Why All Major Religions Are True.

The biggest box…

Why all major religions are true, and their teachings valid, and why Christianity is also true which is said to be “the only way” to God. This is not a contradiction.

Dedicated to my atheist friend “Sam”

I have practiced many different religions before settling on the teachings of Christ. They all have this in common. If practiced correctly (which is always as training and guidance and practice with a master or elder. Religion can not be “studied“).

…all lead to “spiritual awareness”, bar none.

However they do not all lead to awareness of the same awareness, or even the same ‘place’. This physical universe is a ‘place’ in which one can live. It is not one that anyone has to live in. Each religion practices very unique methods that go to a unique and specific “place” in the spiritual realm…

…which is an actual place to live in not in any way different from the physical realm which is also just “as spiritual” as any other.

We all are spiritual beings, and your belief can not change this fact. Everything is “spirit“. You can say everything is (this instead), but everything’s “the same” everywhere. What makes things seem to be different?

Your focused attention and interpretation of whatever you are “focussed on”. People report this difference differently.  This doesn’t mean anything.

A good metaphor is a child on Christmas morning rushing into his living room that is alive with flickering lights. He becomes overwhelmed with the splendor, wonder and excitement of the “experience”. As he scans the scene in front of him he spots “THE BIG BOX”. He then “focuses” all his attention on the “biggest box”, and starts towards it to open it.

Now the child is so wrapped up in the contents of “the big box” he has forgotten that there are “other boxes” under the tree to open…

You are focused on one such box.

Buddhism, for instance “focuses on” a certain area or “truth” about reality in general, existence, and your “immediate environment in general”. This leads them into a very specific area that has very specific mechanics that are unique to this area only. An example would be learning how to navigate your (what is referred to as) “emotional states”. They learn that there is absolutely no difference in the experience of pain and the experience of pleasure, and that the difference that was true in physical awareness comes from your own perception and interpretation of that unique experience…and focusing your attention there.

…or your experience with the contents of “that particular box”.

This is referred to as your belief about that. The Bible refers to this as your faith (in anything). One emotional experience is “appointed” (or assigned to) by the existing person as bad, “pain”, “hurt”, and one is appointed by the existing person as the unique experience of “pleasure, happiness, ecstasy”, or as good.

The experience then becomes the reality they “live in”.

Not as many others actually believe…

…that reality comes first, then the experience of it, then the interpretation of it afterwards, then the belief in it.

That is (as scripture states)…is backwards, or perverted, inverted, take your pick. If we are actually the “Children of God” as the Bible states then we create these things for ourselves…and become trapped in them, also as the Bible states.

Without getting into the “mechanics of reality” or wasting too much time on the other major religions, (they all work on this principle), I will say that I finally settled on the teachings of Christ for two reasons. First, while all others will indeed allow you access to other existences and enhancements to the physical universe for you, they all (as I have mentioned) “go to a certain very specific place” and each has a very specific set of circumstances. Although these may be very rewarding and even pleasurable, they are still confined to their unique existences and all the “conditions” that are unique to them that you have ASSIGNED TO YOUR LIKING, or as people usually say, “believe them to be”.

This will continue to be true from that point forward for as long as you decide to believe that, or “stay in that place”. So you are “keeping the faith” no matter what you do, and the result? Look around.

Christ has, just as is echoed throughout the physical world, “set me free” from the conditions I have “appointed and changed to my liking” that I was not even aware I was in bondage to until Christ pointed this out for me.

For me, not to to me. As the band Creed writes in a popular song, unknowingly “I created my own prison” (and for the same reasons, they are a Christian band).

So keep in mind as we continue these discussions, there is no “us and them”. We will not be whisked away to “somewhere else” while people remain trapped in a decaying physical universe until they all become extinct or blow each other and their world away. There is no “going to heaven” (this is not a Biblical concept). What is a Biblical concept is a “new” heaven and a new earth.

As Jesus likes to say, It is “at hand”… now. (Matthew 10:7 KJV)

Just like those other boxes are “at hand now”.

Note to the atheist and/or naturalist:

Believe it or not although I enjoy the freedom Christ has given me, and the knowledge and understanding of life and death (which are also “places”) physical existence in the physical universe is not some “evil that must be done away with that God will destroy”. God created the these and all other “mansions” that are in His house for me, and for you, and for “whosoever will come”. So while I have denounced all bondage to the physical universe I am not banned from living here. I am just not “bound to it” now. In fact we actually own this place and all others, and we will be living here for just as long as we wish, and coming and going to and from “other places” as we simply decide to.

