|
|
|
hatten_jc
New Member
Sweden
44 Posts |
 Posted - 12/17/2001 : 03:34:44 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Hi, Folks,
First of all, I must tell you that I am the son of a Lutheran minister, have read (some of) the Bible, and was baptized and confirmed, so I'm not a stranger to Christian teachings.
Nice to know...
quote:
However, there's one element of doctrine that has always baffled me. Just how, exactly, did the suffering and death of Jesus expiate the sins of all mankind?
Spooky religion where the death of ONE can free a nother.
Its a common team in many old religion where sacrifys of a "virgin" or a hero might give good crops or mild weather by pleasing the gods.
As Cristiany is strongly influes by older religion its not suprising that stupid idees of having OTHERS die to pay god.
quote:
I'm genuinely curious about this, and I'm not trying to ridicule anyone's beliefs. Is it a question of punishment - that Jesus accepted on himself the suffering that God would otherwise have inflicted upon sinners? Sort of a "Tale of Two Cities" sacrifice, with Jesus taking the rap for everybody?
Probly he said do not punishthem they know not what they are doing.. or somthing simlary.
quote:
Or, is it a purely mystical thing, with Jesus sucking in sin like Pandora's box in reverse? Does the idea of original sin play into this - that Adam's sin condemned mankind and Jesus somehow wiped the slate clean? How so? How does the resurrection fit into the picture - was it doctrinally necessary for the redemption of sin, or did it have some other function (such as fulfillment of prophecy, or impressing the disciples, thereby kick-starting the spread of the gospel)?
Personly i find its insulting that the church claim Jesus die for ower sins.
I Dont whant that i dont whant ANY ONE to die for my sins.
TO claim that a man die in order to save is a church way to give US sins so that we behave.
Then the Church offer a revard thanks to Jesus and his death YOU can come to paradise the only thing you have to do is pray to Jesus evry day he die fore ower sins..
ITs al worslees and INSULTING propaganda.
quote:
Does Jesus' self-sacrifice harken back to earlier belief systems that demanded sacrifices of animals (even human ones) to appease the gods? How is the crucifixion different from that kind of sacrifice?
Not mutch as Jew/christian have relation with the Baal that the Carthage ( Phoenician ) worships in that religion sacrifise mainly of children the FIRST BORN where commen.
In the bibel god test one of his folower by demanding that he sacrifise is OWN son and then lets the child live.
Some say this is a description on a change in kulture no more child sacrifice.
Among the Cartagen religioni where Baal and Moloch a SUN god.
There are some that belive that Moloch IS the one that later became the Jewih God and arkeology have chown that the erly Jewish have the same ancestor as Baal worshipers.
( from North Africa ) then the erly Jew whander east towards egypt and then many hundres years later israel.
( seen a TV chow and read a swedish book abouth this quit intresting. Specily as Baal later became Belsebub thanks to a pope and Baal where the BIG god :)
SO the tradition on sacrifis humans have exist in the Jewish/cristian religion
quote:
Do various Christian sects and churches have different interpretations? How do they differ? Frankly, I find the whole concept rather vague. After all, taken to one extreme limit, it would seem that Jesus worsened the situation for mankind, since now any old sin one might choose to commit is automatically forgiven, as long as the sinner has (or later acquires) true faith in Jesus. This seems a rather double-edged gift.
Jeep it is and its insulting that they say he die fore OWER sins.
quote:
I'd welcome comments from any of our Christian and former Christian participants -- but no prosyletizing, please, I do believe I've heard it all. For the purposes of this discussion, let's assume that the broad outlines of the Jesus story are true: that he was a real person, and that he died in Judea by Roman crucifixion somewhere around 30AD. I can't concede a physical resurrection, but let's at least assume that his followers were convinced that it occurred.
Enlighten me!
-- Donnie B.
Brian: "No, no! You have to think for yourselves!" Crowd: "Yes! We have to think for ourselves!"
i cant pretend to belive in good but i know that there might have been a jesus a mortal human with strange belife you might say a L. Ron Hubbard OF the past.. :)
Never underestemate a humans capaity for activ stupity
Sorry about my lousy English ? can we talk in Swedish :) |
 |
|
|
Slater
SFN Regular
USA
1668 Posts |
Posted - 12/19/2001 : 12:05:24 [Permalink]
|
It's the concept of all of us, being born within 'sin,' that intrigues me. Not to put words into your mouth, but do you perhaps, see it as just a scheme to establish the need of salvation, with all paths leading to the 'estabished' religious orders? Which in a way, would tend to reenforce the "Ignorance is bliss," notion. It is a historical inquiry, when, which teaching, first came up with this idea? Satisfy yourself as to the degree of exactness 'general' would imply of course, but no need to expend a great deal of effort at it.
