My theory of Christianity

[jcaternolo]

I think that the Christian God, has nothing at all to do with Yahweh. Why? Well for starters, Yahweh started off as the Hebrew war god, IIRC. They had a whole pantheon. Somewhere down the line, all their gods got assimilated into one god.

Compare the OT and NT, they are radically different. Jesus would never do any of the things that Yahweh did in the OT. If Yahweh is anything like Jesus, then he would never take lives, unless he absolutely had to. Jesus was a man of action, but also, peace

My belief is that the Christian God that people worship today, is a being of light, mercy, kindness, and all that good stuff. He sends his angels out to help guide, heal, and save others. There are numerous angel encounters recorded, and many people have written books about their experiences with the astral realm, and they claimed to have seen Archangel Michael (or maybe it was Gabriel) guarding the gate to a hall of knowledge or something. I even think that the true Christian God is a polythestic one. The monotheistic nature is something that would come of Yahweh. He is a lot stricter than the Christian God, who I believe only wants people to be good to each other, and take care of the earth, and grow spiritually. There are even people who practice Angel Magick. If that works, then that's another sign that the Bible gives us a completely wrong perception of the Christian God. If he truly is a polytheistic god, I would even be willing to pray to him, like any other deity.

[thalassa]

Re: My theory of Christianity

This isn't a "theory of Christianity"--this is your opinion of the nature and existence of the Christian deity. While the use of the word "theory" doesn't connotate the same rigor as a coloquialism as it does in academia, particularly in the sciences, when used in the context of explaining a central tennet of a widley practice religion, it certainly ought to be based on something other than one's opinion.

[jcaternolo]

Re: My theory of Christianity

This isn't a "theory of Christianity"--this is your opinion of the nature and existence of the Christian deity. While the use of the word "theory" doesn't connotate the same rigor as a coloquialism as it does in academia, particularly in the sciences, when used in the context of explaining a central tennet of a widley practice religion, it certainly ought to be based on something other than one's opinion.

Hmm, well theory to me is, an educated guess about something, while using all known information about the subject. Although I don't personally know 100% if the Hebrews had a whole pantheon, I've read that that was the case, and they all got assimilated into one deity. From there, I deduced that the Christian God must be different from Yahweh. Yahweh was for a much harsher time, and he was specifically referred to as a God of war.

Then again, I've heard that Christianity borrows a lot of concept from Pagan beliefs. Angels for example, are borrowed from Babylonian religious mythos. Although I do believe that the true Christian God is very different from the wartime, Hebrew God, whether or not he uses angels, something else entirely, or he takes the direct approach and does things himself.

In the end, I can only go off of the little scraps of information available, and other people's experiences.

[Hekla]

Re: My theory of Christianity

Educated guess is a hypothesis.

On your concept of the Christian god thing, I agree. I've met (queue flak) Yahweh and he's nothing like the god depicted in the bible at all, even the new testament. He's just there. Very much a pantheon-type deity. In my experience.

[Medusa]

Re: My theory of Christianity

So what you are saying is that your theory pretty much goes against the actual teachings of the Christian religion as outlined in its very one holy book the bible.

Ok.

[jcaternolo]

Re: My theory of Christianity

So what you are saying is that your theory pretty much goes against the actual teachings of the Christian religion as outlined in its very one holy book the bible.

Ok.

Not at all. Jesus taught some important lessons about humility, helping others, etc. All mythos have their merit, but you know what they say. Pray to God for proper understanding of the scriptures. I used to not know what that means. I do now. I know that a lot of people are able to communicate directly with their deities, in one way or another, and they found that the mythos surrounding that deity isn't true. For example, this one person worships the Norse deities. He communicates with Thor through thunderstorms, dreams, and visions. He was informed that Loki was never actually evil. He's a fiery mischievous prankster, but he would never actually kill or harm someone. All his pranks are harmless. But the church demonized him. The same thing has happened to Christianity though. Certain pages that were supposed to be added never were, and pages that weren't supposed to be added were added. So that's why so many people get a twisted perception of Christianity.

[Medusa]

Re: My theory of Christianity

In the new testament God is referred to as the only true god. Now that can be said from any deity I guess. But God in the new testament is viewed as The Only God etc. So there's that.


Mind you I don't believe the bible to be factual. I'm just using it because that's what you are using.

[jcaternolo]

Re: My theory of Christianity

In the new testament God is referred to as the only true god. Now that can be said from any deity I guess. But God in the new testament is viewed as The Only God etc. So there's that.


