• Philosophy and Spirituality
    Welcome Guest
    Posting Rules Bluelight Rules
    Threads of Note Socialize
  • P&S Moderators: Xorkoth | Madness

If Jesus died for our sins...

alasdairm said:
nothing? not even time.

alasdair
Click to expand...

All arguments are valid but if we dont know how we originated on earth how should we know things like this? We should kiss the ground everyday we get out of bed, we lucky to be alive to experiment this shit we call ''Life''. I for one, think the Big Bang its when our universe happend and the other one died.

tumblr_nbj37q3Z2H1rm1v1mo1_400.jpg
 
No I mean people who want their kids to grow up to be something other than crazed anarcho-nihilist dole wallah junkies whose main occupation in life is complaining about their abusive relationships and latest drug abuse/OD/near OD.
 
If I responded differently to opiates than the way I do, I probably would be too.:)
 
Xorkoth said:
Religion is the excuse, not the reason, for hatred. Our problem rests in human nature itself.
Click to expand...

This is true insofar as religion being a construct of human mind and human nature. But whole idea that our nature is violent and flawed is largely a product of religion and there really isn't much scientific evidence for this idea. There is evidence that we evolved altruism towards strangers but also a heightened threat system triggered by strangers. It's precisely this that religion itself exploits by creating artificial differences between people that would not (do not) exist without religion. As it turns out, people will fight and kill over those differences- that's the human nature part at play Religion is creating the pretext for this tribalism in the modern world.

Consider so much of the oppression and violence across the world. Nations that are more religious are both more violent and have worse human rights than secular nations. Secular nations are still populated by humans but they seem to have largely been able to deal with their violent impulses in a different way. The difference between these types of nations are religious beliefs.
 
swilow said:
This is true insofar as religion being a construct of human mind and human nature. But whole idea that our nature is violent and flawed is largely a product of religion and there really isn't much scientific evidence for this idea. There is evidence that we evolved altruism towards strangers but also a heightened threat system triggered by strangers. It's precisely this that religion itself exploits by creating artificial differences between people that would not (do not) exist without religion. As it turns out, people will fight and kill over those differences- that's the human nature part at play Religion is creating the pretext for this tribalism in the modern world.

Consider so much of the oppression and violence across the world. Nations that are more religious are both more violent and have worse human rights than secular nations. Secular nations are still populated by humans but they seem to have largely been able to deal with their violent impulses in a different way. The difference between these types of nations are religious beliefs.
Click to expand...

Perhaps, yet there is fossil evidence that the humans crossing the Bering land bridge from Asia into North America were violent and warlike. Their women tended to have wounds reflected in their skeletons that indicate extreme domestic violence. And don't forget our species decimated the other human-like species (Neaderthals, Denisovans) into extinction. We have a long evolutionary history of war and violence and conquering and although there's a good chance that some spiritual ideas existed in those societies, it seems kind of silly (to me) to blame it on that. It seems more like it's just part of our evolutionary path, something that I hope we, as rational, thinking creatures, can overcome.

The Nazis in WW2 were not a nation being led by religion, and yet they mobilized millions of people to commit atrocities anyway.

I'm not saying religion doesn't have a place in this, it totally does. it's just that it's the easiest way to control people. But it's not the only way. There is also nationalism, ingrained bigory (The Tutsis and the Hutus for example), and probably a variety of others I can't think of.

I do think as a species we should move past religion because it's archaic. We should instead focus on direct spiritual experience, not mediated through officials. It is up to us to determine our path. Organized religion is a net negative on society, I think. But it can also accomplish great good, so it's not something I feel really ready to condemn entirely.
 
The Axe said:
2000 years from now nobody is going to give a shit about Chuck fucking Norris (went to school with his kids btw).
Click to expand...

in 2000 years they probably wont give a fuck about Jesus, either. At least in the West people, more and more people seem to be coming to their senses.
 
Xorkoth said:
Perhaps, yet there is fossil evidence that the humans crossing the Bering land bridge from Asia into North America were violent and warlike
Click to expand...

