jasonwill2
Well-Known Member
Christianity is based on salvation through Jesus's death, how is it not based on a sacrifice? Also the "Ceremony" was not the intent of those killing him, but it basically came out to that in function in what role it plays in Christianity.
Also I don't care how Christians see it, because they are blind due to their odd way of looking at it. I look at it for what it is: hypocritcal. They go on and on about Satanists and blood and human sacrifice, yet RIGHT THERE in their book their god was sacrificed for their salvation. Don't believe me? Jesus was the "lamb", in the sense that like the lambs that were sacrificed at the Temple, so would he. It is definitely clear for anyone who knows the Bible well enough that the spilling of Jesus's blood was the payment for sins in the EXACT same way that animals were, only that since he was god, it would last forever and not be temporary like with the animals. Hence as the animal sacrifices were an image of Christ's coming, so was his death A LITERAL HUMAN SACRIFICE.
And if you somehow object to this view, keep in mind that this is what I was taught when I was a Christian, and shown in the Bible. It's not my beliefs, at least not anymore, but it is essentially what Christianity is about, at least in terms of those who are "Bible believing".
But it actually doesn't make sense to be a Christian and not believe in the Bible, and so I assume Christians believe in at least the Bible, even if with other things:
THE SATANIC BIBLE
Book of Lucifer
"Some Evidence of a New Satanic Age"
"When one name is no longer appropriate for a given thing it is only logical to change it to a new one which better fits the subject. Why, then, do we not follow suit in the area of religion? Why continue to call a religion the same name when the tenets of that religion no longer fit the original one? Or, if religion does preach the same things that it always has, but its followers practice nearly none of its teachings, why do they continue to call themselves by the name given to followers of that religion?
If you do not believe in what your religion teaches, why continue to support a belief which is contradictory with your feelings. You would never vote for a person or issue you did not believe in, so why cast your ecclesiastical vote for a religion which is not consistent with your convictions? You have no right to complain about a political situation you have voted for or supported in any way - which includes sitting back and complacently agreeing with neighbors who approve the situation, just because you are too lazy or cowardly to speak your mind. So it is with religious balloting. Even if you cannot be aggressively honest about your opinions because of unfavorable consequences from employers, community leaders, etc., you can, at least, be honest with yourself. In the privacy of your own home and with close friends you must support religion which has YOUR best interests at heart. "
It seems to me that if you do not believe in the Bible or Jesus's teachings, then you should just stop calling yourself a Christian. Likewise, any "Bible-believing" Christian essentially is embracing a human sacrifice as his ticket to paradise. Sure, it was a one time only sacrifice to end all blood sacrifice, but it was still a human sacrifice which is my entire point.
