Egor: About Veridicanism and its view of God
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
02-03-2012, 12:20 PM
 
RE: Egor: About Veridicanism and its view of God
(02-03-2012 07:48 AM)Erxomai Wrote:  Let me rephrase your idea of Judgment to see if I understood it. It seems to me you're saying hell is a real place, but there might be two types of punishments: Destruction, by which I think you mean Annihilation, and Torment, by which I mean burning eternally in a lake of fire.

Yes. Although destruction wouldn’t be a punishment per se, it’s just what happens to people who aren’t elected to have faith in Christ.

Quote: I'm guessing you're saying that people who never rejected Christ because they never heard of him would be annihilated but people such as myself who knew Christ yet rejected him will bring great pleasure to God (and by the transitive property, to you and the elect) by my never-ending screams of torment. Is that about right?

Yes, except the elect of whom I am one, won’t have any exposure to hell. That’s something for God alone.

Quote:Would you consider KC a "Brother in Christ" even if he rejects the idea of Veridicanism yet still professes to be elect?

I don’t know his heart, so I can’t judge him. But one doesn’t have to be a Veridican to be saved. The Veridican Creed of Salvation states that in its preamble. http://www.veridican.com/salvation.html

Quote:Last thought: you said you haven't really explored the idea of Messiah too much, and yet you use the title Jesus Christ. I'm not trying to sound pedantic, but Christ isn't Jesus' last name as in Mr. Christ. It's a title, and the title is the Greek word that means Messiah. So I'm thinking that if you're going to use that title in your theology you might want to go back and see what Messiah means and how the OT message about the Christ fits with your Gnostic version.

It doesn’t matter, does it? Christ is defined in Veridicanism as God conscious of Himself from within His creation.

Quote:Oh, and I'm dying to know why animal husbandry is such an important tenet to Veridicanism.

Me, too, since it’s not. Animal care is a spiritual practice of Veridicanism. The tenets are:

1. God is monistic in His nature

2. The human purpose is to become one with Christ



(02-03-2012 09:37 AM)Dom Wrote:  For a compassionate and fair god, hell should be for those who consciously do bad, regardless of anything else.

So, hell should be for you. Right?
Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Egor's post
02-03-2012, 12:54 PM
RE: Egor: About Veridicanism and its view of God
(02-03-2012 12:20 PM)Egor Wrote:  
(02-03-2012 09:37 AM)Dom Wrote:  For a compassionate and fair god, hell should be for those who consciously do bad, regardless of anything else.

So, hell should be for you. Right?

well, yes, eating too much chocolate is definitely bad, and I knew exactly what I was doing.

[Image: dobie.png]

Science is the process we've designed to be responsible for generating our best guess as to what the fuck is going on. Girly Man
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 5 users Like Dom's post
02-03-2012, 01:03 PM (This post was last modified: 02-03-2012 01:13 PM by morondog.)
RE: Egor: About Veridicanism and its view of God
Hi Egor, quick question: How is anything wrong, since by your definition everything that happens is God doing stuff to himself? I mean... murder, rape, pillaging... it's all God right? I'm struggling to get my head around it.
I see Erx asked it before: you're reply is quite nice Smile I like that you're not sure yourself - you said something like "the only reason I entertain the idea of hell is because Jesus was quite clear on the subject".

I want to suggest an interpretation: do you think that maybe Jesus was talking in terms of some kind of metaphor? basically saying "look, if you don't believe things will be very very bad indeed"...?

I still don't get it though. God kills another bit of God. That bit of God, assuming it was a "good" bit of God, get's to go to God's pleasure place. The other bit of God who did the killing has to wait until it dies itself, then goes to some *other* horrible place, *unless* it says some words and adopts some prescribed behaviours from a book, in which case it goes to the same pleasure place... Meantime, another bit of God refuses to believe in itself (whatever that means to God) and goes automatically to the bad place.

It's really... tangled.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like morondog's post
02-03-2012, 10:13 PM
RE: Egor: About Veridicanism and its view of God
(02-03-2012 12:54 PM)Dom Wrote:  
(02-03-2012 12:20 PM)Egor Wrote:  
(02-03-2012 09:37 AM)Dom Wrote:  For a compassionate and fair god, hell should be for those who consciously do bad, regardless of anything else.

So, hell should be for you. Right?

well, yes, eating too much chocolate is definitely bad, and I knew exactly what I was doing.

No Dom, your sin was in not sharing with the Reverend. Big Grin

It was just a fucking apple man, we're sorry okay? Please stop the madness Laugh out load
~Izel
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
02-03-2012, 10:21 PM (This post was last modified: 02-03-2012 10:26 PM by GirlyMan.)
RE: Egor: About Veridicanism and its view of God
(02-03-2012 12:54 PM)Dom Wrote:  
(02-03-2012 12:20 PM)Egor Wrote:  
(02-03-2012 09:37 AM)Dom Wrote:  For a compassionate and fair god, hell should be for those who consciously do bad, regardless of anything else.

So, hell should be for you. Right?

well, yes, eating too much chocolate is definitely bad, and I knew exactly what I was doing.

Was it dark chocolate? Like 70% or greater cacao content? 'Cause then it'd be good for you.

