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

Re: In Need New Close Friends, 19 Female Looking

Expand Messages
  • Mike Leavitt
    Hello Jen ... Looks like Corax s filters are down. :-) Boy is she in the wrong list (I think :-)). Regards -- Mike Leavitt ac998@lafn.org
    Message 1 of 10 , Dec 20, 2002
    • 0 Attachment
      Hello Jen

      On 20-Dec-02, you wrote:

      > In Need New Close Friends, 19 Female Looking
      >
      > Hay I am Jen I am 19 and Like meeting new people from deffernt walks
      > of Life.
      > I like meet people who like been sweet to me and care for me but
      > most of all Love try all types of sex, well I try anything once
      > Hoping to meet some nice open mined people from all ages and both
      > male and females.
      >
      > If you want to see my pics and Get my contact details please go to
      > my home page http://www.dcompany.net/jenshomepage

      Looks like Corax's filters are down. :-) Boy is she in the wrong list
      (I think :-)).

      Regards
      --
      Mike Leavitt ac998@...
    • lady_caritas
      ... walks ... list ... LOL What timing, Mike. I just deleted Ms. Jen s post as you responded. BTW, deleting posts is generally against our policy, so I hope
      Message 2 of 10 , Dec 20, 2002
      • 0 Attachment
        --- In gnosticism2@yahoogroups.com, Mike Leavitt <ac998@l...> wrote:
        > Hello Jen
        >
        > On 20-Dec-02, you wrote:
        >
        > > In Need New Close Friends, 19 Female Looking
        > >
        > > Hay I am Jen I am 19 and Like meeting new people from deffernt
        walks
        > > of Life.
        > > I like meet people who like been sweet to me and care for me but
        > > most of all Love try all types of sex, well I try anything once
        > > Hoping to meet some nice open mined people from all ages and both
        > > male and females.
        > >
        > > If you want to see my pics and Get my contact details please go to
        > > my home page http://www.dcompany.net/jenshomepage
        >
        > Looks like Corax's filters are down. :-) Boy is she in the wrong
        list
        > (I think :-)).
        >
        > Regards
        > --
        > Mike Leavitt ac998@l...


        LOL What timing, Mike. I just deleted Ms. Jen's post as you
        responded. BTW, deleting posts is generally against our policy, so I
        hope the other moderators don't mind that I took exception to this
        one, which I personally found offensive. Then again, some of those
        ancient heresiologists might have figured a licentious female would
        fit right in a Gnostic setting. Eeeek. ;-)

        Cari
      • Terje Dahl Bergersen
        ... It´s a reading , interpretation - in terms of the Carpocratians, Ireneaus mentions, probably as among the first, secret handshakes - by which the
        Message 3 of 10 , Dec 21, 2002
        • 0 Attachment
          Re: [Gnosticism2] Re: In Need New Close Friends, 19 Fe

          > Looks like Corax's filters are down. :-)  Boy is she in the wrong
          list
          > (I think :-)).
          >
          > Regards
          > --
          > Mike Leavitt  ac998@l...


          LOL  What timing, Mike.  I just deleted Ms. Jen's post as you
          responded.  BTW, deleting posts is generally against our policy, so I
          hope the other moderators don't mind that I took exception to this
          one, which I personally found offensive.  Then again, some of those
          ancient heresiologists might have figured a licentious female would
          fit right in a Gnostic setting.  Eeeek.  ;-)

          It´s  a "reading", interpretation - in terms of the Carpocratians,
          Ireneaus mentions, probably as among the first, secret handshakes -
          by which the initiates of the school would recognize eachother without
          letting others know, nor uttering a word which would betray their
          affiliation; Ireneaus is brief about what is involved, but states
          that it is "a tickling of the palm with the finger".
          What is amazing, however, is that this is associated with licentious
          behaviour, since the Early underground (pre-Ireneaus) church would
          inwardly identify eachother by drawing the contures of a fish in
          the palm of eachother´s hand. Like Ireneaus did not know that the
          Gospels describes Jesus as not having been crucified at the
          age of 50, Ireneaus does not honestly know how the earliest communities,
          even in his vicinity, the Gaul area, identified eachother towards
          eachother.

          In view of recent spamming, you should know that some of the attacks
          isn´t incidental and entirely innocent - there exists strong policies
          against posting "adult" content on "family" forums, moreover, the
          important thing for those who enforce this policy is that if it is
          discovered, the editors and the forum itself, not the poster, is
          responsible. What am I trying to say - one thing is the noise of
          offtopic postings growing in greater volume than actual on-topic
          discussion posts, another thing is the violation of service regulations
          done purposedly to make the providers close the service.
          "Jen" does not exist, she is a commercial product, a pseudo-identity
          which is used for the precise reason that our "true", or manifest
          personalities are shrouded in mystery through our communication on
          the internet. I suppose those who invented Jen and put her to work
          on this forum wants everyone to go look at "her" homepage, and thus
          solicit interest in their "product". There´s something marvelously
          Archontic about these things. The peddling of dreams and desires
          which is associated, not with self nor with soul, but with a construct -
          is among the oldest tricks in the book.
          I´d like to mention that I received the post, since I read the posts
          on this forum by email.

          I remember being a bit paranoid about the site-takeover/hijack which
          occured this summer of the Ecclesia Gnostica Norvegia website
          bruchion.com - it turned out that suddenly the content of our website
          were replaced by Brasilian pornography.. at that time I thought mine
          about it, turned out the service provider were neglectful and had
          sold the domain name twice.. however, who would associate the Alexandrian
          Bruchion with wanton south-american lesbians who just would love to
          show it all to you?


           I were reminded that some Anti-Masons with a certain
          intelligence concerning how such things could be perceived, and some
          tech-savvy accomplices - systematically hacked, removed and replaced
          Masonic and masons websites, replacing them with commercial porn sites,
          having done so, they reported the supposed owners of those sites
          to the authorities and "leaked" the news that Masons made money on
          pornography on the Internet... It had the effect they wanted, for about
          two weeks when this was found out.

          A further note on license, I am not sure about laws, but I know
          America has a sex industry which isn´t entirely satisfied by
          operating in the shadows and in discreet facilities - in view
          of the founding fathers and their puritan legacy, one might ask if the
          license which is in fact in function, is the sacred symbol of the Dollar.
          Intimacy turned into a product remains a product and not true intimacy,
          today, relationships are grafted by way of a promise of profit, which
          sinks ships along the way, because such profit is never worth the
          sacrifice. Not only the fundamentalists are turning both insensitive and
          hypocritical, all hues and variations of human beings, in our mass-culture,
          has caught it as well.

          Just a little bit of a rant

          (Happy Saint Thomas the Apostle´s day, by the way)

          Pax Pleromae

          Terje Dahl Bergersen
          terje@...
          http://terje.bergersen.net
        • lady_caritas
          ... the ... Dollar. ... intimacy, ... which ... insensitive and ... culture, ... Rant all you want, Terje. My rant took the form of obliterating the post.
          Message 4 of 10 , Dec 21, 2002
          • 0 Attachment
            --- In gnosticism2@yahoogroups.com, Terje Dahl Bergersen <terje@b...>
            wrote:

            > A further note on license, I am not sure about laws, but I know
            > America has a sex industry which isn´t entirely satisfied by
            > operating in the shadows and in discreet facilities - in view
            > of the founding fathers and their puritan legacy, one might ask if
            the
            > license which is in fact in function, is the sacred symbol of the
            Dollar.
            > Intimacy turned into a product remains a product and not true
            intimacy,
            > today, relationships are grafted by way of a promise of profit,
            which
            > sinks ships along the way, because such profit is never worth the
            > sacrifice. Not only the fundamentalists are turning both
            insensitive and
            > hypocritical, all hues and variations of human beings, in our mass-
            culture,
            > has caught it as well.
            >
            > Just a little bit of a rant
            >
            > (Happy Saint Thomas the Apostle´s day, by the way)


            Rant all you want, Terje. My rant took the form of obliterating the
            post. LOL It had occurred to me that this type of spam, unusual for
            our forum, was not entirely incidental.

            And, thanks for the greeting, Terje.

            As you say, the sex industry is taking advantage of a puritanical
            mindset that focuses on the material. There indeed appears to be an
            archontic profit motivation from a product designed to titillate
            those who perceive the body to be "forbidden" and "shameful." And I
            agree that true human intimacy is denigrated in the process.

            Interesting that the Gospel of Thomas has some symbolic words to this
            effect, regarding the importance of our attitudes about the physical
            in order to perceive again as "children":

            "His disciples said, `When will you be shown forth to us and when
            shall we behold you?' Jesus said, `When you strip naked without
            being ashamed, and take your garments and put them under your feet
            like little children and tread upon them, then [you] will see the
            child of the living. And you will not be afraid.'" (Logion 37)

            He also says,

            " …Wretched is the body that depends upon a body. And wretched is
            the soul that depends upon these two." (Logion 87)

            The Meditations over at the Ecclesia Gnostica for today
            (http://gnosis.org/ecclesia/lect163.htm )
            includes a quote from Paul (Colossians):

            "Set your affection on things above, not on things on the earth; for
            ye are dead to earth, and your life is hid with Christ in God."


