With so little gnosis of God, only egotists and fools will t

Philosophy Forums Religion and Spirituality
1

With so little gnosis of God, only egotists and fools will think they know God.

Having had an apotheosis, and knowing God just a bit, I can tell you that we have a ways to go to Gnosis and knowing God as we are not even thinking demographically as yet. First and foremost, God is unity and not division.

Most people of religion or spirituality in these places will believe or have faith in that their God is the right God to follow. That statement would include believers and non-believers alike. Non-believers here would name human constructs for social controls as God. These are basically equivalent to religious tenets.

Gnostic Christians and esoteric ecumenists like myself, seekers for short, are exempt.

We, so to speak, curse any and all constructs for social control. Not because they are not worthy of respect but because it shows an inherent flaw in man and his character. We should be able to quite easily live without them. It is an insult to all humans to have to rely on others for a moral path to follow. I digress.

What does believing that that one knows God,— just on hearsay, — say about the egos of most believers in here?

Those who have named God are basically idol worshiper of their God and —

youtube.com/watch?v=itb6uNL_3ag&feature=kp

“First they came for the Jews, but I did nothing because I’m not a Jew. Then they came for the socialists, but I did nothing because I’m not a socialist. Then they came for the Catholics, but I did nothing because I’m not a Catholic. Finally, they came for me, but by then there was no one left to help me.” – Pastor Father Niemoller (1946)”

What can we say of a believer’s ego, ---- that on the one hand seems to be so huge, — while on the other, — he or she professes to want to just slave himself or herself to God? — Like some tiny baby ego.

I ask the same of non-believers as you too likely are slaved to the political system you follow. That is your God.

Regards
DL

2

So what you are saying is that because you personally know so little, if anyone else thinks they know anything they are egotists and fools, and you are wiser and better than they.

…I see. :confused:
:icon-rolleyes:

3

we don’t really know about god…we are just worshipping ancestors…I kind of like that…
I can look up to Buddha, jesus, Gandhi, and so on…I don’t like the worship thing…I don’t see anything to worship…

4

Do you consistently follow any rules or procedures for doing anything at all?

…that is all “worshiping” means.

To worship the most fundamental Cause of all existence, means that you presume to understand it sufficiently to follow its implications. It is a bit like following the rules of math every time you try to resolve a math equation. You are “worshiping the rules of mathematics”. Your discipline is in mathematics. You are disciplined to their way. You are a “disciple of mathematics”.

5

the word worship doesn’t apply to math

6

Only because you don’t apply it.
It means the same regardless of your application or connotations.

7

From what you’ve demonstrated in these forums, you despise anybody and everybody that doesn’t believe exactly the same things you do. How ecumenical is that? Dogmatists might cause problems, but this certain variety of dogmatists that have convinced themselves they’re tolerant of opposite views when they so clearly are not aren’t any better. I see ‘ecumenical’ people come in here and bitch, and insult, and lie, and attack, and make all sorts of insane, totalitarian demands of people who have different religious views than them, and then in the same breath they talk about how important unity and understanding are. It would make me sick if I wasn’t so overexposed to it.

What can we say about the believers ego who, when you are in the mood to insult them you say is so huge, and when you are in the mood to insult them in a slightly different way, you say is so small? We can say that you’re confused, and not even your strawman is coherent anymore.

8

It seemed like an ill fit, this knowing God just a bit and having had an apotheosis, but I assume the second part is intended as ironic understatement.

Then God is limited in this universe, since there is so much disunity and so much division. If this is mere Surface, then you are also complaining about a Surface phenomenon amongst other believers.

Most people of religion or spirituality in these places will believe or have faith in that their God is the right God to follow. That statement would include believers and non-believers alike. Non-believers here would name human constructs for social controls as God. These are basically equivalent to religious tenets.

You’ve made a jump. You Went from the theological idea, held by some, that some approaches to God are correct and others are not to saying you reject all social Control. First there is a leap here, second there is a paradox, the latter because you are saying that your approach is correct and the others are not, which puts you on a part with these other believers. The leap is because you need to demonstrate that all approaches to and descriptions of God are correct, and/or it does not matter what approach one has. If we were talking about how to become a faster sprinter you would be incorrect. Some methods work better than others. Some explanations of running and how to increase in speed are models that better fit the experience of those training. So with God, it seems, we are dealing with something else, and you know that no descrption of God and not path to reach (gnosis of) God is better than any other.

How do you know this? That’s the rather enormous step you just jumped over.

I’d be interested in your answer. It doesn’t mean they have big or rigid egos. They might, but they could also have weak or normal egos In the end anyone making claims about God, whether they refer to authorities (who they have the self-trust to know ARE the authorities) or refer to their own apotheosis as the source of their knowledge, is making the same claim. They know something and they have a wonderful skill - either to know who, out of the mass of authorities, the right one is and that this authority is right about THIS, or that their own experience is valid on this particular issue.

9

And any God who demanded worship would be know to be a fake as god has no needs or wants except that he does like it when we find him within us.

Regards
DL

10

I do not usually attack beliefs unless they are immoral. For enlightenment, any belief will do.

For intelligent morals, I definitely will push my more moral beliefs than what most Christians believe.
They have mostly poor morals as they follow a genocidal son murderer.

Only a really immoral person will allow Christians to believe their satanic God without trying to discredit him and saving the poor ignorant Christians. Mostly on the right wing.

Regards
DL

11

Jesus did not think apotheosis an ill fit.

youtube.com/watch?v=alRNbesf … r_embedded

As to my disliking any and all social manipulation and control systems, ---- be they religious or government, — I do dislike them and will continue to do so as they are an insult to all thinking people.

You may like and need a big brother but if we were well trained we would not need them.

They were invented to be temporary, not a permanent blemish on man’s character. They teach us how to follow rules instead of thinking of what rules we follow.

Regards
DL

12

Yeah, if we were well trained by social manipulations and control systems, then we wouldn’t need social manipulation and control systems. :evilfun:

13

Exactly.

Show people how to behave instead of forcing it with stupid religious systems.

Better to show a man how to feed himself instead of making him dependant on some other.

Ever hear Jesus and his ---- writing our laws in our hearts?

That is what he was recommending. Right?

Regards
DL: