It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Religions provide the PROOF Religions don't exist. Religion's conspiracy against religion.

page: 1
0
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Aug, 20 2006 @ 06:27 AM
link   
Religions' very core beliefs which sprout their respective belief systems crumble when the basis of their belief systems are applied to their belief systems.

Below are two examples that demonstrate to a degree that the teachings of religions are in conflict internally when only reviewing their own beliefs:

Example 1:
In order for me to be converted to the religion of Christianity, the 2 prerequisites would be:

1) I believe Christ is God manifested in man.
2) Christians are by the very definition of the word, trying to be like Christ.


So, logic dictates that the purest Christian believes Christ is God, and that they must be like Christ.

This being said, wanting to be like God is what got Lucifer expelled from heaven. So if i were to follow Christian beliefs to their end, i would in fact end up expelled from heaven for the same reasons Lucifer was.

How is me being converted to Christianity with the end goal being obtaining the same end as Lucifer the only way to Infinite World Peace?

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

Example 2:
Another aspect of this only way to Infinite World Peace is this:

Christian mission: Convert athiests to Christianity.

There are admittingly different definitions to the word athiest. Many of which include or parralell the following:

"One who does not worship, hold reverence for, or believe in any higher entity or deity"

In any and all monothiestic belief systems, including Christianity, follow a GOD who fits the definition of athiest. And if you doubt this claim, you only need to re-visit the first commandment: "I am a jealous God, and you shall have no Gods before me."

Follow my logic here, please.

If God does not acknowledge any higher entity or deity above God, then God is by the very definition, an athiest. And, if you dissagree, then if you were God, and there were nothing higher, would believing in yourself not make you an athiest? To say God acknowledges God's existance, therefore is not an athiest is to say the same as "I know i exist, so i am not an athiest".

So, since God is an athiest, and Christ is God, and Christians want to be like God, then it seems to me.....

Christians convert Athiests into people who's aim it is to be more like Christ who is God, who is an athiest.

So the roadmap to " Infinite World Peace" is to take atheists and convert them into people who's aim is to be athiests.

Does this prove Christ was not God?
Does this prove God does not exist?

NO is the answer to both questions. The only thing our belief systems prove is we don't know what it is we are talking about. And in order to fully believe armed with facts is to disregard both reason and logic for the intangible.


Don't mourn for my soul yet, "bible thumpers".

It is not my contention that there is no GOD. My purpose of this post is to demonstrate how the belief systems fail when only reviewing the logic of their very belief systems.

One can not have both free will, and indisputable proof. Yet, by the very logic presented in my examples above, it would seem the GOD worshipped in any monothiestic belief system makes no sense whatsoever.

And yet, I believe in GOD. How could this be you may ask?

my answer:because

And it is all the justification i need.

Everything is debunkable, or free will is not real. If free will is not, then God is not.

[edit on 20-8-2006 by Esoteric Teacher]




posted on Aug, 20 2006 @ 06:43 AM
link   
Religon is an concerted effort to bring People to a higher plain of existance. I believe in GOD but not religon. Does this make me an atheist? There was a show last night on the History Channel, Banned from the Bible. You should watch it. It shows that different cultures looked at the writings, and stories of the past and the people who compiled the bibles of many faiths, rejected some of the writings in favor of their view. Such as the Story of Adam and Eve. So the people who live in Africa ( Ethopia) have different stories in their bible, and we have different stories in ours, My Bible ( Yes I Have one) was influenced by the Roman Catholic Church. So Because the Romans killed Christ. Does this make the our Bible wrong. NO. Our ancestors wanted us to be better people than they were. Not turn into people into ones ruled by the sword.

If you read and learn about many faiths you will see that we are all trying to be better people. Some are trying to push their faith but to no aval.



posted on Aug, 20 2006 @ 06:50 AM
link   
Good long post, but sorry for me it doesn't wash.

gods god. full stop. Be all and end all. If you do / do not believe then thats your free will choosing for you. But please, your argument about God being an aethiest, well frankly I fell off my chair laughing. He knows who and what he is - the alpha and omega. he IS every thing and he knows it, so to say he needs to believe in god is laughable....

Any how, it was a good post bar a few dropped points, so I'll say B+ for effort, but slipped to a D - for the conclusion.



posted on Aug, 20 2006 @ 07:50 AM
link   

Originally posted by D4rk Kn1ght
Good long post, but sorry for me it doesn't wash.
But please, your argument about God being an aethiest, well frankly I fell off my chair laughing. He knows who and what he is


Really?

Me knowing i exist does not mean i am not an athiest, even if i were God.



posted on Aug, 24 2006 @ 03:25 PM
link   
I do not consider myself a member of any organized religion, and I do not like the Christian organizations in particular, but I have a background of Christianity, and there are some points I thought should be mentioned.

I think you made a valid point of God being an atheist, as not worshipping or having reverance of a higher power, but there are a couple aspects of God (in Christian dogmas) I learned as a child in Sunday School that create problems: omniscience and omnipotence.

I think the final part of your definition of atheist has a problem, the belief in a high entity. For God (omniscient ) there is no "belief" only knowledge. And there is no such thing as any "higher power" over God (omnipotent). As many have encountered before, logic and argumentation tend to break down concerning God, which is sometimes used as an explanation for the artificial nature of God, or as a hallmark of being the REAL God.

I struggled a bit with the Christians are trying to be like Christ, I'll admit. However the operative word is "like". Imitation is the highest form of flattery, but sometimes you're just stealing someone else's bit/part/style. Christians may aspire to be like Christ, but they also tend to have a very high opinion or Christ coupled with a very low opinion of themselves (when not in the realm of politics, but I digress), the prime difference being sin. They have a curious understanding of being sons and daughters of God, but also an understanding that humans are tiny little insignificants without God's love.

Lucifer however, as you stated wanted to be like God, or did he want to be greater? Here was the highest angel of heaven, supposedly supremely beautiful and second only to God. What more can you ask for? God's position himself? Dude, he's GOD. Here's another case of logical breakdown. Lucifer had to have known that an omnipotent God would always and forever have greater power, and an omniscient God would know beforehand of any attempted rebellion or whatnot. And finding biblical support for lucifer is rather difficult in itself. What was Lucifer's sin, so to speak? I do not know if it is widely supported, but there is a theory that Satan was still good up until he tempted Eve and then was cursed. Why didn't God destroy Satan? Because he loved Adam and Eve so much, he didn't want to, because they had in essence committed the same sin as Satan himself, aspiring to be equal to God; eating of the tree of knowledge of good and evil, becoming "like gods".

I do not like the Christian organizations I see around me, and the idea of heaven being an eternity of mindless worship is less than appealing.

But the same reason you gave for your belief in God can be used by any church, just because, and if they believe they are right, that's all the justification they need.



posted on Aug, 24 2006 @ 04:17 PM
link   
Minor point? Who coined the term "atheist"? Who defined it? I don't see how you can take a term created by and defined by Man and use it to come up with a refutation for God.

Another point- what exactly is "free will" for purposes of this discussion? I'm not sure I understand "If free will is not then God is not".

Believe me I struggle with the whole "free will" thing. I don't think it's just the ability to make choices. I think it's the ability to make uncaused choices, which is a very different thing.

Maybe.



posted on Aug, 24 2006 @ 07:54 PM
link   

Originally posted by Esoteric Teacher
This being said, wanting to be like God is what got Lucifer expelled from heaven. So if i were to follow Christian beliefs to their end, i would in fact end up expelled from heaven for the same reasons Lucifer was....

... No. Lucifer was not expelled from heaven for trying to be like God. Trying to be like God means adopting his characteristics, Love, Light, Wisdom, Faith. Satan was far from any of these, instead he was only interested in God's POWER. Satan was trying to gain more power than God, in order to ultimately overthrow him. Big difference.



Originally posted by Esoteric Teacher
... since God is an athiest, and Christ is God, and Christians want to be like God, then it seems to me.....
Christians convert Athiests into people who's aim it is to be more like Christ who is God, who is an athiest.

What else would God be if he weren't an Aetheist? A Bhuddhist? And again, to be like God is to adopt his characteristics, not physically BE him.



Originally posted by Esoteric Teacher
Does this prove Christ was not God?
Does this prove God does not exist?

...No.



posted on Aug, 24 2006 @ 08:55 PM
link   
The biggest contradiction of religion is the God of the bible itself, a perfect God with all its perfection . . .

Created humanity, then when his biggest creation showed free will, he got mad at his creation so in order to control humanity he became human itself and then got itself crucified to show how much he loved his own creation.

Now if that is not contradiction or plain human contradiction then what can it be.



posted on Aug, 25 2006 @ 01:02 AM
link   

Originally posted by marg6043
... he got mad at his creation so in order to control humanity he became human itself and then got itself crucified to show how much he loved his own creation.

Now if that is not contradiction or plain human contradiction then what can it be.


