Toto

It doesn't matter when it was written. There is nothing in the text to suggest that is describes GNOSTICS fleeing from orthodoxy, as opposed to a younger generation just fleeing from Christianity.

I know you have read a lot of texts, but you only seem to be looking for phrases that you can take out of context to support your preexisting ideas.

mountainman

I disagree. I think it is critical to know WHEN a text was authored.

If one does not know when a text was written one must remain ignorant of its chronological political context.


It does not make sense that the non orthodox would flee from the orthodox on any large scale before this orthodoxy was established. We know the orthodoxy was established at Nicaea.


You appear to be avoiding the logic here.

(1) The gnostics wrote according to mainstream thought in centuries 2, 3, 4 and even afterwards. DrZoidberg's post about the Cathars is a late example.

(2) The gnostics who wrote before Nicaea wrote under a totally different political and social environment that those who wrote after Nicaea.

(3) After Nicaea the gnostics and all other religious groups were persecuted and I have no problem in understanding that they would have by necessity FLED from the orthodoxy and the imperial Christian soldiers.

Are these points illogical and if so in what way?


Would you not expect a group to produce anti-authoritarian tractates WHEN it was subject to destruction and censorship?

stephan huller

No. Say it isn't so. Pete is the greatest scholar of this generation. This generation just doesn't know it yet.

Chili

He just cannot understand that Catholics are not Christian.

Christians are saved and still sinners.

Catholics are sinners but not saved.

Jews are sinners but not saved.

Catholics are like Jews and neither are Christians.

Not for me, but Pete should repeat this a thousand times: Catholics are not Christians..

Ask any Christian if Jews are saved and they will say NO.

Ask any Christian if Catholics are saved and they will say Yes but sure want to get their hands on him to save him!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Billy Graham knew exactly how it was done.

There is not one Bapthist who will say that Catholics are saved.

And Pete insists that they are, but just are going in the wrong direction.

Chili

Gnostis are heretics and do not play by Catholic rule. And if the rules are called by the state with death as punishment to lead their flock astray, it is their call to decide 'yes' or 'no.'

Is that English Pete?

If the rules are like soccer and you want to play hockey, get your own field in a land of you own.

Is that English Pete?

Catholics are not Christian.

Is that English Pete?

Anthro 101 day 1: "The Mythology is for the preservation and prospertity of the tribe.

Is that English Pete?

"Freedom of religion" as a constitutional right is a major contradiction if the mythology is for the preservation and well being of the tribe.

Is that English Pete?

Do you know what spritual fornication is? It is the favorite sport by those who call themeselves Christians = the scum of the earth.

Take note Pete.

You have not got a fucking clue, and insist that you know and worse yet is that you think to be right.

Oh, and the younger generation is fleeing only because after 2000 years not one Christian has proved himself to be right and lived to talk about it . . . as for him 'good times' begin only after he dies.

Toto

The text says nothing about non orthodox fleeing orthodoxy.

You might expect that, but that is not what this text says. It says nothing about persecuted heretics fleeing from Constantine's minions. Have you read past the part about this generation fleeing to find any criticism of orthodoxy?

What you would expect, and what happened, was that the Gnostics lost out to the orthodox. After all, where would they flee? They might lie low for a while, but where would they go?

Chili

All Christian sects, as in all 20.000 of them are lukewarm by degree and without exception a heresy to them.

Catholics are cold, and like Jews are waiting for the coming of Christ in their own life, which for Jews is the first and for Catholics is the second coming and neither will accept home-brewed salvation recipes to strike fire down from heaven in the mind of the believer.

The Gnostics were just a super aggravated sect, who likeley had drank the wine of God's wrath poured full strength in the cup of his anger, with obviously no rest by day or by night.

mountainman

Yes of course I have and the following is the summary of my analysis.

We are dealing with two distinct groups being described.

Let's call them Group 1 and Group 2. The author is from Group 1.

The following has been extracted from here

The Interpretation of Knowledge: NHC 11.1

1.0 GROUP 1

1.1 Group 1 is described as “a great church” associated with life (imperishability) described as “a living school”

1.2 This was the great group (generation) who fled "the rulers and authorities".

1.3 Their universal pagan church had been split apart by the Nicaean monotheism.

1.4 This large group was from "the church of the Living school".

1.5 They were reproached and humiliated; they did not believe the "dead writings" about Jesus.

1.6 "They fled without having heard that the Christ had been crucified".

1.7 "But our generation is fleeing since it does not yet even believe that the Christ is alive."




2.0 GROUP 2:

2.1 Group 2 is described as “a small gathering” associated with death (arrogance or ignorance) “teaches us about dead writings”.

2.2 This was the small group of “the rulers and authorities” from whom Group 1 fled.

2.3 The small group wanted power: “they split the Church so as to inherit . . .”

2.4 The small group was from “the church of mortals”

2.5 They reproached and humiliated before they “taught about dead writings”.

2.6 They crucified Jesus in order “to keep him in the church”.

2.7 They chased down an entire generation - all who would not believe their "dead writings" to be true.

The problem which remains is understanding who these two groups were.

In this exercise we need to know when the NHC 11.1 was authored.

The point of the OP is to explore the argument that these groups are post Nicaean.

If the text is post Nicaean then Group 2 may represent the Constantinian orthodoxy.

If the text is post Nicaean then Group 1, to whom the author of NHC 11.1 belongs, may represent the group subject to Constantinian orthodoxy.

I have already furnished a number of sources that argue the text may have been authored in the 4th century.



Yes of course. But not after a struggle and a great controversy which involved
Group 1 hiding and preserving heretical books and Group 2 seeking out and burning heretical books..

I think it is possible that NHC 11.1 witnesses a post Nicaean struggle.

Group 1 went down to Group 2. (See above analysis).


To the desert. To the wilderness. To Nag Hammadi and other remote locations.

But ultimately, except for modern manuscript discoveries, to oblivion.


NOTE: The following data represents my notes of An Exploration of Valentinian Paraenesis:Rethinking Gnostic Ethics in the Interpretation of Knowledge by Philip L. Tite. The summary section above has been extracted from the following sources:

Chili

It is not that hard Pete, and we all know that Catholicism is cold, that you call dead, while for the gnostics He is alive. Still today Jesus is alive for them but not for Catholics. Jesus is alive makes them charismatic with fire from both ends, and yes, Jesus is the fiery revolving sword that was stationned at the gate when we first left Eden, but the seraph was also there and they ignore her, totally, and do not understand who she is.*

The seraph is there only to lead the believer in from behind the scene as she is the only one who knows how to get back in, and that is the problem and always was the problem for them . . . and finally are a great warrior without wisdom who will bomb the wrong country again and again, and then they will say 'fuck' and hope for better days head.

Instead we have Christ among us and he is not a rioteer, but proclaims peace among men of good will, and so 'the great warriors' are our lost brethren and they need to get fed too, which then is why Matthew and Mark is first to have authority for them, as the rich man himself and pope of his own.

* This actually is much worse today when we openly put the woman up front and is officially declared as our equal beside us. This sounds very nice and generous, but so is also removing her from the great position she held by tradition wherein she is the woman who makes her man, who really is an idiot on his own without her pulling the strings from inside of Eden where she still is home with intuit connection first-hand. But who really cares, as might will always make right for as long as we have bombs and money to spend.

mountainman

In continuation of the OP The Nag Hammadi manuscript NHC 11.1: The Interpretation of Knowledge describes two distinct groups.

Let's call them Group 1 and Group 2.

The author is from Group 1.

The following has been extracted from here



GROUP (1): The pagan generation that fled the "Good News" published by Constantine.

The author is part of this group. I am putting forward the notion that the first generation to flee from the Nicaean agreement of a state church is none other than the pagan generation which included the "Sacred Assembly of Pagan Priests" and other collegiate represented by physicians, mathematicians, logicians, astronomers, writers, philosophers, orators and other collegia.

The Interpretation of Knowledge: NHC 11.1

1.0 GROUP 1

1.1 Group 1 is described as “a great church” associated with life (imperishability) described as “a living school”

1.2 This was the great group (generation) who fled "the rulers and authorities".

1.3 Their large and universal church had been split apart by the Nicaean monotheism.

1.4 This large group was from "the church of the Living school".

1.5 They were reproached and humiliated; they did not believe the "dead writings" about Jesus.

1.6 "They fled without having heard that the Christ had been crucified".

1.7 "But our generation is fleeing since it does not yet even believe that the Christ is alive."

GROUP (2): The Constantinian regime who published the Bible.

The second group I am putting forward as the Constantinian regime. They were rather ruthless and taught "dead writings". The Ruler ordered the army to destroy the major pagan temples, execute a few head priests and prohibited their traditional use. Religious privileges were reserved for those who followed the Ruler's Bible.

The Interpretation of Knowledge: NHC 11.1

2.0 GROUP 2:

2.1 Group 2 is described as “a small gathering” associated with death (arrogance or ignorance) “teaches us about dead writings”.

2.2 This was the small group of “the rulers and authorities” from whom Group 1 fled.

2.3 The small group wanted power: “they split the Church so as to inherit . . .”

2.4 The small group was from “the church of mortals”

2.5 They reproached and humiliated before they “taught about dead writings”.

2.6 They crucified Jesus in order “to keep him in the church”.

2.7 They chased down an entire generation - all who would not believe their "dead writings" to be true.

I put this model forward for discussion and am happy to answer any questions.