- Jun 5, 2005--- In firstname.lastname@example.org, "gich morgan" <gich2@b...> wrote:
>In a Gnosticism forum, I like to think that we're operating under the
> Given that salvation goes to the "spiritual" it seems to me that
> nothing can be more spiritual than babies and so they, certainly,
> would be saved. Hence salvation cannot be through one's 'efforts.'
general assumption that salvation comes via Gnosis. Are you
suggesting now that babies are Gnostic? Were you suggesting in an
earlier post that lepers are Gnostic?
My mother recently contracted a tree-cutting company to get rid of
some old pines in her yard. When the guy initially came to give her
an estimate for the job, he "seemed spiritual" to her when he offered
her a religious book and attempted to proselytize for his church.
Was HE a Gnostic because he gave the appearance of being a spiritual
person, even though it took him four weeks to finish the job that he
*promised* would be done in two days?
I think you are confusing "spiritual" with "pneumatic." I'm not
talking about the literal meaning, but the contextual significance.
Once again, there is a difference between how terms can be used by
exoteric and esoteric communities . . . and yes, Gich, your
understanding seems to be more in line with "the mainstream," no
matter how much you proclaim otherwise.
- << Previous post in topic Next post in topic >>