1
   

A head on a stake? Or a body nailed to a cross?

 
 
Cyracuz
 
Reply Fri 2 Sep, 2005 04:02 am
In older times it was common to place the heads of various criminals on stakes for everyone to see. The idea was to warn off anyone who might be planning similar crimes. (treason and such things).

Over to the crusifix. This holy relic bears many similarities to the old head on a stake.

It is a re rendering of jesus' broken flesh. The vessel of the holy man who died for our sins. We killed him, and commenced to parade his corpse around the world, as though it was the icon of our victory, as a warning to everyone else who wants to enlighten people. "This is what you'll get for your efforts".

Jesus didn't die for our sins. He died so that we can continue sinning without accumulating more karma. That is the christian way of thinking, and it's wrong to my mind.

Nobody truly follows jesus christ. They just hold him up as a warning to those who would, afraid that if a true follower of christ were to appear, he would show us how unworthy we are of the title christians.
  • Topic Stats
  • Top Replies
  • Link to this Topic
Type: Discussion • Score: 1 • Views: 935 • Replies: 17
No top replies

 
material girl
 
  1  
Reply Fri 2 Sep, 2005 04:21 am
Blimey!

I find the whole concept of Jesus and religion in general totally contradictory.
Its supposed to radiate love and peace yet seems to generate dictation and war.

I think in this day and age Jesus is seen by many as a fashion icon, not a religious icon.
He gives comfort to some,or provokes hatred in others.

Surely the fact that Jesus was Jewish and from hin Christianity was born shows that religion is 'made up' and manipulated.If we truly loved Jesus we would be following the Jewish faith.

I saw The Passion of Christ and was amazed by how 'wishy wshy' the reasons were for killing Jesus.If people lives are based on that, I dont think there is hope for anyone.
0 Replies
 
odin 03
 
  1  
Reply Fri 2 Sep, 2005 11:09 pm
Re: A head on a stake? Or a body nailed to a cross?
The crucifix and the old head on a stake have the same purpose, to warn people not to mess around with the "authorities".

The reason Jesus died is because he pissed off the "authorities". Karma, enlightment, etc. didn't have much to do with anything.

Most Christians will say that he died to fulfill a prophecy, or he died for our sins, or whatever. There entitled to their beliefs. After all, it is futile to try to prove or disprove a religious belief.

Cyracuz wrote:


Nobody truly follows jesus christ. They just hold him up as a warning to those who would, afraid that if a true follower of christ were to appear, he would show us how unworthy we are of the title christians.


Out of the billions of Christians in the world, there is probably at least one worthy one, somewhere.

Anyways, the problem with Christianity is not with the individual Christians. The problem is that it has become an "organized" religion, run by people who do not necessarily follow the teachings of Jesus Christ.
0 Replies
 
Cyracuz
 
  1  
Reply Sun 4 Sep, 2005 11:17 am
I see it as a testament to the quality of this forum than no one took this post seriously enough to argue against it. Smile
0 Replies
 
roger
 
  1  
Reply Sun 4 Sep, 2005 11:21 am
Thanks. Sincere compliments are rare.
0 Replies
 
CarbonSystem
 
  1  
Reply Mon 19 Sep, 2005 07:58 pm
Not very many people who are very smart really believe in religions like Christianity.
0 Replies
 
kuvasz
 
  1  
Reply Tue 20 Sep, 2005 11:55 pm
CarbonSystem wrote:
Not very many people who are very smart really believe in religions like Christianity.
0 Replies
 
CarbonSystem
 
  1  
Reply Wed 21 Sep, 2005 01:13 pm
kuvasz wrote:
The importance of Jesus is not his death and resurrection, but the metaphor that his resurrection tells us and informs us of our own spirit, or that the Promised Land is not Jerusalem, but wherever you are. As long as the institutional aspect of the Western religions remains strong, then the concretization, the taking of the spirit of the image for fact shall reign and we see all around us the result of that.


I agree that the stories can be taken as metaphors and teach great life lessons.

Why then, do people spend so much time, so much money in donations, so many times in church worshipping?

I can't believe some people devote so much time, and money (donations and such) to a church.

If they believe in god, then that's all well and good, but why do they need to attend church all the time?
0 Replies
 
Cyracuz
 
  1  
Reply Thu 22 Sep, 2005 06:00 am
No, the importance of jesus was his teachings, not his fate, and not what allegedly happened after he died.

You shall not kill, he said, yet christians eat meat. They justify it by saying that jesus also ate meat.

They do not follow, they imitate. What they forget is that jesus was great. He could do whatever he wanted, he was a mighty man. Still, he said that you shall not kill, and his followers should live by his commands, not wade around in his sandals like kids in their father's shoes.
0 Replies
 
kuvasz
 
  1  
Reply Thu 22 Sep, 2005 05:28 pm
Cyracuz wrote:
No, the importance of jesus was his teachings, not his fate, and not what allegedly happened after he died.

You shall not kill, he said, yet christians eat meat. They justify it by saying that jesus also ate meat.

They do not follow, they imitate. What they forget is that jesus was great. He could do whatever he wanted, he was a mighty man. Still, he said that you shall not kill, and his followers should live by his commands, not wade around in his sandals like kids in their father's shoes.


Really?

Duh!

you missed the point and did not understand the context of the comment in the sentence. the focus of the thread speaks of the crucifixation as an emblem of christianity but that emblem was only a precursor to the Resurrection.

btw: the death and Resurrection of jesus was the fulfillment of the Convenant, and without that there is no heavenly imprimatur on the teachings of jesus christ. without that rising from the dead, he would be just another dead sea prophet.

but thanks for the theology lesson on the teachings of jesus and vegetarianism, i never knew that about the guy until you posted your information. i guess they didn't have any veggie burritios back then.

as to that "shalt not kill" remark, its from exodus 20:13 and it is not numbered as #5 ibn the text ...... and the original hebrew translation means that "one shalt not commit murder."....and there remains until today debate on whether it meant then murder of anyone or only for another member of the tribes of israel.
0 Replies
 
Cyracuz
 
  1  
Reply Fri 23 Sep, 2005 05:26 am
Maybe I did miss the point. Or maybe you all did. No offence intended.

I am just more interested in Jesus the man than in Jesus the son of God. My opinion is that christianity fails to honor the true heritage of Jesus Christ, and I am sure I'm not alone in this.
0 Replies
 
DeepThinkr
 
  1  
Reply Sun 2 Oct, 2005 07:56 pm
you all obviously need to do your research...

You cannot talk about jesus, unless you know why he came and died.

The crucifix is a man-made catholic tradition. what jesus really did, as clearly spelled out in the new testament, is truth. and the old testament sets up the context for what jesus did and why He came. I don't belive in christianity the religion, i believe in christianity the truth. it's not a myth. it's History, as the civil war is history.

you can't say christ didn't die for our sins, if you don't understand that term. this is the basic story of the bible in a paragraph.

God created the world perfect. man introduced sin into the world. God desires to spend eternity with you because He loves you; however, god's rule is that in order to get to heaven (the purpose for everyone's life) you must be perfect. man can't be perfect because he is born a sinner. when someone sins, something has to die to get rid of that sin. so that's where sacrifice comes in. but all sacrifices are not perfect, so this doesn't cover over all the sin, making it impossible for man to get to heaven. this is why Jesus came. He was the only perfect thing in the world. he made a choice to come to earth, because he desires to be with you. he sacrificed himself so that the world could be free of sin. Jesus was the only valid sacrifice that covered over all sin. this is the context for the term 'jesus died for our sins'.

now, I think you all are missing the point. jesus didn't come and die for us to honor His heritage. he died to free us. the Bible is a big flashing neon sign that says this, and you're looking at it and saying, "oh, he was jewish. i guess we're all to become jews." look at what it's really saying and take it seriously.

look into it, and do the research. I hope this helps.
0 Replies
 
kuvasz
 
  1  
Reply Sun 2 Oct, 2005 08:12 pm
DeepThinkr wrote:
you all obviously need to do your research...

You cannot talk about jesus, unless you know why he came and died.

The crucifix is a man-made catholic tradition. what jesus really did, as clearly spelled out in the new testament, is truth. and the old testament sets up the context for what jesus did and why He came. I don't belive in christianity the religion, i believe in christianity the truth. it's not a myth. it's History, as the civil war is history.

you can't say christ didn't die for our sins, if you don't understand that term. this is the basic story of the bible in a paragraph.

God created the world perfect. man introduced sin into the world. God desires to spend eternity with you because He loves you; however, god's rule is that in order to get to heaven (the purpose for everyone's life) you must be perfect. man can't be perfect because he is born a sinner. when someone sins, something has to die to get rid of that sin. so that's where sacrifice comes in. but all sacrifices are not perfect, so this doesn't cover over all the sin, making it impossible for man to get to heaven. this is why Jesus came. He was the only perfect thing in the world. he made a choice to come to earth, because he desires to be with you. he sacrificed himself so that the world could be free of sin. Jesus was the only valid sacrifice that covered over all sin. this is the context for the term 'jesus died for our sins'.

now, I think you all are missing the point. jesus didn't come and die for us to honor His heritage. he died to free us. the Bible is a big flashing neon sign that says this, and you're looking at it and saying, "oh, he was jewish. i guess we're all to become jews." look at what it's really saying and take it seriously.

look into it, and do the research. I hope this helps.


