In contrast to existing religions which teach "fundamentals" and then "interpret" the holy book according to those ideas and IN SUBMISSION to those ideas, resulting in claim "that quote which conflicts the idea is a misinterpretation, it only appears to conflict" we must, for the "love of God" and truth, reveal the dishonesty.
for example if a fundamental faith is: "god is one" then that is how to interpret the book. what happens when the book uses a plural verb? that is impossible?? jesus !!
if we did not have the "prejudice" we would:
***establish the faith on the book yet because existing religions insist the book submits YES SUBMITS, to the idea, resulting the plural verb in the bible is "a misinterpretation" because plural really means something else, yet this is not honest, because if we did not have the prejudice we would say: the fact that the book has a plural verb is a basis to embrace a polytheistic faith=establishing the faith on the holy-book. the prejudice is revealed. resulting even in claiming the book means a message different from "the message that appears" in the holy book.
after establishing that the plural verb which abraham truly said, if we resist lies and respect honesty enough not to corrupt the message in the book, said "they led me to wander" as more than one god the question is: if so why does the rest of the same book have singular verbs for god and why does other book insist on one god? clearly this is:
*** a lack of consistency which causes religious to bend one source to "mean" a message different than what appears. even after the corruption, written in some commentary, what appears is "misleading" and certainly not consistent, so what?
yet religious christians and jews claim "evidence of the holiness of the bible is consistency" only after corrupting one source or the other can they claim both messages are the same idea, because the message that appears is NOT consistent refuting this claim of consistency and revealing how prejudice can cause someone to say ignore what the book actually said.
IINSTEAD LET US ESTABLISH THE FAITH ON THE BOOK.
which source wins? if we choose monotheist then genesis is out because it describes god with a plural verb so that cannot be a truth but an unholy compare psalms speaks of the nation of "abrahams god" then we need to know abrahams god and that was a plural verb.
christians say no problem: god is one which is also many called trinity or tri-une but if jesus died he certainly was not truly a god. consider even a human whose body can die has "an immortal soul" yet the christian god is even weaker and is mortal and DID die as they insist, so even if we assume trinity is valid, jesus is not part because he was mortal and could die and did die if he truly returned from DEAD. clearly honest people like us, we must reject and not accept the faith of christians because god is immortal at least as immortal as a human soul if not STRONGER... jesus christ !!
similarly honesty results in either rejecting genesis or rejecting monotheist judaism.
since their are sevral other reasons to reject genesis we can reject it from the reliable books - see reason in post about 400 years
http://thinkforyourselfn8.blogspot.co.il/2017/03/is-book-genesis-trustworthy.html
after that book is discovered, with my assistance to quickly locate the evidence such as 400 years and the plural verbs we notice that genesis is not reliable hence the challenge to monotheism has been removed.
we can establish three foundations on the book as described in the next post and remove the conflicting books.
No comments:
Post a Comment