what the hell are you talking about?

I'm not sure which part of the quote you are protesting. I didn't even say anything controversial and provided links which corroborate. They aren't the only sources that corroborate, they aren't even close. They were just paths to follow if you were interested. Nevertheless, I will further qualify the statements.

You need to distinguish in your mind the difference in The Roman Church and THE BIBLE.

The Roman Church wrote the bible (the singular book that is a collection of other works). Their writing of it was the founding of the Holy Roman Empire. This isn't even slightly controversial. Obviously they used earlier works in their writing, so here by "writing," I mean translated a selection of earlier works (many of which translations are highly controversial) and decided what to keep, and what to throw away. This final edit was decided at the Council of Nicaea in 325 AD and the Council of Constantinople in 382 AD. These councils were brought together by the ruling bodies (Emperor and God-Emperor respectively) to codify (make into law) certain beliefs and to create the formal church and ruling body (Holy Roman Empire). These councils created all Christian canon specifically to end the debate, which evidence suggests was very controversial at the time, on what Jesus was really saying, who he was, and more importantly, who We The People are in relation to Jesus and God.

The creation of the idea that Jesus is our ruler, our "Lord" God, was created at these councils, by setting him up as the only Son of God, where he said specifically, we are all the Children of God (AKA Split Aparts from Source AKA the Divine Spark). Many earlier Christians held that Jesus was showing us our connection to Source, our Divinity. Of course you can't rule Divine beings, so the church codified into law that that was not true. The church, which set itself up as our ruler, separated us from Source, and wrote the bible (massive edits) to ensure that those beliefs remained. They injected into Revelations a circularly defined Divinity of the book to create the deeply rooted belief that any debate on their interpretation is not allowed because it goes against our Ruler, The Lord God (YHWH in this case, the same entity that was the Ruler of the jews). Revelations itself is hugely problematic and was likely derived from an earlier (pre-Jesus) prophecy with several injections to close loopholes by creating circular arguments.

All later derivations of Christian religion use the same canonical beliefs as those laid down by law to end the controversy (see the Code of Theodosianus, link in previous post). These laws are repeated by all Christian sects during service. What do you think the Nicene Creed is? This controversy was about many things, not the least of which was the creation of the idea of the Trinity (which separates us from Source). All present day Christians repeat these beliefs, to brainwash themselves, at almost every gathering.

I have the better part of several decades of investigation behind me.

I meant a deep dive investigation into the authorship of the bible; one not guided by Christian belief confirmation bias (which I had done before in my life), but rather, with the only intention being to find the truth of it. I didn't mean that was the whole sum of my investigation into Christianity or religion. For that I too have many decades of experience. I'm not going to attempt to get into "qualifications," because such pro hominem arguments are always faulty. If an argument can't stand on its own, it is not a valid argument. Using credentials to support an argument is exactly how the world is in the state it is in.

The Jews weren't even monotheistic.

^Do^you^ever^get^tired^of^being^wrong^?

You didn't address a single point I made in your protest. If you want I'm sure I can probably dig up some references, but if you wish to look for yourself, just look up "jews (or judaism) henotheism". The amount of evidence that supports that the jews believed in multiple gods (both polytheistic and henotheistic, depending on which group of jews you are talking about and the time period) is absolutely overwhelming. I'm not saying the jews that follow the formal religion that we call "Judaism" (there are actually quite a few jewish religions) aren't monotheistic now (though it is debatable which god they really believe in now). As just one simple example, it's written into the very First Commandment, "Thou shalt have no other gods before me." In other words, "I am your number one god." This is a clear statement of both that there are other gods (implicitly stated), and that this "god" is self-stating absolute rulership of the Israelites and Judeans (explicitly dictated). Such rulership creates a hierarchy whereby the priests of the "Divine Ruler" gain ruler status as well, and that was exactly what they had, both then (around 3500 years ago), now, and all the time in between. Of course I'm sure that is purely coincidental.

Final point, a debate is an excellent path to get closer to the truth. This path can only accomplish that goal if it directly addresses points made. It is not about stating "your wrong." If you wish to engage, please engage directly. Using pro hominems, ad hominems, or simply stating "you are so stupid you don't even know how wrong you are" (paraphrased) does not help advance the debate and the investigation into the truth of a thing, rather they accomplish the opposite. In other words, they are used to obfuscate the truth.

what the hell are you talking about?

I'm not sure which part of the quote you are protesting. I didn't even say anything controversial and provided links which corroborate. They aren't the only sources that corroborate, they aren't even close. They were just paths to follow if you were interested. Nevertheless, I will further qualify the statements.

You need to distinguish in your mind the difference in The Roman Church and THE BIBLE.

The Roman Church wrote the bible (the singular book that is a collection of other works). Their writing of it was the founding of the Holy Roman Empire. This isn't even slightly controversial. Obviously they used earlier works in their writing, so here by "writing," I mean translated a selection of earlier works (many of which translations are highly controversial) and decided what to keep, and what to throw away. This final edit was decided at the Council of Nicaea in 325 AD and the Council of Constantinople in 382 AD. These councils were brought together by the ruling bodies (Emperor and God-Emperor respectively) to codify (make into law) certain beliefs and to create the formal church and ruling body (Holy Roman Empire). These councils created all Christian canon specifically to end the debate, which evidence suggests was very controversial at the time, on what Jesus was really saying, who he was, and more importantly, who We The People are in relation to Jesus and God.

The creation of the idea that Jesus is our ruler, our "Lord" God, was created at these councils, by setting him up as the only Son of God, where he said specifically, we are all the Children of God (AKA Split Aparts from Source AKA the Divine Spark). Many earlier Christians held that Jesus was showing us our connection to Source, our Divinity. Of course you can't rule Divine beings, so the church codified into law that that was not true. The church, which set itself up as our ruler, separated us from Source, and wrote the bible (massive edits) to ensure that those beliefs remained. They injected into Revelations a circularly defined Divinity of the book to create the deeply rooted belief that any debate on their interpretation is not allowed because it goes against our Ruler, The Lord God (YHWH in this case, the same entity that was the Ruler of the jews). Revelations itself is hugely problematic and was likely derived from an earlier (pre-Jesus) prophecy with several injections to close loopholes by creating circular arguments.

All later derivations of Christian religion use the same canonical beliefs as those laid down by law to end the controversy (see the Code of Theodosianus, link in previous post). These laws are repeated by all Christian sects during service. What do you think the Nicene Creed is? This controversy was about many things, not the least of which was the creation of the idea of the Trinity (which separates us from Source). All Christians repeat these beliefs, to brainwash themselves, at almost every gathering.

I have the better part of several decades of investigation behind me.

I meant a deep dive investigation into the authorship of the bible; one not guided by Christian belief confirmation bias (which I had done before in my life), but rather, with the only intention being to find the truth of it. I didn't mean that was the whole sum of my investigation into Christianity or religion. For that I too have many decades of experience. I'm not going to attempt to get into "qualifications," because such pro hominem arguments are always faulty. If an argument can't stand on its own, it is not a valid argument. Using credentials to support an argument is exactly how the world is in the state it is in.

The Jews weren't even monotheistic.

^Do^you^ever^get^tired^of^being^wrong^?

You didn't address a single point I made in your protest. If you want I'm sure I can probably dig up some references, but if you wish to look for yourself, just look up "jews (or judaism) henotheism". The amount of evidence that supports that the jews believed in multiple gods (both polytheistic and henotheistic, depending on which group of jews you are talking about and the time period) is absolutely overwhelming. I'm not saying the jews that follow the formal religion that we call "Judaism" (there are actually quite a few jewish religions) aren't monotheistic now (though it is debatable which god they really believe in now). As just one simple example, it's written into the very First Commandment, "Thou shalt have no other gods before me." In other words, "I am your number one god." This is a clear statement of both that there are other gods (implicitly stated), and that this "god" is self-stating absolute rulership of the Israelites and Judeans (explicitly dictated). Such rulership creates a hierarchy whereby the priests of the "Divine Ruler" gain ruler status as well, and that was exactly what they had, both then (around 3500 years ago), now, and all the time in between. Of course I'm sure that is purely coincidental.

Final point, a debate is an excellent path to get closer to the truth. This path can only accomplish that goal if it directly addresses points made. It is not about stating "your wrong." If you wish to engage, please engage directly. Using pro hominems, ad hominems, or simply stating "you are so stupid you don't even know how wrong you are" (paraphrased) does not help advance the debate and the investigation into the truth of a thing, rather they accomplish the opposite. In other words, they are used to obfuscate the truth.

what the hell are you talking about?

I'm not sure which part of the quote you are protesting. I didn't even say anything controversial and provided links which corroborate. They aren't the only sources that corroborate, they aren't even close. They were just paths to follow if you were interested. Nevertheless, I will further qualify the statements.

You need to distinguish in your mind the difference in The Roman Church and THE BIBLE.

The Roman Church wrote the bible (the singular book that is a collection of other works). Their writing of it was the founding of the Holy Roman Empire. This isn't even slightly controversial. Obviously they used earlier works in their writing, so here by "writing," I mean translated a selection of earlier works (many of which translations are highly controversial) and decided what to keep, and what to throw away. This final edit was decided at the Council of Nicaea in 325 AD and the Council of Constantinople in 382 AD. These councils were brought together by the ruling bodies (Emperor and God-Emperor respectively) to codify (make into law) certain beliefs and to create the formal church and ruling body (Holy Roman Empire). These councils created all Christian canon specifically to end the debate, which evidence suggests was very controversial at the time, on what Jesus was really saying, who he was, and more importantly, who We The People are in relation to Jesus and God.

The creation of the idea that Jesus is our ruler, our "Lord" God, was created at these councils, by setting him up as the only Son of God, where he said specifically, we are all the Children of God (AKA Split Aparts from Source AKA the Divine Spark). Many earlier Christians held that Jesus was showing us our connection to Source, our Divinity. Of course you can't rule Divine beings, so the church codified into law that that was not true. The church, which set itself up as our ruler, separated us from Source, and wrote the bible (massive edits) to ensure that those beliefs remained. They injected into Revelations the circularly defined Divinity of the book that was left over after their edits to create the deeply rooted belief that any debate on their interpretation is not allowed because it goes against our Ruler, The Lord God (YHWH in this case, the same entity that was the Ruler of the jews). Revelations itself is hugely problematic and was likely derived from an earlier (pre-Jesus) prophecy with several injections to close loopholes by creating circular arguments.

All later derivations of Christian religion use the same canonical beliefs as those laid down by law to end the controversy (see the Code of Theodosianus, link in previous post). These laws are repeated by all Christian sects during service. What do you think the Nicene Creed is? This controversy was about many things, not the least of which was the creation of the idea of the Trinity (which separates us from Source). All Christians repeat these beliefs, to brainwash themselves, at almost every gathering.

I have the better part of several decades of investigation behind me.

I meant a deep dive investigation into the authorship of the bible; one not guided by Christian belief confirmation bias (which I had done before in my life), but rather, with the only intention being to find the truth of it. I didn't mean that was the whole sum of my investigation into Christianity or religion. For that I too have many decades of experience. I'm not going to attempt to get into "qualifications," because such pro hominem arguments are always faulty. If an argument can't stand on its own, it is not a valid argument. Using credentials to support an argument is exactly how the world is in the state it is in.

The Jews weren't even monotheistic.

^Do^you^ever^get^tired^of^being^wrong^?

You didn't address a single point I made in your protest. If you want I'm sure I can probably dig up some references, but if you wish to look for yourself, just look up "jews (or judaism) henotheism". The amount of evidence that supports that the jews believed in multiple gods (both polytheistic and henotheistic, depending on which group of jews you are talking about and the time period) is absolutely overwhelming. I'm not saying the jews that follow the formal religion that we call "Judaism" (there are actually quite a few jewish religions) aren't monotheistic now (though it is debatable which god they really believe in now). As just one simple example, it's written into the very First Commandment, "Thou shalt have no other gods before me." In other words, "I am your number one god." This is a clear statement of both that there are other gods (implicitly stated), and that this "god" is self-stating absolute rulership of the Israelites and Judeans (explicitly dictated). Such rulership creates a hierarchy whereby the priests of the "Divine Ruler" gain ruler status as well, and that was exactly what they had, both then (around 3500 years ago), now, and all the time in between. Of course I'm sure that is purely coincidental.

Final point, a debate is an excellent path to get closer to the truth. This path can only accomplish that goal if it directly addresses points made. It is not about stating "your wrong." If you wish to engage, please engage directly. Using pro hominems, ad hominems, or simply stating "you are so stupid you don't even know how wrong you are" (paraphrased) does not help advance the debate and the investigation into the truth of a thing, rather they accomplish the opposite. In other words, they are used to obfuscate the truth.

what the hell are you talking about?

I'm not sure which part of the quote you are protesting. I didn't even say anything controversial and provided links which corroborate. They aren't the only sources that corroborate, they aren't even close. They were just paths to follow if you were interested. Nevertheless, I will further qualify the statements.

You need to distinguish in your mind the difference in The Roman Church and THE BIBLE.

The Roman Church wrote the bible (the singular book that is a collection of other works). Their writing of it was the founding of the Holy Roman Empire. This isn't even slightly controversial. Obviously they used earlier works in their writing, so here by "writing," I mean translated a selection of earlier works (many of which translations are highly controversial) and decided what to keep, and what to throw away. This final edit was decided at the Council of Nicaea in 325 AD and the Council of Constantinople in 382 AD. These councils were brought together by the ruling bodies (Emperor and God-Emperor respectively) to codify (make into law) certain beliefs and to create the formal church and ruling body (Holy Roman Empire). These councils created all Christian canon specifically to end the debate, which evidence suggests was very controversial at the time, on what Jesus was really saying, who he was, and more importantly, who We The People are in relation to Jesus and God.

The creation of the idea that Jesus is our ruler, our "Lord" God, was created at these councils, by setting him up as the only Son of God, where he said specifically, we are all the Children of God (AKA Split Aparts from Source AKA the Divine Spark). Many earlier Christians held that Jesus was showing us our connection to Source, our Divinity. Of course you can't rule Divine beings, so the church codified into law that that was not true. The church, which set itself up as our ruler, separated us from Source, and wrote the bible (massive edits) to ensure that those beliefs remained. They injected into Revelations the circularly defined Divinity of the book that was left over after their edits to create the deeply rooted belief that any debate on their interpretation is not allowed because it goes against our Ruler, The Lord God (YHWH in this case, the same entity that was the Ruler of the jews). Revelations itself is hugely problematic and was likely derived from an earlier (pre-Jesus) prophecy with several injections to close loopholes by creating circular arguments.

All later derivations of Christian religion use the same canonical beliefs as those laid down by law to end the controversy (see the Code of Theodosianus, link in previous post). These laws are repeated by all Christian sects during service. What do you think the Nicene Creed is? This controversy was about many things, not the least of which was the creation of the idea of the Trinity (which separates us from Source). All Christians repeat these beliefs, to brainwash themselves, at almost every gathering.

I have the better part of several decades of investigation behind me.

I meant a deep dive investigation into the authorship of the bible; one not guided by Christian belief confirmation bias (which I had done before in my life), but rather, with the only intention being to find the truth of it. I didn't mean that was the whole sum of my investigation into Christianity or religion. For that I too have many decades of experience. I'm not going to attempt to get into "qualifications," because such pro hominem arguments are always faulty. If an argument can't stand on its own, it is not a valid argument. Using credentials to support an argument is exactly how the world is in the state it is in.

The Jews weren't even monotheistic.

^Do^you^ever^get^tired^of^being^wrong^?

You didn't address a single point I made in your protest. If you want I'm sure I can probably dig up some references, but if you wish to look for yourself, just look up "jews (or judaism) henotheism". The amount of evidence that supports that the jews believed in multiple gods (both polytheistic and henotheistic, depending on which group of jews you are talking about and the time period) is absolutely overwhelming. I'm not saying the jews that follow the formal religion that we call "Judaism" (there are actually quite a few jewish religions) aren't monotheistic now (though it is debatable which god they really believe in now). As just one simple example, it's written into the very First Commandment, "Thou shalt have no other gods before me." In other words, "I am your number one god." This is a clear statement of both that there are other gods (implicitly stated), and that this "god" is self-stating absolute rulership of the Israelites and Judeans (explicitly dictated). Such rulership creates a hierarchy whereby the priests of the "Divine Ruler" gain ruler status as well, and that was exactly what they had, both then, now, and all the time in between. Of course I'm sure that is purely coincidental.

Final point, a debate is an excellent path to get closer to the truth. This path can only accomplish that goal if it directly addresses points made. It is not about stating "your wrong." If you wish to engage, please engage directly. Using pro hominems, ad hominems, or simply stating "you are so stupid you don't even know how wrong you are" (paraphrased) does not help advance the debate and the investigation into the truth of a thing, rather they accomplish the opposite. In other words, they are used to obfuscate the truth.

what the hell are you talking about?

I'm not sure which part of the quote you are protesting. I didn't even say anything controversial and provided links which corroborate. They aren't the only sources that corroborate, they aren't even close. They were just paths to follow if you were interested. Nevertheless, I will further qualify the statements.

You need to distinguish in your mind the difference in The Roman Church and THE BIBLE.

The Roman Church wrote the bible (the singular book that is a collection of other works). Their writing of it was the founding of the Holy Roman Empire. This isn't even slightly controversial. Obviously they used earlier works in their writing, so here by "writing," I mean translated a selection of earlier works (many of which translations are highly controversial) and decided what to keep, and what to throw away. This final edit was decided at the Council of Nicaea in 325 AD and the Council of Constantinople in 382 AD. These councils were brought together by the ruling bodies (Emperor and God-Emperor respectively) to codify (make into law) certain beliefs and to create the formal church and ruling body (Holy Roman Empire). These councils created all Christian canon specifically to end the debate, which evidence suggests was very controversial at the time, on what Jesus was really saying, who he was, and more importantly, who We The People are in relation to Jesus and God.

The creation of the idea that Jesus is our ruler, our "Lord" God, was created at these councils, by setting him up as the only Son of God, where he said specifically, we are all the Children of God (AKA Split Aparts from Source AKA the Divine Spark). Many earlier Christians held that Jesus was showing us our connection to Source, our Divinity. Of course you can't rule Divine beings, so the church codified into law that that was not true. The church, which set itself up as our ruler, separated us from Source, and wrote the bible (massive edits) to ensure that those beliefs remained. They injected into Revelations the circularly defined Divinity of the book that was left over after their edits to create the deeply rooted belief that any debate on their interpretation is not allowed because it goes against our Ruler, The Lord God (YHWH in this case, the same entity that was the Ruler of the jews). Revelations itself is hugely problematic and was likely derived from an earlier (pre-Jesus) prophecy with several injections to close loopholes by creating circular arguments.

All later derivations of Christian religion use the same canonical beliefs as those laid down by law to end the controversy (see the Code of Theodosianus, link in previous post). These laws are repeated by all Christian sects during service. What do you think the Nicene Creed is? This controversy was about many things, not the least of which was the creation of the idea of the Trinity (which separates us from Source). All Christians repeat these beliefs, to brainwash themselves, at almost every gathering.

I have the better part of several decades of investigation behind me.

I meant a deep dive investigation into the authorship of the bible; one not guided by Christian belief confirmation bias (which I had done before in my life), but rather, with the only intention being to find the truth of it. I didn't mean that was the whole sum of my investigation into Christianity or religion. For that I too have many decades of experience. I'm not going to attempt to get into "qualifications," because such pro hominem arguments are always faulty. If an argument can't stand on its own, it is not a valid argument. Using credentials to support an argument is exactly how the world is in the state it is in.

The Jews weren't even monotheistic.

^Do^you^ever^get^tired^of^being^wrong^?

You didn't address a single point I made in your protest. If you want I'm sure I can probably dig up some references, but if you wish to look for yourself, just look up "jews (or judaism) henotheism". The amount of evidence that supports that the jews believed in multiple gods (both polytheistic and henotheistic, depending on which group of jews you are talking about and the time period) is absolutely overwhelming. I'm not saying the jews that follow the formal religion that we call "Judaism" (there are actually quite a few jewish religions) aren't monotheistic now (though it is debatable which god they really believe in now). As just one simple example, it's written into the very First Commandment, "Thou shalt have no other gods before me." In other words, "I am your number one god." This is a clear statement of both that there are other gods (implicitly stated), and that this "god" is self-stating absolute rulership of the Israelites and Judeans (explicitly dictated). Such rulership creates a hierarchy whereby the priests of the "Divine Ruler" gain ruler status as well, and that was exactly what they had, both then, now, and all the time in between.

Final point, a debate is an excellent path to get closer to the truth. This path can only accomplish that goal if it directly addresses points made. It is not about stating "your wrong." If you wish to engage, please engage directly. Using pro hominems, ad hominems, or simply stating "you are so stupid you don't even know how wrong you are" (paraphrased) does not help advance the debate and the investigation into the truth of a thing, rather they accomplish the opposite. In other words, they are used to obfuscate the truth.

what the hell are you talking about?

I'm not sure which part of the quote you are protesting. I didn't even say anything controversial and provided links which corroborate. They aren't the only sources that corroborate, they aren't even close. They were just paths to follow if you were interested. Nevertheless, I will further qualify the statements.

You need to distinguish in your mind the difference in The Roman Church and THE BIBLE.

The Roman Church wrote the bible (the singular book that is a collection of other works). Their writing of it was the founding of the Holy Roman Empire. This isn't even slightly controversial. Obviously they used earlier works in their writing, so here by "writing," I mean translated a selection of earlier works (many of which translations are highly controversial) and decided what to keep, and what to throw away. This final edit was decided at the Council of Nicaea in 325 AD and the Council of Constantinople in 382 AD. These councils were brought together by the ruling bodies (Emperor and God-Emperor respectively) to codify (make into law) certain beliefs and to create the formal church and ruling body (Holy Roman Empire). These councils created all Christian canon specifically to end the debate, which evidence suggests was very controversial at the time, on what Jesus was really saying, who he was, and more importantly, who We The People are in relation to Jesus and God.

The creation of the idea that Jesus is our ruler, our "Lord" God, was created at these councils, by setting him up as the only Son of God, where he said specifically, we are all the Children of God (AKA Split Aparts from Source AKA the Divine Spark). Many earlier Christians held that Jesus was showing us our connection to Source, our Divinity. Of course you can't rule Divine beings, so the church codified into law that that was not true. The church, which set itself up as our ruler, separated us from Source, and wrote the bible (massive edits) to ensure that those beliefs remained. They injected into Revelations the circularly defined Divinity of the book that was left over after their edits to create the deeply rooted belief that any debate on their interpretation is not allowed because it goes against our Ruler, The Lord God (YHWH in this case, the same entity that was the Ruler of the jews). Revelations itself is hugely problematic and was likely derived from an earlier (pre-Jesus) prophecy with several injections to close loopholes by creating circular arguments.

All later derivations of Christian religion use the same canonical beliefs as those laid down by law to end the controversy (see the Code of Theodosianus, link in previous post). These laws are repeated by all Christian sects during service. What do you think the Nicene Creed is? This controversy was about many things, not the least of which was the creation of the idea of the Trinity (which separates us from Source). All Christians repeat these beliefs, to brainwash themselves, at almost every gathering.

I have the better part of several decades of investigation behind me.

I meant a deep dive investigation into the authorship of the bible; one not guided by Christian belief confirmation bias (which I had done before in my life), but rather, with the only intention being to find the truth of it. I didn't mean that was the whole sum of my investigation into Christianity or religion. For that I too have many decades of experience. I'm not going to attempt to get into "qualifications," because such pro hominem arguments are always faulty. If an argument can't stand on its own, it is not a valid argument. Using credentials to support an argument is exactly how the world is in the state it is in.

The Jews weren't even monotheistic.

^Do^you^ever^get^tired^of^being^wrong^?

You didn't address a single point I made in your protest. If you want I'm sure I can probably dig up some references, but if you wish to look for yourself, just look up "jews (or judaism) henotheism". The amount of evidence that supports that the jews believed in multiple gods (both polytheistic and henotheistic, depending on which group of jews you are talking about and the time period) is absolutely overwhelming. I'm not saying the jews that follow the formal religion that we call "Judaism" (there are actually quite a few jewish religions) aren't monotheistic now (though it is debatable which god they really believe in now). As just one simple example, it's written into the very First Commandment, "Thou shalt have no other gods before me." In other words, "I am your number one god." This is a clear statement of both that there are other gods (implicitly stated), and that this "god" is self-stating absolute rulership of the Israelites and Judeans (explicitly dictated).

Final point, a debate is an excellent path to get closer to the truth. This path can only accomplish that goal if it directly addresses points made. It is not about stating "your wrong." If you wish to engage, please engage directly. Using pro hominems, ad hominems, or simply stating "you are so stupid you don't even know how wrong you are" (paraphrased) does not help advance the debate and the investigation into the truth of a thing, rather they accomplish the opposite. In other words, they are used to obfuscate the truth.

what the hell are you talking about?

I'm not sure which part of the quote you are protesting. I didn't even say anything controversial and provided links which corroborate. They aren't the only sources that corroborate, they aren't even close. They were just paths to follow if you were interested. Nevertheless, I will further qualify the statements.

You need to distinguish in your mind the difference in The Roman Church and THE BIBLE.

The Roman Church wrote the bible (the singular book that is a collection of other works). Their writing of it was the founding of the Holy Roman Empire. This isn't even slightly controversial. Obviously they used earlier works in their writing, so here by "writing," I mean translated a selection of earlier works (many of which translations are highly controversial) and decided what to keep, and what to throw away. This final edit was decided at the Council of Nicaea in 325 AD and the Council of Constantinople in 382 AD. These councils were brought together by the ruling bodies (Emperor and God-Emperor respectively) to codify (make into law) certain beliefs and to create the formal church and ruling body (Holy Roman Empire). These councils created all Christian canon specifically to end the debate, which evidence suggests was very controversial at the time, on what Jesus was really saying, who he was, and more importantly, who We The People are in relation to Jesus and God.

The creation of the idea that Jesus is our ruler, our "Lord" God, was created at these councils, by setting him up as the only Son of God, where he said specifically, we are all the Children of God (AKA Split Aparts from Source AKA the Divine Spark). Many earlier Christians held that Jesus was showing us our connection to Source, our Divinity. Of course you can't rule Divine beings, so the church codified into law that that was not true. The church, which set itself up as our ruler, separated us from Source, and wrote the bible (massive edits) to ensure that those beliefs remained. They injected into Revelations the circularly defined Divinity of the book that was left over after their edits to create the deeply rooted belief that any debate on their interpretation is not allowed because it goes against our Ruler, The Lord God (YHWH in this case). Revelations itself is hugely problematic and was likely derived from an earlier (pre-Jesus) prophecy with several injections to close loopholes by creating circular arguments.

