Is it a sin to seek knowledge?

Status
Not open for further replies.
Daecon said:
If God had meant for mankind to seek knowledge, She would have bestowed us with the intelligence required to develop fields of study such as science and mathematics.
Click to expand...

Gnostics did just that . the Gnostics were female based .

Not these so call christian gnostics . Where that came from , I don't know .

Remember it was the christians that destroyed , Alexandria .

The Libarary of knowledge at that time in OUR , Human , history .
 
Last edited:
good/evil
end points on a continuum
absolutes exist only in the limited transcription of cognition into language
all is shadow
there is no shadow without light
 
Greatest I am said:
Jew never say Eden as a fall. To them Eden was where man was elevated as you seem to recognize.

To say that Christians think things went well would not be to follow their dogma of a fall and they still see Eden as where we inherited Original sin and lost eternal life.

Christians are not as bright as Gnostic Christians and Jews about such things.

Regards
DL
Click to expand...

Thanks for this about Jewish belief - I did not know that.

But I think you disparage Christians too much and have too simplistic a view of what they think. The sentiments of the Exultet, various carols such as "Adam Lay Ybounden" and so on make clear that generations of Christians have seen this as ambivalent rather than wholly negative. I grant you that those who take Genesis literally are forced to think of it as a literal "sin", in the same category as our individual day-to-day misbehaviours and evil thoughts now. But theologically, Original Sin has always been in rather a different category, representing instead a general predisposition of imperfect Man towards evil. I would urge you not to judge the whole of Christendom by the views of stupid backwoodsmen in the US Bible Belt.
 
It ain't Christian to throw stones at other human beings.
Perhaps, that is the worst "sin" of all.
 
river said:
Gnostics did just that . the Gnostics were female based .
Click to expand...

I think you are incorrect.

We are Universalists and a Gnostic Christian woman will see the spark of her Goddess as equal in value to my spark of God within me.

Gnostic View of Gender Equality by Meera Lester
The Gnostic writings celebrate women as bearers of truth, wisdom, and light. The Gnostic God is often regarded in the context of a dyad possessing both masculine and feminine attributes. The orthodox Christians speak of God the Father and his Son. For the Trinity, the Holy Spirit is added. Mary, the holy mother of Jesus, is not accorded the same stature as God the Father, though she may be reverently referred to as “Mary, Mother of God,” according to religious scholar Elaine Pagels, an expert on the Gnostics. But Mary is not considered the same as God the Father in feminine form. Yet the Jewish wisdom literature in the Hebrew scriptures (Ecclesiastes, Proverbs, Sirach, the Wisdom of Solomon, etc.), in which Christianity has roots, personifies Wisdom as a female.

Further a on righteousness.
The righteousness of God is a kind of sharing along with equality.
Gnostic Scriptures and Fragments: Epiphanes - On Righteousness

http://gnosis.org/library/ephip.htm

We are all children of God and Gods in our own right, so to think we love some of our children more than others would be wrong.

Regards
DL

P.S. You can be a Gnostic of any religion or tradition of thought.
 
exchemist said:
Thanks for this about Jewish belief - I did not know that.

But I think you disparage Christians too much and have too simplistic a view of what they think. The sentiments of the Exultet, various carols such as "Adam Lay Ybounden" and so on make clear that generations of Christians have seen this as ambivalent rather than wholly negative. I grant you that those who take Genesis literally are forced to think of it as a literal "sin", in the same category as our individual day-to-day misbehaviours and evil thoughts now. But theologically, Original Sin has always been in rather a different category, representing instead a general predisposition of imperfect Man towards evil. I would urge you not to judge the whole of Christendom by the views of stupid backwoodsmen in the US Bible Belt.
Click to expand...

I do not do so. I judge all who fly the cross by the fact that they are all supporting the notions of human sacrifice and that they are acting in a moral way when taking advantage of God punishing the innocent instead of the guilty.

Having another innocent person suffer for the wrongs you have done, --- so that you might escape responsibility for having done them, --- is immoral.

I have listened to the Exultet hymn. It calls Adams sin necessary and a happy fault.

You are correct about our God given predisposition to sin, that we must follow, so for God to threaten to punish anyone for being exactly what he created us to be would be quite immoral on his part.

Christians are always trying to absolve God of moral culpability in the fall by whipping out their favorite "free will!", or “ it’s all man’s fault”. That is "God gave us free will and it was our free willed choices that caused our fall. Hence God is not blameworthy."

But this simply avoids God's culpability as the author of Human Nature. Free will is only the ability to choose. It is not an explanation why anyone would want to choose "A" or "B" (bad or good action). An explanation for why Eve would even have the nature of "being vulnerable to being easily swayed by a serpent" and "desiring to eat a forbidden fruit" must lie in the nature God gave Eve in the first place.

Hence God is culpable for deliberately making humans with a nature-inclined-to-fall, and "free will" means nothing as a response to this problem.

If all sin by nature then, the sin nature is dominant. If not, we would have at least some who would not sin.
 
exchemist said:
That is an absurd remark.
Click to expand...

Religions, like all tribal units, only care about survival of their tribe and the wealth it can gain to increase it's chances of survival.

It is all about the cash.

Educate yourself a bit.

You might remember Temple Prostitutes and the fact that they and indulgences are what the Vatican used to build St. Peter's Basilica.

Regards
DL
 
Greatest I am said:
I do not do so. I judge all who fly the cross by the fact that they are all supporting the notions of human sacrifice and that they are acting in a moral way when taking advantage of God punishing the innocent instead of the guilty.

Having another innocent person suffer for the wrongs you have done, --- so that you might escape responsibility for having done them, --- is immoral.

I have listened to the Exultet hymn. It calls Adams sin necessary and a happy fault.

You are correct about our God given predisposition to sin, that we must follow, so for God to threaten to punish anyone for being exactly what he created us to be would be quite immoral on his part.

Christians are always trying to absolve God of moral culpability in the fall by whipping out their favorite "free will!", or “ it’s all man’s fault”. That is "God gave us free will and it was our free willed choices that caused our fall. Hence God is not blameworthy."

But this simply avoids God's culpability as the author of Human Nature. Free will is only the ability to choose. It is not an explanation why anyone would want to choose "A" or "B" (bad or good action). An explanation for why Eve would even have the nature of "being vulnerable to being easily swayed by a serpent" and "desiring to eat a forbidden fruit" must lie in the nature God gave Eve in the first place.

Hence God is culpable for deliberately making humans with a nature-inclined-to-fall, and "free will" means nothing as a response to this problem.

If all sin by nature then, the sin nature is dominant. If not, we would have at least some who would not sin.
Click to expand...

Yes. It is absurd that an omnipotent creator would be pissed off at & punish humans for being what it created them to be. Unless it is insane. And blaming puny humans for everything yet no blame for a god is just plain stupid.

< >
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top