... that statement to be more of abstract thought rather than a direct shot! I started with saying it seems hoping to avoid the idea of being direct. As forMessage 1 of 2 , May 29, 2009View Source
--- In email@example.com, "Brian" <humbleservant1god@...> wrote:
> If I offended you I do sincerley apologize,I believe my goal was for that statement to be more of abstract thought rather than a direct shot! I started with saying "it seems" hoping to avoid the idea of being direct. As for "throwing fuel on the fire" that was a poor way for me to begin. I was looking back at the past posts on the subject and couldn't help but notice it got a bit "heated" at moments! A poor joke for me to start with my friend.
> As for the idea of a creator "god" well,welcome to my life long labrynth! I enjoy "the paraphrase of shem" and its three basic "roots" or primevil powers being light and darkness with spirit in between,but I see it more allegorical. The "apocalypse of adam" sits well with me probably because of my christian background and its overtones of proclaiming a type of heavenly redeemer. My true concept of god finally begins to rest in a belief of its dual nature.
> I find peace in the personal understanding that this which guides me shows no end and wishes not to be fully understood,but yet reveared. I humbly refer to this as god! I don't see those of the past as naïve. I believe that when they got tired of searching they settled for what they felt as right,there own interpretation.
Don't worry, Brian. You didn't offend. Unfortunately, as you already realized, the timing of your entry could have been shall we just say better! LOL The time I have available to spend here is extremely limited, and I very much resent seeing the group derailed by another poster who had no regard for the subject matter. It's simply not fair to those who have stuck it out over the years, nor to newcomers who have a genuine interest in learning something about historical Gnosticism. I had to put on my stern moderator's hat for the other situation, and hoped that you wouldn't take my efforts at "directing traffic" too personally.
It's interesting that you mention relating to the Adam literature because of your Christian background. I feel an affinity for it as well (at some deep level), but continually find myself quoting from Valentinian (or even Thomasine) material to emphasize particular positions. With Christian backgrounds, it almost looks like it should work the other way around. If you're following me, do you have any thoughts as to why this is? I'm not sure I could articulate it myself. I'm genuinely curious.