What do you think?
Rate this book
Gnosticism: New Light on the Ancient Tradition of Inner Knowing
Gnosticism developed alongside Judeo-Christianity over two thousand years ago, but with an important difference: It emphasizes, not faith, but direct perception of God--Gnosticism being derived from the Greek word gnosis, meaning "knowledge." Given the controversial premise that one can know God directly, the history of Gnosticism is an unfolding drama of passion, political intrigue, martyrdom, and mystery. Dr. Hoeller traces this fascinating story throughout time and shows how Gnosticism has inspired such great thinkers as Voltaire, Blake, Yeats, Hesse, Melville, and Jung.
272 pages, Paperback
First published July 1, 2002
126 people are currently reading
1,354 people want to read
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 50 reviews
March 6, 2013
I wanted to like this book, I really did. Hoeller explains at the beginning that this will not be a book for "experts" or theologians; instead it is a book for the educated, intelligent, but not professional individual. I understand that the book is not a work of academic scholarship, but throughout its pages, it purports to be informed by the latest developments in scholarship. With an undergraduate degree in religious studies, I am not the target audience of this book. I thought I understood this going in, and was limited by what my public library made available. I had hoped this book would be a relatively evenhanded look at a misunderstood tradition. I have read some of the early Church Fathers' (such as Irenaeus') diatribes against Gnosticism and was looking for some less biased information. Instead, what I seem to have gotten is a diatribe against the orthodox Christian church, the modern world, and earth based religions. Hoeller's book seems to attempt to serve as a Gnostic recruitment tool.
The book started off promisingly, but this may have been because I am not well versed in classical Gnosticism and cannot tell whether or not the author's descriptions are accurate. I started to worry when he described the Essenes and the Dead Sea Scrolls, with which I am somewhat familiar, as "Gnostic" in nature, but as this was only mentioned briefly, I decided to ignore it. I was comfortable with Hoeller's treatment of the early Church Fathers because I've some of the more famous heresiologists, and understand that the information they gave about Gnosticism is incredibly biased and based on their particular, orthodox perspective. I was, however, uncomfortable with Hoeller's explanations of what "the true" Gnostic teachings were. Frankly, if you're going to spend half a book protesting that the Church Fathers are wrong, you need to be able to back up these claims with your own evidence. I found that Hoeller called into question the motives of detractors without defending the early Gnostics themselves.
For example, Irenaeus argues that according to the school of Carpocrates, human souls are reincarnated again and again, until they have pased through every kind of activity and condition. The followers of Carpocrates believe they can conclude this process in only one lifetime. From this teaching, Irenaeus argued that since to be liberated, one had to pass through all possible experiences, the followers of Carpocrates had to commit all manner of heinous acts, including sexual deviancy. Irenaeus didn't actually believe the Carpocratians actually did these hienous things, but he thought that, according to their own teachings, they "should" (Hoeller, p. 103-104). Instead of offering a different exegesis of the teaching and text in question, Hoeller insults both Irenaeus' interpretation and his motives. I understand that Irenaeus was out to discredit the Gnostics, now tell me how the Carpocratians interpreted this teaching.
Some of Hoeller's early history and mythology seems to be accurate, or at least I cannot tell whether it is inaccurate or not, but when he comes to the modern era, his complete lack of rigor, evidence or balance made me put the book down. I cannot take seriously an academic who raves about H.P. Blavatsky's wonderful contributions to Western spirituality without mentioning her many detractors, petty squabbles, and questionable practices. I have read Blavatsky. I have studied (academically) Theosophy. I have also read the many histories that assert Blavatsky's autobiography is invented, and that she was caught red handed writing and placing messages from the "Tibetan Masters" who ave supposedly ascended to a higher plane of being. This is a controversial figure whom Hoeller gives 3 pages of glowing praise and absolutely no context. I realize the book is not about Blavatsky, but if Hoeller gets so many things wrong, or at least twisted, in these three pages, what does he leave out in the rest of the book? How does he misinform the reader in the other 220 pages?
This book is indeed a sympathetic introduction to Gnostic teachings, emphasis on the sympathetic. If you're interested in converting, and don't mind the complete lack of critical analysis or scholarly rigor, this may be the book for you. If you're looking for something more balanced, however, give this book a pass.
The book started off promisingly, but this may have been because I am not well versed in classical Gnosticism and cannot tell whether or not the author's descriptions are accurate. I started to worry when he described the Essenes and the Dead Sea Scrolls, with which I am somewhat familiar, as "Gnostic" in nature, but as this was only mentioned briefly, I decided to ignore it. I was comfortable with Hoeller's treatment of the early Church Fathers because I've some of the more famous heresiologists, and understand that the information they gave about Gnosticism is incredibly biased and based on their particular, orthodox perspective. I was, however, uncomfortable with Hoeller's explanations of what "the true" Gnostic teachings were. Frankly, if you're going to spend half a book protesting that the Church Fathers are wrong, you need to be able to back up these claims with your own evidence. I found that Hoeller called into question the motives of detractors without defending the early Gnostics themselves.
For example, Irenaeus argues that according to the school of Carpocrates, human souls are reincarnated again and again, until they have pased through every kind of activity and condition. The followers of Carpocrates believe they can conclude this process in only one lifetime. From this teaching, Irenaeus argued that since to be liberated, one had to pass through all possible experiences, the followers of Carpocrates had to commit all manner of heinous acts, including sexual deviancy. Irenaeus didn't actually believe the Carpocratians actually did these hienous things, but he thought that, according to their own teachings, they "should" (Hoeller, p. 103-104). Instead of offering a different exegesis of the teaching and text in question, Hoeller insults both Irenaeus' interpretation and his motives. I understand that Irenaeus was out to discredit the Gnostics, now tell me how the Carpocratians interpreted this teaching.
Some of Hoeller's early history and mythology seems to be accurate, or at least I cannot tell whether it is inaccurate or not, but when he comes to the modern era, his complete lack of rigor, evidence or balance made me put the book down. I cannot take seriously an academic who raves about H.P. Blavatsky's wonderful contributions to Western spirituality without mentioning her many detractors, petty squabbles, and questionable practices. I have read Blavatsky. I have studied (academically) Theosophy. I have also read the many histories that assert Blavatsky's autobiography is invented, and that she was caught red handed writing and placing messages from the "Tibetan Masters" who ave supposedly ascended to a higher plane of being. This is a controversial figure whom Hoeller gives 3 pages of glowing praise and absolutely no context. I realize the book is not about Blavatsky, but if Hoeller gets so many things wrong, or at least twisted, in these three pages, what does he leave out in the rest of the book? How does he misinform the reader in the other 220 pages?
This book is indeed a sympathetic introduction to Gnostic teachings, emphasis on the sympathetic. If you're interested in converting, and don't mind the complete lack of critical analysis or scholarly rigor, this may be the book for you. If you're looking for something more balanced, however, give this book a pass.
March 13, 2025
A very cerebral and interesting read on Gnosticism.
Ever since I’ve been getting into Goth culture and music, I’ve been interesting Esoterica, the Occult, Mysticism, Astrology, and Mythology. I recently had a very bad experience with Catholicism, and I’ve left the church for political and dogmatic reasons. I consider myself a believer in Jesus still and in God, but I question things. I took a world religions class a few years ago, and it made me question: how can my belief by the one true belief when there’s thousands of other religions?
So my study of esoterica, and my recent experiences with faith have led me on a journey of questioning and searching for enlightenment. I had a conversation with a woman who told me she was a Gnostic and it interested me because I remember hearing about the sect during a faith formation class I took on the early Catholic Church. I did a little digging and decided I wanted to read about Gnosticism and I wanted to read these Gnostic gospels that I’d heard of. I bought this book.
This book basically explains what Gnosticism is, and I will say it’s definitely leaning towards Gnosticism in terms of its bias, but the information in this book is so enlightening for me, that I feel like I better understand Gnosticism. It’s all about enlightenment, and the idea of a demiurge, the story about Sofia, and the Gnostic version of Jesus were all fascinating to me.
The case the author makes is definitely convincing for me, but I would say I am still questioning and skeptical about it.
Ever since I’ve been getting into Goth culture and music, I’ve been interesting Esoterica, the Occult, Mysticism, Astrology, and Mythology. I recently had a very bad experience with Catholicism, and I’ve left the church for political and dogmatic reasons. I consider myself a believer in Jesus still and in God, but I question things. I took a world religions class a few years ago, and it made me question: how can my belief by the one true belief when there’s thousands of other religions?
So my study of esoterica, and my recent experiences with faith have led me on a journey of questioning and searching for enlightenment. I had a conversation with a woman who told me she was a Gnostic and it interested me because I remember hearing about the sect during a faith formation class I took on the early Catholic Church. I did a little digging and decided I wanted to read about Gnosticism and I wanted to read these Gnostic gospels that I’d heard of. I bought this book.
This book basically explains what Gnosticism is, and I will say it’s definitely leaning towards Gnosticism in terms of its bias, but the information in this book is so enlightening for me, that I feel like I better understand Gnosticism. It’s all about enlightenment, and the idea of a demiurge, the story about Sofia, and the Gnostic version of Jesus were all fascinating to me.
The case the author makes is definitely convincing for me, but I would say I am still questioning and skeptical about it.
April 1, 2021
Gera knyga pirmai pažinčiai su gnosticizmu.
August 15, 2012
Dr Hoeller explains the basic tennets of the modern Gnostic movement with reference to the historical Gnostics. Much of what is known about Gnosticism is through stories, myths, and criticism which can make explaining the tradition a bit difficult. In a nation founded on Orthodox Christian beliefs, shifting your viewpoint to understand the Gnostic world view can be hard. Dr Hoeller does a decent job showing this worldview, though I found his approach a little haphazard. Many of the chapters can be read stand alone as they don't form a consistent and building viewpoint. I especially enjoy the Gnostic Adam and Eve myth which seems more reasoned and less accusatory. I consider myself a Gnostic and have for many years; with that in mind I think this is a good starting point for someone checking out Gnosticism for the first time, but definitely not an authoratative voice for the whole of the religion.
March 3, 2011
By no means is this a book for theologians. Neither do you have to be of a 'religious' disposition to find this book insightful. A fantastic introduction to this, often misunderstood, sect of Christianity. It provides information on theological origins, its evolution throughout the changes in history, right up to how it has influenced many well known philosophers, psychologists and writers of fiction. Easy to follow and understand, the only downside is a rather preachy last chapter, albeit short.
August 9, 2012
A thorough introduction to the history and thought of Gnosticism. Well written and easily read, Hoeller’s book explores the major mythological teachings of the ancient wisdom tradition, the Gnostic Christ, Sophia, and a historical overview of Gnostic movements (Manichaeans, Mandeans, Cathers). But the best part of this quick and concise introduction is the glossary of terms and suggested reading at the end of the book. This helps any neophyte continue his or her study of the Gnostic tradition.
July 1, 2022
This book is an indispensable introduction to the subject of Gnosticism--its history, and principles. The book is concise and sympathetic presentation of the teachings and spiritual ambience of the Gnostic tradition. The author states in the introduction that the book is not really a work of academic scholarship. I think this is rather a good thing, as most of the books I have read so far on the subject were academic scholarship with a disgusting bias towards the Roman Catholic Church and Orthodox Christianity. With that said, I enjoyed the author's rather free-thinking approach to the subject. If you liked Elaine Pagel's: Gnostic Gospels then I believe you will like this book as well. The difference is this author rather defends Gnosticism and the Gnostics. Elaine Pagels on the other hand defended the corrupt child molesting Roman Catholic Church as if Orthodox Christianity's bloody history justified the end. The author tried to limit references and documentation to an irreducible minimum while expanding the list of recommended reading and annotating it for the readers convenience. The format and style of this book are rather simple than those of his other books. For this reason, the book aspires to serve as an introduction to the subject. Gnosticism is not only for the learned or the pious. Like other esoteric systems of teaching, it might be likened to an ocean, wherein a small child may wade in the shallows while a deep-sea diver may penetrate into the depths. Still, it is impossible to write a book that could bear the title Gnosticism for Dummies. The subject is not one that lends itself to an all too elementary treatment; rather, it requires a certain subtle of thinking and a proclivity for an intuitive perception. The title of the book describes it as containing insights into a tradition. This is intended not as a mere figure of speech, for Gnosticism is truly a tradition and not a mere collection of ideas, myths, and symbols that may be interpreted according to any whim or opinion. Gnosticism is a philosophy geared towards spirituality and those who are on the spiritual path and/or spiritually awakened. Gnosis is knowledge from experience; transcendental experience to be precise. Seeing beyond the five senses and leaving-the-body. This is why Gnosticism requires intuitive perception to truly appreciate it's philosophy and scriptures. Anyhow, upon reading this book you will learn:
1. The Gnostic view of the divine and the manifest world, good and evil, and the essence of the human soul.
2. The Gnostic Christ as the messenger of light and the guide to sacred mysteries.
3. Sophia, the Gnostic archetype of Feminine Wisdom.
4. The scriptures, sacraments, and rituals of Gnostic religions such as the Mandaean, holding secret wisdom traced back to John the Baptist; the Manichaen, founded by the Great third-century Persian prophet, Mani; and the Cathar, the glorious and persecuted movement in medieval southern France.
5. Gnostic literature and its influence on cultural giants such Voltaire, Blake, Yeats, Hesse, Melville, and Jung.
6. Gnosticism west and east, what constitutes a Gnostic, and how Gnosticism can guide us into the twenty-first century.
Great introduction to Gnosticism!
1. The Gnostic view of the divine and the manifest world, good and evil, and the essence of the human soul.
2. The Gnostic Christ as the messenger of light and the guide to sacred mysteries.
3. Sophia, the Gnostic archetype of Feminine Wisdom.
4. The scriptures, sacraments, and rituals of Gnostic religions such as the Mandaean, holding secret wisdom traced back to John the Baptist; the Manichaen, founded by the Great third-century Persian prophet, Mani; and the Cathar, the glorious and persecuted movement in medieval southern France.
5. Gnostic literature and its influence on cultural giants such Voltaire, Blake, Yeats, Hesse, Melville, and Jung.
6. Gnosticism west and east, what constitutes a Gnostic, and how Gnosticism can guide us into the twenty-first century.
Great introduction to Gnosticism!
October 3, 2008
On one hand, this book was precisely what I wanted: it is a quick and easy read, and it lays out many of the tenets of the Gnostic faith, presented within a strong framework of history. After reading it, I feel qualified to discuss Gnosticism with other individuals on the basis of what Gnostics believe, how they view the world, their sacred texts, and their method of living. It also fulfilled my primary purpose of researching Gnosticism: I now know enough to play with the basic precepts to use the ideas and forms presented in a fictional world if I so choose.
On the other, this book fails to be a good, objective view on the subject. I will grant that books on religion written by practitioners of that religion are unequivicably biased. But maybe Bart Ehrman raised the bar for me in what I expect from critical religious literature. There were many assumptions in the text that were faulty, either due to poor research, or a desire to oversimplify the world. In Hoeller's book, there are only three paths being pursued in today's world: the Judeo-Christian-Muslum monotheistic outlook, the elevation of science and technology to a religion, or a New-Age jumble of philosophies dressed in ritual that lack discipline. As an adherent of none of these, I found his regular - and voiciferous - condemnation of such philosophies to be tiring.
It also made some basic assumptions about Christianity that are false - such as the fact that Christianity as a whole believes in "original sin," or that everyone interprets the creation story of Genesis in the same way. Since Hoeller does mention a Mormon scholar at one point, one must wonder how he is so ignorant of the breadth of practices and beliefs present in those who proclaim to follow Christ. Indeed, half of this book read as a diatribe against the early Catholic Church and the writers like Iraeneus who penned tractates against the Gnostics in the first two centuries A.D. In that way, it is no better than those who did it the disservice in the first place. The other half of the book reads as a diatribe against "modernism," "rationalism," and other such philosophies. The true nuggets are in the middle of the book where Hoeller briefly relates the tale of the creation of the universe through the fall and redemption of Sophia, and the view of the role and nature of Jesus. However, this is weakened by the bookends of diatribe and condemnation that open and close the work.
On the other, this book fails to be a good, objective view on the subject. I will grant that books on religion written by practitioners of that religion are unequivicably biased. But maybe Bart Ehrman raised the bar for me in what I expect from critical religious literature. There were many assumptions in the text that were faulty, either due to poor research, or a desire to oversimplify the world. In Hoeller's book, there are only three paths being pursued in today's world: the Judeo-Christian-Muslum monotheistic outlook, the elevation of science and technology to a religion, or a New-Age jumble of philosophies dressed in ritual that lack discipline. As an adherent of none of these, I found his regular - and voiciferous - condemnation of such philosophies to be tiring.
