Lie #5: ‘There is no single truth. Everyone needs to explore and find a truth that works for them.’

This one’s a real hot potato. And it’s not something you hear so much from ancient religious institutions… rather, it’s simply the ‘politically correct’ way to talk about spirituality these days.

It tends to be expressed something like this: ‘You’ve got your truth, and I’ve got my truth. You find a faith that works for you, and I’ll find a faith that works for me.’

Well here’s my question:

How many conflicting versions of the truth can actually be true?

I’m not going to use this space to promote an agenda today — or to push any specific claim of Ultimate Truth. I’m just going to highlight a very simple, logical reality that each of us, in our search for Truth, must recognize. Pardon me if I offend you, but I’m going to put it bluntly.

It’s impossible for all religions to be true.

In other words, if Islam is essentially true, then Buddhism, Hinduism and Christianity are not. If Buddhism is essentially true, then Islam, Christianity and Hinduism are not. And so on.

How can I say such a thing? Because if you *really* study these religions, it will become clear that each makes bold, fundamental assertions about reality that are not compatible with the others.

For example, Hinduism states that divinity is present in everything. Christianity, Judaism and Islam all assert that God is distinctly separate from what he has created. The implications of these different views run very deep, and they are fundamentally incompatible. It’s logically impossible for both views to be true.

So why bring this up, anyway?

Well first I have to make a confession. I would *like* to believe that all religions could be true. I would personally *like* to believe that all paths lead to God. It feels good. It’s a kinder view of the world. It puts everyone on equal footing.

But it just doesn’t make sense.

Truth is, by nature, exclusive. There are always more wrong ways to do just about anything than right ways. There are always more wrong answers to any given question than right ones.

True?

And you know what? This really raises the stakes. It puts a real sense of urgency in our search for truth, because it shows that if we’re not careful, we can fall for a half-truth.

On the other hand, if you diligently search, seek out the facts, and your spiritual journey brings you to a place where the pieces fit in place – if everything makes logical sense and it feels right in your heart – then you should not hesitate to share your joy with others.

OK… now let’s stop right now and make something very clear:

If we possess the truth, it doesn’t give us the right to be unkind to those who disagree. It didn’t give Bin Laden the right to declare Jihad, hijack airplanes and fly them into the World Trade Center. It didn’t give so-called ‘Christians’ the right to kill people in the Crusades. It doesn’t give us the right to be disrespectful or violent.

What it does give us is the right – and the confidence – to go out into the marketplace of ideas and *see* if our Truth stands up to hard scrutiny.

C.S. Lewis was talking about this very thing when he said, ‘You don’t need to defend a Lion. You just need to let him out of his cage.’

If you really do have the truth, then you have nothing to fear. You don’t need to burn books or censor speech. Truth is its own best defense.

In our modern, sophisticated culture, spirituality gets locked up in a cage. It’s a taboo subject. Discussions about religion are not considered ‘polite conversation.’ So nobody talks about it.

The result? People don’t talk to each other. They live in fear and isolation.

Some folks harbor ideas and notions that make absolutely no sense, but because those ideas are never brought out into the light of day, they’re never questioned.

Others have great wisdom, but they’re afraid to share it with others!

How sad.

In your search for the truth, then, know that you’re not just looking for something that sounds good. As with any other kind of truth, it may *not* feel good all the time. Know that you’re looking for something definite, something that will by nature make some pretty bold claims.

Also, please understand that if someone tells you they possess the truth, they’re not being arrogant. Fact is, they’re either sadly deceived or else they’re right. You can’t put someone down for being deceived, and you can’t fault someone for being right!

The real challenge is to discern the difference.

Tomorrow I’m going to cover Lie #6:

‘The Bible is out of date, inaccurate and over-rated. People in the 21st century are way too smart for that.’

Thanks for sticking with me.

Respectfully Submitted,

Perry Marshall

Hear 7 Great Lies or Organized Religion on your computer, iPod or MP3 player:

147 Responses to “Lie #5: ‘There is no single truth. Everyone needs to explore and find a truth that works for them.’”

  1. Mafo Chinyemba says:

    Point blank fact. Makes much good to come out open. Continue.

  2. Richard Ruquist says:

    Michael D. Wolok wrote an interesting Knol on Everett’s Many World Interpretation of QM a couple of years ago. http://knol.google.com/k/hugh-everett-s-many-worlds-version-of-quantum-mechanics\#

    It in essence says that if the world is logical then the Many World theory follows. Otherwise a cosmic consciousness is required. I think it’s the best argument for a cosmic consciousness that I have ever heard.

    But that’s a dilemma for most scientists who neither accept the idea of a cosmic consciousness nor an infinite number of worlds in a finite volume, what the Many World thesis implies..

    • Richard Ruquist says:

      A quantum mechanic argument for universal collective consciousness

      According to the Copenhagen Interpretation of Quantum Mechanics things do not exist if they are not observed. Yet the Copenhagen interpretation yields a number of paradoxes such as Schrodinger’s cat paradox, and also yields wave-particle duality as well as loss of determinism.

      All these problems disappear if the universe takes every possible quantum path, namely Hugh Everett’s Many-Worlds theory of quantum mechanics. His theory makes quantum mechanics deterministic. More to the point, there is no need for free will as every possible choice is made in one world or another.

      Take the Schrodinger’s Cat Paradox for example. In one world the cat is alive and in another it is dead. Whether you see a live cat or a dead cat when you open the box depends on which world you are in. So the Many Worlds version seems subjective, but it is not since some version of you is in every world.

      Take flipping coins. Each time a coin is flipped a heads world is created and a tails world is created. At the beginning of USA football games a coin is flipped and without exception everybody sees either head or tails, suggestive of a collective consciousness. But this is easily explained by all those observers existing in both worlds.

      Bottomline is that every possibility becomes a reality in the Many Worlds theory. Hitler rules in one or more such worlds. Nuclear holocaust has destroyed many such worlds. So such a QM theory naturally leads to every level of good and bad in a multiplicity of worlds no matter what choices anyone makes. Such is the justification for any kind of atrocity.

      My opinion is that logically a Many Worlds Atheist, as most scientists seem to be, has no rational reason to be moral for in another world the opposite will be true. So what is the resolution of such a dilemma.

      Obviously “something” has to select one real physical world from the many virtual worlds of possibilities in order to preserve free will, morality and perhaps even consciousness.

      My candidate for that “something” is a universal collective consciousness, a candidate that seems to be sufficient but not necessary.

