1. No and good for you. There have been untold things written by humans down through the ages. It doesn't mean we should accept all of them as truth.
2.
3.
That's right. And that includes the bible, does it not? The earliest Christians were indeed Gnostics, so it's undestandable that a large portion of the Gospels reflected this. The fact that this area of Christianity was then rejected by the early Church fathers, as they saw it as a challenge to their power/monopoly, shouldn't be a reason for us to ignore it.
That's right. And that includes the bible, does it not? The earliest Christians were indeed Gnostics, so it's undestandable that a large portion of the Gospels reflected this. The fact that this area of early Christianity was then rejected by the early Church fathers as they were seen as a challenge to their power/monopoly shouldn't be a reason to ignore it.
Yes - it could include the bible, but I have decided to choose to believe that the bible - as is - is God's ordained word. I choose to believe that those other "gospels" are not, or they would have been included.
The only people we should try to get even with...
...are those who've helped us.
Right 'round the corner could be bigger than ourselves.
Yes - it could include the bible, but I have decided to choose to believe that the bible - as is - is God's ordained word. I choose to believe that those other "gospels" are not, or they would have been included.
"Gnosticism's Christian form grew to prominence in the 2nd century A.D. Ultimately denounced as heretical by the early church, Gnosticism proposed a revealed knowledge of God ("gnosis" meaning "knowledge" in Greek), held as a secret tradition of the apostles. In The Gnostic Gospels, author Elaine Pagels suggests that Christianity could have developed quite differently if Gnostic texts had become part of the Christian canon. Without a doubt: Gnosticism celebrates God as both Mother and Father, shows a very human Jesus's relationship to Mary Magdalene, suggests the Resurrection is better understood symbolically, and speaks to self-knowledge as the route to union with God. Pagels argues that Christian orthodoxy grew out of the political considerations of the day, serving to legitimize and consolidate early church leadership. Her contrast of that developing orthodoxy with Gnostic teachings presents an intriguing trajectory on a world faith as it "might have become." The Gnostic Gospels provides engaging reading for those seeking a broader perspective on the early development of Christianity."
Yes. I choose to turn a deaf ear to it or flat out ignore it sometimes, though.
Trying to head me off at the pass?
the thing is, though, you have part of God within you to direct and guide you in each moment, and each of us can be trusted to find out for ourselves if information from any source is valid, based on that inner voice. It sounds like when you say this: "There have been untold things written by humans down through the ages. It doesn't mean we should accept all of them as truth."
...that you've prejudged something without reading it yourself and without allowing the holy spirit in you to guide you and to assess the information. My question is have you prejudged the material in question because you decided to believe an authority figure who said it was "wrong", rather than trust the spirit in you?
"The opposite of a fact is falsehood, but the opposite of one profound truth may very well be another profound truth." ~ Niels Bohr
"Gnosticism's Christian form grew to prominence in the 2nd century A.D. Ultimately denounced as heretical by the early church, Gnosticism proposed a revealed knowledge of God ("gnosis" meaning "knowledge" in Greek), held as a secret tradition of the apostles. In The Gnostic Gospels, author Elaine Pagels suggests that Christianity could have developed quite differently if Gnostic texts had become part of the Christian canon. Without a doubt: Gnosticism celebrates God as both Mother and Father, shows a very human Jesus's relationship to Mary Magdalene, suggests the Resurrection is better understood symbolically, and speaks to self-knowledge as the route to union with God. Pagels argues that Christian orthodoxy grew out of the political considerations of the day, serving to legitimize and consolidate early church leadership. Her contrast of that developing orthodoxy with Gnostic teachings presents an intriguing trajectory on a world faith as it "might have become." The Gnostic Gospels provides engaging reading for those seeking a broader perspective on the early development of Christianity."
Don't you see that - if God is truly omniscient - God would very easily be able to use humans to edit existing theories and ensure that the word, as God wants it, is accurately portrayed throughout the ages?
In other words, humans may have edited the bible for whatever reason in their own minds, but God was the one guiding that editing process.
The only people we should try to get even with...
...are those who've helped us.
Right 'round the corner could be bigger than ourselves.
the thing is, though, you have part of God within you to direct and guide you in each moment, and each of us can be trusted to find out for ourselves if information from any source is valid, based on that inner voice. It sounds like when you say this: "There have been untold things written by humans down through the ages. It doesn't mean we should accept all of them as truth."
...that you've prejudged something without reading it yourself and without allowing the holy spirit in you to guide you and to assess the information. My question is have you prejudged the material in question because you decided to believe an authority figure who said it was "wrong", rather than trust the spirit in you?
No - I prejudged it based upon its exclusion from the accepted bible and due to my trust that God would have included it if God wanted to.
The only people we should try to get even with...
...are those who've helped us.
Right 'round the corner could be bigger than ourselves.
No - I prejudged it based upon its exclusion from the accepted bible and due to my trust that God would have included it if God wanted to.
Those such as Jesus or the varied others who received the message of God directly uncovered their own special ability--they found their way to God through their commitment and dedication to God. We have the spirit in us to help us find the way. Many of us do not accept our inner spirit that gives us the ability to have the truth shown to us. We expect the truth to come to us without our own effort to meet it in the middle.
Therefore many, in their human arrogance continue to distort the truth.
"The opposite of a fact is falsehood, but the opposite of one profound truth may very well be another profound truth." ~ Niels Bohr
Don't you see that - if God is truly omniscient - God would very easily be able to use humans to edit existing theories and ensure that the word, as God wants it, is accurately portrayed throughout the ages?
In other words, humans may have edited the bible for whatever reason in their own minds, but God was the one guiding that editing process.
So you believe in the literal word of the bible? And if so, then can you explain, in light of your above comment, why God didn't 'guide' Darwin away from publishing 'The Origin of species', for example?
Yes. I choose to turn a deaf ear to it or flat out ignore it sometimes, though.
If you are choosing to turn a deaf ear to it, or flat out ignore it, do you expect the truth to be handed to you, anyway when you are not willing to show effort? God gives us free will. If we turn our backs on his voice within us, are we still connected to him and his truth?
"The opposite of a fact is falsehood, but the opposite of one profound truth may very well be another profound truth." ~ Niels Bohr
Jesus said, "Those who seek should not stop seeking until they find. When they find, they will be disturbed. When they are disturbed, they will marvel, and will reign over all. [And after they have reigned they will rest.]"
Jesus said, "If your leaders say to you, 'Look, the (Father's) kingdom is in the sky,' then the birds of the sky will precede you. If they say to you, 'It is in the sea,' then the fish will precede you. Rather, the (Father's) kingdom is within you and it is outside you.
I believe that the Gonstic Gospels have a great relevance today for many reasons. One of which is simply that they place the onus of 'salvation' onto the individual, and thereby dismiss the need or urge to rely upon a third party, such as the Church. Religious experience should always be a personal experience. Once it it becomes connected with dogma, creed, or authority then it not only becomes dangerous, but it loses some of it's original purpose.
Jesus said, "Those who seek should not stop seeking until they find. When they find, they will be disturbed. When they are disturbed, they will marvel, and will reign over all. [And after they have reigned they will rest.]"
Jesus said, "If your leaders say to you, 'Look, the (Father's) kingdom is in the sky,' then the birds of the sky will precede you. If they say to you, 'It is in the sea,' then the fish will precede you. Rather, the (Father's) kingdom is within you and it is outside you.
I believe that the Gonstic Gospels have a great relevance today for amny reasons. One of which is simply that they place the onus of 'salvation' onto the individual, and thereby dismiss the need or urge to rely upon a third party, such as the Church. Religious experience should always be a personal experience. Once it it becomes connected with dogma, creed, or authority then it not only becomes dangerous, but it loses some of it's original purpose.
Have you studied ABOUT the gospel of thomas and understood what it is and what people want it to say. I would suggest you study it (that means studying and analysing both sides) and not just study what it says but rather the info behind it.
make sure the fortune that you seek...is the fortune that you need
So you believe in the literal word of the bible? And if so, then can you explain, in light of your above comment, why God didn't 'guide' Darwin away from publishing 'The Origin of species', for example?
You truly do ask some great questions. I'm not sure my answers are as great.
I don't believe that God didn't "guide" Darwin, because Darwin's work isn't represented as the word of God.
I'm not sure that I do believe in the literal word of the bible in that I still think some things in it are open to interpretation (and that leaves me open to being hypocritical).
For example, I'm one of those who do believe in evolution (just that God is the driving force behind it).
The only people we should try to get even with...
...are those who've helped us.
Right 'round the corner could be bigger than ourselves.
Have you studied ABOUT the gospel of thomas and understood what it is and what people want it to say. I would suggest you study it (that means studying and analysing both sides) and not just study what it says but rather the info behind it.
What do you mean by "the info behind it"?
Do you believe you have the holy spirit in you to discern truth from non-truth?
"The opposite of a fact is falsehood, but the opposite of one profound truth may very well be another profound truth." ~ Niels Bohr
If you are choosing to turn a deaf ear to it, or flat out ignore it, do you expect the truth to be handed to you, anyway when you are not willing to show effort? God gives us free will. If we turn our backs on his voice within us, are we still connected to him and his truth?
No. I'm saying that there are times when I KNOW what the Holy Spirit is telling me to do or believe, yet I, of my own free will, go against that direction.
The only people we should try to get even with...
...are those who've helped us.
Right 'round the corner could be bigger than ourselves.
You truly do ask some great questions. I'm not sure my answers are as great.
I don't believe that God didn't "guide" Darwin, because Darwin's work isn't represented as the word of God.
I'm not sure that I do believe in the literal word of the bible in that I still think some things in it are open to interpretation (and that leaves me open to being hypocritical).
For example, I'm one of those who do believe in evolution (just that God is the driving force behind it).
I think the point is that if God wanted us to all be instantly enlightned he COULD do that. It doesn't look like God wanted to give us anything straight out--it looks like we were given the tools and the choice to use them or not. If we choose not to use his very tools, but we want to blindly trust that what is out there is truth, without using our own discernment from God to judge for ourelves we're operating from our humanness. We're not operating from our clear, Truthful spiritual nature that is one with God. Hence human error being the problem, not religion or God.
"The opposite of a fact is falsehood, but the opposite of one profound truth may very well be another profound truth." ~ Niels Bohr
No. I'm saying that there are times when I KNOW what the Holy Spirit is telling me to do or believe, yet I, of my own free will, go against that direction.
Of course we all do that.
The thing is, when we hand our spiritual power over to others to do so as they like, that's our choice. It is a choice best made in understanding. If we give up our spiritual gifts of discernment and trust in another because of their position or label, we are handing our God-given tool to that person. In the end, if that person leads us to ugliness, killing, war, etc, we are responsible for being ugly, for killing, for our part in war, etc.
"The opposite of a fact is falsehood, but the opposite of one profound truth may very well be another profound truth." ~ Niels Bohr
You truly do ask some great questions. I'm not sure my answers are as great.
I don't believe that God didn't "guide" Darwin, because Darwin's work isn't represented as the word of God.
I'm not sure that I do believe in the literal word of the bible in that I still think some things in it are open to interpretation (and that leaves me open to being hypocritical).
For example, I'm one of those who do believe in evolution (just that God is the driving force behind it).
O.k, thanks. That's a surprisingly reasoned answer. Not surprising because it's from yourself, of course, but just surprisingly sound.
Do you believe you have the holy spirit in you to discern truth from non-truth?
I mean, read the philosophy behind it, read the controversy that people who are more educated discuss. Read why some people accept it and others don't. There's often very justifiable reasons why some things are declared heretical or aren't included in the canon; it's not just a power trip.
I guess i get bugged when people find something they agree with on the surface and don't dig deeper to understand why they agree with it and the decide if they should agree with it. Also, it seems that with religion people are more apt to take other texts (gnostic gospels etc...) as truth and ignore the other books of the bible.
Yes I believe i have the holy spririt but i also have reasoning, understanding and mental capabilities to judge the quality of works. I may be wrong in some of those. I would never say that i have the corner on truth, I will say that if something disagrees with the collected appropriate texts that i will hold it much more suspect than something that agrees with it, and that is prudent. Just b/c things are from a similar time does not equate to similar authenticity or accuracy. Preponderance of evidence comes into play to help make decisions.
make sure the fortune that you seek...is the fortune that you need
I think the point is that if God wanted us to all be instantly enlightned he COULD do that. It doesn't look like God wanted to give us anything straight out--it looks like we were given the tools and the choice to use them or not. If we choose not to use his very tools, but we want to blindly trust that what is out there is truth, without using our own discernment from God to judge for ourelves we're operating from our humanness. We're not operating from our clear, Truthful spiritual nature that is one with God. Hence human error being the problem, not religion or God.
I agree God could enlighten us all. the Bible says God wants us to love him and what's more loving...making someone love us or having someone freely choose to love us. God doens't want people who feel they must love him, he wants people to choose to love Him and follow him. I agree with your final statement as well, human beings are the problem not religion or God.
make sure the fortune that you seek...is the fortune that you need
I mean, read the philosophy behind it, read the controversy that people who are more educated discuss. Read why some people accept it and others don't. There's often very justifiable reasons why some things are declared heretical or aren't included in the canon; it's not just a power trip.
I guess i get bugged when people find something they agree with on the surface and don't dig deeper to understand why they agree with it and the decide if they should agree with it. Also, it seems that with religion people are more apt to take other texts (gnostic gospels etc...) as truth and ignore the other books of the bible.
Yes I believe i have the holy spririt but i also have reasoning, understanding and mental capabilities to judge the quality of works. I may be wrong in some of those. I would never say that i have the corner on truth, I will say that if something disagrees with the collected appropriate texts that i will hold it much more suspect than something that agrees with it, and that is prudent. Just b/c things are from a similar time does not equate to similar authenticity or accuracy. Preponderance of evidence comes into play to help make decisions.
Interesting. You believe reason, education, what the majority believes, etc, over the voice of God in you? Preponderance of human issues come into play in human issues. Spiritual truth remains clear and Truthful as spiritual truth.
Do you agree that when we make our decisions based on our human factors, rather than spiritual ones, the error that results (when it does) is human error, rather than God's error?
"The opposite of a fact is falsehood, but the opposite of one profound truth may very well be another profound truth." ~ Niels Bohr
I agree God could enlighten us all. the Bible says God wants us to love him and what's more loving...making someone love us or having someone freely choose to love us. God doens't want people who feel they must love him, he wants people to choose to love Him and follow him. I agree with your final statement as well, human beings are the problem not religion or God.
Oh, sorry, I didn't see this before my last post. I agree with this. It is the most loving thing to do to support absolutely whatever choice we make in everyway, and to give us exactly what we ask for, whether it be war, ugliness, crime, lack of understanding, fear, etc. It makes our true opening to truth, to Love, to Peace to Harmony, etc, all that more jaw-droppingly amazing, when we choose that.
"The opposite of a fact is falsehood, but the opposite of one profound truth may very well be another profound truth." ~ Niels Bohr
I mean, read the philosophy behind it, read the controversy that people who are more educated discuss. Read why some people accept it and others don't. There's often very justifiable reasons why some things are declared heretical or aren't included in the canon; it's not just a power trip.
I guess i get bugged when people find something they agree with on the surface and don't dig deeper to understand why they agree with it and the decide if they should agree with it. Also, it seems that with religion people are more apt to take other texts (gnostic gospels etc...) as truth and ignore the other books of the bible.
Yes I believe i have the holy spririt but i also have reasoning, understanding and mental capabilities to judge the quality of works. I may be wrong in some of those. I would never say that i have the corner on truth, I will say that if something disagrees with the collected appropriate texts that i will hold it much more suspect than something that agrees with it, and that is prudent. Just b/c things are from a similar time does not equate to similar authenticity or accuracy. Preponderance of evidence comes into play to help make decisions.
The truth of it is simply that much of what I have read from the Gnostic canon makes more sense to me than the orthodox Christian canon. The basic Gnostic philosophy ties in with my wider perspective on things - Kantian and Schopenhaurean philospophy, Eastern philosophy, shamanism, Quantum Physics e.t.c. (By the way, this is becoming one of the most interesting threads I've seen on the board for a while. Let me just throw in a quick thanks to those who have contributed!) I produced this post a while ago on the 'Death in the modern age' thread which may give you an idea of where I'm coming from:
...And to consider what happens after death can lead to a moment of terror. I mean, it's not easy to think about time in respect of dying and how long you will cease to exist after you have died. This will bring you to consider eternity and of yourself in the face of this eternity. The thought can overpower you.
However, you can then begin to look backwards - in the other direction. Ask yourself how long it was before you were born. Again, you find yourself having to confront eternity - i.e, how far back can you go? Was there a beginning to time?
I reckon that when looked at this way it brings you to disregard the whole concept of linear time altogether. Because, simply put, it makes no sense. I mean it suffices for our daily existences, but on the grand scale of things it does not add up. So what else, you ask? Well, what do other cultures believe? How have cultures which existed for thousands of years longer than our own perceived the life - death cycle, and time? They saw it in circular terms. Life and time not as linear, but as circular. There is no death, just as there was no death before life. There is only an endless eternity which is round and ever renewing like the seasons.
From The Gospel Of Thomas
The disciples said to Jesus, "Tell us, how will our end come?"
Jesus said, "Have you found the beginning, then, that you are looking for the end? You see, the end will be where the beginning is.
Congratulations to the one who stands at the beginning: that one will know the end and will not taste death."
Shamans, mystics and eastern religions, and the philosophers of the east have always spoken of a oneness which unites everything in the universe. The philosophers of the west also arrived at the same conclusion through the process of sustained reasoning - see kant and especially Schopenhaur. And the quantum physicists have also arrived at this conclusion. Imagine a bowling alley run covered in chalk. You roll a ball across it and it leaves a straight line on the runway. Imagine closing your eyes for 2 seconds and then opening them again and the part of the bowling runway where the ball was when you closed your eyes shows a zig-zag wave effect, and then continues to leave a straight line as we watch the ball roll to the end. This is how an atom behaves when we look at it. Basically, our cognitive make-up creates this world of individuality, linear time, and separateness. But beneath our perception all is one, and all is eternal, and there is no death.
Interesting. You believe reason, education, what the majority believes, etc, over the voice of God in you? Preponderance of human issues come into play in human issues. Spiritual truth remains clear and Truthful as spiritual truth.
Do you agree that when we make our decisions based on our human factors, rather than spiritual ones, the error that results (when it does) is human error, rather than God's error?
I didn't say that i believe reason, education over the voice of God in me; I believe God gives us reason, knowledge to discern what is truth (he also does use the Holy spirit to guide these things). I don't believe the holy spirit will come down and have a beer with me and tell me outright what to believe. I do believe that the influence can be felt and we can know when this occurrs. I'm sorry if it came across poorly (got a few thigns going on).
Yes I agree that when we don't heed the holy spirit and choose freely to ignore spritual factors it is human error, NOT god's error. If I started a cult and ignored the tennants of the Bible and encouraged everyone to murder and rape people, that is human error... I believe God is perfect; therefore, he can't be in error. That's the hardest part of Christianity; acknowledging that I'm not perfect and don't know best all the time.
make sure the fortune that you seek...is the fortune that you need
The truth of it is simply that much of what I have read from the Gnostic canon makes more sense to me than the orthodox Christian canon. The basic Gnostic philosophy ties in with my wider perspective on things - Kantian and Schopenhaurean philospophy, Eastern philosophy, shamanism, Quantum Physics e.t.c. (By the way, this is becoming one of the most interesting threads I've seen on the board for a while. Let me just throw in a quick thanks to those who have contributed!) I produced this post a while ago on the 'Death in the modern age' thread which may give you an ide of where I'm coming from:
I can see why you would choose to believe the Gnostics, it def does agree more with your outlook on life; just like the opposite occurrs for me. I hope i didn't come across arrogant or assuming that you hadn't done the reading; you know how it is with this subject and people...there are very dear personal ideals being discussed. That was an interesting post you made and it did help at least see where you're coming from; it's not a philosophy I'd grab on to but I can see it's something you've thought through. This is an interesting thread (is this where we can derial it and start calling each other names ) and i wish more of the threads could be like this.
make sure the fortune that you seek...is the fortune that you need
I didn't say that i believe reason, education over the voice of God in me; I believe God gives us reason, knowledge to discern what is truth (he also does use the Holy spirit to guide these things). I don't believe the holy spirit will come down and have a beer with me and tell me outright what to believe. I do believe that the influence can be felt and we can know when this occurrs. I'm sorry if it came across poorly (got a few thigns going on).
Yes I agree that when we don't heed the holy spirit and choose freely to ignore spritual factors it is human error, NOT god's error. If I started a cult and ignored the tennants of the Bible and encouraged everyone to murder and rape people, that is human error... I believe God is perfect; therefore, he can't be in error. That's the hardest part of Christianity; acknowledging that I'm not perfect and don't know best all the time.
It sounds like you don't recognise that the holy spirit is with you at all times, ready and waiting for you to connect with it, and to explicitly trust it's guidance. You can choose what to believe and you can also activate the holy spirit in you and have the voice of God to guide you through each step. Well, more specifically you will have the Holy Spirit with you for each step you choose to align with it, "he" doesn't have to come down and have a beer with us, "he's" totally ingrained with us at all times. Do you agree with this?
