What do you think?
Rate this book
Gnosis: The Nature and History of Gnosticism – An Accessible Introduction to the Ancient Religion of Late Antiquity
Presents a readable and appealing introduction to what otherwise might seem an inaccessible religion of late antiquity.
413 pages, Paperback
First published January 1, 1977
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 13 of 13 reviews
January 12, 2011
This is a truly excellent study of Gnosticism and its development and how it relates to other major ancient religions and systems of thought. Of particular interest: the relationship between Gnosticism and early Christianity, the apocryphal texts, the Catholic Church, certain mystical traditions, and certain metaphysical/spiritual ideas including reincarnation ("rebirth" or "transmigration of souls"), the nature of the human being and the nature of the soul, the nature of Christ, the nature of the Old Testament God, the origin of the local universe, "the call," particles of light, and the "spark."
April 13, 2009
Scholarly. Comprehensive. Intense. Yet readable. The best study of the Gnostic sects; great for a personal library as a great resource and reference. Gnosticism 101.
September 4, 2019
An excellent and detailed examination of gnosis/gnosticism. This is really helpful for church historians looking to have a more measured understanding of gnosticism--Rudolph helpfully includes a discussion of heresiographic texts, and what aspects might be accurate and inaccurate. He solidly bases his work in the Nag Hammadi findings, with a good description of their origins and scholarship (spoiler: the history is almost Indiana Jones-worthy, and including grave robbing). I'm so glad this is available in English and has a lot of pictures and illustrations that help visualize this vast, ancient, syncretistic religion. Only one strand, the Mandeans, has made it to the present. Rudolph has contributed great research in that area.
July 7, 2012
I was so glad when it was over. . . .
September 12, 2012
Cogent synopsis of the complex theology and history of Gnosticism (proto-Christian, Christian, and other).
June 21, 2026
Rudolph's book was among the first books on Gnosticism that were written to fully take into account the trove of texts from Nag Hammadi, which were discovered in 1945 but only became widely available in the 1970s. The incredible variety of the Nag Hammadi texts revolutionized scholars' understanding of gnostic thought, so I certainly would not rely on sources much older than this one. Yet this one still feels weighed down by old assumptions. While it might be a useful survey of gnostic ideas, I would not recommend it as an introduction to the topic.
Rudolph casts the widest possible net for what is considered gnostic. The core definition of the term always includes Christian sects that claimed the world was created by an evil deity and that Jesus taught secret knowledge that would allow the soul to escape that deity's clutches. Many of the distinctive beliefs of these sects were shared by other traditions that were not, or may not have been, Christian at all. Among the biggest outliers were Hermeticism, a Greco-Egyptian philosophical tradition whose resemblance to the standard definition of Gnosticism was very loose; Manichaeism, a religion in the late antique world that was more widespread and organized than any of the Christian Gnostic sects; and Mandaeism, a small religion that survives in Iraq to this day. Rudolph includes them all.
Moreover, he writes a single long chapter on the "nature and structure" of all these groups, encompassing their mythologies and practices. This chapter is highly informative, and it doesn't pretend the vast differences between sects do not exist. But the overall flow of the chapter, in which each broad tendency in gnostic thought is illustrated by extensive examples from particular sects, comes dangerously close to building a single "Gnosticism" out of disparate pieces. It's no surprise that this overgeneralizing approach produced a backlash. Some later authors have argued that "gnostic" is an incoherent category that should be abandoned—though the first book to make this argument, Rethinking Gnosticism by Michael Williams, explicitly refuses to even discuss Hermeticism and Manichaeism because they're so far outside its scope!
There are other unwise assumptions and weird biases. Rudolph calls gnoticism "parasitic", because it attached itself to preexisting religious traditions. But all religious traditions that emerged in Roman times justified themselves by appealing to older ideas and interpreting them in novel ways. For instance, orthodox Christianity interprets Jewish messianic and apocalyptic texts as referring to Jesus, and it justifies his theological position using Greek philosophical concepts like the logos. Gnostic groups took different elements from those traditions or interpreted them in different ways, but the differing choices do not make it somehow a "parasite". And although he expresses some caution about it, he is still too confident about his hypothesis for how the gnostic Christian sects formed. (Proto-orthodox Christians blamed Simon Magus for founding gnosticism, and although Rudolph says most of the stories about Simon are legend, he nevertheless assumes that Simon was a gnostic and the outlines of his belief system can be reconstructed.)
Williams' book is an useful corrective to the assumptions of earlier scholars like Rudolph, but his arguments are too radical for most scholars to have adopted them wholesale. If you're looking for an introduction to gnosticism in general, Gnostic Religion in Antiquity by Roelof van den Broek is probably your best option.
Rudolph casts the widest possible net for what is considered gnostic. The core definition of the term always includes Christian sects that claimed the world was created by an evil deity and that Jesus taught secret knowledge that would allow the soul to escape that deity's clutches. Many of the distinctive beliefs of these sects were shared by other traditions that were not, or may not have been, Christian at all. Among the biggest outliers were Hermeticism, a Greco-Egyptian philosophical tradition whose resemblance to the standard definition of Gnosticism was very loose; Manichaeism, a religion in the late antique world that was more widespread and organized than any of the Christian Gnostic sects; and Mandaeism, a small religion that survives in Iraq to this day. Rudolph includes them all.
