It's a good question, same can be said about the Christian church. The famous question: Can a truly converted Christian ever lose his salvation? regardless how much sin he/she commits afterwards.
Touche! I should have said everyone needs to do good like everyone needs to breathe. Some people deny the need, and end up lacking; some recognize the need and engage it. Doing good includes ensuring full coverage for how one's past sins have harmed oneself and others, so the end result answers the question in each case.
IMO, doing good instead of evil negates archons influence on you and me and helps us with our struggle for spiritual liberation.
Okay ....
Because when you forget what you are, pure divine awareness, unbound by form, you fall asleep inside their dream.
How does the awoken live in this physical world then? Isn't it how Jesus lived, master of every situation, always down to earth remaining above it all?
Anyway, my point was eschatological so less important. If there is present motivation as you describe then there is always fruit and no doubt about whether any question will persist infinitely.
Why would life-and-death matters be based on manuscripts hidden from humanity for 1,500 years, how would that be fair to those who came before?
They aren't, they are based on matters accessible generally to all people and specially via echoes in all cultures. The recent phenomenon of a "complete Bible" is merely systematization of that eternal accessibility. Proof, the Bible never existed as one set of manuscripts in the same place at the same time, copies (even very poor ones) always work like the originals.
Among them were the Gnostics, communities that believed something revolutionary. You don't need priests, churches, or salvation from anyone else because the divine spark already lives within you. This wasn't just a theological disagreement. It was an existential threat to religious authority itself.
I don't understand. The divine spark makes anyone in very real senses a priest, church, and saviour. Therefore there should be no problem with letting anyone else be priest, church, or saviour too. Gnostics, or Orthodox, who would live and let live wouldn't have a problem with this. When a Gnostic, or an Orthodox, forgets the divine spark in another and declares separation that's when the war starts. So the aspect of gnosis you describe doesn't logically constitute an existential threat IMHO.
A little bit. This is a community that likes sources for sweeping claims like this. Gnostics executed, trying to recall any, nothing comes to mind. Libraries burned, doesn't sound like when the gnostics were alive. Yeah, a couple people were exiled as far as I know for "scattered communities". What physical facts did you have in mind?
For over 1500 years, we only knew Gnosticism through the writings of its enemies. Until 1945, when an Egyptian farmer discovered 13 buried co[d]ices near Nag Hammadi. Suddenly, we could hear the Gnostics speak for themselves. And what they revealed changes everything we thought we knew about early Christianity.
Thanks, James, but this doesn't sound like your own voice. When I discovered Nag Hammadi it didn't change anything I thought I knew.
I'm still not sure I understand your concern/question about Satan or Samael. Perhaps you could be more specific which tradition you are referring to.
I'm not referring to tradition but to actual beings. Is there not a single extant, conscious, sentient, communicative, spiritual being that currently answers to "Samael" and the title "satan"? Or do you not mean an entity at all but merely a cluster of abstract concepts like "Evil"?
he is often understood to represent the sinful impulse (in Hebrew, yetzer hara) or, more generally, the forces that prevents human beings from submitting to divine will.
Yeah, not what I'm talking about at all. Yetzer hara and forces are human or cosmic functions that can be instantiated, they're not abstract like evil. Similarly, spirit entities are personal beings like we are, and if they weren't then we should stop personifying them and just speak about them abstractly like evil.
the world is also full of people radiating hate, darkness, violence, and fear.
Or, these things are lack of radiation ....
And you can choose to call god: Yahweh, Jehovah, LORD, Elohim, Adonai, or Sabaoth. You can also choose to call evil: satan, samael, abaddon, or lucifer.
This sounds like you want to take the personality of both Monad and adversary out of the question. I'm focusing on persons.
I'm a person. I answer to the highest person that exists. If the Monad is a person, I answer to it; if not, I ask who is the highest person. Evil is not a person. There exists a most evil person (unless all humans and devils will be personally purified without exception). If there are no evil people, there is no point attributing personal titles to satan; if there is a most evil person, there is no point attributing him titles beyond what his evil deserves. HTH and thank you for the great counterpoint.
Touche! I should have said everyone needs to do good like everyone needs to breathe. Some people deny the need, and end up lacking; some recognize the need and engage it. Doing good includes ensuring full coverage for how one's past sins have harmed oneself and others, so the end result answers the question in each case.
Okay ....
How does the awoken live in this physical world then? Isn't it how Jesus lived, master of every situation, always down to earth remaining above it all?
Anyway, my point was eschatological so less important. If there is present motivation as you describe then there is always fruit and no doubt about whether any question will persist infinitely.
They aren't, they are based on matters accessible generally to all people and specially via echoes in all cultures. The recent phenomenon of a "complete Bible" is merely systematization of that eternal accessibility. Proof, the Bible never existed as one set of manuscripts in the same place at the same time, copies (even very poor ones) always work like the originals.
I don't understand. The divine spark makes anyone in very real senses a priest, church, and saviour. Therefore there should be no problem with letting anyone else be priest, church, or saviour too. Gnostics, or Orthodox, who would live and let live wouldn't have a problem with this. When a Gnostic, or an Orthodox, forgets the divine spark in another and declares separation that's when the war starts. So the aspect of gnosis you describe doesn't logically constitute an existential threat IMHO.
A little bit. This is a community that likes sources for sweeping claims like this. Gnostics executed, trying to recall any, nothing comes to mind. Libraries burned, doesn't sound like when the gnostics were alive. Yeah, a couple people were exiled as far as I know for "scattered communities". What physical facts did you have in mind?
Thanks, James, but this doesn't sound like your own voice. When I discovered Nag Hammadi it didn't change anything I thought I knew.
I'm not referring to tradition but to actual beings. Is there not a single extant, conscious, sentient, communicative, spiritual being that currently answers to "Samael" and the title "satan"? Or do you not mean an entity at all but merely a cluster of abstract concepts like "Evil"?
Yeah, not what I'm talking about at all. Yetzer hara and forces are human or cosmic functions that can be instantiated, they're not abstract like evil. Similarly, spirit entities are personal beings like we are, and if they weren't then we should stop personifying them and just speak about them abstractly like evil.
Or, these things are lack of radiation ....
This sounds like you want to take the personality of both Monad and adversary out of the question. I'm focusing on persons.
I'm a person. I answer to the highest person that exists. If the Monad is a person, I answer to it; if not, I ask who is the highest person. Evil is not a person. There exists a most evil person (unless all humans and devils will be personally purified without exception). If there are no evil people, there is no point attributing personal titles to satan; if there is a most evil person, there is no point attributing him titles beyond what his evil deserves. HTH and thank you for the great counterpoint.