All later derivations of Christian religion use the same canonical beliefs as those laid down by law to end the controversy (see the Code of Theodosianus, link in previous post). These laws are repeated by all Christian sects during service. What do you think the Nicene Creed is? This controversy was about many things, not the least of which was the creation of the idea of the Trinity (which separates us from Source). All Christians repeat these beliefs, to brainwash themselves, at almost every gathering.

I have the better part of several decades of investigation behind me.

I meant a deep dive investigation into the authorship of the bible; one not guided by Christian belief confirmation bias (which I had done before in my life), but rather, with the only intention being to find the truth of it. I didn't mean that was the whole sum of my investigation into Christianity or religion. For that I too have many decades of experience. I'm not going to attempt to get into "qualifications," because such pro hominem arguments are always faulty. If an argument can't stand on its own, it is not a valid argument. Using credentials to support an argument is exactly how the world is in the state it is in.

The Jews weren't even monotheistic.

^Do^you^ever^get^tired^of^being^wrong^?

You didn't address a single point I made in your protest. If you want I'm sure I can probably dig up some references, but if you wish to look for yourself, just look up "jews (or judaism) henotheism". The amount of evidence that supports that the jews believed in multiple gods (both polytheistic and henotheistic, depending on which group of jews you are talking about and the time period) is absolutely overwhelming. I'm not saying the jews that follow the formal religion that we call "Judaism" (there are actually quite a few jewish religions) aren't monotheistic now (though it is debatable which god they really believe in now). As just one simple example, it's written into the very First Commandment, "Thou shalt have no other gods before me." In other words, "I am your number one god." This is a clear statement of both that there are other gods (implicitly stated), and that this "god" is self-stating absolute rulership of the Israelites and Judeans (explicitly dictated).

Final point, a debate is an excellent path to get closer to the truth. This path can only accomplish that goal if it directly addresses points made. It is not about stating "your wrong." If you wish to engage, please engage directly. Using pro hominems, ad hominems, or simply stating "you are so stupid you don't even know how wrong you are" (paraphrased) does not help advance the debate and the investigation into the truth of a thing, rather they accomplish the opposite. In other words, they are used to obfuscate the truth.

what the hell are you talking about?

I'm not sure which part of the quote you are protesting. I didn't even say anything controversial and provided links which corroborate. They aren't the only sources that corroborate, they aren't even close. They were just paths to follow if you were interested. Nevertheless, I will further qualify the statements.

You need to distinguish in your mind the difference in The Roman Church and THE BIBLE.

The Roman Church wrote the bible (the singular book that is a collection of other works). Their writing of it was the founding of the Holy Roman Empire. This isn't even slightly controversial. Obviously they used earlier works in their writing, so here, by "writing" I mean translated a selection of earlier works (many of which translations are highly controversial) and decided what to keep, and what to throw away. This final edit was decided at the Council of Nicaea in 325 AD and the Council of Constantinople in 382 AD. These councils were brought together by the ruling bodies (Emperor and God-Emperor respectively) to codify (make into law) certain beliefs and to create the formal church and ruling body (Holy Roman Empire). These councils created all Christian canon specifically to end the debate, which evidence suggests was very controversial at the time, on what Jesus was really saying, who he was, and more importantly, who We The People are in relation to Jesus and God.

The creation of the idea that Jesus is our ruler, our "Lord" God, was created at these councils, by setting him up as the only Son of God, where he said specifically, we are all the Children of God (AKA Split Aparts from Source AKA the Divine Spark). Many earlier Christians held that Jesus was showing us our connection to Source, our Divinity. Of course you can't rule Divine beings, so the church codified into law that that was not true. The church, which set itself up as our ruler, separated us from Source, and wrote the bible (massive edits) to ensure that those beliefs remained. They injected into Revelations the circularly defined Divinity of the book that was left over after their edits to create the deeply rooted belief that any debate on their interpretation is not allowed because it goes against our Ruler, The Lord God (YHWH in this case). Revelations itself is hugely problematic and was likely derived from an earlier (pre-Jesus) prophecy with several injections to close loopholes by creating circular arguments.

All later derivations of Christian religion use the same canonical beliefs as those laid down by law to end the controversy (see the Code of Theodosianus, link in previous post). These laws are repeated by all Christian sects during service. What do you think the Nicene Creed is? This controversy was about many things, not the least of which was the creation of the idea of the Trinity (which separates us from Source). All Christians repeat these beliefs, to brainwash themselves, at almost every gathering.

I have the better part of several decades of investigation behind me.

I meant a deep dive investigation into the authorship of the bible; one not guided by Christian belief confirmation bias (which I had done before in my life), but rather, with the only intention being to find the truth of it. I didn't mean that was the whole sum of my investigation into Christianity or religion. For that I too have many decades of experience. I'm not going to attempt to get into "qualifications," because such pro hominem arguments are always faulty. If an argument can't stand on its own, it is not a valid argument. Using credentials to support an argument is exactly how the world is in the state it is in.

The Jews weren't even monotheistic.

^Do^you^ever^get^tired^of^being^wrong^?

You didn't address a single point I made in your protest. If you want I'm sure I can probably dig up some references, but if you wish to look for yourself, just look up "jews (or judaism) henotheism". The amount of evidence that supports that the jews believed in multiple gods (both polytheistic and henotheistic, depending on which group of jews you are talking about and the time period) is absolutely overwhelming. I'm not saying the jews that follow the formal religion that we call "Judaism" (there are actually quite a few jewish religions) aren't monotheistic now (though it is debatable which god they really believe in now). As just one simple example, it's written into the very First Commandment, "Thou shalt have no other gods before me." In other words, "I am your number one god." This is a clear statement of both that there are other gods (implicitly stated), and that this "god" is self-stating absolute rulership of the Israelites and Judeans (explicitly dictated).

Final point, a debate is an excellent path to get closer to the truth. This path can only accomplish that goal if it directly addresses points made. It is not about stating "your wrong." If you wish to engage, please engage directly. Using pro hominems, ad hominems, or simply stating "you are so stupid you don't even know how wrong you are" (paraphrased) does not help advance the debate and the investigation into the truth of a thing, rather they accomplish the opposite. In other words, they are used to obfuscate the truth.

what the hell are you talking about?

I'm not sure which part of the quote you are protesting. I didn't even say anything controversial and provided links which corroborate. They aren't the only sources that corroborate, they aren't even close. They were just paths to follow if you were interested. Nevertheless, I will further qualify the statements.

You need to distinguish in your mind the difference in The Roman Church and THE BIBLE.

The Roman Church wrote the bible (the singular book that is a collection of other works). Their writing of it was the founding of the Holy Roman Empire. This isn't even slightly controversial. Obviously they used earlier works in their writing, so here, by "writing" I mean translated a selection of earlier works (many of which translations are highly controversial) and decided what to keep, and what to throw away. This final edit was decided at the Council of Nicaea in 325 AD and the Council of Constantinople in 382 AD. These councils were brought together by the ruling bodies (Emperor and God-Emperor respectively) to codify (make into law) certain beliefs and to create the formal church and ruling body (Holy Roman Empire). These councils created all Christian canon specifically to end the debate, which evidence suggests was very controversial at the time, on what Jesus was really saying, who he was, and more importantly, who We The People are in relation to Jesus and God.

The creation of the idea that Jesus is our ruler, our "Lord" God, was created at these councils, by setting him up as the only Son of God, where he said specifically, we are all the Children of God (AKA Split Aparts from Source AKA the Divine Spark). Many earlier Christians held that Jesus was showing us our connection to Source, our Divinity. Of course you can't rule Divine beings, so the church codified into law that that was not true. The church, which set itself up as our ruler, separated us from Source, and wrote the bible (massive edits) to ensure that those beliefs remained. They injected into Revelations the circularly defined Divinity of the book that was left over after their edits to create the deeply rooted belief that any debate on their interpretation is not allowed because it goes against our Ruler, The Lord God (YHWH in this case). Revelations itself is hugely problematic and was likely derived from an earlier (pre-Jesus) prophecy with several injections to close loopholes by creating circular arguments.

All later derivations of Christian religion use the same canonical beliefs as those laid down by law to end the controversy (see the Code of Theodosianus, link in previous post). These laws are repeated by all Christian sects during service. What do you think the Nicene Creed is? This controversy was about many things, not the least of which was the creation of the idea of the Trinity (which separates us from Source). All Christians repeat these beliefs, to brainwash themselves, at almost every gathering.

I have the better part of several decades of investigation behind me.

I meant a deep dive investigation into the authorship of the bible; one not guided by Christian belief confirmation bias (which I had done before in my life), but rather, with the only intention being to find the truth of it. I didn't mean that was the whole sum of my investigation into Christianity or religion. For that I too have many decades of experience. I'm not going to attempt to get into "qualifications," because such pro hominem arguments are always faulty. If an argument can't stand on its own, it is not a valid argument. Using credentials to support an argument is exactly how the world is in the state it is in.

The Jews weren't even monotheistic.

^Do^you^ever^get^tired^of^being^wrong^?

You didn't address a single point I made in your protest. If you want I'm sure I can probably dig up some references, but if you wish to look for yourself, just look up "jews (or judaism) henotheism". The amount of evidence that supports that the jews believed in multiple gods (both polytheistic and henotheistic, depending on which group of jews you are talking about and the time period) is absolutely overwhelming. I'm not saying the jews that follow the formal religion that we call "Judaism" (there are actually quite a few jewish religions) aren't monotheistic now (though it is debatable which god they really believe in now). As just one simple example, it's written into the very First Commandment, "Thou shalt have no other gods before me." In other words, "I am your number one god." This is a clear statement of both that there are other gods (implicitly stated), and that this "god" is self-stating absolute rulership of the Israelites and Judeans (explicitly dictated).

Final point, a debate is an excellent path to get closer to the truth. It is about directly addressing points made. It is not about stating "your wrong." If you wish to engage, please engage directly. Using pro hominems, ad hominems, or simply stating "you are so stupid you don't even know how wrong you are" (paraphrased) does not help advance the debate and the investigation into the truth of a thing, rather they accomplish the opposite. In other words, they are used to obfuscate the truth.

what the hell are you talking about?

I'm not sure which part of the quote you are protesting. I didn't even say anything controversial and provided links which corroborate. They aren't the only sources that corroborate, they aren't even close. They were just paths to follow if you were interested. Nevertheless, I will further qualify the statements.

You need to distinguish in your mind the difference in The Roman Church and THE BIBLE.

The Roman Church wrote the bible (the singular book that is a collection of other works). Their writing of it was the founding of the Holy Roman Empire. This isn't even slightly controversial. Obviously they used earlier works in their writing, so here, by "writing" I mean translated a selection of earlier works (many of which translations are highly controversial) and decided what to keep, and what to throw away. This final edit was decided at the Council of Nicaea in 325 AD and the Council of Constantinople in 382 AD. These councils were brought together by the ruling bodies (Emperor and God-Emperor respectively) to codify (make into law) certain beliefs and to create the formal church and ruling body (Holy Roman Empire). These councils created all Christian canon specifically to end the debate, which evidence suggests was very controversial at the time, on what Jesus was really saying, who he was, and more importantly, who We The People are in relation to Jesus and God.

The creation of the idea that Jesus is our ruler, our "Lord" God, was created at these councils, by setting him up as the only Son of God, where he said specifically, we are all the Children of God (AKA Split Aparts from Source AKA the Divine Spark). Many earlier Christians held that Jesus was showing us our connection to Source, our Divinity. Of course you can't rule Divine beings, so the church codified into law that that was not true. The church, which set itself up as our ruler, separated us from Source, and wrote the bible (massive edits) to ensure that those beliefs remained. They injected into Revelations the circularly defined Divinity of the book that was left over after their edits to create the deeply rooted belief that any debate on their interpretation is not allowed because it goes against our Ruler, The Lord God (YHWH in this case). Revelations itself is hugely problematic and was likely derived from an earlier (pre-Jesus) prophecy with several injections to close loopholes by creating circular arguments.

All later derivations of Christian religion use the same canonical beliefs as those laid down by law to end the controversy (see the Code of Theodosianus, link in previous post). These laws are repeated by all Christian sects during service. What do you think the Nicene Creed is? This controversy was about many things, not the least of which was the creation of the idea of the Trinity (which separates us from Source). All Christians repeat these beliefs, to brainwash themselves, at almost every gathering.

I have the better part of several decades of investigation behind me.

I meant a deep dive investigation into the authorship of the bible; one not guided by Christian belief confirmation bias (which I had done before in my life), but rather, with the only intention being to find the truth of it. I didn't mean that was the whole sum of my investigation into Christianity or religion. For that I too have many decades of experience. I'm not going to attempt to get into "qualifications," because such pro hominem arguments are always faulty. If an argument can't stand on its own, it is not a valid argument. Using credentials to support an argument is exactly how the world is in the state it is in.

The Jews weren't even monotheistic.

^Do^you^ever^get^tired^of^being^wrong^?

You didn't address a single point I made in your protest. If you want I'm sure I can probably dig up some references, but if you wish to look for yourself, just look up "jews (or judaism) henotheism". The amount of evidence that supports that the jews believed in multiple gods (both polytheistic and henotheistic, depending on which group of jews you are talking about and the time period) is absolutely overwhelming. I'm not saying the jews that follow the formal religion that we call "Judaism" (there are actually quite a few jewish religions) aren't monotheistic now (though it is debatable which god they really believe in now). As just one simple example, it's written into the very First Commandment, "Thou shalt have no other gods before me." In other words, "I am your number one god." This is a clear statement of both that there are other gods, and that this "god" is self-stating absolute rulership of the Israelites and Judeans.

Final point, a debate is an excellent path to get closer to the truth. It is about directly addressing points made. It is not about stating "your wrong." If you wish to engage, please engage directly. Using pro hominems, ad hominems, or simply stating "you are so stupid you don't even know how wrong you are" (paraphrased) does not help advance the debate and the investigation into the truth of a thing, rather they accomplish the opposite. In other words, they are used to obfuscate the truth.

what the hell are you talking about?

I'm not sure which part of the quote you are protesting. I didn't even say anything controversial and provided links which corroborate. They aren't the only sources that corroborate, they aren't even close. They were just paths to follow if you were interested. Nevertheless, I will further qualify the statements.

You need to distinguish in your mind the difference in The Roman Church and THE BIBLE.

The Roman Church wrote the bible (the singular book that is a collection of other works). Their writing of it was the founding of the Holy Roman Empire. This isn't even slightly controversial. Obviously they used earlier works in their writing, so here, by "writing" I mean translated a selection of earlier works (many of which translations are highly controversial) and decided what to keep, and what to throw away. This final edit was decided at the Council of Nicaea in 325 AD and the Council of Constantinople in 382 AD. These councils were brought together by the ruling bodies (Emperor and God-Emperor respectively) to codify (make into law) certain beliefs and to create the formal church and ruling body (Holy Roman Empire). These councils created all Christian canon specifically to end the debate, which evidence suggests was very controversial at the time, on what Jesus was really saying, who he was, and more importantly, who We The People are in relation to Jesus and God.

The creation of the idea that Jesus is our ruler, our "Lord" God, was created at these councils, by setting him up as the only Son of God, where he said specifically, we are all the Children of God (AKA Split Aparts from Source AKA the Divine Spark). Many earlier Christians held that Jesus was showing us our connection to Source, our Divinity. Of course you can't rule Divine beings, so the church codified into law that that was not true. The church, which set itself up as our ruler, separated us from Source, and wrote the bible (massive edits) to ensure that those beliefs remained. They injected into Revelations the circularly defined Divinity of the book that was left over after their edits to create the deeply rooted belief that any debate on their interpretation is not allowed because it goes against our Ruler, The Lord God (YHWH in this case). Revelations itself is hugely problematic and was likely derived from an earlier (pre-Jesus) prophecy with several injections to close loopholes by creating circular arguments.

All later derivations of Christian religion use the same canonical beliefs as those laid down by law to end the controversy (see the Code of Theodosianus, link in previous post). These laws are repeated by all Christian sects during service. What do you think the Nicene Creed is? This controversy was about many things, not the least of which was the creation of the idea of the Trinity (which separates us from Source). All Christians repeat these beliefs, to brainwash themselves, at almost every gathering.

I have the better part of several decades of investigation behind me.

I meant a deep dive investigation into the authorship of the bible; one not guided by Christian belief confirmation bias (which I had done before in my life), but rather, with the only intention being to find the truth of it. I didn't mean that was the whole sum of my investigation into Christianity or religion. For that I too have many decades of experience. I'm not going to attempt to get into "qualifications," because such pro hominem arguments are always faulty. If an argument can't stand on its own, it is not a valid argument. Using credentials to support an argument is exactly how the world is in the state it is in.

The Jews weren't even monotheistic.

^Do^you^ever^get^tired^of^being^wrong^?

You didn't address a single point I made in your protest. If you want I'm sure I can probably dig up some references, but if you wish to look for yourself, just look up "jews (or judaism) henotheism". The amount of evidence that supports that the jews believed in multiple gods (both polytheistic and henotheistic, depending on which group of jews you are talking about and the time period) is absolutely overwhelming. I'm not saying the jews that follow the formal religion of Judaism (there are actually quite a few jewish religions) aren't monotheistic now (though it is debatable which god they really believe in now). As just one simple example, it's written into the very First Commandment, "Thou shalt have no other gods before me." In other words, "I am your number one god." This is a clear statement of both that there are other gods, and that this "god" is self-stating absolute rulership of the Israelites and Judeans.

Final point, a debate is an excellent path to get closer to the truth. It is about directly addressing points made. It is not about stating "your wrong." If you wish to engage, please engage directly. Using pro hominems, ad hominems, or simply stating "you are so stupid you don't even know how wrong you are" (paraphrased) does not help advance the debate and the investigation into the truth of a thing, rather they accomplish the opposite. In other words, they are used to obfuscate the truth.

what the hell are you talking about?

I'm not sure which part of the quote you are protesting. I didn't even say anything controversial and provided links which corroborate. They aren't the only sources that corroborate, they aren't even close. They were just paths to follow if you were interested. Nevertheless, I will further qualify the statements.

You need to distinguish in your mind the difference in The Roman Church and THE BIBLE.

The Roman Church wrote the bible (the singular book that is a collection of other works). Their writing of it was the founding of the Holy Roman Empire. This isn't even slightly controversial. Obviously they used earlier works in their writing, so here, by "writing" I mean translated a selection of earlier works (many of which translations are highly controversial) and decided what to keep, and what to throw away. This final edit was decided at the Council of Nicaea in 325 AD and the Council of Constantinople in 382 AD. These councils were brought together by the ruling bodies (Emperor and God-Emperor respectively) to codify (make into law) certain beliefs and to create the formal church and ruling body (Holy Roman Empire). These councils created all Christian canon specifically to end the debate, which evidence suggests was very controversial at the time, on what Jesus was really saying, who he was, and more importantly, who We The People are in relation to Jesus and God.

The creation of the idea that Jesus is our ruler, our "Lord" God, was created at these councils, by setting him up as the only Son of God, where he said specifically, we are all the Children of God (AKA Split Aparts from Source AKA the Divine Spark). Many earlier Christians held that Jesus was showing us our connection to Source, our Divinity. Of course you can't rule Divine beings, so the church codified into law that that was not true. The church, which set itself up as our ruler, separated us from Source, and wrote the bible (massive edits) to ensure that those beliefs remained. They injected into Revelations the circularly defined Divinity of the book that was left over after their edits to create the deeply rooted belief that any debate on their interpretation is not allowed because it goes against our Ruler, The Lord God (YHWH in this case). Revelations itself is hugely problematic and was likely derived from an earlier (pre-Jesus) prophecy with several injections to close loopholes by creating circular arguments.

All later derivations of Christian religion use the same canonical beliefs as those laid down by law to end the controversy (see the Code of Theodosianus, link in previous post). These laws are repeated by all Christian sects during service. What do you think the Nicene Creed is? This controversy was about many things, not the least of which was the creation of the idea of the Trinity (which separates us from Source). All Christians repeat these beliefs, to brainwash themselves, at almost every gathering.

I have the better part of several decades of investigation behind me.

I meant a deep dive investigation into the authorship of the bible; one not guided by Christian belief confirmation bias (which I had done before in my life), but rather, with the only intention being to find the truth of it. I didn't mean that was the whole sum of my investigation into Christianity or religion. For that I too have many decades of experience. I'm not going to attempt to get into "qualifications," because such pro hominem arguments are always faulty. If an argument can't stand on its own, it is not a valid argument. Using credentials to support an argument is exactly how the world is in the state it is in.

The Jews weren't even monotheistic.

^Do^you^ever^get^tired^of^being^wrong^?

You didn't address a single point I made in your protest. If you want I'm sure I can probably dig up some references, but if you wish to look for yourself, just look up "jews (or judaism) henotheism". The amount of evidence that supports that the jews believed in multiple gods (both polytheistic and henotheistic, depending on which group of jews you are talking about and the time period) is absolutely overwhelming. I'm not saying they aren't monotheistic now (though it is debatable which god they really believe in now). As just one simple example, it's written into the very First Commandment, "Thou shalt have no other gods before me." In other words, "I am your number one god." This is a clear statement of both that there are other gods, and that this "god" is self-stating absolute rulership of the Israelites and Judeans.

Final point, a debate is an excellent path to get closer to the truth. It is about directly addressing points made. It is not about stating "your wrong." If you wish to engage, please engage directly. Using pro hominems, ad hominems, or simply stating "you are so stupid you don't even know how wrong you are" (paraphrased) does not help advance the debate and the investigation into the truth of a thing, rather they accomplish the opposite. In other words, they are used to obfuscate the truth.

what the hell are you talking about?

I'm not sure which part of the quote you are protesting. I didn't even say anything controversial and provided links which corroborate. They aren't the only sources that corroborate, they aren't even close. They were just paths to follow if you were interested. Nevertheless, I will further qualify the statements.

You need to distinguish in your mind the difference in The Roman Church and THE BIBLE.

The Roman Church wrote the bible (the singular book that is a collection of other works). Their writing of it was the founding of the Holy Roman Empire. This isn't even slightly controversial. Obviously they used earlier works in their writing, so here, by "writing" I mean translated a selection of earlier works (many of which are highly controversial) and decided what to keep, and what to throw away. This final edit was decided at the Council of Nicaea in 325 AD and the Council of Constantinople in 382 AD. These councils were brought together by the ruling bodies (Emperor and God-Emperor respectively) to codify (make into law) certain beliefs and to create the formal church and ruling body (Holy Roman Empire). These councils created all Christian canon specifically to end the debate, which evidence suggests was very controversial at the time, on what Jesus was really saying, who he was, and more importantly, who We The People are in relation to Jesus and God.

The creation of the idea that Jesus is our ruler, our "Lord" God, was created at these councils, by setting him up as the only Son of God, where he said specifically, we are all the Children of God (AKA Split Aparts from Source AKA the Divine Spark). Many earlier Christians held that Jesus was showing us our connection to Source, our Divinity. Of course you can't rule Divine beings, so the church codified into law that that was not true. The church, which set itself up as our ruler, separated us from Source, and wrote the bible (massive edits) to ensure that those beliefs remained. They injected into Revelations the circularly defined Divinity of the book that was left over after their edits to create the deeply rooted belief that any debate on their interpretation is not allowed because it goes against our Ruler, The Lord God (YHWH in this case). Revelations itself is hugely problematic and was likely derived from an earlier (pre-Jesus) prophecy with several injections to close loopholes by creating circular arguments.

All later derivations of Christian religion use the same canonical beliefs as those laid down by law to end the controversy (see the Code of Theodosianus, link in previous post). These laws are repeated by all Christian sects during service. What do you think the Nicene Creed is? This controversy was about many things, not the least of which was the creation of the idea of the Trinity (which separates us from Source). All Christians repeat these beliefs, to brainwash themselves, at almost every gathering.

I have the better part of several decades of investigation behind me.

I meant a deep dive investigation into the authorship of the bible; one not guided by Christian belief confirmation bias (which I had done before in my life), but rather, with the only intention being to find the truth of it. I didn't mean that was the whole sum of my investigation into Christianity or religion. For that I too have many decades of experience. I'm not going to attempt to get into "qualifications," because such pro hominem arguments are always faulty. If an argument can't stand on its own, it is not a valid argument. Using credentials to support an argument is exactly how the world is in the state it is in.

The Jews weren't even monotheistic.

^Do^you^ever^get^tired^of^being^wrong^?

You didn't address a single point I made in your protest. If you want I'm sure I can probably dig up some references, but if you wish to look for yourself, just look up "jews (or judaism) henotheism". The amount of evidence that supports that the jews believed in multiple gods (both polytheistic and henotheistic, depending on which group of jews you are talking about and the time period) is absolutely overwhelming. I'm not saying they aren't monotheistic now (though it is debatable which god they really believe in now). As just one simple example, it's written into the very First Commandment, "Thou shalt have no other gods before me." In other words, "I am your number one god." This is a clear statement of both that there are other gods, and that this "god" is self-stating absolute rulership of the Israelites and Judeans.

Final point, a debate is an excellent path to get closer to the truth. It is about directly addressing points made. It is not about stating "your wrong." If you wish to engage, please engage directly. Using pro hominems, ad hominems, or simply stating "you are so stupid you don't even know how wrong you are" (paraphrased) does not help advance the debate and the investigation into the truth of a thing, rather they accomplish the opposite. In other words, they are used to obfuscate the truth.

what the hell are you talking about?

I'm not sure which part of the quote you are protesting. I didn't even say anything controversial and provided links which corroborate. They aren't the only sources that corroborate, they aren't even close. They were just paths to follow if you were interested. Nevertheless, I will further qualify the statements.

You need to distinguish in your mind the difference in The Roman Church and THE BIBLE.

The Roman Church wrote the bible. Their writing of it was the founding of the Holy Roman Empire. This isn't even slightly controversial. Obviously they used earlier works in their writing, so here, by "writing" I mean translated a selection of earlier works (many of which are highly controversial) and decided what to keep, and what to throw away. This final edit was decided at the Council of Nicaea in 325 AD and the Council of Constantinople in 382 AD. These councils were brought together by the ruling bodies (Emperor and God-Emperor respectively) to codify (make into law) certain beliefs and to create the formal church and ruling body (Holy Roman Empire). These councils created all Christian canon specifically to end the debate, which evidence suggests was very controversial at the time, on what Jesus was really saying, who he was, and more importantly, who We The People are in relation to Jesus and God.