      The above argument is the first I have found that seems to advocate a moral principle in deciding which QM interpretation to accept. What I find acceptable is a interpretation that is similar to the Copenhagen interpretation except that the consciousness that selects the one from the many possibilities is a universal consciousness, not an individual human consciousness.
      Richard

  3. Gyan says:

    The beliefs like ‘My religion is better than your’, or ‘My God is the Real God’ have divided the world more than anything else.
    Be tolerant. Be open to diversity. Be open to the presence of multiplicity in the World. Stop trying to color the world in a single color.
    Much of the discussion above by many learned people leads to this conclusion only.
    Don’t adopt a stance that makes you adopt a God like posture.
    And do not forget that the God for which all this fight is going on – nobody has seen him.
    A humble attitude towards the differences displayed by the humanity, in the form of multiplicity of religions, beliefs, customs, rituals, is what behoves us all! And only this attitude will spread love and understanding.

  4. Gyan says:

    Just a rejoinder to the above-
    World has to learn many things from the tolerance and openness of Hinduism. Hinduism never claims any copyright over truth, or God for that matter, as it believes that God can manifest and can be worshiped in myriad forms.

  5. Amanda "Bamawing" Ulevich says:

    I have heard the idea expressed in this “lie” called Universalism. It’s a very misunderstood concept.

    Most people think universalism means that there “is no one truth” or that any given religion has “a small part of a greater truth.” This is inaccurate. I believe that ALL religions, if they provide peace, inspire compassion, and allow you to walk humbly with your God, are 100% true.

    How can conflicting truths all be true? The answer lies in the complexity of God Himself. He can be hot and cold, day and night, male and female, single and legion.

    He’s God. He doesn’t *do* limitations.

    Saying that God cannot possibly be Christian/Muslim/Hindi/Buddhist/whatever is placing a human limitation on a divine Being. Perhaps people can’t believe two different things at one time, but that doesn’t mean that God can be only one thing or the other.

    Now with the misunderstanding cleared up, let me explain why I believe the way I do:

    Take a look at a vacant lot. Notice all the plants that grow there – the different types. There are probably a number of different insects, too. God appears to be fond of diversity. Why on earth would such a being wish to be worshiped only in one way?

    I hope this clears some things up. I’m not overly tolerant because it’s politically correct or happy fluffy. I believe, strongly, that different faiths are all correct, valid, and sacred.

    • GyanP says:

      Thanks Amanda, for explaining it so clearly. You seem to have stolen my thoughts, which perhaps I was not able to articulate so clearly!
      A God is a supreme intelligence – can He ever think like this: that He is a Christian, so he belongs to my clan; that other is a Jew, he is not a part of my world. That means, there will be many Gods – but that is a contradiction in itself!
      If there is a God, he is One. How we understand Him is our problem – but I cannot believe that he is partial; or in other words, that He is Christian Or Hindu, or Muslim Or Jew Or Jain Or Buddhist.
      If you see contradiction, do some more soul searching – maybe you will get all the answers from within. I think, one who feels obliged/compelled to follow some particular path, is bound to see too many contradictions.
      World is there for millions of years. Religions have come and gone. Will you say that God loved the world a little less before the birth of Krishna/Ram/Christ, etc?
      –Nobody can say that!

  6. david thomas says:

    Elohim bless you all.
    Can I ask what is most important.
    To follow the philosophies of Jesus the Christ.
    Or to pray and sing his praises.
    Reply direct to dt7659@googlemail.com
    And do you believe God is a title like king and that he, the creator has a name?

    • Chris Moolman says:

      Yes David God means a object of worship, so many things can be your god. God almighty has titles and names like the best know title is Father, Son and Holy Ghost. Jesus said in
      Mat 28:19 Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost:
      What most Churches miss is that He said in the NAME of God.
      Then Peter who had the revelation of who Jesus really was said in
      Act 2:38 Then Peter said unto them, Repent, and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins, and ye shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost.

      He used God’s name instead of the titles. God also has name changes. In the old testament He was known as Jehova (Father)and Jesus (Son) in the new testament. Then there is a name change again that is for the last(Holy Ghost). It is found in Revelations.

      Rev 3:12 Him that overcometh will I make a pillar in the temple of my God, and he shall go no more out: and I will write upon him the name of my God, and the name of the city of my God, which is new Jerusalem, which cometh down out of heaven from my God: and I will write upon him my new name.
      and
      Rev 19:12 His eyes were as a flame of fire, and on his head were many crowns; and he had a name written, that no man knew, but he himself.

      I hope this clears it up for you.

  7. nayera says:

    Although the word lie is not suitable but let us start slowly but surely if you don’t mind
    Copying you In other words, if Islam is essentially true, then Buddhism,
    Hinduism and Christianity are not. If Buddhism is essentially true,
    then Islam, Christianity and Hinduism are not. And so on.
    How can I say such a thing? Because if you *really* study these
    religions, it will become clear that each makes bold, fundamental
    assertions about reality that are not compatible with the others.

    *allow me not to agree with you, Christianity, Judaism and Islam are compatible with each other in the three original holy books. But due to the interference by omitting and adding some verses in the first two holy books they look incompatible. What I want to highlight here is the problem is not with the original religions the real problem is with the people who practice the religion and feel free to change GOD’s words. I would like to refer here that for more than 1430 years the holy Quran is not touched with any changes.

    Copying you If we possess the truth, it doesn’t give us the right to
    be unkind to those who disagree. It didn’t give Bin Laden the
    right to declare Jihad, hijack airplanes and fly them into the
    World Trade Center. It didn’t give so-called ‘Christians’ the
    right to kill people in the Crusades. It doesn’t give us the
    right to be disrespectful or violent.
    * Totally AGREE with you, but I just want add that when people are being treated unfairly (am talking about Palestinians, children, women , olds and armless people are being killed for years now and the global society seems to be in deep sleep. An example of what happened today to the Turkish ship which carrying supplements to the Palestinians, see how many innocent people killed and injured and see the reaction of the world especially USA, see how Iran is being punished for the what so called neucular weapon while Israel is not) you cannot expect their reaction of anger. In fact i believe it is political rather than religious what Ben Laden did, he wanted to draw USA attention to what is happening with the Palestinians and how they cannot enjoy their human right in their country especially the Arabs do nothing towards that. I am not justifying what he did, i totally disagree with him same i disagree with Israel practice with Palestinians

    Copying you
    1) The existence of the universe
    2) the extreme fine-tuning of the universe, the solar system and all physical constants
    3) The existence of life, for which modern science, once you get past the smoke and mirrors, has not the beginning of an explanation for
    4) The fact that people everywhere, at all times, have sought God and desired to worship
    5) The innate sense of right and wrong and fairness that all people in all cultures have
    6) Experiences like miracles, near death experiences, very strange things etc etc — if you get 20 people in a room and everyone’s honest and trusts others not to make fun of them, there’s always 3-6 people who can describe very, very strange, seemingly impossible events that have happened to them somewhere along the way.
    7) The fact that most people whom I’ve met, who say there is no God, are always so angry and vitriolic…meanwhile people who worship and pray have joy and peace. Why?
    Allow me to add
    Allah Almighty Said:”We will soon show them Our signs in the Universe and INSIDE THEIR SELVES, until it will become quite clear to them that it is the truth. Is it not sufficient as regards your Lord that He is a witness over all things? (The Noble Quran, 41:53)”
    Very Important Discovery:

    A new star forming out of a cloud of gas and dust (nebula), which is one of the remnants of the “smoke” that was the origin of the whole universe. (The Space Atlas, Heather and Henbest, page 50)
    Allah Almighty said: “Then He turned to the heaven when it was smoke…(The Noble Quran, 41:11)”
    The Noble Quran on the Origin of the Universe
    Only Islam claims that the universe was originated from Dust and Hot Gas, or Smoke.

    Another Very Important Discovery:

    Allah Almighty Said: “And when the heaven splitteth asunder and becometh ROSY LIKE RED HIDE – (The Noble Quran, 55:37)”
    What Allah Almighty is Saying here is that when Galaxies explode, they form a red-rose-shaped explosion. He is also telling us that the Universe will all turn into red exploded galaxies looking like red or reddish roses when the Day of Judgement happens.
    The explosion of Stars (FORMING RED ROSES), Galaxies and the Universe in the Noble Quran had been confirmed by NASA.
    http://antwrp.gsfc.nasa.gov/apod/ap991031.html

    For more
    http://www.harunyahya.com/
    http://www.angelfire.com/stars4/hisham1000/

  8. david thomas says:

    I certainly do not believe in salvation by faith alone — – Nor do I believe in salvation just because one has a faith in Christ.. Absolution is gained by genuine remorse and the resultant action to it. This is in the new testament. —
    MATHEW Cpt 7 -Vse 21 – 24 CHECK IT OUT.

  9. Niaudraf says:

    See the intelligent or (lied) fact science that say the truth. But i wonder,The Darwin Theory never been proven even today. What i learn from it, only historical and evolution without prove. This man name DARWIN are the biggest lied in history in human mankind science. All his theory only says about HYPOTHESIS and not the fact of truth like Albert Eisenstein does with prove and calculation. Which one are you all support. I will choice Albert better than Darwin, the lies! I agree if he are the only evolution from the nut ape@monkey species 2 billion years ago.

  10. Sihan Zheng says:

    I grew up in communist china.
    Many things i learned are not correct. For example Capitalists are not all evil, religion is not a brainwashing device.
    however, when i think about things, i found out that there is no right or wrong. instead, the “correctness” of a concept is based on its situation and environment.
    therefore, i believe that maybe there is no truth. and that the truth doesn’t matter. North Koreans think they live in the most democratic country, and they are still happy although its not true. and didn’t people used to support Hitler? the “truth” does not matter. in Buddhism people say 心诚则灵, which means that things work if you believe in it. if you don’t believe in it, it won’t work.
    so I believe that the truth does not matter. its simply a glorified version of the placebo effect. after all, humanity survived fine thinking that the earth was flat.
    I believe that its better living with a comfortable lie, than an uncomfortable truth. Especially with things like politics, philosophy and religion, where there is no absolute “right” or “wrong”

  11. Mark Yatsko says:

    All religions are half right but some will say that it is better to be half right than half wrong! There is a Creater who we know as God. The word God is a generic term as glass is. There is over one thousand different recipes that make up what we call glass. There are many deities we call God. This is why we have so many religions. The sad thing is that we think our God or our Religion is the right one and everyone else is wrong. Someday in the near future we will all find out who was right. Gays, murderers, war, jealousy and hate is wrong but I am not to judge. I am not worthy of this judgement. My job on earth is to love everyone and to seek Abba (father). You are to pray and to seek Abba, live your life according to the rules of the land and judge nothing. If you live in a land that makes homosexualality against the law then you must follow this law and not judge this law for you are not worthy to judge. If we all live to seek abba (Father) our creator, try to love everyone, respect our Governments and judge no one, then this would be a better world! I cannot say that Catholics are wrong or buddism is wrong, each has some good points and I would be wrong and will miss the truth. If you go around trying to prove your religion is right or trying to prove everyone wrong you become judgemental and you waste your entire life. Do not be concern or judgemental about Gods, religions, life, people, laws or creation. Life is too short and this is not your concern. Abba God is everywhere and in everything, seek your father, love and respect everything, do not concern yourself for what you do not understand, and most of all be not judgemental. The is a higher power that is running all of this. Let Yahweh be Abba and live your life to the best of your ability.

    • robert taylor says:

      I think you have it wrong here. We do need to concern ourselves with the things that we do not understand. With respect, of course. Governments govern by the will of the people for the benefit of the people.Laws must make sense.
      On rational grounds and not religeous grounds.Religeous beliefs should be questioned.There are so many of them that do not make sense. You call God Abba for a start, which means father. That implies a male God.How can a male produce without a female? Does this Abba have a female side? Abba does both parts in the production of life? Does that mean Abba is also a hermaphrodite? To describe the Creator as having male characteristics suggests to me that man has created God in his own image.

  12. Aigars B says:

    I don’t have faith. Faithful people are disturbing, because any moment they can act on NON-reason – plain faith only – terrorists, radical nationalists, believers in god/hell…
    *
    Believers in ONE truth are one step away from atheism. They do not believe in other gods – they only believe in their own. Ohh, man, just give up the last one :)

  13. robert taylor says:

    How can we really know what truth is?

    In the OT, God deliberately sends strong delusions to the prophets. Ezek 14.9.
    ” And if the prophet be decieved when he hath spoken a thing, I, the Lord your God have decieved that prophet.”

    1.Kings 22.23.
    ” Now therefore, the Lord hath put a lying spirit in the mouth of all thy prophets”.

    In the NT we read,2 Thess. 11-12.
    ” For this cause, God shall send them strong delusion that they should believe a lie, that they might all be damned”.
    Even Jesus Himself seems to practice deception.
    Mark 4.9-12, says,
    “That seeing they may see, and not percieve, and hearing they may hear and not understand; lest at any time they should be converted and their sins be forgiven them”.
    What kind of God is it that deliberately decieves?
    Surely that must be the worst possible thing a God could do?
    Instead of helping, deliberately decieveing.
    Who really is the Great Deciever?

