New Book on Sethian Gnosis

Discussion about the New Testament, apocrypha, gnostics, church fathers, Christian origins, historical Jesus or otherwise, etc.
User avatar
stephan happy huller
Posts: 1480
Joined: Fri Oct 04, 2013 3:06 pm
Contact:

New Book on Sethian Gnosis

Post by stephan happy huller » Tue Dec 10, 2013 11:44 pm

Apocalypse of the Alien God shows that the fundamental break between the Platonic tradition and Judeo-Christianity began when the mystic Plotinus rejected the teachings of the Sethians, an influential group of Gnostics who operated at the intersection of Hellenic, Jewish, and Christian thought.

Apocalypse of the Alien GodPlatonism and the Exile of Sethian Gnosticism

Dylan M. Burns

Feb 2014 | 336 pages | Cloth $69.95 Religion | Classics View main book pageTable of ContentsAbbreviationsIntroductionChapter 1. Culture WarsChapter 2. Plotinus Against His Gnostic FriendsChapter 3. Other Ways of WritingChapter 4. The DescentChapter 5. The AscentChapter 6. The CrownChapter 7. Between Judaism, Christianity, and NeoplatonismAppendix: Reading Porphyry on the Gnostic Heretics and Their ApocalypsesNotesBibliographyIndexExcerpt [uncorrected, not for citation]IntroductionThe terms "Christianity" and "Judaism" are difficult for students of these ancient religions. Church historians remain unable to pinpoint once and for all the emergence of "Christianity" from "Judaism"; scholars of Judaic studies debate when Judaism was "invented." "Christianity" and "Judaism" can feel like vacuous terms that house a great diversity of groups, practices, and ideas whose differences seem to outweigh their resemblances. Consequently, some scholars feel more comfortable discussing Christianities and Judaisms, and nobody is comfortable with the term used for groups that exist on the borderlines between them: "Jewish-Christian"(!). Even more problematic is the term "paganism," which is essentially a wastebasket for the religious life of every ancient person who did not identify with a cult of the God of Abraham. Yet we persist in using these terms, despite our misgivings, and not just as a heuristic sleight-of-hand. Sometimes there are significant differences between various groups and their ideas, differences that do correspond somewhat to the way that we moderns might use the terms "Jewish" or "Christian" or "Hellenic" ("pagan" I renounce in this book). These differences did not fall from the sky. They were manufactured, in words, art, and ritual, by cultural warriors who believed that such differences mattered and used them to legitimize their own interests.This book is about some of those real differences and the development of the ideologies that crafted them—in this case, the competing worldviews of "Christian" and "Hellenic" (i.e., Greek) philosophers. It argues that one can identify when and where these worldviews split for good: in the 260s CE, in Rome, in the reading group of the great Neoplatonic philosopher Plotinus. The master had a falling out with some of the Christian interlocutors of the group, sparked by the texts they read. After this controversy at the onset of late antiquity, it becomes very difficult to find academic, Hellenic philosophers with cordial relationships with their Christian counterparts. Instead, they regularly wrote polemical treatises denouncing each other's philosophy (even while still exchanging ideas). Here it becomes meaningful to talk of a Christian philosophy distinct from Hellenic philosophy—as a matter of cultural identity as well as intellectual enterprise—and a closed Platonic tradition, unfriendly to Jewish and Christian sources.Unfortunately, this story gets (very) complicated when we try to learn about the Christian interlocutors of Plotinus and their controversial texts, and it is largely occupied—as is the bulk of this book, really—with what we know about them and, in turn, what these details tell us about the situation in Plotinus's circle. Fortunately, these details are not uninteresting: in fact, they furnish valuable evidence for deepening our understanding of an obscure Judeo-Christian literary tradition, Sethianism (so called due to its focus on the figure of Adam and Eve's third son, Seth, as savior and revealer). This book explains the contribution of Sethianism to Greek philosophy, and the reasons for its subsequent exile from the Hellenic schools; its relationship to Judaism, Christianity, and the "Jewish-Christian" groups that existed in the cracks between them; and the development of Jewish mystical traditions we know from the apocalypses and Qumran. This same tradition provides the most valuable evidence modern scholars possess for understanding the thought, background, and historical importance of any group of Gnostics—early Christians who were associated by their opponents with a myth of the creation of the world by a demiurge ("craftsman") of ambivalent ability and mores. It appears that these sects referred to themselves asgnostikoi ("knowers").Plotinus's student Porphyry provides our only record of a personal encounter with ancient Gnostics that does not come from one of their bitter opponents among the church fathers:There were in his (Plotinus's) time many others, Christians, in particular heretics who had set out from the ancient philosophy, men belonging to the schools of Adelphius and Aculinus—who possessed many texts of Alexander the Libyan and Philocomus and Demostratus of Lydia, and who produced revelations of Zoroaster and Zostrianos and Nicotheus and Allogenes and Messos and others of this sort who deceived many, just as they had been deceived, actually alleging that Plato really had not penetrated