That's total NONSENSE!!!

iF God is a female, She would've never instituted the Sexual Discriminatiion into the human affairs!!!

I'm sorry but what you say here makes no sense at all. According to this particular gospel in John Chapter 10, this was Jesus' response to acusations of blaspheme. The very context of the situation demands that he was implying that all men are equally God every bit as much as he was claiming to be God.

This supports my conjecture that Jesus was indeed a Buddhist who had a pantheistic view of life and God.

So I see no merit in your objection. It appears to me that you simply aren't open to the possibility that the standard Christian view might actually be wrong. I can certainly understand that. But to suggest that the word "god" in this verse merely refers to mortals in positions of power or authority simply doesn't fit in with the context in which it was used.

Your usual valid nonsense is just that.Your so called facts and understanding of the bible is so misunderstood that anyone who knows the gosepel can see right through it.Cleaver ways to distort truth nothing more.Lies always change that's why they are lies.The truth is always the same.

John 10:34

New Living Translation

Jesus replied, "It is written in your own Scriptures that God said to certain leaders of the people, 'I say, you are gods!'

From http://www.ronrhodes.org/qmanbecomegod.html

Jesus is alluding to Psalm 82 where human judges are called "gods," and His reasoning communicates the following idea: "If God even called human judges 'gods' (with a small 'g'), then how much more is it appropriate that I call myself the Son of God." Keep in mind that Christ had just pronounced Himself one with the Father saying, "I and My Father are one" (10:30). The Jews wanted to stone Him because they thought Christ was blaspheming, making Himself out to be equal with God (vv. 3133). Jesus responded by quoting Psalm 82:6 (a verse dealing with human judges) which says, "I said, you are gods." So, Jesus reasoned, if human judges could be called "gods" (with a small 'g'), then why can't the Son of God be called "God."

Third, these judges were "gods" in the sense that they stood in God place, judging over life and death matters. They were not called "gods" because they were actually divine beings. Indeed, the text Jesus cites (Ps. 82) also goes on to say that these judges were "mere men" and would "die" (v. 7).

Fourth, it is possible, as many scholars believe, that when the psalmist Asaph said "You are gods" of the unjust judges in Psalm 82, he was speaking in irony. He indicated to these judges (who had apparently become unjust in their dealings with men), "I have called you 'gods,' but in fact you will die like the men that you really are." If this is so, then when Jesus alluded to this psalm in John 10, He was saying that what the Israelite judges were called in irony and in judgment, He is in reality.

In any event, it is clear that Jesus in this passage was giving a defense for His own deity, not for the deification of man.



Concerning Judas...

In the New testament there is often different accounts on one event because the people giving testomony give details differently by the way they remember them.One person may concentrate on specifics while the other person may concentrate on the whole picture.Either account gives the same picture with different details.Does it matter if one person ran faster than the other to the tomb?The point is both persons were running to the tomb.


Who is to say either verse is wrong?If the bible says Judas bought a field,then I believe he did.If that same verse says he fell and his intestines fell out is he lying?Did he say he Judas died?He did not say he died.Did he spend all of his money on this field?He does not say.I think it is totally pausable that Judas fell,was severly injured,felt great remorse and cursed by God,took what bribe money back to the temple,and then hanged himself.


Jesus never taught opposing morals from the Old testament.Where you are getting that from is beyond me and you need to post bible verses backing up your claim.


Jesus did not have a anything to do at all with Buddah!Jesus never taught anything relating to any other religion.Nor did he ever daily meditate,chant,worship idols,or call the names of any other Gods.He only spoke to God.He only preached the Old testament.These are the facts.He also said not to worship other religions or to associate with other religions.Buddah,Allah,and all the others are DEAD!Jesus is not dead.All those other religions teach that you alone can get to heaven.Only Christianity teaches you that you can not get to heaven alone.

Jesus was not crucified for blasphemy.He was never found guilty of a crime.It was God's wish and his alone for Jesus to die for our sins.

John 18-38

"What is truth?" Pilate asked. With this he went out again to the Jews and said, "I find no basis for a charge against him.

In the Gospel of Matthew (27:24), before condemning Jesus to death, Pilate washes his hands with water in front of the crowd, who had demanded that Jesus be crucified, and says, "I am innocent of this man's blood; you will see".

Well, there you go! Even Pilate agrees with me. There was no basis for the charges against Jesus. And the crowd was charging Jesus with Blaspheme. So even Pilate recognized that Jesus was not claiming to be "God" in the way that the Christians demand. And he was THERE and actually spoke with Jesus!

