Hans Jonas (1903-1993) foi um filósofo judeu-alemão que sob os auspícios de Martin Heidegger desenvolveu uma leitura existencialista do fenômeno do gnosticismo, visto por ele como uma religião dualista cujos contornos antecedem e influenciam o Cristianismo Primitivo. Esta leitura tem ecos ainda hoje na reconstrução histórica do gnosticismo, ainda que alguns autores modernos como Michael Williams (1996) e Karen King (2001) tenham feito duras críticas. Na presente dissertação, verificamos que a análise de Jonas é permeada por conceitos antitéticos na formulação do problema gnóstico. São eles: oriente e ocidente, mito e misticismo, mitologia e filosofia, conhecimento e fé, princípio gnóstico e princípio de responsabilidade. Os conceitos antitéticos são limitativos, pois são assimétricos, isto é, a contraparte que pretendem definir é inferiorizada. (KOSELLECK, 2006) Embora Jonas tenha se voltado ao problema do organismo como ontologia após a experiência traumática da Segunda Guerra Mundial, o princípio gnóstico foi a pedra de toque para a formulação de outro princípio em seu período de maturidade: o princípio responsabilidade. Portanto, concordamos com Wadelstein (2000) quando afirma que a franca hostilidade ao princípio gnóstico do Jonas filósofo da natureza e da responsabilidade não permitiu que sua leitura do gnosticismo avançasse, não obstante a possibilidade de contato com os novos documentos de Nag Hammadi. / Hans Jonas (1903-1993) was a German-Jew philosopher who developed an existentialist view to the gnostic phenomena under the scope and orientation of Martin Heidegger, which is a dualistic religion which boundaries had preceded and influenced the Early Christians. Such understanding has yet today played an important role on the historical reconstruction of Gnosticism, even though it has gathered heavy criticism from current scholars such as Michael Williams (1996) and Karen King (2001). In this dissertation is verified that Jonas‘analysis over Gnosticism is trespassed by non-ethical concepts in the basis to the development of the Gnostic construct. So they are: East and West; Myth and Mysticism; Mythology and Philosophy, Faith and Knowledge, Gnostic Principle and Responsibility Principle. Such non-ethical concepts are restrictive itselves since they are asymmetrical, namely, the counterpart they are supposed to define is diminished by them (KOSELLECK, 2006). Although Hans Jonas had turned to face the problem of the self as an ontological one, after World War II, it was the Gnostic Principle the linking point to the construction of his other Principle on his later days: the Responsibility Principle. So that, in accordance to Wadelstein (2000), it was due to the plain hostility towards Jonas’ construct on Gnostic Principle that prevented his understanding over gnosticism from advancing further, despite the possible conection of his ideas with the new-found Nag Hammadi papers.