Moreover, he writes a single long chapter on the "nature and structure" of all these groups, encompassing their mythologies and practices. This chapter is highly informative, and it doesn't pretend the vast differences between sects do not exist. But the overall flow of the chapter, in which each broad tendency in gnostic thought is illustrated by extensive examples from particular sects, comes dangerously close to building a single "Gnosticism" out of disparate pieces. It's no surprise that this overgeneralizing approach produced a backlash. Some later authors have argued that "gnostic" is an incoherent category that should be abandoned—though the first book to make this argument, Rethinking Gnosticism by Michael Williams, explicitly refuses to even discuss Hermeticism and Manichaeism because they're so far outside its scope!
There are other unwise assumptions and weird biases. Rudolph calls gnoticism "parasitic", because it attached itself to preexisting religious traditions. But all religious traditions that emerged in Roman times justified themselves by appealing to older ideas and interpreting them in novel ways. For instance, orthodox Christianity interprets Jewish messianic and apocalyptic texts as referring to Jesus, and it justifies his theological position using Greek philosophical concepts like the logos. Gnostic groups took different elements from those traditions or interpreted them in different ways, but the differing choices do not make it somehow a "parasite". And although he expresses some caution about it, he is still too confident about his hypothesis for how the gnostic Christian sects formed. (Proto-orthodox Christians blamed Simon Magus for founding gnosticism, and although Rudolph says most of the stories about Simon are legend, he nevertheless assumes that Simon was a gnostic and the outlines of his belief system can be reconstructed.)
Williams' book is an useful corrective to the assumptions of earlier scholars like Rudolph, but his arguments are too radical for most scholars to have adopted them wholesale. If you're looking for an introduction to gnosticism in general, Gnostic Religion in Antiquity by Roelof van den Broek is probably your best option.
June 5, 2025
Always start with original texts, and where you have translations, start with those instead of "new interpretations" or what you've seen with Ancient Greece and Edith Hamilton, etc. That we have original texts from the so-called Gnostic (early Christian) traditions is gift, so don't look at gift miracle in it rotten tomato, if you know what I mean (I don't).
That said, you need context and background in order to tackle original Gnostic material. Kurt Rudolph's book is a decent introduction after you've realized a popular series like what Elaine Pagels has written doesn't quite satisfy scratching the Gnostic itch. You will also realize how a book like this makes it essential that any study of Gnosticism must be in tandem with a study of Jewish mysticism previous to and after Christ (chiefly in the Kabbalah). And what else? Oh yeah, the study of Christianity, which is difficult for a lazy English-speaker like me who hasn't ventured outside of the King James as far as versions go.
Check this out with The Gnostic Bible and The Other Bible anthologies edited by Willis Barnstone.
That said, you need context and background in order to tackle original Gnostic material. Kurt Rudolph's book is a decent introduction after you've realized a popular series like what Elaine Pagels has written doesn't quite satisfy scratching the Gnostic itch. You will also realize how a book like this makes it essential that any study of Gnosticism must be in tandem with a study of Jewish mysticism previous to and after Christ (chiefly in the Kabbalah). And what else? Oh yeah, the study of Christianity, which is difficult for a lazy English-speaker like me who hasn't ventured outside of the King James as far as versions go.
Check this out with The Gnostic Bible and The Other Bible anthologies edited by Willis Barnstone.
February 25, 2026
A complete comprehensive guide to everything you’d want to know about gnosis. It covers everything from mythological and cosmological teachings, to the history behind the different schools and sects of gnosis, and the discovery of the nag hammadi library which made it possible for this book to even be made.
Reading deeply into gnosis and learning about what it truly means to be a gnostic was one of the most enjoyable experiences I’ve ever had learning about a religion. It has such a profound take on what it means to be human and definitely won’t lose its grip on me. For anyone even remotely interested with spirituality I highly recommend delving into this fascinating religious movement.
Reading deeply into gnosis and learning about what it truly means to be a gnostic was one of the most enjoyable experiences I’ve ever had learning about a religion. It has such a profound take on what it means to be human and definitely won’t lose its grip on me. For anyone even remotely interested with spirituality I highly recommend delving into this fascinating religious movement.
This entire review has been hidden because of spoilers.
November 28, 2017
Siimon-Maag
"Kord olevat Siimon lasknud ennast maha matta, et demonstreerida oma ülestõusmist, ei olevat aga enam ellu ärganud. Teise versiooni järgi olevat ta, et näidata Peetrusele oma imevõimeid, võtnud ette katse lennata Rooma kohal, kuid Peetrus olevat lasknud tal, hüüdes Kristuse poole, alla kukkuda. Siimon murdnud reieluu ja surnud."
"Kord olevat Siimon lasknud ennast maha matta, et demonstreerida oma ülestõusmist, ei olevat aga enam ellu ärganud. Teise versiooni järgi olevat ta, et näidata Peetrusele oma imevõimeid, võtnud ette katse lennata Rooma kohal, kuid Peetrus olevat lasknud tal, hüüdes Kristuse poole, alla kukkuda. Siimon murdnud reieluu ja surnud."
August 12, 2020
This is a very informative book.
Want to Read
August 28, 2021it's good book , i like it so much
June 13, 2022
It is a good read
February 29, 2016
"Państwo to naprawdę przeczytali?"
Gruntowy przekrój przez wczesnochrześcijańską gnozę, o ile oczywiście człek nie zagubi się w gąszczu pism i opisach kto ile eonów gdzie wyróżniał.
Gruntowy przekrój przez wczesnochrześcijańską gnozę, o ile oczywiście człek nie zagubi się w gąszczu pism i opisach kto ile eonów gdzie wyróżniał.
Displaying 1 - 13 of 13 reviews