cancel
Showing results for 
Search instead for 
Did you mean: 

Why did Jesus have to be tortured and Crucified?

Trailblazer

Re: Why did Jesus have to be tortured and Crucified?

in reply to

Why did Jesus have to be tortured and Crucified?

 

That's what was done to "rabblerousers" in that time- pretty commonplace stuff.

 

I think the bigger question is why Jesus was selected as our "Savior." He seems like a pretty cool guy- but this "Son of God" stuff sounds like a bloated-out-of-proportion fable.

 

 

Rockstar

Re: Why did Jesus have to be tortured and Crucified?

in reply to

cankertaint wrote:

Why did Jesus have to be tortured and Crucified?

 

That's what was done to "rabblerousers" in that time- pretty commonplace stuff.

 

I think the bigger question is why Jesus was selected as our "Savior." He seems like a pretty cool guy- but this "Son of God" stuff sounds like a bloated-out-of-proportion fable.

 

 


I think there are a few out here that would more-or-less agree. 

Rockstar

Re: Why did Jesus have to be tortured and Crucified?

[ Edited ]
in reply to

marpegtimjus wrote:

It is incredibly hard to have this discussion because christians believe in the bible and believe that they are right and they have the one true god.  When I was a child I was forced to be a Catholic. I remember thinking, man, this stuff just cannot be true.  Recently I have become an agnostic after much reading and study.  My opinion:  it is called faith because there are no real facts to back any of it up.  The bible was written in the bronze age and is full of violence.  The people who want you to believe it is dictated directly from god are the ones who will lose their gig if you don't, i.e. clergy.  The idea that there was a virgin birth, etc. was based on pagan beliefs and ancient astrology.  There are about 17 other gods who were born of a virgin, born on the 25th, are the son of god, were crucified,  descended into hell, rose from the dead, rose up into heaven, rode a donkey and people waved palm fronds, did miracles, rose people from the dead with names that translate to, "Lazarus," and on and on.  Nothing about Jesus is original.  Mithra is one interesting god with the same life facts.  Also Hercules and Zeus.  I think the Vatican knows all this, but keeps it locked up.  Many many horrible things over the centuries have been done in the name of god.  Some people in this world still do horrible things to others because they want to go to heaven and be rewarded.   I believe it is time for people to get over these fairy tales and be good to each other, not because of hell, but because humanity needs it to survive.

 

I feel much better being a good person now, no longer thinking about hell, and stuff like that.  Humans have always been intersted in blood sacrifice.  I think the whole thing with Jesus is a blood sacrifice, sacred heart and all that.  It is really nothing new.  I used to be surprised that millions of people could be duped in this way, but, hey, look at Scientology!  It has millions of followers and everybody knows that Hubbard made it up!  And Joseph Smith and the garden of eden in Missouri?  Please, come on, Mormons, grow up!   They even have magic underwear, and think blacks are inferior beings.  There is very little, if any, proof that Jesus even existed, except the bible, which is questionable.  Now you can go to Nazareth and pay to see the little house Mary was visited in by the angel and told she was pregnant.  You can eat the table that Jesus had the last supper on.  There is NO archeological proof of any of this, or that the Jews spent 40 years in the desert.  NONE!  It is for money and power, and always has been.  The world would be better off without religion.  Then the Catholic women in Africa, whose husbands have HIV, would use condems, and not die and leave their kids orphans.  As I said, my opinion.  I respect others beliefs, unfortunately, several people in my life, no longer want to speak to me because I told them I was agnostic.  Is that what Jesus would do?!!

 

If you are interested, check out Christopher Hitchens, Richard Dawkins, and Sam Harris, on Youtube.  They are brilliant on these topics.

 


No, no no!!!  Citing Hitchens, Dawkins, et al most certainly WILL NOT endear you to the crowd that gets most vocal on this discussion board . 

 

Those guys are/were way too rational.  Never plays well in America Smiley Happy

Re: Why did Jesus have to be tortured and Crucified?

in reply to

snakeplissken1969 wrote:

jason_incognito wrote:

I thought the bible was written by God? If God wrote it there shouldn't be any inconsistencies?

 

And if there are inconsistencies, how can you treat it as the truth? Just like with the verses used against homosexuals. How many are there? 1 1/2? and those aren't direct, but get interpreted?

