- Sep 11, 2002--- In gnosticism2@y..., "Will Brown" <wilbro99@y...> wrote:
> . . . .being
> If there is another self-knowing in which the sense of self itself
> that can enter that fullness, so be it. I do not know it. My
> experience is that the self must be left outside to enter; there
> no place for it. The fullness can not entertain the particular. Howto
> then do we account for the two separate domains of fullness we seem
> be speaking to?Will, in that treatment of The Book of Job that I mentioned
previously, the author made a deliberate distinction
between "submission" and "surrender" to a higher power.
Unfortunately, I left the book with a friend while I was out of
town. If anyone else cares to quote it, I think it was around
section 5 of the Introduction.
Anyway, Job's growth was the result of not merely bowing down to an
unseen authority, but by his release of his own "self," even if
momentarily, so that there might be a union of sorts with the
I think the concept of the tripartite nature of Man is crucial here
for rationalizing why such a union can only be "temporary" as long as
we exist within the temporal world.
Sorry if I've missed your point altogether! I've been driving all
day and I think it's past time to get something to eat. ;-)
- << Previous post in topic Next post in topic >>