So I've been doing some reading up on the early Christian sects and briskly reading over the Gnostic stuff, it's left me slightly confused. I don't really see threads too often about this, so I don't know how many religion buffs are floating around.
Is there a gnostic "canon"? Does it include all the complete books in the Nag Hammadi Codex, or just a select few? This goes for the OT/NT as well -- books like Wisdom of Solomon and 1 Enoch are in or out? Or does it vary?
Is there a clear separation between Sophia and the concept of the Holy Ghost, or are they one and the same?
If the "hidden God" of the NT is good and the Demiurge ("LORD" of the OT) is bad, then wouldn't the narrative of Christ's death and resurrection fit in perfectly with the Gnostic narratives? I'm not entirely sure of how he fits in both the OT and NT narratives of the Gnostic tradition(s).
Thanks in advance for the answers.
>>3259417
There aren't any genuine gnostics left because the lineages that Gnosticism require no longer exist. Reading PDFs about Gnosticism on the internet does not make you gnostic.
>>3259751
>no longer exist
More like exterminated. At least reading Nag Hammadi helps you understand oh the gnostics
>>3259825
The problem is like with every religious tradition, there would have been an oral tradition based on a master-student lineage, that accompanies the textual tradition. Which no longer reliably exists
Sophia and the Holy Spirit have overlapping functions but they are not the same entity. The Holy Spirit is equated to God in Trinitarianism, while Sophia in Gnosticism is a lesser Aeon, which is of a significantly lower hierarchical status compared to the Monad (which would be God).
>>3259751
Mandaeans still exist
>>3259417
There was no single "Gnostic" sect. From what I remember it was almost used as a pejorative by Christian writers to attack Christians that delved to deeply into Greek philosophical concepts