Jesus was a human sacrifice?
By - Brainprouser
In the Old Testament, God required sacrifices. Usually food, sometimes livestock. Jesus is called "the lamb of God" because he was essentially the final sacrifice. The one sacrificed lamb that made God, for lack of a better word, satisfied.
And we are fine with a god that requires human sacrifices?
Why do we consider Aztecs like primitives then?
Because they sacrificed to the wrong god, of course.
Jesus was not just a random person. God did not arbitrarily demand human sacrifice. Jesus is the Son, a part of God, and even he willingly took on that burden. It isn’t even close to the Aztecs who strapped war prisoners to altars and carved out their hearts while they were alive.
>...and even he willingly took on that burden
What burden? It was entirely his choice to demand a sacrifice, and his choice to be that sacrifice. If he hadn't demanded a sacrifice then one wouldn't have been required. He saved humanity from himself. If he didn't sacrifice himself, what, would he have been forced, to punish humanity for ever or could he have opened heaven anyway?
What if humans worshipped Jesus instead of killing him?
God would still be mad at us?
An entire framework of redemption and the Passion is that there is a fundamental burden as necessitated by the framework of reality that needed to be solved.
There are many theodicy books written as to how that works/can work, but it’s a low-effort point to go “sAvEd Us FrOm HiMsElF”.
Where did the burden come from? Who was it owed to? Could God not forgive it without the sacrifice?
I'm not an atheist, I just can't reconcile a version of the creator of the universe with this story of an arcane limitation on his power that required him to jump through these hoops in order to open heaven.
> but it’s a low-effort point to go “sAvEd Us FrOm HiMsElF”.
But it is the truth.
God created the universe in such a way that allowed humans to sin in the first place because everything happens according to his plan, and he designed the punishments for the sins he knew humans would commit. So if Christianity is true, he is without question saving us from something he created. And worse, he has had the power to change the rules at any time. Even to the point of just forgiving us of the sin he knew we'd commit, rather than going through the hassle of creating a loop hole in the system he created.
He knows everything in time and space.
Any test he makes on someone, he already knows the result.
And the person is going to fail or succeed according to how god created him.
I believe it is pretty clear that the ability to sin, and thus the free will that comes with that ability, is worth the trade off of necessitating a burden. I'd rather have value behind my decisions than being mere meat puppets.
So no, it's not "the truth". It's a viewpoint to have, but imo it's a lazy one.
No one even has free will under Christianity. Adam and Eve certainly didn't, because they didn't even know right from wrong until after they ate from the tree. And if God knows all, and if everything happens according to Gods plan, none of us have free will. We are just on a stage playing out what God decided would happen at the dawn of time.
Regardless, free will has absolutely nothing to do with what I said. I'm merely talking about what the sacrifice actually was from God's perspective.
And what I said is, in fact, the truth, and biblical scholars would agree with me, especially since I'm basically paraphrasing some of them. I'm sorry you either don't actually know your own theology, or can't admit that it's nonsense, but neither changes the reality of what is literally written in the Bible.
They may not have known, but there was still choice. As for God knowing all, I'd recommend looking into the concept of Libertarian Free Will or Compatibilism. I subscribe to the former, but perhaps the latter would make sense to you. They are both frameworks to establish free will's exist alongside God or otherwise apparent determinism.
>Regardless, free will has absolutely nothing to do with what I said. I'm merely talking about what the sacrifice actually was from God's perspective.
It has quite a fair amount to do with it, actually. As I said, the rationale is that the fundamental framework of the universe, which enables free will, choice, and objective morality also necessitates a burden for the choices made under this framework, which was alleviated by God through the Passion.
>And what I said is, in fact, the truth, and biblical scholars would agree with me
Biblical Scholars do not necessarily equal theologians. A good number of Biblical Scholars are actually secular and employ many forms of Biblical Criticism from the perspective of the Bible being a completely normal book written by normal, uninspired, humans. I'm some of them would agree with you, but a good many theologians and apologists also agree with what I'm saying. A good example of one that agrees with the framework I have presented would be Richard Swinburne, off the top of my head.
>I'm sorry you either don't actually know your own theology, or can't admit that it's nonsense, but neither changes the reality of what is literally written in the Bible.
Man alive, r/iamverysmart. Well, I think this actually might take the cake for the simultaneously most condescending, presumptuous, and know-it-all statement I think I've ever seen, so take that as you will. Perhaps you yourself are simply ignorant of the frameworks I have presented but instead presume that my own theology is unexamined.
In any case, you've drawn your line in the sand and have devolved into extreme condescension, so I'm done here. Have a good day/night, wherever you're at.
Still god calmed down his wrath towards human because of Jesus death.
He maybe didn't request it, but he appreciated it.
"And we are fine with a god that requires human sacrifices?"
I was thinking about that myself.
The sacrifices in the ot were a metaphor. They were a reminder that forgiveness had a cost. And foreshadowing for Jesus. Plus they ate the animal sacrifice after so it was more like a cookout than a movie style thing.
Did they eat metaphors then?
Metaphors are short stories representing a concept to make it more understandable.
Turning upside down a book to change the whole context for manipulating the message, has another name which at the moment I can't remember.
Jesus and God are the same being. He died for humanity. He sacrificed his own life for others out of love and with promise of everlasting life to his followers. Lots of symbolism and deeper meaning tucked into the story.
He did not ask others to surrender their lives to him through human sacrifice.
Now here's the 180 . . .
Huitzilopochtli required constant nourishment in the form of human blood to prevent the rise of darkness and the end of the world.
The Aztecs gave their bodies to their god.
This doesn't change the dynamics.
It was a human sacrifice.
Of course it changes the dynamics.
The Bible makes it quite clear that God doesn't like human sacrifice. It's not approved.
Jesus was God in the flesh. God didn’t sacrifice Jesus. Rather, Jesus, (as God incarnate), sacrificed himself.
Additionally, crucifixion was a form of capital punishment. Jesus was arrested and executed by the Romans because he proclaimed to be the son of God. The Romans considered his words blasphemous, so they gave him the death sentence. They did not sacrifice Jesus to a deity.
That's very different from Aztec human sacrifice to Huitzilopochtli.
The Bible is ambiguous about that.
Human sacrifices are theoretically forbidden but when they happen there's no punishment from god.
Read about Jephthah for example.
It's known that human sacrifice was allowed in the early Ebrew religion.
It's my understanding Jephthah vowed that if the Lord granted him success against the Ammonites, then whatever greeted him first upon his return, he would offer as a sacrifice. Jephthah’s daughter was the first to approach him. As a result, many conclude that Jephthah actually engaged in human sacrifice, which is incorrect.
Jephthah did not keep his word literally by killing his daughter. He sacrificed his daughter by giving her to tabernacle service. That means she would remain a virgin and not have any children. She was his only daughter, so Jephthah's family legacy ended. That was the sacrifice.
It's also clear that God was not happy with Jephthah for making such an offering. Nothing about human sacrifice.
>Why do we consider Aztecs like primitives then?
Who is "we"? You're on your own with that one, racist.
It was irony.
Infact I don't see any difference between different kind of ignorance, Christians and Aztecs are the same to me.
The ancient greek goddess of bad breath.
Did your original post have a point? Seems like your preconceived notion was set before you posted.
Speaking of ignorance, you are way off base concerning Jephthah. Your rushed copy/paste job obvious. Next time read the whole text, not just the key words that support your claim.
Feel free to respond to my reply concerning Jephthah. This time, take your own advice — read it.
>Infact I don't see any difference between different kind of ignorance, Christians and Aztecs are the same to me
Yeah, you wouldn't. To differentiate, you'd have to be familar with those topics. Talk about ignorance.
My post was meant to find someone who could seriously disprove it.
If you have an hypothesis about Jephthah that is different from the one of the main biblical scholars, I'll be glad to hear it.
I guess you can only play the card of misinterpretating the term "holocaust", but surprise me please.
I'm still waiting for your interpretation of the story of Saul, Samuel and Agag.
Your answers were not credible at all.
I mentioned and pasted parts of the Bible, you only replied with disagreeing unsupported opinions.
Which informations should I show?
Which kind of proofs?
I showed the words of the Bible, this is a proof much more than any opinion of a biblical scholar.
Words are words.
If changing their meaning here and there, someone can turn upside down the message of a book, I'm not interested to that.
Your explanation on Jephthah was just an impression of yours.
No line of the Bible is there to support it, which is the reason why you couldn't mention them.
C'mon. Are you joking?
I mentioned the word "holocaust" because it's the exact therm which is used in that line of the Bible.
And because it's the word that few biblical scholars alter to change the end of Jephthah's daughter.
Did you read what I pasted?
Or that line of the Bible?
You are unbelievable.
You tell me so stay on the topic, which is exactly what I did but you didn't understand it.
Holocaust is not only referred to Jews genocide in WWII and if you ever read the bible, should know it well.
Actually it was used to define Jews genocide of WWII exactly because it's a biblical word.
You blame me of bringing no content.
We are discussing about the Bible and I brought lines of the Bible.
You only brought your personal misinterpretations.
This conversation is getting ridiculous.
Almost as Christianism itself.
A divine meal for a divine appetite.
It's not a sacrifice. Jesus just had a bad weekend.
I won't complain anymore when my father wants me to spend the Sunday taking care of the lawn.
Trying to logic your way through religion is a fools errand.
First lobotomy, then conversion.
The idea was that everybody is imperfect. Bible says everybody does wrong, and the penalty is death. But God also became a person (jesus), and lived without doing wrong. Then still died even though he didn't deserve it. So now Jesus is offering to cover our tabs. As for the help, and he promises to put you under his umbrella so to speak..
And someday God is going to clean house. He is gonna keep everything perfect, and throw everything imperfect in a burn pile. Thus making a perfect place. Problem is we are not perfect. Which is a problem because he loves us and doesn't want to throw us out. So Jesus is basically loaning us his perfection. And to do that he had to cover our tab.
You skipped then point that god required a human sacrifice.
But included the part where he sacrificed himself rather than any of us.
The point wasn't Jesus behaviour but God's expectation.
Yup. Nailed it.
In not the type of person to tell you what to believe, but my thing is why did God need jesus to sacrifice himself? If he's all powerful, he could just save humanity without sending his son to die. Or better yet he could just choose not to damn all of humanity for the actions of 2 people who. Also, since God is all-knowing, then that means he knew that they would listen to the snake and eat the apple, so why tf did he put the tree there and knowingly damn all of humanity?
The tree of knowledge of good and evil. They didn't know about evil. They couldn't have understood eating the fruit, and disobeying God, to be evil until after they had done it.
But omniscent god should have known it.
Still god calmed down his wrath towards human because of a human sacrifice.
I don't get the pattern.
My boss is mad at me.
He send his son to me.
I kill him.
Everything is fixed.
What if humans worshipped Jesus instead of killing him?
God would be still mad at us?
It sounds as a suicide, which is not allowed in Christianity.
The Abraham story was a test and didn't end up in murder.
Seriously, how much if a sacrifice is it if you know you'll rise in three days and be in heaven?
It's still an annoying experience.
There is that...
Something about people who make a difference in peoples lives that die. Just think of all the celebrities and musicians that have made an impact after their death. Now what if someone dies and shows everyone he's *alive* again? It's going to be taken to a whole new level.
Jimi Hendrix was the son of god?