Sacrifice of Jesus.... Was it really?

  • 30 Replies
  • 6400 Views
*

Lorddave

  • 18108
Sacrifice of Jesus.... Was it really?
« on: October 14, 2010, 08:17:27 PM »
Jesus is said to have sacrificed himself, taking all the sins of man upon himself so that we could be forgiven without sacrificing what we have (lambs, cows, ect...).

But my question is... how was his death a sacrifice?

When you sacrifice something, you give it up for another cause.  The choice is yours to give it up or not and often times not having it harms you or takes away something valuable.  Sacrificing something you don't want isn't a sacrifice. 
I also don't think that sacrificing something without some kind of penalty or significant loss is a sacrifice.

In the case of Jesus, it is said that he sacrificed his life so Humans can have a path to salvation without having to sacrifice things in the name of God to balance out their sins.  But was it a sacrifice?

First off, Jesus was hunted by the Romans and his location was betrayed.  It is said that he allowed himself to be captured and crucified but could he really have escaped?  Does it say anywhere in the bible that Jesus possessed the powers of teleportation?  Invisibility?  Or could somehow make himself escape?  Yes he could turn water into wine, heal others of any illness, and walk on water but beyond that he's very mortal. So to me it becomes a question of if he could choose not to die by Roman hands.

The second issues comes at his death.  As much as I like life, if I knew I was going to be the second hand guy at God's side (being the son of god), Death would be a blessing.  I'd go from having to walk around filthy streets, and trying to survive day to day to heaven, eternal bliss, and being the second most powerful being in existence.  That's not really a bad trade.  It's like sacrificing your 1 bedroom apartment for a mansion.

The third issue is taking the Sins of the world with him.  There were no consequences to doing that for him.  Doesn't that mean that the sins of the world are meaningless then?  If a human died with sin not atoned for, he went to Hell, possibly for eternity.  When Jesus died, did he go to hell?  I've heard that he may have but it's not confirmed and if he did, it was for a short time.  So taking the sins of man wasn't a a sacrifice for Jesus as there were no real consequences for it.  Had he been stuck in Hell for eternity that would make his sacrifice worthy of praise.

The fourth issue is his resurrection.  Can you sacrifice something then get it back without penalty and still call it a sacrifice? 


I've also heard that the Sacrifice is not Jesus sacrificing himself, but others sacrificing him.  This didn't happen though since the Romans just wanted him dead.  Murder isn't a sacrifice.
You have been ignored for common interest of mankind.

I am a terrible person and I am a typical Blowhard Liberal for being wrong about Bom.

*

Lorddave

  • 18108
Re: Sacrifice of Jesus.... Was it really?
« Reply #1 on: October 14, 2010, 09:22:33 PM »
First off, Jesus was hunted by the Romans and his location was betrayed.  It is said that he allowed himself to be captured and crucified but could he really have escaped?  Does it say anywhere in the bible that Jesus possessed the powers of teleportation?  Invisibility?  Or could somehow make himself escape?  Yes he could turn water into wine, heal others of any illness, and walk on water but beyond that he's very mortal. So to me it becomes a question of if he could choose not to die by Roman hands.
He was the Son of God. He could do whatever He wanted.
Then dying really isn't an issue for him so how can it be said to be a sacrifice?

Quote
The second issues comes at his death.  As much as I like life, if I knew I was going to be the second hand guy at God's side (being the son of god), Death would be a blessing.  I'd go from having to walk around filthy streets, and trying to survive day to day to heaven, eternal bliss, and being the second most powerful being in existence.  That's not really a bad trade.  It's like sacrificing your 1 bedroom apartment for a mansion.
So? I don't think I've ever heard a Christian describe the sacrifice of Jesus as a "bad trade".
Then why is it a sacrifice?  Sounds more like got a gift.

