Sacrifice of Jesus

The New testament is based on the life, death and resurrection of the man called Jesus. The argument I hear all the time is that God sacrificed his only son for us, and that only through him can we have salvation. They say that he died to vanquish our sins, and that his resurrection is proof of his Godliness.

I must point out a few flaws in the story as told in the Bible. What this has most to do with is motive. The motive that is stated is that God needed a way to forgive our sins. But how is it that an omnipotent God needs a device to accomplish what is a very simple matter of feeling? A person needs only to "feel" forgiveness. Why would a God require an act to accompany that feeling, or to bring that feeling in to existence?

The fact is that original sin is a very Christian idea that is not recognized by the Jewish faith in at all the same way. The need for this kind of salvation comes out of the Christian notion of heaven and an after life with God. So let's look at this sacrifice logically and see what's going on here.

What sacrifice did God make when he allowed his son to be murdered?

They say God sacrificed his only son, but by all reports, Jesus was back with him within hours or a few days of his death. His son did not literally die. And by most accounts, Jesus was God incarnate. Why would a God need to have himself murdered in order to forgive our sins? This makes no sense at all.

If God loved Jesus he would have wanted him back with him anyway. What did he lose? Nothing.

Sacrifice implies loss but I see none in this story except that made by Jesus himself. If the story is true, however, and Jesus was a god, god, or part of god, then Jesus sacrificed very little besides mortal pain. Because, again, he was back with his father in heaven and their mission had been accomplished. What did either of them sacrifice in this case? Nothing.

If you say that Jesus sacrificed his earthly life, then let me remind you that Christians believe in a living Christ, not a dead one. What would he have had to look forward to from then on had he lived a mortal man? More persecution, more violence against his body?

Assuming for a moment the story is true then he chose his time to die.  It was supposedly planned from the very beginning of time. Jesus would teach us and then die for our sins. He knew that was going happen. He knew Pilot would convict and sentence him, he knew in advance that Judas would betray him. The Gnostic accounts say Jesus told Judas to do it.

In that light, Judas can not be seen as a criminal or a traitor. He did God's work according to plan. He should be martyred or sainted. But instead, he and Pilot are looked down upon by history. If it was all planed out to happen the way it did, then how can these men be blamed?

If it was not planned then all of Christianity falls apart. And yet some Christians still blame the Jews for his death. How is anyone to blame if it was planned? If someone besides god or Jesus was to blame, that’s saying it wasn’t planned by god or Jesus. Christianity can’t have it both ways.

If the giving up of his earthly life was a sacrifice, why do Christians want so desperately to get to heaven? What would a God want with a construct of reality when heaven must surely be the real thing?

There are those that say Jesus lost his worldly family, but surely he knew that he would see them all soon in heaven? He was taking a vacation, what is time to a God? So what did either of them sacrifice? Nothing.

What was the purpose or need for a sacrifice in the first place? Why did Jesus have to sacrifice himself for us? Can a God not simply forgive if he wants to? Under what rules does a God operate that would restrict him in the way he is capable of giving forgiveness?

None that I can see. It is not even a prerequisite of the contract God forged with Abraham, or Moses, so why all the Hollywood theatrics? Would Christians be less inclined to believe in Jesus had he not been crucified? Surprisingly, some would. Perhaps that was why it was engineered the way it was by Jesus himself, if he ever existed, or constructed by later believers?

But what is it we are being saved from? Sin? God created sin by decree. Sin is not necessarily a moral issue, it is decreed by God. Morality has a reason based in cause and effect, but sin is a decree like the law of a king or dictator. Working on the Sabbath is not immoral for me because I lack belief in God. But for a Christian it is immoral and a sin. Yet many Christians these days work on Sunday.

The Christian believes that to work on Sunday is a sin for all because it is decreed, as such, by God. God decreed we should not eat of the tree of knowledge. There is nothing immoral in that, but it was a sin. In essence, this God is saving us from his own handiwork. An omnipotent God has created every possibility that exists. By creating possibilities that are sinful, he is tempting us.