  14. June Dewar says:

    In answer to Robert
    Your 1st question. “How can we really know what truth is”? In the OT, God deliberately sends strong delusions to the prophets. Ezek 14.9.” And if the prophet be deceived when he hath spoken a thing, I, the Lord your God have deceived that prophet.”

    Did you read Ezekiel Chapter 12:24 “For there will no more prove to be any valueless vision nor double faced divination in the house of Israel”. Before and after Ezekiel 14:9 God refers to the false prophets and prophetesses who were bowing down to dungy idols and prophesying lies in defiance of what God was speaking through his true prophets.

    If you have adult children you will want them to follow your instructions to keep them safe from danger. If your children continually disrespected you and your instructions and by doing so put themselves in danger what could you do about it other than allow them to be fooled by those who are leading them astray from the right path.

    1.Kings 22.23. Your next question ” Now therefore, the Lord hath put a lying spirit in the mouth of all thy prophets”. Ahab was determined not to listen to what God was telling him through his prophet Micaiah. Ahab told Micaiah all the prophets (Those worshipping dungy idols).were saying they would prove successful against the Syrians. Ahab told Micaiah not to revoke what had been decided. God had previously given victory over the Syrians and Ahab refused to carry out God’s command to put their King Benhadad to death. Now the Syrians were coming up against Ahab again. Ahab allowed his wife Jezebel to have Naboth murdered so Ahab would take over his land rights. He also allowed her to have all God’s prophets murdered. She also constituted disgusting pagan worship and practices. Micaiah warned in 1st Kings 22:22,23 “And now here YHWH has put a deceptive spirit into these prophets of yours; but he has spoken calamity for you. God had told Ahab the truth through Micaiah. Ahab was not willing to listen to the truth. So God allowed one of the evil spirits whom Ahab had been bowing down to fool him simply because he refused to listen to reason. Ahab was warned and told by God he was fooling himself and allowing himself to be deceived.

    You then comment: In the NT we read, 2 Thess. 11-12.
    ” For this cause, God shall send them strong delusion that they should believe a lie, that they might all be damned”. If we read from 2nd Thess 2:8-12 “Then indeed the lawless one will be revealed, whom the Lord Jesus will do away with by the spirit of his mouth and bring to nothing by the manifestation of his presence. But the lawless one’s presence is according to the operation of Satan with every powerful work and lying signs and portents and with every unrighteous deception for those who are perishing as a retribution because they did not accept the love of the truth that they might be saved. So your statement does not stand i.e.
    You say “Even Jesus Himself seems to practice deception”. Mark 4.9-12, “That seeing they may see, and not perceive, and hearing they may hear and not understand; lest at any time they should be converted and their sins be forgiven them”. You ask “What kind of God is it that deliberately deceives? Surely that must be the worst possible thing a God could do? Instead of helping, deliberately deceiving. Who really is the Great Deceiver

    I ask “What kind of people are they who refuse to know the truth; who refuse to know God and Jesus; who refuse to love and care for others; who worship Satan; who accuse God and Jesus of unrighteousness?” Just what kind of people are THEY”?

    • OSEI-AGYEI Kwasi Snr says:

      in your answer to Robert, you asked at the tale ent “What kind of people are they who refuse to know the truth; who refuse to know God and Jesus; who refuse to love and care for others; who worship Satan; who accuse God and Jesus of unrighteousness?” Just what kind of people are THEY”? What makes you believe that your idea of god as obtained in the bible is correct. There are so many contradiction in the bible such that the whole book is rendered useless. How do you say god is the source of all that exist and at the same time claim that satan is the source of evil? A person who was born of man and woman who at the point of dying asked “my god my god why has thou forsaken me” is now claimed to be god. help put an end to this greatest of delusions

  15. Jim Brechtel says:

    Perry,

    First, I would like to commend you on your writings and the obvious dedication and effort you have made for the benefit of others. It would be good to have genuine discussions, regarding what is Truth. The search for Truth is what brought me to this website. Somehow, I pray that we all come closer to the Truth and receive it.

    You stated, “Christianity, Judaism and Islam all assert that God is distinctly separate from what he has created.”

    I find myself neither in agreement nor in disagreement. I think this topic deserves further explanation. Plus, it might be best not to make such a statement, while grouping Christianity with non-Christian religions since it requires a bit of sorting out due to distinct differences.

    While there is a separation that happened at the fall of man, it is written that Jesus said, “The Kingdom is within.” There is the Christian belief in baptism of the Holy Spirit and Apostle Paul taught much about the formation of Christ within. In other words, in Christianity there doesn’t seem to be a distinct separation of the Creator from the created but varying degrees of separation from the Father. What is your take on this?

    • perrymarshall says:

      When you read the Gospels Jesus talks about the Kingdom of something that is coming or has come, and the clear implication is that it wasn’t there before.

      I think you would find very few Christian theologians who would agree that “there doesn’t seem to be a distinct separation of the Creator from the created.”

      • Jim Brechtel says:

        Ah, after almost two months, I can see the error of my own writing. I did not state this correctly. The fault is in the statement regarding a “distinct” seperation.

        Satan brought about the fall of man and the seperation from the Father. Jesus Christ showed us the way to reunification with the Father. If you read the gospels, you will find the teachings of Christ, Himself, and others, such as Apostle Paul, regarding union with God.

        In the beginning, all were in the Father; and to the Father we return. This unity with the Father through Christ and the Holy Spirit is what Christianity is about. Let’s examine verses from Jesus’ prayer in the garden:

        John 17:20-23 “My prayer is not for them alone. I pray also for those who will believe in me through their message, that all of them may be one, Father, just as you are in me and I am in you. May they also be in us so that the world may believe that you have sent me. I have given them the glory that you gave me, that they may be one as we are one: I in them and you in me. May they be brought to complete unity to let the world know that you sent me and have loved them even as you have loved me.”

        Jesus Christ said this prayer for all disciples, including modern-day Christians. Apostle Paul referred to this as the formation of Christ within.

        We seek the Kingdom within, because we are in the Father and He is in us. Having the Creator within does not make the created the Creator, so there is a distinction. However, by following Jesus Christ’s teachings, we become one with the Father, not as Jesus did, but as his children and as He taught and prayed for us. In this way, the seperation caused by the fall of man is ended and there is no longer a “distinct” seperation by virtue of Jesus’ own words. Yet, although we can be reunited with the Father, we will always be distinctly seperate persons who praise God forever in Heaven.

        I don’t know how many Christian theologans recognize this. It’s likely that some will agree and some not.

