Freethought & Rationalism Archive

Autonemesis · 10-11-2002, 09:38 AM

The entire idea of sacrificing the innocent to pay for the deeds of the guilty is repugnant to me, and should be to any thinking person. But as if this weren't absurd enough, the sacrificial "lamb" is said to be God himself in the flesh. But this can only mean that there was no sacrifice at all! Talk about accounting tricks...

jasonpiao · 10-11-2002, 10:15 AM

ManM:

Quote:

The healthy do not need a doctor. If you are well, do you give yourself a sickness so that the doctor will heal you?

But apparently we are made prone to sickness, and most children are given innoculations to avoid certain diseases. Does it seem unreasonable for a doctor able to prevent illness to do just that? Free will or for our own good?
If you build a house for the good, do you leave out the windows knowing full well that the occupants will freeze in the winter or be deluded by insects in the summer? Perhaps you might reward the good by giving them windows. Naw, let's reward the evil by burning the house down. If my logic doesn't make sense, then we are in agreement. My own head just exploded. (but I am reborn, hooray!)

ManM · 10-11-2002, 10:16 AM

K,
Death is not a penalty imposed on us by God, but rather is the natural result of falling away from the one who is the source of life. Human nature fell into death, and so God took on human nature to restore and heal it.

Mageth · 10-11-2002, 10:25 AM

Death is not a penalty imposed on us by God, but rather is the natural result (emphasis mine) of falling away from the one who is the source of life. Human nature fell into death, and so God took on human nature to restore and heal it.

Is there a "natural law" that is above and beyond God that requires death? That's what you seem to be implying here.

If not, then god set up the system (and created us within the system) where "falling away" results in death, so he can very well be described as imposing the penalty of death on us.

[ October 11, 2002: Message edited by: Mageth ]</p>

K · 10-11-2002, 10:35 AM

ManM:

That's the question. Why was the death of an innocent required to heal man. Did God intentionally create a universe that could only be "healed" by killing Himself? If not, what was the power, higher than God, that made this a requirement.

ManM · 10-11-2002, 10:36 AM

jasonpiao,

Quote:

...most children are given innoculations to avoid certain diseases.

We could not have the potential to freely love if we did not also have the potential to refuse love. If God's desire is for us to freely love, any inoculation would be self-defeating.

Mageth,
God is the source of life, so that which falls away from God falls away from life. It is a matter of common sense. As an analogy, the sun is a source of light, so that which hides away from the sun hides from light. Is that what you mean by natural law?

ManM · 10-11-2002, 10:40 AM

K,
We imposed it on God. Why did we choose to make it so His death was required?

[ October 11, 2002: Message edited by: ManM ]</p>

K · 10-11-2002, 10:47 AM

ManM:

So you are saying that we told God He would have to kill Himself to heal us and He agreed? How stupid could our ancestors have possibly been? Why didn't they tell God to heal the world by eliminating pain and suffering? Luckily, there are still many atheists here that haven't been healed yet. Let's tell God that this time He needs to heal the world by eliminating pain, suffering, and physical death. Is everybody with me?

Mageth · 10-11-2002, 10:52 AM

Is that what you mean by natural law?

You brought it up when you said "the natural result of falling away from the one who is the source of life." What did you mean by "natural"? Either it's something that's outside of god (and thus god is not the author of death, and thus death was "created" or imposed by a power other than god) or it's "inside" god and god is responsible for the "design" that requires death for separation.

jasonpiao · 10-11-2002, 10:53 AM

ManM:

Quote:

We could not have the potential to freely love if we did not also have the potential to refuse love. If God's desire is for us to freely love, any inoculation would be self-defeating.

Is this meant to be a response to something I said? Or just a bizarre sentence containing inoculation and the word free(ly)?

How bout this:
Can I beat my children (hypothetical) so that they might understand when I truly love them.
Can I at least leave them to get sick and die?
Perhaps I should make it so that the further away from me they choose to go, the more sick they will get and the more they will suffer?

OR, maybe I should be a responsible parent.

Either god is in control or he is not. It seems that he is in control when you want him to be, yet we suddenly are imposing things upon him when godly explanations fail.

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

10-11-2002, 09:38 AM	#11
Autonemesis Contributor Join Date: Feb 2002 Location: I've left FRDB for good, due to new WI&P policy Posts: 12,048	The entire idea of sacrificing the innocent to pay for the deeds of the guilty is repugnant to me, and should be to any thinking person. But as if this weren't absurd enough, the sacrificial "lamb" is said to be God himself in the flesh. But this can only mean that there was no sacrifice at all! Talk about accounting tricks...

10-11-2002, 10:16 AM	#13
ManM Veteran Member Join Date: May 2001 Location: NW Florida, USA Posts: 1,279	K, Death is not a penalty imposed on us by God, but rather is the natural result of falling away from the one who is the source of life. Human nature fell into death, and so God took on human nature to restore and heal it.

10-11-2002, 10:25 AM	#14
Mageth Contributor Join Date: Jul 2001 Location: Deep in the heart of mother-lovin' Texas Posts: 29,689	Death is not a penalty imposed on us by God, but rather is the natural result (emphasis mine) of falling away from the one who is the source of life. Human nature fell into death, and so God took on human nature to restore and heal it. Is there a "natural law" that is above and beyond God that requires death? That's what you seem to be implying here. If not, then god set up the system (and created us within the system) where "falling away" results in death, so he can very well be described as imposing the penalty of death on us. [ October 11, 2002: Message edited by: Mageth ]</p>

10-11-2002, 10:35 AM	#15
K Veteran Member Join Date: Aug 2002 Location: Chicago Posts: 1,485	ManM: That's the question. Why was the death of an innocent required to heal man. Did God intentionally create a universe that could only be "healed" by killing Himself? If not, what was the power, higher than God, that made this a requirement.

10-11-2002, 10:40 AM	#17
ManM Veteran Member Join Date: May 2001 Location: NW Florida, USA Posts: 1,279	K, We imposed it on God. Why did we choose to make it so His death was required? [ October 11, 2002: Message edited by: ManM ]</p>

10-11-2002, 10:47 AM	#18
K Veteran Member Join Date: Aug 2002 Location: Chicago Posts: 1,485	ManM: So you are saying that we told God He would have to kill Himself to heal us and He agreed? How stupid could our ancestors have possibly been? Why didn't they tell God to heal the world by eliminating pain and suffering? Luckily, there are still many atheists here that haven't been healed yet. Let's tell God that this time He needs to heal the world by eliminating pain, suffering, and physical death. Is everybody with me?

10-11-2002, 10:52 AM	#19
Mageth Contributor Join Date: Jul 2001 Location: Deep in the heart of mother-lovin' Texas Posts: 29,689	Is that what you mean by natural law? You brought it up when you said "the natural result of falling away from the one who is the source of life." What did you mean by "natural"? Either it's something that's outside of god (and thus god is not the author of death, and thus death was "created" or imposed by a power other than god) or it's "inside" god and god is responsible for the "design" that requires death for separation.

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.