Have you leaned what Jesus and your bible teaches?

[Greatest I am]

Have you leaned what Jesus and your bible teaches?

The Bible teaches one to start a spiritual journey from the
bottom, i.e. from a stage where he must consider himself as a born sinner and starts his journey upwards from there. One reaches the second stage when he realises that he is the son and God is his father. The final realisation is when he realises that he and the Father are one.

This is similar to the spiritual journey of a Hindu who starts his journey from the Dwait stage, where he thinks himself and God to be two distinct entities, graduates to Vishishta Adwait, a stage where he thinks himself a fragment/fraction of Him and finally reached to the Adwait stage where he merges himself with that infinite consciousness.

Stevan Davies. The savior is not a celestial being brought to earth; the savior is a capacity of the mind, and the savior’s journey from above is actually one’s own journey from within.

John Lennon. It seems to me that the only true Christians were the Gnostics, who believed in self-knowledge, I.E. becoming Gods
themselves, reaching the Christ within, the light is the truth. Turn on the light. All the better to see you my dear.

John 6 ; 63 It is the spirit that quickeneth; the flesh profiteth nothing: the words that I speak unto you, they are spirit, and they
are life.

Luke 11:52 Woe unto you, lawyers! for ye have taken away the
key of knowledge: ye entered not in yourselves, and them that were entering in ye hindered.

Mark 7:13 Making the word of God of none effect through your
tradition, which ye have delivered: and many such like things do ye.

I think Jesus hated the idol worshipers of the traditional supernatural based religions and wanted to put us on a better and more naturalistic Gnostic Christian path of seeking knowledge and wisdom through Gnosis; that being a deeper knowledge of the self and others.

Do you agree?

Regards
DL

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1IAhDGY ... e=youtu.be

[Karpel Tunnel]

Jesus should probably have avoided walking on water, raising the dead, healing the sick, returning from the dead himself, making psychic claims and repeatedly placing himself as aligned with the OT if he hated believing in the supernatural. Of course these are perhaps merely the stories of his followers only. But then that's what's in the book we're dealing with.

I don't see much evidence of his hate of those with supernatural belief either. I can see ways to interpret things he says in gnostic terms, but that is not the same as saying he hates those who believe in supernatural things. And of course many gnostics believed in supernatural things. Though some gnostics will say those gnostics are not true gnostics. Which is a lot like how other Christian groups have viewed each other. Hatefully.

In any case I do see some instances where Jesus got pissed off. I don't see much to think he wanted people to hate any particular group. There is a fascinating speech where he says only people who hate their families can come to him. Though a literal interpretaiton of this is contradicted by many quotes where he says on should not hate ones brother or family. Reconciling that is not my problem, but I would guess he or the authors meant not letting people be stopped by their families if their families did not love God, however one interprets God.

But overall he seemed to emphasize love and acceptance.

[Greatest I am]

Jesus should probably have avoided walking on water, raising the dead, healing the sick, returning from the dead himself, making psychic claims and repeatedly placing himself as aligned with the OT if he hated believing in the supernatural. Of course these are perhaps merely the stories of his followers only. But then that's what's in the book we're dealing with.

I don't see much evidence of his hate of those with supernatural belief either. I can see ways to interpret things he says in gnostic terms, but that is not the same as saying he hates those who believe in supernatural things. And of course many gnostics believed in supernatural things. Though some gnostics will say those gnostics are not true gnostics. Which is a lot like how other Christian groups have viewed each other. Hatefully.

In any case I do see some instances where Jesus got pissed off. I don't see much to think he wanted people to hate any particular group. There is a fascinating speech where he says only people who hate their families can come to him. Though a literal interpretaiton of this is contradicted by many quotes where he says on should not hate ones brother or family. Reconciling that is not my problem, but I would guess he or the authors meant not letting people be stopped by their families if their families did not love God, however one interprets God.

But overall he seemed to emphasize love and acceptance.

Scriptures have Jesus showing his hate in a number of places.

Luke 11:52 Woe unto you, lawyers! for ye have taken away the key of knowledge: ye entered not in yourselves, and them that were entering in ye hindered.

Mark 7:13 Making the word of God of none effect through your tradition, which ye have delivered: and many such like things do ye.

Jesus also said that the Sabbath was made for man and not man for the Sabbath and one can logically extrapolate from that that he would also say that religions and Gods were made for man and not man for them.

