I'm coping out? Because I do not follow your truths? Is that your version of being a freethinker, as you say? This is exactly why I stay away from everyone's dogma. If you were a true Gnostic, you'd say "follow your intuition", which they believe, and not "follow mine".
Save your condescension for someone else. I can find better quality horseshit in a field.
As far as I'm concerned, you are just another New Age con man. And the only man you've conned is yourself, in thinking you have any idea regarding truth or revelation. True Gnosticism died long ago under the church you grew up with; Catholicism. You've just dusted off the name, and wore it like a boyscout badge you had never earned.
Dalek Prime wrote:I'm coping out? Because I do not follow your truths? Is that your version of being a freethinker, as you say? This is exactly why I stay away from everyone's dogma. If you were a true Gnostic, you'd say "follow your intuition", which they believe, and not "follow mine".
Save your condescension for someone else. I can find better quality horseshit in a field.
As far as I'm concerned, you are just another New Age con man. And the only man you've conned is yourself, in thinking you have any idea regarding truth or revelation. True Gnosticism died long ago under the church you grew up with; Catholicism. You've just dusted off the name, and wore it like a boyscout badge you had never earned.
A free thinker does not discard a whole field of thought.
Greatest I am wrote:A free thinker does not discard a whole field of thought.
That might be, but to keep focus on relevant things is much better.
The issue was Universalism, a policy of rapprochement and love as compared to most other religions who are divisive and have policies of hate.
If that is not relevant to theology and philosophy then neither of those can be complete.
Our friend is ignoring to think about man's basic nature of love and hate, harm/care in moral terms, and thinks he can further his thinking without those key elements.
Greatest I am wrote:A free thinker does not discard a whole field of thought.
That might be, but to keep focus on relevant things is much better.
The issue was Universalism, a policy of rapprochement and love as compared to most other religions who are divisive and have policies of hate.
If that is not relevant to theology and philosophy then neither of those can be complete.
Our friend is ignoring to think about man's basic nature of love and hate, harm/care in moral terms, and thinks he can further his thinking without those key elements.
The issue was Universalism, a policy of rapprochement and love as compared to most other religions who are divisive and have policies of hate.
If that is not relevant to theology and philosophy then neither of those can be complete.
Our friend is ignoring to think about man's basic nature of love and hate, harm/care in moral terms, and thinks he can further his thinking without those key elements.
What job does one such as you have?[/quote]
I do not mind giving the answer but need the relevance of the question before giving it to insure I deal with your thinking.
Dalek Prime wrote:I was looking up Elaine Pagels. Seems she's done a fair amount of work on Gnosticism, and sees eastern influences eg. Buddhism, in it's development. Whilst I'm not looking for a new faith, I am interested to learn more of its history, seeing many similarities between my views and theirs, though not its conclusions, and thank you for pointing me to these works, which I will look into. (I'm happily dystheist without the baggage of others interpretations, having always thought for myself.)
As for the OP, I thank you for pointing out they were universalists. On that topic though, I am dropping it as fruitless for my purposes, and consider it closed, though others are, of course, free to continue the discussion as they choose.
"I'm happily dystheist"
Start the link at about the 14 min. mark although you should listen to all of it.
If seeking God, God as the best set of rules and laws to live life well with, which is what the seeking for a God always was, and you do not try to force the theology you want to always be good or end good for God, then you are coping out on thinking things through to their best rules and laws.
Regards
DL
One thing I am trying to find is information on the first belief in God, so far every program I have looked at talks about Religion which formed long after humans first decided there was a God. Religions also followed the Myths that many religions were formed from. If either of you have any information about these first beliefs or where I could look, I would appreciate it. Not too long ago there was an article in National Geographic titled the earliest religions, but when I read it, they were obviously referring to beliefs that had been long established, I'm looking for the very first instance of man's belief in God.
Dalek Prime wrote:I was looking up Elaine Pagels. Seems she's done a fair amount of work on Gnosticism, and sees eastern influences eg. Buddhism, in it's development. Whilst I'm not looking for a new faith, I am interested to learn more of its history, seeing many similarities between my views and theirs, though not its conclusions, and thank you for pointing me to these works, which I will look into. (I'm happily dystheist without the baggage of others interpretations, having always thought for myself.)
As for the OP, I thank you for pointing out they were universalists. On that topic though, I am dropping it as fruitless for my purposes, and consider it closed, though others are, of course, free to continue the discussion as they choose.
"I'm happily dystheist"
Start the link at about the 14 min. mark although you should listen to all of it.
If seeking God, God as the best set of rules and laws to live life well with, which is what the seeking for a God always was, and you do not try to force the theology you want to always be good or end good for God, then you are coping out on thinking things through to their best rules and laws.
Regards
DL
One thing I am trying to find is information on the first belief in God, so far every program I have looked at talks about Religion which formed long after humans first decided there was a God. Religions also followed the Myths that many religions were formed from. If either of you have any information about these first beliefs or where I could look, I would appreciate it. Not too long ago there was an article in National Geographic titled the earliest religions, but when I read it, they were obviously referring to beliefs that had been long established, I'm looking for the very first instance of man's belief in God.
God, the war God that is, was a late bloomer thanks to Bronze Age man developing weapons powerful enough that man had to start fortifying his city states. Before our war Gods, the Goddess' ruled for over 20,000 years.
Man knew instinctively that woman was to be venerated for life and not a womb-less man. We have been at war ever since. War would likely end if we began to venerate women as we did in the past.
I see that as man's duty but most men have forgotten their duty and have no honor.
That aside.
This scholar is boring as hell but is worth the listen.
I did fight the law in my late 30s and they won but should have lost. History has shown me correct as the laws I fought are presently going to what I had fought for.
The OP doesn't even mention Universalism. And as it's not an orthodox opinion, didn't contribute to the numbers or thoughts on salvation. It was a statistical abberation for my purposes in starting the thread. If an experiment fails early, I am going to drop it, no matter what you say. If you want to talk about Universalism, there's the button up at the top for starting a new thread. Have at it.
And be honest. It's not because of my dropping the thread that you said I was coping out. You specifically quoted my belief in dystheism when you said I was coping out, because I already have a belief, and won't accept your disjointed, New Age rot. Now move on to another sucker with more patience and less brain.
Last edited by Dalek Prime on Thu May 21, 2015 7:29 pm, edited 2 times in total.
Dalek Prime wrote:Serious question: How many people will end up in heaven? Less than in hell? More than? Equal parts? And would others from other sects agree with your estimation? I'd prefer serious religious scholars to answer this, if they would.
Here's an example opinion of what I'm searching for in an answer. Right or wrong, it's thought out.
