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

Re: Topics

Expand Messages
  • Gerry
    ... In a Gnosticism forum, I like to think that we re operating under the general assumption that salvation comes via Gnosis. Are you suggesting now that
    Message 1 of 16 , Jun 5, 2005
    • 0 Attachment
      --- In gnosticism2@yahoogroups.com, "gich morgan" <gich2@b...> wrote:
      >
      >
      > Given that salvation goes to the "spiritual" it seems to me that
      > nothing can be more spiritual than babies and so they, certainly,
      > would be saved. Hence salvation cannot be through one's 'efforts.'
      >
      > Gich
      >



      In a Gnosticism forum, I like to think that we're operating under the
      general assumption that salvation comes via Gnosis. Are you
      suggesting now that babies are Gnostic? Were you suggesting in an
      earlier post that lepers are Gnostic?

      My mother recently contracted a tree-cutting company to get rid of
      some old pines in her yard. When the guy initially came to give her
      an estimate for the job, he "seemed spiritual" to her when he offered
      her a religious book and attempted to proselytize for his church.
      Was HE a Gnostic because he gave the appearance of being a spiritual
      person, even though it took him four weeks to finish the job that he
      *promised* would be done in two days?

      I think you are confusing "spiritual" with "pneumatic." I'm not
      talking about the literal meaning, but the contextual significance.
      Once again, there is a difference between how terms can be used by
      exoteric and esoteric communities . . . and yes, Gich, your
      understanding seems to be more in line with "the mainstream," no
      matter how much you proclaim otherwise.

      Gerry
    • Nick Lawrance
      Gich You suggested discussing whether salvation is by Grace or through one s efforts and you later brought the Gospel of Thomas into the discussion and now
      Message 2 of 16 , Jun 9, 2005
      • 0 Attachment
        Gich
         
        You suggested discussing whether salvation is by 'Grace' or through one's 'efforts' and you later brought the Gospel of Thomas into the discussion and now say we cannot discuss it?!? This reminds me of Wittgenstein's famous observation: 'a nothing would do as well as a something about which nothing can be said'!

         

        ...........................................

        The way you replied to me you were not asking for a discusion, you were asking for 'answers' and I seriously do not believe you can not understand the surface meaning of the sayings; if you can't understand the surface meanings whats the point in going into the deeper meaning?

         

        Nick

        ----- Original Message -----
        Sent: Wednesday, June 08, 2005 11:33 AM
        Subject: Re: [Gnosticism2] Topics

        Hey Nick!

        You offered this as a discussion topic. The conversation so far has gone as follows:

        Nick: I think an interesting idea would be is salvation by 'Grace' or through one's 'efforts.'

        Gich: I'd like you to define what you mean by "grace".

        Nick: Using the Gospel of Thomas sayings: Grace =  (62) Jesus said: I speak my mysteries to those [who are worthy of my] mysteries. Effort = (58) Jesus said, "Blessed is the person who has labored and found life."

        Gich: What does this mean? speak my mysteries? those who are worthy? ... blessed? found life?

        Nick: I am sure you obviously grasp the surface meanings but he whole purpose of Thomas in my opinion is that you investigate the deeper meaning of these sayings for yourself, there meant to be puzzled over not handed to one on a plate.

        Gich - this post: You suggested discussing whether salvation is by 'Grace' or through one's 'efforts' and you later brought the Gospel of Thomas into the discussion and now say we cannot discuss it?!? This reminds me of Wittgenstein's famous observation: 'a nothing would do as well as a something about which nothing can be said'!

        Gich

         

        ----- Original Message -----
        Sent: Sunday, June 05, 2005 4:26 PM
        Subject: Re: [Gnosticism2] Topics

        Hey Nick!

        >>> I speak my mysteries to those [who are worthy of my] mysteries <<<

        What does this mean? speak my mysteries? those who are worthy?

        >>> Blessed is the person who has labored and found life <<<

        What does this mean? blessed? found life?

        Gich

        .......................................................

         

        I am sure you obviously grasp the surface meanings but he whole purpose of Thomas in my opinion is that you investigate the deeper meaning of these sayings for yourself, there meant to be puzzled over not handed to one on a plate.

         

        Nick

        ----- Original Message -----
        Sent: Saturday, June 04, 2005 8:40 AM
        Subject: Re: [Gnosticism2] Topics

        Hey Nick!

        >>> I speak my mysteries to those [who are worthy of my] mysteries <<<

        What does this mean? speak my mysteries? those who are worthy?

        >>> Blessed is the person who has labored and found life <<<

        What does this mean? blessed? found life?

        Gich

         

         

        ----- Original Message -----
        Sent: Friday, June 03, 2005 8:49 PM
        Subject: Re: [Gnosticism2] Topics

        From Gich

         

        >>Hey Nick! I'd like you to define what you mean by "grace".

        ................................................................................................

        Using the Gospel of Thomas sayings:

         

        Grace =  (62) Jesus said: I speak my mysteries to those [who are worthy of my] mysteries.

         

        >> Given that salvation goes to the "spiritual" it seems to me that nothing can be more spiritual than babies and so they, certainly, would be saved. Hence salvation cannot be through one's 'efforts.'

         

        Now that's where the debate comes in for:

        Effort = (58) Jesus said, "Blessed is the person who has labored and found life."

         

        Nick

        ----- Original Message -----
        Sent: Friday, June 03, 2005 7:49 AM
        Subject: Re: [Gnosticism2] Topics

        Hey Nick!

        >>>I think an interesting idea would be is salvation by 'Grace' or through one's 'efforts.'<<<

        I'd like you to define what you mean by "grace".

        Given that salvation goes to the "spiritual" it seems to me that nothing can be more spiritual than babies and so they, certainly, would be saved. Hence salvation cannot be through one's 'efforts.'

        Gich

         

        ----- Original Message -----
        Sent: Thursday, June 02, 2005 11:05 PM
        Subject: Re: [Gnosticism2] Topics

        Hello, all.

        Just thought I'd pop in with a request for discussion topics of
        interest to YOU, in case anyone would like a Weekly Study Session #2
        starting tomorrow, Friday.

        Feel free to post suggestions here or email the moderators.

        Thank you.


        Cari

        .....................................
         
        I think an interesting idea would be is salvation by 'Grace' or through one's 'efforts.'
         
        Nick
        ----- Original Message -----
        Sent: Thursday, June 02, 2005 3:43 PM
        Subject: [Gnosticism2] Topics

        Hello, all.

        Just thought I'd pop in with a request for discussion topics of
        interest to YOU, in case anyone would like a Weekly Study Session #2
        starting tomorrow, Friday.

        Feel free to post suggestions here or email the moderators.

        Thank you.


        Cari



      • Nick Lawrance
        From Gich No Nick I was asking for definitions of the terms YOU introduced. I have defined all the terms I have ever used and I wanted you to do the same.
        Message 3 of 16 , Jun 9, 2005
        • 0 Attachment
          From Gich
          No Nick I was asking for definitions of the terms YOU introduced. I have defined all the terms I have ever used and I wanted you to do the same. Without clear definitions it's not possible to have a meaningful discussion about anything.
          ..........................................
          I am sorry you think that I have been attacking you but I get the feeling that you are just playing games with me. You say you want definitions when you know and I know that you understand exactly what Thomas means at least on the surface level as you have already indicated in your understanding of Gnosticism. If you were a complete beginner I could understand but your not. I am sorry but I just can not buy the idea that you don't understand the terms that I am talking about.
           
          Nick
          ----- Original Message -----
          Sent: Thursday, June 09, 2005 9:42 PM
          Subject: Re: [Gnosticism2] Topics

          No Nick I was asking for definitions of the terms YOU introduced. I have defined all the terms I have ever used and I wanted you to do the same. Without clear definitions it's not possible to have a meaningful discussion about anything.
          Gich
           
          ----- Original Message -----
          Sent: Thursday, June 09, 2005 7:34 PM
          Subject: Re: [Gnosticism2] Topics

          Gich
           
          You suggested discussing whether salvation is by 'Grace' or through one's 'efforts' and you later brought the Gospel of Thomas into the discussion and now say we cannot discuss it?!? This reminds me of Wittgenstein's famous observation: 'a nothing would do as well as a something about which nothing can be said'!

           

          ...........................................

          The way you replied to me you were not asking for a discusion, you were asking for 'answers' and I seriously do not believe you can not understand the surface meaning of the sayings; if you can't understand the surface meanings whats the point in going into the deeper meaning?

           

          Nick

          ----- Original Message -----
          Sent: Wednesday, June 08, 2005 11:33 AM
          Subject: Re: [Gnosticism2] Topics

          Hey Nick!

          You offered this as a discussion topic. The conversation so far has gone as follows:

          Nick: I think an interesting idea would be is salvation by 'Grace' or through one's 'efforts.'

          Gich: I'd like you to define what you mean by "grace".

          Nick: Using the Gospel of Thomas sayings: Grace =  (62) Jesus said: I speak my mysteries to those [who are worthy of my] mysteries. Effort = (58) Jesus said, "Blessed is the person who has labored and found life."

          Gich: What does this mean? speak my mysteries? those who are worthy? ... blessed? found life?

          Nick: I am sure you obviously grasp the surface meanings but he whole purpose of Thomas in my opinion is that you investigate the deeper meaning of these sayings for yourself, there meant to be puzzled over not handed to one on a plate.

          Gich - this post: You suggested discussing whether salvation is by 'Grace' or through one's 'efforts' and you later brought the Gospel of Thomas into the discussion and now say we cannot discuss it?!? This reminds me of Wittgenstein's famous observation: 'a nothing would do as well as a something about which nothing can be said'!

          Gich

           

          ----- Original Message -----
          Sent: Sunday, June 05, 2005 4:26 PM
          Subject: Re: [Gnosticism2] Topics

          Hey Nick!

          >>> I speak my mysteries to those [who are worthy of my] mysteries <<<

          What does this mean? speak my mysteries? those who are worthy?

          >>> Blessed is the person who has labored and found life <<<

          What does this mean? blessed? found life?

          Gich

          .......................................................

           

          I am sure you obviously grasp the surface meanings but he whole purpose of Thomas in my opinion is that you investigate the deeper meaning of these sayings for yourself, there meant to be puzzled over not handed to one on a plate.

           

          Nick

          ----- Original Message -----
          Sent: Saturday, June 04, 2005 8:40 AM
          Subject: Re: [Gnosticism2] Topics

          Hey Nick!

          >>> I speak my mysteries to those [who are worthy of my] mysteries <<<

          What does this mean? speak my mysteries? those who are worthy?

          >>> Blessed is the person who has labored and found life <<<

          What does this mean? blessed? found life?

          Gich

           

           

          ----- Original Message -----
          Sent: Friday, June 03, 2005 8:49 PM
          Subject: Re: [Gnosticism2] Topics

          From Gich

           

          >>Hey Nick! I'd like you to define what you mean by "grace".

          ................................................................................................

          Using the Gospel of Thomas sayings:

           

          Grace =  (62) Jesus said: I speak my mysteries to those [who are worthy of my] mysteries.

           

          >> Given that salvation goes to the "spiritual" it seems to me that nothing can be more spiritual than babies and so they, certainly, would be saved. Hence salvation cannot be through one's 'efforts.'

           

          Now that's where the debate comes in for:

          Effort = (58) Jesus said, "Blessed is the person who has labored and found life."

           

          Nick

          ----- Original Message -----
          Sent: Friday, June 03, 2005 7:49 AM
          Subject: Re: [Gnosticism2] Topics

          Hey Nick!

          >>>I think an interesting idea would be is salvation by 'Grace' or through one's 'efforts.'<<<

          I'd like you to define what you mean by "grace".

          Given that salvation goes to the "spiritual" it seems to me that nothing can be more spiritual than babies and so they, certainly, would be saved. Hence salvation cannot be through one's 'efforts.'

          Gich

           

          ----- Original Message -----
          Sent: Thursday, June 02, 2005 11:05 PM
          Subject: Re: [Gnosticism2] Topics

          Hello, all.

          Just thought I'd pop in with a request for discussion topics of
          interest to YOU, in case anyone would like a Weekly Study Session #2
          starting tomorrow, Friday.

          Feel free to post suggestions here or email the moderators.

          Thank you.


          Cari

          .....................................
           
          I think an interesting idea would be is salvation by 'Grace' or through one's 'efforts.'
           
          Nick
          ----- Original Message -----
          Sent: Thursday, June 02, 2005 3:43 PM
          Subject: [Gnosticism2] Topics

          Hello, all.

          Just thought I'd pop in with a request for discussion topics of
          interest to YOU, in case anyone would like a Weekly Study Session #2
          starting tomorrow, Friday.

          Feel free to post suggestions here or email the moderators.

          Thank you.


          Cari



        • Gerry
          ... You really don t see how that description appears demiurgic? Gerry
          Message 4 of 16 , Jun 10, 2005
          • 0 Attachment
            --- In gnosticism2@yahoogroups.com, "gich morgan" <gich2@b...> wrote:
            >
            >
            > But I view "gnosis" as God's prerogative that he gifts to "the
            > spiritual". I don't know whether babies, lepers or the guy from the
            > tree-cutting company would be considered "spiritual" by God; but he
            > would decide; not me, you or any other person.
            >
            > Gich
            >


            You really don't see how that description appears demiurgic?


