The One in the many and the many in the One

which means as much as there are expressions of this One as many as there are people and I am happy to read such a wide variety of human divinity all around the Internet on many many levels.

They’re All good days, g.

Better days to you.

The sense here and now is gyanama’s truth is more about the “web of lies” g was speaking to.

Projection is a telling device. 🙂

You are so blessed with those divine insights and I really mean this.

It is your special level connected to such a beautiful truth.

Allow others to have theirs 🙂

Love is all there is 🙂

LoL

Yes, the paradox of balance. For some, it’s just a valance. 🙂

The next hypy in the Netherlands are the ‘Brain books’

The paradox of balance 🙂

It’s a paradox. 😉

In my humble opinion your attacks on our gracious host are unwarranted, and your behavior- boorish.

I’m sure these are conscious choices on your part. Good luck with them.

And good luck with the anger management course. God knows you NEED it, you needy little ego-personality.

God has touched lives, in fact God is the life of every individual. As far as Dr Chopra is concerned in and of himself he is nothing…

If you are having a false claim about anger in your life K, then I suggest you study Christian Science..It will heal you of your personal sense…

Don’t worry though I see you perfectly clear, All is Good. And God really doesn’t get angry…

I sense Dr. Chopra has touched more lives than you could ever hope to, and it will continue to play out that way.

::Free Advice for Gyanama(W/a capital G)

Anger Management

Just a thought 😉

Your little me is always trying to extract just a little bit more out of the moment, isn’t it? It’s simpler than your “little me” CAN think.

Something you are having a difficult time with k. If you see me as a person who is thinking or projecting then I AM not responsible. I am not responsible for what you see I am only responsible that I never see a person or follow a person…God is All, and when you awaken k you will not feel a need to Yawn anymore…

Christian Scientist are not followers of anyone. In Christian Science we live the Christ. We do not follow persons! There are no persons to follow.

Your lies k won’t work here…and I am not in your web….

) The main reason why the Gnostic gospels are not to be regarded as authoritative or historically accurate is that these works are written considerably later than the canonical Gospels. The Gnostic works are 2nd century at the earliest whereas the Biblical Gospels were written in the 1st century by the Apostles and their close associates. For example, Basilides (died 140 AD), held to be the first great Gnostic theologian, is the first recorded exponent of the view that someone else died on the cross other than Jesus. He claimed to have received this teaching from a secret tradition going back to the Apostle Peter, but he offers no documentary evidence to support this claim.

Also, the tenor of Gnosticism is not strictly tied to a historical worldview. Gnostic religions are based on the private revelations supposedly given to charismatic individuals that are then passed on secretly to a select few. They consciously do not base themselves on events that are publicly verifiable. They are secretive and elitist. They do not expose themselves to public scrutiny. The Biblical gospels, however, as well as Paul’s writings are consciously historical in that they claim to be publicly verifiable. Luke 1:1-4; John 19:35; 21:24,25; Acts 26:25,26; 1 Corinthians 15:3-8 are all statements that the biblical records of Jesus’ life, death, and resurrection were historically verifiable when they were written.

The Gnostic accounts also are not confirmed by non-Gnostic and non-Christian historical sources such as Roman and Jewish histories. The biblical Gospels, however, are confirmed by these non-Christian histories.

How about Deepak, he’s a really smart guy, much smarter than
me. I know he has a scientific background (MD?). Tell him I’m
I’ll stick to science, not faith based stuff, we’ll just debate
evolution from the scientific perspective.
Surely he can “enlighten” me. Maybe he can connect me with
my “inner self” and than I can let go of all this logic, probability
and other scientific stuff and be brainwashed into his Twilight
Zone.

Trevor, the frustrating things about these blogs is
everything is recorded above…. It might help to reread it
using a little objectivity, I know everything to you is
subjective which makes it difficult to detemine if you
are sane or not…

There are not ransitional life forms within the fossil
record! Show me one legitimate transitional life form between
any species… Don’t waste your time because their are
none!
And don’t give me Lucy, Pilt down man or any of the others,
none of them reveal any conclusive evidence that they were
man’s predecessors. In fact many were determined to be flat
out hoaxes.
I’m asking for true transitional life forms. Species with half of
a wing or legs, then put that in context with Darwins
“survival of the fittest” theory. How can half of anything
be an advantage to survival? Wouldn’t it only become
an advantage after it is useful??
Oh darn, there I go being logical again!

Trevor, if this discussion was happening a few hundred
years ago, you would be trying to tell me the earth is flat…
Because all the smart people say it is!

Therein lies your straw man…

You need to get out and read and stop just staring at the
stars and drawing from your “inner self”. Your an easy
opponent for debate. I’ve had much better and you
never even got started!

Let’s face it Trevor, you and Deepak ar selling snake oil.

the majority of intelligent people on earth will call you
charlatans.

And you have no case!

I am not being evasive by siding with scientific teaching and refusing to
give you a high school biology lesson. The burden of proof lies with you
because you disagree with a prominent scientific theory.
It is up to you to provide evidence for why you think scientists are wrong.
That’s the way science works. It gets tested, and tested, and tested again.
When new information is brought forth, it is tested. When things are shown
to be true, it adds to the data that shapes the theory. There is a mountain
of evidence in support of evolution. If you have something to add, science
would surely love to hear it. Science is not based off of a set system of
beliefs as you are, and they are willing to change if contrary information is
presented that passes the tests.

It is laughable that you say I back tracked by telling you the fundamentals of
evolution. YES, all of my “evolution believers” will agree that evolution doesn’t
bother with telling you how things got started. I never said otherwise, so get
over your backtracking statement. Those that say otherwise have no clue what
they are talking about. It seems you have no idea what evolution really is or
else you wouldn’t make such a statement. The earliest science currently goes
back is the big bang. The moment AFTER it started. They have nothing to say
about what started it, or what was going on before it because it’s not currently
viewable or testable. It’s the same thing with life on this planet. Science doesn’t
know how life came to this planet. But we have fossil records of what happened
to these lifeforms AFTER they appeared. We can trace human lineage back
250,000 years. That is when homo sapiens first appeared. Here’s a nice link
to where we came from and what we evolved out of:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_evolution

It is hilarious to me that you speak of empirical proof, yet you outed yourself
as a Creationist Christian who thinks humans poofed into existence 6,000
years ago, and believes in fairy tale creatures and invisible men in the sky.
You have lost ALL credibility with that statement. I wonder, do you
hold the same skepticism when you look at your religion? Who am I kidding,
we both know you don’t. If you did, you would see Christianity is no different
than every other religion.

Again, it is not my place to provide you with proof. Pick up a science book.
Do you actually think you know more on this topic than people who got their
degrees in this and do it for a living? My side is very secure. People who
accept evolution occurs are the smartest people on the planet.

Albert Einstein, Carl Sagan, Stephen Hawking, Richard Dawkins, Deepak Chopra

and…. the majority of intelligent people on Earth.

I rest my case.

The only point you make is the microbial goo, and then you backtrack
on the veracity of evolution by now saying it doesn’t explain the origin
of life just that life changes over time. How many of your fellow
evolution believers agree with that? But then, you are all entitled to your
own versions of reality right? Well maybe we now need to start with how
life did originate? Your ideology based on observable facts, science
and your “inner self” should know that, right?

Okay, here’s a quote I pulled from an evolutionary scientist;
pre-probability that intelligent life should evolve is thus –
10^52/10^1204 = 10^(-1152).
Do you know how improbable this is Trevor? It is so improbable
that evolutionary scientists know they have a serious problem.
they realize that they can no longer keep extending the age of
the earth back far enough that this number can be even
remotely possible. Instead they have recently come up with
a new “theory”, It’s called “punctuated equilibrium”. The idea
that somehow, some way, conditions came about where
life forms suddenly appeared and/or mutated to more
complex forms. Unfortunately, to accept this point injects
“religion” into scientific theory. It does because you then
have to have “faith” that conditions were different from
what we currently observe with no empirical proof to
support it…

But then, I proposed we argue without including religious
arguments… So, what say you?

Trevor, you are losing credibility here. I’ll be happy to change the subject
but would first like you to prove your assertions. You always claim that your
beliefs are based on the observable and scientific facts. I’m simply giving
you the opportunity to convince me of it and all you can do is tell me I’m
outnumbered and therefore I’m wrong?

