but i thought we were all the children of god? will that be denied now as well?

Yes we are the children of God. We are not God's WORD, we are CHILDREN of God.

Cowboy, I somehow sense that it would be very much worthwhile for you to get a dictionary from somewhere and memorize it.

Cowboy wrote:

Only if your will is not with God. If your will is with the will of God, how would doing the will of God not be doing your will using your free will?

Now you're starting to see the light.

If your will is with God you most certainly aren't going to need to have a rule book to read.

When I read the teachings of Jesus I instantly recognized that Jesus was speaking my will. Therefore, if Jesus was also speaking of God's will, then clearly my will and God's will are one in the same.

Obviously this isn't going to work if we replace Jesus with the laws of the Old Testament. I totally disagree with those laws, the male-chauvinism, the homophobic bigotry, and the religious bigotry that the Hebrews wrote into their original religious doctrines.

So clearly God's will can have nothing to do with the Old Testament if we're going to give Jesus credit for teaching "God's will", we're going to need to consider other doctrines such as Buddhism.

Buddha, Confucius, Lao Tzu and many others expressed a will that is compatible with the will that Jesus was expressing.

Jesus' will is my will because clearly Jesus had the same will as me.

I have no need to "follow" Jesus since we both have the same will.

I simply agree and recognize that our wills are the same. This does not automatically support Christian bigotry or dogma. The Old Testament clearly does not support the will of Jesus, and neither do the teachings of Paul, IMHO.

It is written that Jesus himself said that he came for the sinners and not for the righteous. What would be the point in teaching righteous people what they already know?

So clearly Jesus came for the sake of those who are "lost". They haven't found themselves yet. They are lost in the ego, and because of this their "will" is not going to match the will of their true self, which is clearly the will of God. This is what Bodhisattvas do. It's a standard tradition of Buddhism.

I'm in complete harmony with Jesus.

What you're asking people to support is religious bigotry and Christian fundamentalism which has absolutely nothing at all to do with Jesus, or God.

So I reject your religious views as being a gross misunderstanding of both Jesus and God.

It's that simple. I do not recognize your rigid dogmatic view of the biblical Hebrew cannon of stories to be representative of "god".

From my point of view, you the one who has it all wrong.

I simply agree and recognize that our wills are the same. This does not automatically support Christian bigotry or dogma. The Old Testament clearly does not support the will of Jesus, and neither do the teachings of Paul, IMHO.

Cowboy wrote:

You were doing fairly well till you got to this. The old and new testament are pretty much the same. The only main difference between the two is when we will be judged. Old testament times people were judged on earth by a peer using God's word. The word has not been made flesh and will do it's own judging, eg., Jesus. I can find the commandments in the new testament through the teachings of Jesus. All the teachings of the bible, rules, laws, ect are part of at least one of the 10 commandments.

You seem to think that you can just keep repeating that nothing changed and if you repeat that enough maybe someone will fall for it. But Jesus change things major ways. And your constant denial isn't going to change that fact.

The moral teaching of Jesus match up with the teachings of Buddhism perfectly, and they are in direct blatant contradiction to the teachings and directives that had been taught in the Torah.

Jesus had to have been a Buddhist, there can be no doubt about it.

Cowboy wrote:

You state there were changes. That holds no water less you can show that there was changes. What exactly changed outside of when/how one is judged?

Well, that's enough right there!

If a supposedly unchanging God CHANGED how and when we are judged, then the story flies in the face of it's own premise that God is the same yesterday, today, and tomorrow.

So that's sufficient to destroy the stories right there.

After all, how a God expects us to behave and be judged is the paramount character of this type of Zeus-like ruling Godhead.

So if this God changed dramatically in how and when we are judged, then he's CHANGED in a DRAMATIC WAY with respect to what he expects from his creation and how he judges his creation.

So that's sufficient right there.

It's already a totally contradicting fable. No need to even go into any details.

We can only be judged by ourselves.

Nothing exists but the one and the one judges itself.

Cowboy wrote:

That didn't answer my question. I asked you to provide something different between the old and new testament. We are judged by the word. Old testament times the word was just that, the word. And needed a person to carry out the judgment. The word has now become flesh and can carry out the judgment on it's own. There's no real difference there. So I'll ask again. What "changes" are you speaking of?

You evidently didn't comprehend my previous response. The changes that you have already acknowledged are more than sufficient to violate the premise of an unchanging God.

There's no need to go beyond that. A CHANGE in the way that God a judges and how he judges is a sufficient CHANGE to say that the God has CHANGED in the way that he deals with his creation and in what he expects from mankind.

So the fact that this God has CHANGED the way he deals with mankind and the types of behaviors he expects from mankind has been well-established. This violates the original premise of these fables that this God is supposedly UNCHANGING.

So clearly it's senseless attempt to try preserve any sort of rigid "verbatim" interpretations of these doctrines. And it also makes no sense to believe that Jesus was the son of the God of the Old Testament since he brought such a hugely different moral value system.

However, my observation that Jesus was most likely a Mahayana Buddhist Bodhisattva is worthy of examination. And when it is examined it clearly answers all questions without any problems whatsoever.

Therefore, I've already found a far better solution that your attempt to try to preserve an unworkable rigid verbatim approach to the original cannon of stories that clearly cannot be made to work.

So you have nothing to offer me that can even remotely begin to explain things as well as I have explained them already.

Your talking in meaningless circles.

Your judgment of self has no bearing on your eternal self or death.

I do not consider my "self" to be "my body." I identify myself as my ETERNAL SELF always which is, of course eternal.

The eternal self if God and God is all, that includes me.

Pantheism.

Get over it. Know that I do not believe the way you do.

Cowboy wrote:

There is but one judge for us all, Jesus Christ the almighty.

Well, if what you say is true, and this Jesus fellow is a righteous guy, then we're all in good hands, right?

Or are you suggesting that this Jesus fellow is an unrighteous judge and we are in danger of being judged unfairly?