In Islam, all that is demanded as a sacrifice is one’s personal willingness to submit one’s ego and individual will to Allah.

Islam’s attitude towards ritual slaughter is not that of blood atonement, or seeking favour with Allah through another’s death, but rather, the act of thanking Allah for one’s sustenance.

“Eid Al-Adha” is at the doorstep, many rams, cows, camels, of course, are tied to be slaughtered. What is the concept of sacrifice in Islam?

Actually, there are many misconceptions filling the mind of many non-Muslims, who fail to perceive the significance and wisdom behind acts of worship in Islam. That is why addressing those misconceptions becomes obligatory in order to erase distortions about Islam.

Sacrifice is not a pillar of Islam. We must look at the occurrences in a contextual manner, understanding not only the pre-Islamic institution of sacrifice, the Qur'anic reforms concerning this practice, and the continuance of sacrifice in the Muslim world, but also the context in which the Qur'anic revelations occurred. For it seems that with many people, both non-Muslims and Muslims alike, context is the key that they are missing.

What was the situation in pre-Islamic Arabia with regard to animal sacrifice? Not only did the pagan Arabs sacrifice to a variety of gods with hopes of attaining protection or some favour or material gain, but so, too, did the Jews of that day seek to appease the One True God by blood sacrifice and burnt offerings. Islam, however, broke away from this longstanding tradition of appeasing an “angry God.” The notion of “vicarious atonement of sin” (absolving one’s sins through the blood of another) is nowhere to be found in the Qur'an. Neither is the idea of gaining favour by offering the life of another to Allah. In Islam, all that is demanded as a sacrifice is one’s personal willingness to submit one’s ego and individual will to Allah.

One only has to look at how the Qur'an treats this subject, to see a marked difference regarding sacrifice and whether or not Allah is appeased by blood. The Qur'anic account of the sacrifice of Ismail ultimately speaks against blood atonement. Allah says:

One of the earliest impulses of the human race is the necessity for transferring its misfortunes and sins to some thing or some one in order that the suffering individual or people may go free. This appears in crude and absurded form among savages, lingers as a persistent idea even among civilized nations today, and has formed a central tenet of the highest systems of religious faith.

Tonye-t:

Very interesting topic i must say. . .at least one can be sure of "gaining a concept of an overview".

Another significant religious practice i'll say is Meditation, though the concept and act would differ amongst the various religions all in all the concept i'll say remains a norm.

Buddhist view about Meditation

Samatha (Tranquility meditation)The basic purpose of samatha or tranquility meditation is to still the mind and train it to concentrate.

Vipassana (Insight Meditation) the purpose of insight meditation is the realization of important truths. Specifically, one who practices vipassana hopes to realize the truths of impermanence, suffering and "no-self."

Metta Bhavana (Loving-Kindness Meditation) The purpose of loving-kindness meditation is to develop the mental habit of altruistic love for the self and others. It is said to "sweeten the mind

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------

Some Christians view

There are two primary Hebrew words for meditation:

Haga, which means to utter, groan, ponder: some sect see this act as the form of praying in the spirit (tongues)

Sihach, which means to muse, rehearse in one's mind, or contemplate. These words can also be translated as dwell, diligently consider, and heed.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------

View in Islamism

There are two concepts or schools of meditation in Islam. One is that which is described in the Qur’an and Sunnah, another is that which has been developed by the Sufis in later times (that is, after the first phase, considered the ideal phase of Islam).

The original concept of meditation is based on contemplation, called tafakkur in the Qur’an. That is, reflection upon the universe to gain food for thought. To put it differently, this is a form of intellectual development which emanates from a higher level, i.e. from God.

his intellectual process through the receiving of divine inspiration awakens and liberates the human mind, permitting man’s inner personality to develop and grow so that he may lead his life on a spiritual plane far above the mundane level.

The second form of meditation, the one developed by the Sufis, is largely based on mystical exercises. However, this method is controversial among Muslim scholars. One group of Ulama, Al-Ghazzali, for instance, have accepted it, another group of Ulama, Ibn-Taimia, for instance, have rejected it as an innovation.

The word dhikr is commonly translated as "remembrance" or "invocation". In reality, it has taken a wide range and various layers of meaning.[1] For instance, while dhikr is commonly understood as the practice of remembering God, it has also been used in the Islamic sources to indicate God as the subject and the servant as the object of dhikr,[2] and also been directly applied to the Islamic prophet, Muhammad, as embodiment of dhikr of God.[3]
Essentially, the practice of dhikr is a form of prayer in which the Muslim will express his or her remembrance of God either within or overtly; this may come in the form of recitation, lyrical chanting, or simply always remembering God in one’s heart. In tasawwuf (Islamic mysticism) dhikr is most likely the most frequent form of prayer. Among the orders of Muslims that practice dhikr, there are some who advocate silent, individual prayer, while others join together in an outward, group expression of their love for God.[4]
[edit]

m_nwankwo:

Hi Pastor,

My view is that all pure joint worship of God climaxes with the sharing of the meal. The meal is not a sacrifice for the atonement of sins, rather it is a spiritual act  where our creator renews us with his power. The power of God (not God Himself) flows into the bread and wine. Thus the meal is consecrated with the power of God and any creature who inwardly opens him or herself will directly receive the power of God by his participation in the meal. The power thus received will invigorate the spirit, giving it the necessary strength to sense and only live in accordance with the will or intention of God. The meal is thus one of the provisions which the omniscience of God makes available to his creatures, ensuring that every and each person who genuinely seek God will receive of his power. In all genuine temples of God from this physical plane up to the highest temple of God in the divine, this meal is an integral part of joint worship of God. It is an expression of the living covenant between the creator and his creatures. The creator pours out his power in the act of the meal, inwardly open creatures receive of this power and a spontaneous but jubilant gratitude for the inconceivable love of God emanates from our spirits and finds its way to God. In such moments, a human spirit albeit momentary senses what pure worship is as it is done in heaven.  Stay blessed.

On the fifth day, of 'Inner Engineering' program, our teacher showed us one of Sathguru's video discourse. The discourse was mainly on Food, after watching it, I understood that Human body does NOT see food as Fat, Protein or Carbohydrates. Primarily, the human body sees food as 'that which sustains the life-force', because a strong life-force keeps the immune system strong. The life force is known as 'Prana'. Prana is the universal energy, sheer life force, the layer of love that covers our planet.This energy is what makes our bodies and minds balanced.

Whatever food we eat/drink, it is either positive pranic (food that gives u energy), negative pranic (food that takes away your energy) or zero-pranic food (food that neither takes away or gives back energy). In order to know what kind of food we are consuming, rudraksha mala can be used.

The rudraksha mala has a special property by which when held over positive pranic food ,it rotates clock-wise, when held over negative pranic food,it rotates anti-clock-wise and when held over neutral pranic it oscillates like a pendulum.
We conducted a test with lemon, potato and garlic, and it was confirmed that Lemon is a +ve pranic food, garlic as -ve pranic food and potato as zero pranic food. He gave as some example of Negative-pranic food, which we should avoid, example onion, garlic, brinjal etc.

A good meal should have a balanced proportion of Cereals, Carbohydrates, Fruits, Vegetables. Raw food seems to attract more prana to the cells while cooked food seems to repel it. As fruits can be consumed raw, it should be maintained in our diet plan. All kinds of legumes, cereals & pulses are positive pranic food. Later in another blog, I will post the list of positive/negative and zero pranic food.

The Mass: A Sacrifice for Sins


Question: I am a Roman Catholic but I was never taught that the Mass is a sacrifice for sin as you wrote in your website. The mass is the commemoration of Jesus giving himself for us on the cross. In fact Christ himself said, "Do this in remembrance of me."

Answer: Many people wrongly think that the Mass is a commemoration of the sacrifice of Christ, much the same as the Lord's Supper in Evangelical churches. It is not; the Mass is something more than a memorial. The Roman Catholic Church teaches that the Mass is a real sacrifice for sin. Please read carefully the following citations from Catholic sources.

