Posted on 06/16/2005 7:34:16 AM PDT by Junior
Boys from Africa are being murdered as human sacrif ices in London churches.
They are brought into the capital to be offered up in rituals by fundamentalist Christian sects, according to a shocking report by Scotland Yard.
[snip]
(Excerpt) Read more at thisislondon.com ...
25) After the same manner also he took the cup, when he had supped saying, "this cup is the new testament in my blood, this do ye, as oft as ye drink it, in remembrance It's symbolic. Done in rememberance. When you take communion, you accept Christ as your savior, his covanent, his sacrafice
The Christians from the actual period of time that the accusations were flying around seem to disagree with you. If you are going to insult Junior for what he said, you might as well insult them as well.
Secondly, I find it interesting that you quote 1Cor 11:24, and that for the quotation to support your position you must insert [symbolic of]. Those clarifying remarks are not representative of the actual words, which literally mean "this is" (they are not really clarifying remarks, but rather insertations which twist the actual words to say the opposite of what is being said).
And, yes, the Eucharist is offered in rememberance of Christ. That does not necessarily mean that Christ is not present in the Eucharist, unless you assume so at the outset.
Yes, but it does not follow logically that such therefore makes it symbolic. We accept Christ's covenant and his sacrifice as we take him within us, body and blood. It actually makes the acceptance of Christ's covenant and his sacrifice in the act that much more profound.
> those people thought they were destroying God's enemies
A perfectly valid definition of "sacrifice."
well, It's a little more than Symbolic. It's also acceptance of christs testament, acleansing, and a vow of sorts.
Christ is the bread of life. The lamb of God. he replaced the sacrafice the Jews used to do on the alter.
Certainly not "cannabolism".
> I am disagreeing with your premise that they undertook these actions with the desire to "appease God" in the first place. I believe that many sincerely thought the people in question were witches, but that they burned them out of a belief they were doing harm to society rather than to appease God
In Pre-Christian Europe, witches were not automatically assumed to be evil. In fact, it was a much sought-after profession in many regions. "Witch = evil" really only began when the Church took over. As a consequence, wiping out witches was a *religious* task - at least as far as most peopel thought. Yes, there were always the ones who'd burn some cranky old lady to steal her farm, but nevertheless the bulk of everyone who took part in such things thought that witches were an affront to God. That whole "shall not suffer a witch to live" thing.
Er, out of curiousity, how does destroying someone's enemies become a 'perfectly valid definition of "sacrifice"'? I think you are stretching it a little here.
Perhaps you ought to define what you mean by "sacrifice"...
"none of our business....
====right , let's move on, nothing to see here, it's just human sacrifice.....
But the article finally made sense when it clarified that these sacrifices are done by Africans living in England, and not carried out, say, by THE CHURCH OF ENGLAND. Why oh
why were these people ever allowed into Western cultures, which already have their own problems?
Yes. The first and principal effect of the Holy Eucharist is union with Christ.
Communion is meant to mean the actual reception of the Sacrament of the Eucharist.
An in depth understanding can be found here.
www.newadvent.org/cathen/05584a.htm
I think the key thing here, is that almost all the witdh-burning, superstition-based executions, punishments, tortures, etc, were church-backed and supported by the clergy. For justification against evil, God/the church was usually invoked.
Nope, not cannibalism...I like to think of it like the beating of a heart sending it's life throughout the body.
We are the body of Christ, and like in the legend of the Pelican who feeds her babies with blood from her own breast, Jesus feeds us with his self to sustain us.
I can see where you are going in your logic, but I perceive that the problem comes about in our definitions of "sacrifice". You seem to be defining "human sacrifice" as any taking of life on religious or semi-religious grounds. Most of the people you are arguing with would define a human sacrifice as an act of offering something to a deity in propitiation or homage. That is more or less the intention of the so-called "Christian Fundamentalists" in the article. Would you argue that such was the intention of Christians in past ages?
I would put forward that Christians were certainly responsible for violent acts based on religious grounds, but that those acts are not necessarily "human sacrifices" per se, and that to paint them as such is a stretch.
Actually, it was the witches that burned Christians at the stake in a frame-up/cover-up scandal to enable witchcraft to continue in that region. Some deals were cut and scapegots were rounded up. Unfortunately, modern day history has been purged of the truth in order to keep the war against Christians going.
Could be, but police did investigate at least one suspicious death in connection with this.
Protestants consider it to be symbolic. Catholics do not.
Oh, but my point is that simply that such does not make it human sacrifice, such as we find in the churches presented by the article.
Anyone who claims it to be an act of cannabolism deserves more than and insult
Again wrong. You simply aren't understanding. The deeds of people have changed from time to time but not Christianity. People sin. There is nothing in following Christ that has led them to this. Admittedly, this is one of those absolutes people have so much trouble with these days.
And if you were not trying to imply a causality between Christianity and the atrocious activities you mentioned then you were engaged in nothing more than useless trivia( i.e. people wearing red socks eat 1.00348 times as many corndogs as people who wear blue socks).
So do all the people that want to wipe every Muslim off the face of the earth, want to appease God or destroy His enemies?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.