As it was in the beginning is now and ever shall be, world without end. Amen.
And I will show you something different from either
Your shadow at morning striding behind you
Or your shadow at evening rising to meet you;
I will show you fear in a handful of dust.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes GirlyMan's post
02-03-2012, 10:37 PM
RE: Egor: About Veridicanism and its view of God
(02-03-2012 10:21 PM)GirlyMan Wrote:  
(02-03-2012 12:54 PM)Dom Wrote:  
(02-03-2012 12:20 PM)Egor Wrote:  
(02-03-2012 09:37 AM)Dom Wrote:  For a compassionate and fair god, hell should be for those who consciously do bad, regardless of anything else.

So, hell should be for you. Right?

well, yes, eating too much chocolate is definitely bad, and I knew exactly what I was doing.

Was it dark chocolate? Like 70% or greater cacao content? 'Cause then it'd be good for you.

Dammit! I almost bought some tonight when I was that the store, and now that I have the munchies, it would go well with this bottle of California Old Vine Zin.

It was just a fucking apple man, we're sorry okay? Please stop the madness Laugh out load
~Izel
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
02-03-2012, 11:14 PM
 
RE: Egor: About Veridicanism and its view of God
(02-03-2012 01:03 PM)morondog Wrote:  Hi Egor, quick question: How is anything wrong, since by your definition everything that happens is God doing stuff to himself? I mean... murder, rape, pillaging... it's all God right? I'm struggling to get my head around it.
I see Erx asked it before: you're reply is quite nice Smile I like that you're not sure yourself - you said something like "the only reason I entertain the idea of hell is because Jesus was quite clear on the subject".

I want to suggest an interpretation: do you think that maybe Jesus was talking in terms of some kind of metaphor? basically saying "look, if you don't believe things will be very very bad indeed"...?

I still don't get it though. God kills another bit of God. That bit of God, assuming it was a "good" bit of God, get's to go to God's pleasure place. The other bit of God who did the killing has to wait until it dies itself, then goes to some *other* horrible place, *unless* it says some words and adopts some prescribed behaviours from a book, in which case it goes to the same pleasure place... Meantime, another bit of God refuses to believe in itself (whatever that means to God) and goes automatically to the bad place.

It's really... tangled.

Those are really good questions. How can God send Himself to hell? How could anything be bad if it is ultimately a modality of God that is doing the sinning?

I am working on a theory of souls. It is somewhat philosophical and mathematical (simple math, I assure you). I do not have the answer to your questions at this time. But I will have to answer them at some point. What I appreciate is that you asked them and that has given me a direction I needed in the development of this theory.

It is a fact that God is monistic. If God is monistic, how can there be sin? If there is sin, there can be hell, even if God is only tormenting some modality of himself. It may be that such a balance is required in order for the attribute that gives rise to that modality to be perfect in its nature.

We see this in nature. God uses seeds to create new life forms. A zillion orange seeds are simply wasted and destroyed for every orange tree that eventually grows and bears fruit. Why?

The theory of souls so far explains the arrival of the human being in the universe. I am still working on the lifespan of a human being and the eventual return to God. My guess is this is all very simple. But it certanily seems tangled at this point.
Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Egor's post
03-03-2012, 12:08 AM
RE: Egor: About Veridicanism and its view of God
(01-03-2012 11:51 AM)Erxomai Wrote:  If I may jump in with a question, I'm trying to get my head around the connection of monism with damnation.

If all that exists is God (if I'm understanding your definition of monism), then if a non-believer is damned to hell, do you see any quandary in the fact that God is essentially condemning his "godness" to eternal torment? And if I'm not representing your view in the question, then how does hell and condemnation fit with your concept of a monistic God?

Good question.

I guess monism certainly rules out the possibility of hell being "separation from God". But then again, theologians have historically had a struggle with defining hell as separation from a God who is omnipresent.

My girlfriend is mad at me. Perhaps I shouldn't have tried cooking a stick in her non-stick pan.
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
03-03-2012, 12:37 AM
RE: Egor: About Veridicanism and its view of God
(03-03-2012 12:08 AM)Starcrash Wrote:  
(01-03-2012 11:51 AM)Erxomai Wrote:  If I may jump in with a question, I'm trying to get my head around the connection of monism with damnation.

If all that exists is God (if I'm understanding your definition of monism), then if a non-believer is damned to hell, do you see any quandary in the fact that God is essentially condemning his "godness" to eternal torment? And if I'm not representing your view in the question, then how does hell and condemnation fit with your concept of a monistic God?

Good question.

I guess monism certainly rules out the possibility of hell being "separation from God". But then again, theologians have historically had a struggle with defining hell as separation from a God who is omnipresent.


Which is the reason why, on my way out of the Church, I briefly started wanting to believe the Annihilationist viewpoint which interprets Hell as being separate from God and the only true way of being separate from God is to be zapped completely from existence. And...it's a comforting theology to Atheists. IF that .0001% chance of God being rule were to come true, at least I'll only be zapped from existence and that's what I plan on happening anyway! Big Grin

It was just a fucking apple man, we're sorry okay? Please stop the madness Laugh out load
~Izel
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Erxomai's post
03-03-2012, 03:53 AM
 
RE: Egor: About Veridicanism and its view of God
I think we have truly hit a paradox.

God is necessarily monistic in nature.

Human beings must be independent souls apart from God.

If human beings are not independent, Christ makes no sense; morality makes no sense; atheism makes no difference, and heaven and hell of course are pointless. In short, without independent beings, there is no theology.

How could God make a freewill agent? And it can't just be some illusion like a dream. We really have to be independent from God for any of it to work.

But how could God make a separate entity without at the same time contradicting his monistic nature?

This is where I am stuck in my theory of souls.


P.S. Dom, I love your signature picture!
Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Egor's post
Post Reply
Forum Jump: