Which parts of text the believers should read...

I start this topic for the atheists which have knowledge about the different religions and have some nice parts of information to let the believers (Christians, Islam, Egyptians and stuff) read, to give them different views concerning their belief (knowledge they don't get in church for example).

I don't mean knowledge about the BigBang, evolution theory and stuff, but specific information from their own beliefs which could let them think. So please no reasoning like: 'God couldn't have created everything in seven days', but information they normally wouldn't get.

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

I would like to start with the Rephaim which is mentioned in the Bible, and according to the Bible was build by the Giants which existed by the intercourse of the sons of God and females (of menkind). Many know about these giants (Goliath) but looking more closely at the Rephaim at this site you see the following:

The site is enormous. The outside circle has a diameter of 159 meters and over 37,000 tons of rock went into the construction of the complex. Two openings in the circles may have been used to measure the solar solstice and the rising of Sirius in 3000 BCE.

And the opening to the south-east was pointed to Sirius 3000 BCE. Sirius is a star by the way. Are we going to compare this with what the Koran says:

at this site

53:49 And that He is the Lord of Sirius

Then we have to say the Quran and Bible say the same at this point, God comes from Sirius. This wouldn't be known by reading the Bible and the connection couldn't be made if a person would read only the quran.

Well this is the kind of information I mean... hope you guys think it is a good idea

All of the texts they can. The more diversity of information, the better one can understand whats going on and deciepher truth from garbage.

people should read everything, all religious works, and open their minds to all of the possibilities, but refrain from putting blind faith into any singular thing.

Yes and because not everyone likes to read thousands of pages of texts there are some people which start a thread which give specific information about things people normally wouldn't know.

Theoretically it is the best to read everything, but that isn't really an option for some people. So by putting together information in a thread which deals with information you normally wouldn't get you reach those people with interesting information...

So please post specific information which let's people think, like the describtion of God in Ezekiel

And I look, and lo, a tempestuous wind is coming from the north, a great cloud, and fire catching itself, and brightness to it round about, and out of its midst as the colour of copper, out of the midst of the fire.

their appearances `are' as coals of fire -- burning as the appearance of lamps; it is going up and down between the living creatures, and brightness `is' to the fire, and out of the fire is going forth lightning.

And the multiplicity of the Gods of Christ.

Elohim is the common name for God. It is a plural form
The name Elohim is found 2570 times
Eloah, 57
El, 226 times

A lot more times is God told as being multiple instead of being one

I would like to add something to this topic in the way of a few simple quotes from the bible that I don't think people really ever think about... to me these are pretty much irrefutable proof of the bible not being what most people believe (Christian, Catholic etc..) and also adds credence to the "created as slaves" theory.

(The quotes are translations from the original Hebrew)

"And the Deity Yahweh planted an orchard
In Eden, in the east;
And he placed there the Adam
Whom He had created.
And the Deity Yahweh
Caused to grow from the ground
Every tree that is pleasent to the sight
And good for eating;
And the Tree of Life was in the orchard
And the Tree of Knowing good and evil...
And the Deity Yahweh took the Adam
And placed him in the Garden of Eden
To work it and to keep it.
And the Deity Yahweh
Commanded the Adam, saying:
"Of every tree of the orchard eat you shall;
but of the Tree of Knowing good and evil
thou shalt not eat of it;
for on the day that thou eatest therof
thou shalt surely die." "

"Yahweh took the Adam and placed him in the garden to work it and to keep it." Why did god create the Adam? God wanted a gardener.

God even LIED to Adam, saying that "on the day that thou eatest therof [the Tree of Knowing] thou shalt surely die." God wanted to keep his worker dumb using lies of death to scare him from attempting to eat the fruit.

"And the Serpent... said unto the woman [Eve]:
"Hath the Deity indeed said
'Ye shall not eat of any tree of the orchard'?"
And the woman said unto the Serpent:
"Of the fruits of the trees of the orchard
eat we may;
it is of the fruit of the tree in the
midst of the orchard that the Deity hath said:
'Ye shall not eat of it, neither touch it,
lest ye die.' "
And the Serpent said unto the woman:
"Nay, ye will surely not die;
It is that the Deity doth know
that on the day ye eat therof
your eyes will be opened
and ye will be as the Deity-
knowing good and evil."
And the woman saw that the tree was good to eat
And that it was lustful to behold;
And the tree was desirable to make one wise;
And she took of its fruit and did eat,
And gave also to her mate with her, and he ate.
and the eyes of both of them were opened,
And they knew that they were naked;
And they sewed fig leaves together,
And made themselves loincloths."

Now this "serpent" is always believed to be the devil... why? This serpent came along and told the truth! This serpent wanted Adam and Eve to become knowledgable of who and what they were. This serpent set them free from the blindness and toil that the other deity enforced. Thats not evil! Thats helpful and even shows caring.

"Then did the Deity Yahweh say: 'Behold, the Adam has become as one of us, to know good and evil.'

Here god refers to other deities using the word "us". Is god wrong? Or maybe he is lying again? Or are their more deities?

I would like to explain sometihng about the word "adam". Do you notice how Adam is never refered to as just "Adam"? He is always called "the Adam" indicating that this is not his name as such but something else that the gods have shall we say "labeled" him?
The term "adama" originally meant earth or soil, but more specifically dark-red soil. Like the parallel Akkadian word adamatu (dark red earth), the Hebrew term adama and the Hebrew word for red (adom) stem from the words for blood: adamu, dam. When the Bible calls the being created by god "the Adam" it employs a favorite Summerian linguistic play of double meanings. "The Adam" could mean "the one from the earth" (Earthling), "the one made of the dark red soil" and "the one made of blood"
God did not name his creation as he would something he loved, it is just a scientific label that was carried over in the translations. The Adam was no more than a tool to his god.

"And the Deity Yahweh planted an orchard
In Eden, in the east;
And he placed there "the one created from blood"
Whom He had created.
And the Deity Yahweh
Caused to grow from the ground
Every tree that is pleasent to the sight
And good for eating;
And the Tree of Life was in the orchard
And the Tree of Knowing good and evil...
And the Deity Yahweh took "the one created from blood"
And placed him in the Garden of Eden
To work it and to keep it.
And the Deity Yahweh
Commanded "the one created from blood", saying:
"Of every tree of the orchard eat you shall;
but of the Tree of Knowing good and evil
thou shalt not eat of it;
for on the day that thou eatest therof
thou shalt surely die." "

God doesn't sound like much of a "father" to Adam when translated fully does he? Adam was not WHO he was, Adam was WHAT he was.

So lets recap: On one hand we have "god", the so called one almighty loving being that created his children to love for all eternity. The one who in the bible lied and threatened with dieath and tried to keep his children docile and unknowing so they would keep his garden for him and then expelled them wanting nothing more to do with them when became "knowledgable".

On the other hand we have "Satan" the evil lord of hell who likes to torture and corrupt blah blah blah. If this was really Satan then we ALL owe him one, without him we might still be mindless slaves, this serpent never did anything evil, he helped Adam and Eve and freed them from the labor of the Deity Yahweh.

This doesn't sound like the conventional story of Creation but I havent changed/altered/edited anything, i have merely read it more clearly and with a more open mind and have seen that not all things make sense. If these two beings really are God and Satan (which I don't believe for a second) I know who I like the most and its not the Deity that wanted us to be his docile workers.

Anyway believe what you like, this is just what the bible says.

Very interesting post you made Faceless.

for on the day that thou eatest therof
thou shalt surely die." "

"Yahweh took the Adam and placed him in the garden to work it and to keep it." Why did god create the Adam? God wanted a gardener.

God even LIED to Adam, saying that "on the day that thou eatest therof [the Tree of Knowing] thou shalt surely die." God wanted to keep his worker dumb using lies of death to scare him from attempting to eat the fruit.

Are we going to look at Gospel of Thomas however:

(85) Jesus said, "Adam came into being from a great power and a great wealth, but he did not become worthy of you. For had he been worthy, he would not have experienced death."

So perhaps Adam was really killed for that�

Now this "serpent" is always believed to be the devil... why? This serpent came along and told the truth! This serpent wanted Adam and Eve to become knowledgable of who and what they were. This serpent set them free from the blindness and toil that the other deity enforced. Thats not evil! Thats helpful and even shows caring.

Also make your guess about who fought against the God of Moses to save the Egyptians from drowning and the plagues�?

Here god refers to other deities using the word "us". Is god wrong? Or maybe he is lying again? Or are their more deities?

Elohim is plural.

If these two beings really are God and Satan (which I don't believe for a second)

It probably is Satan, in the Egyptian religion Satan (Seth) was already warned one time, and the second time a Gods war began. I personally belief the serpant helping Adam and Eve in the garden was the first warning, and the Gods war was the war between some Egyptian Gods (Lucifer and his Angels) against the God of Moses, but that�s just my view.

just thinking about this, concerning the tale that 'greys' are evolved here on earth from some kind of reptile rather than apes:

Could the 'serpent' have actually been a more primitive grey? They are supposed to be millions of years more evolved than us. Maybe they knew of some evil diety's plan to use the homonids as slaves and they basically freed us before it really happened, so god gets mad and starts saying stuff like Satan and Serpent in the same sentence. The serpent is evil! Hmm... I'm gonna keep posting on this as I develop my theory, and I really don't care who I upset in the process. Any others with open minds are definitly encouraged to contribute Maybe we are, through this thread, discovering the ultimate truth. Maybe we are just throwing stuff way out of proportion. The further this gets developed, the more we will know if it is a truth or not. I can totally understand why something like this would need to be covered up. Remember how hurt you were when you found out that Santa wasn't real?

Originally posted by Earthscum
just thinking about this, concerning the tale that 'greys' are evolved here on earth from some kind of reptile rather than apes:

Could the 'serpent' have actually been a more primitive grey? They are supposed to be millions of years more evolved than us. Maybe they knew of some evil diety's plan to use the homonids as slaves and they basically freed us before it really happened, so god gets mad and starts saying stuff like Satan and Serpent in the same sentence. The serpent is evil! Hmm... I'm gonna keep posting on this as I develop my theory, and I really don't care who I upset in the process. Any others with open minds are definitly encouraged to contribute

Maybe we are, through this thread, discovering the ultimate truth. Maybe we are just throwing stuff way out of proportion. The further this gets developed, the more we will know if it is a truth or not. I can totally understand why something like this would need to be covered up. Remember how hurt you were when you found out that Santa wasn't real?

If the Greys are millions of years more evolved then us, then they wouldn't be reptiles only a few thousand years ago when this happened.

The Serpent was obviously not just a snake because he could talk to Eve, and knew the truth about the matter of "knowing" and was of such high stature that he unhesitantly exposed the deity as a lair. In most (if not all) ancient traditions the main god always fought a serpent, a tale that undoubtably goes back to these Sumerian gods.

Once again Sumerian and Biblical plays of words occur again. The Biblical word for "Serpent" is nahash which does mean snake. But the word stems from the root NHSH which means "to decipher, to find out", so that nahash could also mean "he who deciphers, he who finds things out" which is a fitting epitaph for Enki, the chief scientist of the gods (Nefilim), the God of Knowledge.

It was Enki who suggested and undertook the creation of primitive workers. As the Sumerian text recorded the course of human events, Enki as a rule emerges as Mankinds protagonist, Enlil (biblical Yahweh) as its strict discipliner if not outright antagonist. The role of a deity wishing to keep the new humans sexually suppressed, and of a deity willing and capable of bestowing upon mankind the fruit of "knowing" fit Enlil and Enki perfectly.

There was a depiction unearthed in Mesopotamia that strongly suggests the biblical tale: a serpent entwined in a tree pointing at its fruit. High above the tree are celestial symbols: the planet of crossing which stood for Anu (the highest of the gods) and the cresent moon, which was the symbol of Enki.

