Jump to content

The Crucifixion


crazy-tiger
 Share

Recommended Posts

I'm on a bit of a roll today, so here's another thought that crossed my mind.

 

 

What was the point of sacrificing Jesus?

 

According to a shit load of Christians, it's to atone for the sin committed by Adam and Eve back in the Garden of Eden. The sacrifice Jesus made was needed to "balance the scales" so that people could enter Heaven.

 

 

So... what happened to all those Good and Righteous people who lived before Jesus was crucified? None got to go to Heaven? What was the point in giving the commandments? The 613 Rules God laid down that, if they were followed, would enable you to enter Heaven when you died?

 

Was God lying when he said you could get to Heaven just by following his rules? Bad God... Lying is a sin and God cannot abide Sin. (makes you wonder how he lives with himself)

 

 

 

But... even if God changed his mind and decided a blood sacrifice was all that was needed to atone for the sin committed by Adam and Eve... was it really needed to save everyone else?

 

According to the Bible... NO!

 

Deut. 24:16 "Fathers shall not be put to death for their children, nor children put to death for their fathers; each is to die for his own sin."

 

2 Kings 14:6 "Yet he did not put the sons of the assassins to death, in accordance with what is written in the Book of the Law of Moses where the LORD commanded: "Fathers shall not be put to death for their children, nor children put to death for their fathers; each is to die for his own sins.""

 

But that's OT... what did Jesus have to say about it? Nothing.

 

So... Has God started to punish children for the sins of their fathers? Looks like it.

 

 

What can we see in all of this...? We can see a God who subjected people to a long list of rules that he later decided they didn't need. (so much for being perfect...) We can see a God who decided a blood sacrifice was needed to atone for a sin that he wasn't holding anyone other than Adam and Eve responsible for. We see a God who suddenly decided that innocent beings must now be punished for what they didn't do.

 

We see that God is suffering from split personalities, or the OT God is not the same God as the NT God...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 57
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

  • Amanda

    11

  • NotBlinded

    11

  • mwc

    7

  • Ouroboros

    6

Top Posters In This Topic

I'm on a bit of a roll today, so here's another thought that crossed my mind.

 

 

What was the point of sacrificing Jesus?

 

According to a shit load of Christians, it's to atone for the sin committed by Adam and Eve back in the Garden of Eden. The sacrifice Jesus made was needed to "balance the scales" so that people could enter Heaven.

 

 

So... what happened to all those Good and Righteous people who lived before Jesus was crucified? None got to go to Heaven? What was the point in giving the commandments? The 613 Rules God laid down that, if they were followed, would enable you to enter Heaven when you died?

 

Was God lying when he said you could get to Heaven just by following his rules? Bad God... Lying is a sin and God cannot abide Sin. (makes you wonder how he lives with himself)

 

 

 

But... even if God changed his mind and decided a blood sacrifice was all that was needed to atone for the sin committed by Adam and Eve... was it really needed to save everyone else?

 

According to the Bible... NO!

 

Deut. 24:16 "Fathers shall not be put to death for their children, nor children put to death for their fathers; each is to die for his own sin."

 

2 Kings 14:6 "Yet he did not put the sons of the assassins to death, in accordance with what is written in the Book of the Law of Moses where the LORD commanded: "Fathers shall not be put to death for their children, nor children put to death for their fathers; each is to die for his own sins.""

 

But that's OT... what did Jesus have to say about it? Nothing.

 

So... Has God started to punish children for the sins of their fathers? Looks like it.

 

 

What can we see in all of this...? We can see a God who subjected people to a long list of rules that he later decided they didn't need. (so much for being perfect...) We can see a God who decided a blood sacrifice was needed to atone for a sin that he wasn't holding anyone other than Adam and Eve responsible for. We see a God who suddenly decided that innocent beings must now be punished for what they didn't do.

 

We see that God is suffering from split personalities, or the OT God is not the same God as the NT God...

 

This is a question often asked by Christians as well as non-Christians. Before Jesus came to earth from heaven to offer his supreme sacrifice at the age of 33 (approx) God demanded a long list of different animal sacrifices as an atonement for sins committed. They are too numerous to mention here but can be found in Leviticus. The Old Testament promised the people a Messiah who would ultimately save them but they got it wrong and thought he was going to save them from Roman slavery and not from their sins.

 

Oh how disappointed they were when they found out. The people looked forward to salvation just as we now look back to Christ for salvation.

 

God bless all non-Christians

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Goodness... a Christian's replied...

 

 

Oh, it's you.

This is a question often asked by Christians as well as non-Christians. Before Jesus came to earth from heaven to offer his supreme sacrifice at the age of 33 (approx) God demanded a long list of different animal sacrifices as an atonement for sins committed. They are too numerous to mention here but can be found in Leviticus. The Old Testament promised the people a Messiah who would ultimately save them but they got it wrong and thought he was going to save them from Roman slavery and not from their sins.

 

Oh how disappointed they were when they found out. The people looked forward to salvation just as we now look back to Christ for salvation.

 

God bless all non-Christians

What sins?

 

According to God, (well, according to the Bible... OT to be specific) the Messiah was going to lead Israel into an age where they would be free from being ruled by other people. The Messiah was also going to be nothing more than a human. The Messiah was also going to fulfill ALL the Messianic Prophecies before his death. The Messiah was also going to be of the line of David. The Messiah was going to follow ALL the commandments that God laid down.

 

Nothing in the Bible (OT) says anything about the Messiah turning up from any other bloodline, breaking the commandments, re-writing God's Laws, being God in human form, failing to fulfill the Prophecies and being a blood sacrifice.

 

 

What you have done is tried to claim that the Messiah was nothing like what the OT says the Messiah would be like, yet still claim that it's the same Messiah in both cases.

 

In summary, you've failed to answer the topic in any way while managing to repeat the twisted lies Christianity has been expounding for the last 2,000 years.

 

 

 

Shiva bless all Christians. (meaningless, isn't it? It's only there to make the one saying it feel better about themselves... yeah, we know all the tricks. We've used them all before ourselves)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Lance, what was Jesus' sacrifice? I thought sacrifice meant that someone actually gives up something. What did Jesus give up?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This is a question often asked by Christians as well as non-Christians. Before Jesus came to earth from heaven to offer his supreme sacrifice at the age of 33 (approx) God demanded a long list of different animal sacrifices as an atonement for sins committed. They are too numerous to mention here but can be found in Leviticus. The Old Testament promised the people a Messiah who would ultimately save them but they got it wrong and thought he was going to save them from Roman slavery and not from their sins.

 

Oh how disappointed they were when they found out. The people looked forward to salvation just as we now look back to Christ for salvation.

 

God bless all non-Christians

 

Lance, You have zero concept of Jewish belief or rituals, so why you choose to say things which you have zero knowledge about is perplexing.

 

You are wrong on the sacrifices and atonement, you are also wrong about the messiah.

 

It is because you have the mindset of the blood thirsty cult that you believe a god can not forgive unless blood is spilled. In this view, your god is no better or different then from the god of the Aztecs.

The rules to forgiveness are in the 613 laws that Crazy talked about.

 

a god in the Jewish belief will only forgive you, when you have wronged him. Sins against other people you'll have to fix on your own. Yom Kipper is also celebrated yearly to atone for ones sins against their god. Personal responsibility and how you conduct yourself is a huge issue in the Jewish faith, even today. There is zero Free pass cards for anything.

 

The Sacrifices were A) to only be done in the temple, b ) only to be done in a specific manor and c)from what I've read and studied, apparently it was more to make the person feel better then being necessity that god required to forgive. Jews won't have anything to do with blood, it is considered the 'life force' of a person or animal. In saying that the thought of human sacrifice is also considered a pagan ritual.

 

As far as the messiah, He is suppose to be a great man like Moses, but just a man. Moses is also considered a messiah which means great leader. The godman idea was put there by the pagan Romans and Greeks from their ancient religions. The Christ story along with hell, heaven, the virgin birth are all passed down from sunworship, just in a different form.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Gave up 3 days of his precious infinite time and then flew off into heaven to chill out. Wow, what a great sacrifice.

Jesus sacrificed nothing. If he had, there would only be one ass in hell today and it'd be the intolerant, pompous and arrogant ass of jeebus kryast. Instead of that, he got front row seats to watch innocent perfectly good humans burn in agony for eternity all because of his own father's incompetence and idiocy.

 

The babble sure is one disgusting and horrible book. Good thing it's fiction!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What was the point of sacrificing Jesus?

:) Crazy Tiger, IMO, the story is to show there are some things worth dying. Is it better to exist with an oppressed mentality or fight for principles to be considered innately equal in value to live one's life? :shrug:

 

According to a shit load of Christians, it's to atone for the sin committed by Adam and Eve back in the Garden of Eden. The sacrifice Jesus made was needed to "balance the scales" so that people could enter Heaven.
:HaHa: It's amazing how this story took so many twists and turns, IMO. The knowledge of good and evil allowed man to judge, the forbidden fruit of judgment is condemnation. Condemning kills the will to thrive, life, while the concept of grace erases condemnation... while still keeping responsibility and accountability for one's action.

 

So... what happened to all those Good and Righteous people who lived before Jesus was crucified? None got to go to Heaven? What was the point in giving the commandments? The 613 Rules God laid down that, if they were followed, would enable you to enter Heaven when you died?

As I see it, heaven and hell are just states of mind. The law on paper is one thing, however, understanding the intent gives additional freedoms from just limiting one's self to adhering to just written words. Do you think this reasoning might have come from Socrates’ and Plato's teachings, only about 400 years earlier?

 

Was God lying when he said you could get to Heaven just by following his rules? Bad God... Lying is a sin and God cannot abide Sin. (makes you wonder how he lives with himself)

Perhaps if God is within us, then maybe abiding by some rules against stealing, lying, killing, adultery, coveting, etc. might foster heaven within?

 

 

But... even if God changed his mind and decided a blood sacrifice was all that was needed to atone for the sin committed by Adam and Eve... was it really needed to save everyone else?

 

According to the Bible... NO!

 

Deut. 24:16 "Fathers shall not be put to death for their children, nor children put to death for their fathers; each is to die for his own sin."

 

2 Kings 14:6 "Yet he did not put the sons of the assassins to death, in accordance with what is written in the Book of the Law of Moses where the LORD commanded: "Fathers shall not be put to death for their children, nor children put to death for their fathers; each is to die for his own sins.""

Doesn't that make sense for each person to be accountable and responsible for their own behavior?

 

The idea of blood sacrifices is horrifying! :eek: Yet, many other myths seem to have this same idea too. I'm curious if it has had any influence in developing our conscience though?

 

But that's OT... what did Jesus have to say about it? Nothing.

 

Sacrifices? The story says Jesus claims that the sacrifices were never good for clearing the conscience, so it seems they finally ended. :phew:

 

So... Has God started to punish children for the sins of their fathers? Looks like it.

I think it's the OT that says the sins of the father are carried down for 7 generations. IMO, this is just the passing along of dysfunctional mindsets. Isn't this just in the OT though?

 

We see that God is suffering from split personalities, or the OT God is not the same God as the NT God...

One good thing I see in this story is the OT saw God out there somewhere, and the NT brings God within us... and as the story says, Jesus claimed it not robbery to be equal to God and that we too are gods. :wicked:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Amanda, good answers...

 

Though, this topic and question are aimed at those who believe that it's no story... that Jesus was sacrificed for humanities sins... that all people are carrying the blame, the sin, that Adam and Eve committed... It's all aimed at pointing out that this belief, and those like it in Christianity, are shown to be false by the Bible itself.

 

Now, for those who take it as allegory, rather than a historical account... there's no problem with it, as you've just shown.

 

 

 

 

Oh, the blood sacrifices thing... I'm a cynic. I admit it, and I'm just a tad glad that I am. (I get pleasantly surprised on a regular basis, so it's keeping me pretty happy)

 

To my mind, there's a damn good chance that the whole idea was that by making the sacrifice, you were wiping the slate clean and didn't have to worry about bad things coming back to bite you.

 

 

...which now I come to think about it, seems to be what a lot of Christians believe about Jesus's sacrifice... "Jesus died so God could forgive our sins"

 

Is it too much to ask that they could do something themselves to make up for what they've done??

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Because the Roman Catholic Church saw the power in screwing up the story by trying to tie the crucifixion into the Torah.

 

A lot of people remain ignorant on this and there is one here now...

 

God forgive the fundy Christians! :HaHa:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What the Crucifixion did was change the rules now of going to heaven. This is a whole new game with Jesus dead what it did was change the old way of going to heaven (blood sacrafice I am correct). Now with this Jesus guy dead people can do whatever the hell they want. All they have to do is be forgiven by Gawd and Cheezus Christ. Yes this does have major impact on the way people can act aside from the Torah. I would rather their just be a Judaism than Christianity honestly because I never here of Jews lieing, commiting fraud, MOLESTING LITTLE GIRLS, stealing tithes, telling people how to act. Yes the Torah is violent but they do not follow it like the Christians.

 

Thats the flaw in this:

 

A murder who raped 11 year old girls can beg Gawd for forgiveness while a old lady who does nothing wrong curses God and now is sentenced to hell.

 

PS.

 

Was the orginal sentence blood sacrafice of a sheep or something then go to heaven or virgins. WHY IS IT BLOOD SACRAFICE ANYWAY? Someone has to die because of another persons actions. Thats bull shit and any Christian should be able to see that but they don't because they live in a FUCKING bubble.

 

Sorry I am ranting but this really got me fired up this is a major flaw. If God is so powerful why can't he just say " I forgive you." No what does he do dash babies against rocks.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This is a question often asked by Christians as well as non-Christians.

So this is a question asked by a lot of people then?

 

Before Jesus came to earth from heaven to offer his supreme sacrifice at the age of 33 (approx)

Really? Age 33? Perhaps you have more evidence? I mean, I could say that 38 is approximately 33 if I wanted to make a case for it.

 

As for "supreme sacrifice" you're really going to have to do better. All the "supernatural" bits aside, here's a guy that went through (according to the texts we have) literally NO MORE than other people that went to the cross and he died in mere hours instead of DAYS as opposed to those others I mentioned. For a "perfect" specimen he did WORSE than us imperfect humans. He even died quicker than the two guys hanging with him...who I can also assume made "SUPREME SACRIFICES" according to your logic. The only difference is...and now I have to go back on what I said above...is that the other two guys DIDN'T get a special magical DO-OVER. They got the mass criminal tomb.

 

Not that it matters as the passion story as a whole is implausible anyhow.

 

God demanded a long list of different animal sacrifices as an atonement for sins committed. They are too numerous to mention here but can be found in Leviticus. The Old Testament promised the people a Messiah who would ultimately save them but they got it wrong and thought he was going to save them from Roman slavery and not from their sins.

God? Oh, YHWH. For a second I was worried but you mean the petty tribal god of your special book. Yeah, he sure likes the smell of the meat burning on the alter for some reason. He made a bunch of rules and, you know what? The people loved them. They brought them closer to their god. Oh, now I know that Paul says otherwise, but YHWH, David, the old prophets, baby-god jesus and the early church fathers like Theophilus of Antioch all would side very much with me on this one. The Law is GOOD. To follow the Law is GOOD. This god does not give these rules to show sin like Paul says...and since Paul has to bastardize what Moses says in Deuteronomy (as I recall) to make his point...it seems Paul is a piss-poor witness on this point.

 

As for the "Old Testament" promising a Messiah I find that odd. First of all, there was no "Old Testament." There was no Jewish bible of any sort until around 100CE when they closed their canon because the xians started mucking around with things. Second, the writings they did have made mention of several "Messiahs" of note (and anyone who was annointed was a "messiah" so any kings or high priests were messiahs). Cyrus the Great, a non-Jew, was literally named Messiah by the Jews when he brought them from captivity. He's mentioned in Daniel (of course Daniel was written late 2nd century BCE) among others. You're probably thinking of the Messiah in Jeremiah and those prophecies. They remain unfulfilled. Your candidate failed to accomplish even the simplest of tasks he was to do towards these goals. Even Bar Kochpa (sp?) in the 2nd Jewish War came much, much closer.

 

Oh how disappointed they were when they found out. The people looked forward to salvation just as we now look back to Christ for salvation.

How so? The Pharisees pretty much all believed in a resurrection of the body. The Sadducee's did not. For the most part most Jews of the day seemed to believe that at the end of days there would be a universal physical resurrection of the Jews and they would all live under the rule of a human (Jewish) messiah king and Judaism would be the de facto religion everywhere. The temple would be rebuilt and the Law and sacrifices would be going as they always had. It would be business as usual.

 

I'm not sure where you got your ideas that anyone had "salvation" on their mind or that they were "disappointed." The only "disappointment" they suffered, and it was a major one, is when the 2nd War failed and the Jews were banned from Jerusalem. Not only that but to make sure the temple couldn't be rebuilt (and to add insult to injury) a temple to Jupiter was built on its site (the Dome of the Rock is there today). These two things basically killed the Jewish religion. The Mishnah then occurred and Rabbinic Judaism rose up in its place. That's basically what exists today and is closest to what the Pharisees believed (to the best of our knowledge). Of course to simplify this down I had to leave a lot of details out but this is basically the gist of things.

