HWPeeler (HPeeler)

It is the bible I don't believe in.

Hosted by HWPeeler (HPeeler)

I can accept the possibility of a god of creation. Jesus was a nice guy, but probably a con man. It is the stories of the bible I do not believe in. It is obvious men wrote these stories, not a god. It is not that god does not exist, but rather man does not know god. If man does not truly know god them all religions are just the fantasies of people. When man can say with certainty where and how the universe came from nothing we may have a better understanding of god. When man can explain WHY we evolve and HOW consciousness comes from non-living matter we may have something. As long as we cannot explain how consciousness works and where memories come from we have to admit there is more to reality than we know of.

  • 101
  • 296
  • 0


A sign in the heavens ...

Started May-18 by HWPeeler (HPeeler); 24 views.
HWPeeler (HPeeler)

From: HWPeeler (HPeeler)


At the time this book of Revelations was written mankind thought the Earth was the center of the universe and astrology made sense. The perspective from some spot on Earth was valid.

September 23, 2017 will hold no significance in the position of the Sun, Moon and stars. Trying to find meaning in the positions is as meaningless as Astrology.

There is no "heavens" above the Earth. The images you might consider in the stars only exists in your imagination. Different cultures saw different patterns, thus there is no universal godly interpretation here. If this "god" were ever present all people would see the same "god". But this definition of "god", the bible, Revelations, and all is not universal.

In reply toRe: msg 1
HWPeeler (HPeeler)

From: HWPeeler (HPeeler)


If somebody tried to pass a book like Revelations off today as inspired text people would ask him what kind of drugs he was on. This is rambling nonsense.

Any pattern you imagine you see only exists in your imagination.

Jesus coming down from the sky? In a space ship.


From: CelticWarlrd


I've never taken much of any substance from the book.  There was debate in the early centuries as to whether it should even be included in the canon.  Martin Luther wanted it left out when he did his German translation of the bible, but wound up placing it in an appendix at the end.  Pretty much anything can be read into the writing, and evangelical end-timers love it.  My own feeling is that the fanciful tales contained in Revelation are about events which have already happened, or were happening at the time the book was written.  This is the position of a Roman Catholic booklet titled Getting to Know the Book of Revelation.  There the author states quite simply, the book is not a collection of future events due to occur in our time.