Born Again? The Grand Conspiracy?

Toltec,

I made it abundantly clear what I mean. Your additional crap is not what I said or what I suggested.

I didn't suggest any religious leaders anywhere got together to make their religions similar, asimilar, or anything to that concept. And I suggest you not try and rewrite what I made totally clear. But to even further clarify.
God is as He is. He is unwavering. He does not have many paths to Him, but one. As is evident in all His creation, He is a stickler for the details. He doesn't make different paths for you, depending on how you see things, or think things ought to be. The mere concept is stupid and shallow on its face. That idea is as stupid as outcome-based education and relative morality.

Again, do not say what I suggest. You are lying when you do. I never suggested that God wants conflict. It is obvious that He does not. It is our rebellion that brings upon conflict. Again, do not ever, ever attempt to surmise my suggestion. You have not the horsepower. I will call your lie a lie, and that is nothing but a flaming lie.

My "argument". I have no argument. You are attempting to create an argument. Furhtermore, believe what you will. You have all the facts, and you have all the deceit, you decide. That is your right. You, as the rest of us, will have to live with the consequences of your decisions, be they right or wrong.

In your mind, religion preference is a matter of semantics, but you are not God, and I'm not concerned with your theories or your preferences in cars. Neither is God. I repeat, neither is God, and you are not God. Make no mistake, your preferences are extremely unimportant. So are mine. The difference is, I'm not so pompous as to think that my preferences are important, apparently, you do. The mere idea that a God that is as precise as this One is allows for the whims of imperfect creatures such as us is laughable. We do well just to not commit horrible and selfish atrocities on a daily basis, and societally speaking, we do not even suceed in that, and you think He considers our opinions as how things ought to be. What an arrogant little finite creature you are.

In regard to your last little comment after your usual "any thoughts" comment, there is nothing sincere in your post, otherwise you would not have attempted to put your very lame and highly inaccurate words in my mouth. I am aware that our opinions differ with almost every person, but that does not mean God has varying opinions and positions on any given topic. You want more thoughts of mine? Accept Christ, and have the Holy Spirit guide you in an understanding of God through the scriptures.

Yes Thomas God does seem a stickler for detail and as far as mankind is concerned the details, with respect to generalization in all systems of belief seem apparent.

God seems to have been very detailed in that respect.

As far as crap, this is often a definition many use in respect to semantics (I use it all the time).

For the record I am not the one claiming to know what God thinks (unlike what you are doing), I am simply presenting a valid argument.

A rose by any other name still smells as sweet Thomas, that all religions are generally the same, means we are looking at roses (figuratively speaking of course)

Therefore as far as SATANIC influences would sugest you look carefully and beyond the box you seem to have placed yourself in.

Any thoughts?

PS: As far as claiming I am not sincere you are suggesting I do not believe in what I am posting?

That is not true.

As far my application of the term "argument.� I am suggesting that
from the context how such a term is defined in formal debate.

This of course is in respect to my statements not yours. To be sincere accept that this is how I am applying the term.

As far as your sincerity I am not reading your mind so cannot offer an opinion.

[Edited on 19-10-2003 by Toltec]

The grand.....
I think it all amounts to the same truth through different paths,

Bhuddism,
Then the Buddha expounds the four virtues conducive to a layman's happiness hereafter: (1)Saddha: he should have faith and confidence in moral, spiritual and intellectual values; (2)Sila: he should abstain from destroying and harming life, from stealing and cheating, from adultery, from falsehood, and from intoxicating drinks; (3)Caga: he should practise charity, generosity, without attachment and craving for his wealth;(4)Panna: he should develop wisdom which leads to the complete destruction of suffering, to the realization of Nibbana.

Sikhism,
The five cardinal vices are; Kam (lust), Krodh (anger), Lobh (greed), Moh (worldly attachment) and Ahankar (pride). If one can overcome these, they will achieve salvation.

"Five thieves who live within this body are lust, anger, greed, attachment and ego. They rob us of ambrosia, but the egocentrics do not understand it and no one listens to their cries" (Guru Amar Das, Sorath)

"I am in the Refuge of the Lord; Bless me, O Lord with your Grace, so that the lust, anger, greed, attachment and ego may be destroyed" (Guru Arjan Dev, Gauri Sukhmani)

Ascension,
To ascend is to move upward, to succeed. Ascension is the process of ascending.

Ascension is the bringing of Light into matter. It is bringing Heaven down to Earth ("on Earth as it is in Heaven"). It is the shedding of our lower selves to bring into full being our higher selves.

Ascension is the merging back into who we really are, sons and daughters of god, right now, on Earth.

The concept of Ascension is by its very nature inclusive of all religions and all beliefs. Ascension does not require any certain religion or belief, but accepts and synthesizes all.

It is our inevitable destiny as humankind to ascend, or move upward, into higher levels of consciousness. This is the way of creation. For some of us, this will be long process. For some of us, this will be a shorter process.

For some of us, this will require staying on the wheel of rebirth and karma for a while longer. For some of us, this will allow us to step off of the wheel of rebirth and karma and step onto the wheel of evolution and grace. For all of us, it will be at the right time.

However long it takes, we must hold ourselves open to the Ascension energy within each other, the Earth, the solar system, the galaxy, and the universe.

There is a word. That word is Namaste. It is a Sanskrit word which means "God in me honors God in you". It means we all recognize the Ascension potential within each other, and our responsibility to share and support each other in this process.

Christ Consciousness,
'Empty thyself and I shall fill thee.' This is a wondrous single sentence message of Jesus the Christ. The Spirit is not a quantity and it is opposed to all quantitative measurements and conceptions. 'Blessed are the poor in spirit,' is another suggestive statement of the Christ. We cannot understand what is meant to be poor. For us, to be poor is not to have money, grains and gold, not to have a field, a house and friends, and not to be recognised in society. That would be poverty, economically. We cannot think of poverty except in an economic, material and social sense. Likewise, the idea of emptying oneself, as far as our minds can understand, is a physical displacement of content. Far from this is the idea of the Spirit, which is implied in the above single-sentence message. The Christ-Consciousness, and not the personality of Christ, is what is to be taken into account here in our understanding of this statement. There is a difference between Christ and Christ-Consciousness. This fact was repeatedly emphasised by the Christ himself in many of His declarations as recorded in the New Testament. He never regarded Himself as a person, nor did He ever indicate that a person was speaking when He spoke. He always referred to 'Him that sent me'. He was very much fond of referring to 'Him that sent me'. He said: 'I am here to proclaim the Law of Him who sent me here. It is not my law that I am demonstrating or proclaiming to the world.' The Spirit that spoke through Him was not a creature of time.

There is a very humorous and most significant statement of His. "Before Abraham was, I am." What does it mean? "Before Abraham was, I am", is a contradiction, grammatically. It conveys no sense. It is a blunder of grammar to say, 'I am before Abraham was." But that is the real Christ that spoke. And it is from the standpoint of that reality of Christ, the 'present' was precedent even to the 'past'. The present precedes the past. How could it be? And that is what is implied in saying, "Before Abraham was, I am." The Spirit is a present and not an event or a content or a creature in the passage of time which is usually dissected into the past, present and future. The Spirit has no past, no present and no future. And this is the Christ-Consciousness.

Eternal bliss of the soul,
that is the grand of all Grands.
Deep

Thomas:
Your post is abundantly clear even though some people seem to have trouble understanding the purport. What always amazes me is the number of people who will believe a complex lie and ignore the simple truth. The Gospel of Christ is simple:
1. There is a God.
2. We have all sinned; the price of sin is to endure God's wrath (this is the "fine" for sin).
3. God sent the Son to earth. On the cross, Jesus Christ endured God's wrath for our sins. He paid the "fine" for our sins. The requirement is that the "fine" be paid.
4. This is a gift (the gift of Grace) available for all who will accept it. As a gift we must ask for it from God and beleive in Jesus Christ as our personal savior.
5. Once we receive the gift of Grace, we will be allowed entry into Heaven and God's presence.

