There always will be flaws in religion

[majour ka]

After all, Religion is a man made concept.

[markulous]

Yep...

[Old Dood]

Duh!

[Stookie]

Hey now, don't get too deep into discussion... lol

[Elohm]

"There will always be Flaws in Religion"

so tell me....if religion is flawed then why is it the word and belief in god?.....

isnt god supposed to be flawless???

to me....i dont think that thier is a god....spirits, yes.....but not "gods"....




"There are Spirits in every aspect in Life; To the Trees, To the Rivers that run through Forests."
~Elohm.

[majour ka]

In my limited knowledge of religion there seems to be more than the concept of the belief in God. but a whole load of man made Dogma. I'm not saying it doesn't contain any truth or sign posts that may lead us nearer our own truth... and maybe to god lol

[Tayesin]

"There will always be Flaws in Religion"

so tell me....if religion is flawed then why is it the word and belief in god?.....

It is only so historically because man sought power of control over other, less educated people. This was done by telling people what God says, what God wants from us and never allowing the people to know that they could find out for themselves by having the direct experience of God's connection with them.

Jesus tried to tell people that they could in fact have the experience for themselves, so he was stopped from enlightening the populations by those in control. Then of course a power struggle ensued for the control of the new church that Jesus' brother had inherited and intended to continue the path of awakening others to reality. So Paul, Saul, wrested the control and began the process of limiting knowledge, adding some things to make people believe what he wanted them to believe, such as, Jesus died for your sins, he was resurrected, he was the ONLY son of the father, etc. Of course, people who heard this message were awed by such revelations and thought that this must be true for that to have happened.

About 60 to 100 or so years after the alleged death of Jesus the first books from Mathew, Mark, Luke and John were beginning to be written. And we must then question their validity because we know now how significantly a story can change down one line of ten people during an experiment, so anything written so long after Jesus was gone must have flaws to it, and since they would have been written from the perspective of Paul's direction for the church they can be no more than additional reasons to have people believe what Paul intended them to think.

After all of this, a move was begun by those in power to insure any other surviving material that might contain information Jesus spoke about our direct connection and reality got detroyed, and so we find historically that any place that held such information was wiped from the face of the planet, and only a few things remain from then..... eg: Nag Hammadi Library.

Some more time passed and this new church was what we could call a fledgling Christianity that was fighting for it's existence back in that ancient world. Eventually we can move onto the Nicene Counsel that was to decide what information was suitable for the plebs (us) to know. Of course no one could agree so the decisions were made by the Roman Emperor of the time, who's name I still forget, lol. And all this was about 300 or so years after the fact. So again we must wonder about the truth we are left with.

Next came many translations into different languages, which in itself caused over 4,000 direct mistranslations that changed so many meanings that we are left with a dry, wrung-out version of the facts. Again, control was the mechanism, as well as the misunderstanding of the scribes doing the translations. As an example, a word in Hebrew that meant "Master of the Craft" was translated as Carpenter, so that Jesus' father now became a wood-worker of sorts instead of being the intelligent, self-aware person he may well have been. That DNA was more important than we give it credit for too.

Okay, I'm a little tired of this, so I suggest people do their own research without reading what they want to see in it.

be well.

[CFTraveler]

Forgive me Tayesin, because I'm going to repeat what you said in other words....

"There will always be Flaws in Religion"

so tell me....if religion is flawed then why is it the word and belief in god?.....

Who said religion is the word of God or the belief in God?  Religion is the systematization of control of the masses using theory based on belief in God.  In other words, religion has very little to do with God, and more about controlling what people believe about God.

isnt god supposed to be flawless???

Most people believe so.  Except some religious groups.  Depends on what they base their religion in.
Which goes back to the point of the first post.

[no_leaf_clover]

so tell me....if religion is flawed then why is it the word and belief in god?.....

There is really no meaning to this question at all.  Words are empty and there is nothing to 'believe in'.

isnt god supposed to be flawless???

Because it's just a concept dreamed up by men, if the concept is of being "flawless," then "god" is "flawless" by definition.  But it is still only a concept.  Your brain can hold infinities of them.  Which allow you to see and interact with the world in the most beautiful way?

[kamals]

After all, Religion is a man made concept.

No offense is meant by this, but this subject is important enough not to mince words about.

I personally find this concept to be puerile and somewhat superficial.

Have you examined all religious beliefs, in depth, to arrive to this conclusion?

Just as in all sweeping and blind generalizations there is, of course, some real element of truth to it. But the element of truth is accidental, whereas the element of absurdity is essential here.

