Could this be the END of RELIGIONS as we know them ?

[Eddy_P]

Evidence has been released that contradicts what we have been told about the source and origins of religious legends and stories - including the Creation Account.

Brief summary of findings…

The stories about gods and God from the ancient Middle East, including Egypt, all came from the same non-divine source.

The story of Enki (as related by Sitchin) is not about an encounter with aliens.

Ancient Creation accounts all came from the same non-divine origin.

The Hebrew, Christian, and Muslim perceptions of GOD also came from this same source.

The story of Atlantis and the biblical story of Creation came from the same non-divine source.

Moses held in his hands this non-divine source - being one of the ‘tablets of stone’.

Babylonian and Mesopotamian accounts called this same stone the ‘tablet of destiny’.

Documented in the Old Testament, Ezekiel and Daniel’s “visions” came from this same non-divine source.

In Revelation (NT) John’s “visions” also came from the same non-divine source.

The story by Ezekiel about seeing “Wheels within Wheels” is not about seeing an alien spaceship.

In referring to “The Lamb (of God)” John was not referring to Jesus.

John documents being shown the source and origin of all these things.
He called it ‘A book with seven seals, written on the backside and the inside’.

Egyptian scribes also held this object. They depicted and called it the ‘RA-Disk’.

Hindu tradition documents this same object as ‘the Egg of Brahma’.

Biblical Gospel scholars note a missing document (called the “Q”) that was the original source for some of the New Testament stories.

Mormon prophet, Joseph Smith, documented holding ‘artefacts’, and a mid 1800s picture shows him holding the case which held a specific ‘seer stone’.

.
The ‘tablet of stone’ held by Moses, the Sumerian ‘tablet of destiny’, the Hindu ‘the Egg of Brahma’, John’s ‘book’, the Egyptian ‘ra-disk’, the ‘Q’, and Smith’s ‘seer stone’ all refer to the same non-divine object.

In 1998 the Australian researcher Ronald Pegg identified this non-divine object, conducted investigations, and subsequently found the basis for all the above religious subject matter not to be of a divine origin.

There is now proof revealing that there is no GOD, and that this religiously perceived GOD did not create the earth 6,000 years ago.

2 videos show from where much of the above subject matter originated.
Link: www.worldbreakingdiscoveries.com.au/index.html
.

[Robert0326]

I hope so.  The planet would be a more peaceful place.

[Jennifer Murdoch]

You can say that anything is "not divine."  What is divine?  People have never seen an angel, not in modern times anyway. Religion is taken on faith, and you aren't going to destroy that just cause you can't find any ultimate proof.  That is what faith is all about, right?

[Eddy_P]

Religion is taken on faith, and you aren't going to destroy that just cause you can't find any ultimate proof.  That is what faith is all about, right?

You must have misunderstood the contents of the linked website. Proof IS presented.

The 2 videos, the 10 Text Evaluation, the Ezekiel Report, the 7 News Reports, and the Overview of Findings - ALL present where various aspects of different religions and their sacred texts originated, and it is not from a divine source called GOD (or by what any name is used).

Showing evidence that the foundations upon which religions have based their concept and understanding of “God” is not what it seemed - is proof of no God.

To put it another way.

People say ‘religious texts A,B,C, verses 2,5,8 state who, where, and what GOD is’.
They then used this reasoning to believe in God and start a religion.

What Ronald Pegg discovered was that those verses in those texts refer to something else that can be quantified and examined. That source is not divine, thus the religious people’s understanding is incorrect.
Based upon what they cite as proof for their God - is shown to be about something else, thus there is no God (as described in their texts).

[Keith Ranville]

The Sun God makes more sense in worshiping, the sun it supports life, food chain wise to every creature/organism on earth and is always there year round, and shows up in your life just about everyday and in other peoples lives, and you can trust it to be there, if its not visible on cloudy days..

Some ancient civilizations worshiped the sun, as a god..  they must of have witnessed something of the sun that would make one to many to worship it? 

[Jennifer Murdoch]

You must have misunderstood the contents of the linked website. Proof IS presented.

The 2 videos, the 10 Text Evaluation, the Ezekiel Report, the 7 News Reports, and the Overview of Findings - ALL present where various aspects of different religions and their sacred texts originated, and it is not from a divine source called GOD (or by what any name is used).

You are never going to conclusively prove that there is no God, nor that people never meant to create a God, Ronald. First off, you can't prove a negative, conclusively.  Second, the whole point of religious texts, whether they be the Bible, the Talmud or the Q'uran is to explain God. 

[Eddy_P]

…the whole point of religious texts, whether they be the Bible, the Talmud or the Q'uran is to explain God.

In the religious texts, where they explain GOD (as you say) - is actually describing the sequences of pictures from a cd-rom that was taken back to the past, where it was shown to various people (now known as prophets).

So what they use to “explain GOD” is not about the God of the Bible/Talmud/Qur’an, but about the images from a cd-rom.

Thus where religious people say “this text in this verse Explains God” - it does not.
Hence the concept of their GOD is based upon a misunderstanding of what the various prophets saw during their encounter with a time traveller.

…you can't prove a negative

There is no negative to prove.
People say ‘religious texts A,B,C, verses 2,5,8 state who, where, and what GOD is’.
They then used this reasoning to believe in God and start a religion.

Ronald Pegg has shown that  ‘religious texts A,B,C, verses 2,5,8’ are about the contents and images from a cd-rom.

Its straight forward. What religious people were using to ‘prove’ their God - is not about a divine creator that they were led to believe.

[Tom Hebert]

Hi Eddy,

Jennifer is right.  God can neither be proven nor disproven.  That's why "religious people" call it Faith.

Tom

[Jennifer Murdoch]

Thanks, Tom.

Ronald, the problem you're having all this is that you think if you show something you view as "proof," people are autmatically give up all their own beliefs.  If it was really that simple, why doesn't everyone believe in evolution?  Plenty of proof on that, not everyone is a believer.

[Jennifer Murdoch]

People see what they want to see, that is why arguments like this are automatic non-starters.

[archaeologist]

The planet would be a more peaceful place.

actually it wouldn't. with God's presence gone, His morality removed and those who followed Him taken out the earth will face violence that would make the nazi's look like a pet shop. men do not get better when they do not believe, they get worse.

God can neither be proven nor disproven

God has already been proven to exist--the earth exists, the universe exists, you exist.  if God did not exist there would be no religion anywhere, no God nor false ones, no temples, and so on. the only reason false gods and religions exist is because God does as does the devil.

[Robert0326]

That is complete crap.  Non-believers are just as moral as a believers.  Morality is innate in ALL of us.  If you believe and follow everything in the Bible and not cherry-pick like most people of faith then your not very moral at all.  Do you see countries like Sweden and Norway which are at least 80% secular committing act of genocide and violence?  NO... You do not.

Saying God has been proven to exist because the universe, the earth and we are here is the typical response of ignorant believers.  I exist because my parents had sex.  Just as yours and everyone else's parents.  The universe and the earth exist because of the Big Bang. 

[archaeologist]

Non-believers are just as moral as a believers.  Morality is innate in ALL of us.

really...then how do you explain Kim Jong-il, his father, Saddam Hussein, his sons, Pol Pot, Stalin, and so many more people?  then add in all the child molestors, rapists, murderers, thieves, liars and not just from america but world wide? obviously they are not as moral as believers.

Do you see countries like Sweden and Norway which are at least 80% secular committing act of genocide and violence?  NO... You do not.

acts of genocide and violence are not the only sins which make a person immoral and they have their share of the above mentioned people.

Saying God has been proven to exist because the universe, the earth and we are here is the typical response of ignorant believers

and you would be wrong. 

I exist because my parents had sex.

no, you exist because God allowed you to be born.

The universe and the earth exist because of the Big Bang. 

the big bang never happened and scientists cannot prove that it did.
remember they weren't witnesses to the event and have no clue as to what took place. they also cannot corroborrate their 'findings or evidence'. it is all a big guess by them. they have no clue whatsoever what took place and even less that they are actually correct.

they can't even tell you what you had for breakfast last week or where you ate it let alone describe what took place, according to them, 14 billion years ago.

