Does all of Christianity operate under a shared delusion?

A) All you said to me was a quote that said if my death is consided as having saved the tribe, it was human sacrifice... but maybe, maybe not (how would I know what they would do after I was dead?). If they did everything but choose me?

B) We didn't choose Jesus.

Mister Emu said:

A) All you said to me was a quote that said if my death is consided as having saved the tribe, it was human sacrifice... but maybe, maybe not (how would I know what they would do after I was dead?). If they did everything but choose me?

B) We didn't choose Jesus.

Click to expand...

I've seen some back-peddling and side-stepping in this thread, but that one is the most ludicrous of all.

LOL

:clap

yuvgotmel said:

Unless you have since recanted what you wrote earlier, then the last sentence is perfectly fitting.

Click to expand...

Context. There's a little word called context.

Jesus can have died on the cross in order to set us free from sin without that death constituting what you think of as a human sacrifice. Look at your own list of parial criteria for human sacrifice. #1 is (paraphrased), "Select a victim." But we didn't choose Jesus. Jesus chose us.

Therefore, the crucifixion cannot be seen to be a human sacrifice.

Umm... O... K...

What did I sidestep, and what did I backpedal from?

"But, if death is regarded as having saved the tribe, then we are in the presence of human sacrifice

Click to expand...

Your quote to me.

A group of people choose a victim for their ritual.

Click to expand...

Your first point of human sacrifice traits.

sojourner said:

Context. There's a little word called context.

Jesus can have died on the cross in order to set us free from sin without that death constituting what you think of as a human sacrifice. Look at your own list of parial criteria for human sacrifice. #1 is (paraphrased), "Select a victim." But we didn't choose Jesus. Jesus chose us.

Therefore, the crucifixion cannot be seen to be a human sacrifice.

Click to expand...

yuvgotmel said:

[FONT=Times New Roman, Times, serif]“On hearing this, Jesus said, ‘It is not the healthy who need a doctor, but the sick. But go and learn what this means: [/FONT]​

[FONT=Times New Roman, Times, serif]‘I desire mercy, not sacrifice.’’”[/FONT]​

[FONT=Times New Roman, Times, serif]Matthew 9:12~13[/FONT]

​

Deuteronomy 12:23~25: "Be extremely careful not to eat the blood, since the blood is associated with the spiritual nature, and when you eat flesh, you shall not ingest the spiritual nature along with it. Since you must not eat the blood, you can pour it on the ground like water. If you do not eat it, you and your descendants will have a good life, since you will be doing what is morally right in God's eyes."

Joel 1:5: “Wake up, you drunkards, and weep! Wail, all you drinkers of wine; wail because of the new wine, for it has been snatched from your lips.”

Deuteronomy 24:16: “Fathers shall not be put to death for their children, nor children put to death for their fathers; each is to die for his own sin.”


​

Nite nite kids...:sleep:
​

​

Click to expand...

We did not sacrifice Christ. But the very act of God becoming one of us and becoming obedient, even to the point of suffering death, was certainly an act of mercy on the part of God toward humanity.

I posted this elsewhere but it seemed fitting here too:
What many Christians fail to understand is the very premise which they prescribed as their supporting evidence (i.e. "the old testament") contridicts their understanding of the "new testament," especially in lieu of a "man-god" (i.e. "Jesus"). Even the Jewish view of a "Messiah" is much different from the Christian version.

Because my words will most likely fall on deaf ears, I won't bother looking up the specific book, chapter and verses about "god" not having any form whatsoever.

Furthermore, the idea that "god" could come in the form of flesh and blood and die is rather non-sensical.

At any rate, for what it's worth, there is my response.

Most likely, it won't be heard, but it's there anyway.

yuvgotmel said:

Furthermore, the idea that "god" could come in the form of flesh and blood and die is rather non-sensical.

Click to expand...