            Cari
          • Mike Leavitt
            Hello Terje ... God bless you Terje, you are the only one who could turn a porno spam into a two screen rant, plus HTML, which you should have cut. Anyway I
            Message 5 of 10 , Dec 21, 2002
            • 0 Attachment
              Hello Terje

              On 21-Dec-02, you wrote:

              >>
              >>> Looks like Corax's filters are down. :-) Boy is she in the
              >> wrong list
              >>> (I think :-)).
              >>>
              >>> Regards
              >>> --
              >>> Mike Leavitt ac998@l...
              >>
              >>
              >> LOL What timing, Mike. I just deleted Ms. Jen's post as you
              >> responded. BTW, deleting posts is generally against our policy, so
              >> I hope the other moderators don't mind that I took exception to
              >> this one, which I personally found offensive. Then again, some of
              >> those ancient heresiologists might have figured a licentious female
              >> would fit right in a Gnostic setting. Eeeek. ;-)
              >
              > It´s a "reading", interpretation - in terms of the Carpocratians,
              > Ireneaus mentions, probably as among the first, secret handshakes -
              > by which the initiates of the school would recognize eachother
              > without letting others know, nor uttering a word which would betray
              > their affiliation; Ireneaus is brief about what is involved, but
              > states that it is "a tickling of the palm with the finger". What is
              > amazing, however, is that this is associated with licentious
              > behaviour, since the Early underground (pre-Ireneaus) church would
              > inwardly identify eachother by drawing the contures of a fish in the
              > palm of eachother´s hand. Like Ireneaus did not know that the
              > Gospels describes Jesus as not having been crucified at the age of
              > 50, Ireneaus does not honestly know how the earliest communities,
              > even in his vicinity, the Gaul area, identified eachother towards
              > eachother.
              >
              > In view of recent spamming, you should know that some of the attacks
              > isn´t incidental and entirely innocent - there exists strong
              > policies against posting "adult" content on "family" forums,
              > moreover, the important thing for those who enforce this policy is
              > that if it is discovered, the editors and the forum itself, not the
              > poster, is responsible. What am I trying to say - one thing is the
              > noise of offtopic postings growing in greater volume than actual
              > on-topic discussion posts, another thing is the violation of service
              > regulations done purposedly to make the providers close the service.
              > "Jen" does not exist, she is a commercial product, a pseudo-identity
              > which is used for the precise reason that our "true", or manifest
              > personalities are shrouded in mystery through our communication on
              > the internet. I suppose those who invented Jen and put her to work
              > on this forum wants everyone to go look at "her" homepage, and thus
              > solicit interest in their "product". There´s something marvelously
              > Archontic about these things. The peddling of dreams and desires
              > which is associated, not with self nor with soul, but with a
              > construct - is among the oldest tricks in the book. I´d like to
              > mention that I received the post, since I read the posts on this
              > forum by email.
              >
              > I remember being a bit paranoid about the site-takeover/hijack which
              > occured this summer of the Ecclesia Gnostica Norvegia website
              > bruchion.com - it turned out that suddenly the content of our
              > website were replaced by Brasilian pornography.. at that time I
              > thought mine about it, turned out the service provider were
              > neglectful and had sold the domain name twice.. however, who would
              > associate the Alexandrian Bruchion with wanton south-american
              > lesbians who just would love to show it all to you?
              >
              >
              > I were reminded that some Anti-Masons with a certain intelligence
              > concerning how such things could be perceived, and some tech-savvy
              > accomplices - systematically hacked, removed and replaced Masonic
              > and masons websites, replacing them with commercial porn sites,
              > having done so, they reported the supposed owners of those sites to
              > the authorities and "leaked" the news that Masons made money on
              > pornography on the Internet... It had the effect they wanted, for
              > about two weeks when this was found out.
              >
              > A further note on license, I am not sure about laws, but I know
              > America has a sex industry which isn´t entirely satisfied by
              > operating in the shadows and in discreet facilities - in view of the
              > founding fathers and their puritan legacy, one might ask if the
              > license which is in fact in function, is the sacred symbol of the
              > Dollar. Intimacy turned into a product remains a product and not
              > true intimacy, today, relationships are grafted by way of a promise
              > of profit, which sinks ships along the way, because such profit is
              > never worth the sacrifice. Not only the fundamentalists are turning
              > both insensitive and hypocritical, all hues and variations of human
              > beings, in our mass-culture, has caught it as well.
              >
              > Just a little bit of a rant
              >
              > (Happy Saint Thomas the Apostle´s day, by the way)
              >
              > Pax Pleromae
              >
              > Terje Dahl Bergersen
              > terje@...
              > http://terje.bergersen.net

              God bless you Terje, you are the only one who could turn a porno spam
              into a two screen rant, plus HTML, which you should have cut. Anyway
              I remember what happened to Bruncion, and it was not funny. I knew
              it was spam to the list, and almost deleted it from the server, but
              could not believe what it was. The thing on Carpocrates was worth
              the two screens though. HOLY BLOOD, HOLY GRAIL picked up on
              Ireneaus' thing about Jesus being 50 when he died, and it may have
              been an alternate early tradition, BTW. Like you, though, I think it
              was his spotty background in Christianity.

              Regards
              --
              Mike Leavitt ac998@...
            • Mike Leavitt
              Hello hesperos19 ... Quite openly, in some cases, but those aren t the dangerous ones. Regards -- Mike Leavitt ac998@lafn.org
              Message 6 of 10 , Dec 22, 2002
              • 0 Attachment
                Hello hesperos19

                On 22-Dec-02, you wrote:

                > --- In gnosticism2@yahoogroups.com, Mike Leavitt <ac998@l...>
                > wrote:
                >> Hello Jen
                >
                >>> Hoping to meet some nice open mined people
                >
                > Um - no comment.
                >
                >
                >> Looks like Corax's filters are down. :-) Boy is she in the wrong
                > list
                >> (I think :-)).
                >>
                >> Regards
                >> --
                >> Mike Leavitt ac998@l...
                >
                > Hello Mike:
                >
                > I havent been reading this list in a while since it has been very
                > quiet - as most seem to be.
                >
                > I agree with Terje that attcks seem to be de rigeur on gnostic
                > groups, but I would not blame antimasonics right off the bat,
                > there are some thelemites who have done a fine job of infiltrating
                > and sabotauging gnostics lists as well over the past 2 years.
                >
                > Corax

                Quite openly, in some cases, but those aren't the dangerous ones.

                Regards
                --
                Mike Leavitt ac998@...
              • hesperos19 <coraxo@elp.rr.com>
                ... Um - no comment. ... list ... Hello Mike: I havent been reading this list in a while since it has been very quiet - as most seem to be. I agree with Terje
                Message 7 of 10 , Dec 22, 2002
                • 0 Attachment
                  --- In gnosticism2@yahoogroups.com, Mike Leavitt <ac998@l...>
                  wrote:
                  > Hello Jen

                  > > Hoping to meet some nice open mined people

                  Um - no comment.


                  > Looks like Corax's filters are down. :-) Boy is she in the wrong
                  list
                  > (I think :-)).
                  >
                  > Regards
                  > --
                  > Mike Leavitt ac998@l...

                  Hello Mike:

                  I havent been reading this list in a while since it has been very
                  quiet - as most seem to be.

                  I agree with Terje that attcks seem to be de rigeur on gnostic
                  groups, but I would not blame antimasonics right off the bat,
                  there are some thelemites who have done a fine job of infiltrating
                  and sabotauging gnostics lists as well over the past 2 years.

                  Corax
                • hesperos19 <coraxo@elp.rr.com>
                  ... ones. ... Yes who is to know really who among whom are the dangerous ones. I really know very little of the antimasonics that Terje was referring to nor do
                  Message 8 of 10 , Dec 22, 2002
                  • 0 Attachment
                    --- In gnosticism2@yahoogroups.com, Mike Leavitt <ac998@l...>
                    >
                    > Quite openly, in some cases, but those aren't the dangerous
                    ones.
                    >
                    > Regards
                    > --
                    > Mike Leavitt ac998@l...

                    Yes who is to know really who among whom are the dangerous
                    ones.

                    I really know very little of the antimasonics that Terje was
                    referring to nor do I intend to omplicate "all" thelemites in such
                    activity - I know that one account of mine was hacked by
                    malaysian islamic fundamentalists which I am currently involved
                    with Verisign to get taken down - with no small amount of
                    difficulty.

                    Verisign, just so you and others know, is pretty soft on such
                    hacking and one has to go through a number of hoops to get
                    such things resolved.

                    I would not register a domain or use Verisgn for secure
                    transactions precisely because they are not as secure as they
                    purport to be.

