Redemption through Divine Blood

[godnotgod]

From ash unto dust. We are the mask, the true face behind it is...dust. Hence the lamination of a "mortal" soul.

...and what is behind the dust? even behind mortality and immortality?

 

[Orias]

Perhaps a fabric that holds everything together. Perhaps nothing, must there always be something behind another thing? I tend not to think so, it has to get to a point where nothing becomes the ultimate definition of whatever is being sought.

 

[godnotgod]

Perhaps a fabric that holds everything together. Perhaps nothing, must there always be something behind another thing? I tend not to think so, it has to get to a point where nothing becomes the ultimate definition of whatever is being sought.

I think you might be on to something, LOL!

Everything else must just be play.

 

[Orias]

If this is so, then where is the work?

Is it operant or suggestive?

 

[godnotgod]

If this is so, then where is the work?

Is it operant or suggestive?

The work comes into play (no pun!) when one senses that something is amiss with the 'reality' one finds oneself in; that something is not quite right. At this point, one decides to embark upon the 'Seeking' mode of the cosmic game of Hide and Seek, but not realizing one's true divine nature is still hiding from oneself. One still thinks oneself as a separate seeking 'self' as real, but this 'self' is still lost in Identification, or 'Waking Sleep', the Third Level of Conscious Awareness. So one begins to make efforts to awaken. There is struggle; there is conflict; and so, there is work. But in the end, the self that seeks, that works, that 'finds oneself' dissolves away, and the true Self unfolds.

 

[Orias]

The work comes into play (no pun!) when one senses that something is amiss with the 'reality' one finds oneself in; that something is not quite right. At this point, one decides to embark upon the 'Seeking' mode of the cosmic game of Hide and Seek, but not realizing one's true divine nature is still hiding from oneself. One still thinks oneself as a separate seeking 'self' as real, but this 'self' is still lost in Identification, or 'Waking Sleep', the Third Level of Conscious Awareness. So one begins to make efforts to awaken. There is struggle; there is conflict; and so, there is work. But in the end, the self that seeks, that works, that 'finds oneself' dissolves away, and the true Self unfolds.

Surely, behind the shell of man is where the discovery remains.

"True self" is an assimilation of products other than our own. For this waking to occur one must of already actually known, in a sense. I think all operations then, are suggested by something other than what we actually think, but the air around us thinks.

 

[godnotgod]

Surely, behind the shell of man is where the discovery remains.

"True self" is an assimilation of products other than our own. For this waking to occur one must of already actually known, in a sense. I think all operations then, are suggested by something other than what we actually think, but the air around us thinks.

What we seek may have been present all along, and as intimate as our very breath.

It is said:

"That which you are seeking is causing you to seek."

 

[sojourner]

One of the core doctrines of Christianity is the redemption of sin via the shedding of the divine blood of Jesus through his Crucifixion and Death

No. It's not one of the "core doctrines" of Xy.

 

[godnotgod]

No. It's not one of the "core doctrines" of Xy.

Sorry, but it in fact may be THE core doctrine, without which there is no remission of sin for mankind, and therefore, no Christianity.

Matthew 26:26-28

26 As they were eating, Jesus took bread, blessed and broke it, gave it to the disciples, and said, “Take and eat it; this is My body.” 27 Then He took a cup, and after giving thanks, He gave it to them and said, “Drink from it, all of you. 28 For this is My blood that establishes the covenant; it is shed for many for the forgiveness of sins.

 

[sojourner]

Sorry, but it in fact may be THE core doctrine, without which there is no remission of sin for mankind, and therefore, no Christianity.

Matthew 26:26-28

26 As they were eating, Jesus took bread, blessed and broke it, gave it to the disciples, and said, “Take and eat it; this is My body.” 27 Then He took a cup, and after giving thanks, He gave it to them and said, “Drink from it, all of you. 28 For this is My blood that establishes the covenant; it is shed for many for the forgiveness of sins.

One bible verse does not a "core doctrine make."

 

[InChrist]

One bible verse does not a "core doctrine make."

Right, one verse does not indicate a core doctrine, but the entire sacrificial system of the OT and the offering of the perfect lambs were a picture of the final sacrifice of the perfect Lamb of God, the Savior Jesus Christ, for the sins of the world.

And He Himself is the propitiation for our sins, and not for ours only but also for the whole world. 1 John 2:2

In Him we have redemption through His blood, the forgiveness of sins, according to the riches of His grace. Eph. 1:7

 

[Luke Morningstar]

I think you might be on to something, LOL!

Everything else must just be play.

If it's "just" play, you're not playing hard enough.

 

[godnotgod]

If it's "just" play, you're not playing hard enough.

Oh? Now you want play to have a serious purpose, do you? Oh, now you've ruined all the fun!

"Shall I, a gnat, dancing in Thy Ray, DARE to be reverent?"
Coventry Patmore, 'The Rod, The Root, and The Flower'

 

[godnotgod]

One bible verse does not a "core doctrine make."

Apparently, it does. Christian Orthodoxy considers it so core that it practices a ritual at every service called 'Holy Communion'.

The divine blood "shed for many for the remission of sin" is not an insignificant statement on the part of Jesus. This is pivotal. But it is also pagan and based on ignorance.

 

[John Martin]

One of the core doctrines of Christianity is the redemption of sin via the shedding of the divine blood of Jesus through his Crucifixion and Death:

'Take this, all of you, and drink from it: for this is the chalice of my blood, the blood of the new and eternal covenant.which will be poured out for you and for many for the forgiveness of sins.'

If faith is required anywhere in the teachings, it is here, since no one knows exactly how this is accomplished. One must only have unquestioning faith that it does.
Therefore, a scapegoat was required as the host upon whose back both sin and guilt were transferred and carried, this being reflected in the Jewish image of the scape-goat that is sent into the wilderness to perish. (Leviticus), the prefigurement of Jesus as scapegoat 'bearing the sins of the world', and as the sacrificial 'Lamb of God'.

Many of the ancients believed that the blood carried the life-force. If a warrior was slain on the battlefield, it was practice to drink his blood while still warm as a means of acquiring his warrior powers.

The Jewish practice of sin redemption via animal sacrifice seems to be the forerunner of the Christian belief.

In Mithraism, the bull is slaughtered and its flesh and blood were literally eaten and drunk as Eucharist.

In the East, however, it was the breath that was considered the life-force, a vital pathway to achieving Enlightenment. This was not based on belief, but on direct practice and the experience of spiritual transformation. This, too, was the practice of Yeshu the Essene, before his teachings were corrupted and/or destroyed by Rome, overwritten with those of St. Paul's 'Jesus', whose myth is the same as that of Mithra.

Therefore, the retention of the doctrine of sin redemption via blood sacrifice within Christianity is a pagan ritual, based purely on superstition, having no basis in fact or via direct experience, as in meditation and spiritual transformation of consciousness. It's efficacy is purely a product of the belief that it is so, with virtually no understanding as to how it is achieved. In this sense, we are talking about something called 'white magic', culminating in the ritual of the Mass, wherein wine and bread are believed to be literally transformed into the flesh and blood of Jesus Christ (ie; 'transubstantiation'). The process of sin redemption is two-fold: contrition, repentance and confession, and then the partaking of the Eucharist as a means of entering into the state of grace.

Yeshu's original teachings did not include blood sacrifice. In fact, Yeshu would have been a vegetarian as a practitioner in the Nazarene Essene community. Removing the layers of overwritten Roman doctrines is akin to removing the layers painted over Michelangelo's Sistine Chapel frescoes to reveal their true beauty hidden underneath.

It should be noted that, according to Essene teachings, which are said to be three-tiered, the first tier is for the initiates, while the second and third are of the inner Mysteries, of which the initiates would not have understood. It was the members of this first tier of initiates who broke with the Essenes and became the first Christians, their focus being primarily evangelistic, rather than mystical in nature. Therefore, doctrine and belief become the primary focus amongst orthodox Christians, rather than direct access to, and experience of the inner living source within, sometimes referred to as Gnosis, Namaste, the Kingdom of God, Big Mind, etc.

Dear godnotgod,
Thank you so much for directing me to this thread. First of all I appreciate your depth of knowledge. I too agree with you that Jesus original teachings did not include blood sacrifice. I too agree that early Christians have projected their understanding into the teachings of Christ, particularly on the Eucharist.
The important question to the early Christians was why Jesus, the Son of God, had to die,a miserable death, death on the cross like a criminal. It might have been a shock to them. Probably Jesus himself did not expect it until the end. The death of Jesus was like tragedy to the early disicples. When some tragedy happens we need to find a meaning for that otherwise we fall into depression and become self destructive. There were some practices in the Jewish tradition which came to their rescue: one is the paschal lamb, another is the scape goat and another is the blood sacrifices.
When Israelite were in Egypt God saved all the male children of Jews through the blood of the lamb. God asked them to kill a lamb and paste its blood on the doors. when the wrath of God came it passed over these houses where there was blood.
So they were saved by the blood of the lamb.
The second is the scape goat which took away the sins of the people and finally killed.
Third blood as necessary to take away the sins.The Jewish practice of sin redemption via animal sacrifice.
The early Christians projected these things into the death of Jesus and also into the Eucharist. They thought Jesus offered his blood as a sin redemption.
Jesus is the scape goat who takes away the sins of the people.
Jesus is the paschal lamb of God whose blood frees people from the wrath of God.
When they saw this then they found meaning in the death of Jesus on the cross. They thought that Jesus had to shed his blood and die for the sin redemption of the people. This way of thinking made them to come out of their depression. Their tragedy became a victory. The cross of Jesus became the symbol of victory.
The same meaning they projected into the Eucharistic celebration. Probably Jesus only said: take this all of you, and drink from it. The rest is the addition and projection of the early christian understanding.'Take this, all of you, and drink from it: for this is the chalice of my blood, the blood of the new and eternal covenant.which will be poured out for you and for many for the forgiveness of sins. Jesus might have used the expression 'New Covenant', because he mission was to inaugurate the New Covenant. The New Covenant is nothing to do with the blood sacrifice. The first covenant was done with the blood sacrifice and so they thought that the New Covenant also should be inaugurated with blood. Jesus blood was more superior than the animal blood.
Jeremiah 31.31-34

31The days are surely coming, says the Lord, when I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel and the house of Judah. 32It will not be like the covenant that I made with their ancestors when I took them by the hand to bring them out of the land of Egypt—a covenant that they broke, though I was their husband, says the Lord. 33But this is the covenant that I will make with the house of Israel after those days, says the Lord: I will put my law within them, and I will write it on their hearts; and I will be their God, and they shall be my people. 34No longer shall they teach one another, or say to each other, “Know the Lord,” for they shall all know me, from the least of them to the greatest, says the Lord; for I will forgive their iniquity, and remember their sin no more.


Letter to the Hebrews chapter 10. gives a different meaning to the offering of Jesus.

IN WHOLE BURNT OFFERINGS AND sacrifices FOR SIN YOU HAVE TAKEN NO PLEASURE. 7"THEN I SAID, 'BEHOLD, I HAVE COME (IN THE SCROLL OF THE BOOK IT IS WRITTEN OF ME) TO DO YOUR WILL, O GOD.'" 8After saying above, "SACRIFICES AND OFFERINGS AND WHOLE BURNT OFFERINGS AND sacrifices FOR SIN YOU HAVE NOT DESIRED, NOR HAVE YOU TAKEN PLEASURE in them" (which are offered according to the Law).


The sacrifice that Jesus offered was not his blood but his will which is a great sacrifice one can offer. This sacrifice he did at the moment of his baptismal experience and was awakened to the eternity and realized his oneness with God. This should have been a focal point to the Christian tradition but they made the cross the focal point and unfortunately developed the theory of atonement through the blood sacrifice of Jesus. We cannot completely blame them because they were able to understand in that way and that helped them to come out of their tragedy and meaning to their lives. But it is no longer satisfactory and we need to look for the original message and truth of Jesus Christ.





'

 

[Estro Felino]

We are saved through our merits.
no divine blood can save us

 

[John Martin]

We are saved through our merits.
no divine blood can save us

Salvation is a free gift of God. When God creates he or she already saves. For God creating and saving are not two different things. God manifested us in his or her own image and likeness. Our image and likeness is already in a state of salvation where God is present. But we have the possibility to lose that awareness or consciousness, like sleeping or falling into dreams. Salvation is awakening from our sleep or dream.
No one can save us because we are already saved. Jesus did not save anyone but in his own realization he saw everyone already saved. He invited everyone to wake up from their sleep or dreams,with the word, 'repent'.
We are not saved by our merits. Meritorious life may prepare for awakening but not necessarily. It may also lead people to self-righteousness. Jesus said to the scribe and pharisees( self righteous people)that the tax collectors, prostitutes and sinners may enter the kingdom before them. What is needed is awakening, going beyond merits and demerits, into the realm of grace or unconditional love of God.

 

[godnotgod]

Dear godnotgod,
Thank you so much for directing me to this thread. First of all I appreciate your depth of knowledge. I too agree with you that Jesus original teachings did not include blood sacrifice. I too agree that early Christians have projected their understanding into the teachings of Christ, particularly on the Eucharist.
The important question to the early Christians was why Jesus, the Son of God, had to die,a miserable death, death on the cross like a criminal. It might have been a shock to them. Probably Jesus himself did not expect it until the end. The death of Jesus was like tragedy to the early disicples. When some tragedy happens we need to find a meaning for that otherwise we fall into depression and become self destructive. There were some practices in the Jewish tradition which came to their rescue: one is the paschal lamb, another is the scape goat and another is the blood sacrifices.
When Israelite were in Egypt God saved all the male children of Jews through the blood of the lamb. God asked them to kill a lamb and paste its blood on the doors. when the wrath of God came it passed over these houses where there was blood.
So they were saved by the blood of the lamb.
The second is the scape goat which took away the sins of the people and finally killed.
Third blood as necessary to take away the sins.The Jewish practice of sin redemption via animal sacrifice.
The early Christians projected these things into the death of Jesus and also into the Eucharist. They thought Jesus offered his blood as a sin redemption.
Jesus is the scape goat who takes away the sins of the people.
Jesus is the paschal lamb of God whose blood frees people from the wrath of God.
When they saw this then they found meaning in the death of Jesus on the cross. They thought that Jesus had to shed his blood and die for the sin redemption of the people. This way of thinking made them to come out of their depression. Their tragedy became a victory. The cross of Jesus became the symbol of victory.
The same meaning they projected into the Eucharistic celebration. Probably Jesus only said: take this all of you, and drink from it. The rest is the addition and projection of the early christian understanding.'Take this, all of you, and drink from it: for this is the chalice of my blood, the blood of the new and eternal covenant.which will be poured out for you and for many for the forgiveness of sins. Jesus might have used the expression 'New Covenant', because he mission was to inaugurate the New Covenant. The New Covenant is nothing to do with the blood sacrifice. The first covenant was done with the blood sacrifice and so they thought that the New Covenant also should be inaugurated with blood. Jesus blood was more superior than the animal blood.
Jeremiah 31.31-34

31The days are surely coming, says the Lord, when I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel and the house of Judah. 32It will not be like the covenant that I made with their ancestors when I took them by the hand to bring them out of the land of Egypt—a covenant that they broke, though I was their husband, says the Lord. 33But this is the covenant that I will make with the house of Israel after those days, says the Lord: I will put my law within them, and I will write it on their hearts; and I will be their God, and they shall be my people. 34No longer shall they teach one another, or say to each other, “Know the Lord,” for they shall all know me, from the least of them to the greatest, says the Lord; for I will forgive their iniquity, and remember their sin no more.


Letter to the Hebrews chapter 10. gives a different meaning to the offering of Jesus.

IN WHOLE BURNT OFFERINGS AND sacrifices FOR SIN YOU HAVE TAKEN NO PLEASURE. 7"THEN I SAID, 'BEHOLD, I HAVE COME (IN THE SCROLL OF THE BOOK IT IS WRITTEN OF ME) TO DO YOUR WILL, O GOD.'" 8After saying above, "SACRIFICES AND OFFERINGS AND WHOLE BURNT OFFERINGS AND sacrifices FOR SIN YOU HAVE NOT DESIRED, NOR HAVE YOU TAKEN PLEASURE in them" (which are offered according to the Law).


The sacrifice that Jesus offered was not his blood but his will which is a great sacrifice one can offer. This sacrifice he did at the moment of his baptismal experience and was awakened to the eternity and realized his oneness with God. This should have been a focal point to the Christian tradition but they made the cross the focal point and unfortunately developed the theory of atonement through the blood sacrifice of Jesus. We cannot completely blame them because they were able to understand in that way and that helped them to come out of their tragedy and meaning to their lives. But it is no longer satisfactory and we need to look for the original message and truth of Jesus Christ.

'

Yes, I think you hit all the nails squarely on the head in this post.

I think early man associated the life force with the blood, as it seemed obvious that if a man bled profusely he could die due to lack of blood. So they assigned a greater power to the blood than it actually possessed. In all of the examples you pointed out, it is transference of one's burden to the host that occurs. Jesus carries the 'sins of the world' upon his shoulders. The other element is innocence which means purity. The Paschal Lamb is such an image, but Jesus, the Son of God, is the only truly acceptable host in the eyes of God, whose sacrifice can calm His wrath over man's sins.

To become a Christian, all one need do is kneel and proclaim Jesus as one's Lord and Savior, and he is that simply because of the power of his redeeming divine blood. There is nothing to understand. That is why Rome wanted this doctrine to replace the more difficult breath-related practices of Yeshu. Blood sacrifice had a wider appeal, and if you want to convert tens of thousands of pagans who already had the promise of eternal life in Mithra, what do you do?

The Essene-Nazarene view is that the first Christians were Essene initiates who broke off from the outer three of their three tiered teachings, the outer being more evangelical, while the inner two had more to do with the secret mysteries. The initiates did not understand the inner two teachings. Is it any wonder that modern Christians also are mainly Evangelical.

