Exaltist Ethan
Bridging the Gap Between Believers and Skeptics
In a previous thread I explained that I'm not just part of Earthseed but a gnostic on the subject of God, explaining that I know and understand the very fundamentals on how to create it. It seems to me that my very theology of Exaltism is essentially Earthseed Gnosticism. Earthseed teaches that God is change, I explain what changes creates God.
However, if you actually look up the concept of Gnosticism, you get results that focus on a particular group of early Christians that "knows" God. If you take the word "agnostic", meaning "no knowledge of God", then gnostic, the opposite of that, seems to be "knowledge of God." But gnosticism in general theory seems to be very open to interpretation of what God is, and the Gnostics that I've heard and read about seem to point all ideas of it to Christianity.
Now, I don't want to confuse people by making them thinking I'm Earthseed AND Christian Gnostic at the same time, because, frankly, I'm not a Christian. When I say that I'm an Earthseed Gnostic, I'm using Earthseed as the adjective and Gnostic as the noun, describing myself as someone who knows how to create God, which is what Earthseed and the other syntheist religions are trying to do.
This might confuse people, and I'm wondering if I should relabel myself, or simply go back to Earthseed to avoid confusion. My theological practice is different from Earthseed, primarily because I don't see change itself being God, but rather, the thing that changes, my idea of "synverses", can become God through those changes. As explained before, God is not necessarily a being but a description of a being. It seems proper, then, to call myself an Earthseed Gnostic, because I am able to describe myself as someone who not only understands Earthseed theology but how it develops and creates God.
And just like the Christian Gnostics, the development of God in my own gnostic idea could be viewed as esoteric, no matter how exoteric I try to make the concepts to be.
Maybe i am overthinking this...
Okay. When someone tells you that they believe in Gnosticism, which of these two concepts of gnosticism do you think they believe?
(1) They know God.
or
(2) They belong to a certain group of Christians and Christianity that had extra-Biblical scriptures and claimed to know God from that?
Your responses will help me understand how I should frame my theology. If people take the broader sense of the term, (1), then I'll just keep my religion as Earthseed Gnostic, as confusing as it might be to people not familiar to transhumanist theology. But if by calling myself "Gnostic" in any way automatically makes people assume I am Christian, I really want to avoid that connotation completely, and will revert back to simply "Earthseed".
Or maybe I'll change it again once I find an even more specific idea that better co-relates to my theological construct. I mean, I do call myself "Exaltist" Ethan, from my own idea of Exaltism, but I want to avoid using my own terminology whenever possible in an attempt to convey a more exoteric idea and concept.
So please, explain to me what the term "gnostic" or "gnosticism" really means.
Also, I would like to point out that whether or not I keep calling myself "gnostic" I do in general want to understand this concept that has been elusive for me for the past several years. Not too many people claim to actually be gnostic, but many religions do claim that they actually know God, apparently.
Maybe in the end I'll find a different description that explains myself better than the esoteric words I've found and created. Instead of putting a religion in the religion description I could just say "We Create God" or "God Building", although the latter idea was once considered an extreme Marxist propaganda tool.
My quest to find the concept that describes me is not over. But even if I change my religion and no longer put Earthseed as it, I shall always be influenced by its simple premise that God is change. That is one thing about me that won't change.
However, if you actually look up the concept of Gnosticism, you get results that focus on a particular group of early Christians that "knows" God. If you take the word "agnostic", meaning "no knowledge of God", then gnostic, the opposite of that, seems to be "knowledge of God." But gnosticism in general theory seems to be very open to interpretation of what God is, and the Gnostics that I've heard and read about seem to point all ideas of it to Christianity.
Now, I don't want to confuse people by making them thinking I'm Earthseed AND Christian Gnostic at the same time, because, frankly, I'm not a Christian. When I say that I'm an Earthseed Gnostic, I'm using Earthseed as the adjective and Gnostic as the noun, describing myself as someone who knows how to create God, which is what Earthseed and the other syntheist religions are trying to do.
This might confuse people, and I'm wondering if I should relabel myself, or simply go back to Earthseed to avoid confusion. My theological practice is different from Earthseed, primarily because I don't see change itself being God, but rather, the thing that changes, my idea of "synverses", can become God through those changes. As explained before, God is not necessarily a being but a description of a being. It seems proper, then, to call myself an Earthseed Gnostic, because I am able to describe myself as someone who not only understands Earthseed theology but how it develops and creates God.
And just like the Christian Gnostics, the development of God in my own gnostic idea could be viewed as esoteric, no matter how exoteric I try to make the concepts to be.
Maybe i am overthinking this...
Okay. When someone tells you that they believe in Gnosticism, which of these two concepts of gnosticism do you think they believe?
(1) They know God.
or
(2) They belong to a certain group of Christians and Christianity that had extra-Biblical scriptures and claimed to know God from that?
Your responses will help me understand how I should frame my theology. If people take the broader sense of the term, (1), then I'll just keep my religion as Earthseed Gnostic, as confusing as it might be to people not familiar to transhumanist theology. But if by calling myself "Gnostic" in any way automatically makes people assume I am Christian, I really want to avoid that connotation completely, and will revert back to simply "Earthseed".
Or maybe I'll change it again once I find an even more specific idea that better co-relates to my theological construct. I mean, I do call myself "Exaltist" Ethan, from my own idea of Exaltism, but I want to avoid using my own terminology whenever possible in an attempt to convey a more exoteric idea and concept.
So please, explain to me what the term "gnostic" or "gnosticism" really means.
Also, I would like to point out that whether or not I keep calling myself "gnostic" I do in general want to understand this concept that has been elusive for me for the past several years. Not too many people claim to actually be gnostic, but many religions do claim that they actually know God, apparently.
Maybe in the end I'll find a different description that explains myself better than the esoteric words I've found and created. Instead of putting a religion in the religion description I could just say "We Create God" or "God Building", although the latter idea was once considered an extreme Marxist propaganda tool.
My quest to find the concept that describes me is not over. But even if I change my religion and no longer put Earthseed as it, I shall always be influenced by its simple premise that God is change. That is one thing about me that won't change.
