1. Robinson, James M., The Nag Hammadi Library in English (New York, 1977),Google Scholar hereafter NHL, pp. 24–25.

2. Bultmann, Rudolf, “Die Bedeutung der neuerschlossenen mandäischen und manichäischen Quellen für das Verständnis des Johannesevangeliums,” Zeitschrift für die neutestamentliche Wissenschaft 24 (1925): 100–145.CrossRefGoogle Scholar For a critique of the works of Reitzenstein and Bousset, see Colpe, Carsten, Die religionsgeschichtliche Schule (Göttingen, 1961).Google Scholar

3. Yamauchi, Edwin, Pre-Christian Gnosticism (Grand Rapids and London, 1973),Google Scholar hereafter PCG, pp. 170–184. Cf. Green, H. A., “Gnosis and Gnosticism,” Numen 24 (1977): 95–134.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

4. Malcolm Peel, a member of the Nag Hammadi translation committee, in a letter written on August 17, 1971, responded to my query as follows: “I have recently read through the whole of Nag Hammadi (that so far done and at my disposal) and cannot at the moment add anything further to your list of non-Christian tractates.” Reviews of PCG include those by: MacRae, George W., Catholic Biblical Quarterly 36 (1974): 296–297;Google ScholarPeel, Malcolm, Journal of the American Academy of Religion 43 (1975): 329–331;Google ScholarQuispel, Gilles, Bibliotheca Orientalis 32. 3–4 (1975): 260;Google ScholarTurner, John D., Journal of Biblical Literature 93 (1974): 482–484;CrossRefGoogle Scholar and Wilson, Robert McL., Expository Times 84 (1972–1973): 379.Google Scholar

5. MacRae, George W., “Adam, Apocalypse of,” The Interpreter's Dictionary of the Bible, Supplementary Volume, ed. Crim, Keith, et al. (Nashville, 1976),Google Scholar hereafter IDBS, p. 9.

6. Böhlig, Alexander and Labib, Pahor, Koptisch-gnostische Apocalypsen aus Codex V von Nag Hammadi (Halle-Wittenberg, 1963);Google Scholar see also Böhlig, Alexander, “Jüdisches und Iranisches in der Adamapokalypse des Codex V von Nag Hammadi,” Mysterion und Wahrheit (Leiden, 1968), pp. 149–161.Google Scholar Böhlig later explained that by “pre-Christian” he did not mean a Gnosticism before the birth of Christ, but a Gnosticism Out of which developed the Christian Gnosticism of the second century. See Bohlig, Alexander, “Christentum und Gnosis im Agypterevangelium,” in Eltester, Walther, ed., Christentum und Gnosis (Berlin, 1969), p. 2, n. 5.Google Scholar

7. Robinson, James M. and Koester, Helmut, Trajectories through Early Christianity (Philadelphia, 1971), p. 234, n. 4.Google Scholar

8. Robinson, James M., The Nag Hammadi Codices: A General Introduction (Claremont, 1974), p. 13.Google Scholar

9. Pearson, Birger, “Nag Hammadi Codices,” 1974 Yearbook of the Encyclopedia Judaica (Jerusalem, 1974), p. 246.Google Scholar

10. MacRae, , IDBS, p. 10;Google Scholar cf. MacRae, George W., “The Coptic-Gnostic Apocalypse of Adam,” Heythrop Journal 6 (1965): 27–35.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

11. MacRae, , IDBS, p. 10;Google Scholaridem, “The Apocalypse of Adam Reconsidered,” SBL Book of Seminar Papers, ed. Lane C. McGaughy (Missoula, 1972), p. 573; idem, “Seth in Gnostic Texts and Traditions,” SBL 1977 Seminar Papers (Missoula, 1977), p. 21.

12. Cf. the reviews by Daniélou, Jean, Recherches de science religieuse 54 (1966): 285–293;Google ScholarHaardt, Robert, Wiener Zeitschrift für die Kunde des Morgenlandes 61 (1967): 153–159;Google ScholarOrbe, Antonio, Gregorianum 66 (1965): 169–172.Google Scholar

13. The Berliner Arbeitskreis für koptisch-gnostische Schriften in Troger, Karl-Wolfgang, ed., Gnosis und Neues Testament (Berlin, 1973),Google Scholar hereafter GNT, p. 46, comments: “They were instructed by him (the author) about the true redeemer, whom the highest God ‘had chosen from all eons’ and ‘upon whom the Holy Spirit had come,’ –Jesus.”

14. Böhlig, Alexander, “Die Adamsapokalypse aus Codex V von Nag Hammadi als Zeugnis jüdisch-iranischer Gnosis,” Oriens Christianus 48 (1964): 47.Google Scholar

15. Unlike MacRae I can see no reference to a Pais or Servant in the text, or to the suffering of a Messiah who vicariously expiates the sins of Israel before the establishment of his rule. Cf. Zimmerli, Walther and Jeremias, Joachim, The Servant of God (Naperville, Illinois, 1957), pp. 77–78.Google Scholar

16. Krause, Martin in Foerster, Werner, Gnosis II: Coptic and Mandaean Sources (Oxford, 1974), p. 15;Google Scholaridem, “Zur Bedeutung des gnostisch-hermetischen Handschriftenfundes von Nag Hammadi,” in Martin Krause, ed., Essays on the Nag Hammadi Texts tn Honour of Pahor Labib (Leiden, 1975), hereafter ENHT, p. 82: “All of these texts, which go back to the first or second century A.D., are on account of their age and the absence of Christian concepts of extreme importance for a non-Christian Gnosticism, which (texts), however, do not thereby have to be pre-Christian at all.”

17. MacRae, George W. in Robinson, , NHL, p. 256.Google Scholar Speaking of non-Christian works in the Nag Hammadi Library, MacRae echoes the judgment of Krause: “To conclude that these are pre-Christian Gnostic works would be unjustified, especially in view of the relatively late date of the collection.” IDBS, p. 618.

18. Böhlig, and Labib, , Koptisch-gnostische Apocalypsen, p. 95;Google ScholarBöhlig, , “Die Adamsapokalypse,” p. 46.Google Scholar

19. Cf. Drower, Ethel S., The Mandaeans of Iraq and Iran (Leiden, repr., 1962), pp. 100–101.Google Scholar Kurt Rudolph, “Coptica-Mandaica,” in Krause, , ENHT, p. 215,Google Scholar also notes the contrast between baptism in the Mandaic literature and the Nag Hammadi texts: “Also the connection between the reception of gnosis and baptism is only poorly developed in the Mandaica, a fact which leads us to conclude that here the old cultic basis remained dominant, in contrast to the Gnostic Coptica.” Cf. Morard, Francoise, “L'Apocalypse d'Adam de Nag Hammadi,” in Krause, Martin, ed., Gnosis and Gnosticism (Leiden, 1975), pp. 41–42:Google Scholar “We believe that we can propose that this editor belonged to a Sethian Archontic milieu, and that he maintained a position of opposition with regard to the traditional conception of baptism, whether this conception had been that of his original sect, whether it had been that of a baptist group of the period (Elchasaism, for example), or whether finally it had been that of Christianity.” Cf. note 48 below.

20. Though such scholars as Ethel S. Drower, Rudolf Macuch, and Kurt Rudolph believe that Mandaeanism is pre-Christian in origin, the objective evidence indicates a date no earlier than the second century A.D. See Yamauchi, Edwin, Gnostic Ethics and Mandaean Origins (Cambridge, Mass., 1970).Google Scholar

21. The Berliner Arbeitskreise in Tröger, , GNT, p. 47,Google Scholar comments: “As against other theories, The Apocalypse of Adam is perhaps an example of that phase of Gnosticism in which Manichaeism had already influenced existing systems.”

22. MacRae, , “The Apocalypse of Adam Reconsidered,” p. 577.Google Scholar

23. Henrichs, Albert “Mani and the Babylonian Baptists,” Harvard Studies in Classical Philology 77 (1973): 44.CrossRefGoogle Scholar Cf. Henrichs, Albert and Koenen, Ludwig, “Eine alte griechische Mani Schrift,” Zeitschrift für Papyrologie und Epigraphik 5 (1970): 97–216.Google Scholar

24. lrmscher, Johannes, “The Book of Elchasai,” in Hennecke, Edgar and Schneemelcher, Wilhelm, eds., New Testament Apocrypha (Philadelphia, 1965), 2: 747.Google Scholar

25. Robinson, , NHL, p. 262.Google Scholar

26. Vermaseren, Maarten J., Mithras, The Secret God (London, 1963), p. 75.Google Scholar

27. Yamauchi, Edwin, “The Apocalypse of Adam, Mithraism, and Pre-Christian Gnosticism,” Études Mithriaques, Textes et Mémoires (Acta Iranica), ed. Duchesne-Guillemin, Jacques (Teheran-Liège, 1978), 4: 537–563.Google Scholar

28. Cumont, Franz, “The Dura Mithraeum,” Mithraic Studies, ed. Hinnells, John R. (Manchester, 1975), 1: 161.Google Scholar