Hans Jonas (1903-1993) foi um filósofo judeu-alemão que sob os auspícios de Martin Heidegger desenvolveu uma leitura existencialista do fenômeno do gnosticismo, visto por ele como uma religião dualista cujos contornos antecedem e influenciam o Cristianismo Primitivo. Esta leitura tem ecos ainda hoje na reconstrução histórica do gnosticismo, ainda que alguns autores modernos como Michael Williams (1996) e Karen King (2001) tenham feito duras críticas. Na presente dissertação, verificamos que a análise de Jonas é permeada por conceitos antitéticos na formulação do problema gnóstico. São eles: oriente e ocidente, mito e misticismo, mitologia e filosofia, conhecimento e fé, princípio gnóstico e princípio de responsabilidade. Os conceitos antitéticos são limitativos, pois são assimétricos, isto é, a contraparte que pretendem definir é inferiorizada. (KOSELLECK, 2006) Embora Jonas tenha se voltado ao problema do organismo como ontologia após a experiência traumática da Segunda Guerra Mundial, o princípio gnóstico foi a pedra de toque para a formulação de outro princípio em seu período de maturidade: o princípio responsabilidade. Portanto, concordamos com Wadelstein (2000) quando afirma que a franca hostilidade ao princípio gnóstico do Jonas filósofo da natureza e da responsabilidade não permitiu que sua leitura do gnosticismo avançasse, não obstante a possibilidade de contato com os novos documentos de Nag Hammadi. / Hans Jonas (1903-1993) was a German-Jew philosopher who developed an existentialist view to the gnostic phenomena under the scope and orientation of Martin Heidegger, which is a dualistic religion which boundaries had preceded and influenced the Early Christians. Such understanding has yet today played an important role on the historical reconstruction of Gnosticism, even though it has gathered heavy criticism from current scholars such as Michael Williams (1996) and Karen King (2001). In this dissertation is verified that Jonas‘analysis over Gnosticism is trespassed by non-ethical concepts in the basis to the development of the Gnostic construct. So they are: East and West; Myth and Mysticism; Mythology and Philosophy, Faith and Knowledge, Gnostic Principle and Responsibility Principle. Such non-ethical concepts are restrictive itselves since they are asymmetrical, namely, the counterpart they are supposed to define is diminished by them (KOSELLECK, 2006). Although Hans Jonas had turned to face the problem of the self as an ontological one, after World War II, it was the Gnostic Principle the linking point to the construction of his other Principle on his later days: the Responsibility Principle. So that, in accordance to Wadelstein (2000), it was due to the plain hostility towards Jonas’ construct on Gnostic Principle that prevented his understanding over gnosticism from advancing further, despite the possible conection of his ideas with the new-found Nag Hammadi papers.

Dans le Traité 33 (II 9), Plotin se dresse contre les « gnostiques » : ceux qui disent que le démiurge et le monde sont mauvais. Ses critiques sont précédées par une introduction qui résume sa doctrine de l’Un-Bien et de l’Intellect. Dans le premier chapitre du Traité 33, à partir des thèses de ses adversaires, Plotin construit une série de propositions concernant les réalités premières – leur nombre, leur nature et leurs actions. Il dénonce les erreurs de chaque proposition, comme conduisant à la construction d’un univers des intelligibles défectueux, ignorants et impuissants. La thèse porte sur la place de la métaphysique de Plotin dans sa polémique antignostique. Les arguments qui introduisent cette polémique sont construits de manière à pouvoir rejoindre les principales conceptions du principe premier : celles proposées par les principales écoles philosophiques et celles qui ont été élaborées par les différents courants du gnosticisme et du christianisme. Plotin s’intéresse à ces doctrines nouvelles, émergentes en marge des écoles philosophiques. Le rapport entre Plotin et le christianisme est l’objet de notre attention. La perspective métaphysique permet d’examiner tous les courants doctrinaux du christianisme primitif. Une partie de la critique plotinienne va à l’encontre des efforts des chrétiens à respecter les exigences du monothéisme par rapport à l’idée d’un « autre Dieu ». À leur opposé se situent les gnostiques qui proposent une multiplication des entités issues du premier principe. Ainsi, la conception plotinienne du principe transcendant, après lequel viennent les hypostases ayant rang de principes, répond aux interrogations de ses nombreux adversaires. / In Treatise 33 (II 9), Plotinus stands against the “Gnostics”: those who consider the demiurge and the cosmos to be evil. His criticisms are preceded by an introduction summarizing the Plotinian doctrine of the supreme principle – the One. In the first chapter of Treatise 33, based on the theses of his opponents, Plotinus constructs a series of propositions concerning the first realities - their number, their nature and their activities. He denounces the errors of each proposition as leading to the construction of a universe of defective, ignorant and helpless intelligibles. This thesis deals with the place of the metaphysics of Plotinus in his anti-Gnostic polemics. The arguments constituting these polemics are constructed to fit within the principal conceptions of the first principle - not only those proposed by the main philosophical schools, but especially those designed within different currents of Gnosticism and of Christianity. Plotinus is interested in these new doctrines emerging on the margins of the established philosophical schools. The object of our attention is the relationship between Plotinus and Christianity. The metaphysical perspective enables us to examine all the doctrinal currents of primitive Christianity. Part of Plotinian criticism may go against the efforts of Christian writers to respect the demands of monotheism in relation to the idea of "another God". At their opposite are the Gnostics, who propose multiplication of entities derived from the first principle, the Pleroma. Thus, the Plotinian conception of the supreme principle, after which come the hypostases having the rank of principles, answers the questions posed by his adversaries.

Raymond Queneau s’intéresse au mythe, comme bien d’autres écrivains. Mais quel est le rapport qu’il entretient avec cet imaginaire collectif ? Notre propos est d’examiner la particularité des idées de Queneau sur le mythe, dans tous les sens du terme. Il est question d’abord d’observer ce que signifie le « mythe » pour Queneau, en considérant comment ses relations avec les surréalistes et Georges Bataille l’ont sensibilisé aux sciences humaines et sociales en vogue au début du XXe siècle, et en étudiant sa lecture de Nietzsche et Joyce qui réfléchissent sur le mythe et la littérature. La réécriture des mythologies anciennes, gréco-romaine et biblique en particulier, dans l’œuvre de Queneau est également analysée, sans oublier celle de la mythologie gnostique, inextricablement liée chez lui à la philosophie hégélienne, et surtout à l’idée de « la fin de l’histoire ». La notion de «mythologie moderne », discutable pour certains, est tout de même envisagée pour tenter de savoir pourquoi le personnage de Zazie et le Paris décrit par Queneau ont acquis une telle popularité dans le grand public. À la lumière de ces examens, Queneau apparaît comme un écrivain toujours fasciné par cette forme de récit, saturée de symboles, structurée par une tension oppositionnelle, organisée par une construction circulaire, contenant une logique sous-jacente, qui nourrit, tout en gardant l’anonymat, l’imaginaire collectif. / Like many other writers, Raymond Queneau was interested in myth. But what was his relationship to this entryway into the collective imagination? I propose here to examine the particularity of Queneau's ideas on myth, in all senses of the term. I begin by looking atwhat "myth" signified for Queneau, and considering how his relations with the surrealists and Georges Bataille kindled his interest in the social sciences and humanities in fashion at the start of the 20th century, and by studying his reading of the reflections of Nietzsche andJoyce on myth and literature. I also analyze Queneau's rewriting of ancient mythologies, Greek and biblical in particular, but also gnostic mythology, which for him was inextricably tied to Hegelian philosophy, and most of all to the idea of the "end of history." The notion of "modern mythology," which some view as debatable, is nevertheless examined in an attempt to illuminate the reasons why Queneau's character Zazie and Paris he described became so popular with the general public. These analyses reveal Queneau as a writer who was always fascinated by this type of story: saturated with symbols, structured by an oppositional tension, organized by a circular construction, and containing an underlying logic that, while maintaining anonymity, nourishes the collective imagination.

Judas Iscariot has been and remains to this day one of the most hated persons in human history. The goal of this project is to examine the evolution Judas as he appears, first within the pages of the Christian canon, then moving over to literature outside the canon, into Apocrypha. Moreover, consulting ancient and modern sources allows for the ability to raise questions regarding the possibility of redemption for Judas as well as an analysis on whether this person was real or simply a literary construct by ancient authors in order to strengthen the core of the Christian belief system. With the inclusion of a clear and present villain in the narrative, the early Christians or proto-Orthodox were able to separate themselves from the initial Jewish community and labelled Judas as the ultimate example of what not to do when it came to being a “true” Christian. The discovery of the Gospel of Judas and its subsequent publication brought mainstream attention to the early years of Christianity, with its many different structures. The exploration of its pages reveal an entirely different message in which Judas Iscariot is a central figure, amidst a more “gnostic” tradition. The character of Judas Iscariot has since travelled through the centuries and it is this project’s mission to demonstrate the evolution of this character, showing how he first appears as merely one of twelve men who follow Jesus to a personification of evil. The project will also demonstrate how a possible misunderstanding of literature could have created a literary scapegoat, resulting in Judas Iscariot’s use as a tool to foster hatred and animosity towards the Jews. The end result leaves the reader with the question of whether Judas deserves absolution for his actions, who may have been an important part of God’s plan for humanity’s salvation.

