-->
@Tradesecret
And it was then that truth as it were "dawned on me".
GNOSTIC
How do you define "God"...
Posts
Total:
187
-->
@3RU7AL
--> @TradesecretAnd it was then that truth as it were "dawned on me".GNOSTIC
The Gnostics, in their reading of Scripture, acknowledged no such debt; for they believed that the Hebrew Bible was the written revelation of an inferior creator god (dêmiourgos), filled with lies intended to cloud the minds and judgment of the spiritual human beings (pneumatikoi) whom this Demiurge was intent on enslaving in his material cosmos.
If the truth is not found in the Bible then Gnostics believe in a different source like special knowledge. That special knowledge must be superior than the word of God.
-->
@Tradesecret
It was then that truth found me. And it didn't try and prove that it was the truth and nor did it try and demonstrate that it was the truth and it did not validate itself and it didn't even task me to believe it was the truth.
We believe something because we have become convinced. We can be convinced by good or bad reasons, but there is a reason for belief nonetheless. It sounds to me you became convinced for no good reason. This may work for you, but it has no persuasive power for those who are not starting with belief and working backwards.
You are on that journey. that is one reason you visit this site and others probably. You might not call it a journey for truth or perhaps you do. but you haven't found what you are looking for yet - or else you wouldn't be here
I am on a journey - on that we agree. However, I passed the part of the path you see as the ultimate destination. I moved on because, well, for many reasons, but generally because I found the picture painted by Christianity was flawed: People aren't born broken, sex isnt 'dirty', absolute certainty isnt reasonable, etc.
Enjoy the scenery, but don't look too closely, my friend - it's illusory.
-->
@Shila
If the truth is not found in the Bible then Gnostics believe in a different source like special knowledge. That special knowledge must be superior than the word of God.
GNOSIS = DIRECT EXPERIENCE
-->
@SkepticalOne
SkepticalOne: I am on a journey - on that we agree. However, I passed the part of the path you see as the ultimate destination. I moved on because, well, for many reasons, but generally because I found the picture painted by Christianity was flawed: People aren't born broken, sex isnt 'dirty', absolute certainty isnt reasonable, etc.Enjoy the scenery, but don't look too closely, my friend - it's illusory.
You are both familiar and speak with conviction about your illusory beliefs. You are a self declares Pastafarian.
Pastafarianism definition ... A parody religion centered around a creator deity who resembles spaghetti and meatballs, the Flying Spaghetti Monster.
-->
@Shila
You are both familiar and speak with conviction about your illusory beliefs. You are a self declares Pastafarian.
Are you saying there's not really a spaghetti monster?!
Blasphemy. 😏
-->
@SkepticalOne
--> @ShilaYou are both familiar and speak with conviction about your illusory beliefs. You are a self declares Pastafarian.Are you saying there's not really a spaghetti monster?!Blasphemy. 😏
Why is spaghetti a monster to you? Don’t you like pasta?
-->
@Shila
Don’t you like pasta?
Love it. Although, I prefer fettuccine and Alfredo.
-->
@SkepticalOne
--> @ShilaDon’t you like pasta?Love it. Although, I prefer fettuccine and Alfredo.
Have I converted you that spaghetti is not a monster?
-->
@Shila
Have I converted you that spaghetti is not a monster?
Have I converted you to accept his noodly appendage?
-->
@SkepticalOne
--> @ShilaHave I converted you that spaghetti is not a monster?Have I converted you to accept his noodly appendage?
You are still struggling with the spaghetti monster. That is why you still believe his noodly appendage makes him a monster.
-->
@SkepticalOne
It was then that truth found me. And it didn't try and prove that it was the truth and nor did it try and demonstrate that it was the truth and it did not validate itself and it didn't even task me to believe it was the truth.We believe something because we have become convinced. We can be convinced by good or bad reasons, but there is a reason for belief nonetheless. It sounds to me you became convinced for no good reason. This may work for you, but it has no persuasive power for those who are not starting with belief and working backwards.
I never said I was unconvinced. Nor that I was convinced for no good reason. My point was that people are looking for truth - but they don't actually know what they are looking for. and that is one of the significant reasons people NEVER find the truth.
You are on that journey. that is one reason you visit this site and others probably. You might not call it a journey for truth or perhaps you do. but you haven't found what you are looking for yet - or else you wouldn't be hereI am on a journey - on that we agree. However, I passed the part of the path you see as the ultimate destination. I moved on because, well, for many reasons, but generally because I found the picture painted by Christianity was flawed: People aren't born broken, sex isnt 'dirty', absolute certainty isnt reasonable, etc.
I passed the path of Christianity as well. I went onto other pastures and other possible destinations. Nevertheless, I met others on the journey going the other way. I met many many atheists and skeptics. I met many Buddhists and Hindus. This is part of the problem I raised in my last post. What is truth? How do you know if you see it?
I agree that some of the picture of Christianity that is painted is flawed. And that is what I discovered as well. Yet, that is part of the puzzle as well. Adam Smith's vision of economy was brilliant because it captured the nature of humanity and its self interest. What appears to be a flaw was actually the piece of the puzzle that makes it make sense. Not all Christians think sex is dirty. Absolutes do exist - what are they is a different question? It does strike me as ironic that you can detect what is flawed if you do not yet know what truth is.
Enjoy the scenery, but don't look too closely, my friend - it's illusory.
Illusory - sounds like you have been listening to Harikrish far too much.
-->
@3RU7AL
nope.
-->
@Shila
We have you admission you are not looking for truth anymore. You looked for truth and never found it. And like also admit you haven't found what you are looking for yet - or else you wouldn't be here.
I know that English is not your first language so I just want you to know I won't hold that against you in your interpretation of what I have written.
I am not looking for truth anymore - why? Because it found me. Why would I keep looking if I have now been found my truth?
And as for me being here - I am an exception to the rule. I know that sounds weak and probably is. but its true. I also like to talk with people who are looking for the truth - and hopefully I can assist them in some way. Either by leading them to the truth or by helping them to see the truth more clearly. I admit I don't always do a good job.
-->
@Tradesecret
-->@ShilaWe have you admission you are not looking for truth anymore. You looked for truth and never found it. And like also admit you haven't found what you are looking for yet - or else you wouldn't be here.I know that English is not your first language so I just want you to know I won't hold that against you in your interpretation of what I have written.I am not looking for truth anymore - why? Because it found me. Why would I keep looking if I have now been found my truth?And as for me being here - I am an exception to the rule. I know that sounds weak and probably is. but its true. I also like to talk with people who are looking for the truth - and hopefully I can assist them in some way. Either by leading them to the truth or by helping them to see the truth more clearly. I admit I don't always do a good job.
You said the same thing in another post but quite differently.
Tradesecret: I don't need to search for truth anymore. Truth found me. As someone once said - if you can't take Muhammed to the mountain - you bring the mountain to Muhammed. There are more than one way to skin a cat. The interesting thing about Christianity - is truth is not a concept - it is a personIf truth in Christianity is not a concept, it is a person and the person is Jesus.
Then truth in Christianity was crucified. Jesus was mocked, beaten and crucified.
-->
@Shila
-->@ShilaWe have you admission you are not looking for truth anymore. You looked for truth and never found it. And like also admit you haven't found what you are looking for yet - or else you wouldn't be here.I know that English is not your first language so I just want you to know I won't hold that against you in your interpretation of what I have written.I am not looking for truth anymore - why? Because it found me. Why would I keep looking if I have now been found my truth?And as for me being here - I am an exception to the rule. I know that sounds weak and probably is. but its true. I also like to talk with people who are looking for the truth - and hopefully I can assist them in some way. Either by leading them to the truth or by helping them to see the truth more clearly. I admit I don't always do a good job.You said the same thing in another post but quite differently.Tradesecret: I don't need to search for truth anymore. Truth found me. As someone once said - if you can't take Muhammed to the mountain - you bring the mountain to Muhammed. There are more than one way to skin a cat. The interesting thing about Christianity - is truth is not a concept - it is a personIf truth in Christianity is not a concept, it is a person and the person is Jesus.Then truth in Christianity was crucified. Jesus was mocked, beaten and crucified.
Yes I did. and you can read my response there.
-->
@Tradesecret
-> @Shila-->@ShilaWe have you admission you are not looking for truth anymore. You looked for truth and never found it. And like also admit you haven't found what you are looking for yet - or else you wouldn't be here.I know that English is not your first language so I just want you to know I won't hold that against you in your interpretation of what I have written.I am not looking for truth anymore - why? Because it found me. Why would I keep looking if I have now been found my truth?And as for me being here - I am an exception to the rule. I know that sounds weak and probably is. but its true. I also like to talk with people who are looking for the truth - and hopefully I can assist them in some way. Either by leading them to the truth or by helping them to see the truth more clearly. I admit I don't always do a good job.You said the same thing in another post but quite differently.Tradesecret: I don't need to search for truth anymore. Truth found me. As someone once said - if you can't take Muhammed to the mountain - you bring the mountain to Muhammed. There are more than one way to skin a cat. The interesting thing about Christianity - is truth is not a concept - it is a personIf truth in Christianity is not a concept, it is a person and the person is Jesus.Then truth in Christianity was crucified. Jesus was mocked, beaten and crucified.Yes I did. and you can read my response there.
Yet, what you omitted about Christianity, is that in its teachings is that truth was resurrected. And all that know the truth - will be set free. their condemnation will be cast aside. Their lives will rejoice. And I for one am happy about this. I am the way the truth and the life. Those are the words of Jesus.
So the truth was crucified. The truth was then resurrected. But the resurrected truth left for heaven. So we are again left without the truth.
I am the way the truth and the life. Those are the words of Jesus. And where is Jesus today?
John 14:2 My Father’s house has many rooms; if that were not so, would I have told you that I am going there to prepare a place for you? 3 And if I go and prepare a place for you, I will come back and take you to be with me that you also may be where I am
The Bible tells us Jesus is in heaven living in his fathers house and working as a housekeeper preparing rooms for guests. And that is the truth.
-->
@Tradesecret
I am not looking for truth anymore - why? Because it found me. Why would I keep looking if I have now been found my truth?
Is your truth the same as gods' truth?
And as for me being here - I am an exception to the rule.
No. You are not an exception to anything. You are just another member of a forum and another speck on the planet, just like anyone else. Even though you claim to have been "chosen by god himself"
I know that sounds weak and probably is.
It sounds arrogant and pompous to me. That is my truth.
I also like to talk with people who are looking for the truth - and hopefully I can assist them in some way.
I think you mean convince them that your truth is the correct truth. When you haven't told us what "your truth" is.
Either by leading them to the truth or by helping them to see the truth more clearly.
leading them to your version of "the truth", is what you mean.
What is " your truth"?
I admit I don't always do a good job.
No, you don't. And this is why when you are on the backfoot after painting yourself into a theological corner, you start to redefine and reinterpret what scripture actually says. This is not to mention parading all of your alleged qualification all over the forum.
Don't forget my question, will you?
Is your truth the same as gods' truth?
-->
@Tradesecret
I never said I was unconvinced. Nor that I was convinced for no good reason.
No, of course you didn't SAY that, but you did express you were convinced and provided no good reason.
What is truth? How do you know if you see it?
Truth is that which conforms to reality.
Not all Christians think sex is dirty.
Perhaps. I came from a fundamentalist/evangelical background. This is where many religiously motivated disagreements stem from in society and what I am referencing.
Absolutes do exist - what are they is a different question?
Absolute certainty is not a universal principle. You have addressed something other than my criticism.
It does strike me as ironic that you can detect what is flawed if you do not yet know what truth is.
I recognize many 'truths' which are sufficient to mark flaws in overarching (over-reaching) worldviews. I'm dubious there is a capital 'T' truth though, and reality doesn't demand there is one. This is not ironic in any way. For example, a basic understanding of mathematical truths can tell us what an answer is *not*. I don't *know* the answer to -982637^2 is, but I know the answer is not a negative number.
-->
@Tradesecret
What is truth? How do you know if you see it?
The same question was raised by Pilate in John 18.
John 18:38 “What is truth?” retorted Pilate. With this he went out again to the Jews gathered there and said, “I find no basis for a charge against him. 39 But it is your custom for me to release to you one prisoner at the time of the Passover. Do you want me to release ‘the king of the Jews’?”
40 They shouted back, “No, not him! Give us Barabbas!” Now Barabbas had taken part in an uprising.
40 They shouted back, “No, not him! Give us Barabbas!” Now Barabbas had taken part in an uprising.
The truth is Jesus was rejected. The crowd picked Barabbas.
Why?
Isaiah 53:3 He was despised and rejected by mankind, a man of suffering, and familiar with pain. Like one from whom people hide their faces he was despised, and we held him in low esteem.
-->
@Shila
The truth is Jesus was rejected. The crowd picked Barabbas.Why?
That is a good question. But we have to notice that Barabbas 's full name was Jesus Barabbas
So when the crowd had gathered, Pilate asked them, “Which one do you want me to release to you: Jesus Barabbas, or Jesus who is called the Messiah?”Matthew 27:17
It is quite difficult to imagine that Pilate would release a known war mongering zealot "who had committed murder in the insurrection.” What insurrection one may well ask? The only nuisance that seemed to be mentioned in scripture is where Jesus over turned the tables.
Unless of course this was something a lot worse than scripture is letting on and the authors are trying to play it down to nothing more than a hissy fit on Jesus' part. Which I believe they are.
The bible does say "another man that had committed insurrection with him".
-->
@Stephen
--> @ShilaThe truth is Jesus was rejected. The crowd picked Barabbas.Why?That is a good question. But we have to notice that Barabbas 's full name was Jesus BarabbasSo when the crowd had gathered, Pilate asked them, “Which one do you want me to release to you: Jesus Barabbas, or Jesus who is called the Messiah?”Matthew 27:17It is quite difficult to imagine that Pilate would release a known war mongering zealot "who had committed murder in the insurrection.” What insurrection one may well ask? The only nuisance that seemed to be mentioned in scripture is where Jesus over turned the tables.
That is why Pilate left the choice up to crowds to pick who they wanted to be crucified. They picked Jesus not Barabbas.
Unless of course this was something a lot worse than scripture is letting on and the authors are trying to play it down to nothing more than a hissy fit on Jesus' part. Which I believe they are.
The insurrection was evidenced by the crowds demanding Jesus be crucified. The Romans were concerned it would escalate into a riot and insurrection.
Luke 23:21 But they kept shouting, “Crucify him! Crucify him!”
The bible does say "another man that had committed insurrection with him".
That is why Pilate left the choice up to crowds to pick who they wanted to be crucified. They picked Jesus not Barabbas.
-->
@Shila
The insurrection was evidenced by the crowds demanding Jesus be crucified. The Romans were concerned it would escalate into a riot and insurrection.Luke 23:21 But they kept shouting, “Crucify him! Crucify him!”
Nope. There was no insurrection at that point in time. This insurrection had already happened, and this is what they were all on trial for. The bible clearly states that there HAD been an insurrection- past tense. And that Barabas was one of those that had committed insurrection "WITH HIM", Jesus.
And like I have pointed out; it is hardly likely that Pontius Pilate would have released Jesus Barrabas a known murderer of Roman's. you need to read your bible carefully. And stop reading something that isn't even there.
I have said my theory is that the turning of the tables was a lot more than just a girly hissy fit thrown by Jesus. I believe it was a full-blown rebellion. And it was this that had forced the Romans hand and led to the arrest of all involved to the delight of many of Jewish the high priesthood.
-->
@Stephen
Nope. There was no insurrection at that point in time. This insurrection had already happened, and this is what they were all on trial for. The bible clearly states that there HAD been an insurrection- past tense. And that Barabas was one of those that had committed insurrection "WITH HIM", Jesus.
Barabbas, a well-known criminal who had been imprisoned “for an insurrection in the city, and for murder” (Luke 23:19). But he was not as popular as Jesus. Therefore less of a threat to the Romans.
Matthew 21:9 The crowds that went ahead of him and those that followed shouted, “Hosanna to the Son of David!” “Blessed is he who comes in the name of the Lord!” “Hosanna in the highest heaven!”
Jesus did not know Barabbas. Jesus was a Jewish religious reformer not an insurrectionist.
And like I have pointed out; it is hardly likely that Pontius Pilate would have released Jesus Barrabas a known murderer of Roman's. you need to read your bible carefully. And stop reading something that isn't even there.
Barabbas, in the New Testament, a prisoner mentioned in all four Gospels who was chosen by the crowd, over Jesus Christ, to be released by Pontius Pilate in a customary pardon before the feast of Passover.
Matthew 27:26: Then he released Barabbas to them. But he had Jesus flogged, and handed him over to be crucified.
I have said my theory is that the turning of the tables was a lot more than just a girly hissy fit thrown by Jesus. I believe it was a full-blown rebellion. And it was this that had forced the Romans hand and led to the arrest of all involved to the delight of many of Jewish the high priesthood.
Jesus was definitely a threat to the Jewish high priesthood because he called them brood of vipers.
In Matthew 12:34, Jesus proclaims, "Brood of vipers! How can you, being evil, speak good things? For out of the abundance of the heart, the mouth speaks."
First Jewish Revolt, (AD 66–70), Jewish rebellion against Roman rule in Judaea. The First Jewish Revolt was the result of a long series of clashes in which small groups of Jews offered sporadic resistance to the Romans, who in turn responded with severe countermeasures. In the fall of AD 66 the Jews combined in revolt, expelled the Romans from Jerusalem, and overwhelmed in the pass of Beth-Horon a Roman punitive force under Gallus, the imperial legate in Syria. A revolutionary government was then set up and extended its influence throughout the whole country. Vespasian was dispatched by the Roman emperor Nero to crush the rebellion. He was joined by Titus, and together the Roman armies entered Galilee, where the historian Josephus headed the Jewish forces. Josephus’ army was confronted by that of Vespasian and fled. After the fall of the fortress of Jatapata, Josephus gave himself up, and the Roman forces swept the country. On the 9th of the month of Av (August 29) in AD 70, Jerusalem fell; the Temple was burned, and the Jewish state collapsed, although the fortress of Masada was not conquered by the Roman general Flavius Silva until April 73
-->
@rosends
@Shila
Nope. There was no insurrection at that point in time. This insurrection had already happened, and this is what they were all on trial for. The bible clearly states that there HAD been an insurrection- past tense. And that Barabas was one of those that had committed insurrection "WITH HIM", Jesus.Barabbas, a well-known criminal who had been imprisoned “for an insurrection in the city, and for murder” (Luke 23:19). But he was not as popular as Jesus. Therefore less of a threat to the Romans.
He was a murderer of Romans ffs. Who had Jesus murdered? Insurrection was an attempt to overthrow Roman rule. An armed attempt to overthrow Roman rule.
And like I have pointed out; it is hardly likely that Pontius Pilate would have released Jesus Barrabas a known murderer of Roman's. you need to read your bible carefully. And stop reading something that isn't even there.Barabbas, in the New Testament, a prisoner mentioned in all four Gospels who was chosen by the crowd, over Jesus Christ, to be released by Pontius Pilate in a customary pardon before the feast of Passover.
(1) There is absolutely no evidence concerning dispensation offered by Rome to Jewish zealot murderers. It is rubbish that this was any type of Jewish custom.
It is more likely that this was the gospel writer are alluding to the two goats of Yom Kippur as told in Leviticus.
I have said my theory is that the turning of the tables was a lot more than just a girly hissy fit thrown by Jesus. I believe it was a full-blown rebellion. And it was this that had forced the Romans hand and led to the arrest of all involved to the delight of many of Jewish the high priesthood.Jesus was definitely a threat to the Jewish high priesthood because he called them brood of vipers.
I agree. He was also a threat to Rome too.
-->
@Stephen
Nope. There was no insurrection at that point in time. This insurrection had already happened, and this is what they were all on trial for. The bible clearly states that there HAD been an insurrection- past tense. And that Barabas was one of those that had committed insurrection "WITH HIM", Jesus.
Barabbas, a well-known criminal who had been imprisoned “for an insurrection in the city, and for murder” (Luke 23:19). But he was not as popular as Jesus. Therefore less of a threat to the Romans.
He was a murderer of Romans ffs. Who had Jesus murdered? Insurrection was an attempt to overthrow Roman rule. An armed attempt to overthrow Roman rule.And like I have pointed out; it is hardly likely that Pontius Pilate would have released Jesus Barrabas a known murderer of Roman's. you need to read your bible carefully. And stop reading something that isn't even there.
Barabbas, in the New Testament, a prisoner mentioned in all four Gospels who was chosen by the crowd, over Jesus Christ, to be released by Pontius Pilate in a customary pardon before the feast of Passover.
(1) There is absolutely no evidence concerning dispensation offered by Rome to Jewish zealot murderers. It is rubbish that this was any type of Jewish custom.It is more likely that this was the gospel writer are alluding to the two goats of Yom Kippur as told in Leviticus.
Pilate refers to the custom of releasing one prisoner at the time of Passover.
John 18:39 But it is your custom for me to release to you one prisoner at the time of the Passover. Do you want me to release ‘the king of the Jews’?”
I have said my theory is that the turning of the tables was a lot more than just a girly hissy fit thrown by Jesus. I believe it was a full-blown rebellion. And it was this that had forced the Romans hand and led to the arrest of all involved to the delight of many of Jewish the high priesthood.
Jesus was definitely a threat to the Jewish high priesthood because he called them brood of vipers.
But the real rebellion started (66-70) AD.
I agree. He was also a threat to Rome too.
Is it ironic the Romans went on to destroy the holy temple and city and replaced Judaism with the Roman Catholic Church.
-->
@Shila
Nope. There was no insurrection at that point in time. This insurrection had already happened, and this is what they were all on trial for. The bible clearly states that there HAD been an insurrection- past tense. And that Barabas was one of those that had committed insurrection "WITH HIM", Jesus.Barabbas, a well-known criminal who had been imprisoned “for an insurrection in the city, and for murder” (Luke 23:19). But he was not as popular as Jesus. Therefore less of a threat to the Romans.
Wrong again. (1) The city mentioned here is Jerusalem. (2) The population of that city didn't even know who Jesus was. (3) Barabbas was a zealot and a murder of Romans. Who had Jesus murdered?
(1) There is absolutely no evidence concerning dispensation offered by Rome to Jewish zealot murderers. It is rubbish that this was any type of Jewish custom.It is more likely that this was the gospel writer are alluding to the two goats of Yom Kippur as told in Leviticus.Pilate refers to the custom of releasing one prisoner at the time of Passover.
FACT. There was never any such Jewish custom. If you insist to the contrary, I would like you to produce the evidence that supports your claim other than the bible.
I have said my theory is that the turning of the tables was a lot more than just a girly hissy fit thrown by Jesus. I believe it was a full-blown rebellion. And it was this that had forced the Romans hand and led to the arrest of all involved to the delight of many of Jewish the high priesthood.Jesus was definitely a threat to the Jewish high priesthood because he called them brood of vipers.
I don't know how old you are shila, but name calling the high priesthood would be the last reason they had to want Jesus gone. The Priesthood had a lot to lose if Jesus was to become king priest. They were puppet priests put in place by Rome. It was a false and corrupt priesthood.
Atheist don't get to define god plain and simple, fuck off. It's like men trying to discuss abortion, fucking idiots.
-->
@Polytheist-Witch
Atheist don't get to define god plain and simple, fuck off. It's like men trying to discuss abortion, fucking idiots.
apparently you can't manage to define god either
@the witch
Atheist don't get to define god plain and simple, fuck off. It's like men trying to discuss abortion, fucking idiots.
Come for a shit again, have you , Witch.
Polytheist-Witch wrote; I'm here to basically like I said drop my opinion like I'm taking a shit and walk away.#140
Have you run out of trees and bushes to take a dump behind?😂😂😂