the church of spiderman? i wonder or that church would say that making deals with the devil is good.
The Big Picture: Nerd Gods
- Thread starter MovieBob
- Start date
Recommended Videos
Not sure if anyone already mentioned this, but the description of Gnosticism in the video was kinda wrong. Kinda VERY wrong.
Gnosticism was a Christian ?and pre-Christian (cf: apocalypse of adam)- sect which believed that reality was an evil delusion created either by satan or by a demented god who beloved himself to be the true god and is by and large worshiped as on by most people (depending on the sect). the Christian Gnostics believed that the devil froze mankind in a dream the moment that Christ died and that we are still suspended in that moment and will remain so until we realise that it is in-fact a dream. Interestingly a lot of the original parts of the bible ? the gospel of mary magdelene for example- were Gnostic but were cut out during the canonisation because it was felt that the message was too complex and too aecetic for the majority of followers. Most of the original Gnostic gospels were destroyed by the church over the years but some came into the position of groups such as the templar?s, who bought them as religious curiosities during the crusades (not to get all ?conspiracy theory? on you but some historians have suggested that members of the group converted to Gnosticism and that that was one of the big reasons that the templar?s were exterminated). They mostly disappeared from history until the discovery in the 30?s of the ?nag hamandi library?, and the dead sea scrolls which had Gnostic tracts in them.
I?m guessing that the confussion in the video derived from the similarity between Gnostic and Agnostic as terms. However ?gnosis? means knowledge in greek and the Gnostics were those who possessed the ?knowledge? gifted to them from the true god beyond the ?veil of sorrows? while agnositic simply means ?a-gnosis? or without knowledge and refers to those who do not ?know? (in the religious, a-prori sence) that there is a god.
As far as the comment someone made about heratics goes, yeah Gnostics and other dualist faiths have always gotten it pretty hard in the shorts from Christianity. The original Gnostics were hunted to extinction by the early church and when they (sort of ) re-emerged in the 1200?s as the ?cathar? sect in what is now southern France and north east Spain they were subjected to the ?abegensian crusade? which saw the destruction of Carcassonne and the immolation of thousands of people. To be fair its only to be expected if you go round saying that the pope is a servant of the demiurge and that people should not have to pay everything they earn to the church?.
Anyhow, history lesson over my point is that the Gnostics felt that most of the stuff that the existent bible says are the ?lies of the archeron? so yeah, no they don?t accept the bible. Sorry to be anal about this but someone has to say it.
Gnosticism was a Christian ?and pre-Christian (cf: apocalypse of adam)- sect which believed that reality was an evil delusion created either by satan or by a demented god who beloved himself to be the true god and is by and large worshiped as on by most people (depending on the sect). the Christian Gnostics believed that the devil froze mankind in a dream the moment that Christ died and that we are still suspended in that moment and will remain so until we realise that it is in-fact a dream. Interestingly a lot of the original parts of the bible ? the gospel of mary magdelene for example- were Gnostic but were cut out during the canonisation because it was felt that the message was too complex and too aecetic for the majority of followers. Most of the original Gnostic gospels were destroyed by the church over the years but some came into the position of groups such as the templar?s, who bought them as religious curiosities during the crusades (not to get all ?conspiracy theory? on you but some historians have suggested that members of the group converted to Gnosticism and that that was one of the big reasons that the templar?s were exterminated). They mostly disappeared from history until the discovery in the 30?s of the ?nag hamandi library?, and the dead sea scrolls which had Gnostic tracts in them.
I?m guessing that the confussion in the video derived from the similarity between Gnostic and Agnostic as terms. However ?gnosis? means knowledge in greek and the Gnostics were those who possessed the ?knowledge? gifted to them from the true god beyond the ?veil of sorrows? while agnositic simply means ?a-gnosis? or without knowledge and refers to those who do not ?know? (in the religious, a-prori sence) that there is a god.
As far as the comment someone made about heratics goes, yeah Gnostics and other dualist faiths have always gotten it pretty hard in the shorts from Christianity. The original Gnostics were hunted to extinction by the early church and when they (sort of ) re-emerged in the 1200?s as the ?cathar? sect in what is now southern France and north east Spain they were subjected to the ?abegensian crusade? which saw the destruction of Carcassonne and the immolation of thousands of people. To be fair its only to be expected if you go round saying that the pope is a servant of the demiurge and that people should not have to pay everything they earn to the church?.
Anyhow, history lesson over my point is that the Gnostics felt that most of the stuff that the existent bible says are the ?lies of the archeron? so yeah, no they don?t accept the bible. Sorry to be anal about this but someone has to say it.
Wasn't Scientology started by L. Ron Hubbard? Don't be dissing Card, he is my favorite writer of all time.
also, why does he blame scott card and Ellison for Scientology? i know Ellison was kinda bat s**t an had a fairly ambivalent attitude to human suffering but i seem to remember him being a vitriolic critic of Scientology. also there was that one story in 'paingod and other delusions' were the moral was 'don't trust what ANYONE tells you unless they produce proof before hand'. im open to correction on this tho....
