Unconventional Religion

[genkaus]

Hey, we've arrived at direct contradiction!
Which of these cases of self-sacrifice is irrational? (We are using 'irrational' to mean 'bad', 'stupid', 'should never be done'.) Self-sacrifice is largely irrational in another sense. And I don't mind.

First of all - no we are not using 'irrational' to mean 'bad', 'stupid' or 'should never be done'. We are using it to mean what it does mean, i.e. without use of reason.

Secondly, unlike you, I don't make moral or rational judgment without any regard to the context. So no, I am not going to had out blanket judgments of 'bad', 'stupid', 'should never be done' or 'irrational' without a context being specified.

Soldiers dying for their country.

In a lot of cases - yes, it is irrational.

Parents struggling for their children.

In a lot of cases where it bears resemblance to self-sacrifice - yes, it is irrational.

Blocking a bullet.

Also, yes - in many cases.

If they're OK, we'll need a case of self-sacrifice being 'irrational in a bad way'.

The examples given above would qualify - in most cases.

[The Magic Pudding]

When I was a god I'd imbue my words with power.
If some fucker tried to twist 'em he'd stylishly asphyxiate.
Jesus? I'm trying but I don't remember him at all.
There was an odd self harm guy, kept mostly to himself...

[The Reality Salesman01]

Let's be fair here. What definition of "sacrifice" are you using here? In the context of religion, it is understood that this is what is meant:

sac·ri·fice (skr-fs)n.
1. a. The act of offering something to a deity in propitiation or homage, especially the ritual slaughter of an animal or a person.

b. A victim offered in this way.

You seem to be trying to defend the above definition by using examples of a different definition:


sac·ri·fice (skr-fs)n.

2. To forfeit (one thing) for another thing considered to be of greater value.

Such as...

A mother instinctively jumping in front of a car to push her child out of the way could be defined as "sacrifice" after the fact. But only from a third person's perspective after the events have transpired.

Say somebody was tying up their child to a stake, and pouring gasoline all over them.

You walk up to them and ask why they're doing that.

They say: "sacrificing my kid to Jobu, of course!"

...This example is covered by the definition provided above.

The stuff you are offering are pretty skectchy examples...

Soldiers dying for their country.

You are equivocating here. "dying for their country" is a figure of speech. Countries aren't offering their soldiers as sacrificial lambs to please a deity. There is a subjective motive that drives individuals, based on an actual thing (a country), that correlates with reality.

If, to a soldier, the preserving of their country's well being for future generations is subjectively more valuable than their fear of possibly dying to defend it, than no, it's not irrational. It's a difference in oppinion.

Parents struggling for their children.

Not even sure what this is supposed to be an example of. If it is intended to be an example of irrational behavior, you have missed the mark out of shear ignorance.

Blocking a bullet.

Again, for whom? Another person? An actual observable being? Making a subjective assessment that values another's life more than that of their own? Not irrational. Somebody seems confused on the terms being used and how they apply.

If they're OK, we'll need a case of self-sacrifice being 'irrational in a bad way'.

Killing a person as a means of pleasing an unidentifiable entity. Making a decision that affects an ACTUAL verifiable and valued life in favor of a supposed God's preference for human-life currency.

A believer of any faith could certainly understand any number of examples.

Think of a God you don't believe in.
Imagine somebody killing themselves in the name of it.

Jesus, if it happened, would be a good example. Willing or not. He should have been committed, not slaughtered. Anyone that doesn't understand this by now, will probably have a hard time understanding it at all.

[Consilius]

Self-sacrifice is irrational. We can all agree to that. This being the case, does something being irrational make it bad?

[genkaus]

Self-sacrifice is irrational. We can all agree to that. This being the case, does something being irrational make it bad?

Not according to your morality - which is what makes your morality irrational.

[The Reality Salesman01]

Self-sacrifice is irrational. We can all agree to that. This being the case, does something being irrational make it bad?

Again, you're gonna have to nail down the examples that you are deeming as irrational. I addressed some examples above were not irrational, and described some that are irrational. The irrational forms of self-sacrifice listed above are objectively bad as they relate to society. Saying that something is irrational, isn't enough to know whether or not its morally bad. I would need more information than that.

Example:
Bleeding can be a sign of serious injury. I could give countless examples of when blood is indicitive of something bad.

If you asked me..."Is bleeding bad?"

I would have to know exactly what instance you were inquiring about. I can also think of examples when bleeding or blood would NOT be bad.

Do you understand?

[ronedee]

We're starting to get off your original topic and delve into the plausibility of Christian theology and its compatibility with OT beliefs. That's fine, of course, but just saying...

Jesus exists as an intercessor and remains an intercessor. He does not claim supremacy to God (the center stage).

But Christians pray to Jesus, something the OT would not tolerate, given the verses I quoted you.

As stated before, if Jesus is God, he doesn't need to be his own intercessor with himself. That makes no sense. If he is not God, Christianity violates the 1st Commandment and Christians are sinning in a way that Yahweh would not tolerate.

Jesus, as an intercessor, is the closest link mankind has to God. Man cannot directly get to God without Christ, the only way.

But the ancient Jews were able to go directly to Yahweh with no need for an intercessor. Yahweh publicly spoke to the whole nation of Israel in Judges 1. He spoke to Moses face to face as one does to a friend. He dropped by Abraham's place for lunch. He wrestled with Jacob. He took someone up into Heaven in a whirlwind (sorry but his name escapes me right now, I'll likely remember it later).

The OT god required no intercessor. The OT god tolerated no intercessor.

Christianity is the amalgamation of pagan concepts of an intercessor deity awkwardly rammed together with strict Jewish monotheism. The babbling nonsense of the Trinity is the glue that holds it together.

Then who is God's Messiah, as promised by Him? And why wouldn't He be worshipped and obeyed if He is anointed of God Himself? Wouldn't that make the Messiah....His son? Or something of the sort?
What King says: "worship me...but not my son?"
Messiah [mɪˈsaɪə]
n
1. (Non-Christian Religions / Judaism) Judaism the awaited redeemer of the Jews, to be sent by God to free them
2. (Christian Religious Writings / Theology) Jesus Christ, when regarded in this role
3. (Government, Politics & Diplomacy) an exceptional or hoped for liberator of a country or people
[from Old French Messie, ultimately from Hebrew māshīach anointed]


son (sn)
n.
1. One's male child.
2. A male [descendant].
3. A man considered [as if in a relationship] of child to parent: a son of the soil.
4. One [personified] or regarded as a male descendant.
5. Son Christianity The second person of the Trinity.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

[Consilius]

Self-sacrifice is irrational. We can all agree to that. This being the case, does something being irrational make it bad?

Not according to your morality - which is what makes your morality irrational.

What I'm getting from you is that self-sacrifice is bad. You see, you didn't answer the question, and resorted to a backhanded comment.

---

Again, you're gonna have to nail down the examples that you are deeming as irrational. I addressed some examples above were not irrational, and described some that are irrational. The irrational forms of self-sacrifice listed above are objectively bad as they relate to society. Saying that something is irrational, isn't enough to know whether or not its morally bad. I would need more information than that.

I don't see an instance where self-sacrifice, an irrational act, would be immoral.
Human sacrifice on the part of the victims would be moral, if they had consented to it. To the sacrificers, no. The victim truly believes that his or her death will benefit others. It is still altruism.

[Rahul]

A soldier's job is not to die for their country. Their job is to make sure that other SOB dies for theirs.

[max-greece]

Not according to your morality - which is what makes your morality irrational.

What I'm getting from you is that self-sacrifice is bad. You see, you didn't answer the question, and resorted to a backhanded comment.

---

Again, you're gonna have to nail down the examples that you are deeming as irrational. I addressed some examples above were not irrational, and described some that are irrational. The irrational forms of self-sacrifice listed above are objectively bad as they relate to society. Saying that something is irrational, isn't enough to know whether or not its morally bad. I would need more information than that.

I don't see an instance where self-sacrifice, an irrational act, would be immoral.
Human sacrifice on the part of the victims would be moral, if they had consented to it. To the sacrificers, no. The victim truly believes that his or her death will benefit others. It is still altruism.

You don't see an example in this thread or you cannot imagine one?

9/11 ring any bells?