It is demonstrably obvious that a good deal of what people consider "religion" has an artificial socially generated aspect to it, of course. But there are principles and there are manifestations and to simply state without justification that the entirety of religious phenomena are man made is simply ignorant. Religion and spirituality consist of a good deal more than what you may perceive, particularly in the pre-modern world. The social aspects of a spiritual ecumen organized around the principles of a formal religion are secondary to the actual principles involved.

The principles of religion itself are of non-human origin, they are not man made, and the only segment of humanity that persistently asserts otherwise has done so much damage to the world in the name of their non-religion that a reasonable person can safely dismiss the view.

...and most of those who make such statements simply assume as such on the basis of a secular world-view whose very axioms they rarely question.

Ever. Really.

The idea that in 40,000 years of the history of homo sapiens, mankind has been not only so profoundly dimwitted, but also so profoundly delusional, as to be unaware that that which all pre-modern traditional non-Western human beings valued highest above all things, the rites and beliefs that tied them, they believed, to their god or gods; that such beliefs were the results of human invention... this is a severe indictment of the intelligence and spiritual sense of all of humanity

The one making this claim should bring for real evidence of her own; and the idea that "all religions contradict each other" is not proof for it is demonstrably essentially false, and shown thusly by the sheer commonality of certain beliefs, symbols, and fundamental principles. It is true that exoteric expressions of specific historical faiths often contradict each other to degrees but is one so blind as to miss those things in which they are all in agreement? Or so superficial as to be unable to examine how such contradctions are often simply contingent on historical processes of decay and involution, and how many religions in their earlier primal phases resemble each other more closely?


That idea also reflects a form of muddle thinking; and expressed on a forum full of people attempting to find an operative spirituality in the middle of the wasteland of modern Western materialism... is troublesome, and disturbing.

The mindset behind this statement is the same mindset that has led to the destruction of our natural environment, of a good deal of the spiritual treasures of humanity (hence people here are on a web forum dedicated to rediscovering that which 12 year old primal aborigines can do without effort), and the invention of the nuclear bomb.

The ability to do neat astral tricks is on a different order than understanding, truly understanding, metaphysical principles and seeing to the essence of finitie religious forms. One can have a good deal of psychic development while being spiritually undeveloped. I argue that anyone who can not see the eternal principles in a religious form has a lot of good-natured self-work to do on themselves.

These are also sweeping generalizations on my part, of course, but I trust my point is taken. These sort of statements about "the flaws in religion" reflect a massive arrogance typical to secular modern and post-modern westerners that is not grounded


A question, and a well meant and well intentioned one. Have you ever read any Rene Guenon? I recommend it, his writings do challenge some worldviews but have a rigor to them. Anyone who rigidly holds the party line that "religion is a man made concept" should at least challenge that view of theirs by reading articulate arguments to the contrary.

[SomeoneAwful]

No offense is meant by this, but this subject is important enough not to mince words about.

I personally find this concept to be puerile and somewhat superficial.

Have you examined all religious beliefs, in depth, to arrive to this conclusion?

Just as in all sweeping and blind generalizations there is, of course, some real element of truth to it. But the element of truth is accidental, whereas the element of absurdity is essential here.

It is demonstrably obvious that a good deal of what people consider "religion" has an artificial socially generated aspect to it, of course. But there are principles and there are manifestations and to simply state without justification that the entirety of religious phenomena are man made is simply ignorant. Religion and spirituality consist of a good deal more than what you may perceive, particularly in the pre-modern world. The social aspects of a spiritual ecumen organized around the principles of a formal religion are secondary to the actual principles involved.

The principles of religion itself are of non-human origin, they are not man made, and the only segment of humanity that persistently asserts otherwise has done so much damage to the world in the name of their non-religion that a reasonable person can safely dismiss the view.

...and most of those who make such statements simply assume as such on the basis of a secular world-view whose very axioms they rarely question.

Ever. Really.

The idea that in 40,000 years of the history of homo sapiens, mankind has been not only so profoundly dimwitted, but also so profoundly delusional, as to be unaware that that which all pre-modern traditional non-Western human beings valued highest above all things, the rites and beliefs that tied them, they believed, to their god or gods; that such beliefs were the results of human invention... this is a severe indictment of the intelligence and spiritual sense of all of humanity

The one making this claim should bring for real evidence of her own; and the idea that "all religions contradict each other" is not proof for it is demonstrably essentially false, and shown thusly by the sheer commonality of certain beliefs, symbols, and fundamental principles. It is true that exoteric expressions of specific historical faiths often contradict each other to degrees but is one so blind as to miss those things in which they are all in agreement? Or so superficial as to be unable to examine how such contradctions are often simply contingent on historical processes of decay and involution, and how many religions in their earlier primal phases resemble each other more closely?


