[Gnosticism2] Re: Resonating scripture
- lady_caritas writes:
> --- In firstname.lastname@example.org, klaus schilling <pessy@c...>The book of thomas the contender is composed of jewish apocalyptic letters
> > klaus schilling writes:
> > > lady_caritas writes:
> > > >
> > > > Klaus, do you personally find any other Gnostic scriptures to
> > > > liking?
> > > >
> > > The Book of Thomas the Contender (II,7)
> > Forgot to add the Second Logos of the Great Seth, the Paraphrasis
> of Sheem,
> > the Dialog of the Redeemer, and the Apocalypse of Petrus,
> > but I don't have their NHL Index at hand.
> > ... outside the NHL the fragmentarily quoted excerpts from Julius
> > exegesis of the lost Egyptian Gospel (Clement refutes them in his
> > Klaus Schilling
> Klaus, you have mentioned writings that others have not. It would be
> interesting to hear commentary on your selections, if you're so
which got deuterochristianized later.
It's paranetic, with strong makarisms and woe-calls,
distinguishes strictly between followers of the fleshly instincts
and followers of wisdom who are supposed to be encratites.
The second logos of the Great Seth (VII,2) promotes docetism and
polemizes rigorously against judaism and catholicism,
properly against any sort of organised churches,
acknowledging only a docetic church-in-spirit.
The Apocalypse of Petrus (VII,3) is also strongly denigrating catholicism
and temple jews. Catholics are shown to be the straight successors
of temple jews. It's also docetic and explicitly antipaulinic.
Also the sect of Simon the Mage is denigrated.
The paraphrasis of Shem (VII,1) presents the strict gnostic dualism
of creation vs. salvation in various metaphors.
It also employs demonology and negative pornography
in order to underline the disgusting essence of matter and nature.
Baptising practises are denigrated as well.
It has much in common with what later became Manicheism.
due to copyright problems, it is not available online.
The dialog of the Saviour (III,5) is as poorly preserved as the Test.Ver.
It interprets many sayings that orthodoxers understood falsely.
It stresses opposition to the archons, soul destiny, and encratism.
Julius Cassianus was a former Valentinian who split with same over
questions like encratism and the strong form of docetism
which Cassianus promoted, but Valentians denied.
Both the TV and the DS have been assigned at times to Julius Cassianus.
Clement of Alexandria disputes Cassianus' excerpt of the Ev. Egypt.
in the third book of his Stromata,
which is not available online in English translation due to CR problems.
Following the Ev. Egypt.
the Saviour comes in order to destroy the work of the womb,
(Jesus tells Salome that death will prevail as long as women give birth)
a motive found throughout gnostic encratite literature.
> 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.