Freethought & Rationalism Archive

sakrilege · 10-11-2002, 01:00 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by kingjames1:

Theologians have always argued that more awful than the physical pain of slowly suffocating to death while nailed to a wooden post (rubbing against your back, which had been split open from previous floggings) was the psychological pain endured by Christ in bearing the guilt of the sins of many (enduring even the moral filth of sexual perverts).

<img src="graemlins/boohoo.gif" border="0" alt="[Boo Hoo]" /> <img src="graemlins/boohoo.gif" border="0" alt="[Boo Hoo]" />

According to the mythology, god created the system he suffered with. Seems like a miscalculation on his part if it was such a problem. Remember, humans are just pawns in the system.

livius drusus · 10-11-2002, 01:12 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by kingjames1:
However, I think it is wrong to focus on the physicality of Christ's sufferings in 'weighing' the depth or breadth of the atonement of Christ.

The op referred to the xian habit of emphasizing the physical agony. If you think this focus is wrong, take it up with your xian brethren. Babelfish already doesn't buy it.

Quote:

Though crucifixion was certainly one of the most horrible and agonizing forms of execution ever devised (see, for example, William Edwards' vivid article on crucifixion in the Journal of the American Medical Association, March 21, 1986), it is not necessary nor even biblical to claim that Jesus suffered more physical pain than any human being has ever endured.

On a crufixion continuum, Jesus suffered hardly at all. Victims could live for days, particularly if their arms were not tied over their heads. Compared to the 6000 slaves of the Spartacan revolt lining the Appian Way, Jesus got off easy.

Quote:

Theologians have always argued that more awful than the physical pain of slowly suffocating to death while nailed to a wooden post (rubbing against your back, which had been split open from previous floggings) was the psychological pain endured by Christ in bearing the guilt of the sins of many (enduring even the moral filth of sexual perverts).

The bizarre and disturbing xian obsession with the genital geography rears its, um, ugly head yet again. Why is the so-called moral filth of sexual perversion any worse than the moral filth of say, genocide which is, after all, one of Yawheh's favorite land-clearing devices?

And what constitutes sexual perversion anyway? Everything outside marital penis-vagina intercourse during ovulation? I think bringing up sex in a discussion of pain in crucifixion is rather perverted, frankly.

K · 10-11-2002, 01:16 PM

Quote:

Everything outside marital penis-vagina intercourse during ovulation?

Man on top! Man on top! How could you forget man on top you sexual pervert?

Mageth · 10-11-2002, 01:19 PM

And don't forget to turn out the lights!

MarcoPolo · 10-11-2002, 02:40 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by babelfish:
I've noticed that many apologists like to stress what a HORRIBLE, PAINFUL form of torture crucifixion is. They often go into loving detail about just how excrutiating this particular form of execution was back in Roman times.

Every time I hear about another little child being kidnapped and tortured and killed by some sadistic pervert, I think about Christ's suffering and death. I think about the contrast between what he went through and what these innocent little children go through. He knew whatever was happening to him was temporary. Sure he was in pain, and frightened, but he knew that it would all be over soon. Not only would the suffering be over, but he would be alive again in three days.

What about what those little children go through? They don't know what's going on. You and I probably can't even fathom how frightened they are. They may even realize there is no way they're ever going to live through this. It's almost too horrible for me to think about - as a parent it's my worst nightmare.

So please, I just can't buy the suffering of some fully grown "all-knowing, all-powerfull" man as the worst imaginable sacrifice, worthy of substituting for all our sins.

Just thought this post was worthy of a 'here here!'

So... HERE HERE!

babelfish · 10-12-2002, 04:23 AM

kingjames1 - I read your post through once or twice. You've summed up the standard apologetics about this subject brilliantly.

I thought of a few questions, but I'll refrain from asking them, because it would just seem like I'm ridiculing Christianity.

Let it suffice to say, I'll never cease to be amazed by the mental contortions one must subject one's brain to in order to explain these human religious fabrications.

You might have spared yourself a bunch of typing if you had just summarized by saying:

"You and I can never hope to understand God - our brains are way too small and puny - it's a mystery - just believe!"

or something along those lines.

kingjames1 · 10-12-2002, 08:28 AM

babelfish

I believe your reduction concerning the mysteries involved in the incarnation and crucifixion (as understood by orthodoxy) to simply "don't bother to understand it, it's too big for your brain," is actually ridiculous. It destroys the substance of the faith which generations of deep-thinking men and women have pondered productively and meaningfully for centuries.

The issue is not that mystery is beyond human comprehension, so just give up! If that were the case, where would modern science be? What arrogant physicist claims to understand the wave/particle duality, or the 'true meaning' of the Einstein, Podolsky, and Rosen paradox, or the origin of space and time or quantum mechanical law in the big bang, etc. What about the mysteries of human consciousness (e.g. what possible survival value is their in having the mental equipment to dream in abstract mathematics? - surely that is a mystery) You get the gist...the point is this: the real issue is that the mystery of God and His redemption for the nations has been revealed in Jesus Christ and His apostles. The apostle Paul says, "Surely you have heard about the administration of God's grace that was given to me for you, that is, the mystery made known to me by revelation, as I have already written about briefly. In reading this, then, you will be able to understand my insight into the mystery of Christ, which was not made known to people in other generations as it has now been revealed by the Spirit to God's holy apostles and prophets." This mystery was the gospel. To quote Paul elsewhere, "Beyond all question, the mystery of godliness is great: He appeard in a body, was vindicated by the Spirit, was seen by angels, was preached among the nations, was believed on in the world, was taken up in glory."

This is not that tired old dichotomy of faith versus reason. There is no such thing as reason without 'faith' nor faith (worth the title) without reason. I don't believe in blind faith. And I don't think my first post was so 'mysterious' or 'chalk to the god-of-the-gaps' dismissal, so as to be contentless or without meaning - at least, not within the interpretative framework in which it is articulated.

We can know without knowing comprehensively...we do it all the time. It's permissible to 'know' mystery, and it yet remain mysterious to us in portions. Just ask a quantum physicist or a theoretical biologist.

J.

Steve K · 10-12-2002, 08:41 AM

Reply to kingjames1:

In your first post, you quoted Wayne Grudem as saying: "Jesus became the object of the intense hatred of sin and vengeance against sin which God had patiently stored up since the beginning of the world."

This sounds to me a lot like holding a really big grudge. That doesn't seem like a very loving thing to do?

- Steve

kingjames1 · 10-12-2002, 08:41 AM

in reply to scombrid

to understand this question, you might want to familiarize yourself with the council of Nicea (325 CE) and the works of Athanasius, where such questions were explicitly dealt with (over 1,600 years ago). To understand how the deity endures any pain at all, one must first come to grips with the incarnation - the deity took on full humanity and hence took on the attributes of humanity (e.g. the ability to suffer pain, even death, as a human being). The council of Nicea and later at Chalcedon (451) did not unravel the mysteries of the incarnation, but did seek to establish the 'language' with which we can speak coherently, and use to help us get a handle on such an incomprehensible (not to be confused with ineffable) event: God with us.

J.

kingjames1 · 10-12-2002, 08:45 AM

Reply to Steve K

Is it necessarily a "grudge" when a judge gives a convicted man three consecutive life-sentances for brutally killing a family? Since when is justice a grudge?

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

10-11-2002, 01:19 PM	#14
Mageth Contributor Join Date: Jul 2001 Location: Deep in the heart of mother-lovin' Texas Posts: 29,689	And don't forget to turn out the lights!

10-12-2002, 04:23 AM	#16
babelfish Veteran Member Join Date: Oct 2001 Location: Augusta, Maine, USA Posts: 2,046	kingjames1 - I read your post through once or twice. You've summed up the standard apologetics about this subject brilliantly. I thought of a few questions, but I'll refrain from asking them, because it would just seem like I'm ridiculing Christianity. Let it suffice to say, I'll never cease to be amazed by the mental contortions one must subject one's brain to in order to explain these human religious fabrications. You might have spared yourself a bunch of typing if you had just summarized by saying: "You and I can never hope to understand God - our brains are way too small and puny - it's a mystery - just believe!" or something along those lines.

10-12-2002, 08:28 AM	#17
kingjames1 Junior Member Join Date: Oct 2002 Location: Florida Posts: 84	babelfish I believe your reduction concerning the mysteries involved in the incarnation and crucifixion (as understood by orthodoxy) to simply "don't bother to understand it, it's too big for your brain," is actually ridiculous. It destroys the substance of the faith which generations of deep-thinking men and women have pondered productively and meaningfully for centuries. The issue is not that mystery is beyond human comprehension, so just give up! If that were the case, where would modern science be? What arrogant physicist claims to understand the wave/particle duality, or the 'true meaning' of the Einstein, Podolsky, and Rosen paradox, or the origin of space and time or quantum mechanical law in the big bang, etc. What about the mysteries of human consciousness (e.g. what possible survival value is their in having the mental equipment to dream in abstract mathematics? - surely that is a mystery) You get the gist...the point is this: the real issue is that the mystery of God and His redemption for the nations has been revealed in Jesus Christ and His apostles. The apostle Paul says, "Surely you have heard about the administration of God's grace that was given to me for you, that is, the mystery made known to me by revelation, as I have already written about briefly. In reading this, then, you will be able to understand my insight into the mystery of Christ, which was not made known to people in other generations as it has now been revealed by the Spirit to God's holy apostles and prophets." This mystery was the gospel. To quote Paul elsewhere, "Beyond all question, the mystery of godliness is great: He appeard in a body, was vindicated by the Spirit, was seen by angels, was preached among the nations, was believed on in the world, was taken up in glory." This is not that tired old dichotomy of faith versus reason. There is no such thing as reason without 'faith' nor faith (worth the title) without reason. I don't believe in blind faith. And I don't think my first post was so 'mysterious' or 'chalk to the god-of-the-gaps' dismissal, so as to be contentless or without meaning - at least, not within the interpretative framework in which it is articulated. We can know without knowing comprehensively...we do it all the time. It's permissible to 'know' mystery, and it yet remain mysterious to us in portions. Just ask a quantum physicist or a theoretical biologist. J.

10-12-2002, 08:41 AM	#18
Steve K Junior Member Join Date: Aug 2001 Location: Corvallis, OR USA Posts: 64	Reply to kingjames1: In your first post, you quoted Wayne Grudem as saying: "Jesus became the object of the intense hatred of sin and vengeance against sin which God had patiently stored up since the beginning of the world." This sounds to me a lot like holding a really big grudge. That doesn't seem like a very loving thing to do? - Steve

10-12-2002, 08:45 AM	#20
kingjames1 Junior Member Join Date: Oct 2002 Location: Florida Posts: 84	Reply to Steve K Is it necessarily a "grudge" when a judge gives a convicted man three consecutive life-sentances for brutally killing a family? Since when is justice a grudge?

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.