Abstract
One of the few data in the study of Gnosticism that always seemed rather certain was the hypothesis that the tmythological Gnosist as represented by the sect of the Gnostikoi of Irenaeus 1.29, the Apocryphon of John and so many other writings found near Nag Hammadi, preceded the more tphilosophical Gnosist of Valentinus and his pupils. Bentley Layton discusses critically the evidence which seems to point out that Valentinus knew the myth of the Gnostikoi. He has, however, ignored one passage which seems relevant to this problem. Irenaeus quite often mentions the Gnostikoi, mostly together with the Valentinians: according to him they are a separate sect. The chapter quotes passages which prove without any shadow of doubt that the original doctrine of Valentinus is rooted in a preceding mythological Gnosis which he hellenised and christianised. If he was not a Gnostic, he certainly was a gnostic.Keywords: Bentley Layton; Gnostikoi; Valentinus
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
