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.

 

Was Jesus a Voluntary Human Sacrifice?

page: 1
3

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 20 2010 @ 01:34 AM
link   


Jesus struck at the heart of the animal sacrifice system, and before the end of the week, He was crucified. The Temple incident was not His only attack on rabbinical and Mosaic law. In a number of passages, Jesus shows clearly He does not support the church of his day

www.come-and-hear.com...




I find no evidence that Jesus volunteered himself to be sacrificed in place of a Passover animal, though some religious people call him the "scapegoat sacrifice" or the "true" Passover sacrifice.

It appears that Jesus was not sacrificed as a sin offering on behalf of future humans, but was instead, murdered in retaliation for upsetting a lucrative pyramid scheme.

Anyone who takes a chance as a whistleblower, exposing a deceitful corporate scheme and thereby destroying its income, knows that retaliation may come in some form. How many people have we seen in the news who had access to information that could threaten those in high places? How many times do we see those people come to an end through suspicious "suicides" or just mysteriously "found dead" in spite of good health?

Of course Jesus knew he was taking a risk in exposing the wool of manipulation and exploitation that had been pulled over the eyes of the ignorant masses. At some point I suspect that he anticipated his death because of it.

In the beginning he was more careful and guarded in the way he presented his ideas. He used stories and parables in trying to get people to reason for themselves and see it. Truth is not something you can just tell someone and have them believe it because you said so. Truth is something that must be investigated and dissected by each individual in order to come to a rational conclusion.

In his last days, Jesus felt confident that he had done all he could to help people "wake -up" to the sham of religions. The last two things he did was bold and confrontational; this determined his fate and immediate demise.

After he turned over the tables of the merchants, he then affronted the priests with his Victory Ride into Bethphage. This village was the headquarters of the Sanhedrin and only priests were allowed to live there. In that day and time, people would have interpreted this as "he's asking for it!" But his real reason in doing this was to embolden his disciples and his followers. It was also his way of telling the evil-doers that they were finished.

Perhaps he was a bit over-confident and premature in his thoughts of victory. Could it be that he did not realize the depth and power of so many secret groups that were tied into this power ring? Yes, he did make a big ripple in the evil religious tyranny of the day. But after the crucifixion, both his disciples and followers were hunted and killed.

It is said that the victor is the one who rewrites history. And so, this evil power ring regrouped, and placed Jesus at the center of a new hero worship design, where people would welcome their oppression believing they would be rewarded in an afterlife for their suffering. This new religion taught people that suffering was virtuous; it kept them oppressed and they never spoke out against injustices because inwardly, they believed that god would either rescue or reward them.

The stories of Jesus being sacrificed for the "sins of humanity" make him nothing more than a stand in for a goat or an ox or a lamb. It is a demeaning concept. The sacrifice of Jesus was not in his death, but in the way he lived his life; the challenge of evil authority and his examples of how to love.

When Jesus used the metaphor of drinking wine as being his blood and that the bread they were eating might as well be his body, he had some idea at that point that they would kill him. He may have even known about some of the ritual human sacrifices that took place.

Because we know the bible has been embellished, changed, and used as a tool of manipulation and control, it is highly unlikely that Jesus had any intention of establishing a pretensious version of a morbid Gaulish blood drinking ritual in his honor.

(The idea of transubstantiation, that the wine magically turns to blood as you drink it at Communion, is completely absurd. But some people whole heartedly believe this cannibalistic grossness because some religious leaders enforce this doctrinal enigma among their membership.)

When Jesus rode into Bethphage, he was thumbing his nose at all authority. Many of his followers were in attendance. They entered a town that was off limits to them. In essence they were defiling the holy ground of their betters. Surely, for all their wealth, status, and superiority, it was a slap in the face to be bested by a lowly homeless rebel riding a donkey. And to have the public attending him with palm leaves! It was an insult that had to be dealt with.

For the tyrannical system to maintain any vestige of honor, the apostates had to be killed. All those who had associated with Jesus and continued to spread his anarchist ideas were relentlessly pursued and killed. The only way to regain control over the masses was to head off and annihilate those with the knowledge of their inner workings and deception. Only the "blind ones" were saved by their obedience to the system and their controllers.


