Jesus Christ, A Pointless Sacrifice
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
11-06-2015, 08:48 AM
RE: Jesus Christ, A Pointless Sacrifice
(10-06-2015 09:55 PM)Mark Fulton Wrote:  
(10-06-2015 08:16 PM)Tonechaser77 Wrote:  It is interesting. Extremely. Paul's so called conversion comes purely from his hallucination on the road to Damascus. The reader assumes that Jesus' entire gospel was revealed to him there or shortly thereafter. (I have my own questions about this and they involve mind altering drugs.) Think about this:

--The gospels come decades later and are the first we hear about an earthly Jesus.

--The gospels appear to be unrestrainedly fictitious in their content and even in structure.

--Every single story has discernible allegorical and propogandistic content and intent.

--Even the first Mark looks like meta-parable where outsiders are told some type of story while the insiders are told what it really means.

Everything is either not independent or fabricated like the Infancy gospels, forged epistles and even Jesus letter to Abgar.

If you truly want to get in depth with some fascinating readings that in the very least should cause you to take a step back and look at why you believe what you believe I would suggest the following books:

1) Stephen Law - Evidence, Miracles and the Existence of Jesus
2.) Robert M. Price - The Christ myth Theory and it's Problems
3.) Early Dougherty - The Jesus Puzzle
4.) Randall Helms - Gospel Fictions
5.) Richard Carrier - On the Historicity of Jesus, why we may have reason to doubt

Read those and then come back to us with logical reasons how these cannot be taken seriously. In the very least we have a mesmerizing amount of evidence to cause us to doubt and in my very humble and unworthy opinion, reason to not believe at all. Confused

I agree with all of this. But from Q's perspective, you're just a goddamn atheist... so why would he read any books you recommend? He doesn't even read what us atheists post, or if he does he just skims over it without digesting anything.

Re "Paul's so called conversion comes purely from his hallucination on the road to Damascus."

I agree Paul's ideas are very much a product of his own delusions. Yet Paul knew nothing of a "road to Damascus" appearance of a Jeebus.... because he never mentions it in any of his own letters. The road to Demascus story is a second century fiction invented by the author of Acts... one designed to create some sort of tangible connection between Jeebus and Paul's theology.

Mark, I learn something new every day! That's why I keep hanging out here. Thumbsup

Question though: Aren't there multiple stories of Paul's hallucination and both have differing elements intertwined? I thought I had come across that statement once but it was in passing and I was too busy to look for it myself.

**Crickets** -- God
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Tonechaser77's post
11-06-2015, 10:03 AM
RE: Jesus Christ, A Pointless Sacrifice
All,

Here's the deal. JDEP absolutely touches on the authorship of the rest of the OT:

* OT prophets reprove people for not following MOSAIC LAW. If YOU read the sources you quote so confidently before accusing me, you'd realize the impossibility of prophets writing and quoting Mosaic Law before it was written...

* JDEP is invalidated by archaeological findings, things like construction of buildings and doors as they are described... archaeology did not exist until the modern era and the descriptions throughout the OT invalidate later post-exilic dating for the Penteteuch...

* JDEP OF COURSE touches non-Penteteuch OT, because BB and Mark have apparently forgotten that language forms and terms for YHVH, etc. that pepper the Penteteuch and are used to theorize JDEP in the first place are also in the prophets and Psalms, etc. Thankfully for you, just because the Google pages you visited forgot this salient fact, I'm able to remind you.

* My original points stand. Including one which Mark brought up yet again (Mark, try some gingko biloba, brother!). THANK YOU for saying the gospels are circa post-70 AD. Brilliant! Now address my point--don't you think the young men who were Jesus's disciples could remember the miracles and things they saw for forty years before they were written? OF COURSE, last week, Mark you claimed the gospels were dated to the 2nd century, at least until I quoted Clement I and others who quoted them in the 1st century...

Some of you think (so you can push away the Lord, I'm thinking) that I'm as crazy as a goony bird... at least I'm consistent in what I preach! BB and Mark and etc. change their stance weekly or however it suits their fancy. To be very, very honest, they change their stances so often I wonder if they do something mind-altering before they post to respond to my posts...

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
11-06-2015, 10:32 AM
RE: Jesus Christ, A Pointless Sacrifice
(11-06-2015 10:03 AM)The Q Continuum Wrote:  All,

Here's the deal. JDEP absolutely touches on the authorship of the rest of the OT:

* OT prophets reprove people for not following MOSAIC LAW. If YOU read the sources you quote so confidently before accusing me, you'd realize the impossibility of prophets writing and quoting Mosaic Law before it was written...

* JDEP is invalidated by archaeological findings, things like construction of buildings and doors as they are described... archaeology did not exist until the modern era and the descriptions throughout the OT invalidate later post-exilic dating for the Penteteuch...

* JDEP OF COURSE touches non-Penteteuch OT, because BB and Mark have apparently forgotten that language forms and terms for YHVH, etc. that pepper the Penteteuch and are used to theorize JDEP in the first place are also in the prophets and Psalms, etc. Thankfully for you, just because the Google pages you visited forgot this salient fact, I'm able to remind you.

* My original points stand. Including one which Mark brought up yet again (Mark, try some gingko biloba, brother!). THANK YOU for saying the gospels are circa post-70 AD. Brilliant! Now address my point--don't you think the young men who were Jesus's disciples could remember the miracles and things they saw for forty years before they were written? OF COURSE, last week, Mark you claimed the gospels were dated to the 2nd century, at least until I quoted Clement I and others who quoted them in the 1st century...

Some of you think (so you can push away the Lord, I'm thinking) that I'm as crazy as a goony bird... at least I'm consistent in what I preach! BB and Mark and etc. change their stance weekly or however it suits their fancy. To be very, very honest, they change their stances so often I wonder if they do something mind-altering before they post to respond to my posts...

Stop.

Hammer time?
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 3 users Like Fodder_From_The_Truth's post
11-06-2015, 10:47 AM (This post was last modified: 11-06-2015 11:07 AM by Grasshopper.)
RE: Jesus Christ, A Pointless Sacrifice
(11-06-2015 08:48 AM)Tonechaser77 Wrote:  
(10-06-2015 09:55 PM)Mark Fulton Wrote:  I agree with all of this. But from Q's perspective, you're just a goddamn atheist... so why would he read any books you recommend? He doesn't even read what us atheists post, or if he does he just skims over it without digesting anything.

Re "Paul's so called conversion comes purely from his hallucination on the road to Damascus."

I agree Paul's ideas are very much a product of his own delusions. Yet Paul knew nothing of a "road to Damascus" appearance of a Jeebus.... because he never mentions it in any of his own letters. The road to Demascus story is a second century fiction invented by the author of Acts... one designed to create some sort of tangible connection between Jeebus and Paul's theology.

Mark, I learn something new every day! That's why I keep hanging out here. Thumbsup

Question though: Aren't there multiple stories of Paul's hallucination and both have differing elements intertwined? I thought I had come across that statement once but it was in passing and I was too busy to look for it myself.

There are three separate accounts of Paul's conversion in the book of Acts (the major two are in chapters 9 and 22), and they differ in some of the details -- such as whether or not his companions also saw the light and/or heard the voice.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Grasshopper's post
11-06-2015, 12:10 PM (This post was last modified: 11-06-2015 05:29 PM by Bucky Ball.)
RE: Jesus Christ, A Pointless Sacrifice
(11-06-2015 10:03 AM)The Q Continuum Wrote:  All,

Here's the deal. JDEP absolutely touches on the authorship of the rest of the OT:

* OT prophets reprove people for not following MOSAIC LAW. If YOU read the sources you quote so confidently before accusing me, you'd realize the impossibility of prophets writing and quoting Mosaic Law before it was written...

* JDEP is invalidated by archaeological findings, things like construction of buildings and doors as they are described... archaeology did not exist until the modern era and the descriptions throughout the OT invalidate later post-exilic dating for the Penteteuch...