Well Thomas, have I left anything out? It is simple, anybody can understand it. That is one reason why I believe totally in the Gospel of Christ. Anyone can understand it. Yet it is so sublime that the greatest of minds can study it for their entire life and not reach the depth of the meaning. But at the same time the simplest of minds can grasp the significance. The Gospel of Christ is universal for all people. All can appreciate the meaning.

However we have people who wish to see parallels between belief systems, people who will tell you that you must past through complex stages of learning to be saved. Mantras, channeling, mystic knowledge is the answer to salvation they claim. This is the complex lie. Why oh why do they believe the complex lie and cannot see a simple truth.

Jagd, every religion has prophets all of which professed in general what Jesus professed. That he died because he professed it could be interpreted in many ways, but to say that he died so that all the killing that ensued, to insure his message was received is a positive thing is quite another story. No to sugest you are saying that at all, but that is what happened and the issue of differences was applied religiously.

Again the essential nature of the message presented by Jesus is not that different from the message presented by prophets of other cultures (even the Lords prayer can be found in the Talmud).

For the record TC since the very first day I arrived at this forum, I have always been very clear in regards to my thought. To quote "All religions are fundamentally the same," I see no reason for you to claim I am insincere.

Any thoughts?

Originally posted by Toltec

To all concerned, lets keep in mind this is R&S for those who wish to present the nature of this discussion from the context of responses, which focus on its political aspects.

Would ask they be presented in alternative forums, which better fit that issue in regards to the topic.

In respect to that though would state that issues such as separation of church and state simply, did not apply prior to the advent to the US

Any thoughts?

I'm not sure I understand. Isn't this thread exactly along the lines of "Does The Idea Of God Play A Pivotable Role In The Conspiracy?" ?

I take the stance that the religious conspiracy is the predecessor to all conspiracies. It is the root, IMHO. Take out the root and the house of cards will fall.

Anyway, point me to the example of what you're referring to so that I will know in the future.

Jagd, every religion has prophets all of which professed in general what Jesus professed. That he died because he professed it could be interpreted in many ways, but to say that he died so that all the killing that ensued, to insure his message was received is a positive thing is quite another story. No to sugest you are saying that at all, but that is what happened and the issue of differences was applied religiously.

No Toltec, Jesus Christ was crucified for only one reason. To suffer death and the wrath of God as payment for our sins. Again people want to believe the complex lie rather than the simple truth. Jesus died for our sins. There is no other interpretation. Also all religions are not fundamentally the same. If you were to do a study you would see the important differences.

uIVIa that aspect of my response had nothing to do with you or this thread. Was referring to those who could want to use this thread for discussing the role of politics within the context of the topic.

In the sense of a presenting a post whose content was specifically oriented to that aspect of the topic.


By all means the topic is well within the perview of this Forum

Originally posted by jagdflieger

Jagd, every religion has prophets all of which professed in general what Jesus professed. That he died because he professed it could be interpreted in many ways, but to say that he died so that all the killing that ensued, to insure his message was received is a positive thing is quite another story. No to sugest you are saying that at all, but that is what happened and the issue of differences was applied religiously.

No Toltec, Jesus Christ was crucified for only one reason. To suffer death and the wrath of God as payment for our sins. Again people want to believe the complex lie rather than the simple truth. Jesus died for our sins. There is no other interpretation. Also all religions are not fundamentally the same. If you were to do a study you would see the important differences.

Can you prove it? I mean can you prove that Jesus was crucified and can you also prove that he did it for our sins. Can you prove it without the bible?

I mean we as a race are still using religion as an excuse for human sacrifice aka murder aka War. Nothing against the bible as it's a great book but if the subtle twists aren't picked up on then you'll believe everything that's in it. And the book contradicts itself so much it becomes impossible to take everything literally. I seriously doubt it was meant literally but most people take it as such. Have you ever read the Nag Hammadi codices?

