuroscientists at Columbia University’s Teachers College has come down decisively on the matter: for “deeper reading” there is a clear advantage to reading a text on paper, rather than on a screen, where “shallow reading was observed”.

Using a sample of 59 children aged 10 to 12, a team led by Dr Karen Froud asked its subjects to read original texts in both formats while wearing hair nets filled with electrodes that permitted the researchers to analyze variations in the children’s brain responses. Performed in a laboratory at Teachers College with strict controls, the study used an entirely new method of word association in which the children “performed single-word semantic judgment tasks” after reading the passages.

Vital to the usefulness of the study was the age of the participants – a three-year period that is “critical in reading development” – since fourth grade is when a crucial shift occurs from what another researcher describes as “learning to read” to “reading to learn”....

 For more than a decade, social scientists, including the Norwegian scholar Anne Mangen, have been reporting on the superiority of reading comprehension and retention on paper. As Froud’s team says in its article: “Reading both expository and complex texts from paper seems to be consistently associated with deeper comprehension and learning” across the full range of social scientific literature.

A pattern in Lehi’s life in Jerusalem. Prayer and revelation and discipleship in a dangerous world. 1st Nephi, chapter 1

 I am thinking about Lehi…growing up with a sense of having been blessed by the Lord, and a clear knowledge of “the goodness and mysteries of God“ and living his life in a city that shows ever increasing departure from God’s guidance, including the embracing of violence.  He lives there at a time when there are prophets actively pointing out the embracing of sin and calling for repentance and a return to God.  (verses 1-4)

So, what does Lehi do first?  He doesn’t condemn, despise, reject, denigrate, or verbally assault those who are actively involved in wicked, destructive behavior.  He doesn’t aid or abet division in his society, calling on others who see what he sees to overthrow the perpetrators of violence, etc.  Instead, he prays for those who are fostering violence and greed and other sins in his society. (verse 5)

And it is that actively praying for “those who despitefully use… and persecute..” (Matthew 5:44) that opens his mind and heart to receive life changing, amazing, personal revelation as to how to proceed: first to be able to see what was coming, and secondly, to be firmly and irrevocably reminded of the amazing power, mercy and love of God, and particularly His mercy towards those who come to Him. (verse 14)

So now his great dismay over the sins of his generation is no longer his primary emotion.  Instead his heart is turned into “rejoicing because of the things…which the Lord had shown unto him”. (verse15)

Lehi’s next actions, because of this encounter with that amazingly loving, merciful, powerful God, were not to spend time despising or actively working to discredit those who were fostering wickedness, but rather his resultant actions were to point out and call those sins (not those people) reprehensible, and to share what he had learned about a divine and loving God (his love, mercy, goodness) and what he had learned from God (what was ahead) as a result of that divine encounter; “to declare unto them concerning the the things that he had both seen and heard”.  (verse 18)

His words were not well received, to say the least. (verse 19)  In fact his life was threatened. (verse 20).

So what saved his life in a society where disagreeing with a powerful man could get you killed?  The same thing that had enlightened his understanding in verse 5…communication with God and following the divine instructions/inspiration he received, (2 Nephi:1-2) which is how the journey begins.

"Autarkeia", Paul on the topic of eliminating needs in order to be able to give more abundantly.

For me to consider, remember, and figure out how to apply better:

"But this I say, He which soweth sparingly shall reap also sparingly; and he which soweth bountifully shall reap also bountifully. Every man according as he purposely in his heart, so let him give; not grudgingly, or of necessity: for God loveth a cheerful giver.

"And God is able to make all grace abound toward you; that ye, always having all sufficiency in all things, may abound to every good work:" 

2nd Corinthians 9:6-8 

 

"Paul insists that God can give a man both the substance to give and the spirit in which to give it....He speaks of the all the "sufficiency" which God gives us. The word he uses is "autarkeia". This was a favorite Stoic word.  It does not describe the sufficiency of the man who possess all kinds of things in abundance.  It means independence.  It describes the state of the man who has directed life not to amassing possessions, but to eliminating needs.  It describes the man who has taught himself to be content with very little. It is obvious that such a man will be able to give far more to others because he wants so little for himself.  It is so often true that we want and keep so much for ourselves that we much less left to give to others....

"...it is God who can give us the spirit in which to give...It is God alone who can put into our hearts the love which is the essence of a the generous spirit."

~ William Barclay, Commentary on 2nd Corinthians, Chapter 9

Aids in my efforts to keep my brain in good shape

 

https://www.positive.news/lifestyle/how-to-redice-dementia-risk/

Reducing dementia risk

(Did you notice the spelling error in the accurate link above?)

Excerpt from that article:

Eating a healthy diet was found to have the strongest effect, and was defined as sticking to the recommended daily intake of at least seven out of 12 food groups, including fruits, vegetables, legumes and nuts.

Cognitive activity such as playing cards, doing crosswords or reading at least twice a week was the second most impactful behaviour. Regular exercise was close behind, defined as 150 minutes of moderate-intensity exercise, or 75 minutes of vigorous intensity, every week. Socialising twice a week, by visiting friends and family or attending meetings, also made it onto the list, as did never having smoked or being an ex-smoker, and drinking no alcohol.

Interestingly, the results held true even for participants who were identified as genetically susceptible to memory loss due to having a key Alzheimer’s risk gene (called AP0E4)

They found that people with four to six healthy lifestyle habits were 90 per cent less likely to develop dementia than those who had zero or one. People with two to three were 30 per cent less likely.

Dr Susan Mitchell, head of policy at Alzheimer’s Research UK, said: “While our genetics play an important part in the health of our brains as we age, this research found a link between healthy lifestyle and slower cognitive decline even in participants with a key risk gene.

“Too few of us know that there are steps we can all take to reduce our chances of dementia in later life. Factors across our lifespan can influence the health of our brains so it’s never too early or too late to think about adopting healthy habits.”