 

Anyhow, this is all way off topic, but your answer was just so trite I couldn't help myself.

 

mwc

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Though, this topic and question are aimed at those who believe that it's no story... that Jesus was sacrificed for humanities sins... that all people are carrying the blame, the sin, that Adam and Eve committed... It's all aimed at pointing out that this belief, and those like it in Christianity, are shown to be false by the Bible itself.

Crazy Tigerl, before coming here... I had no idea how much myth was imposed on these teachings, nor the extent cultural beliefs had gone unchallenged! Researching to show people here, such as yourself :) , were wrong... I found out you all were right!

 

It's amazing how people have a tendency to impart a super-natural status to what was probably just a remarkable human. It's like St. Nicholas to Santa Claus! Imhotep is another case too. Why do you think this happens? I think the story of "Jesus" was manipulated and used to achieve power... just reframing and deterring it to selfish agendas. People don't take time to critically think about their beliefs, like what goes on here. Look how rulers and religious institutions have used it to do what they've wanted, even today. :rolleyes:

Oh, the blood sacrifices thing... I'm a cynic. I admit it, and I'm just a tad glad that I am. (I get pleasantly surprised on a regular basis, so it's keeping me pretty happy)

 

To my mind, there's a damn good chance that the whole idea was that by making the sacrifice, you were wiping the slate clean and didn't have to worry about bad things coming back to bite you.

 

 

...which now I come to think about it, seems to be what a lot of Christians believe about Jesus's sacrifice... "Jesus died so God could forgive our sins"

Okay, I think you're right as that being the popular belief today. Here's another perspective. As we were leaving the hunter and gatherer stage and becoming stable, I imagine we were a bit barbaric. Becoming conscientious of the need for rules and civilized aspects... do you think the initial intent of ritualistic emphasis on the sacrifice of an innocent life was a means that brought sorrow and a sense of horrible price it cost for disrespectful behaviors?

 

It seems the OT was of the mentality one had to be perfect, therefore all were condemned. :twitch: Then the NT says we are all doing the best we can, we do need to be accountable and responsible, yet how can we condemn anyone for not doing better than their best? :shrug:

 

Is it too much to ask that they could do something themselves to make up for what they've done??

I think that's what the NT says. As I've watched documentaries on Madeline O'Hare, I see her teachings and the NT teachings are the same... only the NT does seem to assert other coping skills and emphasize a reverence given to all living things. I don't think Madeline O'Hare would even be against that. NT teachings might be the precursor to Atheism, in that God is within and must act through us.

 

These religious institutions seem to have swayed it a different way. How could they then sell indulgences for man's sins, promote poverty so give them all their money, and then become one of the wealthiest institutions in the world? I think it was emperor Constantine that had a hedonistic sexual lifestyle, then decided it was not the thing to do so swayed these teachings to promote his new perspective, since this would be a way to immediately being accepted as 'gospel'. I suppose this is just a few distortion examples of millions... :ugh:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Here's the simple answer to why did Jesus have to die:

 

He was the Messiah. Messiahs don't die but Jesus was the Messiah and he did die. So the disciples had to make sense of it. They decided they got it wrong first time around. Jesus definitely was the Messiah but a different kind of Messiah than they had always thought. He was the kind of Messiah that saves from spiritual oppression rather than from political and social oppression. So yeah, Jesus was the Messiah and this Messiah did die, and the purpose of this dying was to save people from spiritual oppression called sin. And because Messiahs can't stay dead he resurrected a few days later from a decent burial. Then he instructed his disciples on how to run a church. Then he flew off to heaven.

 

QUESTION: How did Jesus' dying save anyone from their sins?

Neither the Bible nor Christianity answers that question. When pressed for an answer Christians will say you have to have faith. Oh yeah, that's it! I can fly if only I have faith. Okay, I have faith--lots of it. There's some bridges and over-passes around here. I'll go find one of them and put my faith into practice. I will jump with the full knowledge that my faith will allow me to fly safely from the edge of the bridge or over-pass and out away from the traffic or water (depends whether I choose an over-pass or a bridge) and back home. I will land comfortable in my backyard, walk to my door and go back to bed because I will surely be tired after such an unusual exersion.