            Gerry
          • Gerry
            ... feeling that you are just playing games with me. You say you want definitions when you know and I know that you understand exactly what Thomas means at
            Message 5 of 16 , Jun 10, 2005
            • 0 Attachment
              --- In gnosticism2@yahoogroups.com, "Nick Lawrance"
              <nicholson2000r@c...> wrote:
              >
              > I am sorry you think that I have been attacking you but I get the
              feeling that you are just playing games with me. You say you want
              definitions when you know and I know that you understand exactly what
              Thomas means at least on the surface level as you have already
              indicated in your understanding of Gnosticism. If you were a complete
              beginner I could understand but your not. I am sorry but I just can
              not buy the idea that you don't understand the terms that I am
              talking about.
              >
              > Nick



              Don't take it personally, Nick. I'm still not sure that Gich isn't
              playing games with all of us, but then again, I'm also not sure that
              he doesn't suffer from Asperger's Syndrome. The latter would explain
              a lot, and while there would certainly be no need for him to be
              embarrassed by such a condition, I'm not sure how anyone here could
              be of help to him. At some level, it may be possible to present some
              of the material in such a way as to convey (in fairly concrete terms)
              some of the subtle nuances that are being missed. At the same time
              though, if this subject is nothing more than a fixation for him, then
              we may as well be discussing train schedules or dinosaurs.

              Gerry
            • janahooks
              Gerry, ... explain ... could ... some ... terms) ... time ... then ... In one of your posts, you bulleted a couple of items that you were comparing. Visual
              Message 6 of 16 , Jun 10, 2005
              • 0 Attachment
                Gerry,

                ... but then again, I'm also not sure that
                > he doesn't suffer from Asperger's Syndrome. The latter would
                explain
                > a lot, and while there would certainly be no need for him to be
                > embarrassed by such a condition, I'm not sure how anyone here
                could
                > be of help to him. At some level, it may be possible to present
                some
                > of the material in such a way as to convey (in fairly concrete
                terms)
                > some of the subtle nuances that are being missed. At the same
                time
                > though, if this subject is nothing more than a fixation for him,
                then
                > we may as well be discussing train schedules or dinosaurs.

                In one of your posts, you bulleted a couple of items that you were
                comparing. Visual organization might help, and Gich, I am not being
                patronizing. I am a visual learner swimming in an endless sea of
                Times New Roman and no pictures. :( Gerry, I've had three students
                with Asperger's, and I feel like I ask them more questions about
                their fixation than they ask me. ;) My theory is that Gich is
                writing a movie script, with a role based on pmcv. Heh.

                jana
              • Gerry
                ... being ... Hey Jana. I have Zero experience in this area, so thanks for any insights you can offer. The site I was looking at earlier simply mentioned a
                Message 7 of 16 , Jun 10, 2005
                • 0 Attachment
                  --- In gnosticism2@yahoogroups.com, "janahooks" <janahooks@y...>
                  wrote:
                  > Gerry,
                  >
                  > ... but then again, I'm also not sure that
                  > > he doesn't suffer from Asperger's Syndrome. The latter would
                  > explain
                  > > a lot, and while there would certainly be no need for him to be
                  > > embarrassed by such a condition, I'm not sure how anyone here
                  > could
                  > > be of help to him. At some level, it may be possible to present
                  > some
                  > > of the material in such a way as to convey (in fairly concrete
                  > terms)
                  > > some of the subtle nuances that are being missed. At the same
                  > time
                  > > though, if this subject is nothing more than a fixation for him,
                  > then
                  > > we may as well be discussing train schedules or dinosaurs.
                  >
                  > In one of your posts, you bulleted a couple of items that you were
                  > comparing. Visual organization might help, and Gich, I am not
                  being
                  > patronizing. I am a visual learner swimming in an endless sea of
                  > Times New Roman and no pictures. :( Gerry, I've had three students
                  > with Asperger's, and I feel like I ask them more questions about
                  > their fixation than they ask me. ;) My theory is that Gich is
                  > writing a movie script, with a role based on pmcv. Heh.
                  >
                  > jana



                  Hey Jana.

                  I have Zero experience in this area, so thanks for any insights you
                  can offer. The site I was looking at earlier simply mentioned a
                  series of steps that help to delineate, in a demonstrably concrete
                  fashion, whatever emotional subtleties may be lost on someone who has
                  difficulty reading between the lines. I'll have to find the site
                  again, but right now, I had stayed up last night to adjust to a new
                  sleep schedule so I can accommodate two new jobs. I was just about
                  to turn in when I saw your post.

                  The problem with this material, as Nick pointed out, there is only so
                  much that a person can show another. It's not quite like one of
                  those graphic posters where you can tell a person how to squint just
                  right and where to focus so that he can see the picture in the
                  abstract hodgepodge.

                  At this point though, I would be happy if he would see that . . .

                  "accidental" does NOT equal "purposeful."

                  I'm a conceptual-minded person myself, regardless of how much I may
                  appear to be a stickler for details here and there. No matter how
                  much I try to look at this from either perspective though, I just
                  can't see how someone makes that leap from Error to Divine Plan.

                  Gerry
                Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.