The four forms of "gnosis"
(media.greatawakening.win)
Comments (26)
sorted by:
I respectfully do NOT agree with these characterizations. The last three "types" debate and seek knowledge throughout their lives.
You misunderstand the first form, fren. The definition of god is "undefined", as is existence. That doesn't mean one cannot have faith in God, or define what God means to them, or seek knowledge. All that it means is any debate upon the issue of "the existence of god" has no meaning logically, as it descends into a semantic argument, and one based on circular reasoning.
So the atheist and theist don't think about the nature of God? That's not true.
Oh they think upon it. But there is no definition for either god or existence. How can you define that which is potentially outside the universe we perceive?
"But there is no definition for either god or existence."
There are a multitude of definitions.
If there are many definitions for god, then there isnt an agreed definition for god. If there isnt a unified definition, then any debate on such a being existing or not is inherently flawed. It either becomes a semantic argument, or a circular reasoning argument.
We cannot know, which is why one must choose to either believe or not. I choose the former.
I don't identify with any box.
me either, cookie cutters never applied to me /shrug
I dont see how there are any other options available, really. Everyone falls into one of these, whether they like it or not.
Nope. I follow an evolutionary model. It involves thinking across disciplines and not being confined to a structure.
This surely is what we try and avoid as humans isn't it? We can try our best to put words to thoughts but it doesn't supplant the thought. The thought is utterly more complex that out language can encompass. I shed these labels and all others because they don't accurately describe me (or arguably anyone else in their entirety- we are all infinitely more complex than those expressions permit).
Just because the four classifications exist doesnt mean you cant move from one to the other. And these four describe the states that can exist regarding the discussion on the existence of god.
That's all the do. They don't define anything else.
Words are definitions. This is an Ouroboros argument and scarcely worth considering. If you know your mind, why name it?
Then define God
Pass. Different for everyone.
And that, my fren, is why im ignostic.
This meme is nonsense. Most self described atheists are agnostics when you hear their viewpoint and are open to being proven wrong (at least about God, maybe not about their liberalism).
I've not debated many atheists or theists willing to accept that god (or existence) is an unknowable thing. Agnostics simply accept they dont know, and ignostics consider the question to be an unprovable argument and that not only do they not know, they never can truly know either's meaning.
Something being completely unknowable and something being partially knowable are two different things. God is revealed through relationship. Existence is sustained by God. To have no relationship to God is to be alienated from both God and ones own existence. When that separation is bridged God is known in part as the ultimate goodness that holds all of existence together.
Presuming god does exist (which is easiest for me as i do believe in him), he most likely exists outside our dimensions or our universe altogether. Otherwise, you would have a paradox of a creator creating himself via creating the universe. As we cannot perceive that which is outside our universe, we cannot truly know what god is.
To some, god is a being like man but perfect. To Dante, he described him as perfect geometric circles, if i correvtly remember my Paradiso. To presume to be able to describe him in any way is nigh on impossible for me. I have faith he spoke the universe into being with his Word, and that He exists, but what spoke the Word, i would never strive to define that being, let alone prove such a being exists or not.
The characterizations in that picture are bullshit. 3 of the 4 start out with a false statement. Garbage.
Here I was thinking from the title "Dia", "Prog" etc lolz
You're missing here the "gnostic theist" who does question and think about it, and through spiritual revelation KNOWS the answer.
I was married to an atheist who claimed to be agnostic. Said if there is a God you have to prove it to me.
I couldnt live with him anymore because he'd criticize me when I prayed, to him lying and cheating and stealing didnt matter unless you got caught.
Then found him on dating sites: spiritual but not religious
He'd say he didnt believe in heaven or hell. I said: You will. He's dead now, now he believes..
Respectfully...On theist: God has personality; He is a person. Part of the Trinity - to me, there’s no “it” about it!
Always good to know God to be a PERSONA. Then you can copyright it and claim every living being, universally, is dependent on the vicar for salvation.
For reference i am an ignostic believer in a one true God, but i accept no proof of existence of God can be derived logically without an explicit and agreed definition of God.