Not true.

It is true. Incarnate is when we are given this flesh, this body, when we are born. Reincarnate is when we are given another body, born again, ect.

incarnate - embodied in flesh; given a bodily, especially a human, form:
reincarnate - to give another body to; incarnate again.

I'm not convinced that Jesus supported a single final judgment.

On the contrary, we have NO CLUE what Jesus might have actually stood for since he have absolutely nothing that was written by him.

All we have is the hearsay rumors of people who were trying to make out like Jesus was "The Christ". It's obvious that they were thinking in terms of one final judgment.

Personally I don't trust the authors of the New Testament to speak for Jesus.

In fact, this is how I can know without any doubt that these scriptures are not from any God, and that Jesus most certain wasn't God.

If Jesus had truly been "God", or even a messenger from God, then Jesus would have known that people like myself would never believe second-hand hearsay rumors.

Why should I believe that a supposedly omniscient God wouldn't even be smart enough to know that a lot of people would not see any reason to trust second-hand rumors?

There is nothing in the Bible that actually came straight from Jesus.

Not a single solitary WORD.

So every time you quote from those rumors it's not the slightest bit impressive at all. Those people most likely had no more clue than you do.

In fact, look at you, you talk and act like as if you "know" this stuff is true and you are removed from it by over 2000 years!

Well, all you're doing is proving to me that there exist humans who will swear to anything and even claim to "witness" anything, even when they have NO CLUE whether there is any truth it something or not.

So for all I know these Hebrew fables could have been written by a bunch of Hebrew "Cowboys".

Totally unimpressive.

There is nothing in the Bible that came directly from Jesus.

Not a single solitary WORD.

It's all hearsay rumors by people who clearly had an agenda to support a myth, not really any different from you at all. Look at you, you support this stuff when clearly you have NO CLUE.

I have no doubt that this is what the authors of the New Testament were doing as well.

Jesus is not even in the New Testament.

That's the biggest Christian fallacy of all. The Christians keep claiming that "Jesus said this, and Jesus said that", but we have absolutely no clue what Jesus might have had to say, and obviously he wasn't interested in telling us, otherwise he would have written it down HIMSELF.

There is no Jesus in the Bible.

None at all.

The Bible is nothing more than a book of untrustworthy hearsay rumors. Rumors that are clearly biased toward trying to make out that Jesus was "The Messiah". This is also something that could not possibly be true because Jesus was never handed the throne of King David, so Jesus could not possibly have been the messiah prophecized in the Torah.

These New Testament rumors are clearly false.

That's not the reason you don't believe, you don't believe cause you choose not to. Would not make one difference if Jesus would have written the entire new testament himself. You would return with things such as but not limited to "you can not prove he wrote that". And it being from a different language, time period, and culture, you would say things such as "just made up stories".

ANYTHING from yesterday is "hearsay rumors". Doesn't matter if the person in mention wrote it or not. It can not be proven that someone wrote it.

I know the difference between the meanings of the words incarnate and reincarnate Cowboy.

I am saying that incarnation (or reincarnation) is NOT "creation."
It is manifestation.

It is my belief that all is God and God manifests.

I do not believe that I am separate from God or that God created me.

I believe that all life is God manifest. That includes me.

The reason I don't believe in this religion is because it's based on a God that is depicted as being a male-chauvinistic pig, who can only solve his problems using ignorant forms of punishments, (which have never even WORKED to solve any of his problems anyway).

And he's supposedly a God who is appeased by blood sacrifices. Like as if having his son (or himself) beaten and nailed to a pole is going to "pay" for something.



It's a sick religion.

And yes, you're right, I still wouldn't believe in Christian if Jesus had written down this same utter nonsense in his own hand.

But that's truly a moot point.

To begin with any God who wants to communicate with his creation of humanity would necessarily have to be SMARTER than to have his messages contaminated by hearsay gossip. That would be utterly stupid in any case, IMHO. Yet this is precisely what the Christian Bible is, total hearsay gossip.

So writing things down in his own hand would only be ONE REQUIREMENT that I would need to see satisfied before I would even begin to believe that the message had any validity.

The SECOND requirement would indeed be that whatever he wrote would need to be intelligent. So if he wrote down the same things that are spewed about in the current hearsay rumors then it wouldn't be anymore impressive.

The only reason I would have liked to have heard what Jesus actually had to day in his OWN WORDS, is because I'm confident that he would NOT be making all the utterly absurd claims that are being made on his behalf in the New Testament. He probably would have spoken more along the lines of Buddhism without all the superstitious rumors that he was born of a virgin, or that he was the "only begotten son" of any God.

If we had writings that came directly from him we could probably clearly see that he was never claiming to be any "messiah".

And this is precisely why second-hand hearsay rumors cannot be trusted.

I have absolutely no reason whatsoever to believe that the authors of the New Testament "Speak for Jesus".

As far as I can see they are running a dead marionette doll of Jesus and making him say whatever they would like people to believe that he supported.

I don't believe any of it.

And way don't I believe it Cowboy?

Simply because I choose to not believe it?

No, not at all.

I don't believe it because in order to believe it I would also need to believe that our creator is utterly stupid.

That's why I don't believe in Christianity Cowboy.

I'm sorry if that offends you, but it's the TRUTH.

I reject the religion because the religion requires that God is utterly stupid, and I don't believe in a stupid God.

If there's a God it has to be far wiser than these ignorant Hebrew mythology.

Or maybe there is no God at all and the atheist are actually right.

As far as I'm concerned atheism would be a far less disturbing picture of reality than to think that we were created by a God who is so utterly stupid that he thinks that having someone crucified on a pole would "pay" for something.



I mean seriously.

That's a mentality better reserved for the Klu Klux Klan.

It's not the mentality befitting of a God, IMHO.

So yes, I choose to not believe that God is an idiot.

Sorry if that bothers you.

By the way, you're missing the point.

I'm not saying that I would necessarily believe it if it had been written by the Demigod.

But that's not the point.

The point is that I don't believe that any God, or Demigod, would leave such an important message up to hearsay rumors. If the message was that important he'd write it down himself.

Therefore the fact that this message was not written down by the Demigod himself, that proves to me that it could not have been an all-important message from God.

Whether I would have believed it if it had actually been written by the Demigod is a moot point because that never happened. I still might not believe the author's own claims.

But that doesn't change the fact that any REAL ALL WISE GOD would have known better than to leave his message up to hearsay rumors.

~~~~~

So the fact that it got to us as hearsay rumors basically proves that it's nothing more than man-made exaggerated superstition or outright religious propaganda.

It doesn't leave open the "possibility" that it could be a message from God. Because a REAL God would have written down his own message.

They are only hearsay rumors to you and those alike. Again, everything from yesterday is hearsay rumors if you wish to look at it like that.

For instance, say I seen an alien yesterday. I wrote down everything I experienced in my experience with the Alien.

What I wrote down, would be hearsay rumors to everyone that did not wish to give it accountability. You CAN NOT absolutely prove something of yesterday. Even down to say I had it on video. Heck I could have digitally made that video the night before on my computer. Absolutely nothing can be proven less one gives credit to the evidence shown.

Even further down then that, you can not prove Abraham Lincoln was president of the United states without the evidence being seen as hearsay rumors, less that one was willing to give it credibility.

Hearsay is testifying about what someone else said about someone or some event.

If you see something and write it down and your handwriting proves it was written by you and signed, or you get it notarized by a third party witness, that is not hearsay. That is a signed statement by a first person witness.

But nevertheless the first hand witness is hearsay if another doesn't wish to give it credibility. Regardless if they get it notarized or anything else. That just notarizes that fact that they are claiming such a thing happened.

No, its not. These are legal terms.

That is not to say a notarized statement will be believed or even be signed by the person it is supposed to be signed by. Even those can be forged.

But "hearsay" is one person testifying about something another person said.

This is what it is Cowboy. Go ask a lawyer or a judge.

Wikipedia:

Hearsay is information gathered by one person from another person concerning some event, condition, or thing of which the first person had no direct experience. When submitted as evidence, such statements are called hearsay evidence. As a legal term, "hearsay" can also have the narrower meaning of the use of such information as evidence to prove the truth of what is asserted. Such use of "hearsay evidence" in court is generally not allowed. This prohibition is called the hearsay rule.

For example, a witness says "Susan told me Tom was in town" as her evidence to the fact that Tom was in town. Since witness does not offer in this statement the personal knowledge of the fact, this witness statement would be hearsay evidence to the fact that Tom was in town, and not admissible. Only when Susan testifies herself in the current judicial proceeding that she saw Tom in town, the Susan's testimony becomes admissible evidence to the fact that Tom was in town. However, a witness statement "Susan told me Tom was in town" can be admissible as evidence in the case against Susan when she is accused of spreading defamatory rumors about Tom, because now witness has personal knowledge of the fact that Susan said (i.e. pronounced the words) "Tom was in town" in presence of the witness.

Many jurisdictions that generally disallow hearsay evidence in courts permit the more widespread use of hearsay in non-judicial hearings.

Definition of hearsay -
Information received from other people that cannot be adequately substantiated; rumor

The information one would be receiving from another would be that they seen an Alien and had dinner with it.



That is only the most common hearsay. Hearsay is someone saying something happened or someone said something without adequate evidence. So it all revolves around what someone feels is adequate evidence or not.

There is no need for 'reincarnation'... God don't make junk...

He gave creation to you.

Why would he give you a gift... and have need to give it again...

CREATION is far more than the mere flicker you see of it in this time...

What matter the form given as your now progresses through life...

or the place one observes from... changes.

Change of state does not destroy... it simply changes your now.

I'm not the slightest bit interesting in proving anything, or obtaining proof for anything.

I'm telling you that I'm simply not convinced by the stories that they came from any God.

The only people who are concerned with "proof" are those who are trying to convince me.

I'm quite happy with dismissing these fables based on the reasons I give. They simply don't represent the behavior that I would expect from a supposedly all-wise being.

I wouldn't expect an all-wise being to allow such important information to even be conveyed via hearsay rumors. And I'm using the term technically in the legal sense that Jeanniebean described.

Heresay is second-hand information. And that's precisely what these Hebrew stories are. They are "RUMORS" about a man called Jesus.

If Jesus was God's messenger, I would expect at the very least to receive the message directly from him, at least in the form of his own writings. But there are not writings by Jesus. Either Jesus was illiterate, or if he did write things down those scriptures have long since been lost or destroyed by people who don't want us to know what Jesus truly had to say.

My bet is that he was indeed teaching a pantheistic view of "God", along the lines of Mahayana Buddhism, and if he did write anything down the so-called "Christians" would most certainly want that destroyed because it wouldn't match up with their claims about that man.

I see no reason to believe that an all-powerful, all-wise creator who supposedly maintains "His Holy Word" in scriptures would not be the scribe of those very scriptures. Especially if he went to all the trouble of actually becoming incarnate as a human male.

To become incarnate as a human male only to be associated with highly questionable hearsay gossip would be utterly absurd, IMHO.

This is why I say that the very fact that these scriptures are indeed hearsay rumors, we can be certain that they are indeed nothing more than the superstitious exaggerations of men. Or worse yet, the purpose religious propaganda using a dead Jesus as a marionette doll.

Clearly some guy was horribly crucified for teaching LOVE, and that became a highly controversial thing. There were many rumors about who this man Jesus might have been. The idea that he was some sort of messiah sent specifically by God is merely the Christian rumors. The Jews themselves clearly did not accept these rumors either.

And no one truly should, IMHO.

It's not about "proof", it about the mere fact that these rumors aren't even remotely reasonable.

Cowboy you should never go to college because you think you already know everything. You would be a terrible student.

Hearsay is NOT simply "someone saying what happened." If they were not there when it actually happened and if they did not PERSONALLY WITNESS IT, then they are simply repeating a story which is rumor or hearsay.

It has nothing to do with what someone feels is adequate evidence or not.

Exactly.

The New Testament writings are hearsay rumors. Period amen.

That would not be the case if they had actually been written by Jesus himself. Of course, it doesn't automatically follow that if they had been written by the man they are supposedly about that this would automatically make them true and correct. Anyone can lie or be mistaken, even the original claimant.

However, my point is that it is uncharacteristic of a supposedly "all-wise" being to leave such an important message to humanity up to nothing more than hearsay rumors.

If Jesus truly was our creator incarnated (or his son sent specifically with such an important message to humanity) then Jesus himself should have written this down in his own words and style.

In fact, his style of writing (being of such divine origins) should have been so profoundly crystal clear and unambiguous that it would blow the socks off anyone who reads it. After all, if God himself can't impress mere humans with his writings then who could?

The mere fact that the bible is nothing more than hearsay rumors proves to me that this is all that it is. Period.

I stand firm in my belief that any truly all-wise supreme being who wanted to communicate with all of humanity would simply know better than to allow that message to fall into the ruins of convoluted and often conflicting hearsay rumors.

After all, if Jesus was supposed to be the "WORD" made flesh, then he should have been able to write in a way that would blow the socks off any and all literary scholars. He should have been able to write up a document that was so perfectly stated and organized that it everyone who read it would be extremely impressed by the perfection of his writings.

But clearly that's not what the Christian doctrines are. Instead they are convoluted hearsay rumors, that often even conflict with each other.

~~~~~~

In addition to all of that, if Jesus himself was sent to give humanity a "New Covenant" with God then there would be absolutely no reason at all for the writings of Paul or any others.

Jesus should have been able to fulfill his purpose completely without the need for anymore elaboration by mere untrustworthy mortal men. Yet the New Testament is mostly the babbling of Paul. Paul wrote about 75% of what's actually in the New Testament. And most of his writings are just using Jesus as an excuse to dredge up crap from the Old Testament which actually flies in the face of the things that were supposedly attributed to Jesus himself anyway.

Why would God need Paul to FINISH the job of conveying his New Covenant to humanity. Did Jesus not do a good enough job?

~~~~~~

This whole idea that God is "The Word" and that Jesus was "The Word" made flesh is utter nonsense if Jesus didn't even bother to actually use the POWER of the written WORD himself. Leaving "The Word" to nothing more than hearsay rumors and the babblings of other mortal men like Paul would not be "wise", IMHO. And therefore it's safe to conclude that these hearsay rumors about Jesus are totally false superstitious exaggerations.

Whoever Jesus was (assuming he even existed at all), he was clearly just a mortal man who was objecting to the teachings of the Torah. He was not the "Divine Word" made flesh. That's nonsense. His behavior doesn't fit that role. If he were truly "The Divine Word" made flesh then he would have understood the power of "The Written Word", and he would have also understood the dependability of hearsay rumors. And like I say, why bother with Paul at all? What would Paul have to do with "THE WORD" and what would Paul have to do with bringing God's "New Covenant" to mankind?

If Jesus were truly GOD he would have had no need to lean on Paul to continue his message. He would have been able to complete his message convincingly the first time via his own writings.

So we clearly have fables here that have no more merit than Greek Mythology.

That's my personal conclusion, and it's all based on very sound principles.

Jeaniebean, you should never go to college because you think you already know everything. You would be a terrible student.

Hearsay is when someone makes a claim they can not provide evidence for. Weather it is what someone said or did. Even if they can provide a minute amount of evidence, it is then up to the discretion of the one it's being presented to, to make the decision if it's hearsay or not.

And where did God even tell the apostles to write everything down? The bible wasn't originally written as the bible is today. The bible is full of epistles and "books". The bible is a gather of separate letters/books combined together, written at different times by different people. Was the different apostles experience with Jesus and or the different prophecies they were given.

Well Morning Song,

You know I love you, but try to see it from a different point of view.

Maybe YOU think they wont get saved, and Christians are taught that Jesus Christ is the only way to heaven, I know.

But I personally, honestly, feel, that if a person at least has a higher power that they believe in, and it makes them feel blessed, than live and let live.

Everyone has the right to believe in whatever they like.

And you cant down them, if they want to believe differently, or
save them by trying to change them.

Its not that easy, although I know, your heart is in the right place sister. And that you just want those you believe are not going to be saved, to be saved in Jesus.

I just hope they are happy, healthy, and wish them the best.

Bless all!