Jump to content

astrocat5

Senior Members
  • Content Count

    56
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by astrocat5

  1. That's not true, the Non-dual of Advaita existed in the east long before Jesus was born.

     

    You can believe in dualism or whatever you want but just let you know that the scholars in the field think otherwise.

    Of course I'm a dualist - I'm Gnostic.

    There are two of everything, Immortal - I realise as a 'monist' you think there's only one of everything. 'Scholars in the field...' don't make me laugh. Who cares about the Sun God? Not me, that's for sure.

     

    I have bigger fish to fry.

     

    I'm trying to explain Gnosticism. It comes from the Greek word 'gnosis,' and is the root word for 'knowledge.' What is it that a Gnostic knows? We know, for example - that Jesus was the Son of the Perfect One and was therefore perfect.

     

    God isn't perfect, and nothing he makes is perfect - I hope we can agree.

     

    Now, if Jesus was the Son of God, he wouldn't be perfect. He would have been like any one of us, weak and useless.

  2. You don't get it, do you? Read Valentinian Monism. There is no such thing as evil everything resides in the pleroma of the Father.

    Now why would I, a Gnostic and a Dualist - be interested in a book on 'monism.'

     

     

    Who do you think the God of the Advaita is? It is the Sun God and if the Father of the Valentinians shows an astonishing degree of similarity to the Sun God then what must be concluded? The 'Immortal Perfect One' is the Sun God. These are not baseless assertions. This is not preaching. Valentinian Monism is well established by reputed scholars like Elaine Pagels and others and it is these Gnostic scholars who have established the cosmogony of the Holy Father and this cosmogony as an astonishing degree of similarity with the cosmogony of the Sun God.

     

    Look - a genuine Gostic is a Dualist, with no links to your 'Monism.' That's your Christian thinking - one God, one wife, one life, one pool, one house, one car etc. etc. You people totally fail to grasp that every thing comes in two - man, woman - Earth , Moon, hot cold, cars pollution - it goes on and on. All the Eastern Religions are Dualist. so was Jesus. If someone writes a book on Monism, and claim to be a Gnostic - you can tell they're faking it.

     

    There is a lot of garbage written about Gnostics, and that's what I'm here to straighten up. We believe in Jesus and his Heavenly Father - The Perfect One. No, we don't worship the sun (Sol) tho' we do, of course - have our own Cosmology. It's you who have everything backwards. You have a Cosmos operated by anti-gravity and ours is run by Gravity.

     

    Gnosticism is granted to a person. It's 'gnosis' (root word of 'knowedge') and you suddenly realise God is no good. I actually

    started crying - a grown man, but it was a very moving moment. You can't know The Father. That's not me - that's Jesus. 'But I and the father are the same.' Jesus went on.

     

    If you know Jesus, you know The Heavenly Father. Your God is jealous, and vengeful with it. Jesus taught love and forgiveness. Are you sure you know God? The Heavenly Father, I mean - the Father of Jesus.

     

    Jesus rejected the world 'My kingdom is not of this world.' preferring to be poor, relying on the ordinary people to feed him, etc. We Gnostics think the world is Evil.

     

    Organised religion will tell you 'You're evil and the world is beautiful - that's why you don't fit in. We Gnostics say the world is Evil and you're Beautiful, that's why you don't fit in. Jesus felt the same, I'm sure.

     

    The world is Evil? Sure, if you have to spend your life in a wheelchair or hospital bed. Or if you can't make ends meet. There are countless ways to reject God. I hope it happens to you, but you retain your love of Jesus. If you truly loved Jesus, and were familiar with the New Testament, I think you could easily reject God.

     

    Free yourself - reject God - just go with Jesus. He won't let you down. Thjat's my plan, anyways.

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

  3. What have the authors of the bible done to earn my respect?

    In the Old Testament? Nothing. But I think you would be respectful if you met Jesus. That's the New Testament.

     

    There is no such thing as absolute evil or absolute good. Both good and evil originates from the Father. If you call yourself a Gnostic and believe in Jesus then you need to accept this if not you're going against the words of Jesus himself.

    Jesus was absolutely good, so is his father, our Heavenly Father.

     

    The Devil, Lucifer - whatever you want to call him - is absolutely evil.

     

     

     

    Your Heavenly Father resides in everyone(not in Heaven) and who ever sees him becomes him. We are all Gods, sons of the most high. Jesus was a monist not a dualist. If you want eternal life you need to become the Father, eternal life doesn't come by faith. If you seperate the people, the world and the Father then you're a dualist which is contradictory to what Jesus taught. Do you really want to go against Jesus, the one whom you believe by stating that world is evil?

    Your God is the Devil. Your God made the world, didn't he? This world is imperfect, I would say. Your God makes imperfect things? I think your God is imperfect. Anything your God makes will self-destruct. And you think he resides in you?
    It seems you know nothing about your heavenly father and you know nothing about my God and what Jesus taught.
    I know all about our Heavenly Father, just as I know all about Jesus. And nowhere does Jesus say, 'I am the Son of God.'

     

     

  4. You're not the only one who have responded with such rudeness, PeterJ. There have been many and its not anyone's mistake. The problem is with the kind of worldview which we are trying to establish nowadays. For example:- Roger Penrose to establish that strong AI is impossible had to run through Turing machines, theory of computability, microtubules in the brain and molecular neurobiology, Godel's theorems, noncomputable mathematics and quantum physics. Hufff.

     

     

    Many scholars and philosophers are trying to establish the connection of Modern Physics with eastern mysticism. I cannot repeat my position about this again and again, for some I have responded to them through PM and others like TAR understand my position that what we learn from science is one thing and what we learn through religion is another. This is because of the way the world is.

     

    So just as you say that there is a reason why all metaphysical statements are undecidable, the reason being the world is a unity. I think there is a reason why scientific realism might be false and the quantum physicist Bernard d'Espagnat has went on to say that "what we call empirical reality is only a state of mind". Here is his argument for holding this position --> http://www.scientifi...197911_0158.pdf.

     

    From the begining of the civilization of mankind, all the Gnosis religions of the world and the Platonic realism of Neo-Platonism have been constantly stating that scientific realism is false and the doctrine of Non-dualism or Advaita which you're defending is one among those Gnosis traditions. Therefore if Unity has to exist or if the God of the Gnostics have to exist one of the necessary pre-condition for it is that scientific realism must be false. So I think there is a reason why scientific realism might be false its because our cosmos is established in such a way that when we perceive the world in one state of mind(not brain) we see the world of emiprical reality and when we perceive the world in a different state of the mind we see the world of platonic reality or the noumenal reality.

     

    Therefore this justifies my statement that "Religion and Science is about different worlds." If some scholars and philosophers are very much desperate to connect scientific or rational concepts with religion then I and Schroedinger can cheerfully say that God help them. I for one is not going to talk about science or metaphysics when talking about God or Unity in the religious forums.

     

     

     

    When you look at it from the Gnostic point of view they call the Abrahamic God as the demiurge and go on to say that he is the cause of the evil and when you look it from the Bible point of view they call the Perfect One as the deceitful Satan, the Lucifer. So how do you decide who is evil and who is good or who is perfect and who is imperfect?

    Speaking as a Gnostic, we call the Abrahamic God (Kill me a son, Abraham - just kidding!) the Devil. Same as the God of Moses, same as your God! Who made the world, who's world it is. Who Jesus called the Devil when he (Jesus) was offered the world if he would fall down and adore him (the Devil). Who's world is it?

     

    Your God made the world and every other material thing. Material - Jesus warned us against it. 'If you love this life you will lose it, but if you hate this life you will live forever in heaven.' Who said that? Jesus - I forget exactly where. Anybody know?

     

    Gnostics don't believe in the evil or the Devil. Evil == Ignorance. For them everything is good as said by Plato and that includes this world too. Seeing the world as evil sounds more like typical Buddhism.

     

     

     

    I did read John 8 sometime back and it is considered to be an important chapter where Jesus reveals his own identity and the identity of the Father. But the orthodox Christians interpret it differently. They think he called the Satan as the Devil and not the Abrahamic God. What are your thoughts on it? What if you're wrong?

     

     

     

    'The pleroma of God' is the Kingdom of the Perfect One present in everyone of us, the heaven of the Perfect One is not above the sky but present in each of us, this is the basic teaching of the Gnostics, the sons of the Perfect One or the aeons exist in each one of us. This whole pantheon of aeons guided by the 'Perfect One' is the pleroma of God. Angels exist in us not in heaven above the sky. This is the worldview of the Gnostics, a view which drastically changes the way think about our place in the cosmos.

     

     

     

    I believe in a higher power but I don't think anyone can say that this God is good or this God is bad. There are hardly a few people in the history of mankind who have reported to have made an ascent to heaven and you claim that you've met the Abrahmic God? How was he like?

     

     

     

    Why do you commit me to hold on to a particular belief? I told you I don't have any fundamental belief. Faith doesn't give you everlasting life.

    Your God made the world - an 'imperfect' place if ever there was one. God was made perfectly by the Perfect One - who lives and is perfectly happy in his spirit lifestyle. Being a spirit, he (or she) needs nothing. The Perfect One, our Heavenly Father ('Our Father, who art in Heaven...) made many perfect beings, angels and arch-angels. One of these Arch -angels, the perfect One's favorite - Lucifer, turned away from the Perfect One and made the world, offering it to Jesus (according to Jesus - the Son of the Perfect One) if Jesus would fall down and adore him - Lucifer!

     

    Your religion will tell you 'You're Evil, and the World is Beautiful, that's why you don't fit in!'

    But Gnostics say, 'The World is Evil, and You're Beautiful. That's why you don't fit in!'