Mind you I don't believe the bible to be factual. I'm just using it because that's what you are using.

I was going to say, I thought that only the OT mentions God saying that there are no gods to be before him. Although I believe the NT mentions numerous times that the only way to salvation, is through Jesus, who is the son of God. Hmm, guess I won't be sending any prayers to him then, because there are other deities I want to pray to, and as far as I know, all others are just as valid as he is. Oh well, at least I have the consolation of the Christian God not being as bad as the Bible makes him out to be.

[anunitu]

Re: My theory of Christianity

SOOOO,perhaps you are implying "God" "Might" be a multi-personality kinda thing? Sometimes a bad ass,and other times sweet and caring. Hmm,with the whole trinity thing that might explain the alternate "Personality" issues.

BTW,I am not really all that interested in the whole "Who is god really" question,mainly because, well I just am not concerned with "Why"

[frankincense]

Re: My theory of Christianity

I think that the Christian God, has nothing at all to do with Yahweh.

Compare the OT and NT, they are radically different. Jesus would never do any of the things that Yahweh did in the OT. If Yahweh is anything like Jesus, then he would never take lives, unless he absolutely had to. Jesus was a man of action, but also, peace

Old Testament - No Jesus
EXODUS 2:12 And he looked this way and that way, and when he saw that [there was] no man, he slew the Egyptian, and hid him in the sand.
NUMBERS 20:11 And Moses lifted up his hand, and with his rod he smote the rock twice: and the water came out abundantly, and the congregation drank, and their beasts [also].

Moses had trouble speaking, so it was like he was a "dumb". He also taught Isreal to perform sacrifices, so when he killed this man, it was his Daily Sacrifice he performed, before he taught it to Isreal. Daily Sacrifice was an observance of Salvation in his day, which was separate from the body. Moses saw a burning bush not and angel in the form of a man. Moses also smote the rock, and only water came out, which is the gospel, an angel did not smote the rock.
(Moses did not see an angel, and an angel did not smote the rock)

New Testament - Jesus
LUKE 1:19 And the angel answering said unto him, I am Gabriel, that stand in the presence of God; and am sent to speak unto thee, and to shew thee these glad tidings.
LUKE 1:20 And, behold, thou shalt be dumb, and not able to speak, until the day that these things shall be performed, because thou believest not my words, which shall be fulfilled in their season.
LUKE 1:24 And after those days his wife Elisabeth conceived, and hid herself five months, saying,

Zacharias had trouble speaking, when he saw the angel, he became dumb. Moreover, Zacharias did not speak to Isreal in this sense like Moses had done, the Angel spoke to Isreal. The Daily Sacrifice was not to become an offering by man, it was to become Christ, therefore the word of the Angel was sufficient, not an offering to the lord by man, or the priest.
(An Angel revealed himself, therefore an Angel smote the rock, and Jesus came out of the womb, instead of water out of the rock)


There is a clear difference between the Old Testament and the New Testament. The Church is the center of attention. It was to be an arbiter, or a spiritual authority in the name of the Gospel over the congregation, over Isreal. The lynch pin is this, the Apostles were hated and killed by the church in their day, and it did not accept their teaching in their day, but eventually would. When the sin of the temple destruction in 70AD took place they finally began to take accountability as the gospel had intended them to.

(This specific transition I believe is why Aliens did not reveal themselves to Moses, because it was to be made clear that an angel did not reveal themselves, and the gospel was not to be frustrated ... where as in Abraham's day no salvation was taking place, and the aliens had revealed themselves, as the gospel was not fustrated ... if we follow the salvation divisions given to us in the Book of Daniel, 2300 ended with Abraham, but did not began until Moses 1290, Ended with King David 1335, and Ended with Antichrist 6001 minus Daniel's Figures = 1075 + 1 Satan)

[jcaternolo]

Re: My theory of Christianity

SOOOO,perhaps you are implying "God" "Might" be a multi-personality kinda thing? Sometimes a bad ass,and other times sweet and caring. Hmm,with the whole trinity thing that might explain the alternate "Personality" issues.

