What is my religion called?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:What am I? I know what I believe, but I'm not sure what it's called.
Here's what I believe
1. I believe in one God and an afterlife.
2. I believe that God created the universe, and everything in it( that could've been through the Big Bang.)
3. As far as humans go, I believe that we were Gods most important creation. I believe in evolution for other animals, but NOT for humans. I do not believe that humans came from any other animal.
4. As far as prophecy and revelation go, I'm not sure what to believe. I believe Jesus was a very special human being. I believe he was Gods example to the world of how everyone should live.
5. I do NOT believe Jesus was God.
6. I strongly support traditional marriage, and am staunchly against abortion, homosexuality, fornication, and adultery. I view these acts as immoral.( I don't want an argument about this)
7. I believe that all of the worlds major religions have bits of the answer.( the major religions share many traits, and each one is right about some things, and wrong about others)
8. I believe that all people who believe in God, and who live a good, clean, moral life will go to heaven.
What am I? I've sometimes thought of myself as a Conservative Unitarian( but do those even exist)

You are a Universalist

[Anonymous]

It sounds like you are some form of Christian Heretic. I looked at

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Christian_heresies

and saw many that might be yours, but without knowing more do not know which one. So, don't feel alone! Sometime in the past there was a community of people who believed like you. Maybe you have suffered from temporal dislocation?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Could be Muslim too. Pretty standard beliefs of the faith.

'

This sounds plausible. To Muslims, Jesus was a prophet, a good guy. Everything lines up with Islam. Have you looked into Islam, OP?

OP would need to be on board with lots of other things in Islam besides just what she's listed.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Could be Muslim too. Pretty standard beliefs of the faith.

'

This sounds plausible. To Muslims, Jesus was a prophet, a good guy. Everything lines up with Islam. Have you looked into Islam, OP?

OP would need to be on board with lots of other things in Islam besides just what she's listed.

Maybe Op could start a new religion. People do it all the time.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What do you find so hard to believe about Jesus being God?

Think of it this way. What do you find so hard about Noah being God? What do you find so hard about David Koresh being God? What do you find so hard about Krishna being God? What do you find so hard about Osiris being God? What do you find so hard about Gaia being God?

We're raised to believe that certain things are "true" and others are impossible. But when you really think about it, all of the above are just as plausible (or implausible) as Jesus being God.

OP has already embraced the idea of a personal creator God who made man in His image (and not evolved). OP accepts Christ as a great teacher. OP accepts a lot of Biblical morality and already has a conservative view of sin. What OP describes is pretty close to traditional Christianity. Yet OP stops short of accepting Christ as God, as the Bible teaches. I'm just really curious why OP finds that additional step too far to go.

Regarding Noah: Noah never claimed to be God, and Noah wasn't perfect. David Koresh? Dead, so not God. Krishna, Osiris, Gaia? Please. The Bible recounts man as made in the image of God, and Christ as God coming to earth to live among His creation in sympathy and identification with man, and dying for man's sins (because man rejected God) because God loves His creation. These aren't hard concepts to grasp, and a God that creates man in His image and comes to live among His creation makes a lot more sense than anything else you mentioned.

[Anonymous]

Modern Orthodox Jew? Jesus was a rabbi after all.

[Anonymous]

Not Christian as the most imp aspect of that is the Jesus is lord and savior.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What do you find so hard to believe about Jesus being God?

Think of it this way. What do you find so hard about Noah being God? What do you find so hard about David Koresh being God? What do you find so hard about Krishna being God? What do you find so hard about Osiris being God? What do you find so hard about Gaia being God?

We're raised to believe that certain things are "true" and others are impossible. But when you really think about it, all of the above are just as plausible (or implausible) as Jesus being God.

OP has already embraced the idea of a personal creator God who made man in His image (and not evolved). OP accepts Christ as a great teacher. OP accepts a lot of Biblical morality and already has a conservative view of sin. What OP describes is pretty close to traditional Christianity. Yet OP stops short of accepting Christ as God, as the Bible teaches. I'm just really curious why OP finds that additional step too far to go.

Regarding Noah: Noah never claimed to be God, and Noah wasn't perfect. David Koresh? Dead, so not God. Krishna, Osiris, Gaia? Please. The Bible recounts man as made in the image of God, and Christ as God coming to earth to live among His creation in sympathy and identification with man, and dying for man's sins (because man rejected God) because God loves His creation. These aren't hard concepts to grasp, and a God that creates man in His image and comes to live among His creation makes a lot more sense than anything else you mentioned.

Krishna and Osiris are also human forms in God's image that came to live on earth. Why can't you understand that?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What do you find so hard to believe about Jesus being God?

