Atlantis Online
December 10, 2023, 04:46:14 am
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
News: Scientists to drill beneath oceans,8063.0.html
  Home Help Arcade Gallery Links Staff List Calendar Login Register  

Fragments of a Faith Forgotten

Pages: 1 ... 7 8 9 10 11 12 [13] 14   Go Down
Author Topic: Fragments of a Faith Forgotten  (Read 3078 times)
Peggie Welles
Hero Member
Posts: 203

« Reply #180 on: March 20, 2009, 03:13:49 pm »

p. 567

THE attentive reader will have already perceived that the contents of the Pistis Sophia treatise, of the The Kinship of the Titled Treatises. Extracts from The Books of the Saviour, and of the fragments given under the title The Book of the Great Logos according to the Mystery, are closely related together; they indubitably belong to the same school. The result of the researches of Schmidt into this very interesting question may be most clearly seen in his reply to Preuschen's criticism on his work, a copy of which was kindly sent me by Schmidt himself. (See Zeitschrift für wissenschaftliche Theologie, Pt. iv., 1894.) Schmidt here sums up his position, bringing together the results of his researches.

If I might myself venture a general opinion on so difficult and abstruse a subject, I would say that all the three compilations we are considering, belong not only to the same school, but also to one and the same effort at syntheticizing and reformulation. It is evident that each of them contains older materials, and it is almost certain that the writer of the Pistis Sophia was acquainted with the material of the Extracts of the Ieou and Baptism expositions. The far more difficult question is the relationship of the Extracts to The Book of the Great Logos, and the most difficult question of all is the school and authors to which to assign them.

p. 568

Date.So far there is nothing absolutely proved as to date, except that the compilers of these documents had access to the same Sayings-material as the compilers of the Canonical Gospels; the terminus a quo may, therefore, be placed somewhere about the end of the first quarter of the second century. But the curious phrase used in introducing a quotation from the Pauline Letters ("Thou didst say unto us aforetime by the mouth of Paul our brother") shows such complete indifference to the Canonical Acts account, that it argues an early date. Because of the complex nature of the contents, however, they have been ascribed by some to the third century; but this does not seem to me to be sufficient reason for so late a date, when we consider the complex nature of the new-found pre-Irenæic Gnostic work, and the exceedingly abstruse character of the contents of the superior untitled MS. of the Codex Brucianus, the contents of which Schmidt places well in the second century.

Authorship.Some of the materials are undoubtedly very old indeed, but it is the compilation-problem that at present engages us. I think that all three were compiled by the same group, or even by the same writer (though the latter will seem a very rash hypothesis to some). It is evident that the treatises pertain to the most intimate centre of Gnosticism, familiar with the inmost traditions, the most secret documents, and the practical inner experiences of the school. It matters not whether you call this stream of the Gnosis, "Ophite," "Barbēlō-Gnostic," "Gnostic," or "Valentinian"; such names

p. 569

could have meant little for the compiler or compilers of these documents.

Now it is evident that the Extracts and part of The Book of the Great Logos are both based on the same original. It is true that the text of the Baptism extract of the Askew Codex differs, slightly from the text of the same rite in the Bruce Codex, but they are probably translated by different hands, and both translators used great freedom in their version, and were often puzzled how to put the Greek into Coptic, as is evident in many passages.

A certain reformulation of the Gnosis is, then, referred to as The Books of the Saviour orThe Titles. The Book of the Great Logos; perhaps the original Greek document or documents had no title, and it was the copiers, or the Coptic translators and scribes, who added these titles. The Pistis Sophia treatise, however, refers to a work called The Two Books of Ieou, and further adds that they were given by the Saviour to Enoch and preserved from the Flood.

Now it seems to me that if these references in the Pistis are not interpolations, The Two Books of Ieou The Books of Ieou. cannot be identical with the common document in the Extracts and The Book of the Great Logos, but that this document was an overworking and reformulation of these two Books. The Books of Ieou belonged presumably to some ancient tradition, probably Egyptian, containing a host of symbols and seals, pass-words and mystery-names, and much else which were referred to what Manetho calls "the Egypt before

p. 570

the Flood" (the Egypt of the "First Hermes" or Agathodæmon), the traditions of which were equated with the Semitic traditions by Jewish and Christian Gnostic circles. I have dealt with this subject at length in my work on the Trismegistic literature.

The Probable Author.I believe, then, that the common document in the Extracts and The Book of the Great Logos was not the actual Books of Ieou referred to in the Pistis Sophia, but that it contained the substance of the Ieou Books, worked up by a Gnostic writer into a new form. I further suggest that this writer was the same as the author of the Pistis Sophia treatise, who reformulated the Books of Ieou in the light of the Gnosis of the Living Master. These things, however, do not seem to have been done in order; they were more probably the various attempts at some consistent synthesis of the old wisdom, attempts which in all probability did not satisfy the writer. They were presumably the results of a long life of labour, and may have been several times revised or recast. Who can say in our present ignorance of all historical data?

And if it be asked: Who could have made such The Obscurity of the attempt? I can find no answer, on reviewing the whole list of known Gnostic writers, than that Valentinus alone could in any way have attempted it. But that this can ever be proved beyond cavil I have no hope, for we know practically nothing of him and his writings; we only know of his great reputation, and of his attempted reformulation of the Gnosis. Indeed so-called Valentinianism helps us not at all in this speculation;

p. 571

on the contrary, if we are to believe in any way the indications of the Church Fathers, "they of Valentinus" seem to have formulated things somewhat differently, and their ideas form only a small worked-in part of the great syntheses with which we have been dealing. But the information of the Church Fathers is very defective, and they seem for the most part to have dealt with the semi-popular phase of Gnosticism. Such abstruse subjects and such inner teachings as our Codices contain, could not possibly have been circulated publicly; they were meant for "disciples." It is true that the Pistis is in parts in a far more popular form, but if it had been widely circulated; it is strange that no mention of so marvellous an exposition should remain.

I, however, put forward this speculation with all hesitation; it means a totally different reading of Valentinianism, a reading from within and not from without. Our ideas on Gnosticism have, however, been so often of late revised by new discoveries, that it may still be hoped that some new find may yet throw a clear light on this (at present) entirely obscure problem.

In the Introduction to my translation of the Pistis Sophia, I find that I have stated my conclusions somewhat more crudely than I should now do. I will, therefore, in repeating what I there said as to the probable story of the adventures of the contents of the Askew Codex, slightly modify some expressions.

The original Greek treatise which is now called the Pistis Sophia may, then, probably

p. 572

The Original Pistis Sophia.have been compiled by Valentinus in the latter half of the second century, perhaps at Alexandria. By "compiled" I mean that this Apocalypse or Gospel, or whatever its title may have been, was not invented from first to last by Valentinus; the framework of the narrative, the selection of texts and ideas from other scriptures, Hebrew, Christian, Egyptian, Chaldæan, Greek, etc., and the adaptation of the nomenclature, were his share of the task.

The Coptic Translation.Of this original doubtless several copies were made, and mistakes may have crept in. One of these copies was presumably carried up the Nile and translated into the vernacular, Greek being but little understood so far up the river. The translator was evidently not a very accurate person; moreover his knowledge of the subject was so imperfect that he had to leave many of the technical terms in the original, and doubtless made guesses at others. It is also probable that some things were added and others subtracted on the score of orthodoxy. The wearisome length of the Psalms, for instance, which Pistis Sophia recites in her repentances, followed by the shorter Salomonic Odes, leads one to suppose that the compiler originally quoted only a few striking verses from each psalm, and that the later and more orthodox translator, with that love of wearisome repetition so characteristic of monkish piety, whether of the East or the West, added the other less apposite verses, with which he was very familiar, while he was compelled to leave the Salomonic Odes as they

p. 573

stood, owing to his lack of acquaintance with the originals.

Moreover, the translator must have translated or possessed a translation of other similar documents, The Books of the Saviour. which he or a later scribe styles The Books of the Saviour, and from them he extracted what he considered to be passages apposite to the subject in hand, and appended them to the Pistis translation. These Books also, in my opinion, came from the literary workshop of Valentinus.

The whole MS. of the Coptic translator seems to have been copied by some ignorant copyist, who The Copyist. made many mistakes of orthography. It was copied by one man as a task, and hurriedly executed; and I would suggest that two copies were then made and occasionally a page of one copy substituted for a page of the other; and, as the pages were not quite exact to a word or phrase, we may thus account for some puzzling repetitions and some equally puzzling lacunae. This copy was conjecturally made towards the end of the fourth century.

Report Spam   Logged
Peggie Welles
Hero Member
Posts: 203

« Reply #181 on: March 20, 2009, 03:14:01 pm »

What was the history of the MS. after this date is impossible even to conjecture. Its history must, however, have been exciting enough for it to have escaped the hands of fanatics--both Christian and Mohammedan. During this period some of the pages were lost.

The contents of the inferior MS. of the Bruce Codex presumably had somewhat similar adventures, may even have come from the same distributing Coptic centre.

It would be entirely out of place in these short

p. 574

sketches to enter on a critical investigation into the nature of the æonology, cosmology, soteriology, christology, and eschatology of these documents, and attempt to trace their modifications. The evolution of the universe is according to a certain order, but its involution seems to change that order; the soteriology modifies the æonology and cosmology. It is, in my opinion, because of this, rather than for any other reason, that the scheme underlying the Extracts and The Book of the Great Logos is said to be an "older form" than that underlying the Pistis treatise.