Religious people believe that Jesus "died to take away sins of the world". Did his death really accomplish that? Is there no sin today because Jesus was murdered?
Or was Jesus a voluntary human sacrifice in that he was a risk taker for what he believed in?




posted on Jan, 20 2010 @ 02:07 AM
link   
One way to look at this is not so much by examining what Jesus did or didn't do in his life, or by arguing over arcane theolgical approaces about Jeusus's "choices" and his relation to the rest of the trinity and so on.

Rather, look at it from the other side. Sacrifice was part of the near eastern world for thousands of years, and was especially prevelent in temple Judiasim. Shortly after Jesus's death, the Romans sacked and destroyed the temple, putting an end to the massive daily sacrificial events. Many Jews were at a loss as to how to recoup ther traditions during the diaspora, where strict observance of temple mass sacrifcie was no longer possible. Given this, the Jesus story (true, partially true, or not true at all), offered a convenient theological and philsophical "out." The Jesus theories said, in effect, "Hey, we know you have been cut off from the duties of the Temple and the ancient sacrificial rituals. But this is OK, because Jesus gave himself as a kind of sacrifice-to-end-all sacrifcies. Simply let Him into your heart, accept his gift, and there will be no need for any further sacrifices."

This must have been a powerfully attractive message to diaspora Jews trying to make some sense of a scattered ritual structue and a leveled Second Temple. It provided an "easy out" from the complex, bloody, and often disturbing and expensive rituals of daily animal sacrifice. At the same time, it appealed to non-Jewish citizens of Greece and Rome who had previously looked askance at the Jewish sacrifical culture yet found much to empulate in their scriptures and rituals. It was a win-win for all invovled...there was no more need for violent, disturbing, and difficult sacrificial rituals. Any poor refugee or slave could now satisfy his divine imperatives merely through inner-world actions (accepting salvation, praying, and attending relatively much more simple rituals like mass, etc.).

This condensed, simplified, and much easier form of "Hellanized Judaiciasm" that later became known as Christianity spread throuh the world like widlfire. To use a metaphor, it was the equivalent of abandoning a massive room-size supercomputer (Herod's temple) for an iPod (the believer's portable heart). In orther words, abandoning a large, specfic temple with thousands of complex do's and don'ts for a kind of portable, condensed spirituality that any anyone cound take anywhere in their own hearts, no matter what situation they found themslves in. It was highly convenient, massively "usable" and simplified, and promised total salvation.

I see this behind its spread rather than the original intentions, beliefs, and attitudes of the very earliest Christians (i.e., the twelve apostles, etc.). Christianity offered the right "product" fulfilling the right needs at just ther right time, and spread like lightning because of it. This has less to do with what went on in Christ's life per se than the conditions after 70 AD or so, when the second temple fell and the Jewish diaspora began.



[edit on 1/20/10 by silent thunder]



posted on Jan, 20 2010 @ 02:13 AM
link   
Your right but after that, basically, the whole place torn apart within minutes. Jesus did spill the beans but his life wasn't exactly ordinary. Labeling him as a un-voluntary sacrifice is a little disrespectful to the christian community. If i remember before he died he asked his father ''to forgive his people for they do not know what they do'' or something like that.

Put yourself in Jesus's shoes; if your felt you knew knowledge that would topple today's world, you wouldn't necessarily be quiet about it? Not a christian person but I like the religion, alot of parallels to what i believe. Still, you make very interesting points.


I may not be 100% correct on the info but i was compelled to comment on this topic.


[edit on 20-1-2010 by iEndure]



posted on Jan, 20 2010 @ 02:22 AM
link   


Religious people believe that Jesus "died to take away sins of the world". Did his death really accomplish that? Is there no sin today because Jesus was murdered?


I always thought that the gesture was to remove the sins of the time and avoid another event like the flood thhat wiped out all Noahs mates.
In essence Jesus was the substitute for the entire human race - if he didn't die for our sins, then we would.
The final judgement is yet to come.

You might want to have a look over The Gospel of Judas to show that apparently whoever wrote the text certainly thought that Jesus did indeed know that he would soon die and actually arrange for Judas to betray him.


The The nag Hammadi Library has other texts that were also not included in the bible that might provide further insight for you, I haven't read many of them as yet, so can not detail their relevance to this particular topic.


[edit on 20-1-2010 by ilandrah]



posted on Jan, 20 2010 @ 02:30 AM
link   
I know this one, I used to be a Jesuit Priest...

Yes Jesus was absolutely a voluntary sacrifice, you can find the whole story in the Gospel of Judas in the Apocrypha. The whole point was to put into effect what he called ""The New Covenant" - which essentially meant two things. One: That the covenant between God and the people of Israel would be broadened to include all of mankind. And Two: That the Levitican laws would be replaced by the teachings of Jesus, including the rules of burnt offerings. This is the reason that the Book of Hebrews is included in the New Testament, this is the reason that The New Testament is called The New Testament, and this is the reason that Christianity became so popular so quickly.

Think about it, virtually every society at that time and later were doing human and animal sacrifices to Gods, when Christianity came along they were given a huge out and they took it. The most obvious is the assimilation of the people in the "New World."

The warriors like Sancho Panza and Hernando Cortez were nothing compared to the handful of Priests they took with them. The entire civilizations were as welcoming as could be to a religion that could end human sacrifice and they jumped on it. To this day some of the most dedicated Christians in the world are those Christians living in South America and Mexico.



posted on Jan, 20 2010 @ 02:41 AM
link   
reply to post by Alethea
 

You analysis is based on opinion and not on the historical record.

Jesus said, "I lay down my life, that I might take it again. 18 No man taketh it from me, but I lay it down of myself. I have power to lay it down, and I have power to take it again. This commandment have I received of my Father." John 10:17-18

The drama He was living out had been prophecied in the sacrificial system for 1500+ years...
...and it was played out as the services described.




posted on Jan, 20 2010 @ 03:29 AM
link   
According to "The Gospel of Judas", Jesus set the whole thing up and Judas complied to Jesus' wishes.

IRM



posted on Jan, 20 2010 @ 03:43 AM
link   
reply to post by Alethea
 


I agree, after reading the New Testament several times and really thinking about it I'm convinced that Jesus never intended any of the "sacrifice for all our sins" stuff that most Christians believe.

Jesus's teachings contradict the idea that he wanted to give himself for the sins of the world because he preached responsibility for ones own sin. He taught that you should examine the log in your own eye before you point out the speck in someone's eye. He taught Judge not lest you be judged. He was all about tolerance and responsibility for the deeds of your own hands.

He was also a rebel.

So they killed him and when his teachings just wouldn't go away the Romans hi-jacked the religion, changed it and its been changing ever since. Just go to any church, half the time they aren't even preaching a story about Jesus in a CHRISTian sermon. Most of what they believe comes from other places in the Bible, it's like the red letters take a back seat, I know I used to be a Christian.

Jesus also seemed to preach that we are all sons of god, that's what I believe he was referring to when he called himself the son of man or the son of god and that's why he taught them to pray "Our Father". I get the feeling he was fed up with watching the people of the day go through the religious motions under Roman rule waiting for a Messiah who was never going to show up so he wanted to teach them that through love they could become their own Saviors.

Also, I find the whole idea of this poor innocent man dying and bleeding and suffering nailed brutally to a Cross to be disturbing and very very cult-ish. Especially with the whole tradition of drinking his blood... Then they stand around and sing happy hymns about the Cross, the object of his torture... I think those supernatural and human sacrifice elements really detract from the profound philosophical teachings of Jesus.





[edit on 20-1-2010 by Titen-Sxull]



posted on Jan, 20 2010 @ 04:22 AM
link   
The Torah has the most truths from the true revelations of our one true Creator.

Animal Sacrifices are relevant to this day and God (Yahweh/Hashem) looks very fondly on his people who do participate in this holy ritual of the highest.



posted on Jan, 20 2010 @ 05:09 AM
link   

Originally posted by Titen-Sxull

I agree, after reading the New Testament several times and really thinking about it I'm convinced that Jesus never intended any of the "sacrifice for all our sins" stuff that most Christians believe.


Thank you for your succinct response to this thread, Titen-Sxull. I am glad that you agree because in this world of insane, misdirected zealots, it is comforting to find another soul that has a similar perspective.



Originally posted by Titen-Sxull
Jesus's teachings contradict the idea that he wanted to give himself for the sins of the world because he preached responsibility for ones own sin. He taught that you should examine the log in your own eye before you point out the speck in someone's eye. He taught Judge not lest you be judged. He was all about tolerance and responsibility for the deeds of your own hands.




You are right and I don't think the human race has ever applied personal responsibility into any religious doctrine. The early christian church allowed one to pay off "sin debts" in cash (as opposed to animal sacrifice)by selling indulgences. Fear of divine retribution is a money maker, so why change the psychology of revenue?

Another reason people don't own up to personal responsibility is arrogance. Many people will find a way to justify whatever "wrongs" they have done. Even those who take advantage of others say "if people are that ignorant they deserve to be exploited". It must be a genetic character flaw that humans are so self righteous.





Originally posted by Titen-Sxull

So they killed him and when his teachings just wouldn't go away the Romans hi-jacked the religion, changed it and its been changing ever since.



Exactly. Jesus didn't 'come' with a divine destiny to start a new religion. Christianity was born out of 'damage control' and evolved to become hero worship.



Originally posted by Titen-Sxull
Jesus also seemed to preach that we are all sons of god, that's what I believe he was referring to when he called himself the son of man or the son of god and that's why he taught them to pray "Our Father".


I don't think he ever called himself the son of god because he was no relation to the old testament god the people were "familiar" with.
I think John 8:19 makes this clear.



Then they said to Him, “Where is Your Father?”
Jesus answered, “You know neither Me nor My Father. If you had known Me, you would have known My Father also.”









Originally posted by Titen-Sxull
I get the feeling he was fed up with watching the people of the day go through the religious motions under Roman rule waiting for a Messiah who was never going to show up so he wanted to teach them that through love they could become their own Saviors.



I think the people of that time may have believed that Solomon was the promised Messiah. Several scriptures in 1 Chronicles seem to bear this out. (1 Chron. 28:6, 22:10, 17:11-14)



Originally posted by Titen-Sxull
Also, I find the whole idea of this poor innocent man dying and bleeding and suffering nailed brutally to a Cross to be disturbing and very very cult-ish. Especially with the whole tradition of drinking his blood... Then they stand around and sing happy hymns about the Cross, the object of his torture... I think those supernatural and human sacrifice elements really detract from the profound philosophical teachings of Jesus.


You are absolutely right. It all seems so barbaric, cultish, deluded and so far away from what Jesus ever intended.



posted on Jan, 20 2010 @ 05:24 AM
link   
But the old testaments prophecies of the messiah clearly state how the messiah would die for the transgression of all humanity.

From: here



Isaiah 53:5 But he was pierced for our transgressions, he was crushed for our iniquities; the punishment that brought us peace was upon him, and by his wounds we are healed. 700 B.C. Zechariah 12:10 And I will pour out on the house of David and the inhabitants of Jerusalem a spirit of grace and supplication. They will look on me, the one they have pierced, and they will mourn for him as one mourns for an only child, and grieve bitterly for him as one grieves for a firstborn son. 500 B.C. John 19:33-34; 36-37 [33] But when they came to Jesus and found that he was already dead, they did not break his legs. [34] Instead, one of the soldiers pierced Jesus' side with a spear, bringing a sudden flow of blood and water. [36] These things happened so that the scripture would be fulfilled: "Not one of his bones will be broken," [37] and, as another scripture says, "They will look on the one they have pierced."


Without being killed in accordance with the old testament writings Jesus would not be considered the messiah



posted on Jan, 20 2010 @ 06:36 AM
link   

Originally posted by ilandrah
But the old testaments prophecies of the messiah clearly state how the messiah would die for the transgression of all humanity.


