Is needlessly sacrificing your child, as God did, child abuse and murder?

page: 1
6
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join

posted on Dec, 9 2013 @ 08:45 PM
link   
Is needlessly sacrificing your child, as God did, child abuse and murder?

Bishop Spong indicated that we Christians should not perceive God as a God who demands barbaric acts like human sacrifice to appease his sense of justice. He uses the term child abuse and I just call it more of what it would be if the myth was real; murder.

I say needlessly because God has no needs. He only has wants and no decent God would want to needlessly sacrifice his son.

If a Sacrifice were required, God would not send a boy to do a man’s job and he would be man enough to step up himself.

If you were to dare judge this issue or scenario of God, --- knowing that he planned to have Jesus sacrificed even before creating the potential for sin, would you find God criminally liable for child abuse and murder?

Regards
DL




posted on Dec, 9 2013 @ 09:02 PM
link   
reply to post by Greatest I am
 


void watches with interest...



posted on Dec, 9 2013 @ 09:02 PM
link   
Unfortunately most religious types are so lacking in common sense or have been so completely brainwashed that they cant even see whats written down right in front of them in their bibles.

God (the god of the bible) is a sadistic megalomaniac, rape, torture, theft, genocide, fratricide, you name it god is guilty of it.

God is just lucky he had masters of propaganda on his side or else he would be seen as a tyrant.

It would be like someone coming along and saying Charlie Manson was a good bloke, yeah he killed those people ...... but only because he loves us all.

In fact Charlie looks positively Angelic when compared to the Abrahamic "god"



posted on Dec, 9 2013 @ 09:10 PM
link   
No argument and thanks.

Regards
DL



posted on Dec, 9 2013 @ 10:02 PM
link   

Greatest I am

If you were to dare judge this issue or scenario of God, --- knowing that he planned to have Jesus sacrificed even before creating the potential for sin, would you find God criminally liable for child abuse and murder?



There is a lot of thing that I think the bible got wrong and is humanities miss understanding, but in this case I have nothing against Jesus home going and can even understand it.

Yes there is pain when the body shuts down but I am pretty sure Jesus was having the bliss when it happened so the pain was not as bad as it would have been for a normal person.

Do you ever think of how Jesus must have thought about humanity from his view? Do you think it was a picnic for him spending time on earth with a dualistic humanity with ego issues who did not and do not listen? Can you imagine Jesus feeling a little bit disconnected from humanity and feeling like he did not belong here?

From my point of view Jesus was and is probably ok with leaving since he went home to where he belongs. It might just be another day in Paradise but it is still Paradise.



Jesus was in a way like a warrior who went against a enemy and used words to change part of the enemy to a friend. Will you condemn all fathers who have let their sons go to dangerous places for the good of all that is.
edit on 9-12-2013 by LittleByLittle because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 9 2013 @ 10:30 PM
link   

IkNOwSTuff
It would be like someone coming along and saying Charlie Manson was a good bloke, yeah he killed those people ...... but only because he loves us all.


LOL
Wish we still had the thumbs up emote.



posted on Dec, 9 2013 @ 11:04 PM
link   
Needless? If you consider saving sinners who seek forgiveness from their sins so that they can have eternal life with God in Heaven not a good cause, then yeah I guess it's needless. God did know that humans would crucify his son, but it was part of the perfect plan to completely defeat Satan, conquer death, and create a path to salvation for all of humanity, so I and most Christians are appreciative of the sacrifice God made of his only son. God says in the Bible that Jesus was the perfect representation of his love for us and that his salvation is open to anyone, even the criminal who died on the cross next to Christ, repented for his lifestyle, and was told by Christ, "today you will be with me in paradise." If you have read the Bible, I don't believe you did so with an open heart, but you think I'm a brainwashed narrow-minded Christian who is incapable of understanding other points of view, so I'm sure you don't care.
edit on 9-12-2013 by ghostfacekilah00 because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 10 2013 @ 12:11 AM
link   

Greatest I am
Is needlessly sacrificing your child, as God did, child abuse and murder?



Explain the concept of the trinity to me, and then tell me if you think God sacrificed his son as in we think of a son.

Not a bad place to start.


. If a Sacrifice were required, God would not send a boy to do a man’s job and he would be man enough to step up himself. I


We know Sacrifice was required when we are talking about the Biblical God Hebrews 9:22 and 1 Peter 3:18.




