Spirituality
14 Sep 06
15 Sep 06
Originally posted by thesonofsaulDJBecker's 'understanding' is a prime example of the misunderstanding
You try to win your argument through emotional response garnered by exageration, vaguarity, and your own imagination, and I'm sure that for some, you succeed. However, on an intellectual level all you do is create more linguistic conflict.
"utter humiliation": Being God in the form of Man and being without sin, humiliation shouldn't even be an issue ...[text shortened]... othing by dying on the cross--if anything, he gained, going by the biblical account.
that I was mentioning in my post.
15 Sep 06
1 edit
Originally posted by thesonofsaulUsing language of accomodation, the term "ultimate sacrifice" is meant to be a shocking term, to shock the hearer into drawing a similar parallel to their own situation. As fallen and depraved humanity cannot possibly relate to absolute perfection, the situation presented with the Lord Jesus Christ's sacrifice is couched in terms we can understand. Namely, the laying down of human life--- our most prized possession.
This idea of an "ultimate sacrifice" is a farce. Christians say and type these words without even thinking about them. What did God supposedly sacrifice for us in the story of Jesus? Did he sacrifice his only son? No, he actually didn't, as he rose up again in about a day and a half. And they both know that was going to happen. If you gave up your your Queen for a pawn so you can queen two of your pawns. No loss of material--only gain.
Ultimate sacrifices have been made since the dawn of history, and will continue to the end of human history. It is the laying down of one's own life in the service/protection of another. Soldiers, policemen, firemen, citizens, fathers, mothers, brothers, sisters, kin, friends. We all make sacrifices, taking off a little of ourselves to give to those whom we regard... and some make the ultimate sacrifice and allow their lives to be exintguished in the process.
In that specific regard--- the laying down of one's life for a friend--- the Lord Jesus Christ did not 'best' anyone else who acted in a similar fashion. If, in His own words He states that greater love has no man than to lay down his life for his friends, how can His sacrifice be considered greater?
Truth is, His physical sacrifice was not the ultimate of what He, as God, sacrificed. The truly ultimate sacrifice occured sometime in eternity past, when the Godhead considered creating in the first place. Because of His omniscience, God knew how the creature would respond. He also knew the only payment that could be acceptable is perfection--- His perfection, His most prized possession.
The ultimate sacrifice was His willingness to pay for the actions of others.
Some say 'big deal: He laid it down knowing He was going to pick it back up in three days.' The truth is, there is no mixture between the humanity of Jesus and the deity of the Christ. While joined together in the God-man, no compromise exists in the nature of either. In other words, the humanity of Jesus was not exercising life in the power of His deity. He, like all of us, was born ignorant and was forced to learn about God and about Who He was, via faith.
Laying down His life in faith, not in realization. Anyone can recognize Heaven when one is walking on a street of gold.
15 Sep 06
Originally posted by whodeyDon't get me wrong. I love Jesus. But he didn't actually have FAITH did he? He KNEW God is for real. It's us that have to decide whether to pin our hopes on a dream which can't be proved while we still live.
Our fate has been revealed to us according to faith as was Christ's fate was revealed to him according to his faith.
- Joined
- 01 Oct 04
- Moves
- 12095
15 Sep 06
Originally posted by thesonofsaulMy post was directed at BDP, btw.
You try to win your argument through emotional response garnered by exageration, vaguarity, and your own imagination, and I'm sure that for some, you succeed. However, on an intellectual level all you do is create more linguistic conflict.
"utter humiliation": Being God in the form of Man and being without sin, humiliation shouldn't even be an issue ...[text shortened]... othing by dying on the cross--if anything, he gained, going by the biblical account.
16 Sep 06
Originally posted by RistarPerhaps a more objective admonishment is, "Fellow Christians, let us not enter into threads with an obvious skeptical perspective and expect not to have our beliefs, however near and dear to us they may be, challenged."
