Jesus the ritual sacrifice

[exile]

The Sumerians, Egyptians, most members of the Greater Aryan stock, and New World societies engaged in the ritual sacrifice of humans. This practice developed out of totenism where the sacrifice of the totem animal was thought to be resurrected to renew the well being of the society. When agriculture was introduced the totem animal was anthropomorphosized and humans replaced the totem animal in ritual sacrifices. The clan head was now thought to be resurrected and renew fertility and the well being of the society. In Egypt the sacrificed Pharaoh was thought to be resurrected in the afterlife and ultimately by the time the Sed festival was introduced the human sacrifice developed into a symbolic human sacrifice. The Zarathushtrian belief that God was eternal, no longer requiring a scapegoat to ensure the well-being brought an end to the ritual sacrifice of humans among the Aryans (Irano-Afghans). If the Mittani did not perform ritual sacrifices its possible that they contributed to the development of a real human sacrifice into a symbolic human sacrifice considering the close contact the Mitanni had with the Egyptians around the time the Sed Festival was introduced into Egypt. The human sacrifice was prevalent among the Jews. Yahweh instructs Abraham to sacrifice Isaac, but ultimately stops him. This could mark the end of the human sacrifice among the Jews, but then I thought to myself: That's exactly what Jesus was, a ritual sacrifice. He's often linked to Demuzi and other dying gods. Jesus was sacrificed for the well being of man. He died for man's sins in order to redeem man. If God was viewed by the Jews as eternal then why did ritual sacrifice persist into Christian times?

 

[Dream]

Making things up again. No sources, asking other people to do your research for you. Asking questions about made up histories that don't even matter, then also not accepting answers. To begin there are no answers to questions about things made up in one's head. Its not other people's jobs to make sense out of your random associations.

 

[Etu Malku]

Making things up again. No sources, asking other people to do your research for you. Asking questions about made up histories that don't even matter, then also not accepting answers. To begin there are no answers to questions about things made up in one's head. Its not other people's jobs to make sense out of your random associations.

Aside from the grammar, and run on sentences, I found everything "exile" posted to be true and historically correct.

Simply because you are ignorant of these facts does not make them irrelevant.

 

[A Cup Of Tea]

This is a fact, no it's not, yes is is, no, YES, NO! Is there a point to this?

 

[Etu Malku]

This is a fact, no it's not, yes is is, no, YES, NO! Is there a point to this?

I don't understand your line of reasoning here?

 

[A Cup Of Tea]

I don't understand your line of reasoning here?

I don't understand any of yours, if there are facts then bring them to the table, discuss them and learn what can be learned.

 

[Dream]

Aside from the grammar, and run on sentences, I found everything "exile" posted to be true and historically correct.

Simply because you are ignorant of these facts does not make them irrelevant.

Dumping assumptions into the Christianity forum won't make them verifiable.

New World societies engaged in the ritual sacrifice of humans. This practice developed out of totenism.... The human sacrifice was prevalent among the Jews.

This is like the work of an eight year old. Its got no insights into what Jews actually did.

Yahweh instructs Abraham to sacrifice Isaac, but ultimately stops him. This could mark the end of the human sacrifice among the Jews, but then I thought to myself

You say you understand the Bible, but you stop at only the first time the LORD relents. Didn't read the rest? Not interesting enough? The Bible is nothing if not stories in which the LORD spares people that are worthy of death. No human sacrifices! Everybody is worthy of death, but nobody is sacrificed! Remember what Paul said about it? "The Letter kills but the spirit gives life!"

1 Yahweh instructs Abraham to kill Isaac but stops him. 2 An angel wants to kill Moses sons but Moses wife saves them. 3 Judah is going to execute (not sacrifice) Tamar, but Judah relents. 4 The LORD is going to wipe out all life on earth, but the LORD relents. 5 The LORD wants to wipe out Israel, but Moses talks the LORD out of it.... 6 The LORD sends enemies...but then relents over & over repeatedly. 7. David is supposed to kill Absolom but he won't.... on and on 8. Elijah spares Israel's enemies and even provides them with a meal!