Quote
The third issue is taking the Sins of the world with him.  There were no consequences to doing that for him.  Doesn't that mean that the sins of the world are meaningless then?  If a human died with sin not atoned for, he went to Hell, possibly for eternity.  When Jesus died, did he go to hell?  I've heard that he may have but it's not confirmed and if he did, it was for a short time.  So taking the sins of man wasn't a a sacrifice for Jesus as there were no real consequences for it.  Had he been stuck in Hell for eternity that would make his sacrifice worthy of praise.
Yeah, but that's just, like, your opinion, man.
Yes but the point I was making was that you can't have a sacrifice mean something if there was no consequence to the sacrifice.  If I use my life to save another knowing full well that I'm immortal and will be brought back in about an hour, is that a sacrifice?  The most I've lost is a few hours of time and possibly a shirt.

Quote
The fourth issue is his resurrection.  Can you sacrifice something then get it back without penalty and still call it a sacrifice?
Yes.
Then how is it a sacrifice?  You're only giving up something temporarily. 

Quote
I've also heard that the Sacrifice is not Jesus sacrificing himself, but others sacrificing him.  This didn't happen though since the Romans just wanted him dead.  Murder isn't a sacrifice.
Sacrifices often involved murder - and still do on occasion. What planet are you from?
Yes and no.
It's only yes if
1. The person being killed doesn't want to die (thus you are sacrificing them)
and
2. The person doing the killing wants to kill you.

I understand where you're coming from: Human sacrifices.  However a sacrifice, by definition, must be giving up something valuable.  If I grab some stranger and kill him, I'm not sacrificing him since he has no value to me.
You have been ignored for common interest of mankind.

I am a terrible person and I am a typical Blowhard Liberal for being wrong about Bom.

*

Chris Spaghetti

  • Flat Earth Editor
  • 12744
Re: Sacrifice of Jesus.... Was it really?
« Reply #2 on: October 15, 2010, 05:59:32 AM »
He had hell of a time before his death. Whipped, beaten, spat on, nailed to a piece of wood, crucified in the hot Palestinian sun. Sounds like it was a sacrifice to me.

That's if any of it even happened, of course.

*

parsec

  • 6196
  • 206,265
Re: Sacrifice of Jesus.... Was it really?
« Reply #3 on: October 15, 2010, 07:14:33 AM »
Do you think the guards who guarded his tomb were necrophiliac maniacs who raped his embalmed corpse, but later, when they realized they'd be caught on Monday (or Sunday), they simply chopped the body into small pieces and burried it in the nearby field? It's not like they had CSI back then.

?

Hazbollah

  • Flat Earth Editor
  • 2444
  • Earth Shape Apathetic.
Re: Sacrifice of Jesus.... Was it really?
« Reply #4 on: October 18, 2010, 02:15:56 PM »
It was a sacrifice, but a symbolic one more than anything. It represented the finite nature of mortality, and that atonement has a point because the soul is immortal. So replace 'Jesus' with 'soul' and you have your answer.
Always check your tackle- Caerphilly school of Health. If I see an innuendo in my post, I'll be sure to whip it out.

*

ﮎingulaЯiτy

  • Arbitrator
  • Planar Moderator
  • 9074
  • Resident atheist.
Re: Sacrifice of Jesus.... Was it really?
« Reply #5 on: October 18, 2010, 02:19:11 PM »
It was a sacrifice, but a symbolic one more than anything. It represented the finite nature of mortality, and that atonement has a point because the soul is immortal. So replace 'Jesus' with 'soul' and you have your answer.

lolwut? We nailed god's soul to a piece of wood?
Even looking for symbolism in that doesn't help.
If I was asked to imagine a perfect deity, I would never invent one that suffers from a multiple personality disorder. Christians get points for originality there.

*

Chris Spaghetti

  • Flat Earth Editor
  • 12744
Re: Sacrifice of Jesus.... Was it really?
« Reply #6 on: October 19, 2010, 01:04:47 AM »
It was a sacrifice, but a symbolic one more than anything. It represented the finite nature of mortality, and that atonement has a point because the soul is immortal. So replace 'Jesus' with 'soul' and you have your answer.

That makes it sound like less of a sacrifice.

Like burning a fire-retarded book.

?

