Gamera

Not only absurd, but not the intent of the Christian scriptures.

The gospel is about acceptance of God's love and its transformative power; the narrative used in one of "sacrifice" because everybody understands what it means to be a parent or a child (since everybody on earth is one or the other), and the crucifixion embodies the depth of God's love (either in the form of losing one's child, or in the form of being lost to one's parent). And that is the purpose of event, not sacrifice per se, and certainly not sacrifice in the Jewish Temple system.

The sacrifice language is mostly an artifact of later theology. Paul indulges it twice (Ephesian and Philipians) but not as an exegesis of the crucifixion but merely a general statement that Jesus in fact suffered and died, which is consistent with the gospel as a narrative to evidence God's love not his slavish insistence to sacrifice. (The author of Hebrews makes a more concrete connection, but of course, his audience is Jewish converts, who understood the sacrificial system of the Temple). But the examples of Paul's preaching never involve the sacrificial theme.

Christianity simply doesn't need this theme to function, and the gospel works perfectly well without it.

Draconis

I don't see how an entity which is immortal can die anyway. OK, Jesus's body got whipped, scourged and crucified, but I doubt that's the only time all that happened.

Draconis

And why, if he did "die" then why not die, for instance, so that there is no more suffering in the world? Instead of just saying "you've killed someone, Jesus died and therefore it is all OK?" How does that help the poor person who got killed, their family, etc? It almost sounds as if "God" is saying their suffering is irrelevant.

fatpie42

If we take it as read that Paul doesn't indulge in the idea of Jesus as a sacrifice (controversial as that is), how exactly does the 'atonement' work without the concept of sacrifice?

fatpie42

I don't think any of God's killings are taken as murder. They are either victories against the rivals of the Jews/Israelites (killing in battle is not murder), or they are punishments for sins (the death penalty was not seen as murder either).

greyline

From the Christian perspective, if everyone in the OT was born with Original Sin they deserved not only death but eternal roasting in hell - from that perspective, yes, everyone who died was being punished for sins (just not their own sins).

But the specific instances of God killing weren't always punishment for crimes or killing in battle.

God killed every human on the planet except Noah's family - including babies who had done nothing wrong.

Killing women and children in battle (re. Amalekites, who were killed for their ancestors' crimes) is a crime against humanity.

Wiping out seven nations ("Do not leave alive anything that breathes. Completely destroy them.") is called ethnic cleansing.

God killed David's son because David had a man killed in order to take the man's wife.

God killed 70,000 people with a pestilence because David took a census that God didn't approve of.

And there are so many more...

dzim77

Amaleq,

1. When you say 'taken on by one aspect of God' ... are you referring to the 2nd person of the trinity becoming a human being? (just to clarify)

2. Why is it not a 'genuine sacrifice'? What is a 'genuine sacrifice?'


sacrifice (dictionary.com):
the surrender or destruction of something prized or desirable for the sake of something considered as having a higher or more pressing claim.

-Jesus laid down his life so that God would receive greater glory by the salvation of many who would trust in Jesus' death... seems like a sacrifice to me... and if Jesus is God, then it is an infinitely worthy sacrifice. none can be greater.

dzim77

Humans are supposed to emulate Jesus in His character -as he lived his life on earth (i'm sure you know this ).

Again... you're judging the God of the Bible according to your own 'moral compass' and not according to the standard of scripture. Maybe you don't like the God of the Bible, but you can't say the God of the Bible is inconsistent to his character on this basis.

But here's the thing... in his first coming, Jesus came as a sacrificial Lamb... he came in peace to die for the sins of mankind so that many would believe in Him and be saved. But, when Jesus comes for the second time, the Bible says he will come not as a Lamb but as a Lion. A conquering King. He will come to righteously judge and condemn those who have not trusted in Him and to bring to eternal life those who have.

The idea in the Bible is that we all deserve death because of our sin and total depravity... the fact that we have one more day to live is purely the grace of God. By taking away our life (or the lives of those you mentioned in the OT examples) God is giving us only what we deserve. So we can not judge Him for chosing to take life in one way or another. (Besides, the death rate for human beings is 100% - we all die someday). So God is consistently Just throughout the Bible. He has the right to give life and to take it away and is perfectly Just to do so. The air that you breath, the beauty of a sunset, the satisfaction of a cold glass of water on a summer's day, the experience of romantic love... these are all 'common grace' that God affords to us while we live on this earth. If we choose to rebel and reject God, insisting on our independence to live apart from God... then one day he may give us what we ask for... independence from Himself. Of course, this means independence from 'common grace' or any kind of grace, thus cutting ourselves off from the very source of life.

According to the Bible's view of God, we should not be suprised or appalled that some are condemned, but we should instead be suprised that ANY are saved at all... this is the amazing grace of a holy God toward sinners.

greyline

And Christians say evolution devalues human life! Jesus Christ.

(I will reply properly but I have to walk the dogs.)

aa5874

I think you should verify whether any person actually did anything like the Bible claims Jesus did. It is very difficult to emulate fictious characters.