That may be why Christians sing that Adam’s sin was a happy fault and necessary to god’s plan. — Gnostic Christian Bishop

I don't even understand how Adam's act of eating from the tree of good and evil was evil if he didn't know what evil even was until he ate the apple.

It is very annoying that you assert to be the speaker for
"Gnostic Christianity" when that is an idea only recently recovered from the mangled text of recorded time.
If it is the case that there are alternative ways to listen to accepted understandings of text read by many people, shouldn't you be starting there?
Nobody will care if you blow off their narratives only because you think something or the other. If you care about what some people think, then start caring.

Thoughts? — Gnostic Christian Bishop

The "eating of the Tree if Knowledge" myth is the "See spot run!" part of the Bible. Whoever invented it was an idiot.

Supposedly the god put two naive (childlike) beings into a garden and instructed them to enjoy themselves but not eat of a particular fruit.

Any three year old child could predict with CERTAINTY what would happen.

The god in the story was an idiot invented by an idiot.

You are correct in that there was no real sin in the consuming of knowledge. That is why it has been shifted to the desire to be a god.

The less astute think it was disobedience, but that fails for the same reason you put above. Adam would not know it was evil to disobey.

Yahweh thus murdered A & E unjustly.

Regards
DL

If it is the case that there are alternative ways to listen to accepted understandings of text read by many people, shouldn't you be starting there? — Valentinus

I thought I was doing just that by showing the contradiction in Christian thinking of calling Eden where we fell, --- while at the same time them saying that sin is necessary to god's plan.

As to Gnostic Christianity. It, due to it's esoteric side, predates Christianity and is demonstrably a more moral religion.

That fact is why the inquisitors where sent to annihilate us.

The winner of those god wars is the inferior religion and without collusion from governments would have disappeared along with it. stupid literal reading of myths.

Regards
DL

Yes it is.

It's hippy-ish, sailing over the ocean in a yaght with your girlfriend - drinking a wine. (These are harsh times, what's the norm may reduce my point).

Careless about the species. Prodigal.

We, are already a unit. None of us have the ability to own the world - we can produce an illusion of a similar feat.

Through this alternative illusion, we can dream of such. Truthfully though, dreams are more potent.

The god in the story was an idiot invented by an idiot. — Frank Apisa

Actually, the reverse is true if you reverse the Christian take of a fall to the original Jewish view of Eden being where man was elevated.

The idiot label belongs to the Christians who reversed the moral of the story. The Jewish version is quite good and elevating to the ego instead of tearing it down the way Christianity did. All while even more stupidly saying that Adam furthered god's plan.

Yes it is. — xyzmix

It is what?

None of us have the ability to own the world — xyzmix

Reality belies that, given that, what, the top ten rich people own 90 odd % of the world.

All they have to do, and have done, is buy the politicians who are eager to be owned.

Regards
DL

It is evil for members of a species to go on their own anti-species pilgrimage.

A human who becomes a God is not a human.

It is an abomination, because it is literally a member of humanity, and that's logical.

To then co-exist as a God, rather than a member, IS evil.

Gnostic Christian Bishop
997
The god in the story was an idiot invented by an idiot.
— Frank Apisa

Actually, the reverse is true if you reverse the Christian take of a fall to the original Jewish view of Eden being where man was elevated.

The idiot label belongs to the Christians who reversed the moral of the story. The Jewish version is quite good and elevating to the ego instead of tearing it down the way Christianity did. All while even more stupidly saying that Adam furthered god's plan. — Gnostic Christian Bishop

Really?

I've got a couple of Hebrew Bibles...and they have the same story as the Christian Bibles.

Explain to me (to us) the difference as you see it.

To then co-exist as a God, rather than a member, IS evil. — xyzmix

Why, when gods are here, as Jesus pointed out, to serve humans. That is good, not evil.

As you can see, I do not define gods as supernatural and so they never give up their humanity or duty to society.

Gnostic Christian Cathars, for instance, have Parfait as their highest possible spiritual position.

The only possible gods we can have are human ones. That may be why some of the Roman Emperors named themselves gods and their children, children of god.

