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

Re: Jesus, Mary, & Da Vinci.....

Expand Messages
  • lady_caritas
    ... them. ... is ... Well, there is a chat feature on our homepage, but I don t know if anyone has used it. :-) http://groups.yahoo.com/group/gnosticism2/
    Message 1 of 11 , Nov 5, 2003
    • 0 Attachment
      --- In gnosticism2@yahoogroups.com, "David" <christianofzion@y...>
      wrote:
      > Cari, thank you for those links, I'll definitely take a look at
      them.
      > Is there a Gnostic chatroom somewhere in yahoo or do some of the
      > members get together and chat sometime? I know there are Christian
      > rooms and then rooms yahoo members create. Was wondering if there
      is
      > a room where Gnostics can gather or whatever.



      Well, there is a chat feature on our homepage, but I don't know if
      anyone has used it. :-)

      http://groups.yahoo.com/group/gnosticism2/

      Perhaps other members know of other chatrooms.


      Cari
    • Ginosko
      MM David Something else about Da vincii you might find interesting is that there arer those who now claim him to be the creator of the Turin shroud thru use of
      Message 2 of 11 , Nov 5, 2003
      • 0 Attachment
        MM David

        Something else about Da'vincii you might find interesting is that there arer
        those who now claim him to be the creator of the Turin shroud thru use of
        his own "camera obscura". They have replicated the process sucessfully to my
        understanding. The very chemicals required were known to Arabic scientists
        going back to the 10th cent (silver nitrate being the chief one) to which he
        himself had access to their docs.

        MP
        Penn

        --
        "Toleration isn't much. But it is the first step towards curiosity,
        interest, study, understanding, appreciating and finally valuing diversity.
        If we can get everyone on the first step of tolerance, at least we won't be
        killing each other."

        Anon


        > Hi all. I'm new here and excited about being a new member of this
        > group. My main interests lie in the Gnostic Gospels, many seem to
        > dismiss them at apparent fact (mainly Catholics, i.e., the Vatican).
        > I'm Catholic myself actually, and find them (the gospels) very
        > enlightening and educational. I currently have the Gosepl of Thomas
        > and looking to get the Gospel of Mary Magdalene this week, along
        > with the Da Vinci Code. My question is, what are everyone's thoughts
        > on the tv special that was on last night, entitled "Jesus, Mary, &
        > Da Vinci"? It was on Primetime, the ABC channel at 8pm. I didn't
        > know very much about the Da Vinci Code, but I knew it was a book and
        > recently published. I enjoyed watching the program, practically made
        > my night. To anyone who watched it, do you know if or where I can
        > get a copy of that special, whether it be on VHS at the ABC website
        > or somewhere else? I look forward to talking with you all over time.
        >
        >
        >
        >
        > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
        > gnosticism2-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
        >
        >
        >
        > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
        >
        >
      • incognito_lightbringer
        David, get a copy of The Nag Hammadi Library edited by James Robinson and The Gnostic Scripture by Bentley Layton. Both are in paperback and normally found in
        Message 3 of 11 , Nov 6, 2003
        • 0 Attachment
          David, get a copy of The Nag Hammadi Library edited by James Robinson
          and The Gnostic Scripture by Bentley Layton. Both are in paperback
          and normally found in most bookstores. The NH Library was mentioned
          in both Brown's book and in the ABC special.
          http://www.gnosis.org had not only a good booklist but also has an
          online library that contains the entire Nag Hammadi Library and many
          other texts.

          Now, as to Brown's book itself. I reviewed this on this board back in
          July and I HATED it. It's fiction and largely based on Holy Blood
          Holy Grail which itself is crackpot. This is not a good place to
          start if you wish to learn about gnosticism and Mary Magdelene. If
          you want to read it for entertainment, that's fine. Just be aware
          that it's sensationalism with little to back it up. The Davinci Code
          to religious scholarship is what tabloids are to journalism. You
          know, those things they sell at the supermarket checkout that have
          titles like "my mother married an alien".

          The ABC special attempted to be objective. It still wasn't entirely
          satisfactory. Here's an example. A lot of discussion went into
          whether Mary Magdelene was a prostitute or not. It was interesting as
          a historical analysis but no one seemed to get the point that her
          portrayal in gnosticism and early Christianity as a "whore" was
          metaphorical. Examples: Thunder Perfect Mind "I am the honored one
          and the scorned one. I am the whore and the holy one." or Gospel of
          Thomas "Jesus said, "Whoever knows the father and the mother will be
          called the child of a whore"" or The Second Treatise of the Great
          Seth "For those who were in the world had been prepared by the will
          of our sister Sophia - she who is a whore - because of the innocence
          which has not been uttered." In some cases the feminine and the whore
          is also a metaphor for the soul: The Exegesis on the Soul "As long as
          she was alone with the father, she was virgin and in form
          androgynous. But when she fell down into a body and came to this
          life, then she fell into the hands of many robbers. And the wanton
          creatures passed her from one to another and [...defiled] her.Some
          made use of her by force, while others did so by seducing her with a
          gift. In short, they defiled her, and she [...lost] her virginity.
          And in her body she prostituted herself and gave herself to one and
          all, considering each one she was about to embrace to be her husband"

          Mary Magdelene is a symbol for the fallen Sophia. She's the one the
          descending Christ comes to save.
          Instead, it was assumed the motivation was to belittle her because of
          the misogyny of a patriarchal system. Which I'm not saying wasn't a
          motivation, but there's another side to this. The ABC special
          interviewed several religious experts including Pagels and no one
          brought up the alternative explanation.




          --- In gnosticism2@yahoogroups.com, "David" <christianofzion@y...>
          wrote:
          > Hi all. I'm new here and excited about being a new member of this
          > group. My main interests lie in the Gnostic Gospels, many seem to
          > dismiss them at apparent fact (mainly Catholics, i.e., the
          Vatican).
          > I'm Catholic myself actually, and find them (the gospels) very
          > enlightening and educational. I currently have the Gosepl of Thomas
          > and looking to get the Gospel of Mary Magdalene this week, along
          > with the Da Vinci Code. My question is, what are everyone's
          thoughts
          > on the tv special that was on last night, entitled "Jesus, Mary, &
          > Da Vinci"? It was on Primetime, the ABC channel at 8pm. I didn't
          > know very much about the Da Vinci Code, but I knew it was a book
          and
          > recently published. I enjoyed watching the program, practically
          made
          > my night. To anyone who watched it, do you know if or where I can
          > get a copy of that special, whether it be on VHS at the ABC website
          > or somewhere else? I look forward to talking with you all over time.
        • David
          Incog, as much as I enjoyed the ABC special, it did seem to only cover the subject of Mary s being or not being a prostitute, so you re indeed right. That one
          Message 4 of 11 , Nov 6, 2003
          • 0 Attachment
            Incog, as much as I enjoyed the ABC special, it did seem to only
            cover the subject of Mary's being or not being a prostitute, so
            you're indeed right. That one issue out-weighed the others of her
            possibly being the one to the right of Christ in "The Last Supper";
            being married to Christ, or not; as well as the Prieure de Sion and
            the possible descendents of Christ and Mary Magdalene. I found it to
            be very informing despite it only covering one particular issue.
            After having thought about everything that was covered and reading a
            few things on the Da Vinci Code and some of the historical subjects
            included with the Da Vinci Code at ABC.com, I'd have to say that the
            issue of Christ and Mary Magdalene is quite probable. I mean, none of
            us were there in his time
            and there are a few errors in the bible as it stands, i.e., the
            conflicting genealogies of Christ in the NT and things coulda been
            kept out of the Gospels, like Christ's personal life, because all we
            read about is his ministry and having twelve disciple, I'd figure at
            least one of them would know his personal life. Anyway, all I'm sayin
            is that the fact he was or wasn't married coulda been included, so
            we'd know more about him, but that kind of thing wasn't written. And
            the person who is supposed to be John in "The Last Supper" does look
            mighty feminine, and Jesus and Mary were rather close, as is
            believed, so it coulda been her. I also have to say that the painting
            is just a painting, not a snap-shot, the figures were painted in a
            way that showed Da Vinci's skill in painting people. People talk like
            it was a picture taken at the time of the Last Supper, like that's
            what they looked like and basing opinions about who is who and
            possibly why everyone close to Jesus wasn't there with him at the
            Last Supper and included in the story of the Last Supper in the NT.
            Not to discredit Da Vinci with his painting, just giving people
            something to think about regarding the painting. Think that's all I
            have to say at the moment. :-)

            David
          • Wayne
            ... wrote: a historical analysis but no one seemed to get the point that her ... be ... innocence ... whore ... as ... a ... husband ... of
            Message 5 of 11 , Nov 6, 2003
            • 0 Attachment
              --- In gnosticism2@yahoogroups.com, incognito_lightbringer
              <no_reply@y...> wrote:
              a historical analysis but no one seemed to get the point that her
              > portrayal in gnosticism and early Christianity as a "whore" was
              > metaphorical. Examples: Thunder Perfect Mind "I am the honored one
              > and the scorned one. I am the whore and the holy one." or Gospel of
              > Thomas "Jesus said, "Whoever knows the father and the mother will
              be
              > called the child of a whore"" or The Second Treatise of the Great
              > Seth "For those who were in the world had been prepared by the will
              > of our sister Sophia - she who is a whore - because of the
              innocence
              > which has not been uttered." In some cases the feminine and the
              whore
              > is also a metaphor for the soul: The Exegesis on the Soul "As long
              as
              > she was alone with the father, she was virgin and in form
              > androgynous. But when she fell down into a body and came to this
              > life, then she fell into the hands of many robbers. And the wanton
              > creatures passed her from one to another and [...defiled] her.Some
              > made use of her by force, while others did so by seducing her with
              a
              > gift. In short, they defiled her, and she [...lost] her virginity.
              > And in her body she prostituted herself and gave herself to one and
              > all, considering each one she was about to embrace to be her
              husband"
              >
              > Mary Magdelene is a symbol for the fallen Sophia. She's the one the
              > descending Christ comes to save.
              > Instead, it was assumed the motivation was to belittle her because
              of
              > the misogyny of a patriarchal system. Which I'm not saying wasn't a
              > motivation, but there's another side to this. The ABC special
              > interviewed several religious experts including Pagels and no one
              > brought up the alternative explanation.



              The only True explanation.
            • incognito_lightbringer
              Message 6 of 11 , Nov 12, 2003
              • 0 Attachment
                <<I'd have to say that the
                issue of Christ and Mary Magdalene is quite probable. >>

                David, who cares?
                The problem I have with this is that gnosticism is about freeing the
                spirit from the material, and here are a bunch of bozos concerned in
                what direction the sperm went.
                For what reasons? Power? Prestige? Are they hoping they can control a
                second coming?
                It's ridiculous.

                <<the conflicting genealogies of Christ in the NT>>
                'Cause the people writing it got their facts mixed up.
                Or else they wrote it to "prove" he was the foretold Jewish messiah.
                People nowadays have problems tracing their family history even a few
                generations back.

                <<Anyway, all I'm sayin
                is that the fact he was or wasn't married coulda been included, so
                we'd know more about him,>>

                I have this wacky theory that he didn't go through a wedding
                ceremony, simply because Mary, as a symbol of the fallen Sophia, is
                *already* his wife. But that's just me ;)

                <<And
                the person who is supposed to be John in "The Last Supper" does look
                mighty feminine>>

                Not only that, but the Mona Lisa is claimed to be, by some, Leonardo
                himself in drag. As a symbol of his divine feminine half. They've
                done computer models to try and back this theory up. Leonardo, on his
                death bed, had two paintings by him. One of John the Baptist, hint
                hint, and the other was the Mona Lisa. Of course, John the Baptist is
                painted looking remarkably like a lecherous Dionysus, so who knows
                how Leonardo interpreted gnosticism?
                Leonardo also painted Jesus standing over a table with three pieces
                of bread on it, no wine. Some claim it looks remarkably like a shell
                game (you know, that street hustle dating back to ancient Egypt?). A
                commentary on orthodox interpretation of that day perhaps?

                <<I also have to say that the painting
                is just a painting, not a snap-shot, >>

                Well, I like my personal copy of the icon of the Black Madonna
                currently hanging in Czestochowa Poland. If there's a second coming,
                or a time machine, I'm hoping he'll turn out to be a black dude just
                to shock all the bigots. :)


                --- In gnosticism2@yahoogroups.com, "David" <christianofzion@y...>
                wrote:
                > Incog, as much as I enjoyed the ABC special, it did seem to only
                > cover the subject of Mary's being or not being a prostitute, so
                > you're indeed right. That one issue out-weighed the others of her
                > possibly being the one to the right of Christ in "The Last Supper";
                > being married to Christ, or not; as well as the Prieure de Sion and
                > the possible descendents of Christ and Mary Magdalene. I found it
                to
                > be very informing despite it only covering one particular issue.
                > After having thought about everything that was covered and reading
                a
                > few things on the Da Vinci Code and some of the historical subjects
                > included with the Da Vinci Code at ABC.com, I'd have to say that
                the
                > issue of Christ and Mary Magdalene is quite probable. I mean, none
                of
                > us were there in his time
                > and there are a few errors in the bible as it stands, i.e., the
                > conflicting genealogies of Christ in the NT and things coulda been
                > kept out of the Gospels, like Christ's personal life, because all
                we
                > read about is his ministry and having twelve disciple, I'd figure
                at
                > least one of them would know his personal life. Anyway, all I'm
                sayin
                > is that the fact he was or wasn't married coulda been included, so
                > we'd know more about him, but that kind of thing wasn't written.
                And
                > the person who is supposed to be John in "The Last Supper" does
                look
                > mighty feminine, and Jesus and Mary were rather close, as is
                > believed, so it coulda been her. I also have to say that the
                painting
                > is just a painting, not a snap-shot, the figures were painted in a
                > way that showed Da Vinci's skill in painting people. People talk
                like
                > it was a picture taken at the time of the Last Supper, like that's
                > what they looked like and basing opinions about who is who and
                > possibly why everyone close to Jesus wasn't there with him at the
                > Last Supper and included in the story of the Last Supper in the NT.
                > Not to discredit Da Vinci with his painting, just giving people
                > something to think about regarding the painting. Think that's all I
                > have to say at the moment. :-)
                >
                > David
              Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.