I don´t think we should invent new gods(and no, I´m not a catolic, I´m a atheist). If we want to teach other people teachings to improve everyone´s live, we should tell them, or write a book about it,not invent a god or start worshiping gods from old TV shows. So, bye, and all praise the Ori! (Lame Stargate SG-1 old reference)
I think when WBC was getting all up in arms about Comic Con, somebody said that, judging by the kind of media and following we have for fictional characters, it is possible that some alien or far future civilization could mistake them for our gods, but that the unfortunate implications of this are that the stories and characters we've been worshipping for a thousand years or two might have been just that - stories and characters.
It may have been about that time I read an expanded universe Doctor Who novel called Night of the Humans, in which a primitive human civilization, decended from the passangers of a crashed cargo ship, worship the shipping company's mascot Bozo, and believe that some old Western films that were in the ship are the stories of Bozo's sons, brothers, and the minions of 'the evil one'. It's also pretty clear by the end of the book that they welcome death via meteor as they think it must be Bozo coming to take them to 'El Paso', their idea of heaven. It's a bit of a disturbing thought, and sums up why I don't feel I want to trust my whole life to religion - there's every probability that it's just a story.
It may have been about that time I read an expanded universe Doctor Who novel called Night of the Humans, in which a primitive human civilization, decended from the passangers of a crashed cargo ship, worship the shipping company's mascot Bozo, and believe that some old Western films that were in the ship are the stories of Bozo's sons, brothers, and the minions of 'the evil one'. It's also pretty clear by the end of the book that they welcome death via meteor as they think it must be Bozo coming to take them to 'El Paso', their idea of heaven. It's a bit of a disturbing thought, and sums up why I don't feel I want to trust my whole life to religion - there's every probability that it's just a story.
Certain Christians are already against the Star Wars movies because they say that the Jedi Philosophy is Buddhism under another name, and becoming one with the force is just another version of Buddhist enlightenment. Jedi Buddhism, anyone? But myself, being an atheist, am from Missouri when it comes to religion. You know, the "Show Me State".
I've seen a lot of really "Out there" claims od evidence and proof for all sorts of deities. But when you ask for that evidence and proof objectively, it's suddenly all about faith. It's like trying to pin down a drop of mercury with your finger. Every time you think you are close to getting an answer, the goalposts move.
I've seen a lot of really "Out there" claims od evidence and proof for all sorts of deities. But when you ask for that evidence and proof objectively, it's suddenly all about faith. It's like trying to pin down a drop of mercury with your finger. Every time you think you are close to getting an answer, the goalposts move.
Interesting to note: The phrase 'Xmas', isn't 100% secular at all. The 'X' symbol was actually Emperor Constantine the Great's war banner that would supposedly protect him and his men as he went into battle, and it did...well as much as a banner can protect an entire army of Romans (and not, you know, military tactics). He claimed that he'd seen it in a vision, in which an angel gave him the idea. Coupled together with the fact that Constantine was the first religiously tolerant Roman Emperor (even becoming a Christian on his death bed so he'd be absolved of all sins during his life, sneaky bugger), 'X' slowly came to mean 'Christ'.
koriantor said:
He's a practicing Mormon (like a certain lady Author), but, there's nothing really wrong with that, there's plenty of nice Mormons out there. Card just also happens to be vehemently anti-homosexual. He is also on the board of directors for the National Organisation for Marriage Welfare: http://www.nationformarriage.org/site/apps/nlnet/content2.aspx?c=omL2KeN0LzH&b=5075187&ct=6938473superline51 said:
This, coupled with some of his outspoken views on homosexuality soured some of his fans, who while admitting they liked books like Ender's Game, now refuse to read anything he writes.
An interesting article expounding on his views: http://www.nauvoo.com/library/card-hypocrites.html TLDR: Homosexuals are engaged in a not so-clandestine 'network' and are driven purely by their need for sex from other homosexuals. To be fair on the man, he does state that he does not mean that Homosexuals should be treated harshly because of this, but only that it is to be considered abhorrent and not in anyway the natural state of things. i.e. The desire to commit Homosexual acts is a 'temptation', and giving in to those desires is sinful.
As for Ellison. He's a harsh, straight talking man, but while he was friends with Hubbard, I think he very much understands Hubbard's reasoning for creating the faux religion, i.e. to get rich and famous. Don't really get what Bob was hinting at since it was just a picture and a quick snipe at both of those authors.
Le sigh. Nobody is coming to save you. Not from a death where you somehow feel non-feeling forever, not from your 'sins', and not from space army Tuesdays because, fun as it may be conceptually, there is no space army Tuesday.
There's enough real difficulties in life (paying rent, getting laid, dealing with the annoying guy at work, getting your ass home after a party, being sick) that you shouldn't make up imaginary difficulties to worry about too. So no, don't make more religions. Shut down the ones that aren't working (read: ALL OF THEM).
There's enough real difficulties in life (paying rent, getting laid, dealing with the annoying guy at work, getting your ass home after a party, being sick) that you shouldn't make up imaginary difficulties to worry about too. So no, don't make more religions. Shut down the ones that aren't working (read: ALL OF THEM).
I'm unsatisfied with using fictional characters as religious icons. We need a concrete, and tangible focus for our belief.
That said, I'll sacrifice myself totally for this cause, and will allow you all to worship me. Shame on you for not doing so earlier.
That said, I'll sacrifice myself totally for this cause, and will allow you all to worship me. Shame on you for not doing so earlier.
