New Age Religion is the Most Obvious Choice...

Dont you think?

I mean really think about it... and only if you believe in some type of religion please... no offense but you atheists arent really going to contribute anything.

but really, if something else is out there (religion), then wouldn't some New Age religion be the correct one?

of course, you have to pick the right one, and thats the problem, but here's my theory...

Back in the day, when communication with people from all over the world was blocked, most every tribe, community, people had their own relgion.

in the east, you have Taoism, Buddhism, Muslims, Judaism etc, and in the west, apart from the Indian spirits, you had Christianity and probably more.

Well, each of these religions were based off of something right?
History shows that Jesus existed.
Many religions acknowledge that. But Buddha probably existed as well.
And many religions did take bits and pieces from other religions.
For instance, many people are not aware that many people speculate that during the missing years of Jesus' life in the bible, he went east and studied eastern philosophies, Taoism most likely.
brief example:

well, this would make sense right?
Many eastern religions acknowledge the existence of Jesus, and that he was a prophet. Also, many of Jesus' teaching mirrored the philosphies of eastern practices of looking into oneself and being kind to your neighbor.
but anyway, that is just an example...

My point is, that something "holy," if you will, contributed to the creation of all the different religions...
When communication started opening between peoples of the world, little pieces got thrown in here and there...

SO, would you not think that with all of our communication and knowledge of all the different religions that a combination of religions would be the ultimate higher power?
If Buddha existed in the east, and Jesus in the west, then the only reason those religions are not combined is because:
1) they happened at different times.
2) communication was blocked.
But, that doesn't mean that they both didnt happen right?
SOMETHING has caused these people to believe in their faith so deeply that they would die for that belief or spiritual awakening they have had.

So, to me at least, it would make sense that there is something spiritual in all the different religions around the world.
Just because one thing happened one place, and another happened somewhere else, doesnt mean they both can't exist at the same time...

So now that we have all the different pieces of the puzzle, shouldn't a new age religion that combines those pieces really be onto something big?
Could it be that TIME was the key factor to a spiritual awakening?
Time enough for us to gain the knowledge and information from all the different areas of the world instead of just where we live?

anyway, I hope you guys are not offended in any way by this post, but I really think I'm onto something here, and would LOVE to hear everyones opinions.
And if you guys DO agree, then please give this thread a Flag so others might also see it and contribute.
I've never requested people flag a thread of mine on ATS before, but I feel this is important.
Also, if you want to comment on the Jesus being Taoist thing, thats fine, but really not what the thread is about. I dont even know if that is true, but am totally open to the possibilities of it. The real point of the thread is that we are now capable of putting all the little pieces of the puzzle together...

thank you all,
-Odessy

The obvious thing.....at least to me.....is that Jesus spent time away from Judea.
He went, obviously...again...to me....in order to further his studies.
Modern Judiesm has as its base the religion of the Jews of Babylon.
Judea was layed waste by Nebacanesor and the learned peope were brought to Babylon, to work in his government offices.
The militants were the ones who moved back to Judea, to re-settle the land.
The scribes and doctors of theology stayed in Babylon and established the schools that Jesus would have ended up attending.
The gospel tells us that Jesus had a wealthy sponsor in Joseph af Aremathia.
He would be a likely candidate for someone who would have met the young Jesus and would have been happy to pay for his tutorage.
The Persians who took over the eastern empire were smart enough to not destroy established knowledge systems and would have invited the teachers of all religions to find a home there.
Jesus could easily have gotten exposure to other teachings and would have been influinced by its words.
In conclusion: anything useful from a diverse assortment of teachings would have been already incorporated into Jesus' teachings, and we need not look any further into them.

[edit on 26-3-2008 by jmdewey60]

sure, but you can't expect that Jesus had the teachings of every philosphy of every religion.
if you take was Jesus and Buddha say word for word, the teachings are basically the same.
treat your neighbor like you want to be treated.
There are many things in Christianity that I dont agree with, the same as there is with other eastern religions.
which is why I think that combining bits of knowledge from all the religions might give us better insight to the big picture.

I just got the Urantia book today.
looking forward to reading it.
and interesting as to what their philosophy is to the life and teachings of Jesus.

I believe there are already religions founded on this principal. I have been researching many different religions lately and what I find is that many of the religions foundations are the same in that they all believe in one god. Then the different religions begin to split based upon the teachings of various "Prophets". For instance Christians, Muslims, and Jews all believe in the God of "Abraham" however they begin to split as each religion begins to follow a different "Prophet" or "Messiah". The Jews believe the "Messiah" is still yet to come, The Muslims Believe in "Mohammad" and of course the Christians believe in "Jesus". After this point each religion is split even further based upon the teachings of other prophets or various beliefs in specific Doctrine. As an example Christianity breaks down into Catholic, Protestant, Baptist, Mormon, Etc. There are also various factions of the Jewish as well as the Muslim religions.
Now I think the fundamental problem with combining all these religions is that by doing so you are combining the various beliefs of all religions and thus risk being deceived by false doctrines, teaching, and prophets. However; you must apply this theory to that of the end times. By doing so you may see how a “one world religion” ties into the end times, and also how that is intertwined with the NWO. So in essence your thoughts are correct and all such religions may very well be combined at some point in the future. But in order for this to occur there would have to be some major event that would cause the religions to unite under one. Just food for thought.

reply to post by Odessy


Oh, I have to admit that there are some distorsions in the Gospels.
They went to too much trouble trying to "prove" that Jesus was the fulfilment of, not just the prophets, but current myths of the time.
For a long time I believed there would just Have to be some way a believer could get closer to the actual living historical man.
I have looked hard and am not satisfied.
For all I know, Goodey could be right and all he was doing was trying to reform the Jewish religion.
Paul's writings are slightly less than satifying.
My opinion of what Paul was saying is reflected in my other posts here.
Basicly, God was satisfied with the performance of Jesus, that He has delayed condemnation of the world.
But it is difficult to come up with a "program" to put yourself into, in order to be a superior human.
Following that path is the road to being a modern pharisee.

[edit on 27-3-2008 by jmdewey60]

[edit on 27-3-2008 by jmdewey60]

please, everyone is jumping onto new age religion like it's the next best thing, only because it's so new.

give it 2000 years, plus an infinite amount of power and influence, and you won't be any better off than right now. Why should religion be the answer? Atheist doesn't mean no religion, it means disbelief in god. Religion is not required to believe in god(s), and nothing more than a tool used to enslave the minds of men.

besides, it's not even religions fault in many cases, but the groupthink mob-like mindsets it generates among the lowest common denominators, which turns into nasty intolerance - which then engulfs even the brightest and most rational person.

[edit on 27-3-2008 by scientist]

personally, I dont think religion is the answer...

I think a person needs to really gain consciousness of themselves and the world around them.
When you do that, then you'll understand we are all connected, and the same.
Violence, prejudice, injustice... these are all things that would go away if everyone was in a state of higher consciousness.
and I wish I could find a better word than consciousness, but I hope you get what I mean.

BUT, since we dont know, for sure anyway, and the answers do lie somewhere in religion, then I figure a new age religion, of whatever age mind you, would be able to find the answer...
... an answer other than catching a ride on a spaceship behind the comet...
I wonder if they ever got there...

[edit on 27-3-2008 by Odessy]

I do not know if we need to be in a special state of mind or perception, all the time.
If we were in the right state, once, and remembered what we learned at that moment, that would go a long way towards a recognition of the cosmos we exist in.
If we come to the realization that we are only a projection into a framework of pecieved existance, we would understand how temporary the differentiation our own being is from every other being or even things we would not normaly consider to be beings.

Originally posted by Odessy
History shows that Jesus existed.

I stopped reading your post after that as it is clear you are deluded. Where do you get this from? There is not a shred of historical evidence that the Jesus character from the Bible actually existed. Stop making things up!

Originally posted by SilentGem

Originally posted by Odessy
History shows that Jesus existed.

I stopped reading your post after that as it is clear you are deluded. Where do you get this from? There is not a shred of historical evidence that the Jesus character from the Bible actually existed. Stop making things up!

yes, I am obviously delusional...

Historians
Few scholars question the fact that Jesus was a true historic person. It's difficult to estimate the dramatic impact Jesus had on Western Civilization.
These links are classified according to Christian, modern, and ancient historians.
source

I was going to list tons or references, nut I'm not even going to bother.
Believe what you want to believe, but I'm not pulling things out of my ass...
though it seems like your probably reading things that was pulled out of someone else's...

and please, dont post comments that have nothing to do with the thread or call people names, post request of forum moderators and ATS rules...
ATS Forum Moderator Thread Link

now, if you would like to make an educated response, instead of simply pointing fingers and calling names, I will be more than happy to hear you out.

Also, Jesus appears in many religious texts, not just the Christian Bible...

[edit on 29-3-2008 by Odessy]

SilentGem,
Existance of Jesus:




Jesus in the Muslim Faith:






Whether you believe Jesus was a holy man or not, still doesn't mean that he didn't exist.

[edit on 29-3-2008 by Odessy]