But why?
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
27-03-2013, 10:48 PM
But why?
Given the fact that Easter is approaching and I just wanted to get some clarification on the sacrifice and resurrection story. I mean... Jesus supposedly sacrificed himself to rid man kind of sin correct? So wouldn't that mean everyone is free of sin from that point on? If not, then what the hell was the point of him sacrificing himself in the first place.

Secondly, it is my understanding that Jesus is God and vice versa (correct me if I'm wrong). So wouldn't that mean that God sacrificed himself to himself (even though he is all seeing and knew all this was going to happen anyway)!?

Am I missing something here, or does none of this make sense?
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Thoughtful Nate's post
27-03-2013, 11:00 PM
RE: But why?
(27-03-2013 10:48 PM)Thoughtful Nate Wrote:  Given the fact that Easter is approaching and I just wanted to get some clarification on the sacrifice and resurrection story. I mean... Jesus supposedly sacrificed himself to rid man kind of sin correct? So wouldn't that mean everyone is free of sin from that point on? If not, then what the hell was the point of him sacrificing himself in the first place.

Secondly, it is my understanding that Jesus is God and vice versa (correct me if I'm wrong). So wouldn't that mean that God sacrificed himself to himself (even though he is all seeing and knew all this was going to happen anyway)!?

Am I missing something here, or does none of this make sense?

First question, if you believe it, yup.

Secondly, Yup, and yup.

You're not missing anything.Cool

But now I have come to believe that the whole world is an enigma, a harmless enigma that is made terrible by our own mad attempt to interpret it as though it had an underlying truth.

~ Umberto Eco
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
27-03-2013, 11:38 PM (This post was last modified: 06-04-2013 12:32 AM by Doctor X.)
RE: But why?
******

Those who administer and moderate in order to exercise personal agenda merely feed into the negative stereotype of Atheism
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 4 users Like Doctor X's post
27-03-2013, 11:56 PM (This post was last modified: 28-03-2013 12:29 AM by Bucky Ball.)
RE: But why?
Excellent summary. Tongue
Don't forget what the Witch of Endor said to Saul, (only the witch could see the "shade"), when he asked what she saw in conjuring up Samuel's "shade" for Saul.
Says she, "I saw a DIVINE being".
Sorta throws a whole new light on what "divinity" actually meant to them.
Equal to Yahweh ? Nope.
In "Good and Evil", the Jewish philosopher/Talmud scholar Martin Buber, (see part II), (who BTW Catholics just LOVE to quote from his "I and Thou", but NEVER this one)
forever puts the lie to any "salvation from sin" BS. If you haven't read it, you really should. Sacrifices for Hebrew were "cosmic reconcilliation" (attempts), humans to their god. A "repair" in a "ruptured" relationship. In Paulianity, it get changed to "personal purification" (by sacrifice), and where did he get it ?
Zoroastrianism/Mithraism
And where was Paul/Saul from ?
Tarsus.
And what was the Greek center of Mithraism ?
Tarsus
Bingo
You get the nickel.

Insufferable know-it-all.Einstein
Those who were seen dancing were thought to be insane by those who could not hear the music - Friedrich Nietzsche
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
28-03-2013, 12:12 AM (This post was last modified: 06-04-2013 12:32 AM by Doctor X.)
RE: But why?
******

Those who administer and moderate in order to exercise personal agenda merely feed into the negative stereotype of Atheism
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
28-03-2013, 12:32 AM
RE: But why?
(28-03-2013 12:12 AM)Doctor X Wrote:  
(27-03-2013 11:56 PM)Bucky Ball Wrote:  Says she, "I saw a DIVINE being".
Sorta throws a whole new light on what "divinity" actually meant to them.

And uses the word: אלהים.

Was Paul influence by Mithracism? He may have certainly had to confront it as he had a number of other competing movements including competing movements from different christianities. However, he does really not need Mithracism--he has the "Paschal Lamb" which he equates Junior with in 1 Cor 5:6-8. In his very interesting work, Levenson explores this and notes:

Quote:Given the threefold equation of the paschal lamb, the beloved son, and Jesus that we found lurking beneath the surface of the Gospel of John, we should not be surprised to find Paul identifying his Christ not only with the passover offering but also with Isaac, the beloved son par excellence of the Hebrew Bible (the only Bible Paul knew). Indeed, the boldness with which Paul projects Jesus (and the Church) into the story of Abraham is a midrashic tour de force that has affected Jewish-Christian relations every since (Levenson, 210).

--J.D.

Reference:

Levenson JD. The Death and Resurrection of the Beloved Son: The Transformation of Child Sacrifice in Judaism and Christianity. New Haven: Yale University Press, 1993.

I know I need to read that. Does he talk about ''Gehenna" in it ? The constantly burning trash dump outside Jerusalem (where the "fires of hell" came from), and which was at one point the place where the sacrificed kids were burned.

Insufferable know-it-all.Einstein
Those who were seen dancing were thought to be insane by those who could not hear the music - Friedrich Nietzsche
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
28-03-2013, 12:46 AM
 
RE: But why?
(27-03-2013 10:48 PM)Thoughtful Nate Wrote:  Am I missing something here, or does none of this make sense?

I'm pretty sure you don't want a bunch of atheists' opinion on this topic only, so I'll give you mine.

The Cro-Magnon Christians cannot defend atonement. It makes no sense whatsoever and is contradictory on so many levels, it's amazing anyone even believes it. I wrote an article about it here.

The fact is the sacrifice wasn't to God; it was from God. We didn't have to kill Jesus on the cross--but we did. Now God is pissed, and rightly so. It's a George Bush kind-of-thing after 9/11, "You're either with us or against us." We killed Jesus. Now God is like, you're either with Christ or against him--and the only way you can prove you're with him is to consume the substance of Christ, thus killing off your human spirit and being reborn into the spirit of Christ.

If you won't put your faith in Christ that way--then you nailed him to the cross. It's perfect black and white.

The remission of sins thing through the blood of Christ is part of the Last Supper teaching, which has nothing to do with Jesus being crucified.

All of this is plainly obvious when reading the Gospels, even the ancient Gospels (as compared to the VGJC). But Ancient Christians mix Judaism in; they mix Old Testament and New Testament, and they end up with a contradictory mess.

Seriously, you won't figure it out, and they can't explain it to you. It literally makes no sense.
Quote this message in a reply
28-03-2013, 12:51 AM (This post was last modified: 28-03-2013 12:59 AM by Bucky Ball.)
RE: But why?
(28-03-2013 12:46 AM)Egor Wrote:  
(27-03-2013 10:48 PM)Thoughtful Nate Wrote:  Am I missing something here, or does none of this make sense?

I'm pretty sure you don't want a bunch of atheists' opinion on this topic only, so I'll give you mine.

The Cro-Magnon Christians cannot defend atonement. It makes no sense whatsoever and is contradictory on so many levels, it's amazing anyone even believes it. I wrote an article about it here.

The fact is the sacrifice wasn't to God; it was from God. We didn't have to kill Jesus on the cross--but we did. Now God is pissed, and rightly so. It's a George Bush kind-of-thing after 9/11, "You're either with us or against us." We killed Jesus. Now God is like, you're either with Christ or against him--and the only way you can prove you're with him is to consume the substance of Christ, thus killing off your human spirit and being reborn into the spirit of Christ.

If you won't put your faith in Christ that way--then you nailed him to the cross. It's perfect black and white.

The remission of sins thing through the blood of Christ is part of the Last Supper teaching, which has nothing to do with Jesus being crucified.

All of this is plainly obvious when reading the Gospels, even the ancient Gospels (as compared to the VGJC). But Ancient Christians mix Judaism in; they mix Old Testament and New Testament, and they end up with a contradictory mess.

Seriously, you won't figure it out, and they can't explain it to you. It literally makes no sense.

LOL.
I needed a good laugh.
Please never stop your comedy routines.
You remain THE best ad for atheism on the planet.
I used to think you were serious. Then I realized you are all just "tongue in cheek" You really have pulled off your gigantic joke pretty well.
Thumbsup

Insufferable know-it-all.Einstein
Those who were seen dancing were thought to be insane by those who could not hear the music - Friedrich Nietzsche
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Bucky Ball's post
28-03-2013, 01:13 AM
RE: But why?
(27-03-2013 10:48 PM)Thoughtful Nate Wrote:  ...
Am I missing something here, or does none of this make sense?

It makes perfect sense but only in the context of chocolate and easter bunnies.


[Image: chocolate-bunny.jpg]

Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes DLJ's post
28-03-2013, 02:26 AM (This post was last modified: 06-04-2013 12:33 AM by Doctor X.)
RE: But why?
******

Those who administer and moderate in order to exercise personal agenda merely feed into the negative stereotype of Atheism
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like Doctor X's post
Post Reply
Forum Jump: