Jesus Christ, A Pointless Sacrifice
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
08-06-2015, 07:03 PM
RE: Jesus Christ, A Pointless Sacrifice
The objections to the idea of Jesus being sacrificed only have validity if one assumes Pauline Trinitarianism. Of course it's absurd for God to sacrifice Himself to Himself. But there's a more rational reading of the scriptures: The Marcionites noted the incompatibility of the God of the OT and the God of the NT and reached the conclusion that they are different Gods. In Marcionite theology, the God of the OT created the material world and (as stated in the OT) is ruthless and capricious. But the God of the NT (again, according to the Marcionites) is the God who sent Jesus Christ (to save us from the evil God of the OT). In this theology, Jesus didn't suffer at all. It was all an illusion to trick the creator God into releasing Mankind from original sin. The real Jesus was laughing on the sidelines as an illusion was crucified.

Of course it's all bullshit. Jesus was executed for attempting to overthrow Roman rule. The same fate that awaits all unsuccessful revolutionaries. But Paul decided to make a religion out of it and was clever enough to pull it off. Which is why people who call themselves Christians so seldom follow any of the teachings of Jesus. Paul hit on a foolproof enticement: To be a Christian you didn't have to follow any of those inconvenient rules (like turning the other cheek or giving all your stuff to the poor) you only had to "believe" that Jesus was God.

And if you're stupid enough to believe all that sacrifice stuff, then you're probably also stupid enough to give money to the church. I think the church makes the story stupid on purpose: They don't want smart people in their religion because smart people won't give their money to a bunch of fat, lazy priests. They only want people stupid enough to give money, so they make the story stupid on purpose. Thus we have the Trinity and the Resurrection, and the sacrifice of Jesus for "our" sins.

"El mar se mide por olas,
el cielo por alas,
nosotros por lágrimas."
-- Jaime Sabines
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 8 users Like daniel1948's post
09-06-2015, 09:08 AM
RE: Jesus Christ, A Pointless Sacrifice
There's no evidence one of the many wandering preachers (Jesus) tried to "overthrow Roman rule". Rome was an overwhelming occupying power. What there may be evidence for, is that he was a small brief annoyance to the civil order of Jerusalem and Jewish priests whose economic position was entirely based on the temple economy, and the system of "ritual festivals" which was their main income source. It (like always) was all about money.

Insufferable know-it-all.Einstein God has a plan for us. Please stop screwing it up with your prayers.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
09-06-2015, 09:40 AM
RE: Jesus Christ, A Pointless Sacrifice
(08-06-2015 10:40 AM)Bucky Ball Wrote:  
(08-06-2015 10:01 AM)The Q Continuum Wrote:  Jesus resurrected in bodily, not metaphorical or "spiritual" form.

My information comes from both the Bible and what I know of orthodoxy, practice, law, archaeology, etc. outside the Bible.

The Bible is the inspired Word of God in its original manuscripts. Fortunately, we can read direct Greek and Hebrew to English Bibles from manuscripts that we have many reasons to believe are direct, authentic, accurate copies of the originals, if not the originals themselves. We may have some of the original texts!

Your claims are worth no more than someone claiming "the moon is made of green cheese". There is no evidence that Jesus resurrected bodily, either in the Bible or outside it. In light of the other exaggerated and allegorical "events" recounted in the resurrection MYTH, (the 500 other who supposedly rose, the split rocks, and the torn temple curtain, .... all of which we KNOW did not happen) as NOT ONE historian or archaeologist has ever found a shred of evidence for any of it. In fact the Bible says the followers repeatedly did not recognize him when they "saw him". That is not a physical body. You have no "information". At the end of Matthew it says even though (supposedly) "seeing him" they STILL doubted. Either you see a body or you don't. All you have is delusional wishful thinking that you claim is "information". There is no archaeologist that claims to have information about a resurrected Jesus. In fact, in the context of Jewish apocalytic heros, (as Bart Ehrman also explains in his book), "exaltation" (which is NOT physical resurrection), is more than likely what was meant. The Bible is not the "inspired word" of anyone. No one claimed "inspired" for hundreds of years. When Timothy said "all scripture is god breathed" there was no "canon", so he could not have meant your Babble, and that's just more Fundamentalist garbage you accept, which was cooked up, and is essentailly non-historical, and meaningless. Copies of original myths and lies are still lies. There are countless contradictions and errors in the gospels we know about, to say nothing of all the other gospels which were eliminated, and not for HISTORICAL reasons. Original faith texts cooked up many decades after the supposed events are no more reliable that fairy tales. Repeating your drivel does not make it true. And in fact there are Christian scholars with FAR FAR FAR more expertise in their fields than you will ever have, who totally disagree with your Funide nonsense.

In his book "The Better Angels of our Nature, the decline of Violence", Dr. Stephen Pinker, the Evolutionary Neuro-psychologist from Harvard, discusses what actually DOES lead to improvements in human culture. Jesus' ''sacrifice" (if the routine execution of a common trouble-maker could even be said to *be* a "sacrifice") led to no improvements.

Then it is highly fortunate for me that most of your claims are likewise unsubstantiated, hearsay and speculation.

I'm told atheists on forums like TTA are bitter and angry. If you are not, your posts to me will be respectful, insightful and thoughtful. Prove me wrong by your adherence to decent behavior.
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
09-06-2015, 09:41 AM
RE: Jesus Christ, A Pointless Sacrifice
(09-06-2015 09:08 AM)Bucky Ball Wrote:  There's no evidence one of the many wandering preachers (Jesus) tried to "overthrow Roman rule". Rome was an overwhelming occupying power. What there may be evidence for, is that he was a small brief annoyance to the civil order of Jerusalem and Jewish priests whose economic position was entirely based on the temple economy, and the system of "ritual festivals" which was their main income source. It (like always) was all about money.

Um, sure. Or do you think the pantheist Romans got heavily involved in Jewish disputations over the worship of YHVH and Jewish Law?

You get the "Stating The Obvious Award" for this week!

I'm told atheists on forums like TTA are bitter and angry. If you are not, your posts to me will be respectful, insightful and thoughtful. Prove me wrong by your adherence to decent behavior.
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
09-06-2015, 09:45 AM
RE: Jesus Christ, A Pointless Sacrifice
(08-06-2015 07:03 PM)daniel1948 Wrote:  The objections to the idea of Jesus being sacrificed only have validity if one assumes Pauline Trinitarianism. Of course it's absurd for God to sacrifice Himself to Himself. But there's a more rational reading of the scriptures: The Marcionites noted the incompatibility of the God of the OT and the God of the NT and reached the conclusion that they are different Gods. In Marcionite theology, the God of the OT created the material world and (as stated in the OT) is ruthless and capricious. But the God of the NT (again, according to the Marcionites) is the God who sent Jesus Christ (to save us from the evil God of the OT). In this theology, Jesus didn't suffer at all. It was all an illusion to trick the creator God into releasing Mankind from original sin. The real Jesus was laughing on the sidelines as an illusion was crucified.

Of course it's all bullshit. Jesus was executed for attempting to overthrow Roman rule. The same fate that awaits all unsuccessful revolutionaries. But Paul decided to make a religion out of it and was clever enough to pull it off. Which is why people who call themselves Christians so seldom follow any of the teachings of Jesus. Paul hit on a foolproof enticement: To be a Christian you didn't have to follow any of those inconvenient rules (like turning the other cheek or giving all your stuff to the poor) you only had to "believe" that Jesus was God.

And if you're stupid enough to believe all that sacrifice stuff, then you're probably also stupid enough to give money to the church. I think the church makes the story stupid on purpose: They don't want smart people in their religion because smart people won't give their money to a bunch of fat, lazy priests. They only want people stupid enough to give money, so they make the story stupid on purpose. Thus we have the Trinity and the Resurrection, and the sacrifice of Jesus for "our" sins.

I've never subscribed to the different OT/NT god theories. Why? Because in both testaments, God both punishes and rewards, shows mercy to some, judgment to others.

As for God sacrificing Himself:

1. Killing one man seems could only save one man. It would be logical for a much larger sacrifice, of significance.

2. God is in all and fills all. So He'd be sacrificing Himself regardless.

Also, who are the "they" you write of who dumbed down the scriptures to make money? Did you know the Bible was written by 40 authors over a millennium, everyone from kings to priests to prophets to shepherds? I can believe one man, Muhammed, had an agenda. You are making the Bible the greatest conspiracy theory in history.

I'm told atheists on forums like TTA are bitter and angry. If you are not, your posts to me will be respectful, insightful and thoughtful. Prove me wrong by your adherence to decent behavior.
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
09-06-2015, 10:57 AM
RE: Jesus Christ, A Pointless Sacrifice
(09-06-2015 09:45 AM)The Q Continuum Wrote:  
(08-06-2015 07:03 PM)daniel1948 Wrote:  The objections to the idea of Jesus being sacrificed only have validity if one assumes Pauline Trinitarianism. Of course it's absurd for God to sacrifice Himself to Himself. But there's a more rational reading of the scriptures: The Marcionites noted the incompatibility of the God of the OT and the God of the NT and reached the conclusion that they are different Gods. In Marcionite theology, the God of the OT created the material world and (as stated in the OT) is ruthless and capricious. But the God of the NT (again, according to the Marcionites) is the God who sent Jesus Christ (to save us from the evil God of the OT). In this theology, Jesus didn't suffer at all. It was all an illusion to trick the creator God into releasing Mankind from original sin. The real Jesus was laughing on the sidelines as an illusion was crucified.

Of course it's all bullshit. Jesus was executed for attempting to overthrow Roman rule. The same fate that awaits all unsuccessful revolutionaries. But Paul decided to make a religion out of it and was clever enough to pull it off. Which is why people who call themselves Christians so seldom follow any of the teachings of Jesus. Paul hit on a foolproof enticement: To be a Christian you didn't have to follow any of those inconvenient rules (like turning the other cheek or giving all your stuff to the poor) you only had to "believe" that Jesus was God.

And if you're stupid enough to believe all that sacrifice stuff, then you're probably also stupid enough to give money to the church. I think the church makes the story stupid on purpose: They don't want smart people in their religion because smart people won't give their money to a bunch of fat, lazy priests. They only want people stupid enough to give money, so they make the story stupid on purpose. Thus we have the Trinity and the Resurrection, and the sacrifice of Jesus for "our" sins.

I've never subscribed to the different OT/NT god theories. Why? Because in both testaments, God both punishes and rewards, shows mercy to some, judgment to others.

As for God sacrificing Himself:

1. Killing one man seems could only save one man. It would be logical for a much larger sacrifice, of significance.

2. God is in all and fills all. So He'd be sacrificing Himself regardless.

Also, who are the "they" you write of who dumbed down the scriptures to make money? Did you know the Bible was written by 40 authors over a millennium, everyone from kings to priests to prophets to shepherds? I can believe one man, Muhammed, had an agenda. You are making the Bible the greatest conspiracy theory in history.

Actually it was a "set of conspiracies". Most of them politically motivated. The OT was initiated by Judean priests to control the Jews on return from exile. There were far more than "40 authors". In many cases they edited Babylonia myths. You actually know almost nothing about the Bible, as you have demonstrated many many times here.

Re : 2 I see you're a pantheist. Nice.
(Too bad you have yet to offer even one shred of evidence for any god. So basically, you're whistling in the wind here.)

Insufferable know-it-all.Einstein God has a plan for us. Please stop screwing it up with your prayers.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Bucky Ball's post
09-06-2015, 11:28 AM
RE: Jesus Christ, A Pointless Sacrifice
(09-06-2015 09:40 AM)The Q Continuum Wrote:  
(08-06-2015 10:40 AM)Bucky Ball Wrote:  Your claims are worth no more than someone claiming "the moon is made of green cheese". There is no evidence that Jesus resurrected bodily, either in the Bible or outside it. In light of the other exaggerated and allegorical "events" recounted in the resurrection MYTH, (the 500 other who supposedly rose, the split rocks, and the torn temple curtain, .... all of which we KNOW did not happen) as NOT ONE historian or archaeologist has ever found a shred of evidence for any of it. In fact the Bible says the followers repeatedly did not recognize him when they "saw him". That is not a physical body. You have no "information". At the end of Matthew it says even though (supposedly) "seeing him" they STILL doubted. Either you see a body or you don't. All you have is delusional wishful thinking that you claim is "information". There is no archaeologist that claims to have information about a resurrected Jesus. In fact, in the context of Jewish apocalytic heros, (as Bart Ehrman also explains in his book), "exaltation" (which is NOT physical resurrection), is more than likely what was meant. The Bible is not the "inspired word" of anyone. No one claimed "inspired" for hundreds of years. When Timothy said "all scripture is god breathed" there was no "canon", so he could not have meant your Babble, and that's just more Fundamentalist garbage you accept, which was cooked up, and is essentailly non-historical, and meaningless. Copies of original myths and lies are still lies. There are countless contradictions and errors in the gospels we know about, to say nothing of all the other gospels which were eliminated, and not for HISTORICAL reasons. Original faith texts cooked up many decades after the supposed events are no more reliable that fairy tales. Repeating your drivel does not make it true. And in fact there are Christian scholars with FAR FAR FAR more expertise in their fields than you will ever have, who totally disagree with your Funide nonsense.

In his book "The Better Angels of our Nature, the decline of Violence", Dr. Stephen Pinker, the Evolutionary Neuro-psychologist from Harvard, discusses what actually DOES lead to improvements in human culture. Jesus' ''sacrifice" (if the routine execution of a common trouble-maker could even be said to *be* a "sacrifice") led to no improvements.

Then it is highly fortunate for me that most of your claims are likewise unsubstantiated, hearsay and speculation.

In case you failed to notice, you forgot to mention even one of my "unsubstantiated claims". Nice try at comparing your garbage about a resurrected Jebus with anything else. There are no more ridiculous and unsubstantiated claims than Jebus rose from the dead, and that his followers actually meant to claim that he physically rose from the dead.

Insufferable know-it-all.Einstein God has a plan for us. Please stop screwing it up with your prayers.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Bucky Ball's post
09-06-2015, 12:33 PM
RE: Jesus Christ, A Pointless Sacrifice
(08-06-2015 07:03 PM)daniel1948 Wrote:  Of course it's all bullshit. Jesus was executed for attempting to overthrow Roman rule. The same fate that awaits all unsuccessful revolutionaries. But Paul decided to make a religion out of it and was clever enough to pull it off. Which is why people who call themselves Christians so seldom follow any of the teachings of Jesus. Paul hit on a foolproof enticement: To be a Christian you didn't have to follow any of those inconvenient rules (like turning the other cheek or giving all your stuff to the poor) you only had to "believe" that Jesus was God.

I agree it's all bullshit but we can't assume that Paul decided to make a religion out of a story that there was a historical Jesus that was executed for attempting to overthrow Roman rule.

This all occurs right smack dab in the middle of a trend of mythical gods in that age. Romulus, Osiris, Zalmoxis, etc all had several characteristics in common. Namely, 1.) They were all savior gods, 2) They all undergo a passion, 3) they all have stories set in "human history" 4) They are all a son or daughter of a god, 5) They all obtain some sort of victory over death and 6) None of them actually existed. Of course this information is old news and I'm not saying correlation equals causation I'm just saying it deserves a better look.

Along with the trends of the types of outer space gods there were trends of syncretism. Eleusinian and Dionysian cults combined Hellenistic elements with Phoenician. Mithras cults combined Hellenistic elements with Persian. Attis and Cybele cults combined Hellenistic elements with Phygrian. Isis and Osiris combined Hellenistic elements with Egyptian. Christianity combined Hellenistic elements with Jewish trends, etc.

I think these quite possibly set a foundation for Paul's Jesus to be just another trend in these religions.

According to Paul scripture and revelation are the only sources he mentions having for his story. The Jesus he knows and refers to and speaks to is always in space and because of this he never clearly places Jesus on earth or in human history.

1 Cor. 11:23 - For I received from the Lord what I also delivered to you, that the Lord Jesus on the night when he was betrayed took bread, 24 and when he had given thanks, he broke it, and said, “This is my body which is for[b] you. Do this in remembrance of me.” 25 In the same way also the cup, after supper, saying, “This cup is the new covenant in my blood. Do this, as often as you drink it, in remembrance of me.” 26 For as often as you eat this bread and drink the cup, you proclaim the Lord’s death until he comes.

He specifically says he "received" this from the Lord, not from anyone else. This would have to be some sort of hallucination of a "spirit" Jesus. Nothing is said here about this happening to a Jesus on earth.

I Cor. 15: 1-8 - For I delivered to you as of first importance what I also received, that Christ died for our sins in accordance with the scriptures, 4 that he was buried, that he was raised on the third day in accordance with the scriptures, 5 and that he appeared to Cephas, then to the twelve. 6 Then he appeared to more than five hundred brethren at one time, most of whom are still alive, though some have fallen asleep. 7 Then he appeared to James, then to all the apostles. 8 Last of all, as to one untimely born, he appeared also to me.

In this "accordance to scriptures" Jesus is not said to have appeared before his death, but anyone who claims to see him only happens after. Also "accordance to" could mean "we are told by" or "in fulfillment of"

Galatians 1:11-12 - For I would have you know, brethren, that the gospel which was preached by me is not man’s[b] gospel. 12 For I did not receive it from man, nor was I taught it, but it came through a revelation of Jesus Christ.

Again, this "revelation" Paul contends was caused by a spiritual or outer space Jesus.

Now, are there elements in Paul that make more sense if there was a "real" Jesus? There are some, yes, but they are vague and quite debatable.

**Crickets** -- God
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Tonechaser77's post
09-06-2015, 04:48 PM
RE: Jesus Christ, A Pointless Sacrifice
(09-06-2015 12:33 PM)Tonechaser77 Wrote:  
(08-06-2015 07:03 PM)daniel1948 Wrote:  Of course it's all bullshit. Jesus was executed for attempting to overthrow Roman rule. The same fate that awaits all unsuccessful revolutionaries. But Paul decided to make a religion out of it and was clever enough to pull it off. Which is why people who call themselves Christians so seldom follow any of the teachings of Jesus. Paul hit on a foolproof enticement: To be a Christian you didn't have to follow any of those inconvenient rules (like turning the other cheek or giving all your stuff to the poor) you only had to "believe" that Jesus was God.

I agree it's all bullshit but we can't assume that Paul decided to make a religion out of a story that there was a historical Jesus that was executed for attempting to overthrow Roman rule.

This all occurs right smack dab in the middle of a trend of mythical gods in that age. Romulus, Osiris, Zalmoxis, etc all had several characteristics in common. Namely, 1.) They were all savior gods, 2) They all undergo a passion, 3) they all have stories set in "human history" 4) They are all a son or daughter of a god, 5) They all obtain some sort of victory over death and 6) None of them actually existed. Of course this information is old news and I'm not saying correlation equals causation I'm just saying it deserves a better look.

Along with the trends of the types of outer space gods there were trends of syncretism. Eleusinian and Dionysian cults combined Hellenistic elements with Phoenician. Mithras cults combined Hellenistic elements with Persian. Attis and Cybele cults combined Hellenistic elements with Phygrian. Isis and Osiris combined Hellenistic elements with Egyptian. Christianity combined Hellenistic elements with Jewish trends, etc.

I think these quite possibly set a foundation for Paul's Jesus to be just another trend in these religions.

According to Paul scripture and revelation are the only sources he mentions having for his story. The Jesus he knows and refers to and speaks to is always in space and because of this he never clearly places Jesus on earth or in human history.

1 Cor. 11:23 - For I received from the Lord what I also delivered to you, that the Lord Jesus on the night when he was betrayed took bread, 24 and when he had given thanks, he broke it, and said, “This is my body which is for[b] you. Do this in remembrance of me.” 25 In the same way also the cup, after supper, saying, “This cup is the new covenant in my blood. Do this, as often as you drink it, in remembrance of me.” 26 For as often as you eat this bread and drink the cup, you proclaim the Lord’s death until he comes.

He specifically says he "received" this from the Lord, not from anyone else. This would have to be some sort of hallucination of a "spirit" Jesus. Nothing is said here about this happening to a Jesus on earth.

I Cor. 15: 1-8 - For I delivered to you as of first importance what I also received, that Christ died for our sins in accordance with the scriptures, 4 that he was buried, that he was raised on the third day in accordance with the scriptures, 5 and that he appeared to Cephas, then to the twelve. 6 Then he appeared to more than five hundred brethren at one time, most of whom are still alive, though some have fallen asleep. 7 Then he appeared to James, then to all the apostles. 8 Last of all, as to one untimely born, he appeared also to me.

In this "accordance to scriptures" Jesus is not said to have appeared before his death, but anyone who claims to see him only happens after. Also "accordance to" could mean "we are told by" or "in fulfillment of"

Galatians 1:11-12 - For I would have you know, brethren, that the gospel which was preached by me is not man’s[b] gospel. 12 For I did not receive it from man, nor was I taught it, but it came through a revelation of Jesus Christ.

Again, this "revelation" Paul contends was caused by a spiritual or outer space Jesus.

Now, are there elements in Paul that make more sense if there was a "real" Jesus? There are some, yes, but they are vague and quite debatable.

Excellent points.

"According to Paul scripture and revelation are the only sources he mentions having for his story. The Jesus he knows and refers to and speaks to is always in space and because of this he never clearly places Jesus on earth or in human history."

True.

Paul clearly was unaware of the Jeebus of the gospels...because they hadn't been written yet.
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Mark Fulton's post
09-06-2015, 07:28 PM
RE: Jesus Christ, A Pointless Sacrifice
(09-06-2015 04:48 PM)Mark Fulton Wrote:  Excellent points.

"According to Paul scripture and revelation are the only sources he mentions having for his story. The Jesus he knows and refers to and speaks to is always in space and because of this he never clearly places Jesus on earth or in human history."

True.

Paul clearly was unaware of the Jeebus of the gospels...because they hadn't been written yet.

Mark you usually make points much more succinctly (and with a much greater grasp of knowledge I might add) than I do. ...perhaps I will get there one day, good sir! Big Grin Drinking Beverage

**Crickets** -- God
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Tonechaser77's post
Post Reply
Forum Jump: