How is Christianity monotheistic?

what Edit difference does it make. just pray to god and cover all your bases



Mod edit removed vulgarity

[edit on 6/7/2008 by Sauron]

Well, hate to tell you, but the majority of the world are Buddhists..... What if they're right instead?

Sorry, I'm not going to throw logic out the window "just in case". When the time comes, IF the Christians are right, then I'll state my case to God plain and simple. If he deems fit to toss me in the fires of Hell for simply not acknowledging this absentee father, then by all means, I'll jump into the flames myself rather than spend eternity with such a one as he....

Originally posted by Gazrok
"Moses never said Adam and Eve were the first humans on Earth"

No, he didn't....God supposedly did. Right in Genesis in the Bible.

It doesn't say that Adam was the first man. What Genesis says is that God decided to create man in his image (when God says our image, he doesn't mean that he is somewhat more than one person like some say, no we just see that Elohim (Forces) is a plural word, and the pluralis we see here is called "majesty pluralis". God is one. There is no other God than the God of Abraham).

To assume otherwise is gross assumption, especially when taken in context to everything else in the Bible surrounding Adam's creation, as well as Eve's. Not that I agree with Creation...I don't, but citing the Bible, there is no need to consult Moses, when you have the word from the horse's mouth (so to speak)...assuming of course, that you also take the Christian doctrine that the Bible is dictated by God, but written by man.

[Edited on 28-5-2003 by Gazrok]

If you read the bible literally, you don't know much about the Book of Books. Has it never occured to you how Jesus was the Lamb, Judah a lion, Lillit an owl and Satan a snake etc. and how this animal/human thing is one of the most important things in the Bible. You can't possibly believe that Jesus was actually a sheep, can you?

Blessings,
Mikromarius

but where these metaphors are used, they are quite obvious... Genesis is not rife with metaphors, nor is there anything in context to assume that anything concerning the creation is metaphoric.

Originally posted by Gazrok
but where these metaphors are used, they are quite obvious... Genesis is not rife with metaphors, nor is there anything in context to assume that anything concerning the creation is metaphoric.

Wow! The whole of Genesis and most other books within the bible are metaphores, or rather allegories. In the story of Adam and Eve in Eden, we even meet one animal that stands out among all the other animals, and hey, it speeks. Some snake that can walk and talk! We have all heared that this snake is Satan. The bible also mentions another "animal" in eden in perticular: the night owl, Lillit, Adam's first wife whom Adam divorced before he got Eve according to Jewish tradition. Lillit didn't fit Adam's longing. It's said that it was because she was too indipendent and strong minded. You don't believe that Satan is literally a snake, do you?

Blessings,
Mikromarius

Originally posted by mikromarius
The bible also mentions another "animal" in eden in perticular: the night owl, Lillit, Adam's first wife whom Adam divorced before he got Eve according to Jewish tradition. Lillit didn't fit Adam's longing. It's said that it was because she was too indipendent and strong minded. You don't believe that Satan is literally a snake, do you?

Blessings,
Mikromarius

That, you'll find, is Jewish folklore and is not in the Bible.

How is a talking snake any more miraculous than the parting of the Red Sea? As you may have figured out by now Mikramarius, I am not a Christian, so yes, I'll state quite literally what's in the Bible. To assume that almost anything and everything in the Bible is a metaphor, simply makes the whole book a piece of clay that can be modelled to say anything you damned well please. This is why I'll use the literal, rather than figurative accounts, because I don't want the claim of my own interpretations to muddy the arguement...

However, there are NO obvious metaphors, when it is stated that God made Adam first, from dust, and in his own image, and then made Eve from one of his ribs (a quite literal explaination of our anatomical difference here).

Originally posted by Byrd

Originally posted by mikromarius
The bible also mentions another "animal" in eden in perticular: the night owl, Lillit, Adam's first wife whom Adam divorced before he got Eve according to Jewish tradition. Lillit didn't fit Adam's longing. It's said that it was because she was too indipendent and strong minded. You don't believe that Satan is literally a snake, do you?

Blessings,
Mikromarius

That, you'll find, is Jewish folklore and is not in the Bible.

Isaiah makes mention of Lilit in chapter 34:14 "The wild animals of the desert shall meet with the wolves, and the wild goat shall cry to his fellow; yes, the Lilit shall settle there, and shall find her a place of rest" (Hebrew Names' Version).

Call it myth, call it folklore, call it whatever you like, but don't say it isn't in the bible. The bible refers to the story of Lilit. The same is the matter with Enoch. He is only mentioned briefly, but as you will see after you have read his "story", you see that he is refered to throughout the bible and is an incredibly important figure in the course of time. The same is the matter with many other parallell books and stories.