Without being killed in accordance with the old testament writings Jesus would not be considered the messiah



Ilandrah, thank you for your contribution to this thread. Isaiah 53 (in your quote) is an excellent choice of scripture to cite as an example of the premise you have stated above.



Although Isaiah 53:5 appears be to describing the suffering of an individual, it is believed to be in reference, not to Jesus, but as an allegory depicting the nation of Israel.






Influential Jewish commentator Rashi, as have all other rabbis have believed Isaiah 53 referred to Israel.[4] Rashi, writing in the 11th century, did have some historical precedent for this interpretation, as his commentary became one of the best popular commentaries on the Tanakh. In Christian church father Origen's Contra Celsus, written in the year 248, he writes of Isaiah 53:

Now I remember that, on one occasion, at a disputation held with certain Jews, who were reckoned wise men, I quoted these prophecies; to which my Jewish opponent replied, that these predictions bore reference to the whole people, regarded as one individual, and as being in a state of dispersion and suffering, in order that many proselytes might be gained, on account of the dispersion of the Jews among numerous heathen nations.[5]

en.wikipedia.org...



posted on Jan, 20 2010 @ 06:37 AM
link   
It seems that non-Christians are obsessed about Jesus. As far as I see it, this barrage of constant threads bashing/marginalizing Christianity is getting offensive. It's fine to question, but if you choose to not be a Christian, quit talking about him. Christianity seems to be a nice target these days due to the fact that we won't attack anyone who doesn't agree with us.



posted on Jan, 20 2010 @ 06:51 AM
link   

Originally posted by Bilw85
It seems that non-Christians are obsessed about Jesus. As far as I see it, this barrage of constant threads bashing/marginalizing Christianity is getting offensive. It's fine to question, but if you choose to not be a Christian, quit talking about him. Christianity seems to be a nice target these days due to the fact that we won't attack anyone who doesn't agree with us.

Devils and those influenced by them are obsessed with Jesus...
...Jesus is their nemesis.




posted on Jan, 20 2010 @ 06:59 AM
link   

Originally posted by ilandrah

You might want to have a look over The Gospel of Judas to show that apparently whoever wrote the text certainly thought that Jesus did indeed know that he would soon die and actually arrange for Judas to betray him.





I am familiar with The Gospel of Judas. Much of the manuscript is missing and it would be erroneous to base any conclusion on mere word fragments.

The story line that Jesus set up his own crucifixion by instructing Judas to turn him in would imply that Jesus had suicidal tendencies. I think that is faulty reasoning and not in keeping with his character.

Therefore, I personally do not place any validity on this crumbled manuscript.



posted on Jan, 20 2010 @ 09:19 AM
link   
reply to post by Alethea
 


Hello Alethea!

I know from experience...these kind of threads are not made seeking for stars and flags...and the quickly fall to the dust of ATS. But I give you a thumbs up...for its not easy to go against the grain of many.

I believe you are very much hitting this nail on the head. Jesus's nature taught to turn the other cheek and to not fight for this life. He practiced what he preached. How many people can do that? Not many at all.

Jesus did go against the grain of the very belief system he likely grew up in. I find it hard to believe, that since he was killed do to his rebellious ways against the main stream...that his story was past on to us exactly as Jesus would of wanted it to...without bias distortion of Rome, Pagan beliefs, as well as the link tying it to Judaism. The NT had an agenda and it was political. They used Jesus to tie the people together and to end the blood shedding all with one stone. It is actually very brilliant...with harsh future repercussions.

There is a gnostic text that talks about how upset Jesus was for the selling of animals going on in the Temple. There are small text throughout the Bible and other literature that sways more in the idea that the blood sacrifices of animals was a mistake and misunderstanding of the people in the OT days.

If you are trying to live a righteous life, hoping to have a unblemished soul, what would fighting for you life do in this regard? Could you fight for your life of flesh, things of Earth...and still remain unblemished? And if one's sins are placed onto a scapegoat....what have they learned? And why then does it tell us Jesus says to 'carry our own cross and follow him'? Also the NT still talks about we will reap what we sow. If Jesus was a sacrifice for us...why do we still have to reap what we sow?

I see Jesus knowing they would seek to kill him. I see him believing in what he said so much, that he prepared himself for this. I believe when the time came where Jesus was prepared for what was going to occur...he was willing to 'bring it forward' through Judas or a loved one...making the event on his terms...instead of the masses terms. It seems through the writings it was all in the terms of the masses...but I think Jesus was very ready to walk the path he saw before him.

I think the givens from prior man are meant to be for the masses who fall for following without discernment. I think there is truth between the lines for those who seek their way with their heart. Even Jesus did not just give truth away. He did not offer spiritual wisdom's to those who would call it foolishness. And when they did hear of his teachings...they did...call him foolish.



posted on Jan, 20 2010 @ 01:40 PM
link   
Interestingly enough I don't believe Jesus was a true "human" sacrifice. A pure human sacrifice would be someone who sacrifices themselves based on faith. If your a Christian, Jesus "knew" he was the Son of God. Now knowing and faith are mutually exclusive and by definition opposites. So if Jesus "allowed" himself to be sacrificed full well knowing he was the son of God and that he would rise to Heaven... Then it wasn't a human sacrifice.

Now if he was a mentally ill individual who thought he was the son of God and allowed himself to be sacrificed then it's a different story.



posted on Jan, 20 2010 @ 01:59 PM
link   
I believe Jesus knew what he was doing and who would kill him. In a human body he is limited to our physics, but when released from the body he could sit on the throne beside God. He did not actually take our sins only if we repented he did.

One thing Jesus did that might have got him killed was when he destroyed the stores within the synagogue. He must have upset a lot of the elite.



posted on Jan, 20 2010 @ 06:19 PM
link   

Originally posted by LeoVirgo
reply to post by Alethea
 

Jesus did go against the grain of the very belief system he likely grew up in.

Second Temple Judaism was very different to its origins 1500 years previously...
...much as modern Christianity differs from its primitive roots with those who saw the resurrected Jesus.


There is a gnostic text that talks about how upset Jesus was for the selling of animals going on in the Temple.

These references are in the bible manuscripts too.

Jesus was concerned that the symbols had been made into a business...
...and the meaning and lessons of the symbols had been forgotten...
...and been replaced with commercial motive.



There are small text throughout the Bible and other literature that sways more in the idea that the blood sacrifices of animals was a mistake and misunderstanding of the people in the OT days.

It was never to have just been about the sacrifices but about the meaning.

Passover is a clear example...
...it was a sacrifice that marked their released from Egypt...
...and prefigured the actions of their Messiah.



If you are trying to live a righteous life, hoping to have a unblemished soul, what would fighting for you life do in this regard? Could you fight for your life of flesh, things of Earth...and still remain unblemished? And if one's sins are placed onto a scapegoat....what have they learned? And why then does it tell us Jesus says to 'carry our own cross and follow him'? Also the NT still talks about we will reap what we sow. If Jesus was a sacrifice for us...why do we still have to reap what we sow?

You really must read these statements in context...
...Christianity is not a list of teachings...
...or secret knowledge...
...it is the history of a man who had real interactions with real people...
...you must then read anything He said in the context of the circumstances and people He was conversing with...
...if there is some application to your curent situation this is secondary and should be applied with care.



I think the givens from prior man are meant to be for the masses who fall for following without discernment. I think there is truth between the lines for those who seek their way with their heart. Even Jesus did not just give truth away. He did not offer spiritual wisdom's to those who would call it foolishness. And when they did hear of his teachings...they did...call him foolish.

1 Corinthians 1:18 "...the preaching of the cross is to them that perish foolishness; but unto us which are saved it is the power of God."




posted on Jan, 21 2010 @ 09:38 AM
link   
reply to post by troubleshooter
 


Or....it also could be...that Jesus knew that the Perfect Holy One did not need us to kill anything for Thee...and that this was a huge shortcoming of man for a long time.

I dont believe for one second that the Perfect One killed babies or ordered killings ever.

Blood sacrifices are not of God....this is my faith. You can offer me feed back if you think you can show me a spiritual wisdom...I always accept a challenge to my understandings.



new topics

top topics



 
3

log in

join