Some have argued that it doesn't have to be dated before the mid 3rd century as the Zostrianos we have may not be the same as that mentioned at Porphyry's "Life of Plotinus" (16). IMO this reference should be called the Testimonium Porphyrianum.MrMacSon wrote: ↑Sun May 01, 2022 2:37 amCheers. Yes, my understanding is Zostrianos is dated to the early 3rd century CE. (and it has to be dated before the conflict between the Sethians and Plotinus in the early to mid 260s CE.)andrewcriddle wrote: ↑Sat Apr 30, 2022 4:05 am I posted on this a number of years ago starting with http://hypotyposeis.org/weblog/2009/07/ ... t-one.html
Coming back to the issue more recently, I now tentatively feel that there is a much stronger case for dating Zostrianos before 250 CE than is true for the other Platonizing Sethian texts such as Allogenes and Marsanes.
Andrew Criddle
Birger A. Pearson makes it pretty clear that the heresiologists all seem to agree that the gnostics are somehow related to Platonists ...
WITH SPECIAL REFERENCE TO MARSANES (NHC 10,1)*
Birger A. Pearson; University of California, Santa Barbara
From ancient times it has been averred that the Gnostics derived their basic ideas from the Greek philosophers, especially Pythagoras and Plato. For example,
Irenaeus (Adv. haer. 2.14) argued that the Valentinian Gnostics borrowed their doctrines of the pleroma and kenoma from Democritus and Plato.
Hippolytus (Ref. 1.11), more systematically, tried to show that the founders of the Gnostic heresies borrowed most of their ideas from Greek philosophy and religion.
The Valentinian brand of gnosis, Hippolytus (Ref. 6.21-29) argues, is derived from the philosophy of Pythagoras and Plato. [1]
Tertullian (Praesc. 7) claimed that all of the heresies were based on Greek philosophy.
Valentinus is stated specifically to be "of the school of Plato."
Plotinus (Enn. 2.9.6), the reputed founder of Neoplatonism, claimed in a famous tract that his doctrinal opponents, whom he did not identify but who were obviously Gnostics, [2] based their doctrines on a misunderstanding of Plato.
Porphyry's Life of Plotinus 16 provides us with more information on the Gnostic opponents of Plotinus, and refers to them "sectarians from the ancient philosophy," i.e., Platonism.
In our own times scholars have referred to Gnosticism as a kind of Platonism.
Willy Theiler calls the Gnosticism of the Imperial period, both Christian and pagan (Chaldean Oracles, Hermetica), "Proletarier platonismus." [3]
Simone Petrement portrays Gnosticism as "un platonisme romantique"; [4]
A. D. Nock prefers the designation "Platonism run wild." [5]
John M. Dillon refers to the Gnostic and Hermetic writings and the Chaldean Oracles as "the 'underworld' of Platonism." [6]
It can hardly be doubted that the ingredients of the Gnostic religion in its origins and early history included a substantial dose of popular Platonism. [7]
https://www.jstor.org/stable/1509519