BTW,I am not really all that interested in the whole "Who is god really" question,mainly because, well I just am not concerned with "Why"

I'm not saying that God is multi personality, I'm saying the scripture basically combined the feats of multiple deities into one, to make it sound like everything was done by one deity. Also, I checked out a site about Christo-Paganism and it mentions a lot of deities being used to make the Christian God, while I believe that Christo-Pagans believe in God (Yahweh), and the Goddess (Mother Earth). Yahweh is a sky god, while Mother Earth is the goddess of the earth. They combined their powers to create all of creation. The church tried to take out all mentions of the goddess, but they didn't completely take out all mentions, because it still mentions the virgin Mary, Mary Magdalene, and I believe there are other references as well. According to Christo-Pagans, they are all connected to Mother Earth (I think, going off of the information from one site that claims to represent Christo-Paganism)

[DON]

Re: My theory of Christianity

Since this is a discussion in the Abrahamic traditions area, then I'll base my response on some fundamental truths according to these traditions...
Firstly, according to these traditions there is only one God and he is constant.
Secondly, according to the specific tradition you refer to, Jesus was also God in human flesh.

This leads us to a conflict because the characteristics exhibited by the two identities in these foundational statements are not consistent.
I could explain away this apparent contradiction merely by pointing out that the different behaviours are tactics employed at different points of time. We ourselves exhibit very different behaviour when dealing with different situations but that does not mean we are two entirely different people.

YWH is full of love and wrath at the same time. Understandable by anyone who has kids I'm sure.

Jesus was also full of love and wrath, but the focus of his wrath did not exist in the physical realm as it was during Genesis / Exodus.

We see Jesus expression of love because his love was directed toward humanity. If we had been witness to what went on after he died, then it would be widely understood that Jesus is very much a "god of war" as someone put it. We are left however with indirect evidence of this (how demons react to his name and authority), and prophesy (in which he returns to our physical realm with destruction in mind).

In my mind, YWH and Jesus are indeed one and the same.

The next logical question then is if Jesus and YWH are the same, YWH is good and just (according to the tradition) then what could have prompted the genocidal activities of Genesis / Exodus? We also know that it wasn't just one sided either. Israel got dealt to on many occasions by their God. At one point, YWH even "divorced" Israel entirely.

But for me, the genocide needed addressing and I personally found a reasonable answer after quite a bit of digging. If this is really the root of your question then I suggest you pick up a shovel and dig :-)

[Azvanna]

Re: My theory of Christianity

I couldn't reconcile God of the Old Testament with God of the New Testament for quite a while, either! My struggle was rooted in the belief that the words in the books of the Bible were the indisputable, perfect, pure, words of God. After my break from church, I could look at things even slightly objectively! Although I still believe the words of the Bible are inspired, I don't see them as infallible.

I see the Bible less as God's revelation to humankind about himself and more of an account of the progression of humankind's revelation of God. The writings we find throughout are authored by ancient people of great faith and intelligence who sought to make sense of the world around them through spiritual eyes. Each revelation built upon the next as they stood on the teaching of the ones who came before them. Obviously, the ancient world was a very different place politically and geographically to how it is now, and so how the people of the time saw their God in action is different to how we see perceive him to be now. I see a progression from a very tribal, localised God who lives in a box in a tent in the middle of camp to a God that is not bound to any particular place or culture and who now resides within his people. When we realised that God has the capacity to be within all people, God stopped ordering the killing of people based on their nationality. Does this mean God changed or does it mean our perception of what He wanted changed?

I hope our revelations of God continue, because we have a long way to go yet before I see us surrendering to the limitlessness of the divine. Does it really have to be one way or the other? Can God still be God if He is not just lamb, but lion also? In monotheism, there has to be room for paradox. There is no pantheon to describe the different characteristics of the Divine on display. It is one god displaying and encompassing the complexity of the natural and the supernatural. I love the mystery embedded in this kind of thinking. There is no predicting and the surprises help me maintain a sense of wonder about the world while at the same time increasing the sense of interconnectedness.

As I grow in wisdom, I learn more of God and the journal I keep reflects and is testimony to the changes I make in my thinking and behaviour as result. It doesn't mean that those newly discovered principles never existed, it means that way of thinking was just never available to me. The way I viewed and recorded past circumstances take on deeper meaning, but I needed the shallow before I could move to the deep.

[MaskedOne]

Re: My theory of Christianity

shrug, there's a reason that when he named himself, the name he gave was

I AM!

The LoH isn't something that easily fits into a small, well defined box and he tends to laugh at you before throwing random objects at your head when you get too comfortable thinking that you've pinned him down. He's more than one thing and he operates on levels that humans don't normally understand easily. He isn't (insert adjective of a choice) or a (insert noun or adjective/noun combo of choice). He is and he expects you to deal with that premise.


Understand, I could make this claim about most Powers. The LoH just happened to be blatant in spelling it out once or twice.

[Medusa]

Re: My theory of Christianity

Mariah Carey's new album is called I AM me. Also don't forget Popeye!