  16. Larry Kwiat says:

    One of the older names for God translates as: “The Great Unknown”.
    When I combine that concept with the multi-dimensional universe we find ourselves in today, it becomes clear to me that we can indeed all have our own truths, and that we only need to share these with each other where our dimensions overlap. It isn’t a matter of ownership, but rather of existence and awareness.

    It isn’t radically different than the theological history of the same views, they simply reside in a slightly different dimension. The overlap comes in areas where Creation brings about similar patterns: not necessarily just dealing with awareness in words, but in molecules, cells, atoms, and so on. In earlier history, we hadn’t explored quite so much of the references that we find real today in science: but I have yet to see science really disprove theology. Religion: to bind back (re-ligio) is another matter, that is a process of organizing the ideas into a common theme. Sets them in cement, which ages and eventually cracks.

    We need to look instead at real questions like: what is a miracle? How do we define (?) a miracle. If we succeed in defining one, is it still a miracle? Hmmm….

    God bless!

    Larry

  17. Albert Jesuit says:

    It’s all really very simple, everyone is over thinking this. The Proof that God ‘is’ is science it’s self. Not just that God ‘exists’, for God is the cause of ‘existence’, and can ‘exist’ at will of course(Jesus in the flesh for instance); but God is beyond ‘existence’. ‘Existing’ is a sub-set of God.

    Think about it. If this is a random Cosmos governed by Magic (abbra kadabra, poof!, a Universe just appears and poof! Life just appears, for no reason what so ever), then how in the world can science exist? Science needs repeatability. Science needs rules (laws of Nature).And some Intelligence (aka God) needs not only to create these rules, but to maintain them through time and arbitrate them microsecond by microsecond, or science would not even be possible. if there is no God, then measurements I take today and the observations I take would not be repeatable tomorrow or next year in a random dominate Cosmos, now would they?

    Q. E. D. God is! :) (and thank God for that! What is the point of getting out of bed other wise? Atheists ‘got’ no reason to live, do, be, write, breathe, Love, create, or anything else.)

    • OSEI-AGYEI Kwasi Snr says:

      You state “Think about it. If this is a random Cosmos governed by Magic (abbra kadabra, poof!, a Universe just appears and poof! Life just appears, for no reason what so ever), then how in the world can science exist?” When you say god is beyond existence, what do you actually imply? If he (why not she?) actually exists what is the source of his existence to be beyond it? Logic should be coherent. don’t you think so? Seems to me the act of creation that you trying to postulate is no different from the magic (abbra kadabra, poof!) sort of thing you abhor.

      • Jim Brechtel says:

        Why do some people who ascribe to science have such dificulty with the idea that God created science and, therefore, God and science are not mutually exclusive?

        • Conway Redding says:

          1. Jim, the word you were looking for is “subscribe,” not “ascribe.”
          2. The other word with which you seemed to have a minor problem is “difficult,” not “dificult.”
          3. Those of us who subscribe to science (maybe not so much to science as to the logic and rationality that are the foundation of science), and who are also nullifidians, have difficulty with the idea that God created science, because to us, the evidence for the real existence of a deity of any kind seems outweighed by the evidence that all deities, from Tarhunt to Hadad to Amun-Ra to Zeus to Ahura Mazda to Jehovah/Allah/God, are imaginary constructs, much like Winnie-the-Pooh and Frankenstein’s monster, created, not as were Winnie-the-Pooh and Frankenstein’s monster, for entertainment, but rather to explain many frightening, once inexplicable phenomena to which we humans are subject here on earth, chiefest of which is probably death, and to provide the false hope that, by propitiating these deities, we might have some kind of control over those frightening phenomena.

          • Jim Brechtel says:

            Conway,

            The definition of “ascribe” is “To attribute to a specified cause, source, or origin”. So, I definitely used the correct word and did so deliberately. An atheist will generally “ascribe” that which others believe to be a “miracle” purely to science or some non-supernatural cause.

            Thank you for pointing out my typographical error, regarding the word, “difficulty”. That’s very kind of you.

            There is an answer to your #3 question, which you will probably reject – but just in case you have an open mind:

            You see, there is an enemy at work that would very much like it if no-one believed in anything. So, it caused pagan religions to pop up over the ages, even some that have actual supernatural attributes. We see it now in public schools, where kids are taught about pagan religions and even encouraged to celebrate the pagan holiday of halloween. At the same time, they are not allowed to celebrate Christmas or even mention Jesus Christ in school – yet my grade school son was forced to write an essay on Bhudda as a “history” assignment. Go figure. This is so that the children, who will someday be adults, will become so confused about religion that they end up believing in nothing. Where does this effort to confuse come from? Well, it comes from the antichrist, which is everything that is opposed to “Christ”. From a government perspective, it’s much easier to control people who don’t believe in anything, as well.

            Most of the “frightening phenomena” you mention are just fairy tales and, therefore, not frightening. However, having actually experienced the presence of God’s Holy Spirit, angels, etc, and witnessed absolute miracles that could in no way be replicated with any known medical or scientific technology, I have to say that there is absolutely no question that there exists a truly omniscient and omnipotent God. I could go on but I don’t think you would be interested. But if you are sincerely interested in hearing more then I would be happy to continue.

            The bottom line is that there really is one true God – and only one. If you ask and are sincere about knowing the truth, you will be shown. Perhaps, not when or how you want to be shown but God will not refuse you if you sincerely want to know the truth. Give it a try and have patience. I believe you will be shown.

            • Conway Redding says:

              Sorry, Jim, “ascribe” is a transitive verb, requiring an object. One may sensibly say that an atheist, or nullifidian, ascribes certain virtues (“certain virtues” would be the object here) to science, but to say that an atheist, or nullifidian, ascribes to science, is grammatically incorrect and semantically meaningless. On the other hand, one of the many meanings of “subscribe (to)” is “to believe in,” or “support.” So I maintain that what you meant to say was that atheists subscribe to science.

              I didn’t specify any frightening thing other than death, which I doubt that many would hesitate to call “a fairy tale.” I also doubt that the many natural disasters (often called “acts of God”) that have created human misery for as long as mankind has been in existence, are likely to be seen as fairy tales either, nor any of the many unpleasant diseases/physical conditions to which we may be subject, such as amyotrophic lateral sclerosis, retinoblastoma, glioblastoma multiforme, scleroderma, Huntington’s chorea, Gerstmann-Sträussler-Scheinker syndrome, fatal familial insomnia, anencephaly — the list can be almost endlessly lengthened.

              As for your argument that “there is an an enemy at work that would very much like it if no one believed in anything,” it is self-contradictory insofar as you blame that enemy for fostering beliefs in the defunct deities I mentioned. If the enemy doesn’t want anyone to believe in anything, then why would this enemy foster any beliefs at all? For that matter, how can you be sure that your belief in the deity you call the “one true God” is not another one of “the enemy’s” tricks?

              I suppose, of course, that when you speak of this “enemy,” you are referring to Satan. Well, in my book, Jim, Satan is another creation of the human imagination, that has as its function explaining why so many bad things happen in the world. If the deity in whose real existence you seem to believe is indeed all-powerful, how is it that this deity even allows Satan to do any mischief? Or even allows Satan to exist? These questions become more difficult to answer when you consider that another of the attributes of your deity is supposed to be all-goodness. So you’ve got an all-powerful, all-good, all-knowing deity who allows a supremely evil being, Satan, to do mischief to mankind, to whom your deity is supposed to stand in the same relationship as that of a loving father to his children? Jim, the story just doesn’t hang together.

              Now, I don’t know exactly what your personal experiences have been — you speak of “the presence of God’s Holy Spirit, angels” and “absolute miracles” — and I don’t question that you have indeed had such experiences –, but in my 40 some years as a clinical psychologist I have talked to many people, some hospitalized, some not, who have had personal experiences that in no way reflected consensual reality, and I guess my first hypothesis would be that you are another such. Understand that this says nothing about your sincerity, only about your state of mind. Nor does it say anything about your intelligence; there are many quite intelligent people who are thoroughly deluded. Case in point, Ted Kaczynski, the Unabomber, a brilliant mathematician. And there are many quite intelligent people who hallucinate all sorts of interesting things, on any one of a number of sensory modalities — visual, auditory, olfactory, tactile.

              In closing, here is the only circumstance I can think of that might make me rethink my position on the real existence of a deity: If the skies were to open and a golden staircase were to unfurl and Jesus the Christ were to descend that staircase accompanied by choirs of Angels, Archangels, Cherubim, Seraphim, Wheels, Thrones, Powers, Dominions, Authorities, and Principalities, all the imaginary denizens of an equally imaginary “Heaven,” then, once I had convinced myself that the spectacle was not a production of Dreamworks’ or Pixar’s CGI wizardry, I would be inclined to say, “Gee, I guess I was wrong.” But until then, the whole Christian mythology, and the whole Islamic mythology, and the whole Judaic mythology, and the mythologies of all the other religions that have clouded and that continue to cloud the minds of humankind, are just that, mythologies. And as I look around at the events in the world, what I observe leads me to conclude that either the deity of whom you speak does not exist in any real sense, or, if that deity does exist in any real sense, then he/she/it is of such a depraved moral character as to make holding him/her/it in any esteem whatsover well nigh unthinkable.

              • Jim Brechtel says:

                Conway,

                There is nothing wrong with my use of “ascribe”. There is a problem with your use of “subscribe”. But why should we care? We both know what is meant and to continue that thread of discussion adds nothing and would be moronic.

                Re: “but in my 40 some years as a clinical psychologist ”

                Ah. That explains a great deal. I once had a “psychiatrist” quack diagnose me with a dilusional disorder after talking to me for less than 15 minutes. Of course, he didn’t wait for me to produce the photographs and videos of angels nor the testimonies of people who had been miraculously healed, etc. But then neither did I because I walked out.

                There are a lot of people who are on medication because they see things and/or hear things that are real. Just because *you* don’t believe doesn’t make them not real. Atheist shrinks tell people they are hallucinating, when they are not, and give them drugs, which rarely solves the problem but covers it up for a while. They just need stronger meds later on. While there are likely to be true mental disorders of this type, not all are so. To give out meds like that is pure atheist quackery and hurts the patient more than you know.

                However, that you’re not an actal doctor but a “psychologist” is duly noted.

                I have, indeed, questioned my own sanity but have been evaluated by a real “doctor” and found to be quite sane. You see not all psychiatrists and physicians are atheist. Some believe in the Truth. Plus, it’s quite difficult to hallucinate someone else’s healing and actally have them verifiably healed by a third party. That would be quite a feat, indeed.

                Re: “here is the only circumstance I can think of that might make me rethink my position on the real existence of a deity”

                Good luck with that one. If you were someone like Moses or Elijah or Jesus Christ, himself, you might have a chance at it. However, what makes you think you’re that worthy to deserve such a sign or treatment from the God you have repeatedly insulted and blasphemed?

                Jesus said we should not throw pearls before swine nor give our food to dogs. If you want to have a sincere discussion and be open to the truth, I am very willing. However, if your goal is to just argue, insult, and try to convice of others your atheist beliefs then this conversation is over.

                • Conway Redding says:

                  Jim, I have enclosed your comments in quotation marks, but not mine.

                  “Conway,

                  There is nothing wrong with my use of “ascribe”. There is a problem with your use of “subscribe”. But why should we care? We both
                  know what is meant and to continue that thread of discussion adds nothing and would be moronic.”

                  Well, as you used the word in your response to my first post, you were correct. But in the post of yours that prompted my comment, you were wrong, and insisting that you were not gets us into one of those schoolyard exchanges of the “Is so!….Is Not!” variety. Not very productive. When I questioned your use of the word “ascribe,” though, I specified wherein you were in error. Now you question my use of the word “subscribe,” but with no reason given. I can’t help but think that that is typical of those who have a religious mindset, to make a bald assertion without any supporting reasoning. But no matter.

                  “Re: ‘but in my 40 some years as a clinical psychologist’

                  Ah. That explains a great deal. I once had a “psychiatrist” quack diagnose me with a dilusional”

                  The word is “delusional,” Jim.

                  “disorder after talking to me for less than 15 minutes. Of course, he didn’t wait for me to produce the photographs and videos of angels nor the testimonies of people who had been miraculously healed, etc. But then neither did I because I walked out.”

                  You have photographs and videos of angels? Please, release them to public scrutiny, so that those of us who doubt that such entities exist can be amazed and can revise our beliefs, once we’ve ruled out photo- or video-processing trickery.

                  “There are a lot of people who are on medication because they see things and/or hear things that are real. Just because *you* don’t believe doesn’t make them not real. Atheist shrinks tell people they are hallucinating, when they are not, and give them drugs, which rarely solves the problem but covers it up for a while.”

                  If what these folks are experiencing is non-hallucinatory and therefore real, why would it be considered a problem at all, something capable of being covered up for a while, but then, I take it, likely to reassert itself?

                  “They just need stronger meds later on. While there are likely to be true mental disorders of this type, not all are so. To give out meds like that is pure atheist quackery and hurts the patient more than you know.

                  However, that you’re not an actal doctor but a ‘psychologist’ is duly noted.”

                  Just so you’ll know, in the academic hierarchy, if not in the eyes of the general public, those who hold Ph.D.’s are ranked higher than those who hold M.D.’s. More to the point, however, is that Ph.D. level psychologists, duly licensed in the state in which they practice, are considered to be “real doctors.” We’re just not medical doctors, which may be just as well, because much of what we deal with are not, strictly speaking, medical disorders. As for psychiatrists, who are M.D.’s, what they learn about the mind and about human behavior they acquire in a 2-year residency in psychiatry. Most Ph.D. psychologists have spent anywhere from 5-7 years in formal study of the mind and human behavior. This is why psychologists tend to spend a good deal of time actually listening to and trying to understand those who come to them for consultation, while psychiatrists listen just long enough to decide what chemical they’re going to prescribe.

                  “I have, indeed, questioned my own sanity but have been evaluated by a real ‘doctor’ and found to be quite sane. You see not all psychiatrists and physicians are atheist.

                  Some believe in the Truth. Plus, it’s quite difficult to hallucinate someone else’s healing and actally have them verifiably healed by a
                  third party. That would be quite a feat, indeed.”

                  Assessing the veridicality of such healing would require, to my way of thinking, some steps that may or may not have been present in what you observed. First of all, was the original diagnosis verified by more than one physician and by whatever laboratory tests, X-rays, MRIs, CATs, might have been relevant? As you are aware, medical diagnosis is often inexact, and many people have been given medical diagnoses that were so far off the mark that the treatment for the illness they didn’t actually have has killed them. Second, was the ailment not one of those, like a broken bone, or a simple rhinovirus, that is known to heal or remit with the passage
                  of time? Third, if the answers to the first two conditions were “Yes,” was there more than one third party who did the verifying, also backed up by whatever lab tests, X-rays, etc., might have been relevant? Of course, I do not expect you to provide me with this data, since you recognize that, on matters pertaining to theology and the supernatural, you and I are 180° apart, and my argument that people tend to see what they are looking for is a double-edged sword, since people also tend not to see what they are not looking for. But, all things considered, I do subscribe to the belief that events that get called “supernatural” or “miraculous” turn out, upon closer inspection, to be thoroughly natural, and I therefore am likely to ascribe “supernatural” happenings and “miracles” to a deficiency in the comprehension of that fact, and to a faulty analysis of such events.

                  “Re: ‘here is the only circumstance I can think of that might make me rethink my position on the real existence of a deity’

                  Good luck with that one. If you were someone like Moses or Elijah or Jesus Christ, himself, you might have a chance at it. However,
                  what makes you think you’re that worthy to deserve such a sign or treatment from the God you have repeatedly insulted and blasphemed?”

                  Well, presumably, Jim, were such a sign or treatment to occur, it wouldn’t be for my benefit alone, and I wouldn’t be the only one
                  experiencing it, which would be one of the factors that would disabuse me of the notion that I might be hallucinating. I’d probably
                  still have to be persuaded that special effects wizardry wasn’t involved, though.

                  “Jesus said we should not throw pearls before swine nor give our food to dogs. If you want to have a sincere discussion and be open
                  to the truth, I am very willing. However, if your goal is to just argue, insult, and try to convice of others your atheist beliefs then
                  this conversation is over.”

                  My goal in this discussion, as in any discussions I have had with True Believers, is to see whether any vestige of critical thinking ability
                  remains within those who posit the real existence of a deity. So far I have been disappointed. I notice in passing that you have not at all addressed my question of what makes you so sure that your belief in the real existence of a deity is not simply something into which you have been tricked by The Great Deceiver, whether you term that imaginary entity Satan or The Anti-Christ, and at this juncture I suspect you haven’t addressed it because you can’t do so without abandoning logic. So, to your statement, “…this conversation is over,” I respond, “Roger that.”

                  • Jim Brechtel says:

                    Conway,

                    Wow. That’s quite a paper you just wrote. Thank you for correcting my spelling mistakes and teaching me about academinc hierarchies. I noticed you are using the word, “ascribe”, and doing it correctly. Very nice. You must be very proud.

                    While we’re on the topic of spelling, semantics, use of words, grammar, etc, I’ll take this opportunity to offer some valuable insight to understanding the questions you might have about Christianity by letting you in on a secret (well, it’s not really a secret) to effectively reading scriptures. You are obviously very focused on detail and the “letter” of the written word seems to be very important to you. This is just one reason why you appear unable to comprehend the meaning of scriptures and your eyes and ears remain closed. To understand scriptures, you must stop focusing on the “letter” of the written word and seek the “spirit” of what is written.

                    I have already posted one angelic photo on this site but here it is again. I’m certain you will find a very intellectual and impressive way to declare that it’s a fake or digital hallucination of some sort: http://metasophic.com/IMG_0728.jpg

                    Re: “If what these folks are experiencing is non-hallucinatory and therefore real, why would it be considered a problem at all…”

                    Because the experiences can be unsettling or frightening if the subject does not understand what is happening. If the apparition is demonic then giving the person drugs only masks a problem that is best dealt with via intercession. If the apparition is angelic then the only problem would be if the subject is unable to discern what they see and are afraid. But then, you don’t believe in the spiritual. So, if you were a real doctor you would most likely throw them a pill bottle, instead of helping them to understand what is actually happening. You say that you spend time listening and trying to understand what your subjects are telling you. But I gather that you’re not actually open to what they say other than to find ways to impose your atheism on them.

                    Re: “I have been disappointed. … you have not at all addressed my question of what makes you so sure that your belief in the real existence of a deity is not simply something into which you have been tricked by The Great Deceiver”

                    First, are you admitting the existence of the “Great Deceiver”? Truly, if a Great Deceiver exists, then one might infer that a Great Source of Truth also exists – that would be God.

                    Second, it was not apparent that you had asked specifically that question you just stated. I must have missed it. To answer your question, try reading the rest of this site. Beyond that, I believe because I have seen. So, I have no excuse to not believe. I guess I’m just more fortunate than others in that regard but I do not know why I should be.

                    Re: “I suspect you haven’t addressed it because you can’t do so without abandoning logic”

                    Come on, now! you are an atheist. I am not. Therefore, whatever you declare to be logical will not necessarily hold as logic with me and neither will what I hold as logical necessarily be logical to you. For instance, what you might refer to as “supernatural” is to me, “natural”.

                    Re: “Assessing the veridicality of such healing would require…”

                    Well, how about guy who was deaf for twenty years before I touch him and he is suddenly able to hear? Can’t get much more definitive than that. He was deaf but now he hears. Very conclusive. No need for MRI machines, etc.

                    God is awesome!

  18. Albert Jesuit says:

    PS, if everything is relative, then there is no ultimate Authority, and ultimately Anarchy rules. A little ‘thang’ called gravity disproves that silly notion. That notion which is in your heads is there because you Atheists are afraid of authority and are really just closet anarchists. The very fact that we are here in coherent units shows Anarchy and Chaos do not rule and dominate our Cosmos, much as you anti-establishmentarians wish that were the case. if it were as you say it is, units, molecules and cells could not hold together long enough for coherent life to not only exist, but to propagate. Whoops!

    Some more Scientific quandaries for you also;

    According to the standard model of physics, we should not be here. Matter and anti-matter should have canceled each other out and only left photons/light. Whoops! Guess science has that wrong, hey? because you are here blogging. Darn! Back to getting a job, making a living and contributing positively to society, shucky darn!

    Also, the Cosmos should either be slowing down or contracting if science has it correct, but we are both expanding and accelerating. Whoops, guess science has that wrong too!

    Pelicans should not fly according to science. Whoops!

    LOL, just because some people mis-interpret religious teachings, doesn’t mean Religion’s got it all wrong, any more than the same broad paint brush for science says science has it all wrong. Before Galileo proved Aristotle wrong, science thought a 10 Lb. weight fell 10 times faster than a 1 Lb. weight. By Atheistic logic, we should have disavowed science when science was ‘dis-proven’ by Galileo.

    • Richard Ruquist says:

      Albert,

      The way I see it, modern physicists have come to accept the Many Worlds Interpretation MWI of Quantum Mechanics. This is really more like na theory than an interpretation for it postulates that every quantum possibility, in physics called every quantum superposition, is realized in one parallel world or another. As a result there are effectively an infinite number of parallel worlds in our one universe, which is called the multiverse- a source of great confusion.

      Anyway physicists like this theory because it resloves all of the many paradoxes of other interpretation of quantum mechanics. But in addition, and most important, it makes quantum mechanics totally deterministic. In effect the theory reduces quantum mechanics to a classical theory.

      In such a reality there is no room for chance as everything is predetermined. In my opinion as a result there is no need for god except perhaps something to start the whole process- Deism.

      The alternative which is not acceptable to mainstream is to have a cosmic consciousness capable of selecting one appriopriate quantum superposition from the many thereby resulting in a single universe with a single world that in which randomness can play a role, and in which god can play a role. A 9 page paper of mine discusses that in detail:
      http://vixra.org/pdf/1101.0044v1.pdf
      Richard

    • Conway Redding says:

      Albert, you wrote: “By Atheistic logic, we should have disavowed science when science was ‘dis-proven’ by Galileo.

      Reply: Nope. On the basis of Galileo’s observations, we should have disavowed, and we did disavow, only the notion that a 10 lb. weight falls faster than a 1 lb. weight. This process of revising one’s opinions in the face of contrary evidence is how science progresses.

      And by the way, wherever did you get the idea that, according to science, pelicans should not fly? Any scientist worth his/her salt who concluded, on the basis of his/her calculations of the aerodynamics of pelican flight, that the bird should not be able to fly, would, upon actually observing the creature in flight, immediately suspect that something was wrong with his/her calculations, and would simply say, “I have made a mistake somewhere.”

  19. I came to the same conclusions about “conflicting truths” back when I was 15 and started seriously studying religion. All religions couldn’t be 100% true and yet be contradictory.

    Since then I’ve concluded two things:

    1. Some things only appear contradictory to us because we are interpreting them through the 5 senses in a reality ruled by relativity. You’re point that Hindus believe that God is present in everything, while Christianity says it’s separate is sort of right… except Hindus also believe God is separate from creation. They believe both and explain that belief based on the idea that material creation really doesn’t exist at all — there is just consciousness, energy and “the absolute” (the REAL Hindu trinity of aum-tat-sat).

    In short, what I’m saying is that many contradiction between different religions and even within the same religion are sometimes just a result of our limited physical brains trying to understand something that our soul must experience.

    2. A lot of what we call “Christianity” or “Buddhism” or “Hinduism” is really just _interpretations_ of the founders teachings. I laugh when I hear Christian say Jesus taught this or that — e.g. like one-life over reincarnation — when really there’s nothing int he Bible that says anything very clearly on such matters. The interpretations have just been so ingrained in Western culture that people assume that’s what the Bible is saying — see what they’ve been told to see.

    I’ve come to believe that what Buddha, Jesus, Krishna and countless others were teaching was the “same religion” just with different cultural spins and slight variations to appeal to different personalities.

    That what the Jews calle “The Christ” has come many times. That Jesus was much “bigger” than most Christians give “him” credit for. You only have to look at the shocking similarities between the birth, childhood and adult life of Krishna and the Buddha compared to Jesus to see that same “Christ Consciousness” has been incarnate many times. Jesus was just the one that got “popular” (and manipulated for political control by the Romans and later the medieval Church).

    It was only over the centuries that those original teaching diverged through the misunderstanding of followers and the intervening of political interests (e.g. the Roman Empire completely changed Christianity and shaped most of what defines it today).

    A lot of the differences between religions evaporate when you put aside what you’ve been taught about them and just sit down and read their scriptures side by side. Studying Hinduism and Buddhism has helped me understand what Jesus was really teaching.

    A great book from the 19th century is “The Holy Science” by Swami Sri Yukteswar Giri — a Hindu swami who wrote a side-by-side comparison of the New Testament and Santana Dharma. Most surprising is how he shows that the Book of Revelations is more about quantum physics than “the end of the world.”

    Another great book about the unity of Christianity and Hinduism is “The Yoga of Jesus” by Paramhansa Yogananda (who also wrote a great little book called “The Science of Religion” which describes how all religions are essentially one — except that they are more “sects” of the One Inner Religion).

    If you’d like copies of any of these books just let me know and I’d be happy to mail them to you.

    • Jim Brechtel says:

      I once thought as you do. After years of research and experience I’ve come to the conclusion that this way of thinking is very wrong. There is absolutely zero unity between hinduism and Christianity. I’ve read the book “The Yoga of Jesus” and find it to be false. Buddha, Jesus, Krishna did not teach the same religion at all. They are very very *very* different. Based on “insider” information given me by a taoist “master”, one who claimed to be a student of the world’s highest taoist master, the eastern religions are not at all inspired by God but by satan.

      Jesus Christ is the Way, The Truth and the Life. There is no way to the Father but by Him.

  20. Richard Ruquist says:

    John C. A. Manley ,

    I would be pleased to receive those books.
    You may contact me at yanniru@aim.com
    Richard Ruquist

Ask A Question

Questions must be respectful, clear, thoughtful and on-topic - all others will be deleted by the moderator.