1. Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Redemption through Divine Blood

Discussion in 'Theological Concepts' started by godnotgod, Mar 4, 2013.

  1. godnotgod

    godnotgod not born, not dead

    Messages:
    7,607
    One of the core doctrines of Christianity is the redemption of sin via the shedding of the divine blood of Jesus through his Crucifixion and Death:

    'Take this, all of you, and drink from it: for this is the chalice of my blood, the blood of the new and eternal covenant.which will be poured out for you and for many for the forgiveness of sins.'

    If faith is required anywhere in the teachings, it is here, since no one knows exactly how this is accomplished. One must only have unquestioning faith that it does.
    Therefore, a scapegoat was required as the host upon whose back both sin and guilt were transferred and carried, this being reflected in the Jewish image of the scape-goat that is sent into the wilderness to perish. (Leviticus), the prefigurement of Jesus as scapegoat 'bearing the sins of the world', and as the sacrificial 'Lamb of God'.

    Many of the ancients believed that the blood carried the life-force. If a warrior was slain on the battlefield, it was practice to drink his blood while still warm as a means of acquiring his warrior powers.

    The Jewish practice of sin redemption via animal sacrifice seems to be the forerunner of the Christian belief.

    In Mithraism, the bull is slaughtered and its flesh and blood were literally eaten and drunk as Eucharist.

    In the East, however, it was the breath that was considered the life-force, a vital pathway to achieving Enlightenment. This was not based on belief, but on direct practice and the experience of spiritual transformation. This, too, was the practice of Yeshu the Essene, before his teachings were corrupted and/or destroyed by Rome, overwritten with those of St. Paul's 'Jesus', whose myth is the same as that of Mithra.

    Therefore, the retention of the doctrine of sin redemption via blood sacrifice within Christianity is a pagan ritual, based purely on superstition, having no basis in fact or via direct experience, as in meditation and spiritual transformation of consciousness. It's efficacy is purely a product of the belief that it is so, with virtually no understanding as to how it is achieved. In this sense, we are talking about something called 'white magic', culminating in the ritual of the Mass, wherein wine and bread are believed to be literally transformed into the flesh and blood of Jesus Christ (ie; 'transubstantiation'). The process of sin redemption is two-fold: contrition, repentance and confession, and then the partaking of the Eucharist as a means of entering into the state of grace.

    Yeshu's original teachings did not include blood sacrifice. In fact, Yeshu would have been a vegetarian as a practitioner in the Nazarene Essene community. Removing the layers of overwritten Roman doctrines is akin to removing the layers painted over Michelangelo's Sistine Chapel frescoes to reveal their true beauty hidden underneath.

    It should be noted that, according to Essene teachings, which are said to be three-tiered, the first tier is for the initiates, while the second and third are of the inner Mysteries, of which the initiates would not have understood. It was the members of this first tier of initiates who broke with the Essenes and became the first Christians, their focus being primarily evangelistic, rather than mystical in nature. Therefore, doctrine and belief become the primary focus amongst orthodox Christians, rather than direct access to, and experience of the inner living source within, sometimes referred to as Gnosis, Namaste, the Kingdom of God, Big Mind, etc.
     
    Last edited: Mar 4, 2013
    WyattDerp and Orias like this.
  2. Breathe

    Breathe Bitter Edgelord :^)

    Messages:
    17,212
    Religion:
    Complicated but fairly consistent
    How do you know it was his practice?
    What does the East have to do with the Semitic beliefs, however, with what Jesus would have known, which says in the Torah, the life a creature is in its blood? (Leviticus 17:11)

    What makes you think they were corrupted or destroyed by Rome?

    Why do you think that?



    Why do you think Jesus was either a Nazarene or an Essene?

    Why do you think that:

    A: The Essene's beliefs were three-tiered?
    B: The Essenes and Christians were once one group?
    C: That Christianity's focus is primarily evangelical, when Christianity has a fair bit of emphasis on "the mystery of God", "the mystery of the Trinity", etc, etc?
     
  3. godnotgod

    godnotgod not born, not dead

    Messages:
    7,607
    Any professed interest in 'the mystery of God' or 'the Trinity' is purely superficial and belief-based, and only serves the real interest, which is evangelism, conversion, and 'salvation':

    "Go ye into all the world and preach the Gospel to every creature" (Mark 16:15)

    "Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost" (Matthew 28:20)
     
    Last edited: Mar 4, 2013
  4. godnotgod

    godnotgod not born, not dead

    Messages:
    7,607
    Essenes are mystics practicing meditation, breath control, and yoga. Yeshu was a Jewish mystic.