I would love to take on your last statement as it can be shot down
with high school logic. I won’t because it will only let you off the
hook on my challenge to debate the issue.

I’m still waiting for you to give me proof although it’s clear I better not
hold my breath.

And by the way, I don’t need you to teach me high school biology.
I would like you to at least prove you understand the issue at that
level. You can’t win an argument by

You claim “the virus mutations thing is BS.” Okay, what evidence do
you have that it is so? This is something that we can currently observe.
Please tell me how it is wrong.

Evolution doesn’t set out to explain how something came from nothing.
It is an explanation for how life changes over time. That is all.

“Our evidence shows that just about everything in the universe evolves.”

Reveal to me your evidence! You can’t debate a topic by making
statements like this. I heard this in my high school science class.

This is your opportunity to bring me over to your side! Does
evolution have a “99.99% probability of being correct”?
If so you should be able to hammer me with proof.
Give me one, something I can respond to.

Do you have any idea what it takes to become a scientific
theory? Theory is not some word to be thrown around lightly.
It’s different than your average Joe’s “theory” on why his water
tastes like crap. A fact is something that can be proven 100%. That
is something we cannot do. If you do not understand, I will be
more than happy to tell you why. We can rule out possibilities though
and say with 99.99% probability that something is correct. Science
does not make absolutes. Only that this is what the evidence shows.

Our evidence shows that just about everything in the universe evolves.
From the smallest microbe to the largest animal. It usually takes
thousands is not millions of years however. There are certain types of
organisms that evolve very quickly though. Check out viruses. They are
constantly evolving which is why we need to keep making new vaccines.
The viruses adapt and evolve into new strands that are no longer killed off
by our medicine. It’s the way nature works.

Evolution is so well documented that many are starting to refer to it as
scientific fact. Again, I don’t use the word fact, but the outcome is the same.
The only thing up for debate is the reasons why evolution happens and the
exact mechanisms that trigger and control it.

We have a theory about gravity too. If it were proven wrong someday,
that doesn’t mean gravity doesn’t exist. Just our understanding of how
it works.

You think evolution is a fact? no longer a theory, huh?

You go first. no rhetoric or baseless assertions. make you best
case to support your belief that evolution is no longer a theory,
but fact and I will respond to each point… No changing the
subject, no mystical stuff, no theory, NO RELIGION!
I’ll even make you a bet… You will be the first to revert to a
religious argument.
I promise I will stick to pure science. You game?
Then, make your case….

These were all strongly believed at the time. What changed? People
got smarter. We realized that fire in the sky isn’t the god Ra, but a star
that our planet circles. That noise in the sky isn’t Thor but shock waves
of air cooling and contracting. That wasn’t Zeus that smote you, but
lightning which is caused by heat and electricity in the atmosphere.
Neptune didn’t doom your father, Aphrodite didn’t cause you to fall in love,
and Satan did not make me kill anyone because they don’t exist.

Superstitious fairy tales created by primitive man so they wouldn’t be
so scared at night.

You seemed to have missed the point. Wiping religion from the world
would mean that your Christian beliefs would never return. But people,
by nature, seek to understand the world around them, and what they
don’t understand, they will manufacture ways that help explain it to them.

My school of thought is based on scientific observation of the world and a
inner knowing of your true self. This does not need to be taught, and has
been prevalent in all human cultures since the beginning. If you were to
wipe mine and Deepak’s mind clean, we would both come back to this.
It’s inevitable.

Religion dies when enough people stop believing in it.

Oh, and I’m not speaking for Einstein. His ideas are very clearly presented.
He thinks religion is childish, and does not believe in your god.

These aren’t my words, but his.

Guess he is rotting in hell, huh?

I see a problem of logic in your last statement (we agree logic is science?)…. If you hold
to that truth it logically follows that religiosity has been a false thought process with man from
the very beginning. If man were created suddenly, as I believe, someone or thing infused the
original idea of it into him or he came upon it himself. If he has evolved, it was either given
to him or he came upon it himself. More simply, how did we get this idea of religion in the
first place. If it is so foreign than we did not come up with it and therefore if you could erase
it the same method of bringing it back would be repeated (He who put it there still exists).
If we were born with the notion, it could be erased but the next generation would still have it,
and you could then only presume that man is inherrantly irrational, which would leave you
to question the validity of your own assertion???
My question to you would be first, Have I missed another option,
and if not, which way do you see it happening?

