Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

13425Re: Taxonomy of Gnostic, Proto-Gnostic, Semi-Gnostic, Pseodo-Gnostic etc..

Expand Messages
  • Sean
    Mar 17, 2008
      I agree.

      All definitions of Gnosticism, gnostism work and all do not work. For me it is like trying to
      define the wind. We know what the wind can do but does that define the wind.



      --- In gnosticism2@yahoogroups.com, pmcvflag <no_reply@...> wrote:
      > Hey George
      > >>>What a great idea ! To develop a taxonomy... naturally
      > this is subject to exactly how gnosticism is defined.
      > But let's say we get a definition that everyone (or most
      > everyone) finds adequate.<<<
      > Thanks, I'm glad you like it. I am still trying to work on the other
      > taxonomy that Thalprin suggests, as well as the timeline.
      > As for the definition of Gnosticism (and in this forum we are
      > talking about Gnosticism with a capital "G", not gnosticism with the
      > small "g"), we are open to some tweeking and discussion.... but...
      > the fact that we will attempt to maintain the more
      > academic/historical definition as the base is frankly not open to
      > debate.
      > Think of it another way; if "everyone" (in other forums)
      > believed "existentialism" was about any beliefs
      > concerning "existance", but there was one last forum dealing only
      > with "Existentialism" (the philosophical school)... why should that
      > Existentialist forum bow to "everybody" and try to redefine itself
      > to talk about the "existentialism" of common understanding? Doesn't
      > the Existentialist forum have a right to maintain its study of
      > Existentialism with a capitol "E"?
      > Public opinion has a place, but this forum is the final refuge for
      > those who prefer disambiguation in their study of classical
      > Gnosticism.
      > PMCV
    • Show all 24 messages in this topic