9755Re: [Gnosticism2] Re: Aeons?/ Gerry
- Jul 17, 2004Out of curiousity, is that what you feel I am doing Gerry?Even knowing that nothing that I will learn here will change me in any way?If I was looking for some spiritual guidance, or a spiritual cure for some ailment, then perhaps what you said would apply to me.But, I'm still curious if you feel that I'm whitewashing or perhaps taking it all too lightly? Perhaps if you knew me better you would understand how I came to be here asking you'all questions at all? If you like, I can go into some of that?Anyways, I know why people take their spirituality serious, but I sure don't want to be misunderstood here.Sincerely,
Lynette"To find the solution is to discover there is no problem."--- In firstname.lastname@example.org, David Gallardo <david@g...> wrote:
> It's always dangerous to make comparisons between religions, since
> polarity often changes, but I believe the Gnostic demiurge
> corresponds to the Judeo/Christian biblical God. If I'm not
> mistaken, that's the main reason Gnosticism is considered heretical
> by Christian theologians...
Thanks for reiterating that admonition, David. That's what I had in
mind when I said several days ago how ill-advised it is to simply
substitute terminology between Gnostic and orthodox systems.
Whitewashing demiurgic beliefs does nothing to repair any rotten wood
underneath, and putting our faith in one god rather than another does
nothing to facilitate the personally transformative process of
gnosis. What strikes me as especially odd is how easy it often is to
distance oneself from a literal interpretation of orthodox beliefs by
jumping headlong into an exceptionally literal view of Gnostic
concepts. Between the two, it's almost as if the approaches are
reversed from what one might expect. I can even see evidence of
those trends in my own perspective when I was first introduced to
Gnosticism. Very strange.
Anyway, I almost think that Stephan Hoeller barely scratched the
surface when he said in his preface to _Gnosticism_, "The subject is
not one that lends itself to an all too elementary treatment; rather,
it requires a certain subtlety of thinking and a proclivity for an
Indeed. It's not at all something to be entered into lightlyby
superficially putting a novel spin on established concepts. That
just gives us new wine in an aged wineskin.
- Next post in topic >>