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

Re: a SPECIAL post for Ms Blackfire

Expand Messages
  • incognito_lightbringer
    Message 1 of 35 , Apr 28, 2003
      <<So you think it is derogatory to call a group of people
      > pre schoolers? That is what I see the ancient Gnostics saying.>>

      Then you're interpreting the way I do; as possibilities for evolution.
      Preschoolers have the ability to grow up. The problem is *some*
      people (not me, and apparently not you based on your question) insist
      the Gnostics texts claim there are divisions according to inherent
      ability. In other words, the hylics are hylic because they're not of
      the "pneumatic race". They just don't have that special something in
      them, they weren't born with that inner spark. That has always
      disturbed me. The question is if it's historically accurate reading
      of the texts. I think they *can* be interpreted differently.



      --- In gnosticism2@yahoogroups.com, "George Harvey"
      <georgeatnsn@y...> wrote:
      > --- In gnosticism2@yahoogroups.com, incognito_lightbringer
      > <no_reply@y...> wrote:
      > > <<As for your own comments, why is it you see "hylic" as
      > emphatically
      > > derogatory in Gnosticism? Both you and Blackfire seem to point
      out
      > > that it "CAN" be applied in a bigoted fashion, but I don't see
      how
      > > that equates to the term being derogatory in itself. If the term
      is
      > > inherently disparaging, then it would be derogatory in virtually
      > any
      > > situation.>>
      > >
      > > It is derogatory Gerry, if it's meant to be applied to groups of
      > > people.
      >
      > So you think it is derogatory to call a group of people
      > pre schoolers? That is what I see the ancient Gnostics saying.
      >
      > George Harvey
    • incognito_lightbringer
      Message 35 of 35 , Apr 28, 2003
        <<So you think it is derogatory to call a group of people
        > pre schoolers? That is what I see the ancient Gnostics saying.>>

        Then you're interpreting the way I do; as possibilities for evolution.
        Preschoolers have the ability to grow up. The problem is *some*
        people (not me, and apparently not you based on your question) insist
        the Gnostics texts claim there are divisions according to inherent
        ability. In other words, the hylics are hylic because they're not of
        the "pneumatic race". They just don't have that special something in
        them, they weren't born with that inner spark. That has always
        disturbed me. The question is if it's historically accurate reading
        of the texts. I think they *can* be interpreted differently.



        --- In gnosticism2@yahoogroups.com, "George Harvey"
        <georgeatnsn@y...> wrote:
        > --- In gnosticism2@yahoogroups.com, incognito_lightbringer
        > <no_reply@y...> wrote:
        > > <<As for your own comments, why is it you see "hylic" as
        > emphatically
        > > derogatory in Gnosticism? Both you and Blackfire seem to point
        out
        > > that it "CAN" be applied in a bigoted fashion, but I don't see
        how
        > > that equates to the term being derogatory in itself. If the term
        is
        > > inherently disparaging, then it would be derogatory in virtually
        > any
        > > situation.>>
        > >
        > > It is derogatory Gerry, if it's meant to be applied to groups of
        > > people.
        >
        > So you think it is derogatory to call a group of people
        > pre schoolers? That is what I see the ancient Gnostics saying.
        >
        > George Harvey
      Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.