The creation of the idea that Jesus is our ruler, our "Lord" God, was created at these councils, by setting him up as the only Son of God, where he said specifically, we are all the Children of God (AKA Split Aparts from Source AKA the Divine Spark). Many earlier Christians held that Jesus was showing us our connection to Source, our Divinity. Of course you can't rule Divine beings, so the church codified into law that that was not true. The church, which set itself up as our ruler, separated us from Source, and wrote the bible (massive edits) to ensure that those beliefs remained. They injected into Revelations the circularly defined Divinity of the book that was left over after their edits to create the deeply rooted belief that any debate on their interpretation is not allowed because it goes against our Ruler, The Lord God (YHWH in this case). Revelations itself is hugely problematic and was likely derived from an earlier (pre-Jesus) prophecy with several injections to close loopholes by creating circular arguments.

All later derivations of Christian religion use the same canonical beliefs as those laid down by law to end the controversy (see the Code of Theodosianus, link in previous post). These laws are repeated by all Christian sects during service. What do you think the Nicene Creed is? This controversy was about many things, not the least of which was the creation of the idea of the Trinity (which separates us from Source). All Christians repeat these beliefs, to brainwash themselves, at almost every gathering.

I have the better part of several decades of investigation behind me.

I meant a deep dive investigation into the authorship of the bible; one not guided by Christian belief confirmation bias (which I had done before in my life), but rather, with the only intention being to find the truth of it. I didn't mean that was the whole sum of my investigation into Christianity or religion. For that I too have many decades of experience. I'm not going to attempt to get into "qualifications," because such pro hominem arguments are always faulty. If an argument can't stand on its own, it is not a valid argument. Using credentials to support an argument is exactly how the world is in the state it is in.

The Jews weren't even monotheistic.

^Do^you^ever^get^tired^of^being^wrong^?

You didn't address a single point I made in your protest. If you want I'm sure I can probably dig up some references, but if you wish to look for yourself, just look up "jews (or judaism) henotheism". The amount of evidence that supports that the jews believed in multiple gods (both polytheistic and henotheistic, depending on which group of jews you are talking about and the time period) is absolutely overwhelming. I'm not saying they aren't monotheistic now (though it is debatable which god they really believe in now). As just one simple example, it's written into the very First Commandment, "Thou shalt have no other gods before me." In other words, "I am your number one god." This is a clear statement of both that there are other gods, and that this "god" is self-stating absolute rulership of the Israelites and Judeans.

Final point, a debate is an excellent path to get closer to the truth. It is about directly addressing points made. It is not about stating "your wrong." If you wish to engage, please engage directly. Using pro hominems, ad hominems, or simply stating "you are so stupid you don't even know how wrong you are" (paraphrased) does not help advance the debate and the investigation into the truth of a thing, rather they accomplish the opposite. In other words, they are used to obfuscate the truth.

what the hell are you talking about?

I'm not sure which part of the quote you are protesting. I didn't even say anything controversial and provided links which corroborate. They aren't the only sources that corroborate, they aren't even close. They were just paths to follow if you were interested. Nevertheless, I will further qualify the statements.

You need to distinguish in your mind the difference in The Roman Church and THE BIBLE.

The Roman Church wrote the bible. Their writing of it was the founding of the Holy Roman Empire. This isn't even slightly controversial. Obviously they used earlier works in their writing, so here, by "writing" I mean translated a selection of earlier works (many of which are highly controversial) and decided what to keep, and what to throw away. This final edit was decided at the Council of Nicaea in 325 AD and the Council of Constantinople in 382 AD. These councils were brought together by the ruling bodies (Emperor and God-Emperor respectively) to codify (make into law) certain beliefs and to create the formal church and ruling body (Holy Roman Empire). These councils created all Christian canon specifically to end the debate, which evidence suggests was very controversial at the time, on what Jesus was really saying, who he was, and more importantly, who We The People are in relation to Jesus and God.

The creation of the idea that Jesus is our ruler, our "Lord" God, was created at these councils, by setting him up as the only Son of God, where he said specifically, we are all the Children of God (AKA Split Aparts from Source AKA the Divine Spark). Many earlier Christians held that Jesus was showing us our connection to Source, our Divinity. Of course you can't rule Divine beings, so the church codified into law that that was not true. The church, which set itself up as our ruler, separated us from Source, and wrote the bible (massive edits) to ensure that those beliefs remained. They injected into Revelations the circularly defined Divinity of the book that was left over after their edits to create the deeply rooted belief that any debate on their interpretation is not allowed because it goes against our Ruler, The Lord God (YHWH in this case). Revelations itself is hugely problematic and was likely derived from an earlier (pre-Jesus) prophecy.

All later derivations of Christian religion use the same canonical beliefs as those laid down by law to end the controversy (see the Code of Theodosianus, link in previous post). These laws are repeated by all Christian sects during service. What do you think the Nicene Creed is? This controversy was about many things, not the least of which was the creation of the idea of the Trinity (which separates us from Source). All Christians repeat these beliefs, to brainwash themselves, at almost every gathering.

I have the better part of several decades of investigation behind me.

I meant a deep dive investigation into the authorship of the bible; one not guided by Christian belief confirmation bias (which I had done before in my life), but rather, with the only intention being to find the truth of it. I didn't mean that was the whole sum of my investigation into Christianity or religion. For that I too have many decades of experience. I'm not going to attempt to get into "qualifications," because such pro hominem arguments are always faulty. If an argument can't stand on its own, it is not a valid argument. Using credentials to support an argument is exactly how the world is in the state it is in.

The Jews weren't even monotheistic.

^Do^you^ever^get^tired^of^being^wrong^?

You didn't address a single point I made in your protest. If you want I'm sure I can probably dig up some references, but if you wish to look for yourself, just look up "jews (or judaism) henotheism". The amount of evidence that supports that the jews believed in multiple gods (both polytheistic and henotheistic, depending on which group of jews you are talking about and the time period) is absolutely overwhelming. I'm not saying they aren't monotheistic now (though it is debatable which god they really believe in now). As just one simple example, it's written into the very First Commandment, "Thou shalt have no other gods before me." In other words, "I am your number one god." This is a clear statement of both that there are other gods, and that this "god" is self-stating absolute rulership of the Israelites and Judeans.

Final point, a debate is an excellent path to get closer to the truth. It is about directly addressing points made. It is not about stating "your wrong." If you wish to engage, please engage directly. Using pro hominems, ad hominems, or simply stating "you are so stupid you don't even know how wrong you are" (paraphrased) does not help advance the debate and the investigation into the truth of a thing, rather they accomplish the opposite. In other words, they are used to obfuscate the truth.

what the hell are you talking about?

I'm not sure which part of the quote you are protesting. I didn't even say anything controversial and provided links which corroborate. They aren't the only sources that corroborate, they aren't even close. They were just paths to follow if you were interested. Nevertheless, I will further qualify the statements.

You need to distinguish in your mind the difference in The Roman Church and THE BIBLE.

The Roman Church wrote the bible. Their writing of it was the founding of the Holy Roman Empire. This isn't even slightly controversial. Obviously they used earlier works in their writing, so here, by "writing" I mean translated a selection of earlier works (many of which are highly controversial) and decided what to keep, and what to throw away. This final edit was decided at the Council of Nicaea in 325 AD and the Council of Constantinople in 382 AD. These councils were brought together by the ruling bodies (Emperor and God-Emperor respectively) to codify (make into law) certain beliefs and to create the formal church and ruling body (Holy Roman Empire). These councils created all Christian canon specifically to end the debate, which evidence suggests was very controversial at the time. on what Jesus was really saying, who he was, and more importantly, who We The People are in relation to Jesus and God.

The creation of the idea that Jesus is our ruler, our "Lord" God, was created at these councils, by setting him up as the only Son of God, where he said specifically, we are all the Children of God (AKA Split Aparts from Source AKA the Divine Spark). Many earlier Christians held that Jesus was showing us our connection to Source, our Divinity. Of course you can't rule Divine beings, so the church codified into law that that was not true. The church, which set itself up as our ruler, separated us from Source, and wrote the bible (massive edits) to ensure that those beliefs remained. They injected into Revelations the circularly defined Divinity of the book that was left over after their edits to create the deeply rooted belief that any debate on their interpretation is not allowed because it goes against our Ruler, The Lord God (YHWH in this case). Revelations itself is hugely problematic and was likely derived from an earlier (pre-Jesus) prophecy.

All later derivations of Christian religion use the same canonical beliefs as those laid down by law to end the controversy (see the Code of Theodosianus, link in previous post). These laws are repeated by all Christian sects during service. What do you think the Nicene Creed is? This controversy was about many things, not the least of which was the creation of the idea of the Trinity (which separates us from Source). All Christians repeat these beliefs, to brainwash themselves, at almost every gathering.

I have the better part of several decades of investigation behind me.

I meant a deep dive investigation into the authorship of the bible; one not guided by Christian belief confirmation bias (which I had done before in my life), but rather, with the only intention being to find the truth of it. I didn't mean that was the whole sum of my investigation into Christianity or religion. For that I too have many decades of experience. I'm not going to attempt to get into "qualifications," because such pro hominem arguments are always faulty. If an argument can't stand on its own, it is not a valid argument. Using credentials to support an argument is exactly how the world is in the state it is in.

The Jews weren't even monotheistic.

^Do^you^ever^get^tired^of^being^wrong^?

You didn't address a single point I made in your protest. If you want I'm sure I can probably dig up some references, but if you wish to look for yourself, just look up "jews (or judaism) henotheism". The amount of evidence that supports that the jews believed in multiple gods (both polytheistic and henotheistic, depending on which group of jews you are talking about and the time period) is absolutely overwhelming. I'm not saying they aren't monotheistic now (though it is debatable which god they really believe in now). As just one simple example, it's written into the very First Commandment, "Thou shalt have no other gods before me." In other words, "I am your number one god." This is a clear statement of both that there are other gods, and that this "god" is self-stating absolute rulership of the Israelites and Judeans.

Final point, a debate is an excellent path to get closer to the truth. It is about directly addressing points made. It is not about stating "your wrong." If you wish to engage, please engage directly. Using pro hominems, ad hominems, or simply stating "you are so stupid you don't even know how wrong you are" (paraphrased) does not help advance the debate and the investigation into the truth of a thing, rather they accomplish the opposite. In other words, they are used to obfuscate the truth.

what the hell are you talking about?

I'm not sure which part of the quote you are protesting. I didn't even say anything controversial and provided links which corroborate. They aren't the only sources that corroborate, they aren't even close. They were just paths to follow if you were interested. Nevertheless, I will further qualify the statements.

You need to distinguish in your mind the difference in The Roman Church and THE BIBLE.

The Roman Church wrote the bible. Their writing of it was the founding of the Holy Roman Empire. This isn't even slightly controversial. Obviously they used earlier works in their writing, so here, by "writing" I mean translated a selection of earlier works (many of which are highly controversial) and decided what to keep, and what to throw away. This final edit was decided at the Council of Nicaea in 325 AD and the Council of Constantinople in 382 AD. These councils were brought together by the ruling bodies (Emperor and God-Emperor respectively) to codify (make into canon) certain beliefs and to create the formal church and ruling body (Holy Roman Empire). These councils created all Christian canon specifically to end the debate, which evidence suggests was very controversial at the time. on what Jesus was really saying, who he was, and more importantly, who We The People are in relation to Jesus and God.

The creation of the idea that Jesus is our ruler, our "Lord" God, was created at these councils, by setting him up as the only Son of God, where he said specifically, we are all the Children of God (AKA Split Aparts from Source AKA the Divine Spark). Many earlier Christians held that Jesus was showing us our connection to Source, our Divinity. Of course you can't rule Divine beings, so the church codified into law that that was not true. The church, which set itself up as our ruler, separated us from Source, and wrote the bible (massive edits) to ensure that those beliefs remained. They injected into Revelations the circularly defined Divinity of the book that was left over after their edits to create the deeply rooted belief that any debate on their interpretation is not allowed because it goes against our Ruler, The Lord God (YHWH in this case). Revelations itself is hugely problematic and was likely derived from an earlier (pre-Jesus) prophecy.

All later derivations of Christian religion use the same canonical beliefs as those laid down by law to end the controversy (see the Code of Theodosianus, link in previous post). These laws are repeated by all Christian sects during service. What do you think the Nicene Creed is? This controversy was about many things, not the least of which was the creation of the idea of the Trinity (which separates us from Source). All Christians repeat these beliefs, to brainwash themselves, at almost every gathering.

I have the better part of several decades of investigation behind me.

I meant a deep dive investigation into the authorship of the bible; one not guided by Christian belief confirmation bias (which I had done before in my life), but rather, with the only intention being to find the truth of it. I didn't mean that was the whole sum of my investigation into Christianity or religion. For that I too have many decades of experience. I'm not going to attempt to get into "qualifications," because such pro hominem arguments are always faulty. If an argument can't stand on its own, it is not a valid argument. Using credentials to support an argument is exactly how the world is in the state it is in.

The Jews weren't even monotheistic.

^Do^you^ever^get^tired^of^being^wrong^?

