tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6010494928772077300.post4553885539222558945..comments2024-03-01T14:26:39.432+01:00Comments on Sophia's Mirror: The two Mary'sEmmahttp://www.blogger.com/profile/11344595922514131573noreply@blogger.comBlogger3125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6010494928772077300.post-22020394310193999632013-01-13T16:37:44.724+01:002013-01-13T16:37:44.724+01:00And what a pleasure it is for me to have such know...And what a pleasure it is for me to have such knowledgeable and truth-loving readers on board.<br />But it is more than a pleasure, for I am very grateful for your insights which I value so much.Emmahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11344595922514131573noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6010494928772077300.post-86825676052841870932013-01-13T16:25:14.502+01:002013-01-13T16:25:14.502+01:00What a pleasure it is to have one's thinking s...What a pleasure it is to have one's thinking stretched by such posts and the ideas they contain! Emma's post here and Joseph's comment well express the idea that what seem like dualities are really different forms of the One. Polytheistic beliefs make this idea accessible, since all gods and goddesses are forms of the original unity, and our different 'selves' reflect that truth.<br /><br />Joseph mentions the recently-discovered fragment of Gnostic text. I'm inclined to think that those with a vested interest in not having their boat rocked (the forces of orthodoxy) are the ones who are going to shout 'forgery' the loudest! Impartial scholarship is what is needed in such situations - and at the moment impartial scholarship sees no reason to think that the fragment (which is written in Coptic) is not genuine. The fact that Jesus refers directly to Mary as his wife in the text is naturally very compelling. The textual context and the age of the fragment both conform to other Gnostic texts which have long been accepted as genuine.Hawkwoodhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07993700120131916459noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6010494928772077300.post-68782757300700786032013-01-13T03:43:27.336+01:002013-01-13T03:43:27.336+01:00The relationship between the two women both named ...The relationship between the two women both named Mary is an intriguing one. One has been called the Mother of God, the Virgin. The other has been hinted at by the Church of being as what Emma describes as a "redeemed whore." Some who have researched the Knights Templars are convinced that Mary Magdalene was the wife of Jesus, and there appears to be some convincing evidence for this including an ancient letter that has been brought to light showing evidence that Mary Magdalene was Jesus' wife. This has sparked controversy with some stating that the letter is fraudulent. I will let the experts settle this but I remain open to the possibility that this may be genuine. <br /><br />What this blog means to me is that the various "selves" that we live through are all small aspects of us. We can be a parent, a friend, a lover, an enemy, a stranger, a saint and a sinner. All in one! Similarly the aspects of our deities are ultimately aspects of our self. For example, in Buddhism we have the Buddha of Infinite Light, Amitabha. Amitabha is not an entity or Lord or deity separate from us. Amitabha is our true nature as Pure Consciosness. <br /><br />Emma writes:<br />"And perhaps all that it takes to unite the two Mary’s is our own awakening awareness of these traditions, and to realize that what had seemed to us to be two separate and individual women are in fact merely two aspects of the one goddess." <br /><br />Yes, and that goddess is you (and us)!<br /><br />Josephhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08209551489584694322noreply@blogger.com