Jesus Christ is the Devil !!!!!!!!!666!!

[kahljorn]

Sorry I couldn't respond much yesterday helm, I have a kitten who hurt her leg and she's been limpin about.

[Mr. Vagiclean]

okay nobody meant ANYTHING they said move along now

[Helm]

hehe

[kahljorn]

Did you hear that Helm? It's a clear message that you should go clean out your semen crusted vagina.

[Helm]

neat

[Nom]

kahljorn - Thanks for the expanded definitions and the reading references; I will definitely (not "definately" - the word does not exist) check out the latter when I have time. Please note that it does make a difference whether or not it is the pronoun (capitalized) version of “Demiurge”, which is the connotation I have been using in context with its usage in reference to Gnosticism. It ought to be said, if there are sects of Gnosticism which assert that humans are co-creators with the Demiurge; I will go out of my way to identify and ignore and/or stay far away from them. I think what’s egotistical is to presume that homo sapiens plays some special role in the “creation of this world”, other than the realms directly at our disposal, i.e. Earth and its environment, etc. It also seems you are saying that the “Archon” or Demiurge is created/manifested by humans, which is equally perplexing. It’s like saying we created God; which is all but atheistic. I don’t see how Gnosticism, being theistic, could logically support this stance. Nevermind, I’ll read up and save commenting for now. Thanks!

[kellychaos]

Thanks for taking my call. I will hang up and listen for your response.

[kahljorn]

It's not human beings. It's the "Microcosm". The "Divine seed of the divine human" inside of us. Sorry to ruin your wonderful perception of gnosticism, but it's all bulshit(what you've been reading, especially). They say human beings can never know God and never understand existence, though. Just the microcosm inside of us. Pick up some books by Jan van rijckenborgh and max heindel. They are the more recent writers on gnostic ideas. They are rosicrucians. I'd also reccomend the gospel of thomas, which they talk about alot, and the Book of Enoch just because a lot ofpeople treat him like Hermes or Thoth-- andgnostic teachings seem tobederieved from them. In fact, you could even read plato, since alotof their teachings come from him, especially the allegory ofthecave.
Freemasonry is good to look into if you want to learn about gnosis. You know, it doesn't really matter what you study, once you start reading into it, and not phony internet shit(which i can tell you're reading. You may or may not know this but 90% of the people who have webpages on the internet arecomplete morons who don't know what theyare talking about. People with the mind of a 12 year old playcating themselves as some ancient gnostic).
Also, you should stop trying to correct people's spellings when you don't even understand what you're reading. The idea, and very definition, of gnosis is "knowledge". Why would anyone who seeks knowledge and gains it continue to seek knowledge if the bullshit you're saying is correct? Why would it even still be around? Shock value? Shock people out of what? Where's the momentum? This is why you're a complete moron. Spell checkers don't raise your iq at all, it helps to at least understand what you're talking about. Use your brain, read something that isn't some worthless asshole's opinion on the internet about the "Demiurge".
This whole "God is evil thing" doesn't even work into the picture with the way gnostics consider things. Dialectics, we live in a dialectic universe, where everything dies. There's nothing permanant, here, in this world--not even death. That's what they say. Not that God's evil. You clearly have no idea what you're talking about.
Gnosis is about learning, not ascribing to a set ideaor a setpath. It's an investigation into the knowledge of the world, all kinds. It's taking religion and belief and ascribing philosophy to it,psychology, and techniques to work your existence. Not, "ITS THE DEMIURGE WHO CONTROS US, OH NO". That's pointless. In short, you're boring. Nobody is impressed with you.

Essentially it's observing the universe around you, it's natural laws, and placing them onto your psychology and mode of operation. That's really what all religion/belief/meditation/philosophy is though. In all honesty, who really cares what god is if you can't even operate your mind properly. A simple investigation into physics would tell you what you can and can't do with your mind, and even give you the techniques to do them with. Everything operates on the same principal.

[ziggytrix]

Originally Posted by Nom

It’s like saying we created God; which is all but atheistic. I don’t see how Gnosticism, being theistic, could logically support this stance.

For someone so distressingly anal as to correct spelling errors that haven't even been made in this discussion, you really ought to understand English a little better. Atheisim means NO God. The notion that God exists as a manifestation of human energies isn't even remotely similar to atheism because of that whole "God exists" part.

Also you would do well to look up the words 'create' and 'manifest' as they are not synonymous.

[Nom]

Since you insist on comparing understanding of this - I’m sorry to burst your bubble, but apparently what passes for gnosis where you are attending lectures is a late, and sadly, lacking adaptation of the original gist of early Gnostic teachings. However, that fact is not eclipsed by the glaringly apparent lack of your own understanding.

