Brill’s New Pauly

Gnosis, Gnostics, Gnosticism

(4,110 words)

[German version]
Table of Contents
A. Definition, names
A. Definition, names
The term Gnosticism that is common today in the German-speaking areas B. Sources, literature
(γνῶσις; gnôsis, ‘insight, knowledge’) has to a large extent superseded the older C. Basic concepts
term ‘Gnosticism’ that is, however, used in English and French. It goes back to D. Beginnings and history
the early Christian period (1. Tim 6, 20; Iren. Adversus haereses I, 6.2) and has a
E. After-effects, history of
heresiological meaning; its representatives are called ‘Gnostics’ (γνωστικοί; research
gnōstikoí, Iren. Adversus haereses I, 2.1), i.e. people who represent and
disseminate particular ‘insights’ and also ways of behaving that diverge from the
official Church and its theological tradition.

Apart from the ‘gnoseological’ meaning in Greek philosophy, the term has remained a positive one in Christianity
since Paul and John the Evangelist ─ it is not seen as being in opposition to pure ‘faith’ (pístis) but as defining the
recognition of salvation, as it regarded the dominant school of thought in early Christianity. Origen and Clemens [3]
Alexandrinus understood the term in the sense of Christian theology, placing it against heresiological Gnosticism.
Certainly the primarily negative usage in polemics continued to exist.

Gnostic sources claim the true ‘insight’ about the position of man and his redemption from the material world that is
often equated with darkness; in spite of this, ‘Gnostic’ is not a constant self-description. Other names, as we now
know from the Nağ Ḥammādī texts demonstrate this: ‘Lineage, children or descendants of Seth’, ‘Children of the
light’, ‘Children of the bridal chamber’, ‘Chosen ones’, ‘Saints’, ‘Perfect ones’, ‘Outsiders’, ‘Possessors of the spirit’
(Pneumatics), ‘Unconvertable race’, ‘Kingless race’, also simply ‘Church’ [1].

The names that appear in the heresiological sources primarily refer to the founders of the school (Simonians,
Valentinians, Basilidians, Marcosians) or to obvious points in their teachings (Archonts, Barbelo-Gnostics, Ophites or
Naasenes, i.e. snake worshippers, Sethians, or similar). It was not until modern research that the term Gnosticism was
introduced as a general description of the world view common to these groups (see E. below).

Rudolph, Kurt (Marburg/Lahn)

[German version]

B. Sources, literature

By 1945/46 there were only relatively few original documents that could be attributed to Gnosticism [9; 10; 11]. These
include the texts of the Codex Ascew (Pistis Sophia) and Codex Brucianus (2 books of Jeu, untitled writing) that are
only preserved in Coptic, the Coptic papyrus Berolinensis 8502 (Evangelium Mariae, Apocryphon Johannis, Sophia
Jesu Christi) that has been known since 1896 but was not edited until 1955, also some parts of the Corpus
Hermeticum (especially the 1st tract ‘Poimandres’), the ‘Odes of Solomon’ and passages of apocryphal apostle
literature (Acta Johannis, Acta Thomae with the ‘Song of the Pearl’). Also the polemic literature of the apologists and
Church Fathers of the 2nd 4th cents (Justin Irenaeus of Lyon Hippolytus of Rome Tertullian Clement of
Church Fathers of the 2nd-4th cents. (Justin, Irenaeus of Lyon, Hippolytus of Rome, Tertullian, Clement of
Alexandria, Origen, Epiphanius of Salamis) contains relatively long quotations and summaries of Gnostic writings
and poetic works (e.g. the book of the Gnostic Iustinus, the Naassene homily, the ‘Great revelation’ of Simon Magus,
the letter of Ptolemy to Flora, extracts from the comm. of Heracleon on Io, fragments of Valentinus among others).

However it was not until the appearance of the 13 Coptic codices with 51 writings, not all completely preserved, that
were found in 1945 at Nağ Ḥammādī (Upper Egypt), that there was a turning point in the literary documentation of
Gnosticism [6-8; 12; 13]. Of these, 45 texts are shown to be clearly Gnostic, and 39 of them were previously unknown.
They are still being edited and evaluated. They contain not just a known wide variety of Gnostic teachings, primarily
Valentinian, ‘Sethian’ or ‘Barbelo-Gnostic’ and also of Hermetic origin (in Codex 6), but they partly reveal a literary
process that stretches from the preliminary phases of the Greek originals of the 2nd/3rd cents. to the Coptic
translation in the 4th/5th cents. AD. On many occasions these are compilations, which is why classification with the
Gnostic schools known from the heresiological data often remains uncertain. In some texts the secondary Christian
adaptation becomes clear (Apocryphon Johannis, Sophia Jesu Christi or Eugnostus Letter; three-fold Protennoia)
whilst others work on (middle) Platonic traditions. The breadth of content is flanked by a literary one: aside from
‘Revelations’ (Apocalypses), like those of ‘Adam to his son Seth’, of ‘Dositheus’ (Three Steles of Seth), of Zostrianus
(Zoroaster), of Peter and Paul, or ‘Secret writings’ (Apókryphoi), that are available particularly in the form of
‘Dialogues’ between the Redeemer (Sōtḗr, Jesus Christ) and his disciples (Apókryphoi of John, of Jacob; Dialogue of
Sōtḗr), there are collections of proverbs or didactic texts as ‘Gospels’ (of Thomas, of Philip, of the Egyptians, of truth),
letters (of Jacob, Rheginus, Eugnostus), tracts (so-called Tripartite Treatise, Authenticus Logos, Exegesis of the Soul,
Nature [hypóstasis] of the Archonts), prayers and homilies.

The Mandaeans, whose extensive Aramaic literature increasingly attracted the attention of Gnostic research at the
end of the 19th cent., form an autonomous Oriental branch of Gnosticism. Manichaeism is also part of Gnosticism in
the widest sense ( Mani, Manichaeans).

Rudolph, Kurt (Marburg/Lahn)

[German version]

C. Basic concepts

Like other ancient and early Christian movements, Gnosticism attempts to provide answers to the problems of evil in
the world, its origin, the position of man in the cosmos and his destiny, but it does so in a truly radical way. Here
dualistic views in particular play a decisive part leading to the parlous state of the world being traced back to an
accident in its creation and the discrepancy between spirit and matter (body) being depicted as unbridgeable
antitheses. Taking as the starting-point faith in an absolutely transcendent God ( ágnostos theós , often called
‘Father’), the origin of the world is traced back to a subordinate, hybrid creator (demiurge, also called ‘Fool’) who with
his ‘Powers’ (angels, archonts, planets) also undertakes the creation of man (Adam). In order to control this process
that had been set in motion, God takes several counter-measures revolving around the salvation of man as the centre
of the cosmos. Without the knowledge of the demiurge and his helpers, the body of Adam that is not viable, is fed a
supra-worldly ‘divine’ substance called either ‘Spirit’ (pneûma, énnoia), ‘Soul’ (psychḗ, Aramaic nisimta), ‘Spark’
(spinthḗr) or something similar. This part of man not only enables him to recognize the true God and to comprehend
the work of the creator as having turned out badly but also to recognize the true goal of man as the return to the
spiritual realm of the true God, often called ‘Fullness’ (plḗrōma) or ‘Realm of light’, to ‘know’ ─ at the same time
however to recognize the frailty of the cosmos as a topsy-turvy creation based on evil intentions.

