Did Jesus Really Make A Sacrifice?

reply to post by Lazarus Short


Took a look at 'thunderbolts.com'. It appears to be closed down.

Found instead 'thunderbolts.info'. A typical fringe-science-site with commercial pushing of pseudo-science. What little actual information I could find was, that because some observations open questions on a (postulated) gravity-theory scientific tyranny, an alternative 'electrical' model of cosmos is more or less valid, and D-g knows how support theistic arguments.

It's pure bosh and has nothing to do with real science.

The 'enterprisemission' is run by a charlatan (and is as far as I could see for sale). I have formerly spent some time on this site (in company on a forum with real scientists as participants), and found that some of the basics for his claims are so speculative, that they need to be demonstrated and validated first.

If you feel like it, I can try to unravel what's just empty blabla on the site and find the small traces of scientific efforts.

At an informed lay-person level, I do have some understanding of hyperdimensional physics, which is

a/ Hypothetical

b/ One of several competing answers to certain points in quantum physics

c/ In no way giving any direct credibility to theist speculations.

And not so complex, as you would like to make it.

That none of the above relate to any of Hawaii's claims is not his/her responsibility. So maybe you'll present your own approach and use of this (for me obvious) pseudo-science.

reply to post by bogomil


OK, let's just leave it at that...

Originally posted by Lazarus Short
reply to post by bogomil

 

OK, let's just leave it at that...

No worries.

It's not my intention to present any exclusivity on the part of science/logic. If parallel/competing systems exist, that's fine, and can sometimes lead to the opening of new valuable avenues of knowledge.

I'm just a bit of a stickler about calling things by their proper names. There's too much hijacking going on between ideologies and/or methodologies.

reply to post by Griffo

The atonement doctrine

Let me begin with a short discussion of the historical beliefs and attitudes that led to the atonement doctrine. The early Hebrews believed that "without the shedding of blood there could be no remission of sin." (Heb. 9:22) They accepted the primitive idea that God could not be appeased except through blood sacrifice. Moses made a distinct advance in that he forbade human sacrifice and substituted instead the ceremonial sacrifice of animals.

This concept of ceremonial sacrifice was preserved, in principle, by the apostle Paul as the doctrine of atonement for sin through the sacrificial death of Jesus. Paul, however, went beyond Moses and the Jewish teachers in that he expounded theories of original sin, hereditary guilt, and innate evil. Paul was a great man; he more than anyone else was responsible for bringing Jesus' teachings to the world. But he also injected a number of his own ideas which were not taught by Jesus, and indeed, were at variance with the teachings of his Master.

I emphasize that human teachers such as Paul were not only fallible but made a serious blunder in promoting the atonement doctrine. I believe we need to make a fundamental distinction between the teachings of Jesus and those of the human followers of Jesus. Jesus is the Son of God as well as the Son of Man and his life and teachings are a divine revelation. Therefore, I believe that we should look to Jesus first, and judge all other teachings by their harmony with his life and teachings.

Accordingly, the first reason I would cite in defense of my belief that the atonement doctrine is in error is that it is not harmonious with Jesus' revelation of God as our loving heavenly Father. While the ancient Jews taught the necessity of sacrifice, Jesus, in his life and teachings, revealed a God of love, mercy, and forgiveness. The Old Testament prophets and the New Testament teachers recognized God but not with the insight, clarity, and perfection of Jesus. Although Jesus' God is just and righteous, it is love -- the heavenly Father's perfect love for his human children -- that is the defining characteristic of his teachings. This concept of God as our loving heavenly Father was the only concept, besides acknowledging God as a spiritual being, that Jesus ever taught. He said, "God is love," and in his teachings God's love is supreme over justice and all other divine attributes.

The ancient Jews had conceived of God as a harsh king-judge. They believed that the only approach to God was through fasting and sacrifice. They felt that racial guilt had separated them from God and that sacrifice was necessary to appease his divine wrath. Paul's atonement doctrine grew out of these beliefs.

But such a God sounds little like the God of Jesus. He taught that God's attitude toward us is that of a Fatherly affection -- he loves us as his sons and daughters. This fatherly affection is the dominant characteristic of the God revealed by Jesus. God's loving forgiveness is always open to us; we must only seek it and be forgiving of others. Jesus revealed this in the prayer he taught his apostles: "forgive us our debts, as we forgive our debtors." God's love is not held hostage to an inflexible justice that cannot forgive until a totally innocent Son is sacrificed in remission of sin.

This brings me to the second problem I find in the atonement doctrine. It assumes a lower conception of God than is presented by Jesus' life and teachings. Indeed, the conception of a father who will not forgive his erring children until an entirely innocent elder brother dies as a human sacrifice sounds barbaric. We would expect more even from a human father. This conception is a relic of ancient times and primitive beliefs, ideas, and practices which Jesus came to free us from. He brought a new and higher revelation of God; and in his life he sought to free believers from the Jewish system of ceremony and sacrifice.

The last argument I would advance in opposition to the atonement doctrine is that it was not taught by Jesus. Isn't it reasonable to assume that if Jesus' purpose in living his bestowal life on our world was to die on the cross for our sins, he would have emphasized this doctrine? But Jesus did not teach the necessity of sacrificing himself for man's sins; instead he consistently focused on the Kingdom of God.

There are other problems with the atonement doctrine. In particular, it tends to mask Jesus' true teachings of the kingdom of heaven. In his message, the gospel of the kingdom, Jesus taught that God is our loving heavenly Father and we are his sons and daughters. We are called to live a life of faith in our Father's love and over-care, to trust in God as Jesus trusted God, to trust Him as a little child trusts his earthly father.

Jesus' emphasis was always on the kingdom of heaven -- the rule of God in the hearts of his sons and daughters. The prayer he taught his apostles reveals this central teaching: "Your kingdom come; your will be done." He identified the kingdom of God with the will of God and taught that we enter the kingdom by the inner submission of our will to God's will. It is this teaching that Jesus held supreme; he did not teach the atonement doctrine.

Paul taught the atonement doctrine to help make Jesus more acceptable to the Jews, and to try to explain the seemingly inexplicable fact that the Creator (John 1:3, Col. 1:16, Heb. 1:2) of our universe was killed by his own creatures.

Jesus' death was significant; it was the final act of a life of love and service bestowed upon mortal man. The great thing about Jesus' death was the way he died, the magnificent spirit in which he met that death. His final prayer, "Father forgive them, for they know not what they do," is Jesus' final demonstration of the love and forgiveness of our heavenly Father.

In Gethsemane Jesus sought to avoid his death if this choice would be consistent with the Father's will. He prayed, "Father, if you are willing, remove this cup from me." But his purpose was to live the full human life of his earth creatures. And in a human life we cannot usually have our death avoided or taken away. So Jesus submitted himself to death on the cross, a death brought about by men -- not by God. It was God's will that Jesus finish his human bestowal, even though it included "drinking the cup" of death at the hands of his enemies.

Jesus' courage and selfless devotion to the service of man and God in his crucifixion inspires us onward. It was the final act of a life of service. "Greater love has no man than to lay down his life for his friends." Jesus lived a life of service, revealing truth to humankind, and he courageously and selflessly submitted to the death that truth teachers must often face.

After Jesus had asked if the cup might be removed, he finished the prayer with the words, "Nevertheless, not my will but yours be done." This prayer -- not the atonement of Jesus -- is the key to our salvation. We are saved not by Jesus' death on the cross but by our faith submission to God's will. This is evident from the fact that believing in "the blood of Christ" will not save someone who does not faithfully choose to live in accordance with the Father's will. And such a choice of God's will over our own personal will can be made independently of the death of Jesus.

Although I believe it is incorrect to refer to Jesus as our redeemer, he is truly our savior. For even though the way to salvation was open before Jesus lived, he, in his bestowal life, did truly make the way of salvation more clear to humanity. His life and teachings are our lighthouse, our certain and infallible guide to salvation. Certainly we may gain much from the teaching of his well-meaning followers, but we must also recognize that they were human and fallible. Jesus is divine and his teachings are perfect; they are the touchstone by which all other teachings should be judged.

reply to post by UB2120


You know you can get in trouble for copy and pasting the same document in multiple threads.

Just so you know

The topic here is Did Jesus really make a sacrifice? If someone gives their life on behalf of all to see if truly there is life after death and to shed light on the very essence of the two great commandments known as the Ten Commandments, I would say that is truly a sacrifice.

You are under refinement, your glory comes at the end of your refinement; but to understand the essence of that glory and the purpose of your refinement, you were given two great commandments in which their very essence is the very light of life, which light is known as Love. You have a Creator who is fashioning you his creature, and because you are yet in the making stage you are yet to know him; and because you are yet to understand who you are and that which is going on with and in you, you are yet to discern and appreciate his work. To understand his very essence, he gave you the first great commandment; and to understand its fulfillment, he showed it to you in Christ.

But then he also gave a second great commandment, which is an extension of the first great commandment; and seeing that you are yet being refined, and part of that refinement is the understanding of the power and grace of the glory you are to take on, he has to also manifest its fulfillment to you: this is the reason why he instituted two sacrificial lamb offerings at the time he gave you the two great commandments: for those two offerings manifest the fulfillment of the two great commandments. This also is the reason why there are two cherubims of GLORY shadowing the mercyseat: for they are the two lambs being sacrificed for you.

They are not only sacrificial lambs, but their very essence is the light of your life, even as you were told in Zechariah 4: read through it. And if you need to learn more, go to waterofshiloh.com...; and I say this only because it is too large to post on this thread. Peace be with you!!!

reply to post by Olise

If someone gives their life on behalf of all to see if truly there is life after death and to shed light on the very essence of the two great commandments known as the Ten Commandments, I would say that is truly a sacrifice.

It cannot be considered a sacrifice though because you believe that he died and went to heaven. If he died and stayed dead, then it would be considered a sacrifice

reply to post by Griffo


A) You can't prove Jesus existed.

B) You can't prove the immaculate conception

C) You can't prove that his "ressurection" was a miracle and not just a mistake. (Same with water to wine etc.)

D) You can't prove Jesus is divine, or that God exists if we consider A, B and C true.

reply to post by awake_and_aware


I don't believe that Jesus existed, I was telling him what he had to believe if he believed the bible

reply to post by Griffo


I know, i was buffering your argument, not that it needed it. Just thought i'd make those facts clear.

Peace

Originally posted by awake_and_aware
reply to post by Griffo

 

A) You can't prove Jesus existed.

B) You can't prove the immaculate conception

C) You can't prove that his "ressurection" was a miracle and not just a mistake. (Same with water to wine etc.)

D) You can't prove Jesus is divine, or that God exists if we consider A, B and C true.

Awake, you ought to chanell your mind to line up with your chosen screen name: you are the one and only proof you need, you are proof enough that Jesus existed: for he was once Adam; and through Adam the world, including you, was multiplied. And the immaculate conception was God's conception of man/Adam; not Mary conceiving Jesus n the womb: for the lineage of Jesus was through Joseph not Mary. The man sows the seed; the woman is the womb in which the seed engenders.

And regarding the resurrection, If the resurrection was a mistake then every thing you see is a mistake, nothing exists, not even you. The very life that you are is an eternal phenomena, it never dies; and the resurrection was meant to assure you of that. And finally, the divinity of Jesus is in that he was the one that came down from heaven, being first Adam; and this same divinity extends to you who also is of him. And in that you exist, God is, else how would you have become? You are living proof of that which you ignorantly deny!! Peace be with you!!!

reply to post by Olise

Awake, you ought to chanell your mind to line up with your chosen screen name

Well i'm awake, and aware. That's what makes me human and thus the screen name.

you are the one and only proof you need, you are proof enough that Jesus existed

Incorrect, i'm proof that i exist, and that i evolved from a common ancestral legacy. There is no proof that Jesus existed, although that doesn't mean he didn't.

Even if Jesus DID exist, you can't prove he was acting with regards to a universal dictator or supernatural force, or whether the supernatural entity actually exists.

And the immaculate conception was God's conception of man/Adam; not Mary conceiving Jesus n the womb

The Immaculate Conception of Mary is, according to Catholic doctrine, the conception of the Virgin Mary without any stain ("macula" in Latin) of Original Sin.[1] It is one of the four dogmata in Roman Catholic Mariology. Under this aspect Mary is sometimes called the Immaculata (the Immaculate One), particularly in artistic contexts.[2]It is the principal patroness of the Philippines.[3]

The man sows the seed; the woman is the womb in which the seed engenders.

I can understand how humans re-produce. There's a number of possibilities in regards to Mary, either:-

a) It was a miracle sent from the dictator of the universe (temporary suspension of the natural order)

b) It was a mutation, or genetic defect in which Mary has become asexual, capable of reproducing by herself

c) A jewish minx might have told a lie.

You are living proof of that which you ignorantly deny!!

I don't deny that i am human, and i don't deny that JESUS MAY have existed. I don't deny that i am a living entity. I just deny your supernatural story as it doesn't have any grounding or any logic to it.

Here's some thoughts on your ideology:-

Another relevant video to the OP:-

reply to post by awake_and_aware


To start with, regarding the Catholic doctrine, I already explained religiosity and the driving force behind it to you; and also already explained the immaculate conception to you.

And regarding God, your Creator and Maker, you refer to him as a dictator, if you create something, do you not make it to will? Lets take it a step further, when you have kids, do you not raise them to will, knowing that what you are doing is to their benefit? You are his creature; and in the end you will see the glory he is fashioning in you and you will glorify him: for his light will manifest the glory you will become!

I watched both your videos; now read that which I suggested to you at waterofshiloh.com.... Peace be with you!!!

reply to post by Olise

And regarding God, your Creator and Maker, you refer to him as a dictator, if you create something, do you not make it to will?

You don't know whether there is a maker, whether causation is a nessasary assumption regarding the universe.

And if religion's "THEORY" is true, then this God IS a dictator.

You didn't have to explain immaculate conception, i fully understand it.

God doesn't do anything similar to a parent. What parent creates imperfect children only for them to die after they're hunted down by other children (animals) What parent creates bacteria and parasites that leech onto his children? What parent watches suffering of children with indifference? What parents allows another Gallaxy to Collide into his Children's? What parents allows his children to starve?

Just more evidence that there is nothing ou there looking over us, NOTHING. If it does, it cares not.

And so you state you do not adhere to religion......So how do you extract a moral position from nature? From observing nature? Does God speak to you? How? I don't want any of this vague "from within" or "inside of all of us" spiritual nonsense - I just want an honest answer.

reply to post by awake_and_aware


Each parent brings their child into the world knowing that they are going to suffer and die. They are still doing it, it is the gift of life. Does that make every parent a dictator? Does that make them cruel?
The suffering that us humans have to endure is part of the bitter/sweet experience.
The suffering is the forgetting. The suffering points us toward god. Freedom from suffering is the mission.
We come here to forget that we are god.
But we will all remember.

reply to post by Itisnowagain


All makes sense now.

Thanks.

reply to post by Griffo


Jesus had a mission to acomplish on earth he was sent down here to die for our sins, so no it was not a sacrifice because it was his goal.

reply to post by Doublemint


i could claim i was sent down to absolve sins.

The evidence is still 0 - Vicarious redemption (sacrifice for sins) is immoral preaching. I promotes setting yourselff free of personal responsibility.

That 1 human sacrifice can save a whole species. Cool story, but not fact.

reply to post by Doublemint


i could claim i was sent down to absolve sins.

The evidence is still 0 - Vicarious redemption (sacrifice for sins) is immoral preaching. I promotes setting yourselff free of personal responsibility.

That 1 human sacrifice can save a whole species. Cool story, but not fact.