 


Who decides what parts of the bible don't matter anymore? Serioulsy, the logic (or lack thereof) is so hard to follow.


Here's another take: What if God isn't honest? How do we know that God doesn't lie? Because He says He doesn't?

He murders, clearly. He sends Angels to kill us, even after giving Noah a rainbow as a symbolic promise that He would not raise His might against us and slay us again. So...

Either there is a shortage of rainbows, or... God doesn't keep his word. And...

How can you trust a Heavenly Father that damns you to Hell if you don't follow protocol? That's not a good Dad...


This concept has come up more than once, a couple of different ways. It's not about blaming God for our sin, either... it's about the actions of God himself. Whether God is imaginary, of real, either way, the Bible portrays God, or various Gods according to some, as tyrannical, dishonest, disloyal and murderous. Not good public relations for a being who is only interested in our ever lasting love and devotion.

 

Re: Why did Jesus have to be tortured and Crucified?

in reply to

Trailblazer

Re: Why did Jesus have to be tortured and Crucified?

in reply to

Well, Jesus came and changed his mind about the Old Testament. So Christians now only follow the New Testament. 

Re: Why did Jesus have to be tortured and Crucified?

in reply to

Heh... ''Changed his mind''... thank Christ for small favors...

Re: Why did Jesus have to be tortured and Crucified?

in reply to

The thing is, Christians have been saying that ''Jesus changed all that'' when speaking about the Old Testament.

 

Did he really? I think that Jesus might want to take another look at his Father's New Testament...

 

Re: Why did Jesus have to be tortured and Crucified?

in reply to

You know... I don't want to distrust God. I don't want to think of God as a murderous warlord.

 

What I want is for someone... anyone... who says that I have the wrong idea, to please... please... say something that can lead to an understanding of God outside of the portrayal of the tribes of man in his various holy books, that clearly is of a different portrayal than what I've seen in the Bible, and by the actions of what I estimate to be most of those that believe that the Bible really is the word of God.

 

And it's not that I'm closed to an understanding, or that I'm ''not ready'' to understand...

 

I've been waiting for a logical synopsis of the God concept that demonstrates something other than an all powerful, all jealous tyrant, based on something other than ''the Bible is the word of God, we are not to question it, or even understand it, my whole life.

 

I just would like to understand God with something other than a long record of His kill count, and a story about a promise of eternal Disneyland. Frankly, it seems as if that's the end-all, be-all point, anyway... gettin' into Heaven...

 

Seems selfish, the oposite of what a religion is for, which is to make the lives of the less fortunate better, and to promote a relationship between a loving God and man. How does ''winning the lottery'' figure into this so strongly, anyway?

 

Can't win if ya' don't play... Can't get to Heaven if ya' don't get saved...

 

Can anyone express an understanding of this being... ''God''... without quoting a piece of literature? And tell me why such a loving being would kill so many of his children, over and over? (?)

Guide

Re: Why did Jesus have to be tortured and Crucified?

in reply to

 

 

 

 

*~~* Valley *~~*

Re: Why did Jesus have to be tortured and Crucified?

in reply to

Ok...

 

Not bad, Valley... not bad at all. Nice job... now, that's how you say somethin'... Smiley Happy

 

Then, the juries not in for me yet.

 

Guide

Re: Why did Jesus have to be tortured and Crucified?

[ Edited ]
in reply to

I'm in a special kind of mood today. Smiley Very Happy

 

PS,

I meant to post that to Bob. So I meant no offense to you. But see, when we get caught in those circle of discussion it serves a purpose just as coming to a conclusion does. But it's not good like coming to a conclusion is. The purpose it serves to make people spin their wheels, get stuck and never move forward. Although I do so enjoy fighting that.

*~~* Valley *~~*

Re: Why did Jesus have to be tortured and Crucified?

in reply to

I thought that I was being honest and informative.  Did not know I was supposed to endear myself to the crowd.  What good is the forum if you have to say what "endears you to the crowd?"

Guide

Re: Why did Jesus have to be tortured and Crucified?

[ Edited ]
in reply to

Yeah don't do that. You don't have to. Just say what you want and don't worry about it.

 

 

To everyone else,

And about Jesus changing things. He changed some things in OT law. Not all. It's a very deep study (that I haven't completed) and it would only be ripped apart and destroyed here.

 

But I will say this.