Thanks for the heads up here... although you are a couple of millennium too late with this original thought:

I Corinthians 1:18 For the message of the cross is foolishness to those who are perishing, but to us who are being saved it is the power of God. 19 For it is written:
"I will destroy the wisdom of the wise;
the intelligence of the intelligent I will frustrate." 20 Where is the wise man? Where is the scholar? Where is the philosopher of this age? Has not God made foolish the wisdom of the world? 21 For since in the wisdom of God the world through its wisdom did not know him, God was pleased through the foolishness of what was preached to save those who believe. 22 Jews demand miraculous signs and Greeks look for wisdom, 23 but we preach Christ crucified: a stumbling block to Jews and foolishness to Gentiles, 24 but to those whom God has called, both Jews and Greeks, Christ the power of God and the wisdom of God. 25 For the foolishness of God is wiser than man's wisdom, and the weakness of God is stronger than man's strength. NIV


You don't "get it"... yeah, we knew that.

yuvgotmel said:

This is the Romanian Orthodox creed...
http://www.stmaryro.org/en/default.asp?contentid=704

THE CREED
I believe in One God, Father Almighty, Maker of heaven and earth and of all things visible and invisible. And in One Lord, Jesus Christ, the only begotten Son of God, begotten of the Father before all ages. Light of Light, true God of true God, begotten, not created, of one essence with the Father, through whom all things were made.
For us and for our salvation He came down from heaven and was incarnate by the Holy Spirit and the Virgin Mary and became Man. He was crucified for us under Pontius Pilate, and He suffered and was buried. On the third day He rose according to the Scriptures.
He ascended into heaven and is seated at the right hand of the Father. He will come again with glory to judge the living and the dead. His kingdom will have no end.
And in the Holy Spirit, the Lord, Giver of Life, who proceeds from the Father, who together with the Father and the Son is worshipped and glorified, who spoke through the prophets.
In one, holy, catholic, and apostolic Church.
I acknowledge one baptism for the forgiveness of sins.
I expect the resurrection of the dead; and the life of the age, to come. Amen.

​

http://www.romanianorthodoxchurch.com/index.cfm?pkLink_ID=17

For us and for our salvation He came down from heaven and was incarnate by the Holy Spirit and the Virgin Mary and became Man. He was crucified for us under Pontius Pilate, and He suffered and was buried.

​

Click to expand...

There is no suich thing as the Romanian Orthodox Creed as there is no such thing as the Romanian Orthodox faith. There is only the Orthodox faith and its Creed is the Nicene-Constantinopolitan Creed. The closest you could come to a Romanian Orthodox Creed would be to post the Creed in Romanian, but thi is English.

Look, you've already demonstrated your willingness to twist texts to your own meaning rather than attempt to understand them as we understand them. No text, secular or religious, actually stands alone - there is no such thing as an objective meaning. You will now claim that the Creed proves we believe in the necessity of Blood Sacrifice, but as we don't yoou'd be wrong. You're misreading the words based on your assumption that we do and your wish that this is in fact so.

I do not dispute anything in that Creed. Christ was Incarnate for us and died for us. The method of his death was Crucifixion. That still doesn't make it sacrifice. If you assume sacrifice (which presupposes Penbal Substitutionary Atonement where the Father sacrifices the Son before He can forgive the offence of Adam) then you will se it in the Creed, but those words most certainly do not rule out the self-sacrifice of a loving God who lays down His life for the sake of man, so that in dying He might rise again and break the bonds of death and sin. That's what we believe, and that's a much older view than the one you are trying to tell me I adhere to. Please stop preaching at me and LISTEN FOR A CHANGE. Where, in that view, is there any hint of blood sacrifice being a necessity? Self-sacrifice (presumably to you too, as you've conscientiously avoided answering those of you who called you on the issue) is not, by any means the same as sacrifice.

James

sojourner said:

Maybe SOME of the Christian community suffers under the delusion of human sacrifice, but not ALL by a long shot. You just don't get to pass that kind of judgment on us. You're entitled to your opinions, but then...so are the rest of us.

The creed reads:
"...For our sake he was crucified under Pontius Pilate; he suffered death and was buried."

But that doesn't carry the implication that you seem to think it does.

Might I suggest that the delusion does not lie in the Christian viewpoint, but in the opinions of those "pundits" who do not understand Christian theology?

Click to expand...

Here, here.

James

yuvgotmel said:

Let me ask you this....

Does your "hypothetical" situation include rituals of:

Click to expand...

Even if it did, your post proves that our faith does not believe in the sacrifice you believe we do. Let me demonstrate:

--communion (whereby the tribe commemorates your deed by eating your flesh and drinking your blood)

Click to expand...

We don't commemorate Christ's deed. That's not what the Eucharist means to the pre-Reformation churches at all. And might I point out that Christ instituted the Eucharist before the Crucifixion - so clearly you aren't understanding it correctly in that respect either.

--praying to you as a "messenger" between you and "god" (i.e. a father, or whatever)

Click to expand...

We don't see Christ as a messenger between God and man at all. He is the reconciler of man to God being both fully God and fully man - clearly your grasp of Christology and soteriology is no better than your understanding of the Eucharist.

And did the tribe SELECT you to begin with to be the one to "sacrifice" for them?

Click to expand...

Christians didn't select Christ either. Nobody but God did that. As I clearly stated earlier, the self-sacrifice begins at the Incarnation of God the Son, not at the Crucifixion. Again you demonstrate not only your ignorance but your unwillingness to listen and your wilfull distortion of our faith.

Will you be venerated as a "god" after your death?

Click to expand...

Quite apart from your misuse of venerate (and you ought to know the difference if discussing with christians) Christ was never worshipped as a god, but as God, and He accepted said worship whilst still alive.

There are more attributes, but you get the gist....

Click to expand...

Then why not supply them so that we can laugh at their inapplicability to Christian faith as well?

James

Heya sojourner,
I am unsure how you are using "empirical method". Can you please list a few so I understand your meaning?

I am also still unsure on the difference between "what is true" and "what is". How can you claim "what is" without inferring "truth"? Please give me an example of a claim or belief that is of the type "what is" but does not impart or attempt to impart truth.

Heya Mr Emu,
I have one or two qualms with that definition.
Firstly, I mean "to successfully uphold or defend as warranted or well-grounded" (I was unsure whether that was being implied).
Secondly, in order to warrant success, a justification has to pass certain criteria. These criteria are set up according to the premise that it is more rational to accept the more plausible solution than to accept the less plausible solution. So in another words, a justification must successfully demonstrate why whatever it is justifying is more plausible than the alternatives.

To put it another way, if the premise "the Christian God exists" can be shown to be the most plausible belief to hold compared to the alternatives and according to current information then it can rationally be held as truth. Otherwise it is more rational to accept it as false until new information is recieved.

JamesThePersian said:

///You will now claim that the Creed proves we believe in the necessity of Blood Sacrifice, but as we don't yoou'd be wrong. You're misreading the words based on your assumption that we do and your wish that this is in fact so.

I do not dispute anything in that Creed. Christ was Incarnate for us and died for us. The method of his death was Crucifixion. That still doesn't make it sacrifice. If you assume sacrifice (which presupposes Penbal Substitutionary Atonement where the Father sacrifices the Son before He can forgive the offence of Adam) then you will se it in the Creed, but those words most certainly do not rule out the self-sacrifice of a loving God who lays down His life for the sake of man, so that in dying He might rise again and break the bonds of death and sin. That's what we believe, and that's a much older view than the one you are trying to tell me I adhere to. ///

Click to expand...

The breakdown in communication, at least as I've been able to figure it out, is that uvgotmel does indeed come from a Christian background that believes in the Penal-Substitutionary Atonement. And, most likely, from the POV of the flavor of Christianity she was raised in, and has now rejected, the Penal-Sub doctrine is the only one that qualifies as "True Christian."


So, if you don't believe in the Penal-Sub Atonement, you're not a 'real' Christian.

And if you do and are thus are a 'real' Christian, you believe in a human blood sacrifice. :cover:

Circular, I know, but that seems to be her case.

On top of this, I think even the various nuances of the Penal-Sub/Sacrifical Atonement theology do not fit 'blood sacrifice' as uvgotmel presents it.

lunamoth said:

The breakdown in communication, at least as I've been able to figure it out, is that uvgotmel does indeed come from a Christian background that believes in the Penal-Substitutionary Atonement. And, most likely, from the POV of the flavor of Christianity she was raised in, and has now rejected, the Penal-Sub doctrine is the only one that qualifies as "True Christian."
.

Click to expand...

Or if I'm wrong I hope uvgotmel will clarify because otherwise this whole thing has me really perplexed.

lunamoth said:

Or if I'm wrong I hope uvgotmel will clarify because otherwise this whole thing has me really perplexed.

Click to expand...

Thanks for your kindness Lunamoth.

As far as this thread is concerned, I feel as if I have said everything that needs to be said, unless otherwise feel the need to say anything more. I'm refraining from responding to any more posts on this thread. That is not due to cowardess or lack of information; rather, I feel, at this time, that I should let the chips fall where they may.

lunamoth said:

The breakdown in communication, at least as I've been able to figure it out, is that uvgotmel does indeed come from a Christian background that believes in the Penal-Substitutionary Atonement. And, most likely, from the POV of the flavor of Christianity she was raised in, and has now rejected, the Penal-Sub doctrine is the only one that qualifies as "True Christian."


So, if you don't believe in the Penal-Sub Atonement, you're not a 'real' Christian.

And if you do and are thus are a 'real' Christian, you believe in a human blood sacrifice. :cover:

Circular, I know, but that seems to be her case.

On top of this, I think even the various nuances of the Penal-Sub/Sacrifical Atonement theology do not fit 'blood sacrifice' as uvgotmel presents it.

Click to expand...

Well said. I think you've hit the nail on the head. I don't quite think that Penal Substitutionary Atonement fits yuvgotmel's blood sacrifice either as it means God sacrificing God for the sake of man, though that idea does come closest to what she claims is our 'shared delusion'. I wanted to give frubals but I couldn't. I'll owe you for later.

James

Scuba Pete said:

Thanks for the heads up here... although you are a couple of millennium too late with this original thought:

I Corinthians 1:18 For the message of the cross is foolishness to those who are perishing, but to us who are being saved it is the power of God. 19 For it is written:
"I will destroy the wisdom of the wise;
the intelligence of the intelligent I will frustrate." 20 Where is the wise man? Where is the scholar? Where is the philosopher of this age? Has not God made foolish the wisdom of the world? 21 For since in the wisdom of God the world through its wisdom did not know him, God was pleased through the foolishness of what was preached to save those who believe. 22 Jews demand miraculous signs and Greeks look for wisdom, 23 but we preach Christ crucified: a stumbling block to Jews and foolishness to Gentiles, 24 but to those whom God has called, both Jews and Greeks, Christ the power of God and the wisdom of God. 25 For the foolishness of God is wiser than man's wisdom, and the weakness of God is stronger than man's strength. NIV


You don't "get it"... yeah, we knew that.

Click to expand...

Excellent !!, well quoted scuba pete,It's ironic how so many carry on trying to explain the things of the spirit of God with the human intellect alone and the best they can do is deface, slam and continually fail at accurately understanding scripture.
yet they seem to think the born again christian is deluded.
Someday, it will very interesting to find out who the deluded are in this world.
It was for this reasom that Jesus was careful with who he shared scripture to and revealed the kingdom mysteries.
Jesus says,Mat 7:6 Give not that which is holy unto the dogs, neither cast ye your pearls before swine, lest they trample them under their feet, and turn again and rend you why "don't cast your pearl before swine"
Why, it was a waste of precious treasures of God 's word given to someone who was just going to mock ,ridicul;e and deface the Holy things of God.
Those people then and today are locked out of the things of the spirit of God until they humble themselves and cry out to God for mercy,but ,that is another thread ,man thinks of himself more highly than God.