The Scheme presupposed in these Treatises.The scheme underlying the Pistis Sophia has been industriously analysed by Köstlin and revised and corrected by Schmidt, who has also endeavoured to trace the modification of the general scheme underlying the Extracts (hitherto erroneously called the Fourth Book of Pistis Sophia) and The Book of the Great Logos, and of the scheme presupposed in the Pistis Sophia,--modifications brought about by the revelation of the new glories of the three Spaces of the Inheritance in the last treatise.

As the general outlines of the scheme underlying the Pistis Sophia may be of service to the reader, we will give it here, but it should be understood that it represents only one configuration of the cosmic mystery, at a certain moment of time, or in a certain phase of consciousness.

The Ineffable.

The Limbs of the Ineffable.

I. The Highest Light-world, or The Kingdom of Light.

i. The First Space of the Ineffable.

p. 575

ii. The Second Space of the Ineffable, or the First Space of the First Mystery. ii. The Second Space of the First Mystery.

II. The Higher (or Middle) Light-world.

i. The Treasure of Light.

ii. The Place of the Right.

iii. The Place of the Midst.

III. The Lower Light- or Æon-world (The Mixture of Light and Matter).

i. The Place of the Left.

1. The Thirteenth Æon.

2. The Twelve Æons.


3. The Fate.

4. The Sphere.


5. The Rulers of the Ways of the Midst.

6. The Lower Firmament.

ii. The World of Men.

iii. The Under-world.

1. Amenti.

2. Chaos.

3. Outer Darkness.

We now come to a brief consideration of the superior MS. of the Bruce Codex. Here also wè must rule out of place any attempt to grapple with an exposition of the system presupposed by the compiler or compilers, in spite of the following opinion and high appreciation of Schmidt, who in his Introduction (pp. 34 and 35) writes:

"What a different world on the contrary meets us in our thirty-one leaves! We find ourselves in the pure spheres of the highest Plērōma,

p. 576

see step by step this world, so rich in heavenly An Appreciation of the Untitled Treatise. beings, coming into existence before our eyes; each individual space with all its inmates is minutely described, so that we can form for ourselves a living picture of the glory and splendour of this Gnostic heaven. The speculations are not so confused and fantastic as those of the Pistis Sophia and our two Books of Jeū; here everything is in full harmony and logical sequence. The author is imbued with the Greek spirit, equipped with a full knowledge of Greek philosophy, full of the doctrine of the Platonic ideas, an adherent of Plato's view of the origin of evil--that is to say Hylē (Matter). Here it is not Christ who is the organ of all communications to the disciples; it is not Jesus who is God's envoy, and the redeemer and bringer of the mysteries; but we possess in these leaves a magnificently conceived work by an old Gnostic philosopher, and we stand astonished, marvelling at the boldness of the speculations, dazzled by the richness of the thought, touched by the depth of soul of the author. This is not, like the Pistis Sophia, the product of declining Gnosticism, but dates from a period when Gnostic genius like a mighty eagle left the world behind it, and soared in wide and ever wider circles towards pure light, towards pure knowledge, in which it lost itself in ecstasy.

"In one word, we possess in this Gnostic work as regards age and contents a work of the very highest importance, which takes us into a period of Gnosticism, and therefore of Christianity, of which

p. 577

very little knowledge has been handed down to us."

Not to be attributed to a Single Author.While cordially agreeing with Schmidt in his last paragraph, and in his high appreciation of the sublimity of the contents of this MS., we must venture to differ from him as to the clearness and logical order of the contents as at present preserved to us. If all is so clear and in such logical sequence, it is surprising that Schmidt has made no attempt to explain the contents. Many and many an hour have I puzzled over the contents of his translation and tried to get them into order, but I have as yet always failed. The result of my study, however, has led me to differ from Schmidt's assumption that the work is by a single author.

The Apocalyptic Basis.My present conclusion, which is of course put forward as entirely tentative, is that the underlying matter was originally in the form of an apocalypse, a series of visions of some subtle phase of the inner ordering and substance of things. I would suggest that these visions were not in an ordered sequence, but were written down, or taken down, at different times as the seer described the inner working of nature from different points of view. The original writer was clearly, as it seems to me, an adherent of the Basilidian Gnosis, imbued with its teaching and nomenclature; but he had his own illumination as well, and, seeing some of the things of which he had been taught, in high enthusiasm and inspired confidence, he sang of the greater things by analogy

p. 578

with the lower he had seen--even these lower being so glorious that he could not express them as they really are.

The Overworking.These apocalyptic visions were elaborately expanded and annotated and welded into a unity (the first part being cosmogonical, and the second soteriological) by a writer of great knowledge and wide reading, who was not only familiar with all the Gnostic literature of his time, but also had seen the things for himself; he laboured to make a consistent treatise with the apocalyptic material, on which he set a very high value, as a basis; but he often did not succeed, and clearly states that it is impossible for any "tongue of flesh" to tell of such sublime mysteries.

I am strongly persuaded that the overwriting of this apocalypsis belongs to the same circle of literary activity of which we have been already treating. In it I think we have another specimen of the attempts to re-edit and syntheticize the Gnosis, of which the main attempt is associated with the activity of Valentinus. As to the history of the Greek original, it parallels presumably that of the Pistis Sophia original. It was probably translated about the same time, and had adventures of a somewhat similar nature.

Report Spam   Logged
Peggie Welles
Hero Member
Posts: 203

« Reply #182 on: March 20, 2009, 03:14:18 pm »

p. 579

WE have now to lay before our readers what little information is at present available with regard to the latest find in Gnosticism. Ten years ago, Dr. Carl Schmidt informed me that he had hopes of bringing out a work on the subject (including presumably a text and translation) in some two years; but unfortunately his anxiously-awaited labours have not yet seen the light. We are, therefore, entirely dependent upon the report of the important communication made by him to the Royal Prussian Academy of Sciences (Kgl. preuss. Acad. d. Wissenschaften) published in the Transactions, and dated July 16th, 1896.

Schmidt's communication, entitled A "Pre-irenæic Gnostic Original Work in Coptic" ("Ein vorirenaeisches gnostisches Original-werk in koptischer Sprache"), proves the enormous importance of the happy discovery. His paper is of course exceedingly technical and learned, but the following summary will give the reader a general idea of a subject which at present can only appeal to a very limited number of specialists, but which ought in time to be familiar to all serious students of Christian theosophy.

In January, 1896, Dr. Rheinhardt procured at Cairo, from a dealer of antiquities from Akhmīm, The MS. and its Contents. this precious papyrus MS., which he asserted had been discovered by a fellah in a niche in a wall. The MS. is now in the Berlin Egyptian Museum, each leaf being carefully protected with glass.

p. 580

Unfortunately the MS. is not entirely perfect; it contained originally seventy-one leaves--six of which are now missing; each page contains about eighteen to twenty-two lines. The writing is of extraordinary beauty, and points to the fifth century.

After a short preface, the MS. bears the superscription Gospel according to Mary, and on p. 77 the subscription Apocryphon of John; immediately on the same page follows the title Wisdom of Jesus Christ, and on p. 128 the same subscription; the next page begins without a title, but at the end of the MS. we find the subscription Acts of Peter.

The MS. therefore contains three distinct treatises, The Gospel of Mary and The Apocryphon of John being the same piece.

The Gospel of Mary.The first work begins with the words: "Now it came to pass on one of these days, when John the brother of James--the sons of Zebedee--had gone up to the temple, that a Pharisee, named Ananias (?), came unto him and said unto him: 'Where is thy Master, that thou dost not follow him?' He said unto him: 'From whence He came thither is He gone (?).' The Pharisee said unto him: 'With deceit hath the Nazaræan deceived you, for he hath . . . you and made away with the tradition of your fathers.' When I heard this I went away from the temple to the mountain unto a solitary place, and was exceedingly sorrowful in heart and said: 'How now was the Saviour chosen; and wherefore was He sent to the world by His Father who sent Him; and who is His Father; and what is the formation of that æon to which we shall go?'"

p. 581

While he is sunk in these thoughts, the heavens open, and the Lord appears to him and to the disciples, in order to resolve his doubts. The Saviour then leaves them, and again they are sorrowful and weep. They said: "How can we go to the heathen and preach the gospel of the kingdom of the Son of Man? If they have not received Him, how will they receive us?"

Then Mary arose, and, having embraced them all, spake unto her brethren: "Weep not, and be not sorrowful, nor doubt, for His grace will be with you all and will overshadow you. Let us rather praise His goodness that he hath prepared us, and made us to be men."

Peter requests her to proclaim what the Lord had revealed to her, thus acknowledging the great distinction which the Lord had always permitted her above all women. Thereupon she begins the narrative of an appearance of the Lord in a dream; unfortunately some pages are here missing.

Hardly has she finished, when Andrew rises, and says that he cannot believe that the Lord has given such novel teachings. Peter also rejects her testimony and chides her. And Mary in tears says unto him: "Peter, of what dost thou think? Believest thou that I have imagined this only in myself, or lied as to the Lord?"

And now Levi comes forward to help Mary, and chides Peter as an eternal quarreller. How the dispute went on we cannot determine, as two pages are missing. On p. 21 a new episode begins and continues to the end of the first treatise without a break.

The Lord appears again to John, and John

p. 582

immediately repairs to his fellow-disciples and relates what the Saviour had revealed unto him.

Schmidt suggests that the original title was The Apocalypse or Revelation, and not The Apocryphon of John.

The Wisdom of Jesus Christ.The book of the Wisdom of Jesus Christ begins with the words: "After His resurrection from the dead His twelve disciples and seven women disciples had gone into Galilee to the mount which . . . . for they were in doubt as to the hypostasis of the All . . . . as to the mysteries and holy economy. Then did the Saviour appear unto them not in His prior form but in the invisible spirit. His form was that of a great angel of light, His substance indescribable, and He was not clothed in flesh that dieth, but in pure, perfect flesh, as He taught us on the mountain in Galilee which was called . . . He said: 'Peace be unto you; My peace I give unto you.'" And they were all astonished and were afraid.

And the Lord bids them lay all their questions before Him; and the several disciples bring forward their doubts and receive the desired replies.

The Acts of Peter are likewise of Gnostic origin, and belong to the great group of apocryphal stories of the Apostles. This third document treats of an episode from the healing-wonders of Peter.

Irenæus Quotes from the Gospel of Mary.The importance of the whole MS. is, not only that it hands down to us three hitherto unknown Gnostic writings, but especially that it gives us a work which was known to Irenæus, our first important "authority" on Gnosticism among the Fathers

p. 583

a work from which he made extracts, but without giving the sources of his information or quoting the title of the book. This work is The Gospel of Mary.

Irenæus begins the last section of his first Book (29-31) with the words: "And besides these, from among those whom we have before mentioned as followers of Simon, a multitude of Barbēlō-Gnostics hath arisen, and they have shown themselves as mushrooms from the ground."

In cap. 29 he treats mostly of a group of so-called Barbēlō-Gnostics, with regard to whom he gives the contents of one of the books they used, a teaching which we do not find put forward by either the earlier or later hæresiarchs. Theodoret (I. 13) among the rest of the Refutators alone knows of this teaching, and he simply copies Irenæus.

Report Spam   Logged
Peggie Welles
Hero Member
Posts: 203

« Reply #183 on: March 20, 2009, 03:14:30 pm »

This source is our Gospel of Mary; and we can now for the first time control Irenæus point by point, and see how little the Church Father succeeded or could succeed in reproducing the exceedingly complicated systems of the Gnostic schools. A few examples will be sufficient to establish this point abundantly.

Irenæus begins his exposition with these words: "Some of them suppose a certain never-ageing An Examination of his Statements. Æon in a Virginal Spirit, whom they name Barbēlō. Where they say is a certain unnameable Father."

This "Father of All" is characterized in our new document (p. 22) as the Invisible; as Pure The Father. Light, in which no one can see with mortal eyes; as Spirit, for no one can imagine how He is

p. 584

formed; the Everlasting, the Unspeakable; the Unnameable, for no one existed before Him to give Him a name. Of Him it is said: "He thinketh His Image alone and beholdeth it in the Water of Pure Light which surroundeth Him. And His Thought energized and revealed herself, and stood before Him in the Light-spark; which is the Power which existed before the All, which Power hath revealed itself; which is the perfect Forethought of the All; the Light, the Likeness of the Light, the Image of the The Mother.Invisible; that is, the perfect Power, the Barbēlō, the Æon perfect in glory--glorifying Him, because she hath manifested herself in Him and thinketh Him. She is the first Thought, his Image; she becometh the First Man; that is, the Virginal Spirit, she of the triple Manhood, the triple-powered one, the triple-named, triple-born; the Æon which ages not, the Man-woman, who hath come forth from His Forethought."

According to this, the "Father of the All" stands at the head of the system, the "Invisible." After Him comes His "Image," that is, the "Barbēlō," the "perfect Power," the "unageing Æon" of Irenæus.

By thinking of His Image, His Thought reveals herself in the Light-spark, that is, in Barbēlō.

Irenæus gives all this in a short, incomprehensible abstract as follows: "And that He was fain to manifest Himself to the same Barbēlō. And that Thought came forth and stood before Him, and asked for Foreknowledge."

Our text then proceeds: "And Barbēlō besought The Pentad. Him to give unto her Foreknowledge. He nodded,

p. 585

and when He had thus nodded assent, Foreknowledge manifested herself and stood with Thought, that is Forethought, and glorified the Invisible and the perfect Power, the Barbēlō, for that through her she had come into existence.

"Again this Power besought that Incorruptibility be given unto her. He nodded, and when He had thus nodded assent, Incorruptibility manifested herself and stood with Thought and Foreknowledge, glorifying the Invisible and Barbēlō, in that through her she had come into existence.

"For their sakes she besought that Everlasting Life be given them. He nodded, and when He had thus nodded assent, Everlasting Life manifested herself, and they stood and glorified Him and Barbēlō, because through her they had come into existence in the manifestation of the Invisible Spirit.

"This is the pentad of the Æons of the Father, that is, the First Man, the Image of the Invisible; that is, Barbēlō, and Thought, and Foreknowledge, and Incorruptibility and Life Everlasting."

At the request of Barbēlō, also, the Invisible causes to come forth after Thought the three following feminine Æons, according to Irenæus; "Thought asked for Foreknowledge; Foreknowledge also having come forth, again upon their petition came forth Incorruptibility; then afterwards Life Eternal; in whom Barbēlō rejoicing, and looking forth into the greatness, and delighted with her conception, generated into it a Light like unto it; her they affirm to be the beginning of the enlightening and generation of all things; and that

p. 586

the Father seeing this Light anointed it with His goodness to make it perfect; and this they say is the Christ."

The Decad.In this passage without doubt Irenæus had before his eyes the words: "He is the decad of the Æons, that is, He is the Father of the ingenerable Father. Barbēlō gazed into Him fixedly . . . and she gave birth to a blessed Light-spark. Nor doth it differ from her in greatness. This is the Alone-begotten, who hath manifested himself in the Father, the self-generated God, the first-born Son of the All, the pure Light-spirit. Now the Invisible Spirit rejoiced over the Light, which had come into existence, which had first of all manifested itself in the first Power--that is, His Forethought--in Barbēlō. And He anointed him with His goodness, that he might be made perfect."

This Alone-begotten is consequently identical with the Light or the Christ. Irenæus offers us here no enlightenment, and further on he only gives us the sentence: Therefore the First Angel, who stands near the Alone-begotten," etc.

The Alone-begotten asks for Mind to be given him; when this has been done, he praises, as Mind, the Father and Barbēlō.

Irenæus continues: "And this, they say, is Christ; who again requests, as they say, that Mind may be given to help him; and then came forth Mind; and after these the Father sends forth the Word."

In this place Irenæus has omitted a stage and quite forgotten the third male Æon, namely, Will. Our MS. gives us the following:

p. 587

"The Invisible Spirit willed to energize. His Will energized and revealed itself and stood with the Mind and the Light praising Him. The Word followed the Will, for through the Word hath Christ created all things."

With this the upper Ogdoad is shut off from the Decad, the lower æon proceeding from separate pairs. The Christ. Next we have the Self-begotten from Thought, the Word, of whom it is written: "Whom He hath honoured with great honour, because he came forth from His first Thought. The Invisible hath set him as God over the All. The True God gave him all powers, and made the Truth that is in Him subject unto him, that he might think out the All."

Irenæus reproduces this as follows: "Then afterwards, of Mind and the Word, they say, was sent forth the Self-begotten, to represent the Great Light, and that he was highly honoured, and all things made subject unto him. And the Truth was sent out also with him, and that there is a conjunction of the Self-begotten and Truth."

Report Spam   Logged
Peggie Welles
Hero Member
Posts: 203

« Reply #184 on: March 20, 2009, 03:14:41 pm »

(It is impossible at present to attempt to analyze the system from the above fragments; it may, however, be suggested that the treatise is here exposing the three root-phases, or moments of emanation, of the Plērōma, or ideal world: (a) the In-generable, (b) the Self-generable, and (c) the Generable--the Father, the Logos, the All. The Gnosis, however, is more elaborate than any other known system, and its idealistic intuitions of primal processes know no limits.)

p. 588

From the Light of the Christ and the Incorruptible proceed forth four great Lights to surround the Self-begotten. Their names are Harmozel, Ōroiael, Daveithe and Eleleth. From Will and Everlasting Life proceed four others: Charis, Synesis, Aisthesis and Phronesis. Irenæus writes:

"And from the Light which is Christ, and Incorruptibility, four Luminaries were sent forth to surround the Self-begotten; and that from Will again and Life Everlasting, four such emanations were sent forth to minister under the four Luminaries, which they call Grace (Charis), Free-will (Thelesis), Understanding (Synesis), and Prudence (Phronesis). And that Charis for her part was conjoined with the great and first Luminary; and this they will have to be the Saviour, and call him Harmogen; and Thelesis with the second, whom also they call Raguel; and Synesis with the third, whom they name David; and Phronesis with the fourth, whom they name Eleleth."

This passage is of interest in many ways. We learn the correct names; we notice that three of them (Eleleth, Daveithe, Ōroiael) are also to be found in the Codex Brucianus, and thus we establish the relation of this important Codex with the first piece in our MS.