So this just further supports my conjecture. Thanks for pointing that out.

What point???You said he was crucified for blasphemy.Read you own post.The crowd charged Jesus with Blaspheme not Pilate.Pilate could have set Jesus free no matter what the crowd said.He had all the power(including the Roman army)to do what ever he wanted.It was not the crowd the crucified Jesus it was a order from Pilate.Pilate said he was not guilty.Furthermore Jesus had followers in the tens of thousands and if he gave the word he could have easily overthrown Rome and anyone else that got in his way.Jesus also saw this whole event before it even happened and asked God "to let this cup of poison pass me".You fail to reconize that it was always Gods will to sacrifice Jesus for payment for our sins.It was Jesus's will to die doing Gods wishes.


Your double standard is truly amazing.One mintue you are huffing and puffing about how the bible is false,made up and blah blah blah.Then next you are quoting bible verses using the very book to defend your actions.Make up your mind.If you believe the bible is true then stop saying it is made up and false.If you keep blabbing it is false then stop being a hypocrite and using bible verse to back up your theories.

You've just pointed out even more inconsistencies in the story. Inconsistencies that I've always been aware of. Even the Gospels have Jesus not understanding "God's will". This totally conflicts with the concept that "I and the Father are one". This is why the story, as the authors of the Bible portray, it makes absolutely no sense at all.



No, not at all. I simply view the book as a form of human rumors and religious propaganda. That makes it a very valid topic to comment on, especially since the book is claiming to speak for creator of all humans. Well, I'm a human and that gives me every right to comment on how utterly absurd the story is.

You talk about double standards, but that's precisely what Christianity always does when it comes to the Bible. On the one hand they want to claim that the book is the word of the creator of all mankind, but then on the other hand they flatly reject any human who refuses to believe it and claim that such humans have no right to comment on the book then.

That's a double standard my friend!

The book itself is claiming to speak for "My Creator" (the creator of all humans), that gives me every right to comment on why I believe the book is absurd. Every human has a right to comment on this book. The authors of the book opened that door when they decided to claim that they are speaking for the creator of all mankind.

In fact, Christians drive this home with their constant proselytizing schemes and evangelism. As long as they continue to harp on the idea that the book is written by EVERYONE's creator, then they have opened the door for EVERYONE to comment on the book.

So there is nothing at all hypocritical in my actions. However, if you claim to be a Christian and you're judging me to be a hypocrite, then what does that say about you?

You may say this book is absurd but your posts and responses tell me otherwise.You fight tooth and nail and spend a great deal of time with your head in this book you think is basically worthless.You obviously don't believe it.You tell people all the time it is made up.So myself and probably many people in here have to keep wondering why you are wasting your time debating these topics?What is the point?If you believe there is no God and no Jesus is there any reason to keep using the bible for your arguments?Isn't that like standing in a empty room and saying there is people in there to a bunch of Atheist?Is there any reason at all you can't use something other than the bible and Christianity for your debates?If God does not exist and all the Christians left the planet what who would you rant and rave against?

Once again you are not making any sense about God being the creator.YOU DO NOT BELIEVE IT!Why do you care about what God has to say if it doesn't affect you?God doesn't talk to you,he doesn't tell you what to do,he has ZERO effect in your life.Yet your telling me that because people believe in God it is somehow getting in the way of your life.How does someone believing in God effect your life?Atheist can live a full life with out hearing a single word from the Bible.I don't believe in any of the other religions.You think I have the slightest idea what they believe in?I don't.I have no intentions of even debating them.I know their book is false and there is no reason to debate it.

And everyone has a right to their own opinion.You don't have to believe it but what people believe is there own business.

You think judging a persons actions are wrong?The entire book of the bible speaks about the difference between good and evil,who you should be friends with and who you should avoid.You don't learn those traits by sticking your head in the sand.You judge a person by their actions and it is what the bible tells us to do.You don't judge assuming as Jesus told us not to.

Thomas,

With all due respect you have no clue what you are taking about in your assumptions and presumptions about me and my motivations for posting what I post. You suggest that I don't believe in God, but that's a total misconception on your part. Just because I reject the Biblical version of God does not mean that I don't believe in a God. I just don't believe in bloodthirsty Zeus-like mythologies or Jealous egotistical godheads as being a valid picture of God.

