How can sins be redeemed by a sacrifice?

[Jumbo]

Kind of like most other rational human endeavors

Um, ok.

[Prosperity]

Um, ok.

Basically, the same response I had to your post.

[Jumbo]

Basically, the same response I had to your post.

You have seemed uptight lately. Shouldn't your newfound religion be helping that in the other direction?

My post wasn't intended to annoy anyone in any way, and was directly related to what I quoted. I thought yours was very silly in its generality, inaccuracy, seemingly (now confirmed) defensive (needlessly) nature, and lack of relevance. But I thought I'd "suggest" reflection nicely. Is this better?

[AsburySkinsFan]

I'm in deep water here' date=' But the way I understood it was this:

1. The story of Abraham and Isaac shows us that God rejects human sacrifice.[/quote']

Actually we don't see rejection of human sacrifice with Abraham, in fact there is no judgment at all about it there, it is only when Moses receives the Law do we see God forbidding human sacrifice, until that point there isn't a provision against child sacrifice and that's the reason why Abraham never even questions God's call to sacrifice Isaac, because at the time it was accepted practice in religions.

2. The Jewish law required animal sacrifice.

The Law required A sacrifice, but used animal sacrifice as substitutionary and repeated yearly until a suitable sacrifice could be provided for all.

3. Jesus' sacrifice is the ulimate fulfillment of the law making any sacrifice unnecessary for those who follow Him.

Yes, but also making sacrificial law obsolete.

4. The destruction of the Temple in AD 70 ended animal sacrifice because there was now no place to perform such sacrifice.

Jesus' sacrifice ended animal sacrifice because there was no longer a need for it. If we look at the destruction of the Temple theologically it is God tearing down that which no longer has a purpose.

I agree that Christians tend to focus more on the cross than on the resurrection. However, it is the story of the cross that moves me because I am accept that my God can conquer death. What is powerful is he that would allow himself to suffer and die that horrible death.

There is no denying the powerful message that the cross sends, but again we stress the wrong syllable when we emphasize Good Friday over Resurrection Sunday. After all, there had to have been a strongly compelling reason to move the day of worshipful celebration from the historical Sabbath (Friday evening-Saturday evening) to Sunday morning. If they understood the emphasis on the crucifixion then the Sabbath remains where it was, yet there was something so powerful and transformative about the resurrection of Jesus that they felt compelled to structure their entire lives of worship around that singular event, which is why we are so often called an "Easter People".

[Jumbo]

I appreciate the detailed (whether it serves as a refresher to stuff I learned before or is new to me) information on such theological topics as offered by ASF, techboy, and others at times, especially when I know they come from a denominational viewpoint other than the catholic one I was raised in, as such broadens the Christian perspective for me.

[AsburySkinsFan]

Dang....I hate using my iPhone for long posts, I look back through it and see all of the typos. :doh:

*edit

Now I feel compelled to fix them all.

[Darth Tater]

I've recently heard it said that Christianity is a cult of human sacrifice. While that particular framing is a bit strong, I do see it providing an interesting perspective.

How can brutal killing of Jesus redeem people of their sins? I am having a hard time making sense of how that works.

Do you not understand what it is to sin given a deontological view of morality?

[Lombardi's_kid_brother]

Quick point and I don't want to quote a huge section.

When I say that the sacking of the Temple marked the end of animal sacrifices, I meant that in regards to the Jews. Animal sacrifice has never been part of Christianity for the reasons you mention.

[AsburySkinsFan]

Quick point and I don't want to quote a huge section.

When I say that the sacking of the Temple marked the end of animal sacrifices' date=' I meant that in regards to the Jews. Animal sacrifice has never been part of Christianity for the reasons you mention.[/quote']

Gotcha, I'm kinda anal about being specific, I don't take many details for granted. One of the big things that gets overlooked is that the Temple wasn't just the designated place of sacrifice, but even so much more it was understood as the very place where Heaven and Earth meet, and with Pentecost the church (the body of believers) serves the purpose of the Temple, which is why the Temple's destruction wasn't so troublesome to the early church as it was to the Jews.

---------- Post added April-20th-2012 at 08:01 PM ----------

Do you not understand what it is to sin given a deontological view of morality?

Deontological doesn't apply here because Jesus gave his life, it isn't as if God sent him to be killed. No one would suggest that a soldier who throws himself on a grenade to save his squad would say that his actions were an example of deontological ethics. Now, someone will say that God knew what was going to happen, yet that limited views places all of history into a fatalsitic spin where God is responsible for everything that goes wrong because He fore-knew things would happen. The closest thing I've seen to understand this is watching a sporting event on dvr, while you know what will happen your knowledge of those events in no way makes you responsible for those events.

[Prosperity]

You have seemed uptight lately. Shouldn't your newfound religion be helping that in the other direction?

My post wasn't intended to annoy anyone in any way, and was directly related to what I quoted. I thought yours was very silly in its generality, inaccuracy, seemingly (now confirmed) defensive (needlessly) nature, and lack of relevance. But I thought I'd "suggest" reflection nicely. Is this better?

No not really, because instead of engaging you dismissed. That generally annoys people, as I'm sure you know.

FWIW I wasn't defensive until your dismissive response (I was actually feeling a bit like BSing about a philosophical tangent you seemed interesting in). As an aside your liberal use of the smiley function gives me the impression of you using a patronizing tone. Now it's quite possible you don't intend that. But that's just how it comes off to me [see what I mean?]

[Jumbo]

No not really, because instead of engaging you dismissed. That generally annoys people, as I'm sure you know.

FWIW I wasn't defensive until your dismissive response (I was actually feeling a bit like BSing about a philosophical tangent you seemed interesting in). As an aside your liberal use of the smiley function gives me the impression of you using a patronizing tone. Now it's quite possible you don't intend that. But that's just how it comes off to me [see what I mean?]

Now, yes, and my bad. <---sincere smiley.

[Corcaigh]

Kind of like most other rational human endeavors, that is people do things they think will help. Whether it is good, and whether it is true are not the same question. But, whether it is good, and whether we should continue it, are inextricably linked.

And of course, most religions that I know of now, basically say that (facilitating the handling of difficult aspects of life) is the point of their religion in the first place (even if by another name like "salvation").

If this was all religion was about, then I might be more sympathetic. But religion goes beyond some helpful social aspects and providing an opiate against the discomforts of the rational world for LKB, to support dreadful doctrines that directly result in discrimination and hate.

[AsburySkinsFan]

If this was all religion was about, then I might be more sympathetic. But religion goes beyond some helpful social aspects and providing an opiate against the discomforts of the rational world for LKB, to support dreadful doctrines that directly result in discrimination and hate.

LoL Wut?

[Corcaigh]

LoL Wut?

Do you think that mainstream religions in the USA are not a major force in oppressing equal rights for homosexuals?

[Prosperity]

If this was all religion was about, then I might be more sympathetic. But religion goes beyond some helpful social aspects and providing an opiate against the discomforts of the rational world for LKB, to support dreadful doctrines that directly result in discrimination and hate.

Well, as a non-believer you certainly don't demand perfection from religions, do you? I don't see you railing against the general idea of government just because governments have been used to oppress people.

Now, yes, and my bad. <---sincere smiley.

No worries

[Corcaigh]

Well, as a non-believer you certainly don't demand perfection from religions, do you? I don't see you railing against the general idea of government just because governments have been used to oppress people.

Perfection? No, but an absence of misogyny and homophobia would be nice.

[AsburySkinsFan]

Do you think that mainstream religions in the USA are not a major force in oppressing equal rights for homosexuals?

Nope, but if that's what you consider hate then seriously you don't understand the reason behind their opposition, and no it isn't about them hating homosexuals no matter how much some say. That said, I am NOT under any circumstances about to take part in a derailment of this thread into a homosexual debate nor am I going to participate in a bashing of Christianity as a whole because someone cannot figure out that the behavior of some does not reflect the faith as a whole.

[Chants]

Sacrifice does not redeem or forgive sins. That's just magical thinking. Sort of like indulgences and carbon credits.

However, making certain choices and sacrifices at certain points in one's life will reduce certain unpleasantness in one's life and other people's lives.

[AsburySkinsFan]

Sacrifice does not redeem or forgive sins. That's just magical thinking. Sort of like indulgences and carbon credits.

However, making certain choices and sacrifices at certain points in one's life will reduce certain unpleasantness in one's life and other people's lives.

Question; if you started a thread about the Redskins' offensive potential in the 2012 season, would you be a bit confused and annoyed if I began to talks about the Dallas Mavericks' draft prospects next year?

Yeah, we don't crap on your threads, all we ask is for the same courtesy.

[Chants]

Question; if you started a thread about the Redskins' offensive potential in the 2012 season, would you be a bit confused and annoyed if I began to talks about the Dallas Mavericks' draft prospects next year?

Yeah, we don't crap on your threads, all we ask is for the same courtesy.

I didn't mean any disrespect and I apologize if offense was taken.

I do submit, however, that when I express an opinion about the connection between sacrifice and sin in a thread about the connection between sacrifice and sin, I haven't strayed too far off topic.

[AsburySkinsFan]

I didn't mean any disrespect and I apologize if offense was taken.

I do submit, however, that when I express an opinion about the connection between sacrifice and sin in a thread about the connection between sacrifice and sin, I haven't strayed too far off topic.

Except for the fact that the discussion is specifically in regards to the Christian theological perspective of sacrifice and atonement for sin....as such to dismiss the Christian understanding of atonement for sin through sacrifice in order to write a secular viewpoint is off topic.

BTW, you didn't offend me, it takes a lot more than a trolling post on a message board to offend me.

[Renegade7]

I can't believe ya'll made a thread on this. People demanding that everything be rationalized is just as agitating as people going by that book like every word in it is 100% fact, imo.

[AsburySkinsFan]

I can't believe ya'll made a thread on this. People demanding that everything be rationalized is just as agitating as people going by that book like every word in it is 100% fact, imo.

Well, thanks for your non-constructive input, and your post which adds nothing to the conversation at hand.

BTW, which forum rule number is it that required you to read the thread and then forced you to reply?

[Renegade7]

Well, thanks for your non-constructive input, and your post which adds nothing to the conversation at hand.

BTW, which forum rule number is it that required you to read the thread and then forced you to reply?

None, but I sure feel better having gotten that off my chest. Sorry if that bothers you, but you coulda easily just ignored me like most people do. Thread title and OP put a really bad taste in my mouth, and I'm really not religious, either. I just have a little more faith then I used to...

[Conn]

I can't believe ya'll made a thread on this. People demanding that everything be rationalized is just as agitating as people going by that book like every word in it is 100% fact, imo.

The conversation in here until the last page or so, even between believers and non-believers like myself, has been pretty informative and constructive so far actually. Your above post makes me assume that you read.....none of it.

---------- Post added April-21st-2012 at 12:19 AM ----------

None, but I sure feel better having gotten that off my chest. Sorry if that bothers you, but you coulda easily just ignored me like most people do. Thread title and OP put a really bad taste in my mouth, and I'm really not religious, either. I just have a little more faith then I used to...

Someone inquiring about the core beliefs of your (I think?) religion leave a bad taste in your mouth? All of the believers so far in this thread answered any questions very calmly and informatively. If you'd read the thread, you'd know that. This was more of a learning experience, even if I'm not a believer myself, than anything and I'm not sure HOW the OP could have offended you in the slightest. A question was asked, answered, and discussed pretty civilly.

If you can't explain a bit about your faith in the face of honest questioning born from curiosity or misunderstanding (or anything else), without getting offended, what does that say?