Clivedurdle

It looks to me as if the term gnosticism is being used in different fashions.

I understand it to be an extremely ancient idea - someone knows something someone else does not and decides to divy out that knowledge to select groups.

Add in ideas of a good god and a bad god - which do track back to Zarathustra.

Remember the Albigensian crusades.

Is gnosticism being assumed to be something that evolved within xianity? Why?

I see this as a problem of a continuum of what ingredients you put into your belief system - so you will get gnostic flavours of anything. And what we should be looking for are the patterns, the interactions, like a pre-existing idea of a fire bird and fire being critical to Zarathustran beliefs, and how this evolves into ideas expressed in the gospels and Revelation.

Cesc

Wasnt the myth of, for instance, Persephone/Demeter used to teach the initiate something about life after death, on a philosophical level, as opposed to a mere mythological level? (Doesnt Burkett's book talk about that?) How can you be initiated without being reborn? What I heard suggested was that just as the resurrection themes of Ishtar, Osiris, Demeter, etc., were part of the myths of the various religions, face value, so in the mysteries and priestly schools they (ideally) had a higher and deeper meaning than simply a superstitious story.

Resurrection/rebirth is a many-faceted concept and I think that a trip to the Underworld and back again is a symbolic part of that whole concept. The oldest direct resurrection we know is probably(?) Inanna and what was that myth used for and symbolising? What does St. Paul get from the concept of resurrection/rebirth?
Im no expert, if thats what you mean. Please do correct me if Im all wrong.

andrewcriddle

One problem is the secrecy of the ceremonies of the mysteries which make it difficult to know exactly what went on.

However we do know that some people who were both interested in Philosophy and interested in the mysteries tried to expound the mysteries as having a deep philosophical meaning.

What is much more doubtful is how far this type of interpretation played any part in the mysteries themselves. It seems likely that the mysteries themselves were something experienced rather than something taught and learnt.

Andrew Criddle

Jeffrey Gibson

No, it/he doesn't, even if it were clear what you meant my "mere mythological level".

Could you define "reborn", please, and show that language of "rebirth" was associated with any deity who was the object of any given mystery and was proclaimed to be a state that the initiate into that god's mysteries obtained.

As Burkett notes with respect to this idea:

Quote:

... some caution and qualification are called for. The Frazerian construct of a general "Oriental" vegetation god who periodically dies and rises from the dead has been discredited by more recent scholarship. Cf. Colpe 1969; S&H 99- 101. There is no evidence for a resurrection of Attis; even Osiris remains with the dead; and if Persephone returns to this world every year, a joyous event for gods and men, the initiates do not follow her. There is a dimension of death in all of the mystery initiations, but the concept of rebirth or resurrection of either gods or mystai is anything but explicit. See chap. iv at nn, 51-70. On the other hand, tales about suffering gods, who may die and still come back, are not confined to institutional mysteries. The most striking case is that of Adonis, whose myth is largely parallel to and probably related to the Attis myth, and whose festivals imply ritual lament and nocturnal rites but never had the organization of mysteries reserved for initiates of either sex. On Adonis, see W. Atallah, Adonis dans la litt&ature et I'art grec (Paris 1966); M. Detienne, Lesjardins d'Adonis (Paris 1972) [The Gardens of Adonis, Atlantic Highlands 19771; S&H 105-1 1 1; S. Ribichim, Adonis, Aspetti 'orientali'di un mito greco (Rome ig8i); Adonis, Relazioni del colloquio in Roma (22-23 maggio ig8i) (Rome 1984). Likewise, the Heracles cult did not develop into any mysteries of Heracles, even though everyone knew about his sufferings, his death, and his ascent to heaven; it was the mysteries of Eleusis that claimed Heracles as their most prominent initiate. In Egypt and Babylonia, the suffering gods Osiris and Marduk There is a much-discussed Akkadian text about the sufferings of Marduk, kept prisoner in the "mountain"; see H. Zimmern, '7um bob - ylonischen Neujahrsfest, " it, Ber. Leipzig 70 (19 18) 2-9, cf. W. v. Soden, Zeitschrift flirAssyriologie 17 (1955) 130-166; 18 (1957) 224-234. did not give rise to mysteries of the Greco-Roman type. Finally, even if we grant the importance of the "suffering god" myth for mysteries, it is virtually impossible to include Mithras in this company. Ugo Bianchi tried to enlarge or generalize the concept of a suffering god , speaking of dio in vicenda instead Bianchi 1979, 12f., amply discussed in that volume, see esp. M. V. Cerutti, ibid. 385-395, Sfameni Gasparro, ibid- 397-4o8; Sfameni Gasparro 1985, xvif.; cf. Berner 1972, 266f. Too much has been made of the term transitus in monuments to Mithras (CIMRM 1495, 1497, 1722, 1737, 18 1 1, 1900, 2205); a certain date or festival, cf. n. 104 but it is difficult to see why Mithras in his adventures should be more subject to change or transformation than Heracles or Hermes in their corresponding exploits-or even Apollo, who was born at Delos, fought the dragon, received purification, served Admetus, and so forth. Once again we must acknowledge the special position of the mysteries of Mithras: they are mysteries without a "suffering god" myth, whereas myths of this type are current even outside of mysteries. The dogmatic Christian theology of "dying with Christ and rising with Christ' [note -- not being reborn], Romans 6. 1 -11, on which see Wagner 1962 with the review of C. Colpe, Gnomon 38 (1966) 47-51; Wedderburn 1982 imposes too narrow a principle on the variability of ancient mysteries and their myths.

What you heard? From where or whom? Was your source reliable/informed?

Are you not engaged in petitio principii when you assume, as you do, that resurrection (of the body) and rebirth/being reborn are the same things? And is the Jewish concept of "resurrection of the body" ever perceived to be a journey, let alone one to and from the underworld?

Umm... does Inanna actually die in any version of the story of her journey to visit her sister in the underworld? And is her return to the "above world" depicted as a rebirth, let alone as a resurrection? (what specific language is used?) Is it something to be joyous about?

Where does Paul speak of rebirth? Is it ever within the context of a discussion of resurrection or rising? Does he actually indicate that he thinks the concepts are synonymous? And what specifically is the concept he speaks of when he speaks of Jesus' or a believer's resurrection? Is it the same as being born, let alone born again/anew?

I was not asking if you were an expert. I was asking if the claims you made so apodictically claims were informed -- i.e., grounded in direct acquaintance on your part with the works of recognized authorities on the mysteries and with the primary literature from/about the "philosophical mystery religions" you spoke of.

Apparently the answer is no. Is that correct?

Jeffrey

Cesc

I didnt make any claims. If you reread my first post, you'll see I said that I've heard these things suggested. As an answer to the question in the OP. I do appreciate your reply though, some of it is quite enlightening. What do I mean by reborn and resurrected in the various contexts and how do I think it can be regarded as the same thing? And what did Paul mean specifically by this and that? If I had the time I could tell you what I think about these interesting questions, but no, its not based on any large amount of knowledge of primary litterature and works of recognized authorities. Surely I must have read a faulty translation of the Inanna myth, because it distinctly said her dead body was hung on a hook for three days and then she was resurrected with life-giving water before returning to the above world?

mountainman

This much appears certain - The christian ecclesiatical historians of the fourth and fifth centuries appear to approach the term as a form or a mode or christian heresey. We need further perspectives by which to gauge what the term meant outside of "christendom". But there are some perhaps in this discussion group who are induced to believe that there is no such place - outside of christendom. This is a massive stumbling block to ancient historical truth.


I would like to put forward for discussion that the gnostics to be strongly associated with the (neo- if you prefer) Pythagorean collegiate and academic and ascetic tradition (perhaps closely associated with the temple practices which endured until at least the fourth century) ... and that the inscription above the doors of the academy Know Thyself is highly relevant to the issues surrounding the issue of the identification of the gnostics.

Further that the process of the recordal of knowledge involved the process of the burial of hidden meanings, the embedding texts within texts, the use of parables in a very sophisticated manner inasmuch as the stories were strongly allegorical -- hidden meanings abound.

NHC 6.1 = TAOPATTA = The 2nd greatest allegory of the pearl.
For the first greatest allegory see the insert into Acts of Thomas in India.


Add in ideas of a good god and a bad god - which do track back to Zarathustra.[/quote]

Are you referring to Zorastrianism founded by Ardashir c.224 CE?

Late.



Because Eusebius and other 4th and 5th century christian eccesiastical historians conflated it that way by the authority of their pronouncements upon the authors of such texts and the texts themselves. Of course this tradition has been passed down via a very authoritatiarian tradition.



All ingredients require a foundation and in our case it is chronology defined by th evidence itself. So far we have 2 C14 citations for the entire New testament corpus of literature, and they are both with respect to documents which are perceived as gnostic. Deconnick perceives one as a parody (gJudas) and the other document cited by the C14 is physically bound in the Nag Hammadi series of codices -- much of which is non christian.

NHC 6.1 "The Acts of Peter and the Twelve Apostles" appears christian. On the surface it has christian characters and the appearance of christian themes, however it cannot be disputed by anyone who has stuidied the text that the leading character of the text is the figure of Lithagoel - the healer after the tradition of Asclepius - the knower of the path to the city of the pearl - the human embodied soul (see the Gita quote).

However the author of NHC 6.1 IMO was a clever non-christian gnostic logician who clearly satirises the c.348 CE (C14) christian religion and its travelling apostles, while at the same time presenting an allegory of the pearl of great price set in the standard gnostic (associated with asceticism) manner (See the Hymn of the Pearl in the Acts of Thomas).

There is also associated with gnosticism the use of codes, such as did the Pythagoreans with their proclivity for numbers and mathematics and geometry, and as did Pachomius (to be associated with Nag Hammadi) and as did I Zosimus. The codes of Pachomius AFAIK is still an unsolved puzzle of some kind. I dont seem to be able to get the details of the puzzle. Has anyone heard of this?

Best wishes,


Pete

Jeffrey Gibson

What you said you heard suggested was that there was a conjunction between the Phoenix theme and Jesus' resurrection.

But then you went on to say:

Quote:

More like the whole ancient resurrection theme in itself and the profound meaning that particular theme had with the philosophical mystery religions.

which certainly is a claim -- and not just that the "theme of resurrection" was something that the philosophical mystery religions employed, let alone regarded as having a profound meaning, but that there were such things as "philosophical mystery religions".


It appears you read the Wiki summary.

Jeffrey

Clivedurdle

http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/...457189/phoenix

andrewcriddle

There is a translation here of the Descent of Inanna

Andrew Criddle

Clivedurdle

http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/...#ref=ref386968

Death and resurrection would also seem to be grounded in biologic principles!