Have you investigated Gnostic Christianity?

[Gnostic Christian Bishop]

Have you investigated Gnostic Christianity?

The Gnostic wing of Christianity, if it can even be called that today, has quite a few differences to Christianity and Catholicism.

If the old Gnostic Christians were here, they would hardly recognize what has happened to the original Orthodox Catholic Church or it's various offshoots in Protestantism or Islam. The Gnostic Christian Jesus would have a fit and would be quite disappointed I think. I know that this Gnostic Christian is.

The two main differences that moved the old Christians to kill Gnostic Christians and burn their scriptures was literalism in reading scriptures and the fact that the Gnostic version of Jesus was a Universalist.

That Gnostic Christian Jesus, and the Gnostic Christians of that flavor, (there are likely as many Gnostic sects as Christian sects), sees a spark of God in all people including women and gays. That fact, to me, makes Gnostic Christianity a more desirable denomination of Christianity than all the rest.

If a religion cannot abide with equality of the sexes then to my mind it is not a just religion and is not worthy of the support of moral people. Inequality is an immoral position and most of the Abrahamic cults are of that immoral persuasion.

As the superior Catholic theology, it is my hope that Gnostic Christianity will eventually bury the non-egalitarian and immoral Christian cults as their members recognize that equality is the right moral system for all to live under.

If you have investigated Gnostic Christianity, do you agree that from a moral POV, they are the superior Christian theology thanks to equality and Universalism?

Regards
DL

 

[Underseer]

What happened to the Gnostic Christians of old was a travesty, however the fact that your woo is very different from the woo of mainstream Christianity doesn't really change the fact that it's woo. It's all just a pile of ad hoc fallacies and argument from ignorance fallacies. Whether the fallacies in question are more imaginative or more appealing than the fallacies of the next religion is pretty much beside the point.

 

[Gnostic Christian Bishop]

What happened to the Gnostic Christians of old was a travesty, however the fact that your woo is very different from the woo of mainstream Christianity doesn't really change the fact that it's woo. It's all just a pile of ad hoc fallacies and argument from ignorance fallacies. Whether the fallacies in question are more imaginative or more appealing than the fallacies of the next religion is pretty much beside the point.

You make a good point.

The thing about Gnostic Christians is that we know that all religions are based on myths and we just know that those myths can be internalized to activate the pineal gland and open the third or single eye.

If you have a spiritual itch to scratch, although it sounds like you do not, bring whatever you want to believe to it and seek your God within.

If you have no spiritual itch to scratch, no problem. We likely share the same morals as I dislike the Christian ones.

Meditation and seeking the higher man within you, you can still do even if an atheist and that is all I recommend.

You think it woo but it worked for me and there is no woo involved just meditation.

Gnostic Christians believe that there is nothing greater than man and that God is to serve us and not us him.

Regards
DL

 

[Angry Floof]

The only moral version of Christianity is one that is completely metaphor, in which case the details of the story become irrelevant to truth as the metaphors can be replaced with any other metaphorical model from any mythology with no moral qualms. If the story of Jesus represents personal transcendence, then so can the story of a phoenix rising from ashes or any other resurrection myth.

Had Gnostic Christianity won out in the competitive selection process, it would still likely exist today as just as destructive a force of divisiveness and ignorance as the current versions. All you need is a handful of ideological teachers and mouthpieces preaching any part of the story as literal and/or forwarding the story as superior to other myths and belief systems, that these particular symbols and stories actually are the truth and not just another image of the search for truth.

Do you go to a restaurant and eat the menu because it shows symbols representing food? If not, then why consume a belief system of symbols as if the symbols are what they represent? That is poisonous ideology in a nutshell.

 

[Sarpedon]

Why yes, I have. The Gnostics were the only ones to really have a good answer to the Problem of Evil.

The fact that such a reasonable group of Christians were wiped out through violence is a salutory lesson on how the cult mentality works.

 

[Gnostic Christian Bishop]

The only moral version of Christianity is one that is completely metaphor, in which case the details of the story become irrelevant to truth as the metaphors can be replaced with any other metaphorical model from any mythology with no moral qualms. If the story of Jesus represents personal transcendence, then so can the story of a phoenix rising from ashes or any other resurrection myth.

Had Gnostic Christianity won out in the competitive selection process, it would still likely exist today as just as destructive a force of divisiveness and ignorance as the current versions. All you need is a handful of ideological teachers and mouthpieces preaching any part of the story as literal and/or forwarding the story as superior to other myths and belief systems, that these particular symbols and stories actually are the truth and not just another image of the search for truth.

