It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Jesus as a blood Sacrifice. Pagan Conspiracy?

page: 2
8
<< 1    3  4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Sep, 2 2009 @ 09:51 PM
link   
Hello, I do not mean Pagan in a broad sense of the term. I in general do not have problems with those who identify themselves as "Pagan", and in terms of the broad word I do not have problems with Eastern religions, Native Americans or any of those things.

You could just as easily say "gentiles", but I didn't because gentiles doesn't really define what that person may believe specifically. But Pagan and sacrifice seemed to better describe it. I do not at all mean to paint entire groups here, and think such a painting would be ignorant and wrong by default, as people are individuals.

I do not consider myself to be Christian, but I am a huge huge fan of Jesus. I do not at all like organized religion.

I do not believe in the blood sacrifice of Jesus and haven't for some time(ever really). To me it seems contradictory to what Jesus said and did, as well as being contradictory to my understanding on what is "divine". I have come across this information because I have been trying to figure out exactly how that "myth" got into effect, or why I was wrong.

My search for trying to figure these things first lead me to the OT, which I was having trouble with as well, due to the blood sacrifice it talks about. So I turned to the Jewish to find out how they understood things. Jesus was a Jew, so I figured it would be good to find out what they believed. That was when I found out about the different forms of atonement, and that blood sacrifice was generally looked down upon, and that repenting for your sins was the highest form - which is what I agree with and understand.

But where I did find that was in the beliefs of the Romans of the time. As such, the "Pagan influence" I mention comes directly from the Roman elite/rulers. Mostly likely as a way of keeping their authority. So that is where the pagan influence/conspiracy of it comes from.

Basically, what I found out is that the form of Christianity based on a human blood sacrifice is not actually anything from Judaism as Christianity would claim, but is instead a manipulation from another influence(Thus, Pagan influence). This manipulated version had no choice but to be accepted, as they killed anyone who didn't go along - which is btw prophecy fulfilled. Also of note is that Jesus said do not go to these people(gentiles), but Paul changes that.

Sorry for the confusion.





[edit on 9/2/2009 by badmedia]




posted on Sep, 2 2009 @ 09:56 PM
link   
reply to post by badmedia
 


well a lot of things christians do have nothing to do with christ or the bible like the easter bunny and the christmas tree.



posted on Sep, 2 2009 @ 10:32 PM
link   

Originally posted by babloyi
This thread is hilarious. The OP started off with some information showing how the "sacrifice" concept was infused into christianity by other non-christian sources, but it all ends up with people arguing in defense of "Paganism", something that the OP didn't really even attack.

If I am right, what the OP means is that this is a conspiracy that involved infusion of Pagan (at the time Roman) ideals into Christianity. Not that Pagans are responsible for a secret conspiracy against christians.


This is correct. I kind of suck at making these things clear. Thanks for pointing it out.



posted on Sep, 3 2009 @ 11:49 AM
link   

Originally posted by cautiouslypessimistic

Originally posted by JustG


2. Pagan tradition.
The pagan traditions came from the Catholic church. This is an entirely separate issue than what you are discussing.



You are going to have to ellaborate on this, as it is completely false and I'd love to see where you are getting these lies from.

Pagan religions pre-date christianity by thousands of years.

Christmas just happens to coincide with pagan solstice holidays.

Easter just happens to coincide with pagan fertility holidays(heck, they even use the same symbol the pagans did-the bunny)

Christians call Beltaine "May day"

Christians celebrate Halloween, which just happens to fall right in line with Samhain.

Chrisitans celebrate groundhogs day on Imbolc

Do I need to go on?


Wow, you really know how to take something out of context. Let me rephrase for you. The pagan traditions were brought into Christianity by the Catholic church.

Happy?



posted on Sep, 3 2009 @ 11:51 AM
link   

Originally posted by zaiger
reply to post by badmedia
 


well a lot of things christians do have nothing to do with christ or the bible like the easter bunny and the christmas tree.


Yea, funny thing is, so do atheists. I don't see any point in your post.



posted on Sep, 3 2009 @ 12:33 PM
link   
Sorry for late replies, it's been a busy few days with work.


Originally posted by rogerstigers
As for the supposed sacrifice of Jesus, well, the story goes back eons. A god king who is sacrificed to save its people from damnation is a common theme in old religions. So much so, that it really makes one wonder how much of the NT was a reporting of facts on the ground and how much was a re-telling of old stories.


But it doesn't go back into Judaism. Which is a good bit of what I'm getting at in my first post.

Another thing I didn't mention in my first post is I do not believe in the virgin birth as in Mary is a virgin. There are not only 2 deaths, but there are 2 births as well. 1 birth is of the flesh, 1 birth is of the soul/spirit. Jesus is IMO born of Joseph and Mary, and Mary is not a virgin. Those are his flesh parents. He is born "of a virgin" because he has been born of spirit, and born of the father. The 2nd birth.

The so called prophecy of the "virgin birth" in the OT actually means young woman. More evidence can be found in the fact that at one point Jesus denies Mary is his mother.

But for me, it's not the story itself that matters. What matters to me and why I'm a fan of his is based on what he says and does. He speaks an understanding that is divine. I recognize the father/divinity within him.



For the record, I now identify myself as pagan. I am universe-centric and believe that we are of the universe in all levels and all dimensions. I don't really follow on ritual, although I still celebrate the time of lights and giving of gifts at Yule.


This is also a topic in itself, but this is the main point/reason I disagree with pagan religions as well as new age people. They do not at all understand the 2 births or the difference between the observer and what is observed, the ride and the rider, the experience and that which experiences it.



posted on Sep, 3 2009 @ 12:45 PM
link   

Originally posted by dakota1s2
Sacrifices were made as early as the time of Adam and Eve. Not included in the Catholic bible but just the same one of the ancient writings which have as much validity as any ancient script, The Gospel of Adam and Eve show such sacrifices.


Well I disagree with sacrifice, which is why I have been studying up on this topic a bit. In the OT it is a very very limited thing, and not of high stature at all. It is not a valid for of "washing away all the sins".



Jesus' death was the ultimate sacrifice. Gave his earthly life for all. He was sent for this one purpose although he lived and taught during his time here.


This is what I am bringing into question. I already know this point of view, I am showing reasons why I think it is bunk. Repeating things over and over doesn't make them true, and you haven't offered any response or information to back up the statement. I'll bet if you do, it won't be from Jesus.



As for paganism which has entered into the so called Christian religion, there was nothing pagan taught during the time of Christ. It has crept in slowly. Can you imagine, Conspiracy? This still doesn't effect the real or true Church, which has no Buildings or organizations. Most people who really don't know Jesus don't realize that no organization on earth represents the true Church.


The Christian religion is built upon that sacrifice. That is the basis in about half the NT. I agree the church isn't physical, but what do you think it is built out of? Faith?

Are you saying you personally know Jesus, or are you just another person who says they know Jesus because they read the bible?



Please quit looking at Earthly organizations or so called Christians(who really don't believe in the power of God and Jesus) to Categorize us all.


You assume this. I don't at all look at such things as being a reflection of god or Jesus. I know for a fact they aren't, and I know what they are a reflection of.

Plus, I even made specific mention I don't group people up. Did you even read the post itself, or did you just see the title and decide to open your mouth? Because you have failed on just about every level to even reply to the things made inside the topic, all you did was respond to the title.



posted on Sep, 3 2009 @ 12:47 PM
link   

Originally posted by zaiger
reply to post by badmedia
 


well a lot of things christians do have nothing to do with christ or the bible like the easter bunny and the christmas tree.


Hi zaigar/

Actually,the easter bunny is a deceptive invention by those that simply do their best to deceive!

As for the symbolism of the decorated tree....joyful because it stays green for all seasons!
The Christmas tree has it's origins of why it is used at Christmas time...I read this awhile back, but cannot remember where?
Russian maybe!

ICXC NIKA
helen



posted on Sep, 3 2009 @ 12:49 PM
link   

Originally posted by JustG

Originally posted by zaiger
reply to post by badmedia
 


well a lot of things christians do have nothing to do with christ or the bible like the easter bunny and the christmas tree.


Yea, funny thing is, so do atheists. I don't see any point in your post.


reply to post by JustG
 


Okay see that above? I was talking to bad media...
When you hit that reply to button it means you are talking to that person.
like right now im responding to you. You understand so far?
He was putting forth his theory on something the christians do come from pagan rituals. I was saying that a lot of things christians do come from other religions.
If you still do not understand I do not know what to tell you but you can have this



posted on Sep, 3 2009 @ 12:50 PM
link   

Originally posted by cautiouslypessimistic
The problem with your conjecture, as has been stated SO many times on here before, if that Christians erradicated pagans. The christian church made it their mission to heathenize and destroy all earthly religions. They took pagan traditions and made them their own.

This is why you see the ideologies cross-not because of a pagan conspiracy.


Because Christianity isn't an earthly religion? And if you adopt the practices of others, then you become that.

Christians "erradicated" anyone who didn't go along with their beliefs.

And once again another poster who has failed to address anything said in the post. Did you also read only the title and then reply?



posted on Sep, 3 2009 @ 12:58 PM
link   
reply to post by helen670
 


The christmas tree comes from germanic pagan practices and has nothing to do with christianity, the easter bunny comes from the pagan god Ēastre which was their god of fertility.



posted on Sep, 3 2009 @ 01:20 PM
link   

Originally posted by JustG
1. The sacrifice
Jesus was killed as the spotless lamb for the sins of the world. Willingly, blamelessly until the time He was risen. Look-up the meaning of the spotless lamb.


I know the story and the claims. But in the OT sacrifice only atoned for sins that the person was unaware they had committed. It didn't atone for sins the person knowingly did and things like that. The only thing that fixed those were to repent for your sins. Which means to fix and change your ways.

And the wages of sin is paid with the 2nd death, and Jesus doesn't die the 2nd death.

It boils down to saying the truth had to be sacrificed in order for the lie to live.



2. Pagan tradition.
The pagan traditions came from the Catholic church. This is an entirely separate issue than what you are discussing.


Well no, this is entirely my point. As I mention in my post, Jesus never does these things and says things opposite of them. What I am trying to point out is the the things he did have been manipulated and changed to blind people. It's not Jesus who is wrong, it's the church and the Christian religion as a whole, which is based on that Catholic Church. All Christian religions are built upon the sacrifice, and it is a lie.



4. Why aren't Christians more like Jesus
Because we are imperfect regular human beings just like everyone else. While we try to do our best, we are still who we are. Hence the quote by Jesus that he came not for the healthy but for the sick. ie. We recognize our need for Christ.


So then why do you worship his death?



posted on Sep, 3 2009 @ 01:24 PM
link   
One thing to note is that it would be Judeo Christianity that forms a religion around the death of Jesus on the cross as a sacrifice. Other forms of Christianity (non-Judeo), follow the principles of being anointed and of religious practice, that doesn't mean blood/flesh sacrifice (for example, Universal Church, which is non-denominational). Given these differences, I'm a bit confused as I follow the discussion in this thread. Maybe your thesis isn't clear?

[edit on 3-9-2009 by dzonatas]



posted on Sep, 3 2009 @ 01:31 PM
link   

Originally posted by zaiger
reply to post by badmedia
 


well a lot of things christians do have nothing to do with christ or the bible like the easter bunny and the christmas tree.


Well, what I'm talking about though is a manipulation from what the OT says, what Jesus does and the main basis of modern Christianity.

Christians say their salvation can be found in the sacrifice/death of truth. Where as I think that is a manipulation, and it is from his life, his example and understanding that one can find such a thing.

That the sacrifice part is added on to later as a means of deceiving people, and where I found that coming from is the roman elite/rulers of the time who just so happened to be the ones who took and pushed this form and also had the sacrifices and so forth.

I'm just trying to show that the sacrifice part is not the real deal so that maybe people will start to look at his life rather than his death. I'm not trying to shove it all out the door or anything, I am trying to separate the truth from the lies.



posted on Sep, 3 2009 @ 01:41 PM
link   

Originally posted by dzonatas
One thing to note is that it would be Judeo Christianity that forms a religion around the death of Jesus on the cross as a sacrifice. Other forms of Christianity (non-Judeo), follow the principles of being anointed and of religious practice, that doesn't mean blood/flesh sacrifice (for example, Universal Church, which is non-denominational). Given these differences, I'm a bit confused as I follow the discussion in this thread. Maybe your thesis isn't clear?


Well I don't see how it can be from that. I listened to and talked to Jewish people on the topic. I gathered that there are 3 forms of atonement, each with different purposes.

Sacrifice is the least of the 3. It only atones for sins that the person is unaware they have committed. Where they just honestly didn't know any better and did not realize.

Above that, there is a repaying of things. Like if you steal a man's horse, then you need to give away things etc. A restitution of sorts. Didn't really get much information on this part.

But the highest form of atonement is to repent for your sins. Repent = fix/change, sins = mistake. The 2nd one to me seems to be apart of this one, but the highest form of atonement basically means learning from your mistakes and then correcting yourself in the future.

Here's a lecture from a Rabbi you can listen to on the topic. I find the guy refreshing.

Sin and Atonement : Who Needs the Blood?

Yes, either I did an extremely poor job explaining myself, or people are just reading and responding to the title. Honestly, as I keep having to repeat the same points over and over, I think people are just reading the title and posting. I could be wrong.



posted on Sep, 3 2009 @ 04:24 PM
link   

Originally posted by badmedia


Another thing I didn't mention in my first post is I do not believe in the virgin birth as in Mary is a virgin. There are not only 2 deaths, but there are 2 births as well. 1 birth is of the flesh, 1 birth is of the soul/spirit. Jesus is IMO born of Joseph and Mary, and Mary is not a virgin. Those are his flesh parents. He is born "of a virgin" because he has been born of spirit, and born of the father. The 2nd birth.



It just seems that you are basically denying the power of God concerning what He is or isn't capable of doing. You understand the concept of two deaths and two births but it's as if you won't allow your mind to wrap around the notion, that the power of God came upon this woman and did something very unique .

Explain why Jesus can't be a product of the merging of both realities; spiritual and physical? A physical manifestatiion of the union of things above with those below?



posted on Sep, 3 2009 @ 04:35 PM
link   
Hello Badmedia,

You know that I agree that the blood sacrifices were misunderstood. To me it is obvious that the OT men used their carnal minds more then their spiritual minds due to the fact they killed many for Earthly things. This is not divine at all.

So many say that if blood sacrifices were not meant to be or required by God then Jesus died in vane. The blindness holds many.

God doesnt teach through death, for life is what is from the Spirit. We must look at the life of Jesus.

Even Jesus says to pick up ones own cross and follow him. If Jesus took on my sins if I place my faith in him...then why the need for me to pick up my own cross? It makes more sense to me that God is showing us that he does not need anything of Earthly value...even the Earthly body of Jesus. What God needs is for us all to follow the actions and ways of Jesus, the perfect example.

What good would it do me to place my wrongs on Jesus? Am I not to own up to them and claim them as mine? Surely I am. I would receive no wisdom or growth about my spiritual self if I didnt.

I have met many Christians that like to talk about their old days when they believe Satan was misleading them. I say....was it not you that chose to make the decisions you did (mabey for greed, lust, desire, pride)? They look at me strangely, for then I know they have not owned up to their Earthly mind that lead them in the past. No, they say to me, Satan knew I didnt have God in my life and I was vulnerable. I say to them....is that not an excuse....did you not know that your choice could of been overcome....and this overcoming would of been due to your spiritual self that lead the way?

To me, in my mind, the law represents a law of life...which revolves around reaping what you sow. If you kill you will be killed. This to me shows possible reincarnation...for we know that there are men that killed but died yet of old age. The law of reaping what you sow still stands today. Jesus showed us how to plant good seeds and to be a part of the good vine. He is the vine and we are the branches.

If Jesus came to teach us literal things...he wouldnt have taught in parables. So often many only follow and read literally. Very few are trying to seek a deeper understanding that would not of been given to the simple/natural/carnal minds. It would be like giving your pearls to the swine.

Even Jesus had no reason to fight for his body of flesh....so he used it...to show a lesson....of light and darkness....spirit and physical. Most cant see both, they only see the physical. It is a journey to learn both...it cant happen in a day and one needs to knock at the door...to be taught through the Spirit. There are things the books cant teach us.

Just my thoughts...
LV

[edit on 3-9-2009 by LeoVirgo]



posted on Sep, 3 2009 @ 04:40 PM
link   
reply to post by Myrtales Instinct
 


There is a old text the talks of the baptism of Jesus and it says that God says....'I have now begotten thee'....

I think we have to be careful of literal meanings.

We can all be born of the Holy Spirit.

Things get written down years later and mabey gets a little twisted. Just saying its possible.

The Holy Spirit is the ultimate Virgin....bringing life to all things.



posted on Sep, 3 2009 @ 04:53 PM
link   

Originally posted by LeoVirgo
reply to post by Myrtales Instinct
 


There is a old text the talks of the baptism of Jesus and it says that God says....'I have now begotten thee'....

I think we have to be careful of literal meanings.

We can all be born of the Holy Spirit.

Things get written down years later and mabey gets a little twisted. Just saying its possible.

The Holy Spirit is the ultimate Virgin....bringing life to all things.


One should not so easily dismiss the idealogy of a literal meaning because for the kingdom to be able to come near the believer in the first place, things HAD to be done on earth as they are in heaven.

John and Jesus' ministries both started with the call to "repent." One ministry represents the washing of the outside and the other with washing the inside.

For the Holy Spirit to really take up residence inside someone, they must be made clean and this is done through Jesus' baptism of spirit and fire.



posted on Sep, 3 2009 @ 04:58 PM
link   

Originally posted by Myrtales Instinct
It just seems that you are basically denying the power of God concerning what He is or isn't capable of doing. You understand the concept of two deaths and two births but it's as if you won't allow your mind to wrap around the notion, that the power of God came upon this woman and did something very unique .

Explain why Jesus can't be a product of the merging of both realities; spiritual and physical? A physical manifestatiion of the union of things above with those below?


I'm not saying he is not capable of things. But I just know from experiencing the 2nd birth myself that the virgin birth is of the soul and the father - to which there is no equal.

That and the sacrifice is part of what I see as a larger manipulation. Where Jesus is made into something that you can not ever be and so forth. But the truth is, Jesus was just like you - the difference was he knew the father that was within him. This both puts people down, but also creates the notion that the father is an external thing, which is required for the so called "anti-christ".

Because he had truth, understanding and wisdom, he is a physical manifestation of those thing. The last supper for example, that is straight out of Proverbs, where Jesus is playing the part of wisdom, and giving those at the table understanding.

Proverbs 9

All are children of god, not just Jesus.



John 10

33The Jews answered him, saying, For a good work we stone thee not; but for blasphemy; and because that thou, being a man, makest thyself God.

34Jesus answered them, Is it not written in your law, I said, Ye are gods?

35If he called them gods, unto whom the word of God came, and the scripture cannot be broken;

36Say ye of him, whom the Father hath sanctified, and sent into the world, Thou blasphemest; because I said, I am the Son of God?


Which one finds out upon the "2nd birth", as you then know the father within you. Finding the father is the entire point.

It's a manipulation from understanding into church doctrine and religion. This is why Christians are so unlike Jesus, and why people are rejecting the things. If they were instead shown and seen true understanding, then these things would not be a problem.




top topics



 
8
<< 1    3  4 >>

log in

join