Blood Sacrifice

• Messages sorted by: [ date ][ thread ][ subject ][ author ]

<snip>


>I have only just joined this group so if my question has been hashed and

>re-hashed please forgive me.  After more than a few years of study

>concerning the teachings in the Bible in general and Christianity in

>particular, I have come to the conclusion there are some serious questions

>which must be addressed.


For some texts which discuss the matter, I would suggest visiting
www.infidels.org

This site has a great wealth of skeptical, freethought and nontheistic
writings.

 I admit, I am disturbed and angry at some of the

>things I have found.  My "revelation" came in small ways and I was always

>able to rationalize, harmonize or explain away some of the errors in the

>Bible. (many are errors in interpertation [IMHO] )


I think you'll find that this is a typical experience among believers who
"de-convert."

Religion is a very comforting thing. People want it to be true. Of *course*
they want it to be true. If all the "nice" things were true, it would be
wonderful. Unfortunately, wanting doesn't make it so.

Pretty much all religions were made at times when people's understandings
of the world, humans, and basic logic were woefully inadequate. Thus, when
examined in today's light, there will always be problems.

<snip>


>I don't know if this is the right list for me.  I hope it is.


Basically, Errancy is a list devoted to the discussion of whether or not
there are any errors in the bible. If you have believed that there are not,
but now suspect that there are and wish to see how and why, this list is
for you.

However, if you wish to discuss the truth of christianity (or lack
thereof), there is such a list. Check out the mailing lists resources at
the above web site. Right now that list  is rather quiet, but there are
people who would be happy to engage in a discussion on any issue you
choose. The "blood sacrifice" issue gets discussed from time to time.

 I hope some

>of you may have been over this ground and can help me think through this.

>I have subscribed to and unsubscribed from other similar lists because I

>feel they are every bit as judgmental against "Christians" as the

>Christians were against ME when they discovered my "heresies" --  I'm not

>angry at the Christians... it isn't their fault.


Here you will find that people can, at times, be judgemental. But this
normally happens with two matters:

1. Bad arguments.
2. People who insist on continually advancing the same bad arguments.

In the first case, I don't think you'll find anything wrong with harsh
critiques directed against a person's argument. That's just something one
has to accept.

In the second case - well, it's unfortunate, but unavoidable with certain
people who really don't care about rational arguments are just like to
write silly messages.

<snip>


>I always had a BIG problem accepting some of the "miracles" and

>supernatural events of the Bible. I rationalized that this was probably

>"poetic" language... or maybe meant to be taken as alegory. These problems

>involve "virgin birth" "the resurrection of Christ" "heaven" "hell"

>"angels" "demons/devils/Satan" and people being transported through time

>and space etc.


A valid response. However, you are left with the issue of explaining why
some things (hell) are allegory, but others (heaven) are not. It cannot be
done. Either you believe it or not - there are no rational, logical
arguments to support such a position.

Some problems are just basic, run-of-the-mill continuity errors. No virgin
birth was ever foretold by the prophets, but a mistranslation led gospel
writers to think otherwise - so they inserted it into Jesus' life. Kind of
makes you wonder about the other stories, doesn't it?


>I got past all this -- BUT the one thing I CAN NOT get past is the idea of

>human sacrifice.  How can killing one - atone for the sin of another?


1. It cannot, given a humane, civilized view of humanity.

2. God cannot die, so what was the sacrifice (this is a discussion in the
christianity list)?

3. Since god made the rules and forced the "fall," it's up to god whether
or not a "sacrifice" is called for. It isn't *necessary*, since that would
impose a rule upon god. So we are left with god wanting god to "die" to pay
for the "sins" which god has allowed.

  (I

>probably should have prepared for this better... My Christian brethren

>would have demanded it) But in the OT God let it be known through his

>prophets that he did not want human sacrifice... (sacrifice of any kind

>just doesn't make sense to me!) But then in the NT he turns right around

>and "sacrifices" his "only begotton son" so that "our" sins could be

>forgiven?  I don't know how I could have been so stupid as to "buy" that

>doubletalk.


Easy:

1. Maybe no one ever made it plain enough to you that it *was* doubletalk.

2. You probably never considered the possibility that there really could be
such doubletalk. If you don't approach the text with open mind as to what
is going on, you won't see such things. Once you accept the possibility
that there might be something very wrong here, this type of thing will pop
up and smack you in the face.


Austin Cline; German Department; Princeton University
--- The surest way to corrupt a youth is to instruct him to hold in higher
      esteem those who think alike than those who think differently.

               - Nietzsche "The Dawn" (1881)

• Previous message: Blood Sacrifice
• Next message: Blood Sacrifice
• Messages sorted by: [ date ][ thread ][ subject ][ author ]