to the depth of intelligible substance. Wherefore, Plotinus often attacked their position in his seminars, and wrote the book which we have entitled "Against the Gnostics." He left it to us to judge what he had passed over. Amelius went up to forty volumes, writing against the book of Zostrianos, and I, Porphyry, wrote a considerable number of arguments against the book of Zoroaster, showing the book to be entirely spurious and contemporary, contrived by the founders of the heresy to fabricate the idea that the doctrines which they had chosen to honor were in fact those of the ancient Zoroaster.The translation of this passage will be discussed in detail below, but it is immediately clear that Porphyry gives us evidence more specific and reliable than what we have about any other Gnostics. First, he says that, in Plotinus's time, there were Christian heretics, Plotinus's refutation of whom he entitled Against the Gnostics; therefore, "Gnostics" were present in Rome and known to Plotinus and his group. Second, Plotinus discussed philosophical questions with these Gnostics, which means that they were sufficiently educated to participate in a sort of ancient postgraduate seminar. Third, these discussions led to disagreement, much of whose substance is extant in Plotinus's treatise Against the Gnostics. Finally, Porphyry mentions the books the Gnostics considered authoritative: "revelations" (apokalypseis, i.e., "apocalypses").Luckily for us, titles identical to several of the apocalypses mentioned by Porphyry were unearthed at Nag Hammadi (Upper Egypt) in 1945. Thus the especial importance of Porphyry's evidence; when read in concert with Porphyry and Plotinus, these apocalypses, and other texts (mostly apocalypses as well) from Nag Hammadi that belong to the same literary tradition, enable us to pose and answer significant questions about the social background, literary preferences, theological proclivities, and ritual life of a particular group of Gnostics, who came into serious conflict with the great Platonic academics of their time. One of these titles, Allogenes, means "foreigner," or "alien." As we will see, the concept of alienation figures strongly in the Sethian apocalypses, texts that describe a god so utterly transcendent and divorced from creation that he can only be revealed by an avatar who bridges a chasm between human and divine, descending from heaven to preach to the elect, who reside as "aliens" on this strange planet. Conversely, to Plotinus, everything about this message—from its vigorous use of Judeo-Christian language and literary traditions to its treatment of specific philosophical problems (such as divine providence or the afterlife of the soul)—seemed wrong, wrongheaded, and decidedly foreign: that is, alien. For both parties, albeit in entirely different senses, the Sethian literature offered a revelation (apocalypse) of the alien god to his alien worshippers.One might then ask how it is that the Sethian literature and its Christian Gnostic readers wound up in Plotinus's circle in the first place. The Nag Hammadi discovery answers this question: some of the now extant Sethian literature—in particular, a group known as the "Platonizing" texts (Zostrianos [NHC VIII,1], Allogenes[NHC XI,3], Marsanes [NHC X,1] and the Three Steles of Seth [NHC VII,5])—appears to have been deeply conversant with advanced Platonic metaphysics and does not mention the figure of Jesus. The question of dating the copies that were known to Plotinus and others, and thus the possibility of mutual philosophical influence between them, remains controversial; however, there is a scholarly consensus that some version of this literature was present at a crucial period in the development of Platonic metaphysics, and may have even contributed to the thought of Plotinus himself.Yet the importance of the Sethian literature is not limited to our understanding of the history of later Greek philosophy or even Gnosticism. Its indebtedness to the literary traditions and genre of Jewish and Christian apocalyptic literature merits their inclusion in the study of Jewish and Christian pseudepigrapha of the second and third centuries, a period for which our evidence is otherwise scarce. Some of these traditions deal with themes of self-transformation that we know not just from these apocalypses but from the Dead Sea Scrolls, again, furnishing valuable evidence for an obscure field of study—the development of Jewish mysticism between Qumran and the late antique ascent literature known as the "Hekhaloth" ("palaces") corpus, a field the great scholar of Kabbalah, Gershom Scholem, termed "Jewish Gnosticism." Finally, these texts also occupy a liminal position along the notoriously permeable boundaries of Judaism and Christianity, and some of their doctrines are most recognizable in the context of the Syrian groups scholars label "Jewish-Christian," particularly the Elchasaites. The Sethian evidence from Nag Hammadi is thus indispensable for scholars trying to understand the negotiation and mutual permeation of the boundaries between emerging Christianity and Judaism.The evidence for these conclusions is set out in the first six chapters of this book. Chapter 1 addresses an overlooked but significant implication of Porphyry's evidence: the physical presence of these Gnostics in the social context of a philosophical study group. The chapter thus explores the context of such groups in the Hellenic culture wars of the second and third centuries CE, where the Second Sophistic movement developed a Hellenophile ideology permeating educational life and was countered by a spike of interest in "Oriental" sages