Historical Jesus does not equal Biblical Jesus. In case you missed that.

It’s funny how you keep claiming Einstein and people like me “struggle with
the issue of good and evil.” We couldn’t be more at ease with the whole idea.
It seems you are struggling to comprehend what we are talking about and trying
to justify it by searching for an outside source. God, Jesus, Satan, whatever.

If religion were wiped clean from the Earth, and our memories erased of it,
by beliefs would still be the same. Yours would not. Therein lies your fault.

Einstein also had these answers to these questions in an interview..

“To what extent are you influenced by Christianity?”
“As a child I received instruction both in the Bible and in the Talmud. I am a Jew, but I am
enthralled by the luminous figure of the Nazarene.”

“Have you read Emil Ludwig’s book on Jesus?”

“Emil Ludwig’s Jesus is shallow. Jesus is too colossal for the pen of phrasemongers,
however artful. No man can dispose of Christianity with a bon mot.”

“You accept the historical Jesus?”

“Unquestionably! No one can read the Gospels without feeling the actual presence of Jesus.
His personality pulsates in every word. No myth is filled with such life.”

He like many others however seem to struggle with the issue of good and evil. Accepting
the premise that a creator God exists. I maintain then that to recognize such
an emmensely powerful entity and personality, one has conclude that he can not be
a bystander on the issue of good and evil. The Jew and Christian have the answer
to this, He cares! He created man to be a love object. To express love one must have the
free will to choose to return it. In doing so, evil became a necessary alternative.

“I do not believe in the God of theology who rewards good and punishes evil.”
— Albert Einstein

and more importantly…

“I believe in Spinoza’s God, who reveals himself in the harmony of all being”.
— Albert Einstein

For reference, Spinoza was a pantheist.
(Greek: πάν (pan) = all and θεός (theos) = God, literally “God is all” -ism)

It’s basically a rough description of what I have been describing.

I maintain that one can hypothesize with material explanations of how this world came
in to being, and how it all works…. But the difficulty becomes, how one explains the soul
or whatever you feel comfortable calling it. Although under the microscope the building
blocks of life have all the same mechanics, there is an element to our existence,
our consiousness, that cannot be explained by attempting to understand the material world.
I would be curious to know if Einstein has wrestled with this dilemma in any of his
writings?

“The word God is for me nothing more than the expression and product of
human weaknesses, the Bible a collection of honourable, but still primitive
legends which are nevertheless pretty childish. No interpretation no matter
how subtle can (for me) change this. These subtilised interpretations are
highly manifold according to their nature and have almost nothing to do with
the original text. For me the Jewish religion like all other religions is an
incarnation of the most childish superstitions. And the Jewish people to whom
I gladly belong and with whose mentality I have a deep affinity have no different
quality for me than all other people. As far as my experience goes, they are also
no better than other human groups, although they are protected from the worst
cancers by a lack of power. Otherwise I cannot see anything ‘chosen’ about them. ”
– Albert Einstein

and…..

“A human being is a part of a whole, called by us “universe”, a part limited in
time and space. He experiences himself, his thoughts and feelings as something
separated from the rest… a kind of optical delusion of his consciousness.
This delusion is a kind of prison for us, restricting us to our personal desires and
to affection for a few persons nearest to us. Our task must be to free ourselves
from this prison by widening our circle of compassion to embrace all living
creatures and the whole of nature in its beauty.” — Albert Einstein

You’re not smarter than Einstein, are you???

Just having some fun, don’t take that too seriously.

“What is real? How do you define real? If you are talking about your senses,
what you feel, taste, smell, or see, then all you’re talking about are electrical
signals interpreted by your brain.”

Through Quantum Physics, science has proven what mystics have known for
thousands of years. The material world is an illusion.

Jesus, Buddha, Mohammad, and all other Prophets speak about the same
thing. See the similarities and you will see the interconnectedness of it all, and
you will see the truth.

Be still and know that I am god.

Who said that? Give up? Buddha maybe?
Jesus? It’s actually a school of thought that both taught, but you may recall
reading it in your bible.

When Jesus was alive, the art of being still, or stillness, is what in today’s world
we call meditation. He was giving instructions on how each person can realize
their true nature. This was a teacher telling his students how to meditate.
Modern day meditation teaches you to be still, and meditate on a specific word
or idea. Buddhists use “Om” because they believe it mimics the sound and
frequency that universe vibrates at. They do this in order to achieve oneness
with their surroundings.

If I were teaching you, and I said “Be still and know that I am god.” I’m not telling
you to shut up and worship me. I’m tell you to clear your mind and realize YOU
are god. You are acknowledging your connection with everything.

Although, It is impossible to touch, smell, feel, or see God, I believe he can be proven
much in the sense that one can prove a persons guilt or innocence in a court of law.
Most believe men landed on the moon, that the earth is round, and that countries we
have never visited still exist. We draw those conclusions on the evidence available to us
and it is rational and reasonable to reach those conclusions. I have come to find that the
same is true with the biblical God. He has given a glimpse of himself in nature, in his
book, the bible, and speaks to us through our conscience, a profound sense that the world
is not as it should be. Man throughout history has searched for nirvana, utopia, eternity, a
world without war and has has done so for a reason. The reason is is because this is the
plan He had for this world and he has instilled this in us. Man, through his idea of making
his way without Him has made a mess of it. Giving man free will, and in so doing rendered
him a “person” and not a machine, He knew many would choose this path. To those who seek
Him he has provided a way back through the gift of his Son, Jesus Christ.

The material world is an illusion. Everything you see is made up of
molecules shooting around and bouncing off each other. They flash
in and out of existence at the speed of light. If you were to examine your
skin under a microscope, you would start to see the tiny pieces that make
up the whole. If you go further, you would see the enormous gaps in between
these atoms. Protons and electrons flying all over the place in a seemingly
endless void. However, when we look at these from the human viewpoint,
we see a solid form. We exist in a sea of molecules. It is only our nervous
system that decodes this information so that we may see material forms.
When these molecules blink back and forth in and out of existence, where do
they go?

In this sea of energy that is our universe, everything is touching. Everything
is part of everything. Separation is an illusion created by your mind so that
we may view the physical world. Material is immaterial. So, in essence,
God is everything, but also nothing. If everything exists as one, local is
meaningless. God is everywhere, which is also nowhere.

Omnipresence: the property of being present everywhere.

Omniscience: the capacity to know everything infinitely.

God is everywhere because everywhere is God.

God knows all because all is God.

There are no rules. There are no guidelines.

God is everywhere and nowhere. God is everything and nothing.
Lift up that rock, you will find god. Without evil there could be no
good, so it must be good to be evil sometime. Everything exists out of
necessity. Cause and effect. All is needed. All is divine.

God is within you, and you are within god. You are one and the same.
You are choosing to view this at the moment through the illusion known
as Dale.

It’s like you were taking a test where you aced the first half, and then gave
up thinking on the second half and just “christmas tree’d” it.

I’m sorry you find my reality depressing. It’s very free and liberating, and
I’m a pretty happy fellow.

Well, I now understand you and if so we I will agree that you have no logical
flaw in your ideological position.
It is a most depressing reality however.. To come to a conclusion that we
are left with no method to avoid the emense human tragedy that occurs in
our world and throughout history. As you already know I can not accept this
reality. Killing out of selfish convenience is wrong, I will not accept rape,
incest, murder, thievery, extortion as acts subject to a person’s personal
gratification. What you speak of is not love, it is not virtuous. I conclude it
is a ideological refuge for scoundrels (sorry).

I continue to reject your biblical scholarship, but there is not enough time or
room in this blog to refute your assertions.

