Freethought & Rationalism Archive

Ian St. Ian · 07-17-2008, 04:09 PM

We all hear about how Jesus died so that we may live.

Is it accurate to say that the innocents in the "Slaughter of the Innocents" died so that Jesus could live?

By allowing Herod to think he'd killed the messiah along with all the others, it seems to me that these little boys were offered up so that Jesus could make good his escape. . .and that it had to happen so that the prophecy could be fulfilled.

Maybe I'm wording this rather clumsily, but does the above make sense?

Keith&Co. · 07-17-2008, 04:41 PM

Maybe you're asking: How did the senseless slaughter of infants further Jesus' cause?

Or, If God values every life from conception on, how many infants besides Baby Jesus did he save from Herod's troops?

Wouldn't the more life-affirming choice have been to just prevent Herod from hearing the prophecy?
Or simply pull a Pharoh on him? Harden his heart to oracles and prophets so no blood need be spilled?

Toto · 07-17-2008, 04:42 PM

The slaughter of the innocents is just a grizzly detail in a fictional account. It didn't happen.

But if it had, you might be right.

Manitoumulegirl · 07-17-2008, 04:52 PM

And what happened to all those unbaptized innocents after they died? There are those who would have us believe that they went straight to hell, since they died without benefit of baptism. So on top of being slaughtered, do these innocent souls now burn in hell for eternity so that JC might live?

Ian St. Ian · 07-17-2008, 05:24 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Toto

The slaughter of the innocents is just a grizzly detail in a fictional account. It didn't happen.

But if it had, you might be right.

That's what I meant, I guess. I don't believe the account to be historical.

But, strictly speaking, in the context of the story, can an argument be made that they died in order that Jesus might live?

Or was it instead just incidental to his life and the furthering of his cause?

I feel like I might be on to something (and it's not original with me) but I'm having trouble articulating it.

Keith&Co. · 07-17-2008, 06:38 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Toto

The slaughter of the innocents is just a grizzly detail in a fictional account.

No. The two she-bears tearing into 42 kids was a grizzly detail.

This one was just grisly.

Keith&Co. · 07-17-2008, 06:41 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ian St. Ian

I feel like I might be on to something (and it's not original with me) but I'm having trouble articulating it.

It would make a different T-shirt...

"For God so loved the world, He let 2,576 babies be stabbed to death, so that His son could live."

Ian St. Ian · 07-17-2008, 08:24 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Keith&Co.

"For God so loved the world, He let 2,576 babies be stabbed to death, so that His son could live."

Catchy.

PS: Where was John The Baptist at the time and how/why did he escape?

Manitoumulegirl · 07-17-2008, 09:27 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ian St. Ian

Quote:

Originally Posted by Keith&Co.

"For God so loved the world, He let 2,576 babies be stabbed to death, so that His son could live."

Catchy.

PS: Where was John The Baptist at the time and how/why did he escape?

Probably in a cave with the gang responsible for the Red Sea Scrolls.

Casper · 07-18-2008, 09:56 AM

Hold on, Mary and Joseph are complying with an arduous mandate for a cenus by dropping their possessions and livelihood, endangering their lives and Jesus' too, but hiding one who should be counted in this endevour? Why comply at all?

I never thought about it like that, but now it is bothering me.

07-17-2008, 04:09 PM	#1
Ian St. Ian Regular Member Join Date: Apr 2008 Location: Buckeye State Posts: 204	Did "Innocents" Die So That JC Could Live? We all hear about how Jesus died so that we may live. Is it accurate to say that the innocents in the "Slaughter of the Innocents" died so that Jesus could live? By allowing Herod to think he'd killed the messiah along with all the others, it seems to me that these little boys were offered up so that Jesus could make good his escape. . .and that it had to happen so that the prophecy could be fulfilled. Maybe I'm wording this rather clumsily, but does the above make sense?

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

07-17-2008, 04:41 PM	#2
Keith&Co. Contributor Join Date: Mar 2006 Location: Pittsfield, Mass Posts: 24,500	Maybe you're asking: How did the senseless slaughter of infants further Jesus' cause? Or, If God values every life from conception on, how many infants besides Baby Jesus did he save from Herod's troops? Wouldn't the more life-affirming choice have been to just prevent Herod from hearing the prophecy? Or simply pull a Pharoh on him? Harden his heart to oracles and prophets so no blood need be spilled?

07-17-2008, 04:42 PM	#3
Toto Contributor Join Date: Jun 2000 Location: Los Angeles area Posts: 40,549	The slaughter of the innocents is just a grizzly detail in a fictional account. It didn't happen. But if it had, you might be right.

07-17-2008, 04:52 PM	#4
Manitoumulegirl Veteran Member Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Cortez, Colorado Posts: 1,000	And what happened to all those unbaptized innocents after they died? There are those who would have us believe that they went straight to hell, since they died without benefit of baptism. So on top of being slaughtered, do these innocent souls now burn in hell for eternity so that JC might live?

07-18-2008, 09:56 AM	#10
Casper Regular Member Join Date: Jul 2004 Location: Texas Posts: 430	Hold on, Mary and Joseph are complying with an arduous mandate for a cenus by dropping their possessions and livelihood, endangering their lives and Jesus' too, but hiding one who should be counted in this endevour? Why comply at all? I never thought about it like that, but now it is bothering me.

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.