 

Let's see, I'm booked pretty full this week. And next week doesn't look much better. Maybe this summer I'll find time. Ummm. Just thinking about it gives rise to a variety of feelings inside of me. On one hand, there is lots of exhiliaration at the idea of actually flying through the air and feeling the air rush by me. It must be the ultimate freedom. On the other hand there is a very real sense of fear that it takes more than faith to actually accomplish all that....

 

Oh yeah, now I get it. Maybe the disciples felt spiritual oppression and maybe they were totally depraved and needed to be saved from sin but I don't feel any of that. When I became an adult I put away childish things. I no longer feel depraved because I know I am a pretty cool woman. Maybe I'll just cancel those plans about flying off bridges and over-passes. That seems like a wise idea for a mature adult. The fact of the matter is, humans are not equipped to fly on their own power and as a mature adult I accept that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Okay, I think you're right as that being the popular belief today. Here's another perspective. As we were leaving the hunter and gatherer stage and becoming stable, I imagine we were a bit barbaric. Becoming conscientious of the need for rules and civilized aspects... do you think the initial intent of ritualistic emphasis on the sacrifice of an innocent life was a means that brought sorrow and a sense of horrible price it cost for disrespectful behaviors?

 

It seems the OT was of the mentality one had to be perfect, therefore all were condemned. :twitch: Then the NT says we are all doing the best we can, we do need to be accountable and responsible, yet how can we condemn anyone for not doing better than their best? :shrug:

It's strange... I see the stuff in the OT as justification for not saying sorry to those you hurt. (told you I was a cynic) The stuff in the NT, on the other hand... I see a lot of it basically saying that we should make amends for what we do. I also see most of it being complete bollocks that got tacked onto the basic message so that those in charge could get away with treating people like crap.

 

Such a shame that people made a religion out of the crap and ignored the good stuff... :shrug:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's strange... I see the stuff in the OT as justification for not saying sorry to those you hurt. (told you I was a cynic) The stuff in the NT, on the other hand... I see a lot of it basically saying that we should make amends for what we do. I also see most of it being complete bollocks that got tacked onto the basic message so that those in charge could get away with treating people like crap.

 

Such a shame that people made a religion out of the crap and ignored the good stuff... :shrug:

Isn't that the truth!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So the disciples had to make sense of it.

RubySera... :HaHa: I had to laugh! However, I've heard that our mind is inclined to make order out of things.

 

QUESTION: How did Jesus' dying save anyone from their sins?

I think it's the concept of grace that saves us from the condemnation of our 'sins', while keeping accountability and responsibility for one's actions.

 

Even though we won't condemn you... please stay away from any flying lessons without airplanes. :wink:

 

Such a shame that people made a religion out of the crap and ignored the good stuff... :shrug:

 

I'm curious as to why people in the far east didn't seem to do this. It seems the Jews, Christians, and the Muslims seem to have manufactured out of their religion what suits them, but not Zen and Buddhism.... that I know. Are we from a lineage that is more aggressive and more manipulative? :Hmm:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

My take on the sacrifice:

 

During the hunting and gathering time disasters were explained by the gods being angered.

 

The gods were angry because of "sin", people doing wrong things, upsetting the gods.

 

The gods were made happy again by giving them food offering.

 

If the gods were too angry, a life had to be given to please them. Maybe it was the idea of sending a soul to the spiritual world as a slave? Slaves were used for trading in the old viking era at least. "I trade you two slaves for that ox..."

 

Over a long time, animal sacrfices were enough, and since in the Jewish religion blood started be the symbol of life (if you bleed a lot, you die, so life must be in the blood, right?), the blood itself became holy for cleaning of sin.

 

What kind of blood sacrifice, or life sacrifice is the most ultimate? Human of course. But what is more than having to sacrifice an unwilling slave? A willing human would be even more holy and special.

 

That's why the idea of a willing human sacrifice would be the ultimate and final for cleansing all sins against the gods.

 

The problem is though, if everyone in the world is cleansed from their sins, how can you make them convert to your religion? There's no incentive if all is fixed. The incentive is that you can only get this special sacrifice deal if you believe in it. Tada. Now you have the basics for Christianity. A pagan idea, developed into a systematic and organized religion to hold the people under control.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm curious as to why people in the far east didn't seem to do this. It seems the Jews, Christians, and the Muslims seem to have manufactured out of their religion what suits them, but not Zen and Buddhism.... that I know. Are we from a lineage that is more aggressive and more manipulative? :Hmm:

Since I seem to have been drawn into a few more discussions about the far East religions lately I've been trying to learn a little more about them (and so far it is literally a "little" more ;) ).

