Freethought & Rationalism ArchiveThe archives are read only. |
10-18-2002, 03:08 PM | #11 | |
Veteran Member
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: southeast
Posts: 2,526
|
Quote:
What type of sick god would make a painful murder a precondition for forgiveness? Besides, I believe Jesus was actually stoned to death by the Sanhedrin for blasphemy. The corpse was then hung on a tree. |
|
10-18-2002, 10:28 PM | #12 |
New Member
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: USA
Posts: 3
|
The sacrifice that Jesus made kept us away from eternal damnation. He did what he did, those three horrible days, so we won't suffer but spend eteranal life with him. This means that we do make mistakes but his sacrfice took away our eternal punishment.
|
10-18-2002, 11:04 PM | #13 | |
Regular Member
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: CA
Posts: 217
|
Quote:
|
|
10-19-2002, 03:45 AM | #14 |
Regular Member
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: UK
Posts: 227
|
A few points:
#1. Justice entails giving people exactly what they are deserving of. Jesus is not supposed to have been deserving of any punishment, hence it was unjust for him to be sent to suffer for our sins. If we deserved punishment from God, then that's what justice dictates we ought to have received. Punishing innocent people in the place of guilty ones is called "a miscarriage of justice," and is repugnant. Any religion founded on the glorification of a miscarriage of justice is similarly repugnant. It might be said that Jesus "took our guilt upon himself" and hence he came to deserve our punishment. However, that notion is incoherent. By definition, people can only be guilty for the crimes that they actually committed. Since it is incoherent to say that Jesus committed the crimes that we committed (and not him), it is incoherent to say that Jesus took our guilt upon himself. #2 What did the crucifixion achieve, such that it was logically impossible for an omnipotent being to achieve that goal by less harmful means? It is hard to conceive of a single sensible candidate. You say that Jesus had to suffer to provide the "needed way of salvation." How about if instead of being crucified, Jesus had stubbed his big toe? In that case he would have suffered, so why would that not have provided "the needed way of salvation"? Furthermore, do you think that God's goal could have been achieved if Jesus had instead died of cancer, had instead been stoned to death by the Romans, or had instead been pushed off a high cliff by the Pharisees? If none of those things would have done the trick to allow human salvation, why not? God is omnipotent, after all. If he can achieve human salvation via Jesus' crucifixion, then presumably he could also have achieved salvation by other means, such as via Jesus being strangled by Judas, or via Jesus stubbing his big toe. SRB [ October 19, 2002: Message edited by: SRB ]</p> |
10-19-2002, 04:39 AM | #15 | ||
Veteran Member
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: UK
Posts: 1,898
|
Quote:
Well, no... all we have been given is the dangling carrot, but not the stick. Chains old bean, giving us only one half of the equation is a little disingenuous don't you think? Lord Asriel put it best: Quote:
|
||
10-19-2002, 10:36 AM | #16 |
Veteran Member
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: secularcafe.org
Posts: 9,525
|
Sigh. Can't you preachers read? Don't you see the forum that says 'Rants, Raves and Preaching, etc.'? Take your blather there!
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
|