like those invoked by Plotinus's Christian Gnostic opponents.Chapter 2 takes a close look at Plotinus's own writing about these opponents, who, he says, were once his "friends." He viciously attacks their cosmology, anthropology, and soteriology, accusing them of developing a kind of deviant Platonism. His criticisms apply not only to the apocalypses his Gnostics read but also to contemporary Christian Platonism in general, serving as evidence of the Christian background of the group and the more generally Judeo-Christian valence of their texts.Chapters 3 through 6 introduce and discuss the Sethian Gnostic apocalypses themselves, alongside evidence from Plotinus that has been hitherto read in isolation from them. Chapter 3 examines the genre of the texts, grounding their rhetoric, motifs, and especially claims to authority in contemporary Jewish and Christian apocalyptic literature. Their approach to myth and revelation is sharply contrasted with contemporary Platonic models, which employed allegory to interpret myths; thus, to Plotinus, they appeared to be "another," alien "way of writing." Chapter 4 discusses the apocalypses' attitudes toward soteriology, focusing on the identity of the Sethian savior (a cosmic Seth who descends to earth throughout history to intervene on behalf of the elect), the ethnic valence of their soteriological language, and Plotinus's complaints about these conceptions with respect to his philosophy of divine providence. Chapter 5 looks at Sethian eschatology, both personal (handling the postmortem fate of the soul) and cosmic (handling the fate of the cosmos). In both of these chapters, it is clear that the apocalypses' stances, from a philosophical perspective, resemble Christian Platonism, not its Hellenic counterpart. Chapter 6 studies the strategies for divinization in these Gnostic texts. A review of these practices shows that they drew not from Platonic but from Jewish and Christian sources, particularly those associated with ancient Jewish mysticism, as preserved in the Dead Sea Scrolls, apocalypses, and Hekhalot literature. Moreover, recalling scholarly debate about vision and experience in Jewish literature helps us resolve obscurities in Sethian rituals themselves and theorize for what they could have been used in an ancient context.Chapter 7 summarizes the aforementioned conclusions, offering a clearer picture of the function of the Sethian apocalypses, the lives of their authors, and their relationship to the Gnostics in Plotinus's circle. Moreover, the chapter discusses the texts' relationship with Judaism, Manichaeism, and Christianity (or "Jewish Christianity"), emphasizing the important role that Jewish literature plays in understanding Sethianism, the ways that Sethian literature helps elucidate the thorny problem of "Jewish Gnosticism," and the significance of the Sethian literature for the history of Jewish mysticism. Similarly, significant parallels to Manichaeism emerge that invite a reevaluation of exactly what kind of baptismal groups Sethianism grew out of, and where they might have been.Finally, this book will defend a Judeo-Christian authorship of the Sethian treatises—even the "Platonizing" texts that do not mention Jesus Christ or Scripture!—thus rejecting the scholarly consensus that the texts represent a non-Christian or pagan development of Sethianism, or evidence of an outreach to paganism. Some have recognized already that "a lack of Christian features" does not necessarily indicate Jewish or pagan provenance. Yet the boundary between Judaism and Christianity seems impossible to divine in much of the Sethian literature, particularly the Platonizing texts, which are laden with Neoplatonic jargon instead of biblical references. Perhaps this is no accident, because many of their Jewish and Christian features are associated specifically with groups that flourished precisely along these borderlines, groups (such as the Elchasaites, Ebionites, and author of the Pseudo-Clementine literature) that have duly been named "Jewish-Christian" by modern scholars. As I will argue in the concluding chapter, it is likely that Sethian traditions developed in a Jewish-Christian environment like that which produced Mani, who also drew widely on Jewish apocryphal traditions in formulating a religion that honored Jesus of Nazareth as one of many descending savior-revealers—important, but not the object of every prayer or treatise.The apocalypses brandished in Plotinus's seminar were thus the products of intellectuals from a community that, like Manichaeans or the Elchasaites, dwelt on the boundaries of Judaism and Christianity. Drawing from the literary traditions of the Jewish pseudepigrapha, they wrote their apocalypses as manuals for eliciting an experience of visionary ascent, using Platonic metaphysics as a meditative tool. While such practices are best understood in the context of contemporary Jewish mysticism, the Platonism that informs them also permeated the cosmological and soteriological thought of their authors, producing a Platonism that was at the forefront of Christian theology—hence their appeal to the Christian "heretics" mentioned by Porphyry. He and Plotinus recognized the Christian valence of this Platonism, and here drew a line in the sand between the Platonism of their Christian Gnostic interlocutors and their own thought. Hellenic Platonism thus began to be seen not just as a school interpreting Plato but a Hellenic philosophy distinct from and actively opposed to Jewish and Christian traditions, which the Platonists hoped to exile from their schools once and for all.
Everyone loves the happy times

User avatar
Peter Kirby
Site Admin
Posts: 5512
Joined: Fri Oct 04, 2013 2:13 pm
Location: Santa Clara
Contact:

Re: New Book on Sethian Gnosis

Post by Peter Kirby » Tue Dec 10, 2013 11:46 pm

Wonderful. But $70? Make it a $10 e-book too, and they'd get the library sales and the individual sales, best of both worlds.
"... almost every critical biblical position was earlier advanced by skeptics." - Raymond Brown

User avatar
Blood
Posts: 899
Joined: Sun Oct 06, 2013 8:03 am

Re: New Book on Sethian Gnosis

Post by Blood » Wed Dec 11, 2013 5:41 am

stephan happy huller wrote: Even more problematic is the term "paganism," which is essentially a wastebasket for the religious life of every ancient person who did not identify with a cult of the God of Abraham. Yet we persist in using these terms, despite our misgivings, and not just as a heuristic sleight-of-hand. Sometimes there are significant differences between various groups and their ideas, differences that do correspond somewhat to the way that we moderns might use the terms "Jewish" or "Christian" or "Hellenic" ("pagan" I renounce in this book).
Right away I like how this guy thinks. I can't believe historians actually use the dumb Christian slander "pagan" as if it were appropriate or even meaningful.
“The only sensible response to fragmented, slowly but randomly accruing evidence is radical open-mindedness. A single, simple explanation for a historical event is generally a failure of imagination, not a triumph of induction.” William H.C. Propp

beowulf
Posts: 498
Joined: Sat Oct 12, 2013 6:09 am

Re: New Book on Sethian Gnosis

Post by beowulf » Wed Dec 11, 2013 6:32 am

Sethianism (so called due to its focus on the figure of Adam and Eve's third son, Seth, as savior and revealer)
Glad the pagans are now in a pagan heaven.

User avatar
stephan happy huller
Posts: 1480
Joined: Fri Oct 04, 2013 3:06 pm
Contact:

Re: New Book on Sethian Gnosis

Post by stephan happy huller » Wed Dec 11, 2013 10:38 am

Hi Blood

The reason I cited the argument - I was already in bed and posted by smartphone which sucks in terms of formatting - is that I thought the author's point was quite incisive. I would only take it one step further. If the author was aware of Samaritan sources he'd realize that there exists evidence to suggest that the Samaritan leadership which punished on philosophical grounds. Yes the evidence gets stranger if you take things back beyond the third century.