"For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life." - John 3:16

Note that it does not say "For God so hated the world, that he..." God was not contradicting himself, his whole point in coming to Earth was to be crucified in the first place.



posted on Aug, 25 2006 @ 02:01 AM
link   
Very interesting views being brought up. Great read. I was kinda let down when reading all the posts. I want more! I have pondered many religious contradictions myself, as I'm sure most every human has. Sometimes I'll ask religious family members of their opinion on certain inconsistencies. I never get a point of view that I truely believe one way or another.

Case in point. God created the flood. He did this to kill all but a select few. Isn't it fair to say that God commited mass murder? That is definately something one does not want on their resume.

Some people think it's the devil working through someone when they bring questions like this up. "Deliberately trying to shake the faith of the faithful." I don't quite understand that train of thought. I do feel a little guilty though when I hear that response. However, I feel that it's in our nature to question such things.

I look forward to reading more posts on this very interesting topic!

Deep thoughts.....



posted on Aug, 25 2006 @ 02:17 AM
link   
It has always baffled me how Christianity proclaims one true God and yet there are quite clearly 2 in the bible

Jesus calls himself "lucifer" at one point in the bible - the name refers to the position (at Gods right hand) rather than an entity so it is incorrect to call the dark one Lucifer as he/she/it no longer holds that position

Also "Satan" is a descriptive noun - not a name. it means "The Accuser" . A real worshipper of the "dark one" will never be able to tell you the name of the God they submit to

Its all mumbo-jumbo but just thought i'd share that nugget



posted on Aug, 25 2006 @ 03:16 AM
link   

Originally posted by dj howls
Jesus calls himself "lucifer" at one point in the bible - the name refers to the position (at Gods right hand)


I'm sorry, i am not familiar with any passage in the bible that states Jesus calls himself "lucifer".

Could you tell me where the bible says this?



posted on Aug, 25 2006 @ 04:20 AM
link   
Hm, I was taught that the word "Satan" meant "Adversary", something against God. I looked it up, according to the Theological Glossary in the back of my bible (New Jerusalem Version) the entry reads:

"Satan - The Hebr word means 'adversary' and is used in a general sense, then in particular of one of the 'sons of God' who is responsible on God's behalf for testing and proving human beings. Only in 1 Ch 21:1 (Satan took his stand against Israel and incited David to take a census of Israel - 1 Chronicles 21:1) does it become a proper name. In the NT (New Testament) he is interchangeably called the 'devil' (Gk diabolos = accuser), and also actively promotes evil, claiming power over the world. In the Johannine writings the devil/Satan is a fundamentally evil entity."

bold text are my notes. Also interesting to note is that 'Lucifer' appears nowhere in either the Theological Glossary, nor the Index of Persons (Satan does appear in the Index of Persons) of my bible.

I hope I'm not "post whoring" if that's a phrase at all, but I think I offered up a reasonable explanation from the Christian side of the discussion about God's perfection, love, and yet condemnation of the human race. This of course incorporates an anthropomorphic God - God loved Adam and Eve so much he did not want to destroy them, nor give them the same curse as was given to Satan (if it is accepted that Satan did not fall until after the 6th day), but they deserved punishment, which was the expulsion from Eden, and pain, toil, and etc. After Adam and company had passed on, humanity was evil except for one man, Noah, and so God, as with Adam, saved him from proper punishment (emphasis is on the fact that it is proper - deserved, in other words), and promised never to wipe clean the world again (or if you're literal, simply not to flood the world again).

Hehe, I used to say that to pushy annoying street corner preachers when asking me if I wanted to go to heaven or burn in hell, "sit at the right hand of God? I would love to have Satan's old position!"

Peace



posted on Aug, 25 2006 @ 12:25 PM
link   

Originally posted by TheB1ueSoldier

Note that it does not say "For God so hated the world, that he..." God was not contradicting himself, his whole point in coming to Earth was to be crucified in the first place.


And that is not contradiction on Itself, how human can it be when a supreme being of perfection has to become an imperfect human being to prove a point.

That is nothing more than human thoughts and human way of thinking.



posted on Sep, 6 2006 @ 11:26 AM
link   
According to bible.com the bible never mentions the word Lucifer, just to clear that up.

Heres the link to that

bibleresources.bible.com...

and according to www.biblegateway.com

www.biblegateway.com...

both are online bible sites. BUT that’s the NIV.

The name only shows up once in the King James Version. In Isaiah (14:12)

At least according to bible gateway.com

Here’s Isaiah 14:12

How art thou fallen from heaven, O Lucifer, son of the morning! how art thou cut down to the ground, which didst weaken the nations!

