Gnostic Bishop
-
Posts
1,221 -
Joined
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Calendar
Posts posted by Gnostic Bishop
-
-
On 18/04/2017 at 11:14 PM, RevRainbow said:
Judging people is not my job description as a Christian. Loving people is. I may judge certain acts as immoral but only among other Christians. I am not to be concerned (in a judgemental way) with the behavior or beliefs of non-Christians but, by my behavior, I am to emulate what a Christian believes.
Interesting. But I cannot agree or work that way.
Let me adlib a quote and then give you another.
1. For evil to grow, all good people need do is nothing.
That would include not judging the evils that non-Christians do.
2. "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)”
Would you, if you lived in a Hitler type environment, not judge Hitler as evil and try to help the Jews?
Regards
DL
-
13 minutes ago, Brother Kaman said:
See, that is the beauty of it all. We can all do as we please with our spiritual beliefs or lack of them. As long as we abide by the laws of our land with our actions, none of the rest of it is anyone's business. Quoting Bible to me is meaningless. You can spread your Bible blather to someone else.
So it is none of our business if our neighbor beats his wife and sells his daughter for a few cows after her sexual pleasures are destroyed by FGM.
For evil to grow, all good people need do is nothing.
You promote doing nothing and allowing evil to grow.
Regards
DL
-
14 hours ago, Gwynn ap Gruffudd said:
I believe we should maintain a strong military, but with the goal of never having to use it.
??
As a free man, I see my first duty as trying to insure that all share in that freedom.
Is that not how you see things, as a free man, and if so, should you restrict using military might to attain that goal?
Regards
DL
-
If Jesus was alive, and recognizing that his main (enemy) was poverty, I think he would be well pleased with the world of today.
Especially since most of the markers for evil, violent death by all causes, poverty, sickness and slavery, are all at the best rate per capita that we have ever enjoyed.
As to Trump.
It is my hope that his stance against Islam translates into a discussion of all the evil religions we follow.
Christians and Muslims have a lot to learn and a healthy disrespect for their immoral creeds would be a good place to start.
All who dislike homophobes and misogynous creeds will agree.
I think it time we killed off the more immoral Gods like Allah and Yahweh.
Regards
DL
-
17 minutes ago, Jonathan H. B. Lobl said:
It's hard enough to find good things in the Bible; without missing something because of the idiom. Sometimes, the obvious is easy to overlook.
Indeed.
Christians are expert at missing what they do not want to accept.
They run from quotes that I have put that show the more esoteric Jesus who would free our minds instead of slaving them to a religion.
Regards
DL
-
On 08/02/2017 at 3:25 PM, Gwynn ap Gruffudd said:
Hi Gnostic Bishop,
Good point. She did tend to use the feminine pronouns for God in context of her practice of Gnostic Christianity, but she used standard male pronouns when speaking in general to the public at large.
Bendithion,
Gwynn
Strange that she would miss the opportunity to correct the less informed who put a male face to God and ignore that most of the old traditions had androgynous Gods so that both males and females could relate.
Regards
DL
-
On 07/02/2017 at 9:09 AM, Jonathan H. B. Lobl said:
It does small good to reference the eye; unless you say that it is the Ajna chakra.
I think that most who have studied the old Eastern religious traditions will know what is at issue.
Always good to add information as you have done though.
Regards
DL
-
On 10/02/2017 at 7:22 PM, Brother Kaman said:
Your A/atheism is such that you take glee in making others uncomfortable? Tsk, tsk, tsk...
??
You would not have the delusional corrected?
Proverbs 3:12 For whom the Lord loveth he correcteth; even as a father the son in whom he delighteth.
1 Thessalonians 5:21 Test all things; hold fast what is good.
Should we allow the delusional to follow an immoral creed just because we make them uncomfortable?
Uncomfortable is the first step out of poor thinking.
Regards
DL
-
On 14/11/2016 at 6:43 PM, mark 45 said:
i never said anything about them acting on said beliefs,and doing nothing.if i am or were in a position to stop it,i would do what i could.but i still feel no need to persecute them for their beliefs.
and by the way,clitoris removal is done usually by the girls mother and any help she can get(and most of the women who do it have had it done to them,and think they are doing right).i don't think they are.
Correcting poor thinking is not persecution.
It is us showing our love to others.
Imagine where we would be today if people did not correct each others poor thinking.
Pass the bananas and my wife club.
