>>42813926
It's more then that to me, we see in the bible Jesus confront those who act out the steps of being good with nothing behind it. To just keep the peace or get other to witness how well we fit the role. There has to be a heart to really see that good come to pass more then following steps to have everyone call good. Its the understanding you do good when no one watching because something is always watch.

File: 1765133666705063.jpg (161 KB, 595x860)

161 KB JPG

Stop being deceived by abrahamic archon slaves

As above so below

>>42814210
Aaaaand here comes the obligatory gnostic poster. Gnosticism is for men like new age crystals are for women.

File: cap.jpg (2.55 MB, 2382x3000)

2.55 MB JPG

>>42814264
>still clinging to the 2000 year judeo slave epstein blood cult created by the elites

yes I'm sure the elites tortured and killed you into converting to christianity for your own good

pinkie promise lmao

>>42814287
Why do you idolize the elites so much? They're probably not that happy.

>>42814301
>never said I idolize them
hylic projection

they're literally archons in skinsuits

>>42814319
Nah, you do idolize them because you believe only something inhuman can become an elite. They're just regular humans and they struggle with achieving happiness even with their riches.

>>42814344
>ignore the unseen world
>ignore the spiritual forces at play obviously guiding this loosh farm

lol ok archon. you're number one lie is trying to trick people this world is organic when it's not.

>>42813926
God is a retarded lying tranny who tries to pretend that the afterlife will be better than my life right now when he literally abuses me for my thoughts right now. The afterlife is just dreaming in the womb and the fact that God abuses me for things like thinking and playing video games is proof that his problem is me being happy/enjoying myself. The nature of God doesn't change, he's not going to magically become more tolerant of my happiness when I'm dead in the womb, if he abuses me for my thoughts, playing video games, watching tv/movies now then he not going to allow me to experience anything more enjoyable than that when I die, or as enjoyable as that. God is a retarded tranny who never intends to stop making my life hell, he doesn't tolerate me being happy in life and he won't tolerate me being happy in death either.

>>42813926
>Life is a testing ground,
I do not consent to being tested.
>b-but before you existed your oversoul...
I don't give a fuck. I am here and now, I have no memory of anything before or after or sideways AND I DO NOT CONSENT.

>>42813926
What about people born who can't walk or can't talk or are retarded or had a stroke. This makes no sense unless you assume that part of the population isn't a valid life in th simulator

>>42813926
Why punish in the afterlife? Would be both moral and efficient to simply give those that are bad no afterlife.

>>42814475
A TRUE LEADER OF MEN RIGHT HERE

>>42813926
>it's not complicated
It is though.
Can we murder a murderer, or to stop them from murdering?
How much can I charge for something before it is stealing?
What determines ownership, such that we can define theft?
Can I own a person?
If you try to liberate that person, are you stealing?

>>42815182
Can we murder a murderer, or to stop them from murdering?
You shouldn't murder another, because what you put out is what you get back. If you murder someone you can expect to get murdered. Self-defense is not murder, if you are certain you'd die if you didn't kill someone who's going to kill you, it may be a gray area. Actual accidents also don't qualify as murder in my view.
How much can I charge for something before it is stealing?
One can charge as much as one wishes, but if someone see's no other choice than to buy from you and your price is too steep, then you may eventually have to face that type of situation from the buyer's perspective.
What determines ownership, such that we can define theft?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ownership
Can I own a person?
Owning a person other than yourself can be considered slavery, which is banned by law in many places, that said, there are many types of slavery, so yes, it is possible, although owning a person against their will would be bad
If you try to liberate that person, are you stealing?
If you liberate the person that is owned against their will it is not stealing, but if you "liberate" a person who is owned and willing to be owned then it is stealing

I have no clue.
>be christian
>go through edgy atheist phase
>find spiritualism again but more esoteric
>go through various rabbit holes
>end up gnosticism
>major existential crisis
>dig even more
>everything is fake and gay, and god/whatever controls this reality/earth is retarded or evil
>history keeps repeating over and over with the same fake and gay theater done by the elites
>say fuck it and just enjoy my life
Fuck the demiurge though.

>>42813926

imho it can be more subtle than the examples given. for instance, two upstanding citizens, who dont kill, rape, or pillage, who are devoutly religous, may seem the same. but underneath the cultivated facade, is where it lies.

woo-woo books use many different ways of explaining the "two sides" you speak of. one common way, that removes a lot of the obvious violence, is service to others, or service to self. sto, or sts.

if you give this thought, you will see a divide. but its not as simple as you think. true intention matters. heres an example.

a person might be sts without knowing it, because very few look within. this person might read some woo-woo, and be like, "fuck ya, watch how im gonna service others! imma service the shit outta them! watch how fast, i polarize! ouu look, an old lady fell, gonna give her a hand, so everyone can see how selfless i am!"

are the intentions of that person, like, everything theyvare trying, are they ultimately servicing others to really themselves, or is it genuine? do you see what i mean?

another example is unitary vs separation. or sharing knowledge vs hoarding it. it goes deeper and deeper. now if you dont like woo-woo, try science. probablistic vs deterministic. theres many examples to ponder.

though we have free will, i believe its not a choice. i believe, we need to find our true selves, and align with what actually fits. many seem to pick sides because of possible rewards or drawbacks. like theyre picking what to wear today, or what fastfood combo to order. while i dont condemn this, i dont agree with it.

>>42815807
>in my view.
Who gives a fuck about YOUR view? Why do YOU get to decide what is good?
In my view, letting a murder kill a thousand people just because you dont want to kill him makes you just as bad as he is.
>if someone see's no other choice than to buy from you and your price is too steep
MORE "you get to decide" bullshit. What is "no other choice"? what is "too steep"?
How much can Nestle charge for people to drink clean water?
They dont HAVE to drink clean water...
>https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ownership
So now the libs of wiki get to decide?
If you cant even give a decent explanation, how can you set yourself up as the arbiter?
I own a bowl of soup.
If I add water to that soup - do I own the water?
>can be considered slavery
So?
You said dont murder, rape, or steal. You didnt say dont enslave.
See how you are now adding to your "just be good"?
Not so simple.

>>42814264
Nugnostics love trapping themselves inside their own cages

As the first anon said, intentions matter.
But I would go further than that.
Are you really considered a good person if you don't investigate the things that you take for granted? How many animal lives are you personally responsible for ending via your diet? Is it only humans that matter? If so is it fine to beat a dog?
>but muh protein, muh nutrients
Everything you need can be obtained now, b12 can be synthesized, etc.
>this isn't about vegetarianism anon!
I think that participating in, or ignoring, or choosing to stay willfully ignorant of the #1 bar none source of violence and suffering in the world is potentially relevant. And that it has implications for a lot of things.
People decry "muh loosh factory :(" and then go on and eat factory farmed hamburger without seeing the irony.

>>42815988
I have my view, I have my own belief system and my own moral compass. It helps to have structure to one's life and way of being.
>MORE "you get to decide" bullshit. What is "no other choice"? what is "too steep"?
Case by case basis. Learn discernment, or be confused. Eventually you may learn either way.
>How much can Nestle charge for people to drink clean water?
>They dont HAVE to drink clean water...
Semantics can be argued endlessly. Monopoly in general is bad when the price gets difficult to pay.
>So now the libs of wiki get to decide?
You have trouble defining ownership, yet somehow the concept of ownership has persisted for hundreds of years, again this comes down to discernment and common sense
>If I add water to that soup - do I own the water?
This depends on how you got the water
>You said dont murder, rape, or steal. You didnt say dont enslave
Slavery is bad if the one being enslaved is unwilling to it, if there's no consent its bad, simple as.

Discernment and common sense, read about it

>>42816385
>I have my view, I have my own belief system and my own moral compass.
Does anyone get to have this, or just you?
> Learn discernment
I discern differently than you.
Are you wrong?
>Monopoly in general is bad when the price gets difficult to pay.
Why? What do you mean by "difficult to pay"?
You have added yet more complexity to your "it's so simple" nonsense.
>You have trouble defining ownership
Ownership in general is difficult to define. you didnt even try and deferred to wikipedia.
>This depends on how you got the water
Why?
Who owns water?
Do they own ALL the water?
And you didnt answer if I put the water in my soup - does it become mine?
These are simple ownership questions.
You seem to have trouble defining ownership.
>Slavery is bad if the one being enslaved is unwilling
Why?
It's not murder, it's not rape, it's not theft.
And what slave is willing?
>Discernment and common sense
you dont seem to have ANY at all.
Every thing you say leads to more complexity and more "because I say so" bullshit.

>>42816442
>Does anyone get to have this, or just you?
On my vibrational level this is a standard
I do realize others may have different standards that are incompatible with mine, I'm not claiming to be better than anyone else, I'm outputting that which I prefer to get back, because what you put out is what you get back. I prefer a certain way of being so I perpetuate that way of being.
>I discern differently than you
Then depending on how you discern, you may be incompatible with this belief structure and as such might benefit more to go to what fits you better
Your vibrational level seems to be lower because you are apparently trying to plant fear, uncertainty and doubt in others belief systems and that is perceived as not so good thing to do
>Why? What do you mean by "difficult to pay"?
Monopoly is bad, since it drives up prices of goods and services and people have certain means to pay for goods and services in the scarcity system (which doesn't even have to be that way but it has been up until now) Generally people get paid certain amounts of money or other exchange worthy material or service. Because of the scarcity system, what they get paid is limited and if prices go past certain limits (depending on how much is available to pay with) it becomes unaffordable, as such its unethical to put prices that are higher than what is generally affordable.
>Who owns water?
When water gets into the possession of a person, that person owns that water. In my view, water is only owned when contained. That does not apply to lakes, rivers or the ocean that is in public space.
This system may seem alien to you, but its what I've grown up with.
>if I put the water in my soup - does it become mine?
If you stole the water from someone else, then its not your water and if you put it in that soup then its not fully your soup anymore. That doesn't mean you can't consume it, but its a bad thing to do to steal things and you may regret it later.
>what slave is willing?
BDSM?

>>42816710
>On my vibrational level this is a standard
I am higher than your vibration, and I say you are wrong.
Does this mean there are more than one standard, or just that you are in error and causing suffering?
>you may be incompatible with this belief structure
So your "just be good" is complete bullshit.
>Monopoly is bad
Is God bad? God holds a monopoly.
>When water gets into the possession of a person, that person owns that water.
So your answer is YES? If I put water into my soup - it becomes mine?
How MUCH water does this hold true for?
>If you stole the water from someone else,
How did I steal the water?
Who owned it?
>BDSM?
Are not slaves.
you seem very ignorant of this and you shouldnt talk more until you've read up.