Jump to content


  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


Everything posted by Hierophant

  1. Thanks for clarifying those terms. Backing up a bit, could you explain to me how double slit theory was the epiphany that made you go from agnostic to Christian? What specifically about that theory did you think pointed to the veracity of Christianity?
  2. Walter - I know what you are getting at. I am going somewhere with my line of questioning, i.e., down the road, I am going to press Joe on certain points, but before I get there, I want to make sure I have a good idea of what he is trying to argue and try to see how he is thinking about his theology. I have noticed over the years that if I do not define terms and concepts before debating them, then frequently I end up talking right past someone. I have done a lot of studying of Christianity so I am familiar with sects, beliefs, esoteric language, and I might have a definition of a term or principle I am used to because of my background that others do not.
  3. Could you explain what you mean by evil, sin, or even bad. I do not want to rehash the Genesis discussion, but I do want to define terms. For example, in my Christian experience, sin, and to my understanding, the way it is used in the Bible is to "miss the mark," to fall short of a standard; therefore anything that was short of God's standard is bad, evil, sinful. Do you define these words differently?
  4. I am racking out for the night. I will see your response in the morning if you post it tonight.
  5. Okay. I think I am following what you are saying there. When it comes to biblical authority, you stated the Bible is more of a guide. What would you say to a Christian who challenged you with Sola Scriptura? There a many Christians who would say the Bible is the authority for all things. For the most part, to be taken literally.
  6. Interesting. How does original sin work then? Do you believe in inherented sin or do you think humans sin because the nature of the reality we live in? I think the term is Pelagianism.
  7. I am familiar with what you are saying based on other comments you have made. Quick question on this reality and Jesus. I am not quite clear on how Jesus was material and existed in this reality as a human, which is Satan's domain without being part of sin nature. If I am following you correctly, then everything in this reality is tainted by sin, is that correct?
  8. Could you expand upon how this relates to Satan, evil, etc.? Exactly how one is correlated to the other, how they relate, or just generally how you understand it.
  9. Okay, I see. Thanks for clarifying. Could you explain what you mean by decoherent waves and matter. I am a bit unclear on what you mean by that. If you could give as much context as possible, I would appreciate it.
  10. I hear what you are saying, I am just trying to pin down your thought process. I am tracking the trinity and the theology around it. For the sake of discussion, you can assume I am very familiar with your typical Christianity and the beliefs. And just to make sure I did not misunderstand, when you said Jesus became a man, do you mean a physical, what we normally think of as human, or something else? I ask because I am uncertain about whether or not you think something physical is inherently corrupted or evil. You mentioned an angel being physical so I want to clarify and make sure I was on the same page.
  11. I started one in the theology section, because I am literally just asking questions of Joe's theology, I am not going to debate anything. I may want to debate once I have a much better understanding of where he is coming from, but not this moment.
  12. I know what you mean, but I just have to hear this out. If everyone would prefer I move it to a private chat, I most definitely will.
  13. I did not word that question correctly, I meant to say, before his death, during his earthly ministry, was he matter? In the same way you and I are. Also, I forgot to ask, were you an agnostic or atheist prior to a couple weeks ago?
  14. I am asking him about his theology. It's not a debate, I am generally curious to know what he believes, why he believes it, and how he defines things.
  15. I think I am following some of what you are saying. Speaking of physicality, do you think Jesus was physical or consisted of matter?
  16. Sure thing. I ask because your theology is not necessarily what I would call orthodox, at least not what I am used to being called orthodox, and probably not something most of the backgrounds here would call orthodoxy. So I don't ask you for information you already provided elsewhere, do you have a bio or quick history of your experience with religion and how to came to your current theology? I saw someone had mentioned you started out Catholic, but I am guessing you are not longer affiliated with the Catholic church?
  17. @pittsburghjoe You definitely have a unique theology and I want to ask you more about it without the debate aspect. I want to ask questions and get your definitions of terms. Also, I want to get your opinion of church history, Bible history and how you reconcile different ideas against your theological approach. While others are welcome to ask Joe specific theology questions, I do not want this to be a debate....that is for the Lion's Den. @pittsburghjoe, are you up for a Q&A session?
  18. I wouldn't concede to Gnostic Joe's definition of evil. Sin, by biblical definition means to miss the mark. According to Gnostic Joe, something bad is not necessarily evil when it comes to YHWH's standards. I cannot agree to that definition and I do not think the Bible supports it either.
  19. That was how the Gnostics tried to come to terms with how the world was so screwed up, i.e., the suffering, violence, misery, etc. They rationed this world could not be the doing of an all powerful and good god, so it must be the product of something else. Of course not all gnostics believed the same thing, but generally speaking they thought there was one true God that was perfect, ideal, etc. This being created, but everything it created was a little bit less divine than the true God. Over time, these other divine beings created, had offspring, etc. All the way to where Sophia (wisdom) either created or had the Demiurge (creator of the material world). The Demiurge was so far down from the one true God that it did not even know that God existed. Gnostics would quote the OT where it says, "besides me, there are no gods (Isaiah or Ezekiel I think) as proof the Demiurge did not know it wasn't the highest God. Now, the gnostics themselves thought that they each had some kind of divine spark. Sophia looked into a body of water and it left divine sparks within the water. How the gnostics received this spark, I cannot remember, but I am sure it's crazy. To awaken that spark in someone, it required a gnostic revealer. Gnostics would often feel (before conversion) like they did not belong in this world, something was off. Then when they met a gnostic revealer....boom, that's why they always felt something was amiss. Christian Gnostics thought Jesus was a gnostic revealer. Apparently The Gospel of John contains some gnostic leanings and probably had more before a few redactors sanitized it so it was better suited for orthodoxy.
  20. Gnostics thought they had "special knowledge" and were enlightened about the real world. They thought they had a spark that came from the real high God from the pleroma. They considered the maker of the material world (the demiurge) to be a ignorant being who thought they were the most high God. Doectist thought that Jesus was more of an illusion or could change his form. Essentially Jesus was really without form, but appeared real. If I remember correctly, like the gnostics, they thought matter was evil or corrupted, therefore no god would take on the form of real matter.
  21. I have rebranded PittsburghJoe as Gnostic Docetist Joe, first of his name, High King of Double Slit Theory and creation. May he outwit the Demiurge and his hylics.
  22. Gnostic Joe is equivocating with the whole "living in a state of good" and knowledge of good and evil. He fails to understand that Adam lacked agency to know what good was. Adam would not even be able to evaluate what he was experiencing as good. It would simply be what is without any kind of judgement by an agent.
  23. Last I will say on this is that you do not know if you are correct. You do not realize that you could be wrong and it is intellectually dishonest. If you will not entertain other evidence and reason that does not fit your theory, then you are okay with simply being ignorant and not interested in truth.
  24. And Joe, before I finally left Christianity, I begged God for evidence that I was on the right path...so don't even start with that BS. A lot of atheist were very, very devout believers who were unable to reconcile real life with belief. I will not tolerate a statement like that because it is demonstrably false.
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Guidelines.