Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
So, ergo, he's not the "shaman to the entire human race" or necessarily anything to any random person. He might be their Messiah. He could be another of their prophets. He could be one of many facets of god. Or he could be no one. He may even be entirely unknown.
Yeshua had 5000+ people listening, and accepting him...
Yeshua said do not call him good; because there is none good but God (Mark 10:18)...
Yeshua had 5000+ people listening, and accepting him...
If we read the prophecies, Zechariah 11, Jeremiah 25:29-38 it discusses that the Leaders will reject their Messiah, causing the Curse of Moses to be placed, and then they will rewrite it.
Buddha was accepted whilst alive, Krishna was... It is only after the corruption by the Roman Empire, that people started following fake religious values...
In other words personally find many in this world cult followers, playing follow the leader, and not the understanding as One; dividing books by religious author is missing the point.
Yeshua said do not call him good; because there is none good but God (Mark 10:18)...
Only God is perfect 100%, anything down here in the Maya gets corrupted by its very nature.
In my opinion.
Hello Tony,
Nah, because blood really isn't thicker than water. Blood can be blood in strict biology terms, but as far as real world relationships we find so often that blood is meaningless, as blood is often rejected and non-blood accepted as blood. If the Jewish God sent their Messiah, it was for them. Not for me. He made a series of covenants between himself and his prophets that were for the Jewish people. I'm not Jewish, so why would I include myself into something that my ancestors weren't themselves into? Trees were very significant to them, but you still have to believe what they did for trees to be that. To me trees are great, but I don't see them as spirits or having any supernatural ties or relevance to any sort of god. But that view was just as real to them as was the Catholic view of Christianity to their descendants. Which is still very heavily Pagan, but appropriated from "Rome Proper," who appropriated it from the early Gnostics, who themselves appropriated it from the Jews. So it overall has a bunch of this and that, and that is largely, mostly, and heavily predominately the Christianity that has been known and widely accepted today and throughout the majority of it's existence. And then it changed, but still remained pretty Pagan. It changed and changed, and changes still. Surely this requires belief to hold any truth or binding ability, just as it required belief in the Olympians as deities in order for Mt. Olympus to hold deep significance.
I acknowledge that. But it doesn't mean one religious principle or concept equally applies to us all. IMO, god wouldn't use humans to communicate his desires, will, and rules. We're really not that good at recording things, accurately doing so, or when it comes to honesty.
Rules are good. They just do need to be flexible. Which is a necessary need that can easily and not uncommonly does lead unfortunate ends. Often times I'm surprised we made it this far without driving ourselves into extinction. Rules are too strict and things are bad, they get too lax and things are bad, and we are crap and doing that "balance" thing.
But as I just explained, you can never rationally arrive at that conclusion.