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

Re: The Ancient Communities Categorized as "Gnostic"

Expand Messages
  • pmcvflag
    Hey George ... a more modern period?
    Message 1 of 19 , Mar 24, 2008
    • 0 Attachment
      Hey George

      >>>Chronologically speaking, where do we draw the line into
      a more modern period?<<<

      If I recall the Messina definition simply states "the Late
      Antiquities" as an attribute of the "Gnosticism" category (up to about
      500 C.E. was the common date). However, since that time it seems most
      scholars have dealt with the issue more on the front of specific
      belief systems. This is probably more reasonable since if we found a
      text by a Sethian sect still existing in the Medieval era we would
      have to include it.

      The more important attributes that scholars generally look at as
      definitive include cosmology/cosmogeny, soteriology, and a specific
      cultural origin (Hellenistic/"Biblical" syncratism).

    • Mark
      a bit like a muslim studying catholicism No, more like a modern gnostic studying his (or her) roots in historical Gnosticism. Many things are useful to a
      Message 2 of 19 , Mar 25, 2008
      • 0 Attachment
        "a bit like a muslim studying catholicism"

        No, more like a modern gnostic studying his (or her) roots in
        historical Gnosticism. Many things are useful to a point--and the
        point is often knowing that point. The flaw may be in your
        expectations and not in the purpose of this list.


        --- In gnosticism2@yahoogroups.com, "Br Benjamin Assisi"
        <brbenjaminassisi@...> wrote:
        > in this group yes,
        > this group is very much just a study/history group...
        > interesting I guess...but flawed, a bit like a muslim studying
        > useful to a point.
        > Arguing at the AGCA??? We are discussing a central core, well I am
        trying to
        > attempt one, Personally It think there are few "universals" in
        > unknowable god, illusion, no dogma etc. I dont find any problem in
        > that out side "Gnosticism" either... But I realize in this group
        and others,
        > its mostly an exercise in separation, putting that substance in a
        > and seeing what you get. So I am here to lurk mostly...
        > On Sun, Mar 23, 2008 at 3:02 PM, George <historynow2002@...> wrote:
        > > Brother Benjamin:
        > >
        > > Indeed, I had worked under the assumption that we were looking
        > > for what was the central CORE of these various groups, rather
        > > than an historical view of who, and what, and where.
        > >
        > > I presume I was in error?
        > >
        > > Regards,
        > >
        > > George
        > >
        > >
        > --
        > Better than one thousand verses
        > Where no profit wings the word,
        > Is one solitary stanza
        > Bringing peace of mind when heard.
      Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.