Your views are definitely similar to Darwins, to survive in it one can only hope
to be the “fittest”. It is a worls without objective purpose.. My postiton
of absolutism can be argued from the natural as well…
There is unmistakable purpose within nature. The balance that sustains life
here on earth is curiously narrow. It cannot be explained by evolutionary
processes. No scientist can make progress in his field by ignoring
the two laws of thermodynamics. Entropy is diametrically opposed to
the mechanics of evolution. Energy (which is also matter) is not
increasing in complexity. Half of an eye, half of a wing are not advantages
to life forms, they are disadvantages. The soul of man can not be explained
materially, What makes man wonder and wrestle with these difficult
issues? Why should we care about where we came from? these notions
are not just products of higher intelligence. I maintain that we are created as
the bible teaches in our Creator’s image. We yearn for relationship and Love
because He does. We search for truth, because He is truth. And westruggle
for justice because He has instilled it in us.
There is a God, He has purpose and it is illogical to accept that he would not
make Himself known to those who search… I maintain He has. The story
is recorded in the Bible. And he walked wit us in the form of a man,
Jesus Christ, and in His time will judge evil and bring about a world
without evil. Those who accept his way of salvation will be spared the
penalty of their transgressions. Those who don’t will be judged and
punished.. It really is that simple..

On to your Hitler question, Hitler believed he was doing what was best for humanity.
He also believed he was doing gods will. His belief structure is actually highly defendable
if you choose to. He was set to create a better breed of human, the exact same way
you would breed horses. Horse breeders go to great extent keep the blood line
“pure” and they will only breed with other horses of the same make and they must
also be in great shape. It is a proven fact that these “pure-blood” horses perform
better than those of mixed breeds that breed with any horse that comes their way.
Hitler wanted this for the human race. He thought that by getting the smartest,
strongest, and healthiest people to breed with each other, he could create a
master race.

Society has judged Hitler as being evil for what he did. The most important thing to
realize though, is that he thought he was doing good. No one ever thinks that
they are evil or doing wrong. They are doing what makes sense to them.

Back to the religious stuff, the burden of proof lies with your side. I could make
only one argument, and still win. The world does not work that way. Until you can
prove that there are invisible men in the sky, or that some evil devil guy is
creating all the bad stuff in the world, you cannot win. I know a guy right now
that can turn water into wine, walk on water, and even make the Statue of
Liberty disappear. His name is David Copperfield, and he’s a magician. An
illusionist. It’s fantasy and nothing more.

Why don’t you believe in any other religion? They all have documentation, and
witnesses, testimony, and people who have suffered? I will tell you this, the same
reason you discount every other religion in the world is the same reason I discount
yours.

Now excuse me while I go pray to David Blaine.

“I am trying here to prevent anyone saying the really foolish thing that people often say about Him:
“I’m ready to accept Jesus as a great moral teacher, but I don’t accept His claim to be God.”
That is the one thing we must not say. A man who said the sort of things Jesus said would not
be a great moral teacher. He would either be a lunatic — on a level with the man who says he
is a poached egg — or else he would be the Devil of Hell. You must make your choice. Either this man was, and is, the Son of God: or else a madman or something worse. You can shut Him up for a fool,
you can spit at Him and kill Him as a demon; or you can fall at His feet and call Him Lord and God. But let us not come with any patronizing nonsense about His being a great human teacher. He has not left
that open to us. He did not intend to.”
On the logic question, it’s possible I misunderstood you. I posed the dilemma on how one can
reject Hitler’s set of values, which led to the Holocaust. You continually maintain that
one person’s views are no more valid than another’s. Perhaps you are willing to accept
this predictable outcome in holding this belief. My absolutist ideology maintains that
an objective standard (Provided by a creator God) would provide a person with the tools to
reject it and in the case that enough people, perhaps including Hitler, accept this as
true, the holocaust would not have occured. Now as long as you accept this predictable
outcome, you have no logical dilemma.
So then, my question to you would be. do you in fact accept this predictable outcome, and
if not explain logically how I am wrong?

Having one Indian family in your church does not ‘shoot holes’ in my argument.
With any statistic, there are always outliers. It’s obvious that not everyone keeps
the religion of their parents, although the vast majority do, without question. That
is the point. Congratulations on not blindly following your parents religion, and
choosing one for yourself.

I would like to hear what logical problems you perceive my “side” to have. Why is it
so hard for you to consider that people sometimes kill others out of convenience as
you say? Watch some mafia movies and you’ll see it’s filled with incidents like this.

I never said their weren’t any absolutes, as that would be an absolute statement in
itself. I will defend the argument that you don’t need an outside authority to tell you
how you should feel, and that people are capable of making up their own minds.

Religion exists as a form of control. To control your mind and behaviors. Most religions
do this out of fear of punishment. Whether it be Hell or Purgatory or being reincarnated
as a roach. It’s one of the most basic forms to attain obedience. Any religion that
uses fear is false and not worth your time.

When discussing the agenda’s of the writers of the bible, I’m not referring to John,
Matthew, Mark, Luke, etc. I’m referring to the Council of Nicea where they actually
decided what stories were going to be put into this bible, and which did not fit
their vision of it. The Gospel of Thomas was one of these that did not make it in.
Like you mentioned with the others, this was written by one of Jesus’ followers.
He had no agenda, he just wrote down what he saw. Yet it was not included.
Why? Because it spoke of a mortal Jesus who did not perform magic tricks, and
spoke of our universal connection with god.

The best part about this, is that the original documents were discovered, unchanged
since it was written (unlike the bible). We got the chance to see what unaltered
history looked like, and it painted a much different picture.

Do I have an agenda? Of course! That’s why I am here.

Look, my beliefs are rarely convenient in my life. Curiously I would be considered by most to be
successful in my career. I hold a senior level management position having no more than
a high school diploma. I consider myself to have average intelligence proven by my mediocre
acedemic history. I make a six figure salary and answer directly to the ownership of
my company. I remember my first promotion to a management position. The very next day
I was directed to pursue a course of action that was contrary to my views on moral
grounds. It wan’t received well when I told my superior I could not do it. I told my wife that night
my promotion would be shortlived. For some reason I was not relieved and have continued
to be promoted??

I have never been a joiner. I Didn’t want to accept a perceived “religion” that would and did cause
seperation from friends and family. I was compelled knowing that I had reached an intellectual
conclusion that I could not ignore. In difficult time I have to remind myself constantly that
God has promised to honor decisions I make to please him and I find my security only in
that.

I share this with humility. I have know reason to feel proud.
My nature is to blend in with society. I find it uncomfortable to take unpopular positions with
people that I must associate with.

“People who wrote the bible had an agenda”…? This was one of the issues I struggled
with during my investigation of the facts. I discovered that most of the writers and early
desciples lived a a relatively poor and selfless lifestyle. Many then were persecuted
and even killed for their belief in Christ, Peter was crucified upside down.
I learned that these stories were documented by early non-Christian
historians. they were historical facts, not just recorded in the Bible. I could not ignore
the notion that people with these “agendas” do not choose to suffer and die for them.

Interestingly, in my church this weekend sat a family of East Indians,
in traditional clothing, worshipping the God of the Jews. They were abviously
born in the land of Hinduism.. Their testimony shoots holes in you –
“Gods of our Fathers” argument.

Your representation of ideas appears to reveals an agenda of your own.

Your entire fist paragraph was meaningless Christian propaganda that
was brainwashed into you when you were young, and are now regurgitating.

People don’t need a savior. There is nothing to be saved from. No boogieman
is going to get you. There is no cosmic mind reading zombie that is keeping
track of your dirty deeds.

The bible has not stood the test of time, and stating that it has does not make it
true. For centuries, its contradictions and falsities have been pointed out by
the intelligent minds of the time. You hinted at your own answer when you said
“gnostic gospel was not accepted as Holy Scripture for a reason.” You’re exactly
right. The PEOPLE that created the bible did not include it because it refuted the
agenda that they were trying to set forth. These include topics such as Jesus being
no different than any other man, and not the one and only son of god. His sexual
relationship with Mary Magdalene. And the inseparability of all things, and the true
nature of god, among many other topics.

Your next comment again, you did the work for me. What kind of God would that be
if his message was misunderstood because we know everyone got it right? Right!?
Thank you for proving my point.

My line of thinking has been around longer than your religion, and it will be around
much longer as well. I wonder if the skepticism you hold towards other beliefs
is the same you hold to yours. After all, it is most likely you were born to Christian
parents. If you had been born in India, you would probably be Hindu. You are
just falling into the “Godsof Our Fathers” argument. You believe what you do
because that’s how you were raised.

It’s time to think for yourself.

The Bible has stood the test of time and scholarship. Your gnostic
gospel was not accepted as Holy Scripture for a reason.

Jesus (God) did not become a man to be “misunderstood by
“simple farmers”. What kind of God and savior would that be?
Read the Beatitudes…

And I say in 2000 years your relativism will be just another speck of sand in the
dustheap of history. I’m sure by then there will no longer be
the opportunity to convince people otherwise.

If you’re asking what are the implications of “Looking for a new Christianity,” then I would say
it’s just another step humanity’s search for understanding. It is inevitable that all religions
die. It is why we no longer worship Zeus and the Olympians or Ra the Sun God. In their
time, these were real entities part of the daily life in the Greek and Egyptian cultures. All
that happened was someone else came into power that believed something different.
Nothing drastic happened to the people, they just stopped believing and found something
that better suit their lifestyle and beliefs.

In another two thousand years, I don’t Christianity will exist in the same form that it does
today. Jesus wasn’t the first to realize his true nature and try to share it with others. He
just may be the most famous because of how he was killed. This may sound strange to
you, but Buddha and Jesus were talking about the same thing. This goes back to my
earlier comment on how two people will try to teach the same thing and do it in completely
different ways.

Both left society for awhile in order to find themselves. Only when they were alone and their
minds were quiet were they able to become who they were.

Deepak mentions the Gnostic gospels in his post above. Check out the Gospel of Thomas:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gospel_of_Thomas . “In Thomas v.3, Jesus says,

…the Kingdom of God is inside of you, and it is outside of you. When you come to
know yourselves, then you will become known, and you will realize that it is you who
are the sons of the living Father. But if you will not know yourselves, you dwell in
poverty, and it is you who are that poverty. ”

That is straight up Buddhist teaching, but Buddha didn’t say it, Jesus did.

What the Gnostic gospels will show you is how easily people misinterpreted what Jesus
said. It’s not the Jesus was wrong, it’s that he spoke in metaphor to describe the
indescribable, and it went way over the heads of the simple farmers of the time.

Religion attempts to take abstract ideas, and turn them into absolutes in order to
control followers. It’s a business. Jesus didn’t need religion, and neither do you.

Your understanding of the true nature of god is what I question.

We Christians may be wrong… That we are the victims of a cruel joke…
Deepak help us all if this is the case!

Right from the very you start you begin with placing the decision on something else.
“God’s truth.” That is your first mistake. Truth is self evident. Perhaps you’ve heard the
phrase “Nature is red in tooth and claw.” Killing happens all the time in nature. It is
neither good nor bad. It just is. Most creatures kill for food and survival, some for
pleasure or sport.

What makes an experience good or bad is up to the individual, not some divine doctrine.
What might be good for me, could be terrible for you. Any example you can think of,
can be justly viewed from the opposite side as well. You don’t need a book or anyone
else to tell you how you should feel in a given circumstance. You know what is
right and wrong for you. Follow that and stop worrying how to appease some
invisible man in the clouds that you’ve never met.

Is killing right or wrong? With your Absolute Truth, this should be an easy one.

I agree with you completely with you! Feels good to relate to someone.

First off, before I forget I really would like to connect with the female Hispanic woman. I am a single mother of two and I feel so much like you it is unreal! I thought about the writer name Steven and whether or not I should respond since something inside me wants to but after digesting it for a while, I have decided not to elaborate on it too much. Why? Because it shows no consideration for people that believe and think differently, believe in it in my way or go to hell. I truly believe that the path of spirituality is not one path, there are many ways to experiencing and understanding God. Now, back to the women I was speaking of. I know what it feels like to be lonely in your understanding of God. But that does not mean that you don’t know him. Keep claiming understanding and the answers will find you. That is what happened to me. In MY experience, I have a much stronger and more meaningful relationship with God without being a Christian. I completely respect someone who has that with Christianity.

Look, I have been a follower of Christ for 25 years, I’m 34 now. But I have experienced the one true God and strive to serve Him, not myself, everyday. Thankfully, His grace saves me, because I screw-up every single day. Following Christ is a journey and a struggle, but thankfully, I live with purpose, hope, and peace. I pain for those who live without hope. Please, don’t waterdown the bible or change it to fit what you think your needs are. Accept it for what it is, the Word of God.