Perhaps you should take a bit of your own advice and do some further research yourself.

The theme of a divine or semi-divine being sacrificed against a tree, pole or cross, and then being resurrected, is very common in pagan mythology.

It was found in the mythologies of all western civilizations stretching from as far west as Ireland and as far east as India. In particular it is found in the mythologies of Osiris and Attis, both of whom were often identified with Tammuz.

Osiris landed up with his arms stretched out on a tree like Jesus on the cross. This tree was sometimes shown as a pole with outstretched arms - the same shape as the Christian cross.... oh say, 1500 years BCE.

In the worship of Serapis (a composite of Osiris and Apis) the cross was a religious symbol. Indeed, the Christian "Latin cross" symbol seems to be based directly on the cross symbol of Osiris and Serapis.

The Romans never used this traditional Christian cross for crucifixions, they used crosses shaped either like an X or a T.

The hieroglyph of a cross on a hill was associated with Osiris. This heiroglyph stood for the "Good One," in Greek "Chrestos," a name applied to Osiris and other pagan gods. The confusion of this name with "Christos" (Messiah, Christ) strengthened the confusion between Jesus and the pagan gods.
0 Replies
 
Lash
 
  1  
Reply Sun 2 Oct, 2005 08:13 pm
A guy named Josephus was writing a basic history circa Jesus' lifetime, and made some remarks not coerced by religious affiliation about his impressions. You might want to give that a look.
0 Replies
 
kuvasz
 
  1  
Reply Sun 2 Oct, 2005 08:56 pm
Lash wrote:
A guy named Josephus was writing a basic history circa Jesus' lifetime, and made some remarks not coerced by religious affiliation about his impressions. You might want to give that a look.


actually the two texts by John Dominic Crossan, "the Historical Jesus" and "Jesus: A Revolutionary Biopgraphy" would do you better.

I can loan out my copies or you can get them here:

http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/search-handle-url/index%3Dstripbooks%26field-keywords%3Djohn%20dominic%20crossan%26results-process%3Ddefault%26dispatch%3Dsearch/ref%3Dpd%5Fsl%5Faw%5Ftops-1%5Fstripbooks%5F4272837%5F2/102-6702123-8231324

Josephus was a lacky to the Romans and an apologist for them to Jews, and vica versa...and his writngs post-date the death of Jesus by several decades.
0 Replies
 
Lash
 
  1  
Reply Mon 3 Oct, 2005 08:11 pm
Thanks for the titles, kuvasz. Should be interesting.
0 Replies
 
kuvasz
 
  1  
Reply Mon 3 Oct, 2005 08:34 pm
Lash wrote:
Thanks for the titles, kuvasz. Should be interesting.


you are welcome, the first text "the historical jesus" is more of a scholarly work, full of minutae and references. it has only an author and biblical text index, no subject index, which makes it hard to look up things, the second text is more for general reading.... in the first one Crossan blasts Josephus as a sharper who was always out to make his patrons happy, either roman or jew.

but the first text has an intro chapter called "overture" that is fascinating for its exposition on what jesus actually said. you will enjoy that chapter.

Crossan is an ex-jesuit priest who is a member of the jesus seminar group. the other two texts in this area that might be of interest are the Nag Hammadi translation of Gnostic texts (James Robinson, editor..its the most accessible translation) and elaine pagel's "the gnostic gospels."

enjoy... and glad to find mutual ground with you in the teachings of Jesus.
0 Replies
 
Lash
 
  1  
Reply Mon 3 Oct, 2005 08:40 pm
Very Happy Glad, too.

My daughter has expressed an interest more than once about such a study of Jesus, and I'm thankful to have a starting place for her--and I have my own curiosity.
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

How can we be sure? - Discussion by Raishu-tensho
Proof of nonexistence of free will - Discussion by litewave
Destroy My Belief System, Please! - Discussion by Thomas
Star Wars in Philosophy. - Discussion by Logicus
Existence of Everything. - Discussion by Logicus
Is it better to be feared or loved? - Discussion by Black King
Paradigm shifts - Question by Cyracuz
 
  1. Forums
  2. » A head on a stake? Or a body nailed to a cross?
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.03 seconds on 05/17/2024 at 10:11:54