If I were to build a swimming pool and a child drowned in it due to my carelessness, I would be at fault, not the child that stepped in to the pool. Even if I said that the pool was just for looking at, and that no one was to swim in it, I would still be liable.

Say I plant a tree in the middle of a play ground and tell all the kids not to eat the pretty apples because they are poison. Say a child eats one anyway and dies. Who would be responsible? I would be responsible, no one else.

To a god we would be like children, wouldn’t we? To expect us not to sin if he creates sin, is not realistic. If there is no god then there is no sin and nothing to saved from. It is the wrath of God that Christians want to be saved from. He offers protection from himself. No wonder the Mafia created protection rackets, its what their god does.

There is another twist to this: Why would god add the blood of Jesus to man's hands if he wanted to forgive us? Was not his commandment, " Thou shalt not kill"? Did man not kill a god that day? We certainly killed a man. If god punishes for eating of the fruit of a tree yet rewards for killing his son, what kind of a god have we?

By the logic of the story, we had to sin in order to be forgiven for our sins? This does not make sense to me.

The very nature of this god has to be taken in to question here, supposing for a moment that this story is true even in its most liberal form, there had to come a time when God said to Jesus "Allow them to murder you and I will forgive them their sins against me," Or if you believe that Jesus was the one to instigate the deal, then he must have said. " Allow them to kill me so you might forgive them their sins against you."

Either of these cases shows a God that is so vain that it requires a blood sacrifice, Or in other words: "A death." before it can forgive. I ask again: by what rules does this God operate that it requires blood sacrifice in order to be capable of forgiveness? And If their are no restrictions on his actions, then why would a God choose to do it that way?

In the time of Jesus, sacrifice was an every day thing. Today we do not sacrifice animals or people and we are appalled by the idea, yet, in the time of the man Jesus they did it all the time and it was considered natural.

Can a God not take what it wants? Its all well and good as long as we are not the ones being sacrificed. But one must ask: What pleasure can a God get from such an act? If it is an act we do to show our love then he has a funny idea of love, or we do.

If I were to go to my son and say: "If you let them murder you, I will forgive them all the wrong they have done to me." I would be branded an egomaniac, vain, arrogant, cruel beyond belief, and certainly, a complete and utter lunatic. People would line up at my execution. Yet people are willing to follow a God that says this, or accepts it? If I were to accept such a proposal from my son, I would still be no less than what I mentioned above.

The only way Jesus could have sacrificed anything was if he was just a man with an idea he was willing to die for. But Christians won’t accept that even though no other rational conclusion can be drawn.

From what I can tell there was no sacrifice in any real sense, even if the story were true.

More by this Author


4 comments

Liam Hannan profile image

Liam Hannan 5 years ago

You've hit so many nails on the head I don't even know where to begin. I'm impressed with your perception and clarity, and it's nice to see a rational criticism of religion coming out on here.


Slarty O'Brian profile image

Slarty O'Brian 5 years ago from Canada Author

Thanks, Liam. It's a pleasure to have you on Hubpages.


Vince 4 years ago

Very impressive, Slarty. I was thinking in the same lines but you truly helped me express it in a more elaborate fashion!


John King IV 3 years ago

Yes, I so agree with you...that the belief that jesus died for everyone in order to bring about the forgiveness of sin......that this makes no sence, and is in fact a worthless idea and idol that has no power to save anyone.

I would argue that this idea in christianity is actually a very modern one. No christian believed this 200 or more years ago. It is true that christians have believed in the diety of christ, and in the power of sacrifice and the cross, since the days of the church fathers, (1700 years ago or so). But that this faith brings universal forgiveness and atonement for all, is a completely modern notion.

I think people are offended at the concept of hell, and of 2000 years of christian authority, ignorance, and tyranny.

    Sign in or sign up and post using a HubPages Network account.

    0 of 8192 characters used
    Post Comment

    No HTML is allowed in comments, but URLs will be hyperlinked. Comments are not for promoting your articles or other sites.


    Click to Rate This Article
    working