God to Jesus. I just condemned the human race. Now go die to save them

1. 0

   Greatest I amposted 11 years ago

   God to Jesus. I just condemned the human race. Now go die to save them.
   
   http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YoHP-f-_F9U
   
   http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4ott15j2 … re=related
   
   http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rqP_fjBk … re=related
   
   I think that the notion that punishing the innocent instead of the guilty perpetrator is immoral. Be it a willing sacrifice as some believe with Jesus or unwilling victim.
   
   I also think that God, who has a plethora of other options, would have come up with a moral way instead of an immoral and barbaric human sacrifice.
   
   I agree with scriptures that say that we are all responsible for our own righteousness as well as our own iniquity and that God cannot be bribed by sacrifice.
   
   Ezekiel 18:20
   The soul that sinneth, it shall die. The son shall not bear the iniquity of the father, neither shall the father bear the iniquity of the son: the righteousness of the righteous shall be upon him, and the wickedness of the wicked shall be upon him.
   
   Psalm 49:7
   None of them can by any means redeem his brother, nor give to God a ransom for him:
   
   I believe as I do because I believe that the first rule of morality is harm/care of children.
   
   http://blog.ted.com/2008/09/17/the_real_differ/
   
   Do you agree that the notion of substitutionary atonement is immoral and that God’s first principle of morality is harm/care and that this would prevent him from demanding the death of his son?
   
   Regards
   DL

   replyreport
2. 70

   Cagsilposted 11 years ago

   You know?
   
   Even I have a problem with this thread and I am not religious. Hmmm....
   
   Let's take your title for instance.
   
   "God to Jesus. I just condemned the human race. Now go die to save them."
   
   If you want to seriously think about it and I have given it all of two minutes to come to my conclusion, then you truly don't understand.
   
   God condemned the human race due to sin, sin is against God's wishes.
   
   How do you know God commanded Jesus to die for the human race's sin? You don't. No one does.
   
   It is possible, God gave Jesus a choice to do it. Humans have choice. Why wouldn't God(omnipresent,omniscient,omnipotent) give Jesus a choice. Jesus was made in God's image, when God created everything in existence.
   
   Jesus could have said Father, I will gladly sacrifice my life on Earth, to come back to you and save the human race. God testing Jesus' character by giving him the choice.
   
   So, I find this thread foolish.

   replyreport
   1. 0

      Greatest I amposted 11 years agoin reply to this

      Not surprising as you do not know scriptures or the dogma it seems.
      
      Why would a three headed God need to test one of his heads, Jesus is God to most Christians and one head cannot keep secrets from the other heads.
      
      I mentioned in the O P that voluntary sacrifice is no more moral than a forced sacrifice.
      
      As to the voluntary part you try to split moral hairs with. Jesus said----my father who sent me.
      
      Do you believe that a religion based on human sacrifice is a moral one?
      
      Do you think it is good justice to punish the innocent instead of the guilty?
      
      Regards
      DL

      replyreport
      1. 70

         Cagsilposted 11 years agoin reply to this

         Actually, I do, which is why your post is foolish, as I logically presented you with a different possibility, which could coincide with what is written or believed by believers. Rationally or even Logically you don't have grounds to stand on.
         So now you're comparing the human psyche to that of the Trinity of God? Sounds a bit absurd considering God's mind would be much more advanced than that of the duality, considering it's a Trinity(meaning three).
         
         God is outside of time and space, exists everywhere and has the ability extinguish your spirit from ever existing in any form. Have you ever contemplated non-existence? It scares the hell out of most.
         Actually, it is.
         
         Is it not moral for a Mother to protect her child from death if put into that situation. If a mother wants to exchange her life for her child, so the child could continue living is in fact one of the most respected moral choices one can make. Anyone sacrificing their life for another cannot be immoral.
         Yes, God could have sent Jesus. What you do not know is if God asked Jesus or Commanded. The bible doesn't answer that question. Jesus dying on the cross would suggest he came willingly and not otherwise.
         Human sacrifice is your negative intentions brought out to those who read. It is self sacrifice, which resides outside ego.
         Punish the innocent instead of the guilty? I'm not sure what you're getting at? Explain.

         replyreport
         1. 0

            Greatest I amposted 11 years agoin reply to this

            Jesus said---my father who sent me.
            Either way does not make the result moral in any way.
            
            You do point out though, in your mother child scenario what should happen. The parent defers to the welfare of the Child. Not at all what God did. He made the child defer to the father who had stupidly set his life as a ransom for sin.
            
            As to your last, look again at that third clip. It says all that Christian dogma says.
            
            It is particularly enlightening because it shows that there is no logical, philosophical, theological, or moral justification for the idea that someone had to be tortured to death in order for God to forgive sin.
            
            
            Regards
            DL

            replyreport
3. 62

   SpanStarposted 11 years ago

   Very impressive especially coming from Cagsil.
   
   From these comments made here by "Greatest I am" we are placing our human  morality into a spiritual domain. Years ago substitution was standard practice when men sinned they use animals as a substitution for their sins. We do not dictate to God what terms or process he will use in order to accept our sins.
   
   We as individuals or as a group are not acceptable in the eyes of God for our sins. The only person he is willing to accept on our behalf is Jesus. So with out Jesus sacrifice on the cross mankind would have absolutely no way of saving ourselves.

   replyreport
   1. 0

      Greatest I amposted 11 years agoin reply to this

      Untrue.
      
      Was heaven empty before Jesus died?
      NO. Scriptures say that God walked with some etc.
      
      How can you limit God to o9nly being able to murder his own son.
      He could just forgive outright or in whatever other way he wanted. Scriptures even say that God would prefer repentance to sacrifice.
      
      He also provided another way to save us all. If his will is supreme and Christians think it is.
      
      2 Peter 3:9
      The Lord is not slack concerning his promise, as some men count slackness; but is longsuffering to us-ward, not willing that any should perish, but that all should come to repentance.
      
      Regards
      DL

      replyreport
      1. 62

         SpanStarposted 11 years agoin reply to this

         Very good Greatest I am,
         
         You are correct God could just forgive however he chose to do things differently. If we were good enough to get into Heaven on our own there would have not been any need to send Jesus to die on the cross.
         
         It is only after Jesus resurrection that he tells his disciples because I live you shall live.
         
         If God does not judge mankind what does that say to the Angels now demons on their way to hell?

         replyreport
         1. 0

            Greatest I amposted 11 years agoin reply to this

            It says that they like bible God are just part of a myth that was never real.
            
            Regards
            DL

            replyreport
            1. 62

               SpanStarposted 11 years agoin reply to this

               When something is so horrific like a heinous crime do we not at times make out like it isn't as bad as it actually is? We say things like two people were slain last night while they slept rather than saying these people were savagely butchered by some sick individuals.

               replyreport
               1. 0

                  Greatest I amposted 11 years agoin reply to this

                  How does this relate to anything here?
                  
                  Regards
                  DL

                  replyreport