This ‘insight’ (gnṓsis) with regard to cosmological and anthropological correlations is a ‘supernatural one’ that is
imparted to the ‘knowing one’ (gnōstikós) through revelations, be it through heavenly messengers appearing in the
name of the true God, or through the traditional form of the myths of ancient times (primarily of Biblical origin). The
occurrences of ancient times determine the fate of the present-day world. The process of liberation of the
supraworldly (divine, spiritual, enlightened) core of man from the chains of the ‘dark’ material cosmos destined for
decline determines the (hidden) course of history right to the end, i.e. soteriology and eschatology ultimately
coincide. It is not ‘redemption’ from individual guilt and sin but the rescue of the ‘Soul’ or the ‘Spirit’ from body and
matter (hýlē) that sets the agenda of Gnosticism. The whole apparatus of Gnostic mythology or theology that is also
documented primarily in the ‘protest exegesis’ of older traditions (especially Biblical ones) serves this purpose that
also guides world-denying behaviours.

The Gnostics therefore regard themselves as a ‘chosen race’, an elite, as opposed to people who are earth- and world-
minded. The communities are correspondingly structured: the ‘Pneumatics’ (amongst the Manichaeans the electi) are
the core, the ‘Psychics’ (the auditores or katechoúmenoi among the Manichaeans) are the simple members of the
community, often identical to the ‘Church Christians’ who were open to Gnosticism without accepting the ultimate
consequences; very much on the outside are the ‘Earthly ones’ (choikoí) who correspond to the ‘Heathens’. Although
only insight guarantees salvation, rituals and sacraments are available; however the sources (apart from the
Mandaean and Manichaean ones) provide little information: there were baptisms, banquets, incantations,
initiations, dedications and death ceremonies [25. 235-261]. The focus however was on the didactic teachings by the
‘Pneumatics’. It therefore took the form of a ‘school’ or a ‘mysteries club’ of Gnostics, which then under Christian
conditions became ‘parish churches’. The reproaches originating in heresiological literature ( Heresiology) regarding
libertine practices that could certainly be deduced from the anti-cosmic ideology, have not been able to be proven to
date in the original texts.

Rudolph, Kurt (Marburg/Lahn)

[German version]

D. Beginnings and history

In the opinion of the Church Fathers, Gnosticism originates in the devil, who wanted to destroy the Church through
it. Simon ‘the Magician’ (mágos) from Acts 8 is designated as the first earthly representative; his pupil Menander
passed the Gnostic heresy on to Saturninus (or Saturnilus) of Antioch and to Basilides of Alexandria. This chain of
religious obedience was used for centuries to explain the origin and dissemination of Gnosticism although it is based
more on legend than history. At any rate, those named were obviously familiar with Gnostic thought; to Simon is
attributed not just (secondarily?) a revelatory writing (‘Great Proclamation’) but also his own school of Gnostic
thought (see B. above). As no historical Gnostic writing has turned up to date, research has to rely on reconstructions
and hypotheses based on the remaining source material. This has occurred many times over the last decades without
having led to a generally recognized viewpoint. Today the predominant opinion of researchers into Gnosticism is,
however, that the origins of Gnosticism are not primarily Christian, i.e. Gnosticism is not purely a Christian heresy
but a relatively independent development with a new ‘understanding of existence’ [19] that is fed in a literary and
religious historical sense by various sources, primarily however it is connected with early Jewish traditions (especially
of Wisdom and apocalyptic writings) (this links in with its preoccupation with Jewish [OT] writings [26. 123-209; 31]).
In addition, the Greek-Hellenistic as well as the Iranian (especially in Mandaean and Manichaean Gnosticism)
background has a part to play in its further course in increasingly influencing early Christian ideas of the world;
although early Christianity ultimately considered Gnosticism to be a heresy, it had already influenced Christian
theology with its deeply probing questions stemming from its curiositas.

The ideological prerequisites of Gnosticism in Hellenistic individualism and syncretism are accompanied by the
socio-economic and political-historical conditions in the east of the Roman empire that were characterized by
exploitation, repression and fear as well as the resistance of the (Oriental) population. The idea of the ‘inner man’
served self-identification beyond the official cult religions and the earthly, social ties. The world is understood as lack
of order (chaos), no longer as a cosmos ruled by logos , as in the political philosophy of the Greeks. This protest,
discernible in the mythological constructions and ascetic behaviour, is one of the most radical of ancient times: in its
concentration on the sole salvation of the ‘inner man’ (Spirit, Soul), it represents utter rejection of this world [25. 294-
315].

The early schools and comments are known to us only in a fragmentary way and can be understood well as the
prerequisites of the later systems (from the 2nd cent. AD). These include the following concepts: the contrast
between God or creator and creation (world), the emanation of spiritual powers (énnoia, epínoia, pneûma) from God
for the salvation of man, the sending of one or several ‘Redeemers’ who can be identical to the founders of the school
(Simon Magus), the soteriological power of ‘insight’, the anti-cosmic state and types of behaviour. The adoption of
the figure of Christ as the dominant figure of redemption is clear in the more or less anti-Gnostic polemic of early
Christian literature (pastoral letters, Ignatius of Antioch), as well as the reverse process: the influence of Gnostic
theologoumena on the Christian intellectual world, above all on the shaping of Christ as a heavenly ambassador
(already discernible in Paul [Eph, Col] and in John) the rejection of the resurrection ‘in the flesh’, the emphasis on the
‘possession of pneuma’ and anti-worldly characteristics (Jude; revelation of John). So-called Docetism ( Doketai), i.e.
the only ‘apparent’ (dokéō, dókēsis) appearance of Christ in the earthly-physical world, is a product of heresiological
polemics. Gnosticism, too, does not dispute the incarnation of the Redeemer, namely of the immortal, supraworldly
‘spiritual’ ambassador of God in the earthly Jesus, but the cosmic powers have not received any power over him: only
his body declines into death, not the actual redeeming power [25. 172-186; 26. 266-272].

If the beginnings of Gnosticism in the 1st. cent. AD can be pinpointed initially in Syria and Asia Minor, then
Alexandria and Rome become its centres in the 2nd cent. without the older areas becoming insignificant in the
process, as the origin of Manichaeism shows. The 2nd cent. is the period when the great systems and schools
flourished in the form of Christian Gnosticism, which in the course of the gradual development of ‘apostolic’
orthodoxy becomes heresy with the aid of the hierarchical bishop system from the middle of the 2nd cent.; the
Church wins out against Gnosticism in the 3rd cent. and with Emperor Constantine I in the 4th cent. is also able to
draw upon statefunds for this purpose. The dispute between the ‘Great Church’ and Gnosticism determines in many
ways the discussion about central topics in early Christian theology. The most recent research has for the first time
acknowledged here the contribution of Gnosticism to this field (especially Basilides and Valentinus as well as
Marcion). The essential features are preserved but are varied and developed in many forms and legitimized with
emphatically exegetic references back to the Biblical writings, including references back to the NT, which was in the
process of evolving. Parallel to the Church development of the ‘Apostolic succession’, Gnosticism also follows a
similar concern; its writings are traced back to the known Christian authorities: Paul (who therefore becomes the
‘Apostle of the heretics’), John, Peter, Thomas and Philip; they are the witnesses of Gnostic ideology, as Christ
‘revealed’ it as higher esoteric wisdom and the witnesses to his spiritually, not hierarchically determined ‘Church’
[26. 220-243].

Listed as the first and best-known theologian and Gnostic school founder is Basilides [2], who lived at the time of the
Emperors Hadrian and Antoninus Pius in Alexandria (117-161). Several works are attributed to him, among these a
gospel, an ‘Exegesis’ in 24 books, psalms or odes; only a little of this is extant in the form of extracts. His son(?) also
wrote several books that have been lost. The teaching of Basilides can only be reconstructed with difficulty as the few
extant fragments of his writings do not suffice to decide between the divergent reports. It is therefore said that he
taught the ‘emergence’ (emanatio) of six paired spiritual powers from the ‘Unbegotten father’ from which a further
365 angelic beings arose with their ‘Heavens’ which together form the world year (aeon). The God of the Jews
‘Abraxas (Abrasax)’ (= 365) created the world with the lowest class of angelic powers. To save man, i.e. only his soul,
from its tyranny, the ‘Father’ sent the Christ-nous that appeared in Jesus. Instead of him, Simon of Cyrene was
crucified. The community of Basilides regarded itself as a ‘selection’ of ascetically living ‘Pneumatics’, as ‘Outsiders’
vis-à-vis the world and mankind. With regard to the debatable position of the contemporary Marcion in respect of
Gnosticism, see that section.

The most important Gnostic theologian before Mani is Valentinus, also an Egyptian. Brought up in Alexandria and
converted to Christianity, he went to Rome in 140 where he founded a school and played a part in the church disputes
about leadership roles. After an interlude in Cyprus (?) he died in Rome in about 160. Only a few (11) quotations from
him are extant, primarily from sermons, songs (hymns) and letters. It turned out that attributing the texts of the Nağ
Ḥammādī Codices ‘Gospel of Truth’ and ‘Three-Part Tract’ to him was a mistake so that as before we are unclear
about the system that was attributed to him by the heresiologists. It is said primarily to have consisted in the
primeval beginning of becoming lying in the divine ‘depths’ (bythós) and its emanations of 15 pairs of spiritual
powers (aeons) of which the first four are of particular importance. The last aeon is ‘Wisdom’ (Sophía) that through
its ‘ignorance’ or its ‘error’ disturbs the harmony of the pleroma and that ─ only through the aeon pair ‘Christ’ and the
‘Holy Spirit’ ─ is returned to the ‘All’; its ‘passion’ (enthýmēsis) however becomes the cause of the origin of the world,
i.e. from it originates the demiurge who with his powers controls the material and psychic world. Only the ‘Spirit’
(pneûma) or ‘Seed of light’ is capable of redemption by being activated through ‘insight’ (gnṓsis), imparted through
J Ch i i h ‘S i i l i ’ (P i ) Th ‘S l’ ( hḗ) h i h lib i l ih h
Jesus Christ, in the ‘Spiritual carrier’ (Pneumatic). The ‘Soul’ (psychḗ) can have a part in the liberation only with the
help of remoulding through the ‘Spirit’. The extent to which the highly complicated system of the school passed
down to us in various versions goes back to Valentinus is a problem that is still unresolved in research. Of the texts of
the Nağ Ḥammādī Codices, the Apocryphon of John that was also used by Irenaeus [2] (Adversus haereses I, 29)
gives an idea of the older stages of this.

Incontestable is the great influence of Valentine on his pupils, of whom several are well known and were described
by the Church Fathers as dangerous competitors. According to this they have been classified into ‘Oriental’ or
‘Anatolian’ and ‘Italian’ schools of thought that differ in matters of Christology. Mark belonged to the former group
active in Egypt, Syria and Asia Minor that dedicated itself particularly to ‘mysticism of the letters of the alphabet’ and
created their own ceremonies for this purpose, and there was also Theodotus, whose views are known to us from the
‘Excerpts’ of Clement of Alexandria. The other school that had its centre in Rome is represented by Ptolemy
(Irenaeus of Lyon describes his teachings) and Heracleon; the latter wrote a commentary on the gospel of John,
which was examined by Origen andClement of Alexandria. We are informed about the activities of the Valentinian
Gnosticism, especially in the East, up to the 5th cent.; undoubtedly it was one of the strongest and most widely
disseminated schools of Gnostic thought whose influence is also obvious in several texts of the Nağ Ḥammādī
Codices. With its testimonies we also reach the end of ‘western’ Gnosticism. Other sources do not originally offer
anything new and do not go beyond the often far-reaching repetitions of the mythological guidelines (e.g. the ‘Pistis
Sophia’); unfortunately we know nothing about who disseminated them. The reports of the enthusiastic Epiphanius
[1] of Salamis (5th cent.) in his ‘Medical box’ (Panarion) to stop the poison of the heresies are both very constructive
and often very much divorced from reality (especially regarding the Borborites) [2].

Rudolph, Kurt (Marburg/Lahn)

[German version]

E. After-effects, history of research

The effect of Gnosticism with regard to the questions about the world (cosmos, creation), redemption and the
Redeemer (soteriology), the relationship between God and the redeemer (Christology), faith and knowledge, body
and spirit or soul, good and evil, death and resurrection ─ that were often raised by it for the first time ─ is mirrored
in the answers of the heresiologists provoked in this way, often affecting the very structure of their works (especially
noticeable in Irenaeus). J.G. Herder already therefore saw in Gnosticism the first religious philosophy of Christianity.
F.C. Baur and also A. von Harnack, with the emphasis on the ‘Hellenization’ of Christianity that then took place,
made similar judgements. The more or less direct continuation of Gnosticism occurred particularly in the Orient in
the form of the world religion of Manichaeism and in the Islamic period among several of the Shiite groups [3]. The
Mandaeans are still today the last heirs of Gnosticism in the Orient. In the West the after-effects can be shown in the
dualistic movements of the Bogomils, Cathars and Albigensians, the combating of which led to the institution of the
Church inquisition and to the appearance of the concept of ‘heretic’ (from cathari, gazari, Italian gazaro). With the
rediscovery of the Corpus Hermeticum in the 15th cent. and its interpretation, Gnostic ideas also again gained
importance and they then played a part in mystic, neo-Cabbalistic, theosophic, alchemistic and other doctrines.
These effects which are not always easy to demonstrate range from the cosmological, anthropological, soteriological
and eschatological field to revolutionary ideology of psychological and philosophical systems [4].

The history of research also contributed and contributes to revitalizing interest in Gnosticism [25. 35-58; 27. texts].
The change in the view of Church history that came about with the Reformation and the end of the subsequent
interdenominational wars also included historical writings regarding heretics. First discernible in the ‘impartial
Church history and history of heretics’ of the Pietistic minister Gottfried Arnold (1699), then in the monumental
work of the Hugenot Isaak de Beausobre about Manichaeism (1734/39) and in the works of the Church historian Joh.
Lorenz von Mosheim (‘Attempt at an Impartial and Thorough History of Heretics’, 1746). The relevant books by F. C.
Baur (‘The Manichaean System of Religion’, 1831; ‘Christian Gnosis or Christian Philosophy of Religion’, 1835) then
constitute the beginning of modern research. The investigations that then started which were critical of the sources
led to a fairer evaluation of Gnosticism within the framework of the history of the Church and the history of articles
of faith, as particularly in Adolf von Harnack (1886). However, only the religious history school around 1900 broke
with the pure Church history view of Gnosticism by placing greater importance on its non-Christian roots that had
with the pure Church history view of Gnosticism by placing greater importance on its non Christian roots that had
already been assumed previously, whilst at the same time however recognizing the repercussions of Gnosticism for
early Christian literature and the development of teachings (W. Bousset, R. Reitzenstein, W. Wrede). In this tradition
are also the works of R. Bultmann and his pupil Hans Jonas, who in 1934 presented his pioneering book ‘Gnosis and
the Spirit of Late Antiquity’. The discovery of the Nağ Ḥammādī Codices signified a further turning-point in
research into Gnosticism (see B. above), as well as the unexpected revival in interest in this phenomenon of late
antiquity and its new documents, a revival that has been sustained right through to the present time without
interruption.

Gnosticism

Rudolph, Kurt (Marburg/Lahn)

Bibliography

1 F. Siegert, Selbstbezeichnungen der Gnostiker in den Nağ-Ḥammādī-Texten, in: Zschr. für die nt. Wissenschaft 71,
1980, 129-132

2 A. Pourkier, L'hérésiologie chez Épiphane de Salamine, 1992

3 H. Halm, Die islamische G., Zürich 1982

4 P. Sloterdijk, T. H. Macho, Weltrevolution der Seele, 1993 (texts).

Bibliogr.:

5 D. M. Scholer, Nağ Ḥammādī Bibliography 1948-1969, 1971; 1970-1994, 1997 (concerns the entire field of research
on Gnosticism).

Ed. and transl.:

6 The Facsimile Edition of the Nağ Ḥammādī Codices. Introduction. Codex I ─ XIII, 1972 ─ 1979

7 The Coptic Gnostic Library ed. with English transl.; intr. and notes publ. under the auspices of the Institute for
Antiquity and Christianity, 15 vols., 1975 -1996

8 Bibliothèque copte de Nağ Ḥammādī. Section ‘Textes’, Collection éd. par J. E. Ménard, P.-H. Poirier, M. Roberge,
1977ff.

9 W. Foerster (ed.), Die Gnosis, 3 vols., 1977, 21995 (special edition 1997)

10 R. Haardt, Die G., 1997

11 B. Layton, The Gnostic Scriptures, 1987

12 J. M. Robinson (ed.), The Nağ Ḥammādī Library in English, 1977, 31988

13 G. Lüdemann, M. Janßen (ed.), Bibel der Häretiker. Die gnostischen Schriften aus Nağ Ḥammādī, 1997.

Bibliography:

14 U. Bianchi (ed.), Le origini dello gnosticismo. Colloquio di Messina 13-18 Aprile 1966, 1967, 21970

15 A. Böhlig, Mysterion und Wahrheit, 1968

16 Id., G. und Synkretismus, 2 parts, 1989

17 W Bousset Hauptprobleme der G 1907 21973

17 W. Bousset, Hauptprobleme der G., 1907, 1973
18 G. Filoramo, A History of Gnosticism, 1990, 21991

19 H. Jonas, G. und spätant. Geist. Teil 1: Die myth. G., 1934, 41988; Teil 2/1.2: Von der Myth. zur mystischen Philos., ed.
by K. Rudolph, 1993

20 K. Koschorke, Die Polemik der Gnostiker gegen das kirchliche Christentum, 1978

21 B. Layton (ed.), The Rediscovery of Gnosticism, vol. 1-2, 1981

22 H. Leisegang, Die G., 1924, 41955

23 A. Magris, La logica del pensiero gnostico, 1997

24 H.- Ch. Puech, En quête de la Gnose, 2 vols., 1978

25 K. Rudolph, Die G., 1977, 31990

26 Id., G. und spätant. Rel.gesch., 1996

27 Id. (ed.), G. und Gnostizismus, 1975

28 W. Schmithals, Neues Testament und G., 1984

29 G. Stroumsa, Another Seed: Stud. in Gnostic Mythology, 1984

30 K.-W. Tröger (ed.), G. und Neues Testament, 1973

31 Id. (ed.), Altes Testament ─ Frühjudentum ─ G., 1980

32 J. D. Turner, A. McGuire (ed.), The Nağ Ḥammādī Library after Fifty Years, 1997

33 R. McL. Wilson, The Gnostic Problem, 1958, 21964.

Cite this page

Rudolph, Kurt (Marburg/Lahn), “Gnosis, Gnostics, Gnosticism”, in: Brill’s New Pauly, Antiquity volumes edited by: Hubert Cancik and , Helmuth Schneider, English Edition by: Christine F.
Salazar, Classical Tradition volumes edited by: Manfred Landfester, English Edition by: Francis G. Gentry. Consulted online on 04 January 2022 <http://dx.doi.org.ezproxy.u-bordeaux-
montaigne.fr/10.1163/1574-9347_bnp_e425720>
First published online: 2006
First print edition: 9789004122598, 20110510