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

Re: what is an "Anti-Cosmic Dualism?"

Expand Messages
  • Mike Leavitt
    Hello Tsharpmin7@aol.com ... The Demiurge created a flawed universe with the possibility of evil. This is dualistic because he ain t the real God, and
    Message 1 of 36 , Sep 1, 2005
      Hello Tsharpmin7@...

      On 09/01/05, you wrote:

      > can anyone tell me what "anti-cosmic dualism" might be? its used in
      > an article i began reading yesterday morning:
      > _http://www.earlychurch.org.uk/article_gnosticism_yamauchi.html_
      > (http://www.earlychurch.org.uk/article_gnosticism_yamauchi.html)
      > (Pre-Christian Gnosticism, the New Testament and Nag Hammadi in
      > recent debate, by Edwin M. Yamauchi).
      >
      > here are the two examples of its usage:
      >
      > "...Hans Jonas has insisted that an anti-cosmic dualism is the
      > essential ingredient of Gnosticism. The same point has been stressed
      > recently by K.-W. Tröger: 'Primarily the Gnostic religion is an
      > anti-cosmic religion'."
      >
      > "A major difficulty in accepting an inner Jewish origin for
      > Gnosticism is to account for the anti-Jewish use which most Gnostics
      > seem to have made of the 'Jewish' elements. The anti-cosmic attitude
      > of the Gnostics contradicts the Jewish belief that God created the
      > world and declared it good. According to Troger, 'But in my view,
      > the hypothesis of a "revolt" within Judaism would hardly be
      > sufficient in accounting for the fundamental and radical
      > anti-cosmism in such a lot of Gnostic writings'."
      >
      > appreciate anyone's help here.
      >
      > your friend,
      >
      > Crispin Sainte III

      The Demiurge created a flawed universe with the possibility of evil.
      This is dualistic because he ain't the real God, and anti-cosmic,
      because the cosmos is not perfect, but flawed and full of evil as
      well as good. That is my best guess anyway. Not really untrue. But
      it is only the physical universe that is flawed, the spiritual
      rhealms above it are not (though they may not be perfect, per se,
      until we enter the Pleroma), so it depends on how we define the
      cosmos.

      Regards
      --
      Mike Leavitt ac998_@_lafn._org remove -'s
    • Mike Leavitt
      Hello pmcvflag ... Actuallly literal acceptance of authorship and age was quite common. Regards -- Mike Leavitt ac998_@_lafn._org remove - s
      Message 36 of 36 , Oct 2, 2005
        Hello pmcvflag

        On 10/02/05, you wrote:

        > Hey Mike
        >
        >>>> Wasn't the emerald tablet known before the Renisance rediscovery
        >>>> of
        > the Hermetic texts, and cited by earlier Alchemists? If so, that
        > could lead to the idea it was more ancient. The Sephir Yedzirah was
        > out there long before the Zohar, for instance.<<<
        >
        > If I recall, the oldest version of the "Emerald Tablet" is from
        > around the 800s (AD), in Arabic. I think there were translations
        > from the 1200s in medieval Europe, and certainly there have been
        > people who thought these texts were very old. I am not sure exactly
        > where the discovery era presents any genuine reasoning for an older
        > date for the text, but of course even though the notion is not
        > relavant in modern thinking it could have been part of the reasoning
        > for people at the time. I can't say for sure. However, if you think
        > about it from the Renaissance rational, Hermes was a real person
        > from the time of Moses, which means that all hermetic writings that
        > were valid came from this historical person. So even then some texts
        > would not have predated the others.
        >
        > It is true, the Sefer Yetzirah predates the Zohar.... but it is also
        > from a different tradition than the Zohar. So, this could be more
        > like comparing pre-Hermetic ideas of "Hermes" with those of the
        > Corpus Hermetica. Yes, they predate them, but they also tell us a
        > limited amount about them.
        >
        > So, you could have a point there... the mere fact that the texts
        > were more popular and known before the Corpus Hermetica were
        > rediscovered could have lead some thinkers to the idea that they
        > were older. However, I am not sure exactly where this thinking would
        > have come from... all things considered.
        >
        > PMCV

        Actuallly literal acceptance of authorship and age was quite common.

        Regards
        --
        Mike Leavitt ac998_@_lafn._org remove -'s
      Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.