Here is the testimony of Abu'l Fath who elsewhere makes clear (and here too) that he is citing from actual historical sources of some sort. While Christians aren't specifically mentioned the testimony is absolutely critical for the understanding of early Christianity:
After Eleazer, ‘Aqbun was High Priest for 23 years. ln the days of this ‘Aqbun, terrible hardships fell upon the Samaritans from Commodus the king — worse than anything that had befallen them from Hadrian. He forbade them to read the Torah; he closed the schools of learning and (forbade) all instruction in the Law. He bolted shut the Synagogues. The High Priests fled, The High Priests fled, as did the wise men, from the tyranny of Commodus the king on account of the great number whom he killed and crucified in every place.

The reason for this (persecution) was a debate that took place in his presence between Levi and a man from his (Commodus') community called Alexander Aphridisias, from Aphridisias, concerning the coming-into-being of the world. Alexander said that its Substance and Prime Matter were eternal and that the Creator only provided the Form and Accidents. Levi replied that Substance and Matter need an originator, just as Form and Accidents do. To this, Alexander retorted, "This would lead to a situation where the world would not be possible and where God would have no power to bring it into being. . For, if he had the power from the first, then before that it cannot have been possible. And yet, if before that it were impossible, this would be a restriction, and there can be no restriction on his power."

Levi said that the world was possible of existence ab aetemo and that no time could be conceived in which the coming-into-being of the world could not be conceived. "lf it were to be supposed that the world simply 'existed' without being created and it be tried to prove that this belongs to the realm of possibility, then this would be a figment of the imagination — an intellectual fiction — and the world would be insubstantial and immaterial. And if something were to exist such as Matter and Substance, then it would exist de se. This existence must be either possible or necessary. lf it were possible, then the argument would be as before. lf it were necessary, however, then it would share with the first Almighty One in eternal existence. And if it did thus share, it would not change either in toto or in paribus, for change is an effect and an effect presupposes an Agent. For the one thing cannot be both Matter and Agent under any aspect.

The debate between them dragged on, with argument and polemic . The situation reached the stage where the possibility of the Creator's "Speaking" was denied. And the Mission of the Messengers is (implicitly) denied by whoever denies that the trustworthy Message has been uttered .( 690) Perhaps more of the discourse of this question ought to have been given here. But I have related it as I found it, and as much as I could cope with.

The situation became such that Commodus took umbrage, and said, "These people have perverted our faith, and have maliciously watered down what our sect regards as traditional, and they have acted in a hostile manner towards us.” So, he stretched out his hands, and many of their wise men were burnt to death; and the eyes of some of them were put out with red-hot iron pokers. He wiped out a great number of people, taking the Books of Chronicles which they had, as well as the Hymns which used to be recited over the Offerings.

In his day Galen the Physician had been an instructor of Commodus . Commodus ordered that the flesh of swine should be sold in every place and that it should be used with all that was eaten and drunk, so as to defile the Samaritans. He also forbade the Samaritans to open a Synagogue for themselves to pray or to read (the Torah) in. Many of the priests fled as from the sword. He took 100 elderly men from among the Chiefs of the Samaritans, and said to them, "Worship the idols". They refused, so he had them burnt to death. He captured 40 priests and dipped a bunch of grapes in pigs' fat and said to them, "Eat it !" They refused, so he heated iron pokers in a fire until they became red-hot and then put them in their eyes. Then he captured another 40 and said to them, "Eat this bunch (of grapes)". They refused, so he crushed them under the stones of the wine press. Then he took 40 of the High Priests "Eat this bunch (of grapes)". They refused, so he had them flung from the top of the fortress and no one dared bury them

He crucified numbers of them, and (other) people he beheaded and the dogs ate their corpses. The Chiefs of the Empire said to him, "If you want all "these Samaritans to embrace our religion, and to bow down to images, then summon their High Priest ‘Aqbun, for he is their model. Compel him to bow down, and all the others will follow him". Now ‘Aqbun was an extremely wealthy man. They sought him, and out of fear he hid himself. They looked for him in the Mountains and in caves, but they did not succeed in finding him. So the king instructed his servants, "Confiscate his wealth and burn down his house.”

This they did, and in burning down his house, they burnt in it the Prayers, the Songs of Praise and the Hymns which used to be recited on the Sabbath and Festivals and which had been handed down from the days of Divine Grace. And it was said to the High Priest 'Akbon: "All that is yours has been taken and your house is burnt down". And he answered and said "All is from God and it belongs to God, and if they have obtained mastery over me and my abode, I submit myself to affliction and destruction but I will not disavow God nor Moses, His prophet, nor His law." So they seized his two sons and the King said to them: "Worship idols." And they said: "We will die, but we will not worship other than God the Merciful."

