But isn't that precisely what I've done?

I've STOPPED telling God what he is like.

It's these Christian fundamentalists who keep trying to tell me what God is like via the BIBLE!

It's the BIBLE that claims what God is like, NOT ME!

~~~~

Also, I'm not telling God what he/she/it is like. What I'm trying to tell people on these forums is why I don't believe that the ancient Hebrews had a clue what God is like.

It's the ancient Hebrew description of God that I don't like.

If that description is wrong, then I rest my case.

All I keep doing is pointing out why I feel that it necessarily has to be wrong. It has God doing all sorts of things that, IMHO, are neither wise, nor righteous.

The Christians tell me to READ THE BIBLE.

Fine, but when I do that I DO NOT LIKE the God I read about. So if this book is so far OFF from what God is really like, then why bother reading it? And why do you keep posting verses from that book in my face, if you don't want me to think that God is like that?

The Bible clearly has God punishing women with painful and sorrowful childbirth for the original sin of Eve. I personally think that's disgusting and totally uncalled for.

If God isn't like this, then perhaps the Biblical account of God is wrong?

The Bible clearly has God supporting male-chauvinism and clearly degrades women to second-class citizens. In fact, this was part of Eve's original punishment. Like as if cursing women with painful childbirth wasn't enough.

This is what this BOOK CLAIMS that God is like. Along with being appeased by blood sacrifices of either animals or, in the case of Jesus, by his very own son.

When I read these Hebrew accounts of "God", all I can tell you is that IF GOD IS LIKE THAT then I don't want any parts of living under the rule of this God for all of eternity.

Now, all the stuff in the Bible is WRONG, and God really isn't like that, then fine. Then I'm not rejecting the REAL GOD. I'm merely rejecting the God depicted in the Bible. Which would obviously be a false notion of God if God isn't truly like that.

In fact, isn't that what I have been holding to be the TRUTH all along.

I don't fee that I'm "rejecting any REAL God", because I stand firm on my belief that the Biblical account of "God" has no more merit than the Greek accounts of Zeus.

~~~~~

You tell me not to tell God what God should be like. Well, in fact I don't. I believe in Mysticism, and in Mysticism God is s "mystery" (that's why it's called Mysticism).

They hold out that God is unknowable and they don't try to claim what God is like. However, they do speculate on various things about the nature of reality. And all that is based on what we observe around us. But none of that demands that God curses people unfairly, or that God will be unduly angry with people who refuse to "obey" God. In fact, God hasn't given any commandments to "obey".

On the contrary, the Mystics believe that God communicates to us through our feelings and intuition. God will let you know whether something is good for you or not good for you instantaneously in the moment. There is no need for any written set of rules. And what might be right or wrong for you may not be the same for someone else.

In fact this is why it's not good to judge other people's actions or behaviors, because as an individual mortal human we have no way of knowing whether their behavior is right for them or not. Unless of course they are obviously harming an innocent non-consenting individual. There are cases when we can recognize clearly wrong behavior.

So I don't put God in a box.

It's the Christians, and the Abrahamic religions in general that want to put God in a box. In fact, the "box" they want to put God in is their dogma.

~~~~~

It's a man-made falsehood that God would ever say to someone, "Either agree to become my eternal obedient slave or I'll cast you into eternal damnation".

That whole ideology was created for the purpose of giving one RELIGION clout over all other religions.

Either surrender to OUR GOD, or you'll be branded a heathen! PLUS God himself will cast you into eternal damnation!

No "REAL GOD" would be so crude and ignorant.

~~~~~

It is said that you can tell truly divine knowledge by it fruit.

Well, any doctrine that claims that God will be mean and cruel to people just because they aren't interested in becoming his obedient slave for all of eternity has truly rotten fruit.

Any truly righteous supreme being would give people a choice, and there would be a way to simply say, "Thank you for the offer but I'm not interested" without the God getting all demonic and casting the person into eternal damnation.

Christianity, and the Abrahamic religions truly don't allow for this possibility at all. There is no way to "politely decline" the God of Christianity. You either cower down to becoming his eternal obedient slave, or you'll be cast into eternal damnation.

This has to be a MAN-MADE religion, because there is not RIGHTEOUS way out of it.

The religion is designed to make sure that anyone who rejects the RELIGION will be DAMNED.

That is the failure of these religions. This is the TELL-TALE sign that these religions are nothing more than the arrogant creations of men who are trying to put unreasonable FEAR into everyone and anyone who might not be interesting in supporting their religion.

Fail to join and support our religion and God will HATE you and be exceedingly MEAN to you.

Then you turn to them and say, "But can I not simply politely decline the offer peacefully?"

They come back with, "NO! You either join our religion and support our religious bigotries or God will HATE YOU FOREVER!"

"And you'll NEVER have a second chance to change the outcome of that CHOICE!"

"Join our religion or be DAMNED!"

There is no other CHOICE available!

That is so totally ungodly and unrighteous that it should be crystal clear to anyone that these kinds of religions did not come from any God.

Religions that try to PRESSURE people into supporting them lest they face the WRATH of God, are indeed man-made CULTS.

That's all there is to it MorningSong.

And the Hebrew Scriptures are indeed such a man-made religion that renounces all non-believers to be "Heathens" who were "Without excuse" for not believing and worshiping this God that you cannot even politely decline.

There's simply no way to politely decline the supposed "gifts" that this God supposedly offers. Either accept this "GIFT" of becoming totally obedient to this God for eternity, or be DAMNED!

There is something grossly WRONG with that whole picture don't you think?

But that's a moot point Cowboy.

They would need to be aware of the choice they are making, otherwise it could hardly be a free will choice. In fact, if they weren't even aware that they had made a choice, then in fact, they could not have made a free will choice.

So the only people who can reject God via free will choice, are those who know precisely what they are doing and who have indeed chosen to reject God.

So when it comes to other people's relationship with God it really has nothing at all to do with you. You don't need to explain anything to anyone. Unless, of course, you don't TRUST GOD to know what he's doing.

No one could reject God without being fully aware that they are indeed making that choice. Otherwise, it would not have been their "Free Will" choice since they would not even be aware that they had made it.

You could hardly call that a FREE WILL choice if the person isn't even aware that they had made it.

~~~~~~

I personally reject the biblical portrait of a God. I don't care for the way that God handles things, nor do I care for his attitude about various things. Such as thinking that cursing people with physical pain is a wise means of dealing with his problems. I also don't care for his male-chauvinistic attitude. There's a lot of things I don't like about the God portrayed in the Bible.

Perhaps, if those stories are indeed a true description of our creator then by rejecting these stories I am indeed rejecting this God. They may very well be true. But if the stories are a correct description then it is indeed true that I reject this God.

Possibly, since I am very polite in my rejection of this God, maybe this God has decided to accept my rejection of him with equal politeness and just allow me to perish without pain as I have requested of him.

If that's the case, then I'm happy with my FREE WILL choice to reject his offer of an eternal life of obeying him. I would not be happy obeying such a God, and therefore I truly would not wish to live in that predicament for the rest of eternity.

~~~~~

So if that's the truth of reality, then I have no desire to be "saved", nor would I want to be "saved". On the contrary being granted a peaceful demise would be the greatest gift this God could offer to me.

And wouldn't that truly be the meaning of FREE WILL?

Should I have the FREE WILL to politely decline this God's offer to live in his male-chauvinistic punishment-oriented fascist heaven?

If we truly have FREE WILL, we should be able to politely say no.

Why does it have to come down to a WAR between "good and evil" with all the supposedly "good" people going to heaven, and everyone else being proclaimed to be "evil" and sent into a state of everlasting punishment?

Where's the FREE WILL to be able to simply and politely say, "Hey look I'm just not interested in this stupid male-chauvinistic heaven, and I'm not interested in the stupid hell either. So how about allowing me to have the FREE WILL to just be politely dismissed from this whole frigg'in nightmare?"

~~~~~

This is a very deeply serious problem I have with the Christian religion. It's too divisive. There's no way for GOOD PEOPLE to get out of this nightmare!

There's no provision to POLITELY DECLINE the offer of everlasting obedience to this male-chauvinistic God.

What kind of FREE WILL would that be if we haven't even been given the FREE WILL to politely decline the offer to be the obedient slaves of a God we don't agree with?

If the only alternative to declining this offer of everlasting slavery to this God is to be sent into a state of eternal damnation and suffering, then there is no such thing as FREE WILL at all in this whole religion.

You're damned if you do, and damned if you don't. There's no way out for someone who simply isn't interested.

That is NOT free will. That's a hell of a predicament to be in.

If this God is truly "Righteous" there has to be a way to POLITELY decline his offer without him getting all bent out of shape and becoming demonic over it.

There would simply be nothing "righteous" about a God who becomes demonic when someone tries to POLITELY decline his offer.

Well, if they haven't been turned into robots or puppets at that point, then how would it have been any different if they had just been born that way to begin with the first time?

Moreover, if that's the result of being "born again", then I must have been "born again" the first time I was born.

Clearly this can't have anything to do with accepting Jesus as your savior. Otherwise, no one could be "born again" until they've heard of Jesus.

Moreover, this really makes no sense. Because Jesus himself suggested that people need to be "born again", and he didn't preach that within any context of accepting him personally as anyone's lord or savior.

The whole "Born Again" idea actually comes from Buddhism. It's considered to be the "Enlightenment". It's simple when a person realizes that they aren't their ego. Then then suddenly "dissolve" into the oneness of the universe and realize that all is one.

However a person can be "born again" in this sense at any stage in their life. Even as a very young child.

In fact, since the Buddhist actually believe in reincarnation it's quite possible to have come a long way toward enlightenment during past lives. It's also not important for everyone to become enlightened within a single lifetime. In fact, many spiritualists believe that that is highly unlikely for any human to actually achieve such a thing in a single lifetime.

Jesus was definitely teaching the spiritual ideals of Buddhism by teaching people that they had to be "born again". That's precisely where that idea comes from.

There was nothing in the Torah about being "Born Again", that's an idea that clearly came from the Mahayana Buddhism that Jesus was obviously trying to teach as best he could in the face of the current hostile religion of the Torah. The religion of the Torah was ultimately the cause of his demise via the idea that the God of Abraham commanded that heathens should be put to death. That's where that idea come from, and that was what was used by the Pharisees to incite the mob to have Jesus crucified.

Basically Jesus was a Buddhist. The Jews of the time where like the Taliban. And they had Jesus crucified because he blasphemed against their religion.

And now Christianity stands in support of that crucifixion. That's how horribly ironic the whole religion is.

I never said anything about creating people who will "obey God".

You're the one who's hung up on the concept of "obedience".

I suggested creating souls who simply already have the same desires as God. Then there would be no need for anyone to have to "obey" anything. Everyone would naturally what to do constructive positive loving things.

~~~~

We can clearly see that this is already the case in humanity. Everyone is not the same. Some people are clearly out to get over on other people. Some even seem to get a thrill out of harming other people. Whilst others are extremely loving and kind NATURALLY.

Moreover, many of the naturally loving kind people are atheists, or of religions and spiritual beliefs far removed from the Abrahamic religions.

~~~~~

It's crystal clear that "obedience" of the Abrahamic God has absolutely nothing at all to do with goodness.

These Abrahamic scriptures themselves contain lies concerning this very thing. There are places in the Bible where it states that no good can come from a "heathen" (a non-believer of the Abrahamic God), yet we know that this is a falsehood.

The authors of these scriptures were caught red-handed making up outright lies about the rest of humanity.

~~~~~~~

In fact, the very idea of a God who is driving by a lust to be "obeyed" is not very attractive anyway. That's a horrible foundation to build a religion upon. Especially since this God is so quick to curse people with painful punishment when they disobey him. And even threaten people with everlasting punishment if they merely don't believe in him.

I don't think the Greek Zeus was even that bad.

No, that's not true at all.

Free will does not automatically equate to an evil-minded person. If it did, then everyone who has free will would automatically be an evil person.

This conclusion that you state about people needing to be robots in order be good people is simply false. This is nothing more than false propaganda spread by Christian religion in an attempt to justify the absurdities in the religion.

We already know from medical knowledge that many of humanities worse criminals were indeed MENTALLY ILL. They often had actual physical defects in the brain.

Moreover much of mental illness cannot even be physically detected.

~~~~~

In fact, in order to hold up your notion that all humans are "PERFECTLY MENTALLY HEALTHY", and the only reason some of them turn to sick demented acts is because of free will, then you'd have to confess that you yourself would actually LIKE to go out and do harm to other people, but only restrain yourself out of FREE WILL.

~~~~~~

This has been a major source of controversy among theologians. Why is it that some people simply have no desire to rape, pillage, murder, steal, etc?

It's not simply a matter of having a free will choice of restraining themselves to not do these things. On the contrary, they have no DESIRE to do them.

Creating people with a predisposition to DESIRE good things, would NOT require than they be robots, puppets or anything like that.

On the contrary they could be as FREE as the WIND!

They could do whatever they want to do and be whatever they want to be. The only difference would be that every human would have a DESIRE to be something GOOD and to only do GOOD things.

That's hardly a ROBOT or PUPPET.

This feeble excuse of religious apologists simply holds no water.

A creator would not need to create Robots or Puppets, in order to give them FREE WILL.

~~~~~

Basically all you're saying is that "FREE WILL" cannot exist unless the ability to do harmful and dastardly things in included in the list of choices.

That's baloney.

Besides, if what you claim were true, then when you got to the Heavenly Paradise your FREE WILL would necessarily need to be taken away if that were the case.

You could not be said to have FREE WILL if you could no longer choose to bad things (according to YOU!). Because if you were like that you'd be nothing more than a robot or puppet (according to YOU)

That simply can't be made to fly.

A person's disposition and desires has absolutely nothing at all to do with having FREE WILL.

A God would need to do is create people with Good Disposition and Good Desires and they could still have total FREE WILL.

I have good disposition and good desires, and I have FREE WILL.

I also have absolutely NO DESIRE to do harmful or cruel things to other people, neither for my enjoyment, nor for my personal gain.

I most certainly would not enjoy harming someone else.

And I have no desire to even do something that would be detrimental to another person for my own gain.

So according to you I'm already a ROBOT.

I have no desire to do evil things.

The whole problem with the Adam and Eve story is that if Adam and Eve didn't know the difference between right and wrong BEFORE they ate the forbidden fruit, then they could not have understood that it would be WRONG to do so.

Thus they would have had to have made the "fall from grace" in a state of complete innocence of the fact that they were doing something "WRONG".

So the fable falls flat on its face right there with the story of Adam and Eve and the "fall from grace".

Yet this God punishes ALL WOMEN with painful childbirth, and to be the subjective slaves to their men, as punishment for Eve's SIN.

But Eve could not have committed any "sin" if she wasn't even aware of right from wrong to begin with.

This would be like a human parent expecting a baby who doesn't know right from wrong to obey them.

"Don't try to climb out of your crib!"

The child had no clue what was even said much less that it would be wrong to disobey the direct. The baby tries to climb out of the crip and the irate parent curses the baby with punishment that will follow the baby all the rest of its days.



That's what we'd need to believe this God is like.

If Adam and Eve didn't know right from wrong before they ate the forbidden fruit then they couldn't have understood that it would be "wrong" to eat it.

The fable shoots itself in the foot with it's opening scenario.






If this God was truly omniscient and truly knew everything, then he would have know that mankind was incapable of maintaining perfection from the get go.

Therefore there would be no need for this God to CHANGE any covenants. He could have just gotten it RIGHT the first time.

Yet another failure of these fables.

They require that their God actually had to change the way he deals with mankind because he clearly wasn't AWARE of mankind's frailties in the beginning.

This flies in the face of a supposedly all-knowing God who should have understood his creation from DAY ONE.




But in truth, there are lots of things that are beyond the subjection of man.

Plague from viruses and bacteria for example. Not to mention natural disasters.

Back when these fables were written it was still believe that the "God" itself was responsible for sending plagues and natural disasters, so since these things were seen as "Acts of God" they weren't seen as things that should be placed under the subjection of men. However, today we know better. In truth, Mankind hasn't even been placed above bacteria. Potentially the entire human race can someday be wiped out by a bacterial or viral infection.

So these fables were created based on the superstitions of the times. They have no basis in reality.



I most certainly would not want a relationship with the God that is described by this religion.

This God is clearly inept, confused, and unstable.

If I truly thought that this God was the real creator of this universe this would be my prayer to this God.

~~~~~

Dear God of Abraham,

I am sorry to hear that you are having such problems with the objects of your creation. After having read the supposed history of your relationship with your creation I feel that I can offer you great insight into how to better deal with humanity. I would be more than happy to share my insights with you and offer you consultation pro bono. I expect nothing in return. Just knowing that I have helped both you and humanity to gain a better relationship will be more than enough reward for me.

I'm personally not interested in eternal life. Especially after having read the history of your views on what life should be like. I would like to politely decline any offer to spend eternity with you, and ask that you accept this in a positive spirit with the same degree of politeness in which is it offered.

There's really no need to become upset about it. From what I've read you lose the vast majority of souls that you create anyway so I would think that losing souls is something you have grown accustom to over the millennia.

All I ask is that you un-create me in the most peaceful and pleasant way that is within your capabilities. If you can't manage that, then perhaps an instantaneous lightening strike could suffice. It would be over with before I knew what happened and that would be cool with me.

Having said that, I am willing to stick around for a while to help you with humanity if you would truly like to have a better relationship with them.

I will do this for both you and for humanity, and like I've already said, just knowing that I have helped the situation will be more than enough reward for me.

I don't require eternal life, or any other rewards.

Thank you very much.

Tell Jesus I said Hi. And tell him that I thank him very much for his attempt to better the situation even though it actually served to make things far worse.

Sincerely,
James

This is supposed to be a story of a CREATOR, not of a fascist dictator.

It is utterly insane to have a CREATOR who punishes people for not obeying him, when it is in fact, HIS demand that they do obey him.

In other words, if he CREATED people for the sole purpose of having them obey him, then it would be utterly foolish for him to punish those who don't. That would be an extremely evil act on his part. Especially considering the fact that he must necessarily being doing this via a pure crap shoot!

He obviously does not have the POWER to create soles who are actually designed to have the same desires and will that he has. After all, if he had the POWER to design such creatures then he would not need to even worry about whether or not they would be willing to "obey" him. They would already all have precisely the same wants and desires that he has.

So in order for this story to even make sense at all, this God necessarily has to be POWERLESS to create soles in his own image (unlike the claims being made by these false fables).

This God would be creating souls on a crap shoot. And when he punishes sole who don't measure up to his wants and desires all he's doing is displaying his own immature ability to control his own frustrations over the fact that he is indeed POWERLESS to create soles that are anything at all like himself.

All this story amounts to is a tale of a pathetic God who is totally frustrated with himself because he cannot create soles who have the same wants and desires as himself. So he takes out his frustration on the soles he creates by punishing them with crude and rude punishments when in fact all of this can only be due to his own ineptitude of a creator.

If a creator is so inept to begin with that he can't even create the kind of soles that he desires, then he should also be mature enough to take on the responsibility of putting them out of their misery peacefully. If anything, this God should be offering everyone who doesn't wish to obey him an apology for having created them in the first place!

Threatening to punish them because he isn't pleased with them would be extremely selfish and arrogant on his part.

Just because a being has the POWER to create life does not dismiss them from the need to be responsible for what they create.

This would be like you creating life and then being mean to it because it simply doesn't agree with YOUR moral standards. That's nonsense. If you had actually created that life from scratch, and it didn't turn out the way you had hope you would be totally out of line taking out the frustrations of YOUR INEPTITUDE on the creation that YOU FAILED to create in a way that satisfied your desires.

There is no justification for any God to be punishing the objects of its very own creation. That's a ludicrous idea right there.

~~~~~~

I would even hold this same standard over mortal human parents. Although they are POWERLESS to "create" life. They have no control over the genetics or anything else of their offspring. When mortal parents have a child they truly are taking a wild chance at what might be produced from their procreation. In other words, they are actually experiencing God's CRAP SHOOT.

Just the same, if they have a child who happens to be "defective" via the very simply definition that the child didn't turn out as they has wished, then it's foolish to blame the child for this. The fault can only be one of the following:

1. The Child was genetically or medically defective in the first place (and that can indeed include mental illnesses)

And let's not forget that "mental illness" by definition can basically include any consistent behavior that is deemed to be inappropriate by the bulk of society (i.e. what is considered to be the norm)

So, in other words, any child who has an abnormally high desire to harm others, or show extreme disrespect for others, is automatically "mentally ill" by that definition.

There's really not even any need to bring a concept of "sin" into the picture. All that truly exists by this definition is mental illness.

A person is either mentally healthy (i.e. they have respect for themselves and others), or they are mentally ill (i.e. they have no respect for themselves and others)

There can be no 'sin' in such a world. All that exists in this case is either "healthy" or "unhealthy" minds.

It's ludicrous to "punish" a mentally ill person for being mentally ill.

Yet this is what the Biblical GOD must necessarily be guilty of!

He is unable to distinguish between his own limitations as a creator, and the behavior of the objects of his creation.

That would be a foolish and ignorant God.

~~~~~~

2. A second reason that a child could turn out in a way that the parents aren't happy with could simply be a failure on the part of the parents themselves. Poor mentoring, and/or mixed messages can result in a child that becomes confused and ultimately rebellious against their parents wishes.

Well the Biblical God fails miserably in both of these areas. The Biblical good is an extremely poor communicator and mentor. The Abrahamic tales of God are extremely convoluted and filled with contradictions, inconsistencies, and mixed messages.

There can be absolutely no denying this.

The Abrahamic religions have fallen apart from the original Judaism, into Islam, Catholicism, and a myriad of arguing rebellious Protestants. None of whom agree on what this God supposedly wants from us or which "doctrine" should officially represent the directives, commandments, and desires of this God.

So there can be absolutely no denying that the Abrahamic God has sent vastly mixed messages that have fallen all to pieces and have no solid foundation at all.

This God could not blame anyone for not believing in any of the many convoluted mixed messages of the Abrahamic religions. This God would represent a "parent" who has absolutely no clue of how to properly mentor his children.

The Jews themselves (the original CHOSEN people of this God) reject the rumors of Jesus as being "The Christ". And they point out quite clearly that this cannot possibly be true because Jesus was never handed the throne of King David by God (which the prophecies make perfectly clear should be the case for any REAL messaih)

Therefore anyone who DOESN'T worship Judaism is actually following a false version of this religion.

But regardless of which of the many fragmented versions of the Abrhamic religion you might follow, the mere fact that they are fragmented already established the fact that they "God" of this religion is a horribly mentor and therefore a horrible parent.

Moreover, what about the rest of HIS CHILDREN? Why does he allow so many other cultures to worship totally different Gods?

That would be like you allowing your children to go and obey some other kids parents and ignore you without you even making an attempt to explain to them that they have made a mistake.

You can't just hide in the corner of one little culture on Earth paying attention to your "chosen children" and expect all your less revered children all around the Globe to accept your teachings to that one culture.

That itself is a ludicrous behavior to expect from a supposedly ALL-POWERFUL God.

An all-powerful God should be able to communicate with all of his children equally. And if he can't do that, then he was irresponsible in the first place by creating more children than he could properly mentor directly.

He shouldn't have bitten off more than he can chew.

~~~~~~~~~~

There are just way too many things that these Hebrew Fables fail to consider when they pretend to speak for a supposedly all-powerful God. These fables necessarily reduce God to being irresponsible and grossly inept, and far from all-powerful.

The whole thing is truly absurd.

It can't be true.

It's just a false myth that has no more merit than any other mythological tales of a human-like Godhead.

You can makes "excuses" for this religion all day long, but in truth, no amount of excuses would suffice. There is no excuse for this religion. The God this religion describes simply does not live up to the character traits and infinite power and wisdom that it's supposed to have.

No science required to dismiss these myths.

They are clearly false based on their own ineptitude.

An all-wise God wouldn't need to "punish" anyone at all. The very mentality that punishment has any positive value is an ignorant idea to begin with.

The only reason that humans resort to such ignorant methods is precisely because they aren't all-wise nor omniscient.

In fact, there are actually quite a few mortal humans who have already recognized the utter stupidity of using crude and harmful punishments as a means of trying to teach anyone anything. There are far more intelligent methods for teaching people positive things.

So the very notion of a God who thinks that punishment is an intelligent method of dealing with anything is already a flawed idea, IMHO. Such a God would be far from "all-wise" and that flies in the very face of what this God is supposed to be.

Therefore these fables are necessarily false.

It's really quite simple.

~~~~~~

I reject that claim because, IMHO, it can't be made to work.

The curse of painful childbirth was part of the Old Covenant, and if the Old Covenant was being replaced by a new covenant, then this too would need to change.

Christians are also quite hypocritical about this in far too many ways. For example the idea that God hates homosexuality come from the old covenant, and NOT from the teachings of Jesus. Yet this religion uses Jesus as an excuse to support the ignorance and bigotries of the old Testament.

Besides, this would be a portrait of a God who changes drastically, from having mortal men judge each other and condemn each other to death, to putting an entirely different system in place.

It's wrought with contradictions and absurdities, IMHO.

The explanation that Jesus was actually a mortal man who rejected the teachings of the Torah and replaced them with the wisdom of Buddhism makes far more sense and contains no inconsistencies or problems.

In other words, to accept your version of things I would need to believe in a truly confused God who changes his ways and basically loses the vast majority of souls that he creates. He also solves all of his problems using violent gory methods not the LEASE of which would be having his son crucified to appease his need for brutal punishments to "atone" for disobedience, etc.

The whole things is founded on a God who solves his problems using low-mentality ideas of physical punishments, etc.

Accepting my conclusions about Jesus requires none of that.

In my scenario Jesus was just a mortal man who spoke out against the horrible ways of the Taliban and tried to teach them better moral values. He was crucified by this mob, and then made into an idol image to actually support the very things that he himself had rejected.

Jesus was a VICTIM of this religion. Not a demigod who came to change a covenant from a God who is appeased by blood sacrifices, including the sacrifice of his very own son. That makes no sense right there.

Jesus basically spoke out against this horrid religion and was crucified for his efforts.

I agree with you MorningSong that this is indeed the claims that are being made by the authors of the New Testament.

My question at this point is not one of "What is the religion trying to say?". Clearly I can already see what they are attempting to claim. I am not confused about what the story is attempting to claim. I understand perfectly.

So now comes a far more important question,...

Do I believe that these claims actually came from an all-wise God? Or does it make far more sense to me that these claims were made-up by men in an effort to create a religion that claims to have the ultimate authority of God?

Well, after many years of considering these things I've concluded that it makes far more sense to me that this religion is the devious scam of men, and cannot possibly represent the actual ideas, thoughts, or plans of any supposedly all-wise God.

So for me, the problem does not reside in understanding the religion. I understand it perfectly. I simply don't believe that any all-wise supreme being would create such a "foolish" situation.

And yes, I do believe that this situation is indeed utterly foolish. That's precisely why I reject the idea that it came from any supposedly all-wise God.

The whole thing flies in the very face of what this God is supposed to be like.

First off this God is supposed to be unchanging and therefore dependable. Yet this religion requires that God has changed his covenant with mankind. So that's already a major contradiction of what this God is supposed to be like.

The argument the apologists give is that this was always God's plan, and therefore does not constitute a 'change' in God's character. I disagree with that line of thinking. That's just a truly feeble excuse to try to support an unsupportable religion, IMHO.

I disagree with the behavior that has been attributed to this God the Old Testament stories. A God who "punishes" women with painful and sorrowful childbirth as a form of "punishment".

That is not wise, IMHO, and therefore cannot have been the action of an all-wise God, IMHO. Moreover, that "punishment" would have served no good purpose. Not only would it have been futile, but even according to these stories themselves it didn't serve to "teach" woman any lessons.

Punishment via physical pain is simply a "stupid" form of dealing with problems, IMHO. Therefore in order for me to believe that God would punish women with painful childbirth requires that I also believe that God is utterly stupid.

I also disagree with the idea of an all-wise all-powerful God having mere mortal humans judge each other and stone each other to death for their sins. Why bother? If God is omniscient and all-powerful he could deal with sinners far more easily than having mere mortal humans judging each other. Only God would know what's in the hearts of men. Other mortal men cannot know. So it would be far more WISE for an all-powerful omniscient God to simply deal with sinners himself. He could just give them a heart attack, or stroke, or just wave them out of existence with his magic wand.

It's totally absurd, IMHO, to think that a God would have "fallen humans" judging each other and stoning each other for being "sinners" when according to this story all humans are sinners anyway!



With all due respect to anyone who supports these stories, surely they can see the WISDOM in rejecting them as being utterly absurd and filled with impossible problems and contradictions.

Anyone who questions these stories as I do should be totally respected for rejecting these stories on the grounds that I reject them. I have extremely sound and sane reasons for rejecting these stories.

The entire old testament is filled with absurdities that I feel could have never been the choice of any truly all-wise supreme being. The choices and actions that have been attributed to the Old Testament God simply aren't wise, IMHO, and therefore cannot possibly be the choices and behavior of any all-wise God.

Even modern day Christians do not like the teachings of the Old Testament. We're basically talking about behaviors that are more akin to the practice of people like the Taliban, and the Christians would be the first people to renounce the moral values of the Taliban. Yet the behavior of the old testament Israelites was very much along the lines of what the Taliban believe.

Women were treated as property to be under the rule of the men (which was also part of God's Punishment to women if you read carefully). So that line of thinking actually comes from these Abrahamic tales. This was God's decree!

I also don't personally agree with God's treatment of the Canaanites. And I especially don't see where it would have been wise for him to have his chosen people mass murder the Canaanites when he's trying to teach them "Thou Shalt Not Kill".

To me that would be truly stupid for a creator to become involved in such utterly mixed messages.

It makes far more sense to me to just dismiss these tales as the superstitious writings of men, no different from the myths of Zeus, Thor, Odin, Athena, Apollo, or any other man-made image of a God. These Hebrews weren't any different from anyone else. They just made up their own superstitious tales that weren't any more wise nor more intelligent than any of the other tales.

So the entire Old Testament holds no value to me as having come from any supposedly "all-wise" God. It simply doesn't contain wise tales.

So then we come to Jesus and the New Testament. Well, to accept that Jesus is the sacrificial lamb of the God of the Old Testament would require that I actually believe in the God of the Old Testament. But I see no wisdom there to believe in.

Also, if you read these stories closely you'll clearly see that God promised to hand the throne of David over to the "messiah" (or "The Christ")

But clearly that never happened with Jesus. Jesus was never officially handed the throne of David. The Jews pointed this out way back in the days when these New Testament rumors were being started, and they rejected the New Testament rumors point blank for good reason, Jesus could not have been the promised "messiah" because he did not fulfill the prophecy of becoming the King of the Jews. So there's no question about it. It's a done deal right there.

I agree with the Jews completely on that account.

However, I go a step further and dismiss the original stories of the God of Abraham as well as being nothing more than Zeus-like myths, that are indeed very unwise in many places.

~~~~

So then the question arises, "Well what about Jesus? Did he truly exist? If so what did he actually teach? And how did he become the central figure of the New Testament as "The Christ"?

Well, I have practical answers for all those questions.

Jesus probably did exist (or at least some guy existed that gave rise to these rumors that he was "The Christ")

Based on my knowledge of both the New Testament and Mahayana Buddhism, I've come to the conclusion that Jesus was most likely a Jewish Mahayana Buddhist. Everything Jesus is said to have taught in terms of moral values fits in far better with the values of Buddhism than it does with anything that had been taught in the Torah (or Old Testament).

Jesus taught, "I and the Father are one". That's Buddhism.

When confronted on charges of blaspheme for having said this Jesus responded, "Is it not written in your law?, I have said, ye are Gods"

Again this shows a deep-seated believe in a pantheistic nature of spiritually. Jesus was actually saying, "We" and the Father are all ONE. That's the Buddhist view.

So he wasn't attempting to claim to be the "only begotten son" of any external jealous Godhead.

Jesus also renounced many of the teachings of the Torah. He renounced the seeking of revenge that had been taught as "An eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth" and instead replaced that with the Buddhist notion of non-involvement. Turn the other cheek, forgive and forget. Don't dwell on revenge, it serves no one any good.

Jesus renounced the stoning to death of sinners by cleverly proclaiming that only he who is without sin should cast the first stone. He also renounced the judging of other people, and instead replaced that with the Buddhist notion of non-involvement. Judge not lest you be judged. This is a principle of karma.

Do unto others as you would have them do unto you.

Put out the karma that you wish to receive in return.

Jesus was clearly teaching the spiritual wisdom of the Mahayana Buddhists, and NOT the nasty ignorance that had previously been taught in the Torah.

The reason people are so attracted to Jesus is not because he supposedly died to pay for their sins, but because he taught true wisdom and love! He taught the spiritual values of Mahayana Buddhism, and not the utterly stupid ignorance of the Torah.

~~~~~

It's crystal clear to me that Jesus could not have been the "son", nor the actual incarnation of the "God" of the Old Testament. Jesus had a totally different character that was the complete opposite of what had been described in the Torah or Old Testament.

~~~~~

So it makes far more sense to me to recognize Jesus as a mortal (albeit highly spiritual) man. If Jesus was in touch with any God, it wasn't the God of the Torah, but rather the God of the Buddhists. The eternal spirit of the Universe itself.

~~~~~~

So what about all these outrageous claims that have been made in the New Testament? And what about some of the things that Jesus supposedly said that appear to potentially support this idea that he was "The Christ"?

Well, first off, we need to realize that once we recognize that Jesus was not the only begotten son of God, then there is no reason to trust the words of the New Testament to be accurate or verbatim.

Jesus was not even alive when the New Testament was written and he did not contribute a single solitary word to it himself. There is really no reason why we should trust the authors of the New Testament to have quoted Jesus perfectly correctly. They could have, and probably did, twist his words to suit their own agenda to make out like Jesus was "The Christ".

That was clearly their agenda. They start by proclaiming that Jesus was "born of a virgin" who was purposefully impregnated by a God.

They go on to ignore the important things that Jesus did NOT fulfill in prophesy, (like being handed the throne of King David), and instead proclaim that a whole lot of little unverifiable things had been fulfilled. Things that they could have easily just written into the story for the sake of "fulfilling" these prophecies. After all, they had the old prophecies right there in front of them, it would be extremely easy for them to write into their stories things which seem to fulfill those prophesies. And they clearly had the agenda to do just that.

~~~~~

It's far easier for me to believe that the New Testament was the work of men who had an agenda to make out like Jesus was "The Christ", than it is for me to actually believe in the whole biblical story.

The very idea than an all-wise super intelligent God would send his son into a crowd to CHANGE his previous laws, when that very God had commanded people to KILL anyone who disagrees with God's Word, would be utterly stupid.

Even if Jesus was crucified for blasphemer that blood would be on God's hands in these stories because God is the very person who instructed people to MURDER HEATHENS. Anyone who was in that mob and being incited by the pharisees to support the crucifixion of Jesus for blaspheme would have only been going along with their very own religious leaders who were supposedly carrying out the very directives and commandments of the God of Abraham anyway.

~~~~~~

The story as held out by the New Testament makes no sense, and cannot be made to work, IMHO.

It would be a story of a God who shoots himself in his own foot.

There would be nothing all-wise or intelligent about it. Not to mention that this God would need to be appeased by blood sacrifices in the first place, which IMHO, is already an "ungodly" trait that belongs solely to the fictions man-made versions of gods.

No genuinely all-wise supreme being would be that crude and ignorant in the first place.

That my reason for rejecting this stories as being the actions and 'Word' of any God.

They simply aren't wise enough. And the idea that Jesus was a Jewish Mahayana Buddhist resolves all issues, and brings the entire historical event into a sound practical perspective.

~~~~~~~~~~

So this is a very valid and respectable view of the story of Jesus, and should not be taken as an "attack" against Christianity. It's just one human's view of how these rumors came to be.

People need to start to realize that a "disbelief" in Christianity is just as respectable as a "belief" in the religion.

It's not a "rejection of God" or any other such nonsense. It's just a sound legitimate conclusion that has been arrived at by some of humanities brightest minds; Albert Einstein, Isaac Newton, Richard Feynman, Carl Sagan, Stephen Hawking, and so on and so forth.

It's absurd to think that all those men were "rejecting God". What they were rejecting is a collection of stories that they feel are far too ignorant and unwise to have ever come from any God.

They are calling the Hebrew tales on the carpet right along with the Greek tales of Zeus. That's all.

She just showed you in blood red words:

"SENT HIS SON AS AN ATONING SACRIFICE FOR OUR SINS,"

Even I know this Cowboy.

This is the Heart and Soul of Christianity Cowboy.

Jesus is the sacrificial lamb of God sent to PAY for our sins.

You're trying to belittle this, yet this is the central core thesis of the religion!

Jesus was the ATONEMENT for your sins!

~~~~~~

At least I know what I'm OBJECTING to.

You keep forgetting Cowboy, I WAS a BORN AGAIN CHRISTIAN at one time. You act like I don't know what I'm talking about, but evidently I understand the religion far better than YOU do!

Cowboy, you DO NOT speak for Jesus, God, or the official religions of Christianity.

You're more than welcome to climb down off that silly giraffe anytime you're ready.

In fact, the Catholics, and the many different denominations of Protestantism, don't even agree with each others interpretations of scriptures.

So where do YOU get off thinking that you speak for God?

You're just an example of how these kinds of jealous God religions can have a negative impact on some people causing them to delude themselves into believing that only they hold the correct interpretations of "the gospels".



You're a shining example of just how these religions can so easily go awry.

Well, if men have to earn their way into heaven by showing obedience to God, then what would be the point in the crucifixion of Jesus.

Clearly if what you say here is true, then men can earn their own way into heaven simply by being obedient to what they believe God expects from them.

It would have accomplished a LOT as far as I'm concerned.

I would be far more impressed by a story of a "Son of God" who constantly eludes his enemies. Every time they go after him or think they have him he slips through their fingers and keeps returning in unexpected places.

That would have made a LAUGHING STOCK out of the Pharisees and authoritarians, and it would have shown that God is truly invincible.

Allowing these bozos to actually crucify Jesus would be a pathetic show of weakness on the part of a God.

What kind of a God can't even protect his own son from the malicious hands of bozos????

So yes, having Jesus constantly elude the authorities and making a laughing stock out of them would have been FAR MORE IMPRESSIVE.

There very fact that Jesus was crucified proves that he was not the son of any God.

Besides, you keep forgetting that the whole significance of this crucifixion in this religion is that Jesus was supposed to be the ultimate unblemished "Sacrificial Lamb" sent by God to pay for the sins of men.

But that's utterly absurd, IMHO, because this would be a God who is making sacrifices unto HIMSELF to pay for the sins of men.

In fact, this even flies in the very face of your own position:

You claim that sacrifices were necessary for men to show their sincerity to God because mere words are not enough, so you claim.

Yet, he God would be sacrificing his son as the "ultimate sacrifice" so that no one would have any need to make any more sacrifices.

So according to your theory, that would be relieving men of having to prove their sincerity.

That would be nonsense.

Why should men no longer need to prove their sincerity to God?

So your theory falls all to pieces when it comes to the crucifixion of Jesus.

A PERFECT plan?

He first has to flood all the sinners off the Earth, save for a few that he kept around to try to reseed humanity. Then he participates in eradicating the Canaanites.

By the way, how would the Canaanites have fit in with Adam and Eve? Where they some of Adam and Eve's offspring, or did they come from somewhere else?

Then after the flood he waits thousands of years before offering up Jesus as his "sacrificial lamb".

This doesn't sound like a very PERFECT plan to me. Moreover, according to the gospels even Jesus has the vast majority of humans failing to enter into the Kingdom of Heaven and only FEW will make it.

That's a "PERFECT" plan?

Why didn't God just offer Adam and Eve a chance to accept Jesus as their savior right then and there at the Garden of Eden?

They could have either accepted or rejected the offer and it all would have been settle PERFECTLY.

Dragging this on for centuries whilst people argue over which interpretations of convoluted religious doctrines to believe in hardly sounds very "PERFECT" to me.

You're not giving God enough power Cowboy.

If all is all-knowing and all-powerful, then surely God could have chosen a place and time to send his son with his message without putting his son in harms way.

He also could have very easily just told Jesus to disappear when the authorities came looking for him. Jesus was already "hiding out" anyway, and supposedly Judas revealed his whereabouts.

In this same story, God seemed to have no problem telling Mary to take the baby Jesus and flee when King Herod was killing all the first born babies.

So clearly this God can protect his son anytime he so chooses without interfering with anyone's "free will" etc.

So there is NO EXCUSE for this God to allow Jesus to be crucified if it was not HIS DESIRE AND WILL to have this done.

Your claim that the crucifixion of Jesus is on humans simply can't stand. It had to be God's will otherwise it could have never happened because this God is supposed to be "All-powerful". There is nothing this God can't do. Therefore saving his son from a crucifixion would be a piece of cake for such a God.

For such an all-powerful omniscient God to "allow" this to happen, would be no different from him having PLANNED it.

The problem I have with all of this is the very idea that God would be wallowing in "glory" over this.

Gee whiz. After reading this I can only imagine that God was absolutely thrilled when Adam and Eve fell from grace. And he must have also been extremely thrilled that humans were constantly disobeying him and giving him reasons to have his son crucified to he can wallow in the "glory".

~~~~~

In all seriousness MorningSong, and with all due respect, it truly surprises me that you have no problem with this.

What do we have here really?

A creator who supposedly creates beings who aren't even compatible with his own desires. They have such a need to disobey him that this is all they can ever seem to do. In fact, to make this story even work we must assume that there does not even exist such a thing as a human who could agree with God, or who would actually want the same things that God supposedly likes.

The creator creates a whole world of these pathetic disobedient bozos who are totally unworthy of saving themselves and supposedly even incapable of behaving properly on their own merit even if they wanted to.

This creator supposedly misjudges the whole situation thinking that maybe human can somehow turn themselves around TWICE. Once before the great flood, and again after the great flood but before the coming of Jesus. Humans failed to turn themselves around in both cases, and thus God was mistaken in thinking that they might even be able to do this on their own.

Finally, this God proudly sends his own son to be crucified by these bozos so that he can offer them salvation. And now God is wallowing in the "Glory" of this new tactic and his saints are rejoicing.

In fact, where did the "saints" come from? Where they fluke humans who were able to turn themselves around ON THEIR OWN? That would kind of blow a hole in the whole idea that humans aren't supposed to be able to save themselves on their own merit.

The whole story is truly unbelievable as far as I can see.

A God who would find "Glory" in having his son crucified on cross so that he can offer "salvation" to defective souls that he himself had created?

This sounds more like a Frankenstein movie, where God would be the scientist who is trying to create a decent life form, but for some reason can't seem to create anything but defective unworthy souls. So in desperation he finally gives up trying, sends his only begotten son to die for them so that he can offer them GRACE, even though they will forever be defective worthless inferior lifeforms that can never be worthy of anything on their OWN MERIT.

And, as humans, we're supposed to "rejoice" at this situation?

To be perfectly honest with you MorningSong if this truly represents the truth of our reality as humans I would request that this God provide me with euthanasia (in a spiritual sense). Just un-create me and quit playing around with trying to create life if that's all the better this God can do.

I have absolutely no desire to be granted entrance into any paradise where I will forever be seen as an inferior being that is unworthy of being there and was only allowed in because God was somehow glorified by having his son nailed to a pole.

To me that would be like living in a Freddy's Nightmare or something.

With all sincerity I would be far more attracted to a completely atheistic universe where we just happened to evolve by accident.

This idea that we are the pathetically inferior creations of some insane God who is "glorified" by having his son crucified so that he can "forgive" the defective souls that he creates, is just not an attractive scenario at all.

~~~~

What truly disturbs me is the fact that so many people actually view this kind of scenario as being inviting somehow.

That's almost scarier than the fable itself.

Well I have never chosen to be at odds with God. Therefore, for me personally this religion makes no sense.

It can only make sense to people who have indeed chosen to be at odds with God. I'm sorry to hear that you feel that you are such a person. And evidently you must feel that way, otherwise how could you believe in a religion that requires that you have indeed made that choice?



This is utterly absurd Cowboy.

The idea is that this God is supposed omniscient and know what is in the hearts of men. There is nothing you can hide from God.

Therefore, there would be absolutely no reason for anyone to prove or demonstrate their sincerity to this God. This God would automatically know whether a person is sincere at heart.

So you're excuse for this religion doesn't wash. It flies in the face of what this God is supposed to be capable of.



I don't buy that mentality Cowboy. In fact, IMHO, that very mentality right there is ignorant.

There is no need to have "chiefs". If a relationship is based on true love and devotion to one another the couple who truly love each other should be able to arrive at a mutual consensus in everything they do. Even if it's a matter of give-and-take.

The excuse that people aren't capable of this is nothing but pure ignorance that I personally do not support.

So again this lame excuse for this religion doesn't wash.



Punishment is STUPID to begin with Cowboy. That is already a totally unwise and ignorant way to deal with things.

The very idea that an all-wise God would stoop to such ignorant and stupid methods of trying to "teach" people lessons via punishments is already an asinine idea.

Moreover, as you can clearly see from the history of humanity and what this religion claims that God wants and expects from people this sort of physical painful punishment DIDN'T WORK anyway!

So there you have it. Proof positive. Not only is it a stupid way to deal with things, but it's clearly ineffective anyway according to these fables.

Therefore, it cannot possibly have been the tactics of any supposedly all-wise God.



I'm not worried about any "payoff" in the end Cowboy. You seem to be the one who is totally obsessed with winning prizes from some God.

This kind of trivial mentality does not appeal to me. Either there exits a truly righteous and wise God, or there doesn't. I'm certainly not going to worry about being let down or punished by some ignorant demon just because I refused to support an ignorant male-chauvinistic fable of an angry egotistical Godhead who would be as evil as you require.





No Cowboy, the human race did not have Jesus crucified on any cross. That's totally false. The stories themselves do not even support that. Pilot himself washed his hands of the whole affair showing his disapproval of what the Pharisees wanted to do with Jesus.

Moreover, it makes no sense to try to pin the crucifixion on men whilst simultaneously holding this event up as the only means by which to receive the grace and mercy of a creator.

Again this is just you wanting to have your cake and eat it too.

Either Jesus was the "sacrificial lamb of God" sent to pay the price for the "sins" of men, or he wasn't.

You can't have men deciding to do this without God's consent.

A God would need to go along with this. And that's extremely problematic right there!

You can't have a God sending his son as a messenger to mankind with a new covenant and not intending to have him crucified to pay for the sins of men, only to have mankind crucifying this messenger without God's will and plan.

That cannot be made to work, IMHO.

Then you would have mankind making God jump through hoops.

Moreover, you could hardly expect a God to then use this crucifixion of his son as the focal point of his LOVE and GRACE, just because a handful of jerks crucified him (certainly not all of humanity as you have falsely claimed). Even the stories do not support that nonsense.

~~~~~

You would have this God cowering down to the actions of a few bad men, and forcing this God to create his entire religious requirements for salvation based on a few bad apples.

That can never be made to work.

The only way that this religion could be made to work is if your claim that the entire human race would have indeed crucified Jesus.

But that would mean that every single living human being would have to have been of the mindset to do such dastardly things. Even Pilot washed his hands of this affair and did not approve of it, so you've already got a problem right there!

This is a huge problem with this religion Cowboy. In order for it to work, every single human being would indeed need to be as disgusting as those who would nail people to poles or burn people at stakes.

But we know for a fact that all humans aren't like this. In fact, we can be very thankful that the vast majority of humans are not like this.

So this religion cannot be made to work. Everyone would need to be a hateful evil person in order for this religion to even begin to work.

And that itself would be extremely problematic right there. Because that would imply that our creator can't even create half-way decent people. All he can create are evil hateful people.

What kind of a creator would that even be?

You've basically got a religion that demands that every single human being is a disgustingly evil person, and that our creator can't even create a good soul.

That doesn't say much for the creator.

~~~~~~

This religion needs far too many excuses for this God.

No matter what you try to do with it, it always ends up being the result of a truly inept creator.

Humans would have never had a chance if they had been created by such an inept creator.

The creator has to take some responsibility for the souls he creates. Especially if they ALL end up being bad, which is what your version of this religion requires.

That doesn't say much for the creator.

Look who's talking about speaking and not listening.

I've offered you alternative explanations for the entire biblical cannon. But you refuse to listen. Instead you keep PREACHING your views.

"Jesus Christ is the only begotten son of God!"

"You must accept him as your lord and savior!"

"There is no other way to appease God!"

I'm quite familiar with the brainwashing scheme of this ancient religion Cowboy.

I'm just telling you that I don't buy into this nonsense. And I try to explain why I don't buy into it. You just become upset because my objections to this ancient religion make perfect sense.

1. I don't believe that I'm at odds with any Zeus-like angry God.
2. I don't believe in Gods that are appeased by blood sacrifices.
3. I don't believe in male-chauvinistic Gods.
4. I don't believe in Gods that would curse women with painful childbirth.
4. I don't believe that Jesus was a virgin-born demigod.
5. I don't believe in a God who would have his own son nailed to a pole.


These are all utterly absurd notions, IMHO.

Jesus as a Mahayana Buddhist Bodhisattva makes far more sense to me. A mortal man who rejected the foolishness taught in the Torah, and who was unfortunately brutally crucified for his views.

The New Testament is nothing more than superstitious rumors, or worse yet, calculated religious propaganda created to try to win followers using the rumors of a dead Jesus in an attempt to make him out to have been "The Christ". (a claim that doesn't fit in any case). Even the Jews themselves didn't fall for that one.

~~~~~~

All of this is a perfectly legitimate conclusion and explanation to explain away religious superstitious fables that would otherwise require that our creator is sicker than many mere mortal humans.

~~~~~

Yes, I reject the religion because in order for it to be true, the God it depicts would need to be mentally ill.

That's more than sufficient grounds for rejecting this religion.

You're just upset because you know I'm right. No "all-wise" God could behave this crudely. The stories simply don't match up with the character traits that this God is supposed to have.

This is precisely why I reject these stories.

It's utterly absurd to believe that an "all-wise" and "all-powerful" God had no choice but to be nailed to a pole in order to communicate with his creation.

That's just plain utterly stupid and there is no excuse for it.

You ask, "How else was he going to give us the message?"

I can offer a gazillion better ways to communicate with the objects of your creation.

In fact, allowing yourself to be nailed to a pole by your creation would be an absolute sign of weakness and stupidity on your part if you are the creator.

There is no excuse for such an ignorant approach to communication. Especially in terms of Christianity where they places this utterly foolish act to be the CENTRAL FOCAL POINT of salvation. That's even makes it stupider yet.




You're continuing to beat the dead horse Cowboy.

I've already told you that there are infinitely many ways that a God could communicate with his creation without having himself nailed to a pole.

Also, you can't pretend that this was the doing of men, and then turn around and demand that accepting this act of crucifixion on your behavior to pay for your sins is paramount to being "Saved".

That is stupidity beyond stupidity Cowboy.

I've already explain this in detail.

In order for the crucifixion to be "God's sacrificial lamb" to pay for the sin of mankind then it would have had to have been God's IDEA and PLAN!

But that is sick twice over. It's sick in an of itself that a supposedly divine God would even need to have a bloody crucifixion associated with, and required for his love and forgiveness.

And it's also sick in the sense that if this was God's IDEA and God's PLAN, then clearly the people who nailed Jesus to the pole would have been doing GOD's WILL!

The whole thing is utterly absurd and, quite frankly it's even disturbing that so many people would think that a divine supreme being would be this mentally ill.

A God who deals in crucifixions as a means of obtaining his love and forgiveness?

That is the epitome of an oxymoron, IMHO.

Jesus as a mortal man who tried to "save" a disturbed culture from their sick religion makes far more sense.

But the idea of an all-wise supreme being actually plotting all this morbid stuff as a means of obtaining his "love and mercy" is nonsense.



I do come to discuss religion. But that includes discussing the reasons why various ancient religions should be rejected as being clearly ungodly.

What you would like to see is censorship where only people who support a particular religion should be allowed to voice their views on it. This is precisely how the religion has been kept alive for so many centuries. Anyone who spoke out against it was banned from any churches, or any other public places were they could be heard.

We've gone through this a million times before. This religion accuses everyone of being a 'sinner' who is in dire need of "salvation" from a mean nasty God who will condemn them into eternal punishment if they fail to cower down to this religion and support all of it's ignorance and religious bigotries.

That's what the problem is Cowboy.

It's a hateful religion based on a mean nasty jealous God who will supposedly condemn everyone who doesn't buy into it as being the ultimate "authority" of God.

That's hogwash. That ignorance needs to be addressed.

~~~~~~

I have offered quite positive and healthy explanations that easily explain all of this nonsense away.

It's really quite simple:

1. The Old Testament is nothing more than man-made fables of a male-chauvinistic ignorant male Godhead not all that much different from the Greek Zeus. He's even appeased by, and requires bloody sacrificial to appease him.

2. Jesus was most likely a Jewish Mahayana Buddhist Bodhisattva. There is nothing negative about that. That is a very respectable and positive thing to be. Even the New Testament has Jesus renouncing the ignorance of the Old Testament and preaching against those sick demented teaching. I have no doubt that he probably was brutally crucified for his views and teachings. But this had nothing to do with any plan from any God to offer anyone salvation.

3. The New Testament was put together in an effort to use the rumors of Jesus to create a new imagine of "God" as "The Christ" who must be accepted if salvation is to be had.

Even the Jews didn't fall for that one!

Neither did the Muslims.

So there are a lot of people who actually believe in the Old Testament but even they don't buy into the New Testament scam.

So that's a commonly accepted way to go right there.

~~~~

I just take it a step further and renounce the whole shebang including the Old Testament.

And as a human being I have every right to voice this view. After all, these fables are proclaiming that I am at odds with this creator. A male-chauvinistic creator, that is depicted (IMHO) as being a really lame idiot who can never even solve a problem. All his solutions were violent and disgusting, and evidently even according to the fables themselves they never even worked very well at all.

It's a lame picture of a lame God.

Hey, that's my honest sincere view of a religion that keeps trying to make out like as if there is something wrong with ME, for not liking this insane idiotic male-chauvinistic pig of a "God".

I get sick of being treated as though I am refusing or rejecting all that is "Good and Loving" just because I refuse to believe that our creator is as sick as these ancient Hebrews claim.

It's a stupid story.

If there is a creator, let's all PRAY that are creator had nothing to do with the ancient Hebrews!

Rather than being God's "Chosen People" the Jews were probably rejected by God a very long time ago and that's why they wrote fables about God trying to depict him to be the ignorant fool.

Now that actually makes some sense.

~~~~~

In the meantime Cowboy, I have absolutely no respect for anyone who uses this religion to look down their nose at me suggesting that because I don't buy into this utter foolishness I am somehow out of touch with God whilst they are so close to God they have actually been authorized by God to speak for God.



Get real!

This religion actually attracts egotists who love to pretend that they are backed by God whilst everyone else is at odds with God.

The jealous God religions were failed from the get go.

Jealousy can never be the basis for divinity.