<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Secret Mark, part 4</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.gospels.net/2009/08/secret-mark-part-4/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.gospels.net/2009/08/secret-mark-part-4/</link>
	<description>an online resource dedicated to the Gospel of Thomas and other early Christian Gospels</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Thu, 25 Feb 2010 20:21:18 -0800</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.4</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: Maurice Cormier</title>
		<link>http://www.gospels.net/2009/08/secret-mark-part-4/comment-page-1/#comment-1792</link>
		<dc:creator>Maurice Cormier</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 21 Aug 2009 22:27:52 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.gospels.net/?p=1221#comment-1792</guid>
		<description>Hello Andrew ...

I&#039;m thoroughly enjoying your insightful thoughts on Secret Mark Part 4. 

To my mind, your summary will serve as a true testimonial to what is highly problematic about some of the biblical research done by academe in this day and age ... which I often describe as an &quot;age of knowledge all too often brought about by unproven givens&quot;. 

Typically, all too many researchers today seem to be too highly pampered and busy to actually go out and &quot;do the true hard research&quot; required to arrive at a valid conclusion, and at times some content themselves to do mere &quot;summaries&quot; of research done by others (their precursors or their contemporaries) to add credibility to their work while thereafter positing academic concensus (and sometimes &quot;pure speculation&quot;) as &quot;givens of the realm&quot;. Case in point! 

The &quot;view&quot; that Hedrick expresses (that the union between Jesus and his disciple MAY HAVE BEEN physical) is in no way founded in the text, and suddenly this view constitutes an alleged &quot;given&quot; by and to homophobics (including no doubt many &quot;follow the leader research types&quot;) that the proverbial baby should now be immediately thrown out with the bathwater ...

A quick 2 minute search on the symbolic use of notions related to nudity, discarding clothing etc as used in even the New Testament should tell even the most gullible of researchers that 
the nudity symbolism used in Secret Mark is such as to convey a message of the shedding of temporal values in exchange for embracing  spiritual values. For example, in the New Testament, when Jesus was crucified and “stripped of his clothing”, the meaning is being added to the text that Jesus&#039; earthly power was as of that moment symbolically being taken from him. 

In the Old Testament / Genesis, when Adam and Eve discovered that &quot;they were naked”, they were suddenly realizing that they had lost their God given “powers over this temporal / material world”. 

Again, even in apocryphal gospels such as the Gospel of Thomas (logia 21, 36, 37 etc) for example (where similar expressions are used) it is clear that the notion of discarding clothing means passing from a temporal/material existence to one which is caracterized by acquired spirituality and extemporal values. (&quot;“When you disrobe without being ashamed and take up your garments and place them under your feet like little children and tread on them, then [will you see] the Son of the Living One, and you will not be afraid”). 

In summary, t&#039;is perhaps best to keep in mind that all too often, &quot;an expert is merely someone from out of town&quot; and not necessarily someone we should all follow blindly .... 

My thoughts, anyways ...

Maurice</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Hello Andrew &#8230;</p>
<p>I&#8217;m thoroughly enjoying your insightful thoughts on Secret Mark Part 4. </p>
<p>To my mind, your summary will serve as a true testimonial to what is highly problematic about some of the biblical research done by academe in this day and age &#8230; which I often describe as an &#8220;age of knowledge all too often brought about by unproven givens&#8221;. </p>
<p>Typically, all too many researchers today seem to be too highly pampered and busy to actually go out and &#8220;do the true hard research&#8221; required to arrive at a valid conclusion, and at times some content themselves to do mere &#8220;summaries&#8221; of research done by others (their precursors or their contemporaries) to add credibility to their work while thereafter positing academic concensus (and sometimes &#8220;pure speculation&#8221;) as &#8220;givens of the realm&#8221;. Case in point! </p>
<p>The &#8220;view&#8221; that Hedrick expresses (that the union between Jesus and his disciple MAY HAVE BEEN physical) is in no way founded in the text, and suddenly this view constitutes an alleged &#8220;given&#8221; by and to homophobics (including no doubt many &#8220;follow the leader research types&#8221;) that the proverbial baby should now be immediately thrown out with the bathwater &#8230;</p>
<p>A quick 2 minute search on the symbolic use of notions related to nudity, discarding clothing etc as used in even the New Testament should tell even the most gullible of researchers that<br />
the nudity symbolism used in Secret Mark is such as to convey a message of the shedding of temporal values in exchange for embracing  spiritual values. For example, in the New Testament, when Jesus was crucified and “stripped of his clothing”, the meaning is being added to the text that Jesus&#8217; earthly power was as of that moment symbolically being taken from him. </p>
<p>In the Old Testament / Genesis, when Adam and Eve discovered that &#8220;they were naked”, they were suddenly realizing that they had lost their God given “powers over this temporal / material world”. </p>
<p>Again, even in apocryphal gospels such as the Gospel of Thomas (logia 21, 36, 37 etc) for example (where similar expressions are used) it is clear that the notion of discarding clothing means passing from a temporal/material existence to one which is caracterized by acquired spirituality and extemporal values. (&#8221;“When you disrobe without being ashamed and take up your garments and place them under your feet like little children and tread on them, then [will you see] the Son of the Living One, and you will not be afraid”). </p>
<p>In summary, t&#8217;is perhaps best to keep in mind that all too often, &#8220;an expert is merely someone from out of town&#8221; and not necessarily someone we should all follow blindly &#8230;. </p>
<p>My thoughts, anyways &#8230;</p>
<p>Maurice</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