You didn't address a single point I made in your protest. If you want I'm sure I can probably dig up some references, but if you wish to look for yourself, just look up "jews (or judaism) henotheism". The amount of evidence that supports that the jews believed in multiple gods (both polytheistic and henotheistic, depending on which group of jews you are talking about and the time period) is absolutely overwhelming. I'm not saying they aren't monotheistic now (though it is debatable which god they really believe in now). As just one simple example, it's written into the very First Commandment, "Thou shalt have no other gods before me." In other words, "I am your number one god." This is a clear statement of both that there are other gods, and that this "god" is self-stating absolute rulership of the Israelites and Judeans.

Final point, a debate is an excellent path to get closer to the truth. It is about directly addressing points made. It is not about stating "your wrong." If you wish to engage, please engage directly. Using pro hominems, ad hominems, or simply stating "you are so stupid you don't even know how wrong you are" (paraphrased) does not help advance the debate and the investigation into the truth of a thing, rather they accomplish the opposite. In other words, they are used to obfuscate the truth.

what the hell are you talking about?

I'm not sure which part of the quote you are protesting. I didn't even say anything controversial and provided links which corroborate. They aren't the only sources that corroborate, they aren't even close. They were just paths to follow if you were interested. Nevertheless, I will further qualify the statements.

You need to distinguish in your mind the difference in The Roman Church and THE BIBLE.

The Roman Church wrote the bible. Their writing of it was the founding of the Holy Roman Empire. This isn't even slightly controversial. Obviously they used earlier works in their writing, so here, by "writing" I mean translated (many of which are highly controversial) a selection of earlier works and decided what to keep, and what to throw away. This final edit was decided at the Council of Nicaea in 325 AD and the Council of Constantinople in 382 AD. These councils were brought together by the ruling bodies (Emperor and God-Emperor respectively) to codify (make into canon) certain beliefs and to create the formal church and ruling body (Holy Roman Empire). These councils created all Christian canon specifically to end the debate, which evidence suggests was very controversial at the time. on what Jesus was really saying, who he was, and more importantly, who We The People are in relation to Jesus and God.

The creation of the idea that Jesus is our ruler, our "Lord" God, was created at these councils, by setting him up as the only Son of God, where he said specifically, we are all the Children of God (AKA Split Aparts from Source AKA the Divine Spark). Many earlier Christians held that Jesus was showing us our connection to Source, our Divinity. Of course you can't rule Divine beings, so the church codified into law that that was not true. The church, which set itself up as our ruler, separated us from Source, and wrote the bible (massive edits) to ensure that those beliefs remained. They injected into Revelations the circularly defined Divinity of the book that was left over after their edits to create the deeply rooted belief that any debate on their interpretation is not allowed because it goes against our Ruler, The Lord God (YHWH in this case). Revelations itself is hugely problematic and was likely derived from an earlier (pre-Jesus) prophecy.

All later derivations of Christian religion use the same canonical beliefs as those laid down by law to end the controversy (see the Code of Theodosianus, link in previous post). These laws are repeated by all Christian sects during service. What do you think the Nicene Creed is? This controversy was about many things, not the least of which was the creation of the idea of the Trinity (which separates us from Source). All Christians repeat these beliefs, to brainwash themselves, at almost every gathering.

I have the better part of several decades of investigation behind me.

I meant a deep dive investigation into the authorship of the bible; one not guided by Christian belief confirmation bias (which I had done before in my life), but rather, with the only intention being to find the truth of it. I didn't mean that was the whole sum of my investigation into Christianity or religion. For that I too have many decades of experience. I'm not going to attempt to get into "qualifications," because such pro hominem arguments are always faulty. If an argument can't stand on its own, it is not a valid argument. Using credentials to support an argument is exactly how the world is in the state it is in.

The Jews weren't even monotheistic.

^Do^you^ever^get^tired^of^being^wrong^?

You didn't address a single point I made in your protest. If you want I'm sure I can probably dig up some references, but if you wish to look for yourself, just look up "jews (or judaism) henotheism". The amount of evidence that supports that the jews believed in multiple gods (both polytheistic and henotheistic, depending on which group of jews you are talking about and the time period) is absolutely overwhelming. I'm not saying they aren't monotheistic now (though it is debatable which god they really believe in now). As just one simple example, it's written into the very First Commandment, "Thou shalt have no other gods before me." In other words, "I am your number one god." This is a clear statement of both that there are other gods, and that this "god" is self-stating absolute rulership of the Israelites and Judeans.

Final point, a debate is an excellent path to get closer to the truth. It is about directly addressing points made. It is not about stating "your wrong." If you wish to engage, please engage directly. Using pro hominems, ad hominems, or simply stating "you are so stupid you don't even know how wrong you are" (paraphrased) does not help advance the debate and the investigation into the truth of a thing, rather they accomplish the opposite. In other words, they are used to obfuscate the truth.

what the hell are you talking about?

I'm not sure which part of the quote you are protesting. I didn't even say anything controversial and provided links which corroborate. They aren't the only sources that corroborate, they aren't even close. They were just paths to follow if you were interested. Nevertheless, I will further qualify the statements.

You need to distinguish in your mind the difference in The Roman Church and THE BIBLE.

The Roman Church wrote the bible. Their writing of it was the founding of the Holy Roman Empire. This isn't even slightly controversial. Obviously they used earlier works in their writing, so here, by "writing" I mean translated a selection of earlier works and decided what to keep, and what to throw away. This final edit was decided at the Council of Nicaea in 325 AD and the Council of Constantinople in 382 AD. These councils were brought together by the ruling bodies (Emperor and God-Emperor respectively) to codify (make into canon) certain beliefs and to create the formal church and ruling body (Holy Roman Empire). These councils created all Christian canon specifically to end the debate, which evidence suggests was very controversial at the time. on what Jesus was really saying, who he was, and more importantly, who We The People are in relation to Jesus and God.

The creation of the idea that Jesus is our ruler, our "Lord" God, was created at these councils, by setting him up as the only Son of God, where he said specifically, we are all the Children of God (AKA Split Aparts from Source AKA the Divine Spark). Many earlier Christians held that Jesus was showing us our connection to Source, our Divinity. Of course you can't rule Divine beings, so the church codified into law that that was not true. The church, which set itself up as our ruler, separated us from Source, and wrote the bible (massive edits) to ensure that those beliefs remained. They injected into Revelations the circularly defined Divinity of the book that was left over after their edits to create the deeply rooted belief that any debate on their interpretation is not allowed because it goes against our Ruler, The Lord God (YHWH in this case). Revelations itself is hugely problematic and was likely derived from an earlier (pre-Jesus) prophecy.

All later derivations of Christian religion use the same canonical beliefs as those laid down by law to end the controversy (see the Code of Theodosianus, link in previous post). These laws are repeated by all Christian sects during service. What do you think the Nicene Creed is? This controversy was about many things, not the least of which was the creation of the idea of the Trinity (which separates us from Source). All Christians repeat these beliefs, to brainwash themselves, at almost every gathering.

I have the better part of several decades of investigation behind me.

I meant a deep dive investigation into the authorship of the bible; one not guided by Christian belief confirmation bias (which I had done before in my life), but rather, with the only intention being to find the truth of it. I didn't mean that was the whole sum of my investigation into Christianity or religion. For that I too have many decades of experience. I'm not going to attempt to get into "qualifications," because such pro hominem arguments are always faulty. If an argument can't stand on its own, it is not a valid argument. Using credentials to support an argument is exactly how the world is in the state it is in.

The Jews weren't even monotheistic.

^Do^you^ever^get^tired^of^being^wrong^?

You didn't address a single point I made in your protest. If you want I'm sure I can probably dig up some references, but if you wish to look for yourself, just look up "jews (or judaism) henotheism". The amount of evidence that supports that the jews believed in multiple gods (both polytheistic and henotheistic, depending on which group of jews you are talking about and the time period) is absolutely overwhelming. I'm not saying they aren't monotheistic now (though it is debatable which god they really believe in now). As just one simple example, it's written into the very First Commandment, "Thou shalt have no other gods before me." In other words, "I am your number one god." This is a clear statement of both that there are other gods, and that this "god" is self-stating absolute rulership of the Israelites and Judeans.

Final point, a debate is an excellent path to get closer to the truth. It is about directly addressing points made. It is not about stating "your wrong." If you wish to engage, please engage directly. Using pro hominems, ad hominems, or simply stating "you are so stupid you don't even know how wrong you are" (paraphrased) does not help advance the debate and the investigation into the truth of a thing, rather they accomplish the opposite. In other words, they are used to obfuscate the truth.

what the hell are you talking about?

I'm not sure which part of the quote you are protesting. I didn't even say anything controversial and provided links which corroborate. They aren't the only sources that corroborate, they aren't even close. They were just paths to follow if you were interested. Nevertheless, I will further qualify the statements.

You need to distinguish in your mind the difference in The Roman Church and THE BIBLE.

The Roman Church wrote the bible. Their writing of it was the founding of the Holy Roman Empire. This isn't even slightly controversial. Obviously they used earlier works in their writing, so here, by "writing" I mean translated a selection of earlier works and decided what to keep, and what to throw away. This final edit was decided at the Council of Nicaea in 325 AD and the Council of Constantinople in 382 AD. These councils were brought together by the ruling bodies (Emperor and God-Emperor respectively) to codify (make into canon) certain beliefs and to create the formal church and ruling body (Holy Roman Empire). These councils created all Christian canon specifically to end the debate, which evidence suggests was very controversial at the time. on what Jesus was really saying, who he was, and more importantly, who We The People are in relation to Jesus and God.

The creation of the idea that Jesus is our ruler, our "Lord" God, was created at these councils, by setting him up as the only Son of God, where he said specifically, we are all the Children of God (AKA Split Aparts from Source AKA the Divine Spark). Many earlier Christians held that Jesus was showing us our connection to Source, our Divinity. Of course you can't rule Divine beings, so the church codified into law that that was not true. The church, which set itself up as our ruler, separated us from Source, and wrote the bible (massive edits) to ensure that those beliefs remained. They injected into Revelations the circularly defined Divinity of the book that was left over after their edits to create the deeply rooted belief that any debate on their interpretation is not allowed because it goes against our Ruler, The Lord God (YHWH in this case). Revelations itself is hugely problematic and was likely derived from an earlier (pre-Jesus) prophecy.

All later derivations of Christian religion use the same canonical beliefs as those laid down by law to end the controversy (see the Code of Theodosianus, link in previous post). These laws are repeated by all Christian sects during service. What do you think the Nicene Creed is? This controversy was about many things, not the least of which was the creation of the idea of the Trinity (which separates us from Source) and the total bullshit that it is. All Christians repeat these beliefs, to brainwash themselves, at almost every gathering.

I have the better part of several decades of investigation behind me.

I meant a deep dive investigation into the authorship of the bible; one not guided by Christian belief confirmation bias (which I had done before in my life), but rather, with the only intention being to find the truth of it. I didn't mean that was the whole sum of my investigation into Christianity or religion. For that I too have many decades of experience. I'm not going to attempt to get into "qualifications," because such pro hominem arguments are always faulty. If an argument can't stand on its own, it is not a valid argument. Using credentials to support an argument is exactly how the world is in the state it is in.

The Jews weren't even monotheistic.

^Do^you^ever^get^tired^of^being^wrong^?

You didn't address a single point I made in your protest. If you want I'm sure I can probably dig up some references, but if you wish to look for yourself, just look up "jews (or judaism) henotheism". The amount of evidence that supports that the jews believed in multiple gods (both polytheistic and henotheistic, depending on which group of jews you are talking about and the time period) is absolutely overwhelming. I'm not saying they aren't monotheistic now (though it is debatable which god they really believe in now). As just one simple example, it's written into the very First Commandment, "Thou shalt have no other gods before me." In other words, "I am your number one god." This is a clear statement of both that there are other gods, and that this "god" is self-stating absolute rulership of the Israelites and Judeans.

Final point, a debate is an excellent path to get closer to the truth. It is about directly addressing points made. It is not about stating "your wrong." If you wish to engage, please engage directly. Using pro hominems, ad hominems, or simply stating "you are so stupid you don't even know how wrong you are" (paraphrased) does not help advance the debate and the investigation into the truth of a thing, rather they accomplish the opposite. In other words, they are used to obfuscate the truth.

what the hell are you talking about?

I'm not sure which part of the quote you are protesting. I didn't even say anything controversial and provided links which corroborate. They aren't the only sources that corroborate, they aren't even close. They were just paths to follow if you were interested. Nevertheless, I will further qualify the statements.

You need to distinguish in your mind the difference in The Roman Church and THE BIBLE.

The Roman Church wrote the bible. Their writing of it was the founding of the Holy Roman Empire. This isn't even slightly controversial. Obviously they used earlier works in their writing, so here, by "writing" I mean translated a selection of earlier works and decided what to keep, and what to throw away. This final edit was decided at the Council of Nicaea in 325 AD and the Council of Constantinople in 382 AD. These councils were brought together by the ruling bodies (Emperor and God-Emperor respectively) to codify (make into canon) certain beliefs and to create the formal church and ruling body (Holy Roman Empire). These councils created all Christian canon specifically to end the debate, which evidence suggests was very controversial at the time. on what Jesus was really saying, who he was, and more importantly, who We The People are in relation to Jesus and God.

The creation of the idea that Jesus is our ruler, our "Lord" God, was created at these councils, by setting him up as the only Son of God, where he said specifically, we are all the Children of God (AKA Split Aparts from Source AKA the Divine Spark). Many earlier Christians held that Jesus was showing us our connection to Source, our Divinity. Of course you can't rule Divine beings, so the church codified into law that that was not true. The church, which set itself up as our ruler, separated us from Source, and wrote the bible (massive edits) to ensure that those beliefs remained. They injected into Revelations the circularly defined Divinity of the book that was left over after their edits to create the deeply rooted belief that any debate on their interpretation is not allowed because it goes against our Ruler, The Lord God (YHWH in this case). Revelations itself is hugely problematic and was likely derived from an earlier (pre-Jesus) prophecy.

All later derivations of Christian religion use the same canonical beliefs as those laid down by law to end the controversy (see the Code of Theodosianus, link in previous post). This controversy was about many things, not the least of which were the beliefs of the Christians about the Trinity and the total hogwash that it is.

I have the better part of several decades of investigation behind me.

I meant a deep dive investigation into the authorship of the bible; one not guided by Christian belief confirmation bias (which I had done before in my life), but rather, with the only intention being to find the truth of it. I didn't mean that was the whole sum of my investigation into Christianity or religion. For that I too have many decades of experience. I'm not going to attempt to get into "qualifications," because such pro hominem arguments are always faulty. If an argument can't stand on its own, it is not a valid argument. Using credentials to support an argument is exactly how the world is in the state it is in.

The Jews weren't even monotheistic.

^Do^you^ever^get^tired^of^being^wrong^?

You didn't address a single point I made in your protest. If you want I'm sure I can probably dig up some references, but if you wish to look for yourself, just look up "jews (or judaism) henotheism". The amount of evidence that supports that the jews believed in multiple gods (both polytheistic and henotheistic, depending on which group of jews you are talking about and the time period) is absolutely overwhelming. I'm not saying they aren't monotheistic now (though it is debatable which god they really believe in now). As just one simple example, it's written into the very First Commandment, "Thou shalt have no other gods before me." In other words, "I am your number one god." This is a clear statement of both that there are other gods, and that this "god" is self-stating absolute rulership of the Israelites and Judeans.

Final point, a debate is an excellent path to get closer to the truth. It is about directly addressing points made. It is not about stating "your wrong." If you wish to engage, please engage directly. Using pro hominems, ad hominems, or simply stating "you are so stupid you don't even know how wrong you are" (paraphrased) does not help advance the debate and the investigation into the truth of a thing, rather they accomplish the opposite. In other words, they are used to obfuscate the truth.

what the hell are you talking about?

I'm not sure which part of the quote you are protesting. I didn't even say anything controversial and provided links which corroborate. They aren't the only sources that corroborate, they aren't even close. They were just paths to follow if you were interested.

You need to distinguish in your mind the difference in The Roman Church and THE BIBLE.

The Roman Church wrote the bible. Their writing of it was the founding of the Holy Roman Empire. This isn't even slightly controversial. Obviously they used earlier works in their writing, so here, by "writing" I mean translated a selection of earlier works and decided what to keep, and what to throw away. This final edit was decided at the Council of Nicaea in 325 AD and the Council of Constantinople in 382 AD. These councils were brought together by the ruling bodies (Emperor and God-Emperor respectively) to codify (make into canon) certain beliefs and to create the formal church and ruling body (Holy Roman Empire). These councils created all Christian canon specifically to end the debate, which evidence suggests was very controversial at the time. on what Jesus was really saying, who he was, and more importantly, who We The People are in relation to Jesus and God.

The creation of the idea that Jesus is our ruler, our "Lord" God, was created at these councils, by setting him up as the only Son of God, where he said specifically, we are all the Children of God (AKA Split Aparts from Source AKA the Divine Spark). Many earlier Christians held that Jesus was showing us our connection to Source, our Divinity. Of course you can't rule Divine beings, so the church codified into law that that was not true. The church, which set itself up as our ruler, separated us from Source, and wrote the bible (massive edits) to ensure that those beliefs remained. They injected into Revelations the circularly defined Divinity of the book that was left over after their edits to create the deeply rooted belief that any debate on their interpretation is not allowed because it goes against our Ruler, The Lord God (YHWH in this case). Revelations itself is hugely problematic and was likely derived from an earlier (pre-Jesus) prophecy.

All later derivations of Christian religion use the same canonical beliefs as those laid down by law to end the controversy (see the Code of Theodosianus, link in previous post). This controversy was about many things, not the least of which were the beliefs of the Christians about the Trinity and the total hogwash that it is.

I have the better part of several decades of investigation behind me.

I meant a deep dive investigation into the authorship of the bible; one not guided by Christian belief confirmation bias (which I had done before in my life), but rather, with the only intention being to find the truth of it. I didn't mean that was the whole sum of my investigation into Christianity or religion. For that I too have many decades of experience. I'm not going to attempt to get into "qualifications," because such pro hominem arguments are always faulty. If an argument can't stand on its own, it is not a valid argument. Using credentials to support an argument is exactly how the world is in the state it is in.

The Jews weren't even monotheistic.

^Do^you^ever^get^tired^of^being^wrong^?

You didn't address a single point I made in your protest. If you want I'm sure I can probably dig up some references, but if you wish to look for yourself, just look up "jews (or judaism) henotheism". The amount of evidence that supports that the jews believed in multiple gods (both polytheistic and henotheistic, depending on which group of jews you are talking about and the time period) is absolutely overwhelming. I'm not saying they aren't monotheistic now (though it is debatable which god they really believe in now). As just one simple example, it's written into the very First Commandment, "Thou shalt have no other gods before me." In other words, "I am your number one god." This is a clear statement of both that there are other gods, and that this "god" is self-stating absolute rulership of the Israelites and Judeans.

Final point, a debate is an excellent path to get closer to the truth. It is about directly addressing points made. It is not about stating "your wrong." If you wish to engage, please engage directly. Using pro hominems, ad hominems, or simply stating "you are so stupid you don't even know how wrong you are" (paraphrased) does not help advance the debate and the investigation into the truth of a thing, rather they accomplish the opposite. In other words, they are used to obfuscate the truth.

what the hell are you talking about?

I'm not sure which part of the quote you are protesting. I didn't even say anything controversial and provided links which corroborate. They aren't the only sources that corroborate, they aren't even close. They were just paths to follow if you were interested.

You need to distinguish in your mind the difference in The Roman Church and THE BIBLE.

The Roman Church wrote the bible. Their writing of it was the founding of the Holy Roman Empire. This isn't even slightly controversial. Obviously they used earlier works in their writing, so here, by "writing" I mean translated a selection of earlier works and decided what to keep, and what to throw away. This final edit was decided at the Council of Nicaea in 325 AD and the Council of Constantinople in 382 AD. These councils were brought together by the ruling bodies (Emperor and God-Emperor respectively) to codify (make into canon) certain beliefs and to create the formal church and ruling body (Holy Roman Empire). These councils created all Christian canon specifically to end the debate, which evidence suggests was very controversial at the time. on what Jesus was really saying, who he was, and more importantly, who We The People are in relation to Jesus and God.

The creation of the idea that Jesus is our ruler, our "Lord" God, was created at these councils, by setting him up as the only Son of God, where he said specifically, we are all the Children of God (AKA Split Aparts from Source AKA the Divine Spark). Many earlier Christians held that Jesus was showing us our connection to Source, our Divinity. Of course you can't rule Divine beings, so the church codified into law that that was not true. The church, which set itself up as our ruler, separated us from Source, and wrote the bible (massive edits) to ensure that those beliefs remained. They injected into Revelations the circularly defined Divinity of the book that was left over after their edits to create the deeply rooted belief that any debate on their interpretation is not allowed because it goes against our Ruler, The Lord God (YHWH in this case). Revelations itself is hugely problematic and was likely derived from an earlier (pre-Jesus) prophecy.

All later derivations of Christian religion use the same canonical beliefs as those laid down by law to end the controversy (see the Code of Theodosianus, link in previous post). This controversy was about many things, not the least of which were the beliefs of the Christians about the Trinity and the total hogwash that it is.

I have the better part of several decades of investigation behind me.

I meant a deep dive investigation into the authorship of the bible; one not guided by Christian belief confirmation bias (which I had done before in my life), but rather, with the only intention being to find the truth of it. I didn't mean that was the whole sum of my investigation into Christianity or religion. For that I too have many decades of experience. I'm not going to attempt to get into "qualifications," because such pro hominem arguments are always faulty. If an argument can't stand on its own, it is not a valid argument. Using credentials to support an argument is exactly how the world is in the state it is in.

The Jews weren't even monotheistic.

^Do^you^ever^get^tired^of^being^wrong^?

You didn't address a single point I made in your protest. If you want I'm sure I can probably dig up some references, but if you wish to look for yourself, just look up "jews (or judaism) henotheism". The amount of evidence that supports that the jews believed in multiple gods (both polytheistic and henotheistic, depending on which group of jews you are talking about and the time period) is absolutely overwhelming. I'm not saying they aren't monotheistic now (though it is debatable which god they really believe in now). As just one simple example, it's written into the very First Commandment, "Thou shalt have no other gods before me." In other words, "I am your number one god." This is a clear statement of both that there are other gods, and that this "god" is self-stating absolute rulership of the Israelites and Judeans.

Final point, a debate is an excellent path to get closer to the truth. It is about directly addressing points made. It is not about stating "your wrong." If you wish to engage, please engage directly. Using pro hominems, ad hominems, or simply stating "you are so stupid you don't even know how wrong you are" (paraphrased) do not help advance the debate and the investigation into the truth of a thing, rather they accomplish the opposite. In other words, they are used to obfuscate the truth.

what the hell are you talking about?

I'm not sure which part of the quote you are protesting. I didn't even say anything controversial and provided links which corroborate. They aren't the only sources that corroborate, they aren't even close. They were just paths to follow if you were interested.

You need to distinguish in your mind the difference in The Roman Church and THE BIBLE.

The Roman Church wrote the bible. Their writing of it was the founding of the Holy Roman Empire. This isn't even slightly controversial. Obviously they used earlier works in their writing, so here, by "writing" I mean translated a selection of earlier works and decided what to keep, and what to throw away. This final edit was decided at the Council of Nicaea in 325 AD and the Council of Constantinople in 382 AD. These councils were brought together by the ruling bodies (Emperor and God-Emperor respectively) to codify (make into canon) certain beliefs and to create the formal church and ruling body (Holy Roman Empire). These councils created all Christian canon specifically to end the debate, which evidence suggests was very controversial at the time. on what Jesus was really saying, who he was, and more importantly, who We The People are in relation to Jesus and God.

The creation of the idea that Jesus is our ruler, our "Lord" God, was created at these councils, by setting him up as the only Son of God, where he said specifically, we are all the Children of God (AKA Split Aparts from Source AKA the Divine Spark). Many earlier Christians held that Jesus was showing us our connection to Source, our Divinity. Of course you can't rule Divine beings, so the church codified into law that that was not true. The church, which set itself up as our ruler, separated us from Source, and wrote the bible (massive edits) to ensure that those beliefs remained. They injected into Revelations the circularly defined Divinity of the book that was left over after their edits to create the deeply rooted belief that any debate on their interpretation is not allowed because it goes against our Ruler, The Lord God (YHWH in this case). Revelations itself is hugely problematic and was likely derived from an earlier (pre-Jesus) prophecy.

All later derivations of Christian religion use the same canonical beliefs as those laid down by law to end the controversy (see the Code of Theodosianus, link in previous post). This controversy was about many things, not the least of which were the beliefs of the Christians about the Trinity and the total hogwash that it is.

I have the better part of several decades of investigation behind me.

I meant a deep dive investigation into the authorship of the bible; one not guided by Christian belief confirmation bias (which I had done before in my life), but rather, with the only intention being to find the truth of it. I didn't mean that was the whole sum of my investigation into Christianity or religion. For that I too have many decades of experience. I'm not going to attempt to get into "qualifications," because such pro hominem arguments are always faulty. If an argument can't stand on its own, it is not a valid argument. Using credentials to support an argument is exactly how the world is in the state it is in.

The Jews weren't even monotheistic.

^Do^you^ever^get^tired^of^being^wrong^?

You didn't address a single point I made in your protest. If you want I'm sure I can probably dig up some references, but if you wish to look for yourself, just look up "jews (or judaism) henotheism". The amount of evidence that supports that the jews believed in multiple gods (both polytheistic and henotheistic, depending on which group of jews you are talking about and the time period) is absolutely overwhelming. I'm not saying they aren't monotheistic now (though it is debatable which god they really believe in now). It's written into the very First Commandment itself "Thou shalt have no other gods before me." In other words, "I am your number one god." This is a clear statement of both that there are other gods, and that this "god" is self-stating absolute rulership of the Israelites and Judeans.

Final point, a debate is an excellent path to get closer to the truth. It is about directly addressing points made. It is not about stating "your wrong." If you wish to engage, please engage directly. Using pro hominems, ad hominems, or simply stating "you are so stupid you don't even know how wrong you are" (paraphrased) do not help advance the debate and the investigation into the truth of a thing, rather they accomplish the opposite. In other words, they are used to obfuscate the truth.

what the hell are you talking about?

I'm not sure which part of the quote you are protesting. I didn't even say anything controversial and provided links which corroborate. They aren't the only sources that corroborate, they aren't even close. They were just paths to follow if you were interested.

You need to distinguish in your mind the difference in The Roman Church and THE BIBLE.