I enjoy physical existence as I should, and I love Rock-n-Roll music. Why shouldn’t I? But to remain trapped in a physical existence of decay and death, AND the idea that it is all eternally set in stone is hell, and God did not cause anyone to choose to remain trapped anywhere, no matter what you “believe“.

However you may if you wish enjoy that reality of a decaying existence with war, pain and eternal death that you freely decide you have to eradicate yourself in forever, because you are also free to do as you wish, and your faith works for you just as is does for all humans. Faith is “belief and assurance”. This is also Biblical concept, and it is called the “place” of weeping and gnashing of teeth” and your faith in your own belief that “this is just the way it has to be” will be honored by God just as my own will, and everyone else’s.

But as for me and my house, we will stay with the Lord of life.

Almost forgot my second reason I finally settled on the teachings of Christ. Christ freely chose to be my friend and offered to teach me to know these things, and I freely accepted His offer.

“In my Father’s house are many mansions: if it were not so, I would have told you. I go to prepare a place for you.” -Jesus. The Christ

Carry on then…

Peace

The Irony Of Evolution; Absurdity Blindness?

“Without getting into the “science” of evolution, or the ongoing controversy that continues to be a popular topic for debate, let’s just look at the underlying heart of this matter… the reason behind the invention of this theory.

It is widely known that the two main characters in this debate are theist, and atheist. It is also widely known that there are two completely different mindsets behind this and other issues surrounding theism and atheism. There are “how” people, and there are “why” people. Interestingly the “how” people seem to be a victim of their own belief, which ironically is what the “why” people claim will happen to anyone and everyone that does not accept the truth of their mindset. So…

What does the “available” evidence actually show?
It shows that only one truth can be “actually”true, obviously. One other thing for those that believe that evolution is “now a proven fact” (again). Facts are not controversial.

The “how” people say they have find out “how this happens”, and claim this…”this has been and still is a “state of “never-ending involvement” (evolution). They seem to be blind to the absurdity of something being “how this happens” one day, and the fact that if it ever changes once, at all…then that was never how it happened in the first place. Although these people (naturalist) invent new “hows” to every objection and correction to the theory their opponent makes against their ever evolving theory (that is said to be a “fact), they seem to remain blind to the absurdity of “ever evolving truth”.

So let’s look at some of the other rather ironic absurdities of this theory.

Fossils. I will never understand how anyone can say that something is the evidence used to reach a conclusion, and then make excuses about why they can not produce any of it. If you can’t produce any of the evidence you used to reach your conclusion, how can you prove your conclusion is based on evidence? Oh, I almost forgot to mention that this evidence and “fact presented to the world” as “what actually happened”; or this “truth” …has since then evolved as well. They no longer point to fossils as evidence.

Instead, we now have an “evolutionary tree of life” with branches to our common distant relatives (aunts, uncles, cousins, etc…) that makes it impossible to determine which animals morphed into which other animal or come up with a coherent chain of events, but it did provided a good excuse for the lack of the fossil records, and it did provide them with a “new replacement truth”…fossils take too long…They are rare and hard to find…blah, blah, blah..

…really? Then how could they be evidence of “the truth of yesterday” and proof for your theory that is still forced on society as “true”? And how can you point to any of that as “part of the evolution, and hold fast to the claim that “This came FROM that, when THAT was never true in the first place?

In fact, how can you now show us why that was not “just a lie that was made up” in the first place”? This is not the real shinkicking irony and obvious absurdity of this theory though. Their reason for it is.

So let’s move on to “the reason” for evolution. Survival.

If we naturally evolved and these “changes” were to make (the evolving soup) better equipped to survive in the environment, then why did the monkey people who lived outside in the elements survive “until” their replacement arrived on the scene, THEN die out (or apparently “lose their ability to survive”) …and become extinct?

Their successors, and following progressions to “modern-day man” can not survive at all in the natural environment, or “out in the open”…they will freeze to death, dehydrate, starve to death, be eaten by a cousin, or meet some other such haphazard calamity as the evidence clearly shows they actually do and will.

I don’t think this theory of changing to better equip the evolving soup for the purpose of survival checks out either.

This post is already too long, and there are many other ironic and absurd problems with this theory that we can discuss below, so I will wrap up with this absurdity.

Out of all the “differences” this one bowl of soup has “morphed into”, why can’t we carry on a discussion (such as this one) with any of our “common cousins” that are said to have the same parents”, such as grasshoppers? Just as “monkeyman” lost his ability to survive, the other “branches” seem to be losing abilities, not gaining them, and “therefore” becoming “better equipped to survive”…

You really think anyone is not going to bring up the fact that “aside from survival” ALL of these the “other branches” are now gone? This raise another absurdity. If they are “gone now” because they have been “replaced” by new and improved versions of “themselves”, then this begs the question; how is it possible that they “inherited” BETTER genes if the gene pool they inherit from couldn’t “survive”? I am sure they have an explanation that will attempt to take your mind off of this fact; the former did not “survive”, and the latter are “less able” to survive in the current “natural” environment, which makes the reasoning of survival = “this species”
can not survive, and neither will their successors in a natural environment.

So the purpose of evolving life is suicide and extinction.

All of this can be explained away (and usually is by added absurdities), but in the meantime there are no “new species” that can be shown FROM ANY AVAILABLE SOURCE PERIOD, yet they claim to know the age of the earth, and everything that has happened on the earth since it’s “birth”.

Just so you know, everyone on the planet is not blind to absurdity, and many are aware of what is actually happening. Many of us are also aware of the outcome. So enjoy this while you have time.

Oh, and one more thing. I almost forgot one more absurd fact about this evolving debate…

…The opposition to evolution has never changed their argument once, not one word of it, in thousands of years.

We were created and designed by an intelligent Creator.

Peace

Debunking The Misconception Of Sin And The Gospel

 

This is an actual response to a post from one of the online debate groups I frequent. The misconception of the meanings of the Biblical scriptures is so wide-spread I had to write an entire post to explain it to some of the people in the group. Someone asked if I would post it here so I did, and left it in its original form…

This post is a response to Allan D Griffin’s post about the original sin. Well thought out post too, as are all of his. I just want to clear up a couple of misconceptions. Apologetics is about more than debating or giving reason for the Gospel message. The other thing I want to clear up is the Gospel message. The first common misconception is about sin and what that actually is. The other is about the Gospel message and what that actually is. The two are not only related, they are absolutely the same thing.

There was no sin until man ate the fruit of the knowledge of sin, or “good and evil”. The misconception is that sin is an action. Adam “sinned”, he did not commit a crime, or as Allan tries to convey in his post “do something wrong” (and did a pretty good job too. I am surprised that it wasn’t brought up by a theist)
The action of eating was not a sin. Nor was there “disobedience to a command”. Why? Because it wasn’t a command. It was a truth statement just like the Gospel message is a truth statement. “If you do X, Y will be the result”, period. This is what God “told” Adam. God didn’t “command Adam not to “do” something””. You’re thinking of sin as an action, or as Paul explained, “transgression of the law”, which it isn’t. If it were then we would not be “born in sin”. God’s very first words to Adam were not “you screwed up!”, because he didn’t screw up. Screwing up is an action. His very first words were, “who told you that?”, or “you did X (eat), and Y is the result”. (knowledge) The result was just as God said it would be. Death. Finite existence. Physical finite reality (or a death sentence awaiting judgement in a spirit prison), which is what physical reality actually is. This was not a “punishment”. This was a protection. Sin is a condition, not an action. You call it naturalism. It’s death. It’s a prison.

The next thing God did was to say, “And the LORD God said, Behold, the man is become as one of us, to know good and evil: and now, lest he put forth his hand, and take also of the tree of life, and eat, and live for ever:” Where do you suppose the thought that “God is keeping you from the goodness of this tree, and punishing you” came from? This lie (or “counterfeit” information) came from the same source, or person that lied to Eve. God is not punishing us. Think what would have happened if man would have eaten the tree of life and lived forever “in this condition”. <—-That would be hell? No, that IS hell. This is not a punishment either, but if you choose to die in this condition your death will be final. The same “person” that told Eve what he was not supposed to tell is also telling YOU that God is “punishing you”. The judgement will be carried out on the transgressor, not man. The transgression was committed against man, not by man. So Allen is very much right.

The Gospel message is the reversal of the original true message God gave Adam. If you do X, Y will be the result. Sin is a condition. You call it naturalism. The original condition of man was spiritual, and the Gospel “X” is the opposite of the original statement “X” and doing X reverses the condition, or reverts it back to the original. I’ll explain.

