The only sin I know of is hubris

My understanding of 'sin' from the Bible is that it would be defiance of God's wishes.

However, since Jesus told as that we are Gods, then 'sin' would simply be when we fail our own expectations of ourselves.

Therefore, be true to thy self and you will be sinless.

can you please inform me of the verse(s) that say that we are Gods? I know he says we are kings, but never have i read anything about us being Gods.

It was originally stated Psalms in the Old Testament and was supposed to be the word of Yahwew:


Psalms 82:6 I have said, Ye are gods; and all of you are children of the most High.


Then in the New Testament John claims that Jesus said the following:


John 10:34 Jesus answered them, Is it not written in your law, I said, Ye are gods?


I'm not interested in arguing 'interpretations'. I just accept it for what it actually says. And yes I have considered the context. I still accept it for precisely what it says.

Of course, I'm convinced that Jesus was actually a pantheist anyway so this fits right in with my belief, and therefore it's not a problem for me.

Don't worry, I won't argue, only correct errors...
I've said this before, there IS a difference between "god" and "God".
"god" means men of high power, priests, kings and the like. "God" means the One and Only God.

Sure, I believe you considered the context, and then quoted out of context.

But let's asume you wrote what you truly believe...



Does that statement mean you believe what is written? If so, then you accept the fact that Jesus is the Son of God and is One with God...
If not, then why would you refute the Bible as being Truth and then try to use it as "evidence"?

First off, I don't believe everything that is written in the Bible. Secondly, I don't see where Jesus himself ever claimed to be the Son of Yahweh. All he did was make the same claims that the Pantheists make "I and the Father are One. Ye are also Gods".



I'm not attempting to use it for "evidence" for anything.

I simply pointed out that even John has Jesus recognizing that we are Gods.

Also, if we are all "gods" then there can be no difference between a "God" and a "god". Especially if the pantheistic view is accepted.

The authors of the Gospels have contradicted each other anyway. So the text is clearly not the infalliable word of any "God". It's clearly the opinionated hearsay of men.

It is not necessary to believe in any particular interpretations of the Bible in order to consider it as a work of men. I'm as free to consider the writings in the Bible just as I am to consider the writings of any other book.

I personally feel that even the gospels clearly have Jesus renouncing the teachings of Yahweh and never claiming to be his Son. All he ever claims was to be one with the father and when he made that claim he also said to everyone else that they too are gods. So as far as I can see, Jesus was a pantheist.

That's my conclusion.

Clearly church clergy have no clue what the book means. They are all over the map. We have the Judaism and Islam, both of whom reject Jesus as the Son of Yahweh. Then we have the Catholics and the Protestants all of whole accept that Jesus was the sacrificial lamb of Yahweh, but disagree on many of the finer points.

So the total and utter confusion of the scholars and clergy of this highly fragmented and confused folklore pretty much speaks for itself. Everyone is guessing and my guess is as good as anybody ele's as far as I'm concerned.

I mean, if you stop and think about it just for a second it's silly for Christains to be expecting Jesus to return. According the gospels Jesus himself said that all of his prophesies would come to pass before the generation he was speaking to came to pass.


Matt.24
[34] Verily I say unto you, This generation shall not pass, till all these things be fulfilled.


Mark.13
[30] Verily I say unto you, that this generation shall not pass, till all these things be done.


Luke.21
[31] So likewise ye, when ye see these things come to pass, know ye that the kingdom of God is nigh at hand.
[32] Verily I say unto you, This generation shall not pass away, till all be fulfilled.


All of these authors are supposedly quoting what Jesus has said live to the people he was speaking with directly. Moreoever, if you read the gospels in detail you'll discover that nowhere does Jesus instruct anyone to write anything down for future generations.

In fact, it's my personal feeling that if Jesus truly was some sort of monotheistic Godhead (or the Son of a monotheistic Godhead) who came to demand that people believe in his words, he would have written them down. The mere fact that he didn't suggests to me that he had no reason to write them them.

Jesus left future generation absolute no way to believe in HIM. At the very best all you can do is believe in Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John. And they all tell conflicting and inconsistent stories.

So no, I'm totally convinced that Jesus could not possibly have been the son of any monotheistic Zeus-like Godhead.

But much more importantly, even if he had been such a mythological figure, based on the scriptures above, everything that Jesus had predicted has already come to pass within the generation that he was speaking to live.

Therefore anyone who's waiting around for Jesus to come back some 2000 years later is waiting for nothing, because according the three main gospels even Jesus himself said that everything he spoke of would come to pass for the generation he was speaking to.

There is no indication at all that Jesus was attempting to send any messages to people 2000 years in the furture. He was very precise and clear that he was speaking to the current generation only.

So even if we accept that he was "God" then we must accept that HIS WORD can be trusted, and HIS WORD says that he was interested in the current generation of his time, not some generation 2000 years later.

In fact, if we also accepts the words of Matthew (who was the only author of the gospels to make the following claim):


[50] Jesus, when he had cried again with a loud voice, yielded up the ghost.
[51] And, behold, the veil of the temple was rent in twain from the top to the bottom; and the earth did quake, and the rocks rent;
[52] And the graves were opened; and many bodies of the saints which slept arose,
[53] And came out of the graves after his resurrection, and went into the holy city, and appeared unto many.


Sure sounds like the Rapture right there to me!

Either Matthew was a bit over-zealous in his storytelling (which I suppect was most likely the case), or that was the actual rapture, and just as Jesus had promised he came back within the current generation to take the very FEW people that he was interested in inviting into his Kingdom of Heaven.

None of the other authors of the gospels mention these other saints raising from their graves with Jesus. That's a pretty important piece of information to just slip their minds I would think.

So if we are to believe the gospels as the infallible word of God, then we must accept that the Rapture had already taken place with the ressurection of Jesus and we are simply the desserted decsendents of the rejects. There's no reason whatsoever to believe that Jesus would be coming back a second time.

Revelations was a dream that John had much later. But that was just John's dream. There no reason to give that book dream merit at all. It's just some guy writing about a dream he had. There's no reason to believe that Jesus had anything to do with his dream.

Talk about hearsay. Now we have people actually confessing that they're just dreaming things up.

So no, I don't accept anyone else's interpretations of anything. I necessarily must do my own interpretating. I take Protestantism very seriously. And that's what Protestantism is all about, rejecting the authority of the Pope and deciding for myself what the scriptures mean.

My conclusions are that Yahweh and the entire old testament was a myth no different from the myths of Zeus. I believe that some guy name Jesus became interested in religion and spirituality at a very young age. Perhaps around 12 years old. Then he traveled to India where the true sages lived and he learned about pantheism. About 17 years later when he was around 30 he came back to his homeland and tried to help people live a better life by renouncing the teachings of the mythological God of Yahweh, and replacing them with the wisdom of Buddha. After all Jesus taught the same things as Buddha which were completely opposite to the teaching of Yahweh.

There's no way he could have been the Son of Yahweh, he didn't even agree with those teachings. That's why he was crucified for blaspheme.

I personally don't believe that anyone rose back up from the dead. No saints, and no Jesus. That was all just an attempt to use the martyrdom of Jesus to prop up the original teaching of the Old Testament that Jesus had denounced and thus rejuvinate the authority of the Church.

After all Jesus would have been a martyr to the people for having deounced all the nasty things of the Old Testament and preaching love and forgiveness instead of judging and stonning sinners to death and seeking revenge as in an eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth.

In fact, that was the attraction of Jesus. He renounced all the horrible ways of Yahweh and replaced them with the love of Buddha.

abra,
you continue to take things out of context to fulfill your own agenda.

Matthew 24:4
And Jesus answered and said unto them, Take heed that no man deceive you.

Matthew 24:15
When ye therefore shall see the abomination of desolation, spoken of by Daniel the prophet, stand in the holy place, (whoso readeth, let him understand:)

Matthew 24:33-34
So likewise ye, when ye shall see all these things, know that it is near, even at the doors.

Verily I say unto you, This generation shall not pass, till all these things be fulfilled.


Mark 13:5
And Jesus answering them began to say, Take heed lest any man deceive you:

Mark 13:13-14
And ye shall be hated of all men for my name's sake: but he that shall endure unto the end, the same shall be saved.

But when ye shall see the abomination of desolation, spoken of by Daniel the prophet, standing where it ought not, (let him that readeth understand,) then let them that be in Judaea flee to the mountains:

Mark 13:29-30
So ye in like manner, when ye shall see these things come to pass, know that it is nigh, even at the doors.

Verily I say unto you, that this generation shall not pass, till all these things be done.


Luke 21:8-22
And he said, Take heed that ye be not deceived: for many shall come in my name, saying, I am Christ; and the time draweth near: go ye not therefore after them.

But when ye shall hear of wars and commotions, be not terrified: for these things must first come to pass; but the end is not by and by.

Then said he unto them, Nation shall rise against nation, and kingdom against kingdom:

And great earthquakes shall be in divers places, and famines, and pestilences; and fearful sights and great signs shall there be from heaven.

But before all these, they shall lay their hands on you, and persecute you, delivering you up to the synagogues, and into prisons, being brought before kings and rulers for my name's sake.

And it shall turn to you for a testimony.

Settle it therefore in your hearts, not to meditate before what ye shall answer:

For I will give you a mouth and wisdom, which all your adversaries shall not be able to gainsay nor resist.

And ye shall be betrayed both by parents, and brethren, and kinsfolks, and friends; and some of you shall they cause to be put to death.

And ye shall be hated of all men for my name's sake.

But there shall not an hair of your head perish.

In your patience possess ye your souls.

And when ye shall see Jerusalem compassed with armies, then know that the desolation thereof is nigh.

Then let them which are in Judaea flee to the mountains; and let them which are in the midst of it depart out; and let not them that are in the countries enter thereinto.

For these be the days of vengeance, that all things which are written may be fulfilled.


Luke 21:31-33
So likewise ye, when ye see these things come to pass, know ye that the kingdom of God is nigh at hand.

Verily I say unto you, This generation shall not pass away, till all be fulfilled.

Heaven and earth shall pass away: but my words shall not pass away.



"Take heed lest any man deceive you"

I love merry-go-rounds!

Its a free country....so we are free to believe in anyone or anything we want. There is no use in argueing over this becuase nobody thinks they are wrong.

I have no "agenda". I'm simply explaining how I see things and the conclusions that I've personally drawn. You millage may vary.

Yes, it's true that the authors of the New Testament have Jesus speaking with forked tongue. So you can always find quotes where they have Jesus contradicting himself. In fact, that's just yet another reason that has convinced me that these writings are the agenda of men, and not the word of any all-wise divine being. They can be made to say anything you like.

That's why the overall religion has fallen into so many confused and fragmented pieces. No two people can agree on what the book is actually saying. Even the clergy within the same sects of this religion have disagreements on how they interpret things.

I have no doubt that the authors of the New Testament were trying to make out like Jesus was the sacrifical lamb of Yahweh. But I didn't find their stories convincing. On the contrary they actually convinced me that Jesus couldn't have possibly be the son of Yahweh.

So that's my firm conclusion.



Truly. I was just offering my reasons why I came to the conclusions I came to. Clearly Pan perfers the traditional version. I'm sure that the authors of New Testament would prefer to be believed.

They just didn't convince me is all, they made way too many mistakes.

so you think exchanging views is a bad thing? do you decide what is of use and what is not now? as you say, it's a free country which means you are free to not read any of this huh?

When did I say anything was bad? How was my statement in any way making a decision? I was simply stating opinion just like every one else.

There is nothing wrong with debating this subject or any other subject to that matter. But its hard to debate with someone who doesnt have an open mind.

fine. i find it easier to agree with this statement than the one where you said such a debate is of no use. and i have no difficulty debating with anyone, open minded or otherwise.

Sin is a term used by the religious to denounce that which goes against their particular God

Sin only apply to those that seek to place themselves under the jurisdiction of a God

in other words sin only apply to those with a belief in a God

I agree with your sentiment here only I would replace the word "God" with the word "Doctrine" because to even call it "God" already loans it some credibility.

In other words, to you, the term "God" means, "Ficticious Character".

But to religious people the term "God" means, "The Creator of the Universe".

However, if you replace the term "God" with "Doctrine" then you're no longer implying that their doctrine has anything to do with "The Creator of the Universe". You're just recognizing it as stories and nothing more.

Moreover, you last sentence would be far more truthful if using the word "Doctrine". Because that's truly what is being believed in, in those cases.

the doctrine is only a written version of a messenger and can not sit in final Judgement only the God can do that... if one sins they choose to sin against the God not against the doctrine