Re: Context is Everything
- Hey, Gerry.
> Y'all have certainly raised some interesting points here lately. II wonder if it's a girl thang that I jumped on that partner/equality
> like the idea of an "equality" being expressed in the "three
> Marys" passage, but I'm not sure that I necessarily get that
> from either "partner" or "companion."
bit. Then again, it does make me think of all that Bride/Bridegroom
stuff. Mind if I try to make sense of that later?
> By offering two English words, both of which could reasonablyrepresent
> either foreign term, Layton has provided us with a moderntranslation in
> which we can still see that the second portion of that passage wasan
> attempt to clarify the first part, and not simply to repeat it.Between you and Lady C., I am convinced that I need to have the
Layton translation. I think it hits that part of my brain that I
use. ;) I couldn't help but be reminded of Monty Python when you
alluded to repititious scripture:
"And the LORD spake, saying, first shalt thou take out the Holy Pin.
Then, shalt thou count to three. No more, no less. Three shall be
the number thou shalt count, and the number of the counting shall be
three. Four shalt thou not count, nor either count thou two,
excepting that thou then proceed to three. Five is right out. Once
the number three, being the third number, be reached, is counted,
then lobbest thou thy Holy Hand Grenade of Antioch towards thy foe,
who, being naughty in My sight, shall snuff it."
>If the original scribes felt it necessary to go to that trouble,Well, I guess the "alternative history crowd" still sensed the same
>then perhaps it's worth our consideration as well. Perhaps we can
>find additional meaning for this Coptic word, and see exactly how
>that significance is borne out within the context of the Gospel of
>Philip. It may be a bit of a wedding crasher for the alternative
>history crowd, but critically thinking Gnostic sympathizers should
>be able to relate to it.
thing--something is a bit iffy. What's next, Gerry? I feel you
have something up your sleeve...
--- In firstname.lastname@example.org, "janahooks" <janahooks@...> wrote:
> [. . .]
> Gerry and Lady C.,thanks for all of the info and links.
Thank you, Jana, for noticing them.
> Gerry, after looking at the National Geographic link, I was
> reminded of some suggestions I gave you on faded writing. I'm feeling
> really good about watery sepia ink and sandpaper...and sand
> horizontally and vertically...with the gray sandpaper...
And ya know, that was the one suggestion you wrote me that I was the most hesitant to attempt. There's something about the dual-layered papyrus and its almost glossy sheen that made me wonder if such coarse measures would destroy the whole thing, but the more I've thought about it (along with your renewed convictions), the more I believe it would indeed yield a desirable finish. I imagine the weathered results would be akin to repeatedly wadding up a sheet of paper to the point that it becomes more like a thin piece of cloth rather than a crisp piece of paper. Only this way, you avoid the wrinkles!