The Egyptian Origin of the Treatise.These proofs are sufficient to establish the point that The Gospel of Mary was composed before A.D. 180, and that the Greek original, from which the Coptic translation was made, was earlier than Irenæus. In the opinion of Dr. Schmidt, the work originated in Egypt. The School which used it was the same as that designated by

p. 589

[paragraph continues] Irenæus as the Barbēlō-Gnostics, or, as they usually called themselves, simply the Gnostics; this School was further subdivided into many single denominations, whose names and teachings Epiphanius has given us in detail. Among them were circulated many books under the name of Mary; thus Epiphanius (Hær., xxvi. Cool speaks of The Questions of Mary, both The Great and The Little, and even in xii. of The Genealogy of Mary. Celsus had previously also met with this School, and perhaps was acquainted with our work, for he informs us that some heretics derive their origin from Mary and Martha, and gives the well-known diagram of the so-called Ophites. Yet more; our original work shows us that Irenæus "copied" from our book only up to a certain place; and in I. 30, he used a second work of the same School which had fallen into his hands.

So far Dr. Schmidt, whose interesting communication is followed by a note of Professor Harnack. Harnack gives his opinion as follows:

"This find is of the first importance to primitive Church history; not only because we have one The Opinion of Harnack. (or perhaps three) original Gnostic works of the second century--(is the Wisdom of Jesus Christ possibly the famous work of Valentinus?)--but kind fate has also added to our debt that Irenæus has quoted from one of the three treatises. We are thus for the first time in a position to control by the original the presentation of a Gnostic system as rendered by the Church Father. The result of this examination shows, as we might

p. 590

have expected, that owing to omissions, and because no effort was made to understand his opponents, the sense of the by no means absurd speculations of the Gnostics has been ruined by the Church Father. Another fact--which can only with the greatest difficulty be extracted from the writings of their opponents--is that the system treats of a psychological process within the first principle, which the Gnostics desired to unfold. Tertullian certainly says once (Adv. Valent., iv.): 'Ptolemæus, the pupil of Valentinus, split up the names and numbers of the æons into personified "substances," external to deity, whereas Valentinus himself had included these in the very summit of the godhead as the impressions of sensation and feeling'--but which of the Church Fathers has given himself the trouble thus to understand the speculations of Valentinus and of the other Gnostics?

"According to Hippolytus (Philos., vi. 42), the followers of the Gnostic Marcus complained of the misrepresentation of their teaching by Irenæus; the followers of our newly discovered book could also have complained of the incomprehensible fashion in which Irenæus had represented their teachings.

"Thus, we had previously known a Gnostic work which probably originated in Egypt in the second century, only through an epitome of it by a Gallic bishop about the year 185, and now we find it again in a Coptic translation of the fifth century--verily a paradoxical method of transmission!"

If, however, the last chapters of Book I. of Irenæus are copied from the lost Syntagma of Justin or some

p. 591

other earlier work, as the best critics have previously maintained, then the original of our new document has a considerably earlier date than Schmidt or Harnack assign to it in the above Transaction.

The student of Gnosticism will at once perceive that the importance of the new find cannot be over-estimated. The Importance of the MS. The new documents throw light not only on the Codex Brucianus, but also on the system of the Pistis Sophia. We have now these three original sources on which to base our study of Gnostic theosophy; and there is hope that at last something may be done to rescue the views of the best Gnostic doctors from obscurity, and from the environment of pious refutation in which they have been previously smothered. The task of the sympathetic student should now be to find appropriate terms for the technicalities of the Gnosis, place the various orders of ideas in their proper relation, and show that the method of the Gnosis, which looked at the problems of cosmogony and anthropogony from above, may be as reasonable in its proper domain as are the methods of modern scientific research, which regard such problems entirely from below. We should not forget that men like Valentinus were theosophists, engaged on precisely the same studies as their brethren the world over. The greatest cosmogonies of the world are of the same nature as Gnostic cosmogenesis, and a study of these will convince us of the similarity of source. Gnostic anthropogenesis has many points of similarity with general theosophical ideas, and Gnostic psychology is in a great measure borne out by recent research. The

p. 592

[paragraph continues] Gnostic technical terms are no more difficult of comprehension than those found in other theosophical writers; and there is an exact parallel between the varying use made of such terms by different writers on the Gnosis and the misrepresentation of the views of the Gnostics by the Church Fathers, and the various meanings given to like terms by other theosophical writers and the misrepresentation of such writers by their critics. The Gnostics were themselves partly to blame for their obscurity, and the Church Fathers were partly to blame for their misrepresentation. In brief, the same standard of criticism has to be applied to the writings of the Gnostics as the discriminating student has to apply to all such literature. It is true that to-day we speak openly of many things that the Gnostics wrapped up in symbol and myth; nevertheless our real knowledge on such subjects is not so very far in advance of the great doctors of the Gnosis as we are inclined to imagine; now, as then, there are only a few who really know what they are writing about, while the rest copy, compare, adapt, and speculate.

Report Spam   Logged
Peggie Welles
Hero Member
Posts: 203

« Reply #185 on: March 20, 2009, 03:14:57 pm »

p. 593

IN the early centuries of Christianity there were in circulation many traditions, legends, and religious romances, called Memoirs, Acts, and Gospels, which contained Sayings-of-the-Lord or Logoi. These Logoi or Logia were oracles, or oracular utterances, couched in the same language and of much the same tenour as the prophetic utterances of the members of the Schools of the Prophets, which were introduced by the solemn formula, "Thus saith the Lord," when recorded in the books of the Old Covenant of the Jewish race.

In course of time certain of these traditional, legendary and mythical settings of the Logoi were declared to be alone historical, and a canon of orthodox tradition was evolved from the second half of the second century onwards. I use the term "mythical" in its best sense, that is to say, stories embodying in a designed symbolic fashion the teachings of the mysteries, concerning the nature of God, the universe and the human soul.

As only a few out of the many writings were selected, a large number of Logoi was thus rejected. Rejected Logoi. The latest collection of these rejected Logoi has been made by Resell, and was published in 1889 in Gebhardt and Harnack's series of Texte und Untersuchungen, under the title of Agrapha: Äussercanonische Evangelienfragmente.

Some of these extra-canonical fragments are variants of the familiar canonical Sayings, and are of interest mainly for the reconstruction of one of the

p. 594

root-sources from which the synoptic compilers drew their information. A few have been preserved in the Pauline Letters. Others are entirely unfamiliar to those who are only acquainted with the canonical selection of the books of the New Covenant, generally called the New Testament. These Logoi are of special interest to students of the origins, and I therefore append a selection of them translated from Resch's text.

It may be mentioned that some of these Logoi have been worked into a religious novel by a Jewish writer, under the title As Others Saw Him, published in 1895, at London, by William Heinemann.


Be merciful that ye may obtain mercy; forgive that it may be forgiven unto you; as ye do so shall it be done to you; as ye give so shall it be given unto you; as ye judge so shall ye be judged; as ye do service so shall service be done to you; with what measure ye mete, with the same shall it be measured to you in return.

Wisdom sendeth forth her children.

He who is near Me is near the fire; and he who is far from Me is far from the kingdom.

If ye observe not the little [sci., mystery], who will give you the great?

They who would see Me and reach My kingdom need must attain Me with pain and suffering.

Good must needs come, but blessed is he by whom it cometh; in like manner also evil must needs come, but woe unto him by whom it cometh.

The weak shall be saved by the strong.

p. 595

Guard the mysteries for Me and for the sons of My house.

Cleave to the holy ones, for they who cleave to them are made holy.

The fashion of this world passeth away.

[Fashion--that is, configuration (σχῆμα), for there are other worlds and other phases of this world].

As often as ye eat this bread and drink this cup make proclamation of My death and confession in My resurrection and ascension until I come [to you].

[A variant gives the saying in the third person, and speaks of the "death of the Son of the Man," the Logos. The Master promises to return to His disciples at the time of the performance of a certain holy rite.]

Be ye mindful of faith and hope, through whom is born that love to God and man which giveth life eternal.

There is a mingling that leadeth to death, and there is a mingling that leadeth to life.

Beholding a certain man working on the Sabbath., He said unto him: Man, if thou knowest what thou doest thou art blessed; but if thou knowest not, thou art accursed and a transgressor of the law.

Why do ye wonder at the signs? I give unto you a mighty inheritance which the whole world doth not contain.

When the Lord was asked by a certain man, When should His kingdom come, He saith unto him: When two shall be one, and the without as the within, and the male with the female, neither male nor female.

Call not any one "Father" on earth, for on earth

p. 596

there are rulers [only]; in heaven is the Father from whom is every descent [that is, "blood descent from a father" (πατριά)] both in heaven and on earth.

Grieve not the Holy Spirit which is in you, and put not out the Light which hath shone forth in you.

As ye see yourselves in water or mirror, so see ye Me in yourselves.

As I find you, so will I judge you.

Seek for the great [mysteries] and the little shall be added to you; seek for the heavenly and the earthly shall be added to you.

Be ye approved money-changers, rejecting the bad and retaining the good.

Report Spam   Logged
Peggie Welles
Hero Member
Posts: 203

« Reply #186 on: March 20, 2009, 03:15:13 pm »

Keep thy flesh pure.

Because of the sick I was sick; because of the hungry I was ahungered; because of the thirsty I was athirst.

Not rendering evil for evil, or railing for railing, or fist for fist, or curse for curse.

Love hideth a multitude of sins.

There are false christs and false teachers who have blasphemed the Spirit of Grace, and have spit forth its gift of grace; these shall not be forgiven either in this æon or in the æon to come.

[Grace is the "power above," the power of the Logos which makes a man a "christ." Charis or Grace is the consort of the Logos, His power or shakti. The false "christs" are those who have been "initiated" and broken their vows. The æon is a certain time-period.]

For the Heavenly Father willeth the repentance of the sinner rather than his chastisement.

p. 597

For God willeth that all should receive of His gifts.

Keep that which thou hast, and it shall be increased into more.

Behold, I make the last as the first.

I am come to end the sacrifices, and if ye cease not from sacrificing, the wrath shall not cease from you.

[Woe unto him] who hath made sad the spirit of his brother.

And never rejoice unless ye see your brother [also] happy.

He who hath wondered shall reign, and he who hath reigned shall rest.

[This is a dark saying; it has been compared to the phrase of Plato: "There is no other beginning of philosophy than wondering"--that is to say, regarding the works of the Deity with wonder and reverence. This is the beginning of philosophy, or gnosis, and the end of it makes the man king of himself, and thus master of gods and men; thus is he at peace.]

My mother, the Holy Spirit, even now took me by one of the hairs of my head and carried me to the great mountain Tabor.

[The hairs of the head may perhaps symbolise the nādi's, as they are called in the Upanishads, by which the soul goes forth from the body; the mountain is the way up to the spiritual regions.]

He who seeketh me shall find me in children from seven years [onwards]; for hidden in them I am manifested in the fourteenth period (æon).

p. 598

[This may refer either to the higher ego or light-spark from the Logos, or to certain degrees of initiation, the initiated having to become as "little children."]

When Salome asked how long should death hold sway, the Lord said unto her: So long as ye women bring forth; for I came to end the works of the female. And Salome said unto Him: I have then done well in not bringing forth. And the Lord answered and said: Eat of every pasture, but of that which hath the bitterness [of death] eat not. And when Salome asked when should those things of which she enquired be known, the Lord said: When ye shall tread upon the vesture of shame, and when the two shall be one, and the male with the female neither male nor female.

["Shame" is presumably the same as the "mingling" in one of the Logoi quoted above. To tread on the vesture of shame is to rise above the animal nature.]

Pray for your enemies; blessed are they who mourn over the destruction of the unbelievers.

I stood on a lofty mountain, and saw a gigantic man and another, a dwarf; and I heard as it were a voice of thunder, and drew nigh for to hear; and He spake unto me and said, I am thou and thou art I; and wheresoever thou mayst be I am there. In all am I scattered, and whencesoever thou wiliest, thou gatherest Me; and gathering Me thou gatherest Thyself.

[Here again we have the mountain of initiation. The initiate beholds the vision of the Heavenly Man, the Logos, and of himself, the dwarf; of the Great

p. 599

[paragraph continues] Man and the little man, the light-spark which sits in the heart.]

May thy Holy Spirit come upon us and purify us [From a very ancient version of the Lord's Prayer, instead of the clause "Thy kingdom come."]

Possess nothing upon the earth.

Though ye be gathered together with me in My bosom, if ye do not My commandments, I will cast you forth.

Gain for yourselves, ye sons of Adam, by means of these transitory things which are not yours, that which is your own, and passeth not away.

For even among the prophets after they have been anointed by the Holy Spirit, the word of sin has been found among them.

[That is to say, after they have been made "christs" (μετὰ τὸ χρισθῆναι αὐτοὺς ἐν πνεύματι ἁγίῳ). The "word of sin" means apparently erroneous prophetical utterances.]

If a man shall abandon all for my name's sake, at the second coming he shall inherit eternal life.

["For my name's sake" signifies the power of the Great Name which the Master used in his public preaching; the second coming is the descent of the Christ-spirit upon the candidate at his initiation. "Eternal life" is the life of the æons or spiritual existences, whose lives are an eternity.]

If ye make not the below into the above and the above into the below, the right into the left and the left into the right, the before into the behind [and the behind into the before], ye shall not enter into the kingdom of God.

p. 600

[That is to say, ye shall not enter into the central point and so pass into the spiritual region.]

I am to be crucified anew.

I recognised myself, and gathered myself together from all sides; I sowed no children for the ruler, but I tore up his roots, and gathered together [my] limbs that were scattered abroad; I know thee who thou art, for I am front the realms above.

[This is the apology, or defence, of the soul of the initiate as it passes through the realms of the unseen world, each of which is in charge of a ruler, the minister of Death. As the Logos gathers together his children (the light-sparks, the limbs of his body), and takes them home into his bosom, so does the ego collect its limbs and becomes the Osirified.]

What ye preach with words before the people, do ye in deeds before every man.

Thou art the key [who openest] for every man, and shuttest for every man.

[This saying is put in the mouth of the disciples; in the direct formula it would read, "I am the key," &c.]

The Oxyrhynchus Papyrus.Numerous other Logoi could be added from Gnostic literature, especially from the contents of the Coptic Codices; but enough has been given to show the reader that much of the Sayings-material has been rejected and forgotten. How precious some of this matter was, has been lately shown by a recent discovery. The ancient papyrus-fragment discovered on the site of Oxyrhynchus by Grenfell and Hunt, in 1897, preserves for us the most primitive form of the Logoi

p. 601

known to us. Of the six decipherable Sayings it contains, one is familiar to us, two contain new matter and important variants, and three are entirely new. If the proportion of now unknown to known sayings was as high in the rest of the MS. as in the solitary leaf which has reached us, then we have indeed lost more by the Canon than we have gained.

The new-found Sayings run as follows, omitting the one already familiar to us:

Jesus saith: Except ye fast to the world, ye shall in no wise find the Kingdom of God; and except ye sabbatize the Sabbath, ye shall not see the Father.

Jesus saith: I stood in the midst of the world, and in flesh was I seen of them, and I found all drunken, and none found I athirst among them. And My soul grieveth over the souls of men, because they are blind in their heart and see not. . . .

Jesus saith: Wheresoever there be two, they are not without God; and wherever there is one alone, I say, I am with him. Raise the stone, and there thou shalt find Me; cleave the wood, and there am I.

[The first part of this saying is exceedingly imperfect; I have followed Blass's conjectures. See Taylor's Oxyrhynchus Logia, Oxford; 1899].

Jesus saith: A prophet is not acceptable in his own country, neither doth a physician work cures upon those that know him.

Jesus saith: A city built on the top of a high hill and stablished can neither fall nor be hid.

Jesus saith: Thou hearest with one ear (but the other thou hast closed).

Since the publication of the first edition of this

p. 602

work the rubbish heaps of ancient Oxyrhynchus have yielded yet another battered scrap of papyrus containing material from a similar collection of sayings, the decipherable portions of which run as follows in Grenfell & Hunt's edition (New Sayings of Jesus; London, 1904):

These are the . . . words which Jesus the Living (One) spake to . . . and Thomas, and He said unto (them): Every one who hearkeneth to these words shall never taste of death.

Jesus saith: Let not him who seeketh . . . cease until he findeth, and when he findeth he shall wonder; wondering he shall reign, and reigning shall rest.

Jesus saith: (Ye ask? Who are these) that draw us (to the kingdom if) the kingdom is in Heaven? . . . the fowls of the air, and all beasts that are under the earth or upon the earth, and the fishes of the sea (these are they that draw) you; and the Kingdom of Heaven is within you; and whosoever shall know himself shall find it. (Strive therefore?) to know yourselves, and ye shall be aware that ye are the sons of the . . . Father; (and?) ye shall know that ye are in (the City of God?), and ye are (the City?).

Jesus saith: Everything that is not before thy face and that which is hidden from thee shall be revealed to thee. For there is nothing hidden which shall not be made manifest, nor buried which shall not be raised.

Report Spam   Logged
Peggie Welles
Hero Member
Posts: 203

« Reply #187 on: March 20, 2009, 03:16:03 pm »

p. 603


Report Spam   Logged
Peggie Welles
Hero Member
Posts: 203

« Reply #188 on: March 20, 2009, 03:16:17 pm »

p. 604

O Light of God, adorable! we worship Thee, that Thou may’st pour Thy light into our minds!
                 Based on the Gāyatrī.

p. 605

Report Spam   Logged
Peggie Welles
Hero Member
Posts: 203

« Reply #189 on: March 20, 2009, 03:16:49 pm »

READER, if you have read so far, you may have journeyed with me or have been taken by some other way; but if you have come so far upon the road, then it seems--to me at least--as though we had journeyed together to some region of light. We have for some short hours been privileged to enjoy converse with those who loved and love the Master. With their words still ringing in our ears, with the life of their love still tingling in our veins, how can we venture to speak ill of them? "Come unto Me, ye weary!" In such a light of love, how shall we find the heart to condemn, because they went out unto Him with all their being? Reading their words and looking upon their lives, I, for my part, see the brand "Heresy," writ so large upon their horizon for many, disappearing into the dim distance, and instead behold the figure of the Master standing with hands of blessing outstretched above their heads. I do not know why this side of earliest Christianity has been allowed to be forgotten. Doubtless there was a purpose served by its withdrawal; but to-day, at the

p. 606

beginning of the twentieth century, in the greater freedom and wider tolerance we now enjoy, may not the veil again be lifted? The old forms need not return--though surely some of them have enough of beauty! But the old power is there, waiting and watching, ready to clothe itself in new forms, forms more lovely still, if we will but turn to Him who wields the power, as He really is, and not as we limit Him by our sectarian creeds.

How long must it be before we learn that there are as many ways to worship God as there are men on earth? Yet each man still declares: My way is best; mine is the only way. Or if he does not say it, he thinks it. These things, it is true, transcend our reason; religion is the something in us greater than our reason, and being greater it gives greater satisfaction. To save ourselves we must lose ourselves; though not irrationally, if reason is transcended. If it be true that we have lived for many lives before, in ways how many must we not have worshipped God or failed to do so? How often have we condemned the way we praised before! Intolerant in one faith, equally intolerant in another, condemning our past selves

What, then, think ye of Christ? Must He not be a Master of religion, wise beyond our highest ideals of wisdom? Does He condemn His worshippers because their ways are diverse; does He condemn those who worship His Brethren, who also have taught the Way? As to the rest, what need of any too great precision? Who knows with the intellect enough to decide on all these high subjects

p. 607

for his fellows? Let each follow the Light as he sees it--there is enough for all; so that at last we may see "all things turned into light--sweet, joyous light." These, then, are all my words, except to add, with an ancient Coptic scribe, "O Lord, have mercy on the soul of the sinner who wrote this!"

Report Spam   Logged
Peggie Welles
Hero Member
Posts: 203

« Reply #190 on: March 20, 2009, 03:17:25 pm »

p. 608

As nothing which may really be called a bibliography of the subject exists, I append an attempt at a preliminary contribution towards a full Bibliography of Gnosticism. Every work (and article) of importance is (I am almost certain) included, and I think that the list of work done on the Coptic Gnostic writings may be said to be fairly complete; there is, however, a certain number of articles in periodicals and publications of learned societies (French especially) which is still to be added, though I do not think that this number is large. I might have added more references to Encyclopædias, but the vast majority of articles in such publications is of very little value. I have divided the General Bibliography into: (i.) Early Works; (ii.) Critical Studies prior to 1851; (iii.) Works subsequent to the Publication of the Text of the Philosophumena in 1851. Division i. contains works generally of very little value; Division ii. suffers from ignorance of the contents of Hippolytus’ Philosophumena, the text of which was first published by Miller at Oxford in 1851. Its

p. 609

contents may be said to have revolutionized the study of Gnosticism. I have also kept apart the Bibliography of the work done on the Coptic Gnostic writings, which will, I believe, in the future still further revolutionize our ideas on the Gnosis. I have made a remark or two on the most popular sources of information in English, but have refrained from all other notes as out of place in so general a work as the present.

Report Spam   Logged
Peggie Welles
Hero Member
Posts: 203

« Reply #191 on: March 20, 2009, 03:17:38 pm »

Early Works.
1569. Marcossius (G. P.). De Vitis, Secretis, et Dogmatibus omnium Haereticorum . . . Elenchus alphabeticus. Coloniæ.

1659. Macarius (I.). Abraxas seu Apistopistus quæ est antiquaria de Gemmis basilidianis Disquisitio et cet. Antverpiæ.

1664. Siricius (M.). Simonis Magi Hæreticorum omnium Patris Pravitates et cet. Giessæ.

1667. Michaelis (?). Dissertatio de Indiciis Philosophiæ gnosticæ Tempore LXX., in Syntagma comment. Gœttingæ. Pt. 2, pp. 269 ff.

1690. Ittig (T.). T. Ittigii . . . de Hæresiarchis Ævi apostolici et apostolico primi, seu primi et secundi a Christo nato Seculi, Dissertatio. Lipsiæ. 2 pts. 1690-96. 2 ed. Lipsiæ 1703 (append. 1696 ed.).

1709. Ittig (T.). Dissertationis Ittigianæ de Hæresiarchis . . ad versus Catalecta F. Lotharii Mariæ a Cruce . . . Defensio. Lipsiæ.

p. 610

1710. Strunz (F.). Friderici Strunzii Historia Bardesanis et Bardesanistarum et cet. Wittenburg.

1710. Massnet (R..). Prolegomena to his edition of Irenæus. Paris.

1734. Beausobre (I. de). Histoire critique de Manichée et du Manichéisme. Amsterdam. 2 vols. 1734, 1739. Vol. ii., pp. 1-142. Dissertation on Basilides, Marcion and Bardesanes as precursors of Mani.

1739. Mosheim (J. L. v.). Institutiones christianæ majores. Helmstadi. Vol. i., pp. 376 f . An able dissertation on the Dositheans

1750. (?). Mosheim (J. L. v.). Geschichte der Schlangenbrüder. Helmstädt (?). Not in British Museum.

1753. Mosheim (J. L. v.). De Rebus christianis ante Constantinum magnum Commentarii. Helmstadtii.

1756. Schumacher (J. H.). Erläuterung der Lehrtafel der Ophiten. Wolfenbüttel. Not in British Museum.

1773. Tittmann (C. C.). Tractatus de Vestigiis Gnosticorum in N. T. frustra quæsitis. Lipsiæ.

1790. Münter (F. C. C. H.) Versuch über u. s. v. (Essai sur les Antiquités ecclésiastiques du Gnosticisme). Anspach. Quoted by Amélineau in his Essai. Not in British Museum.

1795. Schelling (F. W. J. V.). De Marcione Epistolarum paulinarum Emendatore. Tübingen. Not in British Museum.

Critical Studies prior to 1851.
1818, Lewald (E. A.). Commentatio ad Historian

p. 611

[paragraph continues] Religionum veterum illustrandam pertinens de Doctrina gnostica. Heidelberg.

1818. Neander (J. A. W.). Genetische Entwickelung der vornehmsten gnostischen Systeme. Berlin.

1819. Hahn (A.). Bardesanes gnosticus Syrorum primus Hymnologus. Commentatio historico-theologica. Lipsiæ.

1819 (?) Hahn (A.). Dissertatio de Gnosi Marcionis. Not in British Museum.

1820. Bellermann (J. J.). Ueber die Gemmen der Alten mit dein Abraxasbilde. Berlin (?). Not in British Museum.

1820. Bellermann (J. J.). Ueber die Abraxas-Gemmen. Berlin. 3 programmes, 1820-1822.

1821. Fulder (?). Art. De Carpocratianis, in Ilgen's Historisch-theologische Abhandlungen der Gesellschaft zu Leipzig. Not in British Museum.

1821. Hahn (A.). Antitheses Marcionis. Königsberg. Not in British Museum.

1823. Hahn (A.). Evangelium Marcionis ex Auctoritate veterum Monumentorum. Könisberg.

1823. Giesler (J. C. L.). Crit. of Neander, in Allgemeine Literatur-Zeitung. Halle. Nr. 104, pp. 835-38.

1825. Neander (J. A. W.). Antignostikus. Geist des Tertullianus und Einleitung in dessen Schriften mit archäologischen und dogmen-historischen Untersuchungen. Berlin. 2 ed., 1849.

1825. Neander (J. A. W.). Allgemeine Geschichte der christlichen Religion und Kirche. Hamburg. 6 vols., 1825-52. Eng. Trans. (General History of the Christian Religion and Church) by Rose (H. J.) London. 2 vols., 1831-41; Terry

p. 612

[paragraph continues] (J.) from 2nd ed. London. 9 vols., 1847-55; new ed. (Bohn). London. 2 vols., 1890. Vol. ii., "The Gnostic Sects," pp. 1-195.

1828. Matter (A. J.). Histoire critique du Gnosticisme et de son Influence sur les Sectes religieuses et philosophiques des six premiers Siècles de l’ Ère chrétienne. Paris. 3 vols. 2 ed. revised, 1843. There is a German translation by Dörner.

1829. Burton (E.). An Enquiry into the Heresies of the apostolic Age (Bampton Lectures). Oxford.

1830. Giesler (J. C. L.). Art. in Theologische Studien und Kritiken. Hamburg. Pp. 395 ff.

1831. Möhler (J. A.). Versuch über den Ursprung des Gnosticismus. Tübingen. Also in his Gesammelten Schriften. Regensberg. 1839-40. Vol. i., pp. 403 ff.

1834. Neumann (C. F.). Art. Marcion's Glaubenssystem mit einem Anhange über das Verhältnis der Lehre Mani's zum Parsismus, dargelegt von Esnig, aus dem Armenischen übersetzt. Zeitschrift für die historische Theologie. Leipzig. Vol. i., pp. 71-78.

1834. Windischmann (W.). Art. on Esnig, in Bayerischen Annalen für Vaterlandskunde und Literatur. Munich (2). No. for Jan. Not in British Museum.

1835. Baur (F. C.). Die christliche Gnosis, oder die christliche Religions-Philosophie in ihrer geschichtlichen Entwiklung. Tübingen.

1839. Hildebrand (?). Philosophize gnosticæ Origines. Berlin. Not in British Museum.

1841. Simson (A.). Art. Leben und Lehre Simons

p. 613

des Magiers. Zeitschr. f. d. histor. Theolog. Leipzig. Vol. iii., pp. 18 if.

1841. Scherer (?). De Gnosticis qui in N. T. impugnari dicuntur. Strassburg. Not in British Museum.

1843. Norton (A.). The Evidences of the Genuineness of the Gospels. Vol. i., Boston, 1837; vol. ii., 1843; 2 ed., London, 1847. The whole of vol. ii. is devoted to the Gnostics.

1846. Grätz (H.). Gnosticismus und Judenthum. Krotoschin.

1847. Migne (J. P.). Dictionnaire des Hérésies, des Schismes, des Auteurs et des Livres jansénistes, des Ouvrages mis à l’Index, des Propositions condamnées par l’Église, et des Ouvrages condamnées par les Tribunaux français. Paris. 2 vols.

Works Subsequent to the Publication of the Text of the Philosophumena in 1851.
1852. Volkmar (G.). Das Evangelium Marcions. Text und Kritik mit Rücksicht auf die Evangelien des Martyrers Justin, der Clementinen und der apostolischen Väter. Leipzig.