The idea of a "fall" simply does not exist in most of the world's religions. Only in those of the desert countries of the Near East.
In the Far East people seek "enlightenment" and not salvation.
In the Celtic and Germanic countries gods were revered but not worshiped as we know the meaning of the word.
In both Europe and the Far East sex was often considered a religious act. Only in the Near East was it considered intrinsically evil, and women to be "lesser" beings than men.
In Mithraism (Zoroastrianism) the fall of man was solely the work "the powers of darkness."
In Judaism the fall is solely the fault of Eve. But original sin is not passed on to modern man.
Only in Christianity is there the concept that newborn infants are sinful for the simple fact that they were conceived through the sex act. The world is viewed as a vale of tears and corrupt. God is separate from man, God is separate from nature, Man is separate from God, Man is separate from nature. Same goes for nature. A very psychotic world view.
These are probably not concepts that you would come up with by yourself, based on your own observations of the world.
The established Christian Church tells you that you have this difficulty. The only real way to know that you are somehow lacking (sinful) is by taking their word for it.
You might, if left to yourself, think that you were a pretty nice guy. You are loved by your family, take care of your children and aged parents. Play with your dog. Are polite to strangers.
But you are mistaken. You are very bad, you were born bad and you have a sin nature. AND YOU WILL BE PUNISHED FOR BEING BAD. Awful eternal punishment.
However there is one, and only ONE, way to escape punishment. And that is by following the teachings of the Christian Church. The Church which was, I hasten to add, an arm of the Roman dictatorship. More than a little suspicious considering that these people who are going to sell you salvation are the very same people who told you that you needed to be saved to begin with.
Unlike the classical religions the rules of Christianity are not actually based on the spiritual growth but rather the civic responsibilities (just as one would expect from the Imperial govt.). You do not strive to become one with god. You are placed in the position of a follower or servant. You are required to confess any wrong-doing you have done or even thought about doing. You are required to donate a portion of your income.
The sole purpose of "sin" and the "redemption of sin" are to control your actions. This is why shortly after the start of Christianity the majority of the population of Europe was reduced to the status of quasi slave (serf).
Fortunately for us Catholicism became so outrageously corrupt by the time of the Borgia Popes that a competing form of this con game came into existence. It too was so corrupt that Humanism got it's start and that became so popular that in the last 200 years Christians insisted on incorporating it into Christianity. Today most Christians take this caring for the well being of their fellow man as one of the basic tenants of Christianity while in reality it is only a very recent addition.
The only reason that you are told that you are a "sinner" is so that the "authority" who has convinced you of that can exert control-and thereby power-over you.
-------
The brain that was stolen from my laboratory was a criminal brain. Only evil will come from it. |
|
|
|
NubiWan
Skeptic Friend
USA
424 Posts |
Posted - 12/20/2001 : 03:10:32 [Permalink]
|
Thank you, Slater.
Interesting perspective, and, if understood correctly, you suggest that Christianity is unique in at least two attributes. One being of my very interest, that of the 'being born of sin' concept.
",.. newborn infants are sinful for the simple fact that they were conceived through the sex act. The world is viewed as a vale of tears and corrupt. God is separate from man, God is separate from nature, Man is separate from God, Man is separate from nature. Same goes for nature. A very psychotic world view."
[*Gasp!* Couldn't agree more with your conclusion, that gives pause, huh..?]
And secondly, its emphasis on servitude, or "civic responsibility," over one's own spiritual growth. So Christianity is reduced to a Machiavellian scheme of control over the populace at large, by being the only 'offically' recognized path to god.
Have to admit, its a clever scheme, and it works, even today to a large degree. Christianity is certainly not alone in exserting 'control' over the faithful, though. Actually it seems to have grown 'soft' over the ages. We have become too well aware of 'state' patronage of some faiths, and where it can lead. Separation of church and state, is a good thing. Well, if there was any doubt before, can say with some certainity, am not a Christian. Some of my most profound religous perceptions, have indeed come from sexual experiences. And my allegiance extends downward from self, family, to country. Thanks again for sharing your learned viewpoint.
"If we believe absurdities, we shall commit atrocities." -Voltaire |
|
|
|
Tim
SFN Regular
USA
775 Posts |
Posted - 12/20/2001 : 04:39:04 [Permalink]
|
Slater...In general I agree with you, though I find the paradox of predestination and election as opposed to free will more troubling than the idea of being born into sin. However, a contradiction exists with original sin, or rather many contradictions exist. Specifically, couldn't an apologist argue that the blood of Christ washed away the sins of man, (1 Corinthians 15:3, Galations 1:4, Mathew 26:28, etc.). But somehow, salvation is still required, and let's not forget works! I really don't get it, but I'm trying.
Also, you mentioned that sex was considered evil in the Near East. (I don't know how to use that damned quote thing). Is there a time frame on this? I was under the impression that sex within the bonds of marriage was a good thing. The Song of Solomon has always been one of my favorite bed-time stories, though we try to avoid the hardcore stuff like Ezekial 23:19-21.
Seriously, I've been under the impression that sex was basically okay until Augustine decided that it would be a good idea to apply Platonic reasoning to the altar of the bedroom. Ya know, the purpose of sex being procreation, so sex under any other circumstances is irrational, or something along those lines.
|
|
|
|
Trish
SFN Addict
USA
2102 Posts |
Posted - 12/20/2001 : 10:34:07 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Seriously, I've been under the impression that sex was basically okay until Augustine decided that it would be a good idea to apply Platonic reasoning to the altar of the bedroom. Ya know, the purpose of sex being procreation, so sex under any other circumstances is irrational, or something along those lines.
Since sex is a natural and hopefully pleasurable activity removing that concept from the sexual experience is degrading. But it also enacts a form of control over you not only in your public life but your private as well.
quote:
(I don't know how to use that damned quote thing).
Under Format in the response window there is an icon that is a peice of paper with a red arrow. Click that and it will give you the code for the quote at the end of the message window. Or (remove the spaces) type: [ q u o t e ] to open the quote and [ / q u o t e ] to close the quote.
It is by the goodness of God that in our country we have those three unspeakably precious things: freedom of speech, freedom of conscience, and the prudence never to practice either of them. -Mark Twain |
|
|
|
Slater
SFN Regular
USA
1668 Posts |
Posted - 12/20/2001 : 11:16:40 [Permalink]
|
In general I agree with you, though I find the paradox of predestination and election as opposed to free will more troubling than the idea of being born into sin.
You must always keep in mind that when I speak of religion I am speaking of a purely human institution. Because as much as the priests speak of (and for) them no one has yet produced a god. Without an actual god predestination and election are meaningless. The concept of sin, however, is a very powerful device for dominating people.
However, a contradiction exists with original sin, or rather many contradictions exist. Specifically, couldn't an apologist argue that the blood of Christ washed away the sins of man, (1 Corinthians 15:3, Galations 1:4, Mathew 26:28, etc.).
It would seem to be the job description of an Apologist to twist any section of the bible to mean whatever they want it to at any given moment. There are some particularly nasty sections where JC says he wants families to hate one another and that he comes not to bring peace but the sword. I've had Apologists laugh at me for thinking that these sections meant what they said when in "reality" they were all sweetness and light.
The point about the blood of Christ is purely Protestant. That means that from the 300's CE to the 1500's no Christian interpreted it this way. Only when a rival Christianity raised it's ugly head and wanted to make it seem as if the power shouldn't be with Rome, then the novel interpretation was offered. The Protestant Reformation was purely a power play between the Borges and the Hapsburgs
But somehow, salvation is still required, and let's not forget works! I really don't get it, but I'm trying. This is so that the Protestant leaders can exert power over their followers. Even though the bible makes it clear that the power comes from Rome. And why shouldn't it, it was the Romans who wrote the damn thing to begin with.
Also, you mentioned that sex was considered evil in the Near East. (I don't know how to use that damned quote thing). Is there a time frame on this?
Yeah, it's different for different peoples in the area.
With the Jews it would have started with their release from captivity in Babylon by Cyrus the Great-a Zoroastrian. Zoroaster was down on girls.
The Greeks started keeping their women locked up and out of sight about the time that Hellenism began.
I was under the impression that sex within the bonds of marriage was a good thing.
To this day the orthodox Jews use something called a marriage sheet. It's a plain white sheet with a hole in the middle of it so that the glorious Hassidic man won't touch the lowly unclean woman.
Seriously, I've been under the impression that sex was basically okay until Augustine decided that it would be a good idea to apply Platonic reasoning to the altar of the bedroom.
Yes, but Augustine lived from 354-430 CE. That would have put him on the ground floor of Christianity during the reign of Theodosius the Great.
Not so much an altar in you bedroom but the ever watchful eye of authority.
-------
The brain that was stolen from my laboratory was a criminal brain. Only evil will come from it. |
|
|
 |
|
|
|
Topic Locked