Can you prove it? I mean can you prove that Jesus was crucified and can you also prove that he did it for our sins. Can you prove it without the bible?

There are several extra Biblical references to Jesus as being crucified. As for the reason read the New Testament. As for the "the Nag Hammadi codices", no I have not read them. Again here we have people who want to call the New Testament a pack of lies. Yet will believe some gnostic writing as being the truth. You just cannot accept the simple fact that you are totally dependent upon God for salvation. You believe that there is some mystic knowledge, some complex formula, some myriad of mantras that will cause God to accept you. That is not the case, no amount of mystic knowledge, no amount of mantras will make God accept you. There is only one way - His Way. That is to accept the work of Jesus Christ on the cross. It is that simple. You want proof, well look deep into your heart. You know that you cannot even begin to come close to God's standard. Look and you will see that no way can a human being earn God's acceptance with good works, arcane knowledge, mystic beliefs, recital of mantras, etc. The only way is to ask God to accept you by having faith in Jesus Christ.

Hope you don't mind me replying as I know it was directed toward Toltec. I fairly certain that what I say won't change anyone's mind and that's not really what it's for anyway. But, if I can at least bring the spiritual to the point where it's understandable by many then at least the point of view won't be lost by confusion. In other words I don't want agreement I only wish to ensure understanding just as I understand your point of view.

Originally posted by Thomas Crowne

God is as He is. He is unwavering. He does not have many paths to Him, but one.

That's got to be pretty boring but ok. Why then is everyone created differently? Why are there no two humans exactly alike. What would be the point in an infinite creation and infinite aspects of God if we were all just going to be the same. Now, yes, in a highest respect we will be the same but that has nothing to do with the journey.

As is evident in all His creation, He is a stickler for the details. He doesn't make different paths for you, depending on how you see things, or think things ought to be. The mere concept is stupid and shallow on its face. That idea is as stupid as outcome-based education and relative morality.

This planet alone has around 2 million species of plants and animals currently classified, and estimates of the total number range from under 5 million to more than 50 million. From what I can see God loves diversity. In fact, it looks kinda like infinite aspects of God.

You, as the rest of us, will have to live with the consequences of your decisions, be they right or wrong.

Living with enlightenment is going to suck.

In your mind, religion preference is a matter of semantics, but you are not God, and I'm not concerned with your theories or your preferences in cars. Neither is God. I repeat, neither is God, and you are not God.

There's that separation again. Christians just love being separate from God for some reason. I'm not separate from God. I'm an integral part of God. The creation isn't separate and saying so is demeaning to the Creator. The creation existed first in the Creator's mind then the Creator expanded itself to the exact specs that were thought. Sound familiar? Yea, that's how we do it too. Our creations are in the mind first then we use the outside "stuff" to manifest the creation. Is the thought any less real than the manifestation? So christians are separate from their creator, ok.

Make no mistake, your preferences are extremely unimportant. So are mine. The difference is, I'm not so pompous as to think that my preferences are important, apparently, you do.

You are part of God but your preferences aren't important? Either you are saying that God's preferences (that the Creator experiences through you) are unimportant or you are saying you are not a part of God.

The mere idea that a God that is as precise as this One is allows for the whims of imperfect creatures such as us is laughable. We do well just to not commit horrible and selfish atrocities on a daily basis, and societally speaking, we do not even suceed in that, and you think He considers our opinions as how things ought to be. What an arrogant little finite creature you are.

See, that is an opinion in the mind of God. Hehehe. God is so funny some times. God is perfect. The Creator's creations are perfect. There are no mistakes, only lessons.

Oh well, like I said at the beginning I surely don't ask for agreement only that the point is understood. Not validated just recognized. And the underlining point is, either God spewed out a bunch of matter and threw it out into some non part of God ( ) or God is all that is which includes you, me and this monitor I'm staring at. The latter is heaven on earth. The latter is Home.