I love the many forms of intelligence we have. The bottom line that I think you and I agree on is that this life we each have, is a precious gift and is between us and God. There is so much to learn and see. At the same time, we've been taught to value man's knowledge and that man's knowledge is the only truth, and it concerns me when I look at the few "God-fearing" people here, and they, too, give man's knowledge priority over the Truth.
"The opposite of a fact is falsehood, but the opposite of one profound truth may very well be another profound truth." ~ Niels Bohr
Shamans, mystics and eastern religions, and the philosophers of the east have always spoken of a oneness which unites everything in the universe. The philosophers of the west also arrived at the same conclusion through the process of sustained reasoning - see kant and especially Schopenhaur. And the quantum physicists have also arrived at this conclusion. Imagine a bowling alley run covered in chalk. You roll a ball across it and it leaves a straight line on the runway. Imagine closing your eyes for 2 seconds and then opening them again and the part of the bowling runway where the ball was when you closed your eyes shows a zig-zag wave effect, and then continues to leave a straight line as we watch the ball roll to the end. This is how an atom behaves when we look at it. Basically, our cognitive make-up creates this world of individuality, linear time, and separateness. But beneath our perception all is one, and all is eternal, and there is no death.[/i]
So you then realise that through the view of eternity you and I are one? Time is an illusion? Separation is an illusion? And as we learn to comprehend eternity and the oneness, we can travel that oneness into anywhere in the universe and understand anything we choose to, from within our own spirit?
"The opposite of a fact is falsehood, but the opposite of one profound truth may very well be another profound truth." ~ Niels Bohr
Comments
http://www.myspace.com/illuminatta
Rhinocerous Surprise '08!!!
That's right. And that includes the bible, does it not? The earliest Christians were indeed Gnostics, so it's undestandable that a large portion of the Gospels reflected this. The fact that this area of Christianity was then rejected by the early Church fathers, as they saw it as a challenge to their power/monopoly, shouldn't be a reason for us to ignore it.
Yes. I choose to turn a deaf ear to it or flat out ignore it sometimes, though.
...are those who've helped us.
Right 'round the corner could be bigger than ourselves.
Yes - it could include the bible, but I have decided to choose to believe that the bible - as is - is God's ordained word. I choose to believe that those other "gospels" are not, or they would have been included.
...are those who've helped us.
Right 'round the corner could be bigger than ourselves.
"Gnosticism's Christian form grew to prominence in the 2nd century A.D. Ultimately denounced as heretical by the early church, Gnosticism proposed a revealed knowledge of God ("gnosis" meaning "knowledge" in Greek), held as a secret tradition of the apostles. In The Gnostic Gospels, author Elaine Pagels suggests that Christianity could have developed quite differently if Gnostic texts had become part of the Christian canon. Without a doubt: Gnosticism celebrates God as both Mother and Father, shows a very human Jesus's relationship to Mary Magdalene, suggests the Resurrection is better understood symbolically, and speaks to self-knowledge as the route to union with God. Pagels argues that Christian orthodoxy grew out of the political considerations of the day, serving to legitimize and consolidate early church leadership. Her contrast of that developing orthodoxy with Gnostic teachings presents an intriguing trajectory on a world faith as it "might have become." The Gnostic Gospels provides engaging reading for those seeking a broader perspective on the early development of Christianity."
the thing is, though, you have part of God within you to direct and guide you in each moment, and each of us can be trusted to find out for ourselves if information from any source is valid, based on that inner voice. It sounds like when you say this: "There have been untold things written by humans down through the ages. It doesn't mean we should accept all of them as truth."
...that you've prejudged something without reading it yourself and without allowing the holy spirit in you to guide you and to assess the information. My question is have you prejudged the material in question because you decided to believe an authority figure who said it was "wrong", rather than trust the spirit in you?
http://www.myspace.com/illuminatta
Rhinocerous Surprise '08!!!
Don't you see that - if God is truly omniscient - God would very easily be able to use humans to edit existing theories and ensure that the word, as God wants it, is accurately portrayed throughout the ages?
In other words, humans may have edited the bible for whatever reason in their own minds, but God was the one guiding that editing process.
...are those who've helped us.
Right 'round the corner could be bigger than ourselves.
No - I prejudged it based upon its exclusion from the accepted bible and due to my trust that God would have included it if God wanted to.
...are those who've helped us.
Right 'round the corner could be bigger than ourselves.
Therefore many, in their human arrogance continue to distort the truth.
http://www.myspace.com/illuminatta
Rhinocerous Surprise '08!!!
So you believe in the literal word of the bible? And if so, then can you explain, in light of your above comment, why God didn't 'guide' Darwin away from publishing 'The Origin of species', for example?
http://www.myspace.com/illuminatta
Rhinocerous Surprise '08!!!
Jesus said, "Those who seek should not stop seeking until they find. When they find, they will be disturbed. When they are disturbed, they will marvel, and will reign over all. [And after they have reigned they will rest.]"
Jesus said, "If your leaders say to you, 'Look, the (Father's) kingdom is in the sky,' then the birds of the sky will precede you. If they say to you, 'It is in the sea,' then the fish will precede you. Rather, the (Father's) kingdom is within you and it is outside you.
I believe that the Gonstic Gospels have a great relevance today for many reasons. One of which is simply that they place the onus of 'salvation' onto the individual, and thereby dismiss the need or urge to rely upon a third party, such as the Church. Religious experience should always be a personal experience. Once it it becomes connected with dogma, creed, or authority then it not only becomes dangerous, but it loses some of it's original purpose.
Have you studied ABOUT the gospel of thomas and understood what it is and what people want it to say. I would suggest you study it (that means studying and analysing both sides) and not just study what it says but rather the info behind it.
You truly do ask some great questions. I'm not sure my answers are as great.
I don't believe that God didn't "guide" Darwin, because Darwin's work isn't represented as the word of God.
I'm not sure that I do believe in the literal word of the bible in that I still think some things in it are open to interpretation (and that leaves me open to being hypocritical).
For example, I'm one of those who do believe in evolution (just that God is the driving force behind it).
...are those who've helped us.
Right 'round the corner could be bigger than ourselves.
Do you believe you have the holy spirit in you to discern truth from non-truth?
http://www.myspace.com/illuminatta
Rhinocerous Surprise '08!!!
No. I'm saying that there are times when I KNOW what the Holy Spirit is telling me to do or believe, yet I, of my own free will, go against that direction.
...are those who've helped us.
Right 'round the corner could be bigger than ourselves.
http://www.myspace.com/illuminatta
Rhinocerous Surprise '08!!!
The thing is, when we hand our spiritual power over to others to do so as they like, that's our choice. It is a choice best made in understanding. If we give up our spiritual gifts of discernment and trust in another because of their position or label, we are handing our God-given tool to that person. In the end, if that person leads us to ugliness, killing, war, etc, we are responsible for being ugly, for killing, for our part in war, etc.
http://www.myspace.com/illuminatta
Rhinocerous Surprise '08!!!
O.k, thanks. That's a surprisingly reasoned answer. Not surprising because it's from yourself, of course, but just surprisingly sound.
I mean, read the philosophy behind it, read the controversy that people who are more educated discuss. Read why some people accept it and others don't. There's often very justifiable reasons why some things are declared heretical or aren't included in the canon; it's not just a power trip.
I guess i get bugged when people find something they agree with on the surface and don't dig deeper to understand why they agree with it and the decide if they should agree with it. Also, it seems that with religion people are more apt to take other texts (gnostic gospels etc...) as truth and ignore the other books of the bible.
Yes I believe i have the holy spririt but i also have reasoning, understanding and mental capabilities to judge the quality of works. I may be wrong in some of those. I would never say that i have the corner on truth, I will say that if something disagrees with the collected appropriate texts that i will hold it much more suspect than something that agrees with it, and that is prudent. Just b/c things are from a similar time does not equate to similar authenticity or accuracy. Preponderance of evidence comes into play to help make decisions.
I agree God could enlighten us all. the Bible says God wants us to love him and what's more loving...making someone love us or having someone freely choose to love us. God doens't want people who feel they must love him, he wants people to choose to love Him and follow him. I agree with your final statement as well, human beings are the problem not religion or God.
Do you agree that when we make our decisions based on our human factors, rather than spiritual ones, the error that results (when it does) is human error, rather than God's error?
http://www.myspace.com/illuminatta
Rhinocerous Surprise '08!!!
Thanks - your questions are great because they really made me stop and think about my beliefs and thought process. That's what good questions do.
I definitely see your point. I guess if any of it were indisputable fact, we wouldn't have to discuss it!
...are those who've helped us.
Right 'round the corner could be bigger than ourselves.
http://www.myspace.com/illuminatta
Rhinocerous Surprise '08!!!
The truth of it is simply that much of what I have read from the Gnostic canon makes more sense to me than the orthodox Christian canon. The basic Gnostic philosophy ties in with my wider perspective on things - Kantian and Schopenhaurean philospophy, Eastern philosophy, shamanism, Quantum Physics e.t.c. (By the way, this is becoming one of the most interesting threads I've seen on the board for a while. Let me just throw in a quick thanks to those who have contributed!) I produced this post a while ago on the 'Death in the modern age' thread which may give you an idea of where I'm coming from:
...And to consider what happens after death can lead to a moment of terror. I mean, it's not easy to think about time in respect of dying and how long you will cease to exist after you have died. This will bring you to consider eternity and of yourself in the face of this eternity. The thought can overpower you.
However, you can then begin to look backwards - in the other direction. Ask yourself how long it was before you were born. Again, you find yourself having to confront eternity - i.e, how far back can you go? Was there a beginning to time?
I reckon that when looked at this way it brings you to disregard the whole concept of linear time altogether. Because, simply put, it makes no sense. I mean it suffices for our daily existences, but on the grand scale of things it does not add up. So what else, you ask? Well, what do other cultures believe? How have cultures which existed for thousands of years longer than our own perceived the life - death cycle, and time? They saw it in circular terms. Life and time not as linear, but as circular. There is no death, just as there was no death before life. There is only an endless eternity which is round and ever renewing like the seasons.
From The Gospel Of Thomas
The disciples said to Jesus, "Tell us, how will our end come?"
Jesus said, "Have you found the beginning, then, that you are looking for the end? You see, the end will be where the beginning is.
Congratulations to the one who stands at the beginning: that one will know the end and will not taste death."
Shamans, mystics and eastern religions, and the philosophers of the east have always spoken of a oneness which unites everything in the universe. The philosophers of the west also arrived at the same conclusion through the process of sustained reasoning - see kant and especially Schopenhaur. And the quantum physicists have also arrived at this conclusion. Imagine a bowling alley run covered in chalk. You roll a ball across it and it leaves a straight line on the runway. Imagine closing your eyes for 2 seconds and then opening them again and the part of the bowling runway where the ball was when you closed your eyes shows a zig-zag wave effect, and then continues to leave a straight line as we watch the ball roll to the end. This is how an atom behaves when we look at it. Basically, our cognitive make-up creates this world of individuality, linear time, and separateness. But beneath our perception all is one, and all is eternal, and there is no death.
I didn't say that i believe reason, education over the voice of God in me; I believe God gives us reason, knowledge to discern what is truth (he also does use the Holy spirit to guide these things). I don't believe the holy spirit will come down and have a beer with me and tell me outright what to believe. I do believe that the influence can be felt and we can know when this occurrs. I'm sorry if it came across poorly (got a few thigns going on).
Yes I agree that when we don't heed the holy spirit and choose freely to ignore spritual factors it is human error, NOT god's error. If I started a cult and ignored the tennants of the Bible and encouraged everyone to murder and rape people, that is human error... I believe God is perfect; therefore, he can't be in error. That's the hardest part of Christianity; acknowledging that I'm not perfect and don't know best all the time.
I wish god would guide my editing process today. There's no way I'm going to get this all finished by myself!
cross the river to the eastside
I can see why you would choose to believe the Gnostics, it def does agree more with your outlook on life; just like the opposite occurrs for me. I hope i didn't come across arrogant or assuming that you hadn't done the reading; you know how it is with this subject and people...there are very dear personal ideals being discussed. That was an interesting post you made and it did help at least see where you're coming from; it's not a philosophy I'd grab on to but I can see it's something you've thought through. This is an interesting thread (is this where we can derial it and start calling each other names
I love the many forms of intelligence we have. The bottom line that I think you and I agree on is that this life we each have, is a precious gift and is between us and God. There is so much to learn and see. At the same time, we've been taught to value man's knowledge and that man's knowledge is the only truth, and it concerns me when I look at the few "God-fearing" people here, and they, too, give man's knowledge priority over the Truth.
http://www.myspace.com/illuminatta
Rhinocerous Surprise '08!!!
http://www.myspace.com/illuminatta
Rhinocerous Surprise '08!!!