Why Christianity is NOT the Correct Religion

[Cornfed]

If you see religion as a progression it is not surprising that it has antecedents just as science, literature and most worthwhile things do. The apparent evil is just because you don't understand how things work and are comparing it to some libtard misunderstanding of how things should work. Functional things that you can build successful societies around such as Christianity are going to require teachers in the same way that other functional things like engineering require teachers. If you want to blow smoke up your own ass and call it "spirituality" then you can do that on your own but it doesn't actually achieve anything. Just because you don't understand something doesn't mean it doesn't make sense.

[Cornfed]

5) Yahweh is himself part of the creation and not independent of it
He has a physical presence. For example in the story of Enoch, Enoch is taken by angels on a cloud to meet with Yahweh. Why would that need to happen if Yahweh is everywhere?

There are a couple of possible explanations. The Bible meets people where it finds them and explains things to people in terms they can understand. The concept of a supreme being would just have confused people at the time or simply been inexplicable, so they explain things in human terms. Another possibility is that they were dealing with an incarnation of Yahweh similar to Jesus. You could think of this as Yahweh writing himself into his own movie. How exactly would you expect a supreme being to communicate with people or scribes in Biblical times to record such an event?

[Mobo]

@Pixel--Dude

O, the highly wise! Arrive at a conclusion, therefore, that there is nothing beyond this Universe. Give precedence to that which meets the eye and turn your back on what is beyond our knowledge. (2.108.17)

There is no world other than this;
There is no heaven and no hell;
The realm of Shiva and like regions,
are fabricated by stupid imposters.

— Sarvasiddhanta Samgraha, Verse 8

While life is yours, live joyously;
None can escape Death's searching eye:
When once this frame of ours they burn,
How shall it e'er again return?

The enjoyment of heaven lies in eating delicious food, keeping company of young women, using fine clothes, perfumes, garlands, sandal paste... while moksha is death which is cessation of life-breath... the wise therefore ought not to take pains on account of moksha.

A fool wears himself out by penances and fasts. Chastity and other such ordinances are laid down by clever weaklings. — Sarvasiddhanta Samgraha, Verses 9-12

Religion cannot be acquired, Irreligion cannot be rejected. Cunning Manu, has twisted the topic. To lay down on how the State Shall impose Punishments And so, the Vainglorious Pundits venerate him. (Charvaka Shashthi, Verse-27)

The Brahmins impose, Strict moral restraints on sexual actions And yet, their Vedas, Venerate licentious gods like Indra & Chandra (Charvaka Shashthi, Verses 7-8)

Be happy as long as you live. Life never come back on corpses dead & burnt. Take loans if need be, but drink buttermilk. Believe not in marriage. Believe not in Gurus. Real heaven Is how you feel when you make love. Pain of hell Is when real thorns dig into real flesh. A chieftain popular among the people Is like god, utmost. There is no other god. (Charvaka Shashthi, Verses 55-56 & 58)

O dunces, What on earth do you mean by peace? Instead of thinking of re-arrival of life on corpses burnt to char, Work towards making your beloved happy. (Charvaka Shashthi, Verse 33)

[MarcosZeitola]

Any religion that teaches men to "turn the other cheek" rather than to brutally retaliate, is a religion tailor-made for simps and cucks. Try making a move on some Muslim guy's sister or daughter... he'll cut off your dong with a salami sword before you can count to two. Meanwhile a Christian father, no matter how traditional, will just let his daughters walk all over him in nine out of ten cases.

Christian men do not control their women, do not run their households, aren't on top of things, and aren't well-respected in society, nor are they feared by anyone. Christianity is as much to blame for the spineless nature of modern Westerners as the wokes are, truth be told. The vast majority of them are ZOG-loving losers who get a little erect everytime someone mentions Israel or the Chosen People.

[TruthSeeker]

The word religion appears only five times in the Bible (KJV).

James 1:27 Pure religion and undefiled before God and the Father is this, To visit the fatherless and widows in their affliction, and to keep himself unspotted from the world.

Other religions may have some truth but Jesus is the only way to the Father.

John 14:6 Jesus saith unto him, I am the way, the truth, and the life: no man cometh unto the Father, but by me.

There is no direct proof there is a God, but I see indirect proof in the world, the universe and nature.

It's up to you whether you want to believe or not. God wants you to have faith.

John 20:29

Hebrews 11:6 But without faith it is impossible to please him: for he that cometh to God must believe that he is, and that he is a rewarder of them that diligently seek him.

[Cornfed]

Any religion that teaches men to "turn the other cheek" rather than to brutally retaliate, is a religion tailor-made for simps and cucks.

Turn the other cheek and go the extra mile were very specifically attributable to dealing with Roman soldiers at the time. The point was that if the bad guys have overwhelming force on their side, fitting in with that reality before you have the chance to do anything about it is just part of life you have to accept. We accept it all the time in dealing with cops, not punching airport security in the face etc. now.

