To somebody who is totally into believing in one sole cause which exists outside of you, yes, I do agree with the words you use to describe it. That is why redemption, reconciliation with an offended God comes in the form of sacrifice.
For the Jew, at least we are lead to belief based on the OT, it was based on animal sacrifice. The blood was essential. See for instance Yom Kippur: the tale of the two goats, of which one was the scapegoat, laden with the sins of the Nation, and the splatters of water, blood and corn seed before the Arc of the covenant in the temple behind the shroud. And of course the offering of two doves for having born a child, etc.
And if we have to go with the Talmud ...... I won' t go there right now.
For the Moloch worshippers: human sacrifice: the Children.
For the Christian, it is the blood of a human sacrifice, Jesus, who's blood is then abstracted into wine and his body into bread and depending on your church affiliation, celebrated once a year, or more often. There are groups who belief in transubstantiation, which means they belief to actually eat Jesus body and drink of his blood. Within Christendom, the martyr is of special importance because he or she suffers not because of wilful injustice on his or her part, but because of suffering for righteousness. In a way, this points towards self-lessness.
You could go along any system of belief of the past and today. You will find the idea of devotion to Gods to be important. In Greece, certain philosophers were persecuted for not showing the same degree of devotion.
Often times you will also find that what are called Gods, is merely representative of the forces of nature. And Homer, with his tales, shows how unenlightened these Gods actually are.
For the Buddhist? It is the enlightenment through the letting go of self, based on the recognition of the human being a duality: spirit in a material form. You' ll notice this is totally divorced from the concept of devotion/ sacrifice to a God, or even to one self. Hence, the idea of atheism.
The sort of atheism propagated by the types like Richard Dawkins is rather materialistic and misinterprets what a human being is. Then there are those who love left brain technocracy as a means to control the masses. Digitization as we see it today, is one such outgrowth. Submit to your new God, the all-powerfull, all-seeing, all-encompassing System-STATE. This is just another form of materialism.
Very few, I suppose, who are here would yield to such demands. Yet, we are further down the road and deeper into such systems than we like to admit.
And where this discussion began, is Moloch worshippers being atheistic. That is a rather quaint way of looking at it, because it is based on the premise there is only one God, namely, the one the poster beliefs in. Any other is not Theos. By that token, all devotion to Gods or enlightenment should then be considered atheistic.
Whereas the poster's problems with Moloch have nothing to do with atheism, but with the worship the God, theos: Moloch, and the way in which it is done.
I find it interesting that the basic premise of this poster is overlooked and simply accepted as if it is truth instead of corrected.
To somebody who is totally into believing in one sole cause which exists outside of you, yes, I do agree with the words you use to describe it. That is why redemption, reconciliation with an offended God comes in the form of sacrifice.
For the Jew, at least we are lead to belief based on the OT, it was based on animal sacrifice. The blood was essential. See for instance Yom Kippur: the tale of the two goats, of which one was the scapegoat, laden with the sins of the Nation, and the splatters of water, blood and corn seed before the Arc of the covenant in the temple behind the shroud. And of course the offering of two doves for having born a child, etc.
And if we have to go with the Talmud ...... I won' t go there right now.
For the Moloch worshippers: human sacrifice: the Children.
For the Christian, it is the blood of a human sacrifice, Jesus, who's blood is then abstracted into wine and his body into bread and depending on your church affiliation, celebrated once a year, or more often. There are groups who belief in transubstantiation, which means they belief to actually eat Jesus body and drink of his blood. Within Christendom, the martyr is of special importance because he or she suffers not because of wilful injustice on his or her part, but because of suffering for righteousness. In a way, this points towards self-lessness.
You could go along any system of belief of the past and today. You will find the idea of devotion to Gods to be important. In Greece, certain philosophers were persecuted for not showing the same degree of devotion.
Often times you will also find that what are called Gods, is merely representative of the forces of nature. And Homer, with his tales, shows how unenlightened these Gods actually are.
For the Buddhist? It is the enlightenment through the letting go of self, based on the recognition of the human being a duality: spirit in a material form. You' ll notice this is totally divorced from the concept of devotion/ sacrifice to a God, or even to one self. Hence, the idea of atheism.
The sort of atheism propagated by the types like Richard Dawkins is rather materialistic and misinterprets what a human being is. Then there are those who love left brain technocracy as a means to control the masses. Digitization as we see it today, is one such outgrowth. Submit to your new God, the all-powerfull, all-seeing, all-encompassing System-STATE. This is just another form of materialism.
Very few, I suppose, who are here would yield to such demands. Yet, we are further down the road and deeper into such systems than we like to admit.
And where this discussion began, is Moloch worshippers being atheistic. That is a rather quaint way of looking at it, because it is based on the premise there is only one God, namely, the one the poster beliefs in. Any other is not Theos. By that token, all devotion to Gods or enlightenment should then be considered atheistic.
Whereas the poster's problems with Moloch have nothing to do with atheism, but with the worship the God, theos: Moloch, and the way in which it is done.
I find it interesting that the basic premise of this poster is overlooked and simply accepted as if it is truth instead of corrected.
Nice reply! That's a lot packed into such a small amount of text fren! Almost feel like we need a theology.win