[Robert0326]

Saddam Hussein was a Sunni Muslim (religious).  Pol Pot and the Khmer Rouge was a communist totalitarian  regime (political).  Mao Zedong's was another communist regime.  Stalin was an Atheist but his regime was not founded on him being an Atheist.  All he did was continue what all the Czars before him were doing.  North Korea is pretty much the same as all the other you've mentioned.  The people pray to Kim Jong-il and his father everyday for all that they give them.  So you might say it's borderline theocratic.  I'm surprised you didn't mention Hitler.  Religious people usually do when they mention Pol Pot, Mao and Stalin.  He was Catholic just in case you didn't know and spoke about Jesus in many of his speeches.

How am I wrong about your proof about God creating everything?

Prove that God allowed me to be born.

Have you ever picked up and read a science book?  I mean I know their out there. I've read some of them.  Or do you just refuse to consider what scientists have discovered about our species, the planet and the universe simply because it contradicts the Bible.

Here's a challenge for you....  Name me a moral act or statement done or spoken by a religious person that could not be said or done by a non-believer.  I bet you can't. 

[Boreas]

The planet would be a more peaceful place.

actually it wouldn't. with God's presence gone, His morality removed and those who followed Him taken out the earth will face violence that would make the nazi's look like a pet shop. men do not get better when they do not believe, they get worse.

Does that signify the general character of other mammals, not to say primates?
Not even crockodiles behave like that - to my knowledge. And, a.f.a.i.k., they still don't adore a God, unless you include "our great father - the Sun" into the equation.

God can neither be proven nor disproven

God has already been proven to exist--the earth exists, the universe exists, you exist.  if God did not exist there would be no religion anywhere, no God nor false ones, no temples, and so on. the only reason false gods and religions exist is because God does as does the devil.

Dualism is a certain kind of philosophy based on antagonism. Antagonism is a state of mind created by the greed and envy of the confused or sick mind - able to neglect its own, mammalian nature and violate the laws of nature - under the disguise of a hyper-nature. As the warmongers succeeded and the warlords needed to rule their besieged and enslaved neighbours we got sets of hypocracy in stead of the old naturegiven codes of law. At its philosophical end - as a ruling-techique - the superstitous hocus-pocus have been elaborated to fill the need for reasoning and justification of the autrocities made. Just check on the OT.

Retrospect it may seem that the Phonecians, Roman and Greek tyrrants - as well as the inquisitional church, the conquistadors and the nazis - did learned a lot from it. Luckily neither apes, dolphins nor (even) crockodiles have fallen to that kind of retardation. When it comes to worship they still reason with the sun. Especially when it shines through after a rainy day...

The Good Sun is more than proven to exist. Aspecting its vital importance to all and everything that lives on this planet, the antique civilizations used to adress the supernature of this ball of ligth as "the origin and continous support of everything". Thus it was adressed as the incarnate Good - and adressed with honoring labels such as  "Our Great Father" (etc.), while the earth was recalled as "Our Great Mother" (etc.), while the Moon was considered the "Mediator of life", keeping the global water-mass in constant circulation. Thus you may find the personalized nametags on the major elements of life and nature itself - in the schools of knowledge as well the cultural rites and passages that were conducted by the culture that came out of ice-time to create and grow the large civiliations on this planet. Thus we find the male and female rulers aspected as "sons" and "daugthers" of the Sun, or aspects of the moon and earh. Consequently we had social positions and political responsibilities that were aspected as "deities" - an described as "Father/Sun", "Mother/Earth", "Moon-Good" and "Moon-Goodess"... 

We all know what happened to them - as bronze-age turned into the strife, war and conquests of iron-age, where the traditional laws of civilization were broken - and the Kings, Queens and Sun-Deities of the old, legitimate kingdoms were replaced by brutal foreigners who turned everything upside down and justified their murders, rapes,  etnocides and plunder by a most "holy cause", with a "new time" supposed to be the will of a "heavenly master" of immense supernature. Thus they hyped together a space-cowboy that noone could either see, hear or talk to - nor question the existence of, unless you where ready to face a most cruel and painful death - such as crucifixion...

Now what other aspect of life are you willing to seriously consider a reality rather than a fairy-tale - and discuss pro et contra - even if you can't neither see, smell, hear, feel, taste, observe, define nor comprehend it?

Remember - if you are to take basic science seriously you may understand that in the beginning of the universe - as we know it - "there were ligth". Since darkness is nothing but "the abscence of light" - it could hardly be there first...