God said “if” you do this, “this will be the result”. The result is a condition of man who is finite, carnal, trapped in spirit prison (flesh), and dead. “If you do this you will die” This is what the term “die in your sin” means. When man gained the knowledge of sin and death he “learned” a different condition or state of being. Naturalism, or “physical, finite existence” Look around at this life you are calling “natural”. And you also call it life. I didn’t think life had graveyards. It is as God said it would be. It was the truth.

By contrast, the gospel message is the same message in reverse, and if it (X) is “done” reverses the condition (or reverts it back to its original). The opposite of death is birth, thus the saying from Jesus that you must be “born again this time of spirit” (so the saying “you were born in sin” is “you were born in flesh, prison, bondage”)The misconception is that this is a “step up”, or different “better condition” when in fact it is a step back.
Back to the original condition or state of man. Spiritual.
Man was originally created in a perpetual state of birth continually, eternally. This is why naturalist can’t “see” evidence of anything spiritual unless they actually become spiritual. You can’t see anything from the grave. What you think is “life”, isn’t.

Conclusion:

Here is what it looks like.

Original sin:

If you do X, Y will be the result.
“But of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, thou shalt not eat of it: for in the day that thou eatest thereof thou shalt surely die.”

The Gospel:

If you do X, Y will be the result.
“When the people heard this, they were cut to the heart and asked Peter and the other apostles, “Brothers, what shall we “do”?

X

Then Peter said unto them, “Repent, and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the REMISSION OF SINS (or do X. for the reversal of the condition), and ye shall receive the gift of the Holy Spirit” (Y)

Jesus answered, Verily, verily, I say unto thee, Except a man be born of water and of the Spirit, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God. That which is born of the flesh is flesh; and that which is born of the Spirit is spirit. Marvel not that I said unto thee, Ye must be born again from above. Verily, verily, I say unto thee, “We” speak that we do know, and testify that we “have seen”; and ye receive not our witness.

I can’t hand you my eyes.

Footnote:
This is why I read only the King James Bible. Other translations have changed the word “remission” to “forgiveness” so it reads be baptised for the “forgiveness of sins”, which is from the same “person” that likes to tell lies. I don’t need forgiveness for something he did, and he is trying to pin the rap on you right now. I’m not buying his lies, but you can if that’s what you want to do. Not recommended.

A word about testimony

There is a reason God chose personal testimony as the one and only way for me to deliver knowledge of Himself to anyone else.

“A wicked and adulterous generation seeketh after a sign, and there shall no sign be given unto it, but the sign of the prophet Jonas. And he left them, and departed.” (Matthew 16:4)

This sign of Jonas is the actual Gospel, which is a “story” that the Son of Man will spend three days in the belly of the earth, and rise again. This story is all you get… period… that is if you are inclined to looking for “evidence” of the truth about mankind and his origin. This truth can be verified only by God Himself, and the testimony of the “Holy Spirit” which will be given to those that want it…again, period. There is no default “have to”and no imaginary, made up, arbitrary “rules” that apply, again…period.

Testimony is all you get. Why?

Many atheists seem to think atheism is an (or ‘the’) “default position”. This is interesting because I can remember in my earliest memories a “presence” that comforted me when “things”, (lights, shadows, sounds…) scared me. I remember this ‘presence’ as a “Comforter”, that was for all practical purposes “a parental superior”, (which actually had to rescue me from the fears my parents actually created). I remember this ‘presence’ was known to me and superior to my parents…and, (as I later learned), was actually called, “The Comforter”.

This Spirit is known to me now as “The Holy Spirit”. These memories were present before any knowledge of any God was available to me, as my family was not religious. Some of us have kept in touch with this spirit that comforted us in our infancy and learned of its name and constitution later in life when they could read and started to interact with the world.

Some had forgotten, and later in life were reminded by this same Spirit.

Who is giving me these words to type right now? My mind? My “ego”?

“But the Comforter, which is the Holy Ghost, whom the Father will send in my name, he shall teach you all things, and bring all things to your remembrance, whatsoever I have said unto you.” John 14:26 (KJV)

If God exists as a creator of “all that is”, then it logically follows that God is capable of imparting knowledge of Himself to anyone He decides to do so for. It also follows that such a manufacturer would only do so for those that have the common decency to humble themselves in the light of this knowledge that they are a manufactured being, which is what repentance actually means, and simply thank Him for their life, and ask the Him for their answers.

Just sayin’