Why weren't (aren't) we appalled that God required a human sacrifice?

by True North 14 Replies latest watchtower bible

  • True North
    True North

    Apologists for the genocidal behavior written of in the Old Testament have often stated that its victims simply got what they deserved, and that they deserved it in part because their unclean religious practices included human sacrifice, even the sacrifice of their own children.

    Christians have long prided themselves in comparison to many pagan religions in that Christian religious practice has never included human sacrifice and that Christian principles would make one abhor such practices. So why did we (do we) so readily accept the concept that the Christian God would require a human sacrifice -- of his own son, yet -- before he would allow himself to be propitiated? [A related "Leolaia question" that I have is this: have scholars ever suggested that the doctrine of the sacrifice and ransom might echo older, pre-Judeo-Christian beliefs in the efficacy of human sacrifice?]

  • JCanon
    JCanon

    It's really the way you look at it. Comparisons would be:

    A hostage exchange. Say one country has a political prisoner of an opposing country and visa versa. So they agree to a trade off.

    Man's enemy is the LAW, the law that our father Adam broke and threw away our lives. This was part of Satan's plot, to kill all mankind which he actually accomplished, in theory. In order to save mankind, God said that if another perfect man was willing to give up his own right to a perfect human family then he'd accept the adoption in order to give Adam's innocent children a second chance, which was pretty decent. Of course, that infuriated Satan since it sort of undid what he had set up.

    In other words, say Adam sinned and deserved death. That was that. God could have just said, okay, Satan, Adam and Eve, good-bye, I'm starting over. And he would have made another couple and begun again. But..God saw the individuals who were lost of Adam's children. The next couple would not have the same children. All those potentially wonderful people would have been lost like you, John the Baptist, Daniel, Moses, Nehemiah, so many nice folks! So what God said was what if the new couple, instead of having their own children, would agree to adopt Adam's children? If so they'd have a second chance.

    So the Ramson sacrifice was set up. That basically entailed though, arranging for a perfect human to be born and then taking his body away from him in the exchange, which means he would have to die at some point. That individual could be resurrected but his perfect body would be confiscated.

    So it was necessary. The LAW had to stay in place though, otherwise, there would be chaos. Without those laws, God could not "legally" destroy Satan and other angels that had become wicked.

    Perhaps the concept that is best understood by those who might find God barbaric is the concept of property rights. If you owned a garden, you should be able to decide if you want roses or cucumbers, since it's YOUR garden. God has a right to have it his way. Furthermore, God doesn't OWE anybody a single thing. LIFE is a GIFT, not a right.

    So the real judgment of God is simply this: Would you have preferred never to have been born, never to have lived? Or would you prefer having a chance to live forever later on even if you have a life of suffering and eventual death in order to be born?

    But don't worry, everything will work out. Those people who prefer to be dead forever will be given that opportunity. God is not going to force anybody to stay alive and be bored or annoyed with the other people who like God's style and way of doing things. God (and his son) have no qualms about recognizing and eliminating defective humans or spirits. It's part of the trade off of having free moral agency.

    JC

  • gumby
    gumby
    God (and his son) have no qualms about recognizing and eliminating defective humans or spirits. It's part of the trade off of having free moral agency.

    Spoken like a dyed in the wool witness!

    God gives us freewill to do as we please.......then kicks your ass if that freewill isn't done HIS way.

    That's like a dad giving his son the choice between a truck or a car........then kicking his sons arse for picking the one the dad didn't like. I'd call a dad like that a dumb bastard. Why give a choice to someone when you already know what they will choose? Isn't that a bit idiotic?

    Gumby

  • Simon
    Simon

    You say man's enemy is the law and breaking it cause mankind to throw away eternal life yada yada.

    Tell me, who made the law and why was it so important? I mean ... why was man not to eat from that tree? Was it a real magic tree or just symbolic?

    Face it, God is the ultimate sadistic bastard even if we go off the book that he has supposedly written.

    Of course the real answer is that it's just superstitious bunkum created by largely ignorant tribesmen.

  • gumby
    gumby
    Face it, God is the ultimate sadistic bastard even if we go off the book that he has supposedly written.

    Simon.....I think "the bible god" fits your description the best. The reasoning explained for mans situation in the bible is more ridiculous sounding than many pagans reasoning. It indeed paints god as a cruel, un-just bastard.

    Gumby

  • cyber-sista
    cyber-sista
    Simon.....I think "the bible god" fits your description the best. The reasoning explained for mans situation in the bible is more ridiculous sounding than many pagans reasoning. It indeed paints god as a cruel, un-just bastard.

    Gumby

    Well, Gumby can't say these are the exact words I would use to say it, but I do agree with you as this is pretty much the way I am feeling these days.

    JC, I was having some bad Org flashbacks reading your post. I just can't get behind the whole extermination thing, like we are a bunch of bugs and God is the exterminator with the big old can of raid. There are just too many factors that play into the picture here. Just because a person goes to the 5 tedious uninspiring meetings a week in a room with walls but no windows, does a bit of reading and then goes door to door pedaling religious advertising magazines to people in hopes that they can convince these one that the road to salvation is to attend 5 religious meetings a week in a room with walls but no windows, do a bit of reading so that they too can go door to door pedaling religious advertising magazines in hopes that they too can convince others that the road ot salvation is to attend 5 relgious meetings a week...and on and on.

    I now believe this whole thing is a nightmare of sorts. And yes, I was always appalled that a God of love required human sacrifice, but I was too brainwashed at the time to sort it out in my head, but now that I am no longer attending the 5 meetings a week in room with only walls and no windows the view is much clearer to me now.

  • SixofNine
  • gumby
    gumby
    Because we were all a'Pauled instead?

    That's howscome I wear me a cross! Paul was proud of that hangin.

    Gumrafice

  • proplog2
    proplog2

    It is almost a necessity for the founder of a religion to become a martyr. If he doesn't get killed early in the process he makes too many human errors, gets involved in power struggles, gets people mad at him, marries a woman and has stupid kids.

    Three and a half years is about as long as you can go without things falling apart.

  • Agent 1 of 1
    Agent 1 of 1

    To add to the posts, a witness would say that God had prepared in advance and made a promise to Adam and Eve that a seed would be coming in the future to cancel out mankind's sins. Yet, 2 questions. Why did God later on during Noah's time say that he was going to destroy everyone because of their wickedness, yet that would break his promise of the seed? And if mankind's sins are canceled out by means of Jesus' sacrifice, why in the world do we pray for forgiveness, aren't our sins blotted out?

Share this

Google+
Pinterest
Reddit