What makes you assume that the universe, specifically earth and its surrounding area, was not created by God? Or I suppose what evidence points to the idea that we was not created by God?
-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
Gnostics versus Christians
- Thread starter Evangelicalhumanist
- Start date
What makes you assume that the universe, specifically earth and its surrounding area, was not created by God? Or I suppose what evidence points to the idea that we was not created by God?
I'll just inject here that no one that I can see in that thread asked him to expound on that premise. If you see someone buzz in and do a fly-by on you and you don't ask for an elaboration, that's on you. *shrugs*
Grandliseur
Well-Known Member
From a human philosophical perspective, without going to a scriptural (Biblical) authority, your post is interesting.
Let me insert a scripture. It tells us that God says this about himself: I shall become who I am becoming. (Ex 3:14 Interlinear: http://www.scripture4all.org/OnlineInterlinear/OTpdf/exo3.pdf)
This direct statement of who God is - by himself - neither promises love, goodness, nor evil, or hate, or anything else, except one thing - namely, that God shall be true to himself whatever that turns out to be in our regard.
Perhaps others may agree to the following, namely, that without the explanations of the Bible, God's interaction with men on earth cannot be understood, the wonders, the glory-full things, the amazing nature, flowers, birds, insects, all is beyond awe. And, yet, on closer examination, some things, insects, etc. are scary as hell, other things are terror inspiring, typhoons, hurricanes, volcanoes and super ones too. The beauty of a naked woman who has the luck to have natural perfection, and the sorrow of some of us who have the opposite at times. A God of love, and yet so many of us have to suffer.(Of course, satan is greatly responsible for this.)
------------------
Here I will insert a poem of mine that I wrote, but never could write again for it seems beyond myself. I am no longer that which I used to be.
-------------------
Link: >Truth Seeker - Why Forgotten<
Last edited:
The main difference is seeing the world corrupt or good first and then enlightened and corrupt second, makes a cursed world of a difference.
Who can say what came first though...but as nature would have it things start out genrally more healthy and innocent like a new born babe, then turn into a miserable old cuss.
Yea the Bible even says it all started out good, not sure how that gets lost between that to a partaking a curse called wisdom. Is wisdom(knowledge of good and evil) a bad thing?
Nah. The world couldn't have been created by an "evil" entity. I know you, and most others, still accept the myth of "evil" existing, but even by your own standards of evil the world simply doesn't fit the theory that an evil being would create the world.
Choose a brand of evil: and it doesn't really fit.
Wrathful?? No, if that were the case why isn't the world designed in such a way that atheists spontaneously combust??
Prideful?? No, if that were the case one would think that the creator would make himself more obvious.
Greedy?? One would think that a greedy creator would be more obvious and more pushy in asserting his ownership over us.
Gluttonous?? Well... again, I'd think it would be a bit more obvious of a creator existing. It'd be like Galactus, right??
Lustful?? Again, I'd think it'd be more obvious, and we'd all be part of that creator's cosmic harem.
Slothful?? Well, the world wouldn't really exist now would it?? Surely creation is too much work for such an evil.
Psychotic and sadistic?? Well, the world would look like Dante's conception of Hell, but for innocents too, if that were the case.
Even if you still believe that evil exists in the world, it's hard to imagine that whatever being created the world would design it in such a way as to cover the above evils.
I think the most convincing case you could make for an evil creator (or at least the most interesting, as it makes for an interesting story at the very least) would be that the creator's evil was "envy", as a couple "creator is evil" religions actually did believe.
Basically the narrative of that "creator is evil" story went something like this:
God is perfect good, creates Heaven and everything is awesome!!
Creator is jealous of God, wants to create something of his own, creates Earth and convinces people in Heaven to go to Earth, promising it is better than God's Heaven.
Creator essentially traps people in his world by making it appealing. He gets them attached to the material world in such a state that they do not want to leave it, and so they become stuck in a cycle of reincarnation. The only way for people to return to heaven is to detach themselves from the pleasures of the material world, which the Creator uses to trap us all in his inferior copy of Heaven.
That particular "creator is evil" narrative is definitely the most interesting theory on the subject I've ever seen exist, and is the one that makes the most sense for our real world (as if the Creator was evil in a different way, well then the world as we know it would be vastly different).
Though I still think it suffers from a critical flaw: in that the world the Creator is trying to trick us into staying in just isn't appealing enough to people in general. One would think the material and physical pleasures of the world would be almost limitless to trick us into staying if this was the case. And one would think an envious creator would be a bit more blatant about their own existence. Something like a salesman trying to get you to enjoy all the good things in his world while encouraging you to look past the flaws. Basically if the envious creator was successful, your own reasoning for why the creator seemed evil would never have even come about.