Regards
DL
-
On 14/11/2016 at 5:40 PM, cuchulain said:
sometimes I think this is the truth. Then other times I think some people are victims of brainwashing. When a person grows up in a culture so inundated with such beliefs that are immoral, they do not realize they are immoral. A lot of people are sheep, and are unwilling to examine their beliefs, at least in any sort of meaningful manner. Such is my personal opinion, of course. I tend to view such victims with sympathy when I encounter them. They are so full of hate towards something that they cannot stop to see their beliefs are encouraging hate.
Indeed.
All we can do with such closed minds is to try to get them to do as scriptures urge them to do.
Proverbs 3:12 For whom the Lord loveth he correcteth; even as a father the son in whom he delighteth.
1 Thessalonians 5:21 Test all things; hold fast what is good.
When they do the above, they soon begin to know that they have been lied to by their religions and should not read myths literally.
Regards
DL
-
23 hours ago, Gwynn ap Gruffudd said:
I agree with you about the oppression of women. This low status of women was a result of Christianity taking over in Europe. In the ancient Celtic world women had equal status. They could rule over tribes or provinces, become warriors or priestesses, and own personal property. I feel this was a reflection of the Celtic religion which taught of Goddesses who were equal or sometimes superior to the male Gods.
Unfortunately spells are really only a type of prayer. Just as prayers are not always answered, spells are not always successful. There are other factors involved whether you call them Fate, Wyrd, Karma, Cosmic Order, or Natural Law. Free will is also a factor. For those who believe in a God or Gods, the psychic Sylvia Browne (who BTW started a religious group based on her concept of Gnostic Christianity) used to say, "God always answers your prayers. Sometimes he says no."
Bendithion (Blessings),
Gwynn
From the Gnostic POV, she should have said that sometimes she says no.
In Gnostic Christianity, we call God I am. And yes, we really mean us. Here is the logic trail Jesus set for that notion.
Matthew 6:22 The light of the body is the eye: if therefore thine eye be single, thy whole body shall be full of light.
John 14:23 Jesus answered and said unto him, If a man love me, he will keep my words: and my Father will love him, and we will come unto him, and make our abode with him.
Romans 8:29 For whom he did foreknow, he also did predestinate to be conformed to the image of his Son, that he might be the firstborn among many brethren.
Jesus ascended to the judgement seat and takes mastery over God and a Gnostic Christian who reaches that level also does the same.
It basically means to reach our full human potential.
Regards
DL
-
21 hours ago, Jonathan H. B. Lobl said:
We also know from Einstein that the flow of time -- if it can be said to flow -- is not uniform in it's passing; as originally thought. Time is relative, based on the position of the observer.
Let us say that it is proven, for now, that time only moves from past to future. How do we know that the future does not already exist? I'm not arguing. I'm asking.
I also agree with Einstein.
My best answer as to why the future cannot exist is that we have yet to do whatever we do there. Eh, then that is.
Whatever materials, let us say your car, is here now and not else-when.
Today is your pasts future. Your past could not know that it might reply to this post.
Regards
DL -
15 hours ago, Dan56 said:Quote
Jesus said; "There is none good but one, that is, God." (Mark 10:18)..
Your dogma was set up to have you forget that God creates all of us perfect. It is a shame you do not believe your bible.
Deuteronomy 32:4 He is the Rock, his work is perfect:
Gen 3:2 And the Lord God said, Behold, the man is become as one of us, to know good and evil:
Bishop Spong has written of how Christian tradition has lowered man so that we might grovel for God's forgiveness.
. It is easy to see why. A man will pay more if he thinks he needs help than if he thinks he is ok.
Man is God and man is good. Except for those like you who adore a genocidal son murderer.
QuoteSince everyone has sinned and broken the law, your conclusion that God would send a good man to hell is impossible.
If God made us all sinners as you indicate, then turns around and punishes us for being exactly as created, then he is a vile **. Why are you following a vile genocidal son murdering **?
By your analysis, you think there are good people, but God says; "We are all as an unclean thing, and all our righteousnesses are as filthy rags" (Isaiah 64:6).
That is your money grubbing church talking and not God.
Google Martin Luther Indulgences and see the money grubbers at work.
You follow their fall thinking and ignore that the Jews say Eden as our elevation.
They were right and you are wrong.
Regards
DL
-
The only certainty of time is that it flows from past to future. We cannot ignore entropy or the anthropic principle.
So says Hawkins in his book, A brief history of time.
Regards
DL -
21 hours ago, Jonathan H. B. Lobl said:
No entity at all. Temporal mechanics. If the future is as fixed as the past, there is no changing things. I don't know that this is the case. I don't know that this is not the case.
When you insist on talking about "entity" or "control" -- you demonstrate that you don't know what I'm talking about.
How can the future be fixed when it has yet to happen?
Sure, entropy and the anthropic principle forces certain probabilities, but that goes right down to the sub atomic levels and with all the human minds creating change there, we can know that the future is not fixed.
If you would have taken my little test, it would have been me moving sub atomic particles in your fingers and keyboard from a distance and that means that we live in a chaotic universe and would show that we can manipulate the future by our actions.
That tells me that the future is not fixed.
Regards
DL -
Religions should be judged by their morality, rules and laws.
Nice that you have found one that has equality as a requirement, if I read that religion right.
That automatically makes your better and more moral than Christianity and Islam.
If only you could cast a spell to help out those many oppressed women.
Regards
DL
-
8 hours ago, Dan56 said:
Never said the affair was hidden. Your missing the bigger point of my analogy, which is that doing good things doesn't please God when you don't believe in God. If your not acting in His name, your only doing good for yourself or someone else, not God. And despite good deeds, a nonbeliever receives no forgiveness for their bad deeds. So whatever a nonbeliever classifies as a good deed becomes a moot point, hell is still the end point.
Strange that you respect a God who does not respect good deeds and would send a good man to hell.
I expect nothing less from a vile demiurge.
Regards
DL
-
15 hours ago, Jonathan H. B. Lobl said:
You told me once that you were French. You must know about Descarte. "Cogito ergo sum." Sometimes, reason and logic look foolish. At least at first glance. You're not helping.
Why nor what makes you doubt that your will is yours to freely use?
If you suspect at all that your will is not freely your own, then what entity do you think might be controlling your will?
Regards
DL
-
5 hours ago, Jonathan H. B. Lobl said:
You have missed my point. I am not taking a stand on not having free will. I am examining the possibility of free will being illusory. Whether I have free will or the illusion of free will is not important. I conduct my life as though I have free will.
This examination is in the tradition of Descarte. "I think, therefore I am." Someone else, who wanted to be clear about what he knew or only thought he knew.
It never seems to occur to you that you might be mistaken about something. About anything.
On some things, sure, and I usually phrase things carefully as to not misspeak.
It is also because I have given the issues I talk on the necessary thought to confirm with logic and reason what I say.
That and I have yet to be refuted on them.
Regards
DL
-
It would achieve you knowingly giving up your free will to begin a post as you would like, and achieving my goal of proving to you that you have a free will to give up.
That has always been the end result I was aiming for.
Your acquiescence would not be illusory. It would be real and repeatable and thus fulfills the scientific method of proof.
Regards
DL
-
You could have know, or at least given an exception to your delusion and cleared up your misconception by just giving up your will to respond as you normally would.
You refused, and thus also showed that you had a free will to exercise by refusing.
Regards
DL
-
8 minutes ago, Jonathan H. B. Lobl said:
In my philosophy -- we can't call this science -- when I go back into the past, I become part of the past. Without variance. Things unfold as they always have.
If the past is fixed, then so is the future. That makes free will illusory.
The future phrasing of your next post to me is not fixed although your past is.
You will only know how to respond after you read whatever I write.
You can decide to begin it with an "I", or not, depending on whether I ask you to do so here or not., only after reading this.
You consciously decide to not do so the last time I asked but ignored my question as to if not your will refusing to do so, whose will was it.
So let me ask you again to give up your free will to begin as you would like and begin your next response with an "I".
If you refuse again, then whose will is refusing if not your own?
Regards
DL
-
Hmmm.
If you visit my past and do or tell something to me, then you create a new time line and I would not know I was visited in the past in my present time line.
I think that the fact that you chose freely to not take my little test shows you that you have a free will.
If you do not have a free will, then whose will was at play when you refused to take the test?
Regards
DL
-
14 hours ago, Jonathan H. B. Lobl said:
You do not understand temporal mechanics as well as you think you do. Your answer is irrelevant.
If your first was true, you would have informed. That seemed to be your style to date.
My answer, relevant to you or not, is quite accurate.
You disappoint me my friend.
Regards
DL
biblical interpretation and the atheist
in Freethought, Secularism, No Religion
Posted
FMPOV, you should be proud of your judgement of the bible.
Both Christianity and Islam, basically, have developed into intolerant, homophobic and misogynous religions. Both religions have grown themselves by the sword instead of good deeds.
Jesus said we would know his people by their works and deeds. That means Jesus would not recognize Christians and Muslims as his people, and neither do I.
Regards
DL