If you were to dare judge this issue or scenario of God, --- knowing that he planned to have Jesus sacrificed even before creating the potential for sin, would you find God criminally liable for child abuse and murder?


Is God responsible for human choices? No, we have free will. Once again before we can go further in the discussion you need to have a full understanding of the trinity.



posted on Dec, 10 2013 @ 12:58 AM
link   
reply to post by Greatest I am
 


You say Yahweh is not God since he is evil, but then, for some reason, you keep calling him God. Why call him God if you don't believe he is God?



posted on Dec, 10 2013 @ 03:12 AM
link   
reply to post by Greatest I am
 


Are you even reading the stories of Christ?

True the Bible doesn't contain every story, we can thank the church for deleting what they didn't want.... but your understanding of this religion is totally bonkers IMO.

To understand the meaning vs a literal definition are 2 separate ideologies. To read a book for its face value instead of studying the underlying meanings is what Jesus was about. Why do you think he spoke in parables instead of straight forward definitions. Only those who understand His messages will get it. Those who don't, will need more time.



posted on Dec, 10 2013 @ 09:49 AM
link   

LittleByLittle

Greatest I am

If you were to dare judge this issue or scenario of God, --- knowing that he planned to have Jesus sacrificed even before creating the potential for sin, would you find God criminally liable for child abuse and murder?



There is a lot of thing that I think the bible got wrong and is humanities miss understanding, but in this case I have nothing against Jesus home going and can even understand it.

Yes there is pain when the body shuts down but I am pretty sure Jesus was having the bliss when it happened so the pain was not as bad as it would have been for a normal person.

Do you ever think of how Jesus must have thought about humanity from his view? Do you think it was a picnic for him spending time on earth with a dualistic humanity with ego issues who did not and do not listen? Can you imagine Jesus feeling a little bit disconnected from humanity and feeling like he did not belong here?

From my point of view Jesus was and is probably ok with leaving since he went home to where he belongs. It might just be another day in Paradise but it is still Paradise.



Jesus was in a way like a warrior who went against a enemy and used words to change part of the enemy to a friend. Will you condemn all fathers who have let their sons go to dangerous places for the good of all that is.
edit on 9-12-2013 by LittleByLittle because: (no reason given)


If they, like God, create the scenario where they choose needlessly to put their children in harms way, then yes, I would absolutely condemn the fathers as they are the enemy to their own children.

Men of good moral sense will all condemn such insane fathers.

www.youtube.com...

Regards
DL



posted on Dec, 10 2013 @ 09:54 AM
link   

ghostfacekilah00
Needless? If you consider saving sinners who seek forgiveness from their sins so that they can have eternal life with God in Heaven not a good cause, then yeah I guess it's needless. God did know that humans would crucify his son, but it was part of the perfect plan to completely defeat Satan, conquer death, and create a path to salvation for all of humanity, so I and most Christians are appreciative of the sacrifice God made of his only son. God says in the Bible that Jesus was the perfect representation of his love for us and that his salvation is open to anyone, even the criminal who died on the cross next to Christ, repented for his lifestyle, and was told by Christ, "today you will be with me in paradise." If you have read the Bible, I don't believe you did so with an open heart, but you think I'm a brainwashed narrow-minded Christian who is incapable of understanding other points of view, so I'm sure you don't care.
edit on 9-12-2013 by ghostfacekilah00 because: (no reason given)


I hate to see any mind lost to embracing human sacrifice and who thinks it moral to try to profit from the punishment of the innocent and the rewarding of the guilty.

For you to say that most Christians are of that ilk is quite disingenuous.

You do know that most moral men would prefer to punish the guilty instead of the innocent. Right?

Perhaps you should wonder why you take the satanic moral position.


Regards
DL



posted on Dec, 10 2013 @ 09:58 AM
link   

ServantOfTheLamb

Greatest I am
Is needlessly sacrificing your child, as God did, child abuse and murder?



Explain the concept of the trinity to me, and then tell me if you think God sacrificed his son as in we think of a son.

Not a bad place to start.


. If a Sacrifice were required, God would not send a boy to do a man’s job and he would be man enough to step up himself. I


We know Sacrifice was required when we are talking about the Biblical God Hebrews 9:22 and 1 Peter 3:18.




If you were to dare judge this issue or scenario of God, --- knowing that he planned to have Jesus sacrificed even before creating the potential for sin, would you find God criminally liable for child abuse and murder?


