When you become a God, will you use evil the way God does?

Originally posted by Legion2024
I would blink out all that have aided in the harming of any human, That would leave very few people, With one parting message, DON'T MAKE THE SAME MISTAKES or blink

Bible God tried that with the flood but it did not work.

Regards
DL

Originally posted by Greatest I am

Originally posted by Legion2024
I would blink out all that have aided in the harming of any human, That would leave very few people, With one parting message, DON'T MAKE THE SAME MISTAKES or blink

Bible God tried that with the flood but it did not work.

Regards
DL

According to the Bible, those that perished were not human, but the demigod offspring of fallen angels.

Originally posted by zarp3333
Examining the seemingly disparate concept of a loving God and the existence of cruelty, death, hunger, evil, etc was hard to integrate until I considered the concept of reincarnation.

Reincarnation was accepted in the Christian faith until the ecumenical council at Nicea. It makes sense to me that if we live multiple lives and therefore know that reincarnation is factual, it makes sense that we would make agreements in advance of birth, soul contracts, if you will. Some agree to play the roles of bad or "evil" persons so the others would be given the chance to choose a righteous path or fall into evil as well.

I believe that we agree to circumstances that lay at the bleeding edge of our ability to remember our life's purpose once we get here. Bad guys get so into their roles so much that they lose the ability to hear the small still voice in the back of their mind. The righteous get so bummed out they start drinking and drugging and both groups pick up kArma.

I'd say God has it perfect just how it's done here and I wouldn't change a damn thing. Love and kisses!

I would not change anything either but not for the reasons you have.

I like to use the term evolving perfection. Otherwise, a perfect God becomes a stagnant pool of information and our souls and consciousness would be useless to the universe.
Evolving, the perfection of whatever God was, to whatever God will be, means we have to think this way.

Unless you see God as somehow losing his initial perfection.
This is not allowed in a perfect God’s repertoire.


When this was written, most thought it to just be a cynical view of life but I think it is quite true and irrefutable, based on the anthropic principle.
What do you think?

Candide.

"It is demonstrable that things cannot be otherwise than as they are; for as all things have been created for some end, they must necessarily be created for the best end.”

www.youtube.com...

This is done by nature and not a God but would be a requirement of a God if he were real.

Regards
DL

Originally posted by adjensen

Originally posted by Greatest I am
As a Gnostic Christian, I have no problem reconciling evil with reality.

lol, is that what you've finally settled on? You do realize the fundamental error in Gnostic Christianity, right? Reconciling Christ's Jewish ethnicity and support of Judaic scripture and law with Greek duality? How have you worked that out?

Do you know what the gnosis is that the original Christian Gnostics were on about? What is your interpretation of the Treatise on Resurrection?

All fiction. To most Gnostics, Jesus was a man and not a God. That is why their tradition shows Jesus and Mary Magdelaine as man and wife.

Do you really think that a God would condemn man just so that he could die for us and become our hero?
Rather idiotic and self-aggrandising. Right?

Regards
DL

Originally posted by EvilSadamClone
Actually if I was a god I wouldn't advertise and I wouldn't want people worshiping me. I'd go somewhere out of the way and stay away from humanity.

I don't relish the thought of people killing in my name like the Christian god does. I don't want an Inquisition in my name forcing people to convert at the point of a sword.

I believe in real free will and liberty, not the made up stuff that Christianity has to offer.

Basically I'm like the Federation of Star Trek with it's prime directive to not interfere with developing cultures. I believe in letting them develop on their own.

A good view and philosophy my friend.

Regards
DL

Originally posted by ahnggk

Originally posted by Greatest I am
I'll give you a robot that lives, not a zombie!

edit on 3-9-2012 by ahnggk because: (no reason given)

Loadable but you seem to have forgotten how God threw his fit on A & E and all of us the first time they did their will and not Gods.

He in fact murdered them by omission by not allowing them access to the tree of life.

It was God's plan from the beginning to have Adam and Eve eat the forbidden fruit. This can be demonstrated by the fact that the bible says that Jesus "was crucified from the foundations of the Earth," that is to say, God planned to crucify Jesus as atonement for sin before he even created human beings or God damned sin.

If God had not intended humans to sin from the beginning, why did he build into the Creation this "solution" for sin? Why create a solution for a problem you do not anticipate?

God knew that the moment he said "don't eat from that tree," the die was cast. The eating was inevitable. Eve was merely following the plan.

This then begs the question.

What kind of God would plan and execute the murder of his own son when there was absolutely no need to?

Only an insane God. That’s who.

The cornerstone of Christianity is human sacrifice, thus showing it‘s immorality.

