[Gnosticism2] Re: Resonating scripture
- lady_caritas writes:
> You have mentioned an encratic lifestyle in the past, in addition tothe devaluations of sacraments, ritual actions, clerical institutions
> displeasure with Valentinus. What other ideas presented in this work
> appeal to you?
and the like
as well as the radical allegorical interpolation of scriptures
which are understood as historical documents by most people,
like the Temple Midrasch.
> This writing, which upholds an austere view of renunciation of thisThe Book of Thomas the Contender (II,7)
> world, is an example of polemics against other Gnostic sects as well
> as more traditional Christianity. I'm curious. This piece is quite
> unforgiving of various other sects, even though there seems to be
> some agreement, such as the importance of self-knowledge and
> disputing "carnal resurrection." IOW, one might wonder if this
> author isn't placing quite a lot of emphasis on praxis.
> Incompatibility with other Gnostics appears to stem more from
> differing practices he feels are necessary to attain gnosis.
> Klaus, do you personally find any other Gnostic scriptures to your
> Because moving away from Latin as the scholars' lingua francaOthers would argue that the movement INTO Latin as the
> was the greatest error throughout the history of European culture.
> This has already been noted by A. Schopenhauer.
scholar's "lingua franca" was the greatest mistake of western
culture... this would include the Greek-speaking composers of much of
the Nag Hammadi library, as well as it's Coptic speaking translators.
Often times both of these languages were very specifically used as
outposts of resistance against Latin cultural oppression. In northern
Egypt the Greek speaking community was second only to the Jews for
their reputation for insurrection (in Alexandria the Greek community
lived just to the south of the walled Jewish quarter, and the
cultural exchange equalled the resentment of occupation. This is the
venue in which Gnosticism was created).
None of these books we are talking about were written in Latin, so
gumming up the works with yet a fourth (unrelated) language in the
mix seemed rather strange is all. Don't get me wrong, Latin is a
wonderful language, and one that is very useful to the scientific
community. It is also something like speaking Hebrew at a Palistinian
knitting club. I have no problem if you want to use latin... knock
yourself out our uptight friend. Now, if we were talking about
Catholicism it would seem perfectly obvious that you should use Latin.
By the way..... Schopenhauer wasn't Gnostic either.