Re: Hermeneutics recap (and eisegesis vs exegesis)
- Hey JC, you state....
>>>Gnosis (definition of): See Enlightenment (buddhism)<<<This group is a bit more technical in the way it uses words, due in
part to the slightly more academic treatment of this subject.
The "Gnosis = Enlightenment" equation doesn't work here, since it
glosses over too many subjects that are important for our focus.
>>>Gnosis IS salvation.<<<My point as well. However, I do need to point out that the
word "gnosis" has different meanings in different contexts. It would
be wrong to say that the word gnosis always (or even usually) has the
soteriological function that you and I agree the concept holds for
this categorical destinction of historical "Gnosticism". As I stated,
the etymological definition of the word is not the same as the
specialized definition used by many later Platonists.
>>>You are trying too hard to analyse it and not letting it lead youitself.<<<
If you are looking for conversation about modern Gnostic groups
rather than traditional ones, you may be more interested in another
group JC. Let me give you a URL for one that may deal more with the
subject in a way that is less historical but more about modern
Our focus is only on understanding historical Gnosticism and what
that IN TURN could imply for modern understanding. The modern method
is certainly important as well... just not our focus here.
>>>Read the Trimorphic Protennoia.<<<I have read every extant source, JC, even ones that are not widely
available to the public. Please post your comments with specific
passages so we can understand exactly what you mean to be driving at.
We are very open to various views, so long as they are presented in a
spirit of conversation and exploration and presented with textual
demonstration. One liners, on the other hand, will likely only get
reprimands even from those of us who may agree with you.