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

9145Re: Valentinian anthropology

Expand Messages
  • eyeambetty
    Jan 31, 2004
    • 0 Attachment
      > > betty wrote:
      > >> > i have a hard time reconciling the rigidity of the Valentinian
      > >> > system, and the necessity for the psychic category. you have
      the
      > >> > hylic at one end, and the pneumatic at the other, two natures
      in
      > >> > opposition. then in the middle is the psychic, who basically
      has
      > >> > either hylic tendencies or pneumatic tendencies? sort of
      dilutes
      > >> the
      > >>> whole idea of chosen/elect. and what are the determining
      factors?
      > >>> for me the three natures are more symbolic of potentials than
      > >>> judgement about ones eternal fate.


      > >
      > >> Cari wrote:
      > >> Betty, do you feel that we all have all these potentials,
      whether
      > > or
      > >> not realized, or rather that some people are limited by nature
      to
      > > the
      > >> hylic or psychic possibilities?
      > >>
      > >> And then, do you view these various natures in any way related
      to
      > > an
      > >> eternal or infinite upshot?
      > >>
      > > Hi Cari,
      > > upon thinking this more thoroughly, perhaps all these natures are
      > > potentials within us, but one nature eventually predominates. for
      if
      > > indeed we all have a spark/shard of the divine, does that not
      imply
      > > potential? then i keep coming back to, how is it that some
      transcend
      > > the lower levels? and why do some stay bound to those natures? for
      > > myself, i can say that i have lingered in the lower levels in my
      > > life. fortunately, i never got comfortable, but not without misery
      > > and suffering. in hindsight, experientially, that was very
      necessary
      > > in shaping the awareness i have now. maybe what is meant
      by "chosen"
      > > is the grace to be in the midst of the lower natures, internally
      and
      > > externally but not to succumb, but to recognize and observe. how
      > > would one know light without the contrast of darkness?


      Mike wrote:
      > Betty, I have to compliment you for a very well thought out reply.
      >

      Hi Mike!
      thank you, you are very kind. have a wonderful day! the Sun is
      shining here, after many days of dreary, rainy weather. i'm going to
      play in my garden.

      betty
    • Show all 78 messages in this topic