Gnostic Bishop

Satan gave man love. Was it worth the hate? Adam thought so. He instantly and without argument or hesitation ate of that knowledge when Eve offered love to Adam. Without Satan causing Original Sin, mankind could no know of love or hate as love and hate are subject to being good or evil. Would you do as Adam did? Was Satan right in opening our eyes to love and hate? Should we venerate Satan more than Yahweh who tried to deny mankind love? Regards DL

Equality is impossible. Women and children should come first and have rightfully won the equality wars. This is not to say that I do not believe in equality under the law. I do, but would ignore it for my higher duty to family if the need should arise. The protection of home as the family hub and backbone of society is why moral men should and do put women and their children above themselves. That is the highest of a male’s duty to humanity and our evolving species and is a part of our instincts. If a man, and you do not live by the law of the sea and put women and children and their needs above your own, even on land, then you would not be doing your highest or first duty to humanity. Do you agree? Regards DL

If we count the murders, you are bang on. Regards DL

No, I agree, but being as bright as a brick and not reproducing is. Strange how you ignored the worst results. Regards DL

Good post. What I meant was that The Jews see Eden as our elevation, but when Christianity usurped their God, they reversed that elevation to a fall. ‘Instead of the Fall of man (in the sense of humanity as a whole), Judaism preaches the Rise of man: and instead of Original Sin, it stresses Original Virtue, the beneficent hereditary influence of righteous ancestors upon their descendants’. http://dish.andrewsullivan.com/2013/10/20/comparative-theodicy/ Regards DL

?? So you would stay as bright as a brick and not even be bright enough to know you were naked and never reproduce. Ok. Regards DL

Actually, I recognize that the world is getting more moral. But to your stupid remark. All freedoms are regulated by the harm they might cause, including nudity. Go to the most liberal country in the world and have your wife stand near a freeway with her breasts exposed, even in Canada where nudity and exposed breasts are legal, and you will see how fast she is arrested. Out her on an appropriate beach and she would have no problems. Perhaps you should think more deeply about the points you put. Regards DL

So you are saying that you like to be forced or coerced into doing things instead of you voluntarily doing something. Ok. I think you are the exception to the rule. As to Muslim women, you are not quite correct. The instruction to wear veils was so that the richer women that could afford them would not be raped when they went out during the night to go to the washrooms. You seem to forget that Muslim men blame women for the rape they have to suffer. And you like the holy books and religion that promotes that. Try thinking like a woman, or just a gay man in Muslim country. Thinking in do unto others terms should change your mind. As to the morality of both Islam and Christianity. Both Christianity and Islam, slave holding ideologies, have basically developed into intolerant, homophobic and misogynous religions. Both religions have grown themselves by the sword instead of good deeds and continue with their immoral ways in spite of secular law showing them the moral ways. Jesus said we would know his people by their works and deeds. That means Jesus would not recognize Christians and Muslims as his people, and neither do I. Jesus would call Christianity and Islam abominations. Gnostic Christians did in the past, and I am proudly continuing that tradition and honest irrefutable evaluation based on morality. https://topdocumentaryfilms.com/theft-values/ https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZxoxPapPxXk Humanity centered religions, good? Yes. Supernaturally based religions, evil? Yes. Do you agree? Regards DL

That is not logical. All that is knowable is subject to the adjectives of good and evil so the tree of knowledge of good and evil is the tree of all knowledge. You cannot name anything that is not subject to good or evil. Therefore, without any knowledge whatsoever, desire to sin or not sin could not be triggered. Thais Rabbi gives the longer version if you care to hear her, start this up at the 30 min. mark. Fathers, regardless of other conditions, would not desire or conspire to pass on their sins to their children. God is said to be the creator and sustainer of us all. He would thus be willfully passing on those sins which according to the bible is injustice. Ezekiel 18:20 The soul that sinneth, it shall die. The son shall not bear the iniquity of the father, neither shall the father bear the iniquity of the son: the righteousness of the righteous shall be upon him, and the wickedness of the wicked shall be upon him. Deuteronomy 24:16 (ESV) "Fathers shall not be put to death because of their children, nor shall children be put to death because of their fathers. Each one shall be put to death for his own sin. The declaration which says that God visits the sins of the fathers upon the children is contrary to every principle of moral justice. [Thomas Paine, The Age of Reason] If you prefer to think that God is such an unjust prick, who would ignore what he tells us is justice in the bible, go ahead. I will easily agree that Yahweh, a genocidal son murdering God is an unjust prick. Regards DL

A good view. I asked Elizbaeth a question above on Christianity reversing the original meaning of the story. Care to speculate on why they did that? Regards DL

Yours is an intelligent view that I share. As a female, can you guess why Christianity took what the Jews saw as man's elevation and success in Eden, for both man and God, and reversed the moral of the story from success to failure for all concerned? http://dish.andrewsullivan.com/2013/10/20/comparative-theodicy/ ‘Instead of the Fall of man (in the sense of humanity as a whole), Judaism preaches the Rise of man: and instead of Original Sin, it stresses Original Virtue, the beneficent hereditary influence of righteous ancestors upon their descendants’. Regards DL

Freedom of speech does not extend to freedom to lie to our weakest and most gullible. Freedom of speech has always been restricted by the damage it does and fraud directed at our weakest and most gullible is a damage or harm we should try to prevent. Regards DL

Basically, yes. I do not mind Gnostic Christianity and other religions that are wisdom and knowledge seekers as they have no need to lie and place man above God where we belong, given that we have created all of them. Regards DL

Should Governments regulate fraudulent religions? https://www.google.ca/search?source=hp&ei=wRyUWquFHcm4tQXV74XQBw&q=fraud+laws&oq=fraud+laws&gs_l=psy-ab.3..0l10.1003.11584.0.15863.10.10.0.0.0.0.114.1040.3j7.10.0....0...1.1.64.psy-ab..0.10.1037...0i131k1.0.nCgTyqsYAOA Fraud is a broad term that refers to a variety of offenses involving dishonesty or "fraudulent acts". In essence, fraud is the intentional deception of a person or entity by another made for monetary or personal gain. Fraud offenses always include some sort of false statement, misrepresentation, or deceitful conduct. Most governments and countries have fraud laws of some kinds. They generally interfere with religious fraudsters only when physical harm is being done to our gullible citizens yet ignore the monetary theft that the fraudsters fleece from their victims. Prosperity ministries are the most flagrant of these immoral religions, but all religions based on demonstrable lies would be included in this question. Our governments are quite good at acting against obvious fraudsters yet seem reluctant to protect our more gullible citizens when it comes down to religions. Religions, to me, get a free pass to lie and steal all they can from victims, especially the older citizens even when governments know about the fraud. I begin to see the inaction of governments on these religious fraudsters as a dereliction of duty. Do you? Regards DL

So if you would not and are ok with that, why is it not ok for A & E? As to Adam, he just showed the good sense to follow Eve's lead, just as you indicate you would do. Regards DL