There’s the belief in Gnosticism that an evil God has taken over this world and that we’re at his mercy as we’re his crippled play things or meat puppets to torment on this plane of existence. I find myself becoming more of a Gnostic everyday except more on the lines of a pagan-gnostic. For me there was once a beautiful spiritual world when polytheistic paganism flourished amongst western civilization historically and that the Gnostic interpretation of the evil God who took over ruining the world is very much indeed the Abrahamic one. The Abrahamic God is the evil demonic God that the Gnostics constantly reference.
I despise Christianity, Islam, and Judaism, in my opinion they were the worst religious belief systems to befell this entire planet.
Yes, there are many, many, many beliefs about God.
What I would prefer however is for Gnostics to at least make an attempt to demonstrate why their own beliefs reflect that which all rational men and women ought to embrace as well.
After all, as Michael Shermer noted:
“In the past 10,000 years, humans have devised roughly 100,000 religions based on roughly 2,500 gods. So the only difference between myself and the believers is that I am skeptical of 2,500 gods whereas they are skeptical of 2,499 gods. We’re only one God away from total agreement.”
Merely expressing my own views and spiritual beliefs, I’m not saying people should embrace them, merely that they’re my own.
Yes, there’s several manifestations of religion or spirituality, as a subjectivist one would think you could appreciate that, or, are you trying to make an objective atheistic judgement here? How does that fit with dasein Biggie?
You’re confused my brother. What you hate about Christianity and Islam is Platonism.
The ideal world, that wants to banish all Gods and impose the One Perfect Idea.
The Jewish religion had no interest in banishing any Gods. They just for themselves preferred to worship only one. They were and are actually extremely respectful of other people’s beliefs.
That wasn’t Plato’s fault, Islam and Christianity bastardized Platoism with their religious ideals or ideology.
Judaism is respectful of nothing and no-one, its followers literally believe they’re chosen to inherit the entire earth possessing it for themselves only. They care about nobody or nothing other than themselves.
Just out of curiosity, note a few examples of what from your point of view denotes me looking at God and religion objectively.
In fact, I don’t even know objectively if my views on them reflect my own free will. Let alone how I would go about closing the gap between what I think about them here and now and all that would need to be known about them going back to the complete understanding of existence itself.
How do you go about closing that gap?
How would a pagan-gnostic go about it?
Most of course go about it by not actually thinking about it at all.
I just find it interesting how an atheistic nihilist pronounces to reject all forms of philosophical objectivIsm and then goes on in an objective manner to disprove the existence of God or gods. Seems very interesting, how does that inconsistency work exactly?
Of course this is also just something that some “think up” in their head. Or something that others shove down into it. It seems almost a given so that’s as far as they need go to demonstrate it.
On the other hand, there’s still the part where the demiurge is intertwined in the behaviors that they choose on this side of the grave in sync with whatever the demiurge’s role is in deciding the fate of “I” on the other side of it.
But, hey, just “think up” something here to believe is true too, right?
Also, a distinction has to be made between theology and philosophy here. But just “think” that up too.
A nihilist who believes in nothing, sees no purpose in anything, and even to the point of seeing no purpose in themselves for whatever reason is very concerned about the purpose that others creates in themselves in terms of valuing, seems very peculiar Biggie.
Actually, what I don’t finding interesting at all anymore is how you refuse to respond to the points and the questions I posed to you above and, instead, note yet another unsubstantiated assessment of me that is virtually the opposite of how I do think about objectivism philosophically.
Again, in making the distinction between objective knowledge in the either/or world and subjective/subjunctive opinions in the is/ought world. In regard to Gnosticism as well.
And the need to examine it existentially in regard to particular sets of circumstances.
Oh, and it’s not interesting because you and your ilk have been avoiding substantive responses to the points and the questions that I and my ilk raise here for a long, long time.
I have no problem with a dictatorship so long as it is a benevolent one and collectivist in nature, it’s the international privatized dictatorship of today run by a handful of private predatory oligarchs who care nothing about a majority of people I despise, I hope this clarifies my position.
Again, you either give someone absolute power over your life, or you maintain the power to demand conditions. Not both.
You can’t ask for a benevolent dictatorship. You can only ask for a dictatorship. The dictator will decide if it pleases them to be benevolent or not.
What offends people like you, that want to be dominated (if I understand you right), about Jews isn’t that they want to rule your life or whatever you were trying to say. It is that they are a free people and will not be dominated.
They will sooner face extermination than domination.
While you pucker your butt up to the first would-be dictator that tells you you’re pretty.
He actually believes he is describing me accurately here!! He really thinks that this is true!!
Now, I expect this sort of thing from Wendy Darling and the Kids. But Joker is capable of a lot more than this. As was demonstrated in the OP. It is an intelligent, well-articulated assessment of his own reaction to Gnosticism.
I don’t share it and [as usual] am far more interested in the extent to which spiritual beliefs can be demonstrated. But it’s certainly a post that is appropriate at a venue called “I Love Philosophy”.
But look what his exchange with me has now deteriorated into…Stooge Stuff.
Not it at all, it’s all about a philosopher king that lead an empire, nation state, people, and race to greater prosperity for a majority of all along with delivering people to a higher form of consciousness within the realm of a grand future destiny.
A republic or democracy will never deliver this and neither will the international oligarchic communists of today.