En uppsats som genom komparativ teologisk analys undersöker vilka Jesus-epitet som används i den gnostiska (valentinianska) skriften Sanningens Evangelium och vad de och sättet de används på jämfört med i Matteus- och Johannesevangeliet kan säga om den syn på Jesus som speglas i Sanningens Evangelium.

Denna uppsats skrevs som en del av Teologprogrammet på Umeå universitet inom ämnet exegetik och berörde det apokryfiska Thomasevangeliet. Thomasevangeliet är uppdelat i 114 Jesus-ord (logier) och av dessa är det endast 22 som inte har en parallell till Nya testamentets litteratur. Genom att göra en analys av de 22 logierna ville jag svara på vad logierna vill förmedla, vilken idéhistoria de speglar, samt varifrån de kan komma. Detta genomfördes genom att först beskriva Thomasevangeliets bakgrund, samt en kortare genomgång av det vetenskapliga läget när det kommer till Thomasevangeliets språk, datering och författarskap. Sedan analyserades olika textkommentarer om de olika logierna för att sätta in dem i sitt sammanhang och det materialet som togs fram låg sedan till grund för en diskuterande och komparativ analys där ytterligare vetenskapliga röster fick höras.  Genom denna analys och diskussion kunde sedan uppsatsens problemformulering besvaras. Logierna vill förmedla: -    Vikten av inre andlig insikt för att nå frälsningen. -    En legitimering av Thomastraditionens närvaro i sin samtid. -    Vikten av att vara kristen och närma sig Gud. Idéhistorien som evangeliets tidigare försattes i var en gnostisk miljö och även om det finns gnostiska drag i vissa av logierna är detta inte längre den rådande uppfattningen bland teologer. Idag är det istället andra tankar som tas i åtanke, som den syriska traditionen som evangeliet troligen skrev i. Jag kom fram till att det finns flera olika källor som kan ha påverkat Thomasevangeliets utformning och logier. Gammaltestamentliga apokryfer, judiska traditioner och läror, Ignatius av Antiochia, Platon är några troliga källor och Paulus teologi, Markions teologi och annan nytestamentlig litteratur är möjliga källor, men eftersom de var ungefär samtida med Thomasevangeliets daterade nedskrivning är det svårt att avgöra. Jag märkte också att det fanns en del gnostisk och apokryfisk litteratur som verkar varit inspirerade av Thomasevangeliet istället, till exempel Pistis Sophia, Frälsarens dialog och Filipposevangeliet. Det är möjligt att vissa gnostiska drag har tillkommit senare till Thomasevangeliet genom textbearbetningar och avskrivningar.  Uppsatsen är endast en ytskrapning på ett stort ämne och det finns flera aspekter som går att fördjupa sig på. Exempelvis språklig analys av manuskript eller om huruvida Jesus har sagt dessa Jesus-ord och inte bara blivit tillskriven dem. Denna uppsats skrevs som ett hoppfullt bidrag för att inspirera till ytterligare fördjupning i ett ämne med djup botten.

No description available.

