Does the book change your religeous beliefs?

[GPM]

I am tempted to read the book because some readers have commented that the author has insufficient basis for his claims.

[Ferdinand_Otieno]

I don't think so. I was raised a catholic but i don't have any problems reading books that express views opposed to Christianity. I fully support the first amendment in principle. That said, Misreading Judas is basically a Dan Brown thesis and there is no evidence to support his thesis. Anyway, i would rather read a mediocre book than waste time sitting around with people making small talk.

Enemy of small talk.

[Ferdinand_Otieno]

Not even the Bible.

Not even being forced to as a child?

No, my parents never forced me to follow religious teachings. I went to church a few times when I was a child to see what it was about. I stopped going cause it wasn't for me and my parents were fine with that decision. They weren't active Churchgoers either.

Great parents. I had threats of fire and brimstone to keep me in line. Church or hell, it was not until I finished high school that I realized they were christian heretics-kind, understanding, somewhat judgy, but still heretics who could not accept others opinions.

[rachelmarin]

No this doesn't change anything for me. The author makes some interesting points regarding, but like the others it does not change anything for me.

[Ferdinand_Otieno]

No this doesn't change anything for me. The author makes some interesting points regarding, but like the others it does not change anything for me.

It's always great to hear from a strong and stout religious person.

[Quinto]

No it doesn't, because the beliefs the author has is based on an Eastern religion. So it is expected this belief system will clash with the Bible.

[Ak1412]

I am hesitant on reviewing this book simply because I am worried as to how it will portray my religion, and did not want to give a biased review based on that.

[kdstrack]

No, the book did not change anything. The author's frequent use of phrases like, "probably," "it must mean," "could be," etc., are phrases that indicate doubt. Faith is something that gives you certainty and comfort. I find no comfort in a belief that asks me to believe in something that "probably" happened.

[Ferdinand_Otieno]

No, the book did not change anything. The author's frequent use of phrases like, "probably," "it must mean," "could be," etc., are phrases that indicate doubt. Faith is something that gives you certainty and comfort. I find no comfort in a belief that asks me to believe in something that "probably" happened.

Well put. Certainty is a requirement in Faith.

[Ferdinand_Otieno]

No it doesn't, because the beliefs the author has is based on an Eastern religion. So it is expected this belief system will clash with the Bible.

I seem to learn something everyday.

[Sahansdal]

No it doesn't, because the beliefs the author has is based on an Eastern religion. So it is expected this belief system will clash with the Bible.

The whole purpose of the book is to show that the underlying spirituality is the same in all religions, the one real exception being that the New Testament was conceived as disinformation, so it is the outlier. Even the Old Testament is OK. It is a beautiful example of mystic Truth. I am not alone in thinking this about the New Testament! Dr. Robert Eisenman, a brilliant scholar, shows the serious problems with the Gospel story, and Paul. He focused on various Apocrypha and the Dead Sea Scrolls Pesherim (commentaries) to show how the Bible minimizes James the Just, "the brother of the Lord." I used the gnostic texts to show Judas was James, inverted. That is why -- the ONLY reason why -- he is shunned by so many fellow 'scholars.'

[Ferdinand_Otieno]

I am hesitant on reviewing this book simply because I am worried as to how it will portray my religion, and did not want to give a biased review based on that.

That is strange considering that all reviews are somewhat biased.

[InStoree]

I believe there are still many secrets to get out on the surface from ancient times. Some of them connect the biblical dots, and others, raise questions. I agree with most of my colleagues, that a book shouldn't change or shake our belief, but I have also tasted the books which improve my perspective of faith. It doesn't apply in this case. Maybe, the words "change" and "shake" are a bit rigid, for my understanding. A radius of flexibility is always welcome.

[Fazzier]

This book cannot shake my faith in Christianity. Still, I'm planning to read it even as much as it controversial. From there, I can deduce by myself the author's intention.

[Ferdinand_Otieno]

I believe there are still many secrets to get out on the surface from ancient times. Some of them connect the biblical dots, and others, raise questions. I agree with most of my colleagues, that a book shouldn't change or shake our belief, but I have also tasted the books which improve my perspective of faith. It doesn't apply in this case. Maybe, the words "change" and "shake" are a bit rigid, for my understanding. A radius of flexibility is always welcome.

A welcoming perspective if I ever heard one.