Greetings all,
There's nothing wrong with engaging our emotions as long as we don't give in to emotionalism. Let us engage the whole being and not be unkind to those who feel passionately about a cherished belief that gives meaning to their hearts and minds. We are whole people, not merely intellect. Whether we be theists or no, let us not trample on th ...[text shortened]... en we consider the longing we all have for "something more."
Fond regards,
R
We can't help but proceed from our own beliefs. Therefore, I'll continue stating that the story of the Cross, at least in part, is untrue. I wish to make it clear to the casual observer that I am indeed approaching the issue from a skeptical perspective.
The stuff about God outside of time makes for great Science-Fiction, but is not really understandable by we who are trapped within time. The attempted analogy of the lost child does not match up well with the biblical description of the crucifixion. (Where does it say Jesus gave up joy and loveliness? Did you just make that part up?) Forgive me if I find vague and nebulous images anything but powerful.
16 Sep 06
Originally posted by lucifershammerThis is about the most asinine statement I think I have ever heard come out of you, and ranks up there with the top five I have ever heard.
and no one makes a sacrifice without some expectation of compensating rewards.
Sacrifice is about giving up something without ANY sort of reward for it. That is why it is called sacrifice.
16 Sep 06
Originally posted by KnightWulfeI don't know about that. I was the first person in my family to finish college. Many of my older family members helped me tremendously. My grandfather in particular would give a large fraction of his social security/pension payments to help pay for my private high school and for boarding costs. He helped me pay the remaining balance on my tuition bills. He gave me money to begin taking classes in preparation for entering my PhD program. The giving however took a toll on him. He passed up a lot of medical examinations that he needed. He didn't vacation far from his home. In all he lived out a very meager retirement.
This is about the most asinine statement I think I have ever heard come out of you, and ranks up there with the top five I have ever heard.
Sacrifice is about giving up something without ANY sort of reward for it. That is why it is called sacrifice.
When I relate the story I tell people that my grandfather made "sacrifices" for me. He gave up so much so that I could get a good education. In one sense you could very easily say that this was an "investment." An economist might say that the present value of utility from seeing me finish college was greater than the immediate utility from spending the money on himself. To say however that his actions were not "sacrifice" I think belittles the selflessness and suffering that he experienced.
I tell you. He was the happiest person in the crowd when I received my college diploma. He died before he could see me get my MA or my PhD.
16 Sep 06
Originally posted by FreakyKBHUsing language of accomodation, the term "ultimate sacrifice" is meant to be a shocking term, to shock the hearer into drawing a similar parallel to their own situation. As fallen and depraved humanity cannot possibly relate to absolute perfection, the situation presented with the Lord Jesus Christ's sacrifice is couched in terms we can understand. Namely, the laying down of human life--- our most prized possession.
Using language of accomodation, the term "ultimate sacrifice" is meant to be a shocking term, to shock the hearer into drawing a similar parallel to their own situation. As fallen and depraved humanity cannot possibly relate to absolute perfection, the situation presented with the Lord Jesus Christ's sacrifice is couched in terms we can understand. Namel ...[text shortened]... t in realization. Anyone can recognize Heaven when one is walking on a street of gold.
Basically saying that curches in general use Christ as a metaphorical tool to scare people into considering their afterlife. Agreed. However, I would add that the "fallen and depraved humanity" while being unable to relate to absolute prefection can certainly consider it and by that light realize how they have strayed from God and turn to Him with a penitent heart. No blood needed, as far as I can tell.
Truth is, His physical sacrifice was not the ultimate of what He, as God, sacrificed. The truly ultimate sacrifice occured sometime in eternity past, when the Godhead considered creating in the first place. Because of His omniscience, God knew how the creature would respond. He also knew the only payment that could be acceptable is perfection--- His perfection, His most prized possession.
I don't understand this one iota, and I read it several times. Are you saying that God isn't perfect now that he created humanity? That explains the genocide.
Some say 'big deal: He laid it down knowing He was going to pick it back up in three days.' The truth is, there is no mixture between the humanity of Jesus and the deity of the Christ. While joined together in the God-man, no compromise exists in the nature of either. In other words, the humanity of Jesus was not exercising life in the power of His deity. He, like all of us, was born ignorant and was forced to learn about God and about Who He was, via faith.
This is not a statement of reason but one of faith. You say it because it must be true to keep your faith intact. Your faith is intact, and therefore this must be true. Unfortunately, all of this doesn't make the statement creep any closer to making sense, or explain why any of it was necessary to begin with.
16 Sep 06
2 edits
Originally posted by thesonofsaulI am not trying to distract you. My point was that it was not Christ's will to go to the cross. It is evident in how he suffered and prayed before they captured him and led him away to calvary. Likewise, Abraham did not wish to sacrifice his son Isaac. This is the similarity between the two events. Both were submitting to the will of the Father instead of their own will. Also in the end, both looked death square in the eye but did not succumb to death in the end.
But not by his own will. Why are you trying to prove my point wrong by bringing up a completely different story? Are you actually using your gifts of reason or do you solve all intellectual problems by distraction?
16 Sep 06
1 edit
Originally posted by telerionI would not wish to belittle what your Grandfather gave up, but that is all he did...he gave up certain things so that you could make the accomplishments you wished, and he wished for you. To have done that is a wonderful and honourable thing to do. However, he did gain out of it. He gained the furthering of his own proginy. he gained the betterment of his family. He gained the knowledge that he stepped forth to see that the future generations had a good life and he helped to build that for his family. Again, that is a great and wonderful thing that you were granted by him, but it was not truly a sacrifice. Yes, he gave up things, but he gained so many things by those actions. (Again, please do not think that I belittle what he did...it is a wonderful thing.)
I don't know about that. I was the first person in my family to finish college. Many of my older family members helped me tremendously. My grandfather in particular would give a large fraction of his social security/pension payments to help pay for my private high school and for boarding costs. He helped me pay the remaining balance on my tuition bills. when I received my college diploma. He died before he could see me get my MA or my PhD.
The word "sacrifice" is thrown around far too much, just like the word "love."
16 Sep 06
1 edit
Originally posted by BigDoggProblemI hope you don't think I'm against challenging and cross-examination. Far from it. Let's just not descend into insults, that's all. Remember to have compassion and consideration for other people's beliefs as you present your own views. Let's not just talk about tolerance, let's live it.
Perhaps a more objective admonishment is, "Fellow Christians, let us not enter into threads with an obvious skeptical perspective and expect not to have our beliefs, however near and dear to us they may be, challenged."
We can't help but proceed from our own beliefs. Therefore, I'll continue stating that the story of the Cross, at least in part, is ...[text shortened]... st make that part up?) Forgive me if I find vague and nebulous images anything but powerful.
If you wish to take a skeptical view, then do so.
Any human analogy is beggared when speaking of the transcendant, so I don't blame you if you find my illustration inadequate. I think it is too. As C.S. Lewis would say, "I am almost committing an indecency." Remember Jesus' words on the Cross, however. He asked the Father, "Why have you forsaken me?" The pathos in his voice is clearly articulated. If I fail to illustrate with full authority, think that it was ordained to be so. Such failures are entirely mine. A belief system can engage the imagination as much as it can the intellect. 😉
Warm regards,
R
16 Sep 06
Originally posted by MixoIs faith merely believing God is real? Did not Adam and Eve KNOW that God was real but still lost faith anyhow? Again, faith is stepping out and doing the will of the Father.
Don't get me wrong. I love Jesus. But he didn't actually have FAITH did he? He KNEW God is for real. It's us that have to decide whether to pin our hopes on a dream which can't be proved while we still live.
16 Sep 06
1 edit
I took the liberty of looking up the word sacrifice and here is what I came up with.
1. The offering of something to a diety.
2. The forfeiture of something highly valued for the sake of something or someone considered to have a greater value or claim.
3. A relinquishing or something at less than its presumed value, a loss sustained.
I think Christ's sacrifice is best described by the second definition. Humanities value was considered of greater value than the temperal sufferings of Christ and temperal seperation of Christ from the Father.