The cornerstone of Christianity is human sacrifice. Is Chris

[GnosticChristian]

Do you agree that having another innocent person suffer for the wrongs you have done, --- so that you might escape responsibility for having done them, --- is immoral.

Yeah, that's one of the things I dislike in Christian teachings.

That is one of the many things I dislike. That is mostly why I am a Gnostic Christian.

Regards
DL

[GnosticChristian]

Didn’t you just post this exact same thing in the Christian discussion thread?

Yes, as I stated there I would, as I did not know if this was kosher or not.

The mods do not seem to see anything amiss.

If you do ----

Regards
DL

[GnosticChristian]

Yeah, that's one of the things I dislike in Christian teachings.

Yes that and the concept of 'original sin' doesn't leave much room for personal responsibility.

That is what happened when Christianity usurped the Jewish God, became Judaism 2.0 and turned a decent God into the moral monster they are now stuck with.

http://dish.andrewsullivan.com/2013/10/ ... -theodicy/

‘Instead of the Fall of man (in the sense of humanity as a whole), Judaism preaches the Rise of man: and instead of Original Sin, it stresses Original Virtue, the beneficent hereditary influence of righteous ancestors upon their descendants’.

Regards
DL

[GnosticChristian]

Yes that and the concept of 'original sin' doesn't leave much room for personal responsibility.

Ehh...that depends unless you are one of those branches that believes in "once saved, always saved". I kind of agree with the Mormons that you have to be truly reprehensible to be cast out from all of creation, and basically rot in the void (what they call outer darkness). That said I believe that the point of salvation is to not sin anymore so personal responsibility is part of that.

Salvation assumes that God has condemned you and you need saving.

Only an unjust or incompetent fool of a God would create what he has to condemn.

That is why my creed is a universalist creed and have tied righteousness of God to equality.

Scriptures also say that God decides who will believe and who will not so there goes our free will.

What a crappie ideology/theology. No wonder they could only grow by inquisition and murder.

Regards
DL

[Sovaal]

So what are we supposed to discuss? The merits of Christianity? There's already a thread for that.

[GnosticChristian]

YHWH isn't a liberal humanist, no. He is interested in prescribing morals, not in keeping up with humanity's latest moral fads.

Do you think a genocidal son murdering God who even tortures babies for 7 days before murdering them, all because of his anger against the father, King David in this case, can have any clue as to what good morals are?

Would you emulate that God the way scriptures say you should?

I cannot see you or any decent human being that big of a murdering prick.

Regards
DL

[GnosticChristian]

I find it ironic that in the Christian faith, God made man able to sin, let them sin/be corrupted by the snake, held man accountable and literally genocide the initial run of man except Noah and his family, and then after tons of punishing men and screwing with them in the New Testament, kills himself/his son to atone for the people that ‘disobeyed’ him.

So, Hod sacrificed himself/his son to himself!

This is one of the reasons why I find Christianity ridiculous.

Christ's sacrifice was allow the living and the dead (Christ went to Hades) to commune with God via an incarnation. Christ's death is something we participate in in order to participate in His Resurrection.

All those things like crucifixion and resurrection are all supposed to happen in our minds and have nothing to do with the physical world.

Have you never seen the right hemisphere of the brain that God sits in in the creation painting at the Vatican?

The Egyptian Eye is the same representative shape.

The bible is also full of terms showing the parts of the brain.

Do you really believe in a zombie Jesus?

Regards
DL

[GnosticChristian]

Not really all that surprising considering that the god of the Bible is a self proclaimed 'jealous' god and is very much a wrathful one.

What has that to do with hubris?

God is very wrathful but also merificul to those who repent and ask His forgiveness.

Hogwash, ---- says your bible.

It says that God decides who will believe or not and who will be saved or not. An atheist can repent and beg all he wants but if he is on God's non-believer list, he is out of luck as scriptures also say that God never changes his mind, except when lying preachers find it convenient of course.

Regards
DL

[Mardla]

What has that to do with hubris?

God is very wrathful but also merificul to those who repent and ask His forgiveness.

Hogwash, ---- says your bible.

It says that God decides who will believe or not and who will be saved or not. An atheist can repent and beg all he wants but if he is on God's non-believer list, he is out of luck as scriptures also say that God never changes his mind, except when lying preachers find it convenient of course.

Regards
DL

Sounds like Calvinism more than the Bible

[Cetacea]

If not, please show how it is morally and legally good to punish the innocent instead of the guilty, bearing in mind that all legal systems think that punishing the guilty is what is justice.

Regards
DL

If we accept that humans are a social species driven by communal altruism then perhaps beating the offenders 'beloved Brother' is intended to teach the wider social impact of their behaviour and thus the need for empathy - they must consider the affects on others before acting.

Misbehavior to the level that it would be considered 'evil' is hugely destructive the the community, as such teaching that Someone must pay for that destructive behaviour encourages the conscientious to moderate their own behaviour lest someone close to them (their own Brother) must pay the price - and the price of Sin is Death.


* Those people who lack conscience or empathy are an aberration and our society and should rightfully be treated as abhorrent and be either eliminated or confined (as mentally unfit) for the sake of Society

[GnosticChristian]

My understanding has always been that the value of the sacrifice of Jesus is in that it was a selfless act. The idea is not that you have a good child and a bad child, through the concept of the trinity Jesus is God, so it is more akin to a parent choosing to bear the punishment for the actions of their child. In that scenario, the parent is giving of them-self so that their child may live, which while the child is escaping direct punishment, the harm is still befalling one they love. As for escaping responsibility, Jesus is not a get-out-of-sin free coupon. His sacrifice is given freely. However, out of respect for such a gift beyond measure, it is incumbent upon us to try to live as sinlessly as possible.
Hopefully that is coherent and provides some useful insight. I'll linger in this thread.

Selfless is not suiciding to become the hero of the world, after you have unjustly condemned the whole of humanity. That is self-serving to the max, given that you cannot did or do not stay dead.

That aside, you try to make a moral monster out of Jesus in having him break the law he said he came to fulfil.

Ezekiel 18:20 The soul that sinneth, it shall die. The son shall not bear the iniquity of the father, neither shall the father bear the iniquity of the son: the righteousness of the righteous shall be upon him, and the wickedness of the wicked shall be upon him.

Deuteronomy 24:16 (ESV) "Fathers shall not be put to death because of their children, nor shall children be put to death because of their fathers. Each one shall be put to death for his own sin.

Who is more likely to ask you to use a scapegoat? Satan or God?

Satan, in case you do not have the moral sense to know that.

Regards
DL

[GnosticChristian]

I feel like this is more of a blog-post than a genuine attempt at a discussion-starter.

The discussion starts if you have the moral whit to answer the last question in the O.P.

Cowards can never be moral. Are you a coward?

Regards
DL

[Erythrean Thebes]

In my opinion the sacrifice of Jesus Christ was sufficient because it demonstrated that he had a willingness to adhere to the egalitarian and self-effacing creed of the original state of man in the time of Adam and Eve at creation. He did this despite the violent and vituperative resistance of his own people and despite the despondent and dismal circumstances of his life and birth, circumstances which would have turned many people into irresponsible losers. God redeemed all mankind for this persistent act of the Messiah because he was impressed and it convinced him that his creation was not thoroughly corrupt and irredeemable. He had already done this for Noah, so to do it for Christ was not a stretch.

[GnosticChristian]

If your problem with Christianity is what they believe wait until you see what they do.

As a Gnostic Christian whose founders were subjected to inquisitions, I am well aware of the immorality Christians are capable of.

Even todays they continue their low key inquisitions against women and gays with their homophobic and misogynous ways.

Regards
DL

[GnosticChristian]

OP we have a Christian Discussion Thread, just post your Christian stuff there.

I did as well and will go see if it works well enough for me to use.

It does not look like the notification thing works so it may be hard to track return replies in that thread.

Regards
DL

[Holy Tedalonia]

Assuming jesus is real, and god is real etc. Then jesus ultimately went to heaven. If you consider it, the body jesus had, was nothing more than a tool to spread the word and sacrifice his flesh. And assuming the text is real, experiencing bliss in heaven as well as others in heaven.

The lesson is greater good. Jesus had nothing to lose for being killed (again assuming gods real) and did the ultimate sacrifice for our benefit.

[GnosticChristian]

So what are we supposed to discuss? The merits of Christianity? There's already a thread for that.

If you mean the discuss Christianity thread, I did as well and will go see if it works well enough for me to use.

It does not look like the notification thing works so it may be hard to track return replies in that thread.

Regards
DL

[Cetacea]

My understanding has always been that the value of the sacrifice of Jesus is in that it was a selfless act. The idea is not that you have a good child and a bad child, through the concept of the trinity Jesus is God, so it is more akin to a parent choosing to bear the punishment for the actions of their child. In that scenario, the parent is giving of them-self so that their child may live.

For God so loved the world they he gave his only begotten Son
and for this reason I have given you the right to be called the Sons and Daughters of God

So it was Jesus the Son and not God the Father who was crucified for the sins of His children (indeed Jesus' last words on the cross are "Father Why have you abandoned me". Jesus is also the Son of Man to me it suggest that Man had to pay the blood price for the sins of Man

[GnosticChristian]

Hogwash, ---- says your bible.

It says that God decides who will believe or not and who will be saved or not. An atheist can repent and beg all he wants but if he is on God's non-believer list, he is out of luck as scriptures also say that God never changes his mind, except when lying preachers find it convenient of course.

Regards
DL

Sounds like Calvinism more than the Bible

It's in all bibles that I know of.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=byHYeHN4ZUQ

Regards
DL

[Trollzyn the Infinite]

There's no way this isn't satire.

[GnosticChristian]

[

quote="GnosticChristian";p="35132482"]
If not, please show how it is morally and legally good to punish the innocent instead of the guilty, bearing in mind that all legal systems think that punishing the guilty is what is justice.

Regards
DL

If we accept that humans are a social species driven by communal altruism then perhaps beating the offenders 'beloved Brother' is intended to teach the wider social impact of their behaviour and thus the need for empathy - they must consider the affects on others before acting.

Sinners lack empathy or ignore it so punishing the innocent is not only unjust but innafective in generating empathy.

Misbehavior to the level that it would be considered 'evil' is hugely destructive the the community, as such teaching that Someone must pay for that destructive behaviour encourages the conscientious to moderate their own behaviour lest someone close to them (their own Brother) must pay the price - and the price of Sin is Death.

Do you do not think that a justice system based on punishing the innocent would be considered evil?

Every court I know of would as they try hard to punish the guilty.

* Those people who lack conscience or empathy are an aberration and our society and should rightfully be treated as abhorrent and be either eliminated or confined (as mentally unfit) for the sake of Society

[/quote]

I agree, and that would include all who think punishing the innocent instead of the guilty is somehow good justice.

Regards
DL

[GnosticChristian]

In my opinion the sacrifice of Jesus Christ was sufficient because it demonstrated that he had a willingness to adhere to the egalitarian and self-effacing creed of the original state of man in the time of Adam and Eve at creation. He did this despite the violent and vituperative resistance of his own people and despite the despondent and dismal circumstances of his life and birth, circumstances which would have turned many people into irresponsible losers. God redeemed all mankind for this persistent act of the Messiah because he was impressed and it convinced him that his creation was not thoroughly corrupt and irredeemable. He had already done this for Noah, so to do it for Christ was not a stretch.

Egalitarian??

What kind of Christian are you?

If egalitarian, Yahweh would not have created a hell for those he found un-egalitarian.

You do not seem to know your bible much for a guy who reads his myth literally.

Christianity is about as egalitarian as Islam.

Luke 19:27 But those enemies of mine who did not want me to be king over them—bring them here and kill them in front of me.

Qur'an 8:7 "Allah wished to confirm the truth by His words: `Wipe the infidels out to the last.'"

Regards
DL

[GnosticChristian]

Assuming jesus is real, and god is real etc. Then jesus ultimately went to heaven. If you consider it, the body jesus had, was nothing more than a tool to spread the word and sacrifice his flesh. And assuming the text is real, experiencing bliss in heaven as well as others in heaven.

The lesson is greater good. Jesus had nothing to lose for being killed (again assuming gods real) and did the ultimate sacrifice for our benefit.

Sacrifice is when someone gives up something of value to another.

As you say, Jesus had nothing to lose, especially if he did not stay dead, so no lose for him means no gain for his vile father who demanded the sacrifice, so no real sacrifice existed.

Regards
DL

[Erythrean Thebes]

In my opinion the sacrifice of Jesus Christ was sufficient because it demonstrated that he had a willingness to adhere to the egalitarian and self-effacing creed of the original state of man in the time of Adam and Eve at creation. He did this despite the violent and vituperative resistance of his own people and despite the despondent and dismal circumstances of his life and birth, circumstances which would have turned many people into irresponsible losers. God redeemed all mankind for this persistent act of the Messiah because he was impressed and it convinced him that his creation was not thoroughly corrupt and irredeemable. He had already done this for Noah, so to do it for Christ was not a stretch.

Egalitarian??

What kind of Christian are you?

If egalitarian, Yahweh would not have created a hell for those he found un-egalitarian.

You do not seem to know your bible much for a guy who reads his myth literally.

Christianity is about as egalitarian as Islam.

Luke 19:27 But those enemies of mine who did not want me to be king over them—bring them here and kill them in front of me.

Qur'an 8:7 "Allah wished to confirm the truth by His words: `Wipe the infidels out to the last.'"

Regards
DL

I'm sorry, do you think that the Bible happened all at once, in a timeless void? In the beginning there was nothing, and then God created the world. Onto the world he added creatures and then as his last act in that regard, he created man to watch over the creatures. And then he created Eve to assist Adam in safeguarding the living things - just as Adam would watch over her. Do you think that you cannot extrapolate that, if there had been other families, they would have all had an essentially identical obligation to care for one another and keep an eternal peace between one another, a peace ultimately founded on man's innocence without the taint of the Fruit of Knowledge?

This was first in a chronological sequence of historical events. You do not think it is egalitarian?

[Xmara]

Yeah, that's one of the things I dislike in Christian teachings.

That is one of the many things I dislike. That is mostly why I am a Gnostic Christian.

Regards
DL

Why do you call yourself a Gnostic Christian if you hate Christianity so much?