posted April 03, 2008 07:03 PM         

I'm afraid I still don't understand the message you are sending me. In reading this article, I read the words and mull them over. When my heart feels the energy of these words, I sense their lightness of character, that they are not intended for serious consideration.

Just a few examples:

"Then there's the passage where Jesus commanded his diciples to carry nothing in their purse (Mark 6:8). Since only women carry purses, this might suggest that the diciples were women too or that Jesus wanted them to dress up like girls."

" "Yes, but what about Christ's dildo that was found next to the Yoni" questioned professor Clout."

I don't believe that TINK was being arrogant. I think she was aptly perceptive of the humor in the article's words.

The reason I bring this up is because I was extremely surprised by your post:

quote:

---

The date gives cause for suspicion, but proves nothing.
Some, if not all, of this may yet be true.

You have to look closely.

---

Perhaps you are looking too closely at the article and giving it a greater benefit of the doubt than it deserves. That is, unless I misunderstand the meaning of that post...

They see only the chaff, and not the grain.

posted April 03, 2008 07:49 PM           

Oddly, it seemed to me that HSC also found it amusing. Comments about the "backlash" and "looking closely" apparently weren't spoken with tongue in cheek after all.

posted April 03, 2008 07:57 PM           

I essentially agree with what you and TINK percieved.

The post you quoted was before I heard what what you and she had to say.

I ought to have given her credit for that.

What I perceived as arrogance had more to do with TINK's delivery,
and with the fact that she did not see more than the joke.

The intention of the piece is a separate question than the one now raised.

There is truth in the words of a fool, but the fool doesnt know it.

The question is, "Do you hear only what the fool hears?"

Moreover, we cannot know the source of all this information.

That it was compiled in jest is fairly undeniable;
that everything in the article is a lie is not.

posted April 03, 2008 07:58 PM           

quote:

---

I thought the article was funny in a cheeky, lighthearted sort of way. I suppose someone might have been offended by it. I suppose it's also possible that someone might take offense to my amusement. I'm sorry if either is the case.

Oddly, it seemed to me that HSC also found it amusing. Comments about the "backlash" and "looking closely" apparently weren't spoken with tongue in cheek after all.

Unfortunately, I wasn't blessed with HSC's intelligence and profundity. So possibly I'm just missing something.

---

Well said.

posted April 03, 2008 08:00 PM           

Well said.

ROFL, not to blow one's own trumpet eh, HSC?

Words, words.
They are so finite.

posted April 03, 2008 08:02 PM         

That makes sense now. Thank you for the clarification.

Blessings to you, too.

posted April 03, 2008 08:02 PM           

quote:

---

with the fact that she did not see more than the joke.

---

Is that a fact?

posted April 03, 2008 08:03 PM           

99 out of 100 times, when I blow my own trumpet,
it is because I am in a position of defending myself, and the truth.

posted April 03, 2008 08:04 PM           

quote:

---

Hsc, you don't know what I see or think or feel. Nor I you. Can we leave it at that please?

---

I asserted nothing there that you did not assert yourself.

And, yes, let's leave it at that.

posted April 03, 2008 08:33 PM         

:slaps HSC on the arse:

posted April 03, 2008 09:44 PM           

In the beginning in soul form, we were 2 in 1, both female and male, polarities contained in one whole...

the first humans, were both, One Whole Soul, male and female, androgyne...

this did not work...so

they were split in two....

One female and One male

two halfs...opposites

polar

I'm amazed at how many posts there are for this ridiculous story. ...

posted April 03, 2008 10:24 PM           

see, this subject makes me spiral...

back to Hitler, and his fascination with twins..
all the extreme experiments that were conducted on twins..

to make an adrogyne...

He was into the occult, and secret sects...
they were trying for mastership
physically...

big mistake...

we must work with the God within..our TrueS-elf. ...

and, BTW, that picture is so gross, lol

posted April 03, 2008 10:40 PM           

I have to CANCEL...saying that picture was gross...

CANCEL...

posted April 03, 2008 11:30 PM           

that Mary Magdalene, was a Master, along side Jesus, his equal, this had to be hidden...

Individuals, Masters 2 in 1
whole
but, side by side

two pillars

1 1

posted November 09, 2009 01:52 PM         

quote:

---

It's hard to believe Jesus may have been a woman, but then again, anything is possible.

I have heard the debate over the years, that Jesus was homosexual.

---