If you think Gnostic Christians believe in the supernatural, you are not looking very deeply into what we believe. Here is an example.

I wrote this to refute the false notion that Gnostic Christians do not like matter and reality that the inquisitors propagated to justify their many murders of my religions originators. It shows that Christians should actually hate matter and not Gnostic Christians.
The Christian reality.
1 John 2:15Love not the world, neither the things that are in the world. If any man love the world, the love of the Father is not in him. 16For all that is in the world, the lust of the flesh, and the lust of the eyes, and the pride of life, is not of the Father, but is of the world.
Gen 3; 17 Thou shalt not eat of it; cursed is the ground for thy sake; in toil shalt thou eat of it all the days of thy life.
-----------
The Gnostic Christian reality.
Gnostic Christian Jesus said, "Those who seek should not stop seeking until they find. When they find, they will be disturbed. When they are disturbed, they will marvel, and will reign over all. [And after they have reigned they will rest.]"
"If those who attract you say, 'See, the Kingdom is in the sky,' then the birds of the sky will precede you.
If they say to you, 'It is under the earth,' then the fish of the sea will precede you.
Rather, the Kingdom of God is inside of you, and it is outside of you.
[Those who] become acquainted with [themselves] will find it; [and when you] become acquainted with yourselves, [you will understand that] it is you who are the sons of the living Father.
But if you will not know yourselves, you dwell in poverty and it is you who are that poverty."

As you can see from that quote, if we see God's kingdom all around us and inside of us, we cannot think that the world is anything but evolving perfection. Most just don't see it and live in poverty. Let me try to make you see the world the way I do.

Here is a mind exercise. Tell me what you see when you look around. The best that can possibly be, given our past history, or an ugly and imperfect world?

Candide.
"It is demonstrable that things cannot be otherwise than as they are; for as all things have been created for some end, they must necessarily be created for the best end.”

That means that we live in the best of all possible worlds, because it is the only possible world, given all the conditions at hand and the history that got us here. That is an irrefutable statement given entropy and the anthropic principle.

Further, we do not read our myths literally as they were written to put against the bible when all knew that myths should not be read literally. The last link shows the Gnostic Christian view.

I hope you can see how intelligent the ancients were as compared to the mental trash that modern preachers and theists are using with the literal reading of myths.

https://bigthink.com/videos/what-is-god-2-2

Further.
http://www.pbs.org/moyers/journal/03132009/watch.html

Rabbi Hillel, the older contemporary of Jesus, said that when asked to sum up the whole of Jewish teaching, while he stood on one leg, said, "The Golden Rule. That which is hateful to you, do not do to your neighbor. That is the Torah. And everything else is only commentary. Now, go and study it."

Please listen as to what is said about the literal reading of myths.

"Origen, the great second or third century Greek commentator on the Bible said that it is absolutely impossible to take these texts literally. You simply cannot do so. And he said, "God has put these sort of conundrums and paradoxes in so that we are forced to seek a deeper meaning."

Matt 7;12 So in everything, do to others what you would have them do to you, for this sums up the Law and the Prophets.

This is how early Gnostic Christians view the transition from reading myths properly to destructive literal reading and idol worship.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oR02cia ... =PLCBF574D

Regards
DL

[A Shieldmaiden]

Greatest I am wrote:

The Bible teaches one to start a spiritual journey from the
bottom, i.e. from a stage where he must consider himself as a born sinner and starts his journey upwards from there. One reaches the second stage when he realises that he is the son and God is his father. The final realisation is when he realises that he and the Father are one.

Satan's first two lies spoken to humankind, namely: “You shall not surely die,” and “You will be like God
The twin lies of human divinity and immortality have been Satan’s foundation for his counterfeit religion throughout the ages.

[Karpel Tunnel]

Scriptures have Jesus showing his hate in a number of places.

Luke 11:52 Woe unto you, lawyers! for ye have taken away the key of knowledge: ye entered not in yourselves, and them that were entering in ye hindered.

I don't see that as necessarily hatred. It's a criticism, sure.

Mark 7:13 Making the word of God of none effect through your tradition, which ye have delivered: and many such like things do ye.

Even less here. Again, a criticism.

Jesus also said that the Sabbath was made for man and not man for the Sabbath and one can logically extrapolate from that that he would also say that religions and Gods were made for man and not man for them.

Is that hatred?

If you think Gnostic Christians believe in the supernatural, you are not looking very deeply into what we believe. Here is an example.

I've shown you quite a while ago that one of the gnostics you quoted had supernatural beliefs. Even the notion of the Demiurge has supernatural interpretations.

The quotes you had about Gnostics not believing in the supernatural have to do with NOT hating the material. It is not mutually exclusive believing in what gets called the supernatural and accepting, loving what is called material.

Candide.
"It is demonstrable that things cannot be otherwise than as they are; for as all things have been created for some end, they must necessarily be created for the best end.”

That means that we live in the best of all possible worlds, because it is the only possible world, given all the conditions at hand and the history that got us here. That is an irrefutable statement given entropy and the anthropic principle.

Again, I don't see how this takes a stand on the supernatural.

I also notice that you quote from the NT to support the idea that Jesus hated people. But the NT has supernatural events in it involving Jesus, which you did not respond to.

Further, we do not read our myths literally as they were written to put against the bible when all knew that myths should not be read literally.

I do not think the NT was intended as a myth.



Rabbi Hillel, the older contemporary of Jesus, said that when asked to sum up the whole of Jewish teaching, while he stood on one leg, said, "The Golden Rule. That which is hateful to you, do not do to your neighbor. That is the Torah. And everything else is only commentary. Now, go and study it."

Please listen as to what is said about the literal reading of myths.

"Origen, the great second or third century Greek commentator on the Bible said that it is absolutely impossible to take these texts literally. You simply cannot do so. And he said, "God has put these sort of conundrums and paradoxes in so that we are forced to seek a deeper meaning."

Origen believed in the pre-existence of souls. For example.

Matt 7;12 So in everything, do to others what you would have them do to you, for this sums up the Law and the Prophets.

This is how early Gnostic Christians view the transition from reading myths properly to destructive literal reading and idol worship.

Well, they are quoting from the NT which has stories told about hte miracles of Jesus. And these are not told in the mythical form of most cultures, even the OT's genesis. They are talking about a guy, over here, walking around, who he knew, what he did, and then a miracle happens.

Compare that to Greek myths or any cultures myths. It is an entirely different kind of text. Which doesn't mean I think that Jesus was X or not X. I am just pointing out that 1) Gnostics have a variety of beliefs, some supernatural. Some gnostics, it seems, will then say, those guys are not real gnostics. Fine, Christianty and other religions are littered with this kind inter-sect criticism. 2) Jesus predominantly focuses on forgiveness and love.

[Venture]

Greatest I am wrote:

The Bible teaches one to start a spiritual journey from the
bottom, i.e. from a stage where he must consider himself as a born sinner and starts his journey upwards from there. One reaches the second stage when he realises that he is the son and God is his father. The final realisation is when he realises that he and the Father are one.

Satan's first two lies spoken to humankind, namely: “You shall not surely die,” and “You will be like God
The twin lies of human divinity and immortality have been Satan’s foundation for his counterfeit religion throughout the ages.

The Bible teaches us to accept the truth of scripture, the teachings of Christ, and your imperfect human nature in relation to God's plan (law and prophecies in history). Not sure where to find its emphasis on starting from the bottom and becoming like God. Shieldmaden is right, our souls and impressions of personality on future generations may be immortal, but humans are not immortal. Nor can we speak or understand God the way you seem to think we can, only the other way around, as God is the Lord of language and breathes his message through us.

I'm sure Satan, when he was Lucifer, thought of himself as one with God, being just as or more powerful than God. That is his greatest deception, through Pride and Envy, and later on, hatred. Jesus barely mentions his hate, maybe his disgust towards the places of Baal and Moloch, and shows brief instances of temper because of a defiling of the Church.

You are presenting the same links and evidence as in other threads for your personal God complex, without demonstrating any knowledge of scripture and faith in Jesus Christ's teachings. You should be more careful comparing Christianity with Hinduism, as well as showing your blatant disgust towards some of the doctrines of Jesus Christ. The marriage example is funny, especially when comparing the Hindu's doctrines of marriage to Christ's. If I am to do unto others as I would have them do to myself, I would tell you to keep reading and reaching for deeper levels of faith than this Gnosticism you're so obsessed with.

[Greatest I am]

Greatest I am wrote:

The Bible teaches one to start a spiritual journey from the
bottom, i.e. from a stage where he must consider himself as a born sinner and starts his journey upwards from there. One reaches the second stage when he realises that he is the son and God is his father. The final realisation is when he realises that he and the Father are one.

Satan's first two lies spoken to humankind, namely: “You shall not surely die,” and “You will be like God
The twin lies of human divinity and immortality have been Satan’s foundation for his counterfeit religion throughout the ages.

You yourself seem to be starting out with a lie as you twist the word to what you want them to say and not what they say.

That is just pure opinion of course and not seen as a fact to all.

You will be like God sure sounds ok when God says that A & E did become like Gods. You call what God confirmed a lie.

Why is your view not like your God's?

Regards
DL

[Greatest I am]

2) Jesus predominantly focuses on forgiveness and love.

Hogwash on this last.

There were hundreds of Mystery schools and to think that none of them investigated the imaginary realm of the supernatural, would be silly.

It is not surprising as well, given that we lost the God wars to the inquisitions, that theists do not recognize that they have been spoon fed a falsified history by religious Christian liars.

You look to the past to see what an evolving religion was, while not wanting to believe what a modern Gnostic Christian is telling you of what we have evolved into.

Change that mindset, please, or we will just be word fighting instead of having a meaningful dialog.

Regards
DL

[Greatest I am]

[b]
The Bible teaches us to accept the truth of scripture, the teachings of Christ, and your imperfect human nature in relation to God's planwith.

I pulled these out after choking on them.

Only a goof would first say that there is truth in scriptures, while ignoring where God puts lies in the prophets and Jesus constantly is telling us to find truth outside of the Christian doctrine.

You are one of the people Jesus spoke of who hinder the seeking whom Jesus told to seek within themselves for the truth of God.

Get thee behind me. Satan.

You also insult God's creative power in making our demonstrably perfect human natures.

Regards
DL

[A Shieldmaiden]

Greatest wrote:

You will be like God sure sounds ok when God says that A & E did become like Gods. You call what God confirmed a lie.

Where exactly in the Scriptures does it say this?

[Karpel Tunnel]

Hogwash on this last.

Feel free to demonstrate this.

There were hundreds of Mystery schools and to think that none of them investigated the imaginary realm of the supernatural, would be silly.

INcluding one of the people you quoted. IOW your own demonstrations depend on support from people who believed in the supernatural and this undermines your position.

It is not surprising as well, given that we lost the God wars to the inquisitions, that theists do not recognize that they have been spoon fed a falsified history by religious Christian liars.

There are Christians who recognize this but are not gnostics. It's actually complicated, however troubling that might be for people who want it neat and binary

You look to the past to see what an evolving religion was, while not wanting to believe what a modern Gnostic Christian is telling you of what we have evolved into.

I am disagreeing with points you make because they are not presenting a correct, more complicated image of, in this case, amongst other things, Jesus as presented in the Bible. And you still fail to respond to the specific points made.

Change that mindset, please, or we will just be word fighting instead of having a meaningful dialog.

Sure, it might be nice if we could just order other people around to change their minds, but I live in the real world.

[Venture]

Don't call me a goof when you're afraid of matter. Stop enshrouding yourself in the idea that knowledge is above morality. If it wasn't for the Judeo-Christian movements, you would have no literature to base your beliefs on because your ideas wouldn't have flourished. It seems to be a way to pervert the scriptures through offering secret knowledge. I'm interested in studying how the antithetical ideas flourished during the first few centuries, those defined heretical, because there's something seriously wrong with these supernatural magical obsessors who are into rituals, angelic rankings, and 'spirituality' (kabbalah, hermeticism, gnosticism). Something slithered into early Christian movements through Rome, originating in a human lust for power by offering secret knowledge and practices, ancient snake oil salesmen.

What would Irenaeus and Polycarp think of you?

Is there no truth in the migration of Hyksos semites into Egypt? This was mentioned in the Bible early on in differing language, but of course literal interpretations and transliterations have affected your interpretative abilities of the text, that's not my fault. Is there some truth in scripture for Gnostics? A lot of truth? Or no truth? Or is it all true? You have some serious explaining to do, especially with that remark of our 'demonstrably perfect' human natures.

Dualism and manichaeism haven't always sat well with me. All things are parts of a whole, not a mere merism, more Platonic than Aristotelian. We access the whole but can't define it with contrasts and extremes.

[Mowk]

who's bible? what makes it mine, even paradoxically? When I've wanted to read it I've gone on line and borrowed it, there are a lot of translations on line. I'm hardly fluent in the language it was written in. So who's bible is it again?

[Greatest I am]

Greatest wrote:

You will be like God sure sounds ok when God says that A & E did become like Gods. You call what God confirmed a lie.

Where exactly in the Scriptures does it say this?

At the end of Gen 3. It is not a long story.

Regards
DL

[Greatest I am]

who's bible? what makes it mine, even paradoxically? When I've wanted to read it I've gone on line and borrowed it, there are a lot of translations on line. I'm hardly fluent in the language it was written in. So who's bible is it again?

If you have done all that reading and cannot speak to what Jesus taught -----

Regards
DL

[Greatest I am]

Don't call me a goof when you're afraid of matter. .

Quite the assumption. Why would I fear matter?
That would be stupid seeing as I have to eat to live and like to eat matter.

I wrote this to refute the false notion that Gnostic Christians do not like matter and reality that the inquisitors propagated to justify their many murders of my religions originators. It shows that Christians should actually hate matter and not Gnostic Christians.
The Christian reality.
1 John 2:15Love not the world, neither the things that are in the world. If any man love the world, the love of the Father is not in him. 16For all that is in the world, the lust of the flesh, and the lust of the eyes, and the pride of life, is not of the Father, but is of the world.
Gen 3; 17 Thou shalt not eat of it; cursed is the ground for thy sake; in toil shalt thou eat of it all the days of thy life.
-----------
The Gnostic Christian reality.
Gnostic Christian Jesus said, "Those who seek should not stop seeking until they find. When they find, they will be disturbed. When they are disturbed, they will marvel, and will reign over all. [And after they have reigned they will rest.]"
"If those who attract you say, 'See, the Kingdom is in the sky,' then the birds of the sky will precede you.
If they say to you, 'It is under the earth,' then the fish of the sea will precede you.
Rather, the Kingdom of God is inside of you, and it is outside of you.
[Those who] become acquainted with [themselves] will find it; [and when you] become acquainted with yourselves, [you will understand that] it is you who are the sons of the living Father.
But if you will not know yourselves, you dwell in poverty and it is you who are that poverty."

As you can see from that quote, if we see God's kingdom all around us and inside of us, we cannot think that the world is anything but evolving perfection. Most just don't see it and live in poverty. Let me try to make you see the world the way I do.

Here is a mind exercise. Tell me what you see when you look around. The best that can possibly be, given our past history, or an ugly and imperfect world?

Candide.
"It is demonstrable that things cannot be otherwise than as they are; for as all things have been created for some end, they must necessarily be created for the best end.”

That means that we live in the best of all possible worlds, because it is the only possible world, given all the conditions at hand and the history that got us here. That is an irrefutable statement given entropy and the anthropic principle.

Regards
DL

[Greatest I am]

Don't call me a goof when you're afraid of matter. .

Quite the assumption. Why would I fear matter?
That would be stupid seeing as I have to eat to live and like to eat matter.

I wrote this to refute the false notion that Gnostic Christians do not like matter and reality that the inquisitors propagated to justify their many murders of my religions originators. It shows that Christians should actually hate matter and not Gnostic Christians.
The Christian reality.
1 John 2:15Love not the world, neither the things that are in the world. If any man love the world, the love of the Father is not in him. 16For all that is in the world, the lust of the flesh, and the lust of the eyes, and the pride of life, is not of the Father, but is of the world.
Gen 3; 17 Thou shalt not eat of it; cursed is the ground for thy sake; in toil shalt thou eat of it all the days of thy life.
-----------
The Gnostic Christian reality.
Gnostic Christian Jesus said, "Those who seek should not stop seeking until they find. When they find, they will be disturbed. When they are disturbed, they will marvel, and will reign over all. [And after they have reigned they will rest.]"
"If those who attract you say, 'See, the Kingdom is in the sky,' then the birds of the sky will precede you.
If they say to you, 'It is under the earth,' then the fish of the sea will precede you.
Rather, the Kingdom of God is inside of you, and it is outside of you.
[Those who] become acquainted with [themselves] will find it; [and when you] become acquainted with yourselves, [you will understand that] it is you who are the sons of the living Father.
But if you will not know yourselves, you dwell in poverty and it is you who are that poverty."

As you can see from that quote, if we see God's kingdom all around us and inside of us, we cannot think that the world is anything but evolving perfection. Most just don't see it and live in poverty. Let me try to make you see the world the way I do.

Here is a mind exercise. Tell me what you see when you look around. The best that can possibly be, given our past history, or an ugly and imperfect world?

Candide.
"It is demonstrable that things cannot be otherwise than as they are; for as all things have been created for some end, they must necessarily be created for the best end.”

That means that we live in the best of all possible worlds, because it is the only possible world, given all the conditions at hand and the history that got us here. That is an irrefutable statement given entropy and the anthropic principle.

Regards
DL

[Greatest I am]

Stop enshrouding yourself in the idea that knowledge is above morality. If it wasn't for the Judeo-Christian movements, you would have no literature to base your beliefs on because your ideas wouldn't have flourished. It seems to be a way to pervert the scriptures through offering secret knowledge. I'm interested in studying how the antithetical ideas flourished during the first few centuries, those defined heretical, because there's something seriously wrong with these supernatural magical obsessors who are into rituals, angelic rankings, and 'spirituality' (kabbalah, hermeticism, gnosticism). Something slithered into early Christian movements through Rome, originating in a human lust for power by offering secret knowledge and practices, ancient snake oil salesmen.
.

You ignore that most sages, including Jesus, had one line for the sheeple and another secret one for the apostles.

I too like to look at the history of religions as I seek to know how the world ended in preferring the genocidal son murderer over more moral Gods.

To your first sentence. I do not as knowledge is not above morality as they are not on the same graph. Knowledge is either true or not.

Morality is subjective and not objective and cannot be said to be true or not based on some knowledge.

Regards
DL

[Karpel Tunnel]

That means that we live in the best of all possible worlds, because it is the only possible world, given all the conditions at hand and the history that got us here. That is an irrefutable statement given entropy and the anthropic principle.

Regards
DL

Could you explain how entropy and the anthropic principle lead to this being the only possible world and the best world. And isn't the anthropic principle in the realm of supernatural ideas? I mean, it's teleology.

[Greatest I am]

That means that we live in the best of all possible worlds, because it is the only possible world, given all the conditions at hand and the history that got us here. That is an irrefutable statement given entropy and the anthropic principle.

Regards
DL

Could you explain how entropy and the anthropic principle lead to this being the only possible world and the best world. And isn't the anthropic principle in the realm of supernatural ideas? I mean, it's teleology.

It is science that recognizes that the time line only flows the one way.

If you deny the conditions that got us to this point in time, then there is nothing I can say.

What is, has to be, given our history.

If your parents had not mated at exactly the time they did, you would not be here.

Regards
DL

[Karpel Tunnel]

That means that we live in the best of all possible worlds, because it is the only possible world, given all the conditions at hand and the history that got us here. That is an irrefutable statement given entropy and the anthropic principle.

Regards
DL

Could you explain how entropy and the anthropic principle lead to this being the only possible world and the best world. And isn't the anthropic principle in the realm of supernatural ideas? I mean, it's teleology.

It is science that recognizes that the time line only flows the one way.

Entropy is, yes, a concept having to do with the arrow of time and irreversability (and order to disorder) but I am not sure how it weighs in on inevitability or value judgments like 'best possible world'. Many scientists, for example, believe in entropy, but also believe in a multiverse.

Further you say nothing about how the anthropic principle demonstrates best possible worlds.

If you deny the conditions that got us to this point in time, then there is nothing I can say.

I don't know what you are talking about here. I have denied the conditions that got us to this point of time. I asked you about how the anthropic principle and entropy lead you to the conclusions you drew.

If your parents had not mated at exactly the time they did, you would not be here.

Yup. Though entropy doesn't make this any more true or less obvious. And it has nothing to do with the anthropic principle.

[Greatest I am]

It is science that recognizes that the time line only flows the one way.

Entropy is, yes, a concept having to do with the arrow of time and irreversability (and order to disorder) but I am not sure how it weighs in on inevitability or value judgments like 'best possible world'. Many scientists, for example, believe in entropy, but also believe in a multiverse.

I do not see the conflict between those ideas. I would not think many would have a belief in a multi-verse though as those theories have yet to be proven. Strangely, the math works for both a 9 and 12 dimension models where multiverses and branes would exist.

Further you say nothing about how the anthropic principle demonstrates best possible worlds.

If this is the only possible world, which it is and must be given our past, then it is obviously the best of all possible world that there can be if we ignore our wish lists for better. Those wishes can only aply to the future and not the past. We can aim for better but must also recognize that we are at our best possible starting point at all points in time.

If you deny the conditions that got us to this point in time, then there is nothing I can say.

I don't know what you are talking about here. I have denied the conditions that got us to this point of time. I asked you about how the anthropic principle and entropy lead you to the conclusions you drew.

If your parents had not mated at exactly the time they did, you would not be here.

Yup. Though entropy doesn't make this any more true or less obvious. And it has nothing to do with the anthropic principle.[/quote][/quote]

You would be, if you are at all, would be in a completely different time line, and I do think that that fact is rather obvious. Change any one thing in your past and you change all of your history.

Regards
DL

[Karpel Tunnel]

I do not see the conflict between those ideas.

Well, if there is a multiverse than our world, our lives, our experience, is just one possibility amongst an infinite number.

I would not think many would have a belief in a multi-verse though as those theories have yet to be proven. Strangely, the math works for both a 9 and 12 dimension models where multiverses and branes would exist.

But many do, many because it is way of retaining determinism. Further there is evidence, just not confirmation.

Further you say nothing about how the anthropic principle demonstrates best possible worlds.

If this is the only possible world, which it is and must be given our past, then it is obviously the best of all possible world that there can be if we ignore our wish lists for better. Those wishes can only aply to the future and not the past. We can aim for better but must also recognize that we are at our best possible starting point at all points in time.

I'm still not seeing the anthropic principle brought in.

If you deny the conditions that got us to this point in time, then there is nothing I can say.

I don't know what you are talking about here. I have denied the conditions that got us to this point of time. I asked you about how the anthropic principle and entropy lead you to the conclusions you drew.

If your parents had not mated at exactly the time they did, you would not be here.

Yup. Though entropy doesn't make this any more true or less obvious. And it has nothing to do with the anthropic principle.[/quote][/quote]

You would be, if you are at all, would be in a completely different time line, and I do think that that fact is rather obvious. Change any one thing in your past and you change all of your history.

Sure, but that has nothing to do with entropy or the anthropic principle. It does have to do with determinism or saying that we are affected by changes - so identity type issues or causation.

It doesn't have anything to do with the 2nd law of thermodynamics - except that I am in this universe and the 2nd law has to do with this universe - or with the anthropic principle.

And nothing in science, so far, justifies value judgments.

[Greatest I am]

I do not see the conflict between those ideas.

Well, if there is a multiverse than our world, our lives, our experience, is just one possibility amongst an infinite number.

Be this the only universe or one of a billion, our lives, our experience, possibilities are still in a huge number.

I would not think many would have a belief in a multi-verse though as those theories have yet to be proven. Strangely, the math works for both a 9 and 12 dimension models where multiverses and branes would exist.

But many do, many because it is way of retaining determinism. Further there is evidence, just not confirmation.

Correct, and without confirmation, no scientist will say he believes it.

Further you say nothing about how the anthropic principle demonstrates best possible worlds.

It demonstrates this by showing it is the only possible world. If the only possible world, then it is obviously the best of all possible worlds, unless you can somehow change the history.

If this is the only possible world, which it is and must be given our past, then it is obviously the best of all possible world that there can be if we ignore our wish lists for better. Those wishes can only aply to the future and not the past. We can aim for better but must also recognize that we are at our best possible starting point at all points in time.

I'm still not seeing the anthropic principle brought in.

See above and think of the arrow of time. If you cannot grasp that in a progression of time, the first second is followed by the second second, etc, I cannot help you.

If you deny the conditions that got us to this point in time, then there is nothing I can say.

I don't know what you are talking about here. I have denied the conditions that got us to this point of time. I asked you about how the anthropic principle and entropy lead you to the conclusions you drew.

Simply the recognition that things cannot be other than they are.

To change what you are right now, something different would have had to happen in your past. Right?

If your parents had not mated at exactly the time they did, you would not be here.

Yup. Though entropy doesn't make this any more true or less obvious. And it has nothing to do with the anthropic principle.

[/quote][/quote]

It shows that sperm had to be given before you could have been conceived.

You would be, if you are at all, would be in a completely different time line, and I do think that that fact is rather obvious. Change any one thing in your past and you change all of your history.

Sure, but that has nothing to do with entropy or the anthropic principle. It does have to do with determinism or saying that we are affected by changes - so identity type issues or causation.

It doesn't have anything to do with the 2nd law of thermodynamics - except that I am in this universe and the 2nd law has to do with this universe - or with the anthropic principle.

And nothing in science, so far, justifies value judgments.

[/quote]

Determinism is what the anthropic principle speaks to. It says that if you throw a ball forward, it will not go backwards.

Regards
DL

[Venture]

Don't call me a goof when you're afraid of matter. .

Quite the assumption. Why would I fear matter?
That would be stupid seeing as I have to eat to live and like to eat matter.

I wrote this to refute the false notion that Gnostic Christians do not like matter and reality that the inquisitors propagated to justify their many murders of my religions originators. It shows that Christians should actually hate matter and not Gnostic Christians.
The Christian reality.
1 John 2:15Love not the world, neither the things that are in the world. If any man love the world, the love of the Father is not in him. 16For all that is in the world, the lust of the flesh, and the lust of the eyes, and the pride of life, is not of the Father, but is of the world.
Gen 3; 17 Thou shalt not eat of it; cursed is the ground for thy sake; in toil shalt thou eat of it all the days of thy life.
-----------
The Gnostic Christian reality.
Gnostic Christian Jesus said, "Those who seek should not stop seeking until they find. When they find, they will be disturbed. When they are disturbed, they will marvel, and will reign over all. [And after they have reigned they will rest.]"
"If those who attract you say, 'See, the Kingdom is in the sky,' then the birds of the sky will precede you.
If they say to you, 'It is under the earth,' then the fish of the sea will precede you.
Rather, the Kingdom of God is inside of you, and it is outside of you.
[Those who] become acquainted with [themselves] will find it; [and when you] become acquainted with yourselves, [you will understand that] it is you who are the sons of the living Father.
But if you will not know yourselves, you dwell in poverty and it is you who are that poverty."

As you can see from that quote, if we see God's kingdom all around us and inside of us, we cannot think that the world is anything but evolving perfection. Most just don't see it and live in poverty. Let me try to make you see the world the way I do.

Here is a mind exercise. Tell me what you see when you look around. The best that can possibly be, given our past history, or an ugly and imperfect world?

Candide.
"It is demonstrable that things cannot be otherwise than as they are; for as all things have been created for some end, they must necessarily be created for the best end.”

That means that we live in the best of all possible worlds, because it is the only possible world, given all the conditions at hand and the history that got us here. That is an irrefutable statement given entropy and the anthropic principle.

Regards
DL

1 John 2:15 is addressing the issue of loving anything that is not God, which is the realm of perceivable things, the world. If you put priority into material or the supernatural, you are not of God. God reveals himself in the OT, Jesus, and the work of the Holy Spirit in all of us individually. Not all of the created order and material is evil, similar to humans and our desires being good and evil. Our desires can cause us to put other things before God, redirecting us away from the truth, going in another path that glorifies mysticism and supernatural conjecture, theoretical boasting, that will eventually lead to some really bad things that have probably happened in the past.

As for the Genesis verse, obviously cherry picked, the ground is cursed many times, in Cain's story too. God was addressing Adam's choice, which was a worse sin than Eve's deception, that now they must both labor more in order to survive. God was not saying that because of sin and death, all matter is cursed and corrupted and should be feared. Our perceptions were corrupted, no longer pure.

God's kingdom is not all around us, more so inside ourselves and in Christ. Our ideas make our reality, but that does not induce moral subjectivity. The Holy Spirit speaks through our vessel. Ever wonder why God is flying on a brain cloak in Michelangelo's Creation of Adam?

Entropy implies the idea of disorder and order together, which I would be happy to talk more about, but what determines the driving forces is malleable, given our beginning talk of its irrefutability but not determining its causes and effects. I'm not seeing how the anthropic principle is affecting the many-worlds theory and how we are living in the best world, whether or not there is more than one world. The world yesterday is not the world today nor the world tomorrow, and on top of that there is a battle in contemporary quantum theories about what to do with the possibility of a multiplicity of the present.

I see a lot of this theorizing as a dissent from order, an undermining of the importance of morality, and an eventual eroding of most societies before we begin to colonize space.