All roads lead to the same God ?

[SeekingAllTruth]

//I believe the Jesus of the gospels wasn't a real person.//
This puts you at odds with every reliable scholar , historian, secular or otherwise. This is not a serious consideration in any recognised academic field on the matter of history and the bible. Of course your entitled to your opinion .

You will not find any secular historians who will say they believe a Jesus Christ, son of God who incarnated as a man through Mary being inseminated with the Holy Spirit and died for the sins of mankind, ever existed. I defy you to name even two SECULAR historians who will admit to believing such, assuming one could be a closeted Christian crackpot. They'd be laughed out of the academy. Go ahead.

 

[John1.12]

You will not find any secular historians who will say they believe a Jesus Christ, son of God who incarnated as a man through Mary being inseminated with the Holy Spirit and died for the sins of mankind, ever existed. I defy you to name even two SECULAR historians who will admit to believing such, assuming one could be a closeted Christian crackpot. They'd be laughed out of the academy. Go ahead.

I said ' a real person ' .

 

[Rival]

You will not find any secular historians who will say they believe a Jesus Christ, son of God who incarnated as a man through Mary being inseminated with the Holy Spirit and died for the sins of mankind, ever existed. I defy you to name even two SECULAR historians who will admit to believing such, assuming one could be a closeted Christian crackpot. They'd be laughed out of the academy. Go ahead.

They're clearly meaning a historical person called Jesus who attracted followers, not a religious belief about Jesus. And yes, it is the majority scholarly belief that Jesus existed.

 

[Windwalker]

I'm saying this . Anyone can Come to Jesus for salvation . For those that have never heard of Jesus. The ones who seek God , responding to the light thats given, God will make a way to bring the message of Jesus to him . Just like Cornelius in Acts 10 and 11 .But if the message is brought, through another person ,a dream ,a vision even ,and they reject and do not believe then they will remain lost.

What if they never have some preacher come their way, and they die loving God in the way they understand him, under a different name they learned from others in their religion? Does God honor what was in their heart, or are they required to hear about Jesus from a Christian at some point before they die in order for God to accept them? Or is God not so much on technicalities like that, and God's Grace is what really is important?

 

[KerimF]

Please do tell us, if it is reasonable. Right?
I have sympathy with the Christian friends. They take their religion simply on blind-faith . They are dedicated people to their religion alright.
All denominations of Christians (32000+ of them) claim

1. that they are supported by the Holy Spirit and
2. narrate their personal experiences and testimonies to that effect,
3. yet these denominations differ in their teachings and deeds with one another radically and
4. consider other denomination as heretics.
5. This has damaged Christianity considerably
6. people silently cease attending Churches and
7. become Atheists.

This needs to reflect on the situation by every Christian. Right?
There is something drastically wrong with their religion, they themselves have have to find out, please. Right?

Regards

Truth be told, it is somehow easy... saying this or that is wrong. I usually don't follow this path.
If I like talking about the today's Churches and Denominations, I simply present what I learnt from Jesus as I did on post #294. It is repeated here with additions:

And He (Jesus) wasn't a founder of any earthly system (a formal system which organizes a group of people by a set of rules to be followed, observed or obeyed).
His true Church is spiritual (it is not about how to take care of the flesh).
His Church is for 'independent' individuals only (who perceive in their own existence what we may call a living soul besides their living flesh).
It is not for groups of people of any sort.
After all, only an independent person can love his enemies; otherwise he would be a traitor betraying his group.

I like adding this:
Making Jesus teachings (which are printed in one form or another) be available to most people around the world costs time, efforts and money. It happens that, by design, telling half truths (if not lies) while addressing the multitudes is usually well paid (this is a fact that no one can change). On the other hand, if someone is allowed telling a full truth openly (even a natural one), he has to do it, at best, for free. Also telling many natural truths that the common people are not supposed hearing, the teller will be condemned to death for breaking the rules (as it happened to Jesus), if not worse in our days (thanks to the very advanced audio/video technologies, if you know what this means).
I hope you know now why those who run the Christian Churches and Denominations 'cannot' preach clearly and loudly the natural truths (Jesus teachings) as Jesus did. But if there were no rich Churches I wouldn't have the chance to get a copy of the Gospel and discover what Jesus revealed in order to save me from my ignorance (every human baby is born with) and let me walk in life (and the world) under the Light of perfect Knowledge (perfect relative to my needs).
You see... I don't need to judge anyone because I already know, thanks to Jesus, how the world runs by design

 

[SeekingAllTruth]

They're clearly meaning a historical person called Jesus who attracted followers, not a religious belief about Jesus. And yes, it is the majority scholarly belief that Jesus existed.

I readily agree that some sort of historical figure upon which the myth of Jesus, son of God probably did live. He was an ordinary man who was crucified and died. Afterward when all his followers were dead legends and myths of his supernatural powers grew by word of mouth. This went on all the time in ancient Mediterranean.

 

[SeekingAllTruth]

I said ' a real person ' .

I agree a real person upon which the mythology of Jesus was based likely did live.

 

[paarsurrey]

You will not find any secular historians who will say they believe a Jesus Christ, son of God who incarnated as a man through Mary being inseminated with the Holy Spirit and died for the sins of mankind, ever existed. I defy you to name even two SECULAR historians who will admit to believing such, assuming one could be a closeted Christian crackpot. They'd be laughed out of the academy. Go ahead.

I agree with one here. The concept of Jesus-God of Pauline-Christianity is so inhuman, as I understand, it is neither acceptable ethically, morally, spiritually/religiously nor historically. I pointed this out in my post #1044 that Jesus being a literal and or physically God entails following :

1. God has wife (I take refuge with Allah)
2. that makes makes Mary the wife of Christian-God (I take refuge with Allah)
3. Jesus was husband of his mother (I take refuge with Allah)
4. Jesus was his own father. (I take refuge with Allah)

I don't think this is even acceptable to our friend @Barry Johnson . Right?

Regards

 

[Trailblazer]

I agree with one here. The concept of Jesus-God of Pauline-Christianity is so inhuman, as I understand, it is neither acceptable ethically, morally, spiritually/religiously nor historically. I pointed this out in my post #1044 that Jesus being a literal and or physically God entails following :

1. God has wife (I take refuge with Allah)
2. that makes makes Mary the wife of Christian-God (I take refuge with Allah)
3. Jesus was husband of his mother (I take refuge with Allah)
4. Jesus was his own father. (I take refuge with Allah)

I don't think this is even acceptable to our friend @Barry Johnson . Right?

Regards

I also I take refuge with Allah.
Baha'u'llah warned the faithful to seek refuge in Allah they we may be shielded.

“On the eve of Our departure from ‘Iráq, We have warned the faithful to anticipate the appearance of the Birds of Darkness. There can be no doubt whatever that the croaking of the Raven shall be raised in certain lands, as it hath been heard in recent years. Whatever may betide, seek refuge in the one true God, that He may shield you from the wiles of the impostor.”
Gleanings From the Writings of Bahá’u’lláh, pp. 339-340

 

[John1.12]

I agree a real person upon which the mythology of Jesus was based likely did live.

The serious/ sensible debate is not that .Its regarding the Miracles , rising from the dead ect. Thats why we have the Swoon theories, the hallucination theory , the corruption of the text theories, the imbelishment theories, the telephone game theories. ect

 

[John1.12]

I agree a real person upon which the mythology of Jesus was based likely did live.

None of the narrative fits any such nonsense. And yes I've all the rubbish about Horus and other candidate's the narrative is supposedly taking from. No sensible person who has actually read the bible could possibly say such ridiculous things.

 

[KerimF]

I readily agree that some sort of historical figure upon which the myth of Jesus, son of God probably did live. He was an ordinary man who was crucified and died. Afterward when all his followers were dead legends and myths of his supernatural powers grew by word of mouth. This went on all the time in ancient Mediterranean.

No matter if Jesus was real or myth... an ordinary man (or just a character in a novel) doesn't dare saying clearly and loudly in public "Love your enemies... etc". Even the powerful leaders of the greatest nations don't dare saying this before their people; unless one of them decides to be murdered by some of them soon later.

So I will be grateful if you help me know someone other than Jesus (real or myth) who teaches this very clearly.
Thank you.

 

[KerimF]

I agree with one here. The concept of Jesus-God of Pauline-Christianity is so inhuman, as I understand, it is neither acceptable ethically, morally, spiritually/religiously nor historically. I pointed this out in my post #1044 that Jesus being a literal and or physically God entails following :
1. God has wife (I take refuge with Allah)
2. that makes makes Mary the wife of Christian-God (I take refuge with Allah)
3. Jesus was husband of his mother (I take refuge with Allah)
4. Jesus was his own father. (I take refuge with Allah)
I don't think this is even acceptable to our friend @Barry Johnson . Right?

Regards

So you are referring to Pauline-Christianity (of the magic salvation based on faith) and not to what Jesus says on the Gospel (revealing crucial natural rules; an act which is taboo even in the today freest nations).

Now let us talk about the word SON.

I didn't hear anyone in the world saying that ‘desert’ should have a wife when someone tells him "I am son of desert'". Why? Because he knows in advance what desert is and deduces that his guest came from a desert land, his usual home land.

I also didn't hear anyone in the world saying that ‘sin’ should have a wife when people say this person is 'son of sin'; Why? Because they know in advance what the word sin, in this expression, means. Don't you?

So I am not surprised, at all, when you, or anyone else, say that God should have a wife just because Jesus is 'Son of God". Why? Because I know already that most people in the world have no interest, in the first place, in knowing what the word ‘God’ in this expression means really. Otherwise they would know why the human race was allowed to exist; thanks to some predefined instructions/rules of evolution.

By the way the story of Adam and Eve was addressed to some of our primitive ancestors (kids of humanity) to introduce, in a simple way (as we do with our little kids), some elementary ideas about Creation (the same method is used when our kids need to start learning Math, Physics... etc).

Anyway, I don't expect someone gets what I explore here unless I remind him what he knows already

 

[Unveiled Artist]

Wrong. The one God of the universe/universes is behind almost all religions. People from different religions call God different names, and they understand and explain God in different ways but they all is pointing to the same God. God who is the source of this exsistence.

They all lead to different outcomes and different goals. You can't say Buddhist bob who will not "die" for uptenth years has the same goal as christian Jane who believes she'll die once and be with god. You can't have religion based on faith and another based on deeds and assume a god prefers both to lead to him.

One of the biggest conflicts is god as seen as a being and interactive is totally a greek and roman thing. Eastern religions don't even come from that view and to christians they are pagans.

How does a polytheist pagan believe in the same thing to lead to the same god?

Then you have actual pagans who too don't believe in a god concept as similar to abrahamics. Some align creation with their gods and others see creation as their god.

A lot of religions like buddhism doesn't even focus on any source of existence. He said gods don't matter. And I'll make a huge guess hindus don't either because everything Is existence.

Why does every religion need to start with the Christian god?

I'd guess even jews don't see god as personified as christians make him.

 

[KerimF]

They all lead to different outcomes and different goals.

This is very true.
But do you know any well--known religion/belief whose believers/followers are not given a certain list of rules to obey or observe in the least?
Thank you in advance if you help me know it.

On the other hand, although Jesus (on the Gospel) didn't bring such a list to the world (unless one believes that loving others truly, enemies included, should also be imposed by a rule), billions of Christians couldn't avoid be gathered in groups. And a list of rules (labelled Christian) was created for each of them.

So based on my rather long observations I can state that:
All roads (formal religions/beliefs) lead to an Imaginary Ruler... by which a great number of humans (in every region on earth) could be driven rather easily by some masters in order to let them serve the material world in one way or another; as all other living things are created for.

I repeat for clarity what I wrote on previous posts:
On the Gospel, Jesus Church is strictly spiritual. Unlike Judaism and Islam for a few, it has nothing to do about how to take care of the human flesh or its survival.
So Jesus Church is for 'independent' individuals only; those who perceive in their own existence what we may call a living soul besides their living flesh. And this should be obvious; because only an independent person can love his enemies; otherwise he would be a traitor betraying his group.

Please don't worry if you can't get what I say because even Nicodemus who was a great Jewish scholar couldn't get what Jesus was telling him.

 

[SeekingAllTruth]

No matter if Jesus was real or myth... an ordinary man (or just a character in a novel) doesn't dare saying clearly and loudly in public "Love your enemies... etc". Even the powerful leaders of the greatest nations don't dare saying this before their people; unless one of them decides to be murdered by some of them soon later.

So I will be grateful if you help me know someone other than Jesus (real or myth) who teaches this very clearly.
Thank you.

-Samyutta Nikaya v. 353

“Hurt not others in ways that you yourself would find hurtful.”

“One word which sums up the basis for all good conduct…loving kindness. Do not do unto others what you would not want done to yourself.”

-Analects of Confucius 15.23

-Hillel Talmud, Shabbat 31a

“…thou shalt love thy neighbor as thyself.”

You actually think Jesus was the first to teach this, Kerim??????

 

[SeekingAllTruth]

None of the narrative fits any such nonsense. And yes I've all the rubbish about Horus and other candidate's the narrative is supposedly taking from. No sensible person who has actually read the bible could possibly say such ridiculous things.

Forty percent of people in England do not believe Jesus was a real person, a Church of England survey suggests.

Jesus 'not a real person' many believe

 

[SeekingAllTruth]

The serious/ sensible debate is not that .Its regarding the Miracles , rising from the dead ect. Thats why we have the Swoon theories, the hallucination theory , the corruption of the text theories, the imbelishment theories, the telephone game theories. ect

You have no evidence that Jesus rose other than a giant church pamphlet, which is really nothing more than an advertisement to join Christianity. If you have anything other than a holy book to prove it by all means produce it. But I never get a response from you when I ask you to do this. And please don't dodge by saying, "YOu never asked me to." Just produce something outside the Bible.

 

[SeekingAllTruth]

The serious/ sensible debate is not that .Its regarding the Miracles , rising from the dead ect. Thats why we have the Swoon theories, the hallucination theory , the corruption of the text theories, the imbelishment theories, the telephone game theories. ect

Barry, here's a challenge for you:

if you can produce anything tangible outside of the Bible or church writings (secular writings for instance) from people who were there and testify they saw the risen Jesus I will make a public declaration of my faith and belief in Jesus right here on this forum.

 

[John1.12]

Forty percent of people in England do not believe Jesus was a real person, a Church of England survey suggests.

Jesus 'not a real person' many believe

Yes this was probably the same group that surveyed the question " Do aliens exist " ,