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

Re: Rex Mundi film,

Expand Messages
  • pmcvflag
    Hey Mike ... Although I agree with Eisenman for being critical of the discoveries, I was taken aback by this statement from him... And what of this Mary s
    Message 1 of 20 , Mar 9, 2007
    • 0 Attachment
      Hey Mike

      >>Well for once I agree completely with Robert Eisenman.<<<

      Although I agree with Eisenman for being critical of the discoveries,
      I was taken aback by this statement from him...

      "And what of this "Mary"'s other descendant all Gnostic Gospel
      enthusiasts and those wishing for the eternal feminine (to say nothing
      of "the bloodline of the Holy Grail" ) fantasize over, "Sarah"?"

      Good lord! Now Nag Hammadi studies have no validity and anyone with an
      insterest in Gnosticism must be followers of Dan Brown's uncritical
      historical theories. Is there an emoticon for the rolling of ones eyes?

      PMCV
    • Michael Leavitt
      ... I didn t take that statement personally, but you have a point. 0)0) (rolls eyes) (I just made that up). :-)
      Message 2 of 20 , Mar 9, 2007
      • 0 Attachment
        pmcvflag wrote:
        > Hey Mike
        >
        >
        >>> Well for once I agree completely with Robert Eisenman.<<<
        >>>
        >
        > Although I agree with Eisenman for being critical of the discoveries,
        > I was taken aback by this statement from him...
        >
        > "And what of this "Mary"'s other descendant all Gnostic Gospel
        > enthusiasts and those wishing for the eternal feminine (to say nothing
        > of "the bloodline of the Holy Grail" ) fantasize over, "Sarah"?"
        >
        > Good lord! Now Nag Hammadi studies have no validity and anyone with an
        > insterest in Gnosticism must be followers of Dan Brown's uncritical
        > historical theories. Is there an emoticon for the rolling of ones eyes?
        >
        > PMCV
        >
        I didn't take that statement personally, but you have a point. 0)0)
        (rolls eyes) (I just made that up). :-)
      • tau_mar_thoma
        ... nothing ... with an ... eyes? ... Greetings, Mike and PMCV: AMEN! It s about time that people accept that, in fact, The Da Vinci Code is a book of
        Message 3 of 20 , Mar 11, 2007
        • 0 Attachment
          --- In gnosticism2@yahoogroups.com, Michael Leavitt <ac998@...> wrote:
          >
          >
          >
          > pmcvflag wrote:
          > > Hey Mike
          > >
          > >
          > >>> Well for once I agree completely with Robert Eisenman.<<<
          > >>>
          > >
          > > Although I agree with Eisenman for being critical of the discoveries,
          > > I was taken aback by this statement from him...
          > >
          > > "And what of this "Mary"'s other descendant all Gnostic Gospel
          > > enthusiasts and those wishing for the eternal feminine (to say
          nothing
          > > of "the bloodline of the Holy Grail" ) fantasize over, "Sarah"?"
          > >
          > > Good lord! Now Nag Hammadi studies have no validity and anyone
          with an
          > > insterest in Gnosticism must be followers of Dan Brown's uncritical
          > > historical theories. Is there an emoticon for the rolling of ones
          eyes?
          > >
          > > PMCV
          > >
          > I didn't take that statement personally, but you have a point. 0)0)
          > (rolls eyes) (I just made that up). :-)
          >
          Greetings, Mike and PMCV:

          AMEN! It's about time that people accept that, in fact, "The Da Vinci
          Code" is a book of fictions, not inspired by the True God, but
          comprised of a clever concoction of facts but mostly theories put
          together to make money, promote movies, and to be the new hot topic of
          bloggers galore. Furthermore, a lot of his "facts and theories" are
          imperfectly understood and, consequently, render a very imperfect
          "gnostic" revelation. Besides, in the final analysis, you will never
          find Truth in any form of written literature, not even the NHL et al.
          but solely through experiential Gnosis. The written words have their
          place, to be sure, but they are at best vague adumbrations of how and
          what Truth might appear as.

          It is one thing to say "The Word" but this mystical concept must never
          be confused - not ever - with the written words of humans, be they
          spiritual or secular or nearly brain-dead. Unless, at heart, we too
          are become "bible-beating fundamentalists"? What divine Being ever
          wrote anything down, other than the demiurge when it "inscribed" the
          words of the Torah on two blocks of stone?

          Peace,

          +Tau Mar Thoma

          http://www.myspace.com/holy_ewer_gnostic_studies
          http://blog.myspace.com/holy_ewer_gnostic_studies
        • lady_caritas
          ... Vinci ... of ... never ... al. ... their ... and ... never ... Hello, + Tau Mar Thoma. We ve had many discussions about how the ancient Gnostics might
          Message 4 of 20 , Mar 12, 2007
          • 0 Attachment
            --- In gnosticism2@yahoogroups.com, "tau_mar_thoma"
            <tau_mar_thoma@...> wrote:
            > >
            > Greetings, Mike and PMCV:
            >
            > AMEN! It's about time that people accept that, in fact, "The Da
            Vinci
            > Code" is a book of fictions, not inspired by the True God, but
            > comprised of a clever concoction of facts but mostly theories put
            > together to make money, promote movies, and to be the new hot topic
            of
            > bloggers galore. Furthermore, a lot of his "facts and theories" are
            > imperfectly understood and, consequently, render a very imperfect
            > "gnostic" revelation. Besides, in the final analysis, you will
            never
            > find Truth in any form of written literature, not even the NHL et
            al.
            > but solely through experiential Gnosis. The written words have
            their
            > place, to be sure, but they are at best vague adumbrations of how
            and
            > what Truth might appear as.
            >
            > It is one thing to say "The Word" but this mystical concept must
            never
            > be confused - not ever - with the written words of humans, be they
            > spiritual or secular or nearly brain-dead. Unless, at heart, we too
            > are become "bible-beating fundamentalists"? What divine Being ever
            > wrote anything down, other than the demiurge when it "inscribed" the
            > words of the Torah on two blocks of stone?
            >


            Hello, + Tau Mar Thoma. We've had many discussions about how the
            ancient Gnostics might have conceived "Gnosis." Of course, without
            their writings we could not learn what they thought or experienced,
            nor did they convey this information without a theoretical setting of
            some sort. We don't have absolute, firsthand knowledge of all their
            initiatory study and practices; however, their writings exhibit more
            than a passing familiarity with Platonist philosophy, for instance.

            You mention that written works have their place. If I may ask, what
            place is that? If Truth is found "only through experiential Gnosis,"
            what does the adjective "experiential" encompass? From your reading
            of the NHL you mention and other literature, what would the ancients
            take this to mean?

            Do you agree or disagree with the "Attributes of Gnosis" outlined in
            our group files section regarding the historical Gnostics?
            http://groups.yahoo.com/group/gnosticism2/files/

            Cari
          • Michael Leavitt
            ... Right on both points. _The Da Vinci Code_ is no better than _Holy Blood, Holy Grail._
            Message 5 of 20 , Mar 12, 2007
            • 0 Attachment
              > Greetings, Mike and PMCV:
              >
              > AMEN! It's about time that people accept that, in fact, "The Da Vinci
              > Code" is a book of fictions, not inspired by the True God, but
              > comprised of a clever concoction of facts but mostly theories put
              > together to make money, promote movies, and to be the new hot topic of
              > bloggers galore. Furthermore, a lot of his "facts and theories" are
              > imperfectly understood and, consequently, render a very imperfect
              > "gnostic" revelation. Besides, in the final analysis, you will never
              > find Truth in any form of written literature, not even the NHL et al.
              > but solely through experiential Gnosis. The written words have their
              > place, to be sure, but they are at best vague adumbrations of how and
              > what Truth might appear as.
              >
              Right on both points. _The Da Vinci Code_ is no better than _Holy
              Blood, Holy Grail._
            • Michael Leavitt
              ... To me Cari, the books are the lead into the experiential thing, no more no less, sort of like a road map. Now I ll shut up and let the two of you talk.
              Message 6 of 20 , Mar 12, 2007
              • 0 Attachment
                lady_caritas wrote:
                > You mention that written works have their place. If I may ask, what
                > place is that? If Truth is found "only through experiential Gnosis,"
                > what does the adjective "experiential" encompass? From your reading
                > of the NHL you mention and other literature, what would the ancients
                > take this to mean?
                >
                >
                >
                To me Cari, the books are the lead into the experiential thing, no more
                no less, sort of like a road map. Now I'll shut up and let the two of
                you talk.
              • pmcvflag
                Hey Tau Mar Thoma ... Vinci Code is a book of fictions, not inspired by the True God, but comprised of a clever concoction of facts
                Message 7 of 20 , Mar 12, 2007
                • 0 Attachment
                  Hey Tau Mar Thoma

                  >>>AMEN! It's about time that people accept that, in fact, "The Da
                  Vinci Code" is a book of fictions, not inspired by the True God, but
                  comprised of a clever concoction of facts<<<

                  I go even further than that, in that I question whether these
                  supposed "facts" really are facts at all.

                  Anyway, I will be interested to hear your take on Lady Cari's
                  questions.

                  PMCV
                • lady_caritas
                  ... what ... Gnosis, ... reading ... ancients ... more ... of ... Hi, Mike. Certainly there is no need to shut up. Silence can be deafening at times. ;-)
                  Message 8 of 20 , Mar 26, 2007
                  • 0 Attachment
                    --- In gnosticism2@yahoogroups.com, Michael Leavitt <ac998@...> wrote:
                    >
                    >
                    >
                    > lady_caritas wrote:
                    > > You mention that written works have their place. If I may ask,
                    what
                    > > place is that? If Truth is found "only through experiential
                    Gnosis,"
                    > > what does the adjective "experiential" encompass? From your
                    reading
                    > > of the NHL you mention and other literature, what would the
                    ancients
                    > > take this to mean?
                    > >
                    > >
                    > >
                    > To me Cari, the books are the lead into the experiential thing, no
                    more
                    > no less, sort of like a road map. Now I'll shut up and let the two
                    of
                    > you talk.
                    >


                    Hi, Mike. Certainly there is no need to "shut up." Silence can be
                    deafening at times. ;-)

                    So, if "books are the lead into the experiential thing," as you say,
                    could one also place other things like ritual as part of the
                    direction, part of the "road map"? Actually, does one even need
                    books or rituals in order to generate whatever this "experiential
                    thing" is you mention? Or are you referring to a
                    unique "experiential thing"? I guess what I'm thinking is that
                    specific guides might influence direction or quality or framework of
                    a certain "experiential thing." In fact, all these could be
                    considered part of the whole experiential process, even as various
                    facets could be readdressed during an ongoing progression?