* JDEP OF COURSE touches non-Penteteuch OT, because BB and Mark have apparently forgotten that language forms and terms for YHVH, etc. that pepper the Penteteuch and are used to theorize JDEP in the first place are also in the prophets and Psalms, etc. Thankfully for you, just because the Google pages you visited forgot this salient fact, I'm able to remind you.

* My original points stand. Including one which Mark brought up yet again (Mark, try some gingko biloba, brother!). THANK YOU for saying the gospels are circa post-70 AD. Brilliant! Now address my point--don't you think the young men who were Jesus's disciples could remember the miracles and things they saw for forty years before they were written? OF COURSE, last week, Mark you claimed the gospels were dated to the 2nd century, at least until I quoted Clement I and others who quoted them in the 1st century...

Some of you think (so you can push away the Lord, I'm thinking) that I'm as crazy as a goony bird... at least I'm consistent in what I preach! BB and Mark and etc. change their stance weekly or however it suits their fancy. To be very, very honest, they change their stances so often I wonder if they do something mind-altering before they post to respond to my posts...

Nope. That's NOT "the deal". Not at ALL. Sorry. You're telling LIES, Q. As per your usual ignorant stuff, learned from Fundie pamphlets.

1. You have not demonstrated ONCE when the "OT Prophets" were written, and until you do, your point falls on its ass. Too bad. If the Mosaic Law could not be quoted as it wasn't written, then they were BOTH cooked up LATER, dumb-ass. It could have existed as various cultural traditions, or even "named" as such later. Since you have not a shred of experience with academic pursuits, anything you have to say is simply dismissed here as ignoraance.

2. Descriptions in the OT have been demonstrated to be FALSE. Someone saying something in the OT does not make it true, and countless thousands of things have been proven FALSE in the OT (except to Fundie FOOLS who assume just because it's in the OT it's "true"). Archaeology deals with the past. As such it has debunked MANY MANY claims in the OT, which have been proven to be completely absolutely false. Of course this fact is VERY DISTURBING to someone who has the childish view that the literature later assembled into the canon is the "word of a god". Fundies need to take a class or two. This one never took even one.

3. You need not remind anyone of anything. You know nothing about anything, and you have proven it over and over and over. Stating the Documentary Hypothesis "touches" something is a meaningless phrase, and you have provided NOT A SHRED of academic support for this additional crap. You have not read ONE thing that anyone here suggested you read, and cannot discuss even ONE book on any relevant topic here.

4. You have no points about anything that "stand" as you have NEVER referenced even ONE with academic references.
Your assertions have as much value as "The moon is made of green cheese". Making assertions is proof of NOTHING. That's all you seem to be able to do.

5. There is no "lord" to "push away". You have no clue what the fuck you're even talking about here. I do get that is the only infantile way you people have to try to rationalize the fact that most people don't buy into your garbage, and you do need to explain that to your simplistic childish, uneducated minds. Fundamentalism is really a mental disorder, not a religious stance.

6. By all means, keep up this comedy act, Fool-For-Jebus. You are a complete and utter joke. Maybe some day you'll actually read a book about your Babble and have something intelligent to say about it. No one will hold their breath. Forcing the "facts" to fit your belief system must be a very difficult thing to try to maintain. It's a waste of time. Some of the most prominent archaeologists who have debunked the OT are actually Jews in Israel who have everything to lose doing this. At least they have some intellectual honesty. It's a trait you lack, Q.

http://freethought.mbdojo.com/archeology.html
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2013/12/24...al-History
"• Archaeological evidence contradicts all four stories that make up the foundations of the Bible; and
• the Bible was written, re-written, edited and redacted for the purposes of propaganda."


Drinking Beverage

Weeping

Tongue

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
[+] 3 users Like Bucky Ball's post
11-06-2015, 04:49 PM
RE: Jesus Christ, A Pointless Sacrifice
(11-06-2015 12:10 PM)Bucky Ball Wrote:  
(11-06-2015 10:03 AM)The Q Continuum Wrote:  All,

Here's the deal. JDEP absolutely touches on the authorship of the rest of the OT:

* OT prophets reprove people for not following MOSAIC LAW. If YOU read the sources you quote so confidently before accusing me, you'd realize the impossibility of prophets writing and quoting Mosaic Law before it was written...