The Old Testament teaches male chaunvinism, religious intolerance, bigotry against homosexuals, and the list goes on. I don't believe in such a bigoted male chauvinistc picture of God. That doesn't make me an atheist anymore than that the fact that you don't believe in Zeus makes you an atheist.

Actually if I have to choose an archetype to worship as God, I would choose either Wanka Tanka or the Moon Goddess. I thihk they are both quite beautiful archetypes for God. However, as strange as this may seem I actually agree with what Moses wrote in genesis when he suggested that we should not make any graven image of God nor build an altar out of hewn stone nor have any steps leading up to the altar (like almost every Christian Church does).

You can recognize that the Biblial mythology isn't any more valid than Greek Mythology and still believe that there is a God. Just because Zeus wasn't God doesn't mean that there is no God. And the same thing applies to Yahweh.

God is far beyond those manmade images. That's where I'm coming from. I'm not an atheist in the least. That's your own misconception there. But I am extremely tired and fed-up with the idea that the Bible represents the "Word of God". That's the concept that I wholeheartedly reject.

If I could be remembered for something when I die, I would like to be remembered for my contributions toward educating humanity to realize that the biblical picture of God holds no more merit than Greek Mythology.

Yet another contradiction the Bible is full of!

Seems like numerous people, who composed the Book nearly 1400 years ago -- 600 years after the fact -- hasn't bothered to read whatever the previous authors have written!!!

But that doesn't really matter. The church has addopted the text as the main doctrine which ought to be beyond any verification! Those who dare questionning the rationality behind the text are presumed to question "the very word of God"! (again, written in 640 AD, and then very carefully mannually copied for another 1000 years -- until the invention of the printing press -- by various "thorough" people who, no doubt, have never made any omittions, deletions, personal additions and editions, etc. etc. etc.). Besides, people are willingly giving donations to the church. Then HOW CAN ANYBODY REFUSE SUCH A MARVELOUS HOLLY CASH COW? ? ?

Actually, I see nothing wrong in people's studying the way of life of our ancestors! After all, religion is no longer a part of any of the world's governments! As long as it doesn't teach people to revolt agaist the govrnment, WHO CARES? ? ?

thousands of years you mean,,and still noone to prove or DISPROVE His existence,,,,so I guess it will remain left up to faith

--EXACTLY! And nobody has the right of trying to convince the other of being wrong! From that stand-point, this particular topig makes no sense whatsoever!!! Instead of bringing us together, it only divides us into different camps (like a wedge!)

Such personal topigs are better left for the discussions with significant others!!!

I vote for worshiping the sun. Even if you're wrong when you get to hell you'll be accustomed to warmth. It's a win-win. Hehe.

Honestly, though... people believe what they want to believe. Jesus seems neat. I would buy him a beer but the whole water into wine thing makes it pretty redundant.

Sometimes I can understand what would make someone want to sit under a tree for seven years.

Well, that's not exactly true.

While it's true in a general abstract sense where "God" is permitted to be any concept imaginable, it's not true when it comes to mythological gods.

For example, many people feel that Zeus has been proven to be a false image of God because the mythology has him living on Mt. Olympus and it's been shown that no Gods reside on that mountain. (ha ha)

The same is true with the biblical god of Yahweh. He too has been proven to be false. That mythology charges mankind with the accusation of falling from grace from Yahweh and thus brining imperfection, and death into the world. Yet, it's been shown that death and inperfections existed long before mankind ever came onto the scene. Thus the whole basis of the mythology falls flat on its face and had been proven to be false.

So it all depends on what one defins as "God".

As a panetheist I believe that the universe is God, or at least a facet of God. Since it's pretty darn self-evident that the universe exists, then my God has been proven to exist.

So whether or not a particular "god" can be proven or disproved all depends on what attributes have been assigned to that so-called "god". Some Gods can be disproved because they are based on mythologies that can be shown to be false.

the stated 'proof' is rather questionable,,,lol

FOR GOD'S SAKE, msharmony, don't start the whole discussion all over again!!! Be a devoted believer, and let them strike the other cheeck (as Jesus taught)!!!

I am devoted, but I only have two cheeks( this is not the forum for inuendo ,,,lol)

Actually, if you count the bottom ones, everybody have 4 cheecks!

smh,, u HAD to go there,,,,lol

Don't blame me:

you started it with the claim of having Only two cheeks!

I'm sorry...I'll slither back to my hole now.