Embrace Judeo-Christian culture and values! Is this politician serious?


Greatest-I-am's avatar

Embrace Judeo-Christian culture and values! Is this politician serious?

 

 www.youtube.com/watch?feature=…

 

The apostle’s creed shows that Christianity is based on having to embrace barbaric human sacrifice and the notion that the guilty should be forgiven if a suitable human sacrifice is made to God.

 

I suggest that having another innocent person suffer for the wrongs you have done, --- so that you might escape responsibility for having done them, --- is immoral. Immoral regardless of the victim volunteering or not which is not the case with Jesus.

 

That is one of many moral tenets that have cause secular governments to reject Judeo-Christian culture and values.

 

www.youtube.com/watch?v=dx7irF…

 

The bible is a compilation of evil acts by a satanic God and no moral man would every push to have Judeo-Christian culture and values implemented as our law. The U.S. is the closes to that ideal and their jail statistics are the most dismal in the free world.

 

Would you promote Judeo-Christian culture and values?

 

Regards

DL

Comments158
Join the community to add your comment. Already a deviant? Log In
OnTheMountainTop's avatar
Innocent people make sacrifices to save others all the time. Like the Coast Guard. I was just watching Engineering Disasters tonight on the History Channel, and the show talked about a captain who made a stupid decision to sail his boat to Florida in the middle of Hurricane Sandy. Then he got in trouble and put out an SOS. The Coast Guard didn't say "Well, that captain is an idiot so no way are we putting our personnel at risk to save his butt. He deserves to drown and our people don't deserve to be thrust into danger to save him for his own case of stupid." They went out anyway to help him, even though he was dumb.

I'm not sure how much you've read the Bible, but Jesus did volunteer. "No one takes my life, I lat it down by my own free choice." (That's a scripture, John 10:18.) Jesus is more like the Coast Guard (making choices to help people) than a whipping boy. And I can't imagine that if the Coast Guard are good people for risking their butts to save someone else, that Jesus dying is somehow immoral if the whole idea is that he was the only guy in the whole universe who could save humanity from their own self-inflicted demise.
Greatest-I-am's avatar
Jesus said that he was here to do his fathers will and not his own. Not that that really changes the morality of human sacrifice.

I did not need your example to recognize that to die for another can be  quite a good thing.

But following your story above, for the analogy to be complete you would have to have the captain of the Coast Guard needlessly put his man in danger the way God did with Jesus and then have captain kill his own man.

God could have forgiven mankind in a moral way instead of demanding a human sacrifice.

For you to try to profit from that idiocy is quite immoral.

Here is a better analogy than your.

Learn the moral lesson or don't bother coming back.

Human sacrifice is evil and your God demanding one and accepting one is evil.

You trying to profit from that evil is evil. Do just a bit of thinking and you will agree.

 

Imagine you have two children. One of your children does something wrong – say it curses, or throws a temper tantrum, or something like that. In fact, say it does this on a regular basis, and you continually forgive your child, but it never seems to change.

 

Now suppose one day you’ve had enough, you need to do something different. You still wish to forgive your child, but nothing has worked. Do you go to your second child, your good child, and punish it to atone for the sins of the first?

 

In fact, if you ever saw a parent on the street punish one of their children for the actions of their other child, how would you react? Would you support their decision, or would you be offended? Because God punished Jesus -- his good child -- for the sins of his other children.

 

Interestingly, some historical royal families would beat their slaves when their own children did wrong – you should not, after all, ever beat a prince. The question is: what kind of lesson does that teach the child who actually did the harm? Does it teach them to be a better person, to stop doing harm, or does it teach them both that they won't themselves be punished, and also that punishing other people is normal? I know that's not a lesson I would want to teach my children, and I suspect it's not a lesson most Christians would want to teach theirs. So why does God?

 

For me, that’s at least one significant reason I find Jesus’ atonement of our sin to be morally repugnant – of course, that’s assuming Jesus ever existed; that original sin actually exists; that God actually exists; etc.

 

Having another innocent person suffer for the wrongs you have done, --- so that you might escape responsibility for having done them, --- is immoral.

 

Do you agree?

 

Regards

DL

Dragonflae's avatar
Yeah, fuck that shit. 

Religion has no place in politics. 
Greatest-I-am's avatar
I agree.

We cannot question God or punish him for wrongdoing and we should always be able to question and punish those who lead us.

Regards
DL
BlushingBeauty0's avatar
I hate these values you preach.
Greatest-I-am's avatar
So do I. But they are the best.

Regards
DL
chickslovecats's avatar
I think you absolutely completely forgot about Jesus. Just from my understanding, he is our sacrifice. He is truly innocent and holy, as no human is. No human is fit for sacrifice, and no innocent human deserves death, Jesus did it for us. I've even read it places in the bible, in the book of Mark and somewhere in Romans that certainly we need a human sacrifice if we commit sin, BUT, Jesus did it for us. That's just my standing point.
Greatest-I-am's avatar
Let me repeat, in essence, what I gave you elsewhere so that you might stop and look at the morality you follow.

Imagine you have two children. One of your children does something wrong – say it curses, or throws a temper tantrum, or something like that. In fact, say it does this on a regular basis, and you continually forgive your child, but it never seems to change.

 

Now suppose one day you’ve had enough, you need to do something different. You still wish to forgive your child, but nothing has worked. Do you go to your second child, your good child, and punish it to atone for the sins of the first?

 

In fact, if you ever saw a parent on the street punish one of their children for the actions of their other child, how would you react? Would you support their decision, or would you be offended? Because God punished Jesus -- his good child -- for the sins of his other children.

 

Interestingly, some historical royal families would beat their slaves when their own children did wrong – you should not, after all, ever beat a prince. The question is: what kind of lesson does that teach the child who actually did the harm? Does it teach them to be a better person, to stop doing harm, or does it teach them both that they won't themselves be punished, and also that punishing other people is normal? I know that's not a lesson I would want to teach my children, and I suspect it's not a lesson most Christians would want to teach theirs. So why does God?

 

For me, that’s at least one significant reason I find Jesus’ atonement of our sin to be morally repugnant.

 

Having another innocent person suffer for the wrongs you have done, --- so that you might escape responsibility for having done them, --- is immoral.

 

Do you agree?

 

Regards

DL

chickslovecats's avatar
God is God. I'm not God. You're not God. God created the rules of physics, time, morality, and he can certainly add rules to his policies about salvation. Back when there were no Christians, only Jews, each Jew had to sacrifice an innocent animal to get into heaven. Since Jesus died for us, we mustn't anymore. Jesus died for us, and that's it. No more sacrifice. And Jesus died for ALL sin. Some kid who stole something can be forgiven, you challenging God can be forgiven yourself, nazi soldiers who helped support the holocaust can be forgiven. No more sacrifice. Your example with the children absolutely makes no sense to me. On top of that, on my side, you do remember Jesus IS God, right? Not just some dude God created and made an example of, it was God himself. Jesus took in all of our sin. Would you rather agree with having to see people run around the streets slaughtering animals, or even children, in an attempt to find salvation? Hopefully not. Also, would God rarer annihilate 7,000,000 people who are filthy and sinful, or just sacrifice 1? And on top of that, comparing it to your anology, it wouldn't be like beating the other son instead of the bad one. It would he more like donating one of your own organs for a hospital and getting some sort of get out of jail free card from it, perhaps because he wouldn't stop getting in trouble with the law and it's the only thing you can think of that would save him to stay out of trouble with the cops a little bit longer. You better be thankful we have a just God, or we would have been wiped out millennia ago. And to finish that off, no one has needed to be sacrificed ever since Jesus. Jesus was our only sacrifice, he was a worthy one, and it was a just decision to only destroy him and not all of mankind.
Greatest-I-am's avatar
Only a fool would think God would say, --- hey let's have a human sacrifice so that we can end human sacrifice.

You will try anything to keep your blood stained free pass into hell.

Regards
DL
chickslovecats's avatar
Well, I mean, he could have just annihilated the planet and cast all humans to burn in Hell, which I can see is what you would prefer he would have done. So just and holy.
Greatest-I-am's avatar
Strange how the so called religious always go to the extreme of the evil side when thinking of God and always seem to forget his good side that can cure instead of kill.

You might wonder why God always seems to kill when he could cure and why you always want him to kill.

Regards
DL
chickslovecats's avatar
Clearly either legitimately mentally retarded or blind. If you are, my apologies for insulting you. Excuse me? I'm going to assume that you did your schooling in a second or first world country. Did you learn anything about sarcasm, irony, or anything of the such? My point was, you are deeming God as evil for preventing damnation to all of mankind. What would clearly be in your favor? That God merely cast us into Hell. If you feel like you can, try to choose the ultimate choice to either sacrifice Jesus and some sheep, or all of your mighty individual creation just because of a mistake that had a ripple effect that destroyed the lives of all man, whilst betraying every being on Earth. Until you can choose one or the other, you really don't have the right to judge God. If you choose to sacrifice Jesus instead of all mankind, then you have merely proven my point. If you choose the other option, then you had better have one good explanation as to why that is a better choice.
View all replies
macker33's avatar
"The apostle’s creed shows that Christianity is based on having to embrace barbaric human sacrifice " -- I believe in God the Father Almighty www.youtube.com/watch?v=ooecbZ…
Greatest-I-am's avatar
Belief based on nothing but a myth.

Note how much is fathomed of a God your religion says is unfathomable.

Religions are based on the lies of men.

Regards
DL
macker33's avatar
"Religions are based on the lies of men." -- christianity isnt
Greatest-I-am's avatar
Thanks for the lie.

Regards
DL
EdenianPrince's avatar
God is not satanic, quite the opposite. 
Britain, as a nation, was founded on Christian values whether you like it or not. 
These should be embraced, rather than welcoming the evil of multiculturalism. 
SpaceRocker1994's avatar
why bind yourself to a set of overly complex rules that contradict themselves at various points and give you little to no freedom to what you want to do in life? seems kinda crazy to me personally
EdenianPrince's avatar
I don't "bind myself to a set of overly complex rules that contradict themselves at various points and give you little to no freedom to what I want to do in my life"
SpaceRocker1994's avatar
then why embrace them? i can understand embracing "Don't kill, Don't steal, Don't lie, and don't sleep with your neighbors wife or there could be trouble" but a lot of the bible seems really fucked up and evil save for Jesus and what he taught.
EdenianPrince's avatar
I'm not embracing "a set of overly complex rules that contradict themselves at various points and give you little to no freedom to what I want to do in my life""
chickslovecats's avatar
Religion isn't about rules. Or atleast it isn't supposed to be. It is now in religions like Catholicism, Islam, Judaism, but not in true Christianity. True Christianity is supposedly unaltered Christianity. You don't need to be baptized. The only rule is to be morally correct, and that's only to keep society from falling apart, not for faith. The only rule is to trust God. Even then, I've talked to certain Catholics, Muslims, and Jews, and they only listen to that one important rule. That one important rule that will get you to heaven. Faith.