29. Hopfe, Lewis M. and Lease, Gary, “The Caesarea Mithraeum,” Biblical Archaeologist 38 (1975): 1–10.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

30. Robinson, , NHL, p. 259.Google Scholar

31. Goedicke, Hans, “An Unexpected Allusion to the Vesuvius Eruption in 79 A.D.,” American Journal of Philology 90 (1969): 340–341.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

32. Perkins, Pheme, “The Genre and Function of The Apocalypse of Adam,” Catholic Biblical Quarterly 39 (1977): 384.Google Scholar

33. Beltz, Walter, Die Adam-Apokalypse aus Codex V von Nag Hammadi (Berlin, 1970)Google Scholar as reported by MacRae, , “The Apocalypse of Adam Reconsidered,” p. 576.Google ScholarWilson, Robert McL., “Jewish Gnosis and Gnostic Origins,” Hebrew Union College Annual 45 (1974): 179,Google Scholar n. 7, remarks: “The Apocalypse of Adam has been claimed by its editor, Alexander Böhlig, as evidence for a pre-Christian Gnosis, but I should assign it to a later date.” Kasser, Rodolphe, “Bibliothèque gnostique V: Apocalypse d'Adam,” Revue de thêologie et de philosophie 16 (1967): 317–318,Google Scholar thinks that the work may go back to the end of the first or the beginning of the second century. Luise Schottroff, “Animae naturaliter salvandae,” in Eltester, , Christentum und Gnosis, p. 83,Google Scholar holds that the apocalypse is non-Christian but not pre-Christian.

34. Robinson, , NHL, p. 7.Google Scholar

35. Translated by Krause, Martin in Christentum am Roten Meer, ed. Altheim, Franz and Stiehl, Ruth (Berlin, 1973), 2: 2–105.Google Scholar

36. Robinson, , NHL, p. 308.Google Scholar

37. Wisse, Frederik, “The Redeemer Figure in the Paraphrase of Shem,” Novum Testamentum 12 (1970): 137.CrossRefGoogle ScholarBetz, Otto, “Das Problem der Gnosis seit der Entdeckung der Texte von Nag Hammadi,” Verkündigung und Forschung 21 (1976): 70,CrossRefGoogle Scholar remarks, “But as the writer (Wisse) himself observes, this tract contains many Jewish and also Christian elements.”

38. Bertrand, Daniel A., “Paraphrase de Sem et Paraphrase de Seth,” in Ménard, Jacques-E., ed., Les Textes de Nag Hammadi (Leiden, 1975), pp. 149 ff.Google Scholar

39. Wisse, Frederik, “The Sethians and the Nag Hammadi Library,” SBL Book of Seminar Papers, ed. McGaughy, Lane C. (Missoula, 1972), 2: 604.Google Scholar

40. Cf. George W. MacRae, “Nag Hammadi,” IDBS, p. 616. The Berliner Arbeitskreise in Tröger, , GNT, p. 59,Google Scholar concludes: “What may be positively asserted is that the source of Hippolytus and our text belong to the same Gnostic school Nevertheless a literary relationship, in our opinion, is ruled out.”

41. Robinson, , NHL, p. 312.Google Scholar

42. Sevrin, Jean-Marie, “À propos de le Paraphrase de Sem,” Le Musèon 88 (1975): 87.Google Scholar The Berliner Arbeitskreise in Troöger, , GNT, p. 57,Google Scholar asks: “Is it a matter of a secret name for Christ?”, and answers, p. 59, “The revealer of the faith, however, is Jesus.” Karl-Martin Fischer, “Die Paraphrase des Seem,” in Krause, , ENHT, p. 266,Google Scholar comments: “Though there are images, where one cannot find any relationship between the otherwise typical Gnostic Christ and Derdekeas, there are other passages, above all in the section on Soldas, with whom Derdekeas is related, where one can trace the thematic influence of the Christian Gnostic Christ figure. Soldas seems once again to be a code name for Jesus, with whom the heavenly Christ (Derdekeas) is associated.” Of this passage (37,14–25) Sevrin, p. 90, declares: “It is at this level that it is without doubt making an allusion to the baptism of Jesus.” Kurt Rudolph, “Coptica-Mandaica,” in Krause, , ENHT, p. 210,Google Scholar likewise observes: “Among the tractates, which express in detail and explicitly a denigration of water baptism, belongs the ParShem (VII,1). Above all this is illustrated by means of John's baptism, that is, the baptism of Jesus by John the Baptist (30–32; 37f.)…”

43. Robinson, , NHL, p. 324.Google Scholar

44. Wisse, , “Redeemer Figure,” p. 137.Google Scholar

45. Cf. Thomas, Joseph, Le mouvement baptiste en Palestine et Syria (Gembloux, 1935);Google ScholarKlijn, Albertus F. J. and Reinink, G. J., Patristic Evidence for Jewish-Christian Sects (Leiden, 1973).CrossRefGoogle Scholar

46. Fischer, , “Die Paraphrase des Sēem,” pp. 260–261;Google Scholar Berliner Arbeitskreise in Tröger, , GNT, pp. 58–59.Google Scholar

47. Sevrin, , “À propos de le Paraphrase de Sem,” p. 95:Google Scholar “The violent polemical character of the passage and the fact that it seems to oppose a movement of some importance would incline one to think of the Christian baptism or the baptism of the Elchasaites: the latter, as is well known, had extended their influence upon a number of other sects. Certain details would seem to favor the Elchasaite baptism.” See note 19 above.

48. Robinson, , NHL, p. 324.Google Scholar

49. Cf. Pagels, Elaine, “A Valentinian Interpretation of Baptism and Eucharist,” Harvard Theological Review 65 (1972); 153–170,Google Scholar especially p. 158 ff.

50. Krause, Martin, “Das literarische Verhältnis des Eugnostosbriefes zur Sophia Jesu Christi,” Mullus (Festschrift, T. Klauser) (Münster, 1964), pp. 215–223;Google Scholar translations of the two works are set forth in parallel columns in Robinson, , NHL, pp. 207 ff.Google Scholar

51. Wilson, Robert McL., Gnosis and the New Testament (Philadelphia, 1968), p. 117,Google Scholar cf. Yamauchi, , PCG, p. 106.Google Scholar Krause refused to accept such ideas as the Son of Man, the Savior, and the church in Eugnostos as Christian elements “since these terms, however, are not exclusively attested in the New Testament.” Krause, in Foerster, , Gnosis, 2: 26.Google Scholar Betz, “Das Problem,” queries: “M. Krause maintains that The Letter of Eugnostos is a pre-Christian text: but how then should such concepts be used in it as ‘the kingdom of the Son of Man.’ ‘savior,’ ‘church’?”

52. Robinson, , NHL, p. 205.Google Scholar

53. Doresse, Jean in Bleeker, Claas J. and Widengren, George, eds., Historia Religionum I: Religions of the Past (Leiden, 1969), p. 549,Google Scholar suggested the fourth century A.D. as the period when Eugnostos was adapted for the Sophia of Jesus Christ. Cf. Yamauchi, , PCG, p. 182.Google Scholar

54. Schenke, Hans-Martin, “Nag Hammadi Studien II: Das System der Sophia Jesu Christi,” Zeitschrift für Religions-und Ceistesgeschichte 14 (1962): 266.Google Scholar

55. Robinson, , NHL, pp. 272–273.Google Scholar

56. Gilles Quispel, “Jewish Gnosis and Mandaean Gnosticism,” in Menard, , Les textes de Nag Hammadi, p. 82.Google Scholar

57. Ibid., p. 86.

58. Ibid., p. 89.

59. Ibid., p. 95. Cf. the speculations of Patai, Raphael, The Hebrew Goddess (New York, 1967).Google Scholar Quispel argues that “holy prostitution” was unknown to the Egyptians, and derives the figure of the Prostitute Anath/Astarte/Wisdom from Syrian-Israelite traditions. He is not well informed on the Egyptian situation. Cf. Yamauchi, Edwin, “Cultic Prostitution,” in Orient and Occident, ed. Hoffner, Harry (Kevelaer, 1973), pp. 216–218;Google ScholarHelck, Wolfgang, Die Beziehungen Ägyptens zu Vorderasien im 3. und 2. Jahrtausend v. Chr. (Wiesbaden, 1962), pp. 482–514;Google ScholarStadelmann, Rainer, Syrisch-palästinensische Gottheiten in Ägypten (Leiden, 1967), pp. 110–122.Google Scholar

60. MacRae, George W., “Discourses of the Gnostic Revealer,” seminar paper, SBL Conference, Chicago, 11 1973, p. 9.Google Scholar Cf. Birger A. Pearson, “The Thunder: Perfect Mind (CG VI, 2),” a paper given at the Graduate Theological Union, Berkeley, March 1973. Pearson speculates that The Thunder may be associated with Simonian Gnosticism, and may therefore be evidence of early if not pre-Christian Gnosticism. Recent studies, however, have reconfirmed Lucien Cerfaux's scepticism about the patristic accounts of Simon Magus. See Meeks, Wayne A., “Simon Magus in Recent Research,” Religious Studies Review 3.3 (1977): 137–142.Google Scholar