It also made some basic assumptions about Christianity that are false - such as the fact that Christianity as a whole believes in "original sin," or that everyone interprets the creation story of Genesis in the same way. Since Hoeller does mention a Mormon scholar at one point, one must wonder how he is so ignorant of the breadth of practices and beliefs present in those who proclaim to follow Christ. Indeed, half of this book read as a diatribe against the early Catholic Church and the writers like Iraeneus who penned tractates against the Gnostics in the first two centuries A.D. In that way, it is no better than those who did it the disservice in the first place. The other half of the book reads as a diatribe against "modernism," "rationalism," and other such philosophies. The true nuggets are in the middle of the book where Hoeller briefly relates the tale of the creation of the universe through the fall and redemption of Sophia, and the view of the role and nature of Jesus. However, this is weakened by the bookends of diatribe and condemnation that open and close the work.
June 14, 2010
Now I know a lot more about these mystic Christians whose beliefs the early church fathers found so upsetting. One does not find salvation through faith said the Gnostics, but through the knowledge of one’s true identity, the knowledge that one is a divine spark separated from the cosmic consciousness otherwise known as God. Jesus was not sent to die for our sins, but to show us the means by which we can rejoin that consciousness. The author also provides an overview of the complex mythology of the Gnostics which, according to the author, should be viewed through the lens of depth psychology as well as theology. Overall, a very interesting and readable book.
September 21, 2012
You may resignate or not with Gnosticism, but this book is as clear as it can be about it. I didn't feel any proselytizing attitude, on the contrary; a very honest exposition of this spiritual path that removes many of the prejudices we may have about it.
April 23, 2019
lovely intro to gnostic cosmology and history, appropriate for the layman to esotericism. Makes abundant references to Jung and deep psychology, which results in an introduction well cemented in relatively recent works as well as the Nag Hammadi Library and other manuscripts. My one misgiving is the somewhat ambiguous references it makes to hermetic philosophy, as it does not attempt to characterize the relationship between the two in any satisfactory way.
All in all, I would absolutely recommend this to others who may be new to Gnosticism and wish to learn more without stopping at the wikipedia article.
All in all, I would absolutely recommend this to others who may be new to Gnosticism and wish to learn more without stopping at the wikipedia article.
Read
May 29, 2022Better to just read the gnostic works themselves. Not what I was looking for.
September 8, 2022
There is so much of the Christian past that I didn't know. Coming across the Gnostic teachings with the recent discoveries of the Nag Hamaddi texts as well as the Dead Sea Scrolls has really helped spark the resurgence of the Gnostic views and teachings. I am fascinated by what has been "decided" upon to be put in the Bible from the Orthodox Church and what was extracted from the scriptures. If you want some great perspective on the Gnostic faith as well as why perhaps some of the teachings were kept from the Bible, then I suggest you give this book a read.
October 12, 2011
Heady, insightful and properly eye-opening. I'll have more to say once I've digested this a bit because, while blessedly accessible, the amount and variety of information presented here is tremendous. It did reaffirm that Gnosticism appeals to me far more than mainstream Christianity, as well as my suspicion that a lot of people who read and reviewed this book did so neither carefully nor with open minds.
June 28, 2021
A great primer on the lost teachings of old. Recommend to anybody who's looking to reframe their thinking on spirituality and our place in the universe. A slightly less urgent, but still important recommendation for those who would be interested in the "alternative" development of religion, that existed in defiance of the patriarchal and oppressive institutions that have shaped the world we live in today.
March 22, 2012
A rather nice primer regarding the nature and history of Gnosticism. Hoeller's prose is very easily readable and explains the more central beliefs and tenants of the religious tradition rather well, containing quotations from many sacred texts. The further reading section also contains a wealth of extremely worthwhile books on Gnosticism.
August 30, 2012
He doesn't paint a clear enough picture to call it an introduction to Gnosticism and he doesn't go very deep. Wikipedia does a better job because you can follow hyperlinks to get more info.
July 19, 2021
The purpose is to give Gnosticism a 'good name'. Clean up misunderstanding, establish a valid pedigree among recognized religions.
So it proceeds historically. Documents from ancient sources are negative, but suggest why gnostic ideas were spurned. Hoeller prefers to follow Nag Hammadi texts to establish an alternative, positive case. He finds a trail of ideas through suggestive connections with Mandaean and Manichean traditions, with Templars, with Cathars, with Theosophists, up to Jung.
Let the scholars handle that.
What the book might do, what it should do, in order to vindicate the value of gnostic ideas, is show how it operates?
If the found world is indeed corrupt -- evil -- why gloss over how a gnostic practitioner might still delight over a warm, sunny day, over the pleasure of a bird's song, over any touching music? Over laughter among friends, over friendship itself? Hoeller seems to suggest a gnostic believer doesn't reject such things.
And if ceremonial, canonical, Gnostic practice brings one to the prime spiritual release -- akin to Eastern elimination of suffering -- to the point that book-understanding, rationality, cannot reach, then why not try describing how ritual behaviors transmute a disciple?
Jung may try to use 'unorthodox' ideas, religious ones, but his goal is to find its unconscious source in order to provide psychological balance. Hoeller thinks Jung stops short, is too rationalistic, too focused on 'psyche' rather than 'spirit' -- a distinction Hoeller makes often.
The book seems to leave us sitting at the temple entrance, knowing something goes on inside, but barely getting a glimpse of the accoutrements, hardly hearing the speech, not being included.
To earn Gnostic initiation would be as it would with any religious commitment -- faith first, willingness to accept teachings as true, following accepted ritual.
A good life may be attained that way, but what's left open is which of dozens of "ways" is the one to give allegiance to. And if life itself -- even what we consider 'good' -- is actually part of a grand scheme of 'evil', then . . . what sort of spiritual release is being sought?
So it proceeds historically. Documents from ancient sources are negative, but suggest why gnostic ideas were spurned. Hoeller prefers to follow Nag Hammadi texts to establish an alternative, positive case. He finds a trail of ideas through suggestive connections with Mandaean and Manichean traditions, with Templars, with Cathars, with Theosophists, up to Jung.
Let the scholars handle that.
What the book might do, what it should do, in order to vindicate the value of gnostic ideas, is show how it operates?
If the found world is indeed corrupt -- evil -- why gloss over how a gnostic practitioner might still delight over a warm, sunny day, over the pleasure of a bird's song, over any touching music? Over laughter among friends, over friendship itself? Hoeller seems to suggest a gnostic believer doesn't reject such things.
And if ceremonial, canonical, Gnostic practice brings one to the prime spiritual release -- akin to Eastern elimination of suffering -- to the point that book-understanding, rationality, cannot reach, then why not try describing how ritual behaviors transmute a disciple?
Jung may try to use 'unorthodox' ideas, religious ones, but his goal is to find its unconscious source in order to provide psychological balance. Hoeller thinks Jung stops short, is too rationalistic, too focused on 'psyche' rather than 'spirit' -- a distinction Hoeller makes often.
The book seems to leave us sitting at the temple entrance, knowing something goes on inside, but barely getting a glimpse of the accoutrements, hardly hearing the speech, not being included.
To earn Gnostic initiation would be as it would with any religious commitment -- faith first, willingness to accept teachings as true, following accepted ritual.
A good life may be attained that way, but what's left open is which of dozens of "ways" is the one to give allegiance to. And if life itself -- even what we consider 'good' -- is actually part of a grand scheme of 'evil', then . . . what sort of spiritual release is being sought?
January 31, 2020
This is an interesting overview what it means to be Gnostic, and presents as well as the history of a variety of Gnostic endeavors and personages. Many different gospels are discussed, most of which are from the Nag Hammadi trove, but others are presented as well. Much attention is given to how the theological conceptions of these gospels differ from each other, but most importantly, how they differ from mainstream conceptions of Jesus and his relationship to 'God'.
Although the treatment of this appears late in the book, it was interesting to see considerations given to more modern Gnostics such as Blake and Goethe. The book also repeatedly brings Carl Jung into discussion, although the treatment of Jung's connection to Gnosticism never gets adequately covered.
One of the things that surprised me in the book was the dualistic nature of Gnosticism. I had thought that Gnosticism was strictly oriented around experiential personal unification (without a mediator) with the divine, which indeed it is, but apparently Gnosticism still strongly presupposes active divine agent/forces of "good" and "evil" in the world. These spirits are ranked differently by Gnostics, as is what is considered to be "good" and "evil". The consideration given to the Manicheans and Cathars as Gnostics is in line with this dualism.
Although the treatment of this appears late in the book, it was interesting to see considerations given to more modern Gnostics such as Blake and Goethe. The book also repeatedly brings Carl Jung into discussion, although the treatment of Jung's connection to Gnosticism never gets adequately covered.
One of the things that surprised me in the book was the dualistic nature of Gnosticism. I had thought that Gnosticism was strictly oriented around experiential personal unification (without a mediator) with the divine, which indeed it is, but apparently Gnosticism still strongly presupposes active divine agent/forces of "good" and "evil" in the world. These spirits are ranked differently by Gnostics, as is what is considered to be "good" and "evil". The consideration given to the Manicheans and Cathars as Gnostics is in line with this dualism.