                    Off gnostic topic but just a word to the wise regarding such
                    recent computer crimes.

                    It also seems to me that what Terje was referring to about the
                    number of topic posts being on increase on a list seems to have
                    been the case around the time I stopped reading this list.

                    While there may not be a concerted conspiracy, or maybe here
                    is, it is clear that there are a number of occult and reactionary
                    groups that have a vested interest in suppressing gnosticism
                    through spam, porn, and disinformation campaigns.

                    Nevetheless, I have turned my emails back on for this group in
                    hopes that there may be some fruitful discussion after the last
                    spate of non-gnostic stuff.
                    Corax

                    Corax
                  • hesperos19 <coraxo@elp.rr.com>
                    ... wrote: Like Ireneaus did not know that the Gospels describes Jesus as not having been crucified at the age of 50, Ireneaus does not honestly
                    Message 9 of 10 , Dec 22, 2002
                    • 0 Attachment
                      --- In gnosticism2@yahoogroups.com, Terje Dahl Bergersen
                      <terje@b...> wrote:
                      Like Ireneaus did not know that the
                      Gospels describes Jesus as not having been crucified at the
                      age of 50, Ireneaus does not honestly know how the earliest
                      communities,
                      even in his vicinity, the Gaul area, identified eachother towards
                      eachother.

                      ++++++++

                      Salve Terje:

                      Unlike many other modern gnostics I tend to have a bit of
                      forgiveness towards Irenaeus, since of course much of what is
                      to blame later results from later interpretations of Irenaeus.

                      Like the 50 year old Jesus tradition he espouses, he also
                      espouses doctrines which are contrary to Paul, so not only was
                      he unfamiliar with the gospels - if any had trul been written at his
                      time of what the Cgurch now holds as canonical - but he also
                      demonstrates a lack of familiarity with Paul -

                      Book V

                      2. But vain in every respect are they who despise the entire
                      dispensation of God, and disallow the salvation of the flesh, and
                      treat with contempt its regeneration, maintaining that it is not
                      capable of incorruption.

                      contrast with Paul:

                      1Co 15:50 -
                      Now I say this, brethren, that flesh and blood cannot inherit the
                      kingdom of God; nor does the perishable inherit the
                      imperishable.

                      But he is going by the traditions he was taught mouth to ear.

                      the concept of sola scriptura however is a falsity since of course
                      as gnostics we recognize a number of extracanonical writings as
                      well as the power of apostoloc tradition - after all the canon was
                      agreed upon by the ecumenical councils.

                      Irenaeus, despite his railings against Valentinus does make
                      other very beautiful points which i am not entirely willing to
                      disregard - after all, other than the Gnostics a number of other
                      positions were decided against; monarchism, modalism,
                      donatism etc, etc, all of which have compelling arguments in
                      their favor - the monophysite being one such.

                      Unlike the impudently sarcastic and cynical tertullian, I think
                      Irenaeus was sincere in his criticisms of Valentinus. Elsewhere
                      Irenaeus called for tolerance of Montanists - so how closed and
                      dogmatic was he really?

                      At any rate, i do not think Irenaeus is as black as those would try
                      to paint him and in many ways I find him less sinister than
                      tertullian or Hippolyte.

                      Corax
                    • hesperos19 <coraxo@elp.rr.com>
                      ... Paul - ... and ... I really should have said - understanding rather than familiarity because poor Ireanaeus goes through all sorts of hoops in Book V to
                      Message 10 of 10 , Dec 22, 2002
                      • 0 Attachment
                        --- In gnosticism2@yahoogroups.com, "hesperos19
                        <coraxo@e...>" <coraxo@e...> wrote:

                        > time of what the Cgurch now holds as canonical - but he also
                        > demonstrates a lack of *familiarity* (read understanding) with
                        Paul -
                        >
                        > Book V
                        >
                        > 2. But vain in every respect are they who despise the entire
                        > dispensation of God, and disallow the salvation of the flesh,
                        and
                        > treat with contempt its regeneration, maintaining that it is not
                        > capable of incorruption.
                        >
                        > contrast with Paul:
                        >
                        > 1Co 15:50 -
                        > Now I say this, brethren, that flesh and blood cannot inherit the
                        > kingdom of God; nor does the perishable inherit the
                        > imperishable.
                        >
                        > But he is going by the traditions he was taught mouth to ear.
                        I really should have said - understanding rather than familiarity
                        because poor Ireanaeus goes through all sorts of hoops in Book
                        V to argue for the eternal physis of the Flesh using paul as
                        source - my error.

                        Corax, heretic
                      Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.