And they inserted sticks under their nails and they flayed them alive and they put them to death with all torture and they cast their corpses to the dogs; and they hanged on the walls of Nablus thirty-six priests and they did not take down their corpses until they fell of themselves. And in the days of this King Commodus (may God curse him) none taught his son the Torah, except one out of a thousand and two out of a myriad secretly. And Commodus ruled thirty-two years and he died (may God not have mercy on him).6
This event clearly took place at the end of the second century and it is paralleled by evidence from Eusebius about a similar 'monarchist' controversy that is witnessed in the writings of a certain 'Maximus.'

Allen Brent has spent a lot of time developing a parallel thesis here. The tendency toward 'monarchianism' developed from the top levels of the Empire. He shows this with respect to the same mid-third century period that the author here is examining specifically with the Roman papacy. But I think it goes back to the time of Irenaeus.

In other words, as the author is suggesting, Christians, Samaritans - but strangely to a much lesser sense Jews - were still immersed in a philosophical culture which overlapped into their respective religions (Isis, Yahweh etc) which increasingly found itself being 'encouraged' in some sense to reflect monarchist ideal - i.e. that the Emperor was part of a hierarchy that extended from heaven. In the medieval period this is referenced as 'divine right' or something like that. But in this period it has to do with monarchia - i.e. the recognition of a sole ruling principle in the universe.

It can't be coincidence this monarchian emphasis begins with the Commodus as the Empire was disintegrating. Christianity emerged apparently as the 'purest' form of monarchia or at least one which could control the masses in such a way as to make it appear to favorable to Emperor worship. Of course there is the whole 'Era of Martyrs' thing. But the persecutions at the end of the third century were not universal. They seem connected IMO with Arianism or proto-Arianism or at least distinctions in the divine household, making the cosmocrator appear inferior to a hidden divinity (and thus apparently opening the door to a recognition that his earthly twin the Emperor was ignorant, blind, lacking etc.)

I really think this the proper way to view the demise of the heresies. They just became undesirable because of the implication on the veneration of the divine (and earthly) monarchy.
Everyone loves the happy times

User avatar
Peter Kirby
Site Admin
Posts: 5512
Joined: Fri Oct 04, 2013 2:13 pm
Location: Santa Clara
Contact:

Re: New Book on Sethian Gnosis

Post by Peter Kirby » Wed Dec 11, 2013 9:52 pm

Blood wrote:
stephan happy huller wrote: Even more problematic is the term "paganism," which is essentially a wastebasket for the religious life of every ancient person who did not identify with a cult of the God of Abraham. Yet we persist in using these terms, despite our misgivings, and not just as a heuristic sleight-of-hand. Sometimes there are significant differences between various groups and their ideas, differences that do correspond somewhat to the way that we moderns might use the terms "Jewish" or "Christian" or "Hellenic" ("pagan" I renounce in this book).
Right away I like how this guy thinks. I can't believe historians actually use the dumb Christian slander "pagan" as if it were appropriate or even meaningful.
Hellenic is not a direct equivalent to "pagan." I don't think historians, in general, like the etymology of "pagan" at all. Some just like the economy of expression over "non-Christian and non-Jewish." Give them a direct equivalent, and I think a lot would jump on it.
"... almost every critical biblical position was earlier advanced by skeptics." - Raymond Brown

andrewcriddle
Posts: 1942
Joined: Sat Oct 05, 2013 12:36 am

Re: New Book on Sethian Gnosis

Post by andrewcriddle » Fri Dec 13, 2013 1:35 pm

I have considerable respect for Dylan Burns as a scholar but I have reservations here.

1/ I agree that the Sethian Gnostics had strong Christian connections (and probably strong Jewish connections although I am uneasy with some of Burns' suggestions here). I agree that Plotinus would have disapproved of proto-Orthodox Christians as well as Sethians and that some of his arguments against the Sethians apply also to the proto-orthodox. However the core of his argument is specifically against Gnosticism (sub-title Against Those That Affirm the Creator of the Cosmos and the Cosmos Itself to Be Evil) i.e. most of his argument would have Plotinus and the proto-orthodox agreeing against the Gnostics that the material world is basically good.

2/ Plotinus produces a strong polemic against the Sethians but he explicitly invites them to reply if there are genuine grounds in Plato and reason to do so. He is not seeking to ban them from his discussion group. Later Platonism does seek to exclude Christians from the discussion, but this is post-Plotinian and is related to the dogmatic acceptance of the authority of the Chaldean Oracles, a development of which Plotinus would probably have disapproved.

Andrew Criddle

User avatar
Blood
Posts: 899
Joined: Sun Oct 06, 2013 8:03 am

Re: New Book on Sethian Gnosis

Post by Blood » Fri Dec 13, 2013 3:44 pm

I just purchased Turner's 800 page Sethian Gnosticism and the Platonic Tradition, so it will be awhile before I can get to another book on the Sethians, the only ancient sect that actually made Christianity interesting. "Second Treatise of the Great Seth" is still one of the most mindblowing things I've ever read.
Last edited by Blood on Fri Dec 13, 2013 3:59 pm, edited 1 time in total.
“The only sensible response to fragmented, slowly but randomly accruing evidence is radical open-mindedness. A single, simple explanation for a historical event is generally a failure of imagination, not a triumph of induction.” William H.C. Propp

User avatar
Blood
Posts: 899
Joined: Sun Oct 06, 2013 8:03 am

Re: New Book on Sethian Gnosis

Post by Blood » Fri Dec 13, 2013 3:58 pm

Peter Kirby wrote:
Blood wrote:
stephan happy huller wrote: Even more problematic is the term "paganism," which is essentially a wastebasket for the religious life of every ancient person who did not identify with a cult of the God of Abraham. Yet we persist in using these terms, despite our misgivings, and not just as a heuristic sleight-of-hand. Sometimes there are significant differences between various groups and their ideas, differences that do correspond somewhat to the way that we moderns might use the terms "Jewish" or "Christian" or "Hellenic" ("pagan" I renounce in this book).
Right away I like how this guy thinks. I can't believe historians actually use the dumb Christian slander "pagan" as if it were appropriate or even meaningful.
Hellenic is not a direct equivalent to "pagan." I don't think historians, in general, like the etymology of "pagan" at all. Some just like the economy of expression over "non-Christian and non-Jewish." Give them a direct equivalent, and I think a lot would jump on it.
It just perpetuates the stereotype of Judaism and Christianity over here in one corner -- the rational religions with their single god -- and everything else in one corner (irrational religions). And that is simply a grossly false historical picture. It simply prolongs the lies and slanders of ancient dead bigots.
“The only sensible response to fragmented, slowly but randomly accruing evidence is radical open-mindedness. A single, simple explanation for a historical event is generally a failure of imagination, not a triumph of induction.” William H.C. Propp

User avatar
Peter Kirby
Site Admin
Posts: 5512
Joined: Fri Oct 04, 2013 2:13 pm
Location: Santa Clara
Contact:

Re: New Book on Sethian Gnosis

Post by Peter Kirby » Fri Dec 13, 2013 4:33 pm

Blood wrote:
Peter Kirby wrote:
Blood wrote:Right away I like how this guy thinks. I can't believe historians actually use the dumb Christian slander "pagan" as if it were appropriate or even meaningful.
Hellenic is not a direct equivalent to "pagan." I don't think historians, in general, like the etymology of "pagan" at all. Some just like the economy of expression over "non-Christian and non-Jewish." Give them a direct equivalent, and I think a lot would jump on it.
It just perpetuates the stereotype of Judaism and Christianity over here in one corner -- the rational religions with their single god -- and everything else in one corner (irrational religions). And that is simply a grossly false historical picture. It simply prolongs the lies and slanders of ancient dead bigots.
Not really. (Please forgive me if I am weary of manufactured outrage.)

http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.p ... %20Outrage
"A falsified righteous outrage at things that are basically unimportant and meaningless, frequently employed by politicians, political activists, or the media. Politicians and talking heads use it to garner support for their causes, to claim the moral high ground and to tar their opponents; the media often just uses it in a cynical bid to increase ratings."
"... almost every critical biblical position was earlier advanced by skeptics." - Raymond Brown

Post Reply