Choose a brand of evil: and it doesn't really fit.
Wrathful?? No, if that were the case why isn't the world designed in such a way that atheists spontaneously combust??
Prideful?? No, if that were the case one would think that the creator would make himself more obvious.
Greedy?? One would think that a greedy creator would be more obvious and more pushy in asserting his ownership over us.
Gluttonous?? Well... again, I'd think it would be a bit more obvious of a creator existing. It'd be like Galactus, right??
Lustful?? Again, I'd think it'd be more obvious, and we'd all be part of that creator's cosmic harem.
Slothful?? Well, the world wouldn't really exist now would it?? Surely creation is too much work for such an evil.
Psychotic and sadistic?? Well, the world would look like Dante's conception of Hell, but for innocents too, if that were the case.
Even if you still believe that evil exists in the world, it's hard to imagine that whatever being created the world would design it in such a way as to cover the above evils.
I think the most convincing case you could make for an evil creator (or at least the most interesting, as it makes for an interesting story at the very least) would be that the creator's evil was "envy", as a couple "creator is evil" religions actually did believe.
Basically the narrative of that "creator is evil" story went something like this:
God is perfect good, creates Heaven and everything is awesome!!
Creator is jealous of God, wants to create something of his own, creates Earth and convinces people in Heaven to go to Earth, promising it is better than God's Heaven.
Creator essentially traps people in his world by making it appealing. He gets them attached to the material world in such a state that they do not want to leave it, and so they become stuck in a cycle of reincarnation. The only way for people to return to heaven is to detach themselves from the pleasures of the material world, which the Creator uses to trap us all in his inferior copy of Heaven.
That particular "creator is evil" narrative is definitely the most interesting theory on the subject I've ever seen exist, and is the one that makes the most sense for our real world (as if the Creator was evil in a different way, well then the world as we know it would be vastly different).
Though I still think it suffers from a critical flaw: in that the world the Creator is trying to trick us into staying in just isn't appealing enough to people in general. One would think the material and physical pleasures of the world would be almost limitless to trick us into staying if this was the case. And one would think an envious creator would be a bit more blatant about their own existence. Something like a salesman trying to get you to enjoy all the good things in his world while encouraging you to look past the flaws.
Basically if the envious creator was successful, your own reasoning for why the creator seemed evil would never have even come about.
Last edited:
Jumi
Well-Known Member
It's abundantly clear in my opinion that no matter how wonderful nature is, it's out to kill us and make us work so that we need to spend some effort to protect ourselves from nature with clothing, shelter, medicine. There are also limits to us set by nature. We can't fly with just our bodies or use all of our potential in any aspect because nature imposes on us. These are not because nature is evil, but it's just how it works. The Demiurge can be viewed this way, though there were many schools of thought in those days before they were suppressed so some might have disagreed at least on a theoretical level.
Now what's this God that is talked about instead of the "creator", this God that's above nature in this struggle? In my opinion it's that which we can reach through meditation(or prayer) and other efforts such as the pursuit of wisdom(philosophy) and virtue(conscience) that sets us above the struggles of nature. Whatever it is, it's in the domain of experiental mysticism. Whether we call it the only true god or something else is not that important, I would suggest that the experience itself teaches us that before it words are only worth their weight in carbon dioxide.
Now what's this God that is talked about instead of the "creator", this God that's above nature in this struggle? In my opinion it's that which we can reach through meditation(or prayer) and other efforts such as the pursuit of wisdom(philosophy) and virtue(conscience) that sets us above the struggles of nature. Whatever it is, it's in the domain of experiental mysticism. Whether we call it the only true god or something else is not that important, I would suggest that the experience itself teaches us that before it words are only worth their weight in carbon dioxide.
It depends if you mean knowledge from first hand experience. If they only had first hand experience or knowlege of good up until eating the fruit, then gained first hand knowledge of evil after eating the fruit. Meaning they gained knowledge of bad when everything turned to S*** for them. Which was better?
Heck god could even be a woman, imagine?Nah. The world couldn't have been created by an "evil" entity. I know you, and most others, still accept the myth of "evil" existing, but even by your own standards of evil the world simply doesn't fit the theory that an evil being would create the world.
Choose a brand of evil: and it doesn't really fit.
Wrathful?? No, if that were the case why isn't the world designed in such a way that atheists spontaneously combust??
Prideful?? No, if that were the case one would think that the creator would make himself more obvious.
Greedy?? One would think that a greedy creator would be more obvious and more pushy in asserting his ownership over us.
Gluttonous?? Well... again, I'd think it would be a bit more obvious of a creator existing. It'd be like Galactus, right??
Lustful?? Again, I'd think it'd be more obvious, and we'd all be part of that creator's cosmic harem.
Slothful?? Well, the world wouldn't really exist now would it?? Surely creation is too much work for such an evil.
Psychotic and sadistic?? Well, the world would look like Dante's conception of Hell, but for innocents too, if that were the case.
Even if you still believe that evil exists in the world, it's hard to imagine that whatever being created the world would design it in such a way as to cover the above evils.
I think the most convincing case you could make for an evil creator (or at least the most interesting, as it makes for an interesting story at the very least) would be that the creator's evil was "envy", as a couple "creator is evil" religions actually did believe.
Basically the narrative of that "creator is evil" story went something like this:
God is perfect good, creates Heaven and everything is awesome!!
Creator is jealous of God, wants to create something of his own, creates Earth and convinces people in Heaven to go to Earth, promising it is better than God's Heaven.
Creator essentially traps people in his world by making it appealing. He gets them attached to the material world in such a state that they do not want to leave it, and so they become stuck in a cycle of reincarnation. The only way for people to return to heaven is to detach themselves from the pleasures of the material world, which the Creator uses to trap us all in his inferior copy of Heaven.
That particular "creator is evil" narrative is definitely the most interesting theory on the subject I've ever seen exist, and is the one that makes the most sense for our real world (as if the Creator was evil in a different way, well then the world as we know it would be vastly different).
Though I still think it suffers from a critical flaw: in that the world the Creator is trying to trick us into staying in just isn't appealing enough to people in general. One would think the material and physical pleasures of the world would be almost limitless to trick us into staying if this was the case. And one would think an envious creator would be a bit more blatant about their own existence. Something like a salesman trying to get you to enjoy all the good things in his world while encouraging you to look past the flaws.
Sophia (Gnosticism) - Wikipedia
Literally what even did that have to do with my post.
Jumi
Well-Known Member
True, but it's a limitation set on us from nature. Just like much of the "work of the demiurge", we can rise above it.Nonsense!! We can use our bodies to build and operate airplanes.
Sophia is demiurge mother, your post doesn't seem to take that into account. The way the myth goes, the demiurge is not really god, it's a false god.
My post did not refer specifically to Gnosticism, but to the "creator is evil" idea in general that the OP brought up which is found in several religions historically. I had Manichaeism more in mind when writing the post, since while familiar with Gnosticism, I'm more knowledgable on Manichaeism on the subject of a non-good creator.
But yeah, because my post was speaking in generally about a belief and not specifically about a religion that holds that belief, then of course it wouldn't mention specifics about a religion.
Which is why I was careful to use the term "Creator" and not "God" when refering to the belief in a Demiurge or Melech Kheshokha or another similar non-good creator from a similar religion.
Jumi
Well-Known Member
None of these are really what I'd define as evil, more that they are not that they are distracting. Most of them are just in every human nature in varying proportions.Choose a brand of evil: and it doesn't really fit.
Wrathful?? No, if that were the case why isn't the world designed in such a way that atheists spontaneously combust??
Prideful?? No, if that were the case one would think that the creator would make himself more obvious.
Greedy?? One would think that a greedy creator would be more obvious and more pushy in asserting his ownership over us.
Gluttonous?? Well... again, I'd think it would be a bit more obvious of a creator existing. It'd be like Galactus, right??
Lustful?? Again, I'd think it'd be more obvious, and we'd all be part of that creator's cosmic harem.
Slothful?? Well, the world wouldn't really exist now would it?? Surely creation is too much work for such an evil.
Evil is more about putting others(humans or animals) in harms way just because you wanted to.
Because there are a wide variety of things people define as "evil" I thought I'd include all possible definitions including your own.
For neither I nor my religion believe "evil" is anything at all, so it seemed better to use everyone else's definitions for the purposes of this discussion. Otherwise my post would have been nothing other than "The Creator couldn't be evil because evil doesn't exist". And I'm tired of the responses that my disbelief in evil provokes in people who take offense at that disbelief.
Basically I just wanted to cover all possible bases on how someone could define "evil" for the purposes of the premise of asking whether or not the Creator would be "evil", from your definition to the more classic definitions.
Think of God and all created men as an AI that's built into a simulation program. Then you will be closer to the truth.
To my understanding the Demiurge was more delusional than evil. He only believed he was the supreme authority, all-powerful, all-knowing.
Kind of fits along your later scenario.