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

Re: Who (or what) is "THE DEVIL"?/Great Fall of the Spirits

Expand Messages
  • pmcvflag
    Hey Fred, I am glad you took the time to make it more clear in your last post because I was left scratching my head by what seemed to be the same inconsistancy
    Message 1 of 74 , Jun 1 8:25 PM
      Hey Fred, I am glad you took the time to make it more clear in your
      last post because I was left scratching my head by what seemed to be
      the same inconsistancy that Mike pointed out.

      Much of what I would state in answer to you has already been stated
      by others, but let me recap so you know where I stand as well.

      >>So, in that context, do you think perhaps
      that you are drawing a finer distinction, from your "modern"
      perspective, between the texts in the NHL than the historical
      Gnostics actually drew?<<

      As Gerry pointed out, "Gnosticism" it self is a modern term. As he
      also points out, it is far from clear who or why the Nag Hammadi
      Library was brought together. It has become something of an urban
      legend amongst interested laypersons that they were compiled by a
      Gnostic who hid them to save them from being destroyed by the
      church.... but it is just a legend. In addition to the theory that
      Gerry quoted (that the inter-relation between the texts was
      asceticism) I have heard others. One theory holds that the texts were
      brought together in order to use in a polemic (can't remember which
      scholor offered that one), and then burried when the task was
      daunting. The more common theory that I have heard is that they were
      part of a larger collection that may have had works by a number of
      sects and these were simply the ones that seemed the most heretical
      and were thus burried when the orders came around.

      In fact, while the texts are generally thought to have been the
      property of the monks, we don't know that they could not have been
      commissioned by a third party to be translated and compiled. The
      majority of scholors that I am aware of do NOT believe that these
      books were created and burried by Gnostics who were interested in the
      texts as examples of Gnostic works.

      >>>To group the Gnostic, Hermetic, and Platonic texts together, they
      must have seen a common theme to all the texts. I don't believe they
      even referred to themselves as Gnostics, let alone to label certain
      texts as being either Hermetic or Gnostic.<<<

      But, once again, you would even have to prove that the person who
      compiled the texts actually agreed with them beyond some specific
      aspect... such as asceticism.

      In any event, since the Category of "Gnosticism" is a modern
      invention, there is absolutely nothing in your argument.... or in the
      Nag Hammadi Library... that implies the destinction should be
      changed. In fact, your points do not deal with the category. Even IF
      the person who compiled the works saw them as the same (the Gnostic,
      Hermetic, Platonic) how do you know that the thing they saw as the
      same was not the Platonic element that we find in most of the texts?
      After all, I already pointed out that Platonism is the larger
      category, how do you know that this monk (or whoever it was) did not
      intend to compile a group of Platonic, rather than "Gnostic" texts?

    • George Harvey
      ... a ... Gnostic ... Hi Mike, Thank you. I suspected she was wrong but didn t know for sure. George
      Message 74 of 74 , Jun 16 7:27 PM
        --- In gnosticism2@yahoogroups.com, Mike Leavitt <ac998@l...> wrote:
        > Hello George
        > On 06/16/04, you wrote:
        > > Hi Mike,
        > > Someone on my list said modern Gnostic churches do not allow women
        > > to be priests. Is that true of your church?
        > >
        > > George
        > Stephan ordained Rosa Miller to the priesthood, and consecrated her
        > bishop. We currently have two active women priests, and an active
        > woman deacon or three, I can't keep up with it. The short answer is
        > no it is not true of our church, nor is it true of the French
        > Church, our confederate. It may be true of some more traditionally
        > Catholic Gnostic churches, milage may vary. Years ago I asked an
        > old Liberal Catholic Priest (they have no women in orders to this
        > day), "how can you deny one of the sacraments to half the human
        > race." He was stunned by the question, and said that was the only
        > thing anyone had said to him that gave him doubts about the all male
        > clergy.
        > Regards
        > --
        > Mike Leavitt ac998@l...

        Hi Mike,
        Thank you. I suspected she was wrong but didn't know for sure.

      Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.