Les Gnostiques: Mythe, Rituel Et Diversite Au Temps Du Christianisme Primitif

by Marie Chuvin (Translator)

La somme de David Brakke introduit le lecteur dans les debats les plus recents a propos du " gnosticisme " et de la diversite du premier christianisme. En reconnaissant que la categorie " gnostique " est imparfaite et doit etre reconsideree, David Brakke plaide pour un rassemblement plus prudent des preuves sur le premier christianisme, connu comme ecole de pensee gnostique. Il met ainsi en evidence la maniere dont le mythe et les rituels gnostiques se sont adresses a des questionnements humains elementaires (notamment a propos de l'alienation et du sens), repandant le message d'un Christ sauveur et permettant aux hommes de regagner leur connaissance de Dieu en tant que source ultime de l'etre. Plutot que de depeindre les gnostiques comme des heretiques ou comme les grands perdants de la lutte pour la definition du Christianisme, David Brakke soutient la these d'une participation active des gnostiques a la reinvention de la religion monotheiste. Si les autres chretiens ont pu rejeter les idees gnostiques, ils les ont aussi et surtout adaptees et transformees.

Genres: Religion, History, Christianity, Gnosticism, Nonfiction, Academic, Philosophy

202 pages, Paperback

First published January 1, 2011

Reviews

[B. Rule · Rating 3 out of 5]

Valuable for its treatment of the plurality of early Christian communities. Brakke goes to great lengths to show that "proto-orthodoxy" is a post-hoc description of a much more fluid situation, where various schools of thought and groups interacted in a shifting arrangement of communion and fracture. Among these many groups were the Gnostics. Brakke gives a narrow definition of Gnosticism, and then dances around a variety of other thinkers who clearly share a mental framework with his defined group but for various technical reasons don't satisfy his definition. That said, he gives decent accounts of Valentinus (according to Brakke, not Gnostic), Marcion (ditto), Justin Martyr, Origen, Clement of Alexandria, and others in the course of describing the intellectual climate of early Christianity.

While I thought this was a valuable academic examination of certain features of early Christianity, Brakke is too cautious and therefore too narrow to give a very satisfying, comprehensive view of Gnostic thought. Brakke is probably right to mistrust a broad reading of Gnosticism that is over-inclusive and therefore lacks analytic power. But his view is so soberly circumscribed that it becomes a bit bloodless. Thus, I liked this book but it didn't give me quite what I wanted. Brakke almost seemed embarrassed to have to delve too much into the details of various Gnostic myths, and the section where he talks about the Gnostic celestial hierarchy felt very rushed. I was hoping for more details of that mythology and theology, and a fuller account of how various Gnostic thinkers converged and differed in their treatment of the demiurge, the emanations, etc. That's not the book Brakke wrote, and it's not really fair to fault him for it. Decent treatment of what he chose to consider, and I'll keep looking for the one I want to read.

[Richard · Rating 5 out of 5]

Probably the best introduction to Gnosticism I’ve read. Short, Sober, Academic but not too much so.
It’s awesome.

[Ryan Denson · Rating 5 out of 5]

Brakke provides a well-balanced introduction to the Gnostic tradition of early Christianity. This short book gives a good overview of what we know of the Gnostics and their beliefs as well as tracing the history of scholarship on the topic. Brakke then proceeds to give his own thoughts on the broad contours of the Gnostics and how they related to other Christian groups. For instance, he shows the problematic nature of large monolithic terms like "Gnosticism" and "Proto-Orthodoxy." He further proves why scholars should be skeptical of the usual narrative of "the church," as a single entity, "rejecting" Gnostic and other heretical beliefs. Pre-Constantinian Christianity was certainly not a unified body of believers, as this book eloquently details. Brakke does a remarkable job of introducing and summarizing various groups, individuals, and Gnostic texts without getting bogged down in the gritty details so that even though those, who are not acquainted with early Christianity, can easily follow along. This is a highly recommended read for anyone interested in the early centuries of Christianity or heresiology. It will further provide a superb introduction to the fascinating study of Gnostic thought, which, as is often noted, has been said by some scholars to be "Christianity turned on its head."

