cynthia

I would like to know if there is an Atlanta or metro area study group?
I have newly discovered these teachings and would like to join. Also,
where might I find a booklist for relevant study?

Thanks, Cynthia

kater moggin

Cynthia <cka1270@hotmail.com>:

Hi, Cynthia, welcome to ARG. Here's some reading
suggestions to help you get started. If you'd like an overview
or a survey, _The Gnostic Religion_, by Hans Jonas, is a
classic. Kurt Rudolph's book _Gnosis_: the Nature and History
of Gnosticism_ is good, too.

If you'd rather head directly to the sources, _The Gnostic
Scriptures_, edited and translated by Bentley Layton, is a
nice choice, since it comes with notes, maps, intros, and so on.
_The Nag Hammadi Library_, ed. James Robinson, includes all
the writings in that find, gnostic and otherwise, but of course
nothing more.

A few other recommendations: Harnack's _Marcion_: Gospel
of the Alien God_, Simone Petrement, _A Separate God_, _The
Gnostics_, by Jacques LaCarriere, _The Gnostic Gospels_, Elaine
Pagels.

Alot of the source materials are on-line. Brian Mahar has
a great Marcion website here:

http://www.geocities.com/Athens/Ithaca/3827/Library.html

The Church Dads -- a mine of info about ancient gnosticism
-- are at the wonderfully-named Christian Classics Ethereal
Library in the old Edinburgh edition. The 19th c. translations
can be a bit much, but they're handy:

http://www.ccel.org/

And the gnosis.org library has the Nag Hammadi stuff, plus
some other things:

http://www.gnosis.org/library.html

-- Moggin

whyzard

thanks for the booklist and links. Just replying so that this thread
will be in my google/usenet archive

klaus schilling

Kater Moggin <kimmerian@fastmail.fm> writes:


Robinson, Rudolph, ... are naive Euhemerists,
their works aren't worth much.

Petrement and Harnack are even the worst of all, as they try to fool you
viciously into believing in the priotiry of Judeochristianity
over Gnosticism. Especially they spread the lie that the Marcionite
version of the Pauline epistles were less original than the Canonicla
versions. Scholars who claim those types of nonsense are not to
be considered trustworthy.

Only those works are worth consideration who know about
the utter mythicity of the gospel stories/sayings and the utter
inauthenticity and forged- and fakedness of the Pauline
epistles.

Klaus Schilling