Some ideas for a commentary - The Bible and Appeal

[Aetixintro]

The Scientific Bible 2.0 - Commentary to the Bible - The Project Underway - Philosophy of Religion?

Supporting the "scientific Bible": You need to remember that when the Bible was written some 1500 years ago they were... forgive me, simpletons...! They probably sat there and babbled over numbers and said "give me a big number!" and the answer from the buddy was "6000?". Alright, that's a big number, my good man, it is now written! This is the way the Bible came into being. They had no clue over 900 000 things and so on... And they certainly didn't have the Carbon-14 (C-14) dating method in place either! Thus, I think one can expect most or all "reasonable religious people to reject or do away with the old notions of "religious truths" and that it's not serious to bother to hold these old views AGAINST religious people _unless_ they promote these stupid ideas of "these ancestors of ours, these simpletons!" Alright? Put the idiocy to the anachronistic religious people...! By the way, the highest number of the Roman Numbers is M = 1000, so there they sit with 6 Ms and it's almost impossible to describe 900 000 things with the Roman Numbers. So certainly, the "Scientific Bible" should be made!

One thing more over this "evolution theory" (as if it could be crucial whatsoever): There is NO religious _duty_ to stay WITH the description of fx. the Bible (by Noah's Ark and the 6000 year old planet) as such. The core of Religious belief is ethics, meaning, true description and a possibleknowledge entailment of its claims of Heaven or some stage toward reincarnation! Thus, every Religious person can _accept science w/o qualms and PLACE Religion on TOP of this, w/o any (formal) problem_ whatsoever! This is point nr. 2 _pro_-Scientific Bible!

Further:
‎(My) Scientific Bible (after the 1901 version of a woman): Attempts on making a scientific bible have been made earlier and at that point in time "The Science of God: Convergence of Scientific and Biblical Wisdom" by Gerald L. Schroeder (1994) has been a part of my own inspiration, in being criticised for a kind of "flood" view that other people, scientists of geology and others, have criticised shortly after publishing by "Illustrated Science" (Norw. "Illustrert Vitenskap" with url, http://illvit.no/ ). There are lots of other "scientific bibles" from what I can find on Amazon. Enjoy yours! To the Catholic Church, I've also been intrigued by the so-called Galileo-question, that has probably attracted a good deal of negative attention to Christianity up to our times. This is now slashed, I believe and that the Catholic Church and other churches are now moving forward with some greater confidence, perhaps. Times are difficult and people are asked to arm themselves with guns and protect homes with the usual intrusion-countermeasures.

The tree of knowledge:
the tree of knowledge as I interpret it under this new project of mine as the Scientific Bible Ver. 2, must be the the tree of knowledge as the tree that has the knowledge that's dangerous such as the knowledge of how to abuse and torture people.
With the forbidden fruit (of energies).
One the other hand, all the other trees of good knowledge are there where you can eat all the fruit you can possibly have the appetite for!

Religion in history:
The Original Man: 30 000 years
Religious Human Kind: Only 2000 years
Atheism, no matter how wrong: less than 100 years and not entirely popular

Conclusion: Religion is still an achievement worthy of much respect! Also for the Palestine/Israel conflict, that Judaism and Islam and Ecumenical together as peace maker!
The Original Man, genus Homo Humans, neanderthals, homo erectus, and their direct ancestors 2.5 Mn years ago - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timeline_o ... _evolution .

Jesus 2nd Coming, one interpretation, now that I've declared "Metaphysical Jesus" / "Jesus as the Fulfillment of the 10 Commandments" , in a sense, "God to God self", yet unknown...

(but these hysterical people, you must understand...)

So I read the Bible's word for Jesus' 2nd Coming as a _hope_ for stating an undoing of the people's (Pontius Pilatus) crucifixion of exactly Jesus, and that as he returns, by a kind of Buddhistic Reincarnation, directly from Heaven and God self, to "take the promised land" back to God, if not only to oversee that it has returned to God self, by personal confirmation, that is, so to make the promised land the Promised Land, but never before Utopia (or the final days of the Earth).

As we know from before, the Bible is a matter of most honest worries, the need for description/explanation and storytelling and that the New Testament needs to be rated "lower" in value than the (more important) Old Testament.

Now, we arrive at the conclusion: that Jesus is the part of Trinity who's supposed to bring the message of eternal salvation or havoc/eternal condemnation to human kind by the final Judgment (Judgment Day(s)), totally, all planet, all human kind, of the (modern sense) 10 Commandments and that the true Christian hope must be, metaphorically, for Jesus to walk the Promised Land again, triumphant by the 10 Commandments, under God's true words and promise to the human kind, indeed, told of as God's miracle on Earth, that is, human kind, God's miracle, with Jesus, part of Trinity, happy in the Promised Land, the Utopia of the Earth!

... (Cont. under.)

Note: As you add your words here, they are all yours, they belong to YOU at that instant! This is NO competition, only friendly input. Alright? (No killing intended.)

[Aetixintro]

To the Original Sin
In addressing the Original Sin, if we start with the Genesis, it tells us that God creates the Universe and all in it.

But going to the core, one that I'm allowed given the storytelling nature, I only need to "listen" to the 10 Commandments and the 7 Cardinal Virtues and reject the 7 Cardinal Sins to get to Heaven. The sinners aspect in "falling from Eden" because they've eaten from the Tree of Knowledge on How to Torture People or do sins has NO bearing necessarily, on my life, because I only need to live "up to" God, to think about a decent end to Heaven. The sinners aspect must therefore be considered a type of secondary because the very sinners never make it to Heaven at ALL!

You can't tell people they are sinners from birth and then make the innuendo for them to do sins more. This is to lead people ASTRAY from the Bible, which is a very deep sin, one that puts YOU away from the Bible itself!

So just tell them to focus on the 10 Commandments and the 7 Cardinal Virtues and the people you tell it to and yourself are bound to grow by it!

The Two Slayers of Satan
Let's refresh our Latin a bit: St. Sataniel, the Devil's Advocate under God's Perfect Judgment means, as name, the one who kills the Devil, by Satan-i-el, i being the killing, el being the scythe!

Just another claim for Satan's head because St. Michael is known as the Satan slayer by the sword!

Either way, when the explicit God's view is the one for making as many souls return "home" as possible, I don't think God views his "Satan below" with any other mindedness than that (old) junkyard of garbage, even buried a long time ago!

[Aetixintro]

Make the necessary changes in Theology NOW (teeth IN), Leadership of the religious communities!

This goes to all of Christianity! Potentially to many or all other religious communities as well!

This is their (primary) JOB!

Besides, with not one f*cking email to myself from these pristine leaderships, I can't see why I should receive the shame when IN FACT the religious communities have insisted on strict hierarchy since way back there from the START! To "see to the changes throughout the religious communities ARE not my JOB!"

2nd point, the religious communities can't sit there and set up death traps against because some people with corrupt minds have uttered "a dubious sentence of mine saying that I don't want to change Theology"! GOD IS SUPPOSED TO BE PERFECT and that which makes perfect sense...

3rd point, isn't the Bible Study input supposed to give the religious leadership "a clue" on what the theology is supposed to be! That is, Bible study and interpretation → Changes in Theology?