Did god really condemn mankind? Is god a just god?

I think gnosticism is satanic. You're very confused.

 

Your non answer is noted.

Typical garbage Christian apologetics that do my work of discrediting Christianity for me. Thanks.

Regards
DL

 

You are very immoral and your one liner stupidity shows your low I.Q.

Seems we are done so take your satanic views and genocidal god and shove him up where you do your thinking.

Regards
DL

 

Well, I think we're done here. Bye.

 

EXACTLY!!!!!!!!!!!!

Why did G-d say that the original creation was merely "very good!?"

If you have the time and are bored the answer is in the books by Rick Joyner ......
who was given a series of dreams or visions or whatever they were that puts him in the position of a modern
Cephas Peter.......

Basically.... Satan was an astonishingly high level Creation..... but not a son.....
merely a Covering Cherub.... who was jealous of Adam..... who was called a son.....

If you are bored the books by Rick Joyner are exceptional and you can find them on youtube in a format that you could listen too if you are too tired to write on the forums.......
which I did a lot over this past year.....

 

I honestly do not have the intelligence and/ or wisdom to discern perfectly what is a deception from Satan.....
and what is the truth of G-d.......

but I do like the chutzpah that both you and Greatest I am are displaying.... because you are fulfilling many ancient prophecies...... for one... the one about houses being divided and mothers in law being against daughters in law... .and such.....

To my thinking the near death experience of Christian Andreason could be a direct meeting with Messiah Yeshua - Jesus... but many zealous Christians would disagree with me?????????

 

Gnostics are obviously more realistic about the God character in the Bible. What I have a problem with is the Gnostic claim that the Creator was a good God who was driven away by the present God, the demiurge, a bad God. To me it's just a lesser form of nonsense to be understood symbolically if at all.

I prefer Demon Est Deus Inversus. Energy and matter dominate over consciousness in the early stages of Creation. As consciousness increases, it starts to dominate over energy and matter, until eventually the outcome is all pure spirit.

Individuation, the separation of the self from the Source, and the concern for self-interest are the reasons for so-called sin. No boogeyman Devil or bad God or fallen angel is necessary.

 

Intelligent that. You have better morals than the average Christian.

I can see where our demiurge and other supernatural myths would bother you.

To know what Gnostic Christianity is all about, you should know that our myths were written to put against the Christian myth when everyone knew better than to read myths literally.

We absolutely do not hold any supernatural beliefs. Agnostic has the root word gnostic and being perpetual seekers is what we are all about. We think religions should evolve along with the times.

Let my give you this initial link on both literalism and our Gnostic Christian views, which are closer to Jewish mysticism and the Kabballa views, which I think, along with Chrestianity, (not a spelling error), from whose collaboration, I think, created Gnostic Christianity.

I hope you can see how intelligent the ancients were as compared to the mental trash that modern preachers and theists are using with the literal reading of myths.

https://bigthink.com/videos/what-is-god-2-2

Further.
http://www.pbs.org/moyers/journal/03132009/watch.html

Rabbi Hillel, the older contemporary of Jesus, said that when asked to sum up the whole of Jewish teaching, while he stood on one leg, said, "The Golden Rule. That which is hateful to you, do not do to your neighbor. That is the Torah. And everything else is only commentary. Now, go and study it."

Please listen as to what is said about the literal reading of myths.

"Origen, the great second or third century Greek commentator on the Bible said that it is absolutely impossible to take these texts literally. You simply cannot do so. And he said, "God has put these sort of conundrums and paradoxes in so that we are forced to seek a deeper meaning."

Matt 7;12 So in everything, do to others what you would have them do to you, for this sums up the Law and the Prophets.

This is how early Gnostic Christians view the transition from reading myths properly to destructive literal reading and idol worship.



Regards
DL

 

Thanks for the clarifications. The links were well worth reviewing, but one of them wants me to drop my add blocker before proceeding, which I steadfastly refuse to do:

https://bigthink.com/videos/what-is-god-2-2

 

Maybe god should wipe out men ..they’re the ones Committing the atrocities. Then God could impregnate all the good women. (Tongue in cheek)

 

Your welcome.

Here is the transcript.
Question: Who or what is God?

Karen Armstrong: We can't say, and that's my answer to you. We can't say what God is, and until the modern period, Jewish, Christian, and Muslim theologians in the three God religions all knew that. They insisted that we have no idea what we meant when we said that God was good, or wise, or intelligent. God is not good, or wise, or intelligent anyway that we know. So, people like Maimonides in the Jewish tradition, Eboncina in the Muslim tradition, Thomas Aquinas in the Christian tradition, insisted that we couldn't even say that God existed because our concept of existence is far too limited and they would have been horrified by the ease with which we talk about God today.

When I was a young girl, I had to learn this definition of God. "God is the supreme spirit who alone, exists of himself, and is infinite in all perfections." Now, I always found that rather dull and I was eight years old when I learned that and it really didn't mean very much to me. But I now also think it's incorrect because it takes it for granted that it's possible simply to draw breath and define – and the word define means literally to set limits upon a reality that has to go beyond anything we think or know.

The trouble with a lot of modern theology and a lot of modern thinking about God, is that we think of God a sort of being like ourselves, but bigger and better with likes and dislikes similar to our own. Now, as the great Protestant theologian, Paul Tillich said, "That's an idolatry. That's making a God in our own image." And that's where some of the awful atrocities of religion happened when people assume that God shares your likes and dislikes. The Crusaders when into battle to kill Muslims and Jews and cried, "God will's it." That was their battle cry. Obviously God willed no such thing. The Crusaders were simply projecting onto a deity they’d created on their own image and likeness, all their hatred and loathing of these faiths and made it endorse some of their most awful prejudices and lethal prejudices. And modern terrorists do the same. And that is why the theologians insisted before the modern period, that it was really better to approach God in silence.

In ancient India, they developed what I think is an authentic model of theological discourse, religious talk about the ultimate. It was called the Remaja Competition. The priests would go out into the forests; we're talking about the 10th century before Christ. And they would make a retreat and put themselves into a different frame of mind. And that's very important, because you can't talk about God in the same way as you would have an argument with a colleague or discuss an abstruse point in law, in politics, or in business. You put yourself in the receptive frame of mind with which we approach music or poetry, which you can measure the difference on a neurological scanner. When they came back the priests would begin the competition and the challenger would kick off and give a description of the Brahman, the ultimate reality that lay beyond the Gods. He would pour into this definition all that he could think, all his knowledge and insight and found a verbal formula, puzzling, illusive, and difficult. But that's what Brahman is.

And then his opponents would have to build on that and respond to him. But the person who won the competition was the person who reduced all of his opponents to silence. And it was in that silence that the Brahman was present. The Brahman was not present in the wordy definitions. It was present only in the stunning realization of the impotence of speech. And Christian, Jewish, and Muslim theologians all developed similar disciplines, similar rituals, to help people realize that when we talk about God we are at the end of what words and thoughts can do.

Well, nowadays, we've forgotten all about that. We talk about God as though he was like a **** or somebody. We ask him to bless our nation, or save our Queen, or give us a fine day for the picnic. And we actually expect him to be on our side in an election or war even though our opponents are also God's children.

So, we think about God far to easily and that's because of a lot of social, intellectual, and scientific changes that have taken place in the western world and that has made God very problematic for a lot of people.

Regards
DL