That idea also reflects a form of muddle thinking; and expressed on a forum full of people attempting to find an operative spirituality in the middle of the wasteland of modern Western materialism... is troublesome, and disturbing.

The mindset behind this statement is the same mindset that has led to the destruction of our natural environment, of a good deal of the spiritual treasures of humanity (hence people here are on a web forum dedicated to rediscovering that which 12 year old primal aborigines can do without effort), and the invention of the nuclear bomb.

The ability to do neat astral tricks is on a different order than understanding, truly understanding, metaphysical principles and seeing to the essence of finitie religious forms. One can have a good deal of psychic development while being spiritually undeveloped. I argue that anyone who can not see the eternal principles in a religious form has a lot of good-natured self-work to do on themselves.

These are also sweeping generalizations on my part, of course, but I trust my point is taken. These sort of statements about "the flaws in religion" reflect a massive arrogance typical to secular modern and post-modern westerners that is not grounded


A question, and a well meant and well intentioned one. Have you ever read any Rene Guenon? I recommend it, his writings do challenge some worldviews but have a rigor to them. Anyone who rigidly holds the party line that "religion is a man made concept" should at least challenge that view of theirs by reading articulate arguments to the contrary.

Did do know that Jesus rode a raptor? On top of reading Rene Guenon, I would highly recomend picking up the Beginner's Bible Coloring Book. The author delves deep into the different aspects of religion and thoroughly examines some misconstrued facts that people many people have hold on the subject of Jesus and God. He does it in a form rich in color and detail that we all can understand.

[Mustardseed]

There will always be flaws in .....man!!

[Old Dood]

Why can't Scientists find this so-called Missing Link?

Here is a Google Video that explains just that.

Lloyd Pye - Everything you Know is Wrong - 118 min - Apr 23, 2008

Lloyd Pye is an author, researcher, and lecturer in the field of alternative knowledge. He calls on over 30 years of experience to write and speak about the origins of life, human origins, Hominoids (bigfoot, sasquatch, yeti, and others), and the work of Zechara Sitchin. This broad base of knowledge makes him one of the world's leading proponents of the Intervention Theory of origins, which stands in sharp contrast to Darwinism, Creationism, and Intelligent Design. His classic book about these subjects, Everything You Know Is Wrong -- Origins of Life and Humans, has been fully revised and updated as of July, 2007, and will be available from bookstores or directly from www.BellLapBooks.com. More information about Lloyd and his books can be found at www.LloydPye.com

Google Video Link: http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=1285345463618889531&q=lloyd

This is very interesting and Eye Opening for those with an Open Mind.

EDIT: Anyone ever really 'wondered' what the scripture means when it says :"The Sons of God and the Daughter's of Men"?
I believe this answers this...Better then anything else I have heard.

[AndrewTheSinger]

Thanks for the video old dude. How about we go a step further? These two authors are great, Zacharia and Lloyd, their perception is very good, but they both fell for the same mistake - they were mislead by evolution/transition/progression. Natural Selection is correct though. However, there is evidence of modern anatomical type human bones far beneath the oldests of man's supposed ancestors. That means that humans were walking around 'millions of years ago' when Homo Erectus were 'beating stone against stone'. It is not true that they were all primitive, indeed some were far more advanced than people will be willing to accept when all of the evidence is revealed. If we remove the curtain of evolution/transition/transformation, everything will be seen as it is.

There is no missing link, because we never came from the apes, neither through evolution nor through intervention. It is not possible to interbreed with species with 48 chromosomes and produce one with 46 that is even better than the first. But then one could say 'But those Anunnaki were geneticists, they fused the chromosomes.', even if that was true, that doesn't explain the modern human bones found beneath their 'ancestors'. This kind of evidence shows that it was not a 'linear evolution', if an evolution at all.

http://www.skybooksusa.com/time-travel/experime/cenozoic.htm

When those gods were cast out of their heavens as a punishment for throwing manking into the lowest part of the matter (and it's not hard to realize that we are indeed in lowest part, since they use our universe as a quarry), the Earth had a life of it's own. There were apes and humans existing together back then. Now those gods came to exist as evil spirits upon the Earth, and they created angels for themselves that looked like humans, in order to serve them.



It's all written: http://www.gnosis.org/naghamm/origin.html

But before that, they had also created a counterfeit spirit with 48 chromosomes, and guess what happenned...
They created a slave, a lulu, a prehistoric man, but they did not create us, for we were existing before.

[EraserRain]

Or religion is the entity that started the bang and we are all products of religion?

All of us are strolling along dancing to the tune of Religion more or less.

[AmbientSound]

"Everyone knows that evil will win because good is dumb!"

[EraserRain]

Or Good will win because charlie was caught with his pants down?