thedoc wrote:[
quote="Greatest I am"]
Respect grows.
The bible was instrumental in my own apotheosis and I recommend it highly. One has to have the presence of mind to see that the God portrayed is rather vile and should be rejected. Therein lies the wisdom of the bible.
Regards
DL
Thankyou.
The more I study and consider it, the more I have come to believe that the original stories were nothing like what is written in the current Bible. I would suggest that the stories were enhanced quite a bit to impress the people of the time, who were probably very violent because of the world they were living in. I'm more inclined to accept the stories of the new testament, and take a sign that Jesus taught in parables, made up stories to teach a lesson, not to teach history. My thinking is that if the new testament was primarily parables, why not the old testament mythology as made up stories to teach a lesson.
Then you might give this a listen. In it is shown, at about the 24 min. mark, what Jews and Gnostics used to do with gospels to enhance the seeking after God. What you see as finding what the lesson is trying to teach. Is what I call seeking God.
http://www.pbs.org/moyers/journal/03132009/watch.html
Now the question is, what do Gnostic's teach that is different form standard Christianity, and where is standard Christianity wrong in light of Gnostic teaching.
If you recognize that most of what was written about God is myth based, then right and wrong do not quite apply to myths like it does to reality. Myths can be interpreted many ways and right and wrong do not apply.
I'm sure you have elaborated on this before, but I'm going to be lazy and ask you to point me in the direction or post a summary for me. I'm not saying I'm ready to convert or to leave the church I now attend, but I'm always considering other ideas. I have also come to the conclusion that which Church is attended is less important than the individual and their relationship with God.
[/quote]
In that, you would be right.
The big three that drew me to Gnostic Christianity are that unlike Christianity and Islam, we are Universalists and have no need to accept that a moral God would create an immoral construct like hell. Second would be that we cannot be misogynous as we believe equality is a part of righteousness, and thirdly is that for that some reason, we do not discriminate against gays or anyone else without a just cause.
I do have an older thing that I wrote to show our major differences in how we view Jesus. In it I also speak of my apotheosis and end in a question.
----------------------------
Care to compare the Jesus you know to the one I know?
I have been asked to do an O P showing my beliefs and have written a nutshell view to fill that request.
I was a skeptic till the age of 39. I then had an apotheosis and later branded myself an esoteric ecumenist and Gnostic Christian. Gnostic Christian because I exemplify this quote from William Blake and that makes me as hated by Christians today as the ancient Gnostics that Constantine had the Christians kill when he bought the Catholic Church.
“Both read the Bible day and night, But thou read'st black where I read white.”
This refers to how Gnostics tend to reverse, for moral reasons, what Christians see in the Bible. We tend to recognize the evil ways of the O. T. God where literal Christians will see God’s killing as good. Christians are sheep where Gnostic Christians are goats.
This is perhaps why we see the use of a Jesus scapegoat as immoral, while theists like to make Jesus their beast of burden. An immoral position.
During my apotheosis, something that only lasted 5 or 6 seconds, the only things of note to happen was that my paradigm of reality was confirmed and I was chastised to think more demographically. What I found was what I call a cosmic consciousness. Not a new term but one that is a close but not exact fit.
I recognize that I have no proof. That is always the way with apotheosis.
This is also why I prefer to stick to issues of morality because no one has yet been able to prove that God is real and I have no more proof than they for the cosmic consciousness or what I call; the Godhead.
The cosmic consciousness is not a miracle working God. It does not interfere with us save when one of us finds it. Not a common thing from what I can see. It is a part of nature and our next evolutionary step.
I tend to have more in common with atheists who ignore what they see as my delusion because our morals are basically identical. Theist tend not to like me much as I have no respect for literalists and fundamentals and think that most Christians have exaggerated tribal mentalities and poor morals as they have developed a double standard to be able to stomach their God.
I am rather between a rock and a hard place but this I cannot help.
I am happy to be questioned on what I believe but whether or not God exists is basically irrelevant to this world for all that he does not do, and I prefer to thrash out moral issues that can actually find an end point. The search for God is never ending when you are of the Gnostic persuasion. My apotheosis basically says that I am to ignore whatever God I found, God as a set of rules that is, not idol worship it but instead, raise my bar of excellence and seek further.
My apotheosis also showed me that God has no need for love, adoration or obedience. He has no needs. Man has dominion here on earth and is to be and is the supreme being.
Since then, I have tried to collect information that would help any that believe that apotheosis is possible, generally not Christians, --- as they do not believe in the mythical esoteric Jesus that I believe in and churches do not dare teach it.
This first clip gives the theological and philosophical interpretation of what Jesus taught and the second clip show what I think is a close representation of the method that helped me push my apotheosis.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=alRNbesf ... r_embedded
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FdSVl_HOo8Y
Basically, the usual Christian Jesus is their hero and savior while my version demand that man himself steps up to the plate and save himself.
Which version do you think is more moral and deserving of praise and why?
Regards
DL