Regards
DL

Explain to me (to us) the difference as you see it. — Frank Apisa

My view is closer to the Jewish view that shows us and god coming out of Eden as successes and not the failure that Christianity put to it.

Let me let the Jews tell you.

http://dish.andrewsullivan.com/2013/10/20/comparative-theodicy/

‘Instead of the Fall of man (in the sense of humanity as a whole), Judaism preaches the Rise of man: and instead of Original Sin, it stresses Original Virtue, the beneficent hereditary influence of righteous ancestors upon their descendants’.

Regards
DL

I've got a couple of Hebrew Bibles...and they have the same story as the Christian Bibles. — Frank Apisa

The same story but not the same moral to the story.

Which moral of the story do you see?

Should Adam not have eaten and derailed god's plan?

Regards
DL

Okay...so the same story...with different interpretations.

One from a group who considers itself to be the "chosen people" of the god...and one from a group who considers itself not to be the chosen people.

I read the story...as someone who guesses it to be a fable.

And reading this fable as anything but a failure of humanity in the eyes of the god seems one hell of a stretch.

But...that's just me, a non-Christian...and the 2.5 billion Christians who happen to think that interpretation works best.

I see it as a fable...and the only "moral" conclusion I see drawn is of failure on the part of the humans to the will of the god.

Of course, the mythology includes some need for villains...so I understand what you are attempting to portray. You do feel that same way about Judas, right? He was doing what the god of the Bible (and Jesus) wanted and needed done. Correct?

Here is the real way to salvation that Jesus taught and that Gnostic Christians have embraced. — Gnostic Christian Bishop

Too bad the Bible didn't give us the information we need to survive on a violent planet with deadly diseases. I think science has done more to overcome evil than religion. And that Garden of Eden story is one of the worst stories ever written. If we let that story control us, we would still be in the dark ages hunting witches, instead of finding cures for disease.

As we have a world pandemic perhaps the sales of Bibles and silver crosses will go up? whoops, I forgot the holy water. We must be baptized in it to be saved.

To believe in a God who loves you in the Christian sense is to be a narcissist who wants everyone to be a narcissist.

Why would you not want to be infinite and perfect?

Yahweh thus murdered A & E unjustly. — Gnostic Christian Bishop

That assumes no other justification.

If it is the case that there are alternative ways to listen to accepted understandings of text read by many people, shouldn't you be starting there? — Valentinus

That is a good place to start. We can think concretely or abstractly. If we think concretely we interpret things literally. In this case, there are demons and they can be seen fleeing a body as this is what the Bible says. Satan and demons being real entities with the power to affect our lives.

If we think abstractly, a demon is a fear or anger. These are psychological manifestations and are not entities.

Biblical terminology can be useful when we think abstractly and harmful when we think concretely and start hunting witches or become prejudice against a group of people with the notion they are not saved and are under the influence of God's curse (dark skinned people) or Satan. I have not been able to figure out how we are to know if it is Satan troubling us or God punishing us?

But...that's just me, a non-Christian...and the 2.5 billion Christians who happen to think that interpretation works best. — Frank Apisa

They also think a genocidal and infanticidal god is a good god. Go with those immoral thinkers if you like.

You might wonder who their god really is though. This guy might make you think as it seems I could not do so.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VNcRXeCzpno

Regards
DL

I see it as a fable...and the only "moral" conclusion I see drawn is of failure on the part of the humans to the will of the god. — Frank Apisa

I too see it all as myth/fable. A fairy tale for adults.

Of course, the mythology includes some need for villains...so I understand what you are attempting to portray. — Frank Apisa

You, may not. Tell me and I will confirm or deny.

You do feel that same way about Judas, right? — Frank Apisa

I think so. I base my view on Jesus offering a sap to Judas. A sop is kind of a bribe to your best friend to get a promise. In this case, a promise to turn Jesus over, just as Jesus wanted him to do to insure that Jesus could try to make the prophesy of a savior come true. Of course, he failed.

This view is confirmed by the story of the last supper which has all the other disciples not in any way trying to stop Judas from doing Jesus' bidding, thus also helping Jesus in his suicide to test the prophesy.

Regards
DL

I think science has done more to overcome evil than religion. — Athena

We see religions the same way. Other than my own of course.

I do not see any evil in nature. To be evil, nature would need to show intent to harm. Nature only shows that it supports all life and does not care who the winners or losers are. It cannot as it is not sentient.

All evil is human to human as we are the only ones who pass the mens rea qualifier used in secular law. It is Latin for evil mind or evil intent that is primarily used in insanity cases.

We are evolving creatures that can only compete or cooperate with each other.

We default to cooperation which gives good results all around and only do evil to the losers of competitions when we choose to compete.

Survival of the fittest says we have to do one or the other.

In a sense, we are all sinners and have to be to survive.

Religions just screw up on the definition of sin.

The above is why I have no, --- problem of evil.

Be we created by a god or nature, we are all doing exactly what we were created to do.

That view explains why Jesus saw heaven right here and right now at all points in time.

Few, as he indicated, have the mentality to see it.

Regards
DL

That assumes no other justification. — Hanover

Ah, one line of questioning that got Socrates into trouble went like this...

"Are the gods good?" The answer was yes.

"Is adultery good?" Everyone knew Zeus committed adultery and that was not considered a virtue.

So I ask does the Bible say God is a jealous, revengeful, fearsome and punishing God?

Is it good to be jealous, revengeful, fearsome and punishing, or is that the role model for an abusive husband and a terrible boss?

In another thread, there was an objection to Islam carrying the "eye for an eye" justice, but so did Judaism until Jesus. Quakers stay with the New Testament because the ideas of God and justice in old testament are not the God and justice they value. They favor Jesus as the word and God. That new way of seeing God and Justice is Hellenism. "The word" is English for logos, reason, the controlling force of the universe made manifest in the speech. As we understand it, so we manifest it. Mohammid was aware of Christianity and Judaism but did not have the culture of Hellenism, so their correction of the God's truth as the Jews understood it, was not the same as the Christian correction of God's truth as the Jews understood it.

How we interpret the Bible is a matter of concrete and abstract thinking, and also our knowledge of history.

To believe in a God who loves you in the Christian sense is to be a narcissist who wants everyone to be a narcissist.

Why would you not want to be infinite and perfect? — Gregory

A fascist religion would not have it any other way.

To your last.

Perfection or being the best human you can be is a decent goal.

We know that matter and energy are immortal, even as they change from one form to the other on an ongoing basis, but I cannot see our consciousness as even wanting to live forever.

To live infinitely, would be the most boring existence, I think, and would leave us all wishing we could die.

That matches the thinking of Shangri-La writers.

Regards
DL

I don't even understand how Adam's act of eating from the tree of good and evil was evil if he didn't know what evil even was until he ate the apple. — Hanover

It was gaining that knowledge which was the problem. They were then kicked out before they could eat form the tree of life and live forever like the gods.

In the Book of Enoch, 200 angels sin by having sex with human women and then teaching them and other men about secret knowledge from the heavens, such as metallurgy, what sort of roots to eat and so on. That and their kids were giants who ate up all the food and started eating humans. So then El decided to send a flood.

It's a Pandora's Box tale. Christians changed the meaning to be about original sin, the devil and rebellion.

That assumes no other justification. — Hanover

No other justification is offered in the scriptures so it is an informed assumption.

A & E chose education over eternal life without it, even though the scribes made them unable to really choose, not knowing if they were choosing good or evil.

Do you see any other justification for Yahweh to murder A & E by neglect and willfully denying them what would have kept them alive, if they were stupid enough to choose immortality?

Regards
DL

Biblical terminology can be useful when we think abstractly and harmful when we think concretely and start hunting witches. — Athena

Especially when the test for witches cannot be passed and is intended to kill all the witches that are accused.

Inquisitions and witch hunts are how Christianity grew, because they did not have persuasive moral view to convert with.

Not surprising given the fascist nature of Christianity and Islam. I exclude Judaism only because they have mostly become all atheists or agnostics. The smart ones anyway. They have been listening to their more intelligent and honest preachers longer, while Christtians and Muslims are busy believing theit lying preachers.

Regards
DL

"The word" is English for logos, reason, the controlling force of the universe made manifest in the speech. — Athena

You are why Christian men, and their brain dead women, are misogynous.

Intelligent though scares the hell out of Christian men and the women who dream of some sugar daddy to protect them.

Using logos instead of mythos would force them to be better and they want to resist that.

They fear loosing the carrot and gladly take the stick, while cursing the brave who call their immoral satanic god evil.

May we return to Goddess worship before we become a part of the major extinction event we are causing.

Regards
DL.

It's a Pandora's Box tale. — Marchesk

Yes, while ignoring that it has to all be a part of god's plan.

That plan cannot be derailed as it would show an incompetent god whose plan can be derailed by those he himself created.

Foolish thinking but that is the Christian forte that stems from dysfunctional supernatural thinking.

Regards
DL

I do not see any evil in nature. To be evil, nature would need to show intent to harm. Nature only shows that it supports all life and does not care who the winners or losers are. It cannot as it is not sentient. — Gnostic Christian Bishop

I totally agree with you, but I think we are engaging Christians and I want to stress science has done more for us than religion in terms a religious person might grasp.

We default to cooperation which gives good results all around and only do evil to the losers of competitions when we choose to compete. — Gnostic Christian Bishop

I think Cicero would enjoy that explanation. :up:

Religions just screw up on the definition of sin. — Gnostic Christian Bishop

I agree with that. I believe Cicero was correct to say we are compelled to do the right thing when we know what that is. In the US, liberal education, that is education based on being literate in Greek and Roman classics, promoted the idea that bad judgment is the result of ignorance. I think evil is the product of ignorance. When we understand disease is spread by polluted water, we avoid drinking the polluted water. We don't go looking for the witch or drive the Jews (Muslims) away, making a bad even worse. Ouch, :grimace: this reasoning does not appear to be the dominating reasoning of the US today. I think that is a problem of leaving moral training to the Church with a history of persecution and war.

Be we created by a god or nature, we are all doing exactly what we were created to do. — Gnostic Christian Bishop

I strongly disagree with that. For evidence of why that idea is incorrect, I offer an explanation of "fast and slow thinking. This google page provides links https://www.google.com/search?q=fast+and+slow+thinking&rlz=1C1CHKZ_enUS481US483&oq=fast+and+slow+thinking&aqs=chrome..69i57j0l6j69i65.8577j0j4&sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8 I like the youtube explanations but don't know the forum policy of posting them, so I leave everyone with a choice.

Our disagreement rest on the whole notion of our understanding of being human. Wetting ourselves is natural and we learn how not to do that. We can all develop virtues that separate us from the animals, and turn us into thinking beings, not just creatures of nature.

That view explains why Jesus saw heaven right here and right now at all points in time. — Gnostic Christian Bishop

That is a Hellenistic notion. The Greeks wrote the first Bible and filled it with their understanding of what is so. Augustine picked up this paganism and Christianized it. That is, the Romans took control of editing the Bible and they were weak on Greek reasoning, and later Augustine who was influenced by the "pagan" thinking, brought it back into Christian consciousness. The Roman influence has the new testament telling us God wants us to honor Him by being good slaves. That is totally opposed to the old testament explaining Jews can own slaves but should not be slaves because of the relationship with God. I think the Roman influence on Christianity is problematic but that is for another thread.

Few, as he indicated, have the mentality to see it. — Gnostic Christian Bishop

Augustine explains this awareness of knowing God is within and I am confident this a matter of growing up. When we are young it seems everything important is outside of us. We are as empty cups needing to be filled. In our later years, we think of ourselves as being filled with the knowledge of life, our cup is filled, and our thinking literally changes. We shift from seeking knowledge of life through experience, to contemplating the meaning of it all.

Rome was more materialistic than the Greeks, and the White Anglo Saxons Protestants who invaded North America, were not spiritual as the native Americans were spiritual. Those are very different consciousnesses and a man of Rome or under Roman influence, should not be judging the whole of humanity.