McDaddy

Hello everyone,

I'm new to the board (been lurking, first post IIRC). Im reading Elaine Pagels, I bet some of you are familiar with her books on Gnosticism? I just wanted to get an idea where some of you stand on her writings, i.e. if you think most of the NT was written from a gnostic POV as opposed to proto-orthodox (not saying SHE thinks that, as she is just playing "devil's advocate" for all I know).

Thanks!

stephan huller

she's okay but superficial. had a hard life.

Toto

She has said that gnosticism is not a useful term. Early Christianity has to be viewed as a whole, not separated out into the proto-orthodox versus the heretics.

You can see some obvious gnostic elements in the gospels, and in later Christian practice and dogma.

sotto voce

Also sprach Blessed Elaine. All bow.

May we see where?

At the Reformation. Actually, every 'denomination' known to history and to current practice contains 'dogma', i.e. immutable teaching that contradicts the New Testament. One will not find real Christian practice within 'organised religion'. Christians, occasionally, but increasingly infrequently.