If anyone says that the sacrifice of the mass is one only of praise and thanksgiving; or that it is a mere commemoration of the sacrifice consummated on the cross but not a propitiatory one; or that it profits him only who receives, and ought not to be offered for the living and the dead, for sins, punishments, satisfactions, and other necessities, let him be anathema (Council of Trent, session 22, canon 3).

The Mass is the unbloody sacrifice of the body and blood of Christ, The Mass is the same sacrifice as that of the Cross because the offering and the priest are the same - Christ our Blessed Lord; and the ends for which the sacrifice of the Mass is offered are the same as those of the sacrifice of the Cross, The ends for which the sacrifice of the Cross was offered were to honor and glorify God; to thank Him for all the graces bestowed on the whole world; to satisfy God's justice for the sins of men; to obtain all graces and blessings (Baltimore Catechism).

As often as the Sacrifice of the Cross in which 'Christ, our Passover, has been sacrificed' (1 Corinthians. 5:7) is celebrated on the altar (i.e. during the mass), the work of our redemption is carried on (Vatican II, Dogmatic Constitution on the Church).

The Eucharist is thus a sacrifice because it re-presents (makes present) the sacrifice of the cross (Catechism of the Catholic Church, paragraph 1366).

The august sacrifice of the altar, then, is no mere empty commemoration of the passion and death of Jesus Christ, but a true and proper act of sacrifice, whereby the High Priest by an unbloody immolation offers Himself a most acceptable victim to the Eternal Father, as He did upon the cross (Mediator Dei, Encyclical of Pope Pius XII)

It is a good idea to recall at the very outset what may be termed the heart and core of the doctrine, namely that, by means of the Mystery of the Eucharist, the Sacrifice of the Cross which was once carried out on Calvary is re-enacted in wonderful fashion and is constantly recalled, and its salvific power is applied to the forgiving of the sins we commit each day (Mysterium Fidei; Encyclical of Pope Paul VI).

So, the Catholic Church officially teaches the Mass is a sacrifice -- indeed the very same sacrifice of Christ on Calvary -- and it is offered to satisfy God's justice and atone for sins. During the Mass Christ's sacrifice on the cross is not only remembered but it is also carried on, perpetuated, renewed, re-presented and re-enacted.

The Catholic doctrine on the Mass is a distortion of the biblical doctrine of the Lord’s Supper. The Bible describes the Eucharist as a "memorial" or "commemoration" of Christ, and a "proclamation" of His death, and not as a sacrifice for sin. More seriously, the Mass is the denial of the perfection and sufficiency of the once-for-all sacrifice of Christ on the cross of Calvary. If it needs to be carried on, perpetuated, renewed re-presented and re-enacted, the implication is that His once-for-all sacrifice was not enough for the forgiveness of His people. Let's say that I go to my friend's house. If there is no answer when I knock at the door, I will renew my efforts and keep on knocking. If, however, the door is opened, I would stop knocking because my purpose would have been achieved. Even so, having accomplished the redemption of His people by His death on the cross, Christ ascended into heaven and is now seated on the right hand of God. His mission is accomplished!

Please read the following passages from the book of Hebrews and note carefully how the author emphasizes that the sacrifice of Christ is done once for all:

Therefore He is also able to save to the uttermost those who come to God through Him, since He always lives to make intercession for them. For such a High Priest was fitting for us, who is holy, harmless, undefiled, separate from sinners, and has become higher than the heavens; who does not need daily, as those high priests, to offer up sacrifices, first for His own sins and then for the people’s, for this He did once for all when He offered up Himself (Hebrews 7:25:27).

For Christ has not entered the holy places made with hands, which are copies of the true, but into heaven itself, now to appear in the presence of God for us; not that He should offer Himself often, as the high priest enters the Most Holy Place every year with blood of another - He then would have had to suffer often since the foundation of the world; but now, once at the end of the ages, He has appeared to put away sin by the sacrifice of Himself. And as it is appointed for men to die once, but after this the judgment, so Christ was offered once to bear the sins of many. To those who eagerly wait for Him He will appear a second time, apart from sin, for salvation (Hebrews 9:24-28).

By that will we have been sanctified through the offering of the body of Jesus Christ once for all. And every priest stands ministering daily and offering repeatedly the same sacrifices, which can never take away sins. But this Man, after He had offered one sacrifice for sins forever, sat down at the right hand of God, from that time waiting till His enemies are made His footstool. For by one offering He has perfected forever those who are being sanctified. But the Holy Spirit also witnesses to us; for after He had said before, “This is the covenant that I will make with them after those days, says the LORD: I will put My laws into their hearts, and in their minds I will write them,” then He adds, “Their sins and their lawless deeds I will remember no more.” Now where there is remission of these, there is no longer an offering for sin (Hebrew 10:10-18).

The Bible repeats over and over again that Christ offered His sacrifice "once" and "once for all." He "does not need daily to offer up sacrifices." He is in heaven "not that He should offer Himself often." Today "there is no longer an offering for sin." His purpose was achieved: by His once-for-all sacrifice, He "put away sin" and thus He "sanctified" and "perfected forever" His people.

You have two choices. You can either continue to attend Mass, thus showing that you do not really believe that Jesus can save you to the uttermost by His once-for-all sacrifice on the cross. Or else, if you are certain that His sacrifice is finished, perfect and complete, put your trust in Him, and join a Christian community where the Gospel is faithfully preached, and Christ's ordinances (Baptism and the Eucharist) are observed according to the pattern and teaching of the New Testament. It is the great privilege of all believers to meet together to remember the Lord and proclaim His death by observing the Lord’s Supper together.

We conducted a test with lemon, potato and garlic, and it was confirmed that Lemon is a +ve pranic food, garlic as -ve pranic food and potato as zero pranic food. He gave as some example of Negative-pranic food, which we should avoid, example onion, garlic, brinjal etc.

Deep Sight:



Garlic and Onions are absolutely critical and indeed fabulous for dealing with cardiac conditions, and make for a strong healthy heart.

I should know, I suffered a heart condition for six years . . .that's what got me to quit smoking, and eating those supposedly negative pranic foods really helped.

Deep Sight:



Garlic and Onions are absolutely critical and indeed fabulous for dealing with cardiac conditions, and make for a strong healthy heart.

I should know, I suffered a heart condition for six years . . .that's what got me to quit smoking, and eating those supposedly negative pranic foods really helped.

MyJoe:
True, Deep Sight, but it is, or can be, a little more complicated. I have not the energy to go into it right now, but a doctor of Ayuverdic medicine will tell you that garlic and onions may be good for you but bad for someone else. I don't go near garlic and onions, for instance, because I have GI and duodenal complications. The Ayuverdic doctor will assume we require different stuff to balance our humours. But that is not given. So the doctor would advice us both to take a test to determine what is good for us to eat. It's called dosha.

But some schools of thought, Yoga, for instance, will tell us that such things as onions and garlic are not good for anyone since they can damage your body. Here, it is believed that since it is physically harsh on your body it is also not spiritually healthy. Issue of heart or GI problems will not even come up because these problems would not have arisen in the first place if the individual lives in harmony with nature. What, for instance, the guru would ask, would anyone be doing with tobacco or alcohol? He will ask us both if we don't realise that eating animal corpses (meat) means ingesting some of the uric acid and bad energies that remain in their bodies when they die, leading to various diseases.

I don't know a great deal about this pranic stuff. Just want to highlight that the fact something is good for you does not mean it is universally beneficial. I can't find the post you got that quote from, though. Is it in this thread or from another?

Deep Sight:
Why dont we just stick with the dictionary -

re·li·gion
noun \ri-ˈli-jən\

Definition of RELIGION

1

a: the state of a religious <a nun in her 20th year of religion> b (1): the service and worship of God or the supernatural (2): commitment or devotion to religious faith or observance

2

: a personal set or institutionalized system of religious attitudes, beliefs, and practices

3

archaic: scrupulous conformity : conscientiousness

4

: a cause, principle, or system of beliefs held to with ardor and faith

http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/religion

Pastor AIO:

For a number of reasons. It does not tell us anything about defining PRACTICES of religion. I am keen to know what practices religions have in common and why they practice them, and also where and how they differ.

Secondly, the dictionary is defining religion in a loop.

Ques: What is a religion?

Ans: A religion is something that deals with religious things.

Any definition of religion that needs to use the word 'religious' is a poor definition.

Thirdly, . . . . hmmmm . . there was a thirdly but it has escaped my mind. I'll be back . . .

Deep Sight:



No, because in def. 1 it gave a def without using the word "religion" so that when the word is used in subsequent defs, then you can refer to def 1 for what the word means.

Deep Sight:

That is impossible because there are almost infinite practices and infinite differences. Don't let Enigma catch you there.

In spite of infinitude there are certain practices that are found in almost all religions. ie. Sacrifices, fasting, prayer etc etc etc. It is possible to draw general lines around what religions involve.

I have a funny feeling that Enigma won't turn up here, in fact he'll avoid it like the plague.

Deep Sight: ^^^ No, please see the bolded in red: that is where they defined it and that definition refers for the other instances of the usage of the word -

a: the state of a religious <a nun in her 20th year of religion> b (1): the service and worship of God or the supernatural (2): commitment or devotion to religious faith or observance



These examples do not qualify many religions.

Pastor AIO:
I have a funny feeling that Enigma won't turn up here, in fact he'll avoid it like the plague.

Enigma: . . . There is "criticism" and there is idiocy.

When someone says that "Jesus was a bastard" for example you can call it "criticism" if you like, just recognise that others are also free and entitled to see it differently.

Enigma:

Oh just in the way you avoided this post of mine (and others elsewhere) like the plague?


From here: https://www.nairaland.com/934799/reasons-why-obama-not-christian/14#11043223



Nice.

Enigma:

Oh just in the way you avoided this post of mine (and others elsewhere) like the plague?


From here: https://www.nairaland.com/934799/reasons-why-obama-not-christian/14#11043223



Nice.

Pastor AIO:

If there is any other post that you addressed to me that I didn't respond to, please let me know. I'll be happy to respond when I find the time.

buzugee: staying away from pork
staying away from your woman during her period
not having intercourse with your woman until 7 days after her intercourse
staying away from scavengers like shrimps snails lobster
not shaving your beard

THOSE ARE MOSAIC LAWS

Pastor AIO:

But they are not common to other religions.

Although TABOOS, the avoidance of certain foods and actions are common to almost all religions.

Enigma:

Oh just in the way you avoided this post of mine (and others elsewhere) like the plague?


From here: https://www.nairaland.com/934799/reasons-why-obama-not-christian/14#11043223


Enigma: . . . There is "criticism" and there is idiocy.

When someone says that "Jesus was a bastard" for example you can call it "criticism" if you like, just recognise that others are also free and entitled to see it differently.


Nice.

Enigma: ^^^ I am sorry I am simply not going to get involved in this thread.

Those who called Jesus a bastard - at least one on this thread and one or two others not here - know themselves and I am confident you were on at least one (if not more) of those threads.

scapegoat, Hebrew Saʿir La-ʿazaʾzel, (“goat for Azazel”), in the Old Testament ritual of Yom Kippur (Lev. 16:8–10), a goat symbolically burdened with the sins of the Jewish people. Some scholars believe that the animal was chosen by lot to placate Azazel, a wilderness demon, then thrown over a precipice outside Jerusalem to rid the nation of its iniquities. By extension, a scapegoat has come to mean any group or individual that innocently bears the blame of others.

The use of scapegoats has a long and varied history involving many kinds of animals, as well as human beings. In ancient Greece, human scapegoats (pharmakos) were used to mitigate a plague or other calamity or even to prevent such ills. The Athenians chose a man and woman for the festival of Thargelia. After being feasted, the couple was led around the town, beaten with green twigs, driven out of the city, and possibly even stoned. In this way the city was supposedly protected from ill fortune for another year.

During the Roman feast of Lupercalia, priests (Luperci) cut thongs from the sacrificial animals (goats and a dog), then raced around the walls of the old Palatine city, striking women (especially) as they passed with the thongs. A blow from the hide of the scapegoat was said to cure sterility. In early Roman law an innocent person was allowed to take upon himself the penalty of another who had confessed his own guilt. Christianity reflects this notion in its doctrine of justification and in its belief that Jesus Christ was the God-man who died to atone for the sins of all mankind.