All of this points to a need for a mystical understanding of Christianity, as the male God of the Law and mere Obedience is insufficient. Today, you see many seeking spiritual nourishment in mystical feminine/nature-based practices such as Zen, Wicca, Yoga, New Age, Sufism, Taoism, and others, much to the chagrin of the paranoid Catholic Church, which is busy trying to stamp out interest in such things, even labeling them as 'Satanic'. Even Evolution is targeted.

There are some things which stand out of the scriptures which are tell-tale of Yeshu's Eastern teachings, particularly his words from the cross:

'Father, forgive them, for they know not what they do'

Yeshu is not asking forgiveness for their sin, but for their ignorance, and as we know, it is ignorance that is the focus of Buddhism.

 

[John Martin]

Yes, I think you hit all the nails squarely on the head in this post.

I think early man associated the life force with the blood, as it seemed obvious that if a man bled profusely he could die due to lack of blood. So they assigned a greater power to the blood than it actually possessed. In all of the examples you pointed out, it is transference of one's burden to the host that occurs. Jesus carries the 'sins of the world' upon his shoulders. The other element is innocence which means purity. The Paschal Lamb is such an image, but Jesus, the Son of God, is the only truly acceptable host in the eyes of God, whose sacrifice can calm His wrath over man's sins.

To become a Christian, all one need do is kneel and proclaim Jesus as one's Lord and Savior, and he is that simply because of the power of his redeeming divine blood. There is nothing to understand. That is why Rome wanted this doctrine to replace the more difficult breath-related practices of Yeshu. Blood sacrifice had a wider appeal, and if you want to convert tens of thousands of pagans who already had the promise of eternal life in Mithra, what do you do?

The Essene-Nazarene view is that the first Christians were Essene initiates who broke off from the outer three of their three tiered teachings, the outer being more evangelical, while the inner two had more to do with the secret mysteries. The initiates did not understand the inner two teachings. Is it any wonder that modern Christians also are mainly Evangelical.

All of this points to a need for a mystical understanding of Christianity, as the male God of the Law and mere Obedience is insufficient. Today, you see many seeking spiritual nourishment in mystical feminine/nature-based practices such as Zen, Wicca, Yoga, New Age, Sufism, Taoism, and others, much to the chagrin of the paranoid Catholic Church, which is busy trying to stamp out interest in such things, even labeling them as 'Satanic'. Even Evolution is targeted.

There are some things which stand out of the scriptures which are tell-tale of Yeshu's Eastern teachings, particularly his words from the cross:

'Father, forgive them, for they know not what they do'

Yeshu is not asking forgiveness for their sin, but for their ignorance, and as we know, it is ignorance that is the focus of Buddhism.

Thank you so much. Yes Jesus was not asking forgiveness of their sin but for their ignorance.
It is true that ignorance is the focus of Buddhism. When it comes to the Biblical teaching there are some similarities:
Buddhism begins with desire being the cause of suffering.
Desire has to be stopped. It is later thinkers who introduced the concept of ignorance being the cause of desire. Hence in order to be free from suffering we need to be free from ignorance.
The summary of the story of Garden of Eden is:
There is suffering in the world( man has to suffer, woman has to suffer, serpent has to suffer, and creation has to suffer).
The cause of suffering is desire( to become like God).
The cause of desire is ignorance( not being aware of that they are already like God).
Hence to be free from suffering one need to be free from ignorance.

Hinduism also says:
there is suffering in the world( the life of samsara).
The cause of suffering is desire.
The cause of desire is ignorance.
The cause of ignorance is the forget fullness of one's true self.
Hence in order to be free from suffering one has to be free from ignorance by realizing one's true self. This is called self realization.

The fundamental question is how the ignorance came to be? I have not come across a satisfying answer either in Buddhism or Hinduism.
Christian tradition speaks of original sin. When we are born we are in a state of original ignorance. Christianity calls this original ignorance as original sin.
Ignorance does not come from the past. Everyone begins with that. This ignorance produces desire and the whole process of becoming. Hinduism and Buddhism call this process as samsara. Ignorance belongs to the evolutionary process of our spiritual growth. We cannot avoid it. We need to go through it. Christian tradition or Catholic tradition calls it Felix Culpa: happy Fault.
They sing during the Easter vigil, O Happy and Necessary Fault of Adam that brought the saviour into this world.

 

[Estro Felino]

We are not saved by our merits. Meritorious life may prepare for awakening but not necessarily. It may also lead people to self-righteousness. Jesus said to the scribe and pharisees( self righteous people)that the tax collectors, prostitutes and sinners may enter the kingdom before them. What is needed is awakening, going beyond merits and demerits, into the realm of grace or unconditional love of God.

yes we are. because even meritorious atheists are saved, because of their merits