     

    Creating matter was not, in my opinion, pleasing to The Perfect One. Matter, after all, decays. Matter is not perfect. Only a spirit can be perfect. No, God's (or as I and Jesus would call him- the Devil's) world is evil. You don't believe me? Stand outside on a cold winter's day and then tell me how you feel. We build houses to keep the cold away. We don't want to experience just how evil this world is, so we 'insulate' ourselves so we don't have to notice. But if you're poor, you'll notice - but you'll go to Heaven automatically. Feel sorry for the rich man (eye of the needle)...

     

    Daniel Dennet is absolutely right, I think such a study is very much necessary. There are many software tools and databases like the NCBI for molecular biologists in genomics and proteomics and even for physicists to interpret the data and test different hypothesis at the same time but scholars and the public don't get the same advantage to retrieve information from a single portal in religion.

     

    Many times to discover commonalities and differences across different cultures the geography, linguistic, anthropology, iconography, specialization in the teachings of these different cultures is required to make inferences and to test a hypothesis, a scholar can not be an expert in all thse fields so we need to develop software tools to make the work of these scholars more easier so that they can test different hypothesis objectively based on observable evidence.

     

    If we don't find contrary information against our beliefs which are normally the ones which we wish to be true we tend to think that our beliefs are accurate and never really try to know the truth.

     

    Once we have studied it we can then introduce it in schools.

    Well that's interesting, Immortal. I had no idea you could see things like that. Software would help, definitely in our research of other cultures, but as for scholars from the old days - I think we all now know more than them! I'm just saying, 'Put your faith in your fellow man (or woman) rather than the world.'

     

    We Gnostics see the world as evil. It's a cruel place if you're poor.

  5. "The Abrahamic God is the Devil, plain and simple. "

     

    This sort of remark belongs in the pub. It would be impossible to discuss these issues sensibly using this sort of approach. Moderators on a philosophy forum would be down on this like a ton of bricks.

     

    Do I believe in God?

     

    I wish there was simple answer to this. But it's a subtle one, and obviously most people here already know unambiguosly whether He does, so my opinion hardly matters.

     

    I will absent myself from this 'philosophy' forum and spend more time in the science section.

    Jesus was the one who called the Abrahamic God 'The Devil.' (John 8, 44) and before that, when he was tempted. The Devil offered Jesus the world, if Jesus would adore him. Jesus told this story - but Jesus knew the world was made by God and God owned the world. But Jesus called the owner of the world the Devil. Go figure!

     

    Okay, Jesus never said that he is the son of God.

     

     

     

     

    So what must be interpreted by the statement of Jesus in

     

    Luke 22:69

    But from now on the Son of Man shall be seated at the right hand of the power of God."

    Jesus didn't say that exactly. That is what the people 'htought' he said. If you can show me where Jesus said 'I am the Son of God,' I will abandon this thread

    Is he rebelling against the Abrahamic God? or Who is he refering to as the power of God? Is it the Abrahamic God or the Perfect One (Father)?

    'the power of God?' You think that's the same as saying 'I am the Son of God.'?

    astrocat5, saying that the Abrahamic God is the evil one is very much in tone with the Gnostics which implies that you don't completely accept the New Testament, but you don't completely accept the Gnostic view either and say much of it is garbage so why do you call yourself as a Gnostic. The Gnostics don't see the Perfect One as a Heavenly Father, they talk of him in terms of his pleroma with his Aeons and Jesus is conidered as one of his Aeon, he is the son of the Father and they also talk about Sophia and Carl Jung says that these archetypes exist in us as a pyschological part of humans and not as something existing in a Heaven completely detached from the Humans. Why can't you see this astrocat5?

    I said, Immortal, that much garbage has been written about Gnostics (that we think God is a demi-urge) We think he is the Devil. I'm talking about the God of Moses. Of course I accept the New Testament entirely. It's the Old Testament with which I have trouble. Now what Carrl Jung believed is neither here or there (to me.)

     

    John 8, 44 tells me God is the Devil. Jesus told a story of being tempted - offered the whole world - by the Devil. Who owns the world, Immortal? Probably the same guy who made it - and Jesus (who well knew that God made the world) called him the Devil.

     

    Why can't you see this, Immortal. Show me please, where Jesus says, 'I am the Son of God.' If he never said it, why not? He is tyhe Son of the Perfect One - Jesus was perfect. That's why he rose from the dead. You can't kill something that is perfect, Immortal. I'm sorry, but that's the truth. And what is the 'plereoma' of God? It's a word I have never heard.

     

    What happened to me was - the day before I married, I smoked a joint lying back on my bed, and I found myself able to disembody. That is, my spirit came out of my body into the spirit world. Well, I asked to meet God, but I didn't like him. When I came back, I cried, because my faith had left me. My faith in God that is.

     

    But not my faith in Jesus. Some time later I read an article in Time Magazine, about people like me, and they called us Gnostics. So that's why I call myself a Gnostic.

     

    Gnosticism is something that happens to a person. It's not something that you're taught. It's Gnosis, the root word for Knowledge. You know something that other people don't - that God is no good. Sounds brutal, but that's the fact.

     

    Put your faith in Jesus, Immortal - and find everlasting life.

  6. I see I was wrong to refer to the dictionary, and that pmb wasted all his effort citing them. Completely pointless. Apparently they are all wrong. Now we can only have faith in something we cannot know, but only if we claim we do know. Someone better phone the OED to inform them of the change.

     

    Is there a purpose to this discussion or are we all just lonely?

     

    Sure there's a purpose. This is my thread and I'm trying (hard) to explain gnosticism.

    I'm a gnostic, so I should be able to.

     

    Peter, do you believe in God? I have to know that before we can proceed.

     

    Let me know one way or the other.

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

    Don't be such a tease. You know I have a hard time with disappointment.

    Goes to show that you're confused. Do you believe in God, 'Now'?

    If you don't that's okay. If you do please tell me.

     

    Don't you actively deny the existence of God? I know you're a philosopher and you're coming from perennial philosophy or the rational philosophy. Its your constant dogmatic assertions about God as a hopeless muddle in mysticism is what is annoying me. Especially when you put the God of the advaita vedanta and the Aeons of the Gnostics as a hopeless muddle. Let me seperate myself from the scholars who support my view and argue from the point of these scriptures themselves.

     

    Immortal, I have to know whether you believe in God or not.

     

     

    15. The face of truth is covered with a

    golden disc. Unveil it, O Pushan, so that I

    who love the truth may see it.

     

    15. "The face of Truth is concealed by a golden vessel. Do thou, O Sun, open it so as to be seen by me who am by nature truthful (or, am the performer of rightful duties)."

     

    This is the 15th verse of the Isa Upanishad and it is clear that yajnvalkya is praying to the Sun God who emanated from the golden egg - Hiranyagarbha. Yajnavalkya is saying that this Hiranyagarbha is the Brahman itself. What you're not understanding is that by defending this doctrine of non-dualism you're simultaneously defending this God and you seem to be not aware of this and blindly assert that mysticism is the death of the God. Do you really know the implications of the doctrine which you're expouding?

     

    Don't you actively deny the existence of God? I know you're a philosopher and you're coming from perennial philosophy or the rational philosophy. Its your constant dogmatic assertions about God as a hopeless muddle in mysticism is what is annoying me. Especially when you put the God of the advaita vedanta and the Aeons of the Gnostics as a hopeless muddle. Let me seperate myself from the scholars who support my view and argue from the point of these scriptures themselves.

     

    Immortal, I have to know whether you believe in God or not.

     

     

    15. The face of truth is covered with a

    golden disc. Unveil it, O Pushan, so that I

    who love the truth may see it.

     

    15. "The face of Truth is concealed by a golden vessel. Do thou, O Sun, open it so as to be seen by me who am by nature truthful (or, am the performer of rightful duties)."

     

    This is the 15th verse of the Isa Upanishad and it is clear that yajnvalkya is praying to the Sun God who emanated from the golden egg - Hiranyagarbha. Yajnavalkya is saying that this Hiranyagarbha is the Brahman itself. What you're not understanding is that by defending this doctrine of non-dualism you're simultaneously defending this God and you seem to be not aware of this and blindly assert that mysticism is the death of the God. Do you really know the implications of the doctrine which you're expouding?

     

    Is there anyone here who still doubts that this type of thinking is broken?

    I need to know whether he believes in God or not.

     

    Is there anyone here who still doubts that this type of thinking is broken?

    I need to know whether he believes in God or not.

     

    The ancient Gnostic people neither knew about metaphysics nor did they knew about modern science. Religion and Science is about different worlds. If anyone applies metaphysics or modern science to mysticism and makes conclusions then they're doing bad philosophy.

     

    Schroedinger knew about this.

     

     

    [/font]

     

     

    There is a lot of garbage said about Gnostics. Let me tell you, we believe in Jesus. We think your God (the God of Abraham) is none other than the Devil. We have several reasons for this.

     

    We agree with everything Jesus said. We worship him as the son of the Perfect One, the Heavenly Father. Whether or not the ancient Gnostics knew about modern scientific undertakings is neither here nor there.

     

    And please tell me who Schroedinger was or is.

     

    You're not the only one who have responded with such rudeness, PeterJ. There have been many and its not anyone's mistake. The problem is with the kind of worldview which we are trying to establish nowadays. For example:- Roger Penrose to establish that strong AI is impossible had to run through Turing machines, theory of computability, microtubules in the brain and molecular neurobiology, Godel's theorems, noncomputable mathematics and quantum physics. Hufff.