<p>This assignment is a venture into the use of the concept alchemy in the texts on analytical psychology written by Carl G. Jung. Originally the idea was to compare the blending of colours in art painting with the Jungian understanding of alchemy. In order to understand the many and it seems differentiated correlations to alchemy in the texts on analytical psychology written by C.G. Jung, I have found it necessary to investigate the history of alchemy in modern Europe and the Egyptian figure of Hermes Trismegistos. This helps shedding light on Jung’s manner of writing in his texts on analytical psychology.</p><p>The assignment includes an understanding of colours as understood by Goethe as well as the aspect of alchemy in the Rosicrucian movement and the kabbalah. The Jungian aspects of world religions are in this context emphasized as well as the use of symbols and symbolic speech.</p>

From being an exotic small religion that has existed at a fading presence in southern Iraq and Iran mandeism has moved to the West and Sweden. As more and more Mandaeans encounter a new culture and a new society in Sweden it affects not only them as individuals but also their religion mandeism. In this essay, I have begun to examine how Mandaeans think about their identity and religion. I have taken my starting point in a broad theoretical discussion of identity, religion and secularisation. Mandeism is a gnostic religion that probably has its roots in today’s Israel / Palestine and sees John the Baptist as the last prophet. Baptism is the Mandaeans most important ritual and Mandaeans also have several sacred writings, in which the Ginza is considered the one that has most authority. The clergy is important for the performance of rituals and communication of religious knowledge, today there are only about thirty priests left in the global community and these are spread from Sweden to Australia. Among the Mandaeans who answered my questions, the most are relatively secular, only a few see themselves as religious. But they all feel that their Mandaean identity is important, baptism, ceremonies, family, and the Mandaean community is important as factors to keep their Mandaean identity alive. Several Mandaeans in Sweden are experiencing a difficulty to practice their religion in a traditional way due to the cold climate that makes it difficult to perform baptism, the lack of priests and mandi (temple there baptisms can be performed). These factors along with the meeting with a secular Western society and that it has gone from being a relatively geographically cohesive group to be scattered all over the world have led to increased secularisation. This has led to a debate within the Mandaean community how to meet the new situation, such as how to relate to the Mandaeans who marries non-Mandaeans, which previously had not been accepted and is very rare even today. / Från att ha varit en exotisk liten religion som har fört en tynande närvaro i södra Irak och Iran har mandeismen flyttat till västvärlden och däribland Sverige. När allt fler mandéer möter en ny kultur och ett nytt samhälle i Sverige påverkar det inte bara dem som individer utan även religionen mandeism. I denna uppsats har jag påbörjat att undersöka hur mandéer ser på sin identitet och religion. Jag har tagit min utgångspunkt i en bred teoretisk diskussion om identitet, religion och sekualisering. Mandeismen är en gnostisk religion som troligtvis har sina rötter i dagens Israel/Palestina och ser Johannes döparen som den sista profeten. Dopet är mandeismens viktigaste ritual och man har flera heliga skrifter, där Ginza anses vara den som har tyngst auktoritet. Prästerskapet är viktigt för utförandet av ritualer och förmedling av de religiösa kunskaperna, idag finns det bara ett trettiotal präster kvar inom mandeismen i världen och dessa är utspridda från Sverige till Australien. Bland de mandéer som har svarat på mina frågor är de flesta relativt sekulära, ett par ser sig som religiösa. Men samtliga tycker att deras mandeiska identitet är viktig, man ser dopet, högtider, familjen och den mandeiska gemenskapen som viktiga faktorer för att hålla sin mandeiska identitet levande. Flera mandéer i Sverige upplever en svårighet att utöva sin religion på ett traditionellt sätt pga ett kallt klimat som försvårar dop, avsaknad av präster och mandi (tempel där dop kan utföras). Dessa faktorer tillsammans med mötet med en sekulär västvärld och att man har gått från att vara en relativt geografiskt sammanhållen grupp till att vara utspridd över hela världen har lett till en ökad sekularisering. Detta har lett till en diskussion inom mandeismen hur man ska möta den nya situationen, tex hur man ska se på mandéer som gifter sig med ickemandéer, något som tidigare inte har varit accepterat och är mycket ovanligt.