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 ...
Of course. But the beauty of the doctrine is that not only does the Sacrament represent union with Christ, but receiving that unity with Christ also implies receiving his covenant as well. That is why, during the consecration of the cup, the priest says, "This is the cup of my blood, the blood of the new and everlasting covenant...".
Through Communion we accept Christ in so many more ways than simply physically within us.
It seems like a lot of times, in these kinds of discussions, it comes down to...'what the definition of.....is'!!
Mr. Clinton may have been on to something??!!
No, it was because they were Jewish. Cannibalism (eating the body) is verboten to Jews. Jews also consider the blood to be life itself. Kosher slaughter requires the animal be exsanguinated and the blood disposed of properly because it is the very life of the animal. There are prohibitions in the OT against partaking of blood, so when Jesus uttered those words he made a lot of people uncomfortable.
I don't think he was claiming reception of the Eucharist to be an act of cannibalism, but was rather pointing out how Romans could perceive such a claim to be cannibalism.
You still are having problems with reading comprehension, aren't you? I never claimed those were my beliefs and that should've been apparent from the post to which I was replying.
LOL...
Definitions are important. Words mean things. If two people are talking about something, and mean two different things by the same word, they are hardly talking about the same thing!
Any decent discussion or debate requires that people agree upon what they mean by particular words. That is why Socrates often insisted on clarifying what people meant when they put forward certain concepts.
Of course, when it comes to words like "is"... I suppose there's not much room for debate. ;)
"..but to call it a waste of disk space sounds like you want to suppress it because you find it reprehensible."
Sorry. Perhaps I simply over reacted.
> how does destroying someone's enemies become a 'perfectly valid definition of "sacrifice"'?
When you kill them because a god or gods told you to.
> Perhaps you ought to define what you mean by "sacrifice"...
In this context... killing someone (or something) to appease a god: either because you *think* it will appease said god, or because that god, or his priests, have told you that it would appease said god.
That's what makes all these kinds of discussions relative...when nothing can be proven, it then depends on whichever definition is used.
This is why I believe there are no moral absolutes.
> 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. ... Would you argue that such was the intention of Christians in past ages?
In many cases, yes. And in the OT, rather commonly... whole regions were said to be wiped out because the Israelites were informed that that is what God wanted. Now, they hardly went to war and wiped out their neighbors to make God *mad.*
I suppose we ought to refer to the dictionary:
Dictionary.com defines sacrifice as:
1.
a. The act of offering something to a deity in propitiation or homage, especially the ritual slaughter of an animal or a person.
b. A victim offered in this way.
2.
a. Forfeiture of something highly valued for the sake of one considered to have a greater value or claim.
b. Something so forfeited.
3.
a. Relinquishment of something at less than its presumed value.
b. Something so relinquished.
c. A loss so sustained.
4. Baseball. A sacrifice hit or sacrifice fly.
The most pertinent definition is #1. By this definition, a human sacrifice would be The act of offering of a human being to a deity in propitiation or homage. Understood in this light, what you are arguing is not a human sacrifice, as the killing of witches was not the offering of a human being to a deity in propitiation or homage.
I should add that if I accepted your definition I would agree with you on the point entirely, but I simply do not consider what you are arguing to be a human sacrifice.
Of course, there is always the dictionary...
Words mean what society accepts them as meaning - a word is merely a vehicle for expressing a concept. Words, of course, can mean different things to different people. It is all arbitrary, of course, but that's the fun of language as a means of expressing thoughts and ideas. :)
I see def'n 1A to be perfectly appropriate. "The act of offering something to a deity in propitiation or homage" seems a good description of killing people because a deity tells you to.
I should also point out that I see suicide bombers in the same light... killing people becase (they think) a deity wants them to.
But this ain't worth argueing over, IMO.
I should add that by the definition I mentioned, a "sacrifice" necessitates an act of "offering", especially in a ritualistic manner. Witches were not "offered", they were merely killed. A legalistic point? Maybe. But I'd posit that it's essential to the definition.
"These "Christians" are like Haitian "Christians." They have basically changed the designation of the shaman to pastor and the names of their gods and godlets and spirits to the names of Saints or they become "angels." Their practices become "excorcism" and "laying on of hands" (which has very different connotations to these folks)."
Am aware. Sorry to all that had replied to me, I have been busy elsewhere on this site trying to explain to some why things are taking a quite dramatic change for the better in Iraq. I really should not have started into this post.
This is not an urban legend.
A couple of years ago the mutilitated torso of an African boy was fished out of the river Tahmes. The police conclusion was that they boy had been killed as part of some kind of ritual sacrifice.
Even more recently two women and a man of African origin were convicted of torturing and attempting to drown a young relative in their care because they believed her to be a witch.
Unsurprisingly, given these kinds of crimes coming to light, Scotland Yard is focusing it's attention on what may be happening in certain sections of the Afrcian community in London, and certain religious sects which seem to promote (or at least accept) these kinds of acts.
At any rate, I enjoyed the discussion (I tend to enjoy my discussions here, as long as they don't devolve into ad hominem), but my dog is going to be very upset if she doesn't get out for a walk soon.
FReegards!
There are many different Christian denominations and countless interpretations of the Bible, even today.
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.