I've tried to imagine Gods position. If you don't believe in him you will not agree with anything below. And it's not up for argument because it is just my thoughts. Which could change one day if God sees fit. After all he is still working on me. Teaching and guiding me. No one knows everything for sure. Especially me. But there are some things I am sure about.

 

So anyway imagine this.

God created us and all through the OT because of Cain (not Eve), a division was made on earth between Gods followers and those that betrayed them and him. See Cain went off to the Land of Nod and stared up his own tribe. No I don't know where his wife came from but texts other the bible give us some clues.

 

One group submitted to Gods greatness and one group got mad and fought the very thing that gave them life. Control issues perhaps? Wars over good and evil continue even today between these two sides/tribes as well as in the hearts of man. There are just many different limbs on the tree now. But to God it all comes down to good and evil.

 

So God sends his son through human means to bring some knowledge and peace to the world hearts. Sending Christs as a human made more sense that sending him in spirit form. But that's another subject. At the time Christ came the wars between good and evil were at their peak. (As they are today) Rome was a death den to anyone that objected. Now here's the part that I find interesting. Why then? Well perhaps God was sick of seeing people misquote his laws, misuse knowledge to control others and make money off of his name. Again, much like today huh?

 

He didn't take away our free will by sending Christ. He just sent Christ to teach us how to use that free will in a manner that was pleasing to him and good for us. The OT laws were made for the people of that time. And as life changes so can the laws. There was actually a reason to change some things. That simple reason was that things were changing. Gods people were no longer living in the desert where they were isolated and could worship as they wanted. They were no living among others.

 

They were being exposed to people very different from them. People that didn't wage war just to defend themselves as Christians did but rather to destroy those unlike them. Sound familar? So it comes down to the fact that the world needed Christ to offer a way in a soft manner to save anyone that wanted saving from people like the Romans. Who by the way, killed people for everything they didn't agree with. Not just for being Christians.

 

So many will say. What about all those Christian killing people? Well once again if you read the bible stories rather than a verse or two you see that any wars initiated by Gods people were in self defense. God had always planned to give his people the land of Canaan. Satan knew this and moved his followers there to spite God. They stoled it and perverted it. So God said take it back from them. Plus there is more on the Canaanites about how very evil they were. Cannibals even. But that's another subject too. Needless to say no one today would find them a kind and welcoming people.

 

On the subject of Sodom. I don't believe for one minute it was destroyed because of homosexuality. I think some Christians like to use that for a fear factor and I think they will answer to God for it too. It is mentioned but not in that manner within the story. The people were practicing things that were harming others and the world. Thing's that they were taught by demons. Yes I said demons. Well fallen angels actually. There is a differnce but well another subject again. (Book of Enoch)

 

They were so dangerous and involved in evil that God destroyed them because there was no hope and they were harming everything on earth. Both Gods followers and anyone else. They were not just a danger to Christians. The bible indicates they were completely evil. Not one good soul there.

 

So if we can imagine how God saw all this. His creation and intention for it being preverted , changed and lied about. Then we can see why he did this or that to protect those that loved him. And if we believe that God is the Creator then we have to believe he is in charge. And I think that's the burn for some people. Submitting and admiting that.

 

So if we truly believe that God is our creator then we have to know he wants to protect the good from the bad. And really I think we get in a lot of trouble when we judge that without consulting God. He is the one that decides that although he gives us discernment sometimes for our own protection.

 

*~~* Valley *~~*

Re: Why did Jesus have to be tortured and Crucified?

in reply to

OP, very clever - a cunning way to spread your religion....  Please prove that he ever existed, or that if he existed, that he ever actually did anything.  Real honest proof - honest, it won't hurt.  

 

Otherwise, please accept the EQUAL validity of ALL religions.

Everything above this line is sponsored by Captain Zort!
I'm Captain Zort, and I don't know what he's talking about!!!!

-

(Bob in Eugene, WHERE IT RAINS A LOT!!!! Glug, Glug, Drip, Drip)
Trailblazer

Re: Why did Jesus have to be tortured and Crucified?

in reply to

valleyspirit*dvn wrote:

Yeah don't do that. You don't have to. Just say what you want and don't worry about it.

 

 

To everyone else,

And about Jesus changing things. He changed some things in OT law. Not all. It's a very deep study (that I haven't completed) and it would only be ripped apart and destroyed here.

 

 

Ummmm, have you read the bible? Jesus didn't change anything to the OT Law.  Tell me anywhere in the bible where Jesus rejected the OT? If you find one then you have another contradiction of the same God. Which is it?

"For truly, I say to you, till heaven and earth pass away, not an iota, not a dot, will pass the law until all is accomplished.  Whoever then relaxes one of the least of these commandments and teaches men so, shall be called least in the kingdom of heaven; but he who does them and teaches them shall be called great in the kingdom of heaven.”  (Matthew 5:18-19 RSV)

BTW if you're believe in the bible and objective morality then morals CANNOT change. So what's right or wrong will always be that and never changing i.e objective morality is eternal and never changes.

 

 

 

 

 

So anyway imagine this.

God created us and all through the OT because of Cain (not Eve), a division was made on earth between Gods followers and those that betrayed them and him. See Cain went off to the Land of Nod and stared up his own tribe. No I don't know where his wife came from but texts other the bible give us some clues.

 

So I take it you don't think evolution ever happened? Do you think the bible is a science book?

 

 

So God sends his son through human means to bring some knowledge and peace to the world hearts. Sending Christs as a human made more sense that sending him in spirit form. But that's another subject. At the time Christ came the wars between good and evil were at their peak. (As they are today) Rome was a death den to anyone that objected. Now here's the part that I find interesting. Why then? Well perhaps God was sick of seeing people misquote his laws, misuse knowledge to control others and make money off of his name. Again, much like today huh?

 

So exactly what knowledge did Jesus impart that human civilization didn't already know??? Confucious preached almost identical things to Jesus and he predated Jesus by hundreds of years. Was Confucious God?

Why did Jesus explicitly advocated slavery if you think his teaching are so good?

 

 

He didn't take away our free will by sending Christ. He just sent Christ to teach us how to use that free will in a manner that was pleasing to him and good for us. The OT laws were made for the people of that time. And as life changes so can the laws. There was actually a reason to change some things. That simple reason was that things were changing. Gods people were no longer living in the desert where they were isolated and could worship as they wanted. They were no living among others.

 

How is freewill not affected if Jesus went around performing Miracles and announcing he is God?. BTW that's the reason why apologist say that's why God doesn't do any fancy miracles these days because it'll affect our free will. If so why were there so much miracles in biblical times??? If OT laws were made for people of the time then we can reject the 10 commandmants right???

 

 

 

 

So many will say. What about all those Christian killing people? Well once again if you read the bible stories rather than a verse or two you see that any wars initiated by Gods people were in self defense. God had always planned to give his people the land of Canaan. Satan knew this and moved his followers there to spite God. They stoled it and perverted it. So God said take it back from them. Plus there is more on the Canaanites about how very evil they were. Cannibals even. But that's another subject too. Needless to say no one today would find them a kind and welcoming people.

 

 

Who's more powerful God or Satan???? God couldn't stop Satan? Who created Satan?

Say I grant you that it's right to Kill and murder Canaanites because they're evil, why does God want the Isrealites to keep their women alive to **bleep** them???? 

 

 

 

 

 

On the subject of Sodom. I don't believe for one minute it was destroyed because of homosexuality. I think some Christians like to use that for a fear factor and I think they will answer to God for it too. It is mentioned but not in that manner within the story. The people were practicing things that were harming others and the world. Thing's that they were taught by demons. Yes I said demons. Well fallen angels actually. There is a differnce but well another subject again. (Book of Enoch)

 

Well, you do take your bible very literal.

 

 

 

So if we truly believe that God is our creator then we have to know he wants to protect the good from the bad. And really I think we get in a lot of trouble when we judge that without consulting God. He is the one that decides that although he gives us discernment sometimes for our own protection.

 

How exactly do you consult God?

 

Re: Why did Jesus have to be tortured and Crucified?

in reply to

 

 

Genesis 3:22
And the LORD God said, “The man has now become like one of us, knowing good and
evil. He must not be allowed to reach out his hand and take also from the
tree of life and eat, and live forever.”

 


Luke 7:44-47
Then he turned toward the woman and said to Simon, “Do you see this woman? I came into your house. You did not give me any water for my feet, but she wet my feet with her tears and wiped them with her hair. You did not give me a kiss, but this woman, from the time I entered, has not stopped kissing my feet. You did not put oil on my head, but she has poured perfume on my feet. Therefore, I tell you, her many sins have been forgiven—as her great love has shown. But whoever has been forgiven little loves little.”

 

 

 

We must not overlook the connection between faith and love. The woman saw Jesus and recognized who he was and who dwelt in him. That vision was her faith... she had seen a goodness in him that could only be God, and it broke her heart with gratitude and love.


Speaking in the language of today, we would say she went "nuts" about Jesus. Her behavior obviously was the behavior of a "nutty" person...This woman, unlike nice Simon, was not about to turn away.


The familiar stories, traditions, and rituals of Israel enabled them to know the practical significance of this. They were stories and traditions of individual human beings whose lives were interlaced with God's action. Abraham, David, Elijah were well known to all. And the routinely practiced rituals of Israel were often occasions when God acted. Everyone knew that whoever trustingly put themselves in his hands, as this poor scandalous woman did, were in fact in the hands of God. And God's deeds bore out his words.


When he announced that the “governance” or rule of God had become available to human beings, he was primarily referring to what he could do for people, God acting with him. But he was also offering to communicate this same “rule of God” to others who would receive and learn it from him. He was himself the evidence for the truth of his announcement about the availability of God's kingdom, or governance, to ordinary human existence.


This explains why, as everyone saw, he did not teach "in the manner of the scribes” but instead “as having authority in his own right” (Matt. 7 :29) . Scribes, expert scholars, teach by citing others.


But Jesus was, in effect, saying, “Just watch me and see that what I say is true. See for yourself that the rule of God has come among ordinary human beings.”


“Already during Jesus' earthly activity," Hans Kung has pointed out, “the decision for or against the rule of God hung together with the decision for or against himself (italics mine). The presence of Jesus upon earth, both before and after his death and resurrection, means that God's rule is here now “In this sense," Kung continues, “the immediate expectation . . . [of the kingdom] . . . has been fulfilled.”


From the very beginning of his work, those who relied on him had, at his touch, entered the rule, or governance, of God and were receiving its gracious sufficiency Jesus was not just acting for God but also with God - a little like the way, in a crude metaphor, I act with my power steering, or it with me, when I turn the wheel of my car.


And this “governance” is projected onward through those who receive him. When we receive God's gift of life by relying on Christ, we find that God comes to act with us as we rely on him in our actions. That explains why Jesus said that the least in the kingdom of the heavens are greater than John the Baptist-not, of course, greater in themselves, but as a greater power works along with them, The “greater” is not inherent, a matter of our own substance, but relational So, C. S. Lewis writes, our faith is not a matter of our hearing what Christ said long ago and “trying to carry it out." Rather, “The real Son of God is at your side. He is beginning to turn you into the same kind of thing as Himself He is beginning, so to speak, to 'inject' His kind of life and thought. His Zoe [life], into you; beginning to turn the tin soldier into a live man. The part of you that does not like it is the part that is still tin."


Jesus' words and presence gave many of his hearers faith to see that when he acted God also acted, that the governance or “rule” of God came into play and thus was at hand They were aware of the invisible presence of God acting within the visible reality and action of Jesus, the carpenter rabbi.


Some years of reflection and further experience with Jesus and the kingdom enabled his people to describe him in lofty language as “the icon of the unseeable God” (Col. 1:15). Today we might say photo or snapshot instead of icon. He was the “exact picture” or “precise representation of God's substance” (Heb. 1: 3) . But that time was not yet. It was to still uncomprehending ears that Jesus said, “Those who have seen me have seen the Fathers."


To gain deeper understanding of our eternal kind of life in God's present kingdom, we must be sure to understand what a kingdom is.


Every last one of us has a "kingdom" – or a "queendom,” or a "government” – a realm that is uniquely our own, where our choice determines what happens. Here is a truth that reaches into the deepest part of what it is to be a person.


Some may think it should not be so. John Calvin remarked rather balefully, “Everyone flatters himself and carries a kingdom in his breast.” He understood this to mean that “there is nobody who does not imagine that he is really better than the others." Perhaps this is so for human beings as they are. All too easily, at least, we presume to rule others-in opinion and word, if not in deed.


But it is nevertheless true that we are made to “have dominion” within an appropriate domain of reality. This is the core of the likeness or image of God in us and is the basis of the destiny for which we were formed. We are, all of us, never-ceasing spiritual beings with a unique eternal calling to count for good in God's great universe.


Our “kingdom” is simply the range of our effective will. Whatever we genuinely have the say over is in our kingdom. And our having the say over something is precisely what places it within our kingdom.


In creating human beings God made them to rule, to reign, to have dominion in a limited sphere. Only so can they be persons.


Any being that say over nothing is no person. We only have to imagine what that would be like to see that this is so. Such “persons” would not even be able to command their own body or their own thoughts. They would be reduced to completely passive observers who count for nothing, who make no difference.


The sense of having some degree of control over things is now recognized as a vital factor in both mental and physical health and can make the difference between life and death in those who are seriously ill. Anyone who has raised a child, or has even supervised the work of others, knows how important it is to let them do it - what- ever “it” may be-and to do so as soon as that is practically feasible.


Obviously, having a place of rule goes to the very heart of who we are, of our integrity strength, and competence.


By contrast, attacks on our personhood always take the form of diminishing what we can do or have say over, sometimes up to the point of forcing us to submit to what we abhor, in the familiar human order, slaves are at the other end of the spectrum from kings.


Their bodies and lives are at the disposal of another. Prisoners are, in most cases, several degrees above slaves. And, as the twentieth century has taught us, thought control is worst of all. It is the most heinous form of soul destruction, in which even our own thoughts are not really ours. It reaches most deeply into our substance.

 

 

 ~ Dallas Willard, The Dvine Conspiracy
http://lectionary.hararquixotic.com/2006/11/kingdom-of-god.html

 

 


We are so familiar with this cross that we have lost this sense of scandal that Paul speaks of. The cross symbol is everywhere in our churches. It is fashioned into jewelry that we put around our neck. It is so familiar that we forget that we are wearing a representation of an official state instrument of capital punishment. Imagine that at the front of this church we had the sign of the noose. Or imagine that we wore little electric chairs around our necks or perhaps a hyperdermic needle for a lethal injection or perhaps a gas chamber. Would that attract people to our faith? All of these official instruments of capital punishment are in fact far more "humane" as a vehicle of death than the cross was, but the point is made. We preach Christ crucified. We preach Christ executed. We preach Christ electrocuted. We preach Christ liquidated.


http://web.archive.org/web/20050214121852/http://www.umanitoba.ca/faculties/law/Courses/esau/lr/lr_c...

 

 


And wherever there is cross in Scripture it is always for one purpose only, to put an evil man to death. That is what it will do in your life. And that is what the cross of Jesus was. It was an instrument on which an evil man met death!


Does that shock you? One of the most amazing sentences in all Scripture is that word from Paul's second letter to the Corinthians where he says, "He who knew no sin was made sin for us," (2ÊCorinthians 5:21). That is, on the cross, Jesus became Haman. Jesus was made selfish, cruel, grasping, proud, cunning, slimy, and evil. And the only answer that God has to that is to nail it to a cross. Put it to death! And that is the end of Haman. That is what the Bible says took place on the cross of our Lord Jesus; he became sin, and God put him to death.


Now what is true of a timeless event becomes part of our experience when we reenact it in our own lives. This is why the cross of Jesus Christ, with all its possibilities of salvation and deliverance, can be an utterly useless thing as far as you are concerned if it finds no translation into your own experience.


Thus, reminded of Haman's true character and conscious of the evil plot against his friend, the king pronounces Haman's doom, "Hang him on that tree!"


Note that it is not until the king says this that Haman's evil is ended.


Haman's Last Supper
http://www.raystedman.org/esther/0037.html

 

 


When you stand before God as a murderer of Jesus with His blood on your hands, and then you plead with God to forgive you by asking Him to accept the innocent blood of His Son to satisfy your failed obedience, He will promptly tell you to depart from Him you murderer and worker of iniquity. The scriptures are plain, if a wicked man turns from his sin, none of his wickedness will be remembered.


http://www.tzaddikim.org/articles/gracei~2.html

 

 


Who would have thought, after the Enlightenment and the advance of humanism, that a 20th-century Holocaust would redefine the 500-year-old Inquisition as minor in comparison?

 

http://web.archive.org/web/20090214211552/http://www.nationalreview.com/hanson/hanson200602100920.as...

 

 


Jeremiah 10:5
Like a scarecrow in a cucumber field, their idols cannot speak; they must
be carried because they cannot walk. Do not fear them; they can
do no harm nor can they do any good.”

 


Jeremiah 16:19
LORD, my strength and my fortress, my refuge in time of distress, to you
the nations will come from the ends of the earth and say, “Our ancestors
possessed nothing but false gods, worthless idols that did them no good.

 

 


A child's socialization, which can be characterized as learning in its most complete form, encouraging reflective thought, is instinctual and arises spontaneously on its own. Culture is something quite opposite: an intellectual, arbitrary conditioning and enhancement of automatic reflexes that must be both induced and enforced. A society—the product of socialization—is made of spontaneous nurturing and love, while culture can bring quiet hate, which can lead, sooner or later, to a child's subtle or flagrant rebellion. Such rebellions are forcibly put down through the infliction of pain, fear, guilt, and shame, or if none of these works, then through isolation, exclusion from the group, or the labeling of the rebellious child as dysfunctional or unfit...


The summary statement of enculturation—and the clarification of its deadly opposition to the gospel—is, “Ask not what your country can do for you; ask what you can do for your country." That this frequently quoted statement was made by a Christian president in a Christian country points up the fundamental antagonism between the gospel and state religion supposedly based on it. In the gospel we are told that, The Sabbath was made for man, and not man for the Sabbath," which is the fundamental cultural, religious and legal heresy of the ages by default. Were the gospel heard or even this one quote from it comprehended, culture and its states, religions, and law would disappear and society could emerge as our natural state.


~ Joseph Chilton Pearce, The Biology of Transcendence: a blueprint of the human spirit

 


From a religious-experience perspective, Christ as mystery-religion dying-and-rising savior figure is more important than the other figures.


From a storyline perspective, Christ is primarily a subversive rebel leader against the in-power establishment, who evidently lost the power battle at least for the time being but won the battle if shifted to the spiritual and metaphysical plane.


Freke and Gandy are wrong to emphasize the Gnostic Christ over the political Christ, and Acharya S is wrong to emphasize the astrotheological Christ over the mystery-experience Christ and political Christ.


The author of the book about Christ as exorcist is wrong in that he doesn't read exorcism as an expression of the core idea of mystery- experience in which one discovers animalistic broken logic about one's control agency and loathes it as a lower, alien pollution and seeks to eliminate it forevermore.


The sappy liberal books about Jesus as a self-help philosopher are wrong in that the self-help philosopher role of Christ can't be seen as the leading purpose the Christ figure was created.


Now it is time for all the valid readings to battle it out for *relative ranking*. Christ is definitely an overloaded figure, but which readings are somehow "main"? Certainly, few people would want to assert than all roles which are validly assigned to Jesus are exactly equally valuable. How do the roles fit together as a system? In a system, there are usually main systems and subsystems, or higher and lower levels.


How can we draw a system diagram of the hermeneutically overloaded Jesus Christ construct? It's time to place our bets: given that all readings are valid, the question now is if you had to pick two readings as *most* valid, as "predominant" readings, which would you pick? which do you value? That depends on your purposes. If your goal is self-help, then the self-help Jesus is most important to you. My goal is to understand the original, early, dominant Jesus Christ figure in terms of a block-universe determinism theory, in which such determinism or overpowering frozen timeless Fatedness is revealed via entheogenic loose cognition.


I think the Jesus Christ storyline as storyline is mainly the story of political/social/religious rebellion against the in-power establishment which made contrary claims about religion, claims which oppressed people. And, if this storyline is to be more than a political-philosophy *commentary* on religion, but is instead to provide genuine religious experience and deep religious insight into higher reality -- that is, if Jesus Christ is to be a truly *religious* figure and not just a political philosopher and moralist resisting the abuse of religion -- then we must read him from the perspective of the Hellenistic mystery-religions.