     

     

    Many scholars and philosophers are trying to establish the connection of Modern Physics with eastern mysticism. I cannot repeat my position about this again and again, for some I have responded to them through PM and others like TAR understand my position that what we learn from science is one thing and what we learn through religion is another. This is because of the way the world is.

     

    So just as you say that there is a reason why all metaphysical statements are undecidable, the reason being the world is a unity. I think there is a reason why scientific realism might be false and the quantum physicist Bernard d'Espagnat has went on to say that "what we call empirical reality is only a state of mind". Here is his argument for holding this position --> http://www.scientifi...197911_0158.pdf.

     

    From the begining of the civilization of mankind, all the Gnosis religions of the world and the Platonic realism of Neo-Platonism have been constantly stating that scientific realism is false and the doctrine of Non-dualism or Advaita which you're defending is one among those Gnosis traditions. Therefore if Unity has to exist or if the God of the Gnostics have to exist one of the necessary pre-condition for it is that scientific realism must be false. So I think there is a reason why scientific realism might be false its because our cosmos is established in such a way that when we perceive the world in one state of mind(not brain) we see the world of emiprical reality and when we perceive the world in a different state of the mind we see the world of platonic reality or the noumenal reality.

     

    Therefore this justifies my statement that "Religion and Science is about different worlds." If some scholars and philosophers are very much desperate to connect scientific or rational concepts with religion then I and Schroedinger can cheerfully say that God help them. I for one is not going to talk about science or metaphysics when talking about God or Unity in the religious forums.

     

     

     

    When you look at it from the Gnostic point of view they call the Abrahamic God as the demiurge and go on to say that he is the cause of the evil and when you look it from the Bible point of view they call the Perfect One as the deceitful Satan, the Lucifer. So how do you decide who is evil and who is good or who is perfect and who is imperfect?

    The Abrahamic God is the Devil, plain and simple. The Perfect One is our Heavenly Father - not Lucifer. Lucifer, like God, turned away from the Heavenly Father at the time of their creation. Lucifer was made perfectly, so perfectly he was the Heavenly Father's favourite.

    But Lucifer, like God, rejected the Perfect One, thinking he was as good or better than the Heavenly Father.

     

    Everything the Perfect One makes is perfect. Everything God makes is imperfect - this world is a good example. Why can you not see this, Immortal?

     

    I believe in myself, I believe only in what I see, the problem you're not seeing is that there are different traditions with their own pantheon of Gods which are much older than Gnosticism, even though these different gnostic traditions say the same thing in phylosophy and psychology they say different things about their mythology. I am interested in the God of the Gods in those traditions or the perfect one(as you call him the Father) in Gnosticism. When youngsters begin to question things about the religions that they were brought up in much of it doesn't make any sense, they seem very unlikely and if the idea of a religion has got any chance of surviving in this 21st century world then a lot depends on how much truth exists in these gnosis traditions. These gnosis traditions say that the pleroma of god exists in each and everyone i.e the perfect one exist in each and everyone of us and to know whether he exists or not is my only hope.

     

     

     

    If the perfect one made God and if God went on to make imperfect things then isn't it that it is the perfect one who made imperfect things and that would make him the imperfect one not the perfect one.

     

    Your view is a depressing view, this is the Sethian view of Gnosticism but that's not how the Valentinians see it, man is imperfect not because he was created by god man is imperfect because he is ignorant of the true nature of the perfect one and so are other gods and angels. Its not that we are evil, we are just ignorant of the perfect one and its wrong to see the world as evil, the world is very much important in sowing the seed of knowledge in individuals to alleviate them to have gnosis. Therefore the world, the God and man is not evil but just ignorant. If we were evil then we all came from the perfect one and that would make the perfect one imperfect.

     

     

     

     

    I never said that the Bible is garbage, that's not what I said. I said it has a deep different hidden meaning behind it and we should stop taking it literally making inferences about this world of empiricism from the bible.

    You're not getting it. I said God made himself imperfect when he created matter. The Perfect One has nothing to do with matter. The Perfect One, the Heavenly Father, is a spirit and he lives in the spirit world. He hates to get his hands dirty.

     

    I believe in myself, I believe only in what I see, the problem you're not seeing is that there are different traditions with their own pantheon of Gods which are much older than Gnosticism, even though these different gnostic traditions say the same thing in phylosophy and psychology they say different things about their mythology. I am interested in the God of the Gods in those traditions or the perfect one(as you call him the Father) in Gnosticism. When youngsters begin to question things about the religions that they were brought up in much of it doesn't make any sense, they seem very unlikely and if the idea of a religion has got any chance of surviving in this 21st century world then a lot depends on how much truth exists in these gnosis traditions. These gnosis traditions say that the pleroma of god exists in each and everyone i.e the perfect one exist in each and everyone of us and to know whether he exists or not is my only hope.

     

     

     

    If the perfect one made God and if God went on to make imperfect things then isn't it that it is the perfect one who made imperfect things and that would make him the imperfect one not the perfect one.

     

    Your view is a depressing view, this is the Sethian view of Gnosticism but that's not how the Valentinians see it, man is imperfect not because he was created by god man is imperfect because he is ignorant of the true nature of the perfect one and so are other gods and angels. Its not that we are evil, we are just ignorant of the perfect one and its wrong to see the world as evil, the world is very much important in sowing the seed of knowledge in individuals to alleviate them to have gnosis. Therefore the world, the God and man is not evil but just ignorant. If we were evil then we all came from the perfect one and that would make the perfect one imperfect.

     

     

     

     

    I never said that the Bible is garbage, that's not what I said. I said it has a deep different hidden meaning behind it and we should stop taking it literally making inferences about this world of empiricism from the bible.

    You're not getting it. I said God made himself imperfect when he created matter. The Perfect One has nothing to do with matter. The Perfect One, the Heavenly Father, is a spirit and he lives in the spirit world. He hates to get his hands dirty.

     

    I feel a bit slighted :D

    And why is that, Moontanaman?

     

    As pertaining to rigour.

     

    Even on public philosophy forums people usually understand that it is unrigorous to make statements that can be falsified, or at best cannot be proven. Usually there are a plenty of philosophers about so posters who do this are in a minority and will have regular reminders. But here they seem to be in the majority, with the consequence that it is impossible to distinguish between an authoritative statement backed up with evidence and argument and a completely daft one plucked from thin air. Many sentences begin 'The truth is as follows...', when they should begin 'It seems possible to me that...'. When they begin 'The truth is as follows...' the writer must be able to prove it or provide an argument from evidence or axioms. You don't see physcists talking about physics in the way people here talk about philosophy and religion.

     

    Maybe it's just me. Some people aoppear to think that doing philosophy is like doing astrology, while I feel it should be like doing mathematics and is not a matter of opinion.

    It's all about Faith, Peter, and whether you believe or not.

    I'm a Gnostic and I'm simply trying to explain the gnostic point-of-view. Now, if you don't believe - either in God or the Devil you're going to have a hard time in this thread.

     

    I don't believe in Astrology - superstition only. As for your Math, Mathematics isn't a Science. I hope you know that.

    I'm just trying to explain gnosticism, about the difference between Jesus and God, about the Son of Man and the Son of God. We think God is the devil. We don't apporeciate him. Who we like is Jesus.

    Anyway, let me know if you believe in God or not. Please!

     

    As pertaining to rigour.

     

    Even on public philosophy forums people usually understand that it is unrigorous to make statements that can be falsified, or at best cannot be proven. Usually there are a plenty of philosophers about so posters who do this are in a minority and will have regular reminders. But here they seem to be in the majority, with the consequence that it is impossible to distinguish between an authoritative statement backed up with evidence and argument and a completely daft one plucked from thin air. Many sentences begin 'The truth is as follows...', when they should begin 'It seems possible to me that...'. When they begin 'The truth is as follows...' the writer must be able to prove it or provide an argument from evidence or axioms. You don't see physcists talking about physics in the way people here talk about philosophy and religion.

     

    Maybe it's just me. Some people aoppear to think that doing philosophy is like doing astrology, while I feel it should be like doing mathematics and is not a matter of opinion.

    It's all about Faith, Peter, and whether you believe or not.

    I'm a Gnostic and I'm simply trying to explain the gnostic point-of-view. Now, if you don't believe - either in God or the Devil you're going to have a hard time in this thread.

     

    I don't believe in Astrology - superstition only. As for your Math, Mathematics isn't a Science. I hope you know that.

    I'm just trying to explain gnosticism, about the difference between Jesus and God, about the Son of Man and the Son of God. We think God is the devil. We don't apporeciate him. Who we like is Jesus.

    Anyway, let me know if you believe in God or not. Please!

  7. I believe in myself, I believe only in what I see, the problem you're not seeing is that there are different traditions with their own pantheon of Gods which are much older than Gnosticism, even though these different gnostic traditions say the same thing in phylosophy and psychology they say different things about their mythology. I am interested in the God of the Gods in those traditions or the perfect one(as you call him the Father) in Gnosticism. When youngsters begin to question things about the religions that they were brought up in much of it doesn't make any sense, they seem very unlikely and if the idea of a religion has got any chance of surviving in this 21st century world then a lot depends on how much truth exists in these gnosis traditions. These gnosis traditions say that the pleroma of god exists in each and everyone i.e the perfect one exist in each and everyone of us and to know whether he exists or not is my only hope.

     

     

     

    If the perfect one made God and if God went on to make imperfect things then isn't it that it is the perfect one who made imperfect things and that would make him the imperfect one not the perfect one.

     

    Your view is a depressing view, this is the Sethian view of Gnosticism but that's not how the Valentinians see it, man is imperfect not because he was created by god man is imperfect because he is ignorant of the true nature of the perfect one and so are other gods and angels. Its not that we are evil, we are just ignorant of the perfect one and its wrong to see the world as evil, the world is very much important in sowing the seed of knowledge in individuals to alleviate them to have gnosis. Therefore the world, the God and man is not evil but just ignorant. If we were evil then we all came from the perfect one and that would make the perfect one imperfect.

     

     

     

     

    I never said that the Bible is garbage, that's not what I said. I said it has a deep different hidden meaning behind it and we should stop taking it literally making inferences about this world of empiricism from the bible.

    God was made by the Perfect One, our Heavenly Father, but God thought he was as good as, if not better - than the Perfect One. That's vanity. Too bad you can't see it.

    The Perfect One has nothing to do with material. He lives in a Spiritual World which satisfies him perfectly. When God made all the Hydrogen, it probably didn't please the Perfect One - the Heavenly Father.

     

    We came from God. God is imperfect, just as we are. The world is imperfect, and anything imperfect will self-destruct. When the world ends, that will be a good thing, as seen by the Perfect One.

     

    Who made the world? According to jEsus, the world belongs to the devil. Jesus well knew that God made the world - but Jesus calls him the devil. That's good enough for me. Too bad you can't see it.

     

    When you die, you come to these huge Pearly Gates with 'God's People' written above it. It seems like there's a heck of a party going on inside, but it's just speakers and a cliff.

     

    God's people are pushing and shoving to get in, but me and this kid on crutches, we get pushed out. So we go looking along the wall, tll we find a narrow entrance - and it's always Jesus sitting outside. Him or his girlfriend. They invite us in. Jesus always said, 'Enter by the narrow gate,' and that's what we do.

     

    Except, you make the decfision here, in this world. If you get married and have kids, a house and a [pool, that's what you get. Me, I never wanted children - I'll have mine in Heaven, and they'll be angels.

     

    That's the way it works. What you don't have in this world, you will have in the next. What you have in this world, you won't have in the next. What's stolen from you will be returned - by the person who stole it. Jesus' justice is perfect, like him.

     

    But Jesus was made by the Perfect One, not God. The Perfect one decided to save this world - not physically, of course, but spiritually. Jesus was perfect, and so were his miracles and cures.

     

    Someday, you'll see it. I just hope it's not too late.

     

    I believe in the Sun God, the one who emanated from the golden egg - Hiranyagarbha. He is a natural god not a sky god and I believe in him because I comprehend a lot about his mythology and studied it quite well. But I don't always defend him in my arguments. Sometimes I argue for the whole of religious thinking and sometimes I argue in favor of my personal beliefs.

    So now we have it - you worship the sun.

     

    Me, I've moved on from there, to a Spiritual master, the Perfect One, the Heavenly Father. But I'm interested that you don't believe in the God of Abraham. Jesus called him the devil.

     

    Yes, believing in something natural, something you can see and feel is a good idea, or it used to be, thousands of years ago. Sometimes, though, you argue for 'the whole of religious thinking,' and that's gotta include the God of Abraham. But this you deny - well I wish you would make up your mind. The 'whole of religious thinking' must cover the God of Abraham, the way I see it. Maybe you're just being slippery. Maybe you're slipping and sliding along, never willing to state your beliefs, on your guard against any heretics.

     

    Because that's what Gnosticism is - a heresy. I'm a heretic- they used to burn us at the stake. St Francis of Assissi (who made money betraying these Gnostics) always wondered why tthey seemed so cheerful to die and wanted to die for God himself.

     

    Are you not interested in Jesus, or is it God yo're not interested in? Allah? Suva? What are you interseted in, Iggy. You should tell me - this is my thread. Are you interested in Astronomy? Girls? I think you should tell me.

     

     

     

    I'm not interested in your preaching. Please stop addressing it toward me.

    So whatare you interested in, Iggy, I think you should tell me. Is it Astronomy? Girls? What? You are in my hread and I just want to talk to you.

     

    Also, while I might respect the 106 year old for his determination to teach, that's no reason for me to respect the people who wrote the bible. They were not teaching English to 5th grade students. So, once again: what have the authors done to earn my respect?

    Authors of the Bible - nothing. Authors of the New Testament - a heck of a lot of work. What do you believe, John? Why won't you tell me?
  8. That's exactly what my criticism is, you want to do away with god, can you atleast address my critcisms rather than acting innocent.

     

     

     

     

    Yes, it does. If one includes the pleroma of God as the fundamental nature of the cosmos then it drastically changes your worldview and hence I said that your worldview is incomplete.

     

     

     

     

     

    Yes, I need to ask you, it appears from here that you positively believe in advaita vedanta which falls under theistic religions and contradicts your claim of being an atheist.

    I wish you would tell me what you believe in. If you don't believe in the God of Abraham, who do you believe in. If you told me, it would make things a lot easier for me. Thanks, Immortal.
  9. There is an amazing degree of similarity between the pleroma of God with his Aeons of the Gnostic Christians and the pleroma of God with his pantheon of Gods of the Upanishads which is an another ancient Gnosis school of thought. So I'm basically talking about the true God of the Gnostics who is none other than the God of the Upanishads. They both are describing the same pleroma of God and their teachings are identical to each other.

     

     

     

    Plotinus was a Neoplatonist, so he came after Plato.

     

     

     

     

    You're taking it too literally. Jesus took away all our sins not by dieing at the cross, he took away all our sins because he gave us the Gnosis, perfect knowledge of the Father so that we can live a sinless existence.

     

     

     

     

     

    May be he was the son of true God.

     

     

     

    If you call yourself Gnostic then stick to the Gnostic interpretation of the Bible, don't make up things on your own and misrepresent their interpretations and teachings. They have their own interpretation of the Old Testament as well as the New testament, they advice us to interpret the bible in a figurative or a metaphorical way having deep hidden psychological and spiritual meanings, it shouldn't be interpreted too literally.

     

    This is the reason why most of the bible contradicts with empirical evidence because they have been interpreted too literally, surely Noah's Ark couldn't have happened literally there is a deeper hidden meaning behind the bible. If you think whatever I'm saying is incorrect then check out the links which I gave you and then come back.

    I don't need your links, and if you don't beleve in the God of Abraham, then who the heck do you believe in? I think you should say.

     

    God is the Devil, and Jesus never claimed to be the Son of God. He called himself the Son of Man, just so you wouldn't make this mistake. God made himself imperfect - that's why the world is imperfect, and why Man is too.

    The Perfect One made God and many other spirits and angels - all of them perfect. God commited vanity and became imperfect. Everything God makes is therefore imperfect and must self-destruct.

     

     

     

    I think the Bible is a load of Mumbo-Jumbo. The New Testament though, offers much wisdom about rejecting the world. Once Jesus was taken to the top of a mountain and offered everything, if he would bow to the DEvil.

    Now, who's world is it, according to Jesus - the Devil's.

     

    Who is the Devil - God. God made the world and Jesus would have been taught that same thing. Why therefore does he indicate that the Devil made the World?

     

     

    God was made perfect. By entering into 'Materialism' as opposed to 'Spiritualism' God made himself imperfect. THe Perfect One has nothing to do with materialism - anything material will eventually die or self-destruct. The mountains will crumble into the sea etc. etc.

     

    You're right about the Bible. It's a load of garbage to me. Material is evil, only the spirit is good. It's important to take care of your spirit.

     

     

     

     

     

     

    I couldn't say that. I couldn't help but respect the work of... for example... the philosophical and literary work and the author of Ecclesiastes. It is shadowed by Plato and Confucius from the same time in truth and morality, but wins some points back for poetry and eloquence. It got incorporated into an ugly tradition but... even judging it in theological terms, I have to respect that the author realized there was no afterlife and had the number of gods down to one. Very nearly spot on.

    Hi Iggy, nice of you to join my thread. Yes, there's only one Perfect One ands only one God. O course, everything the Perfect One makes is perfect. It's all he can do. God isn't perfect, and that's why the world (and man) is the way it is.

  10. I know that's what you think, but it is not connected with reality. Prayer can sometimes have calming effects, but not really different than any form of meditation or intentional relaxation. Also, intercessory prayer does not have any meaningful impact on health outcomes. There have been studies that show when people know they are being prayed for their health outcomes tend to be worse relative to others in similar situations who did not know people were praying for them.

     

    Either way, even if you dismiss or ignore the above, my previously shared link regarding, "Why won't god heal amputees" shows how painfully nonsensical your position truly is. If you think Jesus cures through prayer, then put your money where your mouth is. Cut off your arm, start praying, and see what happens. Will you try this and report back? I understand it may take you longer to type a response with only one arm, but after all... You have faith, and Jesus heals, right? What do you have to lose?

     

     

    You are correct. I have spent many years considering the topic of religion and gods existence, and also whether or not Jesus was somehow supernatural or divine. After much reflection, and upon realizing that I greatly value my integrity, intelligence, and honesty, I have chosen to truly become a man and abandon the childish thing which is faith.

     

    You are free to believe whatever silly thing you want, but I'm also free to show you where your position is flawed and to offer valid criticisms of your baseless assertions.

    Well the first Hydrogen had to come from somewhere - or someone. I don't have any problem with that. God made it, or the being they call God, Allah, Shiva - that's the creator, or so I believe. If I'm wrong will someone correct me, please. Or if you don't believe, where do you think the first Hydrogen came from? Please be clear.

    Now, do you think this creation pleased the Perfect One? The Perfect One can only create perfection. When he created God, God was perfect. When God thought he was as good, if not better, than the Perfect One he erred - that's vanity!

    And starting a rival Universe by creating Hydrogen (given off in moments of vanity) would not please the Perfect One in his spirit world.

    Material leads to materialism, something you could never say of Jesus.

    Jesus rejected materialism, the good things of this world - preferring to wait until after he was dead.

    We know he loved Mary Magdalene, she was referred to as 'The disciple that Jesus loved,' by the Evangelists. BUt we know what he said to her - 'Don't touch me.'

    When Jesus rose on the third day, he would have needed some clothes - obviously. He found a gardeners shack with some overalls in it and wore those.

    The first people who would have gone to his tomb the day after the sabbath (Passover) would, could, only have been his mother and lover. They were good friends by now, and it's recorded that Mary Magdalene saw 'the gardener' and rushed up to him, asking where they had taken the body, and she must have grabbed him, because he said to her - 'don't touch me.'

    Well that's how she recognised him, the only man who ever told her that (she was very beautiful - probably a blonde from northern Europe, an escaped slave?) anyway they made love then.

    It didn't matter then. Nothing mattered. It was a different time in so many senses.

    Anyway, that's what I believe.

     

    The redefinitions suggested on this page are not extreme, and rather than being obfuscating, they're intended to be clarifying. You will surely accept that dictionaries provide multiple definitions of words, so if we persist with "faith", it is nevertheless important to make vital distinctions, and so we should at least be talking about Faith Type A and Faith Type B.

    Well I don't know what you guys are talking about, but this is my thread and I'm allowed to reply so I will.

    We Gnostics think Jesus is all you need, and I'd rather not tell you what we think of God - not much. Jesus told the Jews their God was the Devil (John 14, verse 42?) and we Gnostics agree. Satan is a puppet God waves in our faces - you better be good or this is who's gonna get you.

    Jesus rejected the World. Religion tells you you're Evil and the World is Beautiful. Gnostics say the World is Evil and you're Beautiful.

    Put your faith in Humanity - that"s what Jesus did. People loved him - poor people, anyway. He did miracles and made cures, that's what it says.

    I don't know about your Faith Type A and Faith Type B. I only know what I have interpreted from the Bible. Let me know, Poledice.

     

    From the Gnostic point of view, faith == ignorance, you either have knowledge of god and know that he exists or you don't have any knowledge of god and do not know he exist. Faith is more of a practical commitment towards god, it doesn't mean we have to completely accept his existence and start believing in him blindly, this is of no use, its darkness, its ignorance. Whether one is willing to show a practical commitment towards god is left to the individual depending on his interpretations on the available data and evidence.

    Look, Immortal - there's a story in the Bible where everybody in the world rejected God. Everybody that is except for one man, Noah. Noah was the only person who believed in God. That's what it says in the Bible, anyway.

    So God told Noah to build a boat. His neighbours must have thought he was crazy, but then God made it rain and he drownded everyone

    in the world - but then Noah, the sole survivor stilll believed in God, so everybody in the world believed in God.

    Now, if that's God's way of changing people's minds - I don't think much of it.

    What do you call someone who kills everybody in the world except for one person? A megalomaniac, or worse - if I'm correct.

     

    I believe in energy more than I believe in either God or Jesus. Energy is everything in my opinion whether it is psychological, esoteric, spiritual or physical.

     

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Energy

     

    https://en.wikipedia...gy_(esotericism)

     

    https://en.wikipedia..._(psychological)

     

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vitalism

     

    https://en.wikipedia...iki/Subtle_body

    Jesus loves you, Seriously Disabled - more than the rest. He loves disabled people more than the able-bodied.

     

    Hi Immortal

     

    I'm afraid that I don't see any disagreement between this professor and the gnostics. I view the professors book as an explanation of gnosticism, or gnosticism as it is once the contingent muddle is cleared away. I feel that Nagarjuna, Radhkrishnan, Shankara, Kapleau, the Dalai Lama, Lao tsu, Chung tsu and all the others of like mind are authoritative on truth, while Elaine Pagels, Stephen Hoeller, Karen Armstrong, Sean Martin and their like are authoritative on gnosticism, but of course it is possible to doubt this and hold a different view.

     

     

    How so? Looks like a rational response from here.

    It is a rational response.

    There is much written on Gnosticism by non- Gnostics, much of it muddled.

    We believe Jesus is all you need, and God is the Devil. God is responsible for all the troubles of humanity, but you'll never see this. God is the creator, like Allah and all the rest. They made material worlds. Worlds made of material. The material world is evil - Jesus rejected it and taught us to do the same. Never mind theDalai Lama - that old stuff won't help you in the modern world.

     

    Oh yes, when you reject the truth and accept things which only suite your worldview, how can you find disagreements.

     

     

     

     

    Contingent Muddle? The pleroma of God and his Aeons are very important for a practicing gnostic, one cannot just clear it away. Why don't you address this rather than acting as though there aren't any disagreements.

     

     

     

     

    The pleroma of God of the gnostics is as important as the unity, both should be known. If you accept one and doubt the other your view is incomplete which implies the knowledge that you're trying to gain is going to be incomplete too.

     

    And also how can you accept these things and call yourself an atheist, it looks like double standards to me.

    We Gnostics reject God in all his forms. We're dualists, you're a 'mono.' You have one God, one life, one wife, one house etc.

    But there's two of everything, male and female, hot and cold etc. etc,.

    The 'pleroma' of God? I have no idea what that is, and I thought I was Knowledgeable.

     

    I said that if you think they say different things then your reaction is rational. What is there to misunderstand in that sentence?

     

     

    Yes.

     

     

    Ergo you did not read my words carefully.

     

     

     

    Fair enough. I would roughly agree. But there are three or four different meanings of 'faith', and they do not all mean believing in any old nonsense.

     

     

    What? I can't even think of a reply to this.

     

     

    What? I didn't even mention the plemora of God. Most of religion is contingent muddle, and I see no reason that Gnosticism should be exempt.

     

     

    Perhaps so. It has no bearing on anything I said.

     

     

    Quite easily. But it's a subtle point, and it seems that subtlety is a no no on this forum.

    Peter, you're an aetheist, right?

    THen where did the first hydrogen come from? It just appeared? What about all the rest? No, it was created, but compared to the spirit world, it was not good.

    God erred when he thought he was as good, if not better than the Perect One. In his material Universe, God looks good - if you believe in materialism.

     

    That's exactly what my criticism is, you want to do away with god, can you atleast address my critcisms rather than acting innocent.

     

     

     

     

    Yes, it does. If one includes the pleroma of God as the fundamental nature of the cosmos then it drastically changes your worldview and hence I said that your worldview is incomplete.

     

     

     

     

     

    Yes, I need to ask you, it appears from here that you positively believe in advaita vedanta which falls under theistic religions and contradicts your claim of being an atheist.

    Look, I'm a Gnostic and we know better. God is evil - same as Allah or anyone of those. Jesus is good, maybe he was pertfect.

    Anyway, Jesus should be all you need. Jesus rejected the world and its materialism. We should do the same, but we're afraid. Afraid of what? Nature.

    Nature brings cold and storms, and other violent weather. We hide from Nature in warm houses we have built.

     

     

     

  11. Do you have any evidence of this belief, or do you just believe it because it feels good to you? Did you know there have been many studies showing that prayer doesn't positively impact health outcomes, and can sometimes even make patients sicker?

    In the New Testament, Jesus cured many people. Prayer can make people sicker? Sure, praying to God won't help you. Only if you pray to Jesus can you be cured, at least that's what I think. It's all a question of Faith - either you believe or you don't.

    You don't seem to believe, am I right? You might as well be honest.

     

    Perfect one! Good. A knew word in my dictionary. Well, you have said that the perfect one made God. Then you said if some one is imperfect then all his creations are must to be imperfect. Of course you are right. Now you see all the creations by the God are imperfect (from your sense). So the God is must to be imperfect. Well, now come on. If the God is imperfect then He is creation of so called Perfect One. How the creation of the perfect one can be imperfect. It's your logic, not me.

    Yes yes, Aymanbinmoshi. But I believe God was made perfect by the Perfect One. Unfortunately, for us, God thought he was as good, if not better, than the Perfect One. By thinking this, God became inperfect - he was vain. God made the world, that's why it's imperfect and that's why Earth will self-destruct.

     

    I really like talking to you but I don't know why.

  12. !

    Moderator Note

    Preaching is against our rules here. If you're going to make statements as if they were true, please back them up with supportive evidence. You are free to talk about what you believe, but not free to assert it as fact without backing those assertions up.

     

    Please obey the rules you agreed to when you joined this forum. Response to this modnote is unnecessary.

    Sorry, I'll do better.

     

    I believe both in Jesus and God but don't believe that Jesus is the son of God. According to Islam, Jesus is a Prophet whose name was Isha (A). Jews tried to kill Him but Allah has saved Him and taken Him to the sky and will send him again to kill Dajjal, the anti-Christ.

    That's fascinating also. I knew Jesus was a prophet to you guys, but I never knew what you called him. But Allah is the same as God, right? He is the creator, is he not? Jesus is much more important to me, as he is the Son of the Perfect One.

     

    The Perfect One I believe, made God and many others, all perfect. Perfectly free to think they were just as good as their creator, but by thinking this, they made themselves imperfect. That was what God thought and it was God who created the World, without consulting the Perfect One.

     

    You see, if you are imperfect, everything you make will be imperfect and will ultimately self-destruct. This "Go forth and multiply" is not good advice today - there are already too many people for the world's resources. Is that Allah's advice also?

     

    Anyway, thanks for replying - I found it highly interesting, what you said. Got any more?

     

    I investigated your references, and you're right, I don't think God will cure you. But you could put your faith in Jesus, who cured many people. That's what I believe, anyway.