    The point is that the East (ie; transcendent practices) has nothing to do with the belief of the blood being the life-force. Yeshu was a mystic, whose views were generally antagonistic toward those of the orthodox Jew.
     
  5. godnotgod

    godnotgod not born, not dead

    Messages:
    7,607
    Because Yeshu's teachings required real inner spiritual work. Rome considered these mystical practices too difficult and esoteric for the masses. The Church wanted a simple means by which everyone could gain salvation, and that was the simple practice of accepting 'Jesus' as one's personal Lord and Savior via mere belief, a belief that through Jesus's blood sacrifice, one was saved.
     
    Last edited: Mar 4, 2013
  6. godnotgod

    godnotgod not born, not dead

    Messages:
    7,607
    He wasn't. Yeshu was. 'Jesus' is a concoction of St. Paul:

    [FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]The first followers of Jesus [ie; Yeshu], under James and Peter, founded the Jerusalem Church after Jesus's death. They were called the Nazarenes*, and in all their beliefs they were indistinguishable from the Pharisees, except that they believed in the resurrection of Jesus, and that Jesus was still the promised Messiah. They did not believe that Jesus was a divine person, but that, by a miracle from God, he had been brought back to life after his death on the cross, and would soon come back to complete his mission of overthrowing the Romans and setting up the Messianic kingdom. The Nazarenes did not believe that Jesus had abrogated the Jewish religion, or Torah. Having known Jesus personally, they were aware that he had observed the Jewish religious law all his life and had never rebelled against it. His sabbath cures were not against Pharisee law. The Nazarenes were themselves very observant of Jewish religious law. They practiced circumcision, did not eat the forbidden foods and showed great respect to the Temple. The Nazarenes did not regard themselves as belonging to a new religion; their religion was Judaism. They set up synagogues of their own, but they also attended non-Nazarene synagogues on occasion, and performed the same kind of worship in their own synagogues as was practiced by all observant Jews. The Nazarenes became suspicious of Paul when they heard that he was preaching that Jesus was the founder of a new religion and that he had abrogated the Torah. After an attempt to reach an understanding with Paul, the Nazarenes (i.e. the Jerusalem Church under James and Peter) broke irrevocably with Paul and disowned him.

    [/FONT][FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]4 Paul, not Jesus, was the founder of Christianity as a new religion which developed away from both normal Judaism and the Nazarene variety of Judaism. In this new religion, the Torah was abrogated as having had only temporary validity. The central myth of the new religion was that of an atoning death of a divine being. Belief in this sacrifice, and a mystical sharing of the death of the deity, formed the only path to salvation. Paul derived this religion from Hellenistic sources, chiefly by a fusion of concepts taken from Gnosticism and concepts taken from the mystery religions, particularly from that of Attis. The combination of these elements with features derived from Judaism, particularly the incorporation of the Jewish scriptures, reinterpreted to provide a background of sacred history for the new myth, was unique; and Paul alone was the creator of this amalgam. Jesus himself had no idea of it, and would have been amazed and shocked at the role assigned to him by Paul as a suffering deity. Nor did Paul have any predecessors among the Nazarenes though later mythography tried to assign this role to Stephen, and modern scholars have discovered equally mythical predecessors for Paul in a group called the 'Hellenists'. Paul, as the personal begetter of the Christian myth, has never been given sufficient credit for his originality. The reverence paid through the centuries to the great Saint Paul has quite obscured the more colourful features of his personality. Like many evangelical leaders, he was a compound of sincerity and charlatanry. Evangelical leaders of his kind were common at this time in the Greco-Roman world (e.g. Simon Magus, Apollonius of Tyana).
    [/FONT]
    http://www.positiveatheism.org/hist/maccoby2.htm


    [FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]*Essenes are a sect of the Nazarenes
    [/FONT]
     
    Last edited: Mar 4, 2013
  7. godnotgod

    godnotgod not born, not dead

    Messages:
    7,607

    Mithraism, the soldier's cult, the official religion of Rome in Justin's time, celebrated a ritual meal, and archaeological evidence indicates this sacrificial community meal occupied a central position in Mithran worship. In this "divine" meal, worshipers ate the flesh of a sacrificed bull and drank its blood. When no bull was available, bread or fish were used as substitutes for the meat and wine took the place of blood. Mithran initiates believed that, by eating the flesh and drinking the blood of the bull, they would be born again and would have eternal life.


    Transubstantiation
    *****


    The Mithraic mysteries, then, of...the sacrament of bread and water... were in practice... before ...the Christian mystery of Divine communion, with bread and water or bread and wine, which last were before employed also in the mysteries of Dionysos, Sun-God and Wine-God, doubtless as representing his body and blood. But even the eucharist of bread-and-wine, as well as a bread-and-meat banquet, was inferribly present in the Mithraic cultus, for the Zoroastrian Hom or Haoma, identical with the Vedic Soma, was a species of liquor, and figured largely in the old cult as in itself a sacred thing, and ultimately as a deity = the Moon = a king. Indeed, this deification of a drink is held to be the true origin of the God Dionysos, even as Agni is a deification of the sacrificial fire. And whereas the Mazdean lore associated the Haoma-Tree with the Tree of Life in Paradise, so do we find the Catholic theologians making that predication concerning the Christian Eucharist. The "cup" of Mithra had in itself a mystical significance: in the monuments we see drinking from it the sacred serpent, the symbol of wisdom and healing. Again, as there is record of an actual eating of a lamb in early Christian mysteries —a detail still partly preserved in the Italian usage of blessing both a lamb and the baked figure of a lamb at the Easter season, but officially superseded by the wafer of the Mass—so in the old Persian cult the sacrificed flesh was mixed with bread and baked in a round cake called Myazd or Myazda, and sacramentally eaten by the worshippers.


    Pagan Christs: Part III. Mithraism: § 9. Mithraism and Christianity
     
  8. godnotgod

    godnotgod not born, not dead

    Messages:
    7,607
    "The early followers of Yeshua in the Jerusalem church had the problem of appealing to the Jews, who saw Yeshua's ignominious death as scandalizing. Paul had the same problem in appealing to the Jews, but he and the Greco-Roman missionaries also had the problem of converting the pagans, who didn't understand the conception of a Jewish messiah. But the time was short—they had to bring as many pagan converts into the fold as possible so they "would not perish, but have eternal life."

    The beliefs of the Jewish followers of Yeshua were still Jewish; Yeshua was the messiah who would return and rout the Romans to establish the Kingdom of Israel. However, those appealing to the pagans and god fearers (non-Jews who worshiped with the Jews) had to make some changes in their presentation of Yeshua for non-Jewish hearers. The promise for the pagan converts was that Yeshua was a Messiah for all of humankind (not just the Jews) and that they could have eternal life without becoming Jews by just believing that Yeshua was the messiah for humankind, whom they termed the savior. The pagan converts would then not "die," but would have eternal life because of their belief.

    These missionaries to the pagans had a major problem, however. Many pagans believed in a god named Mithra (or Mithras). Mithra was an ancient god, so he had tradition and the sacred tenor that an ancient history brings, just as Yahweh had for the Jews. He dated from around 1400 BCE, before Moses led the Israelites out of Egypt. However, Mithra was even more widely accepted than Yahweh, Moses' god. He was known, in various forms, in India, Persia, Greece, and throughout the Roman Empire. For the Greeks and Romans in the first century, Mithras (with an "s") was the chief figure in a mystery religion called Mithraism that held prominence in the Roman Empire all the way through third century CE, especially among the military. His influence spread as far north as Hadrian's Wall and Germany.

    So the followers of Yeshua had to convince the followers of Mithras that they should abandon Mithras and follow Yeshua. That would be today like standing outside St. Paul's Cathedral handing out leaflets telling Roman Catholics they should abandon Jesus Christ and follow a new God named Paul Bunyon.

    But Yeshua and Mithras had something important in common. Mithra's followers were promised immortality and he had been entombed and rose from the dead, proving that immortality was available to those who believed in him. The promise of immortality and his rising from the dead were also the central tenets of Yeshua's message as the early church promulgated it. Those weren't the central tenets of Yeshua's message as he gave it, but the early church was intent on converting people because they were certain Yeshua was going to return any minute to establish the Kingdom of God and as many people as possible needed to be converted to get them into the fold before the return. The promise to entice them to convert was eternal life in Yeshua's Kingdom of God.

    But Mithras already promised eternal life in Mithras' Kingdom of God, so why should the Mithraites convert to following Yeshua? Paul and the other followers of Yeshua outside of the Jerusalem church took care of the problem. They just made some adjustments in the story of Yeshua's life so the pagan believers in Mithras would feel at home with the Jewish Messiah. In the earliest sources (Paul's letters, written around 50 CE to 65 CE, a very early gospel termed the Q source we know from sayings in Luke and Matthew that are not in Mark, written before 70 CE, and Mark, the earliest gospel, written just after 70 CE), there was no miraculous birth and only modest supernatural occurrences in Yeshua's life. By the time Matthew and Luke wrote their gospels (around 90 CE), the story was quite different; Yeshua had a host of supernatural events surrounding his birth and death. The question is, where did these events suddenly come from?

    We find them in Mithras. The missionaries promoting Yeshua as the messiah for humankind simply wrote them into the narrations about Yeshua."


    http://30ce.com/mithras.htm
     
  9. Fingy

    Fingy Member

    Messages:
    38
    godnotgod, you are certainly on the right track in regards to Yeshua being an Essene and fully conforming with the mosaic law and the role of Paul in actually founding the Hellenistic Christ Jesus cult that dominates the globe today. However, in my opinion the similarities you draw between mithraic theology and Pauline theology are exaggerated.

    Where is your evidence for this statement?
    "Mithra's followers were promised immortality and he had been entombed and rose from the dead, proving that immortality was available to those who believed in him."

    It seems to me that the evidence on the mithraic cult is poor. As far as I know there is no surviving mithraic literature, so how can we have such detailed knowledge of their sacred rights?
     
  10. godnotgod

    godnotgod not born, not dead

    Messages:
    7,607
    Here is something of fascinating interest you may want to take a close look at.

    Quote:
    "The Mithras Liturgy received its name and fame from. A. Dieterich. in 1903 Dieterich published his valuable book, Eine MithrasLiturgie, in which he proposed that the text in question contains an official liturgy of the Mithras cult, a Mithraic ritual for the ascent and immortalization of the soul."

    Here is the rest of the article and a translation of the Mithras Liturgy into English:

    Mithras Liturgy - Papyri Graecae Magicae

    In addition, the Church fathers wrote much about Mithras, attacking the religion as having been created by the devil prior to the advent of Christianity to mock and intimidate Christians by imitating many of the Christian sacraments and the resurrection.

    Early Church Fathers on Mithraism | The Devil Did It
     
  11. godnotgod

    godnotgod not born, not dead

    Messages:
    7,607
    I don't think so. We know that Yeshu and his Essenes did not believe in the resurrecton of the body. This doctrine came from outside his teachings. Paul made a big issue of the resurrection of Jesus:

    1 Corinthians 15:14 And if Christ has not been raised, then our preaching is in vain and your faith is in vain.

    Paul was born and raised in Taurus, a center of Mithraic activity, where he would have been exposed as a child to the mystery religions, many of which featured a dying and resurrecting god. Without this doctrine, we only have the divine teacher descending to man, but no resurrection. It is the Resurrection in Christianity that is the centerpiece which proves, for the Christian, that Jesus was who he said he was. Since this doctrine is missing in Essenic teachings, it is highly likely that it came from Paul and his mystery religions. In fact, Hyam Maccoby, a rabbinic scholar, tells us this:

    [FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]Paul, not Jesus, was the founder of Christianity as a new religion which developed away from both normal Judaism and the Nazarene variety of Judaism. In this new religion, the Torah was abrogated as having had only temporary validity. The central myth of the new religion was that of an atoning death of a divine being. Belief in this sacrifice, and a mystical sharing of the death of the deity, formed the only path to salvation. Paul derived this religion from Hellenistic sources, chiefly by a fusion of concepts taken from Gnosticism and concepts taken from the mystery religions, particularly from that of Attis. The combination of these elements with features derived from Judaism, particularly the incorporation of the Jewish scriptures, reinterpreted to provide a background of sacred history for the new myth, was unique; and Paul alone was the creator of this amalgam. Jesus himself had no idea of it, and would have been amazed and shocked at the role assigned to him by Paul as a suffering deity. Nor did Paul have any predecessors among the Nazarenes though later mythography tried to assign this role to Stephen, and modern scholars have discovered equally mythical predecessors for Paul in a group called the 'Hellenists'. Paul, as the personal begetter of the Christian myth, has never been given sufficient credit for his originality. [/FONT]

    The Problem of Paul

    So Paul brilliantly synthesized three elements to launch modern Christianity: the divine teacher, the Gnosis, descending to man, taken from the Gnostics, Jewish history as backdrop to lend credibility to the myth, and a dying a resurrecting godhead, taken from the mystery religions. Again, this was the gimmick Paul used to convert tens of thousands of pagans who already had the promise of eternal life in Mithras.

    The Church did much the same thing in Mexico, when it 'adopted' the Aztec goddess, Tonantzin, and transformed her into 'Our Lady of Guadalupe Hidalgo', as a device to convert millions of indigenous Indios to Christianity. The Indios simply followed where their goddess dwelt.


    As far as I am concerned, it is the Crucifixion and blood sacrifice that is the real key to Christian doctrine, and not the Resurrection, but it is the Resurrection that lends weight to the myth of sin redemption via of the shedding of divine blood. Again, Yeshu and his Essenes did not believe in blood sacrifice; their influence came mainly from the East, where the breath is the life force that leads to Enlightenment. In addition, the healing arts that Yeshu practiced most likely came from his exposure, at the Essene monastery at Mt. Carmel, to the healing arts transmitted to them from the Theravada Buddhists of King Asoka of India, and then through the Therapeutae of Egypt and Greece.
     
  12. Orias

    Orias Left Hand Path

    Messages:
    6,166
    Some interesting reading here. Though in my opinion mysticism is a hook for the fish. Jesus being a fish, bit the hook.

    As far as redemption through Divine blood I can see that, what better way to redeem yourself to THE HIGHEST God other than to slay and collect the blood of a lesser God. Perhaps Jesus did this, perhaps he didn't, only in that knowing he was his on sacrifice could he truly catch so many in his net (or veil if you will).

    We are radiant in that we require fuel to continue this emission. Tis why living things eat living things, and living things eat dead things, and dead things eat living things.

    Now tell me, where in all of this does it say when the dead will arise?
     
  13. godnotgod

    godnotgod not born, not dead

    Messages:
    7,607
    Redemption through 'divine blood' is the question here, not Resurrection. That redemption is possible via the shedding of divine blood comes only as a result of superstitious belief that it does. That is the point.:D
     
  14. Orias

    Orias Left Hand Path

    Messages:
    6,166
    Of course! And without superstition one could not suppose that redemption through the shedding of divine blood would lead an army of the dead to rise out of purgatory and resurrect whatever idols may bring them their reckoning.

    Hail Satan!

    :bat:
     
  15. godnotgod

    godnotgod not born, not dead

    Messages:
    7,607
    It's all about God playing Hide and Seek, and pretending he is some 'other' than who he really is...God playing man pretending to die and resurrect himself so that he can reunite himself with himself when he was never separate to begin with.
     
  16. Orias

    Orias Left Hand Path

    Messages:
    6,166
    Indeed, though from birth I'd say he was separated from the seed of his own creation. As above, so below.

    Xeper!
     
  17. godnotgod

    godnotgod not born, not dead

    Messages:
    7,607
    'Separation' is part of the game of Hide and Seek, you see. It's all One Big Act between God and 'the Devil', who are really One.:D
     
  18. Orias

    Orias Left Hand Path

    Messages:
    6,166
    My understanding of opposition and the rite of Satan has shown me this many years ago.

    Within the mind of all beings there appears to be two main voices, two passages in which only one will be right. This separation exists as a benefactor to those who realize that one man's evil may be another man's good. And that with being right, one must also of been wrong.

    During the conception of this "God" he was truly separated from himself, being that himself was his own father. An experience that was lost, and a memory that can't be recalled. The ultimate dilemma is within, being that the self (of God and of man) is truly the only thing in the Universe that make the universe what it is.
     
  19. godnotgod

    godnotgod not born, not dead

    Messages:
    7,607
    Is there a state of consciousness that is transcendent of right and wrong? Are the Devil and God merely props or masks behind from which the true Self peers out?
     
  20. Orias

    Orias Left Hand Path

    Messages:
    6,166
    From ash unto dust. We are the mask, the true face behind it is...dust. Hence the lamination of a "mortal" soul.
     
Verification:
Draft saved Draft deleted