What a wonderful thread!! Horrah!!

Religion is the gravest sin.

All Religions commit one unforgivable error. They presume to understand god, speak for god, kill for god, die for god, enslave for god, and at the very least ensnare for god. Religion is a crime against god.

Everyone is entitled to have an imaginary friend. But when I tell you my imaginary friend is the one and only god, then I am attempting to enslave you in the worst possible way. And no amount of brotherly love, good intentions or christmas cheer changes it one iota.

If I was god, this is something I would never forgive. Because religion is always an negation of life and a preparation for death.
Religion is the enemy of life, it always has been. If we could all just get past it, what wonderful conversations we could have. What possibilities we could explore.

And for those brainwashed objectors, who fear our moral decline unless it is buttressed by religion, please read some history. You will find christianity, mohammedenism, or Judaism have not a single authentic original moral contribution.

Christainity, with which I am most familiar with, has entirely plagarised pagan thought and text. Not a single original thought. The entire christian cosmology is Platonic. The moral christain life is entirely Stoic.

May the gods bless you.

Yebiga,

Great Call. Someone can see sense at least.

All,

In his discussion on Science and Religion, Wells notes that during time of Ptolemy I, Alexandria was a god factory. With respect to theorcrasia (fusing gods), Wells notes:

“In Alexandra three types of mind and spirit met … the clear headed criticism of the Aryan Greek, the moral fervour of and monotheism of the Semitic Jew and the ancient tradition of mysteries and sacrifices at work in secret cults and cult practices of Greece.”
Perhaps, also Buddhist missionaries from the King Asoka’s Indian court.

Between them, these religions have the monotheism, godhead, trinities, punitive patrimonialism, sacrifice, resurrection and immorality. Like elementary particles, these elementary components can be configured in varies was to produce metaphorical atoms (will come back to this structure) and melded to build a god product.

In this context, Serapis (male) is an interesting product of the aforementioned god factory. Serapis consisted of a trinity:

1. Orisis and Apis (males)
2. Hathor (female)
3. Child god, Horus, Orisis, reborn, as Himself,

“They were each other; they were three, they were also one.”

Sells and all,

Please consider the Periodic Table of Elements. One has elementary particulars, as earlier noted, configured in different ways, producing “particular” elements. That is, the components are universal, yet the configurations, “particular”. If this so, what Sells claims becomes problematic:

Sells asserts that all religions – EXCEPT CHRISTIANITY – are non-religious myths. Only Christianity is true.

Especially given just about even story and theme in the OT and the NT is espoused by other religions built by priestly manufacturers in god factories; saying the Christian godhead is true and every other god false, is equivalent to saying, all the elements (read mythologies) are true, except of Zinc (read Christianity)?

Christianity. Why is it special? Why would a REAL god NOT differentiate Its product? Why embark on a supreme endeavour, in the guise of a mythology?

Cont...

Sells,

I encourage you not to adopt a priori positions in theology. You need to step back from the trunk and see the elephant. For me, the harbour outside of my window does not exist, if I focus only on this computer screen.

Yebiga,

Welcome to the party. Please bring a plate convinctions and a bottle or two of discourse.

Relda,
"The following is strongly implied, for the biblical literalists:

· The Koran must be reviled and the Christian bible upheld (the Koran and the Bible sprang from the SAME CULTURE, something few realize or think about). "
Posted by relda, Sunday, 3/December/2006 5:33:42PM

"Rather than claiming the ‘same’ culture has produced a belief in one God I’m saying the reverse..."

I am assuming the brackets are your own thought? The block capitals are to indicate what my posts have been challenging.

Sells,
MOST 'organised' religions, christianity included, have relied upon keeping their adherents superstitious and ignorant and unable to adequately challenge their priestly classes superior learning and authority, especially concerning aspects of God. For this they are to be universally reviled and despised. I find Buddhism comes closest to what true religion should be, which is concerning for me as they claim there is no God (or just no God external to ourselves?).

Religion should be about developing personal initimate (without the need for outside 'assistance') relationship with some of the many aspects of an infinite God so as to reunite, as fully as possible, our own spirit with God.

I do however challenge your assertion that religion keeps us vulnerable to Nature (with a capital 'N', or our own 'human' nature)

As human beings formed within, and are but a minute part of, Nature we ARE vulnerable to it - it's force and determination to have it's 'will' met are far greater than are our own as individuals. We cannot help but be vulnerable to it.

As far as our human nature goes, all humans are vulnerable to that, even yourself and Oliver, as am I. Only a very enlightened few have ever been able to overcome their own (human) nature and align with, or surrender to, a higher 'will' in every instance.
Cont.

Humans cannot 'know' God (entirely), only by how their thought can convolute to fit God 'inside' of them. That is 'knowing' some human construct, not God itself. Humans must first begin to 'know thyself' before we could ever begin to know God in any Truthfulness. To do otherwise is to deceive ourselves of what we think we know.

Jesus Christ may have been a truly enlightened human being and 'I am the Way' (to God) might hold value for those who understand his words as he intended them (consider to whom he was speaking).

There were paths to God before Jesus lived, hence, his is not the only way. (Personally, I do not currently know of a better one).

The truth is in the particular OF EACH INDIVIDUAL who seeks God and each of us have different 'particulars' (particulates). When addressing more than one individual the truth must be in the Universal, from which each of us derives their own particular truth in alignment with the Universal one. Any particular truth that does not fit with the Universal truth should be reviewed carefully for (human) error within the logic and facts which created it.

Christianity is not based on mythology?

Forgive my imperfect understanding, but i believe Christianity declares Christ the incarnation of the spoken Word of a mythologic God of Abraham and Moses, born of a Virgin and who overcame a physical death to return to sit upon the throne in Heaven? This is not mythology, why? Because we have writings dating back some 2 millenia of people who claim Jesus is Lord?

Your understanding of 'historical events' seems to contain a certain bias to me. I challenge you to show one concurrent, independent (non-christian) writer who gives us evidence that Jesus and his words/ministry were not mere myth.

If you argue Christianity is not a religion based upon myth but upon historical fact and that Islam is a religion based upon myth because it declares God 'spoke' to the prophet Muhammad then you have just lost any vestige of plausibility you might have previously been considered to possess.