One of Christianity's highest form of immorality is what they have done to women.
They have denied them equality and subjugated them to men.

www.youtube.com...

www.youtube.com...

www.youtube.com...

Regards
DL
------------------------

Christians are always trying to absolve God of moral culpability in the fall by whipping out their favorite "free will!", or “ it’s all man’s fault”.

That is "God gave us free will and it was our free willed choices that caused our fall. Hence God is not blameworthy."

But this simply avoids God's culpability as the author of Human Nature. Free will is only the ability to choose. It is not an explanation why anyone would want to choose "A" or "B" (bad or good action). An explanation for why Eve would even have the nature of "being vulnerable to being easily swayed by a serpent" and "desiring to eat a forbidden fruit" must lie in the nature God gave Eve in the first place. Hence God is culpable for deliberately making humans with a nature-inclined-to-fall, and "free will" means nothing as a response to this problem.

If all sin by nature then, the sin nature is dominant. If not, we would have at least some who would not sin.


Having said the above for the God that I do not believe in, I am a Gnostic Christian naturalist, let me tell you that evil is all human generated. Evil is our responsibility.

Much has been written to explain what I see as a natural part of evolution.

Consider.
First, let us eliminate what some see as evil. Natural disasters. These are unthinking occurrences and are neither good nor evil. There is no intent to do evil even as victims are created.

Evil then is only human to human.
As evolving creatures, all we ever do, and ever can do, is compete or cooperate.
Cooperation we would see as good as there are no victims created. Competition would be seen as evil as it creates a victim. We all are either cooperating, doing good, or competing, doing evil at all times.

Without us doing some of both, we would likely go extinct.

This, to me, explains why there is evil in the world quite well.

Be you a believer in nature, evolution or God, we should all see that what Christians see as something to blame, evil, we should see that what we have, competition, deserves a huge thanks for being available to us. Wherever it came from. God or nature.

There is no conflict between nature and God on this issue. This is how things are and should be. We all must do what some will think is evil as we compete and create losers to this competition.

www.youtube.com.../c/6F8036F680C1DBEB

Regards
DL

edit on 4-9-2012 by Greatest I am because: (no reason given)

Originally posted by adjensen
[

Which is exactly what Christianity says about the relationship of God to humanity, regardless of what you've been told. God leaves us alone to sort things out.

Do you mean that all those times he is shown as killing us in scriptures are lies?
That would scrap damned near the whole bible. Right?

Regards
DL

Originally posted by halfoldman
I'd like to say I wouldn't allow evil.

But that would be like watching a continual television show without any dramatic tension for eternity.

I'd allow some minor dramas, but not really evil.

I recall reading a book by Elisabeth Klarer, a South African woman who supposedly courted an alien and lived on his planet for four months before delivering their hybrid baby.
en.wikipedia.org...

That planet, whether imaginary or not, sounded like a non-evil place I'd run.
Even the predatory animals lived on another planet, and all the animals were peaceful (which may seem a bit ecologically unsound to us).

edit on 4-9-2012 by halfoldman because: (no reason given)

You have hit on why the bible is written as is. Drama.

Regards
DL

Originally posted by NOTurTypical
reply to post by Greatest I am

 

Ill never become a god, but for argument's sake lets say I would.. yes, I would use evil the same way God does. What the enemy means for evil I will use for good.

How does using evil to produce good work?

Build a scenario.

Regards
DL

Originally posted by NOTurTypical

Originally posted by Greatest I am

Originally posted by Legion2024
I would blink out all that have aided in the harming of any human, That would leave very few people, With one parting message, DON'T MAKE THE SAME MISTAKES or blink

Bible God tried that with the flood but it did not work.

Regards
DL

According to the Bible, those that perished were not human, but the demigod offspring of fallen angels.

And you believe the bible when even the Jews know that it is fiction?

Regards
DL

reply to post by Greatest I am


That's completely arbitrary do you expect me to reply to that?

reply to post by Greatest I am

I'm not sure anyone can call themselves a "Christian" while calling God evil and Jesus' work on the cross "immoral". Greatest I am (cough) you don't seem to understand the first thing about the nature of the Father/Son relationship nor how God's love made manifest through that relationship applies to us at the level of the heart and soul, and even as the crowning glory of a longgg cosmic evolutionary process.

Originally posted by Greatest I am

Originally posted by adjensen

Originally posted by Greatest I am
As a Gnostic Christian, I have no problem reconciling evil with reality.

lol, is that what you've finally settled on? You do realize the fundamental error in Gnostic Christianity, right? Reconciling Christ's Jewish ethnicity and support of Judaic scripture and law with Greek duality? How have you worked that out?

Do you know what the gnosis is that the original Christian Gnostics were on about? What is your interpretation of the Treatise on Resurrection?

All fiction. To most Gnostics, Jesus was a man and not a God. That is why their tradition shows Jesus and Mary Magdelaine as man and wife.

I think you have your Gnostics confused with a conspiracy theory -- the Gnostic Christians believed that Jesus was a god and NOT a man. The whole "Jesus married Mary and had kids" thing is a modern invention, it had nothing to do with early beliefs, and would have been angrily dismissed by any second century Gnostic.

Originally posted by NOTurTypical
reply to post by Greatest I am

 

That's completely arbitrary do you expect me to reply to that?

Do as you will. There are way too many out here who believe in fantasy, miracles and magic.

One less means little to me except that one good human mind has been saved from idiocy.

Regards
DL

Originally posted by NewAgeMan
reply to post by Greatest I am

 

I'm not sure anyone can call themselves a "Christian" while calling God evil and Jesus' work on the cross "immoral". Greatest I am (cough) you don't seem to understand the first thing about the nature of the Father/Son relationship nor how God's love made manifest through that relationship applies to us at the level of the heart and soul, and even as the crowning glory of a longgg cosmic evolutionary process.

edit on 4-9-2012 by NewAgeMan because: typo

Let us see if you know about a father son relationship.

As above so below.

Would you send your son to die to fill a requirement that you yourself set or would you do the right thing and step up yourself?

Should fathers bury sons or should sons bury fathers.

Regards
DL

Originally posted by adjensen

Originally posted by Greatest I am

Originally posted by adjensen

Originally posted by Greatest I am
As a Gnostic Christian, I have no problem reconciling evil with reality.

lol, is that what you've finally settled on? You do realize the fundamental error in Gnostic Christianity, right? Reconciling Christ's Jewish ethnicity and support of Judaic scripture and law with Greek duality? How have you worked that out?

Do you know what the gnosis is that the original Christian Gnostics were on about? What is your interpretation of the Treatise on Resurrection?

All fiction. To most Gnostics, Jesus was a man and not a God. That is why their tradition shows Jesus and Mary Magdelaine as man and wife.

I think you have your Gnostics confused with a conspiracy theory -- the Gnostic Christians believed that Jesus was a god and NOT a man. The whole "Jesus married Mary and had kids" thing is a modern invention, it had nothing to do with early beliefs, and would have been angrily dismissed by any second century Gnostic.

Listen. Learn.

www.youtube.com...

Regards
DL

Originally posted by Greatest I am

Originally posted by adjensen
I think you have your Gnostics confused with a conspiracy theory -- the Gnostic Christians believed that Jesus was a god and NOT a man. The whole "Jesus married Mary and had kids" thing is a modern invention, it had nothing to do with early beliefs, and would have been angrily dismissed by any second century Gnostic.

Listen. Learn.

www.youtube.com...

I don't watch videos, so how about you just post what it has to say?

Originally posted by adjensen

Originally posted by Greatest I am

Originally posted by adjensen
I think you have your Gnostics confused with a conspiracy theory -- the Gnostic Christians believed that Jesus was a god and NOT a man. The whole "Jesus married Mary and had kids" thing is a modern invention, it had nothing to do with early beliefs, and would have been angrily dismissed by any second century Gnostic.

Listen. Learn.

www.youtube.com...

I don't watch videos, so how about you just post what it has to say?

There are as many Gnostic sects as there are Christian ones.

I chose mine from this particular quote because it applies for me to a T.

Said of Gnostic Christian and Christian reading practices.

“Both read the Bible day and night; but you read black where I read white.”
William Blake.

Regards
DL

We have to ask ourselves what is the process for doing magic? Magic is a power, it is not good or bad. The person behind the magic will reflect the shade.

It may start with meditation and focus, maybe even chanting to the universe, maybe an out of body experience. Being calm, and taking your consciousness away from your percecption, could that be some kind of hypnosis we put ourselves into reaching the magic.

To execute a miracle would take a force outside of the body, as if energy in the air was produced, people may witness a visible force outside of ourselves.

I believe this is possible.

Originally posted by Greatest I am
There are as many Gnostic sects as there are Christian ones.

Not ancient ones, there weren't (well, not that we have any evidence of, at any rate.)

I'm not aware of any ancient Gnostic group that professed that Jesus was married to Mary, just latter day (post 18th century) ones. Are you referring to a group contemporary to the early church, or one which emerged in the past couple of hundred years? If the former, I would very much appreciate a pointer to your sources, as I have a keen interest in that doctrine, in that era.