Do you go to a restaurant and eat the menu because it shows symbols representing food? If not, then why consume a belief system of symbols as if the symbols are what they represent? That is poisonous ideology in a nutshell.

I will not try to predict what Gnostic Christianity would be if Christians had not almost destroyed all of it's scriptures but I like it for it's morality and Universalism.

It just happens that it is easier for our minds to absorb symbols and use them internally for enlightenment than to try to use real life characters. Real life is in the left hemisphere of the brain and it is the right side that needs the stimulation.

Constantine likely had us killed off due to the fact that we gave women the equality they should never have lost. That an the Christian sheep were just that. Sheep.

Regards
DL

 

[Gnostic Christian Bishop]

Why yes, I have. The Gnostics were the only ones to really have a good answer to the Problem of Evil.

The fact that such a reasonable group of Christians were wiped out through violence is a salutory lesson on how the cult mentality works.

I hear you and blame Constantine.

Can I ask you to expand on the Gnostic Christian explanation for evil as you know it?

Do you mean our invention of the demiurge?

Regards
DL

 

[Angry Floof]

The only moral version of Christianity is one that is completely metaphor, in which case the details of the story become irrelevant to truth as the metaphors can be replaced with any other metaphorical model from any mythology with no moral qualms. If the story of Jesus represents personal transcendence, then so can the story of a phoenix rising from ashes or any other resurrection myth.

Had Gnostic Christianity won out in the competitive selection process, it would still likely exist today as just as destructive a force of divisiveness and ignorance as the current versions. All you need is a handful of ideological teachers and mouthpieces preaching any part of the story as literal and/or forwarding the story as superior to other myths and belief systems, that these particular symbols and stories actually are the truth and not just another image of the search for truth.

Do you go to a restaurant and eat the menu because it shows symbols representing food? If not, then why consume a belief system of symbols as if the symbols are what they represent? That is poisonous ideology in a nutshell.

I will not try to predict what Gnostic Christianity would be if Christians had not almost destroyed all of it's scriptures but I like it for it's morality and Universalism.

Why not? You might find it a useful exercise to question why any belief system might morph into zealotry. At the very least, such an exercise could reveal what underlying assumptions you might be accepting without question.

It just happens that it is easier for our minds to absorb symbols and use them internally for enlightenment than to try to use real life characters.

True, I agree that low cognitive effort contributes to our inability as a species to rise above ideological disease.

Real life is in the left hemisphere of the brain and it is the right side that needs the stimulation.

Sounds like cognitive behavioral science would be a more useful belief system for you. I mean, if you must choose one above all others...

Constantine likely had us killed off due to the fact that we gave women the equality they should never have lost. That an the Christian sheep were just that. Sheep.

So you are willing, after all, to examine what might have been...

In my view, if you can't list at least a dozen schools of thought, philosophies, ideologies, views, belief systems, etc., as influencing your own, then you're probably a fanatic waiting to happen. I mean, you're clearly a thoughtful, humane person and you've picked a belief system that you think best reflects and inspires that in you. That's admirable, but it's still one system you're forwarding. If you truly recognize that the answers are in you and not in any symbols, no matter how nice, then you don't need to place any one story above all others. You certainly don't need to encourage that in others. If you do, then your personal transcendence has limited value for anyone else, Bishop.

 

[Sarpedon]

They are the only ones to have a convincing explanation of how there could be an all good god and an evil world. By positing that creation was an involuntary act, hijacked by an imperfect lesser being, Gnosticism avoids the inevitable conclusion that God is Evil that all other monotheistic sects fall into (yet vigorously deny)

The fact that gnosticism was destroyed by violence shows that even plausible seeming religions aren't necessarily true. Of course, religious people have all kinds of excuses for the Problem of Losing (tm), but having your religion wiped out remains a fairly convincing argument that your god isn't real.

 

[Angry Floof]

They are the only ones to have a convincing explanation of how there could be an all good god and an evil world. By positing that creation was an involuntary act, hijacked by an imperfect lesser being, Gnosticism avoids the inevitable conclusion that God is Evil that all other monotheistic sects fall into (yet vigorously deny)

The fact that gnosticism was destroyed by violence shows that even plausible seeming religions aren't necessarily true. Of course, religious people have all kinds of excuses for the Problem of Losing (tm), but having your religion wiped out remains a fairly convincing argument that your god isn't real.

Or that it could be true (or truer than others) but still not be useful to the peace and well being of humanity.

As far as I can tell, Socrates' simple questioning method is the only useful ideology. Anything that claims to be the answer is just another story distracting us from looking further.