Hazbollah

  • Flat Earth Editor
  • 2444
  • Earth Shape Apathetic.
Re: Sacrifice of Jesus.... Was it really?
« Reply #7 on: October 19, 2010, 03:26:19 AM »
It was a sacrifice, but a symbolic one more than anything. It represented the finite nature of mortality, and that atonement has a point because the soul is immortal. So replace 'Jesus' with 'soul' and you have your answer.

lolwut? We nailed god's soul to a piece of wood?
Even looking for symbolism in that doesn't help.
You missed my point. I am far froma bible literalist, but this represents that sins can be absolved with sacrifice, not that this was in itself a sacrifice.
Always check your tackle- Caerphilly school of Health. If I see an innuendo in my post, I'll be sure to whip it out.

*

Lorddave

  • 18108
Re: Sacrifice of Jesus.... Was it really?
« Reply #8 on: October 19, 2010, 04:55:54 AM »
It was a sacrifice, but a symbolic one more than anything. It represented the finite nature of mortality, and that atonement has a point because the soul is immortal. So replace 'Jesus' with 'soul' and you have your answer.

lolwut? We nailed god's soul to a piece of wood?
Even looking for symbolism in that doesn't help.
You missed my point. I am far froma bible literalist, but this represents that sins can be absolved with sacrifice, not that this was in itself a sacrifice.

But sins could be absolved with sacrifice long before Jesus.  Jews sacrificed lambs and other valuable things to God for to be absolved of their sins.  The idea of Jesus being "The Lamb of God" plays off this by saying that the world sacrificed him and now we don't have to sacrifice anything.

But he didn't sacrifice himself nor did anyone sacrifice him.  Some Romans, who felt they were better off with him dead, nailed him to a tree and let him die a painful death. 
Now granted, he did, as the story goes, allow himself to be captured.  This probably saved the lives of his apostles so in that, he did sacrifice his life.

But being the son of God, he knew he would become more powerful than they could possibly imagine.
You have been ignored for common interest of mankind.

I am a terrible person and I am a typical Blowhard Liberal for being wrong about Bom.

*

berny_74

  • 1786
  • The IceWall! Beat that
Re: Sacrifice of Jesus.... Was it really?
« Reply #9 on: October 19, 2010, 06:59:55 AM »
It was a sacrifice, but a symbolic one more than anything. It represented the finite nature of mortality, and that atonement has a point because the soul is immortal. So replace 'Jesus' with 'soul' and you have your answer.

lolwut? We nailed god's soul to a piece of wood?
Even looking for symbolism in that doesn't help.
You missed my point. I am far froma bible literalist, but this represents that sins can be absolved with sacrifice, not that this was in itself a sacrifice.

But sins could be absolved with sacrifice long before Jesus.  Jews sacrificed lambs and other valuable things to God for to be absolved of their sins.  The idea of Jesus being "The Lamb of God" plays off this by saying that the world sacrificed him and now we don't have to sacrifice anything.

But he didn't sacrifice himself nor did anyone sacrifice him.  Some Romans, who felt they were better off with him dead, nailed him to a tree and let him die a painful death. 
Now granted, he did, as the story goes, allow himself to be captured.  This probably saved the lives of his apostles so in that, he did sacrifice his life.

But being the son of God, he knew he would become more powerful than they could possibly imagine.

Like to point out it wasn't really the Romans idea.  Gotta blame the Pharisees on that one.  They were just doing it to try and keep everyone calm.

Berny
Has read the bible
To be fair, sometimes what FE'ers say makes so little sense that it's hard to come up with a rebuttal.
Moonlight is good for you.

*

ﮎingulaЯiτy

  • Arbitrator
  • Planar Moderator
  • 9074
  • Resident atheist.
Re: Sacrifice of Jesus.... Was it really?
« Reply #10 on: October 19, 2010, 09:01:23 PM »
It was a sacrifice, but a symbolic one more than anything. It represented the finite nature of mortality, and that atonement has a point because the soul is immortal. So replace 'Jesus' with 'soul' and you have your answer.
lolwut? We nailed god's soul to a piece of wood?
Even looking for symbolism in that doesn't help.
You missed my point. I am far from a bible literalist, but this represents that sins can be absolved with sacrifice, not that this was in itself a sacrifice.
How can it represent other sacrifice, if it wasn't a legitimate sacrifice itself?

And on that note, I thought Jesus promoted a divine system of forgiving people who are sincere when they ask for it...

How is sacrifice system ever "fair" when it is built on killing other people or random animals? Sacrificing a son wouldn't be fair to the son. Sacrificing a goat wouldn't be fair to the goat. If people were serious about taking responsibility for themselves, instead of having someone/something else pay the 'ultimate price', perhaps these people should have been killing themselves.
If I was asked to imagine a perfect deity, I would never invent one that suffers from a multiple personality disorder. Christians get points for originality there.

Re: Sacrifice of Jesus.... Was it really?
« Reply #11 on: October 25, 2010, 11:04:13 AM »
Consider these:

"And, behold, one of them which were with Jesus stretched out his hand, and drew his sword, and struck a servant of the high priest's, and smote off his ear. Then said Jesus unto him, Put up again thy sword into his place: for all they that take the sword shall perish with the sword. Thinkest thou that I cannot now pray to my Father, and he shall presently give me more than twelve legions of angels?" (Matthew 26)

and...

"Jesus answered [talking to Pilate], 'You would have no power over me if it were not given to you from above. Therefore the one who handed me over to you is guilty of a greater sin.'"
(John 19:11)
There is evidence for a NASA conspiracy. Please search.

Re: Sacrifice of Jesus.... Was it really?
« Reply #12 on: October 25, 2010, 11:08:40 AM »
It was a sacrifice, but a symbolic one more than anything. It represented the finite nature of mortality, and that atonement has a point because the soul is immortal. So replace 'Jesus' with 'soul' and you have your answer.

lolwut? We nailed god's soul to a piece of wood?
Even looking for symbolism in that doesn't help.
You missed my point. I am far froma bible literalist, but this represents that sins can be absolved with sacrifice, not that this was in itself a sacrifice.

But sins could be absolved with sacrifice long before Jesus.  Jews sacrificed lambs and other valuable things to God for to be absolved of their sins.  The idea of Jesus being "The Lamb of God" plays off this by saying that the world sacrificed him and now we don't have to sacrifice anything.

But he didn't sacrifice himself nor did anyone sacrifice him.  Some Romans, who felt they were better off with him dead, nailed him to a tree and let him die a painful death. 
Now granted, he did, as the story goes, allow himself to be captured.  This probably saved the lives of his apostles so in that, he did sacrifice his life.

But being the son of God, he knew he would become more powerful than they could possibly imagine.

I would argue that God, being all powerful, didn't require anything in order to sanctify his people. He could have done it simply by snapping his fingers. His choice to sacrifice Jesus was a display of love.
There is evidence for a NASA conspiracy. Please search.

Re: Sacrifice of Jesus.... Was it really?
« Reply #13 on: October 25, 2010, 11:13:13 AM »
No it was not. Next.

*

ﮎingulaЯiτy

  • Arbitrator
  • Planar Moderator
  • 9074
  • Resident atheist.
Re: Sacrifice of Jesus.... Was it really?
« Reply #14 on: October 25, 2010, 02:45:56 PM »
Consider these:

"And, behold, one of them which were with Jesus stretched out his hand, and drew his sword, and struck a servant of the high priest's, and smote off his ear. Then said Jesus unto him, Put up again thy sword into his place: for all they that take the sword shall perish with the sword. Thinkest thou that I cannot now pray to my Father, and he shall presently give me more than twelve legions of angels?" (Matthew 26)

and...

"Jesus answered [talking to Pilate], 'You would have no power over me if it were not given to you from above. Therefore the one who handed me over to you is guilty of a greater sin.'"
(John 19:11)

wat.


I would argue that God, being all powerful, didn't require anything in order to sanctify his people. He could have done it simply by snapping his fingers. His choice to sacrifice Jesus was a display of love.
durr...
How is torturing your son a display of love?
« Last Edit: October 25, 2010, 02:48:38 PM by ﮎingulaЯiτy »
If I was asked to imagine a perfect deity, I would never invent one that suffers from a multiple personality disorder. Christians get points for originality there.

?

Eddy Baby

  • Official Member
  • 9986
Re: Sacrifice of Jesus.... Was it really?
« Reply #15 on: October 25, 2010, 02:48:47 PM »
I really wish God would keep us up to date with what's going on.

Re: Sacrifice of Jesus.... Was it really?
« Reply #16 on: October 26, 2010, 07:40:18 PM »
Consider these:

"And, behold, one of them which were with Jesus stretched out his hand, and drew his sword, and struck a servant of the high priest's, and smote off his ear. Then said Jesus unto him, Put up again thy sword into his place: for all they that take the sword shall perish with the sword. Thinkest thou that I cannot now pray to my Father, and he shall presently give me more than twelve legions of angels?" (Matthew 26)

and...

"Jesus answered [talking to Pilate], 'You would have no power over me if it were not given to you from above. Therefore the one who handed me over to you is guilty of a greater sin.'"
(John 19:11)

wat.

Jesus had the power to save himself.

I would argue that God, being all powerful, didn't require anything in order to sanctify his people. He could have done it simply by snapping his fingers. His choice to sacrifice Jesus was a display of love.
durr...
How is torturing your son a display of love?


Because Jesus died as a propitiation for man's sins.

Drop the impudence.
There is evidence for a NASA conspiracy. Please search.

*

ﮎingulaЯiτy

  • Arbitrator
  • Planar Moderator
  • 9074
  • Resident atheist.
Re: Sacrifice of Jesus.... Was it really?
« Reply #17 on: October 26, 2010, 08:13:03 PM »
Consider these:

"And, behold, one of them which were with Jesus stretched out his hand, and drew his sword, and struck a servant of the high priest's, and smote off his ear. Then said Jesus unto him, Put up again thy sword into his place: for all they that take the sword shall perish with the sword. Thinkest thou that I cannot now pray to my Father, and he shall presently give me more than twelve legions of angels?" (Matthew 26)

and...

"Jesus answered [talking to Pilate], 'You would have no power over me if it were not given to you from above. Therefore the one who handed me over to you is guilty of a greater sin.'"
(John 19:11)

wat.

Jesus had the power to save himself.
How does this not make it an assisted suicide?

I would argue that God, being all powerful, didn't require anything in order to sanctify his people. He could have done it simply by snapping his fingers. His choice to sacrifice Jesus was a display of love.
durr...
How is torturing your son a display of love?

Because Jesus died as a propitiation for man's sins.

Drop the impudence.
You take offense too easily; I am genuinely curious.
Back to point, why does it appease God for his son to die before forgiving sins? He can forgive sins without Jesus getting tortured and dying.
If I was asked to imagine a perfect deity, I would never invent one that suffers from a multiple personality disorder. Christians get points for originality there.

*

spanner34.5

  • 4642
  • feck arse drink
Re: Sacrifice of Jesus.... Was it really?
« Reply #18 on: October 27, 2010, 02:17:30 AM »
Jesus was nothing more than a criminal. He was tried, found guilty and executed.

This happens quite regularly in some of the more backward parts of the world today.

Why all the fuss?

My I.Q. is 85. Or was it 58?

Re: Sacrifice of Jesus.... Was it really?
« Reply #19 on: October 27, 2010, 07:52:24 AM »
Jesus was nothing more than a criminal. He was tried, found guilty and executed.

This happens quite regularly in some of the more backward parts of the world today.

Why all the fuss?



What were the charges?
There is evidence for a NASA conspiracy. Please search.

*

spanner34.5

  • 4642
  • feck arse drink
Re: Sacrifice of Jesus.... Was it really?
« Reply #20 on: October 27, 2010, 08:40:57 AM »
Jesus was nothing more than a criminal. He was tried, found guilty and executed.

This happens quite regularly in some of the more backward parts of the world today.

Why all the fuss?



What were the charges?
No idea and neither has anyone else. Any information will have been distorted over time
My I.Q. is 85. Or was it 58?

Re: Sacrifice of Jesus.... Was it really?
« Reply #21 on: October 27, 2010, 11:48:56 AM »
Fishing without a licence

Re: Sacrifice of Jesus.... Was it really?
« Reply #22 on: October 27, 2010, 05:54:28 PM »
Jesus was nothing more than a criminal. He was tried, found guilty and executed.

This happens quite regularly in some of the more backward parts of the world today.

Why all the fuss?



What were the charges?
No idea and neither has anyone else. Any information will have been distorted over time

The point being that Jesus was tried and crucified without any charges against him being proven. He was accused of subverting the authority of Caesar and blaspheming YAHWEH, but no evidence was ever brought forward. As you will recall, Pilate ordered his execution but only after telling the Jews that were demanding Jesus' death that his blood was on on their hands.
There is evidence for a NASA conspiracy. Please search.

Re: Sacrifice of Jesus.... Was it really?
« Reply #23 on: October 28, 2010, 11:15:55 AM »
The point being that Jesus was tried and crucified without any charges against him being proven. He was accused of subverting the authority of Caesar and blaspheming YAHWEH, but no evidence was ever brought forward.
Only according to the Evangelists - who had every reason to distort the process in their account of it. It is the equivalent of trusting Charles Manson's "family" with recording the transcripts of his trial.

Except that you have no archeological or textual evidence to support your claim that the account in the gospels was all a conspiracy, whereas the Charles Manson trial is well-documented.

Arguing from ignorance is a logical fallacy.

As you will recall, Pilate ordered his execution but only after telling the Jews that were demanding Jesus' death that his blood was on on their hands.
And thus justifying the pogroms after every Easter sermon for centuries afterward.


True Christian orthodoxy does not hold the Jews as being singularly responsible for Christ's death.

Guilt by association is a logical fallacy.

Again, there is no evidence beyond hearsay of Pilate ever having done this.

Are all written accounts hearsay? What other evidence would you expect?
There is evidence for a NASA conspiracy. Please search.

*

spanner34.5

  • 4642
  • feck arse drink
Re: Sacrifice of Jesus.... Was it really?
« Reply #24 on: October 29, 2010, 03:38:38 AM »
An old world war one tale.

From the front........Send re-enforcements we are going to advance.

Passed down the line became. Send three and fourpence we are going to a dance.

How may times have the bible tales been verbally or in writing 'passed down the line' or translated to become nothing more than meaningless drivel?
My I.Q. is 85. Or was it 58?

Re: Sacrifice of Jesus.... Was it really?
« Reply #25 on: October 31, 2010, 04:07:34 PM »
An old world war one tale.

From the front........Send re-enforcements we are going to advance.

Passed down the line became. Send three and fourpence we are going to a dance.

How may times have the bible tales been verbally or in writing 'passed down the line' or translated to become nothing more than meaningless drivel?

No other work in the history of humanity has been as rigorously studied and translated as the Bible. The people writing new versions of scripture are not morons or televangelists, they are PhD linguists and theological scholars translating documents written during the iron age.

One of the biggest deceptions that people ignorant of Christianity have managed to convince themselves of is that the Bible in its current form is different from the original. The issues that arise are not in the words, but the interpretation.

Except that you have no archeological or textual evidence to support your claim that the account in the gospels was all a conspiracy, whereas the Charles Manson trial is well-documented.
I don't recall making any such claim. Would you accept an account of Manson's trial under the same conditions as you accept Christ's?

Yes. Conviction does not imply guilt. You cannot make a strong case that Christ was a criminal by virtue of the fact that he received a criminal's punishment.

Arguing from ignorance is a logical fallacy.
Then stop doing it.

Be more specific.

True Christian orthodoxy does not hold the Jews as being singularly responsible for Christ's death.
That's such a massive consolation. Thank you so much.

Well, you brought it up. Using Charles Manson and pogroms as analogies is in very poor taste.

Guilt by association is a logical fallacy.
Romans 5:12-14.

We are not guilty because of Adam's sins. If that were the case then how could Christ have been considered perfect, given that he too was descended from Adam?

Are all written accounts hearsay? What other evidence would you expect?
I expect nothing. I'm simply pointing out that spanner34.5's position is just as valid as your own.

But whereas I site written evidence suggesting Christ's innocence, all he has to go on is a hunch that it was a conspiracy.
There is evidence for a NASA conspiracy. Please search.

Re: Sacrifice of Jesus.... Was it really?
« Reply #26 on: October 31, 2010, 04:12:38 PM »
You take offense too easily; I am genuinely curious.
Back to point, why does it appease God for his son to die before forgiving sins? He can forgive sins without Jesus getting tortured and dying.

Saying "durr" and "wat" makes you seem disrespectful.

Christ's death was an appeasement but it was also a demonstration of love. God killed something of himself to save humanity.
« Last Edit: October 31, 2010, 04:14:45 PM by Canadark »
There is evidence for a NASA conspiracy. Please search.

?

Thork

Re: Sacrifice of Jesus.... Was it really?
« Reply #27 on: November 01, 2010, 06:22:08 PM »
Jesus went through a lot of stuff for us.  :(

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-africa-11575773

*

spanner34.5

  • 4642
  • feck arse drink
Re: Sacrifice of Jesus.... Was it really?
« Reply #28 on: November 02, 2010, 04:22:18 AM »
Largely the bible is from an inaccurate translation from a Greek piece of work.

Mary was not a virgin, the true translation means young girl. Joseph then becomes a child molesting pervert. Jesus was the bastard child of a young girl and a paedophile.

With such an upbringing it is not a surprise he became the equivalent of a present day money grabbing evangelist con man. Again no surprise he ended up being executed.

Canadark has is theory, I have mine.
My I.Q. is 85. Or was it 58?

Re: Sacrifice of Jesus.... Was it really?
« Reply #29 on: November 04, 2010, 06:05:12 PM »
Yes. Conviction does not imply guilt. You cannot make a strong case that Christ was a criminal by virtue of the fact that he received a criminal's punishment.
With all due respect, one cannot make a strong case about anything concerning Christ given the source material we have at our disposal.

How does the source material for Christ compare to that of other historical figures from the same century?

Be more specific.
You simply have nothing solid on which to proceed here. I don't think I can be much clearer.
You are going to have to try. When did I make an argument from the position of ignorance?

Well, you brought it up. Using Charles Manson and pogroms as analogies is in very poor taste.
It is pertinent.

The Bible goes out of its way to absolve the Romans of responsibility in Jesus' death. Hell, it even has the Jews declare themselves guilty of it.

You have already admitted that you would accept anything submitted to you by Manson's "family" concerning his trial at face value if it were the only available account. I apologize if you found the analogy offensive, but it has rendered some extremely interesting insight. Rest assured that your moral indignation, whether feigned or not, was not provoked in vain!

But the only thing that Manson had in common with Christ was that they were both punished. Is that enough for you to assume that they both deserved what they received?

A better comparison would be the execution of Socrates, as it doesn't carry the immediate negative connotations we associate with Manson. Assuming that you only had his testimony and that of his followers to go on, would you consider his death to have been justified?

We are not guilty because of Adam's sins. If that were the case then how could Christ have been considered perfect, given that he too was descended from Adam?
I'm not going to try and reconcile discrepancies in your religion. All I know is what the Bible tells me.

The Gospels are rife with people being cursed because of the actions of their forebears. We are still apparently paying for them to this day.

People suffer because of the actions of others, but Christ addressed this issue specifically when the disciples asked him about it in John 9:

As he went along, he saw a man blind from birth. 2 His disciples asked him, “Rabbi, who sinned, this man or his parents, that he was born blind?” "Neither this man nor his parents sinned,” said Jesus, “but this happened so that the works of God might be displayed in him. As long as it is day, we must do the works of him who sent me. Night is coming, when no one can work. While I am in the world, I am the light of the world.”

But this is beside the point. You were making the case the the Bible supports the idea of guilt by association in order to justify using it as an argument against Christianity. It simply does not, but even if it did, you would still be a hypocrite.

But whereas I site written evidence suggesting Christ's innocence, all he has to go on is a hunch that it was a conspiracy.
What evidence? There is no reason to assume the Evangelists were anything more than apologists for a convicted criminal.

Again, you are utilizing the appeal to ignorancehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Argument_from_ignorance.
Your statement amounts to the following:

"You have no proof (that I am willing to accept) that Jesus was not a criminal, therefore I must conclude that he is".

If we are going to accept this as a valid argument then I must concede that you are correct. Then again, you have no proof that Jesus was not a walrus. Prove me wrong or I will be forced to conclude that he was! ;)

As you can see, I cannot prove a negative.
« Last Edit: November 04, 2010, 06:19:56 PM by Canadark »
There is evidence for a NASA conspiracy. Please search.