Christianity is based on substitutionary atonement. Is it a moral religion?
The case of substitutionary atonement that I wish to speak of is when God deemed it moral and just to punish his innocent son Jesus, --- instead of punishing the guilty sinners that God was to condemn.
The strange part of this situation is that God had chosen to sacrifice Jesus even before the potential for sin was created, --- God had yet to create the earth, --- showing that what God was killing Jesus for, --- he had yet to create.
This was an arbitrary choice for God that was completely needless. God could have chosen to punish the guilty, --- what most call justice, --- or God could have found a moral way to forgive us. Instead, God chose to do the unjust and punish the innocent instead of the guilty.
The sacrifice was to pay or bribe God to change his usual policy of punishing the guilty to immorally punishing Jesus. God could have shown mercy and justice but instead decided to use an unjust method to forgive us.
That means that to be a good Christian, you have to accept and embrace the immoral tenet of human sacrifice and the notion that the best form of justice, --- when one wants to forgive someone, --- is to kill an innocent party.
As above so below.
At the end of days, God is to bring his law to earth.
Would you, as an innocent party, think it just if God punished you instead of the guilty?
Do you think that Jesus would ever preach such an immoral form of justice?
Suppose you had a son or daughter who became addicted to hard drugs in their early 20's. Always looking for the next fix. They are broke and can't afford to buy their next bag. They kill a man to rob him and after being caught and tried, they are sentenced to death by lethal injection.
Would you love that son or daughter enough to take his/her place and die instead of he/she?
This is exactly what God did in the form of Jesus Christ. He loves man so much that He gave the best that He has to offer for our freedom from death. The Bible states, "For God so loved that world that He GAVE His only begotten Som that whosoever believes in Him should not perish but have everlasting life."
I emphasized the word "gave" on purpose in that verse. So now you can see that it is not about human sacrifice but the ultimate sacrifice, a one time deal and it is done.
Wow, that story is nothing like the story of Jesus. First off, God set up the rules, he decided what was right or wrong and his laws or sense of morality was so vastly different than our own and so incredibly barbaric that humans couldn't adhere so he tells to sacrifice our livestock in order to show him we are sorry, which is decribed as a bloody mess and something that is pleasing to God. Remember these are rules and laws set up by him, he could have simply forgiven us, but he decided barbarism would be best. I guess he eventually grew tired of all the killings so he split himself apart and was born a man. During this time there was apparently no connection between the two and to make us pay for our sins he killed himself (human sacrifice) so they we no longer have to kill animals to repent. The thing is humans made no sacrifice. it's rather like killing someone else to make someone else be guilt free.
So, if we take your scenario, the kid did some bad things, so in order that he is forgiven lets have him kill someone that he knows to show us he is sorry.
Given your scenario, plus omnipotence, I would have chosen to cure my child of their addiction prior to their killing someone - not kill someone else in a futile gesture to convince a third party I forgive them, too. Love does not demand human sacrifice.
And when you say "gave" I think you meant "loaned for three days" right?
Second best thing he could give for 3 days out of 13,800,000,000 years? Not impressed. Not impressed at all.
There is nothing more to add after RadMan's wilderness's and RA's comment, still
Even if I agree will the judge agree?
If the judge agree, will that be justice?
Whose purpose does that punishment serve?
Who decide that someone has to be killed for atonement of murder?
Suppose Clovis has three sons, Tom, Dick and Harry and Dick killed Harry. For Clovis to forgive Dick, does Tom got to kill himself or remain comatosed for 2 days?
To put it in christian perspective does Clovis have to act dead for two days for him to forgive Dick?
by Ron Hooft6 years ago
Is it moral to profit from the murder of an innocent man? If you accept that the person is murdered to give you everlasting life aren’t you just as guilty of the crime? If a man said to his son, let them murder you...
by Debra Allen7 months ago
The Bible says that all one has to do is ask for forgiveness. Now being that, do you think that Satan might have already asked God for forgiveness? Now before you rattle off scripture.....I don't...
by Chris Mills4 years ago
Is sacrificial death a thing the biblical God CHOSE to require or is it innate to His CHARACTER?This question has to do with the sacrificial death for fogiveness of sins. Hebrew writings require animal sacrifices while...
by Matthew Kirk4 years ago
This is a genuine question;I would like to know the mechanics of how a man being killed by a group of Romans washes away sins?I don't want to be preached to, I would like a 'rational' answer / explanation if one can be...
by janesix5 years ago
Christians,doesnt that bother you?even a little?how many Ted Bundys do you think are "saved"?Do you care who your neighbors are going to be for all Eternity?
by Ahmad Usman6 years ago
Every Christian believes that their sins are forgiven by the blessed name and blood of Jesus on the Cross. The concept that Jesus (PBUH) died for the SINS of Mankind (Original Sin/Blood Atonement) runs contrary to not...
Copyright © 2017 HubPages Inc. and respective owners.
Other product and company names shown may be trademarks of their respective owners.
HubPages® is a registered Service Mark of HubPages, Inc.