What is your Religion: Part II

[Byzantine Mercenary]

First of all, original sin itself is all wrong. Before adam and eve ate "the apple" they did not know the difference between good and evil. Therefore, they did not know it was evil to eat the apple. So how can God punish us for something we did not know was wrong? The "expulsion from eden" was our spiritual awakening and transformation into thinking, choosing human beings. It fits in perfectly with evolution.

Hence, no need for a messiah.



But let's assume for fun that original sin is real. How does the physical death of Jesus cancel out my "spiritual death"? So he died on the cross. Doesn't seem like a big deal to me. Death is an eventuallity, whether you are murdered or die peacefully. Now if Jesus went to hell for all eternity, that would be a different story. THAT would be a sacrifice.



Finally, assuming that (a) original sin is real and (b) Jesus really was God and that his physical death actually menat something, then why the heck do I need to believe it? If he made the sacrifice, then "believing" in it is pointless.


Jesus is the boogey man waiting to kill you in the closet or under the bed. He's Santa Claus in the North Pole. Superman flying throught the sky.

Worship Jesus and you are worshipping a man in the place of our one God. Christianity is pagan. The father, the son, the holy ghost = 3 gods, not one.

Granted, Christianity has done alot of good in this world, but it has also done just as much evil. And all in worship of a human being.


The teachings of Jesus show us a different path. Jesus taught us to be closer to God by simplifying everything. He told as that there are two commandments (love the Lord your God with all your heart, soul and mind, and love your neighbor as yourself.)

The beauty of Jesus was his ability to get people past all the BS bureaucracy and rules that the saducees and pharisees had attached to our worship of the Lord. His disciples, especially Paul, were brilliant in that they brought the Lord to those outside of Judaism. But they were not trying to promote Jesus as God, they were trying to bring the teachings of Jesus to a wider audience.


The sooner that we put the destructive myths of Original Sin and Jesus-as-God into the religious history books, the better off the world will be. One day, the world will all worship the one true God and this distraction from our Lord will be put to a final rest.


Oh- and one more thing. Adam is hebrew for mankind. The Torah is the old testament and was first written in hebrew. So there is no "Adam" as a single person. So "mankind" "ate" "the apple". It also says nothing about a rib bone.

Literal translation of Genesis 1:27 from Hebrew to English-
And created | God | the mankind | in His image, | In the image of | God | He created | him; | male | and female | He created | them

And there is a whole lot more where that came from.

this is the same old argument used against christians, you were a christian once wern't you? surely you understand the concept of the holy trinity?
as for original sin Jesus died for our sins, the sins you and i have commited and will commit not just somethign our ancestors may or may not have done
as for whether you have to believe or not i can't say who will and who won't end up in heaven so i can't give a conclusive anser, however jesus taught to ask and it will be givem to you so if you don't ask (try and believe) you may not get.

[Divinus Arma]

Haruchai, I too, like the idea of purgatory and find it more in agreement with a loving God.

However, I do not at present accept anything less than total strict monotheism, though I have the humility to admit that I have no certainty. I am certain that there is no less than one God. For me, Jesus, the whole trinity, etc, is a pagan perspective. But, again, what do I know for sure? Nothing.

this is the same old argument used against christians, you were a christian once wern't you? surely you understand the concept of the holy trinity?
as for original sin Jesus died for our sins, the sins you and i have commited and will commit not just somethign our ancestors may or may not have done
as for whether you have to believe or not i can't say who will and who won't end up in heaven so i can't give a conclusive anser, however jesus taught to ask and it will be givem to you so if you don't ask (try and believe) you may not get.

Which was the same old argument? I voiced many.

I do sin. And I do ask for forgiveness. And it is given. The messiah is each of us, within ourselves. Our savior is ourselves- to have a relationship with the Lord and continually seek to do his will. We can never be perfect, and Jesus was right when he said that all will fall short. But what differentiates one man from another is his continual individual development towards God's purpose. Man must continually strive to align his own purpose with God's purpose. This is neither action, nor thought, not attitude, not intentions alone. It is all of this, but under the recognition that one will never attain perfection, though one can certainly pursue it. And through this pursuit, one finds himself closer alligned to the will of God.

Jesus was unique because he recognized that he was his own pathway to God. It not "No one comes to the father but my me". It is "No one comes to the father but by you". He was "the way the truth and the light", but so can each of us be. We are each simultaneously our own worst enemy and own best friend. We can facilitate our realtionship with the Lord, or counter it and deny ourselves. But each is a Messiah. Our relationship with God is on an individual level, so each of us requires an indivudal saviour. Ourselves.

[Banquo's Ghost]

However, I do not at present accept anything less than total strict monotheism, though I have the humility to admit that I have no certainty. I am certain that there is no less than one God. For me, Jesus, the whole trinity, etc, is a pagan perspective. But, again, what do I know for sure? Nothing.

On St Patrick's Day, I should be limbering up the old shamrock to show you how the Trinity is actually three aspects of the same one God, just as the old fella did for the pagan Irish kings.

But I'm about to go out and get blotto, so maybe tomorrow, as penance for the sins I am undoubtedly going to commit tonight

[Byzantine Mercenary]

Haruchai, I too, like the idea of purgatory and find it more in agreement with a loving God.

However, I do not at present accept anything less than total strict monotheism, though I have the humility to admit that I have no certainty. I am certain that there is no less than one God. For me, Jesus, the whole trinity, etc, is a pagan perspective. But, again, what do I know for sure? Nothing.



Which was the same old argument? I voiced many.

I do sin. And I do ask for forgiveness. And it is given. The messiah is each of us, within ourselves. Our savior is ourselves- to have a relationship with the Lord and continually seek to do his will. We can never be perfect, and Jesus was right when he said that all will fall short. But what differentiates one man from another is his continual individual development towards God's purpose. Man must continually strive to align his own purpose with God's purpose. This is neither action, nor thought, not attitude, not intentions alone. It is all of this, but under the recognition that one will never attain perfection, though one can certainly pursue it. And through this pursuit, one finds himself closer alligned to the will of God.

Jesus was unique because he recognized that he was his own pathway to God. It not "No one comes to the father but my me". It is "No one comes to the father but by you". He was "the way the truth and the light", but so can each of us be. We are each simultaneously our own worst enemy and own best friend. We can facilitate our realtionship with the Lord, or counter it and deny ourselves. But each is a Messiah. Our relationship with God is on an individual level, so each of us requires an indivudal saviour. Ourselves.

The whole trinity = polytheism argument,

It seems that you like me, were once a christian without understanding the religion properlly. Many years of being a christian and i did not understand so much about the trinity and forgiveness but just because the teachings of some christians are faulted does not mean that the whole religion as a whole is incorrect.

Didn't you you say that you stopped being a christian because a loving god would not allow one child to suffer?

Well the problem with this and any other issue of god interveneing is you are faced with two chioces, you could have a god that controlled and protected that prevented all harmfull acts, everyone would be safe and would live a long time but as a consequance you would be being constantly audited and edited. imagine an over protective parent, it would be intollerable to force such rules on those who do not wish them even if it was for altruistic purposes (just think what has happened when the church has wrongly tried this).

God could compleately abandon us, we would have compleate free will, but at the price of not even knowing our creator or our purpose, and without the guidance that such a powerful force could provide.

In the end its probably a bit of a compramise god makes himself known but not so much that people who do not want to follow him can't, or so little that those who wish to don't know how to follow him. In a model like this Hell would merely be a life without god for all those who reject him, basicly giving them what they wanted.

Again Imagining god as a parent, would you want to live with them your whole life? no, you would want fundamental independance even if it is only the inderpendance to get things wrong on your own. It is the same with god god does not want to force us and over protectiveness is a form of controlling.

Your right, religion is a very personal thing, as i said before the purpose of Jesus was to correct the older teachings and bring new ones, the most important of which is just how much god loves us and just how far he is willing to go to forgive us. Look at the contemporary Pagan gods they all required bribes and sacrifices for their favours. But the God Jesus teached of was one that needed no such trinkets as you would expect any truly loving and powerful being to.

I don't mean to be rude but it seems that your beliefs are very like Arianism perhaps you could say you were an Arian christian?

[Divinus Arma]

The whole trinity = polytheism argument,

It seems that you like me, were once a christian without understanding the religion properlly. Many years of being a christian and i did not understand so much about the trinity and forgiveness but just because the teachings of some christians are faulted does not mean that the whole religion as a whole is incorrect.

I felt I understood it then and I feel I understand it now. I understand that the holy trinity is, as Haruchai wrote, "three aspects of the same one God". I got it then, and I get it now.

But I still think that the Holy Trinity as a concept is in disagreement with the concept of monotheism. In fact, the lord is in everything, but that does not mean I should worship God "In the name of the holy oak tree" or "the puffy cotton cloud", as do people who pray "In the name of Jesus the Christ".

The difference is not only in worship, but in self-awareness and being. It has been explained many times that Jesus and God will sit side by side in heaven. Thus, in the "spiritual realm" Jesus and God are two distinct self-aware entities.