61. Arbeitskreise, Berliner in Tröger, , GNT, p. 47:Google Scholar “Is this text a witness of an original, pre-Christian Gnosticism as it relates no myth and betrays no demonstrable Christian influences, or is it, in contrast, a late philosophical composition, which presupposes the myth of the Fall and the Redemption of Sophia? The latter is, in our opinion, the correct interpretation.” On Quispel's thesis, Unger, Rüdiger, “Zur sprachlichen und formalen Struktur des gnostischen Textes ‘Der Donner: der volkommene Nous”,” Oriens Christianus 59 (1975): 106,Google Scholar comments: “Furthermore I can also not agree with the proto-Gnostic and pre-Christian thesis of Quispel, since I believe that I have been able to ascertain some biblical citations (out of the New Testament) and am of the conviction that still further examples could be added.”

62. Robinson, , NHL, p. 8.Google Scholar

63. Berliner Arbeitskreis für koptisch-gnostische Schriften, , “Die drei Stelen des Seth,” Theologische Literaturzeitung 100 (1975): 571–580.Google Scholar

64. Robinson, , NHL, p. 362;Google ScholarTardieu, Michel, “Les Trois Stèles de Seth,” Revue des sciences philosophiques et thélogiques 57 (1973): 558.Google Scholar Other tractates impregnated with Neoplatonic concepts include: Zostrianos (CG VIII, 1):Google ScholarMarsanes (CG X, 1);Google Scholar and Allogenes (CG XI, 1).Google Scholar

65. In this regard, Colpe, Carsten, “Die Thomaspsalmen als chronologischer Fixpunkt in der Geschichte der orientalischen Gnosis,” Jahrbuch für Antike und Christentum 7 (1964): 92–93,Google Scholar cites the Manichaean and Mandaean texts. For the non-Christian, quasi-Gnostic Hermetic texts, see Edwin, Yamauchi, “Hermetic Literature,” IDBS, p. 408.Google Scholar

66. Robinson, , The Nag Hammadi Codices, p. 7;Google Scholaridem, NHL, p. 7.

67. Townsend, John T., “Seth in Rabbinic Literature,” Philadelphia Seminar on Christian Origins, 12 1977, p. 1.Google Scholar

68. Dennis, Berman, “Seth in Rabbinic Literature,” Philadelphia Seminar on Christian Origins, 12 1977.Google Scholar

69. MacRae, George W., “Seth in Gnostic Texts and Traditions,” SBL 1977 Seminar Papers (Missoula, 1977), pp. 17–24;Google ScholarKlijn, Albertus F. J., Seth in Jewish, Christian and Gnostic Literature (Leiden, 1977).Google Scholar

70. E.g., Dart, John, The Laughing Savior (New York, 1976),Google Scholar an ably written popular exposition of the Nag Hammadi texts by a journalist from The Los Angeles Times.

71. James M. Robinson, in a paper read at the Society of Biblical Literature meeting in New Orleans in November 1978 which noted the parallels between the Trimorphic Protennoia (CG XIII. 1)Google Scholar and the Prologue of the Gospel of John, hailed the former as revealing the Vorlage of the latter. In taking this position, Robinson follows the views of the Berliner Arbeitskreis für koptisch-gnostische Schriften, an East Berlin group which also includes the West Berlin scholar, Carsten Colpe. Cf. Schenke, Gesine, “Die dreigestaltige Protennoia,” Theologische Literaturzeitung 99 (1974): cols. 731–746.Google Scholar Pitted against this position are the arguments of other scholars whose analyses lead them to conclude that the Trimorphic Protennoia is secondary to John's Prologue: Janssens, Yvonne, “Le Codex XIII de Nag Hammadi,” Le Musêon 87 (1974): 341–413;Google ScholarMcL, Robert. Wilson, , “The Trimorphic Protennota,” in Krause, Martin, ed., Gnosis, and Gnosticism, (Leiden, 1977), pp. 50–54;Google ScholarHelderman, Jan, “‘ In ihren Zelten …’ Bemerkungen bei Codex XIII,” in Baarda, T., Klijn, Albertus F. J., and van Unnik, Willem C., eds., Miscellanea Neotestamentica I (Leiden, 1978), pp. 181–211.CrossRefGoogle Scholar