Re: Resonating scripture
- Yes, Unknown, that was my original position but there have been some
interesting and impassioned arguments for the other side.
Philosophia2 is another one of Pmcvflagg's groups only over there he
is known as Atroubador, and he hasn't been around lately.
--- In email@example.com, Unknown <themysteriousmrx@y...>
>is "unconditional hate". The only real love is unconditional love
> There is no such this as "conditional love" any more than there
because conditions are ties to this world and all hate is based from
something and is there for conditional. Unconditional love transcends
this world. Everything else is either "Like" or "Lust". In my opinion.
> > As Mike pointed out, it would be hard to translate poorly
> like the value of Love, and yet, just how often do people come upoccasions,
> with their own bizarre interpretations of it? On numerous
> I've witnessed a person chastising another for not "getting" theproceeding
> meaning of "unconditional" love, and in their explanation,
> to reveal their various qualifications for that allegedly un-love"
> qualified concept. People are funny like that-just not always
> amusing. ;-)
> Well, Gerry, and Cari and Mike and anybody else, there has been an
> ongoing dicussion over at Philosophia2 concerning "conditional
> verses "unconditional love", and can there even be such a thing asand
> unconditional love between us puny humans, with people coming out
> arguing both sides.course,
> But you dicussion of love over here concerns God (the big one, way
> out there; as opposed to the local one, here and now, who, of
> is carrying a false claim)whether
> Oh well, it's all so confusing. I still haven't figured out
> Jesus is a good guy or a bad guy, or is the problem not Jesus butthe
> form of worship that has grown up around His perfect Truth andpost
> twisted it to be used as some means to a nefarious end.
> I haven't decided whether I am gnostic or not. I just study the
> and read a bit when I have some oh-so-precious time to do so.Service.
> Happy Holidays to all and to all a good....(Oh, I don't
> know...future, bank account, love life, health, happiness).
> Yahoo! Groups SponsorADVERTISEMENT
> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of
> Do you Yahoo!?
> Yahoo! Mail Plus - Powerful. Affordable. Sign up now
> Because moving away from Latin as the scholars' lingua francaOthers would argue that the movement INTO Latin as the
> was the greatest error throughout the history of European culture.
> This has already been noted by A. Schopenhauer.
scholar's "lingua franca" was the greatest mistake of western
culture... this would include the Greek-speaking composers of much of
the Nag Hammadi library, as well as it's Coptic speaking translators.
Often times both of these languages were very specifically used as
outposts of resistance against Latin cultural oppression. In northern
Egypt the Greek speaking community was second only to the Jews for
their reputation for insurrection (in Alexandria the Greek community
lived just to the south of the walled Jewish quarter, and the
cultural exchange equalled the resentment of occupation. This is the
venue in which Gnosticism was created).
None of these books we are talking about were written in Latin, so
gumming up the works with yet a fourth (unrelated) language in the
mix seemed rather strange is all. Don't get me wrong, Latin is a
wonderful language, and one that is very useful to the scientific
community. It is also something like speaking Hebrew at a Palistinian
knitting club. I have no problem if you want to use latin... knock
yourself out our uptight friend. Now, if we were talking about
Catholicism it would seem perfectly obvious that you should use Latin.
By the way..... Schopenhauer wasn't Gnostic either.