There is even a Mesopotamian version of this in which it is clearly stated that it was Enki that gave Adapa (biblical Adam) the "knowledge"

In Mari a pictorial tale was unearthed engraved on a cylinder seal containing a picture that may well be an illustration of the Mesopotamian version of the tale of Genesis. In the engraving a great god is seated on high ground rising from watery waves-an obvious depiction of Enki (who's symbol is the moon, the controller of the tides). Water spouting serpents protrude from each side of his throne.
Flanking him are two tree like gods. The one on the right, whose branches have penis shaped ends, holds up a bowl that presumably contains the fruit of life.
The one on the left, that has vagina shaped ends, offers fruit bearing branches, representing the tree of "knowing", the god given right of procreation.
Standing next to Enki is another god who is showing anger towards Enki, obviously this in Enlil.

Gods through the ages are refered to by different people in different times by different names, such as here. They are mostly the same deities throughout ancient history.

I'm not an expert in the Hebrew language, but I know how to work a computer and how to use a dictionary. It has always bothered me why God should somehow feel threatened by homos or why they say he hates homos. And they right away open their badly translated Torahs shaped to fit the policies of the Church in Leviticus 18:22 and they read: "You shall not lie with a male as one lies with a female; it is an abomination" and they say HA! God obviously commands their killing even! No, whoever translated that part does. For look at this: The word they have translated male here Zakar, means male, but it always seems to speak about male children. Boys. Your boys or sons even. Even firstborns, but in this context, I'd say "the general human", or simply anyone. And the word translated woman here, 'ishshah, should in this context, which here is sexuality, always be translated wife or wives. God would have used naqebah here is he meant simply females. I would translate zakar 'anyone' here, since men should leave the houses of their parents to live with their wives. And that's why I also translate 'ishshah wife since this obviously has to do with sexuality.

Then the verse reads: You shall not have sex with anyone but your wife, it's disgusting.

For it's all about context. You shall only lie with your wife is the principle here. A gay person, let's say a male who feels attracted to other males, isn't 100% male. He doesn't fit the full description of a man. His body is like a man's, but his heart is like a woman's. That's quite unfortunate, and nothing he can change or suppress. Therefore I'd say it would be quite unfair to cut him off and deny him offspring, we soon have technology ready for two males to produce offspring, so why cut off perfectly good parents. We're probably soon gonna quit having sex in the first place anyway, so why bother? I'd let him pass for a woman. And you know what? I think I'd marry such a couple if they loved eachother. I think it's perfectly natural. It is adultary and rape God hates. Not the different shaped ones who fall out from the conventions. But grownup males who commit sins towards children, would be better off unborn. Everyone hates such terrible crimes. They should be cut off.

However, in the story of Lot and his daughters, we are presented with a dilemma, and our rightiousness is tested. For what about them? Who is to blame? I would say those two daughters of his should have become salt pillars like their mother, but the offspring should live. The shame would be enough for them. And Lot probably cursed the day he was born when he realised what had happened, he was a rightious man in the sight of God, so I guess he would be able to judge himself. His offspring shouldn't have to suffer unless they followed in the path of Lot's two first daughters. The principle here is that you shall never force yourself on anyone. And like above, you shall not have sex with anyone except your wife. The whole Law is designed in the context of Love and adultary is the crime in all cases. On one level or the other. God is Love.

Blessings,
Mikromarius

[Edited on 29-2-2004 by Hamilton]

The story of the Garden of Eden and the Tree of Knowledge is merely a symbolic explanation of how man came to receive Free-Will.

If you take the bare bones of the story, you will see that God created man in his own image - not as a slave. He created him pure. The knowledge that man received was the choice to do evil. I don't see the serpant as doing mankind a favour by giving him this option.

If, prior to the serpant's meddling, Adam was only able to perceive love and goodness, God was sheltering him rather than enslaving him.

Originally posted by Leveller
The story of the Garden of Eden and the Tree of Knowledge is merely a symbolic explanation of how man came to receive Free-Will.

If you take the bare bones of the story, you will see that God created man in his own image - not as a slave. He created him pure. The knowledge that man received was the choice to do evil. I don't see the serpant as doing mankind a favour by giving him this option.

If, prior to the serpant's meddling, Adam was only able to perceive love and goodness, God was sheltering him rather than enslaving him.

The tree's name was "the Tree of Knowledge of Good AND Evil", not just the knowledge of evil. Prior to this Adam and Eve knew nothing of evil and nothing of good.

True. I cocked up by using the word "perception". But it figures that God wouldn't have created man evil therefore the only actions that he would have undertaken would have been virtuous ones.

The actual knowledge of goodness doesn't really matter if you undertake good deeds in ignorance.

Since an external view was asked for....

I don't these things about Christianity. They are phrased as questions, but i know most the answers, the point is to get you think about your on religion from another view.

Why is your winter holiday on Dec. 25th, a pagan day, the winter solstice? Even when historians place Jesus' B-day around September?

Why is your spring holiday filled with fertility symbols like bunnies and eggs?

Why is your main holy book a gross mistranslation of the original and are you aware that it was Eglish Propoganda not the words of the original authors?

Why do you have humans with feather wins for angels? Are you aware that these are Roman demi-god and that herbrew/christian angels have things like 6 heads, 3 faces, and often kill eachother and humans?

Are you aware that the "firey pits of Hades" have nothing to do with your religion (originaly) but are Pagan Roman?

If Jesus was the Masiah (sp?) then why isn't there peace on earth as prophosied?

Do you know that when the book of the bible were assembled a human chose which to put into the bible and which not too? (Look for other ancient jewish holy text from 100bce-100ce)

Looking at all the religions from a objective view, i can honestly say christianity is by far one of the strangest. The others have original language holy text and prety much stick to them. Christianity is the only major religion that seems to change over time with its followers. And the only one that seems to borrow from other religions (as mentioned above).

I actualy see this as a strong point, in that the religion can change to match modern people, on the other hand, how can one put faith in a religion that is made of mostly of pagan tradtions and a bible that was a propoganda piece of a king 1500 years after the books were originaly written.

Originally posted by Leveller
True. I cocked up by using the word "perception". But it figures that God wouldn't have created man evil therefore the only actions that he would have undertaken would have been virtuous ones.

The actual knowledge of goodness doesn't really matter if you undertake good deeds in ignorance.

Care to name one good deed they did?

None, all they did was "work and keep the land" of Eden so that good old Yahweh didn't have to.

Quest-"Looking at all the religions from a objective view, i can honestly say christianity is by far one of the strangest"

Heres one comment I am fond of:

Take away Christianity and the Bible makes sense.

At least to me it does.

and i agree with you, the bible is just a collection of historic events, beliefs and locations of which some do not conform to Christian beliefs, especially when read without "padding" it with all stuff that isn't actually mentioned (my previous posts here are an example of this).

The tree's name was "the Tree of Knowledge of Good AND Evil", not just the knowledge of evil. Prior to this Adam and Eve knew nothing of evil and nothing of good.

Yes, that was the name of the tree...and in order for Adam and Eve to know what was good...they had to know what was not...and disobeying Gods request, like any "child" will attempt to do, when a parent forbids them to do something...they learned the consequinces of their actions...and knew what was good and what was evil....as was said in doing so they exercised...FREE WILL....

When God told them that they would die if they ate of the tree...he was not telling them they would die a physical death...but a spiritual one...by exercising their FREE WILL...in a way they did die, because they lost their innocence...they were loved none the less by their Creator...but they definitely were being taught a lesson....

No parent loves their child less when they screw up...but sometimes it is necessary to show "tough love"...in order for the message to get across..and since we are all children of God...we are constantly learning that sometimes our free will will get us into trouble...

God has never attempted to assume man should be a slave...Adam and Eve were given a choice...slaves are not...

it's open as to which paths you wish to choose in your lifetime...but be prepared to deal with what comes with that choice...just as Adam and Eve had to pay for what they learned.

~oracle

[Edited on 29-2-2004 by Oracle]

[Edited on 29-2-2004 by Oracle]

As for good and evil and their actual meanings, here's the wordcount for the New American Standard Version:
Word: Towb. Total: 394
beautiful 11, beneficial 1, best 7, better 75, better a good 1, charming* 1, cheerful 3, choice 2, delightful 1, fair 1, favor 1, favorable 3, favorably 3, festive 1, fine 3, fine ones 1, fit 1, generous* 1, glad 1, good 196, good and to those who 1, good is better 1, good man 3, good men 1, good-looking* 1, gracious 1, handsome 3, handsome* 1, happy 1, holiday* 3, intelligent* 1, kind 1, like* 1, man 1, more* 2, one 1, one who 1, one who 1, one who is good 1, one who is pleasing 1, pleasant 2, please* 2, pleased 1, pleases 1, pleasing 5, precious 3, pure 1, right 1, ripe 3, safely* 1, sound 1, splendid 1, sweet 1, upright 1, very well 1, well 6, well off 1, what is good 11, what seems best 1, what seems good 2, what was good 2, whatever you like* 1, who are good 1, wish* 2, worthy 1

And on the other side: 'ra
NAS Word Usage - Total: 239
bad 23, bad* 2, badly 1, deadly 1, defamed* 1, defames* 1, defect* 1, destroying 1, displease* 1, displeased 1, displeasing 1, distressing 1, evil 124, evil man 3, evil men 4, evil things 4, evildoer 1, evildoers* 1, evils 1, great 1, grievous 4, harm* 1, harmful 3, man 1, miserable 1, misfortune* 1, sad 4, selfish* 1, serious 1, severe 2, sore 2, threats* 1, treacherous 1, trouble* 1, troubled 1, ugly 6, unpleasant 1, what is evil 2, what was evil 5, which is evil 3, wicked 15, wicked women 1, wild 5, worst 1, wretched 1

The tree of the knowledge of Tobe and Ra could almost sound like a Hebrew version of the Mesopotamian stories of Enlil (the gardener) and Enki (the serpent) from the stories of ancient Sumeria. That they received the knowledge about what was happening around them, why they had come to be and what would later become of them. Neither the Gardener nor the Serpent is God in their stories, they are merely servants of God. Enki had come here to mine for gold, while Enlil who was the oldest of the two and who planted Edin didn't like the matriarchal society the Serpentgod Enki had made and replaced the queen with a king, which according to the Sumerian texts was the reason everything fell. Unless you understand what made it nessasary to change into a male dominated society. The serpent made the humans eat the magic fruit which opened their eyes, so they could see weapons, laws, rightiousness, wisdom and inventions of all kinds. They were allowed to see into the future and they learned how to procreate. So who was then really to blame for the sudden, negative changes, other than the Serpent? Who wanted all the gold and all the credit, but couldn't care less for the wellbeing of Man and his consort and the workers of Good teaching them the things that lead to death by fooling them to brake an oath written in their flesh and blood. In their minds and spirits. He forced Man to learn the principles of justice and the Law and how to defend and protect. The serpent fell like a lightning bolt to Earth. Cursed and commited. Nearly chained. That's why the serpent has the zigzag on his back anyway.

Blessings,
Mikromarius

It is adultery and rape God hates.
The principle here is that you shall never force yourself on anyone.

Hamilton, what if the Gods told in the religions where aliens? Then God wouldn�t like gay�s because they decrease the chances of survival, while he made the race to increase the chances of survival. Then why would man be better then woman according to God (while looking at the Koran). Just look in the past, how many man have made technological progress in comparison to the woman? Woman�s are more emotional, how would an alien compare that to a more rational being? While following that hypothesis we come to a different conclusion about why God says those things�

The story of the Garden of Eden and the Tree of Knowledge is merely a symbolic explanation of how man came to receive Free-Will.

If you take the bare bones of the story, you will see that God created man in his own image - not as a slave. He created him pure. The knowledge that man received was the choice to do evil. I don't see the serpent as doing mankind a favour by giving him this option.

If, prior to the serpent�s meddling, Adam was only able to perceive love and goodness, God was sheltering him rather than enslaving him.

Look at the 4th chapter of the Book of Enoch

1They consider and behold every tree, how it appears to wither, and every leaf to fall off, except of fourteen trees, which are not deciduous; which wait from the old, to the appearance of the new leaf, for two or three winters.

Are you going to look closer to the Book of Enoch you see that the trees aren�t a symbolic explanation but that they are names for all kind of divisions and stuff God has.

Chapter 65 for example

2Now then shall the angels labour at the trees; (61) but when they proceed to this, I will put my hand upon it, and preserve it.

And concerning the serpent
Perhaps you should think about the following, concerning the serpent being Satan, 1/3th of the angels followed him into death. Perhaps is 1/3th of the angels of God (which have such a nice place in heaven) a reason to question the idea that the serpent was really that bad. Perhaps there is more going on then just the goodness and love of God, perhaps those 1/3th of the angels really knew more. Is it that bad if 1/3th of the angels agree with the serpent? Remember, Adam was also killed according to the Gospel of Thomas, perhaps it isn�t just good and evil, or perhaps Adam and Eve got to know the evil better and realised that perhaps their God wasn�t that nice�

Well we got wisdom after all now didn't we? With that wisdom we are able to procreate without actually doing it if you see what I mean. Why should we interpret the Law in a way that makes the real perpetraitors go free? All those laws of that kind could be replaced by a law prohibiting sex with anyone but your wife or husbond. The reason these sins are as thoroughly disgussed in the Law, has to do with their neighbours, and the Ba'al worshippers who said the great God was a golden calf based on astrology and myth and commited many sick and directly repulsive rituals to honor their gods. Among all these gods a trained eye can even spot the One God and see how he is disgusted with all the sins which are done in his presence. Sodom and Gomorrah, Admah and Sebojjim. These places God destroyed. There they practised ritual raping of people of all ages and genders and even made them mix with animals and idols. This was what God came to hate, not the gays. They were raped just as much as the hetros. The laws in Leviticus 18 is basically a set of anti Ba'al laws to avoid the sic practise they had back in Sodom and Gomorrah.

Blessings,
Mikromarius

Originally posted by Quest
Since an external view was asked for....

I don't these things about Christianity. They are phrased as questions, but i know most the answers, the point is to get you think about your on religion from another view.

Why is your winter holiday on Dec. 25th, a pagan day, the winter solstice? Even when historians place Jesus' B-day around September?

Why is your spring holiday filled with fertility symbols like bunnies and eggs?

Why is your main holy book a gross mistranslation of the original and are you aware that it was Eglish Propoganda not the words of the original authors?

Why do you have humans with feather wins for angels? Are you aware that these are Roman demi-god and that herbrew/christian angels have things like 6 heads, 3 faces, and often kill eachother and humans?

Are you aware that the "firey pits of Hades" have nothing to do with your religion (originaly) but are Pagan Roman?

If Jesus was the Masiah (sp?) then why isn't there peace on earth as prophosied?

Do you know that when the book of the bible were assembled a human chose which to put into the bible and which not too? (Look for other ancient jewish holy text from 100bce-100ce)

Looking at all the religions from a objective view, i can honestly say christianity is by far one of the strangest. The others have original language holy text and prety much stick to them. Christianity is the only major religion that seems to change over time with its followers. And the only one that seems to borrow from other religions (as mentioned above).

I actualy see this as a strong point, in that the religion can change to match modern people, on the other hand, how can one put faith in a religion that is made of mostly of pagan tradtions and a bible that was a propoganda piece of a king 1500 years after the books were originaly written.

This is excatly the way I feel!!!! But about the Gensis story. What if that story wasn't about the true God the Most High. Aren't there repitilan aliens?