Humans definitely have aggressive and warlike instincts but in general, a functioning modern society is one with moral and ethical guidelines which try to counteract and even negate some of these tendencies. Judeochristianity actively condones and exaggerated this side of us. It was perhaps useful guidelines 2000 years ago, just like stone flake flint tools were once useful until we found something better.

Xorkoth said:
And don't forget our species decimated the other human-like species (Neaderthals, Denisovans) into extinction.
Click to expand...

This is actually questioned. Again, there's not a ton of evidence for this except the utter absence Neanderthals and denisovans. But if you look at human genes, aspects of their DNA have been incorporated into some modern homo sapiens. Rather than a violent extinction and genocide, it's hypothesized that hybridization is what killed off other human species by subsuming them. We fucked the Neanderthals to death.

Xorkoth said:
although there's a good chance that some spiritual ideas existed in those societies, it seems kind of silly (to me) to blame it on that.
Click to expand...

Just to be clear, I'm not talking about spirituality here. Spirituality is very different to religion in the way i am referring to it. For some reason, religions take their spiritual beliefs to another level, and start to make other claims based on them.

I've had some very beautiful spiritual experiences of awe and cosmic wonder and the interconnectedness of things. I've just never had an experience which made me realise that condoms are evil or that homosexuality is unnatural. It's the moral claims of religion that I am talking about entirely.

Xorkoth said:
The Nazis in WW2 were not a nation being led by religion, and yet they mobilized millions of people to commit atrocities anyway.
Click to expand...

True, but who was main the target of Nazi persecution? It was the historically hated Jews. Antisemitism can be directly related back to the New Testament. It was then the early church who didn't want to sully it's hands with money (ala Jesus in the temple) so they enlisted the Jews in Europe to do this. The Jews were already violently hated, and this link to money and banking has further haunted them with conspiracy theories ever since- to the extent that a guy tried to wipe them out. I am certain that without religion, there would have been no Holocaust. There wouldn't probably even be Jews. Of course, the religions weren't involved in this explicitly, but the Catholic church did virtually nothing to stop it.

There's not a lot of difference in getting people to kill for the master race, or for God. Clearly, we condemn Nazism as the source of the Holocaust but seem to hesitate in pointing the finger at religions which inspire violence too.
 
hyroller said:
No he died so we could be atoned for our sins.

the body of christ, and amen.
Click to expand...

On Jesus dying for you.

It takes quite an ego to think a god would actually die for you, after condemning you unjustly in the first place.

You have swallowed a lie and don’t care how evil you make Jesus to keep your feel good get out of hell free card.

It is a lie, first and foremost because, like it or not, having another innocent person suffer or die for the wrongs you have done, --- so that you might escape responsibility for having done them, --- is immoral. To abdicate your personal responsibility for your actions or use a scapegoat is immoral.

You also have to ignore what Jesus, as a Jewish Rabbi, would have taught his people.

Ezekiel 18:20 The soul that sinneth, it shall die. The son shall not bear the iniquity of the father, neither shall the father bear the iniquity of the son: the righteousness of the righteous shall be upon him, and the wickedness of the wicked shall be upon him.

Deuteronomy 24:16 (ESV) "Fathers shall not be put to death because of their children, nor shall children be put to death because of their fathers. Each one shall be put to death for his own sin.

Psa 49;7 None of them can by any means redeem his brother, nor give to God a ransom for him:

There is no way that you would teach your children to use a scapegoat to escape their just punishments and here you are doing just that.

Jesus is just a smidge less immoral than his demiurge genocidal father, and here you are trying to put him as low in moral fibre as Yahweh.

Regards
DL
 
Xorkoth said:
Yeah Jesus as I understand him was a great man with the right idea about how to be a good person,
Click to expand...

Hmmm.

Have you ever debated the moral tenets Jesus preached?

Many are not moral at all.

I especially dislike his no divorce for women and substitutional punishment policies. If Yahweh, I add in genocide.

This link speaks to other issues and I agree with his take on most moral issues.

Christians tend to run away from any moral discussions I propose. That is quite telling.

I hope you are up for it.



Regards
DL
 
Shrooms00087 said:
Christ is like Job. Obedient unto death faithful all the less. His death and resurrection brought us the New Testament, where we learn of sin and how to overcome the obstacles of our mortal limitations, thus freeing us from our sins. Going to the cross willingly for his beliefs is how you practice spiritualism, submitting to the story wholly. By accepting him as your savior.
Click to expand...

Which is the immoral thing to do.

I like the Job myth. Especially Job 2;3 where god admits to letting Satan move him to do evil without a just cause.

That is god admitting to being a sinner.

Let me repeat.

On Jesus dying for you.

It takes quite an ego to think a god would actually die for you, after condemning you unjustly in the first place.

You have swallowed a lie and don’t care how evil you make Jesus to keep your feel good get out of hell free card.

It is a lie, first and foremost because, like it or not, having another innocent person suffer or die for the wrongs you have done, --- so that you might escape responsibility for having done them, --- is immoral. To abdicate your personal responsibility for your actions or use a scapegoat is immoral.

You also have to ignore what Jesus, as a Jewish Rabbi, would have taught his people.

Ezekiel 18:20 The soul that sinneth, it shall die. The son shall not bear the iniquity of the father, neither shall the father bear the iniquity of the son: the righteousness of the righteous shall be upon him, and the wickedness of the wicked shall be upon him.

Deuteronomy 24:16 (ESV) "Fathers shall not be put to death because of their children, nor shall children be put to death because of their fathers. Each one shall be put to death for his own sin.

Psa 49;7 None of them can by any means redeem his brother, nor give to God a ransom for him:

There is no way that you would teach your children to use a scapegoat to escape their just punishments and here you are doing just that.

Jesus is just a smidge less immoral than his demiurge genocidal father, and here you are trying to put him as low in moral fibre as Yahweh.

Regards
DL
 
TripSitterNZ said:
Jesus was like Buddha and others through history who came to understand human suffering and try help their fellow people. Jesus was pretty much the first hippie and the shrooms taught him to love. Jesus had mastered the yogic path of love to awakening.
Click to expand...

Indeed, and that thinking was taken up by the Gnostic Christians and that is a part of why some say that we are the only good Christians.

Drugs are not required to gain a Christ consciousness. Just meditation and or fasting aught to do it.

If drugs help, well and good.

Regards
DL
 

Attachments

  • Gnostic-savior-quote.png
    Gnostic-savior-quote.png
    335.3 KB · Views: 2
F.U.B.A.R. said:
But why is it that all the idiots that follow these people manage to totally misinterpret the message and spend a lifetime persecuting others who don't..?
Click to expand...

For the same reason Republicans publicly held their noses to vote Trump in.

They put their tribal affiliations ahead of their moral sense.

Remember that at their roots, all religions and political parties are are tribal units.

Peer pressure for the fellowship is what immoral people let guide them.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T64_El2s7FU

Regards
DL
 
Zopiclone bandit said:
Because they are to be blunt fucking dumb & unable to think for some reason.
Click to expand...

I agree with much of your conclusions, but see you looking at things from a simplistic POV.

No insult meant.

They can think. As shown just above above, they are motivated to put their moral thinking aside to appease their tribal instinct and needs.

Atheists are finally dithering that out and that is why they are finally taking care of their children's instinctive needs by opening atheist churches.

Regards
DL
 
Shrooms00087 said:
He died to give us the Word. The Way to live without sin. Thus, dying (ultimate sacrifice) for our sins. Redeemed by the blood of Christ.
Click to expand...

A true blood sacrifice stays dead.

Care to reply to this O.P.

Blood sacrifice. Are they divine or satanic?

Blood sacrifice. Are they divine or satanic? https://ascensionglossary.com/index.php/Blood_Sacrifice Psa 49 7 None of them can by any means redeem his brother, nor give to God a ransom for him: Repeat after me. Satan would accept a blood sacrifice/ransom. God would not. Thanks for repeating...
www.bluelight.org www.bluelight.org

Regards
DL
 
The Axe said:
Communists don't like religion; hatred, war, and discrimination are still okay.
Click to expand...

??

Hitler loved the Catholic church. They are fascist like he was and the Vatican Bank was his bank.

That is why Catholics helped so many of Hitlers higher ranks escape to South America after the war ended.

Regards
DL
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top