[vlkmo]

Turn the other cheek and go the extra mile were very specifically attributable to dealing with Roman soldiers at the time. The point was that if the bad guys have overwhelming force on their side, fitting in with that reality before you have the chance to do anything about it is just part of life you have to accept. We accept it all the time in dealing with cops, not punching airport security in the face etc. now.

I would like you to discuss this context more. What is it saying how to deal with and defeat bad guys?

[publicduende]

For what my opinion is worth, I agree with you that Christianity is a rehash, in fact a mish-mash, of mythologies taken from other religions and cults popular at the time of the First Council of Nicea (AD 325), which is its official birth date. The events defining the life of "the Son of God", the "Messiah" and "the Prophet" are very similar whether we talk about Horus (Egypt), Mithra (Persia), and Khrisna (India), among the others.

There is no doubt that all religions have a common ancestor, which man's innate tendency towards worshipping the "trascendent descended on Earth", as Carl Gustav Jung aptly called it. Primitive men could not explain the immense power of the Sun and the celestial cycles, yet felt them central to their survival. They deified each of them and worshipped them. The stories about "the Son of God's" birth, life and death were all meant to symbolise celestial events: sunrise to sunset, the onset of a new season, solstices and equinoxes, etc.

There are also mythological elements that were not "home-brewed" but might have well come from mankind's contact with alien communities visiting Earth. I also believe that to be the truth. When a an Italian Hebrew Studies scholar, Mauro Biglino, started translating the Old Testament literally and relate it to other ancient Hebrew myths, he found out that the whole book read like a sci-fi story. "Elohim", one of the names of God, was actual a plural and indicated "the Gods".

This, and more, is why I have always distanced myself from religions, as they all are a system of beliefs pre-designed to please, appease, rule and justify human behaviour which is, by definition, fallible and far from God-like.

This doesn't mean one shouldn't be spiritual, though. Up there there is always one God, sitting, as Dante said, "in this miraculous and angelic temple, that has for confines only love and light". Our immortal souls are like splinters of mirror, reflecting that light and love, yet disconnected from it. Our mission in life is to reconnect with that light and love, and rejoice in its presence, like a baby sleeping safe in the arms of his Father.

The purpose of incarnate life, what we are experiencing right now, is that of a short training camp, to acquire knowledge and act to elevate our soul a bit closer to God. Outside our material world, space and time have no meaning, so we may go through an infinite number of incarnation cycles, maybe across different planets and civilisations, in the past or in the future. When our soul is ready, the samsara, the routine of incarnation cycles, will end and we will be close to God.

[Cornfed]

For what my opinion is worth, I agree with you that Christianity is a rehash, in fact a mish-mash, of mythologies taken from other religions and cults popular at the time of the First Council of Nicea (AD 325), which is its official birth date.

Eh, Christianity had established a cohesive largely agreed upon religion across the breadth of the Roman Empire with the Apostolic Fathers a couple of hundred years before that date. The Council of Nicia was mainly to discuss the Arian Heresy, which to a non-Christian would have seemed like a fairly minor point.

[publicduende]

For what my opinion is worth, I agree with you that Christianity is a rehash, in fact a mish-mash, of mythologies taken from other religions and cults popular at the time of the First Council of Nicea (AD 325), which is its official birth date.

Eh, Christianity had established a cohesive largely agreed upon religion across the breadth of the Roman Empire with the Apostolic Fathers a couple of hundred years before that date. The Council of Nicia was mainly to discuss the Arian Heresy, which to a non-Christian would have seemed like a fairly minor point.

Not really. It is true that Christianity was born a good century before the alleged birth of Jesus Christ. The rule of Emperor Constantine was the real watershed moment for Christianity in Europe. Legend has it that Constantine, the morning before an important battle, saw a large cross of light in the sky and interpreted it as a sign of the Christian God wanting him to win (the famous "in hoc signo vinces", under this sign you will be victorious).

As a convert, he set up the Council of Nicea, officially to discuss doctrine (e.g. the Arianism matter you mentioned), but in practice to craft modern Christianity out of doctrines, liturgies, mythologies and symbolisms present in all of the main religions of the time.

Constantine basically believed that if a Christian religion was created, which contained enough elements of all the main cults, then the followers of those cult would embrace Christianity more willingly as the state religion of the Roman Empire. The name Christ acually comes from Krishna. The myths about his birth, life, death and resurrection were taken straight from those of MIthras or Sol Invictus, which was the "convergence deity" worshipped during the late Roman Empire, especially by the militar ranks. Thoe myths were, themselves, taken from Horus, the Egyptian Sun God.

These kinds of cultural assimilations were very common during the Roman Empire. The Romans had done the same when conquering the Gauls, they "remapped" all of their Gods with one of the Roman Gods. Their main deity, Lug, was associated to Mercury. And so on.

[Cornfed]

For what my opinion is worth, I agree with you that Christianity is a rehash, in fact a mish-mash, of mythologies taken from other religions and cults popular at the time of the First Council of Nicea (AD 325), which is its official birth date.

Eh, Christianity had established a cohesive largely agreed upon religion across the breadth of the Roman Empire with the Apostolic Fathers a couple of hundred years before that date. The Council of Nicia was mainly to discuss the Arian Heresy, which to a non-Christian would have seemed like a fairly minor point.

Not really. It is true that Christianity was born a good century before the alleged birth of Jesus Christ. The rule of Emperor Constantine was the real watershed moment for Christianity in Europe. Legend has it that Constantine, the morning before an important battle, saw a large cross of light in the sky and interpreted it as a sign of the Christian God wanting him to win (the famous "in hoc signo vinces", under this sign you will be victorious).

As a convert, he set up the Council of Nicea, officially to discuss doctrine (e.g. the Arianism matter you mentioned), but in practice to craft modern Christianity out of doctrines, liturgies, mythologies and symbolisms present in all of the main religions of the time.

Constantine basically believed that if a Christian religion was created, which contained enough elements of all the main cults, then the followers of those cult would embrace Christianity more willingly as the state religion of the Roman Empire. The name Christ acually comes from Krishna. The myths about his birth, life, death and resurrection were taken straight from those of MIthras or Sol Invictus, which was the "convergence deity" worshipped during the late Roman Empire, especially by the militar ranks. Thoe myths were, themselves, taken from Horus, the Egyptian Sun God.

These kinds of cultural assimilations were very common during the Roman Empire. The Romans had done the same when conquering the Gauls, they "remapped" all of their Gods with one of the Roman Gods. Their main deity, Lug, was associated to Mercury. And so on.

So would it be fair to say you know absolutely nothing about the subject then?

[publicduende]

So would it be fair to say you know absolutely nothing about the subject then?

This are historical facts, not my opinion. Christianity was extremely fragmented before the time of Constantine. The Apostolic Fathers were just theologians, they might have had a cohesive view on doctrine but they could do absolutely nothing to influence what the thousands of preachers roaming Europe would preach, and what and how people absorbed their preaching.

The Council of Nicea laid the foundation of the "living" modern Christian doctrine. What came out of that council was the official face of the Roman Empire's state religion. And it was no little matter.

[Cornfed]

So would it be fair to say you know absolutely nothing about the subject then?

This are historical facts, not my opinion.

Lets take just one issue. Do a search on the etymology of "Krishna" and that of "Christ". Are you saying the results you get are wrong? Do a search on Mythra. You'll find we don't know anything about Mythra. Do you have some kind of esoteric sources not accepted by mainstream sources? We have the records of the Council of Nicaea and writings beforehand. Any cursory reading would reveal that most issues were agreed upon by near unanimous margins, but then you have not done even cursory reading and are just repeating hand-me-downs, right?

[publicduende]

Lets take just one issue. Do a search on the etymology of "Krishna" and that of "Christ". Are you saying the results you get are wrong? Do a search on Mythra. You'll find we don't know anything about Mythra. Do you have some kind of esoteric sources not accepted by mainstream sources? We have the records of the Council of Nicaea and writings beforehand. Any cursory reading would reveal that most issues were agreed upon by near unanimous margins, but then you have not done even cursory reading and are just repeating hand-me-downs, right?

I don't have time for diatribe, sorry. There is nothing esoteric about the fact that the Council of Nicea was meant to canonicalise the Christian doctrine into a single body of knowledge (the first Bible and set of Holy Scriptures), which all the delegates should then take with them and preach as the Roman Empire's state religion.

All the facts in the Bible are a mish-mash of myths and stories taken from earlier sacred texts, most of which never happened, many of which are simply symbolism for celestial cycles. What was hard was to create a body of theology that could capture the most believers, many of whom did not believe in Jesus but in Mythra, Isis, Khrisna and more.

Whatever Emperor Constantine did in his life was not to set the record straight in matter of theology and spirituality, but to use Christianity as yet another leverage to bring unity to a collapsing empire.

[Cornfed]

Lets take just one issue. Do a search on the etymology of "Krishna" and that of "Christ". Are you saying the results you get are wrong? Do a search on Mythra. You'll find we don't know anything about Mythra. Do you have some kind of esoteric sources not accepted by mainstream sources? We have the records of the Council of Nicaea and writings beforehand. Any cursory reading would reveal that most issues were agreed upon by near unanimous margins, but then you have not done even cursory reading and are just repeating hand-me-downs, right?

I don't have time for diatribe, sorry. There is nothing esoteric about the fact that the Council of Nicea was meant to canonicalise the Christian doctrine into a single body of knowledge (the first Bible and set of Holy Scriptures), which all the delegates should then take with them and preach as the Roman Empire's state religion.

All the facts in the Bible are a mish-mash of myths and stories taken from earlier sacred texts, most of which never happened, many of which are simply symbolism for celestial cycles. What was hard was to create a body of theology that could capture the most believers, many of whom did not believe in Jesus but in Mythra, Isis, Khrisna and more.

Whatever Emperor Constantine did in his life was not to set the record straight in matter of theology and spirituality, but to use Christianity as yet another leverage to bring unity to a collapsing empire.

Just the usual party line then. You haven't actually read any of the proceedings of the Council on Nicea or anything about the Apostolic Fathers of course.