* JDEP is invalidated by archaeological findings, things like construction of buildings and doors as they are described... archaeology did not exist until the modern era and the descriptions throughout the OT invalidate later post-exilic dating for the Penteteuch...

* JDEP OF COURSE touches non-Penteteuch OT, because BB and Mark have apparently forgotten that language forms and terms for YHVH, etc. that pepper the Penteteuch and are used to theorize JDEP in the first place are also in the prophets and Psalms, etc. Thankfully for you, just because the Google pages you visited forgot this salient fact, I'm able to remind you.

* My original points stand. Including one which Mark brought up yet again (Mark, try some gingko biloba, brother!). THANK YOU for saying the gospels are circa post-70 AD. Brilliant! Now address my point--don't you think the young men who were Jesus's disciples could remember the miracles and things they saw for forty years before they were written? OF COURSE, last week, Mark you claimed the gospels were dated to the 2nd century, at least until I quoted Clement I and others who quoted them in the 1st century...

Some of you think (so you can push away the Lord, I'm thinking) that I'm as crazy as a goony bird... at least I'm consistent in what I preach! BB and Mark and etc. change their stance weekly or however it suits their fancy. To be very, very honest, they change their stances so often I wonder if they do something mind-altering before they post to respond to my posts...

Nope. That's NOT "the deal". Not at ALL. Sorry. You're telling LIES, Q. As per your usual ignorant stuff, learned from Fundie pamphlets.

1. You have not demonstrated ONCE when the "OT Prophets" were written, and until you do, your point falls on its ass. Too bad. If the Mosaic Law could not be quoted as it wasn't written, then they were BOTH cooked up LATER, dumb-ass. It could have existed as various cultural traditions, or even "named" as such later. Since you have not a shred of experience with academic pursuits, anything you have to say is simply dismissed here as ignoraance.

2. Descriptions in the OT has been demostrated to be FALSE. Someone sayinig something in the OT does not make it true, and countless thousansds of things have been proven FALSE in the OT (except to Fundie FOOLS who assume just because it's in the OT it's "true"). Archaeology deals with the past. As such it has debunked MANY MANY claims in the OT, which have been proven to be completely absolutely false. Of course this fact is VERY DISTURBING to someone who has the childish view that the literature later assembled into the canon is the "word of a god". Fundies need to take a class or two. This one never took even one.

3. You need not remind anyone of anything. You know nothing about anything, and you have proven it over and over and over. Stating the Documentary Hypothesis "touches" something is a meaningless phrase, and you have provided NOT A SHRED of academic support for this additional crap. You have not read ONE thing that anyone here suggested you read, and cannot discuss even ONE book on any relevant topic here.

4. You have no points about anything that "stand" as you have NEVER referenced even ONE with academic references.
Your assertions have as much value as "The moon is made of green cheese". Making assertions is proof of NOTHING. That's all you seem to be able to do.

5. There is no "lord" to "push away". You have no clue what the fuck you're even talking about here. I do get that is the only infantile way you people have to try to rationalize the fact that most people don't buy into your garbage, and you do need to explain that to your simplistic childish, uneducated minds. Fundamentalism is really a mental disorder, not a relgious stance.

6. By all means, keep up this comedy act, Fool-For-Jebus. You are a complete and utter joke. Maybe some day you'll actually read a book about your Babble and have something intelligent to say about it. No one will hold their breath. Forcing the "facts" to fit your belief system must be a very difficult thing to try to maintain. It's a waste of time. Some of the most prominent archaeologists who have debunked the OT are actally Jews in Israel who have everything to lose doing this. At least they have some intellectual honesty. It's a trait you lack, Q.

http://freethought.mbdojo.com/archeology.html
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2013/12/24...al-History
"• Archaeological evidence contradicts all four stories that make up the foundations of the Bible; and
• the Bible was written, re-written, edited and redacted for the purposes of propaganda."


Drinking Beverage

Weeping

Tongue

"If the Mosaic Law could not be quoted as it wasn't written, then they were BOTH cooked up LATER, dumb-ass."

Q, Just thought I'd post that again for your benefit
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
11-06-2015, 04:56 PM
RE: Jesus Christ, A Pointless Sacrifice
(11-06-2015 10:03 AM)The Q Continuum Wrote:  All,

Here's the deal. JDEP absolutely touches on the authorship of the rest of the OT:

* OT prophets reprove people for not following MOSAIC LAW. If YOU read the sources you quote so confidently before accusing me, you'd realize the impossibility of prophets writing and quoting Mosaic Law before it was written...

* JDEP is invalidated by archaeological findings, things like construction of buildings and doors as they are described... archaeology did not exist until the modern era and the descriptions throughout the OT invalidate later post-exilic dating for the Penteteuch...

* JDEP OF COURSE touches non-Penteteuch OT, because BB and Mark have apparently forgotten that language forms and terms for YHVH, etc. that pepper the Penteteuch and are used to theorize JDEP in the first place are also in the prophets and Psalms, etc. Thankfully for you, just because the Google pages you visited forgot this salient fact, I'm able to remind you.

* My original points stand. Including one which Mark brought up yet again (Mark, try some gingko biloba, brother!). THANK YOU for saying the gospels are circa post-70 AD. Brilliant! Now address my point--don't you think the young men who were Jesus's disciples could remember the miracles and things they saw for forty years before they were written? OF COURSE, last week, Mark you claimed the gospels were dated to the 2nd century, at least until I quoted Clement I and others who quoted them in the 1st century...

Some of you think (so you can push away the Lord, I'm thinking) that I'm as crazy as a goony bird... at least I'm consistent in what I preach! BB and Mark and etc. change their stance weekly or however it suits their fancy. To be very, very honest, they change their stances so often I wonder if they do something mind-altering before they post to respond to my posts...

"Question: "What is the JEDP Theory?"

Answer: In brief, the JEDP theory states that the first five books of the Bible, Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers, and Deuteronomy, were not written entirely by Moses, who died in the 1400's B.C., but also by different authors/compliers after Moses. The theory is based on the fact that different names for God are used in different portions of the Pentateuch, and there are detectable differences in linguistic style. The letters of the JEDP theory stand for the four supposed authors: the author who uses Jehovah for God’s name, the author who uses Elohim for God’s name, the author of Deuteronomy, and the priestly author of Leviticus. The JEDP theory goes on to state that the different portions of the Pentateuch were likely compiled in the 4th Century B.C., possibly by Ezra.

Read more: http://www.gotquestions.org/JEDP-theory....z3cnT6mlZR"

So....the theory is all about the pentateuch....not other books in the OT...what are you babbling on about?
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
11-06-2015, 05:10 PM
RE: Jesus Christ, A Pointless Sacrifice
(11-06-2015 10:03 AM)The Q Continuum Wrote:  All,

Here's the deal. JDEP absolutely touches on the authorship of the rest of the OT:

* OT prophets reprove people for not following MOSAIC LAW. If YOU read the sources you quote so confidently before accusing me, you'd realize the impossibility of prophets writing and quoting Mosaic Law before it was written...

* JDEP is invalidated by archaeological findings, things like construction of buildings and doors as they are described... archaeology did not exist until the modern era and the descriptions throughout the OT invalidate later post-exilic dating for the Penteteuch...

* JDEP OF COURSE touches non-Penteteuch OT, because BB and Mark have apparently forgotten that language forms and terms for YHVH, etc. that pepper the Penteteuch and are used to theorize JDEP in the first place are also in the prophets and Psalms, etc. Thankfully for you, just because the Google pages you visited forgot this salient fact, I'm able to remind you.

* My original points stand. Including one which Mark brought up yet again (Mark, try some gingko biloba, brother!). THANK YOU for saying the gospels are circa post-70 AD. Brilliant! Now address my point--don't you think the young men who were Jesus's disciples could remember the miracles and things they saw for forty years before they were written? OF COURSE, last week, Mark you claimed the gospels were dated to the 2nd century, at least until I quoted Clement I and others who quoted them in the 1st century...

Some of you think (so you can push away the Lord, I'm thinking) that I'm as crazy as a goony bird... at least I'm consistent in what I preach! BB and Mark and etc. change their stance weekly or however it suits their fancy. To be very, very honest, they change their stances so often I wonder if they do something mind-altering before they post to respond to my posts...

"OF COURSE, last week, Mark you claimed the gospels were dated to the 2nd century"

Quote me please.

"To be very, very honest, they change their stances so often..."

show me where by quoting me.

"so you can push away the Lord, I'm thinking"

Ha ha. So we can add delusions of grandeur to your list of character faults.
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
11-06-2015, 05:20 PM (This post was last modified: 12-06-2015 01:29 AM by Mark Fulton.)
RE: Jesus Christ, A Pointless Sacrifice
(11-06-2015 10:03 AM)The Q Continuum Wrote:  All,

Here's the deal. JDEP absolutely touches on the authorship of the rest of the OT:

* OT prophets reprove people for not following MOSAIC LAW. If YOU read the sources you quote so confidently before accusing me, you'd realize the impossibility of prophets writing and quoting Mosaic Law before it was written...

* JDEP is invalidated by archaeological findings, things like construction of buildings and doors as they are described... archaeology did not exist until the modern era and the descriptions throughout the OT invalidate later post-exilic dating for the Penteteuch...

* JDEP OF COURSE touches non-Penteteuch OT, because BB and Mark have apparently forgotten that language forms and terms for YHVH, etc. that pepper the Penteteuch and are used to theorize JDEP in the first place are also in the prophets and Psalms, etc. Thankfully for you, just because the Google pages you visited forgot this salient fact, I'm able to remind you.

* My original points stand. Including one which Mark brought up yet again (Mark, try some gingko biloba, brother!). THANK YOU for saying the gospels are circa post-70 AD. Brilliant! Now address my point--don't you think the young men who were Jesus's disciples could remember the miracles and things they saw for forty years before they were written? OF COURSE, last week, Mark you claimed the gospels were dated to the 2nd century, at least until I quoted Clement I and others who quoted them in the 1st century...

Some of you think (so you can push away the Lord, I'm thinking) that I'm as crazy as a goony bird... at least I'm consistent in what I preach! BB and Mark and etc. change their stance weekly or however it suits their fancy. To be very, very honest, they change their stances so often I wonder if they do something mind-altering before they post to respond to my posts...

"Now address my point--don't you think the young men who were Jesus's disciples could remember the miracles and things they saw for forty years before they were written?"

Are you trying to say that the disciples of Jeebus wrote the gospels? Surely not?

If so, give me some evidence. The (few) quotes from church fathers written 150+ years after the events will not do.
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
11-06-2015, 05:26 PM
RE: Jesus Christ, A Pointless Sacrifice
(16-04-2015 09:56 AM)The Q Continuum Wrote:  
(15-04-2015 05:48 PM)Stevil Wrote:  Many Christians (Catholic especially) state that Jesus could pay for our sin with his death because he was innocent (without sin).
They also claim that us humans inherit the sins of our parents and ancestors going all the way back to original sin by Adam and Eve.
They cite that Jesus was special, living the human life but being able to achieve it without sin, showing us that it could be done.
If we inherit the sins of our parents, all the way back to Adam and Eve then even if no more sin were performed, at the very least we would inherit original sin. Thus we are not free from sin, thus we "deserve" death in the god's eye.
Jesus mother was supposedly Mary, Mary was supposedly human, a descendant of Adam and Eve. Jesus therefore was born with the stain of original sin. If somehow he didn't have that, then he was hardly human and could not attest to achieving a sinless human life.

Going by the sin = destined for death theme, if Jesus was free from sin then he was free from death. Supposedly if not put to death he would have lingered longer than the rest of us, possibly be a 2,000 year old man walking around and "preaching" on street corners. (I swear I've seen him).
But if he were human then he would have eventually died even if he weren't crucified. He would have died of some disease, like polio, leporacy, gonorrhea, cancer or if he were very lucky he would have died of old age.
If however his state of being "sin free" meant that he couldn't die this would mean that he was immune to disease, even immune to old age or even accidents etc. He could have fallen off a 100 M cliff and walked away, he could have had a sword pierce his side and walked away, he could have been nailed to a cross and walked away (once the nails were pulled out).
So how could he have died at the hands of the Romans?
Jesus could have sacrificed himself by intentionally sinning as this would have been akin to giving away his "cannot die/get out of jail free" card.
But then he would have been a sinner like the rest of us and there would have been nothing remarkable about his death.
According to the myth, Jesus died as payment for our sins. So how was this arrangement made? Who were the parties involved? It certainly wasn't me or anyone who is alive today as we weren't around when this deal was allegedly struck.
So it would have to have been a private arrangement between the god and Jesus. For this arrangement to have been made, the god was in the power seat, the god had the power to enforce death or to grant clemency. Apparently the god demanded death (and executed the punishment) of the sinner as payment from the person committing or inheriting sin from ancestors. Kings of old did this sort of thing, sentenced people to death, presumably as a show of power to disincentive would-be rebellious behavior. Or merely as a proud show of power. Kings, being mortal and hence in danger of rebellion have a perceived need to squash any rebellious thoughts from the people that might present a danger to the King. An all powerful immortal god on the other hand has no dangers, so could only be driven in this blood lust requirement for death by a proud desire to show off his power.
It is a bit ridiculous to consider that if the god and Jesus are one and the same, that the god made a deal with himself to "sacrifice" himself to appease himself of his demanded blood sacrifice for transgressions by humans against his own demands on how people are to behave.
It fails as a show of power, I mean "Don't sin otherwise I will kill myself on your behalf and then I will come back from being dead and forgive you" isn't really a knee trembling threat. It's more of a face palming, head scratching hysterical crazy laughter inspiring statement.
"Really? OK, you do that to yourself god, I don't really care, knock yourself out buddy, whatever get's you off, you know."
It's not really much of a sacrifice if he comes back, and what does the god gain from the whole thing? What value does a god get from a human sacrifice? Its madness to demand sacrifice if you gain nothing from it.

But still, the whole crucification was unimportant. If Jesus was "sacrificed" in this unholy deal then all that would be needed would be to take away Jesus death immunity card. Jesus would then have to traverse a mortal human life which would have given him a vastly different human experience. He would now be susceptible to disease and injury. His life faced with these inevitabilities would have been vastly more interesting and fruitful than a simple crucification. The crucification was just one of the may ways that humans at the time died. Unremarkable.
Was there any narrative in the bible to suggest Jesus made such a deal with himself (I mean, god)?
Was there any narrative in the bible to suggest Jesus was immortal prior to the deal but mortal afterwards?
Now, if Jesus "sacrifice" was accepted as payment for our sins and hence taken away the need for death, one has to ask, why since then do humans continue to die?

Good points all. My responses to you:

1. I hope I've made it clear that original sin first appeared circa three centuries after Jesus. The Bible teaches the opposite in both testaments... the OT says, "No longer will it be said the son pays for the father's sins..."

2. You have some good ideas there but wouldn't most Christians not talk about kingship appeasement and deals and so forth, but love? The love of Christ for us?

Quote:Now, if Jesus "sacrifice" was accepted as payment for our sins and hence taken away the need for death, one has to ask, why since then do humans continue to die?

3. Great question. The answer is "because there are two deaths (separations)". All inherit Adam's mortal nature since the Fall of Eden. However, all are also judged after death to be eternally separated unless they have taken refuge in Christ. Two deaths.

So you are saying Jehovah set up two games all pre-set. (cos He knows it all)
Game one- till Jesus Mk 2, we have the Adam's familyShocking just trying to rationalize their fall for a few thousand years, killing all the opposition tribes etc
then

in the Jesus Mk 11 version Jesus self destructs to glorify Dad and keep the abominable game in motion till it self destructs and most of us end up slotted in for Eternal Torture.........................................What next?..........HAPPY DAYS!
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: