Where is the sacrifice?

[bobhikes]

Yeah; he lost the whole weekend; but sacrificing your life is much more than a weekend.

Yes sacrificing is more than a weekend, He had no Family, He had no money, He had no physical home, he lived off the kindness of others, his friends rejected him in his last hours. He sacrificed his whole life as an example for others, unfortunately most don't follow his example. You hear its unrealistic, he was god's son so it was easy for him, no human could do what it says he did. Which is why if you believe in Revelations only a very small amount of people are actually going to heaven.

 

[Quintessence]

He was temporally inconvenienced. To die for 3 days, then come back to life is more of a temporally inconvenience of your life; not a sacrafice of your life IMO.

While I hope you have more compassion for humans who have been "temporarily inconvenienced" for various reasons, I don't think that much matters in the case of someone you never knew, may or may not have been a historical figure, and who isn't important in your life.

In any case, do you understand how your own assumptions are shaping your assessment of the situation and that's quite possibly the thing you are missing? Keep in mind as a Pagan I couldn't care less what you think about Jesus. I'm just hoping you recognize that the way you interpret this is of your own making and you are "missing" the significance Christians see because you are deciding to tell the story differently for yourself.

 

[dybmh]

temporally inconvenience

for an eternal being, temporal has no meaning. that 'inconvenience' never ends.

 

[Colt]

Sin, Sacrifice, and Atonement
​

89:0.1 (974.1) PRIMITIVE man regarded himself as being in debt to the spirits, as standing in need of redemption. As the savages looked at it, in justice the spirits might have visited much more bad luck upon them. As time passed, this concept developed into the doctrine of sin and salvation. The soul was looked upon as coming into the world under forfeit—original sin. The soul must be ransomed; a scapegoat must be provided. The head-hunter, in addition to practicing the cult of skull worship, was able to provide a substitute for his own life, a scapeman.

89:0.2 (974.2) The savage was early possessed with the notion that spirits derive supreme satisfaction from the sight of human misery, suffering, and humiliation. At first, man was only concerned with sins of commission, but later he became exercised over sins of omission. And the whole subsequent sacrificial system grew up around these two ideas. This new ritual had to do with the observance of the propitiation ceremonies of sacrifice. Primitive man believed that something special must be done to win the favor of the gods; only advanced civilization recognizes a consistently even-tempered and benevolent God. Propitiation was insurance against immediate ill luck rather than investment in future bliss. And the rituals of avoidance, exorcism, coercion, and propitiation all merge into one another." UB 1955 IMOP

 

[Kfox]

I think the correct way to understand this is, Jesus used his life for other people, similarly as a soldier can sacrifice his life by defending his country. Jesus could have used his life for himself, but instead of that, used it for us. He didn't get that time back, so it can be said he sacrificed it.

When a Soldier sacrifice his life by defending the country, he does not get that life back; he remains dead. To temporarily use your life to help others is akin to volunteering at the soup kitchen to help feed the homeless; you never get that time back, but that is not the same as sacrificing your life

 

[Kfox]

While I hope you have more compassion for humans who have been "temporarily inconvenienced" for various reasons, I don't think that much matters in the case of someone you never knew, may or may not have been a historical figure, and who isn't important in your life.

In any case, do you understand how your own assumptions are shaping your assessment of the situation and that's quite possibly the thing you are missing?

No; what am I missing?

Keep in mind as a Pagan I couldn't care less what you think about Jesus. I'm just hoping you recognize that the way you interpret this is of your own making and you are "missing" the significance Christians see because you are deciding to tell the story differently for yourself.

How is my story I'm telling different?

 

[Kfox]

for an eternal being, temporal has no meaning. that 'inconvenience' never ends.

When it is no longer an inconvenience, it has ended.

 

[dybmh]

When it is no longer an inconvenience, it has ended.

Eternal means never ending, every moment lasts forever. There is no end. I think I posted a link to Stanford University to help with this. I know it's difficult to imagine.

 

[Quintessence]

No; what am I missing?

How is my story I'm telling different?

You understand "sacrifice" in a very specific way that is unique to you and not necessarily shared by others. That's the story you tell - about what sacrifice means for you. If you want to understand the sacrifice of Jesus from the perspective of those who worship them, you need to suspend your interpretation and your version of the story and instead listen to the meaning gleaned by those who follow these stories in their lives. It's akin to understanding, say, climate science by listening to climate scientists... or understanding Druidry by listening to Druids... or understanding carpentry by listening to practicing carpenters, in a way? If you really want to understand others stories, you've gotta let them speak and listen to how they tell it on their merits instead of judging it by your own standard all the time. In my experience, various worldviews all more or less make sense when approached from within their own narratives. Doesn't mean I agree with them in my own way of life, but that's missing the point.

 

[Kfox]

Eternal means never ending, every moment lasts forever. There is no end. I think I posted a link to Stanford University to help with this. I know it's difficult to imagine.

Eternity means that which is eternal last forever. Moments are by definition are not temporary.

 

[Kfox]

You understand "sacrifice" in a very specific way that is unique to you and not necessarily shared by others. That's the story you tell - about what sacrifice means for you. If you want to understand the sacrifice of Jesus from the perspective of those who worship them, you need to suspend your interpretation and your version of the story and instead listen to the meaning gleaned by those who follow these stories in their lives. It's akin to understanding, say, climate science by listening to climate scientists... or understanding Druidry by listening to Druids... or understanding carpentry by listening to practicing carpenters, in a way? If you really want to understand others stories, you've gotta let them speak and listen to how they tell it on their merits instead of judging it by your own standard all the time. In my experience, various worldviews all more or less make sense when approached from within their own narratives. Doesn't mean I agree with them in my own way of life, but that's missing the point.

So if I understand you correctly, when they say Jesus sacrificed his life for mankind, this is sacrifice in accordance to the Christian definition of sacrifice, not the commonly usage of the word, is that correct?

 

[dybmh]

Eternity means that which is eternal last forever. Moments are by definition are not temporary.

I think there is more to this concept of time than you are aware of which is in support of the suggestion that there are unknown assumptions being made.

Time's Passage is Probably an Illusion

From the fixed past to the tangible present to the undecided future, it feels as though time flows inexorably on. But that is an illusion

www.scientificamerican.com

 

[Quintessence]

So if I understand you correctly, when they say Jesus sacrificed his life for mankind, this is sacrifice in accordance to the Christian definition of sacrifice, not the commonly usage of the word, is that correct?

Sort of, but not really?

Funny thing is, after consultation with a few different standard dictionaries, none of them stipulate a sacrifice must be permanent to be a sacrifice, so.... er....



But naturally, this is all Christianity's fault and they're in the wrong here. Carry on, I guess.

 

[Kfox]

Sort of, but not really?

Funny thing is, after consultation with a few different standard dictionaries, none of them stipulate a sacrifice must be permanent to be a sacrifice, so.... er....



But naturally, this is all Christianity's fault and they're in the wrong here. Carry on, I guess.

To sacrifice means to give something up for a cause.

Sacrifice - Definition, Meaning & Synonyms

A sacrifice is a loss or something you give up, usually for the sake of a better cause. Parents sacrifice time and sleep to take care of their children, while kids might sacrifice TV time to hang out with mom and dad.

www.vocabulary.com

To give up your life means you die. If your death is not permanent, it's meaningless.

 

[Kfox]

I think there is more to this concept of time than you are aware of which is in support of the suggestion that there are unknown assumptions being made.

Time's Passage is Probably an Illusion

From the fixed past to the tangible present to the undecided future, it feels as though time flows inexorably on. But that is an illusion

www.scientificamerican.com

View attachment 81224

Are these hypothetical?

 

[Quintessence]

To sacrifice means to give something up for a cause

To give up your life means you die. If your death is not permanent, it's meaningless.

That is your opinion, one that Christians obviously do not share (and that I don't either, even as a non-Christian).

I'm getting the impression you aren't really interested in understanding others' perspectives here, in spite of asking in the OP "am I missing something" as if you were interested in such things. Seems at this point that you were being rhetorical and have already decided your answer is the correct one and everyone else is wrong. Fair enough, I suppose, though gotta wonder what the point of making this thread was in that case.

 

[dybmh]

Are these hypothetical?

Did you read the article? Aren't we talking about a hypothetical sacrifice, where the one who is sacrificed is eternal? If you intend to move the goal posts, then we can be done with the conversation.

 

[Kfox]

Did you read the article? Aren't we talking about a hypothetical sacrifice, where the one who is sacrificed is eternal?

I'm not getting this; how does one sacrifice his life, yet live eternally?

 

[Stevicus]

I'm not getting this; how does one sacrifice his life, yet live eternally?

If we're assuming the story has any validity at all (which is a stretch), then the idea is that everyone lives eternally in some kind of afterlife. If true, then no one ever sacrifices their life, since the assumption is that they will live eternally.

 

[dybmh]

I'm not getting this; how does one sacrifice his life, yet live eternally?

The 'sacrificing his life' are the all the events leading up to and including an experience of rejection, torture, death which is, for lack of better words, always and forever occuring. Maybe think of it like groundhogs day? Or eternal damnation? Or any other eternal punishment? In this case it's the experience of being rejected, then tortured, then death, all of which the individual has volunteered.

The challenge is, trying to understand that this is an all powerful being, which is adopting these human characteristics, these human death and torture experiences and feeling them just as a human would.

And then, if one applies the consequence of being eternal, then all of these awful experiences are happening continuously without end. Even the last moments where a human would be succumbing to their physical demise, losing concsiousness, everything going black, the fear of the unknown, all of the things that person would feel, if they were hung up by the romans, all of those awful feelings would never end.

It seems that your objection is, "but he rose again, so, it's not a sacrifice of life, because, he could do **stuff** after that", right?

The problem with this objection is that it assumes a linear sequential time-line experience that finite time-bound human would experience. That doesn't work for an eternal being. It's not a linear sequential time-line experience. So there is no 'before', there is no 'after'. Saying "but he rose 3 days later, so there was no sacrifice", doesn't work here. There's no 'later', that doesn't apply here.