Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

6478Re: [Gnosticism] Hi Flag

Expand Messages
  • wilbro99
    Aug 14, 2002
      --- In gnosticism2@y..., pessy@c... wrote:
      > wilbro99 writes:
      Klaus, if I may enquire further, and I enquire out of my own confusion
      here, not to put you into a bind of any sort. It is my experience with
      my own scheme of things that I can corner myself with questions I
      really don't have answers to, one of them being why, whenever I say
      that I have seen through it, that I completely understand it, it
      becomes a thing of thought and comes apart. Does that separate
      understanding from understanding, making one of the only what I think
      the other is? That's a more or less rhetorical question.

      With your response to cari in #6475 in mind, "Depth psychology is a
      tool for understanding religions like gnosticism, buddhism, taoism,
      ...but those religions are not forms of depth psychology," in response
      to #1, "The Gnostics posited an original spiritual unity that came to
      be split into a plurality," you responded yes. Where and how do you
      see that split occurring and does that where and how allow for an
      experience of the split? In other words, how is it possible, if
      possible, to look through the particular healing of the split to the
      universal creation of the split? The question is awkward, but I think
      the drift is there.


      > > Hi Klaus, thanks for the reply. If I may enquire, which of the 12
      do
      > > you personally subscribe to?
      >
      > 1. yes
      > 2. yes (seven competing archons)
      > 3. no (I'm too abstract to need an anthropomorphization of sophia's
      role)
      > 4. yes , extremely
      > 5. yes , extremely
      > 6. no, it's too simplicistic
      > 7. with restriction, i don't suppose all humans to bear the spark
      > 8. somehow (faith is necessary in a non-orthodox sense,
      > good works are a consequence, not a prerequisite)
      > 9. somehow , differs individually
      > 10. somehow, differs individually
      > 11. somehow, differs individually
      > 12. yes , extremely
      >
      > Klaus Schilling
    • Show all 22 messages in this topic