RE: Mithra

From: Don Perrett <>
Date: Fri Apr 08 2005 - 14:07:41 EDT

While I might understand the overall perception that it is "unfathomable", I
believe that parallels can be made. As a father, I would not willingingly
sacrifice my ONLY son (I have 2). I would sacrifice a child if and only if
it meant saving the remaining children. If my house were on fire and I had
only enough time to save 2 out of 3, then I might have to choose which 2 to
save. Difficult decision, but sometimes things like this do happen. Since
God considers all of us his children, the idea of sacrificing his son was a
necessity, in his eyes, so that the remainder might be saved. Although when
one considers the fact that he was to be born again, then what does a
physical death mean to him. To me his sacrifice was symbolic of God's
overall compassion for us. To show that we all might find redemption and
rebirth, even though we sin. For here was a man that did not sin and yet
suffered far greater than we have. His life was perfect and his death was
assured (all die), but it was his means of death that brought it meaning.
If it were just a fairy tale and Christ did not exist, and there are those
that think this, then it would still express the fact that God wishes for us
to live our lives without sin and although we may sin, we may find
redemption. Theologically it still has fact in it. But as with all things,
one must first except the existence of God. Still without a belief in God,
the moral, pyschological and socialogical implications are profound. Many
today feel they are victims. But what is it to be a victim of our own
devices. Until we have suffered for others sake, none of us are victims.
Many today judge others, as if we were perfect, but which one of us has
lived a perfect life? Salvation hs been a part of religions for a long
time, even before Christ. But the methods to achieve it have changed. The
method of redemption is what becomes hard to believe. That we need not make
animal sacrifices, etc. Now we only need have faith that God will forgive
us our sins and shortcomings. Our redemption lies in living a life "like"
Christ's. Even today, we still believe that we must make amends or be
punished for our crimes. The purpose of imprisonment is punishment, but
should be reflection, so that the criminal might be saved. How many of us
try to save those that have fallen? We gather amonst those that we believe
are already saved (fellow christians). Christ went out among the unsaved
(sinners) and saved them. Many of us will gather with sinners, but not for
the purpose of saving them. THis of course may lead to ones own falling.
If we consider that the only time Christ spent not saving (evangelising)
others, he was busy teaching others (already saved) to go out and
evangelise. And in all of this there is the Truth. No fairy tale at all.
Regardless if it is historical.

BTW, I do believe it was historically true.

Don P

-----Original Message-----
From: []On
Behalf Of Alexanian, Moorad
Sent: Thursday, April 07, 2005 22:56
To: AmericanScientificAffiliation
Subject: RE: Mithra

The Gospel is the Good News. Some would say that the news is too good to be
true. How can we believe in a forgiving God, the Creator of all, giving the
life of His Son for ours so that we can have eternal life with Him? This is
humanly unfathomable. Earthly suffering of all sorts pale in comparison with
the bliss of eternal life with God. There is nothing negative to be said
about the plan of Salvation except that it cannot be true; it is a fairy



Hi Moorad,

Off List:

Can you expand on this, for myself and others if you wish.

        -----Original Message-----
        From: []On
Behalf Of Alexanian, Moorad
        Sent: Tuesday, April 05, 2005 4:28 PM
        To: Dick Fischer; ASA
        Subject: RE: Mithra

        I believe the strongest argument against the Christian faith is that it is
too good to be true!


Received on Fri Apr 8 14:09:37 2005

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Fri Apr 08 2005 - 14:09:38 EDT