Didn't you you say that you stopped being a christian because a loving god would not allow one child to suffer?

No. I did not. Please read my comments for clarification, BM. I will be happy to discuss this with you.

Well the problem with this and any other issue of god interveneing is you are faced with two chioces, you could have a god that controlled and protected that prevented all harmfull acts, everyone would be safe and would live a long time but as a consequance you would be being constantly audited and edited. imagine an over protective parent, it would be intollerable to force such rules on those who do not wish them even if it was for altruistic purposes (just think what has happened when the church has wrongly tried this).

God could compleately abandon us, we would have compleate free will, but at the price of not even knowing our creator or our purpose, and without the guidance that such a powerful force could provide.

In the end its probably a bit of a compramise god makes himself known but not so much that people who do not want to follow him can't, or so little that those who wish to don't know how to follow him. In a model like this Hell would merely be a life without god for all those who reject him, basicly giving them what they wanted.

Again Imagining god as a parent, would you want to live with them your whole life? no, you would want fundamental independance even if it is only the inderpendance to get things wrong on your own. It is the same with god god does not want to force us and over protectiveness is a form of controlling.

I agree with all of this, in essence. I too believe that God grants us free will, and we have the choice to align our purpose with his, or to refuse his will and follow a selfish purpose that serves only ourselves.

Your right, religion is a very personal thing, as i said before the purpose of Jesus was to correct the older teachings and bring new ones, the most important of which is just how much god loves us and just how far he is willing to go to forgive us. Look at the contemporary Pagan gods they all required bribes and sacrifices for their favours. But the God Jesus teached of was one that needed no such trinkets as you would expect any truly loving and powerful being to.

I also agree with this. Jesus is an outstanding example of what can happen when one chooses to align their purpose with God. But then ,society could not function if we all just "walked the earth" as Jesus did.

I don't mean to be rude but it seems that your beliefs are very like Arianism perhaps you could say you were an Arian christian?

Not at all rude. I can understand your confusion. First and foremost, I am no longer a Christian. Nor do I misunderstand the holy trinity as Arianism. As Christianity teaches, the Father, Son, and the Holy Spirit co-exist but share the same being. This is my understanding of Christianity and it is one that I regard as polytheistic, despite the unity of these entities in one divinity. This is similar to Hinduism, which has a variety of divine beings, all of which co-exist but share divinity as a manifestation of Brahman, the Hindu concept of our Lord.

[Byzantine Mercenary]

I felt I understood it then and I feel I understand it now. I understand that the holy trinity is, as Haruchai wrote, "three aspects of the same one God". I got it then, and I get it now.

But I still think that the Holy Trinity as a concept is in disagreement with the concept of monotheism. In fact, the lord is in everything, but that does not mean I should worship God "In the name of the holy oak tree" or "the puffy cotton cloud", as do people who pray "In the name of Jesus the Christ".

ok well il try and give an explanation of why i consider it not polytheistic then, basicly i see god as a force outside all reasons and boundarys that is present in everything in the form of the holy spirit. God also created the universe, that aspect of god is as a father of the universe seperate from gods actions as the holy spirit. Then the third aspect, Jesus is god made present amoung man to act as a sacrifice, god must be the sacrifice as no one else could fulfil this role he was there at the begining he his here now and he sacrificed himself for us. Perhaps like the different states of water the same thing in different forms and with different purpose but the same overall thing. A theologin could explain better.

The difference is not only in worship, but in self-awareness and being. It has been explained many times that Jesus and God will sit side by side in heaven. Thus, in the "spiritual realm" Jesus and God are two distinct self-aware entities.

No. I did not. Please read my comments for clarification, BM. I will be happy to discuss this with you.

sorry if i was wrong i thought you said it in this thread but i can't find it to quote, you said how you were a christian and had stopped beign a christian because you couldn't believe in a god that allowed one child to die maybee someone else said it.

I agree with all of this, in essence. I too believe that God grants us free will, and we have the choice to align our purpose with his, or to refuse his will and follow a selfish purpose that serves only ourselves.

I also agree with this. Jesus is an outstanding example of what can happen when one chooses to align their purpose with God. But then ,society could not function if we all just "walked the earth" as Jesus did.

Not at all rude. I can understand your confusion. First and foremost, I am no longer a Christian. Nor do I misunderstand the holy trinity as Arianism. As Christianity teaches, the Father, Son, and the Holy Spirit co-exist but share the same being. This is my understanding of Christianity and it is one that I regard as polytheistic, despite the unity of these entities in one divinity. This is similar to Hinduism, which has a variety of divine beings, all of which co-exist but share divinity as a manifestation of Brahman, the Hindu concept of our Lord.

no, what i meant was that if you disagree with the trinity but agree with the rest of jesus's teaching you would be of a similar belief to that of an Arian Christian (but if you do not consider yourself a christian that is clearly not so) i hold the opposite stance to you and hold Hinduism to be a monotheistic religion this is probably why i dissagree with you on the trinity.

[Divinus Arma]

ok well il try and give an explanation of why i consider it not polytheistic then, basicly i see god as a force outside all reasons and boundarys that is present in everything in the form of the holy spirit. God also created the universe, that aspect of god is as a father of the universe seperate from gods actions as the holy spirit. Then the third aspect, Jesus is god made present amoung man to act as a sacrifice, god must be the sacrifice as no one else could fulfil this role he was there at the begining he his here now and he sacrificed himself for us. Perhaps like the different states of water the same thing in different forms and with different purpose but the same overall thing. A theologin could explain better.

I know you do not consider it polytheistic. When I was a Christian I did not consider it polytheistic either. In fact, it made perfect sense.

But now I see it all as a distraction from our relationship with the Lord. We can each have an individual relationship with God and anybody who tells you otherwise is trying to control you. Furthermore, the concept of a "middle man" acting as a conduit is completely asinine. The fact that Jesus was dead 2000 years ago makes it all the more asinine. Christians worship a dead guy in the belief that the dead guy was God manifested as a human, and thus worshipping the dead guy gives you a ticket to heaven. It's nuts! The fact that Jesus is supposed to be a "group messiah" makes it all the more absurd because each one of us should be seeking out an individual duty to God. Thus, each of us have a responsibility to be our own saviours.

sorry if i was wrong i thought you said it in this thread but i can't find it to quote, you said how you were a christian and had stopped beign a christian because you couldn't believe in a god that allowed one child to die maybee someone else said it.

I told you before, I never said that. I would not never say that. You have me confused with somebody else. Of course I believe in a God that would allow one child to die- how about billions? If God were to jump in and rescue everybody on a daily basis, it would destroy our free choice.

no, what i meant was that if you disagree with the trinity but agree with the rest of jesus's teaching you would be of a similar belief to that of an Arian Christian (but if you do not consider yourself a christian that is clearly not so) i hold the opposite stance to you and hold Hinduism to be a monotheistic religion this is probably why i dissagree with you on the trinity.

Well, in a way Hinduism and Christianity are very similar in that respect. The difference is that Hinudism does not threaten people with eternal damnation for "not believing the way we want you to".

I see the good in Christianity, but I do not agree with the portion that warps it. I can take the best from each religion and work with it.

[Byzantine Mercenary]

I know you do not consider it polytheistic. When I was a Christian I did not consider it polytheistic either. In fact, it made perfect sense.

But now I see it all as a distraction from our relationship with the Lord. We can each have an individual relationship with God and anybody who tells you otherwise is trying to control you. Furthermore, the concept of a "middle man" acting as a conduit is completely asinine. The fact that Jesus was dead 2000 years ago makes it all the more asinine. Christians worship a dead guy in the belief that the dead guy was God manifested as a human, and thus worshipping the dead guy gives you a ticket to heaven. It's nuts! The fact that Jesus is supposed to be a "group messiah" makes it all the more absurd because each one of us should be seeking out an individual duty to God. Thus, each of us have a responsibility to be our own saviours.

of course we each can have a direct relationship with god this is entirely what i believe but jesus came and died so that our sins could be forgiven by god and by ourselves otherwise how could anyone possibly atone for all the millions os sins that they perform during their lives?

I told you before, I never said that. I would not never say that. You have me confused with somebody else. Of course I believe in a God that would allow one child to die- how about billions? If God were to jump in and rescue everybody on a daily basis, it would destroy our free choice.

sorry i thought you did, i remember you talking about how you were a christian and couldn't accept the concept of hell and then saying that you couldn't believe in a god that let children suffer or something i can't find the comments (why can't you search the backroom like the other forums? its very annoying! )

Well, in a way Hinduism and Christianity are very similar in that respect. The difference is that Hinudism does not threaten people with eternal damnation for "not believing the way we want you to".

well i don't remember threatening anyone with damnation, don't hold me or the christian faith as a whole, responsible for the unchristian (im sure you know that we are forbidden to judge) attutudes of others.

I see the good in Christianity, but I do not agree with the portion that warps it. I can take the best from each religion and work with it.

every group has an eliment that ruins it for the rest