[Graham · Rating 5 out of 5]

A great overview of the diversity of Christian thought in the second century. David Brakke makes a compelling case that the idea of the "Gnostics" as a specific group shouldn't be thrown out all together, but instead used as a label for the group other scholars have dubbed "Sethians". He does this by a careful reading of writings from the time, and I for one am convinced. He also gives good example of the "proto-orthodox" church being quite diverse itself, and having more in common with the "heretics" that theologians of the time would have probably liked to admit.

Also, while not the main focus of the book, I found Origen to be a particularly interesting figure. I plan on reading more about him and his writing eventually.

[Taylor Swift Scholar · Rating 4 out of 5]

Brakke’s book has done wonders for helping me to make sense of the “Gnostic” texts I have been reading. Although I was plopped into the middle of a scholarly debate about how to approach the categories of Gnosticism and Christianity, Brakke’s writing is very clear. The Gnostics provided a useful framework for me, not a scholar of early Christianity, to understand these texts and the development of early Christianity. His overview of different lines of thought was also helpful (much more fruitful than trying to make sense of the Secret Book of John on my own.)

[Luke · Rating 3 out of 5]

Not a bad introduction to the history of the Gnostic school of thought and with a little bit of history on Christianity mixed in. I think this text is essential for those who believe that Ancient Christianity was a monolithic belief system that held its head high against the "heresies" when in actuality, it was extremely diverse with varied belief systems and rituals, some even adapting and borrowing from Gnostic Literature. Now to move on to the actual Gnostic texts.

[Jc · Rating 5 out of 5]

A well-written, well-researched discussion of the role of the Gnostic movement(s) in the first centuries of the common era. Dr. Brakke has a unique approach to who and what these early christian sects were, and their relationship to what became proto-orthodoxy. Very well done; quire readable and informative.

[Sasha Wolf · Rating 4 out of 5]

Good overview that provides a more nuanced account of Gnosticism and related beliefs than I got in my theology degree 30 years ago.

[Bledar · Rating 3 out of 5]

It appears that he takes more after the Sethian version of Gnosticism and argues that Valentinius was not a Gnostic.

[Matthew · Rating 3 out of 5]

I have fundamental issues with Brakke's conception of church history and the legitimacy of early "Christianities," but nonetheless a helpful little book to learn more about the Gnostic school of thought.

[Richard Fitzgerald · Rating 2 out of 5]

I’m not sure the purpose of this book other than to obfuscate gnostics of old and the author’s real thoughts. I found this book mostly without meaning or clear thought. The logic of the author’s argument was convoluted and even he admitted that his was not a well-received position among scholars (not that minority positions are always wrong). I feel I wasted my time with this book.

[Caleb Ausbury · Rating 5 out of 5]

In The Gnostics, Brakke argues for the rethinking of the category “Gnosticism” in academia. Some scholars, such as Michael Williams with his famous book Rethinking Gnosticism, argue that the term “Gnostic” does not indicate an actual social entity that existed in the first few centuries of Christianity, but rather categorized groups which were not proto-orthodox into an “other” category. Other scholars treat Gnosticism as its own religion outside of Christianity, which persisted well into the fourth century. Brakke argues for a middle-ground understanding of the Gnostics.

Brakke disagrees with those who think that there were no Gnostics. As evidence, he cites Irenaeus of Lyons, who claims that there were Christians calling themselves Gnostics, despite being “falsely so-called.” Brakke makes the point that to call one a “gnostic” was a compliment, since it indicated one had revealed knowledge, and continued to be so for centuries after Irenaeus. Therefore it is unlikely that Irenaeus would label a group he deemed false as “gnostics.” This leaves Brakke to conclude there really was a group within Christianity which called themselves Gnostics.

However, Brakke is skeptical of the term “Gnosticism,” and limits his understanding of who the Gnostics were to a group of Christians in the second century. He is cautious of using the term “Gnosticism” because he argues that there is no evidence that such a group that self-identified as Gnostics existed past the second century. He claims that scholars have attributed works from the third and fourth centuries that mention a creator god as separate from the god of Jesus to Gnostic authors, despite there being no evidence of a common institution connecting these various works.

Brakke’s arguments rest on what he calls the “horse-race model” for understanding Christianity. Rather than assuming there was always an orthodox Christianity which became corrupted by false teachers, the horse-race model suggests that there were many competing forms of Christianity soon after the time of Jesus. While Brakke uses the horse-race model, he also points out its flaws, such as assuming that each Christianity was a distinct tradition, or “horse.” In reality, he claims, there were many forms of Christianity, each responding to and influencing one another. It was not until the fourth century when Constantine gave Christianity political power that a standard “orthodox” Christianity was implemented.

Brakke also includes a discussion on what the Gnostics used as scripture, but he makes no strong claims given the lack of evidence. In his view, Secret Book of John and the Gospel of Judas are probably the Gnostics’ earliest texts, although he admits the problems of including the Gospel of Judas, since it is not agreed upon when it originated by scholars.

Brakke’s The Gnostics is a lucidly written and well-structured look into the Gnostic controversy in academia. Brakke includes a concise yet apt introduction to who scholars have claimed the Gnostics were, what scriptures they are said to have used, and what earliest sources are available to scholars to reconstruct the Gnostic’s religion. This, along with Brakke’s introduction to early Christianities, makes The Gnostics a useful tool for introducing students not only to the problems of "Gnosticism" in academia, but also to the social dynamics of early Christian schools of thought.

[Christopher Selmek · Rating 4 out of 5]

Do not be fooled by the slimness of this book, it is intellectually heavy. My guess is that Brakke wrote “The Gnostics” as a doctoral thesis and later decided to get it published for general audiences. I highly recommend this book for anyone interested in the Gnostic tradition, because it will give you an idea of how complex the study is. Someone without much interest in this subject will probably trip over the words; it is hard reading.

From the beginning, Brakke sets out to dispel the myth that Jesus left one officially sanctioned doctrine on this earth. He even refutes the more scholarly position that the first through third centuries featured a horserace between multiple competing Christianities, any one of which might have become the established belief system. Instead, Brakke contends that the early Christian horserace featured a variety of schools that changed and developed through time, and evolved as they came into contact with one another. The Gnostic horse and the proto-orthodox horse used similar propaganda techniques, but prior to 325 it was difficult to completely distinguish them.

Part of the reason this study is so complicated is because there was no authentic “Gnostic” in antiquity. Instead, there were a number of gurus walking around the Mediterranean teaching things. Brakke identifies a few essentially Gnostic ideas, and even identifies a Gnostic myth (that is not necessarily common to all Gnostic schools), but the word “Gnostic” only refers to a method of receiving insight. Later, anyone who disagreed with the beliefs that came to be known as orthodox was termed a heretic, and many heretical teachings were lumped together as Gnosticism. He talks about several of the major teachers involved and how they influenced the development of what we today think of as “Christianity”. I found this a very interesting book that changed the way I think about some of these things, and I am keeping it on my shelf to read again sometime later.

[Rachel · Rating 3 out of 5]

I read this book because I wanted to learn more about what early Gnostics believed and it provided me with some insight. It is a well written book, but it is definitely academic and written for a college level. The author spends the first chapter going over various arguments about what the term "gnostic" means and even whether or not it can be used to describe a religious movement of the first centuries AD. In the second chapter he discusses what early gnostics believed and how he specifically defines them. The rest of the book is a more detailed discussion of some early gnostic leaders and their critics. While I'm not sure I will read it again, I found it quite interesting and I am glad my library had a copy. As an aside: I don't agree with gnosticism so don't take my opinion of the book as the same as agreement or disagreement with what is written in it.

In a side note on some of the semantics: there was a section where the author referred to an average Roman around the year AD 150 as "she"; "She could deepen her understanding of Christian teachings by studying with one of the city's several philosophers. . ."; I thought this was an interesting choice of pronoun especially since in my understanding women weren't really taught much about philosophy during that time.

[Steve Wiggins · Rating 4 out of 5]

Maybe a little too sophisticated for an introduction, but Brakke is an able guide to the multiple schools that have come to be known as the Gnostics. Further reflections may be found here: Sects and Violence in the Ancient World.

[Mike · Rating 4 out of 5]

Clearly and concisely the author argues that Gnosticism started out as a school of thought embedded within early Christian communities and only later, when doctrinal issues became a source of conflict, did Gnostics assume separate and heretical identities.