Blessings,
Mikromarius

reply to post by Gazrok
well angels are like the armies of God, so they are not really gods.

If I had the powers of God and I wanted this part of my personality in this body, and other parts in these bodies, and doing this would make the plan I had in store for my creation run easier... do you think I would do that. I sure would! So what the godhead is (i like the term godhead because the original doctrine of the trinity is not true) is basically parts of my God's personality in different sprit-bodies. so its all the same God.

thats how its a monotheism

reply to post by mikromarius

You don't believe that Satan is literally a snake, do you?

Yes, or actually, a serpent that could mean some kind of reptilian.
I imagine the Book of Genesis was compiled and standardized in Babylon.
The Jews would have found themselves confronted by the Sumerian Creation Myth that holds that a serpent created the world.
So, to counteract that foreign concept of God, they made it a clear distinction between their God and the Babylonian god.

first understand this God is a plrual and singular like sheep plural and singular

now God was here on this earth his spirit was split certain attribute of his sprirt and soul given to the spirit bodies of jesus and the holy ghost

so all are seperate but are one God

now why would God split his spirit and soul? so that he can be in heaven and on earth. so that he could die for our sins but still be able to rule heaven. so that the attributes needed in that dispensation can be ruled by him as well as earth. etcc

the reasons are endless but to put it simple its so that his plan for his creations would run smoother

Why do people constantly think the bible is the be all and end all of knowledge BC. As if no other religion existed, no other stories of these great events where around before the bible etc. etc.

One word:

MITHRAS

Even by only looking that one word up and never looking or believing in any other of the evidence discrediting the bible you may learn a few things that will show you the widespread fraud in the bible's claims.

Good thread Gazrok, my father often points out that those of other religions have a hard time seeing Christianity as a monotheistic religion. I have to admit that I agree, especially when considering the Catholic Saints, they seem exactly like a Pantheon to me.

I've never believed in the trinity, not even when I was considered a Christian. It is a fallacy, a creation by men and according to the Christian's own rules, an abomination when sworn to like an oath in church. It was created in 325 ad at the First Council of Nicea.

More about that from Wiki:

The First Council of Nicaea, held in Nicaea in Bithynia (present-day İznik in Turkey), convoked by the Roman Emperor Constantine I in 325, was the first Ecumenical council[1] of the Christian Church, and most significantly resulted in the first uniform Christian doctrine, called the Nicene Creed. With the creation of the creed, a precedent was established for subsequent general (ecumenical) councils of Bishops' (Synods) to create statements of belief and canons of doctrinal orthodoxy— the intent being to define unity of beliefs for the whole of Christendom.

The purpose of the council was to resolve disagreements in the Church of Alexandria over the nature of Jesus in relationship to the Father; in particular, whether Jesus was of the same substance as God the Father or merely of similar substance. St. Alexander of Alexandria and Athanasius took the first position; the popular presbyter Arius, from whom the term Arian controversy comes, took the second. The council decided against the Arians overwhelmingly (of the estimated 250-318 attendees, all but 2 voted against Arius[2])

In my prior studies I have found no evidence what so ever to support the belief in the Trinity. Jesus refers to God as a separate entity on many occasions and through out he is referred to as the Son of God but not as God himself. Take for instance his suffering in the garden, Jesus asks that he not be forced to suffer the crucifixion. This passage clearly illustrates the differences between God and Jesus and shows Jesus' inability to change the will of God.

In many versions of Christianity the worship of the Virgin Mary is commonly accepted. In Catholicism the praying of the Rosary is an integral part of the faith. In this prayer the petitioner prays strictly to the Virgin Mary, an act proving their belief in multiple divine beings. This clearly hearkens back to earlier matriarchal pagan religions and seemingly defies the Commandment "Thou shalt have no other god before me."

I also believe we run into a problem when we consider the absorption of so many polytheistic and pagan cultures into the common culture of Christianity. Much of what we understand as "Christian", such as Christmas and Easter, in fact come from older pagan concepts and holidays.

reply to post by SR
the bible didnt copy it it copied the teachings of the bible

and christians shouldnt celebrate chrismas easter and halloween so dont go there

reply to post by Shadowflux
i agree withall youve said except about the trinity
the original doctrine is wrong but the doctrine i posed to everyone seems to make sense

now i used to not believe in the trinity either but came to believe in a version of it

well this thread was certainly "resurrected"
2003-2008? 5 years?

sorry for the bad pun haha.

in truth christianity is a diffrent God from the old testament.
old testament was Saturn worship known in that culture as "El" or saturn the taskmaster and divine punisher.

new testament seems to be worshipping a more loving mysterious god in the Piscean tradition.

regardless the bible does have truth in it but not literal. it was ment to be understood esoterically. looking for reason in it is an excercise in futility unless you are trying to understand esoteric truths not literal history.

reply to post by Shadowflux


Shadowflux appears to misunderstand the way Catholics pray to Mary when he writes "In Catholicism the praying of the Rosary is an integral part of the faith. In this prayer the petitioner prays strictly to the Virgin Mary, an act proving their belief in multiple divine beings."

Look at the words of the Hail Mary:

Hail Mary full of grace "THE LORD IS WITH THEE", blessed art thou among women and "BLESSED IS THE FRUIT OF THY WOMB, JESUS".

Catholics honour Mary because she brings us Jesus.

The prayer goes on: Holy Mary Mother of God, PRAY FOR US SINNERS, now and at the hour of our death.

It is clear that we pray to Mary, not as a divinity, but as someone who prays to God on our behalf.

So Catholics certainly honour Mary, but it has always been regarded in the Church as a heresy to give Mary worship "which is due to God alone".

Furthermore, some take exception to the title "Mother of God", saying that this makes Mary greater than God. But it is a reasonable title if you believe that Jesus is the second person of the Blessed Trinity.

Originally posted by krossfyter
Time is past, present, and future. There are not three times. Each part of the whole of time is by nature time yet there are not three times but one. Likewise, space is height, width, and depth. Matter is solid, liquid, and gas

Very well said Krossfyter. I have never seen that expressed before. I started thinking that white light is actually a spectrum of colors, you apply filters to see the particular colors one at a time.

Still reading this thread from top to bottom, and I might have further comments.

reply to post by krossfyter


Get a KJV. The new-agers will tell you that it is inaccurately translated, to hide that their bibles are derived from the corrupted Alexandrian scripts.

See in the KJV there is a verse that had to be removed, tp deny the Godhood of Jesus. John 1 states that Jesus is the Word and that the Word is God (naysayers, it is easy to work out if you try to think for a while).

Now this one verse, sets the entire scene:

1 John 5:7 : For there are three that bear record in Heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost: and these three are one.

And just to make sure the verse is not mis-understood, verse 8 states:

And there are three that bear witness in earth, the spirit, and the water, and the blood: and these three AGREE IN one.

Then, Revelation 1:8 and :11 both have Jesus quoted as saying: "I am Alpha and Omega..." then verse 8 continues: "..., beginning and ending," saith the Lord, which is, and which was, and which is to come, the Almighty;

while verse 11 states "...the first and the last."

That leaves one of two options open, of which one is already closed:
Either this is Jesus committing blasphemy by claiming to be God when he is not (which i flatly reject; i know His power by experience); or...

This is Jesus giving clear indication that He is one with the Father and the Holy Ghost, and therefore "they" are one and the same God.

For those who do not see sense in this, one of the prerequisites for the job of God is to be able to do what you want no matter how little sense it makes.

[edit on 2008/11/5 by J.Smit]

Originally posted by Anonymous ATS
reply to post by Shadowflux

 

Shadowflux appears to misunderstand the way Catholics pray to Mary when he writes "In Catholicism the praying of the Rosary is an integral part of the faith. In this prayer the petitioner prays strictly to the Virgin Mary, an act proving their belief in multiple divine beings."

Look at the words of the Hail Mary:

Hail Mary full of grace "THE LORD IS WITH THEE", blessed art thou among women and "BLESSED IS THE FRUIT OF THY WOMB, JESUS".

Catholics honour Mary because she brings us Jesus.

The prayer goes on: Holy Mary Mother of God, PRAY FOR US SINNERS, now and at the hour of our death.

It is clear that we pray to Mary, not as a divinity, but as someone who prays to God on our behalf.

You claim to use the same bible as christians, yet you deny 1 Timothy 2 : 5: "For there is one God, and one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus;"

Those word above, clearly indicate that you pray to her as your mediator, denying the Mediating work of Jesus on the cross.

So Catholics certainly honour Mary, but it has always been regarded in the Church as a heresy to give Mary worship "which is due to God alone".

Then get out of the RCC and get to a Christian congregation.

Furthermore, some take exception to the title "Mother of God", saying that this makes Mary greater than God. But it is a reasonable title if you believe that Jesus is the second person of the Blessed Trinity.

So then call her mother of the Son. God is three. She was not mother of the Father, and definitely not of the Holy Ghost (after all, Gabriël told her that the child was put in her by the Holy Ghost).

And make sure the group you join, knows that Jesus is God (NOT God is Jesus) and that they refuse to join in worship with other religions.

Neale Donald Walsch is a forefront heretic.