Mysteries
Jesus , says Mat 13:11He answered and said unto them, Because it is given unto you to know the mysteries of the kingdom of heaven, but to them it is not given.as it is those without the spirit will always remain,Therefore speak I to them in parables: because they seeing see not; and hearing they hear not, neither do they understand. WHY !!!! is that 15)For this people's heart is waxed gross, and [their] ears are dull of hearing, and their eyes they have closed; lest at any time they should see with [their] eyes, and hear with [their] ears, and should understand with [their] heart, and should be converted, and I should heal them.

Mister Emu said:

Edit: Changed to support a more productive interaction.

Do all Christian sects have a shared delusion?

If, in your opinion, so, what is it(God exists? God interacts with humanity? etc.)

By what method can we ascertain whether a religion is deluded?

Click to expand...

Scuba Pete said:

Thanks for the heads up here... although you are a couple of millennium too late with this original thought:

I Corinthians 1:18 For the message of the cross is foolishness to those who are perishing, but to us who are being saved it is the power of God. 19 For it is written:
"I will destroy the wisdom of the wise;
the intelligence of the intelligent I will frustrate." 20 Where is the wise man? Where is the scholar? Where is the philosopher of this age? Has not God made foolish the wisdom of the world? 21 For since in the wisdom of God the world through its wisdom did not know him, God was pleased through the foolishness of what was preached to save those who believe. 22 Jews demand miraculous signs and Greeks look for wisdom, 23 but we preach Christ crucified: a stumbling block to Jews and foolishness to Gentiles, 24 but to those whom God has called, both Jews and Greeks, Christ the power of God and the wisdom of God. 25 For the foolishness of God is wiser than man's wisdom, and the weakness of God is stronger than man's strength. NIV


You don't "get it"... yeah, we knew that.

Click to expand...

Excellent !!, well quoted scuba pete,It's ironic how so many carry on trying to explain the things of the spirit of God with the human intellect alone and the best they can do is deface, slam and continually fail at accurately understanding scripture.
yet they seem to think the born again christian is deluded.
Someday, it will very interesting to find out who the deluded are in this world.
It was for this reasom that Jesus was careful with who he shared scripture to and revealed the kingdom mysteries.
Jesus says,Mat 7:6 Give not that which is holy unto the dogs, neither cast ye your pearls before swine, lest they trample them under their feet, and turn again and rend you why "don't cast your pearl before swine"
Why, it was a waste of precious treasures of God 's word given to someone who was just going to mock ,ridicul;e and deface the Holy things of God.
Those people then and today are locked out of the things of the spirit of God until they humble themselves and cry out to God for mercy,but ,that is another thread ,man thinks of himself more highly than God.

Mysteries
Jesus , says Mat 13:11He answered and said unto them, Because it is given unto you to know the mysteries of the kingdom of heaven, but to them it is not given.as it is those without the spirit will always remain,Therefore speak I to them in parables: because they seeing see not; and hearing they hear not, neither do they understand. WHY !!!! is that 15) For this people's heart is waxed gross, and [their] ears are dull of hearing, and their eyes they have closed; lest at any time they should see with [their] eyes, and hear with [their] ears, and should understand with [their] heart, and should be converted, and I should heal them.

Individuals operate under delusions, but "Christianity" can't (without engaging in a little bit of delusion to get there). Everyone operates under at least some delusion.

For my purposes, "delusion" means the confusion between the things one creates in thought and imagination and the projected reality outside of thought and imagination. Put another way, "delusion" is the lack of construct awareness.

As I stated in my last post, regarding the mysteries of God, Jesus spoke continuously in parables and mysteries.What appears a delusion from those outside the Christian faith is in reality a secret ,a hidden mystery that only those who come to faith in Jesus are privy to.
Won't that cause some ripples in the water!!!!! ouch!!!!!.
But it's true, the natural man in his own intellect,logic and reasoning mind will not undersatnd the things of God they are foolishness nor can he understand them ,because they are "SPIRITUALLY " discerned. 1Cor 2