The cross

A lot of stuff in The old testament disappeared and stepped out of form when Jesus hung on the cross. I haven't checked this properly, can I just do a little more research and reply later????

Thanx :).

Yes, soulonfire, it is interesting. Very interesting.

I found some stuff on the slavery thing:

Wikipedia states:
The Christian understanding of slavery has seen significant internal conflict and endured dramatic change. Today nearly all modern Christians are united in the condemnation of slavery as wrong and contrary to God's will. Nearly all Christian leaders before the late 17th century recorded slavery, within specific Biblical limitations, as consistent with Christian theology. In both Europe and the United States, progressive Christians were at the forefront of the abolitionist movements. Many other Christians argued that slavery was Biblically justified, creating schisms within denominations. Some members of fringe Christian groups like the Christian Reconstructionists, the Christian Identity movement, and the Ku Klux Klan still argue that slavery is justified by Christian doctrine today.
Read the rest here.

This page also has some interesting facts, looks alot like the one from Wikipedia, but a little different.

This might also be of interest.

This is, however, a subject I don't think I wanna do on opinion on; I do not know that much about it, and with school and everything I can't sit in front of the computer 6 hours a day googling stuff about slavery and christianity. I do, however, recommend doing a Google search on "Lev 25:44 Christian views on slavery" [click] or Christianity and slavery. [click]

Kjersti.

Offcourse you don't have to be religious to be a good person!! But still, it's not really the same. I came over an islamic page on slavery too, if you want it. Didn't really look through it at the time, didn't have the time, but might be interesting.

I did a search on slavery in the New Testament -not sure how it's written with capaitals etc. in English, sorry- and so far it's not much good (good as in what I'm looking for).

Sorry, but this will have to wait untill tomorrow as it's getting kinda late here and I need to get some sleep tonight, as I didn't yesterday (don't ask;)). Will give you a fresh thingy :)

Love & peace; Kjersti :)

Many topics have come up in this thread and each of them will lead to endless discussions because of some major misunderstandings:

1. The Bible is not only promoting peace and a nicer life full of joy and certainly not only teaching us great morals and values. It also teaches us about sin and judgement day and that all of us deserve eternal suffering for our sin. Jesus did not only preach love and happiness and He plainly said that He did not come to bring peace on earth, but division.
Remember in the book of Jonah, how the Ninevites got saved? The only thing Jonah preached there was: "In 40 days you will be destroyed". He didn't say anything about peace or happiness!

2. Other misunderstandings come when we miss the point that the Bible is trying to make. Jesus tought us that he spoke to us in parables for a reason. It was not something He invented in the days He was here to make things complicated! He was teaching us how the Bible is to be understood! For example, when the Bible talks about the rich and the poor, it is not trying to make a point about how to deal with the rich and the poor of this world, it is talking about those who understand the Bible well (rich) and those who don't understand the Bible (poor). When it is talking of orphans and widows, it is not talking about those of this world, it is talking about those who are not children of God and those who consider Christ (their spiritual husband) to be dead.
A lot of these Old Testament laws seem outdated, but they are only so for this world. The spiritual point that it was trying to make however will stand forever more. There are many striking examples of this in Leviticus, say Leviticus 19:19: "Do not wear clothing woven of two kinds of material". If we were to take this literally, we couldn't wear anything like coton/polyester for example. Does that mean the Bible needs to be rejected or changed? No! The spiritual meaning still stands: spiritually, we can not have "the best of both worlds". Meaning that the wise (the saved) will not become wiser by adding the wisdom of the wicked (the unsaved) to it. We can learn that this is the spiritual meaning of this law because Deuteronomy explained that mixing the seeds would also cause the fruit of the vineyard to be defiled, which in turn is a reference to the people that God had chosen to be the caretakers of the Bible!

In the same way the Bible is not trying to make a point about slavery at all. It is using the earthly picture of slavery to teach us spiritual truths, many of which have to do with obedience (ANY act of disobedience or rebellion to God's law = sin!)! But in order for slavery to remain a correct picture throughout time God has provided the laws to keep control over it for as long as it were to exist. Also, Kjersti gave us verses from the New Testament about slaves or being a slave. It is clear that many of these verses have nothing to do with actual slavery at all (like being a slave of sin or being a slave to God's law). Then what (spiritual truth) are they talking about? Well if you want to understand these in more depth, you often have to figure it out from the "outdated" laws. In fact, the laws that are stated in the Bible are the only ones you should need to figure it out.

I think the cross pops up in quite a few religions. I've read things (unfortunately, unable to think of many off the top of my head - Joseph Campbell talks about this a bit) that suggest many religions have this similar root - the son-god (or sun-god) who is born separate from his father (or if we're delving further into pagan religions and overcoming some of this patriachy, because hey folks this is the 21st century and it really is time, the mother) and suffers in order to re-join the greater God.

This particularly popped up a lot around the Mediterranean at the time the Jesus Stories were written. The likes of Mithras, Dionysius, Osiris all follow similar patterns (the similarities between Mithras and Jesus are particularly striking).

The cross pops up a lot in these stories as some kind of universal symbol - the earliest religions (traced back to Mesopotamia in alongtimeago b.c.) appear to have used the cross and the wheel (or disc) as symbols, and you'll find one or other in quite a few religions today. Some people have suggested that the swastika (a hindu symbol, before anyone gets narky, and no I'm not going down the crispin mills route here) and the cross have the same root - although in the western world the one has been corrupted, possibly beyond redemption - for Europeans at least.

I think I'm waffling. And I don't (at the moment) have any sources to back up what I'm saying - but they aren't difficult to find if you're all that interested.

Hi Kjersti,

I know you apologised - I wasn't offended, more amused, and I thought my response came across that way. But its hard to tell in forums like this one, particularly when we rely on certain cultural expressions that maybe don't carry across. I only responded to clear up the point - I think you've been given an inaccurate perception of Buddhism if that is what you've picked up, and it seemed like a good time to clarify things. That said, looking at my post it didn't clarify all that much at all.

Not sure how to respond to Wimme's post except that we're never going to see eye to eye on anything at all, so it probably isn't even worth trying.

Don't be sorry, Kjersti, its fine.

When did this become a Bible Study group? I figured out the Bible when I was 5. It's just a collection of stories that are meant to teach some sort of conformist morality. If you have an IQ of say over 80, you can see that plain as day. But then again people believe in the Easter Rabbit, Santa Claus and the Tooth Fairy too so why not in a bunch of third rate stories from outdated book? I've said it before so I'll say it again. Religion = Crack. Pass the base pipe and hallelujah!

Some musical food for thought. The Only Good Christian Is a Dead Christian.

elvistears said:
I think the cross pops up in quite a few religions. I've read things (unfortunately, unable to think of many off the top of my head - Joseph Campbell talks about this a bit) that suggest many religions have this similar root - the son-god (or sun-god) who is born separate from his father (or if we're delving further into pagan religions and overcoming some of this patriachy, because hey folks this is the 21st century and it really is time, the mother) and suffers in order to re-join the greater God.

This particularly popped up a lot around the Mediterranean at the time the Jesus Stories were written. The likes of Mithras, Dionysius, Osiris all follow similar patterns (the similarities between Mithras and Jesus are particularly striking).

The cross pops up a lot in these stories as some kind of universal symbol - the earliest religions (traced back to Mesopotamia in alongtimeago b.c.) appear to have used the cross and the wheel (or disc) as symbols, and you'll find one or other in quite a few religions today. Some people have suggested that the swastika (a hindu symbol, before anyone gets narky, and no I'm not going down the crispin mills route here) and the cross have the same root - although in the western world the one has been corrupted, possibly beyond redemption - for Europeans at least.

I think I'm waffling. And I don't (at the moment) have any sources to back up what I'm saying - but they aren't difficult to find if you're all that interested.

Joseph Campbell was one of the best writers on religion in the world. I would also recommend Mircea Eliade's "The Sacred and The Profane: The Nature of Religion".
As far as the svastika goes, it is indeed a symbol which was taken by the Nazis from Hindus/Buddhists/Jain belief. You can still svastika on many houses, temples, etc and it is considered a symbol of luck and fortune. Nazi and Indo-Persian svastikas differ however, in the way they are positioned.

The funny thing about Jesus Christ though is that he died as a martyr to make the people free from their sin but eventually since God gave mankind a free will, of course we go on sinning. The death of one man doesn't change the whole human mentality.

And about the cross itself... It all depends in how much you really know about crucifixation. It just happened that the Romans chose that kind of cross to crucify Jesus on, there isn't really any deeper symbolism. The crosses were made to cause as much pain as possible until the victim died and were therefore designed for that.

And yes, I agree about if the Christian God is so omnipotent and benevolent, there wouldn't be any children suffering from famine, people dying of AIDS and other serious diseases etc. Instead the Christians excuses themself with "it's God's will" and since we are only pesky humans, we can't understand not question God. To be honest, for me, Christianity is just a very depressing religion. I was born as a sinner, I was born with a free will to sin and if I fuck up, I will go to hell at Judgement Day and spend the rest of my soulless life there for all eternity and since humans are imperfect to begin with, I will most probably fuck up meaning I will go to hell and forever be tortured.

I also find it very funny that God loves us all, but he is still eager to punish all non-believers and sinners and let them stay in hell for all eternity whilst just a small number will most probably go to heaven.

EDIT
And now when I finally managed to read this whole thread, I would most of all like to add that the Bible in any other regard reflects the society for about 2000 years ago. Some living-standards and virtues can't be followed or applied because it is today considered as inhumane. Especially the Old Testament is incredibly cruel and got a narrow-minded view of women (almost all religions coming from a patricarchal society got).

Therefore people shouldn't take the Bible that seriously either in my opinion, because well, you don't want to get in jail for stoning a woman to death because she was raped, would you? :)

And also, I would like to add... Some things in the Bible are very strange even if you try to understand the deeper meaning. I guess I could on but we are getting off-topic anyway.

Kjersti454 said:
LeaTelamon said:
The funny thing about Jesus Christ though is that he died as a martyr to make the people free from their sin but eventually since God gave mankind a free will, of course we go on sinning. The death of one man doesn't change the whole human mentality.
Yeah. Well, offcourse we do! that's why God gave us the cross in the first place, so that we could know Him even though we don't deserve to.

Well, you see, that's my biggest problem with Christianity. It's a lot that we don't "deserve", we are not "worthy", etc. As if we are compared to maggots but we are still better animals (and what says we are really?).

And yes, I agree about if the Christian God is so omnipotent and benevolent, there wouldn't be any children suffering from famine, people dying of AIDS and other serious diseases etc. Instead the Christians excuses themself with "it's God's will" and since we are only pesky humans, we can't understand not question God. To be honest, for me, Christianity is just a very depressing religion. I was born as a sinner, I was born with a free will to sin and if I fuck up, I will go to hell at Judgement Day and spend the rest of my soulless life there for all eternity and since humans are imperfect to begin with, I will most probably fuck up meaning I will go to hell and forever be tortured.
Actually, there would. God doesn't terrorize us with deceases and evil, we put that upon ourselves.
That's actually the entire reason why God sent his son to die for you, you are only human and will most certainly fuck up. That means instead of being bound to go to hell because of your stupid little mistakes, you can just ask God to take 'em away so you don't have to be forever tortured in flames.

Well, you see, if you sin enough (you are not aware of all sins anyway) God will not forgive you despite the fact he still loves you. And no, I can't see God as a parent in that way, for me personally (no offense to Christians) God is more compareable to a child because that is the logic and reasoning, you can't tell when God "feels like doing something". I lack the word for what I am trying to say right now... I hope you understand anyway.

I also find it very funny that God loves us all, but he is still eager to punish all non-believers and sinners and let them stay in hell for all eternity whilst just a small number will most probably go to heaven.
He isn't eager to punish people, you could compare it to a dad whose kid has just done something wrong, say, stolen something. Now, you'd expect the dad to punish him, right? If he's a good dad, he doesn't like the idea of something bad happening to his kid!
He loves you, and created you so that you would come to look like him.

Ehm, sorry, read what I said above. A parent wouldn't like to eternally punish others just to show that "you did wrong". Actually, a good parent would rather like its child despite all the flaws. I don't believe in punishment as a teaching method, it only creates more obedience where the "child" tries to further push the boundaries.

...I would most of all like to add that the Bible in any other regard reflects the society for about 2000 years ago. Some living-standards and virtues can't be followed or applied because it is today considered as inhumane. Especially the Old Testament is incredibly cruel and got a narrow-minded view of women (almost all religions coming from a patricarchal society got).
Yes you're right. But did you know that Sara, Abraham's (the first patriarch) wife, controled almost as much as her husband, the head of state? These women were all independent and strong women. At least that's what my atheist text books tell me.. And the fact that 2 of the books in OT are about some women's acheievements and at one time the nation was being led by a woman. Also, if you take a look at for instance the story about the Samaritan woman at Jacob's Well, you see that Jesus saw women as equals.

Well, it doesn't change the fact that there were a lot of women-opression during this era. For example, if a female was raped, the perpretrator had to marry her as a "punishment". Great logic from that sense of view. And there are tons of others alike these.

And as far as I know, females are still opressed no matter what Jesus thought of the matter (although he should be the one Christians at least should look upon when it comes to morals).

Therefore people shouldn't take the Bible that seriously either in my opinion, because well, you don't want to get in jail for stoning a woman to death because she was raped, would you? :)
Take a look at this.

Sorry, I wasn't referring to that part of the Bible. What I meant was that even though the woman did nothing wrong, she was still the one to be subconsciously punished through passive and ative punishment.