October 15, 2024
An outstanding introduction to the topic of Gnosticism with a great amount of further paths to follow. I've been really interested in the topic of Gnosticism recently. It is all wrapped up in that notion of knowing oneself. Whatever the self is. And what the self is, turns out to be a Jungian mix of different elements that come together and in their discordance, seem to generate the conscious state.
A really interesting topic anyway. A look at the Abrahamic religion from another angle. With wide ranging influences on culture throughout its history. Blake. Jung. Several dubious organisations. But particularly inside popular culture today. Everything from Dune to Anne Rice, The Matrix to my main man Cormac McCarthy in Blood Meridian.
The influence is wide-ranging and really interesting and revitalises a topic (Christianity) that I've always had a great interest in. This was a perfect introduction that went beyond initial
General overview. The main man is not the main man. He is a Morgoth. (Tolkien was inspired by this). A false god that traps us in the world, separate from the true god and heaven. Once we realise this, we have an opportunity to escape. This was the mission of Christ. To wake us.
Very very simple expression. Well worth a look at. For anyone who loves narrative, it is a doozy.
A really interesting topic anyway. A look at the Abrahamic religion from another angle. With wide ranging influences on culture throughout its history. Blake. Jung. Several dubious organisations. But particularly inside popular culture today. Everything from Dune to Anne Rice, The Matrix to my main man Cormac McCarthy in Blood Meridian.
The influence is wide-ranging and really interesting and revitalises a topic (Christianity) that I've always had a great interest in. This was a perfect introduction that went beyond initial
General overview. The main man is not the main man. He is a Morgoth. (Tolkien was inspired by this). A false god that traps us in the world, separate from the true god and heaven. Once we realise this, we have an opportunity to escape. This was the mission of Christ. To wake us.
Very very simple expression. Well worth a look at. For anyone who loves narrative, it is a doozy.
January 28, 2018
The author is overly inclined to equate ancient Gnosticism with too many other spiritual traditions including his own form of contemporary Gnosticism and does not acknowledge the differences between them, but he has many other valuable insights that redeem the book and make it a very worthwhile read. He also does not cite to the passages in the ancient Gnostic texts that he is talking about, which is frustrating when you are doing research.
March 11, 2021
Interesting introduction to the history of Gnosticism; however, Hoeller falls into the same pitfalls of his opponents, the early Catholic Church fathers, by his own biases. He seems to lump all Abrahamic religions with the exception of gnostic systems under the same banner without any mention of the nuances between them.
June 19, 2024
This is a concise overview of gnosticism. The author's bias in favor of gnosticism is very evident throughout the book� often in the form taking umbrage against those who express negative sentiments against the belief system. I would have favored a more balanced view but don't hold the author's opinions against the book itself. The prose is competent, nothing more.
November 9, 2020
Subject Appeal: 5/5.
Research Depth: 5/5.
Research Breadth: 4/5.
Narrative Flow: 4/5.
Verdict: 5/5. As food for original thought, Hoeller's graspable look at spiritual insight is a feast for broadening the senses.
Research Depth: 5/5.
Research Breadth: 4/5.
Narrative Flow: 4/5.
Verdict: 5/5. As food for original thought, Hoeller's graspable look at spiritual insight is a feast for broadening the senses.
March 21, 2022
It’s a good book and accurate, but it can really only tell you that either it happens to you and you gain gnosis or it doesn’t and you live in darkness, asleep. I’m talking about (and so is the book) a profound spiritual awakening.
August 1, 2023
Great overview, lots of details about Gnostic writers and theorists that I didn't know existed. We don't know everything, but there's far more that we know than I assumed from what I know from the Nag Hammadi find. Not everything was lost for 1,600 years, which is comforting.
April 27, 2024
Engaging, accessible, and relatively grounded. It's good as an introduction for somebody looking for options in their spiritual journey, but not so much as a neutral source of information on Gnosticism.
November 30, 2017
This book provides a good general introduction to Gnosticism. The author is very fond of the religious thought provided by Gnosticism, which might distort a more objective view.
February 13, 2018
2.5 rating
June 29, 2022
Excellent guide for first steps on journey (author and book).
Displaying 1 - 30 of 50 reviews
Can't find what you're looking for?
Get help and learn more about the design.