 

Anyhow, from what I've gathered so far they weren't so different in their earliest known religions. A worship of some gods that were merely a reflection of the earthly system. It wasn't until much later (~800 or so BCE) that ANY of the "enlightened" schools of thought seemed to have wondered onto the scene (although many of them like to claim to be much older there doesn't seem to be any real evidence for that...like other religions they say "oral tradition" or whatnot...whatever).

 

I did find it interesting that Buddhism did make its way into the Selucid Empire, and by that into the Jewish arena, and so this answers my questions as to how the influence of Buddhism would be known to that people (they didn't have to move anywhere, much less India, to learn Buddhism, or some variant, since it came to them around 170 BCE and stayed).

 

We also know that Buddhism didn't end the fighting and wars end among the Indians and Asians so it wasn't any sort of "magic bullet" for them. They didn't seem to fight among themselves (meaning Buddhist against Buddhist for theological reasons), which I guess is a big plus, or against other in some "crusade" but any number of wars were waged nonetheless. It seems humans just do that. :shrug:

 

mwc

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Here's the problem that I have with the crucifixion. It's child sacrifice. God kills his own kid to save some of his creation. Jesus never says he's willingly sacrificing himself and begs his father so much not have to go through it, that he sweats blood. His father ignores his kid's pleas and kills him anyway. What kind of hard hearted father is god?

 

This was god's big plan?!?!?? I mean, he's god and all, you'd think he'd come up with something better than killing his own kid, since, after all, he's had all of eternity before hand to figure it out.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Lance, what was Jesus' sacrifice? I thought sacrifice meant that someone actually gives up something. What did Jesus give up?

Jesus' sacrifice was that he gave up half of his weekend to atone for all the sins of humankind. Not a really big community service commitment, considering Jesus was around before the foundation of the earth and will live forever. Anyway, he supposedly suffered greatly for several hours on the cross, then played dead for a day and a half. Luckily he came back to life in time for his Sunday afternoon golf game.

 

It remains a mystery why God could only work out the salvation thing this way, and also why He waited 4000 years after the fall of man to provide a solution.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

God demanded a long list of different animal sacrifices as an atonement for sins committed.

 

Funny how God gets the blame and Jesus the glory when most Christians are trinitarians. Besides, in Isaiah after the *victory* of Messiah, animal sacrifices, sabbaths and holy days continue along on their merry way. Matter of fact, the whole world (according to the bible) will be under gods reign and if men don't travel once a year to the temple at Jerusalem with their sacrifice, God will not send rain for three years.

 

You'd know all of that though if you read the OT straight through, it really needs no outside help in order to understand the meaning. Apologetics try to explain everything away by twisting and reinterpreting the bible into anything that fits their doctrine.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This is one of the things about Christian theology that doesn't really make sense.

 

If God wanted to forgive people's sins then surely he can just forgive people's sins if they ask for forgiveness. Why does he have to send himself as a man to die?

 

Even if God changed his mind part way through history (which doesn't seem very God-like) - surely he could still simply change the rules he set up.

 

Why is he holding himself to his own rules like this? It's like he originally set up the rules so that those who sin go to Hell but then he decides that it's not very compassionate to be like that. But instead of simply saying "right, from now on if you ask for forgiveness then I'll forgive you", he decides that he can't simply change his mind but must have somebody be punished for all those sins, so he gracefully offers up his own life!

 

It's lunacy!! I'm not quite comfortable with the idea of a God who changes his mind anyway. But to decide to suffer for sin himself because the rules are written down in stone or something, is just ludicrous. Who is making him abide by his own rules? If he is God then he makes the rules anyway and can just adapt them as he sees fit without the need for all that incarnation and sacrifice fiasco.

 

Unless of course he needed to do it so that mankind could understand the idea that God forgives sins.