 

[none]

@Gnostic Christian Bishop, do you have a definition of God, and is the story of Jesus myth in your opinion...?

 

[Keith&Co.]

If you have investigated Gnostic Christianity, do you agree that from a moral POV, they are the superior Christian theology thanks to equality and Universalism?

No, i do not.
What i see in your post is marketing. You're claiming your product is more palatable to modern morality.
But while i may agree with the bullet points of your morality, it's still based on a great big assumption i find hard to swallow. So there's no great advantage to one system over another, if i don't share that assumption. To join with or approve of a religion, i'd have to have some reason to think they're right, not just easier to swallow.

Don't take this wrong, but glossier, longer-lasting lipstick on the pig doesn't make it any more fun to kiss.

 

[Underseer]

What happened to the Gnostic Christians of old was a travesty, however the fact that your woo is very different from the woo of mainstream Christianity doesn't really change the fact that it's woo. It's all just a pile of ad hoc fallacies and argument from ignorance fallacies. Whether the fallacies in question are more imaginative or more appealing than the fallacies of the next religion is pretty much beside the point.

You make a good point.

The thing about Gnostic Christians is that we know that all religions are based on myths and we just know that those myths can be internalized to activate the pineal gland and open the third or single eye.

If you have a spiritual itch to scratch, although it sounds like you do not, bring whatever you want to believe to it and seek your God within.

If you have no spiritual itch to scratch, no problem. We likely share the same morals as I dislike the Christian ones.

Meditation and seeking the higher man within you, you can still do even if an atheist and that is all I recommend.

You think it woo but it worked for me and there is no woo involved just meditation.

Gnostic Christians believe that there is nothing greater than man and that God is to serve us and not us him.

Regards
DL

Meditation involves nothing but internal observation. If it helps calm you down or whatever, then great, but no truth arrived at by meditation can ever be proved to anyone other than yourself, which makes discoveries derived from meditation necessarily useless knowledge-wise.

 

[GenesisNemesis]

To answer the OP's question, no.

 

[Gnostic Christian Bishop]

The only moral version of Christianity is one that is completely metaphor, in which case the details of the story become irrelevant to truth as the metaphors can be replaced with any other metaphorical model from any mythology with no moral qualms. If the story of Jesus represents personal transcendence, then so can the story of a phoenix rising from ashes or any other resurrection myth.

Had Gnostic Christianity won out in the competitive selection process, it would still likely exist today as just as destructive a force of divisiveness and ignorance as the current versions. All you need is a handful of ideological teachers and mouthpieces preaching any part of the story as literal and/or forwarding the story as superior to other myths and belief systems, that these particular symbols and stories actually are the truth and not just another image of the search for truth.

Do you go to a restaurant and eat the menu because it shows symbols representing food? If not, then why consume a belief system of symbols as if the symbols are what they represent? That is poisonous ideology in a nutshell.

I will not try to predict what Gnostic Christianity would be if Christians had not almost destroyed all of it's scriptures but I like it for it's morality and Universalism.

Why not? You might find it a useful exercise to question why any belief system might morph into zealotry. At the very least, such an exercise could reveal what underlying assumptions you might be accepting without question.

It just happens that it is easier for our minds to absorb symbols and use them internally for enlightenment than to try to use real life characters.

True, I agree that low cognitive effort contributes to our inability as a species to rise above ideological disease.

Real life is in the left hemisphere of the brain and it is the right side that needs the stimulation.

Sounds like cognitive behavioral science would be a more useful belief system for you. I mean, if you must choose one above all others...

Constantine likely had us killed off due to the fact that we gave women the equality they should never have lost. That an the Christian sheep were just that. Sheep.

So you are willing, after all, to examine what might have been...

In my view, if you can't list at least a dozen schools of thought, philosophies, ideologies, views, belief systems, etc., as influencing your own, then you're probably a fanatic waiting to happen. I mean, you're clearly a thoughtful, humane person and you've picked a belief system that you think best reflects and inspires that in you. That's admirable, but it's still one system you're forwarding. If you truly recognize that the answers are in you and not in any symbols, no matter how nice, then you don't need to place any one story above all others. You certainly don't need to encourage that in others. If you do, then your personal transcendence has limited value for anyone else, Bishop.

I do not mind commenting on a historical event like when or why we were killed. That is quite different from making up a scenario where we were the winners.

As a Gnostic Christian, I am aware that all answers for me are within me. When I name God, I am, I mean me. I am where the buck stops. If you can do the same, that is great and your God is allowed to be a set of rules or laws. That is all that left brain thinkers can have. That is all I had or needed till my right side kicked in and enlightenment hit me.

We are likely close morally and if you have no spiritual itch to scratch, and do not seek a higher ideal, no sweat. You are not condemned by Gnostic Christianity the way you are with most of the other Abrahamic cults. I hope you do seek higher laws for us because we need them be they come from a religion or as will most likely happen, from a non-believing source. Those laws as you know are less draconian and more designed for humans than absentee Gods.

Be I am and follow your heart. --- or not and follow someone else's if they differ. Your choice.

Regards
DL

 

[Gnostic Christian Bishop]

They are the only ones to have a convincing explanation of how there could be an all good god and an evil world. By positing that creation was an involuntary act, hijacked by an imperfect lesser being, Gnosticism avoids the inevitable conclusion that God is Evil that all other monotheistic sects fall into (yet vigorously deny)

The fact that gnosticism was destroyed by violence shows that even plausible seeming religions aren't necessarily true. Of course, religious people have all kinds of excuses for the Problem of Losing (tm), but having your religion wiped out remains a fairly convincing argument that your god isn't real.

Absolutely. And I see religions as political lackeys. Likely because I see Rome as creating wimpy Jesus as their way of killing off the freedom fighting spirit in the ancient Jewish nation. The Jewish Jesus is much closer to the Gnostic Christian Jesus than Rome's invented boot licking Jesus. The Noble Lie has never been repealed and authorities continue to dumb us down.

Gnostic Christians believe that all religions and Gods should be thought of as myths until you suffer apotheosis. Only then should any reality be given to anything of the unseen world.

As to good and evil. Yes our myths explain it better than Christianity.

Todays Gnostic Christian may use his old myth to activate his pineal gland but when thinking of real evil in our real world, then I hope that most of us will teach how it is evolution that makes evil rear it's ugly head.

You cooperate and mostly produce good. When you compete as we must all do to survive, you create a victim and he is the one who will feel that evil has come his way because if he has a string of loses, he will go extinct. In this sense, we cannot help but do evil. That is likely why the scribes had Adams sin being passed down. Christianity just called that gift a curse out of ancient ignorance of evolution.

Regards
DL

 

[Tom Sawyer]

Well, why do you confuse the situation by using the word God then? It's a loaded term which only obfuscates what you're saying when you say it in a different context than other people are hearing it. If you mean yourself, why not just say "me". Why bring the context of a deity into a discussion which has no deities involved in it?

 

[Atheos]

Pardon the interruption, but that's not a solution to the problem of evil. That's simply positing a god to whom the problem of evil doesn't apply. There are thousands of such gods in mythology. Any god who lacks the ability to eliminate all evil is not amenable to the POE. Any god who lacks the knowledge of the existence of evil is also excused. Any god who lacks the absolute, unabated desire to eliminate all evil gets a pass.

But a god who is unlimited in power, unlimited in knowledge and unlimited in desire to eliminate evil cannot exist in the same universe where evil exists. There is no scenario whereby such a god would not eliminate evil.

 

[Gnostic Christian Bishop]

@Gnostic Christian Bishop, do you have a definition of God, and is the story of Jesus myth in your opinion...?

Myth.

I, like Joseph Campbell, see Jesus as a one of the Heroes of 1,000 faces. I do not know if a Jesus ever existed as described but doubt. I do think there may have been a Jewish Rabbi called Jesus but he was just a man. Not a God. He preached to seek God. If he had claimed to be God he would not have said to seek what was right in front of the seeker.

As to how to best describe God to you atheists, I would ask that you define God as just the best set of rules and laws to live by. You atheists do not personify, which, FMPOV, inhibits your mental growth, --- but that is pure opinion and I admit I could be quite wrong in this --- psychobabble --- which I do not like to do.

I seek God via traditional religions but focus on the morality of rules and laws. Those are the deeds and works all of us must do to find whatever or whoever we want to see as the best rules for life.

Regards
DL

 

[Random Person]

Pardon the interruption, but that's not a solution to the problem of evil. That's simply positing a god to whom the problem of evil doesn't apply. There are thousands of such gods in mythology. Any god who lacks the ability to eliminate all evil is not amenable to the POE. Any god who lacks the knowledge of the existence of evil is also excused. Any god who lacks the absolute, unabated desire to eliminate all evil gets a pass.

But a god who is unlimited in power, unlimited in knowledge and unlimited in desire to eliminate evil cannot exist in the same universe where evil exists. There is no scenario whereby such a god would not eliminate evil.

If a god existed that had unlimited power, knowledge and desire then he would also define what evil is and not humans.