So Why Is The Gospel Still An Offense?

kurious_kathy said:
To know God knows everything and we will have to answer to him is not an easy thing to think about even though I know I am forgiven I still will give account for my life. At least I certain I will not face judgement because I receive Christ or it would be even worse. None of us want what we deserve as far as sin goes. We have all done it so we do need to be covered and that's what I know Jesus does for us.
Click to expand...

Kathy, have you ever considered, if your god really loves you, why does he make you worry and cause you stress like this? Is this something a being who loves you would do?

Ferd
 
kurious_kathy said:
Actually no there is only one path to know God, it's through Jesus and only him. He is the one who reveals the truth to our soul. And yes I think he must reach an intellectual or indivual on a level they can understand. How he does it I'm not sure but I do believe faith only comes by hearing God's Word. It's up to each of us to believe and receive it so I do not know what it might take for someone to get to that point.
Click to expand...

I realized after I'd posted it that 'there are many paths ...' would be open to misunderstanding. I believe that there are many paths (through Jesus) to truth. God isn't just another object 'out there' - He is in all our doings and immanent in the world. So there isn't a special category of things that lead us to Him; He is in all good things - and, many mystics hold, in all sin too, in that it can lead us closer to Him.

Faith indeed comes from the Word of God (the Logos - again, it helps if you know some Greek and Greek philosophy here), but the Word was never limited to the words on a page. As John 1 makes clear, Christ is the Word that we worship. Unless we fall into the heresy of Bibliolatry. Or another way, the Word is a living thing. So I've seen atheists weep at the 'Et resurrexit' from Bach's B Minor Mass, because we all know what suffering and resurrection feels like. We all know what sacrifice is. We all know what feels miraculous. Etc. God's Word is written on our hearts (cf Hebrews 8), and if it isn't then it's dead ink on a page. We can only speak God's Word from our hearts; if it becomes divorced from openness to people's real and honest experiences, then we are speaking not out of love and empathy and the Spirit, but out of our own spiritual poverty.

People believe all kinds of things that people teach but for some the Bible just doesn't fit what they want so they throw it out of there list of books to go by. I say this is a big mistake but I guess it's up to each person to choose for themselves. Not all will get it, I know that but I can hope so.
Click to expand...

From my observations, most atheists know an awful lot more about the Bible than most Christians. But they truly, honestly and genuinely feel that it has nothing to offer them at this time. That shows more respect, I think, than those Christians who don't bother to read it, or don't bother to read it properly, learn about it and think about it. When I used to lecture undergraduates I loved it if they argued with me and told me I was an idiot - at least they were engaging with my arguments. If they sat there mute or just went along with what I was saying I began to suspect that they either didn't care or had switched their brains off. Either way, I wasn't getting a whole lot out of them.

I think there's no point shutting off huge parts of oneself and then desperately offering the remainder, the small bits we think are acceptable, to God. Denouncing atheists is often, I think, a way for Christians to externalise their own doubt. Even - perhaps especially - the most faithful Christians have times when God appears absent; we can either accept our doubts and unbelief as part of faith or push them desperately down into our subconscious while denouncing and damning those for whom unbelief is their primary mode of engaging with the question.

Again, I have only a tiny concept of what God might be, but I'm guessing he might be a whole lot more amused and pleased by some atheists than by some Christians. There's a whole lot of people on this board who are a whole lot smarter and a whole lot better people than I'll ever be, and who on earth am I to say what God thinks of them?

Do you believe that all who call upon the name of the Lord shall be saved or don't you? I do!
Click to expand...

I sure do! Saved from what is an interesting one. I don't think that we can ever be taken out of sin in this life - I prefer Julian of Norwich's formulation that through all sin God will keep me safe, "all shall be well, and all shall be well, and all manner of things shall be well". She was able to say this because she knew from a vision of the cross that while sin is all-pervasive, God does not blame us for our sin, because we cannot avoid sinning - that's the true meaning of the doctrine of original sin. It's not a juridical concept about individual crime and blame, but a statement about how the world just is. The meaning of the Cross is that God works to keep us safe in the midst of the structural sin of the world and our inevitable complicity with it. Again, I don't think I know what form 'calling upon the name of the Lord' will have for everyone. If it is not a mere ritual or sign (form of words) then it has a deeper meaning which goes beyond words and may be found in many different ways by many different people. All of us, atheist, Christian, Buddhist, or whatever, knows what it feels like to be complicit in bad stuff or to act against our own deep moral judgement, and many people think and meditate deeply on this to try to find answers. I believe Christ works with that.

God is bigger than we can ever begin to understand, Kathy, and He is love. Love your neighbour, don't denounce them or act towards them in ways guaranteed to hurt them and put their backs up, and He's working in you. Deride or denounce other humans and you're a long way from Him, in my view.
 
truethat said:
Maybe it was too much.........

Hmm just a simple question Kathy. "Do you think it is moral to require a blood sacrifice in order to forgive someone for their sins?"

Yes or no?

In my mind it is evil to request this, evil to allow it to happen and even more evil to ask someone to accept murder as a fair trade for forgiveness.

Do you understand why this could be considered offensive?
Click to expand...

Hi, I'm not Kathy but I'd like to say something about the blood sacrifice thing.

Firstly, in Christian theology blood sacrifice is only a metaphor for understanding the death (and resurrection) of Christ. As a metaphor or interpretation it goes back to parts of the New Testament, notably to Hebrews which, as its name suggests, was written to a group of Jewish Christians. The writer therefore borrowed heavily from Jewish notions of priestly sacrifice in the Temple.

This notion of Christ as blood sacrifice (as well as, following Hebrews, our great high priest who offers the sacrifice) was taken further by St Anselm, who bent it further towards propritiation - Jesus died to appease God's anger and as punishment for all our sins. In the feudalism of his time, this was understood mainly as a servant taking a punishment for besmirching his Lord's honour. Later, with Calvinism and the development of early capitalism, this was further developed into the idea of a sort of contractual arrangement - humankind broke a contract with God and Jesus had to pay the legal penalty.

This concept of blood sacrifice mixed with legal penalty is very popular among Christians today, unfortunately in my view. They forget that it is only a metaphor and tend to impute to it the status of dogma (ie, ultimate truth).

However, it is simply a metaphor. There are other, often better, metaphors for understanding Christ's death. For instance, John's Gospel seems to tend more towards what's called the Christus Victor view, one popular in the first millennium or so of Christianity. It holds that Christ's death on the cross was his glorification - in John's words, that he was 'lifted up' - so that he could defeat the works of sin and the devil once and for all in a great spiritual battle.

Another interpretation always there in Christianity but to the fore ever since nineteenth century liberal Protestantism, is what's known as the moral theory. This holds that Christ suffered and died as an example to us to show what love and goodness really are. This can even be quite a non-supernatural theory, held for instance by those who view Christ as a great moral teacher but not the Son of God. It can also be supernatural in that it holds that his goodness meant that death had no power over him. There are other images, metaphors and interpretations too.

Again, these are all simply attempts at interpreting the mystery of Christ's death (and resurrection). Here's what Rowan Williams has to say on this topic:

'The single central thing is the conviction that for us to be at peace Jesus's life has to be given up. It isn't that a vengeful and inflexible God demands satisfaction, more that the way the world is makes it unavoidable that the way to our freedom lies through the self-giving of Jesus, even to the point of death. In the kind of world that you and I inhabit, the kind of world that you and I make or collude with, this is what the price of unrestricted love looks like. Hang on to that, and the jostling images and theories are kept in perspective.'

None of this is a watertight or logically satisfying final answer, largely because it relies on what can be seen as the great cop-out: it's a mystery (beyond our understanding). But I think it's worth pointing out that blood sacrifice as a concept isn't the be-all and end-all of Christianity.
 
MarkCorrigan said:
Can someone please find one of my posts and quote it?

Kathy seems to have me on ignore and isn't even responding to PM's.

I'm still undecided whether this is simply not noticing me (and my PM) or if it's intellectual cowardice.
Click to expand...

Given the posting history over the past 4 years, I'd go with intellectual cowardice. Kathy doesn't answer the things she finds uncomfortable to her faith.
 
sleepy_lioness said:
<snipped the interesting discussion>

None of this is a watertight or logically satisfying final answer, largely because it relies on what can be seen as the great cop-out: it's a mystery (beyond our understanding). But I think it's worth pointing out that blood sacrifice as a concept isn't the be-all and end-all of Christianity.
Click to expand...


Neat post, thanks for sharing. The part that I found most distracting about the whole blood sacrifice issue is that it seems to put the final seal on the tomb of the "faith vs. works" debate. What is your opinion on this?
 
kurious_kathy said:
Religion does not offer forgiveness, but Jesus does.
Click to expand...

I see you just moved into the neighborhood. Well, you see, there's some things you should know. I'm here for you. I can get and do anything I want arround here. If you need something, don't be afraid to ask. I have access to many things and nothing happens without my say so.

Now, I'm a peaceful, loving man, but you see... Some people here, aren't so nice. Well, I have the power to keep these guys from messing you with, but you'll have to well. You see, I've already had to sacrifice some of my time protecting you. So, I think it only fair that you provide me with some compensation in return. It's a nominal amount. consider it a minorr tithe. Nothing major. Just a sign of respect you know? If you can keep me happy with those signs of respect, than I'll keep these goons from messing with you ever. However, If you choose to not give the respect expected, well I can't be responsible for what happens, now can I?

Now now, don't go crying about how and what is fair. I know you didn't agree to this arrangement originally. I know you hadn't been here when I sacrificed myself for you. But what's done is done, and you are responsible for these things anyway. So. our relationship really relies on you, Doesn't it? You can either play ball and be my friend, or you can choose to disrespect me. Free will being what it is, I really hope you choose the respect road, as that's much easier on you.

Capiche?
 
Last edited:
Hokulele said:
Neat post, thanks for sharing. The part that I found most distracting about the whole blood sacrifice issue is that it seems to put the final seal on the tomb of the "faith vs. works" debate. What is your opinion on this?
Click to expand...

Thanks. I'm not sure what you mean by this - could you explain a bit further and I'll try to answer?
 
kurious_kathy said:
Yes I can leave that ugly stuff behind now but for years it affected me. Somethings will just be better off barried in the past but one day all of us will give account and that is a bit intimidating to me. To know God knows everything and we will have to answer to him is not an easy thing to think about even though I know I am forgiven I still will give account for my life. At least I certain I will not face judgement because I receive Christ or it would be even worse. None of us want what we deserve as far as sin goes. We have all done it so we do need to be covered and that's what I know Jesus does for us.
Click to expand...

Kathy

You seem to have a bad case of "scruples".

"It's possible to be too hard on yourself Or maybe on others, too, who suffer from scruples "Scruples" -- defined in the old Catholic Encyclopedia as an "unwarranted fear that something is a sin, which, as a matter of fact, is not"".http://www.marianland.com/romancatholicbooks/dealingwithcruples.html
 
KK, I'd like an answer too:

Elizabeth I said:
What had my 10-year-old cousin sown that he reaped death by liver cancer?

What had my 3-year-old brother sown that he reaped death by automobile?

What had my co-worker's newborn sown that he reaped death due to congenital defects only hours after being delivered?
Click to expand...

@linusrichard:
linusrichard said:
Join the club. I'm still kurious to know whether she's posting from the public library.
Click to expand...

What is this thing you have about the public library?
 
Yoo Hoo! KK please look here.

MarkCorrigan said:
Can someone please find one of my posts and quote it?

Kathy seems to have me on ignore and isn't even responding to PM's.

I'm still undecided whether this is simply not noticing me (and my PM) or if it's intellectual cowardice.
Click to expand...




kurious_kathy said:
Well what does this sound like? Once people accept Christ they are the target of the enemy so of course you will some problems, Satan is always trying to destroy a Christians testimony and unfortunately I think is too successful at his game. Can a true believer lose his salvation, no but he can be weak in his walk and perhaps the Lord will just take them home if they fail to serve right. Welcome to the true war zone!
If the gospel of Christ wasn't true Satan would not be working so hard to get people not to believe it!!
Click to expand...


MarkCorrigan said:
The problem with this being, of course, it assumes Satan is real.

Oh, and could you, now you're here, please comment on my question in the other thread you're in?

Linky
Click to expand...


I doubt this will work since we appear to be on the same naughty list.
 
Actually lioness, I would disagree with you. Many times in the bible God requested a blood sacrifice in animal form. Jesus did not "metaphorically" die on the cross. Not only that but it was prophesied in the Old Testament that God wanted him to die in payment.

http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Isaiah+53:1-12


Isaiah 53

1 Who has believed our message
and to whom has the arm of the LORD been revealed?

2 He grew up before him like a tender shoot,
and like a root out of dry ground.
He had no beauty or majesty to attract us to him,
nothing in his appearance that we should desire him.

3 He was despised and rejected by men,
a man of sorrows, and familiar with suffering.
Like one from whom men hide their faces
he was despised, and we esteemed him not.

4 Surely he took up our infirmities
and carried our sorrows,
yet we considered him stricken by God,
smitten by him, and afflicted.

5 But he was pierced for our transgressions,
he was crushed for our iniquities;
the punishment that brought us peace was upon him,
and by his wounds we are healed.

6 We all, like sheep, have gone astray,
each of us has turned to his own way;
and the LORD has laid on him
the iniquity of us all.

7 He was oppressed and afflicted,
yet he did not open his mouth;
he was led like a lamb to the slaughter,
and as a sheep before her shearers is silent,
so he did not open his mouth.

8 By oppression [a] and judgment he was taken away.
And who can speak of his descendants?
For he was cut off from the land of the living;
for the transgression of my people he was stricken.

9 He was assigned a grave with the wicked,
and with the rich in his death,
though he had done no violence,
nor was any deceit in his mouth.

10 Yet it was the LORD's will to crush him and cause him to suffer,
and though the LORD makes [c] his life a guilt offering,
he will see his offspring and prolong his days,
and the will of the LORD will prosper in his hand.

11 After the suffering of his soul,
he will see the light of life [d] and be satisfied [e] ;
by his knowledge [f] my righteous servant will justify many,
and he will bear their iniquities.

12 Therefore I will give him a portion among the great, [g]
and he will divide the spoils with the strong, [h]
because he poured out his life unto death,
and was numbered with the transgressors.
For he bore the sin of many,
and made intercession for the transgressors.
Click to expand...



The actual reality is that Jesus was sent to be the blood sacrifice to appease God. This is what God demanded.
 
Last edited:
Lonewulf said:
So, even though you're "forgiven", you still feel unclean, judged, and hate yourself and who you are, and consider yourself lesser, and always will.

There's honestly not much in your religion that I find tempting... I respect myself too much.
Click to expand...

Kathy is an addict. I'm not slinging this as an insult, as she's admitted it here herself. Substance abuse nearly killed her as did her unwillingness to leave an abusive relationship. Is it any wonder she has replaced these with the non-thinking comfort of her religion addiction?
 
Well in that case I think we should bow out of further conversation. Preaching is her therapy that keeps her sane it seems. Kathy more power to you. Good luck!
 
Freethinker said:
Kathy is an addict. I'm not slinging this as an insult, as she's admitted it here herself. Substance abuse nearly killed her as did her unwillingness to leave an abusive relationship. Is it any wonder she has replaced these with the non-thinking comfort of her religion addiction?
Click to expand...


I don't think that's fair.
What she has done in the past, and what she does now, with her own life, is none of our business. And we have no right to judge it.

Personally, I'm just faintly appalled that her religious views have Kathy convinced that the bad things she has suffered were all her fault.
 
truethat said:
Actually lioness, I would disagree with you. Many times in the bible God requested a blood sacrifice in animal form. Jesus did not "metaphorically" die on the cross. Not only that but it was prophesied in the Old Testament that God wanted him to die in payment.

http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Isaiah+53:1-12





The actual reality is that Jesus was sent to be the blood sacrifice to appease God. This is what God demanded.
Click to expand...

Hmm ... not sure if I would grant the status of 'actual reality' to this interpretation. Isaiah's 'suffering servant' passages such as this one are indeed read in Christianity as applying to Jesus; in fact, the author of Acts explicitly says they do. Yet I have a hard time imagining that this is what the author of Second Isaiah, writing 700 years before Jesus lived, himself meant by it. It's a long time since I studied Isaiah, but I think that the most plausible historical explanation of the Suffering Servant songs is that they relate to the nation of Israel, which was undergoing some of its regular political difficulties at the time.

I see OT prophecy as setting the scene, creating the framework of ideas, from which NT stories about Jesus were formed, rather than being a sort of magical foretelling. IOW, some of the creators of Christian theology described Jesus's death in terms taken from the Suffering Servant passages of Isaiah because that was the intellectual frame of reference they'd grown up with. I think there is a lot of debate among scholars as to the extent to which these passages informed various types of Jewish messianic expectation at the time of Christ.

I don't think it's a small point, either, that ALL Jewish interpreters of Isaiah (many of whom, unlike most Christians, read Hebrew) would disagree that the passage refers to Christ.

I don't disagree at all that there are many instances of 'blood sacrifice' occuring in the OT, of course not. However, not being a fundamentalist or other sort of literalist I tend to read them, as with much else in the Bible, as being an account of how God's people at that time understood their relationship with Him. Animal sacrifice was a commonplace of religions at that place and time so people understood their relationship with Yahweh as mediated through such sacrifice. Again, it's metaphor.

As for the NT, I pointed out that you can indeed find Christ's death described as blood sacrifice, notably in Hebrews. It is one way of understanding the reasons for the death of Christ, it comes out of the Jewish priestly tradition of the times, and is not normative for Christianity as a whole.
 
Elizabeth I said:
@linusrichard:

What is this thing you have about the public library?
Click to expand...

Well, it doesn't have to be the public library, it could be a local university, or maybe a friend's house, but KK is so certain that she's getting into heaven, and I have a suspicion that she might own some property, in violation of Christ's commandment to take and sell what you have and give to the poor.

I'm pretty sure she understands why I'm asking, because that would explain why she hasn't answered.

Christ demands a lot of us. I suspect KK is not as sincere as she would like to think she is.
 
Elizabeth I said:
@sleepy lioness: so are you saying that Jesus was not tortured and crucified? It was all a metaphor? If so, what do you think happened to him?
Click to expand...

No, I'm not saying this. I think that it's reasonably certain that a man called Jesus lived in Palestine and was crucified by the Romans for political agitation.

Them's the bare facts. What I'm saying is that Christians from the earliest days right up to the present have disagreed over the meaning and reasons for that crucifixion. That the interpretation that Jesus died as blood sacrifice to propritiate an angry God is just that, an interpretation, a way of making sense of the bare facts. One interpretation among several. And that the Christian position is that Jesus's death and resurrection is a mystery which we can't fully understand, and that all our ways of interpreting it, including as blood sacrifice, are only partial.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom