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

] Re: Saying 45

Expand Messages
  • joseph baxter
    I don t see pre-destination in 45. In light of the abundance of the heart, we may have bad ideas in our heart, as well as good. We do not need to bring it
    Message 1 of 16 , Sep 29, 2000
      I don't see pre-destination in 45. In light of the abundance of the heart,
      we may have bad ideas in our heart, as well as good. We do not need to
      bring it forth. We can leave it unborn. The will still plays a role.

      This reminds me a little of James 3, how the tongue is like the rudder of
      a great ship. The tongue can bring forth good (fruit) or bad (thorns and
      thistles). If we could just be mindful of the tremendous power of our
      mastery of this little object.

      45, I suspect, has its roots well before Jesus.

      Joe Baxter


      At 04:15 PM 9/29/2000 , you wrote:
      > >> (1) "Grapes are not harvested from thorns, nor are figs picked
      > >> from thistles, for they do not produce fruit.
      > >> (2) A good person brings forth good from his treasure.
      > >> (3) A bad person brings (forth) evil from the bad treasure
      > >> that is in his heart, and (in fact) he speaks evil.
      > >> (4) For out of the abundance of the heart he brings forth evil."
      > >
      >
      >
      > Perhaps the people referred to just aren't going to repent? This could
      >reflect a belief in predestination.
      >
      >Regards,
      >
      >Robert Brenchley
      >
      >RSBrenchley@...
      >
      >-------------------------------------------------
      >To post to gthomas, send email to gthomas@egroups.com
      >To unsubscribe, send a blank email to gthomas-unsubscribe@egroups.com


      [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
    • Jim Bauer
      Mike, Well I still find your discovering hidden meanings as the same sort of endeavor the Kabalist attempted. When I was still in college the acid heads in
      Message 2 of 16 , Sep 30, 2000
        Mike,

        Well I still find your discovering "hidden meanings" as the same sort of
        endeavor the Kabalist attempted. When I was still in college the acid heads
        in the dorm were passing around a slim volume by Jung called
        _Synchronicity_. The thesis entertained here is that besides ordinary cause
        & effect there is an "acausal connecting principle:" which he dubbed
        "synchronicity". For example, he relates a crucial moment in a client's
        therapy where she was relating a dream about a scarab beetle. At that point
        one flew in the window & Jung asked if this was the insect of her dreams &
        she said yes. I feel, though I don't know the Coptic or Greek to defend it,
        that any attempt to treat GThom as a "jigsaw puzzle" is probably foredoomed
        to failure as meaningful coincidence. As for "scientific method", religious
        studies are as a field non-paradigmatic & therefore not science.
        Attributing it to "science" is just another example of what Jerome Ravetz in
        _Scientific Knowledge & its Social Problems_ called the "folk science" of
        modern culture. Anthropologists believe every culture has a folk science;
        modern folk science is science itself as observable in the proliferation of
        things called "science". For example, I met a young college student who was
        majoring in "secretarial science". Political science also comes rapidly to
        mind as an example of what Ravetz discussed in his book. If you're not
        familiar with Kuhn's _The Structure of Scientific Revolutions_ you should
        check it out.

        Jim Bauer
        -----Original Message-----
        From: Michael Grondin <mgrondin@...>
        To: gthomas@egroups.com <gthomas@egroups.com>
        Date: Friday, September 29, 2000 11:12 PM
        Subject: Re: [gthomas] Re: Saying 45 (Jim)


        >Jim Bauer wrote:
        >>This sounds like the "Bible codes" which are so popular with
        Fundamentalists
        >>now. ...
        >>The jigsaw puzzle is probably equally eroneous unless you can show how
        using
        >>Thomas this way actually produces any more coherent view of the whole.
        >
        >As a logician and a firm believer in the scientific method, I hope to show
        >much more than that. I hope to show (1) that there are patterns of
        >transformation, (2) that the "solution" proceeds according to an orderly
        >series of steps, and (3) that the end result is not only "more coherent",
        >but virtually perfect in form and content. In other words, I hope to
        >absolutely prove that it was the intention of the Coptic authors to devise
        >a puzzle. A tall order, and not much progress has been made so far, but I
        >wouldn't personally be satisfied with anything less. These occasional
        >examples that I throw onto the list are not intended as any kind of proof,
        >but merely to illustrate the kinds of things that support the intuition
        >behind the hypothesis. (In actual fact, Th45 was currently being discussed
        >on the GospelofThomas list, and my thinking about that saying evolved as I
        >was writing my remarks to such an extent that it led to some results that
        >surprised me, and I thought it might be worthwhile posting here also.)
        >
        >Mike
        >
        >-------------------------------------------------
        >To post to gthomas, send email to gthomas@egroups.com
        >To unsubscribe, send a blank email to gthomas-unsubscribe@egroups.com
      • Andrew Smith
        ... saying ... sower), ... them, ... we ... further ... eaten ... the ... internal ... reader ... - ... Bad treasure in the heart brings forth evil. Good
        Message 3 of 16 , Sep 30, 2000
          --- In gthomas@egroups.com, Michael Grondin <mgrondin@t...> wrote:
          >
          > > (1) "Grapes are not harvested from thorns, nor are figs picked
          > > from thistles, for they do not produce fruit.
          > > (2) A good person brings forth good from his treasure.
          > > (3) A bad person brings (forth) evil from the bad treasure
          > > that is in his heart, and (in fact) he speaks evil.
          > > (4) For out of the abundance of the heart he brings forth evil."
          > > ...............................................
          > > http://www.geocities.com/mwgrondin/5thGospl.htm
          > > ...............................................
          > <snipped>
          > The mention of thorns should remind us of Th9, the only other
          saying
          > in which that Coptic word is used. In Th9 (the parable of the
          sower),
          > it's stated that the "seeds" that fell on thorns were choked by
          them,
          > and eaten by worms. Could the "good" part of 45 (i.e., 45.2) be the
          > "seeds" that were "choked" by the surrounding statements about evil
          > (45.1,3,4)? If so - and if the puzzle hypothesis is true - then we
          > should expect to find some other saying about worms. Sure enough,
          we
          > find mention of worms in saying 76, where it's recommended that one
          > "seek his(?) ... treasure where ... no worms destroy." If any
          further
          > connection is needed, we find it in the word 'treasure'. What this
          > all amounts to, it seems to me, is that 45.2 is intended to be
          "eaten
          > by" (i.e., joined with) 76.3, and that the remainder of 45 (all the
          > stuff about evil) is one of the three locations mentioned in Th9
          > where the "seed" doesn't produce "fruit". In other words, 45.2 is
          the
          > good seed that inadvertently fell among "thorns". It cannot survive
          > there - it has to be moved. I take this as another piece of
          internal
          > evidence for the jigsaw puzzle theory, according to which the
          reader
          > is intended to rearrange parts of GoT - even to remove parts of it
          -
          > to form a different, more perfect, structure than appears at first.
          >
          > Mike
          >

          Bad treasure in the heart brings forth evil. Good treasure in the
          heart brings forth good.

          Thorns do not produce grapes

          Seeds that fall on thorns are eaten by worms

          seek your treasure where no worms destroy.

          ****
          So seek your treasure where there are not thorns, but where you can
          get figs or grapes.

          So, thorns=bad grapes/figs=good.

          (as we all thought.)

          Mike, if you can find an order to GoT that makes more sense, then I'm
          interested. Are you saying that the collection of sayings existed in
          Greek, then it was reordered in the Coptic version, with sayings
          being
          changed to indicate how to put it back into its original order?

          All of the sayings you quoted above make perfect sense to me
          and have their own internal logic.

          Andrew 'Puzz
        • Michael Grondin
          ... No. Altho that s possible, it s only one of a number of possibilities as far as I can see. The main thing that counts against it, IMO, is that POxy 654
          Message 4 of 16 , Sep 30, 2000
            Andrew Smith wrote:
            >Are you saying that the collection of sayings existed in Greek,
            >then it was reordered in the Coptic version, with sayings being
            >changed to indicate how to put it back into its original order?

            No. Altho that's possible, it's only one of a number of possibilities as
            far as I can see. The main thing that counts against it, IMO, is that POxy
            654 contains the same non-responsive "answer" to the questions in 6A as
            does the Coptic GTh. But if the set of answers in Coptic #14 (not extant in
            the Greek) is joined to the corresponding questions in 6A - as seems likely
            - the result will not be identical to POxy 654. So the hypothesis you
            mention strikes me as being unlikely. But aside from that, it's best for a
            number of reasons to confine my hypothesis to the Coptic text. If and when
            it can be established with respect to that text, then it may be possible to
            reach some conclusions about the text represented by the Greek fragments.

            Mike
          • joseph baxter
            At 03:12 PM 9/30/2000 , you wrote: The thesis entertained here is that besides ordinary cause & effect there is an acausal connecting principle: which he
            Message 5 of 16 , Oct 1, 2000
              At 03:12 PM 9/30/2000 , you wrote:
              The thesis entertained here is that besides ordinary cause
              & effect there is an "acausal connecting principle:" which he dubbed
              "synchronicity". For example, he relates a crucial moment in a client's
              therapy where she was relating a dream about a scarab beetle. At that point
              one flew in the window & Jung asked if this was the insect of her dreams &
              she said yes.

              Some years ago, on a Monday morning, the United States Supreme Court
              announced a decision upholding a conviction where an involuntary confession
              had been used against the accused at trial. It rocked the legal world with
              a stark moment of truth. One of the oldest and tallest pillars of law had
              been felled.

              3000 miles away in a northern California forest, on that same Monday
              morning, one of the tallest trees in the world fell (in a
              storm). According to newspaper reports the awesome tree seemed even larger
              on the ground. Stories high at its base, it stretched for more than the
              size of a football field.

              Jung's story seems to suggest that synchronicity can occur at a moment of
              truth.

              Joe

              [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
            • Jim Bauer
              ... From: joseph baxter To: gthomas@egroups.com Date: Sunday, October 01, 2000 3:13 AM Subject: [gthomas] Moments of
              Message 6 of 16 , Oct 1, 2000
                -----Original Message-----
                From: joseph baxter <joseph@...>
                To: gthomas@egroups.com <gthomas@egroups.com>
                Date: Sunday, October 01, 2000 3:13 AM
                Subject: [gthomas] Moments of Truth


                >At 03:12 PM 9/30/2000 , you wrote:
                >The thesis entertained here is that besides ordinary cause
                >& effect there is an "acausal connecting principle:" which he dubbed
                >"synchronicity". For example, he relates a crucial moment in a client's
                >therapy where she was relating a dream about a scarab beetle. At that point
                >one flew in the window & Jung asked if this was the insect of her dreams &
                >she said yes.
                >
                >Some years ago, on a Monday morning, the United States Supreme Court
                >announced a decision upholding a conviction where an involuntary confession
                >had been used against the accused at trial. It rocked the legal world with
                >a stark moment of truth. One of the oldest and tallest pillars of law had
                >been felled.
                >
                >3000 miles away in a northern California forest, on that same Monday
                >morning, one of the tallest trees in the world fell (in a
                >storm). According to newspaper reports the awesome tree seemed even larger
                >on the ground. Stories high at its base, it stretched for more than the
                >size of a football field.
                >
                >Jung's story seems to suggest that synchronicity can occur at a moment of
                >truth.

                If you are willing to actually accept synchronicity as real I suppose it
                could exist. The problem with synchronicity is that it is purportedly
                "acausal". It is very difficult to reject the laws of cause & effect which
                are required by science & the scientific method. As I said, the acid heads
                in my dorm were passing the book around. It may be true that you can
                perceive synchronicity. Another friend of mine used to get thoroughly
                descoobied on imported beer & put the Psychedelic Furs on his stereo & The
                Dukes of Hazzard on TV to look for synchronicity. With the brain in a
                severely perturbed state.it seems one could experience it but that doesn't
                prove it actually exists. It seems me to be a recapitulation of an
                ancestral state where cause & effect weren't clearly undestood by the
                perceiving system. This is also one of the biological determinants of the
                existence of religion.

                Jim Bauer
                >
                >Joe
                >
                >[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                >
                >
                >-------------------------------------------------
                >To post to gthomas, send email to gthomas@egroups.com
                >To unsubscribe, send a blank email to gthomas-unsubscribe@egroups.com
              • joseph baxter
                ... Jung called it acausal, but I don t see that as part of the necessary explanation. As you put it, it is difficult to reject cause and effect. So it could
                Message 7 of 16 , Oct 1, 2000
                  At 09:31 AM 10/1/2000 , you wrote:

                  >--
                  >If you are willing to actually accept synchronicity as real I suppose it
                  >could exist. The problem with synchronicity is that it is purportedly
                  >"acausal". It is very difficult to reject the laws of cause & effect which
                  >are required by science & the scientific method.

                  Jung called it acausal, but I don't see that as part of the necessary
                  explanation. As you put it, it is difficult to reject cause and effect. So
                  it could be that two things happening at the same time are the effects of
                  causes. By way of example only, one could argue that both efffects are
                  sympathetic responses to something larger, as opposed to one being the
                  cause of the other. I believe that Jung himself meant something like this.

                  Joe


                  [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                • Jeffrey Glen Jackson
                  Regarding synchronicity, I work on compilers, which are computer programs that translate programming languages, such as FORTRAN or C or C++ into machine
                  Message 8 of 16 , Oct 1, 2000
                    Regarding synchronicity, I work on compilers, which are computer
                    programs that translate programming languages, such as FORTRAN or
                    C or C++ into machine language. These programs are themselves
                    written in a programming language and so are used to compile themselves.
                    (Sorry for the long technical explanation -- I'm getting to the point
                    soon). Now, the C compiler is written in C. A new version is compiled
                    with an old version of the compiler. Then we recompile it with the
                    new version we just compiled. Then, we do it again, and make sure
                    this third generation of compilations is identical to the second
                    generation. The new compiler compiled with the old compiler should
                    generate the same results as the new compiler compiled with
                    itself. However, if the new compiler has a bug, it might generate
                    incorrect code for some portion of itself, causing the new compiler
                    compiled with itself to behave differently than the new compiler compiled
                    with the old compiler. More often than is reasonable, the module it
                    generates incorrect code for is the module that has the bug that
                    caused the incorrect code to be generated in the first place. This
                    happens so often its downright spooky.

                    Jeff
                    http://www.jeff-jackson.com
                  • odell mcguire
                    ... Joe/Jim Excuse me for butting in, but it seems to me this synchroneity business poses something of a dilemma for the historian. No one trying to do
                    Message 9 of 16 , Oct 2, 2000
                      joseph baxter wrote:

                      > At 09:31 AM 10/1/2000 , you wrote:
                      >
                      > >--
                      > >If you are willing to actually accept synchronicity as real I suppose it
                      > >could exist. The problem with synchronicity is that it is purportedly
                      > >"acausal". It is very difficult to reject the laws of cause & effect which
                      > >are required by science & the scientific method.
                      >
                      > Jung called it acausal, but I don't see that as part of the necessary
                      > explanation. As you put it, it is difficult to reject cause and effect. So
                      > it could be that two things happening at the same time are the effects of
                      > causes. By way of example only, one could argue that both efffects are
                      > sympathetic responses to something larger, as opposed to one being the
                      > cause of the other. I believe that Jung himself meant something like this.
                      >
                      > Joe

                      Joe/Jim

                      Excuse me for butting in, but it seems to me this 'synchroneity' business poses
                      something of a dilemma for the historian. No one trying to do history from
                      primary sources can accept the kind of seemingly meaningful coincidences being
                      discussed without exhaustively eliminating all possibility of causal
                      connection. If he does not hesitate to entertain the idea of simple coincidence
                      he will never learn anything about his subject from his documents except what
                      their writers want him to think.

                      Coincidences happen. But some cannot be swallowed. I keep thinking of
                      Jesus bar Ananias. According to Josephus (Jewish War.VI.300ff) this character
                      was a peasant, a posessesed lunatic who, some four years before the war began,
                      created an incident in the temple by repeating the words of his 'voices' at the
                      Feast of Booths: "... a voice against Jerusalem and the temple (NAOS), a voice
                      against bridegroom and bride, a voice against all the people" and carried these
                      cries into the streets. "Woe to Jerusalem" he kept repeating. He was chastised
                      first by 'leading citizens' and finally brought before the Roman governor and,
                      when he refused to identify or defend himself, he was scourged 'to the bone.'
                      Woe to Jerusalem.' he said. But he recovered and continued repeating his dire
                      prophecies until he was finally killed by a ballista bolt during the last weeks
                      of the siege in 70 AD.

                      A total coincidence that a peasant named Jesus, thought to be crazy, speaking
                      with the voice of a spirit, was involved in a temple incident, predicted the
                      fall of city and temple before the war, was finally hauled before the Roman
                      governor, refused to say who he was or defend himself, and was severely scourged
                      -all a few months before Mark composed his tale--??? Some say so. But I smell
                      fish, a barrelful. Else I am no historian.

                      But I am nowhere near accepting as explanation the theory, currently being
                      mentioned favorably by some on the Xtalk list, that Jesus, as Mark portrays him,
                      was a Markan midrashic creation. (Partly based on an oral memory of Jesus
                      Ananias.)

                      What, then? The best I am able to come up with is that there *was* a lunatic
                      Jesus Ananias who prophesied the destruction of the city, but probably after the
                      siege began, and that he thereby got himself in somekind of trouble with the
                      authorities and thus left a trace in the documents that Josephus worked with.
                      (So far, an acceptable mass of coincidence; one can easily imagine kooks such
                      as this in Jerusalem under siege and Jesus was a very common name; Josephus
                      alone deals with some 20 Jesuses)

                      But it was not enough by itself for a good Josephan story. (And they *were* all
                      *very* good stories) By most accounts, I think, Josephus wrote 'War' in the
                      80s. About 10 years after Mark wrote 2G. I suspect that Josephus had a copy of
                      Mark's gospel in his library (or its predecessor PN), recognized the real
                      parallels, and copied the rest to
                      flesh out his story. If this is true, the real historical value of the Jesus
                      Ananias 'coincidence mass' lies in the fact that Josephus had access to Mark
                      before he wrote 'Antiquities' and the passages lying behind the Testimonium
                      Flavianum. Etc. Etc.

                      I love a mass coincidence in primary texts. As another Mark wrote about
                      Historical Geology:

                      "It yields such wholesale returns of conjecture out of a trifling investment
                      of fact"
                      From *Life on the Mississippi*
                      --
                      Best wishes, Odell

                      Odell McGuire
                      omcguire@...
                      Prof. Geology Em., W&L
                      Lexington, VA
                    • Tom Ragland
                      All that is being attempted is to abstract concepts and put them into a relational framework and intuitively deduce insights by the construction. This is the
                      Message 10 of 16 , Oct 2, 2000
                        All that is being attempted is to abstract concepts and put them into a
                        relational framework and intuitively deduce insights by the construction.
                        This is the basis for Kaballah (Quabalah, and other spellings), which is
                        supposed to be the mystical tradition of Judaism going back to before the
                        time of Jesus. Judaism sees three divisions in their tradition. The Bible
                        (Old Testament, Torah and Prophets) is the physical set of rules and
                        instructions for the physical molding to the covenant. The Talmud (which we
                        in Christian tradition may think of the Church Fathers instead) is the
                        mental reflection on the covenant, the logical arguments and conclusions.
                        The Kaballah is the mystical gnosis, the direct intuitive link as reflected
                        to the chosen by the archangel Metatron. There are countless books that
                        show evidence of Kaballistic understanding in the writers of the books of
                        Ezekiel and Isaiah, thus pushing the tradition back quite a distance. "For
                        thine is the kingdom and the power and the glory forever and ever" ending to
                        the Lord's Prayer is an obvious reference to Kaballah to anyone who has
                        experienced the Tree of Life. All of this to say that Kaballah is a system
                        of rearranging ideas according to themes and studying the relationships of
                        these ideas at a level higher than that of rational logic. It is intuitive
                        and inspirational and the Jews say that it is angels who guide the awakened
                        insights that are received as if by intuition and an experience that cannot
                        be put back into words. This is why the Kaballah is not a text but rather a
                        drawing. The discussions about the deity in the ancient Gnostic texts prove
                        that early Gnostic Christianity was Kaballistic. The "Self Begotten", the
                        "Silent One", Christos, Logos, the Virgin Mother, the emanations and
                        overflowings, the Sophia who wanted to know the Father and thus gave birth
                        to the universe, the Zoe who is the etheric aura that sustains life--all
                        relate back to the greatest treasure that Judaism has given to the world.
                        It is all confusing contradictory words until placed in the organizational
                        structure of the Kaballah. And then it all comes together, but in a way
                        that you can't explain in just logical terms. But you can introduce someone
                        to the Kaballah and have them come to the same realizations. Sort of a
                        holistic reptilian primative understanding that dissipates in the light of
                        the almighty logical ego trip. Heart over head once again. Seems to be a
                        reoccuring theme of gnosis in general.


                        On Fri, 29 Sep 2000 22:39:37 -0600, jbauer@... wrote:


                        -----Original Message-----
                        From: Andrew Smith <asmith@...>
                        To: gthomas@egroups.com <gthomas@egroups.com>
                        Date: Friday, September 29, 2000 6:18 PM
                        Subject: [gthomas] Re: Saying 45


                        >> I take this as another piece of internal
                        >> evidence for the jigsaw puzzle theory, according to which the
                        >reader
                        >> is intended to rearrange parts of GoT - even to remove parts of it
                        >-
                        >> to form a different, more perfect, structure than appears at first.

                        This sounds like the "Bible codes" which are so popular with
                        Fundamentalists
                        now. Just in case you're unsure what I mean, they do things like read
                        every
                        fifth word & then pretend some meaningful insight to what's really
                        nonsense.
                        The jigsaw puzzle is probably equally eroneous unless you can show how
                        using
                        Thomas this way actually produces any more coherent view of the whole. I
                        think finding such "meaning" is probably of the same order as the meaning
                        of
                        dreams in the psychoanalysis game. Dennet used it in _Consciousness
                        Explained_ (the title of which historian of science Bob Richards said
                        should
                        be followed by a question mark).

                        Dennet uses it as an explanation of hallucination. The game consists of
                        sending one of the party members as a dupe to leave the room while the
                        remaider of the party concoct a dream for him to analyze. It is to be
                        related to him by his asking the remainder yes-no questions When the dupe
                        is gone the remainder agree that they will answer yes if the last letter
                        of
                        the last word is in the first half of the alphabet & no if otherwise. In
                        short, the dupe concocts a dream out of the questions provided him. I'm
                        afraid any attempt to break Thomas down into a code or jigsaw puzzle
                        probably has you asking the same kind of questions & getting the same kind
                        of answers.

                        Jim Bauer
                        >>
                        >>
                        >-------------------------------------------------
                        >To post to gthomas, send email to gthomas@egroups.com
                        >To unsubscribe, send a blank email to gthomas-unsubscribe@egroups.com


                        -------------------------------------------------
                        To post to gthomas, send email to gthomas@egroups.com
                        To unsubscribe, send a blank email to gthomas-unsubscribe@egroups.com



                        Tom Ragland --> tomragland@...
                        http://www.geocities.com/Athens/Parthenon/8219/centuries/





                        _______________________________________________________
                        Say Bye to Slow Internet!
                        http://www.home.com/xinbox/signup.html
                      Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.