Science a GoGo's Home Page Forums General Discussion Not-Quite-Science Forum Could this be the END of RELIGIONS as we know them

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

Brief summary of findings.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

In Revelation (NT) John's “visions” also came from the same non-divinesource.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

No.
1. No one really knows what religion is, they only think they know.
2. Religion is constantly changing with perceptions of reality and belief. So unless changing perceptions and belief is refined into something unchanging and not susceptible to the changing belief systems, religions will continue to exist as they have by the nature of the humans capacity to excel or devolve thru perceptions of awareness and intellectual functions of choice.

so someone made a computer program in 1995 that supposedly
shows proof that religions are fake.

what would have prevented the programmer of the program from using his knowlege of the many varried religions histories and the many known artifacts etc ... etc?

and making the program seem as if ancient people had seen his program?

there is no water to put in your pot that wont hold water.

sorry.

and as for the old picture of the cd rom case that is referenced in one of the videos a see through plastic case could easily have been made from vinegar , milk , water and heat.

It is completely impossible to prove to a believer that there is no such thing as a god or the afterlife. Similarly there is no way to prove that there is a god to an atheist.

Stone tablets, unusual eggs, Ra-discs etc are not needed to prove the existence of god to a true believer. Someone who can believe that a woman appears to 3 or 4 little children and promises the end of the world is scarcely likely to believe it's all over because someone else has produced a computer program.

The need for religious belief is as inexplicable as the belief itself, and in fact can only exist in the presence of unquestioning faith in the believer. That faith has little or nothing to do with reason or proof.

Yes. I take the view that true faith seeks no assurance; i.e., I think of faith as 'positive rationale for existence', and unassailable faith as such a rationale that is never at odds with objective reality.

As for 'religions as we know them', I think that the evolution of religions - Christian religions at least - is directly related to the evolution of the host society. It's the latter, I would say, that causes religions to change, flourish, or die, similar to the way in which the physical environment affects the evolution of living things.