immortal

On one end it is God who brings famine, drought, food shortage and other natural calamities and on the other end it is the same God who gives us perfect knowledge and prepares us to evade all suffering. God is doing his works but he is not responsible for the suffering of little children. They themselves are. Jacob's trouble times was as necessary and important as was his glory in Egypt. If I was the other brother who had a horrific death due to starvation I would die with a calm mind bearing huge pain and knowing that it is God's work and it makes no difference if you just preach the Gospel of truth to their parents or to the children because both who is aware of the Gospel of truth and who is not aware of the Gospel of truth are in bondage and both are suffering with immense pain. The problem is not something which is specific to only African tribes or places in Ghana, its a problem of the world. We as a whole are ignorant of God and his perfect knowledge. You say that God could have showered heavy rains where there are no water or change the genotype of mosquitoes causing malaria but such changes and interventions gives only a temporary solution to the larger problem in hand. So every time there are hurricanes, tornadoes and massive earthquakes should God intervene and save innocent people, Does it evade all our suffering once for all? No, what God is trying to achieve is that God is allowing these natural disasters which are necessary for the stability of the world and he is also trying to give his perfect knowledge through which we can evade all suffering. If God exists he is very optimistic that he is going to produce men on earth such that his necessary works are carried out and yet the people do not under go any form of suffering what so ever through his perfect knowledge. Now tell me isn't God omni-benevolent? He is interfering where it is very much necessary, not in the ever-changing objective world which cannot be fixed but in the human psyche through which we cannot have any suffering at all even though the world around us is going crazy. God's idea of morality is achieving moral perfection i.e transcending both good and evil and the reason why being omnipotent not making us morally perfect is because we aren't prepared enough to have that perfect knowledge which will again be a temporary solution if he gives it now to all of them. Being perfect means you have freedom and free will and a misuse of such knowledge will have bizarre consequences on the whole cosmos. God indeed wants to give us such knowledge but he is preparing us. There is nothing that's gotta give. May be the morality of good and evil.

What's special about little children or babies? You're seeing things from a naturalistic perspective but I am seeing things from the perspective of a metaphysical soul, however it is a fact that we both have to agree that they are suffering, yes they are. The reason they are suffering is not because God is immoral for he allows such acts, God is just doing his works, they are suffering because of ignorance and bondage and why did they fall into ignorance and moved away from light to darkness because they took pride in God's works. God made everything and everyone with fullness and with perfection. The things for doing bad and evil things both exist in the pleroma itself but the soul has to remain calm on such actions always. So its not that they're in bondage for doing evil things, one's actions doesn't determine bondage or freedom because the origin of all actions is from God himself, they're in bondage because they took pride in God's actions. My fundamental premise is that God is responsible for all actions and that we don't have free will while we are in bondage and hence I have to defend such immoral acts which you have listed out in your previous posts. I'm claiming that those aren't immoral acts, definitely not in God's terms.

Even believers are in bondage and are suffering, its not blind faith which evades suffering, its the perfect knowledge of God that evades suffering and such knowledge has to come from God himself and Gnostics believe that he is preparing us to have that knowledge. I wouldn't pray God to stop his good works just because I only want to taste honey. It is his world and these are his bodies and he has every right to use them the way he wants. The whole of humanity is to be blamed for not seeing whether divinity exists in us or not. I am not going by the conventional view of good and evil as viewed by humans or the society. I am going by God's terms and the way he works. For God, good, evil and sin as such doesn't exists. http://www.gnosis.org/valentinus.htm Read the part of Psycho-Cosmogony and the Pneumatic Equation from that link, that's my view. Its Neither, he neither wants to stop it nor he wants innocent children to suffer from his works, that's why he has a perfect world with his perfect knowledge out there. We has humans should try to look for that perfect knowledge and not just sit around and curse God for his good works. Gnostics were some kind of psychologists, they believe that the pleroma of God exists in each and every thing which includes humans, animals and gods, so divinity exists in each one of us and it is the supreme Godhead himself who is the doer of all actions, including that of humans and Gods. No they weren't atheists, they were men who abided in his truth but at some point lost his knowledge and were drawn to ignorance and bondage. The problem of ignorance is something which starts with the fall of Sophia in the pleroma of God himself. Therefore the problem of evil is a problem of ignorance through which we lost the perfect knowledge of God. Its not that God created an imperfect world or was morally imperfect. I was talking about blind believers who have blind faith. I think I have addressed it already. God is morally perfect and if you say that he isn't then it indirectly implies that you're saying he is nothing or he doesn't exist or not worthy of worship at all.

I'm not sure the rest of the people are going to give up their faith even after showing that he doesn't exist and such things shouldn't be tolerated. I might have said it too literally. That's right, but their suffering has got nothing to do with the reasoning for the non-existence of an omnipotent, omniscient and a morally perfect God. I stand by that.

I said Gods or his Aeons are no special than humans because even they are part of his creation and even they are subjected to the forces of nature but the supreme Godhead is not a slave of nature, he is the master of nature, you suffer as long as you're a slave of nature, the moment you realize the one who is bullying and the one who is being subjected to bullying is God himself then what's the point of suffering. The supreme Godhead exists and he is the one who is stimulating one's body to butcher others and the same supreme Godhead is the one who exists in other bodies and makes them being subjected to butchering, the world is his play. The beauty now is that you don't have to suffer such butchering, you're suffering because you're in bondage, you're in ignorance, God is not responsible for you're bondage, you yourself are. God has indeed created a world were we can have an existence with zero suffering but such an existence is impossible without the perfect knowledge of God. So if you don't want suffering you need to abide by his words. Do you know what ignorance is? We all think that it is we who are doing our actions and we take pride in our actions but that's not what the truth is it is the God who is responsible for all actions. This was the real fall of man. Yes famine is necessary, its the destruction of old things which makes way for new entities, that's his plan and the way how he works. Yes God is responsible for the death of innocent children but he is not responsible for their suffering. Suffering is due to bondage and ignorance, with the perfect knowledge of God you can born as an innocent child and yet have complete awareness of him and his works while being embodied as a child. Now again all actions are from God so it is God himself who is rejecting himself through the means of atheists, he doesn't see atheists as evil. God is good. If you weren't in bondage and ignorance you need not have to born again with ignorance and have a horrific death again, God only cares for his purpose and for his good works. To stop that suffering you need to worship him in the first place because you need that perfect knowledge from him to have freedom from your bondage, so don't blame him for not stopping the suffering, you're the one who is hindering his efforts to evading suffering from this world by not worshiping him. If he doesn't exist then lets burn the Bible and concentrate on creating health camps for children in Africa. What use are his words if he himself doesn't exist.

According to the Gnostic interpretation even Gods are no special than humans, even they are in ignorance, the True supreme Godhead doesn't lean towards any side because he is the origin of both evil and good actions which we conventionally assign to such actions as humans, all actions are good and necessary. The cause of our suffering is not due to our actions or others actions it is due to the ignorance of the supreme Godhead. The advice is to do our actions the way the supreme Godhead does, with a calm mind like the stoics, only the purpose of God is important.

The problem of suffering is a problem of ignorance which we at some point lost our true knowledge of the Father because for taking pride in God's works. All actions are from God and such actions are necessary but with the knowledge of the Father we can evade from all suffering yet being embodied in the world doing necessary actions.

Do these cobalt dimers oscillate? They aren't much of a problem if they are electrically neutral. Phi for All, my post was addressed to the OP. You just replied before I did.

You need to ask this man Al_Gore. Global warming is real for sure because an increase in Co2 does warm the planet.

We can't suggest any experiments which makes sence, it will violate the rules.

It feels more than just good if sin doesn't exist.

If Counterfactual definiteness is what is violated by the violation of Bell's inequalities then the observer has a special place in the universe.

For now, all the observations indicate that its going to expand forever.

The scientific community will not accept your hypothesis as an accepted science until you can make some predictions and come up with an experiment to test those predictions. If you cannot then it is not science.

There is an amazing degree of similarity between the pleroma of God with his Aeons of the Gnostic Christians and the pleroma of God with his pantheon of Gods of the Upanishads which is an another ancient Gnosis school of thought. So I'm basically talking about the true God of the Gnostics who is none other than the God of the Upanishads. They both are describing the same pleroma of God and their teachings are identical to each other. Plotinus was a Neoplatonist, so he came after Plato. You're taking it too literally. Jesus took away all our sins not by dieing at the cross, he took away all our sins because he gave us the Gnosis, perfect knowledge of the Father so that we can live a sinless existence. May be he was the son of true God. If you call yourself Gnostic then stick to the Gnostic interpretation of the Bible, don't make up things on your own and misrepresent their interpretations and teachings. They have their own interpretation of the Old Testament as well as the New testament, they advice us to interpret the bible in a figurative or a metaphorical way having deep hidden psychological and spiritual meanings, it shouldn't be interpreted too literally. This is the reason why most of the bible contradicts with empirical evidence because they have been interpreted too literally, surely Noah's Ark couldn't have happened literally there is a deeper hidden meaning behind the bible. If you think whatever I'm saying is incorrect then check out the links which I gave you and then come back.

If religion is just a secular add on holding some dogmatic blind faith then it is more than a mental disease, it is a disease of the world. The Jews consider themselves holy, believers in Islam think that all other Holy books are corrupted and only the Koran represent the word of God in its true form, the middle class of Hindus fall into the hands of men who practice astrology and tantric practices and lose all their earnings, Sikhs give up their important rational decisions of their lives into the hands of their Holy Book, Christians believe Jesus is the mediator to send their message to God for their committed sins. If the idea of a God is based on blind faith then its better to drop that idea rather than holding on to such irrational practices and have such extreme dogmatic beliefs. Its philosophy isn't it, if a belief in God is not useful and falsifiable then what's the point in investing our time in such metaphysical concepts like God. If God is not real it serves more good for humanity if we invest our time on material things rather than wasting our time on irrational blind beliefs which causes a great deal of problems in the world. So an idea of God shouldn't be based on blind faith, it should be based on reasonable faith so that when the evidence is given to you, you should drop the idea of God and concentrate on things which you need to do in this world.

I don't think the God of Abraham was an evil god nor I question the divinity of Jesus but the Gnostic texts seem to indicate that Jesus gave some secret teachings to his inner circles who were matured enough to understand him and those teachings indicate that there is a supreme Godhead above all gods and eventually leads to paganism and contradicts the teachings of the orthodox Christianity. Why is the orthodox Christianity has a higher authority over the Gnostic interpretation of the bible? I do have problems when some God says "I'm the only one, there is no other God".

That's the first thought that comes to anyone's mind, isn't it.

That is a metaphysical question and a non-physical soul can enter into the picture only if physical things don't really exist out there.

We cannot really have a fruitful discussion based on such assumptions.

No, there is a difference. I'm against preferentially abusing boys but I'm not against preferentially treating girls well. If I have kin, I mean little kids, a boy and a girl, I would bring toys and snacks for both of them, I wouldn't do any discrimination on either of them. In fact both boys and girls are being equally abused which I seriously condemn and should not be tolerated.

Well preferentially treating girls well is not equal to preferentially abusing boys. I didn't made a gender-discrimination on boys. You have every right to be yourself and be whoever you want to be but you're not entirely free as an individual, you're living in a society, the society is as important as the individual is, its important for you to establish a harmony between the world or the society and your body or your self.

I have no problem with girls being treated a little well than boys. I don't think you can be mentally stable if you don't identify yourself with a a group of gender, even if you call yourself genderless society will assign you a gender while you're interacting in the world with others and its as important for others to assign you a gender as it is for you to call yourself genderless. Its okay to call yourself genderless while you're interacting through internet where the objective body is not relevant while having a conversation but it won't be the case in the real world out there.

Do you know how to keep a secret? just deliberately add creepy misinformation and other crap stories to it so that the people won't really get the real picture.

If you're reading Kant then you should be aware of his "categories", for him time, space, mass and other physical quantities are categories, just like sweetness, redness and other things are universals (i.e I mean we all experience it) in the same way for Kant the physical quantities are universals (i.e the mind plays an active part in the recreation of reality). Now we find that there is nothing in our Brains which we can correlate it with categories, so Kant is not talking about the mind as a brain, Kant is talking about an external mind and in fact brain itself is a reality created by the external mind and brain as such don't exist in the external physical world. Its just the eastern schools of philosophical thought show how true Kant really was in his distinction of phenomenon and the noumenon in the reality of the world and they are best suited to falsify the existence of an external mind other than the brain. The whole Copenhagen Interpretation leans slightly towards subjective idealism, we are just caught up in the world picture that is been given to us and not the way how actually it is. This raises the question as to whether science is really modelling the external physical world or is it modelling just the categories which exist only in our external minds and external sense organs. When an apple falls, is it really falling in the external physical world or is it falling only in our minds? The universals existing independently in each of our minds is responsible for the retrospective creation of reality.