     

    When you die, you come to these huge 'Pearly Gates,' and music and a big sign over it saying 'God's People,' and everyone's pushing and shoving to get in, but it's just speakers and acliff. But me and this crippled kid, we get pushed out so we go along the wall and eventually come to a narrow entrance, almost too narrow to squeeze thru'. But Jesus always said 'Enter by the Narrow Gate,' so we go in there.

     

    But you make your choice in this world, don't you know?

  13. I don't believe in either. And even if there is a God for the sake of argument, Jesus cannot be God because he died many years ago and as far as we know, people cannot come back from the dead.

     

    My mother always said that she believes in the evil eye but it does not seem rational to me to believe in the evil eye too.

    I find your point of view fascinating. And you're right, 'Jesus cannot be God,' because he never said, 'I am the Son of God.' He said, instead, 'I am the Son of Man,' just so people wouldn't make this mistake (thinking he is the Son of God.) He is the Son of our Heavenly Father - the Perfect One, and everything he makes is perfect.

    Our Father made many other beings, all as good and as powerful as He was. Perfectly free were they to reject the Heavenly Father. Looking at themselves, they (some of them) thought they were justas good as The Father - if not better!

    One of these beings, thinking he was just as good, gave off Hydrogen, from which our Universe evolved. That was God, the creator of all material things.

    The Heavenly Father (who's name we do not know - 'Hallowed be thy name,' according to Jesus. 'You cannot know The Father, but I and the Father are the same.'

    God is a jealous God, and vengeful with it. Jesus showed none of these traits. Jesus taught us The Father is kind and forgiving - just the opposite, I would say, to God

    There's a story, you see, where the snake whispered to Eve to chose to get smarts in the Garden of Eden, then pushed Adam to get smart too. This made God very angry and he kicked them both out of the Garden. God cursed all snakes and turned woman against snakes. It's right there on page 2 of the Bible. I think the snake was right. I would have advised Eve to do the same.

     

    Well, you see, if I think the snake was right, that shows I don't think much of God.

    Anyway, it's been great talking to you, Seriously Disabled, but if you believed in Jesus, you could be cured. Why not try?

  14. I think God is jealous of mere mortals like me in some way. I think God is jealous that I am mortal and he is not, because every moment could be my last. I think that everything is more beautiful because I am doomed.

     

    Anyway, I find God's behavior quite pathetic.

     

    http://www.quickmeme.com/Advice-God/

    What an interesting viewpoint! If you are seriously disabled, if you believe in Jesus - then you could be cured. I don't know, but your belief is essential.

     

    And I don't even like God. When I read about all the horrible things he did, I have to agree with you. As for being doomed - we're all doomed. Some will die before others, but in the end, death wins. That's in this world, where Death rules. In the next one, there4 is no death.

     

    So nice talking with you. I'll pray for you. Let me know if you start feeling better.

     

    Me thinks you have been reading too much Greek mythology. :o

    Whereas I think his wider experience can teach us something!
  15. How much do you know about what kind of God I'm referring to? I was not refering to the God of the Abraham, that a wrong conclusion and a serious misunderstanding of yours.

     

     

     

    He was a great Platonist philosopher of his time. Plotinus

     

    See also- Neoplatonism and Gnosticism

     

     

     

    No, the Holy Father can be known and only he can give us deliverance by knowing him and his perfect knowledge through the secret teachings of Jesus Christ.

     

    There was a different Gnostic tradition at the same time along with Sethians, they were Valentinians founded by Valentinus. I take his views.

     

    Valentinian Theology

     

     

     

    The Father wants us to know him and wants us to take the path of righteousness to attain his perfect knowledge which evades us from suffering, bondage and death.

     

     

     

    Sethians and Gnostic Sethianism

    Okay, I tried... Who is your God, Immortal? Not the God of Abraham? Who is your God?

     

     

    As for Plotinus... I read a book about Philosophy and he was never mentioned in it. Plato sure was. These Sethians, I have to look them up.

     

    What is the Heavenly Father's will? That we should all 'pick up our cross' and follow his Son, Jesus. I can't even understand your answer to this question. Nice talking with you, tho', I'll check on what you said...

     

    What do you mean you think little of him? What do you mean he is imperfect? You fool he is god. He can do no wrong, He cant be imperfect for he is god. Perfect is whatever he wants it to be. Whatever he does is right. If he destroys everything that ever existed it is perfect. Its god...

    If he was perfect, everything he made would be perfect. This world is not perfect.

     

    Who made the world? The same being that took Jesus to the top of a mountain and tempted him, saying 'All this you can have if you worship me?' And who was that? That was the Devil. The devil made the world, that's why it doesn't work - that's why we are destroying ourselves.

     

    And as of Jesus. He died on the cross pleading to god, And to father as well in his last words.. Do not say that their are two because it is clearly stated that their is ONE All mighty god. Jesus made many references to old testament as HIS own god being the same one. This is monotheism, This is not polytheism. Do not try and ruin the glory jesus brought to god and do not try and smierre him, Especially if you refer to him AS god because he is what made us all. And what made everything. How can you think little of such? It is impossible for him to be wrong.

    Jesus was not the son of God - where does he say he IS? He called himself the son of Man, just so there would be no mistake - the same mistake you're making. Don't put your faith in God, put it in Jesus. If you make God your number one, as you seem to have, you could be making a mistake. God is not such a nice person - Once nobody believed in God. Nobody except one man, Noah. So God drownded everybody else (including the unicorns) and when Noah was the only survivor - everybody believed in God.

     

    Now, if you think that's admirable, to kill everybody in he world who disagrees with you - that's sick. If you think that's a good way to convert people to your point of view, well I sure don't. That's what I think anyway.

     

    Very well, After posting the comment i did realize that i was kinda like him once and come up with some pretty wild theories. Very sorry aristocrat and iodine. But as to why i believe these flaws i still hold my ground.

    That's okay, Superfusion. You believe in 'flaws'? Please explain...

     

    Very well, After posting the comment i did realize that i was kinda like him once and come up with some pretty wild theories. Very sorry aristocrat and iodine. But as to why i believe these flaws i still hold my ground.

    That's okay, Superfusion. You believe in 'flaws'? Please explain...

     

    I don't think the God of Abraham was an evil god nor I question the divinity of Jesus but the Gnostic texts seem to indicate that Jesus gave some secret teachings to his inner circles who were matured enough to understand him and those teachings indicate that there is a supreme Godhead above all gods and eventually leads to paganism and contradicts the teachings of the orthodox Christianity. Why is the orthodox Christianity has a higher authority over the Gnostic interpretation of the bible?

     

    I do have problems when some God says "I'm the only one, there is no other God".

    There is much said of Gnostics that is not true. I would also advise you not to put too muchu faith in the Gnostic Gospels - I'm a Gnostic and I don't. I mostly like the Gospels of Mathew, Mark, Luke and John, myself. And how did Jesus die? He drownded. When the Roman Soldier stuck a spear in him, out came water and blood. The corpse was waterlogged.

  16. Immortal

     

    I presume you are voicing your opinions here, and simply forgot to qualify your pronouncements.

     

    What do you mean here by 'You'?

     

    If God creates you and you create God, then presumably you don't mean the same thing by 'you' in each half of this statement, for then then idea would be absurd.

     

    Are you equating one of these 'you's with Holy Ghost? That would make some sense. But how can I believe in a God that I create?

     

    If your God is anthropomorhic and objective that's fine. But where does Jesus ask us to believe in any such God?

     

    He did not, as Astrocat5 points out. You are not describing the God of Jesus, and probably for the reason Jesus gave as quoted above.

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

    .

     

     

     

     

     

    What do I mean by "your god."? I mean your God is the God of Abraham and to tell you the truth I don't like him, from what I've read of him. I mean; I think Eve was right to choose smarts in the garden. I would have advised her to do exactly the same. When faced with eating 'the fruit of the tree of knowledge,' she accepted the challenge, and persuadedr Adam to do the same. Of course 'your god' freaked and kicked them out of the garden - for getting smart - against your god's wishes.

     

    No, I don't think much of your god. My God is Jesus and his heavenly Father.

     

    I admire the width of your lpearning - who is Plotinus? No Philopsopher - who is he?

     

    Your view correspond to the Sethians who introduced Demiurge as an evil God to solve the problem of evil which was strongly criticized by Plotinus.

     

    Everything is inhabited by the true God, good and evil as such don't exist, the material world even though it doesn't exist in the external world, only it exists in our minds is important in fulfilling the works of the true God. This is how Valentinians view it.

     

     

     

    What do you mean by "your god".?

     

     

     

    Again Plotinus criticized the Sethians for not seeing the Goodness of the Demiurge.

     

     

     

    Knowing the Holy Father through the teachings of Jesus gives you deliverance.

    Obeying ther Holy Father by following Jesus will give me something, I'm sure. Who's Plotinus? He's no Philosopher. And "your god" is the god of Abraham - and I've moved on. I think you would do better to put your faith in Jesus and his Heavenly Father 'who's name is too holy for us to know' 'Hallowed be thy name ...' and 'Thy will be done,' What do you think is the will of Our Father in Heaven?

     

    These 'Sethians,' are they the Scythians from the old days?

    Well, nice talking to you.

  17. Your approach of assigning the God of the Old Testament to "Demiurge", who created the material world going against the divine will has been strongly criticized by Plotinus and by Valentinus. In fact Plotinus went on to say that "if some Gnostics think that the material world was created by an evil God and its not of the divine then why don't they just commit suicide".

     

    I'm basically with Plotinus and Valentinus here who think that even that was the play of the supreme Godhead or the Holy Father as you are thinking.

    The god of the old testament created the world. I think we can agree on that. This world is not perfect. We should be able to agree on that also. The world is imperfect because it was made by an imperfect being - your god.

     

    It's not a level playing field. The world favours the rich. If you're rich, life's good. Try being poor - it sucks! Surely you can see these things?

     

    Our heavenly father is perfect and everything he creates is perfect - perfectly free to reject the father if it wants. That's what god did - reject the father. gOD looked at himself and thought he was just as good - if not better - than the father. God made the world to compete with the world of the heavenly father. The heavenly father doesn't get his hands dirty with 'materiel.' That's God!

     

    I also think Eve was right to choose smarts in the garden. It was she who made Adam smart. This upset god greatly - people getting smart. You would have preferred to be made ignorant. Well, without trying to be mean, I think you are.

     

    Gnostics don't commit suicide. They give their lives to Jeseus and (hopefully) die serving him.

  18. But he speaks of god. You dont believe in god.

     

    Do you believe that he was mistaken then?

     

    I did not ask about his opinion about god, I simply said that if you believe in Jesus but not in god then he must be a liar

    I looked thru' the gospels to see how much Jesus talked about god, and it wasn't much. There was the time he said, 'Render unto Ceasar what is Ceasar's and unto god what is god's.' You must remember he was talking to God's People and that's why he talked about god. He never said he was the son of god. Others said that about him. Jesus called himself 'the son of man,' so there would not be a mistake made.

    Jesus wasn't mistaken, but when there was no one around, he'd talk to his disciples about the Heavenly Father.

    In the prayer he gave us, the 'Our Father,' the second line is 'Hallowed be thy name.'

    That means the Heavenly Father's name is too holy for us to know. We don't know his name - only that it is 'hallowed' or very holy.

    We 'can't know the Father' - that's not me, that's Jesus. It certainly isn't 'God.'

    You might enjoy a relationship with God - that's strictly your business. But I'm Jesus'. It's a question of choice, plain and simple.

     

    @Astrocat5

     

    Firstly if you post your thoughts with a embedded quote its highly difficult for others to quote your post and answer it to the point.

     

     

    Where is the evidence from the scripture which indicates that Father was present prior to the God of the Old Testament, can you quote the scripture where it says that the God of Moses rejected the Father and went on to create this world or are you making up this stuff on your own?

     

    The trinity concept of Christianity is not mentioned in the Old Testament, why is the heavenly Father not mentioned in the Old Testament? or Did Moses lied to us?

     

    God said "I will be his Father and he will be my son".

     

    This clearly indicates that the God of Abraham, Jacob, Issaiah, David and Moses is equal to the Father of Jesus in the New Testament.

     

    If the Father and Jesus was present from the beginning or prior to The Genesis then why anyone would say like that "I will be his Father". This clearly indicates that the arrival of Jesus was a prophecy which was yet to be fullfilled.

     

    Irrespective of whether the God of Moses was the Father of Jesus or not, this statement from Jesus "The Father and I are One" has a deep mystical meaning which is often claimed by christian mystics that "God and I are One" or "I am God" which is also in harmony with Jesus teachings that "You all are Gods, men of the most high".

     

    It may be that since Jesus was preaching to ordinary people he said "You can not know the Father" that doesn't mean he is unknowable, it shouldn't be taken literally, infact that would undermine Gnosticism itself because its a view which says we can know everything that is there is to know.

     

     

     

    As I have repeated many times earlier there is theistic mysticism too, if you assert that only Buddhism can be called as Mysticism then one can easily see your double standards and a bias towards non-theistic mysticism. Mysticism involves both theistic as well as non-theistic doctrines.

     

    My view is one of the views of the Isha Upanishad of Yajnavalkya and just because my view is not in line with yours you are asserting that I am not talking about mysticism holding your narrow atheistic view of mysticism.

     

     

     

     

    I would be extremely happy if you just stick to that but you link your theory with mysticism that's when the problem kicks in.

     

     

     

    I am still in non-duality of Advaita as formulated by Shankara. Do you expect me to not call non-duality of Shankara as mysticism or Gnosticism.

    Someone else answered this post - it wasn't me, astrocat5. I don't know who jumped in here!
  19. It strikes me that if you believe in Jesus but not in god, then you must believe Jesus lied about god.

     

    I mean, Jesus went on and on about god, god this, god that...

    Jesus didn't lie. He might have talked about god, but perhaps not in a nice way. Much has been lost in the translations - I think you can see this. When they cornered Jesus, they said they were the children of Abraham, and they worshipped the god of Abraham - but Jesus told them they were children of the devil, and they worshipped the devil, else they would be on his (Jesus') side instead of against him. That's John 8 verse 42 and a few more.

    I'm not so sure Jesus had a high opinion of god.

    Jesus was always creful to stress that he was 'of the Father.'

    Liste, that 'god' person is a god of the Jews. Not that I have anything against the Jews - but they're god's children and that's nothing to do with us.

    When you die, you come to these big 'Pearly Gates.' There's sounds of a great p[arty going on inside and a sign above that says 'God's People Only,' and everybody is pushing and shoving to get in these gates - but me, I'm not one for crowds and this kid on crutches - we find ourselves walking along the wall.

     

    And we find this really narrow entrance, and sitting outside it's always this guy or his girlfriend - and they invite us in. And I remember Jesus always said, 'Enter by the narrow gate,' so I think that's the way in.

     

    As for God's People, there's just a cliff, and a couple of speakers rigged to pump out party music.

    There's no turning around, of course.

     

    But we make our choices in this world, in our day to day living. You can put your faith in the god of Abraham, or Jesus. I know who I'm choosing.

  20. Now that would be interesting. Why don't you give it a go and we'll all stand back in awe.

    You hold up your fingers and start counting, beginning with your pinkie. That's number ten, so now you can put it away. The rest follow naturally - nine. eight, seven and six. Put them away. Now, you have five fingers remaining, so six plus five equals..? Well, you do the math,

     

    Probably because you seem to be misjudging the strengths of certain forces and the way that those forces act on one another in different situations. You give no observable examples other than to give what we already observe and say the opposite of what we think is happening, is happening.

    We're going in because the expansion is speeding up (accelerating). Not just that, but we are going in with an ever increasing Rate of Acceleration. It's the ever increasing Rate of Acceleration that proves it's a Black Hole we're falling into. Now, which part are you having difficulty with, Justin?

    That's all I'm saying at the moment. If you want to be fair to me, you should let me know what part of the above statement you're having difficulty with.

    Not to mention, things don't JUST get sucked into a black hole. They first enter an orbit. We would see such an orbit in the movement of the galaxy clusters. The movement wouldn't be an equal expansion, as we observe now, but would corollate with any orbit we happen to enter. If we entered such an orbit of a blackhole, especially one that big, then we would first notice the clusters entering the orbit either disappear or move very far very quickly. If we were already in orbit, especially an orbit that would draw us into the center, then we would see the clusters around us acting accordingly. Instead they are expanding at an equal rate everywhere.

    If you were in outer Space and you were falling into a distant black hole, you wouldn't feel anything.

    That's because all forces acting on you would seem equal. What do you feel in a descending elevator? Not much, right? If the elavator fell fast enough, you might find yourself rising off the floor - but that's all you'd feel.

    If you're falling (and we are) with all forces seeming to act equally on you, you'd speed up (Newton) and that would cause you to lose pressure (Bernoulli). If you lost pressure, because all forces acting on you would seem equal, you'd lose pressure equally, not in one direction only. If you lost pressure you'd expand (Boyle) and with all forces seeming to act equally, you'd expand equally, and not in one direction only. You'd also cool down (the J-T Effect). All this is what's happening to the Observable Universe. Now, are you clear on this also? If not, you should tell me.

     

    One thing I just remembered you saying also. You said that exspansion is in, like the air at the nozzle of a vacuum. Care to show me where the air at the nozzle of a vacuum expands equally in all directions? I would enjoy seeing that.

    Expansion just means we're coming apart. The air at the nozzle of a vacuum cleaner is, in a way, falling. The air doesn't see it's going into a nozzle - it just knows it's expanding as it loses pressure. If it's falling into the nozzle, all forces acting on it would seem equal - at any given moment. With all forces seeming to be equal, the air will expand evenly, and not in one direction only.

    That's what I think, Justin. Now, how about you?

  21. !

    Moderator Note

    astrocat5, if we lock a thread it displays a lock at the bottom and nobody can post at all in it. We have no need to artificially block anyone from viewing or posting to an open thread.

     

    It is quite common for a thread's visitors to drop off when it reaches a certain size. People start to read, realize you aren't willing to show any evidence and stop coming to waste time with four pages of hand-waving.

     

    Also, this is NOT a democracy, it's a privately owned science discussion forum, one with rules you agreed to when you joined. You do NOT have the freedom of speech to post anything you want here.

     

    Finally, since you have not responded to requests to back up your assertions with any observable evidence, much less attempt to offer a better explanation than current theory, your idea has become speculative only. I'm moving the thread to Speculations (which may actually revive your audience) so please read the sitcky notes regarding speculative threads.

     

    There is no need to respond to this modnote.

    That's okay, I don't mind responding.

     

    Spoken like a true mathematician. Unfortunately (for you) Math isn't a science. That's because you can do anything in Math - you can prove two plus two is five. I( myself, can show you, Mathematically that you have eleven fingers, not ten). Science tho' is governed by hard and fast Laws, Laws which were sometimes bitterly fought for, Laws that must be respected.

    Because I stay away from Math, using only Physics, you say 'I'm waving my hands in the air.'

     

    Tesla said, 'Modern Scientists have substituted experiment for math. They go off in equation after equation until they have built something with no relation to reality.'