Think of it this way. What do you find so hard about Noah being God? What do you find so hard about David Koresh being God? What do you find so hard about Krishna being God? What do you find so hard about Osiris being God? What do you find so hard about Gaia being God?

We're raised to believe that certain things are "true" and others are impossible. But when you really think about it, all of the above are just as plausible (or implausible) as Jesus being God.

OP has already embraced the idea of a personal creator God who made man in His image (and not evolved). OP accepts Christ as a great teacher. OP accepts a lot of Biblical morality and already has a conservative view of sin. What OP describes is pretty close to traditional Christianity. Yet OP stops short of accepting Christ as God, as the Bible teaches. I'm just really curious why OP finds that additional step too far to go.

Regarding Noah: Noah never claimed to be God, and Noah wasn't perfect. David Koresh? Dead, so not God. Krishna, Osiris, Gaia? Please. The Bible recounts man as made in the image of God, and Christ as God coming to earth to live among His creation in sympathy and identification with man, and dying for man's sins (because man rejected God) because God loves His creation. These aren't hard concepts to grasp, and a God that creates man in His image and comes to live among His creation makes a lot more sense than anything else you mentioned.

Krishna and Osiris are also human forms in God's image that came to live on earth. Why can't you understand that?

Neither Krishna nor Osiris come from monotheistic beliefs. They certainly are not taught as a loving creator God in the flesh come to sacrifice for sinful man. One is purple (or blue). The other is green. Your sophistry is specious, and I don't think you actually believe in either one.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What do you find so hard to believe about Jesus being God?

Think of it this way. What do you find so hard about Noah being God? What do you find so hard about David Koresh being God? What do you find so hard about Krishna being God? What do you find so hard about Osiris being God? What do you find so hard about Gaia being God?

We're raised to believe that certain things are "true" and others are impossible. But when you really think about it, all of the above are just as plausible (or implausible) as Jesus being God.

OP has already embraced the idea of a personal creator God who made man in His image (and not evolved). OP accepts Christ as a great teacher. OP accepts a lot of Biblical morality and already has a conservative view of sin. What OP describes is pretty close to traditional Christianity. Yet OP stops short of accepting Christ as God, as the Bible teaches. I'm just really curious why OP finds that additional step too far to go.

Regarding Noah: Noah never claimed to be God, and Noah wasn't perfect. David Koresh? Dead, so not God. Krishna, Osiris, Gaia? Please. The Bible recounts man as made in the image of God, and Christ as God coming to earth to live among His creation in sympathy and identification with man, and dying for man's sins (because man rejected God) because God loves His creation. These aren't hard concepts to grasp, and a God that creates man in His image and comes to live among His creation makes a lot more sense than anything else you mentioned.

Krishna and Osiris are also human forms in God's image that came to live on earth. Why can't you understand that?

Neither Krishna nor Osiris come from monotheistic beliefs. They certainly are not taught as a loving creator God in the flesh come to sacrifice for sinful man. One is purple (or blue). The other is green. Your sophistry is specious, and I don't think you actually believe in either one.

Not pp, but coming from a Muslim upbringing, Christianity does not at all look like a monotheistic religion to me - it is so much more like Hinduism (different divine components) than a "true" monotheistic religion.

But it just goes to show that what we're conditioned to believe as "true" or "possible" or "real" is heavily clouded by our own upbringing. At the end of the day, all of it is as truthful and believable as the other.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What do you find so hard to believe about Jesus being God?

Think of it this way. What do you find so hard about Noah being God? What do you find so hard about David Koresh being God? What do you find so hard about Krishna being God? What do you find so hard about Osiris being God? What do you find so hard about Gaia being God?

We're raised to believe that certain things are "true" and others are impossible. But when you really think about it, all of the above are just as plausible (or implausible) as Jesus being God.

OP has already embraced the idea of a personal creator God who made man in His image (and not evolved). OP accepts Christ as a great teacher. OP accepts a lot of Biblical morality and already has a conservative view of sin. What OP describes is pretty close to traditional Christianity. Yet OP stops short of accepting Christ as God, as the Bible teaches. I'm just really curious why OP finds that additional step too far to go.

Regarding Noah: Noah never claimed to be God, and Noah wasn't perfect. David Koresh? Dead, so not God. Krishna, Osiris, Gaia? Please. The Bible recounts man as made in the image of God, and Christ as God coming to earth to live among His creation in sympathy and identification with man, and dying for man's sins (because man rejected God) because God loves His creation. These aren't hard concepts to grasp, and a God that creates man in His image and comes to live among His creation makes a lot more sense than anything else you mentioned.

Krishna and Osiris are also human forms in God's image that came to live on earth. Why can't you understand that?

Neither Krishna nor Osiris come from monotheistic beliefs. They certainly are not taught as a loving creator God in the flesh come to sacrifice for sinful man. One is purple (or blue). The other is green. Your sophistry is specious, and I don't think you actually believe in either one.

Not pp, but coming from a Muslim upbringing, Christianity does not at all look like a monotheistic religion to me - it is so much more like Hinduism (different divine components) than a "true" monotheistic religion.

But it just goes to show that what we're conditioned to believe as "true" or "possible" or "real" is heavily clouded by our own upbringing. At the end of the day, all of it is as truthful and believable as the other.

Some people change religions as adults or find religion for the first time as adults. But you still have a point, because not all people become the same religion as adults, suggesting that religion is very personal -- what you've learned as a child or chosen (or rejected) as an adult. If there were one true religion that God wanted us all to be, you'd think he'd be more clear about it.

[Anonymous]

Baha'i?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What do you find so hard to believe about Jesus being God?

Think of it this way. What do you find so hard about Noah being God? What do you find so hard about David Koresh being God? What do you find so hard about Krishna being God? What do you find so hard about Osiris being God? What do you find so hard about Gaia being God?

We're raised to believe that certain things are "true" and others are impossible. But when you really think about it, all of the above are just as plausible (or implausible) as Jesus being God.

OP has already embraced the idea of a personal creator God who made man in His image (and not evolved). OP accepts Christ as a great teacher. OP accepts a lot of Biblical morality and already has a conservative view of sin. What OP describes is pretty close to traditional Christianity. Yet OP stops short of accepting Christ as God, as the Bible teaches. I'm just really curious why OP finds that additional step too far to go.

Regarding Noah: Noah never claimed to be God, and Noah wasn't perfect. David Koresh? Dead, so not God. Krishna, Osiris, Gaia? Please. The Bible recounts man as made in the image of God, and Christ as God coming to earth to live among His creation in sympathy and identification with man, and dying for man's sins (because man rejected God) because God loves His creation. These aren't hard concepts to grasp, and a God that creates man in His image and comes to live among His creation makes a lot more sense than anything else you mentioned.

Krishna and Osiris are also human forms in God's image that came to live on earth. Why can't you understand that?

Neither Krishna nor Osiris come from monotheistic beliefs. They certainly are not taught as a loving creator God in the flesh come to sacrifice for sinful man. One is purple (or blue). The other is green. Your sophistry is specious, and I don't think you actually believe in either one.

Not pp, but coming from a Muslim upbringing, Christianity does not at all look like a monotheistic religion to me - it is so much more like Hinduism (different divine components) than a "true" monotheistic religion.

But it just goes to show that what we're conditioned to believe as "true" or "possible" or "real" is heavily clouded by our own upbringing. At the end of the day, all of it is as truthful and believable as the other.

+1

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What do you find so hard to believe about Jesus being God?

Think of it this way. What do you find so hard about Noah being God? What do you find so hard about David Koresh being God? What do you find so hard about Krishna being God? What do you find so hard about Osiris being God? What do you find so hard about Gaia being God?

We're raised to believe that certain things are "true" and others are impossible. But when you really think about it, all of the above are just as plausible (or implausible) as Jesus being God.

OP has already embraced the idea of a personal creator God who made man in His image (and not evolved). OP accepts Christ as a great teacher. OP accepts a lot of Biblical morality and already has a conservative view of sin. What OP describes is pretty close to traditional Christianity. Yet OP stops short of accepting Christ as God, as the Bible teaches. I'm just really curious why OP finds that additional step too far to go.

Regarding Noah: Noah never claimed to be God, and Noah wasn't perfect. David Koresh? Dead, so not God. Krishna, Osiris, Gaia? Please. The Bible recounts man as made in the image of God, and Christ as God coming to earth to live among His creation in sympathy and identification with man, and dying for man's sins (because man rejected God) because God loves His creation. These aren't hard concepts to grasp, and a God that creates man in His image and comes to live among His creation makes a lot more sense than anything else you mentioned.

Krishna and Osiris are also human forms in God's image that came to live on earth. Why can't you understand that?

Neither Krishna nor Osiris come from monotheistic beliefs. They certainly are not taught as a loving creator God in the flesh come to sacrifice for sinful man. One is purple (or blue). The other is green. Your sophistry is specious, and I don't think you actually believe in either one.

Oh, so God doesn't come in blue, purple, black, brown, yellow, etc., right? Only white, according to you. You can look at the scriptures and literature written thousands of years ago in the context of today and throw them out so easily, right? And you think you make a lot of sense.

[Anonymous]

By existing - you are a Hindu. What you believe does not matter.