The Roman Church wrote the bible. Their writing of it was the founding of the Holy Roman Empire. This isn't even slightly controversial. Obviously they used earlier works in their writing, so here, by "writing" I mean translated a selection of earlier works and decided what to keep, and what to throw away. This final edit was decided at the Council of Nicaea in 325 AD and the Council of Constantinople in 382 AD. These councils were brought together by the ruling bodies (Emperor and God-Emperor respectively) to codify (make into canon) certain beliefs and to create the formal church and ruling body (Holy Roman Empire). These councils created all Christian canon specifically to end the debate, which evidence suggests was very controversial at the time. on what Jesus was really saying, who he was, and more importantly, who We The People are in relation to Jesus and God.

The creation of the idea that Jesus is our ruler, our "Lord" God, was created at these councils, by setting him up as the only Son of God, where he said specifically, we are all the Children of God (AKA Split Aparts from Source AKA the Divine Spark). Many earlier Christians held that Jesus was showing us our connection to Source, our Divinity. Of course you can't rule Divine beings, so the church codified into law that that was not true. The church, which set itself up as our ruler, separated us from Source, and wrote the bible (massive edits) to ensure that those beliefs remained. They injected into Revelations the circularly defined Divinity of the book that was left over after their edits to create the deeply rooted belief that any debate on their interpretation is not allowed because it goes against God. Revelations itself is hugely problematic and was likely derived from an earlier (pre-Jesus) prophecy.

All later derivations of Christian religion use the same canonical beliefs as those laid down by law to end the controversy (see the Code of Theodosianus, link in previous post). This controversy was about many things, not the least of which were the beliefs of the Christians about the Trinity and the total hogwash that it is.

I have the better part of several decades of investigation behind me.

I meant a deep dive investigation into the authorship of the bible; one not guided by Christian belief confirmation bias (which I had done before in my life), but rather, with the only intention being to find the truth of it. I didn't mean that was the whole sum of my investigation into Christianity or religion. For that I too have many decades of experience. I'm not going to attempt to get into "qualifications," because such pro hominem arguments are always faulty. If an argument can't stand on its own, it is not a valid argument. Using credentials to support an argument is exactly how the world is in the state it is in.

The Jews weren't even monotheistic.

^Do^you^ever^get^tired^of^being^wrong^?

You didn't address a single point I made in your protest. If you want I'm sure I can probably dig up some references, but if you wish to look for yourself, just look up "jews (or judaism) henotheism". The amount of evidence that supports that the jews believed in multiple gods (both polytheistic and henotheistic, depending on which group of jews you are talking about and the time period) is absolutely overwhelming. I'm not saying they aren't monotheistic now (though it is debatable which god they really believe in now). It's written into the very First Commandment itself "Thou shalt have no other gods before me." In other words, "I am your number one god." This is a clear statement of both that there are other gods, and that this "god" is self-stating absolute rulership of the Israelites and Judeans.

Final point, a debate is an excellent path to get closer to the truth. It is about directly addressing points made. It is not about stating "your wrong." If you wish to engage, please engage directly. Using pro hominems, ad hominems, or simply stating "you are so stupid you don't even know how wrong you are" (paraphrased) do not help advance the debate and the investigation into the truth of a thing, rather they accomplish the opposite. In other words, they are used to obfuscate the truth.

what the hell are you talking about?

I'm not sure which part of the quote you are protesting. I didn't even say anything controversial and provided links which corroborate. They aren't the only sources that corroborate, they aren't even close. They were just paths to follow if you were interested.

You need to distinguish in your mind the difference in The Roman Church and THE BIBLE.

The Roman Church wrote the bible. Their writing of it was the founding of the Holy Roman Empire. This isn't even slightly controversial. Obviously they used earlier works in their writing, so here, by "writing" I mean translated a selection of earlier works and decided what to keep, and what to throw away. This final edit was decided at the Council of Nicaea in 325 AD and the Council of Constantinople in 382 AD. These councils were brought together by the ruling bodies (Emperor and God-Emperor respectively) to codify (make into canon) certain beliefs and to create the formal church and ruling body (Holy Roman Empire). These councils created all Christian canon specifically to end the debate, which evidence suggests was very controversial at the time. on what Jesus was really saying, who he was, and more importantly, who We The People are in relation to Jesus and God.

The creation of the idea that Jesus is our ruler, our "Lord" God, was created at these councils, by setting him up as the only Son of God, where he said specifically, we are all the Children of God (AKA Split Aparts from Source AKA the Divine Spark). Many earlier Christians held that Jesus was showing us our connection to Source. The church codified into law that that was not true. The church, which set itself up as our ruler, separated us from Source, and wrote the bible (massive edits) to ensure that those beliefs remained. They injected into Revelations the circularly defined Divinity of the book that was left over after their edits to create the deeply rooted belief that any debate on their interpretation is not allowed because it goes against God. Revelations itself is hugely problematic and was likely derived from an earlier (pre-Jesus) prophecy.

All later derivations of Christian religion use the same canonical beliefs as those laid down by law to end the controversy (see the Code of Theodosianus, link in previous post). This controversy was about many things, not the least of which were the beliefs of the Christians about the Trinity and the total hogwash that it is.

I have the better part of several decades of investigation behind me.

I meant a deep dive investigation into the authorship of the bible; one not guided by Christian belief confirmation bias (which I had done before in my life), but rather, with the only intention being to find the truth of it. I didn't mean that was the whole sum of my investigation into Christianity or religion. For that I too have many decades of experience. I'm not going to attempt to get into "qualifications," because such pro hominem arguments are always faulty. If an argument can't stand on its own, it is not a valid argument. Using credentials to support an argument is exactly how the world is in the state it is in.

The Jews weren't even monotheistic.

^Do^you^ever^get^tired^of^being^wrong^?

You didn't address a single point I made in your protest. If you want I'm sure I can probably dig up some references, but if you wish to look for yourself, just look up "jews (or judaism) henotheism". The amount of evidence that supports that the jews believed in multiple gods (both polytheistic and henotheistic, depending on which group of jews you are talking about and the time period) is absolutely overwhelming. I'm not saying they aren't monotheistic now (though it is debatable which god they really believe in now). It's written into the very First Commandment itself "Thou shalt have no other gods before me." In other words, "I am your number one god." This is a clear statement of both that there are other gods, and that this "god" is self-stating absolute rulership of the Israelites and Judeans.

Final point, a debate is an excellent path to get closer to the truth. It is about directly addressing points made. It is not about stating "your wrong." If you wish to engage, please engage directly. Using pro hominems, ad hominems, or simply stating "you are so stupid you don't even know how wrong you are" (paraphrased) do not help advance the debate and the investigation into the truth of a thing, rather they accomplish the opposite. In other words, they are used to obfuscate the truth.

what the hell are you talking about?

I'm not sure which part of the quote you are protesting. I didn't even say anything controversial and provided links which corroborate. They aren't the only sources that corroborate, they aren't even close. They were just paths to follow if you were interested.

You need to distinguish in your mind the difference in The Roman Church and THE BIBLE.

The Roman Church wrote the bible. Their writing of it was the founding of the Holy Roman Empire. This isn't even slightly controversial. Obviously they used earlier works in their writing, so here, by "writing" I mean translated a selection of earlier works and decided what to keep, and what to throw away. This final edit was decided at the Council of Nicaea in 325 AD and the Council of Constantinople in 382 AD. These councils were brought together by the ruling bodies (Emperor and God-Emperor respectively) to codify (make into canon) certain beliefs and to create the formal church and ruling body (Holy Roman Empire). These councils created all Christian canon specifically to end the debate, which evidence suggests was very controversial at the time. on what Jesus was really saying, who he was, and more importantly, who We The People are in relation to Jesus and God.

The creation of the idea that Jesus is our ruler, our "Lord" God, was created at these councils, by setting him up as the only Son of God, where he said specifically, we are all the Children of God (AKA Split Aparts from Source AKA the Divine Spark). Many earlier Christians held that Jesus was showing us our connection to Source. The church codified into law that that was not true. The church, which set itself up as our ruler, separated us from Source, and wrote the bible (massive edits) to ensure that those beliefs remained. They injected into Revelations the circularly defined Divinity of the book that was left over. Revelations itself is hugely problematic and was likely derived from an earlier (pre-Jesus) prophecy.

All later derivations of Christian religion use the same canonical beliefs as those laid down by law to end the controversy (see the Code of Theodosianus, link in previous post). This controversy was about many things, not the least of which were the beliefs of the Christians about the Trinity and the total hogwash that it is.

I have the better part of several decades of investigation behind me.

I meant a deep dive investigation into the authorship of the bible; one not guided by Christian belief confirmation bias (which I had done before in my life), but rather, with the only intention being to find the truth of it. I didn't mean that was the whole sum of my investigation into Christianity or religion. For that I too have many decades of experience. I'm not going to attempt to get into "qualifications," because such pro hominem arguments are always faulty. If an argument can't stand on its own, it is not a valid argument. Using credentials to support an argument is exactly how the world is in the state it is in.

The Jews weren't even monotheistic.

^Do^you^ever^get^tired^of^being^wrong^?

You didn't address a single point I made in your protest. If you want I'm sure I can probably dig up some references, but if you wish to look for yourself, just look up "jews (or judaism) henotheism". The amount of evidence that supports that the jews believed in multiple gods (both polytheistic and henotheistic, depending on which group of jews you are talking about and the time period) is absolutely overwhelming. I'm not saying they aren't monotheistic now (though it is debatable which god they really believe in now). It's written into the very First Commandment itself "Thou shalt have no other gods before me." In other words, "I am your number one god." This is a clear statement of both that there are other gods, and that this "god" is self-stating absolute rulership of the Israelites and Judeans.

Final point, a debate is an excellent path to get closer to the truth. It is about directly addressing points made. It is not about stating "your wrong." If you wish to engage, please engage directly. Using pro hominems, ad hominems, or simply stating "you are so stupid you don't even know how wrong you are" (paraphrased) do not help advance the debate and the investigation into the truth of a thing, rather they accomplish the opposite. In other words, they are used to obfuscate the truth.

what the hell are you talking about?

I'm not sure which part of the quote you are protesting. I didn't even say anything controversial and provided links which corroborate. They aren't the only sources that corroborate, they aren't even close. They were just paths to follow if you were interested.

You need to distinguish in your mind the difference in The Roman Church and THE BIBLE.

The Roman Church wrote the bible. Their writing of it was the founding of the Holy Roman Empire. This isn't even slightly controversial. Obviously they used earlier works in their writing, so here, by "writing" I mean translated a selection of earlier works and decided what to keep, and what to throw away. This final edit was decided at the Council of Nicaea in 325 AD and the Council of Constantinople in 382 AD. These councils were brought together by the ruling bodies (Emperor and God-Emperor respectively) to codify (make into canon) certain beliefs and to create the formal church and ruling body (Holy Roman Empire). These councils created all Christian canon specifically to end the debate, which evidence suggests was very controversial at the time. on what Jesus was really saying, who he was, and more importantly, who We The People are.

The creation of the idea that Jesus is our ruler, our "Lord" God, was created at these councils, by setting him up as the only Son of God, where he said specifically, we are all the Children of God (AKA Split Aparts from Source AKA the Divine Spark). Many earlier Christians held that Jesus was showing us our connection to Source. The church codified into law that that was not true. The church, which set itself up as our ruler, separated us from Source, and wrote the bible (massive edits) to ensure that those beliefs remained. They injected into Revelations the circularly defined Divinity of the book that was left over. Revelations itself is hugely problematic and was likely derived from an earlier (pre-Jesus) prophecy.

All later derivations of Christian religion use the same canonical beliefs as those laid down by law to end the controversy (see the Code of Theodosianus, link in previous post). This controversy was about many things, not the least of which were the beliefs of the Christians about the Trinity and the total hogwash that it is.

I have the better part of several decades of investigation behind me.

I meant a deep dive investigation into the authorship of the bible; one not guided by Christian belief confirmation bias (which I had done before in my life), but rather, with the only intention being to find the truth of it. I didn't mean that was the whole sum of my investigation into Christianity or religion. For that I too have many decades of experience. I'm not going to attempt to get into "qualifications," because such pro hominem arguments are always faulty. If an argument can't stand on its own, it is not a valid argument. Using credentials to support an argument is exactly how the world is in the state it is in.

The Jews weren't even monotheistic.

^Do^you^ever^get^tired^of^being^wrong^?

You didn't address a single point I made in your protest. If you want I'm sure I can probably dig up some references, but if you wish to look for yourself, just look up "jews (or judaism) henotheism". The amount of evidence that supports that the jews believed in multiple gods (both polytheistic and henotheistic, depending on which group of jews you are talking about and the time period) is absolutely overwhelming. I'm not saying they aren't monotheistic now (though it is debatable which god they really believe in now). It's written into the very First Commandment itself "Thou shalt have no other gods before me." In other words, "I am your number one god." This is a clear statement of both that there are other gods, and that this "god" is self-stating absolute rulership of the Israelites and Judeans.

Final point, a debate is an excellent path to get closer to the truth. It is about directly addressing points made. It is not about stating "your wrong." If you wish to engage, please engage directly. Using pro hominems, ad hominems, or simply stating "you are so stupid you don't even know how wrong you are" (paraphrased) do not help advance the debate and the investigation into the truth of a thing, rather they accomplish the opposite. In other words, they are used to obfuscate the truth.