                    And even though many different written words and everyday life
                    rituals could influence a mystical episode or a progression of
                    spiritual occurrences and inner exploration in someone's life, it
                    seems that there are specific paths that rely on particular
                    precedents, taken together as an interrelated whole, in order to
                    accomplish desired results within a distinctive context. Gaining
                    inner knowledge or spiritual clarity or whatever is sought after is
                    not always a free-for-all, taking various elements out of context,
                    when it comes to methodology.

                    A question might remain whether all the guides make any difference in
                    the uniqueness or authenticity of a mystical experience. And that is
                    outside the scope of our group. What seems apparent to me, however,
                    is that how one interprets the experience, how much emphasis one
                    places on a mystical episode in relation to other aspects of the
                    process, and how one proceeds in this existent life are factors that
                    can be observed, apart from judging as to efficacy. And the Gnostic
                    writings do give us some information on that score.

                    Anyway, I'll stop here for now to allow for others' coments.

                    Cari
                  • Michael Leavitt
                    ... I agree, and ritual has its part. Being ordained a Deacon and then a Priest were numinous experiences, but geared to service, and initiation in support
                    Message 9 of 20 , Mar 26, 2007
                    • 0 Attachment
                      lady_caritas wrote:
                      > --- In gnosticism2@yahoogroups.com, Michael Leavitt <ac998@...> wrote:
                      >
                      >>
                      >> lady_caritas wrote:
                      >>
                      >>> You mention that written works have their place. If I may ask,
                      >>>
                      > what
                      >
                      >>> place is that? If Truth is found "only through experiential
                      >>>
                      > Gnosis,"
                      >
                      >>> what does the adjective "experiential" encompass? From your
                      >>>
                      > reading
                      >
                      >>> of the NHL you mention and other literature, what would the
                      >>>
                      > ancients
                      >
                      >>> take this to mean?
                      >>>
                      >>>
                      >>>
                      >>>
                      >> To me Cari, the books are the lead into the experiential thing, no
                      >>
                      > more
                      >
                      >> no less, sort of like a road map. Now I'll shut up and let the two
                      >>
                      > of
                      >
                      >> you talk.
                      >>
                      >>
                      >
                      >
                      > Hi, Mike. Certainly there is no need to "shut up." Silence can be
                      > deafening at times. ;-)
                      >
                      > So, if "books are the lead into the experiential thing," as you say,
                      > could one also place other things like ritual as part of the
                      > direction, part of the "road map"? Actually, does one even need
                      > books or rituals in order to generate whatever this "experiential
                      > thing" is you mention? Or are you referring to a
                      > unique "experiential thing"? I guess what I'm thinking is that
                      > specific guides might influence direction or quality or framework of
                      > a certain "experiential thing." In fact, all these could be
                      > considered part of the whole experiential process, even as various
                      > facets could be readdressed during an ongoing progression?
                      >
                      > And even though many different written words and everyday life
                      > rituals could influence a mystical episode or a progression of
                      > spiritual occurrences and inner exploration in someone's life, it
                      > seems that there are specific paths that rely on particular
                      > precedents, taken together as an interrelated whole, in order to
                      > accomplish desired results within a distinctive context. Gaining
                      > inner knowledge or spiritual clarity or whatever is sought after is
                      > not always a free-for-all, taking various elements out of context,
                      > when it comes to methodology.
                      >
                      > A question might remain whether all the guides make any difference in
                      > the uniqueness or authenticity of a mystical experience. And that is
                      > outside the scope of our group. What seems apparent to me, however,
                      > is that how one interprets the experience, how much emphasis one
                      > places on a mystical episode in relation to other aspects of the
                      > process, and how one proceeds in this existent life are factors that
                      > can be observed, apart from judging as to efficacy. And the Gnostic
                      > writings do give us some information on that score.
                      >
                      > Anyway, I'll stop here for now to allow for others' coments.
                      >
                      > Cari
                      >
                      >
                      I agree, and ritual has its part. Being ordained a Deacon and then a
                      Priest were numinous experiences, but geared to service, and initiation
                      in support thereof. The mass can do this to you as can Golden Dawn
                      rituals, these are all I'm familiar with. All have had their effect.
                      Reading Zostranos, I was there with him for a while, and that was not
                      the only instance. When I read Gareth Knight on the paths, I worked
                      them. My psyche got thrown all over the place. So reading has its place.
                    Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.