 


Multiplicity Thematic Sources of Jesus
http://egodeath.com/MultiplicityThematicSourcesofJesus.htm

 

 


The Hebrew Bible, in particular the Torah (The Five Books of Moses), has done more to civilize the world than any other book or idea in history. It is the Hebrew Bible that gave humanity such ideas as a universal, moral, loving God; ethical obligations to this God; the need for history to move forward to moral and spiritual redemption; the belief that history has meaning; and the notion that human freedom and social justice are the divinely desired states for all people. It gave the world the Ten Commandments, ethical monotheism, and the concept of holiness (the goal of raising human beings from the animal-like to the God-like). Therefore, when this Bible makes strong moral proclamations, I listen with great respect...


http://catholiceducation.org/articles/homosexuality/ho0003.html

 

 

 

 

 

You run, run, runaway
It's your heart that you betray
Feeding on your hungry eyes
I bet you're not so civilized


Well isn't love primitive?
A wild gift that you wanna give
Break out of captivity
And follow me stereo jungle child
Love is the kill
Your heart's still wild


Shooting at the walls of heartache
Bang, bang!
I am the warrior
Well I am the warrior
And heart to heart you'll win
If you survive the warrior, the warrior





Religion is a work of art. – Charles T. Smith, philosopher

Re: Why did Jesus have to be tortured and Crucified?

[ Edited ]

That is all quite interesting, but I think it all boils down to one thing.  IS IT TRUE?   I like what Richard Dawkins says, he is interested in the TRUTH.  Perhaps the bible has influenced many people, one way or the other, but IS IT TRUE?  Is there any PROOF that there is something supernatural about this book, or Jesus?  Do you want to base your entire life on a book written so long ago, and the idea that it is supernaturally dictated from God himself, whom we don't even know exists?  Who tells you this?  How do they know it is true?  Do you trust the popes that chose which books got into the bible, based on whatever their problems were at that time?  They are human, what if they screwed up and left out an important one?    What if they left out the one about gays, or birth control, or abortion, because they did not agree with it or like it?   Has god himself talked to you lately, I mean really, not that little voice in your head kind of thing?   Again, I respect everyone's right to have their own beliefs, but should we not, as humans, try to base our lives on reality?  Science is really all we have to base things on; faith is really just what you have when you have no real PROOF of anything, no real FACTS to back up anything.  Lots of people in history have been giving great, noble, spiritual advice on how to live a good life, but that does not mean they were more than a human being, albeit a very smart one.

 

Can we really believe that god spoke to people back then with a booming voice from the clouds?  That a virgin girl got pregnant by the holy spirit and gave birth to the son of god?  That Jesus really raised Lazarus from the dead, when several gods throughout history have been said to do the same thing?   That Mormons have magic underwear, and Scientologists believe in Thetans, and Joseph Smith said the garden of eden is in Missouri?   If god wants us to believe in him and in Jesus, why did he make the whole thing such a puzzle?  Why did he not just show us, and show us now, that he is there, and then we can work with him or not, our choice?  How are we supposed to believe in him when he gives us hardly anything to go by?  Is that fair?  What about all the other gods throughout history?  What about all the gods being worshipped today?  Which one is the right one?  Which book is true?   I am not a dumb person, and I am sure from your posts, that you aren't either.  So why can't any of us figure this out?  How come when I was a child I was taught that the bible was literal.  Now suddenly when some people have decided it is ridiculous, the church has decided we don't have to take it literally?  No, sorry guys, if I was going to go to hell in 1970, then you guys are too.  It is not fair to change the "doctrine" just because people are figuring out that there are NO scientific, or otherwise, facts to back it up.  It is supposed to be the ETERNAL word of god, not subject to change.  If the punishment is eternal burning in hell, pretty serious, then why doesn't god be more clear about his existence?   Again, I respect the beliefs of others, but I find this discussion very interesting and I am just being honest. 

 

 

  People tell me, "do your homework."  Well, the more "homework" I do, the more I read and research, the more agnostic I become.  Would god want me to pretend that I believe in him, just in case I am wrong, so I can get into heaven?  Wouldn't he see thru that charade?  Would he want me to be true to myself or pretend?  These questions are unanswerable.  If god wants me to believe in him, and base my entire life on him, then he has to give me something to go by, because I am only human and he knows it; he made me this way.

Re: Why did Jesus have to be tortured and Crucified?

in reply to

BTW, I read somewhere that the original purpose of male circumcision was to numb the **bleep** and dull sexual pleasure because religious people thought sex was sinful.  Anybody else heard of this.  And we all know that female circumcision is about ruining sex for the female and keeping her faithful.  What an abomination!

Re: Why did Jesus have to be tortured and Crucified?

in reply to

Really, they had to bleep the word **bleep**?  Isn't that just a body part like "arm"?