Clout Chaser 🗿 on Nostr: I think there's a categorical problem here that's hard to address. The Gnostic books ...
I think there's a categorical problem here that's hard to address.
The Gnostic books aren't just alternative works that aren't in the canon. Books that could be historical, but just weren't given canonicity, are ones like; The Ascension of Isaiah, the Testament of the Patriarchs, the Acts of Thomas, etc.
Gnostic books are a completely different genre of literature They're commentary, for one. All the Gnostic books do is flip the story of Eden on its head, tell you Satan is God and God is Satan, and then they usually dump a bunch of occultic names of primordial figures, which takes the bulk of the content. These are most likely the names of demons, and I don't even want to imagine what they're used for.
The Gnostic books aren't just alternative works that aren't in the canon. Books that could be historical, but just weren't given canonicity, are ones like; The Ascension of Isaiah, the Testament of the Patriarchs, the Acts of Thomas, etc.
Gnostic books are a completely different genre of literature They're commentary, for one. All the Gnostic books do is flip the story of Eden on its head, tell you Satan is God and God is Satan, and then they usually dump a bunch of occultic names of primordial figures, which takes the bulk of the content. These are most likely the names of demons, and I don't even want to imagine what they're used for.