 

But that's the point, isn't it? It sounds so much like an idea (a myth) that surfaced as the result of humanity's changing ideas about what God is like. Nothing wrong with that, but at least be honest about it rather than insisting that it is something that really happened. Because it just doesn't make sense when taken literally.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

But that's the point, isn't it? It sounds so much like an idea (a myth) that surfaced as the result of humanity's changing ideas about what God is like. Nothing wrong with that, but at least be honest about it rather than insisting that it is something that really happened. Because it just doesn't make sense when taken literally.

IMO, the symbology is still there but when taken literally, it is missed. Myths are symbolic in nature and the crucifixion is no different. That is why many myths have this death and resurrection theme. Heck, there is no power in honesty! ;)

 

All symbols and metaphors in myth are to be taken as an inward sign about our own nature, not an outward, literal occurance.

 

I see two ways that this can symbolically be taken (there are probably more):

 

1) An awakening to a deep spiritual truth through suffering (suffering will happen).

 

2) I love this one... :) When a person becomes enlightened, that person dies to being in the world and awakens to their God nature. Also, when the person awakens, God dies to being a person in the world and can longer experience life in form. A paradox of opposites that has a profound meaning. This is the death of the God-Man and the Man-God.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Here's the problem that I have with the crucifixion. It's child sacrifice. God kills his own kid to save some of his creation. Jesus never says he's willingly sacrificing himself and begs his father so much not have to go through it, that he sweats blood. His father ignores his kid's pleas and kills him anyway. What kind of hard hearted father is god?

 

This was god's big plan?!?!?? I mean, he's god and all, you'd think he'd come up with something better than killing his own kid, since, after all, he's had all of eternity before hand to figure it out.

Taphophilia, I've been on here long enough to have nothing but the greatest respect for you and your positions. :phew:

 

IMO, this NT myth/philosophy asserts God, the Father, is a place of self empowerment within us ALL. "Jesus," an ordinary man, standing up for his principles was worth doing so even in the face of death... sacrificing himself for his beliefs, sort of approach. Additionally promoting to forgive one's enemies, not for their enemy but for one's own state of mind, yet holding all accountable for their actions. "Jesus," searching for this place within to prevail over death did not work for him in the physical sense, yet seems to have ignited a population to follow these principles. Perhaps "he" lives on in spirit. in these terms? Instead of living in a repressed/oppressed environment, is that really living? Are there mindsets worthy of persistence, even in the face of death? Would a philosophy to do so be enhancing our will to thrive, bringing life? I suppose each person has to interpret that for them self. :shrug:

 

I just saw NBBTB's post. I agree and love it! :wub:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

But that's the point, isn't it? It sounds so much like an idea (a myth) that surfaced as the result of humanity's changing ideas about what God is like. Nothing wrong with that, but at least be honest about it rather than insisting that it is something that really happened. Because it just doesn't make sense when taken literally.

IMO, the symbology is still there but when taken literally, it is missed. Myths are symbolic in nature and the crucifixion is no different. That is why many myths have this death and resurrection theme. Heck, there is no power in honesty! ;)

 

All symbols and metaphors in myth are to be taken as an inward sign about our own nature, not an outward, literal occurance.

 

I see two ways that this can symbolically be taken (there are probably more):

 

1) An awakening to a deep spiritual truth through suffering (suffering will happen).

 

2) I love this one... :) When a person becomes enlightened, that person dies to being in the world and awakens to their God nature. Also, when the person awakens, God dies to being a person in the world and can longer experience life in form. A paradox of opposites that has a profound meaning. This is the death of the God-Man and the Man-God.

 

I have my own favourite interpretation of the symbolism. (apologies in advance to atheists, since this interpretation involves belief in God, or at least an entity or phenomenon that for sake of argument can be called God)

 

God is in some way goodness personified, right?

 

God gives us Free Will, thus allowing evil to occur in the world.

 

By allowing evil to exist in the world, God gives up some of his goodness.

 

This can be seen as God allowing himself to die, that we might live :HaHa:

 

The purpose of Free Will is that we make mistakes so as to learn from them

 

If/when we learn from our mistakes (as individuals or the entire human species - it works on both levels), then we enter a higher awareness and understanding where we don't need to make those mistakes again because we've learnt from them.

 

We have thus been made anew and our evil has been overcome or banished.

 

Then God is resurrected through us.

 

So God dies and is resurrected through our death and resurrection.

 

This interpretation fits my belief that all things are one - that God exists in all things and all things are part of God (though I prefer to think of God as an impersonal process or energy rather than a person or being)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
 Share




×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Guidelines.