Would Jesus condemn or condone Yahweh for his crimes against humanity?

What do they believe? What do you think? Talk about religion as it exists today.

Moderator: JoeWallack

User avatar
Gnostic Bishop
Posts: 766
Joined: Tue Mar 25, 2014 2:57 pm

Re: Would Jesus condemn or condone Yahweh for his crimes against humanity?

Post by Gnostic Bishop »

iskander wrote: Tue Oct 16, 2018 3:35 am
Gnostic Bishop wrote: Mon Oct 15, 2018 7:17 am
iskander wrote: Sat Oct 13, 2018 2:34 pm It is the thinking man religion.


The Upanishads seem to be full of contradictions at first. They do not contain consistent system of thought. Sri Vyasa systematised the thoughts or philosophy of the Upanishads in his Brahma Sutras. The Sutras reconcile the conflicting
statements of the Upanishads. In reality there are no conflicts for the thinker.
Your knowledge of those books exceed mine by miles.

Regards
DL
Your knowledge of those books exceed mine by miles.
I don't think so.
It is the thinking man religion.
Does thinking about sacred scriptures merits this praise?
PS. I count myself amongst the charvakas.
The definition to the word charvakas sounds a lot like Gnostic or Gnosis.

Regards
DL
User avatar
Gnostic Bishop
Posts: 766
Joined: Tue Mar 25, 2014 2:57 pm

Re: Would Jesus condemn or condone Yahweh for his crimes against humanity?

Post by Gnostic Bishop »

iskander wrote: Tue Oct 16, 2018 3:46 am
Gnostic Bishop wrote: Mon Oct 15, 2018 7:15 am
iskander wrote: Sat Oct 13, 2018 2:43 pm
iskander wrote: Sat Oct 13, 2018 2:34 pm It is the thinking man religion.


The Upanishads seem to be full of contradictions at first. They do not contain consistent system of thought. Sri Vyasa systematised the thoughts or philosophy of the Upanishads in his Brahma Sutras. The Sutras reconcile the conflicting
statements of the Upanishads. In reality there are no conflicts for the thinker.
But Chervakas do not like to think, apparentky.


This Sutra gives the view of the Charvakas or Lokayatikas (materialists) who deny the existence of an Atman different from the body. They say that consciousness is a mere material product and that the body is the soul.

They declare that consciousness is seen to exist only when there is a body and that it is nowhere experienced independent of the body. Therefore consciousness is only an attribute or quality of the body. There is no separate self or soul in this body.
Having experienced telepathy twice, including melding with what looked like a cosmic consciousness, I know that our thoughts can exist outside of the body while the body lives. I do not know if they can live when the body is not there to give energy to the sub atomic particles that carry or create the travelling thoughts. Noetic science might know more in the future.

I do not believe in the reincarnation type of existing consciousness outside of the body.

I also could not tell if what I found was the collective consciousness of the living as posited by the professor who created the god helmet, or if it was the consciousness of the dead. Finding it is hard to take.

Gnostic Christian Jesus said, "Those who seek should not stop seeking until they find. When they find, they will be disturbed. When they are disturbed, they will marvel, and will reign over all. [And after they have reigned they will rest.]"


I can attest to the truth of this quote up to the bolded part.

I am not 100% sure what the bolded part and reigning over all mean but think it has to do with how I think in moral and spiritual matters.

In a sense, it is a curse as that would mean that I will never lose and argument, and that means I will not learn anything new and will lose that great pleasure.

Bummer.

Regards
DL
Yes , it is so indeed.
Thoughts may live in the bodies of others long after we have died, but this is probably not what you have in mind.
Telepathy is someting i have never given it a thought , but i am a good listener
My suspicion of the reality of telepathy began when I was quite young. Not certainty but more like an itch that wanted scratching. I think I was just on the fringe or feeling a light touch. Just a time or two. I did not have the motivation or desire to actually use it at it's deeper level until the age of 38 or so. It surprised the hell out if me and as I said above, it basically floored me. I have not been able to do it since and I am way past that age.

It opens both minds to each other and we are private people and might even have mental shields that we generally keep up so as to keep our secrets.

Regards
DL
iskander
Posts: 2091
Joined: Thu Aug 13, 2015 12:38 pm

Re: Would Jesus condemn or condone Yahweh for his crimes against humanity?

Post by iskander »

Gnostic Bishop wrote: Tue Oct 16, 2018 4:57 am
iskander wrote: Tue Oct 16, 2018 3:35 am
Gnostic Bishop wrote: Mon Oct 15, 2018 7:17 am
iskander wrote: Sat Oct 13, 2018 2:34 pm It is the thinking man religion.


The Upanishads seem to be full of contradictions at first. They do not contain consistent system of thought. Sri Vyasa systematised the thoughts or philosophy of the Upanishads in his Brahma Sutras. The Sutras reconcile the conflicting
statements of the Upanishads. In reality there are no conflicts for the thinker.
Your knowledge of those books exceed mine by miles.

Regards
DL
Your knowledge of those books exceed mine by miles.
I don't think so.
It is the thinking man religion.
Does thinking about sacred scriptures merits this praise?
PS. I count myself amongst the charvakas.
The definition to the word charvakas sounds a lot like Gnostic or Gnosis.

Regards
DL
The "thinking man" cannot always get it right, religion is like any other human enterprise. God, sages and popes make little difference : erroneous doctrines will sprout like weeds.

Heretic Buddha.
Chapter II THE CRITIQUE OF ERRONEOUS DOCTRINES
There are other schools which deny the existence of the Atman itself, like nihilism or Sunyavada, a trend in Buddhistic philosophy. ‘Nothing is’. This idea that nothing is arose from another series of discourses given by Buddha himself. Buddha did not say that nothing exists, but something followed from his standpoint. He said that everything is moving and nothing is existing at any particular point, even for a moment, like the flow of the waters of a river. Not for a single moment does the water stand at one place. The river is not a stable object; it is movement. That we are unable to perceive the continuous movement of the waters in a river is the reason why we mistake that the river is a solid water reservoir.
An Analysis of the Brahma Sutra by Swami Krishnananda


The moving water of a river is well known in Greek philosophy , but I don't remember who said it .
iskander
Posts: 2091
Joined: Thu Aug 13, 2015 12:38 pm

Re: Would Jesus condemn or condone Yahweh for his crimes against humanity?

Post by iskander »

"This peculiar difficulty in understanding the real point behind what Buddha said created a discussion by another set of Buddhists leading to nihilism. If everything is momentary, neither does samsara exist nor does karma exist. Non-existence is the final word of nihilistic philosophy. But the nihilists made the same mistake as the Sankhya doctrine became self-contradictory..."
From the same analysis



The thinking men of the East speak like the thinking men of the West.
iskander
Posts: 2091
Joined: Thu Aug 13, 2015 12:38 pm

Re: Would Jesus condemn or condone Yahweh for his crimes against humanity?

Post by iskander »

"The Vedanta comes in and says this argument cannot be accepted. Brahma Sutra refutes it. There must be someone to know that nothing exists. That someone must be existing. It is something like the argument which the Western philosopher Rene Descartes posed before himself. Everything may be doubtful; the world may not be existing; I may not be existing; nothing may be there at all; all things are dubious. It may be so. Some devil might have entered my mind and is making me think erroneously. But he concluded as a wise one that the consciousness that everything is doubtful cannot itself be doubted. “Therefore “I am”.”


Or as Gnostic Christians say . “Therefore “we are”.”
iskander
Posts: 2091
Joined: Thu Aug 13, 2015 12:38 pm

Re: Would Jesus condemn or condone Yahweh for his crimes against humanity?

Post by iskander »

"The Vedanta is a difficult subject. Very difficult subject. Any amount of probing into it can put you out of gear. ‘In what sense is the world existing and in what sense is it not existing?’—must be first clear to the mind."


only super thinking men need apply!
User avatar
Gnostic Bishop
Posts: 766
Joined: Tue Mar 25, 2014 2:57 pm

Re: Would Jesus condemn or condone Yahweh for his crimes against humanity?

Post by Gnostic Bishop »

Interesting.

All well and good for philosophers and science to show that, yes, all things are always moving and that there is a lot of empty space between all subatomic ands atomic particles, but to take that too seriously when a rock is heading to crush us, while we can still escape the death it might bring, would be silly.

The water moving in the stream still erodes the bank.

Regards
DL
iskander
Posts: 2091
Joined: Thu Aug 13, 2015 12:38 pm

Re: Would Jesus condemn or condone Yahweh for his crimes against humanity?

Post by iskander »

"The Personality concept of God is prevalent in all the religions of the world, whether it be Christianity or Islam or Zoroastrianism and all the Semitic religions. In Indian religions, God is considered as the Supreme Person. You may call Him Allah, you may call Him Father in Heaven, you may call Him Narayana, Vishnu or Siva—it doesn’t matter what the name is, you are accepting the Personality of God.

What do you mean by Personality? We must explain it first. Personality is a limitation you are imposing upon the all-pervadingness of God. You have a personality, and you are only expanding the concept of your personality to an infinite extent in order to conceive the Personality of God. God looks like a huge human being. You cannot avoid this defect in thinking. Even if God is an infinitely extended Person, there would be space and time outside Him. The idea of a person cannot arise unless there is a space outside. If space also goes inside the Person, the personality of the conceived object will become Impersonality. Brahma Sutra emphasises the impersonality of God, and permits personality for the purpose of worship and contemplation."


An Analysis of the Brahma Sutra
by
Swami Krishnananda
The Divine Life Society
Sivananda Ashram, Rishikesh, India
User avatar
Gnostic Bishop
Posts: 766
Joined: Tue Mar 25, 2014 2:57 pm

Re: Would Jesus condemn or condone Yahweh for his crimes against humanity?

Post by Gnostic Bishop »

iskander wrote: Wed Oct 17, 2018 1:47 pm "The Personality concept of God is prevalent in all the religions of the world, whether it be Christianity or Islam or Zoroastrianism and all the Semitic religions. In Indian religions, God is considered as the Supreme Person. You may call Him Allah, you may call Him Father in Heaven, you may call Him Narayana, Vishnu or Siva—it doesn’t matter what the name is, you are accepting the Personality of God.

What do you mean by Personality? We must explain it first. Personality is a limitation you are imposing upon the all-pervadingness of God. You have a personality, and you are only expanding the concept of your personality to an infinite extent in order to conceive the Personality of God. God looks like a huge human being. You cannot avoid this defect in thinking. Even if God is an infinitely extended Person, there would be space and time outside Him. The idea of a person cannot arise unless there is a space outside. If space also goes inside the Person, the personality of the conceived object will become Impersonality. Brahma Sutra emphasises the impersonality of God, and permits personality for the purpose of worship and contemplation."


An Analysis of the Brahma Sutra
by
Swami Krishnananda
The Divine Life Society
Sivananda Ashram, Rishikesh, India
As a Gnostic Christian, I am basically discouraged from worshiping as that is idol worship of whatever mental picture I have created for myself of the God I know. God is described by us as the best rules and laws to live by and those would not be allowed to evolve if we idolized them. That would make us no better than Christians or Muslims.

That would be us disrespecting our own religion.

Regards
DL
iskander
Posts: 2091
Joined: Thu Aug 13, 2015 12:38 pm

Re: Would Jesus condemn or condone Yahweh for his crimes against humanity?

Post by iskander »

Gnostic Bishop wrote: Wed Oct 17, 2018 1:52 pm
iskander wrote: Wed Oct 17, 2018 1:47 pm "The Personality concept of God is prevalent in all the religions of the world, whether it be Christianity or Islam or Zoroastrianism and all the Semitic religions. In Indian religions, God is considered as the Supreme Person. You may call Him Allah, you may call Him Father in Heaven, you may call Him Narayana, Vishnu or Siva—it doesn’t matter what the name is, you are accepting the Personality of God.

What do you mean by Personality? We must explain it first. Personality is a limitation you are imposing upon the all-pervadingness of God. You have a personality, and you are only expanding the concept of your personality to an infinite extent in order to conceive the Personality of God. God looks like a huge human being. You cannot avoid this defect in thinking. Even if God is an infinitely extended Person, there would be space and time outside Him. The idea of a person cannot arise unless there is a space outside. If space also goes inside the Person, the personality of the conceived object will become Impersonality. Brahma Sutra emphasises the impersonality of God, and permits personality for the purpose of worship and contemplation."


An Analysis of the Brahma Sutra
by
Swami Krishnananda
The Divine Life Society
Sivananda Ashram, Rishikesh, India
As a Gnostic Christian, I am basically discouraged from worshiping as that is idol worship of whatever mental picture I have created for myself of the God I know. God is described by us as the best rules and laws to live by and those would not be allowed to evolve if we idolized them. That would make us no better than Christians or Muslims.

That would be us disrespecting our own religion.

Regards
DL
worshiping is for those who lack the appetite for esoteric meditation on the nature of Brahma; people who are neither super thinkers nor even thinkers. Brahma allows men and women to consider him as a Person and interact with him as worshipers.


"Vedas consist of three portions viz., the Karma Kanda which deals with sacrifices or ceremonial rites, the Upasana Kanda which treats of Upasana (worship) and the Jnana Kanda which deals with knowledge of Brahman.

Karma Kanda represents the feet of a man, Upasana Kanda the heart, and the Jnana Kanda the head. Just as the head is the most important portion of a man, so also the Upanishads which treat of the knowledge portion of the Vedas is the head of the Vedas. Hence it is said to be the Siras (head) of Vedas."
Post Reply