…

From Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy (http://www.iep.utm.edu/g/gnostic.htm):

“… While the thwarting necessity of nature is, for the Existentialist, a simple, unquestioned fact; for the Gnostics it is the result of the malignant designs of an inferior god, the Demiurge, carried out through and by this ignorant deity's own law. In other words, nature is, for modern Existentialism, merely indifferent, while for the Gnostics it was actively hostile toward the human endeavor.”

In any case, I believe these things:
1. Evil exists in the universe, literally.
2. Something had a hand in creating it, and is therefore evil also.

I don’t give a shit what the present take on Gnosticism is, other than to distinguish whether its current form bears any weight for me personally, and fits into my beliefs. I also believe you are wrong to suggest that your interpretation (which unfortunately, I presume by what you’ve said, must be the mainstream interpretive consensus) is the correct one. There were many philosophically differing sects which arose in the first and second centuries. Some of these did equate the creator to a malignant, ignorant deity, as do I, whether you like it or not.

Again, I don’t give a shit either whether you deign to critique my outward disdain for certain misspellings. It’s my feeble attempt at creating awareness of the common errors, and someone, somewhere, will care and take heed, again – irregardless of what you think. I take pride in my deconstruction. You, sir, are powerless to staunch the flow of my corrections.

Also from the Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy:

“According to the Gnostics, this world, the material cosmos, is the result of a primordial error on the part of a supra-cosmic, supremely divine being, usually called Sophia (Wisdom) or simply the Logos. This being is described as the final emanation of a divine hierarchy, called the Plêrôma or "Fullness," at the head of which resides the supreme God, the One beyond Being. The error of Sophia, which is usually identified as a reckless desire to know the transcendent God, leads to the hypostatization of her desire in the form of a semi-divine and essentially ignorant creature known as the Demiurge (Greek: dêmiourgos, "craftsman"), or Ialdabaoth, who is responsible for the formation of the material cosmos. This act of craftsmanship is actually an imitation of the realm of the Pleroma, but the Demiurge is ignorant of this, and hubristically declares himself the only existing God."

Ignorance breeds suffering, and I call suffering evil. One of the (more reliable) definitions of “evil” is that which causes harm. So I am on firm, common ground with my definition. If you choose to only allow certain definitions for your world view, let me know, so I can slip into something more semantically confining.

Originally Posted by ziggytrix

For someone so distressingly anal as to correct spelling errors that haven't even been made in this discussion, you really ought to understand English a little better. Atheisim means NO God. The notion that God exists as a manifestation of human energies isn't even remotely similar to atheism because of that whole "God exists" part.

Also you would do well to look up the words 'create' and 'manifest' as they are not synonymous.

Atheists are commonly desirous to point out that homo sapiens created the imaginary façade of God. I don’t give a damn how you want to frame “Atheism”; this is an idea that atheists, chiefly, promote. Further, I did not use the term atheism at all, I said atheistic. So, you may look at it as me redefining or twisting the definition a little to suit my purpose, which was in fact, subconsciously yet intentionally done. Atheists wrote the book on anal btw – see your post above. Also, interchanging “create” and “manifest” in kahljorn’s abysmally reconstructed lackadaisical definition of his flawed understanding of the entirety of Gnostic philosophy would not have saved his position.

[ziggytrix]

Jesus fucking Christ, would you please shut up?

[Nom]

Originally Posted by ziggytrix

Jesus fucking Christ, would you please shut up?

I’m just putting you on notice that condescending quips and statements intended to intellectually demean are easily dispatched. I’ve got a few of my own. Can’t stand the heat, get outta the kitchen.

[ziggytrix]

No really, shut up. Something about your posts gives me a headache.

[kahljorn]

irregardless isn'ta word, I'll respond more later when I have time. Ialready saw alot in yourpost to respond to. Like the "inferior god". All your questions havealready been answered by the idea of "Dialectics". There's no good orevil in creation and existing.

[kahljorn]

I read some more ofwhat you said, I should also have you know that "outta" is also not a word.

The gospel of thomas, did you go readit? Of course not...

I know all about that shit, really Ido. You just don't know how much more I know than you, thefact thatthe "Demiurge" is alesser god that you obsess over provides thatmuch knowledge in and ofitself. Nobody cares if the "Demiurge" is capitolized but you. An ignorant beast of a creature doesn't deserve the attention.Infact, it's kind of funny that you obsess over this, when the very nature of the being is being ignorant thatit's not god. "IM GOD IM GOD", "hey, check this guy out. He's kind of cool". What saves you from a two year old going, "Im the presidentof poopyville", "Hey, check this guy out, he's kind of cool".
The entire idea of presenting the idea ofthe demiurge is for you to get past it. Fuck the demiurge, fuck the earthly god. The material god, the godof material. Honestly, whocould care about such a being? You? The human endeavor isto escape death and suffering,and as such to escape life in a sense. Suffering will always be apparant in this world, hence the God of the material is ignorantand evil.
You see, there are simple philosophies inthis world. Yes, i use the word world as in this universe, solar system, galaxy etc. Moving on, this universe follows a few simple rules. Like gravity. What does gravity do? It takes from things. The bigger gets the smaller things. So where there could've been a planet(with people on it), the sun envelops it. Where there could've been world peace, an asshole king collects his gold. Notice a similarity? How about this, everytime you get a job to help yourself, some poor asshole bum is fucked out of the job. Everytime you get online?Polution. Global heating, animals dying, fish in the sea dying, gross fish, people eatting gross fish and drinking bad water, death, sickness, suffering, Assholes who prophet off of it.
Everytime smart people discuss things, someone feels stupid. Everytime you eat food, you'recontributing to natural forests being cut down for farms which kills animals. Gravity. People gather, then they contradict other gatherings. People die.
Further maybe? Everytime you talk toa person and treat them like shit, you'recontributing to their negative attitude, and they arecontributing to someone else's negative attitude when they finally explode. Giving birth? That child will end up giving people grief, who will give other people grief. It will go on forever, because the people who received grief from the people who recieved grief will give grief topeople who will give grief to other people. There's noaction that doesn't have a reaction, even NO ACTION. You remove yourself fromasituation, and anything you could've down for the situation is removed. Reactions have reactions, and those reactions have reactions. The funny thing is even good natured actions can have evil reactions,and always do. But then, evil actions can have goodnatured reactions.
Are you really surprised that the "God" of this world is "Evil"? You're stupid if you're surprised. That factis apparant in it's very nature.

The real point of gnosticism? Knowledge, gnosis. Why would there be an "Endeavor" to gain knowledge? To leave this place? To change it? If there were changes, or if you left-- what would happen? Where would you be? What different 'laws' and rules would bethere? What would the "new endeavor" be? How would your existance be different? What is the "SUPREME GOD" that gnosis talks about. Not the demiurge, the clearly fake god, who only thinks it's the real god, but is ignorant of the fact thatit's not. Who could possibly care about a fake god that has little to no power? Why would anybody care about that God? THE QUESTIONSOF THE SPHINX
(Only someone trying desperately to make a point they don't know would care about an evil God. You don't know what you're doing here trying to act like you some suprognostic who obviously doesn't know whatthe fuck they're talking about. Move on with your life. The bible says that God is evil. Only idiots who were stuck in the christian religion argue that point. Hey, so now we come to you. Trying to shock christians because you were oncea christian, right? How old are you, 12? I remember doing that when I was 12, 13 years old. "Hey guys, the god you think is all loving and shit is evil, haha. I WIN AGAINST MYSELF(i dont lose though!). ") [all ofthat was a secret side note]. {SHHH}
Do you ask these questions?No, because you're boring, and stupid.

The end.

[kahljorn]

P.s. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gnosticism

good references on there. "Immanatize the eschaton"(like discordians). It's great. notice those references? notice howmuch smarter i am than you? GAME OVER, GUMBY WINS.

Also, i have mostof those books bookmarkedor in ebook form, and if i ever feel unlazy i might be so inclined to send them to you...

Also..."The endura" "Transfiguration". Learn those terms.

[Helm]

Kahl, as you use the term dialectic (as in: dialectic materialism. excuse me if the rosa crux idiots use the term in some other way) when you later on describe in the processes of action (or the action of inaction) and reaction isn't really dialectic as much as it is reactionary. I'd hesitate to call 'somebody is born, then brings grief to the world' a dialectic opposition. Dialectic materialism is mostly useful in spotting the coorelations between fundamental aspects of reality (primarily the 'inside' and 'outside' of human perception) and is mainly used in philosophy as a useful socratic 'organon' to define things which cannot generally be a priori defined, against each other. What is existing? It is the oposite of not existing. And so on, so forth. It's actually not a very bright way to define things, but it has it's uses especially for leftists who just want to get ontology OUT OF THE WAY so they can start talking about soup lines and class struggle. Although okay, I can see where you're going with dialecticism in your examples, you're putting a value judgement in various situations, and then counterweighing everything and saying 'dialectic!' whereas dialectic is an ontological thing, not ethical. But whatever, suck my cock.

[Nom]

Finally we’re getting somewhere. I don’t know why it was so hard to admit that the Demiurge can be described as evil. Now that that’s out of the way, thanks for getting to some of the real points, such as what do we do with this knowledge. I guess everyone’s got to be the initiate for at least a day. Don’t go getting all Zen on me though, I haven’t got the patience in regards to this topic, nor do I have the time to pore over umpteen references; that’s what I have you suckers for! Not that I don’t appreciate the references, I do, and I will try to peruse them.

I’m aware that there are whole schools of thought on dialectics. I just think it’s purely semantics; I’m not convinced that dialectics represent reality. Evil exists as suffering, if nothing else. That’s my metaphor and I’m sticking to it.

I could be considered a recovering Christian. Curiously enough though (ziggytrix, close your eyes for this part – Surgeon General declares it’s headache inducing), Gnosticism at its root IS a primarily Christian sect, and it’s fascinating to me, that mainstream Christians generally have not even HEARD of Gnosticism. I hadn’t. I read something somewhere, but had not comprehended the logic. I had my own epiphany on the POE without having (the luxury of?) a professor drilling it into my head. And yeah, if I may indulge in mythical definition, I’m pissed that I did not recognize the inherent evil of the creator, partly due to his propensity for thwarting discovery of his true nature.

That said; don’t miss the inference that I am not interested in whether I live up to Gnosticism, but in finding out how well Gnosticism lines up with my version of the truth; and of course, by the by acquiring new perspectives.

You said (kahljorn), “Nobody cares if the "Demiurge" is capitolized but you. An ignorant beast of a creature doesn't deserve the attention. In fact, it's kind of funny that you obsess over this, when the very nature of the being is being ignorant that it's not god”.

I’m not saying the Demiurge is cool. Far from it. The only reason I’m “obsessed” with the creator, as you put it, is precisely because I hate the bastard. To know thine enemy is to know how to defeat him (or escape him). And no, I’m not trying to shock Christians (but if that’s a byproduct, cool); I just think Gnosticism embodies what Christianity SHOULD HAVE EVOLVED INTO over the years.

So, I win; I’m Gumby dammit.

Regards,

Nom

[ziggytrix]

Originally Posted by Nom

Finally we’re getting somewhere. I don’t know why it was so hard to admit that the Demiurge can be blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah.

Furthermore, blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah English reference blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah gratuitous egosim blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah.

In conclusion, blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah Demiurge Demiurge Demiurge WOO! blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah

[kellychaos]

From where does all the knowledge of all these ancient beings come? I mean that in the basic sense. Was it handed down genetically, telepathically, ect. Did mountains boom? Did birds speak? Did it emenate from the primordial ooze? Why should I accept this fairy tale over all others? ... and don't you DARE say faith!

[kahljorn]

"I don’t know why it was so hard to admit that the Demiurge can be described as evil."
I never said he wasn't, you're just too stupid tounderstand what I'm saying. The demiurge isn't the creator. Let's use an analogy. Let's say you have a program on the computer, like a virus, who's job is to create a bunch of trash and be evil. Now this program thinks it's god,thinks it's the creator. Great. But it'snot,the real god, the real creator, is somewhere far faraway. Quit calling him the creator. The only thing he may have even created is the material world, andnot even all of that,the material world was here before he came here. The story of the demiurge goes that sophia's (Achamoth) daughter merged with matter and chaos and out came the demiurge, hence he created nothing. Only formed, like the word demiurge implies sinceit was originally used to indicate craftsmen. I don't know of you know this, but sophia is the LOWEST of the emanantions of god, which makes the demiurge lower than the lowest of the low. "The logos".
Like i said, most of the demiurge story is more of an allegory than anything,just like most of mythology. The demiurge is a bullshit being, by his very nature. Nobody should care about him, he's so far from God and the source of things and the CREATOR that he should be dismissed as a child having a tantrum. Talk about something with a point.
The idea of the demiurge was taken from Plato, Timaeus. Go read. i probablywon't talk to you anymore. Good day.

[Nom]

Kelly – I like the way you framed your question, very creative. I’m working on an answer, see you tomorrow.

[ziggytrix]

Thanks a fuckin ton, Kelly.

[executioneer]

guys this thread is massively boring

[Ant10708]

I thought so too executioneer but we are just too unfunny to appreciate it. Chojin is a VET and Helm is funny and since he is a big contributer to this thread I think the thread is funny by default.

Or it could just be massively boring like you said. I think Ziggy is the only thing making it entertaining for all us too humor impaired to find the rest of the thread funny and enjoyable.