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

8346Re: Messalians

Expand Messages
  • Mike Leavitt
    Sep 29, 2003
      Hello pmcvflag

      On 29-Sep-03, you wrote:

      > Well, Magusadeptus, you may need to clarify for us. I have heard the
      > name applied to Bogimils, but I don't get the impression that this
      > is what you are talking about. I know that Epihpanius talks about
      > two different groups by that name (which he tries to draw together
      > in some way I can't remember... but that sounds typical), but I
      > guess neither of those groups are who you are talking about.
      > In any event, I am aware of no medieval groups that I would say are
      > technically "Gnostic" (with the possible exception of the Mandaeans,
      > but the jury is still out on that one), and I am really not familiar
      > with any Messalians besides the several different groups I already
      > mentioned. Maybe some of the other founders here know something, or
      > one of our many very knowledgeable members can help.
      > PMCV

      If he is referring to the Bogomils, they are more Manachean, and while
      they may be our second cousins, they are not really gnostics. The
      Bogomils were involved in the founding of the Cathars, again our
      second cousins, with I have the utmost sympathy, but who are again
      not really gnostics. They all outdo the gnostics with their absolute
      dualism, probably due to Mani's having been influenced by both
      gnosticism and Zoroastrianism.

      Mike Leavitt ac998@...
    • Show all 10 messages in this topic