If a condemned man grasps the horns of the altar (we read in the BIBLE) of Yahweh his life was to be spared. Simple as 1+1 = 2, Yahweh did not want any human sacrifices. Jews aren't even allowed to eat bacon! Why do you suppose that is? Becaaaauuuuuuseeee......yes.....(drumroll)...right! Because Jews don't do human sacrifice. Ding!

Even Jesus upon the cross himself is only killed because he is convicted of breaking laws. He's not killed 'As a sacrifice', and the killing breaks several Jewish laws. As soon as they hear about it, the Jews are 'Cut to the heart' that they have made such a mistake as to kill and innocent man! There's no ceremony around him as he dies, and no priest cuts him. The concept of the sacrifice of Jesus is like transubstantiation: ephemeral, sublime, irrational. Its all in your head. So is the 'Sacrifice if Isaac'.

But maybe you already know all this and are just kicking at someone who can't defend themselves; because, hey, why the hell not?

 

[Dream]

Oh, here's a good one. Ok, there are these 'Palestinians' right, and they like to launch missiles at people they've never met, see; but they are not slaughtered for it. Hmmm. Why is that I wonder? Maybe they taste too much like bacon.

 

[Etu Malku]

I don't understand any of yours, if there are facts then bring them to the table, discuss them and learn what can be learned.

I must be confused here . . . "exile" posted something which is not made up, has authentication in historical documents, "exile" was then accused of making things up 'again' . . . so, I stated that I found nothing "made up" about his post.

Are you asking me to link you to verifiable evidence for his post?

 

[Etu Malku]

Dumping assumptions into the Christianity forum won't make them verifiable.

Isn't Christianity itself an assumption?

Even Jesus upon the cross himself is only killed because he is convicted of breaking laws. He's not killed 'As a sacrifice'

You're not taking into account that all of this was written long after the alleged act, that the authors most likely took artistic license with the actual event in order to shape their new Faith into a palatable form for mass consumption.

 

[Etu Malku]

The Sumerians, Egyptians, most members of the Greater Aryan stock, and New World societies engaged in the ritual sacrifice of humans.

All of this is well documented in most historical books. Human sacrifice - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This practice developed out of totenism where the sacrifice of the totem animal was thought to be resurrected to renew the well being of the society.

This too is well known among anthropologists, blood sacrifice often accompanied totem worship.

When agriculture was introduced the totem animal was anthropomorphosized and humans replaced the totem animal in ritual sacrifices. The clan head was now thought to be resurrected and renew fertility and the well being of the society. In Egypt the sacrificed Pharaoh was thought to be resurrected in the afterlife and ultimately by the time the Sed festival was introduced the human sacrifice developed into a symbolic human sacrifice.

I can't find anything incorrect about this statement either.

The Zarathushtrian belief that God was eternal, no longer requiring a scapegoat to ensure the well-being brought an end to the ritual sacrifice of humans among the Aryans (Irano-Afghans).

Zoroaster, born during the Bronze Age, rejected the religion of the Iranians, with their many gods and oppressive class structure, in which the Karvis and Karapans (princes and priests) controlled the ordinary people. He also opposed animal sacrifices. His god was the only god and one of the earliest forms of monotheism.

If the Mittani did not perform ritual sacrifices its possible that they contributed to the development of a real human sacrifice into a symbolic human sacrifice considering the close contact the Mitanni had with the Egyptians around the time the Sed Festival was introduced into Egypt.

This statement I was not able to verify

The human sacrifice was prevalent among the Jews.

Also true

Yahweh instructs Abraham to sacrifice Isaac, but ultimately stops him. This could mark the end of the human sacrifice among the Jews, but then I thought to myself: That's exactly what Jesus was, a ritual sacrifice. He's often linked to Demuzi and other dying gods. Jesus was sacrificed for the well being of man. He died for man's sins in order to redeem man. If God was viewed by the Jews as eternal then why did ritual sacrifice persist into Christian times?

This last conjecture I am in agreement with and would think Judeo-Christianity would also agree with?


Just what are the issues with what "exile" stated here?

 

[NiceCupOfTea]

The Sumerians, Egyptians, most members of the Greater Aryan stock, and New World societies engaged in the ritual sacrifice of humans. This practice developed out of totenism where the sacrifice of the totem animal was thought to be resurrected to renew the well being of the society. When agriculture was introduced the totem animal was anthropomorphosized and humans replaced the totem animal in ritual sacrifices. The clan head was now thought to be resurrected and renew fertility and the well being of the society. In Egypt the sacrificed Pharaoh was thought to be resurrected in the afterlife and ultimately by the time the Sed festival was introduced the human sacrifice developed into a symbolic human sacrifice. The Zarathushtrian belief that God was eternal, no longer requiring a scapegoat to ensure the well-being brought an end to the ritual sacrifice of humans among the Aryans (Irano-Afghans). If the Mittani did not perform ritual sacrifices its possible that they contributed to the development of a real human sacrifice into a symbolic human sacrifice considering the close contact the Mitanni had with the Egyptians around the time the Sed Festival was introduced into Egypt. The human sacrifice was prevalent among the Jews. Yahweh instructs Abraham to sacrifice Isaac, but ultimately stops him. This could mark the end of the human sacrifice among the Jews, but then I thought to myself: That's exactly what Jesus was, a ritual sacrifice. He's often linked to Demuzi and other dying gods. Jesus was sacrificed for the well being of man. He died for man's sins in order to redeem man. If God was viewed by the Jews as eternal then why did ritual sacrifice persist into Christian times?

sounds about right tome

 

[Dream]

Isn't Christianity itself an assumption?

Its not an idea so much as a way of life, and it does not involved eating humans.

You're not taking into account that all of this was written long after the alleged act, that the authors most likely took artistic license with the actual event in order to shape their new Faith into a palatable form for mass consumption.

The assumption threaded throughout is that 'because the Mayans, Egyptians and some Sumerians did it', that it means its part of Jewish practice right up through the time of Jesus. Jews are a bifurcation in History. They never really blend in anywhere for long, and the Bible discusses human sacrifice not to condone it but to condemn and prevent it. For those who absolutely felt the need to sacrifice themselves or someone else there were vows of dedication, such as the Nazarite vow. The Nazarite vow is when a person dedicates themselves to the LORD for a period of time. This 'Dedication' is the only permissible form of human sacrifice, because there is no murder.

The pageant in which Abraham faux sacrifices Isaac is not grounds to assume that Judaism requires human sacrifices. It merely discusses it in order to discard it. Isaac is momentarily a Nazarite. That's all that happens! I merely point out that Isaac is never actually killed, (nor is Jesus if you think about it, since he is resurrected). Jephthah's daughter, too, is committed to temple service rather than medically deceased. (Could use a fact check here but am pretty sure.) In all cases where a person is required, their lifeblood is not.

 

[Etu Malku]

Its not an idea so much as a way of life, and it does not involved eating humans.

Who is talking about cannibalism?

The assumption threaded throughout is that 'because the Mayans, Egyptians and some Sumerians did it', that it means its part of Jewish practice right up through the time of Jesus. Jews are a bifurcation in History. They never really blend in anywhere for long, and the Bible discusses human sacrifice not to condone it but to condemn and prevent it.

Judiasm is at least 1000 years older than Christianity and is still here . . . I'd say they're 'blending' in rather well.

For those who absolutely felt the need to sacrifice themselves or someone else there were vows of dedication, such as the Nazarite vow. The Nazarite vow is when a person dedicates themselves to the LORD for a period of time. This 'Dedication' is the only permissible form of human sacrifice, because there is no murder.

Didn't Yeshua's father sacrifice his only son?

 

[Dream]

Who is talking about cannibalism?

Sacrifices must be eaten, and anything left over must be burned up. If they sacrificed humans, they'd have to eat them.

Didn't Yeshua's father sacrifice his only son?

Its a cheat, because he gets resurrected. Similarly the Nazarite does some time in service to the LORD and then gets to go back to their regular life.

 

[Etu Malku]

Sacrifices must be eaten, and anything left over must be burned up. If they sacrificed humans, they'd have to eat them.

Where'd ya get that from?
Human sacrifice is the act of killing one or more human beings as part of a ritual killing in a manner that was supposed to appease gods, spirits or the deceased. It has nothing to do with cannibalism.

Endocannibalism is ritual cannibalism of the recently deceased as part of the grieving process, or a way of guiding the souls of the dead into the bodies of living descendants.
Exocannibalism is the consumption of a person from outside the community, usually as a celebration of victory against a rival tribe, absorbing his strengths and powers.

 

[exile]

The pageant in which Abraham faux sacrifices Isaac is not grounds to assume that Judaism requires human sacrifices. It merely discusses it in order to discard it. Isaac is momentarily a Nazarite. That's all that happens! I merely point out that Isaac is never actually killed, (nor is Jesus if you think about it, since he is resurrected). Jephthah's daughter, too, is committed to temple service rather than medically deceased. (Could use a fact check here but am pretty sure.) In all cases where a person is required, their lifeblood is not.

But that's my question exactly. The fact that attempted human sacrifices were mentioned presupposes that human sacrifice was part of the pre-Jewish rites and these attempted human sacrifices show that the practice hadn't totally been forgotten. The Jews do appear to have given up human sacrifices, but if they truly did then how did Jesus' sacrifices come to be. Jesus' sacrifice clearly is characteristic of all the ritual human sacrifice in all the above mentioned societies. He claimed to be God just like the Egyptians believed their Pharaohs to be god. The Pharaoh was sacrificed to ensure the well being of society just like Jesus's sacrifice ensured that man would be redeemed of his sins. There's no doubt that his sacrifice had something to do with the ritual sacrifice, but where did the idea come from? The Greeks, the Romans, the Jews? The ritual human sacrifice was substituted with animals early on among the Greeks. The Romans did perform ritual human sacrifices, but also seem to have given the practice up early on. But it was the Jews who were responsible for authoring the New Testament. Maybe the ritual sacrifice was a Mithraic influence, but the symbolic martyrdom in the Mithraic mysteries doesn't appear to have had much to do with the redemption of the society. Rather it was part of the process of initiation into the Mithraic society.

 

[Dream]

Where'd ya get that from?
Human sacrifice is the act of killing one or more human beings as part of a ritual killing in a manner that was supposed to appease gods, spirits or the deceased. It has nothing to do with cannibalism.

Jews don't believe in that. Some of their heretics did, as mentioned by 'Exile'. Eating the sacrifice is required in Jewish sacrifices, some must be eaten by the Levites and sometimes by the participants in the offering. The laws state who is to eat the meat and how, but it is always to be eaten. Animals are not permitted to eat it, nor foreigners nor people who are ceremonially 'Unclean', because eating it is participation in the sacrifice. If you are making any sacrifice than you and the Levites must share it. If you don't share it, the rites have not been followed. Also if you let any of it spoil, then the sacrifice is considered ruined.

Endocannibalism is ritual cannibalism of the recently deceased as part of the grieving process, or a way of guiding the souls of the dead into the bodies of living descendants.
Exocannibalism is the consumption of a person from outside the community, usually as a celebration of victory against a rival tribe, absorbing his strengths and powers.

Neither endo nor exo cannibalism is permitted in the Jewish laws. If it occurs it is not part of a sacrifice or else is part of an idolatrous heresy. It may have been part of Abraham's original culture, but there are indications that he would not have participated in any human sacrifice or eaten dead bodies.

Prior to Jewish laws when Abraham and his allies defeat some evil kidnappers, Abram (proto-Abraham) refuses to accept any gifts from the rescued kings. This separates Abraham from those kings, because he is not 'Sharing' with them; so he is breaking his treaty with them. He also gives gifts of his own to Melchizedek who rules in a city called 'Peace'. (Moloch would never live in such a city.) Together he and Melchizedek consume 1. Bread and 2. Wine -- making a new treaty. Mel. is not a war-monger but a peace-maker, and Abraham is going from a warrior to a civilian. The bread and wine are introducing a covenant equal in force to the sacrifice of any animal but better -- because there is no death. The fact that Abraham eats bread and wine with Melchizedek means Mel. is recognizing Abraham as his equal, like brothers. That is the point of it being in the story! Later when Abraham receives unexpected visitors he 1. bows to them 2. bakes them bread 3. gives them wine and 4. lamb.

 

[Dream]

From that Kiddish, Christians obtain a similar rite. Bread and wine are consumed, bowing is performed and there is a lamb.

The Bowing is respect, understanding, patience for others. The Bread is shared life. The wine is common blood. The lamb represents peaceful coexistence. Roughly paraphrasing.

 

[Ecumenist]

Jesus did not die FOR anyone's sins, except grammatically. He died, iow, because of the Sanhedrin, the disbelievers, and thanks to those who persecuted him, struggling *AGAINST* what He came to share. They did this because they were driven on by the Adversary, even as many are today, often unwitting & unknowing. Others know with more or less accuracy what is being done {or what is NOT done, in the case of `sins of omission'} as did those who crucified the Galilean Initiate 2100 years ago. Yet in both cases we must often stand aside and watch.

I will call YOU to stand with me, beside my Brother who was there and dare to tell me you understand what happened ... or why. You do not.

Before you have earned the right so to stand, however, you will first hear His Call, you will second, ANSWER that call of your own free volition. And third, you will know when you stand where you need to stand ~ and then you won't need to ask questions any longer, about why `ritual sacrifice' was, or is sometimes still performed. If 666 lemmings jumped off of a cliff, simply because it was the 3rd Saturday in a leap year with a neap tide during Saturnalia, would *you, also* feel that is was necessary, just so that you could FIT IN?

So many people yearn, desire and desperately BURN to fit in with something, to fit INTO some king of ... or was that kinD of ... something Greater. Yet while many, many are Called ~ it is the few who are Thinking, Responsive-because-RESPONSIBLE&RESPONSE-Worthy, and READY-because-Readied who will be `Chosen,' because frankly, only these are capable of Answering in the same Language, with the same Level of Honesty, Courage & Determination as the One who is doing the Calling.

All of the bumping into each other, blindfolded, really isn't something which gives pleasure, however ... to Those Who stand and wait, watch and all the while WORK day in, day out, to ensure the best possible FUTURE of the Human Family. It would a wonderful Day, I continue to observe,

Ah, I guess I mean WILL be a wonderful Day, when every 1 gets done just bumping into each other, realizes we have `FORM' as it were, or `middle' here in Jupiter-Land ... then got ON with Life. You see, each has a part to play, a PURPOSE for being here. Each 1 may in fact, in her time, play many parts and even assist in the revealing of quite a thick plot, after all. Yet if you listen to the ignorant theologians, the drooling, rabid, foaming-at-the-mouth religious idiots and the like, you will soon only know that some things ~ as Brother C. has often said ~ never change.

Stop drooling, or otherwise bumping into each other, and unless you really like that big SPLAT at the bottom of the cliff, I'd quit following all these lemmings around here. Don't worry, they bounce back & find their bearings again in the short run. It's the long-timers I do tend to keep an eye on, for them I was sent to watch, even as much as I loathe it.

Namaskar

And yes, I do mean LOATHE it ... at times.