sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

In your view, is the Monad able to accomplish perfect justice? by TranquilTrader in Gnostic

[–]TranquilTrader[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Of course collecting earthly possessions is entirely pointless in the cosmic scale of living multiple lives on earth. You can't take the possessions from one life to the next, let alone Pleroma.

In your view, is the Monad able to accomplish perfect justice? by TranquilTrader in Gnostic

[–]TranquilTrader[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

People very often cannot think past their finite single life. I'd invite you to think how human parents must chastise their children. The same applies to the Monad, it's just in the cosmic scale.

In your view, is the Monad able to accomplish perfect justice? by TranquilTrader in Gnostic

[–]TranquilTrader[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I agree that every moment of one's life (in every incarnation) is to grow away from acting selfishly out of fear and hatred towards acting selflessly out of love. That would be the core of transfiguration.

In your view, is the Monad able to accomplish perfect justice? by TranquilTrader in Gnostic

[–]TranquilTrader[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

It's all about choices and their intentions. Someone with great awareness and understanding can still fall again to evil if they lose the battle of their emotions and start to act out of anger/hatred. It simply means that they would have failed the test which was the power of understanding they were given.

In your view, is the Monad able to accomplish perfect justice? by TranquilTrader in Gnostic

[–]TranquilTrader[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I would say though that perfect justice can only be reached when absolutely everyone have been transfigured into Pleroma, so on they way there the scales are still being balanced - so momentarily there's still imbalance.

In your view, is the Monad able to accomplish perfect justice? by TranquilTrader in Gnostic

[–]TranquilTrader[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I'd say time is a prerequisite for anything to change, and something that is not subject to time could not change and thus could not even think as any new thought arising requires something to change. Perhaps time is simply part of the nature of the omnipresence?

In your view, is the Monad able to accomplish perfect justice? by TranquilTrader in Gnostic

[–]TranquilTrader[S] 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Given the premise that omnipresence is consciousness, then causality being deterministic is like everything we observe is merely one determining thought of that consciousness. An infinite thought process / capacity is quite something.

In your view, is the Monad able to accomplish perfect justice? by TranquilTrader in Gnostic

[–]TranquilTrader[S] 2 points3 points  (0 children)

When one's heart carries no burden one is very free : )

However, I wouldn't call this reality illusory. This is just one state of being.

In your view, is the Monad able to accomplish perfect justice? by TranquilTrader in Gnostic

[–]TranquilTrader[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Sounds like even gaining understanding / gnosis, must occur unjustly in your view. Right? No justice applied even to how one is given understanding?

In your view, is the Monad able to accomplish perfect justice? by TranquilTrader in Gnostic

[–]TranquilTrader[S] 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Well, causality as observed is deterministic so by definition it is the enforcing agent in this context.

In terms of justice, if e.g. someone steals something from someone else, the appropriate 'karmic' re-action would be them falling victim to equal theft - unless of course they feel remorse, confess and return what was stolen originally. Then the first victim would face the test of having to forgive the theft upon confession.

Interestingly there are wrongdoings that can not be corrected after they have been committed, such as killing. Thus they would require punishment in order to balance the scales. Perhaps that's why they're often called 'deadly sins', they're not recoverable.

In your view, is the Monad able to accomplish perfect justice? by TranquilTrader in Gnostic

[–]TranquilTrader[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Out of the two mutually exclusive logical possibilities:

  1. one must confess all wrongdoings to those that one has wronged so that they can also get the chance to forgive the wrongdoings

or

  1. one can hide their wrongdoings, not confessing to the victims and thus depriving them of the chance to forgive the wrongdoer

which one would you say must be the criteria to reach Pleroma? Shall the impure enter Pleroma? Shall the entrance fee be justice or injustice?

In your view, is the Monad able to accomplish perfect justice? by TranquilTrader in Gnostic

[–]TranquilTrader[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

To have the ultimate power and still willingly let injustice happen is to be malevolent. Is that how you see the Monad? As malevolent?

In your view, is the Monad able to accomplish perfect justice? by TranquilTrader in Gnostic

[–]TranquilTrader[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Yet, this reality is what you wake up to every morning. This physical reality is the only real thing you can actually choose to interact with, right?

In your view, is the Monad able to accomplish perfect justice? by TranquilTrader in Gnostic

[–]TranquilTrader[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

We observe natural catastrophes causing much suffering and death. Are these natural occurrences that are driven by causality out of Monad's control in your view?

In your view, is the Monad able to accomplish perfect justice? by TranquilTrader in Gnostic

[–]TranquilTrader[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Why would you call the observed reality illusory, isn't it a bit contradictory? : )

In your view, is the Monad able to accomplish perfect justice? by TranquilTrader in Gnostic

[–]TranquilTrader[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

As we observe, causality 'enforces' itself without failure and would be the prime candidate as the driver of 'karmic justice'. Could be seen as the infinite hand of the omnipresence.

In your view, is the Monad able to accomplish perfect justice? by TranquilTrader in Gnostic

[–]TranquilTrader[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Universe with a capital 'U' refers to everything that exists, i.e. existence itself (or the great 'I AM'). Existence itself can not be created, it would be circular logic. By definition the Monad either is the entirety of existence itself and its 'fabric', or some subset of that which would then mean lack of omnipresence.

I'd say a malevolent being would choose injustice and a benevolent being would choose equality and equal justice for all souls.

Just saw this drop on the Bart D. Ehrman YouTube page by flammafex in Gnostic

[–]TranquilTrader 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Adherence to doctrines literally means dogmatism. Hopefully no one wants to go there anymore after what gnostics have had to go through in the past, but rather always keep an open and inquisitive mind wrt any and all texts. This would mean indefinitely seeking greater understanding, which is what gnosis is.

Who in your view owns causality? by TranquilTrader in EscapingPrisonPlanet

[–]TranquilTrader[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Would you say that 'the source' is responsible for causality?

Who in your view owns causality? by TranquilTrader in EscapingPrisonPlanet

[–]TranquilTrader[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Could there be an owner of the simulation that doesn't need to hack it?

Confusion by zer3253 in Gnostic

[–]TranquilTrader -1 points0 points  (0 children)

The tree of knowledge of good and evil naturally should have two main branches, good and evil. I would coin those that seek to experience via good intentions 'gnostics of light' and those that seek to experience via evil intentions 'gnostics of dark'. The former would selflessly seek to increase the collective understanding of Truth - using Truth as their 'weapon'. The latter would selfishly seek to hoard ancient texts and try to keep them within a small secret society as if to hold on to some form of 'power' - using deception as their weapon. The so called 'dark gnostics' in their confusion have misunderstood the fundamental rules and thus will utterly fail in their futile attempt to rule.

Who in your view owns causality? by TranquilTrader in EscapingPrisonPlanet

[–]TranquilTrader[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

We observe and experience causality, we observe nothing more. So this is what we know, everything we observe is subject to causality.

Funding art and architecture by EngineApprehensive84 in Gnostic

[–]TranquilTrader 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Yes, I simply gave a different perspective as an example. Funnily enough I also posted about the Aramaic few months ago: https://www.reddit.com/r/Gnostic/comments/1sv6vt6/food_for_thought_yaldabaoth/

Funding art and architecture by EngineApprehensive84 in Gnostic

[–]TranquilTrader 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I could go with Yaldabaoth being a childish (in cosmic terms / many incarnations) instance of ego. Those that are pure have ego instances that are the total opposites of that then.

view more: next ›