7480Re: Nag Hammadi codexes
- Apr 6, 2003Hello Gerry
On 06-Apr-03, you wrote:
> Mike and Ernst are right about the etymological origin of "sin," a
> fact which was NOT disputed here. In fact, the same definition had
> been offered here before (probably on numerous occasions prior to
> the botched archive re-shuffling). Again, I love to see that we have
> another area of agreement, but the fact remains that the notion of
> "missing the mark" is different in the eyes of a purely Pistic
> individual than for a Gnostic.
I hate one word replies, but this calls for one, _absolutely_!
Mike Leavitt ac998@...
- << Previous post in topic Next post in topic >>