    He's a scientist I respect greatly.

     

    I don't mind being sent to 'Speculations' - I just wish it had been by a scientist and not a mathematician.

    Thanks anyway - I'm very pleased with 'Science Forums,' as they have tolerated me so far. I hope it keeps up.

  22. !

    Moderator Note

    astrocat5, if we lock a thread it displays a lock at the bottom and nobody can post at all in it. We have no need to artificially block anyone from viewing or posting to an open thread.

     

    It is quite common for a thread's visitors to drop off when it reaches a certain size. People start to read, realize you aren't willing to show any evidence and stop coming to waste time with four pages of hand-waving.

     

    Also, this is NOT a democracy, it's a privately owned science discussion forum, one with rules you agreed to when you joined. You do NOT have the freedom of speech to post anything you want here.

     

    Finally, since you have not responded to requests to back up your assertions with any observable evidence, much less attempt to offer a better explanation than current theory, your idea has become speculative only. I'm moving the thread to Speculations (which may actually revive your audience) so please read the sitcky notes regarding speculative threads.

     

    There is no need to respond to this modnote.

    That's okay, I don't mind responding.

     

    Spoken like a true mathematician. Unfortunately (for you) Math isn't a science. That's because you can do anything in Math - you can prove two plus two is five. I( myself, can show you, Mathematically that you have eleven fingers, not ten). Science tho' is governed by hard and fast Laws, Laws which were sometimes bitterly fought for, Laws that must be respected.

    Because I stay away from Math, using only Physics, you say 'I'm waving my hands in the air.'

     

    Tesla said, 'Modern Scientists have substituted experiment for math. They go off in equation after equation until they have built something with no relation to reality.'

    He's a scientist I respect greatly.

     

    I don't mind being sent to 'Speculations' - I just wish it had been by a scientist and not a mathematician.

    Thanks anyway - I'm very pleased with 'Science Forums,' as they have tolerated me so far. I hope it keeps up.

  23. To OP -

     

    Just by reading Gnostic books you will not become a Gnostic.

    Quite right.

     

    You are missing the deep mystical meaning behind the teachings of Jesus when he says "Father and I are One".

     

    The "I" refers to the body and the mind.

    'I' is Jesus, in 'I and the Father are one (and the same.)

     

    The "Father" refers to an anthropomorphic God whose objective existence is responsible for the existence of body and mind.

    'You cannot know the Father - he's too high above you.' So don't pretend you do.

     

    The Body and the mind cannot exist independent of the Father which means to say that this world cannot exist without the Father.

    The Father is perfect, and everything he makes is perfect - perfectly free to reject him, if you want. God rejected the Father and made this world. The Father has nothing to do with material stuff, and I believe that making this 'imperfect world' did not please the Father.

     

    Saying that Father and I are "ONE" means that you are neither your body nor your mind, You are the "ONE" from which "Father" itself originates. It is in this context that Jesus says "Father and I are one".

    Jesus was talking to simple people and he used simple language to do this. When Jesus said, 'I and the father are one,' that's exactly what he meant.

     

    Its not that he means to say that the human form or the body of Jesus is the Father. It shouldn't be understood in that context. God forms the basis for the objective existence of this world and You form the basis for the existence of God.

    God became imperfect when he rejected the father and created the Cosmos. As I say, the Father considers material stuff beneath him, The father has no need for material stuff, I'm kinda surprised you can't see that.

     

    Immortal

     

    I presume you are voicing your opinions here, and simply forgot to qualify your pronouncements.

     

    What do you mean here by 'You'?

    I don't follow that.

     

    If God creates you and you create God, then presumably you don't mean the same thing by 'you' in each half of this statement, for then then idea would be absurd.

    The world (cosmos) is material and material stuff does not please the Father. Do you think the Father loves gold? That would be absurd.

     

    Are you equating one of these 'you's with Holy Ghost? That would make some sense. But how can I believe in a God that I create?

    The Holy Ghost? Me? Yes, you're right that humans created God, but he exists, just like the world.

     

    If your God is anthropomorhic and objective that's fine. But where does Jesus ask us to believe in any such God?

    Jesus never asks us to believe in God. He wants us to believe in the heavenly father. I don't beleve in god - that's the old Jewish religion, the God of Abraham. I'm not Jewish, I'm gnostic.

     

    He did not, as Astrocat5 points out. You are not describing the God of Jesus, and probably for the reason Jesus gave as quoted above.

    Jesus never said he was the son of god - others said that about him. Jesus said he was the son of man, just so tyere would be no mistake. But everybody makes that mistake.

     

    In moments of vanity - say preening in a mirror, you give off small (tiny) amounts of hydrogen. When the male is sexually excited, he gives off NO (nitrous oxide) Females in such situations, give off pherenomes, tiny bits of matter that excite males.

    When you're afraid, you give off chemicals that dogs can pick up on. The list is pretty well endless...

     

    When God thought he was as good as the Father - if not better, hydrogen was created - enough to make a huge cloud that went critical in the center and the first star was born. The universe evolved from this center - outwards. In this way, God created the Cosmos.

     

     

     

    .

     

     

     

     

     

     

    I beg to differ, there is at least some evidence that suggests that the human mind is predisposed to create and believe such things, but no evidence for an actual real god

    The world is proof of a real God. God is real - as real as the Cosmos. Unfortunately, the (material) Cosmos does not please the Father. When God rejected the Father, he created a 'rival' set of beings, beings that would (he imagined) take over from the Father and restore him (God) to power. That's why God doesn't like it if we kill each other - or worse. Nice chatting to you, Tres.

  24. Believing in Jesus but not in God makes little sense. He was after all God Incarnate. Sure you can hold to some sort of naturalistic explanation for him, but that is hardly what he taught. Leaves me with the question if you believe in him why would you not trust in the things he said?

     

    Are we to believe the man who gave us some of the most sublime moral teachings in history would lie about who he was?

    Jesus never said he was the son of god.

     

    He said he was the son of man, just so this wouldn't happen. The prayer he gave us is a prayer to our Heavenly Father, who's name is too holy for us to know. 'You cannot know the father,' Jesus told people. 'He's too high above you.'

     

    Then he said that he and the Father were the same. Jesus was certainly not 'God-Incarnate,' as you say. God is a jealous, vengeful god in case you don't know. Jesus was none of these.

     

    Of course I believe in Jesus and the things he said. If you want to know Jesus, get his father straight first.

     

    Jesus is dead so no Jesus being God can't be true (obviously).

     

    Also if Jesus really was God then he would not have allowed some people to stick nails in his body and cause him to feel so much pain.

     

    But as they say, let men believe as they will.

    Jesus is dead? So how come billions believe in him?

     

    He knew beforehand he was going to be crucified - when the time came he said to his father - not my will but thy will. It's the best way, it seems, to get to heaven - the supreme sacrifice - your own life.

     

    See! Your own argument is refuted. There are no eyewitnesses, so you can't say it's invalid due to being based on eyewitness testimony... Therefore, it MUST be true! Check... and... mate you atheist heathens! :rolleyes:

    The Gospels were written some time after his death. That's why there are no eye-witnesses. It MUST be true? I think it's more a matter of faith - you believe or you don't. If you don't believe in Jesus, he won't believe in you...

     

    It's like life - a two way street.

  25. There are several reasons. Here are some of them:

     

    1. You are talking rubbish.

    2. You display a singular ignorance of the findings of science.

    3. You fail to justify any of your assertions.

    4. You repeatedly reveal that you misinterpret or misunderstand current theory.

    5. Your observations are boring as well as wrong.

    6. There is nothing of value in your writing.

     

    Freedom of speech is a right: stop abusing it.

    1. Please explain to me where I am talking rubbish. It makes pretty good sense to me. One man's rubbish is another man's gold!

    2. In what way do I disagree with the findings of Science. The big-bang is almost a hundred years old, from somebody Einstein said 'His mathematics are good, but his knowledge of Physics is 'abominable.' Georges LeMaitre. On news that the Observable Universe had been seen to be expanding, he ASSUMED the whole Universe was expanding. Such ASSUMPTIONS are dangerous. Please remember that nobody has seen the expansion of the Universe and it remains unproven to this day.

    3. I can justify any of my assertions. The reason we're speeding up is because we're falling due to Gravity - pain and simple - not because we're being pushed by Anti-Gravity. Anti-Gravity doesn't even exist. It's you who are being deluded.

    4. Because I say speeding up leads to a loss of pressure? Modern scientists say you need a 'surface' to demonstrate Bernoulli's Theorem, but there are no 'surfaces' in Space. Are you therefore saying Bernoulli's Theorem works only on Earth? That's garbage!

    Any time you see the words 'Speeding up,' you can be sure that it's followed by a 'Loss of pressure.'

    5. Boring? 1700 people have observed this thread. Boring? Hardly.

    6. Just because it's new to you, doesn't make it wrong. I read up about the Big-Bang but Mother Nature didn't. Mother Nature says we're speeding up because we're falling due to Gravity. Makes sense to me. Better than Anti-Gravity, I'd say. Maybe you're jealous 'cause you didn't think of that. Your Big-Ban is so complicated you need a Phd in Math to figure it out. But Space isn't complicated - it's all pretty simple. except to you.

    We're speeding up because we're falling and it's the ever increasing Rate of Acceleration that proves we're falling into a black hole. If there was nothing there at the center of the Universe our Rate of Acceleration would decline all the way to the center.

    But you don't know everything with Mass must have a Center of Mass. That's not me, actually - that's Physics 101.

    Nice talking to you, Ophiolite. What's an Ophiolite. Somebody from Ophiuses? So you're an alien?

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.