1852. Jacobi (J. L.). Basilidis Philosophi gnostici Sententias ex Hippolyti Libro nuper reperto et cet. Berlin.

1852. Matter (A. J.). Une Excursion gnostique en Italie. Strasbourg.

1853. Le Vaillant de Florival (P. E.). French translation of Esnig. Paris. Not in British Museum.

1853. Baur (F. C.). Das Christenthum und die christliche Kirche der drei ersten Jahrhunderte. Tübingen. 2 ed., 1860.

p. 614

1854. Hase (C. H.). Kirchengeschichte. Leipzig. 1854 --1877. On Basilides in the 7th to the 10th ed.

1855. Gundert (?). 3 Arts. in Zeitschrift fur die lutheranische Theologie. 1855, pp. 209 ff. 1856, pp. 37 ff., 443 ff. Name not mentioned in British Museum catalogue.

1855. Volkmar (G.). Art. Die Kolarbasus-Gnosis, in Zeitsch. f. d. histor. Theolog. Leipzig. Vol. iv., pp. 603 ff.

1855. Volkmar (G.). Die Quellen der Ketzergeschichte bis zum Nicänum kritisch untersucht. Erstes Band: Hippolytus und die römischen Zeitgenossen; oder die Philosophumena und die verwandten Schriften nach Ursprung, Composition und Quellen untersucht. Zürich.

1855. Uhlhorn (G.). Das basilidianische System mit besonderer Rücksicht auf die Angaben des Hippolytus. Göttingen.

1856. Hilgenfeld (A.). Art. Das System des Gnostikers Basilides. Theolog. Jahrbücher. Tübingen. Vol. i., pp. 86-1.21.

1856. Baur (F. C.) Art. Das System des Gnostikers Basilides und die neuesten Auffassungen desselben. Theologische Jahrbucher. Tubingen. Vol. i., pp. 121-162.

1857. Harvey (W. W.). Sancti Irenæi Libri quinque ad versus Hæreses. Cambridge. 2 vols. Preliminary Observations on the Gnostic System, vol. i., pp. i.-cli.

1860. Miller (EẈ.). Geschichte der Kosmologie in der griechischen Kirche bis auf Origenes mit Specialuntersuchungen uber die gnostischen Systeme. Halle.

1860. Noack (L.). Art. Simon der Magier. Psyche:

p. 615

[paragraph continues] Zeitschr. f. d. Kentniss d. mensch. Seelen-und Geistesleben. Leipzig. Vol. iii, pp. 257-325.

1860. Lipsius (R. A.). Art. Der Gnosticismus. Ersch und Gruber's Allg. Encykl. Leipzig. Vol. lxxi., pp. 223-305. Also separately published at Leipzig.

1860. Baxmann (R.). Art. Die Philosophumena und die Peraten, eine Untersuchung aus der alten Häresiologie. Zeitschr. f. d. histor. Theolog. Leipzig. Vol. ii., pp. 218-257.

1861. Baxmann (R.). Art. Die häratische Gnosis. Zeitschr. f. christl. Wissenschaft u. christl. Leben. Berlin. 1861. Pp. 214-227.

Report Spam   Logged
Peggie Welles
Hero Member
Posts: 203

« Reply #192 on: March 20, 2009, 03:17:52 pm »

1862. Hilgenfeld (A.). Art. Der Gnosticismus und die Philosophumena mit besonderer Rücksicht auf die neuesten Bearbeitungen von W. Möller und R. A. Lipsius. Zeitschr. f. wiss. Theol. Jena. Vol. iv., pp. 400-464.

1863. Merx (E. O. A.). Bardesanes von Edessa, nebst einer Untersuchung über das Verhältiss der clementinischen Recognitionen zu dem Buche der Gesetze der Länder. Halle.

1863. Renan (J. E.). Histoire des Origines du Christianisme. Paris. 8 vols. 1863-83. See vols. v., vi., vii.

1863. Lipsius (R. A.). Art. Ueber die ophitischen Systeme. Zeitschr. f. wiss. Theol. Jena. vol. iv., pp. 410-457.

1864. Lipsius (R. A.). Art. on Ophite Systems. Zeitschr. f. wiss. Theol. Jena. Vol. i., pp. 37-57.

1864. Hilgenfeld (A.). Bardesanes der letze Gnostiker. Leipzig.

p. 616

1864. Gruber (J. N.). Die Ophiten. Historische Inaugural-Abhandlung. Würzburg.

1865. Lipsius (R. A.). Zur Quellenkritik des Epiphanios. Wien.

1867. Lipsius (R. A.). Art. Ueber die Zeit des Markion und des Herakleon. Zeitschr. f. wiss. Theol. Jena. Vol. i., pp. 75 ff.

1867. Lipsius (R. A.). Rev. on the original (not in British Museum) of the following. Literarische Centralblatt für Deutschland. Leipzig. Nr. xxvi.

1868. Hofstede de Groot (P.). Basilides am Ausgang des apostolischen Zeitalters als erste Zeuge für Alter und Autorität neutestamentlicher Schriften, inbesodere des Johannes-Evangelium u. s. w. Leipzig. German trans. from the Dutch.

1868. Hilgenfeld (A.). Art. Der Magier Simon. Zeitschr. f. wiss. Theol. Jena. Vol. iv., pp. 357-396.

1868. Fabiani (E.). Notizie di Simon Mago, tratte dai così detti Filosofumeni. Rome and Turin.

1869. Lipsius (R. A.). Art. Gnosis. Schenkel's (D.) Bibel-Lexikon. Leipzig. 5 vols., 1869-75.

1871. Heinrici (G.). Die valentinianische Gnosis und die heilige Schrift. Berlin.

1872. Lipsius (R. A.). Die Quellen der römischen Petrussage kritisch untersucht. Kiel.

1873. Lipsius (R. A.). Rev. on Heinrici's Valentinianische Gnosis. Protestantische Kirchenzeitung. Berlin. Nr. 8, pp. 174-186.

1873. Harnack (A.). Zur Quellenkritik der Geschichte des Gnosticismus. Leipzig.

1873. Berger (P.). Études des Documents nouveaux

p. 617

fournis sur les Ophites par les Philosophumena. Nancy.

1873. Revillout (E.). Vie et Sentences de Secundus d’ après divers Manuscrits orientaux, les Analogies de ce Livre avec les Ouvrages gnostiques. Extrait des Comptes rendus des Séances de l’ Académie des Inscriptions et Belles-Lettres. Paris.

1874. Harnack (A.). Art. Zur Quellenkritik der Geschichte des Gnosticismus. Zeitschr. f. d. histor. Theol. Gotha. Pt. ii., pp. 143-226. Continuation of above.

1874. Harnack (A.). De Apellis Gnosi monarchica. Leipzig (2). Not in British Museum.

1875. Hilgenfeld (A.). Art. Der Gnostiker Appelles. Zeitschr. f. wiss. Theolog. Jena. Vol. i., pp. 51-75.

1875. Mansel (H. L.). The Gnostic Heresies of the first and second Centuries. London. A posthumous work edited by Lightfoot, consisting of notes of Lectures delivered in 1868.

1875. Lipsius (R. A.). Die Quellen der ältesten Ketzergeschichte neu untersucht. Leipzig.

1876. Hückstadt (E.). Art. Ueber das pseudo-tertullianische Gedicht adv. Marcionem. Zeitschr. f. wiss. Theolog. Jena. Vol. i., pp. 154 ff.

1876. Harnack (A.). Art. Beiträge zur Geschichte der marcionitischen Kirchen. Zeitschr. f. wiss. Theolog. Leipzig. Pt. i., pp. 80-120.

1876. Ludemann (M.). Art. Literarisches Centralblatt. No. xi. Not in British Museum.

1877. Jacobi (J. L.). Art. Gnosis. Herzog's Real Encyclopädie. Leipzig. 2 ed., 18 vols.,

p. 618

Report Spam   Logged
Peggie Welles
Hero Member
Posts: 203

« Reply #193 on: March 20, 2009, 03:18:07 pm »

1877-1888. American ed. New York and Boston. 1882-1883.

1877. Möller (E. W.) Art. Simon Magus. Herzog's R. E. (as above).

1877. Jacobi (J. L.). Art. Das ursprüngliche basilidianische System mit eingehender Rücksicht auf die bisherigen Verhandlungen. Zeitschr. f. Kirchengesch. Gotha. Vol. i., pp. 481-544.

1877. Smith (W.) and Wace (H.). A Dictionary of Christian Biography. London. 4 vols. 1877-1887. Contains an article on every important teacher of the Gnosis, and short notices of many of the principal technical terms by Hort, Salmon, and Lipsius.

1878. Hilgenfeld (A.). Art. Der Basilides des Hippolytus, in Zeitschr. f. wiss. Theolog. Jena. Vol. ii., pp. 228-250.

1879. Tulloch (J.). Art. Gnosticism. Encyclopædia Britannica. London. 9th ed. Very short and unworthy of the subject; the sole source from which the general reader in England gets his information.

1879. De Pressensé (E. de). Art. Gnosticisme. L’Encyclopédie des Sciences religieuses protestantes. Paris.

1880. Ménendez y Pelayo (M.). Historia de los Heterodoxos Esparioles. Madrid. 3 vols.

1880. Hilgenfeld (A.) Art. Der Gnostiker Valentinus und seine Schriften. Zeitschr. f. wiss. Theol. Jena. Vol. iii., pp. 280-300.

1880. Meyboom (H. U.). Marcion en de Marcioniten. Leyden.

1880. Joël (M.). Blicke in die Religionsgeschichte zu Anfang des zweiten christlichen Jahrhunderts.

p. 619

[paragraph continues] Breslau. 2 vols. 1880, 1883. Excurs ii. Die Gnosis. Vol. i., pp. 103-170.

1880. Hilgenfeld (A.). Art. Der Gnostiker Valentinus und seine Schriften, in Zeitschr. f. wiss. Theolog. Leipzig. Pt. iii., pp. 280--300.

1881. Kaufmann (G.). Die Gnosis nach ihrer Tendenz und Organization. Zwölf Thesen: Breslau.

1881. Hilgenfeld (A.). Art. Cerdon und Marcion. Zeitschr. f. wiss. Theolog. Leipzig. Pt. i., pp. 1-37

1881. Hilgenfeld (A.). Art. Revised Text of Letter of Ptolemy to Flora. Ibid., p. 214.

1881. Harnack (A.). Art. Tatian's Diatessaron und Marcion's Commentar zum Evangelium bei Ephraem Syrus. Zeitschr. f. Kirchengesch. Gotha. Pt. iv., pp. 471-505.

1881. Funk (F. X.). Art. Ist der Basilides der Philosophumena Pantheist? Theol. Quartalschrift. Tübingen. Vol. ii., pp. 277 if.

1881. Funk (F. X.). Art. Ueber den Verfasser der Philosophumena. Theol. Quartalschrift. Tübingen. Vol. iv., pp. 423-464.

1883. Hilgenfeld (A.). Art. Valentiniana. Zeitschr. f. wiss. Theolog. Jena. Vol. iii., pp. 356-360.

1884. Giraud (?). Ophitæ, Dissertatio de eorum Origine, Placitis et Fatis. Paris. Not in British Museum; referred to by Carl Schmidt, who had, however, not met with a copy.

1884. Hilgenfeld (A.); Die Ketzergeschichte des Urchristenthums. Leipzig. Summing up the results of his previous researches.

1885. Zahn (T.). Art. Die Dialoge des Adamantinus (for Marcion). Zeitschr. f. Kirchengesch. Gotha. Vol. ix., pp. 193 ff.

p. 620

1885. Salmon (G.). Art. The Cross-references in the Philosophumena. Hermathena. Dublin. Pp. 389 ff.

1887. King (C. W.). The Gnostics and their Remains, ancient and mediæval. London. 2 ed. 1st ed., 1864, very much smaller and containing no reference to the Pistis Sophia.

1887. Amélineau (E.). Essai sur le Gnosticisme égyptien ses Développements er son Origine égyptienne. Annales du Musée Guimet. Paris. Vol. xiv.

1888. Harnack (A.). Art. Valentinus. Encyclopædia Britannica. London. 9th edition. A longer article than Tulloch's on the whole of Gnosticism.

1888. Zahn (T.). Adopts Salmon's Philosophumena theory. Geschichte des N. T. Kanons. Erlangen. Vol. I. i. p. 24, n. 2.

1889. Usener (H.). Religionsgeschichtliche Untersuchungen. Th. i. Das Weihnachtsfest. Bonn.

1889. Harnack (A.). Crit. on above. Theologische Literaturzeitung. Leipzig. Nr. viii., pp. 199-211.

1889. Hönig (A.). Die Ophiten. Ein Beitrag zur Geschichte des jüdischen Gnosticismus. Berlin.

1889. Harnack (A.). Crit. of Amélineau's Essai. Theolog. Literaturztg. Leipzig. Nr. ix., pp. 232 ff.

1890. Stähelin (H.). Die gnostischen Quellen Hippolyts in seiner Hauptschrift gegen die Häretiker Texte und Untersuchungen. Leipzig. Vol. vi., pt. 3.

1890. Harnack (A.). Sieben neue Bruckstücke der Sillogismen des Apelles. Text. u. Unter. Leipzig. Vol. vi., pt. 3.

1890. Kurtz (J. H.). Lehrbuch der Kirchengeschichte.

p. 621

[paragraph continues] Leipzig. 11th ed., 1890. English trans. by Macpherson (J.). Church History. London. 3 vols., 1888-1890. Vol. i., pp. 98-125.

1891. Blunt (J. H.). Dictionary of Sects, Heresies, ecclesiastical Parties and Schools of religious Thought. London. New ed. Very unsatisfactory.

1891. Brooke (A. E.). The Fragments of Heracleon newly edited from the MSS. with an Introduction and Notes. Cambridge. Texts and Studies. Vol. i., No. 4.

1892. Mead (G. R. S.). Simon Magus. An Essay. London.

1893. Harnack (A.). Geschichte der altchristlichen Litteratur bis Eusebius. Leipzig. 2 vols.

1894. Anrich (G.). Das antike Mysterienwesen in seinem Einfluss auf das Christentum. Göttingen. Der Gnosticismus in seinem Zusammenhang mit dem Mysterienwesen. Pp. 74-105.

1894. Harnack (A.). Lehrbuch der Dogmengeschichte. Freiburg i. B. u. Leipzig. 3 vols., 3rd ed. 1st ed., 1886. Die Versuche der Gnostiker u. s. w. Vol. i., pp. 211-253.

1894. Harnack (A.). History of Dogma. English trans. by various hands. London. 7 vols. The Attempts of the Gnostics to create an Apostolic Dogmatic and a Christian Theology; or the Acute Secularising of Christianity. Vol. i., pp. 222-265.

1894. Kunze (J.). De Historiæ Gnosticismi Fontibus novæ Quæstiones critic. Leipzig.

1894. Harnack (A.). Rev. of Kunze's thesis. Theolog. Literaturztg. Leipzig. Pp. 506 ff.

p. 622

Report Spam   Logged
Peggie Welles
Hero Member
Posts: 203

« Reply #194 on: March 20, 2009, 03:18:20 pm »

1895. Amélineau (E.). Le nouveau Traité gnostique de Turin. Paris.

1895. Anz (W.) Zur Frage nach dem Ursprung des Gnostizismus. Texte u. Untersuch. Leipzig. Vol. xv.

1897. Nau (F.). Une Biographie inédite de Bardesane l’Astrologue. Paris.

1897. Bevan (A. A.). The Hymn of the Soul [attributed to Bardesan] contained in the Syriac Acts of St. Thomas. Texts and Studies. Cambridge. Vol. v., No. 3.

1898 Friedlander (M.). Der vorchristliche jüdische Gnosticismus. Göttingen.

1899. Nau (F.). Bardesane l’Astrologue: Le Livre des Lois des Pays. Paris.

1899. Burkitt (F. C.). The Hymn of Bardaisan, rendered into English. London.

1900. Mead (G. R. S.). Fragments of a Faith Forgotten. Some Short Sketches among the Gnostics, mainly of the First Two Centuries. A Contribution to the Study of Christian Origins. London.

1900. Preuschen (E.). Die apokryphen gnostichen Adamschriften aus dem Armenischen übersetzt.

1900 (?). Kreyenbühl. Das Evangelium der Wahrheit. 2 vols. Vol. ii. 1905 (?). Not in British Museum.

1901. Waitz (H.). Das pseudotertullianische Gedicht adversus Marcionem. Ein Beitrag zur Geschichte der altchrist. Literatur sowie zur Quellenkritik des Marcionitismus. Darmstadt.

1902. Liechtenhan (R.). Art. Die pseudepigraphe

p. 623

[paragraph continues] Literatur der Gnostiker. Zeitschr. f. d. neutest. Wissenchaft. Giessen. Fasce. iii., xiv.

1903. Hoffmann (G.). Zwei Hymnen der Thomasakten. Zeitschr. f. d. neutest. Wissenchaft. Giessen. Vol. iv., pp. 273-309.

1903. De Faye (E.). Introduction à l’étude du Gnosticisme au IIe et IIIe Siècle. Paris.

1904. Waitz (W.). Die Pseudoklementinen Homilien u. Rekognitionen. Texte u. Untersuchungen. Leipzig. N. F. Bd. x. Hft. 4.

1904. Hilgenfeld (A.). Art. Der Königssohn und die Perlen. Ein morgenländischer Gedicht. Zeitschr. f. wissenschaft. Theologie. Leipzig. Vol. xlviii., (N. F. xii.). Hft. ii., pp. 229-241.

1904. Preuschen (E.). Zwei Gnostische Hymnen. Giessen.

1905. Harnack (A.). Ed. The Letter of Ptolemy to Flora. Cambridge.

1905. Krüger (G.) Art. Das Taufbekentniss der römischen Gemeinde als Niederschlag des Kampfes gegen Marcion. Zeit. f. d. neutest. Wiss. Heft i.

1906. Mead (G. R. S.). Thrice-Greatest Hermes. Studies in Hellenistic Theosophy and Gnosis. Being a Translation of the Extant Sermons and Fragments of the Trismegistic Literature, with Prolegomena, Commentaries and Notes. London. 3 vols.

p. 624

Report Spam   Logged
Pages: 1 ... 7 8 9 10 11 12 [13] 14   Go Up
Jump to:  

Powered by EzPortal
Bookmark this site! | Upgrade This Forum
SMF For Free - Create your own Forum
Powered by SMF | SMF © 2016, Simple Machines
Privacy Policy