Is God responsible for human choices? No, we have free will. Once again before we can go further in the discussion you need to have a full understanding of the trinity.



I do. Have a look.

www.youtube.com...

As to the rest of you pathetic literalist dogma.

Eve was correct in eating of the tree of knowledge and rejecting God.


It was God's plan from the beginning to have Adam and Eve eat the forbidden fruit. This can be demonstrated by the fact that the bible says that Jesus "was crucified from the foundations of the Earth," that is to say, God planned to crucify Jesus as atonement for sin before he even created human beings or God damned sin.

1Peter 1:20 0 He was chosen before the creation of the world, but was revealed in these last times for your sake.

This indicates that Jesus had no choice.

If God had not intended humans to sin from the beginning, why did he build into the Creation this "solution" for sin? Why create a solution for a problem you do not anticipate?

God knew that the moment he said "don't eat from that tree," the die was cast. The eating was inevitable. Eve was merely following the plan.

This then begs the question.

What kind of God would plan and execute the murder of his own son when there was absolutely no need to?

Only an insane God. That’s who.

The cornerstone of Christianity is human sacrifice, thus showing it‘s immorality.

One of Christianity's highest form of immorality is what they have done to women. They have denied them equality and subjugated them to men.

www.youtube.com...

www.youtube.com...

www.youtube.com...

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

Christians are always trying to absolve God of moral culpability in the fall by whipping out their favorite "free will!", or “ it’s all man’s fault”.

That is "God gave us free will and it was our free willed choices that caused our fall. Hence God is not blameworthy."

But this simply avoids God's culpability as the author of Human Nature. Free will is only the ability to choose. It is not an explanation why anyone would want to choose "A" or "B" (bad or good action). An explanation for why Eve would even have the nature of "being vulnerable to being easily swayed by a serpent" and "desiring to eat a forbidden fruit" must lie in the nature God gave Eve in the first place. Hence God is culpable for deliberately making humans with a nature-inclined-to-fall, and "free will" means nothing as a response to this problem.

If all sin by nature then, the sin nature is dominant. If not, we would have at least some who would not sin.


Having said the above for the God that I do not believe in, I am a Gnostic Christian naturalist, let me tell you that evil is all human generated. Evil is our responsibility.

Much has been written to explain what I see as a natural part of evolution.

Consider.
First, let us eliminate what some see as evil. Natural disasters. These are unthinking occurrences and are neither good nor evil. There is no intent to do evil even as victims are created.

Evil then is only human to human.
As evolving creatures, all we ever do, and ever can do, is compete or cooperate.
Cooperation we would see as good as there are no victims created. Competition would be seen as evil as it creates a victim. We all are either cooperating, doing good, or competing, doing evil at all times.

Without us doing some of both, we would likely go extinct.

This, to me, explains why there is evil in the world quite well.

Be you a believer in nature, evolution or God, we should all see that what Christians see as something to blame, evil, we should see that what we have, competition, deserves a huge thanks for being available to us.

There is no conflict between nature and God on this issue. This is how things are and should be. We all must do what some will think is evil as we compete and create losers to this competition.

Regards
DL

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

Evolutionary theology.

www.youtube.com...



posted on Dec, 10 2013 @ 10:00 AM
link   

arpgme
reply to post by Greatest I am
 


You say Yahweh is not God since he is evil, but then, for some reason, you keep calling him God. Why call him God if you don't believe he is God?


Intelligent people can discuss issues that they do not believe in.

The question should be why you believe that a genocidal son murdering prick is not evil.

Regards
DL



posted on Dec, 10 2013 @ 10:02 AM
link   

ChuckNasty
reply to post by Greatest I am
 


Are you even reading the stories of Christ?

True the Bible doesn't contain every story, we can thank the church for deleting what they didn't want.... but your understanding of this religion is totally bonkers IMO.

To understand the meaning vs a literal definition are 2 separate ideologies. To read a book for its face value instead of studying the underlying meanings is what Jesus was about. Why do you think he spoke in parables instead of straight forward definitions. Only those who understand His messages will get it. Those who don't, will need more time.


It is not a matter of time if this senator is correct.

www.youtube.com...

Regards
DL



posted on Dec, 10 2013 @ 10:08 AM
link   
the problem with ops argument is that jesus was put to ''death'' by people who wanted him dead.... Not God. So there is no question of a '' sacrifice'', except according to christians who insist Jesus' execution was a ''sacrifice''. _________________________________________ Nowhere in the account .....from Jesus' arrest to his trial to his execution to his resurrection..do we ever read of any sacrifice being made. So why read things into it?



posted on Dec, 10 2013 @ 10:13 AM
link   

sk0rpi0n
the problem with ops argument is that jesus was put to ''death'' by people who wanted him dead.... Not God. So there is no question of a '' sacrifice'', except according to christians who insist Jesus' execution was a ''sacrifice''. _________________________________________ Nowhere in the account .....from Jesus' arrest to his trial to his execution to his resurrection..do we ever read of any sacrifice being made. So why read things into it?


If God did not want Jesus dead then why send him down to die?

If there is no sacrifice and if God did not accept it as such, then there was never a redeemer and Christians are no better off than any other sinner. Right?

Regards
DL



posted on Dec, 10 2013 @ 11:51 AM
link   
reply to post by Greatest I am
 


Ok, So you have one guy who says the trinity is wrong but doesn't use one verse to back up his theology....Just to prove to you that God has a sense of plurality about him look into the word Elohim. It is a plural word. The trinity is not three separate Gods it is one God that has plurality.

John 10
30 I and my Father are one.

John 14
8 Philip saith unto him, Lord, show us the Father, and it sufficeth us.

9 Jesus saith unto him, Have I been so long time with you, and yet hast thou not known me, Philip? he that hath seen me hath seen the Father; and how sayest thou then, Show us the Father?

Try thinking of the Trinity as an egg. An egg as a shell, a white, and a yolk however it takes all three to make up One egg. Similarly the Father, the Son, and Holy Spirit are required to make up one God.


More so you cannot say Christians believe in Human Sacrifice, because we do not believe that Jesus was a person, but God in human form. God died for your sins himself, and had every right to choose to do so. He chose to show us mercy, even though we didnt deserve it...he should have just let us all go to hell.





This indicates that Jesus had no choice.


You see there are things God cannot do, because he is governed by his righteousness.



For example, He can’t break His word, He can’t break His Law, He can’t make us love Him, He can’t make us stop sinning, and He can’t prevent us from going to Hell if that’s what we’re determined to do.


Satans Dominion and God's Severeignty




Adam and Eve disobeyed God, causing them to lose dominion over the Earth to Satan. Reversing those consequences cost God the life of His Son (Romans 8:19-21) and the Book of Revelation is partly about God’s move to repossess that which He has redeemed.


As of right now your OP is not arguing against the God of the Bible, because it leaves out fundamental beliefs held by the Bible and Christians themselves...



posted on Dec, 10 2013 @ 12:55 PM
link   
reply to post by Greatest I am
 


That's absurd. Satanic? Jesus willingly accepted crucifixion for sinners. All he had to do was renounce his claim to being the son of God.



posted on Dec, 10 2013 @ 04:18 PM
link   

ServantOfTheLamb
reply to post by Greatest I am
 


Ok, So you have one guy who says the trinity is wrong but doesn't use one verse to back up his theology....Just to prove to you that God has a sense of plurality about him look into the word Elohim. It is a plural word. The trinity is not three separate Gods it is one God that has plurality.

John 10
30 I and my Father are one.

John 14
8 Philip saith unto him, Lord, show us the Father, and it sufficeth us.

9 Jesus saith unto him, Have I been so long time with you, and yet hast thou not known me, Philip? he that hath seen me hath seen the Father; and how sayest thou then, Show us the Father?

Try thinking of the Trinity as an egg. An egg as a shell, a white, and a yolk however it takes all three to make up One egg. Similarly the Father, the Son, and Holy Spirit are required to make up one God.


More so you cannot say Christians believe in Human Sacrifice, because we do not believe that Jesus was a person, but God in human form. God died for your sins himself, and had every right to choose to do so. He chose to show us mercy, even though we didnt deserve it...he should have just let us all go to hell.





This indicates that Jesus had no choice.


You see there are things God cannot do, because he is governed by his righteousness.



For example, He can’t break His word, He can’t break His Law, He can’t make us love Him, He can’t make us stop sinning, and He can’t prevent us from going to Hell if that’s what we’re determined to do.


Satans Dominion and God's Severeignty




Adam and Eve disobeyed God, causing them to lose dominion over the Earth to Satan. Reversing those consequences cost God the life of His Son (Romans 8:19-21) and the Book of Revelation is partly about God’s move to repossess that which He has redeemed.


