![]() To call Gnosticism “pre-Christian” implies a view similar to Bultmann’s. 4 Later, Rudolf Bultmann became a major figure in a school of thought (following Richard Reitzenstein’s hypothesis) that saw Gnosticism as both preceding and affecting Christianity, 5 and Gnosticism as equally valid from a religionsgeschicte point-of-view. The view of Gnosticism as a Christian heresy prevailed until at least 1909, when Robert Law proposed Hellenistic-Oriental Gnostic origins. 3įinally, one last term may now be defined, that is, “pre-Christian Gnosticism.” In the twentieth century, there was considerable debate whether (1) Gnosticism as a religion preceded and developed in parallel or even in tandem with Christianity or (2) it developed more or less directly from Christianity and existed as a Christian heresy. A “proto-Gnostic” element, on the other hand, is one that belongs specifically to the early stages of the formation of a Gnostic religion. Two more terms must be contrasted: “pre-Gnostic” and “proto-Gnostic.” According to the definition adopted at the Messina congress on Gnostic origins in 1966, “pre-Gnostic” refers to elements that existed before Christianity and were later incorporated into Gnostic religions. A working definition of Gnostic religion will follow in the next section. In this way, New Testament passages might be, and often are, alleged to be “gnosticizing.” Two examples are: (1) references to the gospel as “saving knowledge” and (2) the use of terminology - notably by Paul - such as “knowledge,” “all things” ( tá pánta, i.e., “the All”), “fullness” ( plērōma), etc., which were at times employed as Gnostic technical terms.Ĭonversely, it is appropriate to refer to traits, practices, elements, etc., as “Gnostic,” with a capital “G”, when applied to what is by definition a specifically Gnostic religion. 2 The broad sense is most appropriately rendered “gnostic,” with a lower-case “g”, in that it refers to the fact of an esoteric knowledge, or to certain traits or tendencies generally associated with known Gnostic religions. One can refer to things “gnostic” in the broad sense or in the narrow sense. “Gnosticism” is a modern term 1 applied to a number of religious groups that placed an emphasis on esoteric knowledge ( gnōsis) which is passed along, presumably, through the ages among those whom can be said to have “arrived,” that is, achieved some higher spiritual plane. Perhaps the answer - or part of it - can be discovered by examining the sources of the Gnostic view of Christ, and the construct of Christ’s nature and purpose they derive from those sources. The Gnostics, however, appear to be affected by considerable religious and philosophical thought that lies outside the Judeo-Christian orthodox continuum. Is the Gnostic interpretation valid? Is it indeed Christian? Some liberal scholars consider it equally valid with the Christian message. The most important point of departure from orthodox teaching is in the Gnostic redefinition of the meaning, purpose, and nature of Christ. ![]() It was studied with interest in the twentieth century, especially since the discovery of a ruined Coptic library of Gnostic texts at Nag Hammadi in Egypt in 1947.īut why did the orthodox Church object so to this religious strain? And why the renewed excitement among modern religion scholars? The answer is the same on both counts: the thought of the Gnostics represents a variety of interpretation and application of the Christian message that differs from the orthodox view. This phenomenon is known today as Gnosticism. ![]() This separation was performed expeditiously and effectively by such great orthodox leaders as Hippolytus, Tertullian, and most notably by Irenaeus in his Against Heresies. Hughesīy the end of the second century, a religio-philosophical phenomenon on the fringes of Christianity had already been sharply defined by orthodox theologians and severely distanced from orthodox circles.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |