Atheism and the Greek (Gnostic/Egptian/Hermetic) Model of God!

Ficciones

Active member
I like your quote from Lao Tsu. I recently read the same assertion from C.G. Jung for why knowledge of good and evil go hand in hand. One cannot exist without the other because good and evil are values that we place upon things. Therefore, one cannot value good unless one also knows evil. It is why the mythical Jesus and the mythical devil go hand and hand in the Gospels because they are inextricably linked.

Right. Good and evil are relational, social, procedural. They emerge from a dynamic process of people being in the world and evaluating. Jesus and the devil are symbols of that but they're reified, as attempts to understand these relations or processes as things in themselves. Not that it's impossible to retrieve the esoteric meaning... anyways this is why I like the Dao. It's staunchly reification-proof.
 

Lighthearted Atheist

Well-known member
Why does he need to do that since you wont believe it the first time he did it?


What empirical evidence do you have this claim is true?
Your evidence is?
God does not have to do anything. I just will not believe in a supernatural being based on stories in the Codex Sinaiticus. If God is real he can do whatever he likes - but I will not believe.

I have yet to see any empirical evidence from the 1st Century to support any of the claims in the NT. If they exist can you tell me which museum they are in so I can go see?

Thanks.
 

Authentic Nouveau

Well-known member
Sorry. I stopped taking you seriously at "Christians who were gnostics (sic)".
Hype and military grade strawmaning.

Acts 9:1 says he was "breathing out murderous threats against the Lord's disciples." Saul obtained letters from the high priest, authorizing him to arrest any followers of Jesus in the city of Damascus.

Atheeist never had an encounter with Jesus. Paul did..
 

Authentic Nouveau

Well-known member
God does not have to do anything. I just will not believe in a supernatural being based on stories in the Codex Sinaiticus. If God is real he can do whatever he likes - but I will not believe.

I have yet to see any empirical evidence from the 1st Century to support any of the claims in the NT. If they exist can you tell me which museum they are in so I can go see?

Thanks.
Closed mindedness is not unusual.

Your kult is openminded to some dirty ape common ancestor which has never been seen. For which there is zero material evidence.
 

Lighthearted Atheist

Well-known member
And there you have ti - willful ignorance.
If you think that requiring evidence before belief is willful ignorance then yes, I am willfully ignorant. Also, I would like to sell you the Brooklyn Bridge which I definitely own. Do you need me to prove that or do you just believe me?

;)
 

Lighthearted Atheist

Well-known member
But God himself doesn’t appear to the world nor does he speak to us directly.
Right. So there is no reason to believe he exists.
Scripture says that he is invisible to our senses. But God the Son is present with us and in us.
Why would I believe someone who says, "there is something that is definitely real but it is invisible and you cannot sense it but trust me - its real."
The Son manifests the attributes of the Father so we know the invisible Father through the Son. The secret is that we are the Son(s)/Daughter(s) of God. So maybe we can only know of God through the love we have for each other but we thank him in secret for that gift.
And Lord Brahma created the world from a serpent. These are all just supernatural claims. I see no reason to believe them without empirical evidence.
 

docphin5

Well-known member
Right. So there is no reason to believe he exists.

Why would I believe someone who says, "there is something that is definitely real but it is invisible and you cannot sense it but trust me - its real."

And Lord Brahma created the world from a serpent. These are all just supernatural claims. I see no reason to believe them without empirical evidence.
If you see no reason to believe he exists then why waste so much time on a religious forum trying to reason that he does not exist?

I for one believe he exists because of the good in the world, the truth in the world. These are manifestations of the infinite in the finite. So I stand by what I said: "God HIMSELF does not appear to the world nor does God HIMSELF speak to us directly." However, he is manifest in our world through us. We know him by the good we see in each other, we know him by the truth that is evident within our world, and we infer his existence from things present. And that limited good we see in our finite world comes from an infinite source above and beyond the world as we know it. That infinite source of good, truth, and justice is the root of being, the power of existence, and he/she/it is creating an eternal, independent, family who are a reflection of itself. The world in its present state is one stage in a master plan to build a family of independent souls who reflect the divine within themselves.
 
Last edited:

Lighthearted Atheist

Well-known member
If you see no reason to believe he exists then why waste so much time on a religious forum trying to reason that he does not exist?
There are a few reasons:

Debate: I enjoy the debate. I enjoy the discussion of faith vs. facts. I see Christians frequently claim that their beliefs are evidence-based and I like to question that claim.

Countering Con Men: Millions believe Lee Strobel when he claims we have evidence going all the way back to the crucifixion. He is lying. So I question that claim and ask people why they believe in things we cannot prove.

Learning how others think: I also enjoy learning how other people think - especially when they have different beliefs. When I learned that the 2010 earthquake in Haiti caused a church to collapse on Christians while they were praying to God for help I was horrified. I set out to understand how anyone could believe in a loving Christian God after that. It made no sense to me that a God who loved us and wanted us to worship Him would crush a congregation with an earthquake for doing exactly what God asked them to do.

We need to demand proof more often in the USA: I also think that believing what people tell us without asking for evidence is dangerous. It makes us believe politicians who claim things that are simply not true. So I think all Americans need to question what they are told and demand the truth - it leads to a better society. This used to be mostly academic. Now, in 2020, we see that listening to leaders who lie and cannot prove their claim has led to 200,000 dead Americans. This saddens me so I fight where I can :)
I for one believe he exists because of the good in the world, the truth in the world.
What makes you believe this good is from the Christian God and not Allah or Lord Brahma? Why believe The Bible but not the other thousands of of other ancient religious texts?
These are manifestations of the infinite in the finite. So I stand by what I said: "God HIMSELF does not appear to the world nor does God HIMSELF speak to us directly." However, he is manifest in our world through us. We know him by the good we see in each other, we know him by the truth that is evident within our world, and we infer his existence from things present. And that limited good we see in our finite world comes from an infinite source above and beyond the world as we know it. That infinite source of good, truth, and justice is the root of being, the power of existence, and he/she/it is creating an eternal, independent, family who are a reflection of itself. The world in its present state is one stage in a master plan to build a family of independent souls who reflect the divine within themselves.
What makes you believe this is true? Did you find some evidence? Personal revelation? Is this just what you hope is true?

I personally do not believe in anything without empirical evidence. You seem to believe in very specific things about God, the universe, right and wrong, and more that I see no evidence for. So we are very different. And I enjoy learning how others think.

Thanks for the debate and discussion :)
 

Hypatia_Alexandria

Active member
Sorry. I stopped taking you seriously at "Christians who were gnostics (sic)".
Clearly you know absolutely nothing about the development of the Christian religion.

It is apparent that you have never heard of Docetism. Nor of individuals like Marcion or Valentinus. Nor the documents found in the Nag Hammadi "library". Nor later Christian sects like Catharism.

All these [and a great deal more] remain a closed book to you.
 

docphin5

Well-known member
What makes you believe this good is from the Christian God and not Allah or Lord Brahma? Why believe The Bible but not the other thousands of of other ancient religious texts?
But I do believe the thousands of other ancient religious texts!! I have been spending a lot of time recently reading scholarly analysis of the Egyptian religion and am astounded in its correlation with the gnostic Christian beliefs. And why should I be astounded given that gnostic beliefs were formed in a milieu of Greek, Egyptian, Hermetic religious thought? Rather I should expect that Christianity is not unique but a truth written anew for a new generation, that is, Paul's generation.

What makes you believe this is true? Did you find some evidence? Personal revelation? Is this just what you hope is true?
Gosh, that is a good question but one I don't have time or space to answer here.

I personally do not believe in anything without empirical evidence.
So if you had been born five hundred years ago, you would not believe in flying machines, robots visiting other planets, disease caused by microbial organisms, etc. etc. --all things that were inconceivable at one time but with advancements in knowledge, and technology are proven to actually exist. I don't believe you actually believe what you just said because I know you are smarter than that.

You seem to believe in very specific things about God, the universe, right and wrong, and more that I see no evidence for. So we are very different. And I enjoy learning how others think.

Thanks for the debate and discussion :)
Same. Thanks for a rational discussion!
 

docphin5

Well-known member
We need to demand proof more often in the USA: I also think that believing what people tell us without asking for evidence is dangerous. It makes us believe politicians who claim things that are simply not true. So I think all Americans need to question what they are told and demand the truth - it leads to a better society. This used to be mostly academic. Now, in 2020, we see that listening to leaders who lie and cannot prove their claim has led to 200,000 dead Americans. This saddens me so I fight where I can :)
This is entirely unrelated to the OP but how do you speak of "demanding truth" when you believe that 200,000 dead Americans are the result of some leaders statement whether true or untrue, when actually, viruses could care less what we think or say.

The truth is that covid virus is a variant of a coronavirus strain which is endemic in the human and animal populations? Coronavirus in one strain or another has been killing animals long before some leader said this or that.

Moreover, according to the CDC up to 60,000 Americans die from influenza every year for many years? And that is with a vaccine offered every year! Which leader do you attribute those deaths too, if any?

If one basis his/her belief on the empirical facts of virology, immunology and epidemiology, he/she can conclude that the covid virus is not much different than other diseases. Therefore, it has been largely politicized to serve one party's interest. Based on what you choose to believe we can suppose which party you affiliate with --just like religion.

Religion and politics are so similar in why people CHOOSE to believe what they believe (versus the truth). It is tribal. It is also scary how easily people are misled.
 
Last edited:

Hypatia_Alexandria

Active member
Acts 9:1 says he was "breathing out murderous threats against the Lord's disciples." Saul obtained letters from the high priest, authorizing him to arrest any followers of Jesus in the city of Damascus.
On whose authority? What would Marullus the Praefectus of Judaea [38-41 CE] have thought about one of his underlings [the High Priest] sending out someone to foment trouble in a neighbouring separate kingdom? The whole idea is quite preposterous.
 

Lighthearted Atheist

Well-known member
But I do believe the thousands of other ancient religious texts!! I have been spending a lot of time recently reading scholarly analysis of the Egyptian religion and am astounded in its correlation with the gnostic Christian beliefs. And why should I be astounded given that gnostic beliefs were formed in a milieu of Greek, Egyptian, Hermetic religious thought? Rather I should expect that Christianity is not unique but a truth written anew for a new generation, that is, Paul's generation.
I'm sorry but this is clearly cognitive bias - you are seeing the tiny things that may correlate with Christianity and ignoring the mountain of beliefs that contradict it. You cannot read about Zeus, Osiris, Buddha, Huitzilopochtli, Odin, Jupiter, Ahura Mazda and The Coyote Spirit and possibly conclude they align with Christianity.

Cognitive bias is very well understood. It is when you favor information that conforms to your existing beliefs and discounting evidence that does not conform.

May I suggest that if you think the story of Brahma creating the world from the Great Serpent is the same as The Garden of Eden or that the Hindu concept of reincarnation is the same as going to Heaven then you clearly have some cognitive bias. They are just not the same - not even close.

It also seems very hard to believe that there is only the story of God but 10,000 religions saw it and somehow got it all fantastically wrong. It seems much more likely that all religious stories are fabricated by the people that developed them.

Occam's Razor and all that :)
So if you had been born five hundred years ago, you would not believe in flying machines, robots visiting other planets, disease caused by microbial organisms, etc. etc. --all things that were inconceivable at one time but with advancements in knowledge, and technology are proven to actually exist. I don't believe you actually believe what you just said because I know you are smarter than that.
Correct. I only believe what we can prove today with the empirical evidence we have. I am sure there are many things that are real that I do not believe in - yet. I just need evidence.

For example we could find a tablet today that contains a the entire Gospel of Mark carved on a tablet in CE 52. I would then change my belief based on the new evidence. I would believe that it is likely that a man named Jesus existed because of the new tablet.

However, believing in anything before the evidence just does not make any sense.
Same. Thanks for a rational discussion!
:)
 

docphin5

Well-known member
I'm sorry but this is clearly cognitive bias - you are seeing the tiny things that may correlate with Christianity and ignoring the mountain of beliefs that contradict it. You cannot read about Zeus, Osiris, Buddha, Huitzilopochtli, Odin, Jupiter, Ahura Mazda and The Coyote Spirit and possibly conclude they align with Christianity.

Cognitive bias is very well understood. It is when you favor information that conforms to your existing beliefs and discounting evidence that does not conform.

May I suggest that if you think the story of Brahma creating the world from the Great Serpent is the same as The Garden of Eden or that the Hindu concept of reincarnation is the same as going to Heaven then you clearly have some cognitive bias. They are just not the same - not even close.

It also seems very hard to believe that there is only the story of God but 10,000 religions saw it and somehow got it all fantastically wrong. It seems much more likely that all religious stories are fabricated by the people that developed them.

Occam's Razor and all that :)

Correct. I only believe what we can prove today with the empirical evidence we have. I am sure there are many things that are real that I do not believe in - yet. I just need evidence.

For example we could find a tablet today that contains a the entire Gospel of Mark carved on a tablet in CE 52. I would then change my belief based on the new evidence. I would believe that it is likely that a man named Jesus existed because of the new tablet.

However, believing in anything before the evidence just does not make any sense.

:)
You only believe what you can prove is a pretty basic existence. I prefer to imagine and/or create things that are possible yet currently unprovable. This is how human civilization progresses— imagining what is possible!
To each his own I guess.
 
Top