So the bible says that jesus never called himself “Lucifer”

For the thing about satan being thrown from heaven, I don’t think the bible ever says anything about that, I could be wrong and if I am could some one please point that out to me.

The first point you made where you said that Christ is god, I don’t think that’s true. Christianity means being Christ like. That doesn’t mean you are trying to be like god. You are trying to adapt and learn from the teachings of jesus. And the first point you made in example one was that “I believe Christ is God manifested in man” that’s your opinion, in my opinion Christ is literally the son of god, so we can throw that first example out the window because we have to different beliefs.



posted on Sep, 14 2006 @ 11:09 AM
link   
To the person who started this post;
The theory is wack & is also logical, to some degree.



posted on Sep, 14 2006 @ 11:55 AM
link   

Originally posted by dj howls
It has always baffled me how Christianity proclaims one true God and yet there are quite clearly 2 in the bible

Jesus calls himself "lucifer" at one point in the bible - the name refers to the position (at Gods right hand) rather than an entity so it is incorrect to call the dark one Lucifer as he/she/it no longer holds that position

Also "Satan" is a descriptive noun - not a name. it means "The Accuser" . A real worshipper of the "dark one" will never be able to tell you the name of the God they submit to

Its all mumbo-jumbo but just thought i'd share that nugget


This is true.
In Revelations Jesus pronounced himself the morning star.
Lucifer means morning star.
Lucifer was the title that the (now fallen) angel had.
The fallen angel came as a King and persocuted the people of Israel according to Isaiah.
The term Satan is just a misstranslation of this King.

[edit on 14-9-2006 by Techsnow]



posted on Sep, 15 2006 @ 01:52 AM
link   
Esoteric,
To be Christ like means to be one with God, to love God with all our heart, mind, strength, and soul. When you do this, a tangible mystical enlightenment happens to you where you gain a new faculty described as transcendence and additional spiritual senses and knowledge that you never mentally had access to before. With these new faculties comes the complete comprehension of infinity, eternity, the trinity, and you yourself being one with God, since one of the precursors to enlightenment is being indwelled by God and tangibly feeling/kowing this has happened.

This allows you to be one with God, and yet be seperate with humbleness and humility at the same time. When you first reach these states, your first thought is that you are God, then you use your extra faculties to distingish that idea from the fact that you are now concsious of being seperate yet together, which is true and the first statement false. Same goes for God being omnipresent and nowhere. It is something that is actually comprehensible.



posted on Sep, 15 2006 @ 07:05 AM
link   

Originally posted by Techsnow

Originally posted by dj howls
It has always baffled me how Christianity proclaims one true God and yet there are quite clearly 2 in the bible

Jesus calls himself "lucifer" at one point in the bible - the name refers to the position (at Gods right hand) rather than an entity so it is incorrect to call the dark one Lucifer as he/she/it no longer holds that position

Also "Satan" is a descriptive noun - not a name. it means "The Accuser" . A real worshipper of the "dark one" will never be able to tell you the name of the God they submit to

Its all mumbo-jumbo but just thought i'd share that nugget


This is true.
In Revelations Jesus pronounced himself the morning star.
Lucifer means morning star.
Lucifer was the title that the (now fallen) angel had.
The fallen angel came as a King and persocuted the people of Israel according to Isaiah.
The term Satan is just a misstranslation of this King.

[edit on 14-9-2006 by Techsnow]


So correct me if im wrong but jesus never directly calls himself "lucifer" right? He says he is the morning star. In rev 22:16 "I Jesus have sent mine angel to testify unto you these things in the churches. I am the root and the offspring of David, and the bright and morning star." So maybe he wanted people to interpret that as him being the morning star or a star seen in teh east immediately before sunrise. Which happens to be the defintion according to dictionary.com The first to rise again kinda thing.

dictionary.reference.com...




[edit on 15-9-2006 by spaceman16]



posted on Sep, 15 2006 @ 10:13 PM
link   

Originally posted by Esoteric Teacher
So, logic dictates that the purest Christian believes Christ is God, and that they must be like Christ.

This being said, wanting to be like God is what got Lucifer expelled from heaven. So if i were to follow Christian beliefs to their end, i would in fact end up expelled from heaven for the same reasons Lucifer was.


So what does anti-christ mean then?

No, you are wrong. True Christians should beleive that satan causes mankind to sin...and he has caused every single one of us sin. God will not stand for sin and the only outcome for any sinner is eternal damnation. The only way to avoid this is faith in Jesus Christ and all that entails.



new topics

top topics



 
0
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join