As of right now your OP is not arguing against the God of the Bible, because it leaves out fundamental beliefs held by the Bible and Christians themselves...


The three heads of the trinity must all share all attributes and scriptures say they do not as the Father knows some things the son does not and the holy spirit cannot be cursed and the curser be forgiven like he can for cursing the other two.

The Trinity is a stupid concept that should never have been introduced and it was forced down Christianity's throat by Constantine.

Originally Posted by animefan48
Well, the reality is most Christians do buy into the trinity doctrine because of persecution of the early Gnostics and non-Trinitarians, and the religious councils were dissenters were forced to agree to a Trinitarian theology. Many Unitarian and Universalist theologies argue that when Jesus said he was the way, he meant that he was an example of how to live to be united/reunited with God. As for the name, God does give other names for himself including the Alpha and Omega, as well as some believe a name that should not be written (or even spoken I believe). Honestly, I think using the name I Am That I Am would just be confusing and convoluted, seriously. I seriously do not believe that it is a continuation of Gnostic/mystical/Unitarian suppression. Even the Gnostic and mystical traditions within Islam and Christianity do not tend to use that name, and among the 99 Names of Allah, I did not find that one. Also, many Rastafarians believe that the Holy Spirit lives in humans and will sometimes say I and I instead of we, yet they don't seem to use the name I Am for God/Jah either, so I really don't think it can be related to suppressing mystical and Gnostic interpretations. I think that originally oppressing those ideas and decreeing them heretical are quite enough, the early Church did such a good job that after the split many Protestant groups continued to condemn mystical and later Gnostic sects and theologies.





Yup, the bishops voted and it was settled for all time!!1 (Some say the preliminary votes were 150 something to 140 something in favor of the trinity)

But then Constantine stepped in: After a prolonged and inconclusive debate, the impatient Constantine intervened to force an end to the conflict by demanding the adoption of the creed. The vote was taken under threat of exile for any who did not support the decision favored by Constantine. (And later, they fully endorsed the trinity idea when it all happened again at the council of Constantinople in AD 381, where only Trinitarians were invited to attend. Surprise! They also managed to carry a vote in favor of the Trinity.)

home.pacific.net.au...


Even a Trinitarian scholar admits the Earliest & Original beliefs were NOT Trinitarian!

The trinity formulation is a later corruption away from the earliest & original beliefs!

"It must be admitted by everyone who has the rudiments of an historical sense that the doctrine of the Trinity, as a doctrine, formed no part of the original message. St Paul knew it not, and would have been unable to understand the meaning of the terms used in the theological formula on which the Church ultimately agreed".
Dr. W R Matthews, Dean of St Paul's Cathedral, "God in Christian Thought and Experience", p.180

"In order to understand the doctrine of the Trinity it is necessary to understand that the doctrine is a development, and why it developed. ... It is a waste of time to attempt to read Trinitarian doctrine directly off the pages of the New Testament".
R Hanson: "Reasonable Belief, A survey of the Christian Faith, p.171-173, 1980

The doctrine of the Trinity is not taught in the Old Testament.
New Catholic Encyclopedia, 1967, Vol. XIV, p. 306.

"The formulation ‘One God in three Persons' was not solidly established, certainly not fully assimilated into Christian life and its profession of faith, prior to the end of the 4th century.... Among the Apostolic Fathers, there had been nothing even remotely approaching such a mentality or perspective"
New Catholic Encyclopedia, 1967, Vol. 14, p. 299.

"The formulation ‘One God in three Persons' was not solidly established, certainly not fully assimilated into Christian life and its profession of faith, prior to the end of the 4th century.... Among the Apostolic Fathers, there had been nothing even remotely approaching such a mentality or perspective" (New Catholic Encyclopedia, 1967, Vol. 14, p. 299).

"Fourth-century Trinitarianism did not reflect accurately early Christian teaching regarding the nature of God; it was, on the contrary a deviation from this teaching" (The Encyclopedia Americana, p. 1956, p. 2941).

Was Jesus God to Paul and other early Christians? No. . . . .
(Source: How the Bible became the Bible by Donald L. O'Dell - ISBN 0-7414-2993-4 Published by INFINITY Publishing.com)

Constantine’s Victory Arch says it all.

www.simchajtv.com...

Regards
DL





new topics
top topics
 
6
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join