Thread: Only man is fit to be God.

Originally Posted by Deanstar

see that's a prejudice judgment, that I belittle people and that I 'choose' to have an elite religion.

You've said to others they follow anti-christ religions, you've disrespect faiths other than your own, you've called mathematicians retards and misrepresented people in arguments. This is not how you would want to be treated, yet you treat others this way.

I also didn't say you chose to have a religion or the qualities of having chosen a religion. Please re-read my post.

Originally Posted by Darkmatters

[

B]@Gnostic[/B], I'm really fascinated by what you've been revealing about gnostic religion. It seems to be far and away the most common-sense, straightforward, and intelligent take on religion I could imagine, without any of the silly stories or easily falsifiable proclamations that trip up other religions. None of the double standard morality. A religion that can be taken seriously in the modern world, where science unfortunately has eviscerated any other type of religion, causing a great deal of cognitive dissonance among the followers and spurring Nietzsche's declaration that God is dead.

I chose Gnostic Christianity because it is a thinking man's religion. Most others, especially the Abrahamic cults, Catholics, Christians and Islam do not allow thinking out of their perspective boxes. It is their literal way or the highway. That is why they are stuck in the Dark Ages with draconian laws that no civilized person would ever vote into law. Another of the main reasons is that I like to argue religion and philosophy and since I already suited this quote, I was all in.

Said of Gnostic Christian versus Christian reading practices. ---- “Both read the Bible day and night; but you read black where I read white.”
William Blake.

And especially after reading Elaine Pagels.

One thing you haven't covered is what God is, does or did.

I define God as just the ideals in laws and rules. Those are the only thing of any God's that can be followed. There is no other way to follow a God. My apotheosis did show me that there is a cosmic consciousness but it does not order us. It is just our next evolutionary step and only interacts with those who seek God as Jesus urges and finds it. It is not the miracle working super God that most religions invented in their pissing contest for the most fantastic attributes. Those are obviously all lies. The only comment I took from the cosmic consciousness was to think more demographically. Good advice.

Though I suspect that's unfathomable, as it probably should be in any religion.

Theirs is as they have driven their God to that with all their attributes, while saying he is unfathomable. Talk about a glaring contradiction.

Do Gnostics believe God created the universe?

We are perpetual seeking and cannot know that till we find some kind of supernatural entity. I do not think this will happen soon.

We do believe in the concept of the third or single eye, which is just our greater or deeper mind. Something like the mystics believe in. The source of enlightenment. At the same time, we preach that any belief system one believes, true or not, myth or not, can be internalized to open the single eye.

Do they believe in any kind of afterlife? Or are these also unfathomable mysteries?

I cannot speak for all Gnostic and if another has not forced his apotheosis would not necessarily think as I do but thanks to my Gnosis, I know that there is an after life in the cosmic consciousness stated above.

Science might prove it soon if this research bears fruit.

Through The Wormhole - Is There A Sixth Sense PART 2/2 on Vimeo

Regards
DL

Originally Posted by Darkmatters

@Gnostic, I'm really fascinated by what you've been revealing about gnostic religion. It seems to be far and away the most common-sense, straightforward, and intelligent take on religion I could imagine, without any of the silly stories or easily falsifiable proclamations that trip up other religions. None of the double standard morality. A religion that can be taken seriously in the modern world, where science unfortunately has eviscerated any other type of religion, causing a great deal of cognitive dissonance among the followers and spurring Nietzsche's declaration that God is dead. One thing you haven't covered is what God is, does or did. Though I suspect that's unfathomable, as it probably should be in any religion. Do Gnostics believe God created the universe? Do they believe in any kind of afterlife? Or are these also unfathomable mysteries?

Originally Posted by Deanstar

The main philosophy of Gnostic is that your body is a prison that the material world is a trap! They reason that the fall from grace is not due to disobeying God, but they assume that it's just a clumsy God for either being evil or just not getting it right, and that it's their job to fix everything, and become the God that saves the day themself. They in no way aknowledge the scriptures properly, and if they do, they get it wrong and distort it to their own theology. Just an anti-christ religion. Simple as that.

All ancient garbage.

We believe that we have a spark of God within us and, as Jesus said, the kingdom of God is within us. We venerate our bodies and that is part of the reason we do not oppress women and gays the way Christianity does.

You forget that the cursed earth and man is your Christian theology. Not Gnostic Christianity's.

Best to ask what our view are and not look the fool friend.

Regards
DL

We believe that we have a spark of God within us and, as Jesus said, the kingdom of God is within us.

Wow you basically just contradicted your entire thread. You cannot have a part of something in you if you don't believe in it. You believe in the kingdom of God within you, but you dont believe in God? Are you hearing yourself?

Originally Posted by Gnostic

as Jesus said, the kingdom of God is within us.

You attack Jesus, you called God a maniac. You can't use the teaching of Jesus and at the same time spit in his face.

Also luke 17:21 is talking about the spirit of the kingdom, that it does not belong to any particular church or building or institute. It has nothing to do with your gnostic philosophy (which from your posts is just anarchy no different from an atheist, just attacking scripture blindly) Ofcourse you allow gays and transgender and other gender confusions, that's part of sinning isnt it.

Originally Posted by Jookia

You've said to others they follow anti-christ religions, you've disrespect faiths other than your own, you've called mathematicians retards and misrepresented people in arguments. This is not how you would want to be treated, yet you treat others this way.

I also didn't say you chose to have a religion or the qualities of having chosen a religion. Please re-read my post.

you have such bitterness that it almost gives me a laugh, but then I remember I'm here to assist an not laugh at you. Man made religions are anti-christ doctrine. I didn't call mathematicians retards, I said if you think infinity belongs in maths, that's not a number. I used the word retard on the guy that was making multiple definitions of infinite saying "there is different types of infinity", but that's not true. There is only one infinity. That's just how I do my maths. I treated you with more respect than you did me. I didn't go pming you insulting messages and posting them all over the board.

Originally Posted by Jookia

I think it's hypocritical that he chooses that there's one true religion and it's his, and belittle other's beliefs.

He never said that he thought it was wrong to belittle others' beliefs because one thinks it's wrong, so your point is kind of lost on me. Yes, maybe it seems stupid to you, but holding your own belief in something says absolutely nothing about belittling others' beliefs. I mean is it really any different than an atheist who says someone is an idiot for failing to recognize the legitimacy of the evidence supporting evolution? I'm sorry, but I actually have to disagree with you and side with Deanstar on this one. You were misconstruing my point entirely.

edit:

Also, to clarify, I was speaking specifically in reference to the post I quoted. Don't misunderstand me and bring up another post of his and call me an idiot, because I wasn't talking about any of those other posts.

^ I think that's kind of implied by "Hate sin but love the sinners" (you know, the old-school version of "Don't hate the player, hate the game"). And that's not just bringing up another of his posts, it's his ideology, which should inform all of his decisions and all of his posts.

Originally Posted by OneUp

Wow you basically just contradicted your entire thread. You cannot have a part of something in you if you don't believe in it. You believe in the kingdom of God within you, but you dont believe in God? Are you hearing yourself?

Are you hearing that Gnostics are perpetual seekers and are not idol worshipers.

Do you believe in a God?

If you do and name him then you are an idol worshiper.
All Christians are as they are literalists and fools to read myths literally. Christians do not have a monopoly on God.

Did Jesus say seek God or I am God?

He said to seek God and that says that he is not God. He does claim to be a lower case g god though.

Regards
DL

Originally Posted by Deanstar

You attack Jesus, you called God a maniac. You can't use the teaching of Jesus and at the same time spit in his face.

I can do whatever I like with the Roman ass kissing Jesus you believe in while respecting the esoteric Jesus that you ignore. The only one who can enlighten your pathetic literal mind.

Also luke 17:21 is talking about the spirit of the kingdom, that it does not belong to any particular church or building or institute. It has nothing to do with your gnostic philosophy (which from your posts is just anarchy no different from an atheist, just attacking scripture blindly) Ofcourse you allow gays and transgender and other gender confusions, that's part of sinning isnt it.

Only to homophobic creeps who preach love while trying to deny it to millions. Hypocrites IOW.

Look at what your ilk are doing.

Death to Gays.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RMw2Z...eature=related

you have such bitterness that it almost gives me a laugh, but then I remember I'm here to assist an not laugh at you.

Not bitterness. More like disgust at the morality you spew.

Man made religions are anti-christ doctrine.

Your religion is man made. Why do you only have four main gospels? Because your founding fathers said there were only four winds. Do you really think a God would think that stupid way?

Regards
DL

Originally Posted by Darkmatters

^ I think that's kind of implied by "Hate sin but love the sinners" (you know, the old-school version of "Don't hate the player, hate the game"). And that's not just bringing up another of his posts, it's his ideology, which should inform all of his decisions and all of his posts.

Okay, I'll bite. My point in defending him in this case is more or less to point out to Jookia that he's far from the only person to act that way, and indeed it is rather... well, perhaps disgusting is too strong a word. Distasteful, maybe? Case in point, atheists hold their beliefs and belittle theists for having their's literally just as often. I'm tempted to say that it actually happens more often, but I can't back that claim up so I won't. This site is a pretty good example, actually most of the internet is.

Originally Posted by snoop

atheists hold their beliefs and belittle theists for having their's

Technically atheism means "having no belief", but I know what you mean. You're saying atheists also claim to be good moral people. Ok, true. I don't often accuse Christians of being hypocrites, and I certainly don't accuse them all of it - only the ones who claim moral high ground (the fundamentalists mostly) and yet demonstrate that they're not at all morally superior. I've never claimed moral superiority for atheists.

All Christians are as they are literalists and fools to read myths literally. Christians do not have a monopoly on God.

HOLY CRAP. For the past 5 replies, and even my other replies in past threads, I continuously told you that the Bible is not, let me repeat that, not all literal. Most of it is symbolism.

Let me say it one more time so it really gets into your head: The Bible is not all literal, most of it is symbolism and figurative language.

Honestly, I thought you would've picked up on that since your are supposedly the expert here, but I guessed wrong; and I really do know more than you it seems. I don't know whether you are trolling me right now, or whether you really do have no idea what you are talking about. I shall kindly give you this advice: Really, and I mean really pay attention to each post/reply that you read, it will really keep your head in the game, and you won't be totally off topic. It will also prevent you from continuously making the same mistakes, same incorrect assumptions, and will also save me the time from having to constantly repeat myself.

Regards
OneUp

I kind of relate the Bible to a collection of fables. I am sorry if this offends anyone regardless of what you consider your religion or lack of one. I am amazed that the reading of one passage can be interpreted one way at a point in time and another at a future date. That being said, I remember looking to certain passages for comfort or knowledge and realizing that same thing. One year a certain passage spoke to a certain trouble I was having, then several years later the same passage shed some insight into another problem or dilemma and so on. Is it just a cleaver evolution or the wording and translation that accomplishes this, or the nature of the human mind to seek what can be useful and turn it into a revelation for which some thank an unseen, unproven God for?

Originally Posted by OneUp

HOLY CRAP. For the past 5 replies, and even my other replies in past threads, I continuously told you that the Bible is not, let me repeat that, not all literal. Most of it is symbolism.

Let me say it one more time so it really gets into your head: The Bible is not all literal, most of it is symbolism and figurative language.

Honestly, I thought you would've picked up on that since your are supposedly the expert here, but I guessed wrong; and I really do know more than you it seems. I don't know whether you are trolling me right now, or whether you really do have no idea what you are talking about. I shall kindly give you this advice: Really, and I mean really pay attention to each post/reply that you read, it will really keep your head in the game, and you won't be totally off topic. It will also prevent you from continuously making the same mistakes, same incorrect assumptions, and will also save me the time from having to constantly repeat myself.

Regards
OneUp

All who read any scriptures literally are idol worshiping fools.

All Christians must read the bible literally to believe in a literal Christ and thus all literalist Christians are fools.

Cherry pickers but fools nevertheless. Only a fool would read a book that begins with talking animals and thing any of it should be read as literal truth.

“Faith must trample under foot all reason, sense, and understanding.”
“Reason is a whore, the greatest enemy that faith has.”
Martin Luther “

Literal belief puts the rest of us in a position where reasoning with theist becomes impossible.

It is useless to attempt to reason a man out of a thing he was never reasoned into.
Jonathan Swift

Literalism is an evil practice that hides the true messages of myths.

Regards
DL

Originally Posted by Gnostic

All who read any scriptures literally are idol worshiping fools.

All Christians must read the bible literally to believe in a literal Christ and thus all literalist Christians are fools.

Cherry pickers but fools nevertheless. Only a fool would read a book that begins with talking animals and thing any of it should be read as literal truth.

“Faith must trample under foot all reason, sense, and understanding.”
“Reason is a whore, the greatest enemy that faith has.”
Martin Luther “

Literal belief puts the rest of us in a position where reasoning with theist becomes impossible.

It is useless to attempt to reason a man out of a thing he was never reasoned into.
Jonathan Swift

Literalism is an evil practice that hides the true messages of myths.

Regards
DL

Wow, you've stunned me, in a bad way. You even quoted my last reply and still did not comprehend what I said.

I see now that I am wasting my time here. Even as my repeat myself more than 5 times, you still don't understand. HOW do you keep misinterpreting what I am saying.

I will tell you over and over again that most of the Bible is not literal and that it is mostly symbolism and yet anyways you will still reply as if I said the opposite.

Do you not understand the English language or something? Just curious.

I'm done here. I've never met someone who misunderstands people as much as you do, but please, don't take that as a direct insult. I'm only being honest.

All who believe in a real Jesus must read scriptures literally.

No choice.

All who read scriptures literally are fools.

Regards
DL

Originally Posted by Gnostic

All who believe in a real Jesus must read scriptures literally.

No choice.

All who read scriptures literally are fools.

Regards
DL

Ok, at this point I can see you really know either very little, or nothing at all about the Bible. If you read the entire Bible, taking it all in literally, you are the fool. I'm not going to repeat myself anymore.

Your statement, "All who believe in a real Jesus must read scriptures literally" is nonsense. That is not a requirement at all, but merely a rule that you made up.

From this post onward, I will not reply to this thread anymore, I shouldn't have even replied to this, but considering the ignorance of your reply I felt obliged too.

Read my last 4 or 5 posts over again, then slowly think about what you yourself keep repeating. Now you'll realize that all of your replies concerning the way one should look at the context of the Bible are literally nonsense.

Originally Posted by OneUp

Ok, at this point I can see you really know either very little, or nothing at all about the Bible. If you read the entire Bible, taking it all in literally, you are the fool. I'm not going to repeat myself anymore.

Your statement, "All who believe in a real Jesus must read scriptures literally" is nonsense. That is not a requirement at all, but merely a rule that you made up.

From this post onward, I will not reply to this thread anymore, I shouldn't have even replied to this, but considering the ignorance of your reply I felt obliged too.

Read my last 4 or 5 posts over again, then slowly think about what you yourself keep repeating. Now you'll realize that all of your replies concerning the way one should look at the context of the Bible are literally nonsense.

The only place where Jesus is written up as the prime source is in the bible. To believe in a real Jesus, one must read the bible literally as that is the only source of original information of Jesus.

You don't seem bright enough to recognize this truth.

What other possible primary source could lead to a literal belief in Jesus?

There is none.

Regards
DL

Gnostic, is it really that difficult to grasp the idea of taking some things literally and others as symbolism? Someone can believe in a literal Jesus without believing in all of the tales in the bible. You can believe in a Jesus but without the magical miracles.

The problem is that if some things in the bible are symbolic, then how do you go about finding out which things are symbolic and which things are literal? Or in short, the bible is useless if you're going to claim that it's symbolic.

Originally Posted by Gnostic

The only place where Jesus is written up as the prime source is in the bible. To believe in a real Jesus, one must read the bible literally as that is the only source of original information of Jesus.

You don't seem bright enough to recognize this truth.

What other possible primary source could lead to a literal belief in Jesus?

There is none.

Regards
DL

What the hell are you talking about? I didn't even mention a single thing about any sources of credibility of Jesus outside of the Bible.

I couldn't care less whether or not you believe he is real or not.

I see you didn't even pay attention to my post yet again

If anyone here lacks the brightness to really comprehend anything, it is you. You seem to not be able to understand any of my posts at all, and then you continue to reply to them with something that I wasn't even talking about.

The problem is that if some things in the bible are symbolic, then how do you go about finding out which things are symbolic and which things are literal? Or in short, the bible is useless if you're going to claim that it's symbolic.

That is why people actually study the context of the Bible on the daily. You don't just come to perfectly understand a religious text within a few days.

It works the same way that you would study classwork, it takes time and effort on the part of the reader to really start to gain a better understanding of the subject.

The problem nowadays is that everyone who reads the Bible tends to take everything within the Bible as literal. There's a journey indeed to come to a greater understanding of the Bible, and to Christians it is in fact a very warming experience that brings them closer to god himself.

Originally Posted by Maeni

Gnostic, is it really that difficult to grasp the idea of taking some things literally and others as symbolism?

No it is not and that is not what I was arguing. I was arguing that to believe in a literal Jesus then the bible must be read literally to some extent ass literal belief cannot come from any other primary source.

Someone can believe in a literal Jesus without believing in all of the tales in the bible.

Sure but take away Jesus' miracles and Christianity dies as it loses their savior.

You can believe in a Jesus but without the magical miracles.

Then he is just a man and not a savior and if the church loses it's cross, it has nothing left to call a God except the Jewish one they have tried to kill with the new covenant that Jesus provides.

The problem is that if some things in the bible are symbolic, then how do you go about finding out which things are symbolic and which things are literal? Or in short, the bible is useless if you're going to claim that it's symbolic.

I agree and then we would lose the decent esoteric teachings that Jesus, as a man and Rabbi taught.

That would be a loss. It was a decent empowering message.



Regards
DL

Originally Posted by OneUp

There's a journey indeed to come to a greater understanding of the Bible, and to Christians it is in fact a very warming experience that brings them closer to god himself.

Yep. Nothing warms the heart like getting close to a genocidal God who had his son needlessly murdered to appease his own wrath.

Oh wait. That was only symbolic. I should not read that part literally.

Regards
DL

Originally Posted by Gnostic

Yep. Nothing warms the heart like getting close to a genocidal God who had his son needlessly murdered to appease his own wrath.

Oh wait. That was only symbolic. I should not read that part literally.

Regards
DL

Lol I see that your complete arrogance and inability to understand simple messages has caused you to ignore my entire reply.

Originally Posted by OneUp

Lol I see that your complete arrogance and inability to understand simple messages has caused you to ignore my entire reply.

No. It is giving your message the moral slant it deserves.

Regards
DL

Originally Posted by Gnostic

No. It is giving your message the moral slant it deserves.

Regards
DL

XD think what you want

The fact is, you still ignored my entire last reply. Good job making yourself look like the fool here, especially on your own thread.

Maybe for future reference, try not to reply to only one sentence of someone's reply, but rather their entire reply because if you don't it only goes to show that you don't have an answer to their reply and so you can't back yourself up.

Regards
OneUp