Quote from uIVIa:
You are part of God but your preferences aren't important? Either you are saying that God's preferences (that the Creator experiences through you) are unimportant or you are saying you are not a part of God.

No God transcends His Creation and is separate from the creation. IT IS NOT, "God is all, all is God". God is separate from the creation. That includes you and me, the angels, the stars, planets, etc.

No Jag this is the truth,
There is only one God, he is the Creator, Sustainer and Destroyer.

"You are the Creator, O Lord, the Unknowable. You created the Universe of diverse kinds, colours and qualities. You know your own Creation. All this is your Play." (Guru Nanak, Var Majh)

"The Formless Supreme Being abides in the Realm of Eternity. Over His creation He casts His glance of grace. In that Realm are contained all the continents and the universes, Exceeding in number all count. Of creation worlds upon worlds abide therein; All obedient to His will; He watches over them in bliss, And has each constantly in mind." (Guru Nanak, Japji
Deep

Quote from Zerodeep
"You are the Creator, O Lord, the Unknowable. You created the Universe of diverse kinds, colours and qualities. You know your own Creation. All this is your Play." (Guru Nanak, Var Majh)

Well from what you just posted, you say you believe in a Creator which made a Creation. Therefore the Creator must be separate from his Creation. They are two different entities. That is what I just said God is separate from His Creation. We are part of the Creation which is a separate entity from the Creator.

Originally posted by jagdflieger

Can you prove it? I mean can you prove that Jesus was crucified and can you also prove that he did it for our sins. Can you prove it without the bible?

There are several extra Biblical references to Jesus as being crucified. As for the reason read the New Testament. As for the "the Nag Hammadi codices", no I have not read them. Again here we have people who want to call the New Testament a pack of lies. Yet will believe some gnostic writing as being the truth.

The New Testament is not all lies. In fact the majority of the bible is probably true. But the stuff is taken literally. The deeper truths are twisted ever so slightly. I only mentioned the Nag because it's been preserved since around 300 A.D. unlike the bible which has been rewritten countless times. Also, if you read some of the gnostic writings you would find that they carry on the original intent of the christian ideas presented by Jesus. But that would mean reading something other than the bible.

You just cannot accept the simple fact that you are totally dependent upon God for salvation. You believe that there is some mystic knowledge, some complex formula, some myriad of mantras that will cause God to accept you. That is not the case, no amount of mystic knowledge, no amount of mantras will make God accept you.

I'm not sure I could properly put into words the humor in the above statement. I don't need mantras or the bible for God to accept me. The Creator created me. Oh, now he doesn't want me? Bullsh!t The point is for me to know the Creator. The Creator created all this so that I would know and learn to Love the Creator/Creation. If anything it would be me that didn't accept God by not knowing myself.

There is only one way - His Way.

So true. And from my meager vantage point I can see 6 billion of His Ways. Well, those that aren't doing anything and still haven't chosen aren't going any direction so count out about 90% of that 6 billion. Still though that's a lot of mysterious ways.

That is to accept the work of Jesus Christ on the cross. It is that simple.

I'm sure it's simpler than trying to get a bunch of humans to believe that blood has spiritual meaning. Yup, human sacrifice. Long live human sacrifice. Wait, that's an oxymoron.

You want proof, well look deep into your heart.

I did and that's why I'm correcting the twists of logic in my own mind. That's why I'm trying to accept all that is God. That's why I empty my thoughts to allow the epiphanies to manifest. Sure Jesus was the Son of God. So are any one who "knows thyself". It's a choice and Jesus said it well. Too bad his words and deeds were twisted so much.

You know that you cannot even begin to come close to God's standard. Look and you will see that no way can a human being earn God's acceptance with good works, arcane knowledge, mystic beliefs, recital of mantras, etc. The only way is to ask God to accept you by having faith in Jesus Christ.

If that's it I was done around the age of 5. I guess I can kill myself now. And if I remember correctly I'm the one that did the accepting. I was already accepted but didn't know what the deal was. So in symbolic spiritual back down to material terms, I had turned my back on God. No I didn't actually turn my back on God. Oh nevermind.

Originally posted by jagdflieger

Quote from uIVIa:
You are part of God but your preferences aren't important? Either you are saying that God's preferences (that the Creator experiences through you) are unimportant or you are saying you are not a part of God.

No God transcends His Creation and is separate from the creation. IT IS NOT, "God is all, all is God". God is separate from the creation. That includes you and me, the angels, the stars, planets, etc.

I guess I don't remember that part of the bible. Please point me in the correct direction so that I may read it.

unlike the bible which has been rewritten countless times

No the Bible has not been rewritten countless times. The textual reliability of the New Testament can be demostrated. Also there are quotes from the New Testament which can be dated to 170 A.D. to 185A.D. In fact most of the Gospels can be recreated from the quotes in writtings which can be dated from 170 A. D. to 250 A. D. And the term "countless" is incorrect. As long as a set is finite, it is countable. What you suggest is the Bible has been rewritten an infinite number of times by an infinite number of people.

you would find that they carry on the original intent of the christian ideas presented by Jesus

And I suppose that the original intent of Jesus was totally different than what was presented in the New Testament.

The Creator created all this so that I would know and learn to Love the Creator/Creation

Again the issue of sin separates us from God. In order to gain the acceptance of God, the issue of sin must be addressed. Accepting Jesus Christ as our personal savior deals with the issue of sin which separates us from God.

I'm sure it's simpler than trying to get a bunch of humans to believe that blood has spiritual meaning. Yup, human sacrifice. Long live human sacrifice. Wait, that's an oxymoron.

You do not understood the simple concept that Jesus suffered the wrath of God on the cross as our payment for our sins. If you cannot accept that simple premise than you will not be able to understand the concept of Grace. You may believe what you want to believe, but the Gospel of Christ is a simple concept. Why do people want to make is so complicated.

Jesus was the Son of God. So are any one who "knows thyself". It's a choice and Jesus said it well. Too bad his words and deeds were twisted so much.

No there was only one Son of God and that was Jesus Christ. Also just what were His words and deeds which have been "twisted so much".

Jagd, as to the value of differences with respect to religions you seem to be missing the point (sugest you read the thread).

In regards to your hypothesis with respect to what ultimately exist in peoples hearts?

I would again point out that all the prophets with respect to all religions presented the same argument, this being to love god is all his ways and to love each other.

The argument here seems not to be that Jesus was wrong but rather, that he confirmed the same thing all other religions state. It is also, that this fact has not been presented to the masses, as it should have been when it should have been discovered a rather long time ago.

The point being that Religion was used to allow conflict between cultures and that those, in a position to make a difference opted (and still do today) to treat those differences as more relevant than the similarities.

When you think of religion and God what comes to mind as being important... That which is uncreated, that which pervades everything, that which remains beyond the reach of human knowledge and understanding.

What about Distinguishing ego from true self, understanding the nature of desire, becoming unattached, forgetting about preferences, not working for personal gain, letting go of thoughts, redirecting your attention, being devoted, being humble, invoking that reality, Surrendering.

What about how reality approaches you through grace or the teacher

And of course, how you're transformed so that you embody that reality by, dying and being reborn seeing the light, Experiencing union and experiencing freedom.


Have I missed anything?????

My point is simple, feel free to present the argument that differences in religions, are of such importance. That these issues simply did not matter, in respect to what people would have been doing for the last 1000 years, had they known all cultures, had so much in common in respect to each of the above issues.

Not one of those deaths are for a good reason, not one person tortured deserved to be treated that way. They are innocent in every respect (do you know where I am coming from here) in regards to their faith and its validity. The way people are treated today for expressing differences form other in respect to faiths is also invalid.

Jesus may have died for our sins but all those people died for nothing, lived their lives in constant pain for nothing and were falsely accused for nothing.

No difference which you can sugest to me would constitute an excuse, for what has occurred, in respect to what has transpired.

I am not saying that the idea of following the tenants of Christianity is a bad thing. Rather, what I am saying is that in respect to how the masses have been treated no religion, with respect to its leadership has actually adhered to the message presented by any of the prophets. In a way that is meaningful with respect to what any religions have in common. Had that occurred then the meaning of what has been said (in general) by all the prophets, should have made a difference.

Relations between cultures should have been much different had this been addressed with respect to the best interests of all concerned (this including the masses).

That it was not, presents prima fascia evidence of a conspiracy. Which involves all major religions of the world, to undermine any conception of inherent similarities with respect, to what in general is observed by all faiths (as being the same).

Keep in mind I am not presenting the issue of individuality as incorrect. But rather from the context of social systems, cultures and major systems of faith the deception is apparent. They in fact can be seen as having much more in common that what has been promoted and or sugested in a time in history, when knowing how to read was considered uncommon.

This is not just a matter with respect to the fundamentals of spirituality but also in how each culture defines God (again in general) as well as many issues related specifically to religion.

Any thoughts?

[Edited on 20-10-2003 by Toltec]

Genesis 1
1. In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth.
2. Now the earth was formless and empty, darkness was over the surface of the deep, and the Spirit of God was hovering over the waters.
3. And God said, "Let there be light," and there was light.
4. God saw that the light was good, and he separated the light from the darkness.
5. God called the light "day," and the darkness he called "night." And there was evening, and there was morning--the first day.

God created the heavens and the earth. A creator is separate from his creation. Also you can search the Bible for metaphorical refences to God as being the Potter and we are his pottery. This implies separate entities. Or do I suppose you would go to an art show and declare that the artist who made the art is the same entity as the art that was made.

Originally posted by jagdflieger

No the Bible has not been rewritten countless times. The textual reliability of the New Testament can be demostrated. Also there are quotes from the New Testament which can be dated to 170 A.D. to 185A.D. In fact most of the Gospels can be recreated from the quotes in writtings which can be dated from 170 A. D. to 250 A. D. And the term "countless" is incorrect. As long as a set is finite, it is countable. What you suggest is the Bible has been rewritten an infinite number of times by an infinite number of people.

True enough. Didn't mean it literally. Let's just say a bunch. In fact here are a few...

American Standard Version
Amplified Bible
Bible in Basic English
Children's Bible
Contemporary English Version
Darby Bible
Douay-Rheims Bible (Catholic)
God's Word
Grail Psalter: The Book of Psalms
King James Version
King James Version (Additional)
Message Bible
Net Bible
New American Bible (Catholic)
New American Standard Version
New English Translation
New International Version
New King James Version
New Living Translation
New Revised Standard Version
Revised Standard Version
Young's Literal Translation
World English Bible (Hebrew Names Version)
Wycliffe New Testament

And I suppose that the original intent of Jesus was totally different than what was presented in the New Testament.

Not completely no.

Again the issue of sin separates us from God. In order to gain the acceptance of God, the issue of sin must be addressed. Accepting Jesus Christ as our personal savior deals with the issue of sin which separates us from God.

I see your belief and accept it as truth from your current perception. I personally don't enjoy limiting the limitless with my thoughts.

You do not understood the simple concept that Jesus suffered the wrath of God on the cross as our payment for our sins. If you cannot accept that simple premise than you will not be able to understand the concept of Grace. You may believe what you want to believe, but the Gospel of Christ is a simple concept. Why do people want to make is so complicated.

No, I do completely and beyond any shadow of a doubt understand the concept. No one is making it complicated. Here's it is one more time. I'm not sure how you can call it complicated but ok. Ready? Here goes.

One

Yup, that's my complicated theory.

No there was only one Son of God and that was Jesus Christ. Also just what were His words and deeds which have been "twisted so much".

I've already expressed some of those. At this point we are just talking different languages from different time periods. Thoughts limit thought. What else can I say?