The Laughing Jesus

For my birthday, a good friend gave me a book, “The Laughing Jesus: Religious Lies and Gnostic Wisdom.” I had time on my hands yesterday, so I finally sat down to start reading it. I’ve only gotten through the first few chapters, but here’s the basic gist: “Gnosticism,” described by the authors as a sort of self-guided awakening toward spiritual reality, unencumbered by the oppressive shackles of religion, is good. “Literalism,” a broad label the authors use to describe faithful adherence to a religion (particularly any of the major ones), is bad.

The book begins by presenting a visual illustration, a two-column chart, to make very clear to the reader the stark contrasts between Gnosticism and Literalism. I felt compelled to share a few examples with some brief commentary (inserted in brackets):

From the book:

“Gnostics want us to think for ourselves, so that we become more conscious and wake up.
Literalists want us to believe what they believe, so that we will join their cult.”
[I’d have to ask the authors whether part of the reason they’ve written this book is to get others to believe what they believe.]

“Gnostics understand that life itself is a process of awakening.
Literalists believe their particular religion is the only way to the truth and condemn everyone else as lost in diabolical error.”
[Yet the authors claim gnosticism to be the way to the truth, and all those literalists to be lost in diabolical error!]

“Gnosticism is about waking up from the illusion of separateness to oneness and love.
Literalism keeps us asleep in an ‘us versus them’ world of division and conflict…”
[Uh, hello, gnostic guys, what about this little ‘us versus them’ chart of yours I’m reading??]

“Gnosticism unites us.
Literalism divides us.”
[Ibid.]

My conclusion: If Literalism is what these Gnostics say it is, then these Gnostics are Literalists.