Jesus' Sacrifice

[Nope]

Although there is no doubt that crucifixion is a horrible way to die, I have problems viewing the mythological story of Jesus' death as a great sacrifice for humans. (beyond that it isn't true, of course)

In the story, Jesus knew that he would be raised against to live an eternity being pampered and adored. He knows he will win. Granted, I don't like the idea of pain but if I was part of an all knowing god, I would realize the pain was temporary and, compared to eternity, short.

No one asked Jesus to temporarily die for them and Jewish people didn't always require a blood sacrifice for forgiveness. For proof, I give you the link below
http://jewsforjudaism.org/knowledge/arti...icus-1711/

In the Torah, blood sacrifices were not the only path to atonement; there were other ways to achieve forgiveness. For example, incense served to atone for the people in Numbers 16:46-47, and giving charity is described in Exodus 30:15-16 and Numbers 31:50 as `making atonement for your souls’ – the same expression as in Leviticus 17:11. In reality, blood sacrifices were the least effective of all the means of atonement mentioned in the Bible. One important limitation to the effectiveness of sacrifices is that they were only brought for unintentional sins (ie. someone didn’t know that kindling a fire was prohibited on the Sabbath, or they were aware of this, but thought it was Sunday when kindling the fire). Sacrifices did not help to atone for sins that were done intentionally (Leviticus 4, and Numbers 15:22-31).

There doesn't seem to be any reason for a god sacrifice except for Christians to explain why their messiah was killed in such a degrading fashion. If Jesus was supposed to be a direct link to animal sacrifices, shouldn't he have been killed in the same manner as the sacrificial animals and had his throat cut?

If suffering pain was part of the deal(which is pretty sick in itself), why not be flayed alive or drawn and quartered. Cruxifiction is horrible but some forms of historical capital punishment seem worse. Jesus didn't even take as long to die as his fellow thieves. In fact, I read it took him about six hours to die when it took other men days. So, what was the point of being crucified over just having his throat cut? Was it just because bible god needs blood or that he needs to see suffering? How can his death be a glorious sacrifice when Jesus knew he would get an eternity of being pampered and loved?

Compared to an eternity in hell, Jesus's suffering seem laughable. Also, Jesus's so called perfectionism and perfect goodness actually make his sacrifice meaningless. If someone perfectly good dies for someone else, aren't they just following their nature? I am not an all good person. If I die to save a child, wouldn't the fact that I am not perfect mean that I am working against my own nature and thus my death be more impressive?

[Spooky]

You are making the mistake of using logic. Stop doing that. Eat crayons and spray people with holy water like the rest of us.

Christianity is obsessed with blood? That's the only answer I can think of.

[vorlon13]

Jesus could have been sentenced to the boats. He might have held on for a week or so (the record was 17 days).

I'm not sure how a resurrected Jesus would have been perceived after that (ewwwwwwwwwwwwwww), it would have been a tad more icky than nail holes.


Oh, while I'm thinking about it, let me fix the thread title there for you:

Jesus' temporary sacrifice

[abaris]

The fundamental flaw lies in the dogma of the trinity. I have yet to find a theist who can define that dogma or even tries to define it. They usually say, one shouldn't reflect on it, since it's beyond our understanding.

But the bare facts are, according to the dogma, is god incarnate. Ergo the same god, who set up the concept of original sin sacrifices one of his personas to himself to atone for what he has brought into the world in the first place. It gets even weirder when reading the bible, since Jesus repeatedly adresses god. But since he is god, he's merely talking to himself.

And lastly, as I said in a different thread. A sacrifice is only a sacrifice if something precious is lost. Since Jesus is god and god by definition immortal, there is no sacrifice. All that is left is the circus trick of a travelling show.

[dyresand]

The bible story has jesus dying for himself to please himself and that is pointless.
HJ however died for challenging the authority of Rome.

[vorlon13]

The fundamental flaw lies in the dogma of the trinity. I have yet to find a theist who can define that dogma or even tries to define it. They usually say, one shouldn't reflect on it, since it's beyond our understanding.

But the bare facts are, according to the dogma, is god incarnate. Ergo the same god, who set up the concept of original sin sacrifices one of his personas to himself to atone for what he has brought into the world in the first place. It gets even weirder when reading the bible, since Jesus repeatedly adresses god. But since he is god, he's merely talking to himself.

And lastly, as I said in a different thread. A sacrifice is only a sacrifice if something precious is lost. Since Jesus is god and god by definition immortal, there is no sacrifice. All that is left is the circus trick of a travelling show.

I've read the Mormon take on the Trinity.

Oh, my.


If you thought the rest of their bullshit was a fucked up befuddled mess, you ain't seen nuthin' till you've seen that.

[Norman Humann]

Pshh. Comes to Earth. Gets crucified. Takes a three day nap. Rises fresh as a daisy straight up to heaven. I'm not impressed.

[Mr.wizard]

Does anybody wonder why the romans would put jesus in a rich man's tomb in the first place? It seems odd to me that a rich man would give his tomb to jesus and then have it guarded by the romans, when the romans just crucified him. During that period the romans usually let the bodies rot on the crosses or buried criminals in common graves.

[robvalue]

It is absolutely retarded, and I don't know how anyone even pretends to understand it let alone "appreciate" it.

I remember hearing about his death originally being about stopping animal sacrifices. The story got distorted from that point I think? He certainly wasn't meant to be God incarnate first time around. I'm pretty sure that was a later insertion.

Is there a chance that even the crucifixion wasn't the original death method? Or is it accepted that the story always contained that part?

[Alex K]

So it's divine self-mutilation? I see a whole new theology based on that.

Well at least we got great music out of this mess of a story.

---

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jm1os4VzTgA

---