(January 16, 2015 at 1:54 pm)Lek Wrote:(January 15, 2015 at 12:14 pm)Rhythm Wrote: No "we" shouldn't be........Lek..........
“I find something repulsive about the idea of vicarious redemption. I would not throw my numberless sins onto a scapegoat and expect them to pass from me" - Christopher Hitchens.
Good for Christopher!
What? Nice of you to throw an atheist a bone, but you do understand he is blasting the idea of a third party deciding for you what you and another party do and who forgives who? He is saying the Jesus character takes away his decision making and autonomy and personal responsibility.
I know you don't want to accept this, but the idea of blood sacrifice is not new to Christianity. Christians simply took that idea from animal form to human form.
In antiquity in polytheism and monotheism no one could have known what blood was scientifically, like the heart they thought it was magic.
And in battle especially taking one for your tribe was universal act of sacrifice.
The appeal of the Jesus story also really was not new. Our human empathy in reality loves a good story about the underdog defeating authority. In Plato's Apology Socrates upset all the teachers, noblemen and senators for questioning their authority. At the end of the play Socrates was forced to drink Hemlock as punishment for defying the state.
And even in ancient Egypt you had depictions of trinity in Ra, Osiris and Horus who sat in judgment of the dead. Horus was depicted as a savior son god who would save the Egyptian world. Even the idea of curing blindness was not new to Christianity.
If you live in America and see a pharmacy the Rx represents two Egyptian gods. The R is the healing god Thot, and the extended arm of the R going down is spit going into the eye or "x" of the god Horus.
