Thanks for the expansive response. Not to attempt to contradict what you say, but to share my views on some of the points, I'm going to reply below.

However, you may also like to read through my comments to PartOfGod below. Those comments also address some similar points.

there are multiple 'bibles' but obviously under different names and religions. They all have very similar characteristics but most likely adapted to suit a certain sector.

I subscribe to the following perspective on this.

Firstly, that the Fall of Man as described in Genesis was an incident that tragically short-circuited our spiritual capacity by creating an unfathomable disconnect from our source, God, and bringing us (the collective human 'us) into a dysfunctional and destructive engagement with a very bad energy and direction, which manifested in the other being as genesis describes.

Along with that 'fall', our ancestors and subsequently all humanity, fell into ignorance. That's a big problem, because if you are ignorant of a problem (a condition), its causes, its effects, even whether it exists or not, then you cannot do anything to fix it, resolve it, heal it. In that state of darkness, we lost the capacity to even hear our inner voice and resolve our ignorance.

There are two types of ignorance: internal ignorance (aka spiritual ignorance) and external ignorance (ignorance of the material world). We fell into both. In order for us to be able to extricate ourselves from the condition we fell into, we need to recover knowledge, both spiritual and physical (material).

Science has very gradually evolved in order to recover material knowledge. Consider the thousands of years it took to (re)discover and understand how to find and use copper, steel, etc. biology, physics, etc. Humanity's technological development has emerged based on our recovery of material knowledge.

Did it all just come to us, magically? How many of the truly great scientists of our past have acknowledged that their ideas, thoughts, etc, came to them in dreams, inspirations, ideas popping into their heads.

In my view, the truth is that all that knowledge that we will ever need or know, is held by the Creator, and this has been, over time, gradually communicated back to us as the capacity in our minds has recovered or developed. The more mental and intellectual capacity we recovered, the faster and the more the knowledge could be shared back to us. (as you have pointed out, we can access so much now simply by tuning our minds to a particular wavelength, for example.)

Religions (meaning good or healthy religions) have been founded by the creator in order to communicate and facilitate recovery of spiritual knowledge. So, yes, I certainly agree: all the different religions have their own scriptures and teachings (funny that, right?), but each reflects different conditions, environment and personality of the people and the cultures that were recipients.

I believe the truth is within all of us without needing to rely on an external source to tell us what is what. If we can meditate/pray on it, we will be told.

Hmmmm. My view is a bit different. To explain fully, I need to go back to a basic framework or view of how the universe functions and what the nature of the universe is. Normally, this requires a lot of time and a few chapters of thought, but to be brief:

The nature of the creator is love. Love, however, is something that is only realized and experienced through relationship. The creator created the universe in order to realize an object - someone he could experience full and perfect love with. Essentially, that object or recipient of love is humanity.

All relationship requires two parties or components. One stands in an initiating role, the other in a receiving role. e.g. Love is given, beauty is the returned experience.

The dynamic of all relationships in the universe is one of giving and receiving. They complement and complete each other. Imagine you love someone very deeply. You want to give everything to them, love them, see them fulfilled, happy. But if they never receive that love, your heart is never fulfilled. The giving is only completed when it is received.

In a reciprocal relationship, there is one party that first initiates the engagement (relationship) by giving. The other party responds to this by receiving. The connection is established. The next step, however, is for the receiving party to fully respond by giving back to the initiator. The initiator then steps into the position of receiver. I love, and am received. My beloved, responds, and loves me back, I am am now that person's beloved.

In this dynamic, the two become one. They become united.

Why do we love? What inspires us to give? It is the nature of the creator within us, the original nature that the creator endowed us, his children, with. So, in truth, in every true relationship and dynamic, there are 3 parties. The creator, the one who initiates the giving (in response to the creator's own nature within himself/herself), and the one who receives. Why do we receive? It is because the nature of the creator is also the nature of receiving.

So the nature of the Creator manifests as two: as the initiator, the one who gives first, and as the responder, the one who receives first.

However, as I said, the dynamic is fully completed (and can thus develop, and go to the next level as well) when giver and receiver become one in a reciprocal relationship where they both give and both receive.

So, something new is created: the unity of the two parties. That unity is something greater than either party. It is something entirely new - a marriage, a friendship, a child! A business! A farm!

That unity reflects the creator's own original nature of being both giver and receiver united.

This is the fundamental dynamic of all relationships in God's creation; It starts with the impulse from the Creator to either give, or to receive. It develops and manifests in the two parties of the give/receive dynamic. It is completed in the unity of the two parties, creating a fourth party: the unity itself.

Nucleus (protons and neutrons = +) exerts its influence on the electrons ( - ), which responds according to its own nature as endowed by the creator. Their reciprocal dynamic (relationship) forms an atom. + atoms and - atoms interact according to their nature, and form molecules. Male and female interact, and bring forth new life: offspring. etc.

The point here for this viewpoint I'm describing is that there is a reciprocal relationship that underlies all energy generating dynamics.

When you say we don't need to rely on an external source, well, I think that perspective is tainted by the concept of 'reliance'. Similar to partOfGod below, possibly. Sometimes we feel inspired to reject ideas like dependency, reliance, because we identify with the more negative or destructive elements of experiences or perceptions related to these.

But, a child is absolutely dependent on his or her parents until he is mature enough. There is nothing wrong or unhealthy about that. In fact, NOT being able to rely on or be dependent on someone or something when it is necessary is just as unhealthy as being dependent on someone or something when its counter productive.

A teenager might say "I'm not going to rely on my parents at all" in reaction to feeling overshadowed or dominated, stifled by the parents if they are not able to give sufficient space or opportunity for the teenager to develop.

We are, in point of fact, 100%, 1 billion %, reliant on God. (Lucifer was the one who seeks to deny this fact.)

We depend on the earth. We depend on the air, the nature for food, water, warmth, etc. That's not unhealthy or wrong. But, we are created to work for what we need. Just sitting there expecting everything to fall in our laps would be irresponsible and immature.

It seems to me that what you are emphasizing is that giving too high a reliance (an inappropriate reliance) on an external authority by relinquishing one's own responsibility to think, learn, etc, is unhealthy. However, I think it can be quite mistaken to go the opposite as well, and think that I cannot learn, benefit or that I don't ever 'need' any external source. Aka "I only need me". Because in fact, Although I am part of God, and a child of God, God is more than me, and in that sense, while both being inside me, is also external to 'me'.

When the internal capacity of humanity to access and connect with God internally was lost, it needed to be recovered (through lots of tears, sweat, and blood) over time, and as our inner capacity to connect and resonate with God was gradually restored, that capacity to receive guidance, inspiration, and internal direction via the INTERNAL avenue has also been recovered more and more. However, In the beginning, God had to give revelation; give teaching; give external information so that the resonance inside us could respond.

I think that's really important to realize. If you can meditate, reflect, and receive guidance through your connection with God, it actually comes on the foundation of millenia of sweat, tears and blood shed by God and by those he worked with, to gradually restore that capacity and inherit it down to you.

In my view, when you understand that, it brings a humility and an appreciation for the methods and means "outside" of you - external to you - that God has been using to reach out to and communicate with you, over millennia.

There is a temptation in 'new age' thinking that leads to the view that I don't need anyone except myself, or that somehow denies the value of 'external sources' as a reaction to <many different potential conditions>. That can be treacherous, because this is what evil wants humans to think, and lead them into a place of arrogance and isolation. Because, this is what Lucifer thought. I know better than God, I'm going to create a situation where "I don't need God".

When you pray, or meditate, or obtain insight and realization from within, it's important to realize that there is someone who is actually inspiring you or communicating that content, and that the real purpose of that is to build a reciprocal relationship with that person, whether it is the Creator, or the holy spirit, good spirits or guides, etc.

Though i don't believe a God would genuinely punish one of his children in the place described as 'Hell'.

See here is the thing. The scriptures were provided and communicated based on the intellectual and spiritual capacity of the people at the time. In the old testament, God establishes a master-servant relationship, and appears as a frightening judge. That's part of God's nature (God must uphold truth and righteousness), but its not the whole story. When Jesus came, he revealed a completely new level of understanding, a completely new aspect of God's nature, and the kind of relationship God wants with us: a loving father.

Based on the new testament itself, it's very clear that we are scheduled for a final upgrade, where we grasp things on a level hithertofore inaccessible (because our capacity was not restored and we aren't/weren't ready to receive it).

I believe the correct or more accurate understanding in this case is that hell is the natural consequence of choices and actions that result in a certain spiritual condition. It's not punishment inflicted at all. But, if someone chooses to do evil, and destroy their own god-given nature, and create a hell that they come to live in, not even God can prevent that, because each child of God is given free will and also the creative capacity to either connect with God, thus experiencing the natural consequence - 'heaven' - or disconnect with God and thus experience the natural consequence - 'hell' (although there are myriad shades of spiritual condition between these, actually).

It's almost like an added fear instillation.

Fear has a normal and natural function, but like all emotions, it can be exploited, manipulated, or even generated for wrong or unhealthy purposes.

Fear of a danger is not a bad thing in some situations. But indeed, fear has been used and exploited by evil for millenia and for its own destructive needs.Fear is like an alarm response designed to get us to act swiftly to avert a danger. But remaining in fear for any extended period of time debilitates and degrades our heart and spirit, and becomes quickly counterproductive. Also, fear responds to perception, and lies can be provided to someone in order to generate fear which makes them much easier to control.

Likewise, worship can be healthy, or unhealthy. It depends. To love truly is to worship, to venerate, to appreciate. In my view, worship is a natural response that comes from being aware and grateful and cognizant of being given great, great love. It's the giving of glory, appreciation. It's the assignation of value to something that deserves that value. But it all depends on the heart. Worship without love is not really worship. It's a fake substitute.

The reason why the Ten Commandments includes not to 'worship' idols, is because putting anything but God into that central place of subject of love is false worship.