7453Re: Nag Hammadi codexes
- Apr 4 6:11 AM--- In firstname.lastname@example.org, lady_caritas <no_reply@y...>
>A VERY good guess, I might add, but it was a strategy that
> Quite so, Mike! :-)
> Considering to whom Gerry was writing, I think it's possible he had
> Roman Catholicism in mind, a religion well known to Incognita, and
> perhaps he had no intention of offering this as a technical
> definition, but one to which Incognita could relate. He might have
> been oversimplifying to show conceptual differences between Gnostic
> and mainstream usage of terms. Just a guess.
nonetheless backfired. Given that the thread had already dragged on
to inordinate length, and probably shouldn't have needed
clarification at a Gnostic site in the first place, I really
shouldn't be surprised that my comments should be even further
Perhaps next time I'll use even more sarcasm than I did to better
demonstrate that such a contrast is NOT a technical definition . . .
but I figured I had worn out my "bloody savior" motif already. It
would seem that whether my posts are too dry, or super saturated,
there's no pleasing everyone.
- << Previous post in topic Next post in topic >>