Gnostic Return in Modernity
Search in google:
AcknowledgmentsIntroduction1Ch. 1Redeeming and Reconstructing Baur's Model of Gnostic Return23Ch. 2Baurian Gnostic Genealogical Model and Its Contestation492.1Historicist Challenge: Hans Blumenberg and Epochal Shift502.2Agon between Gnostic Baurian and Non-Gnostic Genealogies65Ch. 3Classical Valentinian Narratives: Variety and Unity993.1Ptolemy's Valentinian Gnostic System1023.2The Gospel of Truth1103.3The Tripartite Tractate118Ch. 4Valentinian Narrative Grammar: Irenaean Gestures and the Phenomenon of Valentinian Enlisting1374.1The Contributions of Irenaeus: Developing the Grammatical Hints1434.2Valentinianism's Relation to Other Narrative Discourses167Ch. 5Genealogical Capability of Valentinian Narrative Grammar1795.1Justifying the Protestant Identification of the Baurian Line1815.2Baurian Line and Rule-Governed Deformation of Classical Valentinian Genres1965.3Valentinian Enlisting of Non-Valentinian Narrative Discourses207Conclusion227Notes237Index295
\ BooknewsConvinced that the failure to date of attempts to justify a Gnostic labeling of modernity or any significant aspect of it is only a fact and not a necessity, O'Regan (theology, U. of Notre Dame) gives it a shot. He offers a Gnostic account of historian of dogma Ferdinand Christian Baur (1792-1860), and along the way argues that no one has since surpassed his methodological refinement or content knowledge, especially of the period between Luther and Hegel. Annotation c. Book News, Inc., Portland, OR (booknews.com)\ \
